Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 01 26 Regular 509 City Commission AGENDA ITEM 509 CONSENT INFORMATION PUBLIC HEARING REGULAR X January 26, 2004 Meeting MGR. /2u1 DEPT. , Authorization REQUEST: Commissioner McGinnis requests the Commission rehear the Signage Variance Request from Dr. Corum of 620 West SR 434 (SR 434 Redevelopment Overlay Zoning District), based on the request of the Applicant and does not represent a position in favor off or against the reques1t of the Applicant.. PURPOSE: This rehearing request is based on the desire of the Applicant to be present to give input to the Commission, regarding application for a Variance in the signage setback for Dr. Corum's proposed monument sign. APPLICABLE CODl!!:: Sec. 20-82. Duties and Powers; general. (Board of Adjustment) The Board of Adjustment shall make recommendations to the City Commission to grant any variance or special exception as delineated in this chapter.. .as will not be contrary to the public interest where, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter will result in unnecessary and undue hardship... . In order to recommend any variance from the terms of this chapter, the board of adjustment must and shall find that the request meets all 6 criteria... Sec. 20-103. Restrictions upon lands, buildings and structures. (c) Percentage of occupancy. Sec. 20-486. Signs. (2) Ground mounted single-tenant identification sign: One (1) wide-based monument style permanent project identification sign shall be permitted per single-tenant parcel. . . January 26, 2004 Regular Item 509 a. Shall only advt:rtise one (1) person, firm, company, corporation or major enterprise occupying the premises. b. Shall be located no closer than ten (10) feet from the front, side or rear property lines. c. Shall not exceed two (2) faces. d. Sign copy area shall not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet per face... e. Shall be consistent in design, format and materials with the architecture of the proposed building. f. The sign shall not be more than eight (8) feet in height above the closest driveway or vehicular use area. g. Signs shall be in an enclosed base a minimum width of two-thirds (2/3) the width of the sign. Landscaping shall be incorporated around the base to include low growing shrubs and ground cover and/or annuals to promote color. Sec. 20-486. Signs. (5) Additional SignslVariances: ... The board of adjustment shall recommend variances of this sign code in specific cases where such variances will not be contrary to the public interest and where, due to special conditions, a literal translation of this sign code would result in unnecessary hardship. All requirements, procedures, findings and appeals of sign code variances shall follow those provisions for . . zonmg vanances. CHRONOLOGY: November 10,1997- The City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 683, which, among other things, created the SR 434 Redevelopment Overlay Zoning District. It also set forth standards for sign age and provided a 5-year maximum amortization period for signs that were not in compliance with the new standards. June 12,2000- The City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 2000-17, which provided that any sign, other than a billboard, could be amortized and maintained until November 14,2002. At or prior to November 14, 2002, all nonconforming signs were to be removed and may be replaced with signs that conform to the design standards set forth in the S.R. 434 Redevelopment regulations. All directly affected property owners were notified at or about the time Ordinance No. 2000-17 was adopted. July 26,2002- As a reminder of the up-coming deadline, the former Community Development Director Charles Carrington sent out letters to each property owner with a sign in either of the SR 434 districts. October 9,2003- The variance application (incomplete abutters list) was received by the City. November 6,2003- The Board of Adjustment at its regularly scheduled meeting voted 3-1 to recommend that the variance be granted, citing the limitation of space (given the 17' building setback). December 12, 2003- The Commission heard the Applicant's request and denied the request for the variance; however, the Commission then instructed Staff to bring this item back on January 12, 2004, after reviewing alternatives that might be in the best interest of the applicant and the SR 434 corridor. (See Attachment) January 26, 2004 Regular Item 509 December 18, 2003- The City Manager and Staff visited the site and unanimously agreed that given the site constraints that encroachment into the 10' setback was necessary given the site constraints. January 12, 2004- The City Commission heard the request for a variance and voted unanimously in favor of allowing the monument sign in the proposed location, but with the stipulation that the height of the sign be reduced to six (6) foot maximum and the pedestal base not extend the width of the sign in an already limited area. (See Attachment) CONSIDERATIONS: 1). Commissioner McGinnis has indicated a willingness to place this item back on the Agenda at the request of the Applicant given that the Applicant was not present when the Commission made its decision on the variance; However, Commissioner McGinnis indicates that her request is no way is an indication of support for the Applicant's request to change the previous action of the Commission. 2). The subject site at 620 W. SR 434, is located at the northwest corner of Bombay and SR 434. The property has a C-l Zoning, a Commercial Future Land Use designation, and is located within the SR 434 Redevelopment Overlay Zoning District. 3). The applicant proposes to replace an existing non-conforming sign with a new monument sign as required by code. 4). The existing site includes two one-story office buildings. The buildings have nice architecture which includes an extended roof overhang. A courtyard space between the two buildings is enclosed by a wall to the south which runs parallel to SR 434. The wall and landscaping adds to the appearance of the site. The buildings are setback only 17' from the existing SR 434 ROW line; the wall is only 11' from the SR 434 ROW however does not run the full length of the building. These create major constraints in locating the monument sign. FINDINGS: 1). The Applicant proposes to replace the existing non-conforming pole sign with a monument sign. The applicant is requesting a location that would encroach 4 feet into the applicable 10' sign setback, because of the extension of the base; the majority of the sign (copy area) encroaches only by 3'. The applicant contends that, given the location of the building and wall that there is no place in the SR 434 ROW for a monument sign that would not be in conflict with the 10 foot setback [from the property line] requirements. 2). Staff concured that the location determined by the Applicant, is the best location for the sign given the site constraints, the architecture ofthe building and the roof overhang. 3). However, in recommending the 3' variance, Staff recommended the following relating to the proposed monument sign: January 26, 2004 Regular Item 509 The overall height of the sign be reduced from 8' maximum to 6' maximum. The sign as currently proposed is too massive for the space allowed. Reducing the total volume of the sign will cause it to better fit within the space available. (This reduction in height probably will not affect the actual copy area or size oflettering that is proposed.) The base of the sign is not to extend out beyond the" copy area but is to be flush, given the lack of setback space. 4). The 3' variance is the minimum variance that can be reasonably achieved. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: At its regular November 6,2003, meeting, the Board of Adjustment voted 3-1 to recommend approval of the varianee. The majority felt that the request met the variance criteria. RECOMMENDATION: Commissioner McGinnis recommends the Commission rehear the Signage Variance Request from Dr. Corum of620 West SR 434 (SR 434 Redevelopment Overlay Zoning District), based on the request ofthe Applicant, given that the Applicant was not present when a decision was rendered by the Commission. Staff recommends that the City Commission grant the 3' variance request, but only if the overall height of the sign is reduced (from 8' maximum) to 6' maximum height and the base of the sign does not extend out beyond the copy area. Given these considerations, Staff believes that granting the variance will not undermine the Code, nor be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. ATTACHMENTS: A . Variance application & map B . Picture/rendering of signage C - Board of Adjustment draft minutes D- Letter to Dr. Corum regarding Commission's Action with approved variance as indicated on the site plan and sign age graphic. E ,.Commission Minutes: Dec. 8,2003 & Jan. 12,2004 with approved variance as indicated on the site plan and signage graphic. CITY COMMISSION ACTION: .' , - __''):t~ tJ~J ATTACHMENT A ~/' " ce,,,eD BOA'RD OF ADJUSTMENT APPL.ICATIO,.e n lIQQ3 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS OCi 0 ~ ~ 1126 'EAST STATE ROAD 4.'34 1ERSPRIl'lG8 WINTER'SPRINGS, FL ,32708".:.2799 cnY~~~~_08gm8r1e ,(407)327-1800 P ~ / cio0.3tru" .' FOR: r V. SPECIAL EXCEPTION VARIANCE 'CONDITIONAL USE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISiON '........ 1. " f APPLICANT: ~n ,C; a/ljA1}lJ,4J./),.~" 'PHo.NE ~7-" ~.;27--:07# ADDRESS: P,~' td ~,e #.!Jt,/ (d/~~ cf/,~l? JJ,:l7VS) , ' f/-'~ ~~~i/~ '" J e- J~'Y' ""~,r- -I'($, ATTACH A COPX OF THE PARCEL SURVEY. '--. 4. lITTACH AN 11 x 17 HAP SHOW INO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING PARCELS. - '-<15, ATTACH LEGAL'DESCRIPTION. '--- 6. TAX, PARCEL ~ DENT I F i: CATION NUMBE~ i ..s <I--z--o-'3v'- .s-/eJ' - 2{,oo --. 7. LOCATION 'OF PARCEL (Street Address, and/or ,Nearest Cross Streets) :t..j.:3 S/-fr- 13~rl1.by .4vE-' . 'I -..". 8 . PRESENT ZONING: <:::.-1 FUTURE ,LAND USE: COm~'~11J1; By Signing below' I understand that City of Hinter Springs OffiCials may ~nter Upon my property to ins~ecf that portion, as relates to this application: (If the applicant is not the owner of the subject property, th~ applicant must' attach a letter of authorization signed by the owner) , :.'j;~. D.'. '_ OYlNE -P SE T , , ,_' , , 'P X"QH ER-sioNATURE ' ' , PERSONS ARE ADVISED'l',HAT, IF THEY OECIDE TO APPEAL ANY; DECISIONS MADE J\'r, THESE M'EETINOS'/HEARINGS, THEY W I.1,L ,NEED A, RECORD or THE PROCEEDINGS AND FOR SUCH'PURPOSE, THEY HILL NEED TO INSURE THAT A , VERBATIH'RECORD PF THE ~ROC~EDINGS IS M~DE, 'AT'THEIRCOST. WHICH i INCLUbES THE TESTIMONY AND'EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO 'BE,,'~ BASED, PER SECTION 286.0105" FLORIDA STATUTES-' '-I., SECTION 20-84 - APPEALS FROM DECI~IONS OF THE BOARD or ADJUSTMENT (l) Any per son, 0 r per son s, j 0 i n tl y 0 r s eve rat I y a9 g' ri eve d by any decision of the Boal:d of Adjustment may, within thirty (30) days after the filing of any de~ision in the office of fhe Board of Adjustm'~nt, but not thereafter, apply to' th,6' Ci.ty Council, for administrative ~elief. After, hearing,before the City cou~cil an ag9rievl~~ party may. within thirty'(30) days af.ter the decision of the Citr Council, file an appeal, with a court of competent jurisdiction Over the aubject matter.' , "",<if';' -. ".' ---~.--::.. ATTACHMENT A: APPLICJl.TION INSTRUCTIONS 'J\ staH: 'Report will he "developed for' each' J\pplication, The Applioant should be'ptepared to addres. each bf the issues provided below for Variance r~qu.sts., ' ~ . , '. In ~rd~r to grant a varianoe, the,aoard of ~djustment must make the following Hndin9s of faot: ~\' f 1, That, necia\ "oonditions and Fircumstanoes exist whi~ are p&culh,r to the land. structures or huildincls"involved and whioh are' not appUoabl e 1:0 other I nnds, structures o,r bUUdi~as in the same, zenina ,disl:~ict. ! Ptle:. 70 ~..r,JD~h~ ()~ t.l1/...!J,',()f, -- ::J'P~,IJ~ IP .~.e at/owed (,;,I,..c~r AA:-.4- 2. That 'special 'condt,tions and' oircumstances do not.. r~sul t t~om the ,otions of the applioant, " . , , 3. rhat arantina the varianoe requested will 'not confer on, the appl ioan\: any speoial pdvil eoe, that is denied by this chapter to o\:her lands, buildino~ or struotures In the same ,zon'InCl, distriot. -rf-lf> 'IS ~ P,l.JA'Y ;'~U/J..~}~6 /,v ~It' /J1!.e:/j. r+/4-T U>~~ IJ.. '1!.e:4cbi!.e.. f;,J S erlJ~~ 4.,' That.. literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would' d'!lprive. the applican,t of dahts commQnlY enioyed;, by other properties in, the' sal'(le l',onina di~tdot under the ter's of t 's 0 a' er ado d aca shards' 0 the applioant. ;PI/lJ ke.u /1 t!f!e.s..<(e/1r ,,47'" ;/-..(~-r.l~ FtJY," 70 je'C~ ,VeaTg~'1G~~ol"'4t/ 7?' N€0 ct.e....9'- e...u,vFrA,)ce. ,4~re-r...t::.:> oF' ~ p;).,4;..,IJe/;;-y S. Tl:)at the va,riance aranted is the minimum variance that will make possible' the reasonable use of the' land; buildina 'or sti"uotur-e. a. /~/1 ~ 71'-1' rd2.tpdeM-T: ~/.y /7lil~e.. R.e.z.!M",,-'t;t.Q Ufe ,~' A..e'7cL., ~ ,ej~.;..c.t1J/~, 6... That the arant 'of the varianoe wi"1 be, in'harmony with the' 'aenera'l, intent and purpose of .this ohapter. wi II not' be in11.lrious t6 the neiClhborhood. or otherlo/!se deldmental lo the pul:l1:iowel fare. o,v~7"w/~~ c:/?'A/,tJU';;"~ ,:Ji'dPerT/ " ,6~ ~' 'd-tf ~ J'?$4<Y- "U~ 7. The request must be. 20nsistent wi th, the obiecti vas arid' ~olicies of the Comprehensive Plan. $ .(J.e,Le//e.. m/.f W///' /??e~ cOlf<2c:z0';e..s THE APP~' ICANT IS RESPONSIBLE ~OR PROVIDING THE CITY WITH,THE NAMES AND AD RESSES OF EliCH PRQPERTY OWNER. W I,TH IN' 150 FT, OF EliCH PROPERT LINE BY THE SCHEDULED TIME, : " (7JTH~ AP~~ICANT ;s' RESPO~'SiBr,;E TO POST THE 'BLUE "~OTI6E CARD ~N THE : SITE A~ LtAST SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE .BOARD Op:ADJUSTMENT MEETING,;~~ . " AT WHICH ''rifE HATTER H'ILL BE CONSIDERED: SAID 'NOTICE SHALL NOT BE , POSTED WITHIN ?HE CITY RIOHTS-OF~WAY. .;' " , ' . ~ O'j>~m#.)6/(QV Ct!?'ur-e'~@w...~re~'~/~ C!-'.~'ff. /' 6f3~ Ge,1t'3y ,@ U!~r~'f?'1"f. l'tdn:.Jrf!'/ ~ #,," ," ': ~d 7__ ~.;'l.:1_ ?S'p(;I , !: <::'" " , ',1':' o ~~/t';')~l' fY/',~<!-rtce/~A(~ j,;~''1~'~~mf?"r~/.;~~/ec'iIr ?-o I ' fJ IE ~.3 y' " " " --- L?, '" . -1?... _. ~ :--t' 4 ,41,.f TO '"r if Cc.J ,Jr. 6: ' ClU/Vre'/ ~ .....,.... " '€'/. ' ," <. , , Q), ~e ~/~'~MIk'UJ~,.'::~~:;t~/# '']..-2., 5 R 'J"t.,L d ...'. '._ I ..,...,' /?C9~va:Y~. ~e J ~ c::J6 ' ~3 ., a Cll " W c.., z > g ~~ '" co ~ -' iT) !Ii..;. W C"I z~ o "Z~.: ~.g' W :;:) ~cr -, ~ ~ 5 1]-- APPROVED PROViDED lNFORMAnm~ r-.. .- , PRESENTED ON THIS APfbUCAnJN ~ .<..... ..~ \, 11lUE ANDCORREp.:,. k' . . .. .. DATE: ' ~/~L~~ ' ,I' ., " j-". //~~;--- S.GNED~ @ -- -'--~. -- D)) I H 11 SPACES . go .~ .~ =- : ~.g o. ~-2 - C> <> = ""0..00 ~~ ~ 5 ~c;' ... '" OQ g ~.~~- .~ .~;s -'" ~ ~~ C; :2 co - <.>-> .0 0""" DElfTAL oma:s 14 8PACa! . II' , 3; SPACES 0 e' '" w~ (.)s -... Z 11. c( :E 11. ~'::) 0 a: w 0 t: (.) ,(I) - 1 > 1-3 ~ > fA .. -c' k' n w 0:. In - ~ ,.. ,ut::: == ~ . I ::E =. . : ~ i. l~ = ~. : l....Lj ~ ,.. ; ~ ~ > ~ <~ :z: ~: z'" we; Q;; ~ BOMBAY AVENUE 'SI'TE Pl' N. A ~ ~ Tl-II5 5OLLlTlON PROVlDE5 A TOTAL - OF 30 PARKINCs SPACE5 AND REQUlRE5 APPROX,2(/)o SF OF '~bJTlONAL. P AVINCs-IN T;..lE 5OJTl..l EAST CCRNER Lo1 A.)...t k.-e.. eA-Sf k Df Lo\ ~ ~ .oM- of Co-(' e} - f?!-DU<. ~, of a... ~ ~t.J\~l~ .c.{ Lor- 4>) Bwu<.. 19" Q.II^.&. U:>T "~ 5to<:...K t,; of IVc~ o.r\o..r-!..c) Lo,.. to ) ~ l!)<:.-K- ~). L-o\ I ~ ~ lcu.c ~ ~ k..D r 13 - fbu:u:... dN + NG-f-rL Ov lCl...M-&..c 1 S\ ~ ~ 01"... PLd" /lse-DK /;).. p~ ~. PI;0BI..;(..L ~s. 0+ Se..vvv..Y\...O lL Ir ~ ~ ~ u ~ .. ~ ..0 ) ~: ;l: "1 ., Ille 2-. :1. ~I ~ O' ,Il U ~~ I 2 ..: ~ ~~ 0,1,. ...' ~ :[ ~' w ~ -: I: :R-< C .' y:~~ :3>"""4 ~r-O <-<::u <::;0::0 mmO ~ ::0 f1) -<::D-f Co (;~' 0 en """4 >~:D:"m, , ~ 0 CZ?J ~O <0 o ). ." "'Yt 1JI ~-oo~ '-..C Z ___ ~]:J>'-'-o ~ r- Z 2 'Tt' :!;: 00.- ~, ~ -( ~o .......-4 " IT: oi li ~ '~~~. ~~' ~~,~ j ~ ;~~rt- , . c ~~r ' ~ ~ii' - , ~ ~~~, ~i'~ ~~~ ::;~ ~... ~l ,!... ~~ ~S 0-Jl-/~{/ I '" '~ S'\ ,~ I~ I I~ I~ ~ 4Ii ' , fJr j' ,i ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~\ ~~ "~111 ~~~~ ' "i~"l~ ~ ~, ....... " ,\)' ~~ '-Q .. , ~ ~ NORTH' 0.4' , '..(J I r ~.9.s: 00' --. ~ .... ~~ ~l" ~ - /~ ~~ I, ~ ~~'~: 17l[" I ~ ~, ~ . ... ." ...... J ~~ tt~',~~- ~, . .It,t ," ':"#7' "" , . "- .: ". -II .- " .-' -- -- I AJ'~HALr /}/RQ4/$ ARE"" IJ 'I I.... ,. ~ 50 ~' ,~ ~ / .rr/J.t't' ~.4. , C4MHE~l 4 u/l.,I.JN& ~ , ~ to . ...... -_.....- .~.- .."- ,:.- . ~- .-. - -jl~L . . " ~-:,"" ~ . ... ot. l~r~ . -, , " ,!I, ", . .' ~ . ~\ ~ ~ T..., *..., .I~..i. ~ , , , ~~ /..f~ra. c..~ , ~4NNE~L#1. "! ~ ~///M//I$ ~ 'uJ$' i -'4.. ~ _. . ... ~ ~ \\ H,. .~ ,~ , . S' .. '0 . , . ~...~ ..~.. ~' ~,r 2 r~' ~e1,r J ' /,," . ~ J~ -. .. ,"~ ~, ..... -.... "'~ No.RTN - , Z()~z,' , () -u:t c) ~~ ~ ~~ 6, ~ c::t . fTI tD g;n lD (f) ~ 3<1 ~ ~,~ ~ (1):Z' ~ (;) CD a. or 11 a . - (. 2) c: -n I I\) 01 . I ~ Of , ~ CD .80;)f84Y AVE , ... (1\' 2) 3: n . 1i . o o ;u c: 3: > ~ ~ > ~ = ~ ~ Z ~, > ffiSCRII'Tlrn: Lot "N' & East 1/2 - bf Lot ".11'" and all of Lot ''E'', Block "26" A subdivisiot of Lot 6, Block "18", and. Lot 8 BlOCK "19";" NORl)J 0IILANr0: Lot 10, . Block ""24, Lot 11 Block ."25" and Lot 13 Block "26" of NORIH 0Ri.ANIIJ ISf AlIDITIlN, .Seminole Count}', Florida, as reconle<f, in Plat Book 12, Page 86, Po:hlic ~rds of Seminole Comty, Florida, lIDlepai-tiOJ1arly des cri bed as fo II ""': Lots I, 2 ~ the South ~O. 00- feet of J.o1;. 3~. Block "27", 00RIll 0RrRllx> 8TII ADDlTlOO. as recorded in Plat Book 14, Page 9, PIillic Records of Seminole County, . Florida. AND. . . . _ ... The North 35.00 feet of Lot 3, Block "27". OORill 0RLANr0 8nl ADDITlOO. as recorded. in Plat BOOk 14. Page 9. Public llecords of Se.inole Cotmty. Florida._ and- subjeCt to easements ""<1_ ,restrictions of record. ~~ ~ ~~ 'ON 311:t '-' '- ~ .. .. . 11'- , QC1 \) 9 tan~ p. S?RINGS 1'< Or ",^~iE.OBgI'I\Br\B e\ pe!1n\t\\ng- AT1'ACHMENT A: , I ", ATTACBMENT A: ~i, ....'. ')i;'!~. :A.'.k\ ,jf1.:.."....':.';'.-:i'hi-di.:/.D.J'N:" - 'T' A I A j.r lIf~J!l~) "'~ : t~~~.~-~ ,\ , : ' ~:, . '--, \\<!tl"i; -."'.' , ...~~' . '1 J>.f7f'L-1CJ.<Nl~ yz.eQ U~T- O.F. ILLUMINATED SIGN AT PROPOSED LOCATION > ~ ~ > ~ = ,~ trj :z ~ t:= ; , , '-- .. - .......... ~' SIGN, S Y S T E MS .......... """""'" -........ lof2 &'2Ml3 0!2850 /OS NOlED L_ 1 6/5/03 '-1"=31.92 $qJtf:'7 , =. [).F.IUUMINATED MONUMENT SIGN 5/8"=1'.0" . ALUMINUM CONSTRUcnON...2' ALUM. ANGLE FRAME....09O" ROUTED ALUM FACB...063' FIllER ' . INTERNAl flUORESCENT IUUMINATlON HIGH OUTPUT lAMPS AND BAllAST . PRfOSION ROUTED AlUM. FACES WillS' GREEN (2030) ACRYlIC BACK-UP . MAIN CABlNETTO BE FAUX STUCCO PAINTED TO MATCH SW-2425 , . DECORATIVE SI:lROUD AND BASE COVER FAUX STUCCO PAINTED TO MATCH PORTER PAINTS 7044-4 . ENGlNEfRED SUPPOIIT STEEL AND FOUNDATION . UL USllNG ANO.D1SCONNECT SWITCH H{'u~T'~ FeGl\Je.0T. > ~ ,~ > (j = ~ ~ ~ ~ '0= .. ATTACHMENT C: ciTY OF WINTBR SPRINGS MINUrBS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING - NOVEMBER 6, 2003 PAGE4of6 B. Dr. Pete Corum JRequests A Variance To AJlow A Monument Sign Within The 10' Sign Setback Set Forth In Section 20-486., For His Office At 620 West State Road 434. . ' , . Mr. John Baker, AICP, Senior Planner, Community Development Department, read the request for a variance sign setback stating, "Staffhas looked at this and do hot see any way that we can recommend approval. Also, the staff does not see that they meet the six (6) criteria for the VariEUlC\? Therefore, the staff has to recommend denia1." Dr. Pete Carom, 620 West State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida 32708, represented by Kenneth Soday, US Identity Group: Presented pictures of the new sign which is permitted, j~t :does not meet the setback. It fits the criteria other than the 10 foot setback. The building is only 16 feet back from the edge of the right-a-way; from the sidewalk itself. Dr. Corwn has owned and operated his business from this same location for twenty (20) years. The new sign ordinance has put a, hardship on him to teplace the existing sign. - Discussion. ( Board Member Tackaberry stated, "I personally feel we should convey to the City Commissioners that this is one of several, and maybe they should reconsider so that other people do not have to go through all of this. Maybe change the footage with the existing buildings. " "I WOULD MOVE - THAT WE - REcOMl\fEND THAT THEY GRANT - DR. CORUM - A VARIANCE - TO AUTHORIZE THE NEW MONUl\1ENT SIGN TO BE CONSTRUCTED CLOSER THAN 10 (TEN) FEET FROM STATE ROAD 434 RIGHT-OF-WAY ~lITHIN THE STATE ROAD 434 REDEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER TACKABERRY. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER DILLER. DISCUSSION. Board Member Diller recommended an amendment to state - 7 feet fTom the base. "I 'VOULD LIKE TO AMEND THAT TO READ 7 FEET FROM THE BASE, FROM THE RIGHT-A-WAY." MOTION BY BOARD l\fEl\1;BER, TACKABERRY~ SECONDED BY BOARD l\fEMBER DILLER. VOTE: BOARD MEMBER TACKABERRY: AYE CHAIRMANWATEJRS: NAY BOARD MEMBER DILLER: AYE BOARD MEMBER HERBERT: AYE MQTION CARRIED. ,/ January 26, 2004 Regular Item 509 ATTACHMENT D: City of Winter Springs Community Development Department 1126 East State Road 434 Winter Springs, FL 32708 Planning Division 407-327-5967 January 13,2004 Pete G. Corum, D.M.D. P.A. 620 West SR 434 Winter Springs, Florida 32708 RE: Sign Variance Dear Dr. Corum: On January 12,2004, the Winter Springs City Commission met and reconsidered your application for a variance. Based on Staffs review of the site and site constraints, the Commission approved the following: . Location- Approved the location as proposed by the applicant. (See Attachment A) . Setback Variance- Accepted a 3' variance into the 10' setback for the location of the new monument sign (i.e. no part of the sign is to be closer than 7" from the property line along SR 434). . V olume- Given the limited area and the visual interference with the roof overhang, the Commission is requiring that the total height of the sign be reduced to 6', so that the scale of the sign fits the space available. (See Attachment Bl- Applicant's Request & B2-Commission's Approval) . Style- Given that the limited area is already an issue, an extended pedestal that encroaches into that limited area even more, is not appropriate. The Commission is requiring that the pedestal be flush with the copy area so that the variance granted is the . . . mll1ImUm varIance necessary. Enclosed, you will find a copy of a scaled drawing showing the approved location and a copy of the graphic indicating the height and pedestal restrictions. Sincerely, Eloise M. Sahlstrom, AICP, ASLA Senior Planner , .--.... ~.~ If' j ~;~. ';.. ',.,:'" "',?,.:~..:tt~~~~~fi:!.~~'J~1r.~".~,~";.:'A_,.,~,.,.~iW..JF:.-?f.!J.~:., . . ~ '~1.'"'I''''' .. ,.~ ~''1hT'''''r'' (I ~ . ", . "",':~';}Pf,~~t~1[~!;;~~::~t;;~i1(!021r~~ :;0'-< Cl> l>> (JQ ::l t: t: ~E; "",< ...... I'-) (;'0- i3 "I'-) v.0 00 1,CJ.j>. ;., ... > ~ ~ > (j == ~ ~ ~ ~ o CqMM r~l ON ;b.Pf(2...o\l~l-- D.F. ILLUMINATED SIGN AT PROPOSED LOCATION . . -{I ~~Le>~ To flJU-VPe, ~jH~b~ OP~16D ~(jce.o Tb- ~r_Ot1 MA-X. , (f~ p.,prfZ.Cj)(:. et-o~ ' ~ I'" . ,I~' ~ ~ , ., ~ "'"N 4.1,./-/' .' ~fZ- 4- ~4.-'> J.. ... __ .~ - -......... ~fr- 7. ,f , AI" ~s. ()tJ Llj~'7# ~. JI'J~f I'~ ~I .I!' I~-II o ,~, "5" JIJ-~ '" ...... -U. ~ 1ft 4 I .- 1&:DO~\~O L 00>- -r ( 0\'-1 - - I . CoKH l%tOt--l b-t::vP16P Pr ~' "~MJc..e.. Fi2-.oV\ i ~vz. 4?4 f'rzope~"Y 1A~ i H~bl1" ~tJa(l'OJ-\ ~-rH~ ~~ {;p , 1H~ ~te,fJ."1D (p I ( ?B9~l-txt... 10 ~~ P~H 'Nt1'J-t ~l61IJ.) . ~~: 1"::-1 '-0 I' , 1. ~ - ~...... C1l I>> (JQ ::l t: t: _I>> ~~ .......N -0- C1l . 8 N ,-,,0 00 \D~ > ~ ~ >- n '= ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ . . January 26, 2004 Regular Item 509 ATTJ\CHMENT E: CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 8,2003 REGULAR 501. Community Development Department Recommends The Cilty Commission Hear A Request By Dr. Pete Corum For A 3 Foot Variance From Th{: 10 Foot Setback Requirement Of Section 20-486. (Please See Ordinance Number 2000-17) Of The City Code Of Ordinances, To Authorize A New Monument Sign To He Constructed Within The State Road 434 Redevelopment Overlay Zoning District. Mr. Baker opened this Agenda Item for discussion. !Mr. Kenneth Soda)!, 8637 Piza Drive, Orlando, Florida:~ spoke on behalf of Dr. Pete G. Corum, D.M.D., regarding signage and setbacks. Discussion. Commissioner McLeod said, "Why could not a sign of this nature be worked into this planter section here?" Furthermore, Commissioner McLeod suggested, "Maybe - cut these planters down and use that as your base to put the top part of the sign on." Discussion. Tape 3/Side B Further discussion. "I WILL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS VARIANCE REQUEST ON THIS SIGN." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BLAKE. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER McLEOD. DISCUSSION. DEPUTY MAYOR MIl,LER STATED, "I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US TABLE THIS AND HAVE THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF COME BACK AND SEE IF THERE AREN'T SOME Al,TERNATIVES THAT ARE POSSIBLE." COMMISSIONER MARTINEZ STATED, "WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND GIVE: STAFF AND THE [CITY] MANAGER AN OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN WITH THESE FOLKS AND TRY AND WORK OUT SOMETHING FEASIBLE AND APPEALING AT THE SAME TIME." COMMISSIONER McGINNIS ADDED, "IT SEEMS THAT YOU ARE VERY WILLING TO WORK WITH THE CITY AND COME BACK WITH SOME OPTIONS, January 26, 2004 Regular Item 509 ATTACHMENT E: AND OPEN UP THAT TWO-WAY DIAGLOGUE THERE BETWEEN THE CITY, AND I AM SURE THERE ARE SOME CREATIVE CHOICES THAT WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT AND YOU HAVEN'T EITHER, SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT COME BACK." VOTE: COMMISSIONER McLEOD: AYE COMMISSIONER lVIARTINEZ: NAY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: NAY DEPUTY MAYOR MILLER: NAY COMMISSIONER BLAKE: AYE MOTION DID NOT CARRY. "I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE INSTRUCT STAFF TO BRING THIS ITEM BACK, WORK WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF AND SEE IF' WE CAN'T WORK OUT SOME ALTERNATIVE THAT MIGHT BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF NOT ONLY THE APPLICANT, BUT THE CITY CODE THAT APPLIES TO THIS CORRIDOR - FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY." MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR MILLER. SECOND:ED BY COMMISSIONER MARTINEZ. DISCUSSION. VOTE: DEPUTY MAYOR MILLER: AYE COMMISSIONER BLAKE: AYE COMMISSIONER McLEOD: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE COMMISSIONER MARTINEZ: AYE MOTION CARRIED~ CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS Mini -MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 12,2004 REGULAR 501. Community Development Department Requests That The City Commission Reconsider A Request By Dr. Pete Corum For A 3 Foot Variance From The 10 Foot Setback Requirement Of Section 20-486. Of The City Code Of Ordinances, To Authorize A New Monument Sign To Be Constructed Within The State Road 434 Redevelopment Overlay Zoning District. January 26, 2004 Regular Item 509 ATTACHMENT E: Discussion ensued with Ms. Sahlstrom on notifying applicants. Mayor Bush said, "When the time changes, I think we need to make sure these people are notified immediately once the Clerk has polled the Commissioners and agreed to a different starting time." "MOTION TO TAJBLE ITEM '501'." MOTION BY COMM][SSIONER BLAKE. SECONDED BY DElPLTTY MAYOR MARTINEZ. DISCUSSION. VOTE: COMMISSIONER McLEOD: AYE COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE COMMISSIONER BLAKE: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR MARTINEZ: AYE MOTION CARRIED. REGULAR 501. Community Development Department Requests That The City Commission Reconsider A Request By Dr. Pete Corum For A 3 Foot Variance From The 10 Foot Setback Requirement Of Section 20-486. Of The City Code Of Ordinances~, To Authorize A New Monument Sign To Be Constructed Within The State Road 434 Redevelopment Overlay Zoning District. Ms. Sahlstrom spoke on this Agenda Item. Discussion. Commissioner David W. McLeod suggested, "If your Attachments were marked different - and 'A', and a 'B', and a 'C', and a 'D', or an Exhibit could be an Attachment but it could be a different Exhibit number - we approve by the Exhibit Number or the Attachment numbers, so there is no confusion." Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "That's a good point, I will keep it in mind for the future." Commissioner McLeod added, "I do think you presented this very well." "MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION." MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR MARTINEZ. SECONDlED BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. DISCUSSION. VOTE: DEPUTY MAYOR MARTINEZ: AYE COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE COMMISSIONER BLAKE: AYE COMMISSIONER McLlEOD: AYE MOTION CARRIED.