Resolution - 8264RESOLUTION NO. 8264
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA,
CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL OF VARIANCE NO. 905 THEREBY
• AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION (Jack in the
Box Restaurant)
WHEREAS, there was filed with the City of West Covina,
a verified application on forms prescribed in Chapter 26,
• Article VI of the West Covina Municipal Code, requiring
approval of a Variance to permit a 35-foot high detached sign
to identify a 62 seat drive through restaurant on that certain
property generally described as follows:
A portion of Lot 8 in the Phillips Tract filed in Book 9,
Page 3 of Miscellaneous Records, in the Office of the Los
Angeles County Recorder; and
WHEREAS, hearing on said application was duly noticed and
conducted by the Planning Commission on August 17, 1988, at
which time the application was denied; and
WHEREAS, the action of the Planning Commission was
appealed by the applicant after proper legal notice to the
September 26, 1988, City Council meeting for hearing and
consideration; and
WHEREAS, studies and investigations made by the City
Council and in its behalf reveal the following facts:
1. The Planning Commission approved an unclassified use
permit for a 62 seat, 2,301 square foot drive through
restaurant at the above location in the
Neighborhood -Commercial (N-C) Zone.
2. The development in which this use is located meets or
exceeds all requirements of the N-C Zone.
3. -.The applicant is requesting approval of a variance for a
35-foot high, 64 square feet per face, quadruple faced
detached sign at the above location in the Neighborhood -
Commercial (N-C) Zone.
4. An application for Unclassified Use Permit No. 365 was
filed in conjunction with the application for
Variance No. 905.
5. Unclassified Use Permit No. 365 was approved by the
Planning Commission through Resolution No. 8-88-3659, and
the Planning Commission decision for approval was also
appealed to the City Council for relief from a condition
of approval.
•
0
Page 2
6. Appropriate findings for approval of a variance are as
follows:
• a. That there are exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances not applicable generally to the other
property or class of use in the same vicinity and
zone.
• b. That such variance is necessary for the preser-
vation and enjoyment of a substantial property right
• possessed by other property in the same vicinity and
zone, but which is denied to the property in question.
C. That the granting of such variance will not be mater-
ially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious
to the property or improvements in such vicinity and
zone in which the property is located.
d. That the granting of such variance will not adversely
affect the comprehensive General Plan.
6. This variance is a part of Unclassified Use Permit No. 365
for which an initial study has disclosed that proposed
project will not have a significant impact on the environ-
ment. A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has
been prepared for the proposed project pursuant to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970, as amended.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of West
Covina does resolve as follows:
1. On the basis of the evidence presented, both oral
documentary, the Planning Commission makes the following
findings:
a. No exceptional circumstances exist to warrant extra
signage. The subject restaurant site is located on a
corner lot at the intersection of Azusa Avenue and
Puente Avenue, principal and minor arterials
respectively.
b. No denial of a substantial property right exists,
since the only two restaurants on North Azusa Avenue
that have detached signs over thirty feet high are
freeway oriented or affected by the freeway overpass.
The subject site is seven tenths of a mile away from
the freeway.
C. Excessive signage can reduce the quality of the
visual environment, being a detriment to property in
the vicinity and could set a precedent for future
variance requests, thereby eroding the sign program
• throughout the entire City.
Page 3
d. Zoning regulations are implemental tools of the
General Plan. Excessive signage not justified by
exceptional circumstance reduces the quality of the
• visual environment and thereby adversely affects the
attainment of goals of the Comprehensive General
Plan.
THEREFORE, of the four findings necessary for approval of
a variance, none have been met.
2. That pursuant to all of the evidence presented, both oral
and documentary, and further based of the findings above,
the appeal of Variance No. 905 is denied and Variance
No. 905 is denied.
3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 14thday of November, 1988.
ATTEST:
City Cle
Mayor
I, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly
adopted by the City Council of the City of West Covina,
California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 14th day
of November, 1988.
AYES: Councilmembers: McFadden, Lewis, Bacon, Manners
NOES: Councilmembers: Tarozzi
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
• City Cler
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
—`City Attorney