City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report

Similar documents
City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report

City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report

PC RESOLUTION NO ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL (AC)

City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report

CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G.3 STAFF REPORT August 18, 2015 Staff Contact: Peyman Behvand (707)

City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report

City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT NOVEMBER 15, 2012

PC RESOLUTION NO GRADING PLAN MODIFICATION (GPM)

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA

I Street, Sacramento, CA

CITY OF MERCER ISLAND DESIGN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

Planning Commission Staff Report February 19, 2009

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

Planning Commission Staff Report June 5, 2008

City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report

Retail Signage Options. Planning Commission Special Meeting February 19, 2015

Architectural Review Board Report

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

STAFF BRIEF. Design Guidelines for Lower Downtown Historic District, Appendix A: Standards and Guidelines for Signs (2014), pg.

ARB ACTION MEMO. Mr. Missel called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. and established a quorum.

Design Review Commission Report

Resolution : Exhibit A. Downtown District Design Guidelines March 2003

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT APRIL 7, 2016

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

R E S O L U T I O N. Single-Family Residence/ Church. 2,488 sq. ft. 2,488 sq. ft. Area Parking Required: Church

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Legislative Item

D E S I G N R E V I E W B OA R D

CITY OF FORT COLLINS TYPE 1 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING FINDINGS AND DECISION. CS Commercial, LLC 1337 Riverside Avenue, Unit 1 Fort Collins, CO 80524

MEMORANDUM. TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR

PROJECT REVIEW GROUP REPORT. TO: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PREPARED BY: Martha Dooley Landscape and Sustainability Planner

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA

Rezoning Petition Zoning Committee Recommendation August 1, 2017

CITY OF KEIZER MASTER PLAN APPLICATION & INFORMATION SHEET

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA

STAFF REPORT. To: Planning Commission Meeting date: February 10, Approval of a waiver to reduce the landscaping and parking requirements

Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, :30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL

IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:

STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. Conduct Public Hearing to vacate certain public right of way adjacent to Sycamore Avenue and San Pablo Avenue

City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report

Location and Field Inspection: History: Master Plan Recommendation:

Request Conditional Use Permit (Automobile Repair Garage) Staff Planner Kevin Kemp

County of Loudoun. Department of Planning MEMORANDUM. SUBJECT: ZMOD , Dulles North Business Park Comprehensive Sign Plan, 2 nd Referral

CITY OF LOMPOC PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 4360, 2004, Amendment Bylaw No. 4897, 2016 (Sewell s Landing)

Note: Staff reports can be accessed at Special Permit Application No.

AGENDA 07/14/11 PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting

Pentagon Centre (SP#297) Phase I Site Plan Amendments SPRC #3

MIDTOWN MIXED-USE VILLAGE. TECHNICAL DATA SHEET COMPONENT C-1 FOR PUBLIC HEARING - PETITION NUMBER Project No RZ1.1. Issued.

Narcoossee Roadway Corridor

CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MEMORANDUM

Staff Planner Ashby Moss. Location 4752 Virginia Beach Boulevard GPIN Site Size acres AICUZ Less than 65 db DNL

CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. ITEM NO: 6.a 6.b STAFF: LONNA THELEN

Village of Glenview Appearance Commission

Colerain Township report to. Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission. December 2, 2010, 1:00PM. t a f f r e p o r t

STREET ADDRESS AVAILABLE SIGN COPY AREA (INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED)

HISTORIC TOWN CENTER MASTER PLAN CITY COUNCIL PRESENTATION APRIL 3, 2012

P.C. RESOLUTION NO

COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION

M E M O R A N D U M. Consider a recommendation of a site plan for Sherwin Williams, a proposed approximately 4,500 square-foot paint store.

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA

COLERAIN TOWNSHIP ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Tuesday, October 18, :00 p.m.

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA

CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G. 1 STAFF REPORT August 4, Staff Contact: Tricia Shortridge (707)

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA

Village of Glenview Appearance Commission

CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD Draft RESOLUTION

Block 130, Lot 4 on the Tax Map. Doug McCollister John Stokes William Polise Joyce Howell John Moscatelli Shawn McCanney Eugene Haag Stuart Harting

6 November 13, 2013 Public Hearing APPLICANT: CAH HOLDINGS, LLC

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

CITY OF PLACERVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA

SUBJECT: PREDEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW OF PROJECT LOCATED AT 2632 EAST WASHINGTON BOULEVARD ('ST. LUKE MEDICAL CENTER')

PC RESOLUTION NO

RECEIVE AN UPDATE ON THE ALMOND GROVE PHASE II PROJECT

AWH REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR APPLICATION FOR REZONING ORDINANCE TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT

The meeting convened at 7:30 p.m. in the City of San Mateo Council Chambers and was called to order by Chair Massey, who led the Pledge of Allegiance.

SUBJECT: PREDEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW OF PROJECT LOCATED AT E. COLORADO BOULEVARD (PASEO COLORADO)

SPECIFIC PLAN Requirements

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Prince George's County Planning Department Development Review Division

City Council Special Meeting AGENDA ITEM NO. C.

Future Five. Design/ Development Guidelines. January 2008 Amended June 08 per City Council motion

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA. County Board Agenda Item Meeting of February 23, 2019

Subject: 30 Otis Street, Evaluation of Shadow on Proposed 11th and Natoma Park

Mayor Leon Skip Beeler and Members of the City Commission. Anthony Caravella, AICP, Director of Development Services

Request Conditional Rezoning (R-15 Residential to Conditional B-2 Community Business) Staff Planner Kevin Kemp

D1 September 11, 2013 Public Hearing APPLICANT:

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA MEMORANDUM

Summary of Planning Commission Votes Regular Meeting of the Aurora Colorado Planning Commission February 14, 2018

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT

maurices STOREFRONT SIGNAGE STANDARDS Strip Center, Outlets, Malls, and Downtowns

New Berlin City Center Concept Review PDQ Food Stores, Inc

8 February 9, 2011 Public Hearing APPLICANT: 7-ELEVEN, INC.

CO. RD. 28 Yankee Doodle Road SITE. This map is for reference use only. This is not a survey and is not indtended to be used as one.

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Prince George s County Planning Department Development Review Division

Sierra Springs Regional Commercial Master Site Plan Airdrie, Alberta Hopewell Development Corporation Project No May 26, 2010

Transcription:

ITEM F1 City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Development Services Department Submitted and Reviewed by Sergio Klotz, Al~ rector~ Prepared by Mathew Evans, Contract Planne Continued - consideration of Sign Program (SP) 16-024 for Plaza Del Obispo Shopping Center, a modification to the sign program for an existing shopping center located at 318 78 and 31882 Del Obispo Street (Assessor Parcel Number 668-241-22) (Applicant: Mark Kuwahara). RECOMMENDATION: Reopen the public hearing, receive public testimony; close the public hearing; and Adopt a Resolution approving Sign Program (SP) 16-024 for the Plaza Del Obispo Shopping Center (Attachment 1 ). OWNER/APPLICANT: Applicant Mark Kuwahara Pacific Sign Center 24422 Del Prado, Suite 2 Dana Point, California 92692 Property Owner: Plaza Del Obispo, LLC Post Office Box 129, San Juan Capistrano, California 92693 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Mark Kuwahara, on behalf of Pacific Sign Center (the "Applicant"), has submitted a Sign Program (SP 16-024) application for the Plaza Del Obispo shopping center, a retail shopping plaza located at southeast intersection of Del Obispo Street and Plaza Drive on the edge of the City's Historic Town center. The proposed project replaces an existing sign program with new a sign program that will be applied to all current and future signage for the shopping center, and includes the installation of a new monument sign at the entrance from Del Obispo Street, as well as 4 internal directional signs to be

Page 2 of8 placed within the shopping center parking lot. This item originally came before the Planning Commission on November 9, 2016. A public hearing was opened and closed, and a unanimous motion was passed to continue the item with a recommendation that the Sign Program be reviewed by the Design Review Committee first, and then returned to the Planning Commission for final action. ANALYSIS: General Location: General Plan Land Use Designation: The project site is generally located at the southeast intersection of Del Obispo Street at Plaza Drive. General Commercial Zoning Map Designation: General Commercial (GC) Surrounding General Plan Designations, Zoning, and Existing Land Uses: Direction General Plan Land Use Zoning North General Commercial Town Center Edge (TCE) Bank South General Commercial Gen. Commercial (GC) Retail East General Commercial Gen. Commercial (GC) Retail West General Commercial Gen. Commercial (GC) Retail Use BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This item originally came before the Planning Commission at its November 9, 2016 meeting. The Planning Commission expressed concern that the item had not previously been reviewed by the Design Review Committee (DRC). While the Municipal Code does not require a sign program to have DRC review, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to continue the item, and required that the sign program be reviewed first by the DRC before coming back to the Planning Commission for final action. Design Review Committee The DRC originally reviewed the item on December 8, 2016, provided comments and expressed concerns regarding some of the new signs being proposed. The DRC ultimately continued the item to allow the applicant time to address its concerns by making changes to the sign program. Below are the specific items that the DRC requested be addressed, as well as how the applicant ultimately complied with the DRC concerns: 1. Provide measurements (tolerances) between the sign raceway/backing and the arch, and consider recessing the sign further into the arch.

Page 3 of 8 The applicant addressed this issue by updating the sign program to show a 6"- 1 0" distance between the raceway (sign backing) and the interior of the arch. The applicant did not propose additional recessing of the sign due to the existing placement of each bracket within the arch, citing that doing so would require significant changes to the surface of the top of the arch. The applicant has noted that the dark color of the raceway will help it blend into the background of the arch. 2. Provide measurement from established grade to the bottom of the sign/raceway within the photo simulation. The applicant has provided a measurement of 7 feet 5 inches from the top grade of the existing sidewalk to the bottom of the sign raceway. 3. Provide an appropriate scaled version of the directional signs within the photo simulation. Consider showing fewer business names on the sign. The applicant has provided updated photo simulations with an accurately scaled drawing of the proposed directional sign and has reduced the number of tenant names shown on the sign. 4. Provide a solid base for the monument sign that runs the entire length and width of the proposed sign. The applicant has provided an updated monument sign drawing showing a solid base as requested. 5. Show true colors for monument sign by noting the proposed "off-white" color; DRC would prefer the sign be painted to match existing buildings. The applicant has noted that the new monument sign will be painted to match existing building colors. The sign shown in the photo simulation has not been colored to match, but will be constructed accordingly. 6. Provide updated landscaping plan for the shopping center. The applicant has provided an aerial photo that provides the location of the recent landscaping updates and identifies three islands within the parking lot where slight improvements to the landscaping had been recently made, including the planting of orange trees, the planting of additional ground cover and flowers at the entrance island from Del Obispo Street. It was noted that the remaining existing landscaping consists of a mixture of large mature trees, mature shrubs and mature ground cover. It was further noted that the amount of landscaping to be re-located within the planter areas to make way for the monument sign and the directional signs is less than 16 square feet, and would not constitute a

March 14,2017 Page 4 of 8 revised landscape plan, as no significant landscape was being displaced or removed. The DRC noted that they were pleased with the changes but were confused about the location of one of the directional signs. After a brief discussion, the DRC recommended that the applicant move one of the directional signs to a location that would be better suited for visibility. The applicant agreed, and the DRC voted unanimously to forward the item back to the Planning Commission with a positive recommendation for approval of the sign program. Since then, the applicant has updated the sign program to reflect the change to the directional sign placement, as suggested by the DRC. It should also be noted that there was previous discussion regarding the history of the existing monument sign. Staff's research found that the existing monument near the corner of Del Obispo Street and Plaza Drive was approved by the Planning Commission in 2007. The sign was constructed as approved, and a building permit for the sign was issued shortly after the Planning Commission approval. Previous Discussion The current signage at the shopping center consists of one monument sign located in front of the two-story retail and office building at 31882 Del Obispo Street, and various wall, hanging, and under-canopy signage for each of the in-line tenants and major anchor tenants. The major anchor tenant buildings are allowed wall-mounted channel lettering; and the in-line shops are allowed either an internally illuminated hanging sign mounted under the column arch, or channel letters mounted to a or race-way attached to a trellis cover-structure. Under-canopy signage is also allowed underneath the roofcovered colonnade so that pedestrians walking parallel to the storefront can identify each business. The applicant is proposing to amend the sign program to require an updated look for the hanging and wall signage, as well as to allow for one additional monument sign, and four directional signs within the shopping center parking lot. The proposed sign program is compliant with respect to allowed signage per Section 9-2.343 of the SJC municipal code. Furthermore, the update does not propose to change the sign text copy size or logo sizes currently allowed by the existing sign program, and only one (1) additional monument sign and four (4) directional signs will be added. The proposed monument sign and directional signs are proposed to be placed within existing landscape planters within the shopping center parking lot, and all text copy from the combined signage will be less than 80 square feet as allowed per SJC Municipal Code Section 9-3.543 (b)(d)(7) Calculating area and height. Specifically the applicant is proposing to: Construct one new monument sign at the primary access from Del Obispo Street that will be internally illuminated to show the name of the shopping center only; Construct four new directional signs located within existing planter areas at drive-isle ends which will be internally illuminated to show store names with directional arrows;

March 14,2017 Page 5 of 8 Replace all existing signage that does not conform to the new sign program to meet the requirements of the new sign program; and Require all new tenants to install signage to meet the revised sign program. Table 1 (below) lists the type of signage proposed for the sign program and includes the number of each sign, a description of each sign, the proposed sign materials, and the size and locations of each sign to be used within the shopping center: TABLE 1- PROPOSED SIGNAGE TYPES Sign Type/ Number Description & Materials Size 1 Hanging arch-way sign mounted to a decorative aluminum mesh painted A- 36"X130" brown to match building trim, Hanging (16) (10 sq ft) illuminated LED channel letters mounted to an integrated raceway 8- Trellis mounted internally illuminated Trellis Mounted LED channel letters attached to a Varies 2 (3) brown colored aluminum raceway C- Metal bracket wall mounted double- Under Canopy sided wood "shingle" style painted (20 +/-) hanging sign (non-illuminated) Individual internally illuminated LED D- channel letters/logo's or halo Wall Mounted illuminated LED channel letters (Major tenant) mounted to an aluminum raceway (2) attached to the building, painted to match the building Double faced internally illuminated monument sign with florescent ballast Monument (2) lighting with routed acrylic lettering, and a non-illuminated sign with flat cut aluminum lettering Aluminum cabinet monument style sign painted to match the shopping center Directional (4) buildings with changeable tenant panels routed acrylic lettering internally illuminated with florescent lighting 12"X36" (3 sq ft) Varies 3 42"X137" (22 sq ft) 49"X222" (46 sq ft) 36"X29" (36 sq ft) Location Underneath column arch of the storefront Trellis above the storefront Underneath colonnade next too storefront Allowed signage area on wall above storefront 2 locations at plaza entrances 4 locations in parking lot 1 The calculation is for total sign area, does not reflect actual text copy area 2 Text letters and logos are 16" tall, not to exceed 70% of store frontage in width 3 1.5 square feet of signage area allowed per linear feet of store front area

Page 6 of 8 Table 2 (below) illustrates the sign program by providing detail regarding the type of sign allowed for each tenant within the shopping center, including a list of the proposed signs showing tenant type, sign type, and the number of signs allowed for each tenant: Tenant Type TABLE 2 - PROPOSED SIGN PROGRAM Sign Type Number of Signs Major Ten ant Wall-mounted sign with channel letters 1 In-Line Shops 1,000 sq ft Hanging or Wall Sign 1 In-Line Shops 2,000 sq ft Hanging or Wall and Under Canopy 2 In-Line Shops 3,000 sq ft 4 Hanging, Wall and Under Canopy 3 Entire Shopping Center Monument Sign 2 Entire Shopping Center Directional Sign 4 Sign Program Review Section 9-2.343 (Sign permits and sign programs) of the SJC Municipal Code, allows the Planning Commission to approve sign programs so long as the following findings can be made: The sign program is consistent with the General Plan, and is complementary to the architecture and design of the development project; The sign program conforms to all applicable requirements of this Code and any applicable specific plan or comprehensive development plan; and, The sign program is generally compatible with the design character of adjacent properties and/or rights-of-way. If these findings can be made, then it is appropriate to grant the Sign Program. Conversely, the inability to make even one of these findings would result in a denial. Using this information, staff has prepared the following analysis, which, in turn forms the basis for the recommendation contained in this report and attached resolution. In analyzing the Sign Program request, staff believes the following findings of fact warrant approval of the Sign Program. 1. The sign program is consistent with the General Plan including the Community Design Element, and is complementary to the architecture and design of the development project because the sign program is consistent with the following General Plan policies: 4 Limited to tenant located at 31878-101 Del Obispo Street

Page 7 of 8 Policy 1.2 Encourage high-quality and human scale design in development to maintain the character of the City The signs are to be constructed from durable industry standard materials, and the size of the signs complies with the Municipal Code, which limits the size (height and width) to ensure a human scale. Policy 2. 1 Encourage development which complements the City's traditional, historic character through site design, architecture, and landscaping. The proposed sign program is intended to have the signs better blend within the existing buildings to ensure better compatibility with the Spanish Colonial design of the buildings on the site, which were designed to comply with the City's traditional and historic architecture. Moreover, the placement of new monument signs within the landscaped areas are placed in areas intended to take up the least amount of space possible, and along with new plantings in the planter areas, will enhance the landscaping on site. 2. The sign program conforms to all applicable requirements of this Code and any applicable specific plan or comprehensive development plan because the proposed signs meet do not exceed the total signage allowed by the Municipal Code and because the new sign design is more architecturally compatible with the existing structure with respect to color. Moreover, the Code allows the applicant to apply for a sign program to create a compatible design theme for all signs within a shopping center. Through the sign program, the applicant has created a visually pleasing method of providing compatible and complementary signs throughout the shopping center to minimize visual clutter and to unify the appearance of the shopping center to create a distinctive sense of place. 3. The sign program is generally compatible with the design character of adjacent properties and/or rights-of-way because the proposed free-standing signs (monument and directional) are located within existing planter areas within the parking lot of the shopping center, and because the sign program will more closely match with those at the adjacent shopping center to the northeast which has similar colored hanging and wall signs of that which is proposed for Plaza Del Obispo. COMMISSION/COMMITTEE/BOARD REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS: This item originally came before the Planning Commission on November 9, 2016, when it was continued so that the Sign Program could be reviewed by the DRC. On December 8, 2016 and February 8, 2017, the DRC reviewed the Sign Program and took formal action to move the item forward to the Planning Commission with a recommendation of approval. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: This project has been reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The City's Environmental Administrator has determined that the project is

Page 8 of 8 categorically exempt under Section 15311 Accessory Structures, Class 11(a), as the Sign Program and the eventual installation of additional signs on the property constitutes the placement of minor structures accessory to an existing commercial facilities, and includes the construction of a monument sign, four directional signs, and the replacement of various hanging signs throughout the property, all to be located on the premise. A Notice of Exemption (NOE) will be posted should the project receive final approval. NOTIFICATION: Pursuant to Title 9, Land Use Code, Section 9-2.302(f), Notification Procedures, a public hearing notice was previously mailed to all property owners within 1,000 feet as listed on the Orange County Real Property Tax Assessment rolls and was published in the Orange County Register at least 10 days prior to the original hearing date. This agenda item has been provided to the applicant and its representative through posting of the agenda packet on the City's website. ATIACHMENT(S): Attachment 1 - Planning Commission Resolution Attachment 2 - Revised Sign Program