Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/03/1991, 1 - ARC 89-133: APPEAL OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION'S (ARC) DENIAL OF A HEIGHT EXCEPTION FOR A MONUMENT SIGN, AND DENIAL OF USE OF TENANT NAMES ON THAT MONUMENT SIGN, FOR A MULTI-TENANT BUILDING, ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF PRADO ROAD �����II�II��IWllllll�lll llulll city of San Luis OBISPO MEETING OATE: COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT STEM NUMBER: / FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Developmen Director o BY: Judith Lautner, Associate Plannef� SUBJECT: ARC 89-133: Appeal of Architectural Review Commission's (ARC) denial of a height exception for a monument sign, and denial of use of tenant names on that monument sign, for a multi-tenant building, on the southeasterly corner of Prado Road and Empresa Drive. CAO RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution denying the appeal, thereby upholding the ARC's action. Report-in-brief The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) , after several hearings on signage, approved, on June 17, 1991, a signage program for the site, allowing a wall sign for the primary ground-floor tenant, and smaller wall signs for each other tenant, but denying a proposed monument sign. The applicant appealed that decision to the City Council. Prior to going to the council, however, the applicant made some changes to the design of the monument sign and returned to the ARC in hopes of getting a favorable action on that sign. i On August 5, 1991, the ARC approved a four-foot-high monument sign, denying the one-foot height exception requested, and denying placement of two ground-floor tenant names on the sign. The applicant has subsequently decided to go forward with the previously-submitted appeal. The applicant is asking for approval of the height exception, to allow a five-foot-high sign instead of a four-foot-high sign, and to allow tenant names on the monument sign. The ARC's action was based on finding that the size of the building is larger and taller than most others in the park, and that signage exceptions are not necessary for a building that draws attention to itself, and finding that tenant names on the monument sign would create clutter that may be confusing and unreadable. Staff supports the ARC's action. Staff recommends the council refer to the attached report for the ARC's August 5, 1991 meeting, which further describes the request and previous actions, and evaluates the request. Please note that the staff position has changed, given the ARC's action. OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Other departments have no opinion on this request. f�l �'�I�il!iiil 110 �Illlli city of San L.ais OBISpo COUNCIL. AGENDA REPORT ARL: 225 Prado Road Page 2 FISCAL IMPACTS I i Either an approval or a denial of the appeal would have no fiscal ! impact on the city. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution denying the appeal, thereby upholding the Architectural Review Commission's denial of the height exception and the addition of tenant names. Attached: ARC report for August 5, 1991 Draft resolutions Vicinity map Applicant's letter of appeal ARC August 5, 1991 minutes In packet: plans showing monument sign I , I i i I ; I -02 COMMUNITY III�i1llll������'ll�flll CItJ Of San LUIS OBISN O DEVELOPMENT ' I STAFF REPORT iR Architectural Review Commission MEETING DATE August 5, 1991 BY Judith Lautner, Associate Planner ITEM N0, A PROJECT ADDRESS 225 Prado Road FILE N0, ARC 89-133mi SUBJECT: Revised signage for an approved commercial building on the southeasterly corner of Prado Road and Empresa Drive. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Approve the revised monument sign, and provide direction on allowing similar wall signing for the other major ground-floor tenant. BACKGROUND Situation The commission approved a monument sign for the Red Cross on December 17, 1990. On June 17, 1991, the commission- approved a wall sign for Computerland, who is replacing the Red Cross, and denied a monument sign. The applicants appealed the decision to the City Council, asking for approval of the monument sign as well. Thee applicant has made some minor revisions to the monument sign, and in accordance with ARC preference to review revised projects prior to council hearings on appeals, has agreed to have the ARC review that proposal once again. The council hearing has been put on hold pending action by the commission. Data Summary Address: 225 Prado Road Applicant/Property owner: Prado Corporate Center Representative: Stephen B. Barasch Zoning: C-S-SP General plan: Service Commercial/Light Industrial Environmental status: Categorically exempt - signing Project action deadline: December 17, 1991 Site description The site is 19, 200 square feet in area, flat, and rectangular. It is across Empresa Drive from the Environmental Monitoring Company building and across Prado Road from Rancho San Luis Mobile Estates. Higuera Commerce Park is an 80-acre commercial-industrial specific- planned area, which is over 60% built-out. Proiect description The project is the addition of two signs to a service commercial l -3 117.90 ARC 89-133 Page 2 building and parking lot on the corner of Prado Road and Empresa Drive in Higuera Commerce Park. Signage for other occupants is proposed to remain as previously approved: small identification signs on the ceramic tile near entries. EVALUATION 1. The appeal involves only the monument sign, but staff suggests the commission consider an additional wall sign as well. The ARC approved a wall sign for Computerland, but required it to be lowered to a space just above the first floor. The applicant has made that change, but wants approval of a monument sign as well. The future tenant of the other major ground-floor space, Wallace Glidden, has written a letter (attached) asking for approval of a similar-sized wall sign for his business, located on the same level as the Computerland sign. It is unclear from the letter exactly where on the building this sign would be located. The applicant has discussed allowing it to face the parking lot (on "the easterly elevation of the building) . That wall sign is not a part of the present application. However, staff suggests that the commission consider the idea conceptually, and provide direction to the applicant on whether or not an additional wall sign would be acceptable. If it is, then the applicant can apply for another revision to the signage plan at a later date. 2 . The monument sign exceeds the height standard. The Higuera Commerce Park specific Plan stipulates that one freestanding sign is allowed at the premises, not more than 72 square feet in area or 12 ' in height. The sign regulations further limit freestanding signs that are in the streetyard, to 1/3 of the normal height - in this case, four feet. The proposed freestanding sign is five feet in height and 70 square feet in area. Therefore, it exceeds the height limit by one foot. The monument sign previously approved for the project also exceeded the height limit by one foot. The monument sign's size and height are comparable to others in the vicinity. 3 . The commissioners initially supported the monument sign. Architectural Review Commissioners expressed no concerns with the monument sign initially, except to comment that it would be good to add address numerals to it. (See minutes, attached. ) Commission concerns were primarily with the height of the wall sign, which was originally proposed to be located above the second floor. During discussion of the wall sign, the applicant's representative repeatedly stressed Computerland' s need for the wall sign because of franchise agreements with the parent company, and even said that they would be willing to give up the monument sign rather than the wall sign. It was this statement that prompted a commissioner to make a motion to approve a wall sign and deny the monument sign. ARC 89-133 Page 3 4. Copy on the monument sign has changed. The monument sign originally read "Computerland" , with a small "Prado Corporate Center" at the top. It now reads Prado Corporate Center Computerland Alpine and Marine, Inc. Font styles for the first and third lines are not indicated, although they are expected to be a simple style, such as Helvetica. Staff feels this change is consistent with preference expressed by some commissioners that the sign identify the building more completely. Staff would like to see where address numbers are proposed to be placed, also, and suggests that the commission identify appropriate locations that would be visible from the street and would not clutter the building wall. The height request appears consistent with other approvals in the area. Height exceptions to allow five-foot-high monument signs have been granted frequently in this area. Staff suggests that the commission make the finding that it is consistent with other signage in the area 'and compatible with the building's size. RECOMMENDATION Provide direction to the applicant on the appropriateness of other wall signage on this building, discuss possible locations for address numerals, and Approve the monument sign, based on finding that it is consistent with other signage in the area and compatible with the building's size. Attached: vicinity map Minutes: June 17, 1991 Letter from Walter Glidden In packet: rendering showing proposed signage. ��s RESOLUTION NO. (1991 Series). A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUI$ OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION'S ACTION, THEREBY DENYING A HEIGHT EXCEPTION FOR A MONUMENT SIGN AND DENYING PLACEMENT OF TENANT NAMES ON THAT MONUMENT SIGN, AT 225 PRADO ROAD (ARC 89-133) BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of public testimony, the applicant's request for signage for an approved building (ARC 89-133) , the Architectural Review Commission's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed height exception for the monument sign is not necessary for a building that, because of its height and location, draws attention to itself. 2. The inclusion of tenant names on the monument sign will create a cluttered appearance that will be difficult to read. SECTION 2. Anneal denied. The appeal of the Architectural Review Commission's action is hereby denied, and the monument sign is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The maximum height shall four feet. 2. The sign copy shall be limited to the project name and address. On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Resolution No. (1991 Series) ARC 89-133: 225 Prado Road the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1991. Mayor, Ron Dunin ATTEST: City Clerk Pam Voges APPROVED: zi; City A i st ative 6ffiocer C' to ey Community Dev 1 pment Director �'7 RESOLUTION NO. (1991 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING AN APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION'S ACTION, THEREBY APPROVING A HEIGHT EXCEPTION FORA- MONUMENT SIGN AND APPROVING PLACEMENT OF TENANT NAMES ON THE SIGN, AT 225 PRADO ROAD (ARC 89-133) BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after .consideration of public testimony, the applicant's appeal of action on signage for application ARC 89-133, and the Architectural Review Commission's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed height exception for the monument sign, and the addition of tenant names to the monument sign, are consistent with the pattern of signage established in the area. 2. The exception will not harm the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity. SECTION 2 . The appeal is hereby approved and the proposed signage is approved as proposed. On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 1991. �- 0 Resolution No. (1991 Series) ARC 89-133 : 225 Prado Road Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED: 7�>e— 4� %tZem) otit�"AairrisfrqXive Of iricer C' o y Community Deve op ent Director e:res\89-133.wp •��� _R � RC S q- 133 IF mi I R A00 ROAO ,�i�; _mss z.a..•: t,>• eaY fo fy\i 1{n ` gyp- �- LU a LLd C- s _. a . /v I 1 a s ^ 1 -451 e lu W �a.o..a or BONETTI DRIVE QAC w, CZ,44-:b El LU W ...ut •. M � � � "' •lee+ 1 A134 9q �� • I — :— W .. le[ K M< 1. I-'19-L 18 -L VAI Cit Of SAn WIS OBISPO raoMIRIftwim 990 Palm Street1posl Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL In accordance with the appeals procedure as authorized by Title 1 . Chapter 1 .20 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, 'the undersigned hereby appeals from the decision of f1-y„. �u,Q j��rt2ur �jyvytc�gGrh rendered on which decision consisted of the following ( i .e . set forth factual situation and the grounds for submitting this appeal . Use additional sheets as needed) : 77.0- 147AC Ge�d 7ta �,Q ` ///t�Ynvru�FeZ. /�'►ti.oYl-dr►•`�'1� Fin rr. �-4�7` , v� //��''�` � �-d J�'r,;c, . do aL The jundersijfned discussed the decision being appealed fro with: ' ZZ-S' �'/�-A�Dv �DA� - S�{-iv �.vS C.�/5��� cf•]L/F' DATE b TIME APPEAL RECEIVED: Appellant: Name/Title R E C l a/ F G6N797 /iVG F"OG'?'”, Representative JUN 1 9 1991 '?6b2 t�FL G51RIP,(Tv Scv . g3l Address CITY CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA � , S�Z ��7 06 Phone Original for City Clerk Copy to City Attorney Cated for: 6 Copy to City Administrative Officer Copy to the follows department(s) : City Clerk 1,46 AJ45 1 /�/j DRAFT ARC MINUTES August 5, 1991 2. ARC 89-133: 225 Prado Road; new commercial/industrial building; C-S-SP zone; signing plan revisions. Jeff Hook, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending the commission approve the revised monument sign, and provide direction on allowing similar wall signing for the other major ground-floor tenant. Steve Barasch, architect, responded to the staff report, and explained the signs' changes and showed snapshots of other project signs within the Higuera Commerce Park. Commr. Combrink had no problems with the monument height exception. Commr. Illingworth wanted "Prado Commercial Center" to be stronger. Commr. Cooper was concerned that the monument sign may be overkill. He felt the monument sign should identify the project and not the individual tenants. Commr. Gates agreed with Commr. Illingworth. Chairman Underwood felt that a sign program was needed. He supported the wall sign if the monument sign was deleted, but he could not support both unless the monument sign was reduced to an address sign. Commr.Illingworth moved to approve a monument sign subject to the following conditions: 1. The height be lowered by 4 feet. 2. The sign copy be limited to the project name and address. Commr. Cooper seconded the motion. AYES: Commrs. Illingworth, Cooper, Gates, Combrink, Underwood NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Bradford (one vacancy) The motion passes.