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.