HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH 1 USE PERMIT 85-1 02-19-85PUBLIC HEARING
NO, 1
2-19-85
FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPAR'I~NT
SUBJECT:
APPEAL OF PLANNING CO~ISSION ACTION ON USE PEP. HIT 85-1
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ENV IRONNENTAL
STATUS:
REQUEST:
HICHAEL 3. LAPORE ON BEHALF OF
LEONARD CONSTRUCTION
15461 REDHILL AVENUE, SUITE E
TUSTIN, CA 92680
14460 NENPORT AVENUE
CATEGORICALLY EXElqPT (CLASS 11)
THAT TIlE CITY COUNCIL OVERTURN THE PLANNXNG CO~ISSION D~CISION
DENYING A POLE SIGN AT 14460 NEgPORT AVENUE
BACKGROUND:
On January 14, 1985 the Planning Commission considered Use Permit Application
85-1 which requested authorization to install a 50 square foot pole sign at
14460 Newport Avenue. The Commission .denied the request for the pole sign,
although a 50 square foot monument sign was authorized.
The matter was sUbsequently reviewed without comment on the City Council Consent
Calendar of January 21, 1985. However, in a letter from the applicant dated
January 21, 1985, a formal appeal of the Commission's action was filed.
DISCUSSION:
The sign as requested met the criteria outlined in the sign code necessary for
Commission approval via the Use Permit process. However, since Use Permits are
discretionary actions, the Commission utilized its prerogative determining that
a pole sign at the subject location is inappropriate. This determination was
based on the following findings:
1. That the proximity to arterial highways of the structures to be served,
does not justify the use of a pole type sign.
That a pole type sign is not compatible with the architectural quality of
the structure to be served.
City Council Report
Use Permit 85-1
page two
3. That approval of a new pole sign on the subject property would impair the
orderly and harmonius development of the area.
Staff is in concurrence with these findings and supports the Commission's
action.
As an alternative to the proposal, the Commission authorized a monument sign of
50 square feet to be installed at the subject location, pending review of
revised plans. The applicant has not submitted revised plans choosing instead
to appeal the Commission's decision.
RECOMMENDATION:
Pleasure of the Council
Associate PTanner
JD:do
attachments:
Jan. 14, 1985 Report to Planning Commission
Applicant's letter of appeal
Full size sign elevations and site plan
Community Dev(~iopment Department
Planning
Commission
DATE:
SUBdECT:
APPLICANT:
dANUARY 14, 1985
LOCATION:
CEQA STATUS:
REQUEST:
F L£ COPY
USE P[RNIT 85-1
14ICHAEL LEPORE FOR LEONARD CONSTRUCTION
15461 REDHILL AVENUE, SUITE IE
TUSTIN, CA 92680
14460 NEWPORT AVENUE
CATEGORICALLY EXE~4PT (CLASS 11)
TO INSTALL A POLE-TYPE, TENANT IDENTIFICATION DIRECTORY SIGN ON
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ME#PORT AND HALNUT AVENUES
BACKGROUND
On November 28, 1984 the Planntng Commission reviewed and approved the site plan
and elevations of the shopptng center recently completed at 14460 Newport
Avenue. The original submittal only indicated typtcal wall signs, and free
standing Identification was not Included.
Sectton 9494 of the City Code pertaining to slgnage provtdes Chat, subject to a
conditional Use Per~tt, a tenant identification directory sign may be authorized
when the following criteria are present:
1. 0nly one (1) such sign per center is permitted.
Maximum stgn area must not exceed 50 square feet and ts restricted to
slx (6) square feet per tenant, and center identification must be
incorporated within the stgn area.
3. The stgn shall not exceed the height of the butldtng on site.
4. Such signing shall be authorized in lieu of all other freestanding
signs on the site.
With construction of the new structure, the existing "Little Kings" restaurant
was incorporated into the shopping center. This restaurant currently has a pole
sign identifying the business.
DISCUSSION:
The applicant is proposing to install, on the northeast corner of Newport and
Walnut AVenues a tenant directory pole sign that meets the ~rtte~ta required by
Section 9494 o~ the Sign Code. However, there are several other issues rna:
should be addressed:
Corn munity Development Department
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
USE PERMIT 85-1
PAGE TWO
Second pole stun on the site: The installation of the proposed sign
would be the second pole sign on the site. To comply with the sign
ordinance, the existing "Little Kings" pole sign must be removed.
Uniformtt7 of color: To provide co~atibility with the wall signs
installed on the face of the building, the backgrounds on any
freestanding sign panels should be white.
The appropriateness of a pole si~n at this location: When the
proximiTM of the buildings to majorarterial highways and the
high visibility of the center are considered, staff questioned the
appropriateness of a pole sign. It would appear that a properly placed
monument sign would be adequate to alert on-coming traffic of the
center's location. With the use of a monument the area of tenant
identification panels would not need to be reduced. However, the
height of a monument sign is restricted to six {6) feet above grade.
It should also be noted that a monument sign of this type would require
removal of the existing Little Kings pole sign. In lieu of the
proposed pole sign, staff would ~ncourage the use of a monument.
However, if the Commission determines that the proposed pole sign is
appropriate, then staff would recommend the following conditions be
imposed:
a. The backgrounds of the sign panels shall be white, matching the
background of signs currently installed on the structure located at
14460 Newport Avenue.
b. The pole cover shall be treated with a tex-coatmatertal to match
the type and color used on the structure at 14460 Newport Avenue.
c. That the existing "Little Kings" pole sign must be removed prior to
issuance of sign permits authorizing the proposed sign.
REC0~NDED ACTION:
It is recommended that Use Permit 85-1 be denied on the grounds that a pole sign
is not appropriate for the subject location when considering the proximity of
the structure to major arterial highways. It is further recommended that a
monument sign (tenant directory type) be approved by the Commission subject to
review of the elevations at the next meeting.
Assistant Planner
JD:lg
Community Development Department
LEONARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
15461 REDHILL AVENUE, SUITE E
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680
(714) 838-8310
License No. B1 94318
January 21, 1985
CityCouncil
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
RE: Pole Sign Application #85-1/14460 Newport Avenue
Dear Council Members:
On November 28, 1983, the planning co~),,ission approved the site development
plans for the commercial center located at the Northeast corner of Newport
Avenue and Walnut Avenue. The approval included a reference to a pole sign
to be located on Walnut Avenue.
On January 14, 1985, the planning commission denied our request for this
pole sign. We believe that the sign is justified for the reasons as follows:
1. The proposed sign conforms to the dimensional requirements of the
city ordinance.
2. There is precedence in the area of the subject location. Many of
the commercial developments have pole signs similar and/or larger
than the proposed sign..
3. The building at the subject location sits along the rear property
line and is therefore shielded from view to motorists traveling
southerly on Newport Avenue and westerly on Walnut Avenue.
4. A monument sign poses a traffic hazard at the main intersection of
Newport Avenue and Walnut Avenue.
5. Given the sight lines along Newport Avenue and Walnut Avenue, it
is reasonable to place a pole sign at the major intersection to
call attention to this development. This will allow the motorist
to decelerate and change lanes safely in order to enter the
development.
-continued-
City Council
City of Tustin
January 21, 1985
Page Two
Based upon all of the above, it is our opinion that we have satisfied the city's
requirements for this pole sign. We respectfully request your consideration and
approval of this sign along with cnnditions of agproval A, B and C as proposed
by planning staff in their report to the planning commission. Your consider-
ation in this regard is appreciated.
~ MJL/kjk
Enclosure:
Very truly yours,
Michael J. Lepore
(1) check #2535 - $100.00
cc:
Whittier Income Investors
Bob Bialosky, Chief Auto Parts
Tony Bonwell, Chief Auto Parts
George Hendoza, 7-Eleven Food Stores
Mark Ochs, 7-Eleven Food Stores
Bill Hormuth, K-B Signs