HomeMy WebLinkAbout18 - Jiffy Lube Sign Program - 1520 W Coast Highway?EWroq> CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Hearing Date: January 23, 2001
PLANNING DEPARTMENT Agenda Item No.: 18
.= 3300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD Staff Person: James Campbell
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
(949) 644 -3210
(949) 644 -3200; FAX (949) 644 -3250 Appeal Period: None
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
PROJECT: Jiffy Lube sign program
1520 West Coast Highway, Christian Fanticola, Applicant
BACKGROUND
On August 9, 1999, the City Council approved Use Permit No. 3647 to permit the establishment
of a vehicle service and repair facility specializing in motor oil changes and other minor automotive
repair services. Signs for the project were regulated through a condition of approval, and the city
required that the design of the signs be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. On
December 7, 2000, the Planning Commission approved a sign program for the Jiffy Lube
presently under construction in Mariner's Mile (Exhibit No. 1 & 2). On December 12, 2000,
Councilmember Glover called the decision for review by the City Council.
Condition No. 21 states: "The business shall be limited to a total of two wall mounted signs,
located on the east and west elevations. Additionally, one ground sign shall be permitted and
shall be a monument sign if possible. The final design, size, and location of the wall signs and
the ground sign shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Commission." This condition
was applied due to the Commission's design concerns and a lack of sign plans. The limitation on
the number, location and type of signs was suggested by the applicant as being acceptable during
discussions on the project with the City's design consultant and staff. The applicant agreed to this
condition of approval.
On October 10, 2000, the City Council approved the Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision and Design
Framework that included design guidelines for signs for the entire Mariner's Mile area including
the subject property.
The entire sign program includes two wall signs, a monument sign and two directional signs located
near the driveways. The wall signs are proposed to be located on the east and west elevation in
accordance with the condition of approval. The applicant proposed a monument sign to be located
in the landscape planter near the driveway shared with the adjacent Taco Bell. The applicant's
initial designs did not meet the provisions of the Design Framework, which states that the width of
the monument sign should be 25% of the sign height. The two small directional signs are located
near the two driveways and contain the Jiffy Lube logo and the word "Enter."
The Planning Commission focussed on the size and proportions of the monument sign in
conjunction with the size of the wall signs and their proximity to the street. The Commission did
not explore alternatives to the proposed wall signs, but concluded that a tall monument sign was
excessive when considering the size and visibility of the wall signs. They required that the sign be
no more than 6 feet high by 4 feet wide. This design also deviates from the Design Framework
standards, but the city has the discretion to deviate from the proportions standard since it is
encouraged rather than required in the Design Framework and Municipal Code. The city's design
consultant for Mariner's Mile prepared sketches of the monument sign that is consistent with the
Design Framework and Municipal code and one that is consistent with the Planning Commission
approval (Exhibit No. 3).
The applicant revised the monument sign to be consistent with scheme "A" and it is attached to this
report within Exhibit No. 4. The original monument sign designs have been eliminated from
consideration at the applicant's request. The exhibit shows a silver finish on the cabinet, but the
applicant proposes to texture coat and paint the cabinet to match the building finish, which is
desirable from a design standpoint. The color of the cabinet finish is a close match to the proposed
building finishes and is noted in the controlling written specifications. The location of the sign has
been approved by the Public Works Department and does not create a site distance obstruction.
The Design Framework advocates effective signage that promotes visual coherence and consistency
through tasteful sign regulations in an effort to improve the visual quality. Additionally, signage
that meets this objective while showing a level of restraint is desirable. These design principles are
part of the Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework. Whether or not an individual
sign or entire sign program meets these goals is subjective and highly site dependent.
The City Council has the ability to make modifications to the design, size and location of the
proposed signs although staff believes that both the Use Permit and the Municipal Code allow the 3
principal signs proposed. If the City Council shares the Planning Commission's concerns regarding
the amount of signage on a site of this size, the Council could modify the approval. Some
alternatives include reducing the size of the two wall signs, reducing or eliminating the two
directional signs and/or downsizing the proposed 'monument sign. Staff is exploring these
alternatives with the applicant and will provide additional information at the City Council meeting.
If the City Council desires that the proposed monument sign strictly comply with the Mariner's
Mile design standards, approval of the attached sign program is warranted. If the City Council finds
that the proposed sign program is excessive, staff recommends that the City Council modify the
Planning Commission's approval by reducing the size of the proposed signs.
Submitted by:
PATRICIA L. TEMPLE
Planning Director
A" ; A
Prepared by:
JAMES W. CAMPBELL
Sen' r Planner
Vi Sign Program - Use Permit No. 3647
January 23, 2001 Page 2
Exhibits
Planning Commission staff report dated December 7, 2000.
2. Excerpt of minutes from the December 7, 2000 Planning Commission meeting.
3. Monument sign alternative schemes prepared by Keenan Smith.
4. Revised sign program.
F: \Users\PLMShurdAlCrrYCNL\2001 \0123 \jiffy lube signs 1 -23 IAm
Sign Program - Use Permit No. 3647
January 23, 2001 Page 3
EV'oa, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
v 3300NEWPORTBOULEVARD
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
(949) 644 -3200; FAX (949) 644 -3250
Hearing Date:
Agenda Item No.:
Staff Person:
Period:
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
December 7, 2000
James Campbell
(949) 644 -3210
14 days
PROJECT: 1520 West Coast Highway, Christian Fanticola, Applicant
Jiffy Lube
Use Permit No. 3647
DISCUSSION:
On August 9, 1999, the City Council approved Use Pen-nit No. 3647 to pen-nit the establishment of a
vehicle service and repair facility specializing in motor oil changes and other minor automotive repair
services. A condition of approval was placed upon the project that requires the sign program for the
facility be returned to the Commission for approval. The applicant's proposed sign program is attached
as Exhibit No. 1. The condition of approval requiring the review states:
"21. The business shall be limited to a total of two wall mounted signs, located on the east and west
elevations. Additionally, one ground sign shall be permitted and shall be a monument sign if
possible. The final design. size. and location of the wall signs and the ground sign shall be
subject to the approval of the Planning Commission."
The applicant proposes two walls signs to be located on the east and west elevation in accordance with
the Condition No. 21. The applicant proposes to locate the signs centered above the windows and entry
element of the elevations. The wall signs are red individual channel letters affixed to a raceway which
is painted to match the exterior of the building. The raceway is necessary as the location selected on the
elevation is comprised of windows and the raceway provides the structural foundation for the sign. The
proposed color of the trim cap and letter returns is bronze. The red letters and bronze elements are Jiffy
Lube corporate colors. Additionally, there is a secondary logo plaque with white letters on a black
opaque background. The proposed wall signs meet applicable zoning ordinance requirements for area
and location and are consistent with the Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision and Design,.Framework
(Design Framework).
The applicant proposes a monument sign to be located in the landscape planter near the shared
driveway with the adjacent property. The applicant proposes to texture coat and paint the cabinet to
match the building. The attached exhibits indicates a silver finish on the graphic, but the finish is noted
in the written specifications and is controlling. The location of the sign has been approved by the Public
Works Depanment and does not create a sianificant site distance obstruction.
The design of the proposed monument sign does not meet with criteria identified in the Mariner's Mile
Strategic Vision and Design Framework and recent amendments to the sign standards for Mariner's
Mile. The departure with the prototype monument sign is in the width to overall sign height
relationship. The Design Framework and Zoning Code indicate that the sign should be t/4 or 25% of the
sign height. The monument sign prototype drawing and the Zoning Code text is attached as Exhibit 5
Exhibit No. 1
Nos. 2 and 3. The width of the sign was established by the width of the sign panel which is 3 feet high
by 6 feet wide and has white letters on a red background. The applicant has expressed that the size of
the sign panel is dictated by a franchise agreement with Jiffy Lube and it cannot be smaller. The
applicant has not submitted any alternative sign panel alternatives nor any specific evidence of any
limitations placed upon the sign by Jiffy Lube. In the event that Jiffy Lube has placed a limitation on
the operator through a private agreement on the content and size, this limit has no effect upon the city.
The City retains the ability to deny any sign based upon inconsistency with policy or law, but does not
have the ability to change a trademarked logo. In this case, the sign does not meet the Zoning Code and
Design Framework. Modifying the size of the sign or outright denial can be considered, as no
infringement of the Jiffy Lube trademark occurs. Staff believes that the applicant's concern over
reducing the width of the sign is that the proposed sign panel gets reduced proportionately and the
lettering and logo becomes too small to be effective.-One way to alleviate this is to redesign the sign
panel to include a larger Jiffy Lube logo. This logo design is very identifiable and is roughly square
rather than the proposed rectangular sign panel. Use of this or a similarly proportioned sign panel
possibly in conjunction with a separate secondary panel providing business identity can be
accommodated within a narrower sign while providing adequate visibility and business identification.
The applicant has prepared two alternative monument sign sizes for consideration. Both designs
incorporate the base reveal and monolithic style. The applicant's first choice is the 15 feet high by 6
feet wide sigh. The alternative proposal is 20 feet tall and 6 feet wide. In order to have a 6 -foot wide
sign which will accommodate the proposed sign panel., the sign must be 24 feet high (24 feet X '/4= 6
feet). The maximum height allowable for a sign of this type is 25 feet. and the applicant believes that a
25 -foot high sign too large. The proportions of the two alternative signs and the prototype signs are
compared in the following table:
This monument sign is the first sign to be considered under the newly adopted Mariner's Mile Strategic
Vision and Design Framework. The proportionality concept of the signs is an important aspect of the
sign design guidelines. The City's design consultant who drafted the Design Framework has reviewed
the sign and recommends that the sign be modified to comply. However. he does not recommend
increasing the sign to 24 or 25 feet in order to accommodate the requested 6 -foot wide sign panel. Staff
believes that it is important to adhere to the intent of the Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision and Design
Framework creating a more consistent look to monument signs.
Use Permit No. 3637 - Suns
December 7. 2000 Paget
Height
Width
Proportion
Proposed sign:
15 feet
6 feet
40%
Alternative sign:
20 feet
6 feet
30%
Prototype signs:
15 feet
3' -9" feet
25%
20 feet
5 feet
25%
24 feet
6 feet
25%
This monument sign is the first sign to be considered under the newly adopted Mariner's Mile Strategic
Vision and Design Framework. The proportionality concept of the signs is an important aspect of the
sign design guidelines. The City's design consultant who drafted the Design Framework has reviewed
the sign and recommends that the sign be modified to comply. However. he does not recommend
increasing the sign to 24 or 25 feet in order to accommodate the requested 6 -foot wide sign panel. Staff
believes that it is important to adhere to the intent of the Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision and Design
Framework creating a more consistent look to monument signs.
Use Permit No. 3637 - Suns
December 7. 2000 Paget
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the proposed monument sign be modified to comply with the Design
Framework and Zoning Code, and that the maximum height of the, sign be limited to 15 feet.
Submitted by:
PATRICIA L. TEMPLE
Planning Director
0 G('TMI., z _ j
Exhibits
Prepared by:
JAMES W. CAMPBELL
Senior Planner
La
2. Excerpt of Chapter 20.42 regarding monument signs which includes the Mariner's Mile
monument sign prototype.
FAUSERSWLMSHAREDU P1A.NCO.N\1000\1 ?- 07pcUiffyWbe \jiffy lute sins I2-07.do
Use Permit No. 3647 - Signs I
December 7, 2000 Page 3
Page 20.42 -16
Specific Plan District #5
Mariner's Mile
20.42.055 Signs
A. All signs in Mariner's Mile are encouraged to conform to the following five general
criteria:
1. To the greatest extent possible, signs for each site should be limited to those
identifying businesses, giving directions for on -site circulation and providing leasing
information.
2. Advertising is discouraged on any sign (i.e., product/service information, prices and
sale information, phone numbers, website addresses).
3. Sign copy should be located no closer than one half letter height to any sign edge or
other line of copy to provide sufficient blank space around the letters for the sign to
be legible.
4. Temporary Banners are allowed, subject to City permit requirements.
5. Lighted signs are allowed, subject to City ordinance requirements.
B. All signs within the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan area (SP -5 District) shall be subject to
Chapter 20.67 except as specified by the following requirements:
1. Pole Signs, Multi- Tenant Signs and Single - Tenant Monument Signs.
a. One (1) Pole Sign or Multi - tenant Sign or Single- tenant Monument Signs may be
permitted on a building site with a minimum of 50 linear feet of street frontage.
Additional signs may be considered for large building sites with a minimum of 300
linear feet of street frontage through the submittal of an integrated comprehensive
sign program subject to approval by the Planning Director.
b. The maximum height of a pole, multi - tenant or single- tenant monument signs shall
be 25 feet above natural grade. Within the Mariner's Village Area exceprwhere a
sign is located on Coast Highway, pole signs, multi- tenant signs or single- tenant
monument signs should be designed to a pedestrian scale and the height should not
exceed 15 feet above natural erade.
c. Pole Signs shall consist of distinct base, column and sign panel elements (refer to
Figure 1 — Pole Sign). Design and proportional relationships between sign elements
as shown in Figure 1 are important, although variations are possible. The height of
the base should be 25 % of the total sign height. The sign shall incorporate a
decorative base cap and pole cap. Articulated poles are encouraged. The bottom of
the sign panel shall be clear of the natural grade walk by not less than 8 feet and
shall not overhang the public right -of -way greater than 2 feet subject to the approval
11/23/2000
_Jr
Page 20.42 -17
Specific Plan District #5
Mariner's Mile
of the Public Works Department. The maximum sign panel area shall be calculated
per Figure 1.
po�� Grp
�% a t -
6'PRlriht�l / IliK ii
�E = ;1616rHT
- Lb4o J frw.
MCO'>A 4aC
a 'FIs Imo. or "
po51Heso�s
I n�rrrr3'(
'f t4KA.e
LvGo oR
�t +ni Df.R i
Miyy AArE
Fi -ure 1 — Pole sign
C
11/23/2000
It 11
fi.lt, SlaK�ea.s
xS' X z.5's r-Z.5,%
• !}ILr -14iJ •..BCD
Pier !l�fC
1
Fi -ure 1 — Pole sign
C
11/23/2000
Pa .-e 20.42 -18
Specific Plan District #5
Mariner's Mile
Figure 2 — Multi- tetiant sign
11/23/2000
16
'3St HAX
Page 20.42 -19
Specific Plan District #5
Mariner's Mile
1 /4-4
i
I
i �hl►.3H�W
j•�h►���iti��: —
mi-
SALEg : LLIOPoprflH4
LxAzm $ustusyy i
EQLITP►'OtNT
1%4 ¢OtZ- r4ohert AU
tlo � A It=^ s
Figure 3 — Single- tenant monument sign
11/23/2000
Page 20.42 -20
Specific Plan District #5
Mariner's Mile
d. Multi- tenant Signs shall be monument signs or flush - mounted on building: walls
(refer to Figure 2 — Multi- Tenant Sign). Design and proportional relationships
between sign elements as shown in Figure 2 are important, although variations are
possible. Height of the base should be 16.67% of the total sign height. The width of
the sign panel should be 25% of the total sign height. The height of the primary sign
panel to be 25% of the total sign height and the secondary sign panels to be 25% of
the total sign height. The maximum sign panel area shall be calculated per Figure 2.
e. Single- tenant monument signs may be permitted for the purpose of business
identification and shall comply with Subsection Id of this Section and Figure 3
although the sign may be monolithic without "reveals" and the base may be
eliminated if desired.
2. Wall Signs. Wall Signs are permitted pursuant to Chapter 20.67 except as modified
by this section.
a. No wall sign shall have a projection over public property greater than 2 feet, nor
extend above any adjacent parapet or roof of the supporting building.
b. The area of a wall sign shall not exceed 1.5 square feet per linear business
frontage. Building frontage is the linear extent of a building or business, which
has frontage on either a street, parking area or walkway. Only one side of the
building facing the street, parking area or walkways shall be used to determine the
maximum sign area. A width of a wall sign may not exceed 70% of business
frontage or leasehold and the height of the sign may not exceed 75% of the height
of the fascia or portion of the wall between the top of any windows and the lowest
point of the roof.
c. The location of a wall sign shall be the center of the building entry frontage or
leasehold for which the sign advertises. The location of wall signs is depicted in
Figure 4 — Wall Sign Location. Alternate locations may be approved if the
Director of Planning finds the location is compatible with the design of the
building and site.
d. One sign per street frontage or parking lot frontage per business is allowed, with a
maximum of 3 signs per business. Within multi - tenant buildings, one (1) wall sign
may be permitted per business. Major Tenants with more than 2,000 square feet of
floor area within a multi - tenant building may be permitted additional wall signs
by the Planning Director.
e. In addition to the wall signs permitted; under this section, multi - tenant buildings
shall be permitted a building directory wall sign listing tenants, not exceeding 25
square feet. ,
3. Projecting signs are permitted pursuant to Chapter 20.67.
11/23/2000
I�
El
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December 7, 2000
as defined by Title 20 of the Municipal Code. Prepackaged food
is processed food prepackaged To prevent any direct human
conT with The food product upon distribution from The
manufac r. Ready -To -Eat food that is in a form that is edible
without add' al washing, cooking, or preparation by the food
facility or the c mer and that is reasonably expected to be
consumed in that for .
33. Traditional meal service eit1b4.,cat a counter or table shall be
prohibited, Beverages served in coN nction . prepackaged or ready-
to -eat food does not constitute a m ooking or meal preparation
facilities shall be prohibited.
34. The added portion of the tenant space shall be a of to move the
storefront back approximately 5 feet to reduce the indo eating and
add area for outdoor seating. The alterations shall be ap ved by
the Planning Director.
35. Supplemental off -sheet parking shall be provided during the morning
peak hours (7 a.m. to 10 a.m.) through an off -site parking agreement
with a nearby commercial property owner. The agreement shall be
approved by the Office of the City Attorney. The location of the off -
site parking shall by approved by the Planning Director.
SUBJECT: Jiffy Lube Signs
2801 East Coast Highway
Use Permit No, 3647 sign program
Review of sign program for the Mariner's Mile Jiffy Lube under construction as
required by Use Permit No. 3647.
Commissioner Tucker asked staff for and received a brief review of the
ground rules for monument signs. I am not sure That I understand completely
how The monument sign program works.
Mr. Campbell referring To The staff report noted The prototype exhibit of a
monument sign. This particular exhibit is included in The sign program and
strategic vision, which is The policy document upon which This entire program
was developed. The provisions call for a relationship between the height of
the overall monument sign to its width. That is, the width would be 25% of the
height; if the sign was 24 feet high, it could be 6 feet wide. That is the height
of The Total sign structure. The Term sign panel is The uppermost portion where
the graphic or lettering, etc whatever is being depicted as the sign. The
proportions I am discussing are the overall sign structure of the sign cabinet,
48
INDEX
Item 8
UP 3678 sign program
Approved
Exhibit No. 2
�5
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December T, 2000
INDEX
or the entire monument. The height is whatever is proposed and the width
would be 25% of that overall height. The actual sign panel area there is a
formula that talks about how large the panel can be on that particular
monument. The exhibit depicts the design quality. the proportionality. He
then proceeded to discuss the proportions /dimensions of the exhibit of Figure
3. single- tenant monument sign. Then. referring to Figure 1- the pole sign. he
noted that the only provision or limitation on the sign panel size is to its area.
It will need to fit in the overall width of the cabinet and if you follow the
proportion of the area to its height. you will develop a sign that is relatively
small that basically fits within the top quarter of the sign.
Commissioner Tucker stated that what it comes down to is in order to have a
sign that is not narrow. you need to have a sign that is very tall. A 12 -foot sign
will have a width of 3 feet. A small facility like the Jiffy tube with a 25 it high
sign that is basically as tall as the building as opposed to another business
with a larger frontage or bigger area where a 25 it tall sign fits into the scale
of the property that you are dealing with. We may end up with in this
particular case a sign that is skinny. and I wonder if maybe it might be too
narrow.
Mr. Campbell noted that in looking at this particular provision. staff looked at
developing a relationship between the width of the property to the overall
height of the overall sign. We debated that with the Business Owners
Association who help develop this with staff. We then kept it with the existing
provisions. which would allow it on a 50 -foot wide property. Staff looked at
those relationships and recommended that the sign height be 15 -feet high.
which is below the level of the building and we felt made a good height
transition from the street to the building. It is less than four feet wide. The
existing panel they are looking for at the top of the sign gets to be relatively
small because it will be reduced in height proportionally as the width
decreases. In talking with the applicant. they are concerned that the
message the sign portrays will be lost. given its size at that point. Staff wanted
to point out in the staff report that there are other alternatives that could
meet their corporate identification needs through the use of their logo.
Commissioner Tucker noted that in reading the Mariner's Mile document.
there was a lot to read and now that we have a concrete example in front of
us. I am not overly enthused about a building that small having a sign that is
15 feet tall and is skinny and does not give a lot of text. I question what we
did on that one regard.
Commissioner McDaniel asked if it was an illuminated sign and was answered
that the sign panel at the top is illuminated. The cabinet itself is basically
sheet metal. textured and painted to match the proposed building. There is
no provision for a condition on the amount of illumination that is covered by
the Sign Code that provides light and glare not to be excessive to cause a
detriment. Staff will look at the sign illumination when it has been installed
49
I
City of Newporf Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December 7, 2000
and tone it down if necessary.
Ms. Temple noted that there are specific lumen levels for various types of
business districts within the Code and those will come into play in this case.
Public comment was opened.
Bill Hemingsmith, T and T Sign Co. of 1436 Cherry Ave., Long Beach spoke as
the sign manufacturer for the Jiffy Lube. He noted the following:
• Fabrication - aluminum with a textured background; panel will be a
left -hand face and vacuumed form through the aluminum.
• Illumination - the lumens that will come through will be subtle and
mute; there will be no neon sign. The neighbors or adjoining
businesses will not have a problem with the lighting of the sign itself.
• Number of signs - total of two wall- mounted signs located on either
side of the building; one ground sign and a monument sign if possible.
Jiffy Lube relies on that signage as people come up and down that
street and identify with that logo. Without that, they would not be
able to pull customers in. Jiffy Lube advertising is their signage.
• Monument sign - willing to work with staff so that it is pleasing for the
residents and the City. He presented an alternative design with the
dimensions of 15 ft high and 3 ft wide. He agreed that this does not
look pleasing and is not something that Jiffy Lube would like to have.
He noted that they would like to have something shorter and wider,
not that it dwarfs the building.
Commissioner Tucker stated that if someone misses the wall sign they would
miss the monument sign while driving by. My business as a shopping center
developer and this is a lot of signage. No town that is nearly as permissive as
Newport Beach. I don't have anyplace where I am ten feet off the street
with that small a building with a three -foot sign on both sides of the building. I
am not saying I am not going to vote for a monument sign, but I think that if
you allow it, retailers would put 15 signs on it in case somebody missed the first
14.
Commissioner Gifford referencing the graphic that was provided, noted that
if the 3 feet of the actual copy face were sitting on the 2.6 ft. base with a little
margin on the top and bottom, would that satisfy your requirements? (The
total foot height would be 6.5 ft. monument sign)
Mr. Hemingsmith answered yes: This would add the reveal in the middle so
that an additional 3 inches with 3 feet above that. He asked if the
Commission would like a roof on the top of it? Going 2, 6, 5 and another 6
inches would make it a 6ft sign from the base to the top. The text will be
added with the J logo.
Mr. Campbell added that there is a provision in the code with how much
50
RNITI O
15
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December 7, 2000
area these panels can take up. This new diagram may exceed that area.
At Commission inquiry.; Mr. Hemingsmith noted that some articulation could
be added to the top of the sign, i.e., maybe columns to tie it into the building;
design elements that would scale out to the proportion of the sign that could
be pulled from the building.
Public comment was closed.
Chairperson Selich commented that the suggestion of lowering the sign
seems to be a most acceptable solution. In getting this clarified with staff, it
really seems that when we approved the Mariner's Mile Design Guidelines, we
actually approved the concept that encouraged vertical monument signs
and not horizontal signs. I know there are exceptions in there that allow us to
do a lower monument sign, but the theme we adopted was to go with the
vertically oriented monument signs.
Commissioner Kiser noted that this particular location as close as it is to Coast
Highway and that many of the buildings on the north side are close to the
street; because of the nature of this building allowing wall sign in each
direction not for from the street. I can not imagine people traveling up and
down Coast Highway are not going to see and know there is a Jiffy Lube
there. I question the need for a monument sign at all. I realize it was
approved, but I had in mind that the ground sign should be a 4 or 5 feet high.
not 6, 7 or 8 ft. The Jiffy Lube sign is well recognized and I would think that the
owner would want the most attractive property they can. 1 believe a low
monument sign would fit in here quite well.
Commissioner Gifford noted that in the context of the hypothetical that we
were talking about, could we achieve some of the shortening of that through
lowering the 2ft 6inch base?
Commissioner Kiser answered that from the standpoint of this particular
building, we might consider putting a height limit and let the applicant work
with it. I know the sign people are very creative and they have a couple of
very visible wall signs and so my suggestion would be that we arrive at what
we think makes sense from a height limit and allow them to design
something. They would then come back to either ,the Planning Director or
someone, to have that approved. ;
Commissioner Kranzley noted his agreement that a 6 -foot tall monument sign
is pretty massive, especially with the wall signs and the building is built right
there. I
Commissioner Tucker asked if there was on- street parking. We don't want to
have that sign be too small; I think a 6 -foot sign total might be advisable to
see over the top of cars. I think I would support a 6 -foot sign, maybe 5 1/2
51
INDEX
N
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December T, 2000
feet high.
INDEX
Chairperson Selich noted that the concept under consideration is to use the
exception procedures as noted in the staff report and come up with our own
proportions, which is Taking The 3fT by 6 It sign and putting it on a monument
base.
Motion was made by Commissioner Kiser to approve the sign in connection
with the Use Permit 3647. The monument sign rather than as submitted in the
drawings in the packet dated October 30th having to do with the wall signs
and dated November 22nd; with respect to the monument sign it is to be re-
designed to a maximum size of 4 feet wide by 5 and 1/2 feet high. A plan is
to be submitted to the Planning Director for approval.
Mr. Hemingsmith noted that the way we had it was 6 feet wide and we had it
set up as 3x6 on the panel. Commissioner Gifford mentioned that we just
take that and drop it down onto a base with an architectural feature on top.
If we make it 4 It it will not be much signage. Six feet will be acceptable as
we can get our logo on it. I can be more creative, and if you will allow me to
work with staff on this I understand your concerns.
Commissioner Tucker noted that under our design guidelines, you would have
3 and 3/4 feet width with a 15 -foot sign. We are giving you an extra 3 inches.
AT Commission inquiry, Mr. HemingsmiTh noted That with a 6 -foot width he
could take aluminum, route out the copy and logo, and take 1/2 inch acrylic
and push it through. Then when it illuminates at night, you will just see the text
and logo; the actual background will be opaque. It would give you the
channel letter effect. This would give a halo affect.
Commissioner Selich noted this would be very similar to the sign approved on
Mr. Rocky Ray's Center in Corona del Mar.
Commissioner Kiser noted he would revise his motion to make the outline of
the signs be up to 6 feet wide by up to 6 feet high. The re- design will be
submitted to the Planning Director for approval, but only with the
understanding it will conform with the description just given in the hearing
Tonight by Mr. HemingsmiTh. The sign will be routed aluminum with The push
through acrylic; and the wall Signs as proposed. A variation of an element
within the 6 -foot height will tie in with the architecture of the building, i.e., a
little roof. This would not add any height, but would be within a 6 -ft by 6 -ft
dimension.
Commissioner Tucker noted that considering the amount of signage on the
building, This sign would best be a modest sign. I am sticking with 4 It in width
and 6 It in height in which the base would need to be 2 1/2 feet of that.
52
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December T, 2000
Commissioner Kiser then revised his motion again so That it the sign would be
4 feet wide by 6 feet high maximum including any architectural elements
and that the proponent will work with the Planning Director to get approval
of the sign. The base will be at least 2 1/2 feet high and the construction
elements will be the aluminum with pushed out acrylic.
Ayes: McDaniel, Kiser, Agaianian, Selich, Gifford, Kranzley, Tucker
Noes: None
Absent: None
Planning Commission Meeting Time
Chairpers Selich suggested that whatever time we do settle on for starting
the meeting, hat we have a provision in our Rules that says we do not take
up any new b mess after 11:00. So, if we move it up a half -hour then we
move That Time uiNolso.
Commissioner Kranzley oted That some of our meetings have run on into
time periods when we m not be functioning very well. I don't think a 6:30
p.m. start time is a hardshiN I think it would provide us with more of an
opportunity to get these meeti over with at a decent hour.
Commissioner Gifford noted that sh ees this as a way to helping the public
to participate in our meetings. It is ve hard for people to come here and
have an item that they are concerned w7kand have it heard late at night.
It does not lend itself to citizens' participatio . I am in favor of starting at 6:30
or even 6:00p.m. With a corresponding roll babN< the latest hour at which
we would take up a new item.
Motion was made by Commissioner Kranzley to chaVe the start of the
Planning Commission meetings To 6:30 p.m. and no ad `4onal items To be
heard after 10:30: our rules and procedures are to be so ameN4ecl.
Commissioner Agaianian noted his concern stating That sometim iT is hard
to finish work, get cleaned up and get over here.
Ayes: McDaniel, Kiser, Selich, Gifford, Kranzley, Tucker
Noes: None
Abstain: Agaianian
Absent: None
Mkt
53
INDEX
Item 9
PC meeting
time change
Approved
starting
,% 'I
M M
d5 <'I'l
M
Exhibit No. 3
& --------------- -
If
ol
2-1 U-
= zo�
Oftl
m
(h
ch
>
> m 'o
r- U)
m
cn O M z <
m
M m
m
0 0
FvOD
0
U)
m 0
>
m A
M M r-
m
0
:Tl Z-
FR A
gow
z C3)
C) 0
cb
mm
m0om
X
0 0
yam
boa UN
OD z
0 en
cA
arz
4
hNil I I
V.
17
an
Exhibit No. 4
'q,
-
�4
II
cA
arz
4
hNil I I
V.
17
an
Exhibit No. 4
/ w —
I lE H `
12 ■ �
;�3
(
)
\
)�
)
as
\
)
(
\
\ \(
cc)
\
>
\
;2
0
O^ )
)
(J®
2 / * ;e
C
\! /
7\\§2
/u
,
e((
6\ ,
;�3
)� ]
\ \§!!.�| ', '■ |
__\Rq=
z
j
ƒ
8
�
/
n
§ �
) k§
R !0,9 $
7 \�!;
G °8` No8i
8kF( g ; ;r!
§
>5
Q
w
J
LL
F-
ui
W
III ias 3 4 m o
roroqq m �a1
_11YJL 1m15 O
a n o ¢J
o � �
O
QWZ
2 �
Q$n s arz5 Y� Er.iE E�z���
€€r 5 F
a A A 'uum
.tee 2
n
I�
® ®v
I Ar-.£ f
c
O
O
U
�Q
X
w
w
O
Z
4
z
9
N
to
C�
I .ae
oe
aI
w
LL
Z
C
Z p
k'
¢�
O
U S
(
u
�m
Diu'
¢�5a
wLVm
mL�
� C1m
afm mE SSX
3
UW
c
Q81
w�
`3
mUQ Ua
Q
Z
�< °i9'
LL'vz
oz
VQ�U
c�.Zn^xi
OU"
(a
QV
yiFaw
ZEzE
-O
N C
y 2J S
U
aI
§ (
k k
J
§k \
k2
., z
aw §
§k =
§ m /m \x o
2 k k�° �z §
,} k9§
;zz ;w$m
§ �8rnmoz
§o§m[�
aKkd :§)
. . :
w
§§
�j
4■
cz
(w
&E
/ .
k&
I |
1
i
b
ZU
|
\f
. ;. z
\ o
kk
7�