Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB 2012-10-02 #2 CITY OF Community Development Department – Planning Division Meeting Date: October 2, 2012 Case Numbers: ED12-048; SP12-003 Project Planner: Raffi Boloyan – (415) 485-3095 REPORT TO DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SUBJECT: 400-496 Las Gallinas Ave (Northgate III Shopping Center) – Requests for an Environmental and Design Review Permit and Sign Program Amendment to allow repainting of an existing retail shopping center and revision to the existing tenant signage; APN: 175- 250-14; General Commercial (GC) District; AFC Northgate LLC, owner; Bill O’Callaghan and Mike Schalich, applicants; File Nos.: ED12-048; SP12-003. Terra Linda Neighborhood. SUMMARY The subject project is being referred to the Board for review of proposed change to building colors and the request for an amend to the Sign Program for an existing retail shopping center pursuant to San Rafael Municipal Zoning Code Chapters 14.25.040.C.16 and 14.19.043.A.3 and C. The Board’s recommendation will be forwarded to staff for final action. Based on review of the applicable design criteria, which are discussed in detail below, staff recommends that the proposed project, including signs and building colors, generally address the applicable criteria. The proposed new color scheme would introduce high quality earthtone colors that are appropriate for the site and its setting. The new color palette would include 6 different colors to highlight and accent the various architectural features on the building. The amendment to the Sign Program would improve the signs for the “In-Line” tenants, by moving them from underneath the canopy to a more prominent and visible location as well as creating a more concise and cohesive sign. The remainder of tenant signage in the shopping center would be unchanged. Staff requests that the Board review this report and provide a recommendation on compliance with all pertinent design criteria. Specifically, staff asks the Board to consider the following: Building Colors • Whether the proportionality and the location of the proposed new colors are appropriate for this shopping center Signage • Whether the proposed amendment to the Sign Program to relocate the tenant sign from underneath the canopy to the front of the canopy is appropriate • Whether the design of the new “Tenant ID” signs and “hanging blade” signs provide enough common design elements for the Sign Program • Whether the design of the “Major Tenant Sign” is appropriate for the Sign Program • Whether there are improvements that should be made to the sign program to tie all signs together in a more uniform way BACKGROUND Setting: The subject site is a 5.52-acre parcel located in North San Rafael, at the corner of Merrydale Overpass and Las Gallinas Avenue. The site is developed as a shopping center and contains Albertsons and Longs Drugs as the “Anchor” tenants, a vacant restaurant (last used by Chili’s) as the “Major” tenant, Toscalito/Goodyear Tires as the “Pad Building” tenant and ten retail/personal service tenants as “In- 2 Line” tenants. The parcel exhibits 540 linear feet of frontage on Las Gallinas Avenue, 680 linear feet on Merrydale Overpass, and 800 linear feet on Highway 101. Project History: The Northgate III Shopping Center was originally constructed in 1968. At the time of construction, the City did not have any requirements or guidelines for signs; therefore, signs were approved through an Architectural Approval application. As part of the original construction, signs were installed for each of the individual tenants, including three freeway-oriented signs. In May of 1971, the City adopted its first Sign Ordinance and a part of this ordinance required that signage for shopping centers be controlled by specific standards for each individual shopping center. In 1972, the property owner submitted an application for a Sign Program, which was subsequently approved by the Planning Commission. This original Sign Program for the property set standards for fascia/wall signs, under canopy signs, freestanding signs, and window signs. This program included the existing freeway-oriented signage for the three major tenants, Lyons Restaurant, Lucky, and Longs Drug Store, and granted this right to their successors. The Sign Program was later revised in 1976 to add a section for identification signs along the service drive at the rear of the property. In 1997, the owners of the center submitted a proposal to amend the Master Sign Program. The following represents a summary of the major components of that proposal: • Fascia Signs – Proposed that each tenant’s cabinet signs at the front of the tenant space be moved onto the fascia as individual channel letters/logo. Furthermore, the proposed sign program would have also permitted each tenant a second sign of the same size and type on the building fasica at the rear (freeway) frontage of each business. • Freestanding Sign – Proposed that the existing 16-foot tall, freestanding sign be replaced by a 21-foot tall pylon sign. The Board reviewed this proposal on October 7, 1997 and recommended approval of the revised pylon sign but did not support the design of the fascia signs as proposed or additional signs facing the freeway. With the consent of the Board, the applicant moved the pylon sign portion of the application forward to the Planning Commission with the intent to return to the Board with the remaining signage. The Board agreed and the pylon sign was subsequently approved by the Planning Commission on November 25, 1997 and has since been installed. Therefore, the applicable Sign Program for this center is the 1976 Sign Program plus the modification to the pylon sign approved in 1997. A copy of the current sign program standards are attached (Exhibit 2). In 1998, Chili’s Restaurant received approval of a Design Review Permit to allow exterior modifications to the northwest corner of the center, including a redesigned entry to the tenant space, lighting, and the installation of signage, including a freeway-oriented sign on the rear of the building. The placement of the freeway-oriented sign was determined to be consistent with the Master Sign Program since the approved Sign Program for the property permitted freeway-oriented signage for the three major tenants Lyons/Zims, Luckys, and Longs Drugs, and their successors. In 2002, the applicant submitted an application requesting to amend the Master Sign Program for Northgate III Shopping Center. The amendment proposed three changes, including 1) Relocation of the cabinet signs on the front elevation for all ten of the “In-Line” tenants from below the canopy and above each tenant space to the façade above each tenant space; 2) Allowance of one additional freeway- oriented sign for one of the ten “In-Line” tenants (High Tech Burrito), resulting in a total of four freeway- oriented signs; and 3) Replacement of the blade signs under the canopy with new, internally illuminated cabinet signs, reflecting the revised color scheme. The Board reviewed the project on two occasions, April 16, 2002 and May 21, 2002 and ultimately recommended approval of the change to the in-line tenants, but found that the additional freeway 3 oriented sign was not warranted. At that time, the applicant chose to proceed to the Planning Commission for final review and action. However, the applicant chose to proceed to the Planning Commission with entire proposal and Commission ultimately denied the project without prejudice. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A new owner purchased the center a few years ago and has proposed to modify the building colors and upgrade the signage for the “In-Line” tenants. The applicant has submitted applications for Environmental and Design Review Permit to allow the change to the building colors and a Sign Program amendment to revise the Master Sign Program for Northgate III Shopping Center. The project would consist of the following: Building Colors: The proposal would change the building colors for the entire main retail building and the stand alone retail pad (Toscalito’s). The proposed new color scheme would be a combination of earthtone colors, including 6 different shades of colors in the brown, tan, and grey color hues. The proposed colors would be applied to different building elements. The colored elevations are provided on Sheet A-1 and A-2. Staff notes that the applicant has prepared a partial paint out of the building to illustrate the actual proposed colors in one section of the building. The paint out is located at to the left of CVS, in front of, on the left side of CVS (as facing the building) and will be available for the DRB to review on the site anytime prior to the meeting date. Signage: The project requests a Sign Program amendment. The amendment would change to parts of the existing Sign Program and the remaining components of the Sign Program would remain as they currently exist and are approved. The purpose of the amendment is to provide the “In-Line” tenants with more visibility of their signs. Currently, the “In-Line” tenant signs are mounted to the building wall, which is underneath and at the rear of 6 ft deep canopy/overhang. The proposed amendment would move the “In-Line” tenant signs to the front of the canopy and thus increase their visibility. The proposed new “In-Line” tenant signs would also have a new design and consistent appearance. In addition, new Hanging Blade signs under the canopy are proposed for each “In-Line” tenant would and would be mounted perpendicular to the walkway would provide pedestrian visibility of tenant spaces. The proposed revised Sign Program would consist of the following signs. Staff notes that the only changes proposed to the current Sign Program are in regards to signs E and F, and a minor color change to Sign A below. A. Primary Shopping Center Entry Identity (Site Monument Sign): There are is one small change proposed to this sign and that is the painting of the metal sheet pole color to “Twilight Gold” to match one of the new primary building colors. Other than that, there are no changes proposed to this sign. The sign that was approved in 1997 consists of: Location Adjacent to Las Gallinas Avenue. See Sheet S-3 of the attached plans. Number One for center. Type Freestanding pylon signs identifying the center and three tenant copies. Tenant copies are white lexan panels with translucent vinyl copies. See Sheet S-4 of the attached plans. Size Pylon sign is 10 feet wide by 21 feet tall. Sign Tenant/Copy is 24”tall by 9’ 8” wide. 4 Color Missletoe Green cabinet and texcoated sheet metal pole cover painted “Twightlight Gold” Tenant copies are white lexan panels with translucent vinyl copies painted in corporate colors. Illumination Internally illuminated. B. Anchor Tenants Identity Signs (Michaels and CVS): There are no changes proposed to this potion of the program. Currently, CVS and Michaels both have two signs each installed. This program continues to allow the following signage: Location One on façade at store entry mounted directly on façade and one at rear of the tenant space facing Highway 101 mounted on the equipment screen. See Sheet S-3 of the attached plans. Number 2 per Anchor Tenant. Type Channel letters and logo forms. See Sheets S-5 and S-6 of the attached plans. Size Maximum letter size of 48”/maximum logo height of 60”/Maximum sign area of 1.5 square feet per linear feet of leased space or 200 square feet, whichever is less. Color Per corporate colors. Illumination Internally illuminated. C. Major Tenant Identity Signs (Former Chili’s Restaurant): There are no changes proposed to this portion of the program. This continues to allow the following signage: Location On façade at store entry and side-wall mounted directly onto the façade and one at the rear (facing Highway 101) mounted on the equipment screening. See Sheet S-3 of the attached plans. Number Three signs Type Channel letters and logo forms. Size Maximum sign area of 1.5 square feet per linear feet of leased space or 200 square feet, whichever is less. Color Per corporate colors. Illumination Internally Illuminated. D. Pad Building Identity Signs (Toscalito/Goodyear Tires): There are no changes proposed to this potion of the program. The existing signage at the property would remain and is identified as the following: Location On the pad building currently occupied by Goodyear/Toscallito on walls facing the parking lot, Las Gallinas and Merrydale Overcrossing. See Sheet S-3 Number Three signs – Currently say “Goodyear” (Merrydale elevation) on south, “Toscalito Tire and Brake” on west (Las Gallinas elevation) and “Goodyear” on north (parking lot elevation) See Sheet S-8 and S-9 Type Individual channel letters and panel signs. Size 1.5 square feet per linear foot of building façade. Color Per corporate colors. Illumination Internally Illuminated. E. In-Line Tenant Identity Signs: The proposal would result in the relocation of the “In-Line” tenant signage from directly under the canopy to the front of canopy, mounted below the canopy at the front face. As proposed, the new signs would be internally illuminated aluminum cabinet signs. The face panel would be spray painted a tan (BM#957 Papaya) to match and the returns and backs would be metallic gold (MP#28535 coarse metal flake). The tenant name would be laser cut from the aluminum 5 cabinet and backed with white diffuser panel and translucent color vinyl. No color limitations are proposed for the color of the specific tenant lettering. The details on these proposed signs are as follows: Location Above each store entry mounted directly on underneath the front of the façade canopy. See Sheet S-3 of the attached plans. Number One tenant sign panel for each “In-Line” tenant Type Aluminum cabinet sign with laser cut lettering, backed with white diffuser pane and translucent color vinyl copy. See Sheets S-10- S-14 of the attached plans Size 1.5 square feet per linear foot of demised lease frontage. Width shown to be a uniform width of either 9 ft wide by 2.5 ft tall Color Face panel of cabinet would be a tan (BM#957 Papaya). Copy could be any color for the business or use. Illumination Internally Illuminated. F. In-Line Tenant Blade Signs (Under Canopy): The proposed amendment of the sign program would replace the existing blade signs that are located under the canopy with new, blade signs for each of the ten “In-Line” tenants. Location In the pedestrian arcade at each in-line tenant, centered perpendicularly to each storefront with atleast nine feet clear above the sidewalk. See Sheet S-3 of the attached plans Type Double sided hanging blade sign with color acrylic tenant name applied to aluminum background. Number One blade sign for each of the 10 “In-Line” tenants. See Sheets S-10- S-14 of the attached plans Size 1’ 4”” x 3’ wide. Color Face aluminum panel would be a tan (BM#957 Papaya). Copy could be any color for the business or use. Supports would be painted to match storefront color. Illumination Non-Illuminated. G. Special Standards: As identified in the text of the proposed sign program, there are special standards proposed for the following: Window Signs Neon or internally illuminated window signage may be installed inside the store windows Non-illuminated window signage be applied to the window Window signs are limited to 25% of the window area Temporary Signs Non illuminated temporary signs announcing grand opening or special promotion may be installed for up to 20 days in accordance with City Ordinances Address/Auxiliary Signs Address signs shall be a minimum 6” white numbers above entry Hours, emergency phone number shall be ¾” high white medium copy applied to entry door Credit card decals provided by credit card companies may be applied to the door All signs pertaining to ADA ANALYSIS Chapter 25 - Environmental and Design Review Permit 6 Chapter 25 of the Zoning Ordinance prescribes criteria to be used in reviewing Environmental and Design Review Permits. The applicable criteria for reviewing building colors is listed below in italics and is followed by a staff analysis: ¾ Materials and colors should be consistent with the context of the surrounding area. To minimize contrast of the structure with its background as viewed from the surrounding neighborhood, color selection shall coordinate with the predominant colors and values of the surrounding landscape and architecture. High-quality building materials are required. In hillside areas, as identified in Section 14.12.020 of this title, natural materials and colors in the earth tone and woodnote range are generally preferred. Other colors and materials may be used which are appropriate to the architectural style, harmonious with the site and/or compatible with the character of the surrounding environment. In general, the staff recommends that the revised color palette is appropriate for the site and its surroundings. The proposed colors are earthone and compatible with many of the other colors found in the surrounding area. The new color scheme introduces 6 different colors, whereas there are only 2-3 colors currently on the building. In addition, an appropriate color palette is not always enough to create a well-designed project. Many times, proportionally and location of the various colors are applied are vital in creating a well-designed project. Placement and proportionality of colors can help enhance architectural and massing issues. Staff recommends that the placement, and proportionality of the new colors are appropriate and help break up the large structures and provide some visual relief by creating the appearance of smaller building components. One area staff would like to note is in regards to the former Chili’s restaurant section of the building. As the Board will notice, this section of the building was renovated when Chili’s took over in 1998 and has some building materials and architectural elements (Arched entry features, stone veneer columns, stucco exterior) that are different than the rest of the center. This work was approved by the City and no changes are proposed as part of this application. Staff does believe that the new color palette will reduce the contrast that current exists with the rest of the center in terms of building materials. The applicant has prepared a partial paint out of the building to who the new color scheme. The partial paint out can be found to the left of CVS (as you are facing the building). Chapter 19 - Sign Ordinance: Section 14.19.046 (Sign Programs) of the Sign Ordinance states that the establishment of a Sign Program shall be an alternative to the sign standards set forth in the Sign Ordinance. The use of Sign Programs are specifically intended for unique use and property circumstances with the purpose of addressing multiple uses on one site or multiple signs for uses with special sign needs. Sign Programs are to be used to achieve aesthetic compatibility between the signs within a project, and may allow some flexibility in the number, size, type and placement of signs. Sign Programs are specifically permitted for shopping centers, a single building or multiple buildings containing multiple tenants on one or more contiguous sites, signs proposed in a planned development (PD) district, gasoline or fueling stations and automobile or vehicle dealerships and movie theaters only. Sign programs shall not be used for other uses or conditions with the intent to deviate from the provisions of this chapter. Sign Programs shall are required to be designed so that all signage has a consistent and common design theme and placement, utilizing common materials, colors and illumination. The findings are required for approval of a Sign Program (14.49.046.D): 1. All of the signs contained in the program have one or more common design elements such as placement, colors, architecture, materials, illumination, sign type, sign shape, letter size and letter type; 7 2. All of the signs contained in the program are in harmony and scale with the materials, architecture, and other design features of the buildings and property improvements they identify, and the program is consistent with the general design standards specified in Section 14.19.054; and 3. The amount and placement of signage contained in the program is in scale with the subject property and improvements, as well as the immediately surrounding area. Section 14.19.043 established that the Community Development Director (CDD) has the authority to approve, conditionally approve or deny a request to modify an existing Sign Program. In this case, following the DRB review and recommendation, the CDD will take action on this project. A sign program has been established for this site since 1976 and later amended in 1997. In general, staff recommends that the changes proposed to the Sign Program as part of this applicant are minor and would serve as an improvement to the site signage. In-Line Tenant Signs and Hanging Blade Signs Currently, the “In-Line” tenant signs are a variety of sign designs and do not have a cohesive design. Furthermore, the current location, under the canopy mounted on the main building wall, limit their visibility and functionality. By moving the “In-Line” tenant signs to the front of the canopy and creating a common and cohesive design, the center will realize an improvement. The proposed new blade signs also provide a cohesive look and identification for pedestrians walking within the shopping center. The common shape and color of the blade signs (shape and color of background), provide the unity for all the blade signs as well as blend with the design of the primary tenant sign panels mounted to the front of the canopy. The uniform shape and tan color for the background panel provide adequate commonality for the both types of signs. However, staff does have a few concerns with the sign program text for the “In-Line” tenant signs as follows: ¾ There is no standard for letter height, number of lines of copy or colors for the sign copy contained in the Sign Program for either the Tenant Sign Panel or hanging blade signs. The proposed Sign Program text illustrates (Sheet S-14) that the letter height for the blade signs would be 4” tall letters and 12” tall letters for the Tenant Sign Panel, however, some of the tenant signs may need 2 lines of copy as illustrated on the photo simulations (Sheet S-12). Therefore, this should be clarified and letter height should be established for one and two lines of copy. Staff recommends that the Sign Program text should be modified to allow only one or two lines of copy and to set standards for letter height for the two options. ¾ The proposed Sign Program does not specify the acceptable colors or font that can be used for the either the Tenant Sign Panel or the Hanging Blade Sign copies. Staff recommends that the colors and font size should be specified. Staff does not have an issue with the use of any contrasting colors for sign copy, but would suggest that all lettering be a single color and a second color be allowed for accent or logo ¾ The Sign Program text indicates that “In-Line” tenants would be allowed 1.5-sq.-ft. of sign area per linear frontage of their lease space for the combined Tenant Sign Panel and Hanging Blade sign (Sheet S-10). However, the photo-simulations and sign details (Sheet S-12, 13 and 14) illustrate that Tenant Sign Panels and the Hanging Blade signs are a specific size (both height and width). Staff concludes that the specific size of the cabinet is appropriate and harmonious with the design of the center. However, staff would further recommend that the text of the sign Program be modified to 8 match the sizes indicated by the sign detail sheets, i.e., 9 ft wide by 24 in. tall for the Tenant Sign Panel and 3 ft wide by 14 in. tall for the Blade Sign Major Tenant Sign Three signs are approved and continued to be proposed for the Major Tenant (formerly Chili’s Restaurant). In reviewing the proposed Sign Program amendment, staff find sthat this sign could be improved and provide more commonality with the other new “In-Line” tenant signs. The current plans are a little unclear as to whether this would be a cabinet sign or individual letters. Staff would suggest there are some options to tie in the tan background and cut out colored letters from the other “In-Line” tenant signs, but continue the oval shape. Monument Sign The applicant has proposed to repaint the base (pole cover) of the monument sign with Twighlight Gold to tie in with the new building color. However, the olive color (Mistletoe Green) on the “Northgate III” center identification sign does not match any proposed new building colors. Staff request that the Board review this and determine whether the sign program provides the required common design elements with the existing color on the center identification portion of the monument sign remaining unchanged. Summary Overall, with the comments above, staff believes that the proposed amendment to the Sign Program would provide a cohesive sign design for the center, while providing some individuality for tenants. With some minor revisions to clarify and improve the Sign Program as listed above, staff recommends that the findings to grant the sign program can be made. San Rafael Design Guidelines: The San Rafael Design Guidelines (City Council Resolution No. 11667; adopted November 15, 2004) were adopted as part of the General Plan 2020 and strive to improve the design of all residential and non-residential structures and strengthen the overall visual and functional quality of the City. The Guidelines are separated into two sections, those for residential project and those for non-residential. The applicable criteria from the non-residential section is identified below in italics and is followed by a staff response: • Exterior materials should minimize reflectivity. • Use color to provide appropriate accents on a building. There is no change to the building materials and the existing materials would be painted in a new earthtone color scheme. The proposed building colors are designed to provide contrast and accent the various features on the building. Three new building colors are proposed (tan, clay, and green/gray) and the color palette is earthone and similar to other colors that exist in the surrounding area. The Board should review the colors palette, including their proportionality and placement on various portions of the building and make a recommendation as to whether they are appropriate. NEIGHBORHOOD CORRESPONDENCE Notice of the hearing was posted on site and mailed to the surrounding businesses and property owners within 300 feet, 15 days prior to this Design Review Board meeting. As of the reproduction of this staff report, staff has received no written or oral comments on the project. Any correspondence received after the distribution of this staff report will be forwarded to the Board prior to or at the meeting. CONCLUSION 9 Overall, staff recommends that the new building colors and changes to the Sign Program are warranted and will help improve the appearance of the Center. Staff has concluded that the sign program could be improved by provision of more common, unifying design elements. In particular, and the Major Tenant sign type could be redesigned to incorporate more commonality with the remainder of the center. EXHIBITS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Existing Sign Program for Northgate III Shopping Center • 1976 Original Sign Program for Center • 1997 Amendment to Sign Program for Pylon Sign Full-sized plans have been provided to the DRB members only. • Northgate Shopping Center III – Proposed New Paint Colors • Northgate III – Retail Signage Program (revised) cc: Bill O’Callaghan P.O. Box 24 San Anselmo, CA 94960 AFC Northgate LLC 360 A Jefferson St San Francisco, CA 94133 Mike Schalich (via email)