Loading...
11/16/2021 - AGENDA ITEM 4 - CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO ACCEPT/HEAR AN APPEAL OF SIGN ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW (SAR) 21-01 APPROVAL FOR A 249-SQUARE FOOT WALL SIGNAGENDA ITEM NO. 4 AGENDA STAFF REPORT City of West Covina I Office of the City Manager DATE: November 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: David Carmany City Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO ACCEPT/HEAR AN APPEAL OF SIGN ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW (SAR) 21-01 APPROVAL FOR A 249-SQUARE FOOT WALL SIGN LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE HIGH-RISE OFFICE BUILDING AT 100 N. BARRANCA STREET RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council deny the request to accept/hear an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to uphold the Community Development Director's decision to approve Sign Administrative Review (SAR) No. 21-01. BACKGROUND: The project site is a 1.42 acre lot located on the northeast corner of N. Barranca Street and E. Garvey Avenue North in the "Regional Commercial" (R-C) zone. The site is developed with a 226,110 square -foot 13-story office building with existing "Jollibee" wall signage located on the east and west side. On July 29, 2021, a SAR application was submitted for a 249.37-square foot internally illuminated channel letter "P.K. Schrieffer LLP" wall sign located on the south side of the subject building (the plans are included as Attachment No. 1). As the proposed signage complies with West Covina Municipal Code (WCMC), it was approved by the Community Development Director on August 5, 2021. The following week, submittal of an application for a "Jollibee" wall sign on the same location was attempted. The applicant for the "Jollibee" sign was informed that another sign was approved on the same location. Both the "P.K. Schrieffer LLP" and "Jollibee" signage applicants expressed that they received approval from the property owner to install their respective signs on the same location. Typically, this is a civil matter that should be discussed between the property owner and its tenants regarding which tenant should get the signage. The City's Municipal Code allows citizens to file appeals of City decisions that they do not agree with. On August 13, 2021, Jollibee filed an appeal of the Director's approval of SAR No. 21-01 approving the "P.K. Schrieffer LLP" wall sign. At the October 12, 2021 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission heard the appeal and voted to deny the Jollibee's appeal. That evening, the Planning Commission upheld the Community Development Director's decision and approved the P.K. Schrieffer LLP sign. Pursuant to WCMC Section 26-212(b), the decision of the Planning Commission on the appeal is final, unless a written request of an appeal is made to the City Council. The City Council then considers if they wish to hear the appeal. On October 20, 2021, Jollibee submitted a letter to the City Clerk's Office addressed to the City Council, requesting that the City Council grant a request for an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision (Attachment No. 2). The City Council is not required to grant the request for the appeal of the Planning Commissions decision. DISCUSSION: Per WCMC Section 26-341, signage at the top of a multi -story office building is referred to as "a building identification" sign. The maximum building identification sign area is three (3) square feet for every lineal foot of building frontage, with a 5-percent increase for each story above the 4th story (subsection (d) provides an additional 250 square feet sign area bonus for buildings 150,000 square feet or larger). The street frontage along E. Garvey Avenue North is 125 feet. The maximum allowed signage on the south side of the building is 543.75 square feet. The "P.K. Schrieffer LLP" sign was approved because the signage complies the WCMC. The WCMC does not limit building identification signage to one tenant. The Code allows one sign per street or parking lot frontage. The City Council is not required to grant the request to appeal the Planning Commission's decision. However, if the City Council chooses to grant the request, the appeal will be scheduled and agendized at the next available City Council meeting. As the "P.K. Schrieffer LLP" sign meets WCMC requirements, the appeal to the Planning Commission was denied, and the Planning Commission approved the sign, staff recommends that the City Council not approve the request for the appeal to the City Council. OPTIONS: The City Council has the following options: 1. Not approve the request for the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of SAR No. 21-01; or 2. Approve the request for the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of SAR No. 21-01. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project is considered to be categorically exempt, pursuant to Section 15301 (Class 1, Existing Facilities) in that it consists of the installation of signage on an existing building. The project does not involve any expansion of use or additions to the existing building. Prepared by: Jo -Anne Burns, Planning Manager Attachments Attachment No. 1 - Plans Attachment No. 2 - Jollibee Appeal Request Letter CITY Enhance the City Image and Effectiveness COUNCIL GOALS & OBJECTIVES: ��► P.K. SCHRIEFFER LLP 100 Barranca St # 1100, West Covina, CA 91791 M _ 91j h1 SIG ' rrN➢r6X5 S1NEfX9E June 18.2021 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Sign CriAt A— IS, ose Tyect M,me: rnrBanosni onrnMa 9—I" nr Naa<X:mm sfe i i a. nr ' penowi.�n .n v i n.ry FigNeuNbX ❑ meow eenae k.l➢'. A, nm➢a Mtres pl nrea fw rou b/ r. Cu slg na W11, nerrpnndaa aq ana a nv fir, or ,owownmr YP�Nosewnaeceverwrmv[ s .Z NevIn ❑ rnra Xem:bn ❑ mx rtYan➢mu, Yunan9,namMnyor n. Drawn by: Aen lnVt[rors Inc. A d co W Site Plan d co Vol"! 00 `�Q s M Qk(..51�rF d �* 7 n d y E Garvey Ave N. SITE PLAN NOT TO SCALE o�arNnaµt S\Y4k.A Role r a ir, XlslsanaXglna4 u,,bllil Erawing ereareE "P&PCusMm Synx l[Is wkmillM bryour pnserxluz Nemlunstlan wltha Prleet heln9 Rtlrlresa plannW faryou by P&flCuibm Signs,anJsflallnal penprNueeO.usedhyorElubatleaanYnrm wO CoIsar„yw=wsMraC—C--loin Flnt Peri4en ❑°� SsmMpeAslon ❑ ThidReNsba ❑ w ° P �p peXUMrnpalMe llnlnWepeper0 undo Seale:Rs nattd Maven Ey: S¢n(unb¢im mc. n Internally Illuminated Channel Letters 1 unit required SM SOUTH ELEVATION P,K. SCHRIEFFER LEASES THE ENTIRE 11TH FLOOR cl m si o4XejYXx�oxf 51M'EPae Fmlln Name 1M1'" ynL ryd"M1tltl 9 � byflNCu 5 I b tlb � I � � 0 h"9 etlkrpu fl&flC 5 tl M1all F qe"" ❑ � tl on ❑ Mp wdbexe ene Fme4lene wes�e gneDemaymuv 'ga Pall: A960IM ayypyq be po]uel.wei hY tl" betl fi 7M1kflevsan ❑ Draxn b/: Sg�Cmbx�ov he vmpvalnn� anY WTouwhnsoere wlth— n permiss n Internally Illuminated Channel Letters 1 unit required SOUTH ELEVATION �a. neversed image to show 3"x3" aluminum Frame Frame to be 63'x6'with kickers and 2 roof mounts per bar wwrwiwmimmemzmzmw arzw«.`me.`zmeimiimzero.aw, m.mv.nwwwme.mry r..m...ieu. all wmpr.na zo i s ealmmm amen s =eeee a.a my GI —M,z El, swrarsIwdyn ilgnuny. waee m amx a.awrm-2 m,'s... •mVh wwmaet m-, awk w,mal. 519n�Imltlbmq..Nr ann o—' beaks, ena weals pantl mp6eronne[IawIWM1 wINln slgFlol,ne a,qn It,. P.K. SCHRIEFFER LL South Elevation Y C � `cam �� istnnsw GwNvz� 249.37SQFT Thisisana�inaLun[udisnetl tlrawln9 trea4d Fmjeq Hamm byPNCu m 5i,I is wbminetlbryar penmaluseinm,ju„cllon wMaOmleRhung nnealo,pe br r6P <asmmAsnxanasbaiino, FI,s, PeNsmn ❑ se[ad Pewbn ❑ mad ,M1xnlenel 1W,I1FFl1nlm,� heuetle^'w=, y,wmnsr wa ,§, sole: Af natM INkeiC berepoauel.uutl IF,, aistbsM 1. firm Thia Pevisun ❑ vevpva,un�orany W,W,ewnnweres with— Draxn b/: Sgs (arbxton he Jollibee 0) Oct. 18,2021 Councilwoman Rosario Diaz -District 3 City Council Office, 1444 West Garvey Ave. South West Covina, CA 91790 CC: Mayor Letty Lopez-Viado Mayor Pro Tern Dario Castellanos Councilman Tony Wu Councilmember Brian Tabatabai RE: Appealing the approval of SAR No. 21-01 and denial of appeal by the Planning commission; Requesting that no other sign be placed on South Side of 100 Barranca Towers. Dear Madam Councilwoman, We humbly request your office and other honorable members of this council to reconsider the decision by the planning commission to deny our appeal regarding the subject above last Oct. 12,2021. We are including a copy of the letter we then sent the planning commission on our objection/appeal to avoid repeating most of our points regarding the same. The agenda and meeting are recorded if you so wish to examine them, please note that some commissioners agreed with our contention while a few more disagreed. Suffice to say for the purposes of this letter that while we see the merits of the planning commission's position that the city cannot regulate content of signage, we absolutely believe that the city can regulate size, aesthetics, and location of said signage. Jollibee does not object to eyebrow signage at the lower level of the building for other tenants, we simple wish to point out that even during Wells Fargo's rental of the same structure, only two signs were allowed on top of 100 Barranca. Lastly, we wish to thank you for all your and the councils hard work to make our city the best and most aesthetically pleasing that it can be. 4ReIly(1 1 1 Dela Cruz President, Jollibee North America Honeybee Foods Corporation dbo Jollibee 100 N Barranca St. STE-1200 West Covina, CA 91791 • Tel: 626.369.7118 • Fax: 626.369.5254 a Aug. 13, 2021 City of West Covina, Planning Division Letter of Appeal Ref: SAR 21-01 Appeal (100 N. Barranca St.) Jollibee HQ Dear Sir's /Mesdames, We at Jollibee would like to express our objection on allowing/permitting a different tenant to have the third (south side facade) side of the building for the following reasons: 1. We believe that adding a different entity sign on the building would unintentionally cheapen the image of the building and the surrounding commercial area, making the whole building it look like a billboard instead of a corporate HQ. 2. It has always been our recent intent to make West Covina our North America Corporate Home and as such corporate identity via the building signage is going to be crucial in any further expansion, as such the "diluting" of that identity by an entirely unrelated entity next to our signage will make this potential for future expansion less appealing. Once a different company is allowed on that south side, who can say what other potentially incompatible company/entity might take the space in the future? 3. We were previously informed by the city that no more signage would be allowed on the south side as Jollibee took overall the signage square footage on the east and west. Therefore, we did not bother to file for signage earlier. All things considered, we rather that no further signage be granted on the south side facade to maintain the clean aesthetic of the structure. We ask for your thoughtful consideration and subsequent granting of our appeal. ReTgoNly, R elio R Recano Signed