Loading...
PC Resolution-17-04-25-01 PC RESOLUTION NO. 17-04-25-01 SIGN PROGRAM (SP) 17-003 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA APPROVING SIGN PROGRAM 17-003, AS AMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, A TEMPORARY MASTER REAL-ESTATE SIGN AND BANNER PROGRAM FOR ALL TRACTS WITHIN THE PACIFICA SAN JUAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBERS 675-081-17 THROUGH -21, 23; 675-085-01 THROUGH -48; 675-351-17; 675-411-1 THROUGH - 75; 675-421- 01 THROUGH -19; 675-431-01 THROUGH -39; 675-441-01 THROUGH - 03; 675- 442-01 THROUGH -07; 675-443-01 THROUGH -03; 675-444-01 THROUGH - 25; 675-451-01 THROUGH -31; 675-461-01 THROUGH -52; AND 675-471-01 THROUGH -41) (APPLICANT: MATTHEW LAND, TAYLOR MORRISON HOMES) Whereas, Mathew Land with Taylor Morrison Homes, on behalf of Pacific Point Development Partners, LLC, 100 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 1450, Irvine, CA 92618 (the “Applicant”), has requested approval Sign Permit (SP) 17-003, an approval a master temporary residential Real-Estate sign and banner program for all tracts within the Pacifica San Juan Development, which is General Plan-designated Planned Community (PC) within Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) 81-01 (Forster Canyon) on the Official Zoning Map (the “Project”); and, Whereas, Pacific Point Development Partners, LLC, 100 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 1450, Irvine, CA 92618, are the owners of real property with multiple Accessor Parcel Numbers (APN’s) as listed above; and, Whereas, the proposed project has been processed pursuant to Section 9-2.301, Development Review of the Land Use Code; and, Whereas, the Environmental Administrator has determined that a previously certified environmental impact report (EIR No. 88-02) was prepared and approved for the Pacifica San Juan project on August 20, 1991, and a Final Supplemental EIR was prepared and certified by the City Council (Resolution 02-07-02-05) on September 2, 2003 (SCH #2001061018), and that the Sign Program is consistent with adopted EIR No. 88-02 and the Supplemental EIR; therefore, the EIR/SEIR serves as the environmental documentation for the Sign Program for the Pacifica San Juan development under provisions of California Environmental Quality Act Section 21157.1; and Whereas, the Design Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the plans on March 9, 2017 and recommended that the temporary sign and banner program (SP 17-025) be forwarded to the Planning Commission with a positive recommendation; and Whereas, Planning Commission conducted a duly-noticed public hearing on April 11, 2017 pursuant to Title 9, Land Use Code, Section 9-2.302 and City Council Policy 5 PC Resolution 17-04-25-01 2 April 25. 2017 to consider public testimony on the proposed project and has considered all relevant public comments; and Whereas, at the April 11, 2017 meeting, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and approved temporary sign and banner program (SP 17 -025) with the condition that the large freeway oriented banners and flags were removed from the program because they are inconsistent with surrounding land uses, including the City's hillside. The Planning Commission directed staff to bring back a revised resolution at the April 25, 2017 regular meeting to memorialize the Commission's decision in writing; and Whereas, at the April 25, 2017 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission considered the revised SP 17-025 Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of San Juan Capistrano does hereby find that a previously certified environmental impact report (EIR No. 88-02) was prepared and approved for the Pacifica San Juan project on August 20, 1991, and a Final Supplemental EIR was prepared and certified by the City Council (Resolution 02-07-02-05) on September 2, 2003 (SCH #2001061018). Neither EIR No. 88-02 nor the Supplement EIR were challenged within the statutory period prescribed by the Public Resources Code and thus, the EIR No. 88-02 and the Supplement EIR are presumed valid in accordance with Public Resources Code, section 21167.2. The Planning Commission finds that those documents, taken together, contain a complete and accurate reporting of all of the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, and that SP 17-003, is consistent with adopted EIR No. 88-02 and the Supplemental EIR. Moreover, based on the substantial evidence set forth in the administrative record, the Planning Commission finds that none of the conditions under State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 requiring subsequent environmental review have occurred because SP 17-003: a) does not constitute substantial changes that would require major revisions of the environmental public record due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and b) does not constitute substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which SP 17-003 was developed that would require major revisions of the environmental public record due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of the previously identified significant effects; and c) does not present new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the environmental public record documents were certified or adopted, as applicable, showing any of the following: (i) that SP 17-003 would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the earlier environmental documentation; (ii) that significant PC Resolution 17-04-25-01 3 April 25. 2017 effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the earlier environmental documentation; (iii) that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects, but the applicant declined to adopt such measures; or (iv) that mitigation measures or alternatives considerably different from those previously analyzed would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but which the applicant declined to adopt. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of San Juan Capistrano does hereby make the following findings as established by Section 9-2.343 of Title 9, Land Use Code of the City of San Juan Capistrano: 1. The sign program, as amended by the Planning Commission, is consistent with the General Plan and Design Guidelines, and is complementary to the architecture and design of the development project because the project is located within the Forster Canyon COP and is subject to the Design Guidelines for Pacifica San Juan. The Community Design Element of the General Plan sets forth goals and policies to ensure that the overall design of Pacifica San Juan be of the highest quality, and that accessory facilities, including signs, be compatible with the overall theme, and do not create a visual blight that detracts from the quality of the environment and an individual's perception of the City. The Planning Commission found that the sign and banner program, as originally submitted, did not meet the General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element Policy 4.1 "Assure incompatible development is avoided in those areas which are designated to be preserved for scenic, historic, conservation, or public safety purposes," and Policy 5.2: "Ensure that new development integrates and preserves areas designed for scenic, historic, conservation, or public safety reasons." As proposed and conditioned, the temporary sign and light-pole mounted banner program, as amended by the Planning Commission, meets the intent of the General Plan policies as further detailed below. 2. Furthermore, because there are no regulations in either regulatory scheme that limit or regulate temporary subdivision signage, the City's sign ordinance and sign program are the regulating and guiding documents for any proposed temporary subdivision signage proposed for the project. The City's sign ordinance allows temporary Real-Estate signs in the Planned Community (PC) district. The Code allows a maximum height of twelve feet with a maximum aggregate area of 64 square feet. However, the Planning Commission has authority to grant exceptions to the sign ordinance under Section 9-3.543(k) Signs-Exceptions, which states: Exceptions to the standards set forth in Section 9-3.543 may be granted by the Planning Commission. In order to grant an exception, the Planning Commission shall make all of the following findings: 1. The sign complies with all other applicable criteria of this section; PC Resolution 17-04-25-01 4 April 25, 2017 2. The scale of the sign will be in harmony with the architectural design for the building which it will serve; and 3. The sign will not create a hazard to other adjacent properties or tenants. The applicant is proposing a similar number of signs that are similar in size to the signs used in the 2016 approval for the project, with addition of 9 temporary signs, and 10 light-pole mounted banners, thus the same findings as made in Planning Commission Resolution 16-08-23-01 apply. The proposed sign program, as amended by the Planning Commission, continues to use high-quality signage materials, including painted decorative posts that are painted black with signage area consisting of vinyl adhesive mounted on an aluminum pane. With respect to the Section 9-3.543(k) of the code, staff makes the following findings: 1. The sign and banner program, as amended by the Planning Commission, complies with all other applicable criteria of this section because the signs and light-pole mounted banners will be temporary, constructed of high quality materials. Signs will be constructed by using a vinyl adhesive mounted on an aluminum panel attached to a black painted decorative post The signs are non- illuminated and, as proposed and conditioned , will not be placed within any right- of-way areas where the signs would impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic. The light-pole mounted banners have been demonstrated to be of high quality with can withstand strong winds and elements of the weather that might normally damage such signs. The light-pole mounted banners will have a shorter, two-to three year duration, and are conditioned to be replaced if damaged; and 2. The scale of the sign will be in harmony with the architectural design for the building which it will serve because the temporary signage proposed consists of free-standing directional signs and banners are attached to posts rather than a building. Most signs are relatively small and function solely to provide directions and limited information regarding the residential development. The signs and light-pole mounted banners are temporary, non-illuminated, and the banners will be removed after a maximum of three years with the directional signs remaining for a maximum of seven years; and 3. The signs and light-pole mounted banners will not create a hazard to other adjacent properties or tenants because the temporary signs are free-standing directional signs that are non-illuminated, relatively small in size and placement, and because their locations have been carefully considered to provide directions and information about the development without taking up substantial space at any one location. The applicant has demonstrated that the light-post mounted banner signs will be mounted to a bracket which utilizes a spring tension system to keep the banners in place during normal conditions and allows them to rotate was wind speed increases to help reduce wind load and force on the light post, and allows the banner to withstand wind speeds beyond 80 miles per hour; and 4. The sign and light-pole mounted banner program, as amended by the Planning Commission, conforms to all applicable requirements of this Code and any PC Resolution 17-04-25-01 5 April 25 . 2017 applicable specific plan or comprehensive development plan because the signs are not internally or externally illuminated and will be located within landscaped areas; and 5. The sign and light-pole mounted banner program, as amended by the Planning Commission is generally compatible with the design character of adjacent properties and/or rights-of-way because the signs will not impact the right of way and are temporary which will not have a long term impact on adjacent properties, and will be removed once the project has been built-out. Furthermore, the temporary subdivision signs are not internally or externally illuminated and will be located within landscaped areas outside of the right-of-way. The Planning Commission also found that the proposed freeway oriented banners and flags were incompatible with the San Juan Capistrano hillside. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of San Juan Capistrano hereby approves project, SP 16-025, as amended by the Planning Commission, subject to those conditions of approval established by Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS: The documents and materials associated with this Resolution that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at San Juan Capistrano City Hall, 32400 Paseo Adelanto, San Juan Capistrano, California 92675. The Development Services Director is the custodian of the record of proceedings. PROTEST OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020, the applicant may protest the imposition of fees, dedications, reservations or other exactions imposed on this development project by taking the necessary steps and following the procedures established by Sections 66020 through 66022 of the California Government Code. D ADOPTED this 251h day of April, 2017. Ma k Speros Chairman ~CP, Assistant Development Services Director/Secretary