Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZOA 01-80 SIGNS 1980 ORDINANCE NO. 222 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT, RELATIVE TO IDENTIFICATION SIGNS FOR GENERAL COMMER- CIAL DISTRICT BUILDINGS AND COMPLEXES. CASE NO. ZOA 01-80 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 27th day of March, 1980, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider amendment of Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68 (Zoning Ordinance) , containing sign regulations (Sign Ordinance) , relative to identification signs for general commercial district buildings and complexes ; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by Resolution No. 581 has recommended approval ; and, WHEREAS, said amendment has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-3211 , in that the subject project has not been found to present an adverse impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to approve a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment: 1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted General Plan. 3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health, safety, and general welfare, than the current i regulations. J4. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is "necessary to clearly define the signage entitlement for the situation it addresses. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert does hereby ORDAIN as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and consti- tute the considerations of the Council in this case; 2. That it does hereby approve a Zoning Ordinance Text Amend- ment, as provided in the attached exhibit, labeled Exhibit "A" , to amend Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68, by adding a new section relative to building or building complex identification signs for multiple tenant develop- ments in the general commercial district. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council , held on the loth day of April 1980, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Brush, McPherson, Newbrander , Wilson & Mullins NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None q4c, ( D. MULLINS, MAYOR ATTEST: ` SHEILA R. GILL CITY CL CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIF A ORDIiVANCE NO- 222 Page -2- EXHIBIT A I 26 68 395 Building or building complex identification signs in the general commercial district. In addition to the wall sign area allowed for individual businesses, genera commercial district buildings or building complexes which are designed to contain four or more distinct tenant spaces, may be allowed one identification sign on each right-of-way, or public access thoroughfare. Such signs shall not extend beyond the property line or into the right-of-way or thoroughfare, and shall be used solely to identify the building or build- l ing complex. Relative to such signs, the maximum allowable sign area shall be based on the following: ) 1. Up to 50 feet of frontage, three (3) square feet of sign area. 2. Over 50 feet of frontage, up to 75 feet, five (5) square feet of sign area. 3. Over 75 feet of frontage, up to 100 feet, ten (10) square feet of sign area. 4. Over 100 feet of frontage, maximum size of fifteen (15) square feet. These signs when permitted to be freestanding, shall not exceed eight feet in height, and shall not be erected without first having proper approval as provided in this chapter. I J �Yfi { MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING VIII . RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION No. 80-48 (continued) Mayor Mullins acknowledged the fact that R. S .V .P . does work in Palm Desert and possibly by receiving a contribution, they would do more. Though he realized this might open the doors for solicitation from other organizations , he would be in favor , due to its good merits . Councilman Wilson commented that Palm Desert is the only City not supporting the R. S .V.P . Councilman Brush stated he did not think the City Council should become involved; further . that it should not have donated $15 , 000 for Christmas lights . Mayor Pro-Tempore McPherson stated he had no strong feelings , but that he was in agreement with the previous policy to stop agencies from knocking on our door. Councilman Wilson moved to adopt Resolution No. 80-48 . Mayor Pro- Tempore McPherson seconded. Adopted on a 4-1 vote, with Councilman Brush voting No. IX. ORDINANCES For Introduction: None For Adoption: A. ORDINANCE NO . 222 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT , RELATIVE TO IDENTIFICATION SIGNS FOR RCIAL DISTRICT BUILDINGS AND COMPLEXES . CASE NO. ZOA 01-80. There being no further input , Councilman Newbrander moved to waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 222 . Councilman Wilson seconded . Ordinance No. 222 adopted unanimously. X. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS HELD OVER C. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY By Standard Oil Company of California, C evron USA, Kennetn Williamson and Palms to Pines Chevron For An Unspecified Amount . Mr. Erwin stated that the only reason he requested this item removed for discussion was that the Claimant presented his claim too late, in that this happened in May of 1978 . He recommended denial for that reason. Councilman Brush moved to deny the claim and instruct the City Clerk to so advise the Claimant and to refer the Claim to the Insurance Carrier. Councilman Wilson seconded. Carried unanimously. XI . NEW BUSINESS None XII. OLD BUSINESS None 4 - April 10, 1980 MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) A. CASE NO. 16015 - MAYER GROUP (Continued) Councilman Wilson asked if the details about reimbu ement could not be worked out during Final Map approval and Mr. Beebe responded that that was the appropriate t ' e for it. Councilman Newbrander stated that she did no agree with Mr. White that they were not being treated qually in that ` all developers are required to put in drainage facilities . `t She felt the only way to do it was to d it now. Mr. Bouman asked if the applicant wo d mind a two-week continuance of the matter to iron o t these details , and Mr. White responded that they wou like a decision that night . Councilman Wilson moved and Mayor ro-Tempore McPherson seconded to waive further reading and adopt Res ution No . 80-41 as presented. Motion carried unanimously. B. CONSIDERATION OF A VAC ION OF A PORTION OF UNUSED STREET LOCATED AT THE NORTHW T CORNER OF SHADOW MOUNTAIN DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 74. Mayor Mullins declar the Public Hearing open and invited Staff' s report . Mr. Williams stated that this was initiated by an adjacent property o er on the basis of its unusability for road purposes . In reviewing the request , it appears justifiable. He stat that it was Staff' s recommendation that the request be app ved by Resolution No . 80-42 . Mayor M lins invited input in FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the Public Hearin reques and none was offered. He declared the Pub c g clos C ncilman Newbrander moved and Mayor Pro-Tempore McPherson seconded to wai further reading and adopt Resolution No. 80-42. Motion carried unan' ously. C. CASE N0. �ZOA01-8N - CITY OF PALM DESERT, APPLICANT : CON- SIDERATIMENT TO MUNICIPAL CODE , ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT RELATIVE TO IDENTIFICATION SIGNS FOR GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT BUILDINGS AND COMPLEXES . Mayor Mullins declared the Public Hearing open and asked for Staff ' s report . Mr. Williams reported that after 5 years of experience with the Sign Ordinance , a weakness had been discovered in the ordinance in that it does not specifically address the subject of signs to identify multiple tenant buildings when they are not found to be District or Regional Centers on minimum 3 . 5 acre sites . Application of the Ordinance becomes difficult when a building contains multiple tenant frontages and a common building identification sign is desired. L It was Staff ' s recommendation that the only way to uniformly provide the opportunity for a building identification sign would be to amend the Sign Ordinance and specify a criteria for such signs . Mayor Mullins invited input in FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the request , and none was offered. He declared the Public Hearing closed. Councilman Wilson moved and Mayor Pro-Tempore McPherson seconded to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No . 222 to second reading ; carried unanimously. March 27 , 1980 Page 4 MINUTES PALM:DESERT PLANNING LuMMISSION MARCH 4, 1980 Page -7- IX. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS B. Case No. 202 MF (continued) Commissioner Berkey asked if the guard gate would be manned only at night. Mr. Lennon replied that it would be and also for special events. He also explained the purpose of the security gate at night. Mr. Crump asked who would be responsible for the maintenance and ownership of the gate. Mr. Lennon replied that the Homeowners would have ownership and the expense would be shared by the developer. Mr. Crump pointed out that the Homeowner's Association could change the operating procedures for the gate at some future date. Mr. Lennon concurred that it could happen. Chairman Snyder concurred with the Design Review' Board with regard to inadequate turn around area. Commissioner Kryder felt that there was no problem in relation to the turn around, because the gate would be opened all day. He stated that based on the new information provided, this was acceptable to him. Commissioner Berkey concurred with Commissioner Kryder but was con- cerned for the possibility of a stacking problem during the special events, in which the gate would be manned during that time. After further discussion between Commission and applicant, Commissioner Berkey suggested there should be a requirement on the hours the gate would be manned. The Commission agreed to operational requirements and set forth the following conditions: 1) The security gate shall only be used during the night hours to deter easy access to the project, or when manned. 2) There shall be a 24 hour PBX phone coverage or guard to open the gate. 3) A security guard shall be on duty during the night to man the gate for vehicles larger than a long-wheel. based van or truck. These vehicles will be allowed to enter the project where they can use a four-way intersection to turn around. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Miller, the Commission assumed authority over Case No. 202 MF, and whereas, based on additional information and operational requirements to be implemented, this case was approved by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 580, subject _ to conditions. Carried unanimously (4-0) . THE COMMISSION RETURNED TO PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM F. F. Cas =ZO01-80CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request to amend the City' s zoning ordinance text for Municipal Code Section 25.68, et seq, to provide for a new class of signs identifying multiple tenant buildings or building complexes in the Commercial and Industrial Zone, Chapter of the Sign regulations. Mr. Crump reviewed the staff report stating that prior to this Public Hearing staff had reported to the Commission that the City sign regulations were ambiguous in there application to multiple tenant buildings. He explained the research process staff had conducted and the outcome of a sign survey, which Commission had a copy of in their packets. He further explained the usage and suggested sign size criteria for this new specific type of sign. The Commission discussed this matter briefly and agreed there was a need for a specific category of building identification signs. Chairman Snyder opened the Public Hearing asking if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this case. There being none, the Public Hearing was closed. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Berkey, Case No. .ZOA 01-80 was recommended to the City Council for approval , by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 581. Carried unanimously (4-0). CITY OF PALM DESERT • TRANSMITTAL LETTER I. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council II . REQUEST: Consideration of Amendment to Municipal Code, Zoning Ordinance Text, (relative to the Sign Ordinance) III. CASE NO: ZOA 01-80 IV. DATE: March 27, 1980 V. CONTENTS: A. Staff Recommendation. B. Discussion. C. Draft Ordinance No. 222 D. Planning Commission Minutes involving Amendment. E. Planning Commission Resolution No. 581. F. Planning Commission Staff Report dated March 4, 1980. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Waive further reading and pass to second reading. B. DISCUSSION: The Commission discussed this matter briefly and agreed there was a need for a specific category of building identifying signs, and voted unanimously to recommend approval of this Code amendment. (ANCR_ �1 NO. 222 A RlS- �OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT, RELATIVE TO IDENTIFICATION SIGNS FOR GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT BUILDINGS AND COMPLEXES. CASE NO. ZOA 01-80 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 27th day of March, 1980, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider amendment of Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68 (Zoning Ordinance) , containing sign regulations (Sign Ordinance) , relative to identification signs for general commercial district buildings and complexes; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by Resolution No. 581 has recommended approval ; and, WHEREAS, said amendment has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32" , in that the subject project has not been found to present an adverse impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to approve a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment: 1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted General Plan. 3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health, safety, and general welfare, than the current regulations. 4. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is necessary to clearly define the signage entitlement for the situation it addresses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and consti- tute the considerations of the Council in this case; 2. That it does hereby approve a Zoning Ordinance Text Amend- ment, as provided in the attached exhibit, labeled Exhibit "A", to amend Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68, by adding a new section relative to building or building complex identification signs for multiple tenant developments in the general commercial district. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council , held on the 27th day of March, 1980, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: EDWARD D. MULLINS, Mayor ATTEST: HEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California RESOLUTION NO. 222 Page -2- EXHIBIT A 26 68 395 Building or building complex identification signs in the general Comm district. In addition to the wall sign area allowed for individual businesses, generaT commercial district buildings or building complexes which are designed to contain four or more distinct tenant spaces, may be allowed one identification sign on each right-of-way, or public access thoroughfare. Such signs shall not extend beyond the property line or into the right-of-way or thoroughfare, and shall be used solely to identify the building or build- ing complex. Relative to such signs, the maximum allowable sign area shall be based on the following: 1. Up to 50 feet of frontage, three (3) square feet of sign area. 2. Over 50 feet of frontage, up to 75 feet, five (5) square feet of sign area. 3. Over 75 feet of frontage, up to 100 feet, ten (10) square feet of sign area. 4. Over 100 feet of frontage, maximum size of fifteen (15) square feet. These signs when permitted to be freestanding, shall not exceed eight feet in height, and shall not be erected without first having proper approval as provided in this chapter. _ MINUTES PAL14-USERT PLANNING C(,,,.-iISSION MARCN 4, 1980 Page -7- IX. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS B. Case No. 202 MF (continued) Commissioner Berkey asked if the guard gate would be manned only at ight. Mr. Lennon replied that it would be and also for special eve ts. He also explained the purpose of the security gate at night. Mr. Crump asked who would be responsible for the maintenance and owners ip of the gate. Mr. Lennon replied that the Homeowners would have ownersh'p and the expense would be shared by the developer. M Crump pointed out that the Homeowner's Association could change the opera ing procedures for the gate at some future date. Mr. Lennon concurred at it could happen. Chair an Snyder concurred with the Design Review Board with regard to inadequate to n around area. Commissioner Kryder felt that there was no problem in relation to the turn around, because the gate would be opened all day. He stated that ased on the new information provided, this was acceptable to him. Commissioner Berkey concurred with Commissioner Kryder but was con- cerned for the p sibility of a stacking problem during the special events, in which the gate ould be manned during that time. After furthe discussion between Commission and applicant, Commissioner Berkey suggested the e should be a requirement on the hours the gate would be manned. The Commission reed to operational requirements and set forth the following conditions: ) The security gate shall only be used during the night hours to deter eas access to the project, or when manned. 2) There shall be a 24 hour PBX ph ne coverage or guard to open the gate. 3) A security guard shall be o duty during the night to man the gate for vehicles larger than a long-wheel b sed van or truck. These vehicles will be allowed to enter the project where hey can use a four-way intersection to turn around. Upon motion made by Co missioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Miller, the Commission assumed authori over Case No. 202 MF, and whereas, based on additional information and oper tional requirements to be implemented, this case was approved by adoption o Planning Commission Resolution No. 580, subject to conditions. Carried unanimou ly (4-0) . THE COMMISSION RETURNED TO PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM F. F. . Case No. ZOA 01-80 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request to amend the City' s zoning ordinance text for Municipal Code Section 25.68, et seq, to provide for a new class of signs identifying multiple tenant buildings or building complexes in the Commercial and Industrial Zone, Chapter of the Sign regulations. Mr. Crump reviewed the staff report stating that prior to this Public Hearing staff had reported to the Commission that the City sign regulations were ambiguous in there application to multiple tenant buildings. He explained the research process staff had conducted and the outcome of a sign survey, which Commission had a copy-of- in their packets. He further explained the usage and suggested sign size criteria for this new specific type of sign. The Commission discussed this matter briefly and agreed there was a need for a specific category of building identification signs. Chairman Snyder opened the Public Hearing asking if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this case. There being none, the Public Hearing was closed. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Berkey, Case. No. ZOA 01-80 was recommended to the City Council for approval , by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 581. Carried unanimously (4-0) . PC,.,oiING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.� of A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING CONWHISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF AN AMENDiNENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT, RELATIVE TO IDENTIFICATION SIGNS FOR GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT BUILDINGS AND COMPLEXES. CASE NO. ZOA 01-80 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 4th day of March, 1980, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider amendment of Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68 (Zoning Ordinance) , containing sign regulations (Sign Ordinance) , relative to identification signs for general commercial district buildings and complexes. WHEREAS, said amendment has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32", in that the subject project has not been found to present an adverse impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testi- mony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend approval of a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment: 1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted General Plan. 3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health, safety, and general welfare, than the current regulations . r� 4. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is necessary to clearly ` define the signage entitlement for the situation it addresses. IC NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows : 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and consti - tute the considerations of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment, as provided in the attached exhibit, labeled Exhibit "A" , to amend Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68, by adding a new section relative to building or building complex identification signs for multiple tenant developments in the general commercial district. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 4th day of March, 1980, by the following vote, t0 wit: AYES: Berkey, Kryder, Miller, Snyder NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None WALTER H. SNYDER, Chairman ATTEST: PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary ANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A = - �(ESOLUTION NO. 581 40 (� Page Two 25.68.395 Building or building complex identification signs in the general commercial district. In addition to the wall sign area allowed for individual businesses , general commercial district buildings or building complexes which are designed to contain four or more distinct tenant spaces, may be allowed one identi- fication sign on each right-of-way, or public access thoroughfare. Such signs shall not extend beyond the property line or into the right-of-way or thoroughfare, and shall be used solely to identify the building or building complex. Relative to such signs, the maximum allowable sign area shall be based on the following: 1. Up to 50 feet of frontage, three (3) square feet of sign area. 2. Over 50 feet of frontage, up to 75 feet, five (5) square feet of sign area. 3. Over 75 feet of frontage, up to 100 feet, ten (10) square feet of sign area. 4. Over 100 feet of frontage, maximum size of fifteen (15) square feet. These signs when permitted to be freestanding, shall not exceed eight feet in height, and shall not be erected without first having proper approval as provided in this chapter. I_ i INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SUBJECT: BUILDING IDENTIFICATION SIGN FOR COMMERCIAL DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 1980 AND INDUSTRIAL USES It has come to the attention of Staff that the Sign Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68) does not specifically address the subject of signs to identify multiple tenant buildings (or groups of buildings) , when they are not found to be District or Regional Centers on minimum 3.5 acre sites. The Sign Ordinance presently provides for two types of signs which can be construed for use as building identification: (A) Main Business Identification Sign (Section 25.68.270) , the area of which is related to frontage; and (B) Direc- tional Signs, maximum area of 3 square feet. Application of the Ordinance becomes difficult when a building contains multiple tenant frontages and a common building identification sign is desired. It would appear that the only way to uniformily provide the opportunity for a building identification sign would be to amend the Sign Ordinance and specify a criteria for such signs. If the Planning Commission elects to consider this subject further, and conduct a Public Hearing for purposes of possibly recommending an amendment to the Council , Staff will prepare a background report of previous related signing approvals , and suggested uniform criteria for this type of sign. A draft Resolution has been provided to initiate a Public Hearing. II PAUL A. WILLIAMS , AICP DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES /dj CITY OF PALM DESERT STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report on: Amendment to Municipal Code, Zoning Ordinance Text (Relative to the Sign Ordinance) Applicant: City of Palm Desert Case No: ZOA 01-80 / Date: March 4, 1980 I . REQUEST: Request to amend the City's zoning text for Municipal Code Section 25.68, et seq, to provide for a new class of signs identifying multiple tenant buildings or building complexes in the Commercial and Industrial zone districts. II . BACKGROUND: A. CASE INITIATION: Consideration of Amendment initiated by Planning Commission Resolution No. 571, February 5, 1980. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The Director of Environmental Services has determined that the proposed Project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. III . DISCUSSION: Prior to initiation of this Public Hearing, Planning Staff reported to the Commission that the City sign regulations were somewhat ambiguous in there appli- cation to small scale general commercial developments and buildings , and indicated that the Commission may want to consider a special provision for building/complex identification signs. As noted, the sign regulations only provide for indentifica- tion of district or regional commercial centers on sites containing at least 3.5 acres. Identification signs for general commercial developments consisting of either single buildings or building complexes has not been provided. In some instances it would be desirable to communicate the name of the building or group of buildings to identify the location of a tenant, versus relying completely on tenant signs to direct potential customers and clients. There are two existing sections of the Municipal Code which may be interpreted for use as a multiple tenant/building identification sign: (a) Main Business Identi- fication Sign, based on building frontage (application becomes difficult in multiple tenant situations; the question of determining common frontage versus individual tenant frontage for consistent application) ; and, (b) Directional Signs , maximum three (3) square feet size. Staff has conducted a field study and search of file records, and has found that some 34 general commercial buildings, or building complexes , have identification signs. Of those counted, 16 were approved by the City since the adoption of the present Sign Ordinance. It appears there has been some confusion relative to the entitlement for building/complex identification, when sign programs were reviewed for these locations. This would further indicate the need to define a specific category of sign for this application. The average area of signs approved in these actions was approximately 12 square feet. Staff has prepared a suggested sign size criteria related to the projects frontage, which would appear to be equitable in light of previous actions. The survey, the page of the Zoning Ordinance showing where this new section would be inserted, and a draft Resolution with sign criteria, is attached to this report. rF REPORT :;;;",...,arch 4, 1980 • • Page Two IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval to the City Council of an Amendment to Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68, by adding a new section relative to building or building complex identification signs for multiple tenant developments in the general commercial district by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 581 �h i i 1 I i �III 0 o 43) Or N a) n a) u a) () U a) d ro ' Y U U O U C U U C V O C n C C •O G ro C C ro C •O •r. p ro ro ro ro C ro ro C ro ro - C C C •r C C •r C i ro a) -p •r � •r N O N L L C L O L i O i C V C V O O ro O O O O ro C lT C C C C C ro r ro C C C OI C C Ol C C N C O) lT 'i7 m •r m tT r m •r i y N r i Y O N N N y O i C L Y Y O Q O Y Y C Y C Y Y C Y C L m S- S- S- S- S.- L a1 a) S- cu - LS- um 7 O) S- N L L N U L i 7 u u U L O i N N O a) 7 U U u a) L U i U U U L Y al S- C O i O S- O i L i 4- L S- S- N S- 4- a) C O N a) UJ 'a Ql a) a) a)) S-4- •O m •O C "O C •O m i a) C C C C C C L) m =D U r ro ^ .. ro b S- > > ro ro > 0 O > o c > > o > > > > > > o c - L c c c J > O O > > L > O > > O > i O C d O O O Q O O O n O i O O L O =D d > L Y Y L L d L a i L a i d Y ro Y Y Y O d ro ro a a ro n n a a n d ro ro ^ ro ro ro 2' a S- S- 0- d d ro a Q. ro a S_ r 4- 5- L i o- ro O O ro ro 4- ro ro ro to 4- O ro 4- O O O d a a 4- m m 4- a > ro d a d Q m S- L m m ro m K m m aC m ro L O Y L L L. o O o_' C:: Y K O C K O C Y O L Ln O O O W Cl U U O C1 to 1] m m O N U d U U U C) C C C a C C C Q ¢ ro Q W Q •1 •1 U U Q U N U U N U Q •I V) •1 1 I a V) v ro Ln Ln v m a) ar m > i i h Ol aT N m O m LO L o' h L F-- l0 O_ d In lD M h ri l0 d' rl lS') a0 d C] ct n 1 d y L a) Y _ Y _ aJ y N r C C N �• v m m y C N N N T fN Y r N r Z N N N N y U .0.' v v Ln N _Lo O L. M Ln In to O_ e--1 <D M _ _ m m - O X X N CO rl X M to UJ X l0 '"" m to X w X X - - X X X X X X _X = X X X X X X X X X m co N m N N a) C ro J O v L N � a U n C r O O O O O O O O O O O >� W T a) a) (1) Y al a () (V a) a) a) a) Y 4- CL' ro ro ro ro ro ro ro @ ro ro ro ti rl ti r-1 r1 u O d o_ °- o d a d a o_ a a o_o 3 3 3 3 3 y i i •r Li r- ' a v o w w w w w w w w w w w x x x x x N C J N U) In 5- O CD O - CD O LfJ O O r+ rl .� .--1 O CO O W h O C O N L N l.o to N O h co to -zz� tD m M U K N U ro h t0 m Y ct M N O O N N N M to p I N 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 O to 3 co M M E M M M M M M M M M M M M M Q Z Chu h O) C !T C � •r r y L � •r O ro r• 7 Q1 Q) - O r m iT () O ro ro CT C Q ro ro a) m d •r N i ro ro N It N J •O In m ro ro N a1 i 'O i C r- r 7 ro Iz y m m O Q) a) Y aJ (n 7 al 7 U 431 7 d d' a) O X N N a) N m r O O O a) N ro ro O 0 a) o2f U f6 •> W o�L al d ro ro ro ro ro r N Y a) ro •U O- a YO Y U U K i 0 0 Ln. p_ m O 1- 0- 3 W Q m C7 u) W W W I i v v v J U C C v ro m ril- C C N C m U C D O C L L ro s- o O C O L r O cm C C T C O L o N N N C N Y 1 Y C C C }J a N S- � i L L L Y L L > > C u S- u V ai V L U L L i i N 7 Ul S- S- = C N r C r ro ro > = > > r > ^ O Oi O OL > C C C C a C C C O. ro d C C C1 O J O O O O n O O O ro n O m> m O O �- i r ro ro n CL Q Y Y Y 4Y � � 4' L Y +� 4- C) m ro ro ro v- ro m m a v- i s%. vim- m C L s L i 4- L L L ro ro m O 'O co m n a o 0 0 C m o C 0 d C1 n n Y n n d Y Y d PL. N � q L L L i N i i i N N O O O O O O O O O U U ^ lL V U U V U ^ p C Q Q O C C C C Q C C C N N V) N N r r r ^ 1 w •1 •1 ,1 I 1 1 I U e--I y pl m 'D d a) (/ N a) N a) N N L L •••� N >- L L L L O L L L .-I d p• N N CL d d d M d d d N e N � N N .N Ol U1 N v Z N N C) M C7 - v co X X i O O N t0 �r C) ^ ct' CO t0 M_ - X X X X w X X X X X X X X X O O = = X X X X a _ Ql Cn rl r1 f� n M .•'I �-i N N Ol '-I .-'I r; .--I .--I O ..-I ''1 rl .•y .-1 .--I .-4 N bO .~•I ti ti ry rl r1 .-i r1 e--1 r1 N d n i > T T T 3 3 3 r a 3 3 3 0 x x x x x x x w w w d x x x d in .-+ to M C)N to ^-I f/)I C) M O M CT I� w �r n CT co C:) u'1 w to M m N ti C:) CDC;) d' C, V I I O I 1 I 1 � Ul � V m y- ro Y O m N r r d L L r CO N N ro E ro CJI w 3 Y C Y L C "O L Ot 'O C CT O C CT m > m _N 3 m co N N N U r G U N m m ro m �- 02$ N C) N m C r C U r C N Y N N d d O C L O W G1 I C O N N N E n m Y M a) C L w N C V1 L N C i d' 0 C m ro t L v J 2 x N p n d d U O U H n rJ x (Excerpt from the iunicipal Code - Zoning Ordinance 25 . 68 . 390 Sians in district and regional shopping centers . In addition to the wall sign area allowed for individual businesses , shopping centers in excess of three and one-half acres of land shall be allowed one identifica- tion sign on each right-of-way . Such signs shall not extend beyond the property line or into the right-of-way and shall be used solely to identify the shopping center, shopping area, or businesses and/or activities conducted therein . Relative to such signs , the allowable sign area shall be based on five square feet of sign per acre . These signs shall not exceed twenty-five square feet, shall have a maxi- mum height of eight feet, and shall not be erected without first having proper approval as provided in this chapter. Further, where the unique design of the center allows for adequate integration of a larger sign, the permitted pedestrian traffic signs as allowed in Section 25 .68 .330 may be increased to a maximum of six square feet per side . (Ord. 129' §4 (part) , 1977 : Ord . 98 §1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit A §25 . 38-12 . 12) . 25 68 395 Building or building complex identification signs in the general commercial district. In addition to the wall sign area allowed for individual businesses, general commercial district buildings or building complexes which are designed to contain four or more distinct tenant spaces, may be allowed one identification sign on each right-of-way, or public access thoroughfare. Such signs shall not extend beyond the property line or into the right-of-way or thoroughfare, and shall be used solely to identify the building or building complex. Relative to such signs, the maximum allowable sign area shall be based on the following: 1. Up to 50 feet of frontage, three (3) square feet of sign area. 2. Over 50 feet of frontage, up to 75 feet, five (5) square feet of sign area. 3. Over 75 feet of frontage, up to 100 feet, ten (10) square j feet of sign area. 4. Over 100 feet of frontage, maximum size of fifteen (15) square feet. These signs when permitted to be free-standing, shall not exceed eight feet in height, and shall not be erected without first having proper approval as pro- vided in this chapter. 25 .68 . 400 Sale and rental signs . A. Commercial and industrial properties shall be authorized sale or rental signs on the following basis : 1 . Under two and one-half acres , one sign; 2 . Over two and one-half acres , but less than five acres , two signs; 3 . Over five acres , one sign per street frontage . B . These signs shall not exceed three square feet in area or four feet in height and shall be designed and located in a manner satisfactory to the director of environmental services . Such signs shall be removed upon completion of escrow. (Ord . 129 §4 (part) , 1977 : Ord . 98 §1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit A §25 . 38-12 . 13) . MINUTES PALM-Q,ESERT PLANNING Cin mISSION Page -7- MARCH 4, 1980 ****************************************************************************** IX. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS B. Case No. 202 MF (continued) Commissioner Berkey asked if the guard gate would be manned only at ight. Mr. Lennon replied that it would be and also for special eve ts. He also explained the purpose of the security gate at night. Mr. Crump asked who would be responsible for the maintenance and owners ip of the gate. Mr. Lennon replied that the Homeowners would have ownersh'p and the expense would be shared by the developer. M Crump pointed out that the Homeowner' s Association could change the opera ing procedures for the gate at some future date. Mr. Lennon concurred at it could happen. Chair an Snyder concurred with the Design Review Board with regard to inadequate to n around area. Commissioner Kryder felt that there was no problem in relation to the turn around, because the gate would be opened all day. He stated that aced on the new information provided, this was acceptable to him. Commissioner Berkey concurred with Commissioner Kryder but was con- cerned for the p sibility of a stacking problem during the special events, in which the gate ould be manned during that time. After furthe discussion between Commission and applicant, Commissioner Berkey suggested the a should be a requirement on the hours the gate would be manned. The Commission reed to operational requirements and set forth the following conditions: ) The security gate shall only be used during the night hours to deter ea access to the project, or when manned. 2) There shall be a 24 hour PBX ph ne coverage or guard to open the gate. 3) A security guard shall be o duty during the night to man the gate for vehicles larger than a long-wheel b sed van or truck. These vehicles will be allowed to enter the project where hey can use a four-way intersection to turn around. Upon motion made by Co missioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Miller, the Commission assumed authori over Case No. 202 MF, and whereas, based on additional information and oper tional requirements to be implemented, this case was approved by adoption o Planning Commission Resolution No. 580, subjec t to conditions. Carried unanimou ly (4-0). THE COMMISSION RETURNED TO PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM F. F. . Case No. ZOA 01-80 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request to amend the City's zoning ordinance text for Municipal Code Section 25.68, et seq, to provide for a new class of signs identifying multiple tenant buildings or building complexes in the Commercial and Industrial Zone, Chapter of the Sign regulations. Mr. Crump reviewed the staff report stating that prior to this Public Hearing staff had reported to the Commission that the City sign regulations were ambiguous in there application to multiple tenant buildings. He explained the research process staff had conducted and the outcome of a sign survey, which Commission had a copy -of in their packets. He further explained the usage and suggested sign size criteria for this new specific type of sign. The Commission discussed this matter briefly and agreed there was a need for a specific category of building identification signs. Chairman Snyder opened the Public Hearing asking if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this case. There being none, the Public Hearing was closed. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Berkey, Case. No. ZOA 01-80 was recommended to the City Council for approval , by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 581. Carried unanimously (4-0). e � PL...;NING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. _sl A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT, RELATIVE TO IDENTIFICATION SIGNS FOR GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT BUILDINGS AND COMPLEXES. CASE NO. ZOA 01-80 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 4th day of March, 1980, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider amendment of Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68 (Zoning Ordinance) , containing sign regulations (Sign Ordinance) , relative to identification signs for general commercial district buildings and complexes. WHEREAS, said amendment has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32" , in that the subject project has not been found to present an adverse impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testi- mony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend approval of a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment: 1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted General Plan. 3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health, safety, and general welfare, than the current regulations . 4. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is necessary to clearly define the signage entitlement for the situation it addresses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows : 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and consti- tute the considerations of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment, as provided in the attached exhibit, labeled Exhibit "A" , to amend Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68, by adding a new section relative to building or building complex identification signs for multiple tenant developments in the general commercial district. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission , held on this 4th day of March, 1980, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Berkey, Kryder, Miller, Snyder NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None WALTER H. SNYDER, Chairman ATTEST: PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A 14RESOLUTION NO. 581 Page Two 25 68 395 Building or building complex identification signs in the general commercial district. In addition to the wall sign area allowed for individual businesses, general commercial district buildings or building complexes which are designed to contain four or more distinct tenant spaces, may be allowed one identi- fication sign on each right-of-way, or public access thoroughfare. Such signs shall not extend beyond the property line or into the right-of-way or thoroughfare, and shall be used solely to identify the building or building complex. Relative to such signs , the maximum allowable sign area shall be based on the following: _ 1. Up to 50 feet of frontage, three (3) square feet of sign area. 2. Over 50 feet of frontage, up to 75 feet, five (5) square feet of sign area. 3. Over 75 feet of frontage, up to 100 feet, ten (10) square feet of sign area. 4. Over 100 feet of frontage, maximum size of fifteen (15) square feet. These signs when permitted to be freestanding, shall not exceed eight feet in height, and shall not be erected without first having proper approval as provided in this chapter. 1` II 1 E � CITY OF PALM DESERT STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report on: Amendment to Municipal Code, Zoning Ordinance Text (Relative to the Sign Ordinance) Applicant: City of Palm Desert / Case No: ZOA 01-80 Date: March 4, 1980 I. REQUEST: Request to amend the City's zoning text for Municipal Code Section 25.68, et seq, to provide for a new class of signs identifying multiple tenant buildings or building complexes in the Commercial and Industrial zone districts. II . BACKGROUND: A. CASE INITIATION: Consideration of Amendment initiated by Planning Commission Resolution No. 571, February 5, 1980. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The Director of Environmental Services has determined that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. III . DISCUSSION: Prior to initiation of this Public Hearing, Planning Staff reported to the Commission that the City sign regulations were somewhat ambiguous in there appli- cation to small scale general commercial developments and buildings , and indicated that the Commission may want to consider a special provision for building/complex identification signs. As noted, the sign regulations only provide for indentifica- tion of district or regional commercial centers on sites containing at least 3.5 acres. Identification signs for general commercial developments consisting of either single buildings or building complexes has not been provided. In some instances it would be desirable to communicate the name of the building or group of buildings to identify the location of a tenant, versus relying completely on tenant signs to direct potential customers and clients. There are two existing sections of the Municipal Code which may be interpreted for use as a multiple tenant/building identification sign: (a) Main Business Identi- fication Sign, based on building frontage (application becomes difficult in multiple tenant situations; the question of determining common frontage versus individual tenant frontage for consistent application) ; and, (b) Directional Signs , maximum three (3) square feet size. Staff has conducted a field study and search of file records, and has found that some 34 general commercial buildings, or building complexes , have identification signs. Of those counted, 16 were approved by the City since the adoption of the present Sign Ordinance. It appears there has. been some confusion relative to the entitlement for building/complex identification, when sign programs were reviewed for these locations. This would further indicate the need to define a specific category of sign for this application. The average area of signs approved in these actions was approximately 12 square feet. Staff has prepared a suggested sign 'size criteria related to the projects frontage, which would appear to be equitable in light of previous actions. The survey, the page of the Zoning Ordinance showing where this new section would be inserted, and a draft Resolution with sign criteria, is attached to this report. STAFF REPORT March 4, 1980 Page Two IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval to the City Council of an Amendment to Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68, by adding a new section relative to building or building complex identification signs for multiple tenant developments in the general commercial district by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 581 f i O m O O a) m r U O Y a) Y m a a) n N U a U a) U cu Cl. ro d-+ V U O U C U U m U O m n C m •O O ro C m ro m 'O O ro ro ro ro m ro ro m ro ro V C m m C m •r m i ro a) V N O 'O U "O L S L •O U () i L m L O L L O L m U U C: O 0 O O ro O O O O ro t m m C m m ro r ro C m C CJ m m Q C N 01 cn •r m •O •r i N 1 N L -0 Y '0N N O N N N •N O i m L Y Y O a) O Y Y m Y C Y Y C Y C L m m O m a) m m a) a) CT m L m a) a) L Ol a) a) L_ S- L. L i i S- L) Ol L_ L N S_ L N r U i L L 7 L L O L N N 7 a) 7 U 7 7 U 3 V V L U U U U S-L Y 0)a) S- L S_ 4- L a) L L a) L 4- a) m o a1 a) N a) "O (D N 'O al m S- 4- V 'O m 'O C: •v -D m •O m L a) m m m C C m 7 m ^ ^ U > >0 ro >0 a) O O > > m O m L m m m J - > O 0 > > L > O > > O > L O m n O O O Q O N O O n O i o o L O O } L i i d i L L n n Y m Y Y Y O n ro ro n d ro n n n n �. d t0 ro ro ro ro K n L L n d d ro n d ro 0- L (a 4- i i i C1 16 O O ro ro 4- ro ro ro ro 4- o ro m n O O O CL d 0- 4- ro 4- m 4- > d Cl -cc m L i m m 10 m w m m d' m to L O Y L i S- o O Y 0 K 0 K Y O L N O O O w U U M m N m L7 in N V n U U U O C m m n m m C d Q o Q W V) •I 1 U U Q U N U U N U Q 1 N 1 1 1 CL N a) m N N a) m al a) a) >- i L 1.- to Ci) N Ln CD N L K i4 L i i 1p M l0 d• .--1 L[) W CL in V n Ll d N L al Y _ _ Y _ m m N m O) m N N C N Y N r Z V) N N N N rO+ _ v v M N N 10 Lt_ In Ln LA LO LO - �--1 t0 M _ - CO CO NO O X X r 00 X M W t0 X to LO 1'•1 W tD X X X X X X X X - _X X X X X X X X X CO c M co m N M rl N r1 M m W N N N N .-y r-1 .-I m V N rl N Cl) r1 N -Zt a) m ro J O a) i N ro ro a) a O) a m O O O O O O O O O O O a 10 m 0ro ro ro N N N N N N N r r r CC 4- a ro ro ro ro ro ro ru ro ro U O CL n d O a n d a a d d C N O r r 3 3 3 3 3 L o) r l d d O W w W W W W w w W W w 2 2 2 2 2 N m J N N )n i- O O O - 10 O O Ln O CD r1 r+ .--1 O W O W I� O m O ct N L N LO l0 m O CO t0 -zr to m M to ro n to m Y V m N N N •--1 O O N N N <") l0 M I N 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 O lA 3 O M M E M M M M M M M M Cl) Cl) M M Cl) N n n n ^ ^ n n n n n n n n m m •D Q) •r L O N ro � mCT O _ O r CC1 m 10 0)m O Ot ro ro N m Y 10 ro b b N (1) () N ro J L L m r ^ 7 r ro L m N a) m r m ro ro d 7 O' F- ro O CL O (1) a) a..1 U (0 n J J a) n a' a) O 6 X N a) 0 - m 0 0 0 a) In ro ro w 0 o a) F- >1 •O >• • 17 a) 0) a) n F- O m L O U d m > ro N N N m 0_ r• L (1 a) m W Y O 'O a) CL ro ro ro m m m •r Q 10 (2) L 'a ••- '7 V E 'r n d LL 2 N m N CT Y N (D m U O N r m m ro ro L O a) 10 Y U CC 5_ O 0 L ro r r ro a) U t ro m 3 d n U = r_ry N w w w a d m O F- a 3 W Q m M U V V C C C a1 ro m ro U V 'O C •O C i 0 m i O O C O S- o O O i Cn •r O C N N N O) C i-I ij iT +� N C C r C N a) N a) +� i i i = i U S- S- i i U N 0 O - o 'O "O U "6 i O C C a S O S- O � > > > > 0 0 0 0 c c c c a c c c is ro a c c a o J O - O O O a O O O a > a O O a i Q ro (ao m ro a ? i-I 4J 4- 4I 4� Y 4� i 4� 4� a o m ro m m ro m m 4- a 4- m (o 4- ra C i i L i 4- i i i 4- a 4- i i 4- a o 0 0 o m 0 o o m (a m o o ro m d a a a a Y a a a •H 41 a a ♦-I K Q i i i i V) i L. i N o] V) i i V) m LL U U U U ^ L) U U U U O C C != C ¢ c C C Q Q c c ¢ Q V V) V) N V) W I I I I I I I U I I a a) a) N a) rl a) a) a1 M M to LO a) >- i i i i CD i i L M .--I S- i H d a a a M d a a N LO .--I a N C _ 01 N N N C i O O V N r -P Z N N = O M � O N M _ W li - - X X coN O O N to V O I- LO V N c7 W tD Cl) X X N .--I N X X W X X X X X X X X X O O = = X X X X O O O v v (D rl .ti ,-, m N N m ro ro o 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a ea3 3 3 O x x x x x x x w w w d x x x d N O M CD O _ M lI1 M � •� OD w (M coW O to Ol M N Cl)M Ot I: W cr n cr OfI� tp (� t\ N m Ol � CD O 01 It CD O V p I I I I I I I I I I O I I I I -:d- U'> a) V m 4- m } p 4- N 4� a O m a) 'N 4' a) m N N i a i i ;d m id v v a) ro rn Y rn w c� 3 ++ c i r- O) 'O C Ot O C O' > N U G U L.> ,� m U C (1) -P C r W a) W O C V) N al d n. O C i O C I c o N N E c a m S- o c m ro a) c ai E m V) a�i o (Excerpt from the h.,+icipal Code - Zoning Ordinance, 25 . 68 . 390 Signs in district and regional shopping centers . In addition to the wall sign area allowed for individual businesses, shopping centers in excess of three and one-half acres of land shall be allowed one identifica- tion sign on each right-of-way . Such signs shall not extend beyond the property line or into the right-of-way and shall be used solely to identify the shopping center, shopping area, or businesses and/or activities conducted therein. Relative to such signs , the allowable sign area shall be based on five square feet of sign per acre . These signs shall not exceed twenty-five square feet, shall have a maxi- mum height of eight feet, and shall not be erected without first having proper approval as provided in this chapter. Further, where the unique design of the center allows for adequate integration of a larger sign, the permitted pedestrian traffic signs as allowed in Section 25 .68 .330 may be increased to a maximum of six square feet per side. (Ord. 129' §4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 §1 (part) , 1975: Exhibit A §25 . 38-12 .12) . 25 68 395 Building or building complex identification signs in the general commercial district. In addition to the wall sign area allowed for individual businesses, general commercial district buildings or building complexes which are designed to contain four or more distinct tenant spaces, may be allowed one identification sign on each right-of-way, or public access thoroughfare. Such signs shall not extend beyond the property line or into the right-of-way or thoroughfare, and shall be used solely to identify the building or building complex. Relative to such signs, the maximum allowable sign area shall be based on the following: 1. Up to 50 feet of frontage, three (3) square feet of sign area. 2. Over 50 feet of frontage, up to 75 feet, five (5) square feet of sign area. 3. Over 75 feet of frontage, up to 100 feet, ten (10) square feet of sign area. 4. Over 100 feet of frontage, maximum size of fifteen (15) square feet. These signs when permitted to be free-standing, shall not exceed eight feet in height, and shall not be erected without first having proper approval as pro- vided in this chapter. 25 . 68 .400 Sale and rental signs . A. Commercial and industrial properties shall be authorized sale or rental signs on the following basis : 1 . Under two and one-half acres , one sign; 2 . Over two and one-half acres , but less than five acres , two signs; 3 . Over five acres , one sign per street frontage . B . These signs shall not exceed three square feet in area or four feet in height and shall be designed and located in a manner satisfactory to the director of environmental services . Such signs shall be removed upon completion of escrow. (Ord . 129 §4 (part) , 1977 : Ord . 98 §1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit A §25 . 38-12 .13) . 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 March 7, 1980 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CONSIDERATION FOR AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT (MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 25, CHAPTER 68) RELATIVE TO BUILDING OR BUILDING COMPLEX IDENTIFICATION SIGNS. Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider a request initiated by the City of Palm Desert to amend the City's zoning text for Municipal Code Section 25.68, et seq, to provide for a new class of signs identifying multiple tenant buildings or building complexes in the Commercial and Industrial zone districts. Said Public Hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 27, 1980, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Palm Desert City Hall , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. The effect of the amendment may be to allow a special category of building identification signs not presently provided for in the Ordinance. SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, CITY CLERK City of Palm Desert, California Publish: Palm Desert Post March 13, 1980 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (20109 2015.5 CCP) PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF iJ J r, CONSIDERATION FOR AMENDMENT AMEND I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid : I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the CITY OF PALM DE5ERT� above entitled matter. I am the CONSIDERATION FOR principal clerk of the printer ZOAMENDMNING ENT TO THE of PALM DESERT POST, a newpaper of (MUNICIPAL CODE,TITLE VE general circulations printed TO BUILDINGpOR BUILDING and published daily in the IDENTIFICATION SIGNS city of Riversides County of Publiic�Hearin is g ilibeheld be Riverside, and which newspaper Commssiontoconside°ale. quest initiated by the City of has been adjudged a newspaper of volm Desert to amend the City's zoning text for Munici- general circulation by the goal Code section 25.68, et sea ' Provide for a new class-,of Superior Court Of the County Of sign99 itlgntifvinpm ItioleM ant bulltlings oT bulY din p tSitl Riversides State of Californias Plexes In the Commercial and Industrial zone districts. F� under date of October 5, 19649 Sold Public Hearingg wiq E ' held on Tuesday Morc Case number 83658; that the 1980, at 7:00 p.m. fn the Ca ct Chambers of the Palm 54 : notice# of which the annexed is ert City Hall, e5-275 PrIcklv .. Peor Lane, Palm Desert, Cali- a printed copys has been published fornia, at which time and I place q} 1 terested ner$ons in each regular and entire issue are my ea�o attend an he ' heard. The effect of,; of said newspaper and not in any amendment may be to all ER supplement thereof on the following dentiilcation°Osigpnsfnot build ently provided for In the dates, to—wit: Ordinance. PAUL A. WILLIAMS secretary - 0 2/21 91980 Coommission Planning POP2/41 I Certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated February 219 1480 at Riversides California CITY OF PALM DESERT 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 February 12, 1980 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CONSIDERATION FOR AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT (MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 25, CHAPTER 68) RELATIVE TO BUILDING OR BUILDING COMPLEX IDENTIFICATION SIGNS. Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request initiated by the City of Palm Desert to amend the City's zoning text for Municipal Code Section 25.68, et seq, to provide for a new class of signs identifying multiple tenant buildings or building complexes in the Commercial and Industrial zone districts. Said Public Hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 4, 1980, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Palm Desert City Hall , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. The effect of the amendment may be to allow a special category of building identi- fication signs not presently provided for in the Ordinance. PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission Publish: Palm Desert Post February 21, 1980 Ae �(c -4- �Fc w )> m � v --1 C:) w J m v m m J N G7 S n S I v n M J w -S O O J A n h v rD o z w w m w In o n w (D Jr N C t0 N w N V -0 V -'• n C� o z (D w v a n w a a w v D n o J m (D 'a z CL V w In m w ' w < w -0 C� O j O O J -1 O (D m (D Q l< O ¢o rD Q O a w NM O O O w VI fp N X -O O m ;10 �• V c (D r r -v' v n c J J N (D h rD _ (D o v o v - _ w rD 0 w -s w c _ CL J w N rD (D N w a rF o_ r N a 3 w w z N l< m n 7 tD w v -0 t0 (D a w j -O co to o (D co w c O (D J v J rD d J. (Q 3 V V V V V V V V V V V V V N V V V f2? Z A D w W W W W W W W W W W W w E3 W w w 01 CD 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I N I O Ol w N N N O O 1-' N N N w A h c1 V G C-) N To c) w w Ol A 0) w V C) Cn m V1 N O' N A O 3 0 V m O CO C) O C) v1 O O Cn - O O CD -5 U� N N r 7 N 2 2 2 2 2 m m m m m m m m rn m m C• tG tG t< t< t< O -0 J N V -D -� V V V O V -O V O n Y Y .•� Y Y w a w a w w a w a w w w 7J -h J V Y Y Y Y N V) IA V w N w w V V 0 (D (D rD (D rD (D (D (D (D 71Z (D (D rD t< m t< O O O O O O O O O O O -' O V p V N w w w z rD o r G f0 NA A N Y W N Y N A W Y '-' Y N N N N m W w w _ w 00 _ = w = w x x x x x x x x Ol t0 IV = x x x = x x x = = x x m x x x rn w Y rn rn x rn mw x w x x C,� (� - _ CD NW = H N rD 'm V N N N w Z IA h N N J v N VI rD rF rD N V V V A O -0 w Cn N A a1 Y V W 01 CTt V V 0) � z .$ -5 V V z (T w O ul N t0 rD (D rD co (D (.) rN (D (D N V 1 I 1 (N 1 D> (-) N n C-) (n C7 f7 n I I D> m - o 1+ O � CDN CD O n n CD -nO O O U) z a w .'v O A A O A h co co O O z z s o s -- w UD w w c w w w w 0 0 w n •o 'o <-o 'a -h w w -h -o 0 0 o a o n w w a a h w w o 0 w -o 'Y w 'S z -0 w -O -O w -O -O •Y -0 A a a w C a -o -p v -o v a -o -o a W a a CD J j J h V Z V z z V z V z J J z z z o C O - -O -O - O ---5 < -o O- o o o z < o < < o < z < < o o < r o v < a w < w o w w c a (D m < w < CD n c c c V c c c w z w rz C rD a (D w rD n 0 c z (D rD rD p (D m N (D (D (D O 0 fD -h 'S -5 z z rD 'S -h •5 'Y (zD (D C -S z T O rD h z n n n n (D n n z rD c n c c n c rD c c N -S Z rD z z N z (D 3 C t0 (D rD (D (D CD (D (D (D 'S O (O p rD O C (D 7 t0 r O rD 7 h 1 h h h O h r'h O D O h h O -S O N N N N O N N O- h O_ C J. n. l0 J. lO• lf]• t0 d ID t0 N w �• 3 7 O t0 O 7 fl' a w w to 3 a O O O O a O O n n C (Dm n o_- rDD C n a n z a (D n a o a D p z 3 w m a a 0) C a w a Di a C w w o n 0 w C n 0 o 'an O n 7 n O (D n n h w a m n m rD (D m -C m rD � h (D rD h O - - n rD 0 �l a v o N 2 2 r S C, --I 3 C) O C7 O (D S w 3 w 3 (D Y 7" w w 7 0 .'O Y 3 (D Y L I E N N N (D (D3 (D 0- CD `r w a O Y 3 0 "O 52o (D N h N 0 (Dn n n w w w w 3 w W (D << (D Q.- n : (7 N M N co :E - 0] < (n (D K n (D w n w n w 0 (D CJ -0 7 O (n 3 -' O. (O Y n 3 Y w (D (D (D w w Y Y Y N N co (D h e-F J (D w O n C+ N M O C+ w w (i n m Lck l0 A -P. w� .P w w w w w w w O I I I I O I I I I I I I I I I O A O P t0 O O C) t0 coV V w V m V N O cocoW W Ol m Ul l0 co I--+ J (.n(.nO W Cn I-+ (Sl W O w O (N (n 2 2 2 a J m 0 m zz ME f £ <+ (D v v v O O O NNr�X N V N N x x x x = = oox x x x x x x x x m x x = _ N I✓ CD X X W Ol co N ? Ol V .A Ol N O O � O ? X X 0) co w Cn (D O CJ O t+ N N N (D (O Y O N N N 0 N N w O mw (D (D (D (D fD (D (D (D (D m 1 1 C) I I I 1 I I I m a n 0 n n CD 0 n 0 C• 0 0 n •. n n O n n n + n n n n T 0 0 ;a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 m w o o w w w o 0 o w o 0 0 o v Y Y -h a -h Y Y Y -h Y Y Y ;;aw -, w w -h a �, w w w -h w 0)w w w < a j rF 0 .�i j J j C+ ejF J C a w w o w w D Y a o o a < a o 0 o a o 0 0 o r o a 3 a w a a < Y Y Y Y w o 0 0 0 ' •. J w c J J i rD J (D C C C C C Y C n n n p 1r n Y Y Y Y C Y Y n m n n Y C C C (D Y t 1+ Y Y 3 (D Y Y o C+ N ("f O c+ c'F O (O N N N O O Y n O 3 O O Y w Y Y n o n n w (D rD w n w w w r0 n n n m (D m 50 -75 5f� /Do t �5f co Drrl w v 3 0 (D 0) m m -5 o o 70 - 0 w N O n (+ w D O S N w n V j w (D CD N l0 N w N '(D _ w a w w w v < n o F (n n S (D w D w N N N C J w a0 0o CD o S o on -i o 0 0 rD Q Q. N rD O N X -0 J O O O O (D 710 J• V C ND r r /D _0 w n C •Q J J J (D r (D (D O V O w w w (D N a -s w J c n w N (D (D N w j w (i+y (n w w S N << m .O sw w co (D w w C n o o D (D W w CD n J• (Q LD V V V V V V V V V V V V V (n V V V S2? Z D W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W OJ E Vt O 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I (n 1 O m W N N N O O Y N N N W X� C+ Ul ON V w C7 N .S CT W 00 M ? m 00 V O (IT In (It N S N -P O 0 0 V m O co o Y Y Y Y O O m O O L" N O O O r -S (r W 2 2 2 S S m J J J J C (D O N v v v v v c v 0 v v v o n z -h (D Y Y Y Y Y (D (D (D (D (D CD (D (D J (D (D (D m (< 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = o O o 0 0 y w rD N S 0 o r w 0 rD A N 0:) W N m Y N W �'' Y 1"' N N N N W W Y N Y W N co W W co X X X x x x x X x X = X x x x = x X X = = x x m Y W V CT 00 m NOl X m CT W X F~-+ 00 O x x O N rod' - co co _ _ W � - - (.Jt UI O _ - - - CT (n W = rr N N (D G7 N N N N N Z CD v 0 v v C+ (+ fD N V -0 A O -a 00 U1 Y .A O1 Y V W Ol m C -0 (D (D CD V co (D N Ul 00 O Ul N (O (O V S S (n (D (D N v 1 1 I (A 1 D C7 (n n m (n n D (S O 1 1 D m D .. D o n 0 (0i v 0 (n o 0 m o N o o n n o m O O O (n S 0 (+ ;o O x A Cl A (+ ;a x O O A S C+ O -S w co v O7 w ;a co w CA m S -5 co :I;- -0 w < 'a -h co (v -fi -c v v 0 0 0 -h a o -h w w w w h w w 0 o w v -aC)o c+ (+ J w (+ -0 0 0 0 � 0 'O 0 0 j S C •o c J v O 0 O O 0 O 'O O O O D O O O "O 0 O 0 CD O < < O < 0 < 01 O O < r 0 0 0 0 n O w < w N < w o w w 7 O n c c c c m N C S (D (D O- (D M O. (D CD CD CD O 0 N -h S (D S S (D S o S S S n 0 O S S CD (D (+ S n n n n S n n S (D C n C C n C (D C C (D N rD S S S S (D N S S C (O (D fD N (D N J N N 0 S 0 t0 0 N 0 N C (O 0 0 S 0 t'h 0 + (+ 0 0 (+ (+ SO C t-F D O (+ (+ 0 -5 p N N N N O N N n (c• (Q J• l() n (0 In 3 N 0 0 t0 0 0 t0 0 J 0 0 w (JO ' � 0 w 0 0 w o 0 o p w o o 0 n O S O S S O S 0 S S m (D n S n n s o (D n n p (D J• J• w n n m n n w a 3 w w w w w a 0 n 0 w 0 0 w 0 0 0 w O n 0 n n 0 n o O n w -0 m (D rD m (D rD -C m Mo 0 + D D 0 n J. (D 0 O 7 C') o C) v 0 N 3 AI 3 Pw 3 (D -s 3' Pi N 3 0 .o h y "00 m N N N 0 rD zr O 3 rD O O S 3 O S7 P. -a (D (n N 3 O J rD m J d C'f 3 3 c+ (D 3 n 0 a co a 3 w co (D t< rD Sp C> 3 J (7 N (D N CO J f - W < VI (D t< d rD SD Q. Q) 0- (C S N d 3 SW -0 3 O to 3 c c+ 3 C+ E O m (o c+ 3 Sv SU (D rD (D J w S -S S1 -S N N W . N C+ O r+ J (D d C+ N � Q3 lw J co O d (D Lo 4P V V V to V V V V V V V V V V (n (n A -A. CO tD -Pb A A W W W W W W W p I I I I O I I I I I I 1 I I I p O A t0 O O I--+ <D (D OD V V rn V ;a .A Cn V -P m V tD Lo N O W W w tD m m U'1 tD co cn O W Sn i-' to w O W CD (n (n c 0 w J J J C £ S_ L < G S tG tG tG 0 t< tG tC t< C+ (D v v Su F-• I--• 1� CD 0 0 0 N r+ I-+ I-+ F+ p+- H-• I--• I--• I--• F+ I-+ lD N N I-• I--• W V V I--• F+ lD lD I-+ N (n It,X N V N x x x x = = o_O_x x X x x x x x x m x x N I--• N X X W (n rb A N ? a% V O 4'-M N O O N W .A X X - - - Ul - T 0) W _ w (n I--• _ _ IV t7 W O r+ N N I Lo 3 N N (A �• v v t0 3 r N I-+ 'U •D I--• DI N '0 -V -0 W -V -0 -1 IV I--• S S Dt 1-' w S S S O S S S S Ol W (D (D I--• w (D (D (D I-+ (D (D CD (D I I C) I I I I I I I m N N �. •..• N Sn -' N -� n a 3 3 a a 3 3 3 a 3 3 3 3 O + CI A p 0 O O 0 0 O m O (n SO -S N W V) -S SO SO (n -S O O O a W 0 0 0 a w w O 0 0 m o 0 0 0 -D S S -s -h S S S S .'10 a a A+ w o+ v a o 'O C+ C+ S t+ CF C+ C+ C+ C+ C v a+ a O a w a S _0 0 0 'O < -D 0 0 0 V 0 0 0 0 r O _0 3 3 _ d _0 3 SD O O O O < G < G a+ a c a a J 3 c (D 3 D d c S C c p 3 3 3 S d c d d (D (p (D n S -S S S C S S n (D c) (� S C 3 c C (p -S r S S 3 (D S S 3 N 3 3 VI C+ (a C+ C+ 3 (p N N N 3 O tQ S t0 t0 O 3 d 3 3 a O 3 O O C SL S S d 0 a n r 3 7 N 0 7 CD a a a p 3 3 3 rrDD (D m INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SUBJECT: BUILDING IDENTIFICATION SIGN FOR COMMERCIAL DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 1980 AND INDUSTRIAL USES It has come to the attention of Staff that the Sign Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68) does not specifically address the subject of signs to identify multiple tenant buildings (or groups of buildings) , when they are not found to be District or Regional Centers on minimum 3.5 acre sites. The Sign Ordinance presently provides for two types of signs which can be construed for use as building identification: (A) Main Business Identification Sign (Section 25.68.270) , the area of which is related to frontage; and (B) Direc- tional Signs, maximum area of 3 square feet. Application of the Ordinance becomes difficult when a building contains multiple tenant frontages and a common building identification sign is desired. It would appear that the only way to uniformily provide the opportunity for a building identification sign would be to amend the Sign Ordinance and specify a criteria for such signs. If the Planning Commission elects to consider this subject further, and conduct a Public Hearing for purposes of possibly recommending an amendment to the Council , Staff will prepare a background report of previous related signing approvals, and suggested uniform criteria for this type of sign. A draft Resolution has been provided to initiate a Public Hearing. qC�a PAUL A. WILLIAMS, AICP DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES /dj PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 571 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY'S SIGN ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO THE CRITERIA FOR BUILD- ING IDENTIFICATION SIGNS. CASE NO. ZOA 01-80 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission observes that the City Municipal Code, Title 25, Chapter 68, (Sign Ordinance) does not specifically address building identification signs for multiple tenant buildings; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission deems that it is desirable to consider a specific criteria for said sign type; and WHEREAS, Municipal Code, Section 25.82.020, provides that the Planning Commission may initiate amendments to the said Title for purpose of recommendation to the City Council . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1. That it does hereby initiate consideration of an amendment to Municipal Code, Title 25, Chapter 68, relative to the criteria for multiple tenant building identification signs. 2. That the Commission does hereby direct the Secretary to establish a Public Hearing for such purpose on March 4, 1980, at the regular meeting of the Commission. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 5th day of February, 1980, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Berkey, Kryder, Miller, Snyder NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None WALTER H. SNYDER, Chairman ATTEST: PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary /dj pL�`I .G COrd1ISSION RESOLUTION N0.` 3 A RESOLUTIONd OF THE PLANNING COM'HISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT, RELATIVE TO IDENTIFICATION SIGNS FOR GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT BUILDINGS AND COMPLEXES. CASE NO. ZOA 01-80 r _. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 4th day of March, 1980, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider amendment of Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68 (Zoning Ordinance) , containing sign regulations (Sign Ordinance), relative to identification signs for general commercial district buildings and complexes. WHEREAS, said amendment has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32", in that the subject project has not been found to present an adverse impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testi- mony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend approval of a Zoning .0rdinance' Text Amendment: 1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance. Z. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted General Plan. 3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health, safety, and general welfare, than the current regulations. i 4. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is necessary to clearly define the signage entitlement for the situation it addresses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and consti- tute the considerations of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment, as provided in the attached exhibit, labeled Exhibit "A" , to amend Municipal Code Title 25, Chapter 68, by adding a new section relative to building or building complex identification signs for multiple tenant developments in the general commercial district. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission , held on this 4th day of March, 1980, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Berkey, Kryder, Miller, Snyder �I NOES: None ABSENT: None Ri ABSTAIN: None WALTER H. SNYDER, Chairman ATTEST: PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary