Fremont City Council Meeting: 02/07/23 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: Planning
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Appeals
SCHEDULED
Sponsors:
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 4790) DOC ID: 4790
Updated: 2/2/2023 11:26 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 1
APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PAPÉ FREEWAY PYLON SIGN (PLN2021-00378) - Public Hearing (Published Notice) to Consider a First Party Appeal of the Planning Commission’s Denial of a Conditional Use Permit For a Freeway-Oriented Pylon Sign Located at 43510 Osgood Road, Adjacent To Interstate 680, and a Finding That No Further Environmental Review Is Required Pursuant To the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Per, Without Limitation, CEQA Guidelines Section 15311, Accessory Structures, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, Projects Consistent with the General Plan For Which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2010082060) was previously prepared and certified.
Contact Persons:
Name: James Willis Joel Pullen
Title: Associate Planner Planning Manager
Div/Dept: Planning Planning
Phone: 510-494-4449 510-494-4436
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]
Executive Summary: The City Council is asked to consider a first party appeal of the Planning Commissin’s December 8, 2022 denial of a Conditional Use Permit. Papé, a premier capital equipment provider (hereinafter, the “Appellant”) is requesting that the City Council grant their appeal (the “Appeal”) to allow a 35-foot tall freeway-oriented pylon sign that would be constructed at the rear of their new flagship Papé Machinery equipment dealership located at 43510 Osgood Road, adjacent to Interstate 680. The appellant’s written appeal is enclosed as Informational 1.
This report includes a summary of past actions, an analysis of the Appeal, and findings should the City Council decide to grant the appeal (reversing the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the project, allowing it to proceed forward); a complete analysis of the project design can be found in the staff report to the Planning Commission dated December 8, 2022, which is enclosed as Informational 3 and made a part of this staff report by reference.
Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution granting the Apeal,(reversing the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the project), approving the proposed Conditional Use Permit to allow the freeway-oriented sign as shown in Exhibit A (Project Plans), subject to the findings and conditions contained in Exhibit “B”.
BACKGROUND: In June 2020 the Zoning Administrator approved Zoning Administrator Permit PLN2019-00337 which allowed Papé’s proposed new heavy equipment dealership and service center at 43510 Osgood Road. Papé Machinery a west coast family-owned construction equipment dealer and has operated in Fremont since 1984. Their customers include most construction companies, all regional utility providers, and most municipalities.
This proposed project would consolidate three existing Papé dealerships into Fremont and is expected to be among the City’s major tax revenue generators.
Council Staff Report (ID # 4790) Meeting of February 7, 2023 Updated: 2/2/2023 11:26 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 2
In June 2021, a Master Sign Program was approved for the equipment dealership for all signs at the site, except the freeway-oriented sign which is the subject of this appeal.
In February 2022, the Planning Commission first considered this sign at the hearing and continued the item to allow the applicants to conduct further public outreach and to consider some concerns raised at the hearing regarding the sign. While concerns were raised by the Planning Commission, no concerns were raised by the public and neighboring property owners at the hearing.
In December 2022, the Planning Commission considered a revised proposal from the Appellant for a smaller sign. After deliberations, the Planning Commission denied the application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the proposed revised freeway-oriented pylon sign along Interstate 680 on a split vote of 4-3-0-0. A copy of the minutes from the hearing is attached as Informational 2. In its denial of the project, the Planning Commission made the following findings:
• Sufficient signage exists in the form of building signage that already has been installed on the building;
• Allowing the freeway pylon sign would set a precedent for more pylon signs to be requested along the I-680 corridor;
• The specific location of the sign and its proximity to the I-680 corridor are incompatible with existing character of the area; and
• Illumination of the sign is an inappropriate design element.
PROPOSED PROJECT: The proposed project is a Conditional Use Permit to allow a freeway-oriented pylon sign as shown in Exhibit “A” that would be 35 feet in height from the site’s existing grade (or 22 feet in height from the elevation of the Interstate 680) with a sign area measuring approximately 120 square feet in size.
THE APPEAL:
On December 12, 2022, the Appellant timely submitted a first party appeal of the Planning Commission’s action. In the appeal letter (Informational 1), the Appellant sets forth several points, which they believe justifies reversal of the Planning Commission's decision. The four main points are outlined below.
a) Already Sufficient Signage. There is a dense grove of mature trees immediately to the north of Property (on the Jehovah's Witness property), that significantly reduces the visibility of the Papé Machinery dealership building signage while traveling westbound on I-680. The large high voltage power lines, supported by seven lattice towers, obstruct the building signage while traveling eastbound on I-680. The Appellant does not believe this objection fits within the approval criteria outlined in FMC 18.193.070 (Discretionary approvals – Evaluation standard).
b) Precedent. The Appellant states that according to the City's zoning map, there are only a handful of properties that are allowed this type of freeway-oriented signage.
Of those properties, only one remains undeveloped, the subject property owned by Papé Machinery. The appellant contends that topography of the other properties, in relation to the elevation of Interstate 680, make it either unlikely that those property Council Staff Report (ID # 4790) Meeting of February 7, 2023 Updated: 2/2/2023 11:26 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 3
owners will request freeway-oriented signage, or those property owners are able to place unobstructed building signage (similar to the former Fry's Electronics site), reducing the need for freeway-oriented signage. The Appellant states that they have spent five years working closely with Fremont Planning Division and Economic Development staff on this project, which is supported by City staff. Furthermore, the Appellant states that there is no mention of "precedent" as criteria for discretionary approval.
c) Location of the Pylon Sign. The Appellant states that their property is adjacent to Interstate 680 and the proposed pylon sign is designed to be visible from I-680. The property is approximately 13 feet lower in grade than the freeway. The proposed location of the pylon sign, approximately 9 feet from the property line, was selected by the Appellant in consultation with and approved by PG&E, because of a multitude of site constraints, including high voltage power lines supported by lattice towers and various flood control easements. The Appellant contends that the overall aesthetics of their property and surrounding area are already visually impacted by the power lines and lattice towers. The Appellant furthermore states that the Commissioners' only objection to the location of the proposed pylon sign is that they did not want it visible from Interstate 680, which defeats the purpose of a freeway-oriented sign, which is allowed in the property’s zoning designation.
d) Illumination of the Pylon Sign. The Appellant acknowledges that illumination is a design criteria subject to Planning Commission discretion, but insist that their application adequately addressed this issue. The Appellant states that, as requested by the Commissioners during the initial and first hearing of February 10, 2022, the Appellant reached out to their neighbors, including the Jehovah's Witness Assembly Hall located to the north of their site at 43400 Osgood Road, and Chrisp Company paving contractor located to the south of their site at 43650 Osgood Road. Both owners confirmed to the Appellant that they had no objection to the proposed sign.
The Appellant notes that the nearest residential uses are along Homestead Court, behind a sound wall, approximately 500 feet from the proposed pylon sign. The Appellant points out that no single-family homes back up to or directly face this part of I-680.
In order to address the Commissioners’ concerns, the Appellant revised their application to reduce the overall sign height and area from 40’ and 152 square feet down to 35' and 120 square feet. This is a 12.5% reduction in height and a 21% reduction in sign area. The Appellant states that their proposed pylon sign uses internal lighting to reduce glare and excessive illumination, has an opaque background and only 65 square feet (of the overall 120 square feet) is illuminated.
The Appellant indicates that in addition to the sound wall, the diameter of the proposed pylon sign's support posts further aids in dissipating any light emission from negatively affecting the residential uses. Further, the low height and perpendicular orientation of the sign to Interstate 680 assist in reducing views of the pylon sign from the residences along Homestead Court.
Council Staff Report (ID # 4790) Meeting of February 7, 2023 Updated: 2/2/2023 11:26 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 4
ANALYSIS OF THE APPEAL AND APPLICANT’S ASSERTIONS:
As discussed in detail in the Planning Commission staff report (Informational 3), staff has reviewed the proposed freeway-oriented pylon sign for conformance to the General Plan and applicable development standards contained in Fremont Municipal Code (FMC) 18.193.610 [Permissible sign types and corresponding permit type.].
FMC Section 18.193.070, Discretionary Approvals – Evaluation Standard, limits the approval authority’s discretion regarding signs to noncommunicative aspects of the sign. Examples given in this section are size, height, orientation, setback, illumination, spacing, scale, mass of the structure, and compatibility with surrounding area. As mentioned in the Appellant’s appeal letter, there is no mention of discretion as to what constitutes “sufficient” signage on a commercial site beyond the limitation on size. Freeway oriented signage is common for dealerships, both equipment and passenger vehicle, which the Appellant believes is very important for Papé Machinery, to its identity and success. The proposed freeway-oriented pylon sign conforms to the basic permittable sign area allowance contained in FMC
18.193.610 which regulates permissible sign types and sizes for industrially zoned sites.
The Appellant’s letter states that only 10 properties would qualify for this type of freeway- oriented signage along Interstate 680, which staff concurs is correct. The FMC only allows freeway-oriented pylon signs on industrially-zoned properties which are directly abutting a freeway. These 10 parcels are clustered around the Auto Mall Parkway overpass on the western side of the freeway and are all developed with longstanding uses except for the Appellant’s equipment dealership which is under construction. Furthermore, un like neighboring properties, the Appellant’s property is the only site situated along I-680 which is constrained by so many easements, including seven high-voltage lattice towers, which made the construction of their building closer to the freeway infeasible. Other sites, such as the former Fry’s Electronics and the Western Digital facility, which were able to be built closer to Interstate 680, have placed signage on buildings to advertise to freeway traffic.
Due to the existing surrounding character and condition of these properties adjacent to Interstate 680, it is unlikely that additional freeway pylons signs would be proposed.
As previously discussed, the utility and flood control easements which cover much of the project site prevent the construction of large structures near the freeway. The site selected for the pylon sign is the only area on the Appellant’s property near the freeway that is not restricted by an easement. The site is currently crossed by several tall lattice towers and many high voltage lines. The combination of the lattice towers and lines result in significant visual clutter impacting the site. The height of the pylon sign is necessary due to the difference of grade between the freeway and the project site. The design intent recognizes potential visual and aesthetic impacts. For these reasons, staff supports the location and orientation of the proposed pylon sign as it provides the only means of providing signage specifically allowed by the FMC, and that the sign is designed at an appropriate height and size with reduced night illumination, which avoids artificial light pollution and minimizes potential impacts on the character of area and from the freeway.
Internal illumination of the sign would be limited to just the four “PAPÉ” letters and logo being illuminated. The proposed sign cabinet would largely be unilluminated and opaque.
The supports of the sign, which extend beyond the face of the sign cabinet, would help block any potential light spill from the sign if it is able to be perceptible from properties Council Staff Report (ID # 4790) Meeting of February 7, 2023 Updated: 2/2/2023 11:26 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 5
across the freeway. The proposed illumination for the sign should not have an adverse impact on the area or drivers on Interstate 680.
The residential properties on Homestead Court, across Interstate 680, are approximately 500 feet from the project site and behind a tall sound wall. These properties are unlikely to be able to view the sign due to the angle of the sign, the distance, and the sound wall.
While there was no opposition to the project from the public, the Appellant contacted the property owners on either side of their property, as requested by the Planning Commission, to ask for comment on the proposed sign design. Both neighbors, the Jehovah’s Witnesses Meeting Hall and Chrisp Co. paving contractor, provided letters of support for the proposed freeway pylon sign, and the only member of the public that spoke at the December 2022 Planning Commission hearing expressed support for the sign. For these reasons, staff believes the illumination of the sign would not have an adverse impact on the neighboring properties, including the residential properties across Interstate 680.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONFORMANCE:
The proposed sign has been designed to be in conformance with the General Plan and the applicable regulations contained in the FMC as described in the December 2022 Planning Commission staff report (Informational 3). As described in the December 2022 staff report to the Planning Commission, the proposed project is consistent with the City’s General Pla n, Zoning, and applicable development standards and polies. The proposed sign would support a construction equipment sales and service dealership which is anticipated to become a major sales tax generator for the City. The General Plan recognizes the importance of these major tax generators and provides means to facilitate the attraction or retention of these businesses by providing special consideration, including anticipating the need for additional signage. For the Appellant, this flagship dealership consolidates regional operations into Fremont. The proposed sign would advertise to potential customers the location of the dealership which will serve construction projects locally and regionally. The Appellant notes this dealership location will serve municipal agencies and utilities in the region and provide equipment for major infrastructure projects in addition to supporting private construction projects, and that the proposed sign is important to promote and identify their business.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the City Council find that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to, without limitation, CEQA Guidelines Section 15311, Accessory Structures, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 in that it is an on-site sign which conforms to the Fremont General Plan and applicable Zoning rules, and that each of the foregoing provides a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL:
Pursuant to FMC Section 18.230.060, in order to approve a Conditional Use Permit, the City Council must make the following findings:
a) The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, any applicable community or specific plan, planning and zoning regulations, and any adopted design rules and guidelines;
Council Staff Report (ID # 4790) Meeting of February 7, 2023 Updated: 2/2/2023 11:26 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 6
Analysis: The existing General Plan land use designation for this site is Service Industrial. The existing zoning designation is Service Industrial (I-S). Freeway oriented pole signs may be allowed in this district subject to a Conditional Use Permit. Design of the sign, including maximum permittable sign area, is in compliance with the zoning ordinance.
b) The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of the proposed use;
Analysis: The proposed sign would be located at the rear of the site adjacent to Interstate 680. This portion of the project site contains numerous overhead and underground utilities and associated easements. The sign would not be located within any of those easements and will be situated away from the power lines in response to comments from PG&E. Additionally, sufficient area will be provided on the site to accommodate the proposed sign; there will be no encroachments on or over adjoining properties or the freeway right of way.
c) The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with development in the vicinity;
Analysis: The project site is adjacent to the Interstate 680 freeway and the sign has been designed to be visible from that freeway. The sign would not be located within or impact any existing onsite easements or power transmission lines. The height of the proposed sign is in response to the elevation of the freeway above the project site grade. The site affords adequate area for the placement of the proposed sign.
d) The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of persons or property in the vicinity;
Analysis: The proposed sign would be located entirely within an industrial district and not oriented towards any current residential uses. The nearest residential uses to the proposed sign are located approximately 500 feet away, across Interstate 680 and at the top of a hill. Furthermore, these homes are behind a tall sound wall and located across a residential street from the project site. The sign would be internally illuminated. The Project was submitted to both Caltrans and PG&E for comment early in the project review phase. The Appellant adopted changes to the location of the sign further away from the power lines in response to comments received by PG&E; and no comments were received from Caltrans. The sign would be constructed in accordance with the applicable building codes.
PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT:
Public hearing notification is applicable. Notices were mailed to owners and occupants of property within 300 feet of the site. A Public Hearing Notice was also published by The Tri- City Voice. The applicant did individualized outreach to the Jehovah’s Witnesses church to the north and the Chrisp Company paving contractor to the south to determine if they had any concerns related to the proposed sign. They reached out. Neither property owner expressed concerns about the proposed sign.
Council Staff Report (ID # 4790) Meeting of February 7, 2023 Updated: 2/2/2023 11:26 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 7
ATTACHMENTS:
• Draft Resolution- Pape Machinery Conditional Use Permit • Exhibit A - Project Plans
• Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions
• Informational 1 - Appeal Letter
• Informational 2 - 12-8-2022 PC Minutes
• Informational 3 - 12-8-2022 PC Report
• Informational 4 - Public Correspondence
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Hold de novo public hearing.
2. Adopt the proposed resolution, which:
a. Finds that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to, without limitation, CEQA Guidelines Section 15311, Accessory Structures and CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 in that it is an on-site sign which conforms to the Fremont General Plan and applicable Zoning rules, and that each of the foregoing provides a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance.
b. Determines that that proposed project is in compliance with the City’s zoning ordinance in that the orientation, height, size, and design of the pylon sign are in compliance with the development standards and policies for freeway-oriented pylon signs.
c. Based on the available information, evidence presented at the hearing and consideration of the above, finds that the proposed project is consistent with the City’s General Plan for the reasons described in this staff report and by reference in Informational 3 (December 8, 2022 Planning Commission Report).
3. Grants the Appeal (reversing the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the project and allow the project to proceed), approving the proposed Conditional Use Permit to allow a freeway-oriented sign as shown in Exhibit “A,” subject to the findings and conditions of approval contained in Exhibit “B”.