Commission approves master sign plan for 564 Main Street after council declared pole sign abandoned

The Placerville Planning Commission on Jan. 21 conditionally approved a master sign plan for the restaurant at 564 Main Street following earlier action on exterior modifications and outdoor dining. The commission’s action—approved 3‑1—confirms a sign package that omits the property’s previously prominent pole sign, which city council declared abandoned and ordered abated after advertising copy was not in place by the December 9, 2024 deadline.

Kristen Hunter, planning staff, summarized the background: the Development Services Department provided the council information that the pole sign had not been brought into compliance by the deadline, and council directed abatement and gave the property owners a period to comply. Staff verified that abatement had not occurred and set a city abatement date of March 9, 2025 for the pole sign. Hunter said the commission had previously approved other exterior modifications on Dec. 3, 2024 and continued the master sign plan to Jan. 21 for further consideration.

At the Jan. 21 meeting the applicant requested allowance for modest signage on the west elevation after the pole sign’s removal. Staff worked through the allowable aggregate wall‑sign area (based on lineal frontage) and recommended two wall signs located on the north and east elevations; commissioners ultimately approved a sign program calling for a 112‑square‑foot wall sign on the north elevation, a 45‑square‑foot east elevation sign and 12 square feet of signage on the west elevation. The approval was conditioned as amended in the staff report and removes the pole sign from consideration.

Several speakers addressed the record. Ruth Carter (identified as "City of Placerville" in public comment) urged a review of the city’s pole‑sign rules and noted the burden on building owners when signs must be abated. Staff said it had conducted a records review and found only a limited permit history for the property, including a 1982 construction permit and a 1985 modification; staff cited the municipal process and codes that govern abandoned signage and noted the city references the California Business and Professions Code when processing abandoned‑sign issues.

During deliberations commissioners discussed consistency among past council actions on other pole signs and whether the city had exercised discretion in prior cases. Commissioners amended conditions to add the west‑elevation allowance and to remove the pole‑sign references; the final motion and amendments passed 3‑1, with Commissioner Smith recorded as the lone no vote. The decision is subject to a 10‑day appeal period.