Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Design Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission clears clearer awning and projection rules for Sonoma storefronts
Summary
The commission unanimously approved amendments to design review rules clarifying when awnings, marquees and similar features may be treated as exempt and objective standards for projection, height and storefront placement to reduce subjective review and improve consistency.
The Sonoma City Planning Commission on Sept. 18 voted unanimously to approve amendments to the design‑review ordinance that clarify how awnings, marquees and other projections into the public right‑of‑way will be regulated and when they may be exempted from full design‑review review.
Director of Planning Jennifer Gates presented objective criteria intended to reduce subjectivity in staff determinations, including limits on awning placement (generally within storefront openings), maximum heights (a 16‑foot ceiling in some descriptions and limiting awning portions to not exceed the window head of the lowest story), and a standard that projections must leave a 3‑foot clear path from the curb for public utilities and pedestrian access.
Gates showed local photographs to illustrate examples that would typically be staff‑exempt and others that would likely require full review, and clarified that existing awnings would be grandfathered unless a structure is replaced or substantially modified. Awnings that include signage must obtain sign approval and are subject to review.
Commissioners asked staff to refine wording (windowsill/window head language) and discussed enforcement and maintenance for deteriorated awnings. A member of the public, Tom Graves, urged careful standards to avoid homogenizing downtown character. Commissioners likewise discussed whether large wraparound canopies or architectural features should be treated as building design elements and require commission review.
One commissioner moved to approve the amendments with the discussed clarifying language; the motion passed unanimously on a roll‑call vote.
