San Clemente subcommittee recommends administrative approval for 24 Hour Fitness sign amendment

The Dining Room Subcommittee of the City of San Clemente reviewed an amendment (PHP26019) on Jan. 28 that would add two tenant wall signs to the multi-tenant building at 100–110 Avenida La Pata, and recommended that staff process the change administratively rather than hold a public hearing.

City staff told the subcommittee the project site is an approximately 8.9-acre lot with an 88,070-square-foot, two-story building that currently hosts 24 Hour Fitness and other commercial tenants. The amendment requests two halo-lit channel-letter wall signs (proposed signs 6 and 7) similar in design and materials to existing wall signs. "Staff supports the sign we just proposed," a city staff presenter said during the packet review.

The proposal traces to a master sign program first approved by the planning commission on Sept. 13, 2013; at that time, exception permits were granted for two larger 24 Hour Fitness signs. Staff explained the zoning code allows signs consistent with an approved master sign program to be permitted administratively, but when a site exceeds a typical threshold of about five signs an amendment to the master program is required. The planner determined the current request requires an amendment and asked the subcommittee whether the change is minor enough for administrative approval or should return to the planning commission.

Committee members focused on visual clutter, scale and consistency. One member pointed out a discrepancy in the packet that listed a logo dimension as 26 feet while a photo showed 20 feet; staff and the applicant said the packet incorporated older sign-company materials and that the amendment does not authorize upsizing of existing approved signs. The subcommittee also asked for a full-building rendering showing all existing and proposed signs so members could better judge cumulative visual impact.

Members noted the total proposed sign area for the building is below what the code allows given the building’s frontage, and staff said sign sizes are typically computed by frontage (roughly one square foot of sign per linear foot of frontage) with a common cap near 64 square feet unless an exception applies. Still, members pressed for greater consistency: several said tenant signs should be proportionate and centered over openings, and that the committee should avoid a configuration where a small subtenant could end up with the largest sign on the building. "We want consistency with good proportion," one member said.

The subcommittee also asked that all tenant signs match in kelvin (color temperature) so lighting appears uniform across the façade. Committee members recommended setting a maximum height for new tenant signs (excluding the previously exception-granted fitness signs) and asked staff to require that signs be centered within storefront openings and be no taller than existing tenant signs of comparable frontage.

Applicants Laura Riley, the site owner, and Emily, who handles permitting for the project, said they found the feedback helpful and reiterated that they do not intend to alter the already-approved primary signs. "We're not touching that," the owner said when asked about existing approval formats. Applicants and staff agreed that processing the amendment administratively would avoid permitting delays for the tenant signs as long as the conditions requested by the subcommittee are incorporated.

The subcommittee’s procedural outcome was a recommendation that staff handle the amendment administratively with conditions requiring consistent kelvin temperatures, proportionate sign heights and centered placement; staff will work with the applicant to provide clearer facade renderings and to confirm exact measurements before final administrative approval or referral to the planning commission if necessary. The meeting adjourned after routine business, and the subcommittee set its next meeting for Feb. 25.