Design panel urges subtler signage, tile accents and lighting changes for Taco Bell remodel in San Clemente

The San Clemente Design Review Subcommittee reviewed proposed exterior changes to an existing Taco Bell site, including removal of a sunroom, two trellises (one emphasizing the primary entrance), a tower entrance element on El Camino Real, new exterior materials and altered signage and lighting.

Staff (Speaker 4) said the zoning administrator had asked the project to come before design review over two issues: a purple accent band around an arched surround and what the zoning administrator described as excessive stacking of roof elevations. "The zoning administrator requested that this be reviewed by DRC specifically about the color of the accent pattern, the purple, and then the stacking of the roof elevations," staff said.

Committee members recommended several specific design moves: use ceramic tile rather than paint for the purple accent (staff preference), narrow the accent band to roughly 6–8 inches on secondary arches so it reads as an accent rather than a broad surround, and recess smaller arches to make them less prominent. They also suggested replacing multiple floodlights with downward‑facing sconces and adding downlights on the trellis to reduce glare to adjacent properties. "Delete that and just go down lights on the trellis," one committee member said when discussing the side elevation.

Signage provoked the strongest exchange. Several committee members urged reducing or removing a large freestanding monument sign and minimizing redundant building signage to preserve the "Spanish village by the sea" character of El Camino Real. The site's franchisee and store owner (Speaker 6) pushed back, saying the monument sign is important for branding and customer recognition but agreed to most of the aesthetic recommendations. "It's my store... I own this store," the franchisee said, noting the marketing value of monument signage; the subcommittee said it preferred removal but indicated the application would still be approvable with the sign if the franchisee insisted.

Staff recommended the applicant present the committee's recommended changes at a special zoning administrator hearing scheduled for March 5 at 2 p.m.; the subcommittee asked that any revised renderings, tile samples or lighting plans be submitted in time for the zoning administrator's packet. No final action to require or prohibit the monument sign was taken at the design review meeting; rather, the subcommittee provided guidance to be considered by the zoning administrator.