Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutASAC Minutes 02-04-1976CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino Telephone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE HELD ON FEBRUARY 4, 1976 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA ROLL CALL Members present: Irvine, Sallan (8:40), Chairman Koenitzer Members absent: Dressler Staff present: Assistant Planner Toby Kramer Guest: Mr. Carl Heymann, California Electric Sign Users Council An informal discussion of the Sign Ordinance as proposed by the Sign Review Committee began at 8:10 p.m. On page 10, Section 3.04.3, Member Irvine questioned what a professional sign consultant was. It was decided this would be someone in the graphics art field. A discussion was also held as to whether it should be included in the ordinance that samples of colors and building materials would be required. It was felt this could be a part of the application form. Mr. Heymann noted that with a self-governing ordinance there would be no need to have a sign consultant. The committee could serve in an advisory capacity. He also said the committee should be of at least half being members of the business community who would be using the signs. Ms. Kramer advised the committee members that the ordinance would be going to the Planning Commission for Public Hearing on February 18, 19 76 . Ms. Heymann indicated there were conflicts between the various sections. Ms. Kramer asked that he present a written report on which : sections he felt were in conflict with each other. HC -157 Page 1 HC -157 MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 4, 1976 ADJ. H -CONTROL MEETING Page 2 Member Irvine said he felt if the applicants would include scale drawings (including a human figure by signs) that it would be helpful in indicating size of signs. A discussion evolved about temporary window signs and how to determine if they were exhibited beyond the allotted time span. Chairman Koenitzer wondered about weekly specials shown in grocery windows; they were changed each week but the windows were always covered with signs. dot air balloons were questioned. Ms. Kramer advised these are a different matter and are approved by the City Council. At 8:40 p.m. the third member of the committee arrived so that a quorum was present. The meeting was then convened. Means of differentiating between advertising and decorative statuary was discussed. On page 16, under Section 6.03.1, Member Sallan questioned the 70% figure, feeling it should be less. She also suggested inserting the word "usable" in front of frontage in the seventh line. Placement of signs on the facade was discussed. Ms. Kramer answered Mr. Heymann that small canopy signs were allowed on businesses in shopping centers. Li Section 6.03.3, ?Member Sallan felt there should oe only two tenants on each side of the sign, rather =.ian the three indicated. The otr.�er committee members were in agreement. Mr. 'ieyn.ann said he had uncarlined sections he felt needed further study an! attention; certain, provisions needed to be carefully analysed- and thought about. Ms. Kramer noted he should have presented these ideas when he appeared before the committee a year or so ago. Mr. Heymann said the industry was anxious to police themselves. One suggestion he made was that each contractor should be required to be licensed. He indicated his regret that no one representing the Chamber of Commerce was present. Mr. Heymann also suggested that signs should be checked every two years or so to see if they needed maintainence; there should be identification on each structure as to who had erected sign. MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 4, 1976 AD. H -CONTROL MEETING In answer to Member Sallan, Mr. Heymann said that 95% of what should be included in an ordinance was included in this ordinance. He felt statuary should be clarified; in Section 2.06, "linear line of building wall" should be changed to "business frontage"; definition of sign could be shortened in 2.38. Mr. Heymann questioned how illumination would be determined. Ms. Kramer explained how foot lambert readings would be measured. She noted the City was trying to limit intensity of bulbs before sign was erected to save -costly revisions. Mr. Heymann suggested several criteria for lighting: (1) The intensity should not interfere with function of pedestrian or vehicular traffic. (2) Should not be glaring. (3) Should be compatible with signs on adjoining properties. He noted signs sometimes appear to be glaring because of newness of bulbs which will dim down in a week or so. Also because the eye is not used to seeing the sign. A discussion was held on having Building Inspector check the signs. Ms. Kramer referred again to making sure the sign met requirements before installation so it would not be a hardship on the businessman. Chairman Koenitzer stressed they would rather have some mechanism to measure the sign, making sure it meets the requirements before it is installed. With regard to sign consultant as suggested in Section 3.04.3, Mr. Heymann said he saw no need for such an individual. He pointed out committees such as this one bordered on the legal problem. He stressed these committees should be advisory only and not demanding of changes by the applicant. Member Sallan noted this was perhaps-, a question of "public relations", of dealing more tactfully with the applicant. Mr. Heymann said he felt Section 6.04.2 was too restrictive. After discussion, it was noted a statement should be included that according to Table A, the minimum sign size would be 20 sq. ft. Mr. Heymann made another suggestion: that every 2 or 2½ years, an inspection of the signs should be made to see if they needed mainten- ance. He also said his organization has written a code on profession ism of design. Any discrepancies should be reported to them. Chairman Koenitzer reported Member Dressler's concern that maximum height should be 12 ft. rather than 20 ft. HC -15 7 Page 3 iC-15 7 Page 4 MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 4, 1976 ADJ.H-CONTROL MEETING A suggestion was made that signs could be turned off at night after business hours to conserve energy. Chairman Koenitzer noted parking lot lights could also be turned off or down to a minimum. Member Irvine said he thought the graphics referred to by Ms. Kramer would be an excellent addition. Computation of area was briefly discussed. Member Sallan recommended delaying Planning Commission hearing on ordinance.due to"several unresolved issues. Ms. ramer advised it had already been advertised. ADJ OURNMENT At 11:30 p.m. the meeting was adjourned to the regular meeting of Februnry _ 1976 at 7:00 o.m. —__ -_ /s/ Wm. E. Ryder City Clerk APPROVED: Is/ R.D. Koenitzer, Jr. Chairman