Loading...
DRC 01-21-2016Design Review Committee January 21, 2016 Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE HELD ON January 21, 2016 ROLL CALL Committee Members present: Committee Members absent Staff present: Staff absent: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Alan Takahashi, Chairperson Margie Gong, Commissioner none Tiffany Brown None October 16, 2014 Minutes of the October 16, 2014 Design Review Committee meeting were approved as written WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: None ORAL COMMUNICATION: A resident spoke regarding a recent lunch at Lazy Dog Restaurant. She stated that the lunch went well, the parking garage was easy to navigate and the food and service were good. CONSENT CALENDAR: None PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Application No.(s): EXC-2015-02 Applicant: David Esajian (Main Street Cupertino) Location: 19439 Stevens Creek Boulevard Sign Exception to allow exposed neon on a sign for a new coffee shop (Philz) at the Main Street Cupertino mixed use project Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed. Staff Member Brown explained that the application has been referred to the Design Review Committee because of the neon lighting proposed for the sign. Philz Coffee is located in the interior of the new main Street Cupertino Mixed Use development. The coffee shop is already open for business. They would like to add to their 2 existing signs, one facing Vallco Parkway and one facing the Town Square. The sign facing Vallco Parkway has already been approved (without the neon lighting element) and is approximately three feet by three feet. The exposed neon outline will only be lit at night and be turned 2 Design Review Committee January 21, 2016 off when the shop closes for the night at 8pm. The second sign faces Town Square and is a little larger. They also propose to have neon lighting around the lettering outline and will only have the sign lit at night up until they close. The Master Sign Program for the development was approved in December 2015. The Sign Program allows for exposed neon on signs as long as the property owner and City approve it. The property owner has already approved the additions to the signs and is in attendance today. The City's Sign Ordinance has specific conditions regarding the allowed illumination levels of exposed neon. The draft resolution included a condition to ensure compliance with the Ordinance. The greatest light impact will be during the winter months. A representative from the sign manufacturer has certified to the property owner that the proposed sign's illumination is half of what is allowed in the City's Sign Ordinance. Staff supports the application. Commissioner Gong asked what faces the signs. Staff member Brown stated that the most visible sign is the one facing Vallco Parkway. The building located about 300 feet away has retail uses on the bottom and apartments on the upper level and the hotel is about 400 feet away. It was reiterated that the proposed neon will only be on until 8pm and will not be flashing or in other ways moving. Chair Takahashi opened the public hearing: A resident, Lisa Warren, spoke (on behalf of a larger group of residents) saying that they opposed any exposed neon lighting at Main Street because it is in appropriate. They understood that the original approval for the site stated that there would be no illuminated signing. She felt that the Sign Program was never advertised to the public and the current signs are not what the public wants to see. Her questions and concerns to the property owner have not been addressed or have been glossed over. She does not feel that an exception is necessary and does not want to set a precedence for other stores to obtain exception permits for signage. The entire Main Street project has grown out of scope and scale from what was originally promised. A resident, Jennifer Griffin spoke to say that she also did not want to see neon signs. In the past, neon signs were heard by the Planning Commission and she does not like that these decisions are not being made at that level. She cited other neon signs around the City that are very bright and are on all night. She felt that back lit signs are more appropriate for the City. Chair Takahashi closed the public hearing. The applicant, David Esajian from Ad Art Sign Company, addressed the Committee members. He wanted to assure the Committee members and the speakers that the exposed neon is very subdued. The bright flashing neon from historical memory is not the neon that will be used for these signs. Commissioner Gong asked the property owner if the other tenants were noticed. The property owner, Dean Isaacs, stated that there are only two other tenants in occupation currently and that they were not noticed. He said that these two tenants can't even see the signs from their store. He approved the addition of the neon element to the existing signs because the lighting is not invasive on such small signs. She asked the applicant to confirm that that neon colors are the white and yellow as shown in the exhibits. He confirmed that they are. A representative, for Philz Coffee, David Gray, addressed the Committee to say that the signs are understated and is a corporate branding request. They like the signs because they are small and low key. In other locations, the property managers have even asked the company to increase the size of their signs. They are not interested in going "big and bold" and outshine the other shops in the development or catch people's eyes from off the street. Commissioner Gong felt that the sign was very subtle and unobtrusive, definitely not the flashy signs from the 70s. She was in support allowing the addition of the neon to the existing signs. She thanked the audience member for bringing in an exhibit that demonstrated just how small the signs are. Chair Takahashi reminded the audience that they were meeting tonight to discuss this sign exception request, not the pros and cons or promises and failures of the entire Main Street project. That said, he spoke that the signs being proposed were in context and conformity with the Sign Ordinance. He 3 Design Review Committee January 21, 2016 understood the concerns of the audience regarding neon, but felt that these signs were appropriate to the situation and their application. He didn't see a specific reason to deny the sign exception application on its own merits. MOTION: Commissioner Gong moved to approve EXC-2015-02 per the draft resolution APPROVE: Chair Takahashi ABSENT: none ABSTAIN: none VOTE: 2-0-0 OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: None Respectfully submitted: Beth Ebben Administrative Clerk