PC 032509 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chair Pearce inquired if temporary signs would be allowed. Ms. Decker replied that staff is looking at a Code amendment for temporary window signage, which has been under discussion by the Planning Commission for some time. She stated that the Commission may wish to clarify this point with this particular sign program as it is an issue that has arisen in the Downtown and other areas. Commissioner Blank stated that if the trapezoidal logo sign could be made smaller, it would fit into the approved Master Sign Program signage without changing the logo. Mr. Lancaster stated that they would like to preserve the integrity of the Comerica sign and compared it to putting a Ford sign into another shape. Commissioner Blank noted that the logo presentation of the McDonald’s restaurant on Mission Boulevard in Fremont, which is in a historic area, was significantly modified in order to fit into that district. Commissioner Fox noted that the overhang sign on Division Street appears to be smaller than the one on Main Street, with the gooseneck lights located outside the perimeter of the sign. She inquired if this was the actual dimensions of the sign and if the elevation was accurate. She recalled that in 2003, the Commission had approved a sign for Jack in the Box, but the sign on the plan was not to scale, and the sign that were installed was a lot bigger than what was approved. Mr. Otto replied that this sign is 9 feet, 3 inches long and that the sign program allows up to 12 feet. He then presented the actual construction detail which better represented the sign and showed the gooseneck lights to be within the sign length. Mr. Lancaster agreed it was their intent to have the gooseneck lamps to be contained in the plane of the trapezoid and top dimensions of the sign. Commissioner Fox inquired why signs on both the Main Street and the Division Street elevations were necessary. She stated that she believed one sign on Main Street would be sufficient and added that three signs, including the blade sign on the pedestrian level, is an overkill. Mr. Lancaster stated that the signs are smaller than what they are allowed. With respect to the quantity and positioning of the signs, he explained that the blade signs are geared for pedestrian traffic, the sign on Division Street is for northbound traffic on Main Street, and the sign on Main Street is for southbound traffic on Main Street and also indentifies their main entrance. Mr. Otto agreed with Mr. Lancaster’s statements, noting that one sign was located completely at the opposite end of the building or 50 feet away from the other sign. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 25, 2009 Page 14 of 27