PC 060805 - Laserfiche WebLink

monument sign would measure 12 inches by five feet and would be halo-lit with push-through acrylic letters to allow light penetration. Ms_ Decker stated that staff also supports this sign. Ms_ Decker then recommended approval of the application, subject to the conditions of approval presented in the staff report. Chairperson Maas inquired why staff is supporting internally illuminated signs rather than gooseneck lighting. Ms_ Decker explained that staff generally supports gooseneck lighting, which is more subdued, for pedestrian-level businesses; however, because of how this building is set back from Stanley Building, halo-lit signs would provide more visibility for the building tenants. Chairperson Maas stated that she would support internally illuminated signs for the building but gooseneck lighting for the monument sign. Commissioner Roberts inquired if the proposed monument sign would be the same size as the approved. wooden monument sign. Ms_ Decker said yes. Commissioner Blank asked what the luminosity of the sign would be, the type of lightbulbs to be used and their brightness, if they would be neon or backlit, and if the City has set standards in terms of luminosity. Ms_ Decker replied that the City does not have any standards in terms of luminosity of bulb wattage of internally illuminated signs. She added that staff worked with the applicant to reduce the luminosity level of the signs, opting for the least bright white lighting with the appropriate wattage of internal illumination. 7n response to Commissioner Blank's inquiry if the project could be conditioned regarding the appropriate degree of luminosity, Ms_ Decker said yes. Commissioner Fox indicated her preference to have the address at the top of the monument sign and have landscaping around the bottom. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Carlos Parrague, Vice President £or United Growth, the applicant, stated that the signs initially approved by the Commission looked good and were acceptable to him; however, he is requesting this amendment because he met resistance from the potential tenants who wanted more visibility from Stanley Boulevard Arid considered the gooseneck lighting to be too subtle since the building was set back some distance from the street. He requested the Commission to approve his application. In response to Chairperson Maas' inquiry if gooseneck lighting for the monument sign would be acceptable to him, Mr. Parraguc replied that he preferred ground lighting. He noted that putting the street address at the top of the sign defeats the purpose of providing visibility for the tenants. He indicated that his preference would be to keep the address at the bottom and agreed that _._ adding landscaping around the sign would make it look better. PLANNING COMMISSION MIN C_7TES June 8, 2005 Page 4 of 15