Design Review Commission Meeting – April 16, 2025 (Noted Discrepancy)
Design Review Commission Meeting – April 16, 2025
Discrepancy Note: The published agenda stated the meeting was cancelled due to no business. However, the raw transcript shows that the meeting did occur, with a quorum present and formal actions taken. The following summary is based on the transcript.
Consent Calendar
- No items were considered under the consent calendar.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No public comments were offered.
Discussion Items
-
Master Sign Program (MSP) for 1904 Olympic Boulevard:
- Staff presented a request for a new Master Sign Program for the building at 1904 Olympic Boulevard. The MSP would include a table of contents, criteria for sign use, design guidelines, and location maps. Six sign locations were identified, with signs being non‑illuminated, aluminum‑backed, and totaling just over 12 square feet. Letter heights could be up to 16 inches (logos up to 20 inches). A CEQA exemption (Class 15301, existing facilities) was recommended.
- A subcommittee member noted that flexibility was offered to the applicant but not chosen; no other issues were raised.
- The commission asked no additional questions of staff or the applicant.
-
Commission Considerations – Science Subcommittee:
- Commissioners volunteered to serve on a science subcommittee. Commissioner Riley and Vice Chair Basting offered to continue serving.
Key Outcomes
- Motion to Approve MSP and CEQA Exemption: Commissioner Riley moved to adopt the resolution approving the new Master Sign Program for 1904 Olympic Boulevard, subject to the standard conditions of approval, and to approve the CEQA exemption (15301). Commissioner Case seconded.
- Vote: The motion carried 4‑0 (Chair Newsom, Vice Chair Basting, Commissioner Riley, Commissioner Case all voting yes).
- Adjournment: The meeting adjourned immediately after the vote and brief announcements. No further business was conducted.
Note: The remainder of the transcript (beginning with the mayor’s message and state‑of‑the‑city event) pertains to a separate, unrelated gathering and is not part of the Design Review Commission meeting.
Meeting Transcript
The MSP would include a table of contents, the criteria of which signs can be used, design guidelines for which design for which signs can be designed, and then also the locations. The graphic here shows the building or the sign locations, and there are six locations. So in doing so, I they probably just figured, well, why don't we do an MSP for this building and sign it? So that's what they're doing. And they've hired Sid to do that. All right. So the signs here would include these signs here shown and and those locations, those are the locations that were shown in plan on the last slide. The sign area is about is it's just over 12 square feet. They're non-illuminated. They have an aluminum backing. Um there is a section here, shows how it shows the backing and and the the wall, the backing panel, and the sign. They're non-illuminated. Letter heights can be up to 16 inches with logos to 20. Um just just to state that on the MSP on the other building, letter heights were held to eight inches, but remember those are only on the forward-facing valances of those of the um white the awnings. Similar to what like down here. Those are probably eight inches as well. Right there. Um CEQA does have an exemption for this. It's 15301 existing facilit facilities. It's recommended for this project and should be in any motion for approval if the design, if the design review commission decides to approve this project. And with that, I'd give a recommendation to move to adopt the resolution. There is a draft uh draft resolution in your packet which would um approve this MSP as shown, subject to the standard conditions of approval for an MSP. Are there any questions of staff? The the applicant is here for questions as well, but does not have a presentation. Anyone have any questions for the applicant? No. I have a quick question of our group um sign subcommittee. Were there any suggestions or recommendations you made that you felt weren't addressed? To the extra we we offered up the option of flexibility, which they chose not to do, but that's up to them. So no exception there. Okay. Yeah, that was it. Okay. Great. Thank you. I have no questions. You you do have a question? Nope. No questions. None other than that. I'll go back to my other job. Okay, so with that said, does anybody want to make a motion? Um I'm happy to make a motion to um adopt the revolution resolution approving the new master sign program for 1904 Olympic Boulevard. Also the CEQA exemption 15301. Subject to the conditions of approval. I'll second it. Second, okay. Um for the record, can you confirm that your the first the first part of the motion was for CEQA? Or can you can you restate that the you you would recommend the sequa recommendation first? And that's and I I do that just it's a technical thing where SQL before a project is adopted, the sequel has to be adopted.
openpublica.com