02/03/1993 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

would anly be good Until January l, 1998 and Law Director Gareau advised that this should be made part of the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. Variances granted. The members discussed the non-conforming signs among themselves and agreed that some` kind of policy must be decided for these signs as the expiration date drew closer. Law Director Gareau agreed that something would have to be done about these non-conforming signs. 7. Eyewear 20/20, 26041 Lorain Road. Request for variance (1123.12). Request variance to have 2 additiona.l wall sign (one allowed); also request 48.0 square foot variance for total sign area for a business building. Violations of Ord. 90-125, Sections 1163.12(a) and 1163.11(c). Chairman Gomersall called all iriterested parties before the Board. The oath was administered to Mr. Bedar, Stark Enterprises, who reminded the members that he had been before the board regarding the Jennifer's Convertible sign vaxiance. When the original proposal came before the boards, the rendering showed 3 signs for these buildings which had been approved by the various boards. Since that time the codes have been changed and 3 signs are not allowed. Mr. Gomersall questioned what the actual name was for tiiis store since the pole sign says "Dr. Jay's". Mr. Bedar stated that they are going through a name change and may be changing the face an the pole sign. Mr..Gomersall believed that this was too much signage. Law Director Gareau questioned their statement that "it was imperative tha.t they have identification", and questioned why they need 3 signs on the building, especially since people do not buy glasses on impulse. Mr. Bedar stated tha.t there was ane sign over the front, a sign facing towaxd Brookpark Road, and one wall sign and a pole sign facing Lorain. He maintained that this was approved for this building previously and that eventually the pole sign will have to be removed. Mr. Purper believed that it would be more effective to change the pole sign. Mr. Bedar believed that Dr. Rosenburg,. the owner, might agree to changing the pole sign. The members agreed that replacing the faces in the pole sign and eliminating the wall sign on Lorain would be acceptable. Mr. Bedar offered to withdraw the request until it is determined which Dr. Roseburg prefers. Mr. Gaxeau suggested that the board vote on the alternatives, if the pole sign is eliminated, they can ha.ve the wall sign, but if they do not want to eliminate the pole sign they cannot have the wall sign. B. Graee moved to grant the request for variance to have 2 additional wa11 signs for Eyewear 20/20, 26041 Lorain Road with the option given to the owner to either take down the pole sign and receive the Lorain Road wall sign or do not put up that wall sign, and keep the pole sign, but if the pole sign is used it is to be noted that it must be removed by January l, 1998, and that the variance for the additional sqUare footage will be determined by the Building Department if the pole sign remains, and that the 48 square foot variance for the wall sign i's approved if the wall sign is installed without the pole sign, and the Building Commissioner will advise the board what the actual square foot variance will be at the next meeting, seconded by R. Gomersall, and Unanimously approved. Variances granted. 8. Velvet Touch Auto Wash, 27100 Lorain Road. Request for variance (1123.12). Request varianee to replace faces of existing ground sign (Lorain Road) to in clude prohibited changeable copy area; request variance for second ground sign (Dover Center entrance); request variance for location of Dover Center ground sign which is located within the restricted 35 foot triangular area and a 19 foot 6 inch variance for distance to side property 4