10/16/1996 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the lighing under a minor change and the sign is acceptable. Mr. Conway clarified this is pertaining to the parking lot lignting. Roll call on motion Gallagher, Yager, Liggett, and Krieger, yes. Motion carried. 3) United Wireless, 25553 Lorain Road. Mr. Shwartz presented the proposal explaining individual illiuninated letters will be mounted to the raceway. Building Commissioner Conway clarified the proposal is for the logo. Mr. Yager explained that Mr. Zergott felt the sign and logo are fine, however, the products should be removed from the windows. When questioned about the window signs, Mr. Schwartz clarified he would like to use a neon lettering on the windows. Mr. Conway noted city code prohibits permanent window signs. Mr. Liggett concurred the sign package is acceptable, as long as the window signs are removed. Mrs. Krieger agreed. Mr. Yager felt the board is getting sketchy on the logo idea, therefore it is necessary to clarify why this logo is acceptable. He believed the logo is an additive element and does not support the name United Wireless: Mr. Yager asked for the removal of the logo, because it serves no purpose. In response, Mr. Schwartz clarified the logo is present in nearly all the adveritsing, and to keep consistent the logo is necessary on the sign. He elaborated, people identify United Wireless with the logo. Mr. Liggett believed the front part ofthe sign is more appropriate than a cartoon character logo, such as Murray. Mr. Yager wondered if it could be made clear to the people that are rejected exactly why they were rejected. In response, Mr Liggett stated he would reject a logo if it were not consistent with the letter style. He elaborated the logo would have to blend in with the rest ofthe sign in order to be acceptable. Mr. Liggett noted the board approved the big "N" on the Norwest sign and this is a similar situation. Mr. Yager wondered if the sign styles in this shopping center were consistant. Mr. Shwartz was under the impression that all signs were supposed to be red. Mr. Conway disagreed, sighting the styles and not the color would have to be consistant. Mr. Liggett believed the raceways do not really stick out as a raceway. Mr. Yager asked if the bright red color is intended to be bright red. He suggested using a more distinct color as there is a softness about the letter color that blends in with the green. Mr. Conway asked for clarification as to whether the applicant wishes to pursue the window signs. He noted if they do continue with the window signs this would have to go to the board of zoning appeals. Mr. Schwartz believed the reason for this meeting is the store front sign and at this time they are not discussing the window signage. Mr. Yager would like the motion made very clear that this board is recommending that the board of zoning appeals deny the window signs. He reiterated that the logo was redundent and unnecessary. It was clarified this board is a recommendation board to planuing commission and the board of zoning appeals. If the logo is rejected, Mr. Liggett wondered if this could continue to the board of zoning appeals. Mr. Conway clarified that the applicant always has the right to appeal to board of zoning appeals. Mr. Liggett is in favor of the sign with the logo, but did not want to make a motion because not all of the members were in agreement. Mr. Gallagher suggested making the motion, as the members have a right to vote based on their personal opinion. T. Liggett moved to approve the sign with the following modifications: that the window signs are removed; the color ofthe sign should be addressed to be more pronou.nced; and the sign needs to be consistent with the others on that facade. The motion was seconded by S. Krieger. Roll call on motion: Liggett, Krieger, Gallagher, yes. Yager, no, in regards to the logo only. Morion caried. IV. OLD BUSINESS: 1) Studio Plus, located on the south side of Cou.ntry Club Boulevard, east of Victoria Plaza Apartments. Proposal to construct a hotel including signs.