10/01/1997 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

? with the exact location, so the Building Department can review it. The height variance on the free standing signs is needed because of the 15 inch base a.nd the logo on top. There is a blue band on the base which is the same material as the background of the signs. The members questioned if that band would be lighted. Mr. Jobeson was not sure. It was clarified that the rear signs wou.ld be lit. Councilman McKay stated that they had just negotiated with the owners of the Radisson to remove the light from their sign because it was visible to the neighbors across I-480. He did not think that the signage on the I-480 side did too much good and believed that there were too many signs along Country Club Boulevard. Mr. Miller questioned why an extended stay hotel would need these signs, because this type hotel does not attract guests on impulse. Mr. McKay stated that I-480 is below the grade of the hotel and the main people who see the sign will be the residents across the street. Drivers going east will not see the sign until they are past the interchange. He does not mind the sign, but does not want it to be lighted. Law Director Gareau advised that the city is trying to attract hotels and motels because of the taxes that they generate. Not having a lighted sign on the freeway will be defeating the purpose. Mr. Jobeson did not believe this light would be that intrusive. Councilmau McKay pointed out that there were provisions made to have one sign at the corner of Grreat Northern Boulevard and Country Club which was to list all businesses on Country Club. The members had not been made aware of this by Council. Mr. Purper suggested that the lights on rear sign could be put on a timer. Mr. Miller still wondered why this was necessary for an extended stay hotel. Mr. Jobeson stated that 40% of their guests did come from drive by traffic. Mr. Gomersall doubted this because if someone wants to stay for a period of time, they usually make reservations. The members agreed that there should be no pylon sign but they should have a wall sign on the south elevation. Mr. Jobeson agreed to change the rear wall sign to a non-lit sign. R Gomersall moved to grant to Homestead Village, 24851 Country Club Boulevazd, a variance for adclitional wall sign with the condition that the sign on the rear (south-west comer) will not be lit and will be not higher than the third floor (between 16 and 25 feet) with the notation that this sign be exempted from Ord. 90-125, Section 1163.26 concerning the amortizing of non-conforming signs. Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1163.12(a). The motion was seconded by J. Maloney, and unanimously approved. Variance granted. R Gomersall moved to grant to Homestead Village, 24851 Country Club Boulevard, a 3 foot, 6 inch variance for the height of the wall signs with the notation that this sign be exempted from Ord. 90- 125, Section 1163.26 concerning the amortizing of non-conforming signs. Violation of Ord. 90-125, Sections 1163.12(a), The motion was seconded by J. Maloney, and unanimously approved. Variance granted. R Gomersall moved to grant to Homestead Village, 24851 Country Club Boulevard, a variance to have an additional free standing sign (on the south or I-480 side). Violation of Ord. 90-125, Sections 1163.12(b), The motion was seconded by W. Purper. Roll call on motion: Gomersall, Purper, Miller, and Maloney, no. Motion failed to pass. Variance denied. R Gomersall moved to grant to the Homestead Village, 24851 Country Club Boulevard, a 15 square foot for a ground sign on Country Club Boulevard, with the notation that this sign be exempted from Ord. 907125, Section 1163.26 concerning the amortizing of non-conforming signs. Violation of Ord. 90-125, Sections 1163.12(b). The motion was seconded by P. Miller, and unanimously approved. Variance granted. 3