Laserfiche WebLink
CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED <br />ARCHITECTURAL BOARD OF REVIEW <br />MINUTES - APRIL 20, 1983 <br />I. ROLL CALL: <br />Chairwoman Case called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. <br />Present: M. Case, S. Ebin, and R. Mongello <br />Absent: J. Cavaluchi <br />Also Present: Recording Secretary B. Oring <br />II. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: <br />R. Mongello moved that the Minutes of March 16, 1983 be approved <br />as presented, seconded by S. Ebin, and unanimously approved. <br />III. SIGNS: <br />(a) Springvale Country Club and North Olmsted Golf Course Sign <br />(Ord. 83-14, Located in the right-of-way at corner of Canter- <br />bury Rd. and Butternut Ridge. <br />Heard by Planning Commission March 22, 1983. Approved by <br />Council (Ord. 8314) on March 1, 1983. <br />S. Ebin moved to approve the sign as submitted as long as it <br />confornis to all other codes and regul'ations, including ap- <br />proval of Iocation by Planning Commission and the Safety <br />Department, seconded by R. Mongello, and unanimously approved. <br />(b) Casey's Restaurant, 27350 Lorain Rd. (Simon Sign Co.) <br />Pole Sign. <br />Illuminated Pole of sign approved by Architectural Board on <br />12/22/82 (Original application did not specify lighted pole.) <br />Referred from BZD Committee for ARB approval of pole. <br />B. Hollenbeck of Buddy Simon Signs Co. and a representative of <br />' Casey's explained that the illuminated pole was an afterthought. <br />Some approved signage had been removed from the rear wall in <br />case the lighted pole would be considered as part of the al- <br />lowed signage. It was pointed out that a pole sign cannot ex- <br />ceed 50 sq. ft. regardless of how much actual wall signage is <br />available. The pole sign is.at the maximum allowed area, and <br />if the pole is to be considered, the sign would be oversized. <br />Mr. Ebin stated that if the pole is considered as signage, <br />half of the perighery, of the pole should be counted. It was <br />felt that this is a decision for the Law Department. R. Mon- <br />gello moved that the Casey's pole sign with an illuminated <br />pole be referred to the Law Director for his ruling as to <br />whether or not the illuminated pole should be considered part <br />of the allowable signage of the pole sign, seconded by M. <br />Case,. and unanimously approved. Mr. Ebin read section 1221.064F