04/06/2015 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

? 2. A 105 sq. ft. variance for the maximum sign face per building unit; code permits 81 sq. ft., applicant shows 186 sq. ft., Section 1163.25(c). Ryan Conrad was administered the oath. He said code allows 1 wall sign and they would like to have 3 wall signs. The building is in the mall which has limited visibility. They would like to place a sign along the north, south and west elevations to be seen from Brookpark Road and the ring road within the mall. The total square footage for sign face on a building unit is due to the number of signs requested. He noted other businesses in the mall which had three wall signs. Mr. Russell noted that the applicant withdrew the ground sign at the Planning and Design Commission meeting and stated they would address it when the former Remington building is leased. Ms. Rudolph asked why the west sign needed to be the same size as the others. Mr. Conrad said the size of the wall signs were designed to be consistent. Ms. Rudolph asked if all three signs would be illuminated and Mr. Conrad said yes. Mr. Raig said the minutes of Planning and Design discussed the wall signs being granted based on the owner forgoing their right to have a ground sign. He felt the board should make any approval contingent upon the owner forgoing their rights to a ground sign. Mr. Conrad said the existing building will have two tenants, one of which will have no frontage along Brookpark Road; therefore a ground sign will be needed and addressed at a later date. Mr. Raig didn't feel a ground sign was warranted and would change the eharacter of the area. The amount of signage just for this building is significant enough that no matter how many tenants are in the former Remington building they could also require variances. The Verizon building , itself with three wall signs is basically a ground sign and he would not support granting the wall signs unless the applicant gives up their right to a ground sign. Ms. Rudolph asked the building official if the applicant owned both buildings. Mr. Russell said the site is one parcel with two buildings, as to who owns the lot he isn't sure. However it is not uncommon for parcel owners at the mall to give up their right to have a ground sign for additional wall signs. The applicants' building is 5,000 sq. ft. and they're requesting 186 square footage of signage on the building. Mr. Conrad said it is possible that there could be two tenants in the former Remington building so a ground sign would be needed along Brookpark. They are looking at eliminating a parking space and creating an island for the monument sign. Mr. Russell said if any parking spaces are eliminated additional variances are needed as the site requires 224 parking spaces and 224 spaces are shown. Mr. Conrad said Eden Court Capital is the owner of the lot. Ms. Rudolph moved, seconded by Ms. Bellido, to grant APP15-2809: Verizon of 26200 Brookpark Road the following variances: 1. A varaance for 2 additional wall signs; code perrr?its 1, applicant shows 3, 1163.28(a). 2. A 105 sq. ft. variance for the maximum sign face per building unit; code peranits 81 sq. ft., applicant slaows 186 "sq. ft., 1163.25(c), The motion is coa?tingent upon the property owner forgoing their right to a ground sign, which passed 3-0. APP15-2847: Hi Tech Pools; 32330 Industrial Parkway: Proposal consists of signage, the following variances are requested: 1. A variance for 1 additional wall sign; code permits one (1), applicant shows two (2), Section 1163.28(a). 2