Laserfiche WebLink
BiTILDIlVG & ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br />CITY OF NOIZTH OLMSTED <br />MINU'I'ES OF DECEMBEgt 5, 2016 <br />ROLL CALL <br />Chairman Raig called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm in Council Chambers and led the Pledge <br />of Allegiance. <br />Present: Michael Raig, Bob Papotto, Melissa Meredith, Donna Sabo <br />Absent: Eric Allain <br />Staff: Law Director Michael Gareau, Assistant Building Commissioner Dan Russell, Planner <br />James Aspery, Administrative Assistant Nicole Rambo-Ackerman <br />REVIEV6' ANI) CORRECTION OF MINLTTES <br />1VIr. Papotto moved, seconded by Ms. Sabo, to approve the Building & Zoning Board of <br />Appeals minutes of November 7, 2016, rnotion passed 4-0. <br />COMMERCIAL APPEALS AND REQUESTS <br />16-7407; Hampton Inn; 24601 Country Club Boulevard <br />Representatives: Linda Nichols, LAAD Sign & Lighting, 830 Moe Drive, Akron, OH; Frank <br />Mancine, Riley Hotel Group, 387 Medina Road, Medina, OH <br />Proposal consists of a inonument sign. The property is zoned Mixed Use A. <br />The following variance is requested: <br />1. A variance for a monument sign located within the 35 ft. traffic hazard triangle; code does <br />not allow, applicant shows a sign installed within the triangle, Section 1163.17(a). <br />Note 1: Variances were previously granted for wall signage on 8/7/08. <br />Note 2: Proposal was tabled at 11/7/16 BZBA meeting. <br />Mr. Aspery stated that the applicant is proposing to install a 12 foot high ground monument sign <br />within the 35 foot sight triangle area along the property's western drive. Code prohibits ground <br />signage within sight triangles. Ms. Nichols stated that if the sign was moved back, as requested, <br />it would encroach upon the retention pond in front of the hotel. She added that the monument <br />sign should not be located near the second driveway because it would be too close to the <br />residential area. Mr. Mancine stated that if the sign was moved back, two existing pine trees <br />would reduce visibility of the sign. Mr. Papotto questioned where the specific location of the <br />sign would be, Mr. Mancine stated that the information would be given when the sign permit is <br />applied for. Mr. Raig stated that the neighboring property has a sign that is also blocked by the <br />pine trees. He questioned why the sign could not be placed somewhere else along Country Club <br />since there is no main entrance to the property. Ms. Nichols stated that the strip of land on the <br />other side of the driveway is too narrow for the sign installation. She added that the the driveway <br />is difficult to see around the curve of the road and she believed the sign needed to be before the <br />driveway to prevent accidents. Discussion of previous variances granted and moving the sign <br />elsewhere on the property.