12/01/2005 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. O'Malley suggested that perhaps the board should allow the applicants to meet with Planning Commission to address the issues of signage, required room sizes, required parking spaces and lighting issues before the board motions on any variances. Mr. Newberry advised that if it was the boards wish for them to return they would comply, but asked if the board felt the front and side yard issues were acceptable. Chairman Maloney advised that the board understood the requirements of the front and side yard variances but would like additional information/clarification pertaining to the other issues i.e. room sizes, parking and lighting. J. Maloney moved to table Emerald Village of 30344 Lorain Road as agreed upon to their first meeting in 2006 so they could address the boards concerns. T. Kelly seconded the motion which was unanimously approved. Tabled 4. Fast Cash; 27328 Lorain Road: (WRD 1) Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of a new wall sign. The following variances are requested: A variance for a wall sign larger than code permits on a unit, (code permits 20 '/z sq ft, applicant shows 36 sq ft). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section (1163.24 (C)). Note: Proposal includes ground sign insert which is allowed by code. John Behra with Boyer Signs came forward to be sworn in and address the request. The board asked if the sign was for more than one tenant as the sign seemed to be for more than one business. Mr. Behra advised the request was for one tenant. His clients feels the size of the sign was needed due to the distance form the road. Mr: Rymarczyk advised that the building Commissioner did not believe the size of the sign is needed. The applicant can place a sign to code what is being requested is to large for the building. The board felt that as there was a monument sign at the entrance the oversized wall sign was not needed. The board went through each of the seven factors and could not find any reason why the applicant could not follow city code. Mr. Behra indicated that most of the signs in the strip center are the same size as what is being asked for. He questioned if wording was changed on the sign would the board allow the sign. Board members each stated that wording was not a factor in granting or denying a variance the size of the sign does not meet code. Board members felt the variance to be excessive and applicant could comply with code and still yield a reasonable return. The applicant failed to show a reasonable hardship. N. Sergi moved to approve Fast Cash of 27328 Lorain Road their request for variance (1123.12), which consists of a new wall sign and that the following variance is granted: A variance for a wall sign larger than code permits on a unit, (code permits 20 '/Z sq ft, applicant shows 36 sq ft). Which is in violation of Orcl. 90-125 section (1163.24 (C)). M. Maloney seconded the motion, which was unanimously denied. 5. Dennis Kaczmarek (Therm All Inc.); 31393.Industrial Parkway: (WRD 3) Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of additional ground sign. The following variances are requested: A variance for a second ground sign on a lot (code permits 1, applicant shows 2), (see note). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section (1163.26 (A)). Note: A"Therm All "sign exists on the lot/property for address 31387. The applicant would like an additional ground sign on the lot/property in front of address 31393 "PDL". The proposed sign is to be 250 feet from existing sign. Mr. Kaczmarek with Therm All, and Mr. Shenk with Neon Signs each came forward to be sworn in and address the request. Mr. Kaczmarek reviewed that due to the fact that there is only one lot and 4of5