09/27/2006 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

fence not white painted green. Even after the applicants were issued stop work orders they continued to erect the fence they have defied the city the entire time the project has been going on. The abutting neighbors have had to call the police a number of times due to the applicants not following city laws. If the fence is allowed to be painted then it will become nothing but an on going maintenance problem. Ms. Ryan resident to the rear of Ganley voiced that now that all the trees were taken out the lights from the wall packs on the building illuminate the inside of her home. She questioned how the illuminated signs would affect the neighbors along Timber Cove. Mr. Lasko advised that any light which exists on the site must have zero readings at the property lines and the proposed signs being addressed will be facing south not north to Timber Cove or west towards Ranchview so the signs would not aggravate or further the problem. Ms. Lenart reviewed that the new parking lot abutted her backyard and she is concerned that the illuminated sign proposed for the west wall will shine the light into her home. Mr. Kalina did not feel that the west sign would shine onto her lot. Ms. Lenart said that the light Ms. Ryan was referencing was the wall light over the service door which also shines into her home. Mr. Rymarczyk asked if the light was new or an existing light. Ms. Lenart said it was the light on the new VW building which shines into their homes. She is also concerned what will happen once the new pole lights are turned on as the wall pack shins into neighbor's homes already. She requested the city not allow the applicants to paint the fence. J. Lasko moved to have Planning & Design Commission recommend Board of Zoning Appeals grant the variance for 2 additional wall signs on a building. SG-1 and SG3. The recommendation is based on the applicant's willingness to eliminate the front pylon sign and logo variance needed. The motion was seconded by M. Mahoney roll call on the motion; J. Lasko, J. Cotner, G. Malone, M. Mahoney `yes' and M. Meredith `no'. Recommendation passed (4-1). J. Lasko moved to have Planning & Design Commission recommend Board of Zoning Appeals grant a variance for 1(one) additional ground sign SG6 directional sign. The recommendation is based again on the applicants' willingness to eliminate a pylon sign as well as the logo variance. M. Meredith seconded the motion roll call on the motion; J. Lasko, M. Mahoney, M. Meredith `yes', J. Cotner, G. Malone `no'. Recommendation failed (3-2). Mr. Mahoney voiced that he would have voted no on everything if not for the applicant eliminating the pylon SG-5 sign and logo variance requested. J. Lasko moved to have Planning & Design Commission recommend Board of Zoning Appeals grant a variance for distance between the proposed directional sign SG-6 and the existing pylon sign currently in place. G. Malone seconded the motion which was unanimously approved. Mr. Mahoney reiterated his yes vote. Mr. Lasko thanked Mr. Kalina for taking the time to look into the fence issue pending regardless if the issue is settled or not as it was not an issue before the board. Mr. Kalina assured the commission he would voice the residents and commissions concerns regarding the fence to the owner. Note: Chairman Lasko proposed changing the order of the agenda to address Fifth Third Bank next and all commissioners agreed the order should be changed. V. NEW BUSINESS: