06/01/2006 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Belknap vaith 1VIC Signs and Mr. Khouri, witlm Georgia Properties each came forward to be sworn in and address the request. Mr. Belknap reviewed that the Family Christian store wou9d be taking the place of the Etlian A11en store. 1 hey will be replacing the existing awnings over each of tlie windows and use the same area for signage that the previous tenant used. The design element along the bottom of the wording creates the height variance. The background is not illuminated only the white let#ering is illuminated. They require the letterrang sizes to be adequately seen from the road. The 49'.5" variance is for exeeeding tatal square foatage on a huiIding. They do not believe that costumers would be able to see the signs if they were smalter. The sigriage they axe requesting is smaller than what the previous owner had on the bualding. T'hey believe that the sign package is a good package and will work well with the building. Mr. Bua'ke questioned if the purple color shown on the grintouts were a.n acctarate rendePing and if they are wonld the pwpie areas be illuminated or up for approval. Mr. Beltcnap suggested that the pierple area vvoutd be a darker plum and would not be illuminated. Mr. Conway advised ihat the applicant would need to go before the Planning & Design Commission for the proposed color pallet. Mrs. Diver voiced that due to how close the building is ta the road the sign letters did not need to be so Iarge. Mr. Belknap suggested that to follow code the family letters would only be 18 inches high and the Christian Stores Ietters could only be 8 inches. M-rs. Sergi suggested removing tae design elemerat under the wording to allow for bigger letters. Mr. Belknap advised that the design element was a na.tional logo and could not be removed. Mrs. Sergi pointed otrt that tiie canopy sign did nat include the design element. Mr. Burke suggested the applicants only reason far requesting the variances thus far is based on they want a bigger sign no hardship has been shovvn. Mr. Belknap agreed that they had no hardship but only the letters would be illuminated at naght. Nir. Conway advised that the rendepings are not calculated correctly as the purple area, around the Ietters are also considered part of the wall signs regardless if it is iiluminafied or not. Furthermore the applicants are allowed two wall signs as they front two streets and the a canopy sign ns allowed as vvell. If 41ne puaple background was not there a.nd the individualletters wepe mounted in the same space the sign woulcl not be rec$uared to go before the Planning & Design Commissaon. The background and ca.nopy colors are up for debate as the applicant will have to go before the Planning & Design Commission for approval. As the awnings and color scheme changes the design of the building. Mr. Belknap suggested that alt}aough their sign is larger than the previous owner the existing pole sign was being removed and there vvould be no ground sign. Mrs. 5ergi questioneci why city codes eould not be met. Mr. Belknap advised that the tenants believe that their sign size is comparable to the prior tenants sign and the colors chosen are not up to Yhe BZA but up to the Planning & I)esign Comrrnission now. Mr. Conway saaggested the applicant be tabled uaatil the F1annang & Design Commission addresses the design changes. Mr. Khouri suggested tha.t the Family Christian Store mwners are good tenants to worlc with and are very adamant about using their proposed sigraage. They have conditioned their lease upon theiY signs being approved. He would hate to lose a tenant just because of signage issues. N. Serga anoved tm table I+amaly Cha?stian of 26127 Lorain Road their request for variance (1123.12), whach consnsts of nevv sigaas untal the applicants have been revfewed by the Planning & Design Coffimissaon. M. Daver secondecl the motion, whic6a was unanimously approved. 1. ICI Paints; 4647 Great Nortlnern Bflvd: #4) Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of new signage. T'he following variance is requested: 1. A 107.6 squaxe foot variance for total signage on a buiiding, (code permits 326 sq ft, applica.nt shows 433.6 sc} ft). Wh.ich is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section (1163.24 (B)). Nate: #1 Total signage on building includes a11 existing signs. Mr. Nliller with Global Signs came forward to be swoxn i.n azid address the request. Mr. Miller apologized for his tardiness but has S year old son had his Graduation Ceremany. ICI Paints is the 6