02/02/2006 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Director Wenger requested the height of the letters be no larger then the largest individual letter in the Value City sign which is 4' 7 3/8" as shown in the photo, the applicant presented. Mr. Witcher voiced that it was not advantageous for him to invest two million dollars in a new fagade and then be required to have such a small sign on the new entrance element that it would not be visible from the street. If they could not receive relief from the code they may have to rethink the investment. Mr. Burke indicated that the variance was substantial as it was more than double what is allowed by code. A reasonable return could still be accomplished without the variances. The applicant will have recognition on a future ground sign which the owner is addressing unlike Value City which is not allowed any further signs on the site. He assured the applicant that the board was not against giving the applicant relief but felt that a total height of 6-feet was not unreasonable. Mrs. Sergi questioned if a 6-foot high sign was approved would it create a variance situation for any future tenants. Mr. Rymarczyk assured the board that if the sign was allowed it would not cause future variances. Mr. Witcher stated that he would agree to a 6-foot 3 inches overall height for the wall sign. J. Maloney moved to grant hhgregg of 4706 Great Northern Blvd. their request for variance (1123.12), which consists of a sign and that the following variances are granted as amended and agreed upon: 1. A 44 square foot variance for a wall sign larger than code permits, (code permits 100 sq ft., applicant shows 144 sq ft), section (1163.27 (c)). 2. A 3 square foot variance for total signage on a unit, (code permits 141 sq ft, applicant shows 144 sq ft), section (1163.24 (c)). 3. A 2 foot variance for a wall sign higher than code allows, (code permits 4 ft, applicant shows 6 ft), section (1163.27 (c)). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections (1163.27 (c)) and (1163.24 (c)). N. Sergi seconded the motion which was unanimously approved. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Dale Schmidt; 31399 Industrial Parkway: (WRD #3) Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of a new wall sign. The following variance is requested: 1. A variance for a second wall sign #note 1, (code permits 1, applicant shows 2). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section (1163.27 (A)). Note: One sign exists on building from previous permit. Mr. Schmidt the owner came forward to be sworn in and address his request. Mr. Schmidt indicated that he would like to place a sign along the back of the building which faces I-480 as he has no visibility for his business. The sign would not be illuminated however it would be reflective and there is wall light located over the location. Commissioners reviewed each of the buildings which had rear signs on their buildings along Industrial Parkway. Mr. Burke indicated that there were a lot of the same types of signs throughout the city which may have received variances but he would be looking at all requests more restrictively not on past practices. N. Sergi moved to grant Dale Schmidt of 31399 Industrial Parkway his request for variance (1123.12), which consists of a new wall sign and that the following variance is granted: 1. A variance for a second wall sign #note 1, (code permits 1, applicant shows 2). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section (1163.27 (A)). J. Maloney seconded the motion, roll call on the motion; J. Maloney, J. Burke, N. Sergi, yes, and M. Diver, no. Variance Granted 2