02/01/2007 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

..'i, . ?° , the building. They do not feel that the sign at the proposed height would adversely affect the residential area compared to the Westbury sign. Mrs. Diver pointed out that the Westbury "W" faced the freeway and retail property, where as Victoria Plaza does not face the freeway and the proposed location face residential parcels. She understands that due to the size of the building a variance is needed but a 14 foot wall sign is not warranted. Mr. Petro did not believe the wall sign would affect the residents. Mr. Burke voiced that the board was concerned with the size of the proposed sign. Mr. Petro reviewed that at the last meeting the board was concerned as to where the sign visibility was targeting. The proposed sign will be visible along I-480 and traffic traveling west along Lorain Road. As the board members did not have a site plan depicting the orientation of the building there was confusion as to which wall was the east wall which would house the wall sign. Mr. Kelly voiced that he did not object to the proposed sign as submitted due to the size of the building. Mrs. Sergi questioned how a wall sign with VP would clarify what the building is. The applicants already have a ground sign as well as signs on 2 awnings so the building does have a means to identify themselves. Mr. Burke advised that the applicants themselves compared themselves to the Westbury which has a"W" that is 9 foot 4 inches tall and now they want a sign 14 feet tall just because. Mrs. Sergi suggested that if the oval was removed from the sign the letters would be more acceptable. Mr. Petro said he could not remove the oval as the sign is a logo which he does not have the authority to change. The board asked why the owner or individual who could make changes was not present. Mr. Petro advised that only the owners could approve changes to the sign. Mr. Burke advised that the property could yield a reasonable return without a variance. The variance is substantial. The character of the neighborhood would possibly be substantially altered. Governmental services would not be affected. The owner purchased the property with knowledge. The predicament can be precluded through other methods then variances as they already have signs. He does not feel the spirit and intent of the zoning code would be observed if the variances are granted. Board members felt that a sign larger than allowed by code was warranted however a 14 foot high sign was not warranted. Mrs. Diver suggested tabling the matter so the owner could be present, a site plan submitted and a sign more reasonably sized. Mr. Petro asked what would happen if the board voted on the variances as written and they are turned down. Mrs. Diver advised that the applicant would have to decrease the request a minimum of 25% or wait a year to request the same variances. Mr. Petro said he would then ask that the matter be tabled. Mr. Burke wanted the applicant to be clear that the board was only open to addressing a sign which is smaller then what is currently being proposed. M. Diver moved to table Victoria Plaza of 26101 Country Clulb Blvd their request for a new sign until meeting next. J. Burke secondecl the motion which was unanimously approved. V. COMMiTNICATIONS: VI. AI)JOURNMENT: With no further business pending Chair Burke adjourned the meeting at 8:30 pm. 3