03/05/2009 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Mitchell said last May a new temporary sign code was adopted to improve the overall appearance of the city. The Building Department strongly believes that the variance should not Ue granted. Inspectors have been successful in enforcing the new codes with exception of a few owners/businesses. A brief discussion ensued regarding whether a V angled sign was considered one double sided or two single sided signs. Mr. Mitchell said the application is for one V shaped sign of 32 square feet and only 12 square feet is allowed by code. If two V signs are being requested a 40 square foot variance would be required. Mr. O'Malley questioned if the existing sign was installed before or after May 2008 when the code was adopted. Ms. Cieszkowslci said the sign was installed in September 2008 but she believed enforcement did not talce place until after the first of the year when letters were sent out. Mr. O'Malley said that the site was not grandfathered as the sign was installed after the code was adopted. Mr. Mitchell said the code had been enforced when it went into effect and in January the Building Department sent out over 500 mailers reiterating what type of temporary signs would be allowed; for the most part the majority of owners have complied. Ms. Cieszkowslci said it was their understanding they were grandfathered as the enforcement was not made until after the first of the year. Mr. O'Malley advised that there was no issue of being grandfathered as the law went into effect in May 2008. Board inembers felt the property could yield a reasonable return without the variance as the applicants stated they had other avenues for advertising the site. The variance was substantial in size but would not alter the character or property values of abutting owners. Governmental seivices would not be affected by the variance and it is assuined that all property owners are lcnowledgeaUle of the zoning laws when they purchase their land. The property owner's predicament could be precluded through other means as they are not being denied a sign they are just aslced to follow the code. The board felt the spirit and intent of the code would not be upheld granting the variance. The code was just adopted less than a year ago and V style wind signs are allowed by code just not as big as the applicants want. The distance from the street is not significant so visibility of both sides of the sign is not a factor. 1VIs. Rudolph movecl, seconded by Mrs. Bellido, to grant Carnegie 1Vlanagement & Development of 25102 Brookparlc Road a 40 sq ft variance for a temporary real estate gi-ound sign larger than code allows; code perrnits 12 sq ft, sign is 64 sq ft which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section 1163.34 (13)(1)(c), which was unanimously denied. ADJOURNIVIENT Mrs. Diver rejoined the Board nd adjourned the meeting at 8:00 p.m. I 1 1 Approved: , Maureen Di er, Chair nna Rote, Clerk of Commissions