07/14/1998 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

L.4 explained, the board of zoning appeals granted variances for the wall signs and monument signs. He confirmed the board of zoning appeaLs rejected the neon bands on the building and monument signs. The parking lot has been resurfaced since the May meeting. Mr. Foerster identified the components of the lighting plau including: the H- Fixture; the J- 2 fixture; and the X-2 fixtu.re. He distributed the H- fixture cut sheet and noted it is similar to one that is on the store now, but the proposed fixture comes with a shielding device on the front edge which will direct the light downward thereby reducing the glare and the visibility from the neighboring residents behind. Mr. Foerster further advised the J- 2 fixture, located on two sides of the building under the eve lines, is a square fixture which directs light upward and downward and is completely shielded from the front side where the lamp source is not visible. The lamp was not intended to blast the roof but simply to add some accents on the building. The X-2 fixture is a 400 watt fixture. Mr. Foerster noted the normal installation of the X-2 fixture is at thirty degrees, however the proposed lights would be tilted so that they are parallel to the ground. A photometric study was presented to better illustrate the effects of the lighting. Mr. Foerster quoted some of the existing levels of illnmination and noted an illumination level of.1 and below for the front of the building is completely unacceptable from a safety/liability standpoint. He further explained the'level of illumination to the ;rear of the building is also far too low and may jeopardize the managers safety. The site lighting included: the addition of one pole on the north side of the building to include one 400 watt fixture which will be shielded on the back completely; and one additional fixture on the existing poles, to the rear of the building, which would be aimed toward the restaurant. Mr. Foerster maintained the lighting upgrades were intended to be for the safety of the patrons as well as the'evening manager. Samples of the paint colors were presented which included: Field Color (BM - 239 Cream); Accent Color (BM 1033 Tan); Trim (6145N Green); and Roof (M-100 Copper). A printout of the sample colors was included in the file. Foerster concluded his presentation and requested a recommendation for approval of the following: 1) remove the clay tile roof and install a standing seam metal roof; 2) to construct a dormer and install the wall sign; 3) paint the building followed by the installation of the roof/accent lights; 4) replace the pole sign with a monument sign in the same location and 5) add the parking lot lights, the up/down lights under the eves, and shield the wall mounted fixture on the rear side of the building. Mr. Brennan complimented the architect for involviug the neighbors in the design process. He also advised, in the architectural review board minutes, Mr. Yager did not approve of the roof lights as presented. Mr. Foerster was under the impression that the board approved of the roof lights, although, he confirmed he had not received a copy of the minutes from that meeting. Mr. Brennan quoted the following from the architectural review board minutes "Mr. Yager noted the fixture style for the roof lights will detract from the appearance of the building. He suggested utilizing a smaller, almost hidden, fixture instead of the shoe box style." Mr. Foerster noted he recalled the recommendation to paint the fixtures to match the building so that they are more discrete. In response to a question from W. Tallon, Mr. Foerster confirmed the pole mounting height wou.ld be 24 feet. He further advised the building is 26 to 27 feet high at the ridge line. It was noted there is a change in slope from the front to the rear of the building. Mr. Foerster noted the main concern as expressed at the previous meeting was that the pole lights on the front of the building be no higher than the roof line so that they are not visible from the residential properties to the rear of the build.iug. Mr. Tallon questioned the height of the lowest point of the roo£ Mr. Foerster confirmed the lowest point of the roof is approximately eight (8) feet, six (6) inches. He also noted the pole