11/04/1999 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.. wanted. Mr. Frye indicated that he thought the red was a fire truck red. Mr. Gomersall indicated that the Architectural Review Board recommend that the applicant have the wall sign the same color as the ground sign that is blue. Mr. Koberna reviewed that the red neon sign was put in place instead of the blue neon sign that was approved. initially both signs were approved to be bhie then when the sign was put in place the owner changed his mind and put up a red sign. Mr. Rymarczyk indicated that the red neon sign was currently on the building. Mr. Gareau uidicated that he did not thinlc that a variance was needed for the color o£ the sign. Mr. Rymarczyk reviewed that the Plamiing Comtnission recommended that the signage be blue which the applicant agreed and the proposal went through all the boards under the assumption that both signs would be blue. When the sign was installed the applicant put in a red sign. Mr. Gareau remarked that if it was not a minor change then the proposal would then need to go through all the boards again. He questioned what code the red sign violated and why a variance was needed. Mr. Rymarczyk reviewed that the red sign was put in place instead of the proposed blue sign that was approved Uy all the boards. Mr. Gareau commented that the ArchitectLiral Review Board and Plamluig Commission does not have the authority of law. He indicated that the applicants are appealing the decision of the Building Comrnissioners decision to follow the recoinmendations of the Planning Commission and Architecttiral Review Board. J. Maloney moved to grant the request of Suburban Collision Center of 26618 Brookpark Road Ext., to uphold the ruling of the Building Commissioners decision to require the proposed sign to remain blue as what was approved. Which is in violation of ordinance 90-125 section (1163.04 J). The motion was seconded by R. Gomersall and unanimously denied. Red Sign Allowed. 8. Columbia Land Development; 4647 Great Northern Blvd.: Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of adding a third, good's logo. The following variance is requested: 1) A third good's logo variance for excessive number of goods, (code pernuts 2 applicant shows 3). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section, (1163.03 a 1 c). Note: This proposal was tabled at the request of the applicant at the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting dated 10/7/99. Chairman Gomersall called all interested parties forward, and reviewed the variance requested. Mr. Cicogna from Electric & Sign Company came forward to review the request. Mr. Gomersall indicated that the deluYe paint logo was put in place without checking with the Building Department first. Mr. Cicogna indicated the original plans did not show the dehixe paint logo because at the time it was not part of their registered name. They are in the process of applying with the US trademark to make the logo part of their name, which will take 1 year for it to be approved. After the logo was put up Mr. 0'Connell informed the applicant that the third logo would need a variance as it was not part of their name. Deluxe, Glidden and Devo are registered trademarks of the Deluxe Paint Center Corporation that is nation wide. All the stores are currently be changed and they are a 3-brand store. The new sign is smaller than the old sign that required variances as it was larger than what was allowed by code. The applicants will also be removing the existing pole sign. J. Konold motioned to grant Columbia Land Development of 4647 Great Northern Blvd. their request for variance (1123.12). Which consists of adding a third, good's logo and that the following variance be granted: 1) A third good's logo variance for excessive number of goods, (code pernuts 2 applicant shows 3). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section, (1163.03 a 1 c). The motion was seconded by W. Kremzar and unanimously approved. Variance Granted. 9. Fairview Corporate Center; PP# 237-23-024 Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of parking lot. The following variance is requested: 1) A conditional use variance for office parking in a multiple residence district, section (1118.02). 2) A variance for constructing a parking lot without a structure, section (1161.02). 5