03/04/1999 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Gomersall asked about the wall signs. Mr. Archer indicated variance request l, 2, and 3 are for the two wall signs that will be replaced. There is a pole sign on Lorain lZoad, which will be removed. A ground sign will replace the pole sign and it will be located on the proposed site. Mr. Gareau asked if the applicant was indicating Ames was voluntarily removing the sign on Lorain Road. Mr. Archer asked if he just refaced the pole sign would he need a variance. Mr. Gomersall indicated Mr. Archer was conect, to reface a pole sign the applicant would have to apply for a variance. Mr. Archer indicated Ames has requested the pole sign come down and only these signs before you tonight are to be put up. No further questions were asked. W. Kremzar motioned to approve Ames 41178 of 26666 Brookpark Road their request for variance (1123.12). Proposal to consist of a sign package, and that the following variances be granted: 1) A variance to install an additional wall sign, (Code permits 1, they request 2). 2) A 2' foot height variance for each east and south elevation wal] sign, (Code pernuts 4'ft. they request 6'ft. each. 3) An 81'square foot variance for building signage for each east and south elevation wall signs, (Code permits 75'sq. ft. each, they request 156'sq. ft. each). 4) A 3' foot height variance for ground sign, (Code permits 5'ft., and they request 8'ft.). 5) A 14'square foot ground sign face area variances, (Code permits 50'sq, ft., they request 64'sq. ft.). Which is in Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section (1163.12 A, B). The motion was seconded by J. Maloney and unanimously approved. Variances Granted. In the framing of the motion, Mr. Ransom a concerned neighbor asked to be allowed to speak. Mr. Gomersall apologized-to Mr. Ransom for not asking if any audience members had questions regarding Ames proposal, and asked Mr. Ransom to please come forward. Mr. Ransom suggested he lived behind Hill's store and asked if the signs would be laYger then what is presently there. Mr. Gomersall suggested the signage would be the same in size and that the only thing added would be a ground sign. Mr. Ransom asked why the applicant. needed variances. Mr. Conway explained that the size of the signage is non-conforining.. W. Kremzar asked if Mr. Ransom would like to see A picture of the signs. Mr. Conway suggested a ground sign tivould be placed on the site and the applicants has requested they be allowed to have their ground sign 8' feet high. Prior to the closing of the meeting Law Director, Gareau, and Building Commissioner, Conway reviewed signage issues with the board members. During their discussion it was recommended that the members ask the Planning Commission, and Council to do a sign study. R. Gomersall moved that the Board of Zoning Appeals member's request the City Council and Planning Commission to review the existing sign Code with respect to height limitations, and area limitations. That they consider new regulations based upon distance from the right of way and set back on Lorain Road and other commercial streets. The motion was seconded by T. Koberna aaid unanimously approved. M[otion Carrned. MEETING ADJOURNED: R. Gomersall adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Robert Gomersall, Donna Rote, Clerk of Commissions 7