My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02/04/1999 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1999
>
1999 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
02/04/1999 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:48:10 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 4:04:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1999
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
2/4/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
but the client basically only wants me to fix the existing signage. Basically we would just be changing <br />the face on the existulg signage. Mr. Gomersall questioned if the #1 sign that is on the wall, is just <br />putting a new face on the existing box. Mr. Sawitke uidicated Mr. Gomersall was correct. Mr. <br />Gomersall reviewed that signs # 2#3 and #4 located at the ATM machine would also just be refaced, as <br />well as the existing pole sign. Mr. Sawitke suggesteci the small sign right above the ATM is a plaque. <br />Mr. Maloney suggested request number 4), indicates the number #3 sign is an additional canopy sign. <br />Mr. Gomersall asked if the #2, #3, and #4 sign would just be refaced. Mr. Sawitke suggested # 2, #3, <br />and #4 are existing signs. Mr. Conway indicated there are 2 canopy signs presently in place, they are <br />oitly allowed 1 therefore they need a variance for the second sign. Mr. Gomersall asked about the <br />existing canopy signs. Mr. Sawitke reviewed that they are at 2' feet, and the code states 1'foot 6"inches, <br />so a variance is needed to reface the 2'foot signs that exist. Mr. Sawitke suggested he reviewed with the <br />bank that if he changed the signage in any way that it would require that the signage would have to <br />conform to today's codes. Mr. Gomersall reviewed (request number 5) a 82.5' square foot variance for <br />sign face area of a busuiess building, which is for the overall square footage of all the signs. Mr. Sawitke <br />indicated Mr. Gomersall was correct. Mr. Maloney indicated since the applicant is only asking to reface <br />the existing signage and it would be a financial hardship to replace all the boxes at this time he <br />understood the request. No further questions were asked. <br />J. Maloney motioned to approve Republic Bank, of 26777 Lorain Rd. their request for variance <br />(1123.12), and that the following variances be allowed: <br />1) A variance to reface the following non-conforming sings #2, #3, and #4. (code states that the entire <br />sign shall be brought into compliance with all other provisions of tlie zoning code) (1163.19 (a)). <br />2) A variaiice to reface ail existing prohibited pole sign #4 which projects 2'-3' feet into the public right <br />of way (1163.22 (a) °). <br />3) A 2' foot height variance for each canopy sign #2 and #3 ( code permits 1'foot, 6"inch, applicant <br />requests 2'feet, 6"inch (1163.12 (d)). <br />4) A variance to have an additional canopy sign #3. (code permits only 1 applicant requests 2(1163.12, <br />d. <br />5) An 82.5' square foot variance for sign face area of a business (code permits 85'sq. ft., applicants <br />requests 167.5'sq. ft. (1163.11 °). <br />6) A 19.5' square foot variance for sign face area of free standing signage. (code permits 30' sq. ft., <br />applicants requests 49.5' sq. ft.( 1163.11 (a)). <br />7) A 102 square foot variance for sign face area for total business use. (code permits 115' sq. ft., <br />applicants requests 217' sq. ft. (1163.11 (a)). <br />NOTE: Since pole signs are iiot covered in the code, other than to say they are prohibited, had pole sign <br />#4 been a pylon it would have needed variances for the followuig: #1 setback, #2 Height, #3 <br />encroaching on the public right of way, #4 square footage, and #5 Changeable copy. Which is a <br />Violation of Ord. 90-125, Sections 1163.19(a), 1163.22(a)(c), 1163.12(d), 1163.12(d), and 1163.11(c). <br />The motion was seconded by, W. Kremzar and unanimously approved. Variances Granted. This <br />variance is granted only as to the specific relief requested. Tlie City is currently involved in a federal <br />lawsuit and has agreed not to enforce its prohibition against pole signs until the lawsuit is resolved. <br />Should the lawsuit resolve in favor of the City, your pole sign will be unlawfully non-conforming under <br />City law and will have to be removed unless you obtain another variance at that time. <br />12. Holcombs Knowplace, 25913 Great Northern Shopping Center; <br />Request for variance (1123.12). Proposal consist of a sign package. <br />The following variance is requested: <br />1)A 27.5' square foot variance for maxunum sign face area of a business unit. (code permits only 37.5' <br />square feet, applicant requests 64.5' square feet. <br />Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1163.1(a). <br />Chairman Gomersall called all interested parties forward and reviewed the variances being requested. <br />Mr. Sawitke suggested Holcombs Knowplace will be added to all of Holcombs establishments. He made <br />14
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.