Laserfiche WebLink
signage variances. The signage piece is critical to the company. The site doesn't have any direct access <br />and sits off of the direct street arteries. He then indicated that he would Iike to look at these separately; <br />one being the signage as it relates to the building and one being the signage relates to the site. Mr. <br />Konold questioned if they were planning on tearing the old Ames building down or what. Mr. Olson <br />indicated that they would be taking a master lease of the property from the owner. Kim Co. properties <br />owns the entire parcel. What they will do is tear down the entire Ames building (dotted outline of where <br />Ames buildinb was on site plan) and reconstruct what they are looking at on the site plan. It will <br />eliminate a lot of issues relating to the Aines building. Mr. Koberna questioned the sq. footage of Ames. <br />Mr. Olson indicated they are at 107,000 total and they plan to come back in with about 80,000 sq. ft. <br />Mr. Kremzar questioned if they had talked to the day care center. Mr. Olson replied that they have put in <br />numerous phone calls and letters to the Bogg's and they have not had a response from thein. Mr. <br />Koberna commented that he is glad to see they have a mounding up there because of the compactor. He <br />then questioned if this would be a 24 hr. facility. Mr. Olson indicated that they are going away from a lot <br />of their 24 hr. operations. There is an existing chain link fence, which they've agreed to replace with a <br />wooded fence with the brick pylons. Mr. Kremzar questioned if he would have two more entrances then. <br />Mr. Olson replied yes. The entrances they are adding are really just for service anyway. Mr. Koberna <br />questioned how many stores they will try to put in on the proposed retail on the site plan. Mr. Olson <br />indicated that he would love to find one single user. Mr. Koberna replied right and then at that time the <br />signage will come in under whoever it may be to go in there. N1r. Olson replied absolutely. Mr. Maloney <br />questioned if Mr. Olson's company will have control of the type of signage that go on the building for <br />their tenant. Mr. Olson replied yes, they will. A typical national tenant comes in with their proto-type <br />and certain key elements that they will try to work in. Mr. Maloney indicated that he would like to see <br />everything uniform instead of everybody going their own way. Mr. Gareau suggested that what the <br />board ought to do is that any future requests for signage will be made iby the owner of the property. If <br />you're going to own it then you ought to have control of the signage. Mr. Olson questioned if the <br />signage could be brought in with Tops approval. Mr. Konold replied right. Mr. Konold questioned what <br />the timing on the store would be. Mr. Olson indicated when they pull the trigger with the approvals then <br />Aines has a notice period where they sell down and go out of business. Immediately thereafter, Tops will <br />come in, tear down and begin construction. It would be great to be under construction this year, late <br />surruner. Mr. Crook indicated that the first item is the 3 ft. 10 inch variance requested for their maul <br />Tops sign and logo. Their standard is a 7 ft. 10 inch high sign, technically that is the height of the "T" on <br />the sign and it gradually gets sinaller with the following letters. Item 1 and 2 are related to this first sign. <br />Iteins 3 and 4 relate to the building signage. Item 3 is the "Food and Pharmacy" sign. This sign is not <br />illuminated. Mr. Koberna indicated that they have allowed larger signs in shopping centers because of the <br />distance away froin the street. He is not quite sure what the sign facing east is going to draw. He is not <br />even sure if you can see that going westbound on Lorain Rd. He can understand looking for a larger sign <br />on that south elevation. Mr. Gareau indicated that one of the dilemmas the City had when working with <br />the sign expert working with the new sign code was that we took into consideration the height of signs <br />for the typical building that was 75 or 50 ft. back froin the right of way. We never, even though it was <br />suggested, took into consideration shopping centers and malls and not treat them the same because of the <br />distance. They never got to resolving that issue except for at Great Northern, which we developed with <br />C'rreat Northern their own mini sign code. The way to resolve that is through the variance process. IVIr. <br />Koberna indicated that every sign is different, and his point is that they are asking for the signage on each <br />side of the building. Mr. Gareau commented that the sides of the building are the only places they've got. <br />Mr. Koberna replied that he knows, but it's peculiar because of the arrangement of the building. Mr. <br />Crook indicated *.hat you're closer to it so it doesn't need to be as big, and proportionally it fits in much <br />better with the smaller background. Mr. Koberna indicated that he would take that Tops sign and put it <br />closer to the main entry closer to Sparky Ln. Mr. Gareau indicated that it would be safe to say, if they <br />build this, and this same board is constituted as it is, that the likely hood of getting a variance is not good. <br />7