12/05/2002 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections (1139.06), (1139.07), (1161 Table), (1161.13), (1139.14) and (1161.10 G). The followang variances are requested for the signage: 1. A variance for 2 wall signs on a building, (code permits 1, applicant shows 2), section (1163.27 A 2. A variance for 7 ground signs on a lot, (code permits 1 applicant shows 7), section (1163.26 A). (see note: 1) 3. A variance for a billboard sign, (code does not permit, applicant shows 1), section (1163.29). (see note: 2) 4. A 2 foot variance for a ground sign too close to the right of way, (code requires 5', applicant shows 3'), section (1163.26 B). Note: l. Includes 6 directional signs. 2. An insert panel on CVS monument sign. Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections, (1163.27 A), (1163.26 B), (1163.29) and (1163.26 A). Chairman Maloney called all interested parties forward to review the request. The following individuals came forward to be sworn in regarding this proposal: Mr. Willse of Franchise Management, and residents, Jeff Sturgeon, Kay Bowman, Mary Jane Smith, and Phyllis Sturgeon. Mr. Maloney indicated a letter turned in to the board by the residents will not be entered into the record as it has no signatures. The residents then signed the letter (see attached). Mr. Konold asked Mr. Willse what his role is with Wendy's. Mr. Willse indicated he is the controller and director of operations. Mr. O'Malley said perhaps Mr. Konold is looking to see what his relationship is to the property. He would presume that Wendy's has a contract to purchase or an option to buy the property and it is probably owned by a developer who is not present tonight. Assuming that Wendy's has its development approved, they would proceed. He got confirmation from Mr. Willse that Retail Today is the property owner. Mr. Willse continued and said they would like to withdraw variance #6 for the site. The irrigation was not on the initial set of plans but they do intend to irrigate and meet code. He said they initially wanted a second wall sign facing north but they will withdraw that request. It is the first request under signage. He said there is an existing CVS ground sign that fronts Clague Rd. It has a dominant space that reads CVS currently and a secondary panel underneath it. Part of their deal with the landowner is for Wendy's to go on the sign with CVS but they will take the dominant position. With the road project and the land that was taken, the city relocated the right of way. That particular sign as it sits today is in violation of the code. They discussed at the Planning Commission meeting that they would put that sign back within the allowable space off the right of way. They would move the sign further from the residents who were also concerned about the sign. They would remove sign variance request #4. Mr. Willse indicated the main request is for minimum area requirement. He showed the layout of the site to the board members and residents. The lot is typical and in fact is larger than some of their developments. They feel they have enough area to get the right size lanes, parking, and enough free flowing access on the site. They put the building in a spot to avoid having parking in the front. They believe the better option is to have parking in back for curb appeal and for safety. The next variance deals with maintaining the existing apron. It was poured as part of the road project at 34 ft., which is not in compliance with code. He said it was an existing condition and they would like to maintain it and incorporate it in their plan. The wider the better since it is an entrance/exit. There is an existing curb line on the south end of the property and they would maintain that. If they were to lose that, they would likely lose one parking spot and be out of compliance. He said there is an existing board on board fence on that side. They have added landscaping to the plan to shield even further. They would add a board on board fence to the east by the apartment building. He said the proposal is typical of their developments and he does not believe it compromises any access issues. Mr. Konold asked how many vehicles they expect at their site and where will they enter and exit. 1V1r. Willse said it was addressed extensively at the Planning Commission meetings. He explained there were 2 traffic studies done and it was found the majority of traffic comes from the south. The city's report indicated the proposal would not negatively impact the traffic situation. He mentioned the access easements that 8