PL MINUTES 10211986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

l -5- 1 Notice of the hearing had been published in the October 8th Bulletin and mailed 2 to all property owners of record within 200 feet of subject property. No 3 one reported failure to receive the notice or objected to its content. 4 5 Requested: -variance for a free-standing sign (60 square feet on each side) 6 for service establishment in addition to logo to be added to new 7 mansard roof on building. 8 9 Proponents: Albert Plaisted and Charles Anderson (same as for conditional 10 use pemit) . 11 12 Opponents: none. 13 14 Staff input: suggested recommendation of denial because center already has 15 large pylon sign; 16 proposed two alternatives available to applicant: 17 18 a. wall signage in lieu of existing non-conforming roof 19 sign; or 20 b. leave that signage in place rather than lose "grandfathered-in" 21 status. 22 23 reported Eberhardt representative had met with center owners 24 in New York and a plant for renovating the store fronts and 25 for uniform signage for the center had been developed as per 26 colored sketch provided the City; 27 perceived pressures from City, Merchants Association, and three 28 new tenants in center resulted in center owner allocating money 29 for proposed changes; 30 31 told applicant the current City Ordinance allows only gas stations 32 and shopping centers to have pylon signage, hence the sign on 33 the Mobil station next door. 34 35 Proponents Discussion of Their Request 36 37 believed should be allowed same type of signage as Mobil station next door 38 since only two free-standing buildings in center; 39 wanted free-standing sign to advertise specials and better store recognition 40 from Highway 88 if rotating sign is removed; 41 42 wants to maintain existing sign on roof if request for this sign is refused; 43 sign is part of mansard roof which all Dairy Queen stores would be having 44 45 from now on. 46 Commission Response 47 4 8 Franzese: not happy about second signs City has already approved in that 49 area. 50 51 Madden: supported the ordinance restriction of pylon signs; • 52 told the applicant the Commission could only address his request 53 for a free-standing sign at that hearing and the status of the 54 rotating sign he currently has on his building would not change as long as it is not altered more than 70%;