2004-08-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF PLANNING BOARD -3- 8/5/04 conforming to the required height from the sidewalk. Mr. Moran seconded the motion. Unanimously carried. SUNOCO SERVICE STATION~ 2780 WEST MAIN STREET Next on the agenda was a continuation of a discussion regarding new sign for the Sunoco Service Station. Applicant stated Board had asked him to look into a monument sign. Applicant presented sign proposal to Board. Applicant was concerned that there would be no visibility for the sign. He asked if Board would consider allowing him to have a twin pole sign not illuminated. The Board reviewed the sign for conformance to the code. The applicant is proposing to replace the single pole sign with a twin pole sign and would remove all other single pole signs on site. Applicant also stated they would build a roof over the sign - with gooseneck lights - downlit - he would dress up the sign with railroad ties, brick on bottom and/or flower boxes. Applicant was reminded that when he built the roof/canopy over top of the sign he was still restricted to the 17 ft. Mr. Morris stated applicant did not have to install roof/canopy but needed something on top to attach goosenecks to make them look like they belong. He also stated he would prefer a monument sign but understands why this cannot be done based on the location of the sign. In conclusion it was stated that applicant is proposing one double pole sign - and there would be one existing sign on the building - all other signs would be taken down, he would dress up the bottom of the sign to fit in with the architecture of the building, design a way to down light the sign and bring swatches of material to the next meeting. CHIQUITO, 2676 WEST MAIN STREET Next on the agenda was a proposal for a sign and for the use from Isaac Gutierrez to be able to have a food and beverage center at 2676 West Main Street. Mr. Moa'is asked applicant where the sign would go and he stated it was going to hang perpendicular off the building - it was stated there was enough clearance from highway. It would be mounted oft'the second floor - hanging down probably in the neighborhood of 8-9 feet above sidewalk over the doorway - and distance out from building is approximately 4 V2 feet - There were color samples on file - it is a double sided box sign. Mr. Morris asked applicant if he had considered having a sign - not illuminated but down lit - made of some other material beside plastic - and applicant stated he does not feel that type of sign would give him enough exposure. Mr. Alexander felt that the lights from the stores would emit light into the neighboring apartments on the street and neighborhood. He went on to state the way he reads the code is that if there is light being emitted from a source directly into someone's residence - this is not allowed by code. Applicant stated he subdued the sign with a color background - he does not know the exact wattage of the bulbs but they are a cool white type fluorescent - there would be three bulbs in the sign - it would be very similar to Ciccio's - same color background as an example. Mr. Alexander read from Section 151-13 of the Zoning Code regarding exterior lighting - applicant stated he did not agree with Mr. Alexander's interpretation of the section~ It was decided after much discussion to contact Village Attorney Viglotti and get an interpretation of this section from him - therefore sign proposal will be tabled until the next meeting.