PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
11 December 2001
Chairman William Syfert called the meeting to order at 7:05.
Members present: Councilman Steve Galster, Donald Darby, David Okum,
David Whitaker and Chairman Syfert
Member absent: Richard Huddleston
Others present: Derrick Parham, Asst. City Administrator
William McErlane, Building Official
Don Shvegzda, Asst. City Engineer
Mr. Syfert stated for the benefit of everyone in the audience, we only have five members present tonight. For any final action on any item on the agenda, it takes five affirmative votes. A four to one vote will not pass anything. A request can be made for a continuance.
Chairman Ė Mr. Okum nominated Mr. Syfert and Mr. Galster seconded. Mr. Syfert was elected with five affirmative votes.
Vice-Chairman Ė Mr. Whitaker nominated Mr. Okum and Mr. Darby seconded. Mr. Okum was elected with five affirmative votes.
Secretary Ė Mr. Galster nominated Mr. Whitaker and Mr. Syfert seconded. Mr. Whitaker was elected with five affirmative votes.
Mr. Okum made a motion to adopt Mr. Galster seconded. By voice vote the minutes passed with four affirmative votes. Mr. Darby abstained.
Mr. Galster said Council did not make its appointment to Planning Commission on a timely basis but hopefully it will be cleared up by our next meeting.
Mr. Syfert said the minutes were not in the packets. If you want a copy please request them.
Mr. Syfert said there were a couple of interesting articles where they actually went against a proposed variance and it ended up coming back and they had to demolish the buildings. One was in Florida and one in Wisconsin.
Mr. Galster said everyone should have a copy of the memo from Wood & Lamping. If you have any questions give me a call.
11630 Princeton Pike (former HQ) Ė tabled 11/13/01
The applicant said weíve provided an updated drawing for you to look at providing the signage and post improvements to the space that will be taken by Hobby Lobby.
Mr. Syfert said Ms. McBride is not here tonight. She is sick so Mr. McErlane will fill in for her.
Mr. McErlane said I will try to cover both her comments and mine at the same time. The property is zoned Planned Unit Development as part of the Cassinelli Square development plan. The proposal is to construct an EIFS parapet wall over the proposed entrance for Hobby Lobby, and paint part of the building formerly housing HQ, more recently Cheap Beds and Furniture.
The applicant is proposing the following signs, and these signs are less in size than the ones we saw last month, particularly the smaller signs to the right of the main identification sign. The Hobby Lobby sign is 5í x 50í (250 square feet). It exceeds the maximum 150 square feet permitted by the Zoning Code. There are smaller signs, Crafts, Seasonal, Home Accents and Floral that are now 18-inch high letters instead of the two feet high letters we saw last month. In combination with the two pylon sign panels, the total is 392.7 square feet. The allowable sign area based on their storefront width is 331 square feet. Last month we were looking at 441 square feet. Tonight we are looking at 392.7 square feet. The plan also indicates that the outside area screen wall would be painted to match the masonry on the Hobby Lobby storefront. The metal and masonry front façade to the north of the Hobby Lobby space would be painted to match the Hobby Lobby colors that are presented. One discrepancy we saw in the plans that were submitted to us is that it indicates only 82.9 feet to the north of the Hobby Lobby entrance would be painted. The storefront is longer than that so we need some clarification as to what will happen to the balance of that space. There are about 77 feet north of that that is still part of the HQ space. The applicant is also proposing to repaint the fence and outside sales area the same color as the metal standing seam metal roof, which is dark brown. The front fenced area would have beige slats installed in it and slats would be repaired in the rear fence. The applicant has proposed to repair the north pylon sign. A piece of facing on the sign support was missing. They agreed to remove the theater reader boards from both pylon signs.
Ms. McBride, in addition to these items, has suggested that the applicant screen rooftop units. I believe Hobby Lobby said they were removing one of the rooftop units, the one most visible on the front of the building. She is also recommending that some landscaping be done in front of the building through a method of pots or raised beds that would sit on the paved area. There are no proposals for changing the lighting although she specifically points out that if there is additional lighting added, our concern is glare. In her recommendation also is that the balance of HQ, the 77 feet we were talking about that doesnít show up on the elevation drawing, be painted with compatible colors. Another recommendation is that the 250 square foot Hobby Lobby sign be reduced in area to be closer to the 150 square feet and that there be no outdoor display, storage or sale of merchandise.
Ms. Klepcyk said we do plan on replacing throughout the center any damaged or dead landscaping which is indicated on this plan. We are also showing potted landscaping at the front elevation as requested. There will be no additional lighting on the building. The whole HQ facility as well as the back will be painted by Hobby Lobby and KimCo. The mechanical equipment that is currently serving the garden center will be removed by Hobby Lobby. We request to keep the five foot sign as we have it shown here because of the proximity to the entry. We feel that it does have a good balance with the other work we are doing. We think the size fits well with the size of the parapet. The reader boards will be removed and the pylon signs will be repaired. There will not be any outdoor sales or display of merchandise.
Mr. Syfert asked does that include removing Cheap Beds off the sign on Kemper?
Ms. Klepcyk responded since they are no longer a tenant of the center that would be removed.
Mr. Syfert asked then the 70+ feet in question will be painted, is that correct?
Ms. Klepcyk replied yes, the whole former HQ facility will be painted in the colors you see presented here.
Mr. Okum asked, Mr. McErlane, the calculations on your signage do not include the 77 feet of frontage?
Mr. McErlane replied the calculations for allowable signage are based only on Hobby Lobbyís width of their storefront.
Mr. Okum stated so itís the width of their storefront straight back which does not include any of the outdoor screened in area.
Mr. McErlane said it does not include everything you see on the elevation, only whatís in their lease lines.
Mr. Okum asked their lease lines run front to rear, right?
Mr. McErlane replied itís from the outside storage area to the vestibule. The rest of that is still vacant space
Mr. Okum said when you mentioned painting you said you were going to do all three sides. That would be the masonry wall on Tri-County Parkway as well.
Ms. Klepcyk replied yes. KimCo will do the areas outside the lease portion of Hobby Lobby.
Mr. Okum asked do you have any illustrations of the outside plantings that you intend to do?
Ms. Klepcyk answered it would be potted plants within the design scheme of what the center currently has. Right now they have blue chip junipers and maybe some topiaries.
Mr. Okum asked is KimCo going to take care of the outdoor display area by redoing that and stripping out all the ancillary?
Ms. Klepcyk stated they would clean up the outdoor area, paint areas of the garden center as well as the masonry wall.
Mr. Okum said there was trelliswork inside. Is that all being removed?
Ms. Klepcyk replied yes.
Mr. Okum said racecars and racetracks are pretty common in hobby type environments. Do you sell motorized cars, gas powered racecars, etc.
Ms. Klepcyk replied I believe they mostly sell craft type items.
Mr. Galster said even though Cheap Beds is not going to be there anymore they have painted over sign spaces. Will any sign face that is not displaying an actual tenant be replaced or will we have painted out red sign faces?
Mr. McErlane said they had partially painted the sign face that they had used with their text on it. Since then they have painted more red on top of it.
Ms. Klepcyk stated the Cheap Beds and Furniture sign at the entries would be removed.
Mr. Galster asked on the pole signs, are you going to take those panels out and put in white panels?
Mr. McErlane said I would assume until the landlord has somebody in there they would just be blank panels.
Mr. Galster asked are you renting the actual greenhouse and garden area? Because we talked about what is the use of that piece of property if there is no leasable space next to it. Whatís the purpose of keeping that there if no tenant can get to it?
George Petkervich, KimCo, said the odds of that being leased are slim to none. Obviously, we are going to clean it up. Eventually at some point we may look to use that as additional parking. Weíd like to clean it up and keep it that way if and when we need it.
Mr. Galster said if and when you need it you would need it for parking, so why not take down all the fencing and all the other stuff that you are going through the trouble of repainting.
Mr. Petkervich said I think it is highly unlikely that it gets leased, but at this point I donít want to go through the dollars. Who knows, I might end up leasing it. Iíd like to maintain a little bit of flexibility as I market the property. Right now it is an underperforming asset.
Mr. Galster said but if you lease that to someone they have nothing but the outside space.
Mr. Petkervich said Iím just trying to think ahead to what we may or may not need for a future tenant.
Mr. Galster stated I still have a problem with the overall appearance of that just being a vacant space. Rather or not itís made into parking is an issue that I would be willing to discuss, but right now, itís still going to look like an abandoned part of that building.
Mr. Syfert said the fact that they are going to paint that and put slats in the gate might negate it looking completely vacant. I think itís a vast improvement over not doing anything.
Mr. Okum said getting back to what Mr. Galster was discussing. We have a concrete, masonry wall that is a major eyesore that you have agreed to repaint. I think we still have to look at a tenantable area if you later on decide to enclose that space. Iím not sure what your retail square footage and parking accommodated for that when we did your initial parking calculations when that development was approved. Weíre faced with a situation where we are leaving that as future retail space and we donít have any parking numbers from you that would support that. We know Hobby Lobby would because it was already HQ and a retail use. We know that the 77-foot by whatever would as well. Obviously, when you split one bulk center up your numbers change, because you have divided leasable space and multiple tenants. If we were to add a third tenant, which is the space Mr. Galster was referring to, I am concerned about the numbers and your parking being able to accommodate that.
Mr. Petkervich responded I donít see us leasing that. Obviously, we would have to come back before this Commission and put together numbers that would make it work, but I do think itís an unlikely scenario. As it sits far from the mall and thereís not a lot of traffic on that little street, I think itís very unlikely to become retail space.
Mr. Okum said that little street gets an enormous amount of traffic now. Tri-County Parkway is very well used and everyone sees the side end of your building. Springdale Plaza and Associates did a real nice job at the other end, but that is really needing a lot. I didnít feel good about the decision allowing the block wall to go up there but weíve got it. If that is potentially leasable space then I would want to see numbers. We crunched your numbers when you wanted to do the office space where the cinema was. I think you met the numbers there but that was retail. Weíre talking more of the PUD. You donít want to get into the situation where weíre dissecting a PUD and looking at it on a postage stamp concept versus the whole puzzle. If we donít act on this and you donít feel comfortable getting the five affirmative votes, and you canít justify the retail numbers based on our parking requirements, would that change your thought on spending the money to upgrade the fence, etc.? Iím really questioning whether you could justify the numbers based on your overall plan.
Mr. Petkervich asked would it make you feel more comfortable if I said weíd tear down that wall and park it?
Mr. Galster answered green space.
Mr. Petkervich stated we can park it right now because it already has cement that will hold cars. If I take that out and have to re-pour or re-asphalt, then Iím talking a pretty big expense. If you said youíd really feel more comfortable if we tore that out, Iíd tear out that wall and park it. At some point in the future if something else happens or I go to expand another tenant out there, that can go as parking.
Mr. Okum replied weíd want to deal with that elevation on the building, of course, the inner elevation of the building. As far as Iím concerned Iíd feel a lot better without it. Iíd want to see something done besides just parking. I would want to see some green in that space. That elevation is an elevation of the building. Even though the block wall was an elevation of the building it never turned out like it was painted.
Mr. Petkervich agreed it is ugly. If we have to we can take it down and park it. Then at some point, we could revisit it and use it as parking or expansion for another tenant out there, obviously subject to this Commissionís approval.
Mr. Okum said I canít speak for the other members but I think that is a step in the right direction.
Mr. Galster said I would be much more comfortable with the wall and fencing down and reworking that into a parking field with curbing and some landscaping, etc., but I donít know what thatís going to look like, because I am picturing that up here and I donít know how you are picturing it.
Mr. Petkervich stated I think it would look better that way than with that wall.
Mr. Galster asked what are we going to do to that wall to dress up that new outside wall?
Mr. Petkervich responded I would think we would just paint it. We would paint this side of Hobby Lobby the same color we are proposing on the façade. We were off on the footage we said we were painting but we are painting all the way down.
Mr. Galster said so you would take the whole color scheme all the way around that side of the building. Then youíll have one row of parking?
Mr. Petkervich and Ms. Klepcyk replied we could probably have two rows of parking there.
Mr. Galster said so there might be room for additional green and landscaping and maybe a sidewalk. I would be much more in favor of the proposal because that takes care of most of my issues.
Mr. Syfert stated I would support such a program myself. I wish it had been brought in that way originally and we didnít have to get around to this point.
Mr. Syfert asked Mr. Shvegzda, do you have anything to tell us?
Mr. Shvegzda replied actually I donít. As far as the parking, we would have to take a look at it and see how it affects circulation on either side as well as the number of parking spaces.
Mr. Syfert asked, off the cuff, do you think that would present any major problems?
Mr. Shvegzda responded, off the cuff, probably nothing that couldnít be resolved but weíd have to see what would have to be resolved.
Mr. Galster asked are we going to try to look at this project with a possible vote to move forward pending resolution of that area, or are we looking at tabling and having the applicant come back and show us what they proposed?
The applicant said Hobby Lobby would like to get open.
Mr. Okum said I would like them to reiterate what they are doing with the mechanical units. I thought they were removing a unit.
Ms. Klepcyk said there is a current rooftop unit that is serving the garden center area that is no longer needed. It is in the Hobby Lobby tenant space and Hobby Lobby is proposing to remove that unit. It is the unit that is visible from street level.
Mr. Okum asked youíre not doing any light fixture changes in the parking lot? Ms. Klepcyk replied no.
Mr. Galster said in your color rendering I canít figure out what the dots are in front of the building. Are those potted plants?
Ms. Klepcyk replied yes.
Mr. Galster said Iím going to try to speak for Ms. McBride here when she speaks of the bedded areas. I think she is envisioning more volume as opposed to a couple of round pots, more like a bed or box along the front to break that up. Mr. Okum, if you are looking at some kind of motion I would like to revisit the landscaping to make sure we are okay with that.
Mr. Syfert said if they are going to take down the wall and park along the side, perhaps in our motion we should come in with some kind of landscaping plan rather than just a picture like we see here. You may want to put something out in the parking lot, maybe a raised bed and some pots in front.
Mr. Okum said you donít have a problem with light replacement or repair, that we have a requirement that it be non-glare, downlit type only? Ms. Klepcyck replied no. Mr. Okum said you also indicated that you had no problem with a landscaping plan to be approved by the Commission at the next meeting. That would give Ms. McBride a chance to look at it. All the outdoor signs will be re-faced.
Ms. Klepcyk said for the tenants no longer at the site the red painted signs would be removed and replaced with blank panels.
Mr. Okum said Iím going to say before the motion: south wall, removal of the wall and fencing south elevation and treat that elevation similar to west elevation to be approved by staff; parking, modifications to the south area where the outdoor retail sales was to allow parking field in this area to be approved by staff. You had a dumpster enclosure on the back. They had a crate grinder out there and some fencing around it. Is that still there?
Mr. McErlane said Hobby Lobby wouldnít have any use for it.
Mr. Okum continued we approved a pallet enclosure. I donít see a need for that pallet enclosure to be retained on the backside of the building.
Ms. Klepcyk said Iím not familiar with that area but Hobby Lobby is not planning any use for it.
Mr. Okum asked where are their dumpsters kept currently?
Mr. McErlane replied they have a compactor in the dock area so itís effectively screened by the fenced screen wall.
Mr. Okum said the fence is going to be removed. Mr. McErlane said we need to resolve if that portion of it will stay in place in order to screen it.
Ms. Klepcyk pointed to a section on the drawing that could stay in place. Mr. Okum said itís from the rear gate south around the area.
Mr. Okum made a motion to approve the Hobby Lobby redevelopment of the KimCo property (PUD) to include all staff and engineering recommendations, that the mechanical unit that is most visible is to be removed and any other mechanical units that shall be observed from the public right-of-way shall be screened in approved screening, that no lighting fixture changes are planned- (If lighting fixture changes are to be done, it is for necessity of maintenance, non-glare types shall be used); that a landscape plan be approved by Planning Commission at the next meeting, the dumpster area to remain with the screened enclosure currently in place, that signage as stated shall be repaired and re-faced, red painted signs shall be removed, non-tenanted space signs shall be plain white panels; south wall shall be removed, removal of the wall and fencing from the rear gate south around the entire landscaped outdoor display area; south elevation area shall be treated similar to the west elevation to be approved by staff; parking Ė modification to the south area where the outdoor retail sales were to allow a parking field in this area to be approved by staff; pallet enclosure on the east side of the building shall be removed.
Mr. Galster added if thatís going to be made into parking a lighting plan for that area then. Mr. Okum said I will add that a lighting plan shall be submitted.
Mr. McErlane said just a clarification in respect to signs. I think the motion indicated including staff comments. Have we settled on storefront signage? The applicant is asking for the five-foot high letters due to the storefront distance from Springfield Pike.
Mr. Okum said Iíll put into my motion with the exclusion of Ms. McBrideís recommendation to reduce the sign from 250 to 150.
Mr. Galster seconded the motion.
The motion passed with five affirmative votes.
11512 Springfield Pike Ė tabled 11/13/01
Keith Bowens, representative of Variety Wireless, said you asked us to bring in some materials that we were going to be putting on the building Ė materials, colors, patterns. There were two options, XL06 which is gold, or XL08 which is more of an earth tone color for the awning. The first choice by Voice Stream was the yellow that we discussed last time but that was too bright so they submitted the gold. If not, they would go with the vanilla color with black letters and it would go all the way around the building.
Mr. McErlane stated nothing new was submitted until tonight. The allowable sign area is 93.5 square feet. Each of the awnings shows a total of 12.75 square feet of copy on each of the two awnings so we are looking at 25 square feet. The application we had received indicated that the free-standing sign would be removed.
Mr. Galster asked Mr. McErlane, do we need the property ownerís approval for removing this sign and eliminating the variance on this property?
Mr. McErlane replied the property owner signed the application and signed the ownerís affidavit as part of the application.
Mr. Bowens said the sign belongs to me. I brought it from Professional Printing when they moved off the property.
Mr. Galster asked then you are in approval of removal of the building sign and going to this awning?
Mr. Bowens answered yes.
In response to Mr. Galster, Mr. Bowens said the color number for the façade is Sherman Williams M-24.
Mr. Galster asked the painter, do you agree that the cream color and black lettering go good together? The painter agreed that it does.
Mr. Galster asked do we have a square footage for the letters on the awning?
Mr. McErlane said the awnings themselves are 25 feet long. The copy sizes you gave us came out to 8.5 feet long. The letters are 18 inches high.
Mr. Galster asked is everything going to be contained in the 18" x 8.5í?
The applicant said "Voice Stream" is actually going to be outside of that.
Mr. Galster said on this paper is the actual text. It would be with these dimensions on a vanilla banner with a façade that is painted that color with the removal of the pole sign. Mr. Galster said I make a motion to approve.
Mr. Okum asked are the awnings two 25-foot awnings?
Mr. Bowens replied they are joined as one awning but they come into the corner so itís actually 25 feet one way and 25 the other way.
Mr. McErlane said at the storefront it is 25 feet so out at the projection it will be a little bigger than that. Thereís a two-foot projection.
Mr. Galster withdrew his motion.
Mr. Okum said Ms. McBride commented last time that the CRD (Corridor Review District) requires it to be one coordinated color scheme for a building. With the proposed background yellow the awning is not complimentary. You are in agreement that the vanilla awning, XL08 would be acceptable. The signage is black lettering. Will that awning be illuminated?
Mr. Bowens replied yes, it will be backlit. In response to Mr. Okum, Mr. Bowens said you run the lights behind the awning along the wall. The lights will be 8 foot, double bulb, fluorescent lamps.
Mr. Okum said it would be 160 watts per eight feet. The free-standing sign would be removed.
Mr. Okum said I move that we approve Variety Wirelessí request for renovations to the property at 11512 Springfield Pike to include on the two elevations M24 Sherman Williams color as sample provided on the entire mansard; that the signage shall be permitted for two 8í5" by 18" high sign areas as requested by the applicant in place of the existing pole sign which will be permanently removed; the letter on the awning will be black; the awning shall consist of two 25- foot plus project of two feet awnings XL08 vanilla not to exceed 160 watts of lighting per eight feet of awning. Mr. Darby seconded.
The motion passed with five affirmative votes.
Bill Woodward said we are presenting our comprehensive sign package for Pictoria Corporate Center. The signage package was designed by Cooper Carey, who was the architect for Tower I. We are very pleased with the results of their efforts. We think they captured the character, quality and scope of Tower I in the signage package. There are really two purposes for the sign. One is for identification and one is for direction. We think that the identification of Pictoria Corporate Center is a high quality place of business that is well accomplished by this signage package. Direction is accomplished also with some of the signs; for example, the four panel sign at the corner of the garage which provides direction to the restaurants which will be down in that cul-de-sac. We know that certain of the signs are somewhat larger than normal, but we think they are in keeping with the expanded scale of this project, and are necessary for visibility and being able to be seen from proper distances. With me tonight is David Tipton, one of the partners in the project; also, Gene Maier with Maier Sign Company, who are the fabricators and installers of the signs; also Lanie Wess, with Woolpert, the site engineer who produced the landscaping plan. They are here to help me answer any questions you might have.
Mr. McErlane said the applicant is proposing 9 signs, some of which are directional in nature and some are identification signs. Sign 2A is 5í2" high by 30í9" long. Sign 2A is located in the plaza at the end of what will be shortly called Pictoria Drive. At the terminus of Pictoria Drive right as you head into the plaza itís the major identification sign at that location. Itís actually set back 50 feet from the right-of-way. The copy on that sign is approximately 15 inches high by 23í2" for 29 square feet. Sign 2B is located at the corner near Bahama Breezeís parking lot as you round the bend around the cinemas. There is an existing easement in that location for an identification sign. That sign is 4í6" high by 22í6" long. Itís set back 12í3" from the right-of-way of Pictoria Drive and 15í2" from the City right-of-way that used to be an access drive when there was a residence on that property. The copy on that is approximately 14 inches high by 22í5" long at 25 square feet. Sign 2C, the interstate identification sign, is 8í10" high by 14 feet long, set back 7 feet from the interstate right-of-way. The copy is approximately 21 inches high by 34í4". There are two 4 feet high by 20 feet long panels for tenants. I think it indicates that those would be painted panels.
Gene Maier said those would be painted on the second surface. The second surface is like the inside of the cabin.
Mr. McErlane stated the sign drawings themselves lead you to believe that that is an aluminum face. Are the bottom panels illuminated?
Mr. Maier said there are two options there. On the preliminary sketches there was an option to use 8" aluminum at the bottom for a routed copy versus a lexan. The reason we moved it to a lexan copy second surface is that you canít get a piece of aluminum 20 feet long. If I use clear lexan on the bottom tenant faces and spray on the second surface, it will all be one continuous piece.
Mr. Okum asked why donít you break it into four sections and do it in aluminum?
Mr. Maier replied I can but you will have a seam in it. We are trying to get away from that.
Mr. Okum responded you can do a rolled seam and drop it in.
Mr. Maier said if itís routed out copy, the copy will most probably run into the seam.
Mr. Okum said no, you would have four individual panels all equal.
Mr. Maier replied itís for two tenants, not four.
Mr. Okum stated so you can get a twenty-foot piece of lexan and not use an H joint on it to connect it.
Mr. Maier said also the signís on a gradual arch and it would be a whole lot easier for the lexan to form to the gradual arch.
Mr. Okum asked can you get the lexan the same color as the aluminum?
Mr. Maier replied I can get the lexan clear and spray the second surface and paint it the same color as that paint in the background. It wouldnít have three seams in it.
Mr. Okum said, sorry, Mr. Chairman, it doesnít matter as long as it looks the same as the rest of the sign.
Mr. Maier stated it would look exactly like it. Iím trying to stay away from the seams.
Mr. Okum said so you could do a router lexan panel instead of a router aluminum panel.
Mr. Maier said no, itís impossible to attach to the lexan. Essentially, when you use a routed face with aluminum, you stud aluminum on the back side of that eighth in aluminum. There is no way to put a mounting mechanism on the back side of this lexan.
Mr. Okum said I donít think it would have the same look as Pictoriaís Corporate Centerís lettering.
Mr. Maier said it would.
Mr. McErlane continued mark Sign 2C that instead of as it is indicated, eighth inch aluminum face painted, that itís lexan surface. Sign 3 at 4 feet high by 7í8" long is an identification sign for Pictoria Tower I located at the terminus of Pictoria Drive off to the west side of the oval plaza immediately in front of Pictoria Tower I. Sign 4 A is an 11 feet high by 7í2" long directional sign located at the northwest corner of the parking garage site. Sign 4B which is a similar sign 11 feet high by 7í2" long is in the right-of-way in front of the cinemas at St. Rt. 4. The copy of 4A and 4B is approximately 9í6" x 6í or 57 square feet apiece. There are three other signs that are primarily directional in nature. Signs 5A and 5B are directional signs into and out of the parking garage. They are 5í6" high, 1í5" wide and theyíre set back 19 feet from Pictoria for 5A on the east side of the parking garage and on the west side, that one is set back 4.1 feet from Northwest Boulevard. The copy on those is 11 inches by 2 feet. There is an additional sign proposed for the face of the parking garage that says free public parking that is 6 feet high by 12 feet long or 72 square feet. Signs 2C (main identification sign at the interstate, 4A and 4B (directional signs in public right-of-way at Rt. 4 and at the parking garage) exceed the 7 feet high permitted by code. The height of 8í10" of Sign 2C may be appropriate given its exposure on the interstate, but we believe the heights of 11 feet for 4A and 4B are inappropriate because they are primarily directional signs. Itís our recommendation also that Sign 4B be eliminated or at the most identify Pictoria Drive or Pictoria Corporate Center on the uniform traffic sign. The sign is proposed off-site and in the public right-of-way and approval would set an undesirable precedent. In this particular instance this development is in a highly visible location. Itís not as though you canít find it. Our recommendation is to eliminate Sign 4B. Itís also our recommendation that Sign 6 which says free public parking on the parking garage be reduced in size and located lower on the building. The applicant has indicated that the intent is to allow visibility from the Bahama Breeze parking lot but the likelihood that Bahama Breeze patrons would visit the garage is pretty slim because of the distance from that parking lot. My comment when asked about Sign 4A being erected on the parking garage site which will initially be owned by the City, my understanding from Mr. Parham is that that shouldnít present any problems with respect to it being located on there, because of the way the TIF has to be handled. Itís also our recommendation that Sign 2C, which is the interstate sign, be located ten feet back from the right-of-way unless there is some reason as to why it canít be situated three feet further back; and that Sign 4B be revised to meet the five foot setback. Itís currently at 4.1 feet. I think I covered most of what Ms. McBride had indicated as well except she wanted to make sure there was clarification that Sign 2C is the sign we previously discussed as an identification sign for the Pictoria Tower projects. There is not an additional pylon sign proposed for the site.
Mr. Shvegzda said I would just like to reiterate our concern for Sign 4B being located in the public right-of-way for the issues that Mr. McErlane expressed and also the concern that since it is in the public right-of-way, what rights would other particular businesses in the area, such as Bob Evans, have to be located on that particular signage.
Mr. Syfert said weíve heard the comments. Does the applicant have something youíd like to say regarding them? I personally think your sign man went off the deep end when he got to the parking garage.
Mr. Woodward said letís start with that one. We have taken some photographs and superimposed the sign on the building. We feel it may be a little bright but it gives you an idea of the scale. Sometimes I think we forget how large these buildings are. That 6 feet by 15 feet sign looks to be in keeping with the size of the garage. We do want patrons of all the restaurants to park in the garage. We know that the parking lots will be somewhat undersized. Rather than driving into a full parking lot weíd like to be able to show visitors to the restaurant as quickly as reasonably possible that there is free public parking available in the garage. Itís our notion that the sign ought to be as close to the entrance of the garage as possible but also visible from a reasonable distance. I think what this photograph is showing is that what we are proposing makes sense. Any smaller it will defeat the purpose of having free public parking in the garage.
Mr. Syfert said I was under the opinion that it took away from the beauty of the parking garage. If a parking garage can be beautiful, I think this is one. I like the idea of putting free parking on that four panel sign you have on the corner. You probably couldnít see it clearly from Bahama Breeze but itís one of those things that education will happen.
Mr. Woodward said that sign is 11 feet tall because the individual panels out there now are a little smaller than 3 square feet now. We have also superimposed a photograph of the 11 foot sign we have proposed and it certainly isnít overpowering anything. Those sign panels as we propose them are 2í11" square. If we reduce it down to less than 7 feet tall, they become less than 2 feet square, and you wouldnít be able to read from the stop sign.
Mr. Galster asked are you telling me the no outlet sign is 11 feet tall?
Mr. Maier said I went out there and put a tape measure down on the ground. My designer scaled off of that. If you look at this picture, that piece of conduit is roughly 3 feet. Actually, that sign gets moved farther back so it will appear even smaller.
Mr. Galster asked will it seem smaller than the no outlet sign?
Mr. Okum asked how high is it to the top rail?
Mr. Woodward answered itís ten feet from floor to floor.
Mr. Galster said if you bring it out to the corner it would probably be 50% more height than what the drawing shows.
Mr. Okum said that floor is below grade on the front corner. It sits down about 3 to 4 feet.
Lanie Wess said the east side slopes down. Floor height-wise, itís level.
Mr. Okum asked whatís the height of the vertical masonry panels on the garage?
Mr. Woodward said those are ten-foot panels.
Mr. Okum asked whoís going left and whoís going right?
Mr. Woodward replied when the actual panels are designed weíll know who the restaurants are and weíll come back and present the actual design of those panels. We know one of them is Pappadeaux to the right. The other restaurant will also go to the right. Straight ahead we will have Towers I and II most likely.
Mr. Okum asked would you be leasing sign space off this for Tower I and Tower II identification?
Mr. Woodward replied no, thatís not the plan. If one tenant took the whole building and wanted to have one of those panels direct people to that location, I think thatís appropriate.
Mr. Okum asked, do you really need those four panels on that sign? What else would you go down that lane for besides the restaurants?
Mr. Woodward replied free parking.
Mr. Okum said if it were an entry feature in the public right-of-way which staff has recommended against, the four identification elements on the sign would be appropriate. I think people would be fighting for who gets on the sign. On the other hand, when I get to in front of the parking garage, I need to make a decision. I can go to Karloís, Pappadeauxí, etc. and basically thatís my three choices.
Mr. Woodward stated you can go straight to the Tower.
Mr. Okum said commercially I only see two businesses benefiting from this sign and that would be Pappadeauxís and Mammadeauxís or whatever. I donít see the other two businesses but I do see a need for direction to Tower I and Tower II on this site but I donít think a sign panel is necessary. I think we can bring the sign down a little in size or make it commercial because they do need direction to Tower I and Tower II at that point. To be a lit translucent panel is not necessarily what you want. You donít have a problem moving those back a distance from the public right-of-way? Mr. Woodward indicated no.
Mr. Syfert said on Sign 2C where you have Pictoria Corporate Center and then two panels underneath, I was wondering is there some agreement with a tenant that you are anticipating needing those. It seems to me that it takes away from the sign to put anything else under there.
Mr. Woodward said one of the things we may come back and talk to you about is the hotel we hope to do there to complement the business part. The pylon sign only has four tenants on it and itís for the four restaurants. How would we identify the possible hotel here? The other thought would be for a major building tenant.
Mr. Syfert asked, but right now you donít have any definite tenant for that sign? Mr. Woodward replied no.
Mr. Syfert said in my own mind it takes away from the beauty of whatís going to be there.
Mr. Woodward replied well, if itís not done properly. Thatís one of the benefits of coming back when we actually have the sign panels to do. You all get to help us make sure they are appropriate.
Mr. McErlane said I just wanted to clarify on the one that says free public parking, it looks like it was taken approximately 200 feet west of the Karloís site.
Mr. Syfert asked what about Sign 4B? Do you understand our concern on that?
Mr. Woodward replied I would have a hard time arguing about that? I think having a sign there is important because weíre having visitors to tenants in the building. Theyíre complaining that the visitors canít find them, that they are turning in front of Bob Evans and then getting lost in the parking fields of Showcase Cinemas. We really do need to have some direction there to emphasize the sharp turn onto Pictoria Drive.
Mr. Shvegzda said there will be quite a large sign that will indicate that the Pictoria Drive roadway does continue to the right.
Mr. Syfert asked when will that be done? Mr. Shvegzda replied it could be installed as soon as next week.
Mr. Syfert said I, for one, will probably insist on that being removed.
Mr. Galster suggested the commission go through each one and see what the opinions are. I agree with the chairman that 4B is inappropriate at this time. If we end up with people not being able to find your location down the road, then we would go back and look at ways to take care of that.
2A Ė Identification sign at the turn around.
Mr. Okum said that sign is just at 5 feet but it goes 30 feet across. Any landscaping on that island needs to be treated in front of the sign. You really wonít see whatís behind it. We approved the landscaping plan and now we are putting a pretty good sign across that.
Lanie Wess said when the landscaping was shown in that area we had always shown a future sign so the landscaping is low level plantings, mostly ground cover.
2B Ė located at the corner just as you come out of the Bahama Breeze site
Mr. Okum asked do you have an easement there and Mr. Woodward replied yes. Mr. Okum said it would be contiguous to your property. Mr. Woodward stated it is our property. Mr. Okum asked do you have a landscape plan for this?
Mr. Galster said it is on the second sheet. Itís not the greatest shot but it lets you know they are looking at it.
Mr. Okum asked did Ms. McBride comment on the landscaping?
Mr. McErlane said some of the landscaping shown is on previous landscape plans. The only things that have been indicated as additional are some day lilies and some 50-inch yew.
2C Ė Mr. Galster said there are a couple of issues here, setback, height, changeable faces. My understanding is that these would be for major tenants of the office building.
Mr. Woodward replied or for a potential hotel.
Mr. Galster said if you had a major tenant or hotel most of that would go on the building, wouldnít it?
Mr. Woodward stated I think most retail type tenants like to have interface.
Mr. Galster said itís four feet tall on the interstate going down the ramp.
Mr. Woodward said it is ramping off but itís not on the ramp.
Mr. Galster asked you have no problem moving the sign back ten feet?
Mr. Woodward replied itís not a deal breaker but thereís a hill right there. We want to keep this sign fairly low. There is a detention basin behind it so from the interstate weíre ramping up to the top of the detention basin and thereís a sidewalk on top of that. We want to keep this sign low with eight feet of visibility for interstate traffic but not blocking the building. Thatís why we donít want it pushed back too far. If ten feetís important to you I think itís doable but weíd rather have it at seven feet.
Mr. Galster asked how far back to the sidewalk? Ms. Wess replied ten feet but it slopes up. Mr. Woodward said weíre trying to keep the sign down lower if possible.
Mr. Galster said we can accomplish that by reducing the height.
Mr. Okum asked why donít you put it where that ugly rock pile is?
Mr. Woodward responded weíre going to make that rock pile look so good. Mr. Okum said youíve been saying that for months.
Mr. Woodward said we have $6,000 worth of new rock going in there. Mr. Tipton said we had to do that for the state code.
Mr. Syfert said he didnít have any problem with where the sign is sitting. Mr. Okum said you said ten feet is not a problem.
Mr. Woodward replied it creates more of a problem for us but if itís real important to say ten feet, weíll say ten feet.
Mr. Okum responded Iíd be willing to give on the 8í10" if youíd move it back.
Mr. Galster said if you move it back it starts getting higher in the air. If weíre going to allow the 8í10" height Iíd rather have it closer to the fence so itís not like a billboard.
Mr. Woodward said we have talked to the right people at ODOT about this situation and they are going to allow us to break the fence and tie into the signs so the sign will not block the visibility.
Mr. Okum said I agree with you, Mr. Galster, that getting it lower would be better. That would put it at a line of sight pretty even with the roadway as well.
Mr. Syfert said I donít have any problem with where it is. Do you want it where it is or do you want to bring it closer?
Mr. Woodward replied I would prefer it closer.
In response to Mr. Syfert, Mr. Galster said Iím okay with where it is. I think the 8í10" is getting pretty high still. Even though I agree that the lexan, once it becomes a sign, will look similar. Can you make the lexan look like the base?
Mr. Maier replied yes, thatís why Iím going to use the clear lexan and spray the second surface.
Mr. Syfert asked will it have that textured look to it?
Mr. Maier answered itís a clear acrylic polyurethane finish.
Mr. Syfert stated I donít have any trouble with the height, Steve.
Mr. Okum said they need to get some landscaping in front of it. Itís going to be hard to maintain that landscaping unless you put a gate for those people to get to the bedding.
Mr. Woodward said we have a gate in the fence. We are going to maintain the whole right-of-way.
Mr. Okum responded I realize that but thatís a way off. Thereís a planting area that has to be maintained. Unless you put it right on the fence, itís going to look pretty silly with that fence notching back to the sign. The fence is going to be broken so that the sign gets visibility, which I donít disagree with, so the fence is better than further back. It will look strange if itís going back so weíre talking seven feet. Thatís still a good 150 feet from the road, 100 feet from the ramp.
Mr. Galster said I want to put it right in the middle of the pond.
Mr. Okum said you donít know if thatís right-of-way or whatever. Itís low enough on the site but I think Mr. Galsterís concern is that itís low enough but it will look 8í11".
Mr. Galster said I just donít want it to go up the hill too much.
Mr. Okum said closer to the fence would be bringing it down.
Mr. Woodward said that would make the fence terminating into the sides look the best too. The fence is four feet tall.
Mr. Okum said the sign goes this way and the fence goes that way. Youíll end up with the fence going off the side of the sign.
Mr. Woodward said I was going to take it back to the property line and take the fence straight across.
Mr. Okum said you are going to carry the fence from the corner of the sign. Mr. Galster said heís going to straighten the fence out a little bit. Mr. Okum said then I donít have a problem at all. I say five feet from the right-of-way line. That brings it down a little bit.
Sign 3 - Sign is okay
Mr. Galster said I agree that four panels might be a little much. Maybe what is, is that instead of being a panel maybe as a header it would say Tower I with an arrow and Tower II with an arrow, free public parking with an arrow and two sign spots.
Mr. Woodward said why donít we work on this and come back.
Mr. Galster said I think this can work better and get you to the towers without the tower signs becoming signs. They can become part of the structure itself. You can incorporate the parking because I donít think the one on the building is going to make it as smooth as the first four or five.
Sign 4B Ė at this time is eliminated.
Sign 5A and B
Mr. Galster said there are setback issues on 5B. Just set those back to five feet. What about height?
Mr. Woodward said the overall height is 5í6". Code is 4 feet. If we lower it, it puts the arrow about 2 feet off the ground. That defeats the purpose.
Mr. Syfert asked does anybody have a problem with the height of those? Mr. Galster said no, but do you need 5B if we put the parking sign on 4A?
Mr. Woodward replied yes, I think itís a nice monument right there at the driveway thatís aesthetically pleasing.
Mr. Glaster said with sign 4A modified and 5B right there I donít think sign 6 is needed.
Mr. Woodward said yes. Our concern is that we donít want to make it a detriment to the appearance of the garage. I think maybe this photograph makes it stand out like a sore thumb on the side of the garage but that panel will painted the same color as the garage. It will blend in. The only thing that will be illuminated is the lettering. The rest of the cabinet will blend into the panels on the garage.
Mr. Okum said I kept looking for a sign over the doorway.
Mr. Woodward said we were too but in order to get visibility. Mr. Okum said but once you get to the corner, and you look over there by Karloís and you look to the left at the garage, if there was a sign going across the doorway saying free public parking, it would entice people to go into the garage. I donít have a problem with it there. I think putting it on the building in one spot sort of looks strange, but you would expect signage over the doorway into the building garage. My recommendation would be over the top of the doorway you put free public parking, same reverse lit channel. That way you can see it
Mr. Woodward said we wanted people to be able to see it before they get to Karloís so instead of pulling into their full parking lot and making more congestion, to see that sign on the garage and head for the garage.
Mr. Okum responded I understand Karloís is going to drive on its own. They are going to go through the lot and either go to Pappadeauxís parking lot adjacent, or across the street. If they see a lit sign over that doorway, it says come in. I think you have already made your decision to go back to the development. Where you find your place to park is when you get to an area, look for convenience.
Mr. Woodward said we want to make sure that people understand that it is free and public parking. A lot of people would assume thatís an office garage.
Mr. Galster asked what if it goes over the doorway and instead of being six feet tall and taking up both cubes, itís three feet tall and takes up one cube?
Mr. Maier said the problem with that is that you will have two separate cabinets. You will have free public on one side and another that says parking.
Mr. Woodward said there is an in and out so it would make sense to have it over the entrance portion of the garage.
Mr. Okum said that would be on the right where it says clearance. That clearance sign is not going to be there. You will put a bar there.
Mr. Galster asked how high?
Mr. Woodward replied 6 feet high by 15 feet long.
Mr. Maier said if you put all that in one cabinet you are defeating the purpose of seeing it off in a distance.
Mr. Galster said if I am going to Karloís Iím going to pull into the entrance for Karloís. If I donít find a spot I will be at the other end of the parking lot right in front of the parking garage.
Mr. Woodward said the letters are 20 inches tall and Mr. Woodward said itís a big garage.
Mr. Okum said I think if you have a six-foot panel the sign panel should be about half of that panel.
Mr. Woodward said I would think you could have a reveal of six inches at the bottom and six inches at the top and make it 5í x 12í. It wouldnít fill the whole panel. It seems to me that if it were only three feet tall by the time you put the letters in there, you wonít be able to see it from far away, maybe even the intersection.
Mr. Galster said by the time itís six feet tall and you have six-inch reveals, then weíre down to five. You have two lines of text with six inches in-between. Out of the six feet you are wasting six inches on the top, six on the bottom and a foot in the middle.
Mr. Okum said I just try to draw in Free Public Parking on this one here and I was having trouble getting it to fit.
Mr. Galster asked what if itís just Free Parking?
Mr. Okum asked does the City have a problem with it not saying the word Public?
Mr. Parham said Public Parking is probably better than Free Parking, but Free Parking serves the same purpose.
Mr. Okum said Free Parking would fit in the 3 foot by 15 foot cabinet.
Mr. Maier said if I kept the same text and put six feet on a cabinet and ran a single line text it would be at 18 feet by the time you got all your spacing out.
Mr. Okum said if you did two lines of text on a 3 foot by 15 foot cabinet you could certainly put free parking.
Mr. Galster said but it would be funny looking. Everything would be out of proportion.
Mr. Galster asked how wide are the verticals on that building? Mr. Woodward replied 2 feet for the bigger ones and 18 inches for the smaller ones.
Mr. Galster said from the center we can pick up another three feet almost.
Mr. Okum asked whatís the height from the bottom of the face panels in the driveway? Mr. Woodward replied 8 feet.
Mr. Okum said somebody has put on the structure "Clearance 7í6". Is there a reason for that? Mr. Woodward answered no.
Mr. Galster said why donít we let you mess with that one along with 4A. Mr. Woodward said I thought we were going 3 feet high and panel wide and say Free Parking.
Mr. Galster said with a 15 foot maximum you may find out that 12 feet works. Mr. Okum said I would like them to go up to the edge if itís a shallow case.
Mr. Okum asked how far do they stick out from the panel? Eighteen inches answered Mr. Woodward. Mr. Okum said so they stick out 18 inches and they are 18 inches wide.
Mr. Galster said we have that down to 3 feet tall by single line text, maximum 15 feet wide over the entrance.
Mr. Maier said 15 feet will be pushing it.
Mr. Galster said I make a motion in reference to Pictoria Island overall signage that we approved sign 2A as submitted, sign 2B as submitted, sign 2C with a five-foot setback from I-275 right-of-way as submitted, approve sign 3 as submitted, 4A to be revised and resubmitted for separate approval, sign 4B has been eliminated from the package, sign 5A is approved as submitted, sign 5B is approved with a five-foot setback from the right-of-way as submitted, sign 6 shall be a sign 3 feet tall to a maximum of 15 feet in width and to be submitted for record. Mr. Okum seconded the motion. The motion passed with five affirmative votes.
The commission took a break from 9:12 to 9:27 p.m.
11144 Springfield Pike
Tim Martz, Lykins Oil Company said Phil Martin is giving you a picture of the proposed fascia change for the canopy. The way it is described in number one I donít believe is accurate. Most canopies that you see out there do have projecting letters. The Exxon letters are actually recessed so that they are even with the red stripe that goes around the canopy. Exxon marketing people Iím sure spent millions of dollars trying to come up with a pleasing look. Where Iíve seen these canopies they look very nice. We represent Lykins Oil and we have BP, Exxon, Marathon, Citco. As I compare the canopies the most pleasing look is the Exxon. I wonít call it flat face because itís not, but itís not exactly projecting. It gives the appearance of a more modern look. With the introduction of Kroger and Wal-Mart into the gasoline business, Lykins Oil feels we will be better able to compete with the Exxon brand there as opposed to Shell. We are not here just making a brand change. We feel itís important to the future of the company.
Mr. McErlane said some of the drawings we had did take some interpretation, but as it exists today the canopy is a flush, flex-face on a sign box that is continuous around it. The only things that illuminated right now are the Shell logo and Shell letters as well as the yellow band that is along the bottom of it. To accommodate this change you would take that sign box down and mount what appears to be Ė I guess the back portion is non-illuminated, then the projecting red part that comes off the face is illuminated, then the letters themselves.
Mr. Martz said it is a backlit red with illuminated Exxon letters.
Mr. McErlane said but the letters are not individual channel letters. Itís one continuous box and the letters project out of the face of the box. The application proposes to do that on three sides. One of the questions we had was on the north side, what happens there?
Mr. Martz replied we are actually asking to do this on four sides with two Exxons. The canopy itself will be the same on all four sides with the exception of the Exxons on two sides.
Mr. Syfert asked on which sides?
Mr. Martz replied one will be facing the intersection of Rt. 4 and Northland Boulevard. The other one will be facing as you would go westbound on Northland Boulevard.
Mr. Galster said so the northwest corner does not have the Exxon sign.
Mr. McErlane said so it would be on the west side and south side.
Mr. Galster said it would be on the east side and south side, nothing on the west.
Mr. McErlane said the applicant, at the time they applied for the permit, had also applied for a permit to change a panel on the ground sign and we have already approved that as a panel change. Ms. McBride wanted to point out a general overall color scheme that is necessary in the corridor and the discouragement of high chroma shades as dominant colors on buildings are prohibited within the corridor. We need to clarify what colors are going to appear on the rest of the building. We have noticed recently, even since the photographs were taken by the sign contractor, that the canopy over the front door has been changed to a red color. Are there additional changes that will occur?
Mr. Martz said the person who did that is still with the company. He wasnít aware of that. We propose that for the entire building with the exception of what we just spent, you can tell us what color you would like it to be. Iím sure you would want that yellow taken away, the awnings on both sides and the yellow stripe around the bottom. Weíd be happy to change those to any color you would request, or the entire building. Based on marketing surveys that have been done by the branded marketing companies, they feel that it is very important to have that branded canopy to distinguish ourselves from the unbranded competition. I guess he just went ahead with the red to tie it into the canopy, but weíd be happy to do anything you requested on the rest of the building.
Mr. McErlane said the standing-seam metal roof over two areas is a darker gray than your off-white gray for the rest of the building. Would you be opposed to changing the yellow standing-seam over the windows to that same shade of gray? And on the lower band?
Mr. Martz replied thatís fine. That can go to gray as well.
Mr. Syfert said I have a problem with that much of a red band around there being in the corridor district. I donít think this is consistent with what we are trying to do there. I know that your sign is probably your trademark. I donít know that the red band has to be. Gray or some other earth tone building is fine for the rest of the building.
Mr. Galster said the main building is gray. Are you proposing that the red band not be red, that it stay gray and not be lit?
Mr. Syfert said that would fit my desires. Paint out the Shell logo. I just donít believe that I can conscientiously approve a big red band there in the corridor district.
Mr. Galster asked do we have a size on that canopy?
Mr. Okum stated it is 49 x 49.
Mr. Martz said itís part of the Exxon color scheme. We have a picture. Exxon wants the people in this country to know that they are an American company and itís very important to Exxon that they be the red, white and blue. We donít have a blue option that Iím aware of for the Exxon canopy.
Mr. Galster asked what if it was white, non-illuminated and the stripe across the bottom was blue? On the Shell that is existing right now, make the gray white; make the yellow blue and have the Exxon in those two corners. My problem is first, the red is much more brilliant than blue and even if itís blue, or white, or red, I wouldnít want the whole thing lit up. In the past four months we have probably dealt with three red roofs, all in the corridor. It has to be more earth-tone and not nearly as fluorescent.
Mr. Martz said we would like you to table this until the next meeting. We will discuss this with Exxon and see if we can come up with something else.
Mr. Galster said I have no problem with the lighted boxes in the corner. I donít want to see the band lit and not that much red in that canopy.
Mr. Martz asked based on the Shell, is there a limit because of the corridor?
Mr. Galster said itís because itís the corridor. It can be an accent color but once you put that red all the way around itís no longer an accent. I would consider the yellow band an accent to the gray, but I donít consider the gray the accent color on this canopy.
Mr. Okum said I think there are going to be certain sign packages that Exxon has and their colors are red, royal blue and white. I donít think Exxon is going to give us a rust colored translucent illuminated band as an alternate color in their color scheme of lighting.
Mr. Galster said white with Exxon in the corner with a thin red band is workable for me.
Mr. Martz asked can we cover the Shell? Weíre supposed to get it done by the end of the year. Weíre going to replace the faces.
Mr. Okum said contrary to what Mr. Galster is saying, I donít have a problem with some red band and white, but I donít want something protruding out. I donít disagree with this concept of everything being flat. I would just say everything but about six inches of that red goes away and becomes white and itís blacked out. If they want an accent strip and it happens to light up I donít have a major objection to that. I do have a major objection to the lights under the canopy. Those got changed out a couple of years ago and they are very distracting to the driving public, especially the older people and to me. Those lights have exposed lenses and they are very, very haunting. They entirely light up the street, the intersection. We donít need our ballards because those lights off that canopy are lighting it up. I would like to see you when you come back in, address that with either residence shielding or flat lens fixtures. It is definitely overlit.
Mr. Martz asked does that have to do with the district? I notice the new Shell has the same lights.
Mr. Alsip said that was the first canopy to be done with those lights for LSI Industries. We can have the shields.
Mr. Martz said weíll come back with a plan as part of our total package. Exxon must have packages for restricted zoning districts. A lot of communities have restricted zoning districts. I donít know how I like the glow around the Exxon as it appears in this photograph, but itís a new way of treating box lettering where itís not only illuminated through the face but around the sides of the letter itself.
Mr. Martz stated I think they feel itís giving a three dimensional look to a two dimensional canopy. I expect more to come with this design.
Mr. Syfert said the applicant has asked to have this tabled and weíll have it on the agenda for January.
350 West Kemper Road
The applicant asked that this be tabled.
Mr. Syfert said I explained to Mr. Darby that they couldnít get five affirmative votes. It came in very sketchy and at staff meeting I didnít even want to put it on the agenda.
Mr. McErlane said I received a call today and the applicant said he would bring in additional information. Most of it was to answer a number of questions about the proposal.
Mr. Darby said following the flood in July we made the decision to move the kids out of the basement.
Mr. Syfert said the trailer is just to the north of the one story building across the street here.
Mr. Okum said those trailers are notorious for leaking and the mold levels are extremely high.
Mr. McErlane said there is a little survey card in your packet. If you will, please take the time to fill that out. Weíre trying to get information on how we can improve things and what kind of job we are doing.
Mr. Syfert said he also passed out the Ohio Planning Conference Planning and Zoning Workshop. I encourage all of you who can make that to do so.
Mr. McErlane said the early registration deadline is January 4.
IX. Planning Commission adjourned at 9:56 p.m.
William G. Syfert, Chairman
David Whitaker, Secretary