pm_710804 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

-6- division were approved and would be building one house on the new lot. The other lot contains an existing house and garage. Utility hookups are available. Discussion Mrs. Joe Peck, 1748 Alta Vista, who lives next door to the proposed division, indicated that she had no objection to the application. Mr. Edlund felt that the division of the lot and the construction of the new home would inprove the property. Recommendation Mrs. Demos Moved and Mr. Kellett Seconded, that the Conunission reconmend approval of Clayton Benish and Lillie Syringts request for division of a lot at 1800 Alta Vista Drive. Roll Call, Ayes: Demos, Eagles, Kellett, Edlund and Pope. Nays: None. Planning File 637-71 - Jell Associates request for variance to sign height and size at 2540 North Cleveland Presentation Jerry Loftsgaarden, representing Jell Associates, indicated that he was asking that he be permitted to place a sign on top of the four story portion of his Holiday Inn development. Originally the sign had been proposed to be placed on the face of the building. However, after viewing the situation it was found that the sign would not be visible from the freeway. The sign would be the SaJre as the one originally pro- posed, except that it would contain the Holiday Inn logo. Mr. Loftsgaarden indicated that the Holiday Inn Corporation requires that the roof sign have the logo attached, whereas, the sign on the face of the building is not required to have the logo. The sign would project approximately 16 feet above the height of the building and consist of approximately 270 square feet. Village ordinances require that a sign be no higher than 6 feet above the building, and would allow a square footage of 185 feet for this individual sign. Discussion Mrs. Demos asked if there would be any additional requests for signs in the future. Mr. Loftsgaarden stated there would be no other Holiday IIU1 signs, but there would probably be a "Golden Horn" sign over the door of the restaurant entrance. Mrs. Demos stated that she would like to defend the sign ordinance, and that she would rather error by requiring too small a sign than to error by permitting too big a sign. Mr. Edlund indicated that if he had known that Jell Associates would be retuming for another sign variance that he might not have voted for the first variances that were granted for the pylon sign in front of the development. Mr. Kellett felt that for a road trade operation in that area, that there was no doubt a problem in getting the customer off the freeway. Mr. Kellett indicated that without the Holiday Inn logo the amount of square footage and the overall height would be reduced considerably. He felt that it would perhaps be reasooable to allow the placing of the script sign minus the logo on top of the building rather than on the face as originally proposed. ~1r. Edlund indicated that he thought there was a good deal of merit in Mr. Kellett's suggestion.