[00:00:06]
IT COULD BE 7:00. YEP. GOOD EVENING. AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE NEW ALBANY
[I. Call to order]
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MEETING FOR WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13TH. COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? CHRISTINA. MR. HENSON HERE, MR. ITEM HERE, MR. BROWN. MR. DAVEY HERE. MR. MALLETT'S HERE, MISS MOORE, MR. STROLLER, COUNCIL MEMBER. BRISK HERE. WE HAVE FOUR VOTING MEMBERS[III. Action on minutes: September 9, 2024]
PRESENT. WE HAVE QUORUM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANY ACTION ON THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 9TH, 2024? I WANTED TO OFFER A COMPLIMENT TO OUR CLERK, WHO I THOUGHT DID A SPLENDID JOB ON VERY LONG AND INVOLVED MINUTES. YEAH. FOR SURE. I DIDN'T CLOSELY REVIEW THE PARTS WHERE THE APPLICANT WAS SPEAKING, BUT I DID REVIEW THE PARTS WHERE THE BOARD SPOKE AND I THOUGHT THAT SHE ACCURATELY CAPTURED ALL OF THAT. SO MY HAT'S OFF TO HER. THERE WAS A LOT TO RECORD, SO THANK YOU. BUT I HAVE NO CHANGES. I SECOND THAT SENTIMENT. IN WHICH CASE THEN IN WHICH CASE HEARING NONE. LET ME MOVE. APPROVAL AS AS PRESENTED. THANK YOU. COULD YOU CALL THE ROLL? NEXT. WE NEED A SECOND. OH, I'LL. SECOND. SECOND. YOU SECOND. THE SENTIMENT, BUT NOT THE. YES, MR. ITEM. YES, MR. MALLET. YES. MR. DAVY. YES. MR. HENSON. YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH FOUR VOTES IN FAVOR OF THE MINUTES. AS PRESENTED. STAFF, IF THERE ARE ANY ADDITIONS OR[IV. Additions or corrections to the agenda]
CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING. THERE ARE NOT. I JUST WANTED TO INTRODUCE EVERYONE TO KYLIE BLACKBURN. SHE IS A NEW PLANNER IN OUR DEPARTMENT, SO YOU WILL BE SEEING MORE OF HER. BUT YEAH, NO CHANGES OR ANYTHING TO THE AGENDA. WELCOME, WELCOME, MISS BLACKBURN. I THINK WE ALL, NOW THAT CHRIS AND STEVE WERE HIGHLIGHTED IN THE MATERIALS PUT OUT BY THE CITY. I KNOW THERE'S MAYBE NOW THEY'RE TOO IMPORTANT TO SHOW UP HERE SINCE THEY THEY FEATURE IN. I THINK I'M SUPPOSED TO BE STEVE TONIGHT. ALRIGHT. THEY'VE HAD OTHER. I'M DELIGHTED YOU'RE BOTH HERE. ARE THERE ANY VISITORS FOR ITEMS? NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. HERE. SEEING NONE, I'D LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD. OH, ADMINISTER THE OATH TO ALL WITNESSES AND APPLICANTS WHO PLANNED TO ADDRESS THE BOARD THIS EVENING. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OUR FIRST CASE THIS EVENING IS ARB[VI. Cases]
77 2024 FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ALLOW THREE NEW SIGNS AT 29 SOUTH HIGH STREET FOR LETO. THE APPLICANT IS PRO SIGN STUDIO. ALL RIGHT. YES. SO THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ALLOW FOR THREE NEW SIGNS AT 29 SOUTH HIGH STREET. SO THIS IS THE BUILDING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT. AND IT IS SHARED SPACE. SO THERE'S ALSO GO YOGA NEW ALBANY VELO SIGNS AND BIKE VELO SCIENCE BIKE WORKS. AND SIMPLY COURTYARD. SO THESE ARE WHERE THE SIGNS ARE PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED. SO THE FIRST SIGN IS A WALL, FIRST PROPOSED SIGN IS A WALL SIGN AND WOULD BE ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION OF THE BUILDING. THE SIGN WILL READ LETO AND BE STUD MOUNTED ON THE WALL. THERE ARE EXISTING DOWNLIGHTS ON THE BUILDING OVER THE SIGN, AND THE SIGN WOULD BE 7.25FT■!S AND BE O INCHES THICK. THE SECOND PROPOSED SIGN IS A WALL SIGN. IT IS PROPOSED TO BE ON THE WEST ELEVATION OF THE BUILDING. THE SIGN WILL READ LETO AND BE STUD MOUNTED TO THE WALL. THERE ARE EXISTING DOWNLIGHTS ON THE BUILDING OVER THE SIGN, AND THE SIGN WOULD BE 10.84FT■!S AND A O INCHES THICK. AND THEN FOR THE THIRD PROPOSED SIGN, IT IS A PLAQUE SIGN. SO THIS IS PROPOSED TO BE ON THE EAST ELEVATION. ALSO READING LETO AND HAVING A DIRECTIONAL ARROW POINTING TO THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF THE BUILDING, THERE WOULD BE NO ILLUMINATION ON THE SIGN, AND IT WOULD BE 2.25FT■!S AND BE 0.75IN THICK. SO, GIVEN THAT THE SIGN COMPLEMENTS THE BUILDING'S ARCHITECTURAL STYLE AND THE VILLAGE CENTER AS A WHOLE, THE SUGGESTED WALL SIGN SIGNAGE SEEMS SUITABLE FOR THIS AREA. ALTHOUGH SEVERAL TENANTS SHARE THE PROPERTY, THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE DOES NOT SEEM TO COMPETE WITH THE ONES THAT ARE ALREADY THERE. THE SIGN SEEMS TO BE PLACED APPROPRIATELY BENEATH THE STRUCTURE DUE TO THE EXISTING DOWNLIGHTING, AND THE SIGN WILL ASSIST IN IDENTIFYING THE PROPERTY'S USE OF EACH FRONTAGE.BECAUSE IT IS SITUATED IN A BUILDING THAT FRONTS TWO PUBLIC ROADS AND A PUBLIC ALLEY, AND I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I HAVE A COUPLE. THANK YOU. DOES THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE REPLACE ANY OF THE SIGNAGE THAT IS CURRENTLY IN PLACE? THERE IS NO SIGNAGE ON
[00:05:02]
THE BUILDING FOR THIS SPECIFIC PART OF THE TENANTS. OKAY, SO THIS IS A VACANT SPACE THAT'S BEING ADDED TO THE OTHER THREE ALREADY THERE. BUT THEY DON'T HAVE SIGNAGE AT THE MOMENT.OKAY. AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION IS COULD YOU PLEASE GO BACK TO THE OTHER PHOTOS OF THE EXISTING SIGNS? YEP. IT'S I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE BUILDING AND WITH THESE SIGNS I DON'T RECALL THE GO YOGA SIGN BEING SIMILAR TO THE SIGNS AND THE SIMPLY QUOTED ONE, BUT MY QUESTION IS, THESE SIGNS ARE ALL GENERALLY WHAT I WOULD DESCRIBE AS SORT OF PLAQUE MOUNTED AND PRINTED AS OPPOSED TO INDIVIDUAL LETTERS. I DON'T FIND THE SIGNAGE OBJECTIONABLE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED. I'M JUST ASKING, I GUESS MYSELF AND THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, IF THAT CONSISTENCY IS, IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO CONSIDER. YEAH. SO IT'S STILL CONSIDERED A WALL SIGN AS THOSE THREE ARE ALSO CONSIDERED WALL SIGNS. SO THEY MEET THE SAME QUALIFICATIONS. IT'S JUST THAT THEY DON'T HAVE THAT BACKGROUND ON THEM. RIGHT. AND I THINK THAT'S THE QUESTION WHICH IS WHICH IS AND SO HELP ME FOR A SECOND, MAYBE WE CAN MAYBE I CA, AND MAYBE THE APPLICANT CAN HELP HER A LITTLE BIT. SO THIS THIS TENANT, THIS LIDO IS LIDO OR LIDO. I'VE BEEN SAYING LIDO. WE'RE GOING TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO SAY LIDO. HOW ABOUT THAT? ALL RIGHT. IT IS LIDO. THIS PART DOWN HERE, CORRECT? YES. OKAY.
AND THAT PART GOING NOW, MOVING BACK TO THE THREE SIGNS. CAN YOU MOVE FORWARD NOW TO THE TO THE THREE SIGNS HERE THAT WE THAT ARE BEING BEFORE US. SO BACK A FEW UP UP TO THE PICTURES OF THE SIGNS. OKAY. THERE'S THAT ONE. GO TO THE NEXT ONE AND THEN THE LAST ONE. OKAY. SO IS LIDO SPACE HERE? YES. OKAY. SO THERE IS AT LEAST YOU KNOW, ONE COULD LOOK AT IT. AND WHERE IS GO YOGA OFF.
THIS WAY. YES, YES. OKAY. THAT'S VILLA SCIENCE. THAT NEXT. OKAY. RIGHT THERE. THAT'S VILLA SCIENCE. THE WHOLE BRICK AREA. YEP. SO MY THOUGHT IS, IS THAT ONE COULD DISTINGUISH AT LEAST BASED UPON THE DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION AND SIDING MATERIAL TO POTENTIALLY JUSTIFY A DIFFERENT SIGN, DIFFERENT SIGNAGE MOTIF HERE. THEN OVER THIS WAY. THAT WOULD BE THE ONE THING I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT. AND SO I YOU KNOW, IT DIDN'T NECESSARILY I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE A BACKGROUND HERE AND THEN THE OTHER TWO SIGNS, ONE IS HERE AND THE OTHER ONE'S IN THE REVERSE. YEAH. IT'S AGAINST THE ALLEYWAY. SO IS THAT CAN YOU. I'M SORRY. CAN YOU I'M COMPETING LASER BEAMS HERE. BUT WILL THIS DOOR BE NOT? IS THAT NOT UTILIZED? AS FAR AS I'M AWARE, IT'S NOT FOR THE PUBLIC ENTRANCE AT LEAST. OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANDREW, I BELIEVE THE ENTRANCE IS OFF THIS TERRACE. OKAY, THERE'S A WHOLE TERRACE AREA HERE, AND THAT'S THERE. I'M NOT SURE THAT VILLA SCIENCE DOESN'T HAVE THIS PART OF THIS THAT MAY END HERE, BUT IT MAY ALSO MOVE OVER. BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A SIGN ON THE ON THE, ON THE ON THE FRAME, ON THE FRAME PART. THEIR SIGN IS ON THE BRICK PART. CORRECT. YEAH. AND YOGA IS TO THE RIGHT. TO THE RIGHT OF OR NORTH OF VILLA SCIENCE. SO I'M I'M OPEN TO MR. MALIK. I MEAN, MR. MALIK FEELS STRONGLY WE COULD, BUT I DON'T, I DON'T, I CAN I THINK I JUST WANTED TO ASK THE QUESTION. YEA, NO I DON'T, I LIKE, I LIKE THE DESIGN OF THE SIGN. THEY LOOK IT LOOKS NEW ALBANY. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE NEXT? GO TO THE NEXT PICTURE IMAGE.
THE NEXT ONE PLEASE. AND ONE MORE. YEAH. HAS THE LANDLORD APPROVED THIS WITH. THEY HAVE ALREADY PERMITTED OR APPROVED. COULD YOU COME TO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE? OH, YEAH.
PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF. SORRY. I'M SORRY. NO WORRIES. SEAN ALI, PRO SIGN STUDIO. YES.
THIS WAS ACTUALLY SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY THE LANDLORD PRIOR TO OUR SUBMISSION FOR A PERMIT.
SO THEY'RE NOT GOING TO. WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE OTHER SIGNAGE. AS FAR AS I'M AWARE, THIS IS THEIR SPACE AND THEIR SPACE AS FAR AS I KNOW. OKAY. WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. OKAY.
MAKE A MOTION. MR. ELLIOT. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. THANK YOU, MR. RYAN. I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE TO APPROVAL FOR A OR B77-20240. SECOND. MR. MALIK. YES, MR. DAVEY? YES. MR. EITAN.
YES. MR. HENSON? YES. MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE APPLICATION.
[00:10:05]
THANK YOU. OUR NEXT CASE IS A OR B 78 2024 FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ALLOW THREE NEW SIGNS AT THREE SOUTH HIGH STREET FOR PIED PIPER. THE APPLICANT IS PRO SIGN STUDIO.CAN WE HAVE STAFF REPORT PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. SO WITH THIS ONE THIS IS ALSO A SHARED SPACE BUILDING.
SO IT IS SHARED WITH AN ATTORNEY AT LAW OFFICE IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. AND THEN THIS IS WHERE THE PROPOSED SIGNS ARE GOING TO BE PLACED. ALL RIGHT. SO FOR THE FIRST PROPOSED SIGN IS A GROUND SIGN. THAT WOULD BE ON THE EAST FRONTAGE OF THE BUILDING AND THE STREET FRONT OF SOUTH HIGH STREET. THE SIGN WOULD READ PIED PIPER OF NEW ALBANY. RESET YOUR LIFE TO MUSIC AND HAVE AN ARROW DIRECTING PEOPLE TO PLEASE USE THE SIDE ENTRANCE. THERE WOULD BE NO ILLUMINATION ON THE SIDE, AND IT WOULD BE FIVE SQUARE FEET PER SIDE AND ONE INCH THICK, AND BE 66IN IN HEIGHT, AND THE SIGN WOULD ALSO BE LINED UP AS TO NOT CROSS OVER THE GRASS EDGE. FOR THE NEXT LINE, IT WOULD BE A WALL SIGN THAT WOULD BE LOCATED ON THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE BUSINESS OF THE SOUTH, ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION. IT WOULD READ PIED PIPER OF NEW ALBANY. WE SET YOUR LIFE TO MUSIC WHERE THERE WOULD BE NO ILLUMINATION ON THE SIGN. IT WOULD BE TWO SQUARE FEET AND WOULD BE ONE INCH THICK, WITH ONE FOURTH INCH STUD MOUNTS ON THE WALL, AND THEN FOR THE THIRD PROPOSED SIGN, IT WOULD BE A BLADE SIGN THAT WOULD BE PLACED ON THE NORTH ELEVATION OF THE BUILDING FRONTING MAIN STREET. THE SIGN WOULD READ PIED PIPER OF NEW ALBANY. WE SET YOUR LIFE TO MUSIC AND HAVE AN ARROW DIRECTING PEOPLE TO PLEASE USE THE SIDE ENTRANCE, AND THERE WOULD BE NO ILLUMINATION ON THE SIDE. IT WOULD BE 4.33FT■!S AND TWO INCHES THICK, AND THE SIGN HAS AN 89 INCH CLEARANCE. THE CODE DOES REQUIRE AN 8 FOOT OR 96 INCH CLEARANCE, AND STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL REQUIRING THE APPLICANT TO JUST MOVE THE SIGN TO THE BASE OF THE ROOF TO MEET THE CLEARANCE REQUIREMENT. TO THE APPLICANT IS THAT IS DOING THAT ANY PROBLEM? IT'S IT PRESENTS A CHALLENGE BECAUSE TO MEET THE CRITERIA FOR A BLADE SIGN, WE HAD TO MAKE THE SIGN A LITTLE BIT LARGER THAN WE'D LIKE. SO I ACTUALLY ADDED HEIGHT TO IT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT. THAT'S SET FORTH IN THE SIGN CODE. I WOULD I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO MAKE IT SHORTER TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT. I DID HAVE THAT ORIGINALLY, BUT I WAS I WAS TOLD IT WAS PROBABLY BEST TO EXTEND THE LENGTH TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WOULD FIT WITHIN THE SIGN CODE.
OKAY, SO THAT BY GOING AS FAR IN TERMS OF HOW FAR OUT FROM THE BUILDING IT IS, IS THAT IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? IT'S A IT'S A I'M SORRY, IT'S A 24 INCH SIGN. SO IT'S ONLY THIS BIG. YEAH. WE WERE REQUESTED TO ADD LENGTH TO IT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR THIS WHITE.
YEAH. THIS WIDE. WE WANT TO GO. OKAY. YEAH. SO ORIGINALLY I THINK WE HAD DRAWN UP WITHOUT THE TAGLINE IN THE MIDDLE. SO IT BASICALLY JUST HAD THE LOGO. AND PLEASE USE THE SIDE ENTRANCE WITH THE ARROW. BUT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR AN ACTUAL BLADE SIGN, I WAS TOLD WE NEEDED TO MAKE IT TALLER. OKAY. WELL, I MEAN, I GUESS ONE QUESTION IS AND THAT'S KIND OF THE REASON WHY IT'S NOT UNDER THE 96 INCH REQUIREMENT. SO THE I SUPPOSE THE QUESTION FOR THE BOARD IS IN 89 IS STILL PRETTY HIGH. WE COULD GRANT A WAIVER IF WE DIDN'T LIKE IT. IF WE IF WE DIDN'T, IF WE DIDN'T LIKE THE APPEARANCE OF IT RIGHT NEXT TO THE ROOF. I MEAN, THE OTHER THE OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE WHAT'S THE WHAT IS THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE SIGN WHERE IT IS NOW AND THE ROOF? THE 89IN IS THE PROPOSED ONE. IT'S SEVEN, SO THERE'S SEVEN INCHES FROM THE ROOF. SO BASICALLY TO GET TO 96 THEY'D HAVE TO MOVE IT UP SEVEN INCHES, WHICH WOULD PUT IT RIGHT AT THE ROOF. COULD WE BE VERY CLOSE IF WE MET THE ROOF LINE. YEAH. BEFORE WE TRY TO MANAGE THAT SOLUTION, CAN COULD WE BACK UP TO A COUPLE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT IMPACT THAT? FIRST IS THAT SIGN WOULD YOU MIND GOING BACK TO THE PHOTO THAT SHOWS THE BLADE SIGN PLEASE. THANK YOU. IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THE I CAN NEVER USE THIS. THIS SIGN IS ON THE SAME SURFACE AS THE WALL SIGN NEXT TO THE DOOR. NO. SO THE WALL SIGN IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE OTHER LONG SIDE OF THE. OH, OKAY. ON THE EAST SIDE. ON THE EAST SIDE ITSELF. SOUTH SIDE. THIS IS THE NORTH. SOUTH? YES. YES. YES. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. DIRECTIONALLY CHALLENGED TONIGHT. SO MY THEN COULD YOU PLEASE GO TO THE FRONT IMAGE. YES I KNOW WHERE THAT ONE IS. AND THEN THE NOW NOW I SEE. AND THEN THIS ONE. OKAY. SO MY QUESTION FOR THE BOARD IS WE HAVE AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF
[00:15:02]
SIGN CLUTTER ON THIS BUILDING. I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO SAY IT, BUT THE EXISTING SIGN OVER THE FRONT DOOR, THE BLADE SIGN ADJACENT TO IT, BOTH VISIBLE. OBVIOUSLY, I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT CORNER IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC AND VISIBILITY. SO I GET IT. BUT NOW WE'RE GOING TO INTRODUCE A DISSIMILAR SIGN SORT OF FOLLOWING MY CURSOR DOWN THE OTHER SIDE TO THE CORNER.AND THEN WHEN YOU'RE COMING UP HIGH STREET YOU WILL SEE THAT OTHER SIDE ENTRANCE. AND THAT SIGN. I THINK THIS IS A MASTERCLASS IN NOT HOW TO PLAN SIGNAGE FOR A BUILDING. IF I MA.
AND I THINK WE HAVE TO ASK OURSELVES WHETHER WE HAVE ANY LICENSE OR JURISDICTION TO DISCUSS PLACEMENT OF THESE. BECAUSE MY FIRST QUESTION IS ON THE HIGH STREET SIGN, THE LAST OF THE THREE SIGNS. IT MAY BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE IT BE A WALL SIGN THAN A BLADE SIGN. I THINK HANGING A 24 BY 24, I KNOW THAT AREA AS WELL. AND 89IN IS CERTAINLY GOOD FOR HEAD CLEARANCE, BUT IT'S AWFULLY UNCOMFORTABLE VISUALLY. I MEAN, IT'S THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT SOFFIT IS ALREADY DISPROPORTIONATELY LOW FOR THAT BUILDING. AND SO WE'RE, WE'RE REALLY CALLING ATTENTION TO IT. AND THE LAST CONCERN I'LL EXPRESS IS I'D REALLY LIKE TO WE'VE DONE THIS WITH I THINK IT WAS UP ON THE FURTHER UP ON HIGH STREET TO CONSIDER REMOVING COLOR FROM THE SIGN ITSELF AND JUST GOING WITH A MORE MONOCHROMATIC SIGN TO REDUCE SOME OF THE VISUAL CLUTTER. I DON'T KNOW IF THE APPLICANT WOULD BE OPEN TO THAT, BUT I'D LIKE TO AT LEAST PUT THAT QUESTION OUT THERE TOO. SO I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS I'D LIKE TO BRING UP ON THIS ONE. IT'S AN IMPORTANT CORNER, AND I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN TREATED AS SUCH, IF I MAY, TO ADDRESS THE COLOR ISSUE, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE A MUCH MORE COLORFUL LOGO. THIS BUSINESS HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE IN TENNESSEE SINCE THE 1960S, SO THIS IS THEIR ORIGINAL LOGO.
THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO BRING UP A LIKE A YOU KNOW, A SECONDARY STORE HERE IN OHIO. IT WAS MISS LEVINE'S FATHER'S BUSINESS, I BELIEVE. SO SHE'S TRYING TO OPEN UP THE BACK OF THE STORE FOR THE MUSIC SECTION AS WELL, BECAUSE THEY DON'T USE THAT. SO WE DID TAKE IT DOWN. I MEAN, IT HAD RED, BLUE, YELLOW, GREEN, ALL KINDS OF COLORS IN THAT JESTER CHARACTER THAT THEY USE FOR THEIR LOGO. SO WE DID MINIMIZE IT DOWN TO A LIMIT OF FOUR COLORS. AND WE HAVE BLACK, WHITE IN THE BACKGROUND, AND WE LIMIT IT TO PURPLE AND YELLOW TO GIVE IT JUST A LITTLE BIT OF LIFE. I THINK THAT IF YOU TAKE ALL THE COLOR OUT OF IT, IT KIND OF GETS RID OF THE SOME OF THE FRIENDLINESS THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO PORTRAY, IN MY OPINION. BUT AGAIN, THAT'S CERTAINLY UP TO YOU GUYS. IF YOU WANT TO TRY TO RESTRICT THEM FOR, FOR NOT USING THOSE COLORS. THANK, THANK YOU FOR THE EXPLANATION. ANY THOUGHTS FOR THE POST AS WE'RE SEEING IT IN BLACK TO MATCH THE SIGN, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO BLACK OR GRAY IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. AND THERE'S JUST THERE'S A LOT GOING ON. WELL, AND AGAIN, ORIGINALLY WE DID HAVE ALL THE PANELS BEING WHITE.
I KNOW THE PREFERENCE IS TO HAVE A DARK BACKGROUND. SO THE REASON THAT WE SUGGESTED A WHITE POST IS THAT WITH THAT DARK FRONTAGE ON THAT BUILDING, IT KIND OF GETS LOST. JUST LOOK, IF I IF YOU CAN IMAGINE THAT POST BEING BLACK OTHER THAN THE WHITE WINDOWS, YOU REALLY COULD MISS IT VERY EASILY. BUT IF THAT'S A REQUIREMENT, I MEAN, I'M SURE THAT I COULD CONVINCE THEM TO GO WITH A BLACK POST IF YOU PREFER, VERSUS THE WHITE. AGAIN, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO DRAW ATTENTION THAT SHOULD SOMEBODY PARK OUT ON THE FRONT PART OF THIS BUILDING, THAT THEY'RE TO USE THE SIDEWALK TO GO TO THE SIDE ENTRANCE AND NOT, YOU KNOW, THE FRONT ENTRANCE TO THE LAW FIRM IS WHAT I THINK IT'S 45 NORTH HIGH. THERE. THAT SIGN COULD BE LOWER, COULDN'T IT? I BELIEVE IT'S PERMITTED TO BE LOWER THAN THE HEIGHT IT IS RIGHT NOW. WE COULD PROBABLY. YEAH. OKAY. SURE. SO I THOUGHT WE DID THAT ON ANOTHER APPROVAL. I AGREE WITH THE COLOR OF THE POST, BY THE WAY. I DO THINK IT JUST ADDS ANOTHER LAYER THAT IS PROBABLY PART OF THE CONCERNS I'M EXPRESSING. AND THEN AS FAR AS THE BLADE SIGN IN THE BACK, I MEAN, IF IT'S AN OPTION AND IT WOULD ALSO HELP IF THE CLEARANCE ISSUE, I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE, IS YOUR CONCERN MORE WITH THE WITH THE GROUND CLEARANCE ISSUE FROM THE SIDEWALK TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SIGN, OR IS IT THE OVERALL HEIGHT OF THE SIGN TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF THE SIGN CODE? I THINK IT IS BOTH OKAY. IT'S OVERSIZE FOR THE CONDITION. YOU'RE ALMOST. I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY A TWO FOOT SOFFIT. AND YOU'RE YOU'RE TAKING UP THE FULL WIDTH OF IT. YEAH. SO YOU'RE YOU'RE YOUR SIGN IS, IS THERE'S NOT A LOT OF AIR BETWEEN THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING AND THE SIGN AND THAT SIDEWALK. IT'S A NARROW SIDEWALK GOING UPHILL WHERE THE CLEARANCE GETS LOWER AS YOU TRAVEL. I THINK IT'S JUST
[00:20:01]
A VISUAL OBSTRUCTION. AND EVERY IN EVERY WAY. SO I APPRECIATE THE SENSITIVITY TO RAISING IT, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE. I THINK IT'S TOO BIG, IT'S IN THE WRONG LOCATION, AND I THINK IT WILL COMPROMISE THE SIDEWALK. A POSSIBLE OPTION BE TO MOUNT THAT, A SIMILAR SIGN TO THE WALL ADJACENT TO THE HOUSE. AND I WAS GOING TO ASK STAFF IF THEY I DON'T RECALL WHETHER THAT'S PERMITTED. I WAS ALSO GOING TO ASK WHETHER WE COULD PERMIT A SMALLER AREA OF SIGNAGE FOR THAT CONDITION. YOU KNOW, REDUCE IT DOWN TO 20IN SQUARE INSTEAD OF 24. WOULD THAT HELP? I DON'T KNOW, I'D ALMOST WANT TO SEE IT. BUT WHAT'S THE QUESTION? THE OTHER SIGN. WHAT'S THE SIZE OF THIS SIGN? IT'S ROUGHLY ABOUT THE SAME SIZE 24 BY 24. YEAH.SOMEWHERE IN THAT IT'S A COUPLE INCHES OFF ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. BUT THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR. SO WE WERE TRYING TO KEEP IT SIMILAR FRONT TO BACK. I KNOW THAT BECAUSE OF THE GRADE GOING UPHILL, YOU EVEN HAVE LESS CLEARANCE THERE. BUT I DON'T THINK I THINK THE PLANNING BOARD COMES AROUND THE CORNER THERE. IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, ON THE FRONT. YEAH. SO YOU'RE NOT WALKING UNDERNEATH IT AS MUCH AT THAT POINT. BUT IF IT'S TURNED. BUT I DON'T REMEMBER. THE OTHER CHALLENGE WE WERE TRYING TO OVERCOME IS OBVIOUSLY THEIR LOGO IS MUCH WIDER THAN IT IS TALL.
YEAH. SO WHEN YOU START REDUCING THE WIDTH, IT GETS VERY SMALL AND VERY HARD TO READ.
ESPECIALLY, I DON'T KNOW, I'LL WELCOME THE COMMENTS OF THE REST OF THE BOARD. I THINK I'VE SAID MY PIECE, THE ONE THAT'S ADJACENT TO THE DOOR IS 12 BY 24. AND IT JUST IT FEELS A LITTLE BETTER. IT'S LIKE IF WE CAN AT LEAST MAYBE MAKE THE SIGNS ALL TIE IN. OH, FEEL, FEEL SIMILAR, THEN YOU DON'T HAVE THREE DIFFERENT SIGNS, THREE DIFFERENT SIZES. YEAH. THIS IS BASICALLY WHAT WE PROPOSED ORIGINALLY. AND THEN WE RECTIFIED IT TO MAKE IT TALLER.
YEAH I PERSONALLY WOULD PREFER TO HAVE IT THE SAME SIZE AND APPROVE IN ALL LOCATIONS THAT SIGN ON THE OTHER. YEAH. IN ALL LOCATIONS. YEAH. I, I WOULD, I WOULD SAY EVEN. YEAH THE POST IT WOULD LOOK LESS IS MORE. YEAH. AT LEAST YOU HAVE THREE CONSISTENT. AT LEAST IT'S CONSISTENT. YEAH. SO THREE DIFFERENT SIZES. IF THAT WAS THE CASE WOULD WE BE ALLOWED TO ADD THE DIRECTIONAL ARROW BELOW IT. GIVE IT A LITTLE EXTRA SPACE FOR THE ARROW AND LIKE POINTING TOWARDS THE ENTRANCES JUST TO HELP WITH THE NEED. THE QUOTE AND THE ARROW DIRECTIONAL. WELL, THE QUOTE IS PART OF THEIR BRANDING, AND I COULD POSSIBLY MAKE THAT SMALLER IF IT'S A CONCERN. I THINK THE PRIMARY GOAL IS OBVIOUSLY TO IDENTIFY THE BUSINESS AS THE PIED PIPER.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT'S THE NUMBER ONE THING THAT NEEDS TO BE RELEVANT ON THE SIGN. I THINK THE OTHER CONCERN IS, GIVEN THAT KIND OF ODD POSITION THAT THAT BUILDING IS IN, YOU HAVE THAT SIDE ALLEY DIRECTLY BEHIND IT. YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE CORNER, THE INTERSECTION UP FRONT, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE SIDE SIDEWALK. SO SHE'S JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO KNOW THAT IT'S NOT THE ENTRANCE ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, IT'S ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING. IS THIS I PRESUME? THE ANSWER IS YES. THE BUILDING IS PERMITTED TO HAVE FIVE SIGNS.
IT'S THE CODE READS THAT THEY CAN HAVE THREE DIFFERENT SIGN TYPES. SO THAT'S WHY IT WAS SUGGESTED TO CHANGE IT TO A BLADE SIGN, BECAUSE THE SIGN THAT'S ALREADY EXISTING ON THE BUILDING IS A BLADE SIGN. AND WITH THE GROUND SIGN, THEY WOULD BE AT THE THREE TOTAL. BUT THERE'S FIVE CURRENTLY ON THE BUILDING. SO WHAT IS THE LIMIT FOR THE BUILDING ITSELF IS I GUESS MY QUESTION. I DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS. IS IT STRICTLY BASED ON TENANT SPACES? YEAH. I DON'T THINK WE NECESSARILY. WELL, YOU'VE GOT THE I BELIEVE IF MEMORY SERVES THEY ALLOW NUMBER OF SIGNS BASED ON THE ENTRANCES. AND THERE ARE TWO ENTRANCES ON THIS SIDE OF THE BUILDING, ONE ON THE FRONT. YEAH. SO IT'S ONE PER BUSINESS ENTRANCE, ONE PER BUSINESS FOR A BLADE SIGN. SO YOU'VE GOT THE BLADE SIGN FOR THE WALL YOU GUYS. SO LET ME LOOK AT THE OTHER ONES. WE KNOW LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, THE MARKET SQUARE BUILDING THERE THAT WE'VE GOT LOTS OF SIGNS. SO IT HAS TO BE. YEAH. NO. AND I WAS TRYING TO RECALL WHETHER IT WAS PER TENANT SPACE OR PER BUILDING AREA. I DON'T REMEMBER THE CODE THAT THAT WAS JUST MORE OF AN INCIDENTAL QUESTION. YEAH. AND SAME WITH WALL. YOU CAN HAVE ONE PER ENTRANCE. SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, TWO DIFFERENT SIGNS. SO YOU BOTH CAN HAVE ONE PER ENTRANCE. I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE DO LOOK AT YOU KNOW, IF SOMETHING IS OVER SIGNED OR BUT YEAH, THEY ARE. SO AM I HEARING. WELL A COUPLE THINGS I DO KNOW THAT THAT THAT FROM AT LEAST LOOKING AT GOOGLE STREET VIEW THE LAWYER SIGN THERE, THE AMY LEVINE SIGN IS IN FACT FLUSH WITH THE WITH THE SOFFIT. YES IT IS. AND SO AGAIN,
[00:25:05]
IT MAY BE IT MAY MAKE SOME SENSE BUT BUT BUT THEY LOOK THE SAME. THEN YOU WONDER IF YOU REALLY WANT THE SAME DIMENSIONS. AND AMY LEVINE SIGN IS NOT MUST WE MUST HAVE GRANTED A WAIVER OR OR MAYBE IT WAS. IT WAS AN EXISTING SIGN THAT GOT REPLACED BECAUSE IT IS NOT IT WOULD NOT SEEM TO MATCH THE ONE THAT IS BEING PROPOSED THAT THE STAFF IS SAYING HAS TO BE HAS TO BE THE DIMENSIONS HERE. CORRECT? SORRY. WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION? SO I'M THINKING THAT THAT THAT IF WHAT WE SAY IS AND I THINK I HEARD MR. MALLINSON, MAYBE MR. HENSON SAY THAT WE'D LIKE THESE BLADE SIGNS TO MATCH IN TERMS OF THEIR PROPORTIONS AND PROBABLY THEIR PLACEMENT. BECAUSE IF THE IF THE ONE UP FRONT IS RIGHT UP WITH THE SOFFIT, THE ONE IN THE BACK SHOULD BE RIGHT UP WITH THE SOFFIT. I TOTALLY AGREE. AND IF WE NEED TO GRANT A WAIVER SO THAT THE SO THAT THE DIMENSION CAN BE CAN BE THE SAME, I'D BE PREPARED TO GRANT A WAIVER ON THIS SIGN SO THAT THEY COULD MATCH. WHAT ARE YOUR I MEAN THAT'S A REASONABLE POSITION. WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE OTHER TWO SIGNS IN TERMS OF THE QUESTION THAT MR. HENSON ASKED ABOUT MATCHING ALL OF THEM, BECAUSE THAT WOULD THEN DRIVE THE SIGNAGE FOR THE FRONT AND THE DOOR. WELL, YOU KNOW, DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO MAKE THE ONE NEXT TO THE DOOR MATCH OR IS THAT A SEPARATE. WELL, I MEAN, I THINK IT DOES, CONSIDERING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A BUILDING THAT IS BARELY 1500 SQUARE FEET AND IT HAS IT WILL HAVE FIVE SIGNS ON IT. SO WHAT WHAT WHAT WOULD YOU I WOULD JUST PREFER TO SEE THEM ALL BE CONSISTENT IN SIZE AND PROPORTION FOR THE FRONT POST IT COULD BE A LITTLE LOWER SIGN 24 BY OR 20 BY 20. POSSIBLY ADD THE LENGTH TO THAT ONE AS WELL. IF WE IF WE MATCH THE EXISTING LEVINE BLADE SIGN. YES. WHICH YOU'RE SAYING IS SLIGHTLY SMALLER, YOU THINK IT'S WITHIN A COUPLE INCHES ONE WAY, THOUGH, I'D HAVE TO LAY A TAPE MEASURE ON IT, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, BUT IT'S PRETTY CLOSE. ALL RIGHT. I MYSELF WOULD LIKE TO MATCH THE EXISTING BLADE SIGN SIZE AND BRING IT TO THE CEILING OR THE EAVE AS IT IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE LEVINE SIGN.AND THESE TWO SIGNS. THIS SIGN SHOULD MATCH THE FRONT IN MY OPINION, SHOULD MATCH THE FRONT HANGING SIGN, AND THE POST SHOULD MATCH. YEAH, I AGREE, THEY SHOULD. THEY SHOULD. THEY SHOULD MATCH. ALL RIGHT. SO IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, PLACEMENT SHOULD MATCH THE ANGLED BLADE SIGN ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. THE AMY LEVINE SIGN. AND THEN THIS ONE. YOU'RE OKAY WITH THE SIZE HERE. AND YOU WANT TO REDUCE THE SIZE ON THE POST. YES. SIGN UP FRONT. AND YEAH, I'D LIKE TO SEE THE POST MATCH THE SIGN. OKAY, I AGREE THE DARK COLOR AND MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T ENCROACH ON THE SIDEWALK. OF COURSE. YES, WE'LL KEEP IT. YEAH, I'M TRYING TO KEEP IT RIGHT OVER THE FLOWERBEDS AND NOT, YOU KNOW, IT'S A HAZARD TO ANYBODY. SO NOW LOOKING AT THE STAFF IN TERMS OF THE OBVIOUSLY WITH THE BLADE SIGN, WE NEED TO GIVE THEM A WAIVER BECAUSE IT WON'T BE CODE RIGHT. YES. WELL WHAT. OKAY. IF YOU WANT IT TO BE THE SAME DIMENSIONS AS THE OTHER BLADE SIGN, IT SHOULD MATCH. BECAUSE THAT BLADE SIGN DID RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. IT DID NOT RECEIVE A WAIVER AND NO WAIVER WAS NECESSARY. I RECALL THAT OKAY. YEAH. WE KNOW IT WAS FROM 2017. WE DIDN'T SEE A WAIVER FOR THAT. OH IS THIS IT RIGHT HERE.
THIS IS THE SUBMITTAL. BUT THEY HAD APPROVED TWO OF THE THREE SIGNS. AND THE ONE SIGN WAS THE.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE DIMENSIONS WERE. YEAH. SO THE BLADE SIGN IS 25 BY 32IN OKAY. SO OURS IS 24 BY 26. SO I CAN PUT IT UP TO INCREASE THE SIZE JUST A LITTLE BIT. NOT MUCH. ALL RIGHT. SO WE DON'T NEED A WAIVER. SO WHAT WE'RE TELLING JUST SAY MATCH THE EXISTING CORNER SIGN. YEAH I'LL LET MR. TAKE THIS MOTION. OH PLEASE. THIS IS ABOVE MY PAY GRADE OKAY. SO ARE WE REAL QUICK JUST TO HAMMER IT HOME. SO THAT SIGN'S GETTING BIGGER. THE OTHER ONES ARE GETTING BIGGER.
SMALLER. THE OTHER ONES ARE GETTING SMALLER. WELL, THE FRONT SIGN ON HIGH STREET IS GETTING SMALLER TO MATCH THE DIMENSIONS. THE DOOR SIGN IS THE SAME. THOSE TWO MATCH AND THE BLADE SIGN.
I'M SORRY. THE BLADE SIGN ON SOUTH HIGH STREET SIGN. SEE? THAT'S CURRENTLY 24 BY 26. AND THE OTHER SIGN IS BIGGER. IT'S 25 BY 30, 32. OH, I SEE THE PROBLEM. IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK.
[00:30:09]
IT'S BECAUSE THAT SIGN IS MOUNTED AT A 45 DEGREE ANGLE TO THE CORNER. SO IT'S TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE IT IS MOUNTING OF THE HYPOTENUSE OF THE TRIANGLE. YEAH. SO THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK FOR US BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS GOOD CALL. WE'RE TRYING TO NARROW IT.SO HERE'S HERE WOULD BE ANOTHER WAY TO ASK THE QUESTION. AND THIS MAY NOT ALLOW US TO APPROVE IT THIS EVENING, BUT WE SHOULD PROBABLY FIGURE OUT WHAT THE CLEAR DIMENSION IS FROM THAT CORNER TO THE WALL TO THE CORNER. AND THEN HOW MUCH FURTHER BACK FROM THE SOFFIT IS, AND THEN MATCH THAT DIMENSION. DETERMINE TO DETERMINE THE WIDTH OF THE PROPOSED SIGN. MATCH THE WIDTH OF THE SOFFIT, THE CLEARANCES, THE CLEARANCES SHOULD DICTATE THE WIDTH OF THE SIGN. THE SIGN ITSELF THAT THAT WOULD ALLOW IT TO LOOK CONSISTENT WITH THE ONE ON THE CORNER. WE COULD SAY THAT AND SAY SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL, WE COULD DO THAT FOR SURE. I'M GOING TO GET ROPED INTO THIS ANSWER. YES YOU ARE. YOU'RE ON A ROLL. I'LL I'LL I'LL TAKE A STAB AT IT HARD LAST TIME ANDREW, YOU I WILL TAKE A MAKE A MOTION FOR. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. LET ME GET BACK TO THE AGENDA FOR APPLICATION A OR B 78 2024 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THREE NEW SIGNS AT THREE SOUTH HIGH STREET WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. AND DID THESE SIGNS HAVE A, A, B, C NUMBER TO THEM? THANK YOU. REGARDING SIGN A. IT SHOULD MATCH. SIGN A SHOULD MATCH THE SIZE OF PROPOSED SIGN B OKAY. AND THE POST SHOULD MATCH THE BLACK OF THE SIGN. OKAY. AND IF AGREEABLE TO THE REST OF THE BOARD, I'D LIKE TO ASK THAT IT BE LOWERED FROM WHAT I BELIEVE IS. IS IT 66IN? YES. TO 48? IS THAT IS THAT TOO LOW TO CLEAR THE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LIKE THIS HIGH TO THE TOP OF THE POST. THAT'S PRETTY LOW. OR MAYBE JUST TO GET IT DOWN TO LIKE 60IN. I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE CLEARANCE WITH THE WINDOW AND EVERYTHING ELSE BEYOND. SO I'LL, I'LL RECOMMEND 60. AND IF ANYONE WANTS TO DISCUSS, WE CAN AND THEN FINALLY REGARDING SIGN SEE THE SIZE, THE WIDTH OF THE SIGN SHOULD MATCH.
THE WIDTH OF THE SIGN SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY MATCHING THE CLEARANCE OF THE EXISTING AMY LEVINE SIGN, MEASURED FROM THE NORTH EAST CORNER OF THE BUILDING TO THE OUTSIDE CORNER OF THE ROOF EAVE, DIAGONALLY ALONG THE DIRECTION OF THE SIGN. I BELIEVE THAT WOULD SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL, OF COURSE. AND TO BE CLEAR. SO I'M JUST MAKING SURE NO GO AHEAD. I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY. SO YOU'RE SAYING WHEN YOU SAY CLEARANCE, YOU'RE SAYING THE FROM THE OUTSIDE EDGE OF THE SOFFIT. I'LL GIVE MAYBE AN EXAMPLE. COULD HELP IF THE SIGN IF THE SIGN WIDTH WAS 25IN THE.
LET'S BEAR WITH ME ONE MINUTE HERE. SO IT'S ABOUT THE LENGTH THE IN THE DIRECTION OF THAT SIGN IS, IS MORE THAN LIKELY ABOUT 31IN ALONG THE, THE FROM THE OUTSIDE CORNER TO OUTSIDE CORNER ALONG THE ROOF. IF THE IF THE SOFFIT IS TWO FEET, IT'S MORE THAN LIKELY CLOSE TO 30 31IN. SO IF IT IS, THEN WHATEVER THE REMAINING DISTANCE WOULD BE PROBABLY THREE INCHES OF CLEARANCE. YOU KNOW, JUST DOING SOME SIMPLE MATH IN MY HEAD, THREE INCHES ON THE INSIDE, BETWEEN THE OUTSIDE, THE OUTSIDE CORNER OF THE HOUSE OF THE BUILDING AND THE INNERMOST EDGE OF THE SIGN, AND THEN THREE INCHES FROM THE OUTSIDE ROOF EAVE BACK TO THE OUTSIDE EDGE OF THE SIGN. WHATEVER THAT DIMENSION IS, ARE YOU ALSO SAYING 1 OR 2? WELL, NO THANK YOU. I'M SAYING THAT THE DIMENSION. WE'LL HAVE TO. SORRY ABOUT THAT. THAT TWO. YEAH THAT DIMENSION. BUT IT'S ALSO CLEAR HERE TOO. WELL IN THAT CASE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A WALL SIGN.
IT'S GOING TO BE A HANGING SIGN BECAUSE WE HAVE TO ATTACH IT TO THE WALL. NO, NO I'M SORRY. IS IT IS IT ACTUALLY FLUSH TO THE WALL. YES. OKAY. THEN I WOULD FOLLOW THE SAME, WHICH IS WHAT THE SIGN UP FRONT IS ACTUALLY. YES, I WOULD FOLLOW THAT. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. SO IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE THAT DIMENSION. SO ARE YOU SAYING IN, ARE YOU SAYING, WELL, LET'S SEE IF I CAN POSSIBLY MATCH THE MOUNT TO THE WALL AND THEN MATCH WHATEVER DISTANCE IT IS FROM THE EDGE OF THE CORNER? THAT CLEARANCE FROM EDGE OF SOFFIT TO EDGE OF SIGN? YES. SHOULD BE MATCHED WITH THE NEW SIGN. YEAH. IF THAT'S FIVE INCHES. YES, IT SHOULD BE FIVE INCHES. SIGN GOES. YES. WE'RE STILL OKAY TO MATCH. FLUSH TO THE WALL, CORRECT? YES. OKAY. AND IT SHOULD BE AT THE SAME
[00:35:01]
HEIGHT. SAME HEIGHT BELOW THE SOFFIT AS THE AMY LEVINE SITE. SO MATCH HEIGHT DEFINED A TRIANGLE AND THE OTHER ONE GOES OUT THIS WAY AND YOU HAVE A RIGHT TRIANGLE. WONDER YOU WANT IT OUT THAT FAR. YES. BASICALLY. YEAH. BUT YOU LOST ME WHEN YOU STARTED SAYING HYPOTENUSE. I'M TRYING TO. IT'S LIKE HOW AM I EXPLAINING THIS ONE TO COUNSEL? THAT'S WHY I WAS THROWING A COSINE THERE. THIS IS WHY WE COMMUNICATE THROUGH DRAWINGS, RIGHT? EXACTLY. THIS IS NOT MY STRONG SUIT. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, WOULD THAT KEEP IT AT THE 89 INCH HEIGHT THAT IT'S AT OR HIGHER OR HIGHER? YEAH, I THINK IT WILL BE HIGHER WHEN IT'S ALL SAID AND DONE. BUT YEAH, I WOULD SAY IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BE OUT, WHAT IS REQUIRED OF CODE THAT MAY NEED TO BE A CONDITION. YEAH. SO WHAT I'LL DO IS I'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND REMEASURE JUST TO KIND OF VERIFY WHAT THE GAP IS. OKAY. NOW BRING IT UP THERE WITH THE NEW SIZE OF THE SIGN. AND IF IT DOES REQUIRE ACTION, CAN WE TAKE ACTION ON JUST THAT SIGN IF THAT IF NEED BE. SO THE OTHER SIGNS COULD STILL PROCEED IF NECESSARY? WELL, IF IT'S NECESSARY THAT THAT WE GRANT A WAIVER OKAY. TELL ME IT'S NOT GOING TO BE MORE THAN A COUPLE INCHES OKAY. LITERALLY LIKE 2 OR 3IN DIFFERENCE MAYBE. I'M JUST NOT SURE UNTIL I ACTUALLY GET IT. OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH. DID DID I PROVIDE YOU WITH ANY REASONABLE KIND OF MOTION? IF YOU COULD RESTATE IT, THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE GREAT. I'LL TRY. REGARDING SIGN. SEE. SO JUST FOR SEE. YEAH. OKAY. SO SIGN SEE SHOULD MATCH THE SHOULD BE WALL MOUNTED AS TIGHT TO THE SOFFIT AS THE EXISTING AMY LEVINE SIGN.AND THE WIDTH SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY MEASURING THE EXISTING SIGN FROM THE FURTHEST MOST EDGE OF THE ROOF EAVE TO THE OUTERMOST EDGE OF THE SIGN IS THAT. GET THERE. I THINK IT GETS I YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? I TRY TO COMMIT IT TO. AND SINCE IT'S NOW UP TO THE SOFFIT, IT'S IT BY DEFINITION SATISFIES WHAT YOU WANTED BECAUSE YOU THAT'S WHAT YOU TOLD ME THAT SHOULD BE.
AND THEN I WOULD IMAGINE, BECAUSE I MAY HAVE BEEN A LITTLE LOST, THIS WOULD STILL REMAIN A BLADE SIGN, CORRECT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT. BECAUSE IF IT TURNS INTO A PROJECTING SIGN, THEN THAT'S TOO MANY. OKAY. SO YES, BLADE SIGN. YES. UP SHOULD BE EIGHT FEET. THAT'S GOOD. YEP.
AND THE WIDTH SHOULD MATCH. THE OUTER EDGE OF THE WIDTH SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY MEASURING THE EXISTING SIGN FROM THE OUTERMOST POINT OF THE ROOF EAVE TO THE OUTSIDE EDGE OF THE SIGN, AND MATCHED ON THE PROPOSED SIGN. AND DON'T WORRY, WE CAN REDRAW ALL THAT AND RESUBMIT THIS ONE JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. MR. RIGHT. MADE ME DO THIS. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S DONE. I WOULD SECOND MR. MALIK'S MOTION WITH JOY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MR. MALIK? YES. MR. ITEM? YES, MR. DAVIS? YES, MR. HENSON? YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL. THANKS FOR YOUR HELP. THANK YOU ALL. THANK YOU. GET THAT RESUBMITTED AND ANY QUESTIONS? JUST REACH OUT TO US ONCE WE GET BACK. GREAT. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. YOU AS WELL. YOU TOO. IN OTHER
[VII. Other business]
BUSINESS, WE HAVE AN ATTENDANCE OF MEMBERS. RULE UPDATE. YEAH. SO THIS IS JUST AN FYI. SO CITY COUNCIL RECENTLY UPDATED CHAPTER 159, WHICH IS THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RULES AND PROCEDURES SECTION. SO THE WHITE TEXT SHOWS WHAT IT SAID TODAY. SO IT ESSENTIALLY SAYS ATTENDANCE OF ALL CURRENT SERVING MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION BOARD IS ENCOURAGED. AND THREE CONSECUTIVE ABSENCES BY ANY MEMBER OR FOR ABSENCES AT ANY 12 MONTH PERIOD SHALL BE CONSIDERED FORFEITURE OF THE MEMBERSHIP. SO ADDING A GROUNDS FOR THE FORFEITURE GIVES THE CITY COUNCIL A LITTLE BIT MORE DISCRETION AND FLEXIBILITY. WHAT ALSO CHANGES IS THE FORFEITURE WOULD OCCUR UNLESS THE COMMISSION BOARD MEMBERS ABSENCE IS EXCUSED AS DETERMINED IN THE SOLE DISCRETION OF CITY COUNCIL DUE TO AN ILLNESS, INJURY OR ANY OTHER EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE MEMBER OR IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER. SO ESSENTIALLY, YEAH, THIS JUST GIVES THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE DISCRETION BASED ON EXCUSED OR UNEXCUSED ABSENCES. AND IN A WAY, I'LL SAY THAT ON BEHALF OF COUNCIL, THEY ACTUALLY I THINK THE INTENTION FROM COUNCIL WAS TO TAKE IT A LITTLE LESS DISCRETIONARY. AND TO SAY THAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO BE UNIFORM IN NOT NOT IGNORING[00:40:04]
RECURRING ABSENCES ANYMORE. AND SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS KNOW, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IF THERE ARE EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES, YOU'RE EXCUSED IN ADVANCE, SOMETHING OBVIOUSLY AN ILLNESS. BUT THERE'S A LOT OF WELL, I'M TRAVELING FOR BUSINESS OR I WENT ON A VACATION OR THAT SORT OF THING, AND THEN WE'RE ALL LEFT WITH, WELL, WHICH PEOPLE DO WE EXCUSE AND WHICH DON'T WE? AND WE WANTED TO BE PRETTY CLEAR THAT THAT WON'T BE AS DISCRETIONARY TO US ANYMORE, THAT IT'S OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO IGNORE IT. RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT. IT'S GOING TO FLIP A LITTLE BIT MORE THE OTHER WAY NOW. OKAY. SO. DOES THAT MAKES SENSE? YEP. THANK YOU. THANK YO. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM OUR MEMBERS. IT'S ALWAYS A PLEASURE.ABSOLUTELY ABSOLUTELY A MOTION TO ADJOURN. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. I'LL SECOND.
MR. HANSON? YES. MR. MALIK? YES, MR. ITEM. YES. MR. DAVIS? YES. GOOD
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.