03/09/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PUBLIC HEARINGS PUBLIC HEARINGS ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG PROCIDURAL RULES 7:00 p.m. VARIANCE NO. 98-01 (Marta Crane) ' Filed by the Discovery Science Center to allow two tri-vision signs with two electronic reader boards; a cabinet sign; two signs projecting above the roof of the building; the number of informational items to exceed code on a freestanding sign; four changeable wall banners; and one inflatable roof top balloon located at 2500 North Main Street in the Professional (P) zoning district. LEGALLY NOTICED: Februazy 27, 1998 PUBLICLY NOTICED: February 27, 1998 RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution for Vaziance No. 98-O1 as conditioned which indicates the following: Wall Mounted signs Approves a variance from Section 41-860.a.3 and 41-863.e.4 to allow two tri-vision signs with two electronic reader boards. 2. Approves a variance from Section 41-863.e.7 to allow a cabinet sign. 3. Denies a vaziance from Section 41-863.d.3 to allow two signs projecting above the roof of the building. Monument Sign ' 4. Approves a variance from Section 41-862.d.3 to allow the number of informational items to exceed code on a freestanding sign. Wall Banners 5. Approves a variance from Section 41-871.2 and 41-871.3 to allow four changeable wall banners. Temporary Inflatable Balloon 6. Approves a variance from Section 41-871.2 and 41-861.6 to allow one inflatable roof top balloon. Ms. Marta Crane, Assistant Planner II, displayed pictures of the proposed signs, provided an overview of the staff report, discussed the various variances requested, and staff's recommendation. Mc Walkie Ray, applicant, spoke in favor of the project and indicated that the applicant's request was unique from most sign requests due to the non-profit, educational nature of Discovery Science Center. The applicant believed the proposed signage would be the most efficient way to limit advertising costs. Mr. Robert Smith, representing the applicant, submitted a letter and indicated that the signage was needed for the center, and he believed the colorful appeazance aesthetically complimented the center. Mc Davis, representing the applicant, discussed the technical aspects of the signage and indicated that he believed the signage proposed was the most effective signage for the center. The following persons spoke in support of the project but expressed concerns regazding: the signage package not being discussed initially when the project went through discretionary approval, the precedent that would occur if the signage was approved, the signage display hours, and the impact of the signage into the surrounding neighborhood: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES J MARCH 9, 1998