RICHARD LINTZ – MOTION TO APPROVE

CRAIG OWENS (CO) – MOTION SECONDED

MOTION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY THE BOARD

Chairman Lichtenfeld now states that items 4-6 will be heard prior to the old business items numbered 2 and 3. Since these items are relatively short, if the applicant is present we would like to proceed with them first.

2 NEW BUSINESS

125 N. HANLEY ROAD – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD – ALTERATION/EXTERIOR RENOVATION

Planner Anna Krane summarizes the following staff report: “The subject property is located on the west side of the intersection between North Hanley Road and Westmoreland Avenue. The property has a zoning designation of R-2 Single Family Dwelling District. The project consists of replacing the existing stacked stone wall along the east property line with a stone retaining wall system. The retaining wall ranges in height from 1 foot to 3 feet.

Section 405.1900 of the Zoning Regulations requires that all walls located in the front yard in single-family zoning districts be approved by the Architectural Review Board prior to installation.

“Front yard masonry garden walls, planting boxes, retaining walls, plantings or ornamental or decorative fences may be erected as part of new construction, up to four (4) feet above the grade level in the front yard, provided such structure is an integral part of the architectural feature of the principal structure, is in compliance with sight distance standards and is approved by the Architectural Review Board.”

The Architectural Review Board prefers the use of masonry walls in front yards; however, modular block walls are allowed if they include three different block sizes, color variation and tumbled edges. The proposed design and material of the retaining wall does feature a varying color pallet at least three different sizes of stone. The existing wall is located against the public sidewalk and supports lawn area. The replacement wall will be located in the same place. Multiple nearby houses have front yard retaining walls and fences constructed directly against the sidewalk. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed location of the wall is consistent with neighborhood character.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED.”

JERRY PERRISH (JP) – APPLICANT ON BEHALF OF THE OWNERS JEREMY BUHLER AND WENDY LOVE ANDERSON JP – Addresses the board to answers questions

CHAIRMAN LICHTENFELD – WE HAVE A STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED

CRAIG OWENS– MOTION TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED

BRIAN MAGUIRE – SECOND

BOARD – UNANIMOUS AYE

8321 MARYLAND AVENUE – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD - SIGNAGE

Planner Anna Krane summarizes the following staff report: “The subject property is located on the north side of Maryland Avenue between Crandon Drive and Lancaster Drive. Mercy Go Health Urgent Care is occupying the east tenant space in the 3,457-square-foot retail building located at the southeast corner of the site. The west tenant space of the building is vacant. Regions Bank, the property owner, occupies the entire western building on the site.

The west tenant space of the building is vacant. Regions Bank, the property owner, occupies the entire western building on the site.

3 The applicant is proposing a sign located on the top of the entrance canopy at the southeast corner of the building. The proposed sign is 22.37 square feet in area and constructed of white, blue and orange internally illuminated LED channel letters. The proposed sign location is approximately 10 feet above grade and mounted to the top of metal canopy. The proposed sign does not meet the requirements of the Sign Ordinance, which states that wall signs should be attached to the wall face and not installed on roof structures. The applicant is also proposing a one square foot perpendicular sign located under the metal canopy, which conforms to the Sign Ordinance.

The applicant is proposing a third sign located on the north wall of the building, facing the surface parking area. The plans show a 7.9 square foot sign located above a rear entrance. The tenant will be removing the rear entrance door as part of the tenant finish according to the issued Building Permit. The Sign Ordinance states that signs should be located on street frontages, but does allow for an eight square foot sign at rear entrances. With the tenant removing the rear entrance door, the space no longer qualifies for the rear entrance sign and would require a sign modification.

According to the Sign Ordinance, modifications should only be granted “due to unusual conditions, such as façades that are angled or curved to the front street or streets or land uses which involve substantial accessory uses both inside and outside of buildings and requiring identification or substantial open space or street frontage or a similar unusual condition. The Architectural Review Board shall have the authority to determine the appropriate location, size or number of signs, provided the intent of these regulations is met.”

The purpose of the location restriction for signs is to orient signage toward the pedestrian/ground level environment and create a cohesive signage appearance throughout the City. The proposed south elevation sign is a similar design to the Regions Bank sign that was previously approved and installed on the canopy of the west building. The proposed sign conforms to the size requirement of the Sign Ordinance and staff is of the opinion that the proposed sign is compatible with the surrounding area.

Staff is of the opinion that there are not unusual conditions associated with the property to warrant deviation from the Sign Ordinance for the proposed north elevation sign. The intent of the accessory sign for rear entrances is to help patrons navigate from parking areas to secondary building entrances. Patrons of the urgent care facility will have to walk to the entrance along Maryland Avenue, so the additional north elevation signage will not serve a wayfinding purpose. Also, north of the subject property is a single family residential neighborhood. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed north elevation sign does not conform to the Sign Ordinance and that there are not unusual conditions to warrant a sign modification.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE SOUTH ELEVATION SIGN AND DENY THE NORTH ELEVATION SIGN.”

TREY WATTS (TW) – SPRINGFIELD SIGNS – MERCY GO HEALTH URGENT CARE REPRESENTATIVE TW – Addresses Board to answer questions: Mercy Go Health usually likes to be well identified, especially with high stress incidents they would like to be able to be found so that is why there is a sign shown on the back of the building. RICHARD LINTZ – How is Regions allowed to have a sign there? The north facing sign of regions is not supposed to be there. Without the signage in the back there, there are two buildings so I do think there is some wayfinding to the second sign back there especially for a medical facility. If there were neither sign it would be very confusing as to which is which.