Laserfiche WebLink
CORRECTED AND APPROVED – APRIL 14, 2005 <br />Applicant Presentation: Stephan Mak, 1387 South Boulder Road, East West Grill owner, stated <br />that the reason for the request is that customers have told them they have had difficulty in <br />locating the restaurant. It is also hoped that the sign will bring more people into the shopping <br />center. The sign on the east side would also make it consistent with the other businesses in the <br />building. He requested that if the decision to approve or deny his request would be based on the <br />Subway component then he would ask that they Subway sign be removed from this application. <br /> <br />Commission Questions of Applicant: <br />rd <br />Loo asked Mak if he was interested in a 3 sign. Mak stated that he would be interested but it <br />rd <br />would require his obtaining permission from the landlord for that 3 sign. <br /> <br />rd <br />Deborski asked Johnstone if a 3 sign could be approved as this time without the applicant <br />having to make another application and pay an additional fee. Johnstone stated that if the <br />rd <br />Commission wanted to approve the 3 sign then it could be included based on the public notice <br />provided. <br /> <br />Members of the Public: None heard. <br /> <br />Staff and Applicant Summary and Recommendation: No additional comments. <br /> <br />Public Hearing Closed Commission Comments: <br />Loo stated that she supports the application and that she likes the sign location recommendation <br />on the south elevation. She suggested that sign installed without a permit should have some type <br />of penalty assessed. <br /> <br />McDermott stated that he the supports the request and would support the south elevation as well. <br /> <br />Pritchard stated that he supports the sign request. He does not support the south elevation sign as <br />this time. He also stated that he supports the suggestion from Loo regarding a penalty for a sign <br />that was not permitted. <br /> <br />Deborski stated that he supports the signage request for the east and west elevations but <br />questions if the south elevations are premature at this time. <br /> <br />Sheets stated that she supports the application and believes that it helps both the customers and <br />the tenants. <br /> <br />Pritchard asked the other Commissioners if the south sign should be included at this time. <br /> <br />McAvinew stated that he does not support the south elevation sign request because he does not <br />feel that it is needed. If a south elevation sign were permitted it would need to be for all the <br />tenants in the building and not just one tenant. He does support the sign on the east elevation. He <br />also does not support extending this approval to the other building. <br /> <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br /> <br />