April 21, 2016

Mr. Schwarzbaum stated that given that the Board granted the applicant variances for signs in a previous application, he is not in favor of granting the variances for the monument sign. He said that it is a very large sign and he would be in favor of a small “enter here” sign as opposed to the large monument sign. Mr. Sussman said that he recommends denying the application for many reason cited during the hearing. He said the Board already granted the applicant variances for signs and this sign is not necessary. Chairman Neuer stated that he concurs with comments Vice Chairman Buechler made during the hearing. He said that the Board granted them substantial variances for signs and there are enough signs. Chairman Neuer also said that the mural is massive and it is questionable if the mural is just a sign by another name. Chairman Neuer stated that the Planner did not meet the positive and negative criteria and that his credibility was not establised and recommended that the other Board Members vote no on this application. Vice Chairman Buechler made a motion to deny the application. He said that the applicant came before this Board in 2013 for preliminary and final site plan approval and variances for signs and the applicant was specifically asked at that time if they will put a monument sign up and their attorney said no. Vice Chairman Buechler said that nowhere in the lease does it stipulate that the tenant must construct a monument sign. He said that there are no signs in any of the other driveways for the stores in the Plaza so by LA Fitness not having a sign will not create any confusion. Vice Chairman Buechler stated that there have been no changes in the topography since 2013 and that it is his opinion that they have not met the criteria for the C1 and C1 variances. Ms. Gabry seconded the motion to deny the application. 16