PC 032509 - Laserfiche WebLink

indicate who they are and where they are located. He reiterated that the proposal limits the amount of window signs and that the applicant had reduced it for the second floor. Commissioner Fox referred to the side elevation and expressed concern with numerous signs, various types of fonts, colors, and logos. She inquired if the rest of the businesses could mirror signs similar to Comerica or historical-looking signs. Commissioner Blank said the Commission could always prohibit the use of logos on the window signs. Commissioner Fox referred to historical buildings in Boston, Chicago, and Philadelphia where there are retail businesses or shops that tend to have a historical sign as opposed to having a logo sign. She inquired if there was a way to indicate the need for consistency with each business’s presentation so that there are not so many different signs. Bud Cornett, property owner, mirrored comments of the representatives of Comerica Bank, which would are a tremendous addition to the building, given the current market and his three vacant spaces. He stated that he was in favor of Comerica’s trapezoidal logo sign and that because of all of the other elements of lighting and materials, the signs would fit in very well. He suggested restricting the limits of the Master Sign Program to the side buildings. With respect to the second-floor signage, he indicated that he has always envisioned having gold signs with reflective black to provide a three-dimensional look. He added that these signs would not cover the entire window. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Blank stated that he supported keeping the trapezoidal signs with the Comerica logo but would like to see the length of the sign on Division Street slightly reduced, possibly by ten percent, because the building profile is about 20 percent less. He suggested that a condition be added prohibiting temporary window signs. Commissioner Fox concurred that Comerica should be able to keep their trapezoidal signs and corporate logo as it is the main tenant; however, she would like the identification sign in the front and on the second floor removed. She added that she would like the building ID sign on Division Street reduced in size and taken down from the second floor to the first floor. She suggested that the Commission look at the project as one building and asked that restrictions be placed on window signs. She indicated that she would like to limit window signage in front to two windows rather than all six windows. She stated that she wanted to ensure there is signage consistency on the side elevation, so as the building does not end up with varying sets of signs moving farther down Division Street, and that the signs have a historical nature. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 25, 2009 Page 17 of 27