| Mr. Albert Santia, 37598 Paula Court, Clinton Township, Michigan, came forward |
|
| indicating he is the owner of the shopping center. He was not present at the |
|
| April meeting as he was out of town. He did send an email to the Zoning Board |
|
| but it got stuck in the junk mail, so it was not read at the April meeting. About |
|
| seven years ago, he purchased the shopping center. He's remodeled the |
|
| center trying to keep tenants leasing. When the sign went up five years ago, he |
|
| didn't like it, but did not make a fuss about it. Now the tenants complain that the |
|
| shopping center is lower to the ground compared to the height of the street, and |
|
| the sign blocks the shopping center's view from people travelling on the road. |
|
| He called Mr. Sage about it and he explained the sign is approved for five years, |
|
| after that you can try to fight it and get it removed. Mr. Santia notified his |
|
| tenants of this and is here tonight representing them. He also knew that Bank of |
|
| America on the corner was not going to renew their lease. He worked hard for a |
|
| tenant and got Tim Horton's. They have six months to decide if they will back |
|
| out of the lease or not. He is afraid that the existing sign might stop Tim |
|
| Horton's from leasing the corner. Mr. Santia wants the applicant to be |
|
| successful and have their space leased, but is just asking them to move the |
|
| sign to the other side of entranceway to the shopping center off Avon Industrial. |
|
| The applicant thought that location was not visible enough. It was suggested the |
|
| sign be lowered to three feet, but Mr. Santia doesn't know if Tim Horton's will like |
|
| that - they probably won't want any sign blocking their view from the road other |
|
| than their own. He is asking that the sign not be allowed where it is located, and |
|
| that it be moved to the other side of the entranceway. |
|
| Mr. Brett Everhart, 23619 Brookdale, St. Clair Shores, Michigan, the applicant, |
|
| came forward and stated that what Mr. Santia has stated is true. The reason the |
|
| sign has been in the right-of-way for five years is that he approached Mr. Santia |
|
| and asked if they could come to some type of terms to lease a piece of his |
|
| property for a sign to show there is property back there for lease, due to the |
|
| business park not having visibility on a main road. He also indicated he's fixed |
|
| up his buildings and done a nice job of maintaining them. Mr. Everhart |
|
| explained he met with Mr. Santia and Messrs. Anzek and Breuckman from the |
|
| City, and offered to reduce the sign to half its size just to have visibility. He has |
|
| 80 tenants that have customers and deliveries and finding the complex is |
|
| difficult at best. It is nice to have the sign as a landmark so people know the |
|
| complex is back there. To move the sign to the west of the driveway it would be |
|
| across from the carwash, and to have any visibility of the sign, you would have |
|
| to actually be on Avon Industrial Drive. He receives complaints several times a |
|
| year that there is not enough signage, even at the complex. |
|
