DCPZP-2009-00161 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 2 of 2 Mr. Widish, I am writing on behalf of the neighbors of this property. We would appreciate your further explanation /clarification on the issue of Mr Dale Scholl's HVAC sign, which you referred to in your April 22 email, paragraph 1 is shown below. "I was on site this past Tuesday and was told that my search of our database was correct, permits have not been issued for either sign. Mr. Scholl will need to apply for permits, but as I explained only signs permitted in his district, Agricultural; Construction; Crop; Directory; Farm; Home Occupation; Limited Family Business and On-premise advertising are allowed. The question about the HVAC is two fold, the first is that business on-premise and the second does it meet the home occupation standards and/or is the area zoned correctly. As far as the "wall" sign, for what he is advertising and what he is using the accessory building for a CUP would need to be applied for. Even with that the wall sign is not permitted and he would need to look at other options available to himself. I will be sending out our notice of violation, hopefully today." (Shawn Widish email to Greg Hyer, dated Aprol 22, 2009) At the time of your visit you were able to confirm that neither of Mr. Scholl's signs(wall sign and HVAC) had received the required permits. To the best our knowledge the required permits do not yet exist. The wall sign has since been removed, perhaps as a result of your issuing a notice of violation. Yet, the HVAC sign continues to stand in spite of it also not having been issued the required permit, and therefore also in violation. I hope that I properly understand your statement above which indicates you are still considering two questions about the HVAC sign, the on-premise issue and the home occupation/zoning issue. What I am perplexed about is why does the HVAC sign continue to stand while clearly in violation of the required permit process? Why haven't steps already been taken to have this illegally erected sign removed while you are considering the business on premise and zoning issues? Mr. Scholl should not be rewarded for having violated ordinances or permit processes by continuing to receive any possible advertising benefits from an illegally erected sign while these issues are being considered. The neighbors in the immediate area of this property should not have to continue to be subjected to this HVAC sign every day, for an undetermined period of time until the final disposition of this sign. Mr Scholl should not be benefitting from breaking the law and the neighborhood should not suffer as a consequence. I respectfully request that the initiation of the necessary steps be taken, as early as is possible, to have the complete HVAC sign structure, both signs and their supporting structure, be taken down as soon as possible until this HVAC sign issue is properly dealt with thru all levels of government approval. If there is any additional required formal process which we the neighborhood must initiate in order to have the sign removed, please advise me. We thank you for your response to this issue and your attention to this matter. John Wardour John Wardour 86 Associates, LLC jward @chorus. net 608-575-1774 V12/2009