The sign they’ll be voting on April 6

There’s some confusion about the sign that the Planning Commission will be voting on come April 6. Here is my understanding of it (corrections, as always, are welcome in the comment section), as reported by a concerned citizen who visited the zoning office:

The overall dimensions of the proposed ground sign, including the two piers, is about 10 ft. high, by about 13 ft. wide, by 2.5 ft. deep.  The piers are 2.5 ft. square, and 10 ft. high.  The space between the piers is about 9 ft. wide, where there will be, I believe, a “Walgreens” sign, and the changeable electronic sign of about 8 ft. width.

Just how big is this, really? According to Common Councilor Kathleen Joy, “The entire sign would be about 100 sq ft. …The architect told me that it needs to be big enough to be seen over cars and the Veterans monument. ”

Okay. Let’s put the proposed sign over the Veteran’s Monument:

walgreens monunent 10fT

Veterans Monument

The Walgreens sign will dwarf the monument to our fallen heroes. The purpose of such a large sign is to draw the attention of drivers away from anything else they might be looking at. Is this what we want at the gateway to Eastwood?

Come to the Planning Commission meeting April 6 at 6:00 pm and tell the commissioners how you feel.

Listening to Memorial Day speech next to Veterans Monument

7 thoughts on “The sign they’ll be voting on April 6”

  1. There were 12 neighbors who attended the March 17th meeting and spoke out against the atrocious ground sign, and I do NOT think that was enough to get our point across that there is strong opposition to this interstate-scale monstrosity being plunked down in the middle of our walkable community. If you are thinking “I might go….” PLEASE just make the decision to go, and get there.

  2. This is a struggle against bureacratic inertia and developer deceit that has been going on for five years now. The guidelines were put in place after the City, willy nilly, allowed a perfectly fine building, the Eastwood Sports Center, birhplace of the NBA 24 second clock, and anchor for that corner , to be torn down by a developer out of Buffalo with no ties to the community and no plan to replace it. As a result we have a hole in the ground for going on ten years now.
    What our friends from the development company are pressing for now is the installation of electronic flashing lights in an area that is fifty percent reidential, and over a war veteransmonument. Disgraceful.

  3. This is great! Not only do I already enjoy the excitement of navigating a poorly designed intersection by drivers who neither respect pedestrians nor bicyclists, it can only get more exciting with the increased traffic to Walgreens and inattentive drivers focusing on a flashing sign! Way to go Eastwood! Why not tear down the monument and relocate it somewhere more convenient for Walgreens?

  4. While it’s ugly, it’s far better than their others around here; it’s also the start of a major commercial district, not the residential part of Eastwood.

    That being said – can we petition the city while they’re doing this to reconfigure that interchange at least somewhat logically? (Or, at a minimum, repave it and put proper shoulders in?)

  5. Actually, that spot is the start of a residential district in two directions, down Grant and down James the other way. Only going east on James is it the start of a business district. There are homes that will be looking upon this overlarge sign. Definitely something is going to have to be done at that intersection since the part in front of Walgreens is now one-way and their plans indicated it would be two-way.

  6. Lonnie,

    The way the sign is positioned, it’s more for those headed east on James – towards the commercial district, and perhaps down Grant – which is residential for a few blocks, then is commercial again (Shop City).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *