Laserfiche WebLink
In this case, the applicant has not demonstrated a genuine hardship to justify the <br />variance to number of signs, maximum sign area, and maximum sign height. While the <br />signs were legal non- conforming uses, the structural alteration of the pricing sign <br />caused it to lose this status. <br />CONCLUSION <br />The applicant is requesting a variance to exceed the maximum number of freestanding <br />signs, maximum sign area, and maximum height. The proposed modification to the <br />pricing sign fails to bring the sign into compliance with the ordinance. The existing high - <br />rise sign greatly exceeds both the maximum sign area and maximum height regulations. <br />The applicant has not demonstrated an undue hardship to justify said variances. <br />In order to accommodate the gas station use, the site must be rezoned to B -2 or B -4 <br />and a conditional use permit is required. Staff recommends that the site be zoned B -4, <br />Comprehensive Business, as this designation would facilitate an eventual change to a <br />non -gas station commercial use. Motor fuel stations are allowed by conditional use <br />permit in the B -4 District. <br />ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS AND RECOMMENDATION <br />In regards to the request for a Variance to exceed the maximum number of freestanding <br />signs, maximum sign height, and maximum sign area, the City has the following <br />options: <br />1. Motion to approve the request for a Variance, based on a finding that a genuine <br />hardship exists which prohibits the applicant from having reasonable use of the <br />property. <br />2. Motion to deny the request for a Variance, based on a finding that no hardship <br />has been proven. <br />Staff does not recommend approval of the Variance request as presented. The <br />applicant has not demonstrated any hardship, and an effort to achieve full compliance <br />has not been made. The proposed sign meets the area requirements, but exceeds the <br />maximum height requirement by three feet. Reducing the height of this sign by three <br />feet would bring it into compliance. No changes are proposed to the existing high -rise, <br />which grossly exceeds the maximum height and area requirements. Moreover, the <br />existing sign is inconsistent with the City's architectural guidelines which do not permit <br />internally lit signs with white backgrounds. As a condition of any permits, staff would <br />recommend that the existing high -rise sign face be modified to comply with the "reverse - <br />out" color scheme requirements of the architectural guidelines. <br />4 <br />