08-24-1988 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Analysis The Sign Ordinance contains the following provisions relating to non - conforming signs: 903.110.D. 2. If any property use or business changes ownership, all signs on that property including any sign identifying a business no longer in existence shall be brought into conformance within thirty (30) days. 4. A non - conforming sign may not be: a. Changed to another non - conforming sign. b. Structurally altered except to bring into compliance with provisions of this Ordinance. c. Expanded. Variances, by ordinance direction, are to be considered on the basis of unique situations and genuine hardship. Included in the criteria for variance approval are stipulations that the variance may not confer a special privilege denied to other properties in the district, or that denial of such a variance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties. The City will have to make a policy decision regarding this application. Past precedent set with Unocal 76 and the Ordinance variance criteria will both need to be taken into consideration. Unocal 76: NAC recommended denial of the sign height variance based on non- compliance with variance criteria. The City Council on 25 February 1987 allowed the continuance of a non - conforming sign height for Unocal 76 because the franchisee did not change hands, but rather a trade in property between Mobil Oil and Union 76 took place. Therefore, should property ownership change hands, the Council stated that the City Ordinance would then become applicable. RECOMMENDATION Based on this review, we find this to be a policy decision the City must make. There does not appear to be justification for granting this variance based on established variance criteria found in Chapter 922 of the City Zoning Ordinance. However, City action regarding Unocal 76's non - conforming sign allowed to continue by the City may have set a precedent. Page 41