1996 Planning Commission Packets

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Planning Case No. 468-96: Saturn Development . \? November 20, 1996 Page 2 pedestal sign not exceeding 340 squar� feet, for a total sign area of 440 square feet. If the two additional manument signs were added to the existing signage on the site, the total signage on ihe site would be 278.9 square feet, which is well within the total square footage atlowed. The way the signage is proposed to be distributed and the types of signs proposed, however, are not anticipated by the Sign Code. In eil'ect, signage would be redistributed from the pylon sign to two monument signs. Staf�feels thaY this approach is acceptable and makes the signage package more functianai, but it does require approvat of a variance. 7Chis item is being scheduled on your November 20 meeting for discussion, and has been noticed for action on December 4. The criteria for approval of variances to �he Sign Code are stated below wiih comments from staff as to how this proposal meets the criteria. a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinzty and result from iot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners or the property since the effective date hereof had no control. c, That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant, The Saturn dealership has 764 feet of frontage along Highway 1Q and 580 feet of frontage along County Road H2, and two driveways on each frontage. This amount of frontage is longer than most praperties aiong the commercial corridor on Highway i 0. The City's Sign Code limits properties in the B-3 district to two types of signage: one 340 st�uare foot pylon sign and business accupant signage not to exceed 100 square feet. The Sign Code does nat anticipaie the provision of directiona( signage on properties in the B-3 district. I�ue to the long frontages and the types of activities on this site, directional sibnage is needed to insure customer safety and smooth trai�c flow. The appIicant's proposal does not increase the tota( square foo�age of signage above the amount allowed by the Sign Code, but redistributes sign area from what would have been displayed on the pylon sign to two monument-style directional signs. b. The Iiteral interpretation of khe pravisions of this Title would deprive the app[icant o£ rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. i'hat granting the vaciance requested wiii not confer on ttae applicant any special privilege that is denied by ihis Titie to o�vners of other lands, structures or builciings in the same districE. g. Circumstances under which the titeral interpretation of the provisions of this Title create an undue hardship on the applic�nt. Economic hardship may be a circwnstance for issuance of a variance.