Laserfiche WebLink
� <br />Plaiuiing Commission <br />Planning Case No. 464-96: 2375 High�vvay 10 <br />: Novemher 6, 1996 <br />Page 3 <br />Si�na�e <br />The existing signage inciudes the following: <br />� existing pyion sign 10' x 10' on 26' high supports; area = 100 sq.ft. <br />� existing wall sign 23" x 26.5 ; area = 54_8 sq.ft. <br />� used car sign, ground rnounted 8' 6-1/2" x 5' = 42.7 sq.ft. <br />� miscetlaneous small directional signs <br />The total signage on the site is 193.5 square feet. All of the signage has approved pec�mits. <br />The B-3 district allaws for 100 square feei per business occupant, and one general <br />pedestal sign not exceeding 340 square feei. Only one pedestal sign is allowed per <br />property. The current signage is witk�in the allowances in the Code. The applicant is <br />proposing two additional rnonument signs: one at fihe northeznmost driveway on Highway <br />10 and one ai the easternmost driveway on County Road H2. Both of thes� signs would <br />have the same dim�nsions as ihe existing monument sign an Highway 10 (42.7 square <br />feet}. The appiicant's reason for the additional signage is to better identify driveway <br />entrances and direct customer traffic. The total signage on ihe site including the new <br />signage would be: <br />— 4 existing pylon sign i0' x 10' on 26' high supports; area = 100 sq.ft. <br />• existing wall sign 23" x 26.5; area = 50.8 sq.ft. <br />� used car sign, ground mounted 8' 6-1/2" x 5' = 42.7 sq.ft. <br />• two new ground mounted 8' 6-1/2" x 5' = 85.4 sq.ft. <br />o misceilaneous smai( directional signs <br />Total Signage = 278.9 sq. ft. <br />Total Pernutted = 10� sq. ft. of signage per tenant; 340 sq. ft. pylon sign = 440 sq.ft. <br />The signage on the site is well within the tota.l signage area allowed. Square footage has <br />been redistributed to the monument signs from the allowances for tenani and pylon signs. <br />Staff feels that this approac� is acceptable and maices the signage package more <br />functionai. Staff also feeis that this redistribution requires approval of a variance which <br />r�vould have to b� scheduIed for the Planning Commission's December 4 meeting, due to <br />notice requirements. <br />'� <br />