4.1 BASR 08-13-2013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

business in question to let them know they need to remove one of the signs and make the other smaller. Staff did also review all of the businesses in the DD area and notified six other businesses in the district that they have sign violations based on the complaint. The applicant has stated that the sign has nearly unanimous support from the business community which it directly impacts. It appears to have great support,which is admirable,but the sign cannot advertise any off site businesses, so it is not clear how it will directly impact the downtown businesses. The applicant also states that essentially what they are looking for is a modified sign under 30-866 (9);One on premises, permanent identification sign per apartment or condominium complex. Their building permit application for the sign does not indicate this,it references both freestanding and monument. They claim the proposed sign is an allowed freestanding sign which is just going outside of the parameters of the16 square foot area and above the height of 8 foot limit. They believe what they are proposing is an allowed use,it is just bigger than what is stated,which is what triggers the CUP, so they are looking to modify that with a CUP at the Council level. Again, the only reason the proposed sign would be considered for a CUP is that the changeable copy exceeds 30 square feet. If they want to exceed performance standards, they would have to apply for a variance,not a CUP. If the sign is being proposed as a permanent identification sign per apartment or condominium complex, then it cannot advertise any of the retail/commercial businesses on site, as they are proposing. The BOA asked for clarification on flashing elements,which is prohibited by Sec. 30-872(b)(1). The applicant indicated the sign will not have flashing elements,but will have scrolling messages and it will be no different than the LED billboards you see on the highway. It is important to note that the appropriateness of this type of signage in rural highway settings is still being debated. Any type of internally lit or changeable copy signage outside the window of residential properties is expected to create adverse living conditions. Because it was asked if freestanding signs were overlooked or missed in the past, staff provided information on the history of the definitions. When the DD was created in 2003,monument, freestanding, and pylon were blanket terms at the time which covered all freestanding signs types and were used interchangeably. The applicants sign permit uses both terms to describe the project. In 2010 the city separately defined freestanding and monument signs to promote the use of monument signs by the business community. In doing so, freestanding signs were overlooked in the DD. The applicant said if the city is going to come back and say we meant to say this,we meant to say that, that leaves them (applicant) on"a little unfair ground". Staff clarified that the info was provided because there was confusion if freestanding signs were overlooked in the past. The applicant claims there are two properties where the proposed sign could be built in DD. Exhibit B shows the numerous locations that freestanding signs,if allowed, could be located in the DD. This exhibit,with the exception of one area, does not include any parking lot areas which easily could be used for freestanding signage,increasing the area freestanding signs could be located. The BOA asked staff why not pursue an ordinance amendment? Staff suggested it,but the applicant decided to go with the appeal. The applicant stated the reason they went with the route of an appeal is they felt it was not truly addressed, they felt working with staff on design cues maybe staff could amend the ordinance later on. One commissioner stated he was in favor of the sign,as it is a good idea because it promotes the businesses. Again,if the sign is to be a freestanding sign,it cannot advertise anything off premise. If the N:\Departments\Community Development\Planning\Case Files\V\V 13-04 Granite Shores\V 13-04_staff report granite shore decklan group 8-13- 13.docx