Laserfiche WebLink
Memo to the Planning Commission/V 97-20 <br /> November 25, 1997 <br /> Page 2 <br /> • made so that the credit union could occupy a portion of the building. There is <br /> no freestanding sign on the site, however, the hardware store and the print <br /> shop have wall signs. <br /> Variance <br /> A variance may be granted only if it meets the following five conditions: <br /> 1. Literal enforcement of the ordinance will cause undue hardship. <br /> 2. The hardship is caused by special conditions and circumstances which <br /> are peculiar to the property and the structure involved and which are <br /> not characteristic of, or applicable to, other lands or structure in the <br /> same area. <br /> 3. The literal application of the provisions of this ordinance would <br /> deprive the petitioner of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same <br /> district under the terms of this ordinance. <br /> 4. The special conditions and circumstances are not a consequence of the <br /> petitioner's own action or inaction. <br /> 5. The variance will not be injurious to or adversely affect the health, <br /> safety or welfare of the residents of the City or the neighborhood <br /> where the property is located and will in keeping with spirit and intent <br /> of the ordinance. <br /> The applicant states their hardship is lack of visibility from Highway 10. The <br /> applicant has not shown what is the minimum height needed for a sign to be <br /> visible from Highway 10. The existing signage on the east side of the building <br /> is visible from Highway 10 and is not 40 feet high. Furthermore, since the <br /> building has no frontage on Highway 10, the existing business has been <br /> doing fine at this location without a 40 foot high sign and there are no <br /> freestanding signs of that height on nearby properties, it is questionable <br /> whether a hardship exists. Since there are no other signs in the area of <br /> comparable height and size, if the variance is denied, the applicant would <br /> not be deprived of rights enjoyed by other property owners in the area. The <br /> applicant also moved to this location knowing the difference in elevation from <br /> Highway 10; therefore, it could be argued that the need for this variance is a <br /> result of the petitioners action. <br /> • <br /> s:\planning\scott\v97-20.doc <br />