VN-156 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'. J - - Board of Review -?- j Mr. Nolan indicated-that. they had a sign consultingcampany design the proposed .sign. Mr, Nolanstated that he felt this proposal would solve the identification .problem once and for all.. tickland asked what the nature of the. non-confo.rmty;.was in regards to.-the existing sign along ; :~STrJ, ~'he City Planner noted that the .existing. sign e~ceAded-the allow- able limits for total sign area. The City Planner;.-further noted that there were two panels on .the ign and-that essentially it was the lowex telephone panel which causes the sign to be non-conforming. Harty asked the applicant how far the eisting sign was setback' from the freeway. - Mr. Nolan stated that he wasn't sure but that the distance was - around 50 feet. Mr. Nolan said-that the property is so large (13 acres +) and set back so far from County- Road E-Z that identifca- tion has been extremely difficult. Mr. Nolan indicated that the sign is three years old and cost. $6, 000. - Wickland stated that the City does have~the sign ordinance and. he felt that the Planning Commission should comply with it. Wickland, suggested that while the-sign may be important to the applicant it may not be so important three-years from now. Wickland further suggested that the Planning Commission may want to recommend approval of the variance request with the condition-that the existing sign be made to conform within three years. Fredrickson noted that the Council will be considering an amortza- tion ordinance in the near future and perhaps that the Council should decide how the amortization should apply in this case. Wickland stated that while he was aware that the Council will be considering amortization, the Planning Commission should still tell the. Council something, Wickland indicated that right nova he could-not support the request in its present forma Mr Nolan stated that they are like many other commercial projects in that they think that their signing is the livelihood of their business. Mr. Nc~ian saicl that while they don't expect special treat- ment they would at least like the same treatment afforded other business activities. Mr. Nolan said that they-would gladly comply with any amortization if such an ordinance were .ever adopted. by the Council.