Loading...
Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes - 06/18/198671 M I N U T E S ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT June 18, 1986 'f" PRESENT Bob Balch, Chairman Joan Mason, Vice Chairman Imma Jeanne Alexander William Kidd Bill Rowland Richard Sutton Roger McKinney, Director of Planning ++ Jeanie Thompson, Assistant City Attorney Subir Mukerjee, Development Coordinator Barbara Bridges, Secretary ABSENT r= David Gossom Syd Litteken Robert Seabury CALL TO ORDER Members City Staff Members Chairman Balch called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AV It was moved by Mrs. Alexander and seconded by Bill Rowland that the June 2, 1986 Special Meeting Minutes be approved as printed. Assistant City Attorney Jeanie Thompson requested the to phrase of "a basis which has been upheld is" on page 38 to be changed to: "a question to be asked is". Chairman Balch then called for the vote, which was unanimous. to BUSINESS ITEMS 1. V-86-12. Request to allow a larger replacement sign for a nonconforming business in an SF-2 zone, at 2600 Buchanan St. Board members were provided copies of the staff report which explained the applicant desires to replace an 8 sq. ft. sign for a nonconforming business with a 17.3 sq. ft., lighted sign. The request does not meet any of the criteria of hardship/ special conditions, intent of the ordinance, conformity, or go public welfare. Item No. M, 1 - 3 9 - Page No . ____�— Mrs. Nan Lambert, applicant, addressed the Board. She stated she had chosen a larger, more colorful sign to replace the sign she claimed was stolen, as a better advertisement for her busi- ness. Chairman Balch noted her special circumstances cited is that her business is in a single-family zone. Mrs. Lambert replied customers have told her they "have a hard time finding my place." She advised she had already purchased the sign before applying for a permit and found out it would not meet the requirements of the ordinance. It was brought out the ordinance would allow replacement with a similar sign. Mrs. Lambert claimed the new sign could not be reduced in size because it has a metal border. However, the lighting would not be used at night, because the business closes at 5:00 p.m. After further discussion it was moved by Dr. Sutton that the application for variance be denied based on the fact that no special conditions exist other than financial. This motion was seconded by Mrs. Alexander and carried unanimously by vote of Balch, Mason, Alexander, Rowland, and Sutton. 2. V-86-13. Request to allow a business sign which exceeds the sign standards in an LC zone at 4500 Kemp Blvd. Chairman Balch noted this business item has been considered by the Board at two previous meetings, and at the last meeting a 30 day stay of proceedings was granted. The applicant, Tom Hoffman, then addressed the Board. He stated he is appealing on the basis of a serious traffic hazard, as he has witnessed three near -collisions before the installation of his sign; since then there has been none, and he attributes this to the sign. Mr. Hoffman also spent some time in rebuttal of the Staff Report. As at previous meetings, it was pointed out Mr. Hoffman could have recourse through the sign installer. Mr. Hoffman agreed, but stated "we are talking about the success or failure of my business." Dr. Sutton noted it has previously been agreed there is a cause for action against the sign, but Mr. Hoffman is not asking for help in getting his money back, but to allow him to put up too big a sign. Some discussion was made of the enforcement of the sign portion of the ordinance and citing of sign contractors in violation. Mr. McKinney and Ms. Thompson explained the measures available and taken on this matter, including copies of the sign regula- tions having been provided to all licensed sign contractors. In this case, the problem is the contractor did not apply for a permit. If he had, it would have been denied. Mr. Kidd stated his opinion this should be arbitrated before coming to the Board. .m...,--�� Item No. Mi -40- Page No. 2--_ Ift The Board was also addressed by Gene Douglass, attorney. He stated the Board has been presented evidence as to a traffic hazard, and should grant the variance based on this evidence. am Dr. Sutton noted Mr. Hoffman had presented no evidence other than anecdotically. Chairman Balch also noted the Board must also consider the parameters of the ordinance. Considering this, this sign is approximately 2' too high and 48 sq. ft. too g" large in an LC zone. After further discussion it was moved by Joan Mason that the as Board deny the variance because the lack of access from Kemp Street does not constitute special grounds for hardship. This motion was seconded by Mrs. Alexander, and carried with none WO opposed, by vote of Balch, Mason, Alexander, Rowland, and Sutton. Mr. Hoffman asked for 30 days to have the sign removed. Mr. va Mukerjee indicated this would be acceptable to the staff, and Chairman Balch stated a 30 day period is granted. The meeting adjourned at 2:35 p.m. No Bob Balch, Chairman No r7 E; Item No. MI 6 Page No. 3 -41-