Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes - 02/15/19890
CD
M_ I N U T E S
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
February 15, 1989
PRESENT
Richard Sutton, Chairman
Richard Sutherland
Syd Litteken * Members
Burrell Lacey, Alternate #2
Carl Wilson, Alternate #3
Ron Buffum * Councilor
Roger McKinney, Director of Planning
Paul Stillson, Planner II * City Staff
Barbara Bridges, Recording Secretary
ABSENT
William Kidd
Bill Rowland * Members
Edna Boren, Alternate #1
Harold Arnett, Alternate #4
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Sutton at 1:35 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was moved by Richard Sutherland, seconded by Burrell Lacey, and
passed unanimously that the January 18, 1989 Minutes be approved.
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. V-89-01. Variance request to reduce the setback for a sign from
10 feet to 5 feet at 901 8th Street
Chairman Sutton noted this business item was tabled at the last
meeting in order to give the applicant the opportunity to appear.
Therefore, he brought this item from the table.
The Commission was addressed by Jim Callicott, representing
Federal Signs. Mr. Callicott presented photographs of the previous
sign and a rendering of the proposed sign. He advised it would be
undesirable to raise the sign to a 9' clearance at this location
because the bottom of the large cube would be visible, and the
sign itself could not be seen by pedestrians or motorists at the
bank. An engineer had also advised them that an extensive support
structure would be necessary to bear the wind and weight load of
the cube if raised to such a height. The bank desires a 4' height,
which would clear the bushes in front and the trees above.
Mr. Callicott referenced the fact that
structed at the 5' setback requested
variance. Mr. McKinney advised this
RM
a building could be con -
for the sign, without a
would be allowed, as the
I-em No. miNs
Fade No. I_
M
property is located in the Central Business District. He also
noted that on this corner, all of the other buildings are located
on the property line. Therefore requiring a 10' setback in this
case would not accomplish the intent of the ordinance, as there is
no visual corridor to be maintained.
Chairman Sutton noted that if a variance is granted, the Board
would have the option of reducing the height clearance for the
sign rather than the setback requirement, which would accomplish
the same thing, but would be a smaller variance.
Richard Sutherland stated the sign would not obstruct the visual
corridor due to the direction of traffic flow at this intersec-
tion. He also maintained the sign would be aesthetically
unobtrusive, as numerous signs in this area project over the
sidewalk. Mr. Lacey noted that the signs cited by Mr. Sutherland,
however, do meet the 9' height clearance.
After further discussion, it was
variance be granted based on the
ordinance would not be impaired
the basis that:
moved by Mr. Sutherland that the
fact that the intent of the sign
by the proposed construction on
- there would be no impairment of the traffic corridor, and
- there are unique circumstances in the Central Business Dis-
trict and unique circumstances regarding the landscaping of the
property.
Therefore, the variance would not be at odds with the intent of
the ordinance or with the public interest. The motion was seconded
by Carl Wilson and carried by unanimous vote of Litteken, Wilson,
Sutton, Lacey, and Sutherland.
2. Add -on item
Chairman Sutton asked that the Assistant City Attorney report on
the Padilla case at the next meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 2:10 p.m.
2&
Richard N. Sutton, Chairman
Date
Item No.
Page No. 2-
Em
109