Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes - 04/17/2013MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
April 17, 2013
PRESENT:
Dustin Nimz, Chairman
0 Members
Jose Garcia
0
Chad Hughes
0
Scott Stillson
0 Alternate#3
Tyson Traw
0 Alternate#4
Annetta Pope -Dotson 0 Council Liaison
Kinely Hegglund, Senior Assistant City Attorney 0 Legal Dept.
Marty Odom, Planner III OCity Staff
Monique Coleman, Planner II 0
Diane Parker 0
ABSENT:
Jerry Beavers 0 Members
Kerry J. Maroney 0
David Lane 0Alternate #1
Robert Riddle 0Alternate #2
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Nimz called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.
II. MINUTES
Mr. Traw made a motion to approve the minutes of the March 20, 2013 Zoning Board of
Adjustment meeting. Mr. Stillson seconded. The minutes were approved with a
unanimous vote in favor.
III. REGULAR AGENDA
1. Case V 13-02
A request for a variance to expand the overall area of an existing sign
structure to construct decorative columns around the existing sign
columns
3136 St" Street (Seymour Highway)
Mr. Syd Litteken of Litteken Design Concepts represented the owner of 3136 5t" Street
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 2 APRIL 17, 2013
who requested a variance to construct decorative columns over the existing eight inch
ground sign columns. The property owner, Arthur Gaona, hired Mr. Litteken to design a
new sign base to rehabilitate and enhance the appearance of the existing sign.
The existing sign is 140 square feet. The proposed enhancements to support structures
will increase the sign area by 90 square feet or a total sign area of 230 square feet.
The proposed enhancement to the columns must be added to the overall sign area
because the proposed sign exceeds 24 inches. Section 6750 of the Sign Ordinance
states: "Support structure(s) and/or support structure covers shall be included in the
overall calculation of the sign area if the support structure(s) or cover(s) at any point
measured parallel to the ground has a width or cumulative width of 24 inches or more."
Construction on the sign began in March, 2013. A stop work order was issued by the
Inspection Division because the overall sign area was being increased without
permission. On behalf of Mr. Gaona, Mr. Litteken consulted the Planning staff and was
advised he needed to request a variance from the Board of Adjustment for the
increased size, height, or area to be permitted within ten feet of the property line. Table
6741 of the Sign Ordinance states a sign area cannot exceed 80 square feet within ten
feet of the property line and cannot exceed 120 square feet within the 25 foot setback.
As previously stated, the total sign area will be 230 square feet, which exceeds the
maximum sign area allowed. A variance is required to allow work on this sign to
continue.
Ms. Coleman stated the provisions for which the variance was being considered:
Provision A (Section 6750 A) — if the sign support structures or covers exceed a
cumulative width of 24 inches, the proposed construction area must take into account
the overall area of the sign.
Provision B (Section 6750 B) — the maximum area of a sign that is allowed is in
accordance to the distance a sign must be setback from the property line.
Section 6125 A — allows for a non -conforming structure to be altered as long as an
addition shall not be greater in area than the size of the original structure before the
alteration.
Ms. Coleman continued by stating the existing non -conforming sign of 140 square feet
was constructed within the ten foot setback which exceed the current requirements of
the Zoning Ordinance of 80 square feet within 10 feet of the property line and a
maximum of 120 square feet within 25 feet of the property line. Staff was unable to
determine when the existing sign was constructed but the property was developed in
1958; the sign was probably constructed around the same time.
The width of Seymour Highway is wider than other arterials classified as corridors in the
city. The increased width provides an added distance buffer between traffic with a 14
foot shoulder.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 3 APRIL 17, 2013
Then, Ms. Coleman reviewed the Qualifying Criteria:
a. Special conditions or circumstances which are peculiar to the land, structure, or
building.
Applicant's statement: "The sign exists at an apex of a curve on Business
Highway 82 or 3136 5t" Street (Seymour Highway). The curve of the road makes
the sign appear further away from the property line than it really is. As the
roadway curves the line of site (sic) is directed away from the sign."
Staff response: Although staff feels street design does not have a significant
impact on sign visibility, a special condition may exist due to the right-of-way
width of Seymour Highway. The Thoroughfare Plan requires a right-of-way width
of 120 feet for a major arterial but, at this location, Seymour Highway has a right-
of-way width of 150 feet and has a 14 foot shoulder, which is uniquely wider than
other major arterial shoulders in the city. A wider shoulder creates a greater
distance separation from the regular traffic movement and property line than
what is typical on other major thoroughfares such as Southwest Parkway, Kemp
Boulevard and Midwestern Parkway.
b. Special conditions and circumstances do not result from the applicants' actions.
Applicant's statement: "A special condition was naturally created by the
construction of Seymour Highway many years ago. This roadway was built
paralleling the natural curve of the Wichita River. Another condition is the
neighboring billboard on the next property is so large that the visibility of the
River Walk Suites sign becomes negligible. Currently the tall skinny black pipe
columns and the existing signage disappear in the shadow of the double
billboard structure at the Rio Vista Center next door."
Staff response: The right-of-way width of Seymour Highway is not a result of any
actions of the applicant. In addition, the placement or location of the pre-existing,
legally non -conforming sign is also not a result of any actions of the applicant.
C. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the
applicants of a right commonly enjoyed by the other persons.
Applicant's statement: "The literal interpretation of the purpose of a sign is to be
an important means of communication. The Deluxe Inn Sign is not able to
communicate because of its unique placement, the roadway curvature, and the
surrounding signs which camouflage it. If the existing 8-inch pole legs had
decoration around them a passerby might notice the sign amongst its
surroundings."
Staff response: If the Sign Ordinance provisions stated in this staff report are
enforced literally, the sign enhancements/improvements cannot commence.
However, the existing face of the sign could be improved, which would not
increase the area of the sign.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 4 APRIL 17, 2013
Chairman Nimz asked how the sign face could be improved without increasing the area.
Ms. Coleman stated in the applicant's Exhibits A-1 and A-2, there is a 140 square foot
existing sign. Exhibit A-2 shows the proposed sign. The face of sign could be changed
or modified in the existing frame and not increase the total area.
d. The granting of the variance would be in harmony with the objectives of the
ordinance and would not confer upon the applicants any special privilege.
Applicant's statement: "The purpose of a sign (per the Sign Ordinance) is to
communicate and advertise. Granting a variance for noticeable decoration to the
pipe column legs would not be showing special privileges to the owner.
Furthermore, granting a variance would help the site to be noticed at ground
level by passing vehicles and would help communicate with the public within the
general area."
Staff response: Staff agrees with the applicant that the purpose of the sign is to
communicate and advertise. Furthermore, as stated above the extent of the work
being performed will not alter the position or height of the sign. Therefore, while
there does not appear to be a hardship, a special condition may exist and staff is
not opposed to this request, which supports Mr. Litteken's application to allow
the completion of the sign support column enhancements.
Mr. Hughes made a motion to approve the Qualifying Criteria; Mr. Garcia seconded.
The motion carried.
Evaluation Criteria:
Ms. Coleman reviewed the Evaluation Criteria with the Board. In summary, staff
determined granting the variance would not be contrary to the public interest. There is a
special condition other than a financial hardship whereby a literal enforcement of the
terms of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship to the applicant. The
granting of the variance would not permit an activity which is not allowed by the Zoning
Ordinance. Ms. Coleman continued stating this variance is consistent with the intent of
the ordinance, is in harmony therewith, and would not be injurious to the surrounding
businesses or detrimental to the public welfare.
Mr. Litteken was present at the meeting and expressed his appreciation to the Board for
hearing this case. He stated driving down Seymour Highway this sign does not show up
because of the other signs in the area. The owner was not aware that enhancing the
sign columns would result in this action.
Chairman Nimz asked if this sign, with the shoulder plus the right-of-way, had a setback
that was unusually large. Ms. Coleman agreed. She also stated measuring from the
driving thoroughfare back to the shoulder was 27 — 30 feet back. The width of Seymour
Highway is wider than other arterials with the same classification. This factor would help
support the Board's decision if the variance was granted. He asked if Seymour was
divided at this location; Ms. Coleman responded it is a four -lane arterial, two lanes
each direction, with a
median. Ms. Coleman explained at the base of the sign the columns have a width of six
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 5 APRIL 17, 2013
feet.
Mr. Odom explained that adding the support structures as part of the area is a fairly
recent addition, five to six years ago. The ordinance previously did not acknowledge
support structures because they were poles. It was noticed that signs were being
constructed with covers over the poles resulting in a huge sign. Staff decided to
address the problem by changing the ordinance. If the sign pole is 24 inches or multiple
poles having a cumulative measurement over 24 inches, then staff must address it.
Chairman Nimz asked if the variance procedure would be required with the new Sign
Ordinance; Mr. Odom stated it would.
Mr. Stillson asked what material would be used on the outer covering. Mr. Litteken
replied EIFS — Exterior Insulation Finish System, one manufacturer is Dryvit. Building
exteriors in Wichita Falls are being resurfaced with this product. Mr. Stillson then asked
if there were any plans to advertise the River Walk or other businesses; Mr. Litteken
replied there was not. Mr. Litteken stated the owner originally planned to change only
the plexiglass face of the sign but then decided to make more improvements to the
sign.
Chairman Nimz stated this improvement does not appear to be a safety issue or detract
from the area; it seems to be a positive update.
Mr. Garcia made a motion to approve the variance; Mr. Stillson seconded. The motion
carried.
IV. Adjourn
The Board adjourned at 1:50 p.m.
Dustin Nimz, Chairman
Date