Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6608 Staff AnalysisDecember 21, 1998 IMOM File No.: Z-6608 Owner: Head and Engquist Equipment Address• 2801 West 65"' Street Description• Part of Tract 31, Little Rock Industrial District Zoned• I-2 Variance ReQuested: Variances are requested from the sign height and area provisions of Section 36-554 to permit a ground - mounted sign exceeding allowable area and height. Justification: ;,Applicant's Statement: The business moving to this location is "Head and Engquist", a heavy machinery dealership. They would like for their sign to be read from I-30, so we are pleading for you to accept our proposal of 160 square feet at 35 feet OAH, and grant us the variance before you. Head and Engquist has gone to much time and expense to put up a attractive building with attractive landscaping. Less than a block from their location are three convenience stores with large signs and a motel with a large pylon sign. The proposed sign is illuminated and would give extra security at night when it is illuminated. Present Use of Pro ert New building under development Proposed Use of Propert Heavy machinery sales and service Staff Report: A. Public Works Issues: No issues related to this sign variance. December 21, 1998 No.: 11 (Cont. B. Staff Anal sis• Head and Engquist Equipment, L.L.C., a heavy equipment sales, service and rental business has recently completed construction of a new facility on the I-2 zoned property located at 2801 West 65`h Street. Head and Engquist is requesting a variance to allow for placement of one, 35 foot tall, 160 square foot ground -mounted sign on the property. The code limits ground -mounted signs in the Industrial zones to 30 feet in height and 72 square feet in area. The property is located approximately two blocks west of the I - 30/65`h Street interchange and the applicant would like a sign which can be read from the interstate. The variance to allow a sign 5 feet taller than permitted by code is minor and staff feels that it is not unreasonable. This is a large tract and the visual perception of the difference between a 30 foot tall sign and a 35 foot tall sign is negligible. The distinction between a 72 square foot sign and the proposed 160 square foot sign is much greater. Even so, under specific circumstances, staff can support the requested area variance. As was previously mentioned, this is a larger tract, with 680+ feet of frontage on West 65`h Street. Section 36-557(c) states "in commercial and industrial zones where a lot has in excess of one hundred fifty (150) linear feet main street frontage, one (1) additional on premises freestanding sign will be allowed for each additional one hundred fifty (150) linear feet of main street frontage. Based on this section, the subject property is entitled to four (4), 30 foot tall, 72 square feet ground -mounted signs. A principal purpose of the Sign Ordinance is to reduce the proliferation of signs in the City. Staff believes it is appropriate to allow this one larger sign in lieu of the four signs which are permitted by right. Additionally, three convenience stores, a restaurant and a hotel are located just east of the site, at the intersection of I-30 and West 65`h Street. These uses have larger signs. Some of these properties have taller signs due to their direct relationship to I-30 which is elevated at this point. The sign proposed by the applicant is not that out of character with other signs in the area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested sign height and area variances to allow the proposed 35 foot tall, 160 square foot ground mounted sign subject to compliance with the following condition: 2 December 21, 1998 Item No.: 11 1. There are to be no other ground -mounted signs on this property. - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (DECEMBER 21, 1998) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to there being no other ground -mounted signs on the property. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position. 3