HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-8121 Staff AnalysisOCTOBER 30, 2006
ITEM NO.: 3
File No.: Z-8121
Owner: J.C. Hallsell
Applicant: Ben Holliday, Clayton Signs
Address: 6201 W. Markham Street
Description: Lot 2, Ruebel's Second Subdivision
Zoned: C-3
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-
557 to allow wall signs without public street frontage.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Vacant Commercial Building
Proposed Use of Property: Restaurant
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Anai sis:
The C-3 zoned property at 6201 W. Markham Street is occupied by a one story
commercial building within the south half of the property. There are two (2)
driveways from West Markham Street which serve as access. There is paved
parking and drives on all sides of the building. The property is located within
the City's Midtown Overlay District.
The property owner is planning to remove the existing commercial building from
the property and construct a new Chick-Fil-A restaurant. The new restaurant
building will be located within the north half of the property with one (1) entry
OCTOBER 30, 2006
ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.
drive at the northeast corner of the property. Paved parking will be located
along the east, west and south sides of the proposed building.
With the proposed restaurant development, one (1) main ground -mounted sign
(106 square feet) will be located within a landscaped area along the front
(north) property line. There will be three (3) 33.68 square foot wall signs on the
building. These wall signs will be located on the north, east and west sides of
the building, as noted on the attached site plan. There will also be a 72 square
foot wall sign at the northwest corner of the building, along the top band of the
building. This sign is located on the north side of the building, wrapping around
to a portion of the west facade.
Section 36-557(a) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that all on -premise
wall signs face required street frontage, except in complexes where a sign
without street frontage would be the only means of identification. Therefore,
the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the 33.68 square foot wall signs
on the east and west building facades, and the portion of the 72 square foot
wall sign located on the west facade.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff feels the request is
reasonable. The proposed wall signs are relatively small in scale as compared to
the overall building facades. This type of signage is not out of character with wall
signage on fast food restaurants throughout the City of Little Rock. Staff believes
the signage will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the overall
Midtown Overlay District.
In reviewing the signage plan for the property, staff did notice two (2) possible
parking issues which will require variances from the Midtown Overlay District
regulations, based on the site plan submitted for the sign variance. Staff has
notified the developer, through the sign company, of the parking issues.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variance, subject to the site
development complying with the Midtown Overlay District regulations.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(OCTOBER 30, 2006)
Ben Holliday was present, representing the application. There were no objectors
present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of approval. Staff
added the following condition to the "staff recommendation":
No sign permits will be issued until after a building permit is issued for
the new building construction.
2
OCTOBER 30, 2006
ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.
Craig Berry addressed the Board with respect to the Midtown Overlay District
Ordinance. He noted that there could be some activities in the future which could
jeopardize the redevelopment of the University Mall property. He expressed
concern with properties being redeveloped prior to a redevelopment plan for the mall
site. He explained that his presence at the meeting was to raise the consciousness
of the Midtown Overlay District Ordinance.
There was a motion to approve the application as recommended by staff, with the
additional condition as noted above. The motion passed by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays
and 1 open position. The application was approved.
3