HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-8689 Staff AnalysisAUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 7
File No.:
Owner:
Applicant:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Dorothy Ussery/Harold Crye Living Trust
John Thatcher, Kum & Go
7620 Baseline Road
Northwest corner of Baseline Road and Chicot Road
C-3 and C-4
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-557
to allow wall signs without street frontage.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Commercial Strip Center and Vacant Single -Family Residence
Proposed Use of Property: Convenience Store with Gas Pumps
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comment
B. Staff Analysis:
The C-3 /C-4 zoned property at 7620 Baseline Road is currently occupied by a
one-story commercial building located at the center of the property, with parking on
its south side. The southernmost portion of the property is undeveloped and
grass -covered. The north portion of the property contains an old, vacant single-
family structure. The property is located at the northwest corner of Baseline and
Chicot Roads. Access drives from Baseline and Chicot Roads serve the
development. The commercial building is part of a larger commercial development
extending to the west, with the drive from Baseline Road being a shared driveway.
The applicant is planning to construct a new convenience store with gas pumps
facility on this property. The development will include a convenience store building
located within the north portion of the property, with gas pumps and covered
canopy within the south half. Paved parking will be located on the north and south
sides of the convenience store building. Access drives will be located along the
Chicot and Baseline Road frontages. The driveway from Baseline Road will
continue to be a shared driveway.
AUGUST 29, 2011
1� � �►�i � �L�)�l[K�L1�1
As part of the development plan, the applicant is proposing wall signs on the north,
south and east elevations of the convenience store building, as noted on the
attached building elevations. Wall signs are also proposed on the south, east and
west elevations of the gas pump canopy. The applicant will also be installing one
(1) ground -mounted sign on the property, along the Baseline Road street frontage.
The wall signs on the north elevation of the convenience store building and the
west elevation of the gas pump canopy do not have direct street frontage, face a
street right-of-way. The wall sign on the north elevation of the convenience store
will be 39 square feet in area, with the sign on the west elevation of the canopy
being 25 square feet.
Section 36-557(a) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that all on -premise wall
signs face required street frontage. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow the wall signs on the north building elevation and west canopy
elevation.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as
reasonable. The signage as proposed is typical of that found in conjunction with
convenience store developments throughout the city. The proposed wall signs on
the west canopy elevation will face interior parking and access drives within this
overall development. The proposed signs will aid in identifying this business to
traffic within this larger development, as well as to traffic eastbound on Baseline
Road and southbound on Chicot Road. The wall sign on the north building
elevation is proposed in -lieu of a ground -mounted sign along the Chicot Road
frontage. Staff believes the proposed signage is consistent with that found in other
similar developments, and will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties
or the general.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variance, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Permits must be obtained for all signs.
2. The sign located on the gas pump canopy must not extend above the face
of the canopy.
3. No ground -mounted sign will be allowed along the Chicot Road frontage.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 2011)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval, with conditions.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved, as recommended by staff
with a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays, 1 recusal (Winchester) and 0 absent.