Laserfiche WebLink
Community Development Director Trudgeon noted that the building is two feet from the lot line <br />because it is in the Town Center zoning district, so a ground sign is not an option. He stated this <br />sign size would not be an issue if it were not in the Town Center zoning district. <br /> <br />Jim Deal, NAU, indicated the sign is not that large if you look at the square footage of the <br />building. He stated it is a little over one percent of the front of the building, so it will look <br />proportionate. He added the sign will be 24 feet in the air, so it needs to be larger or you will not <br />be able to read it. <br /> <br />Jim Cota, Leroy Signs,/nc. advised they need to make the sign functional and pleasing to the eye. <br />He stated when you get thirty feet offthe ground the lettering has to be larger, and because of the <br />L-shape of the building, you will only be seeing 25 feet of the sign at one time. He indicated the <br />building is 179 feet on one side and 183 feet on the other, and only 25 feet of the sign will show <br />at one time. He added that with the Size of the entryway they felt this size sign was reasonable <br />without being exaggerated. <br /> <br />Commissioner Shepherd asked why the sign could not be lowered so the lettering could be <br />smaller. <br /> <br />Mr. Cota indicated that much of the frOnt is glass, and is a very decorative entrance area, and they <br />did not think the sign would look appropriate mounted on the glass. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson stated he still believes the sign is appropriate and is unique enough to <br />warrant the variance. <br /> <br />Mr. Cota added that a ground sign would block the traffic site line because it would have to be so <br />close to the street. <br /> <br />Commissioner Van Scoy asked if the height and size of the building should be included in the <br />findings as something that makes it acceptable. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson agreed that size would be helpful to distinguish it from other buildings in <br />the future, and agreed to add it as a condition of his motion to approve the findings. Chairperson <br />Nixt agreed with this amendment to the mOtion. <br /> <br />Commissioner Shepherd noted the sign coUld be mounted in the wall. She indicated she feels <br />they are defeating their original vision of limiting signage in the Town Center zoning district by <br />allowing this large of a sign. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated it is a valid concem, but he thinks there are unique circumstances to <br />warrant the variance. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Commissioners Johnson, and Van Scoy. Voting <br />No: Commissioners Shepherd and Watson. Absent: None. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/February 3, 2005 <br /> Page 4'of 15 <br /> <br /> <br />