Laserfiche WebLink
Statement and support of application for variance by B-Dale <br />Properties. <br />On November 27, 1978, B-Dale Properties contracted with Equity <br />Construction Company for a pylon sign to be placed at B-Dale <br />Center. The order provided that the sign was to go 15' west of <br />the driveway entry into the shopping center and specified that <br />the seller of the sign was to obtain the sign permit. <br />On January 4, 1979, Equity Construction Company obtained building <br />permit number 18375 for the pylon sign. The permit specified <br />that the sign was to be placed at a 30' setback from the property <br />line. Equity Construction Company contracted with a sign <br />installer to do the actual installation of the sign. The sign <br />footings were apparently inspected by a representative of the <br />city and approved. <br />The sign, which is a double <br />double sided face, has been <br />Recently, the merchants in <br />that they would like to add <br />existing sign face. They <br />install that additional sign <br />pylon sign with a 5' by 10' interior <br />in service until the present time. <br />the B-Dale shopping center decided <br />4' by 10' reader board below the <br />retained Lawrence Sign Company to <br />on the existing pylon poles. <br />When Lawrence Sign applied for the building permit, it was <br />discovered that the sign was installed about 20' back from the <br />property line instead of the required 301. This was the first <br />that the merchants or the applicant were aware of the error. <br />The existing sign is set back further from the street than any <br />other sign in the area. It is 37' back from the curb. The <br />nearest sign is one at Jerry's Foods, which is 24' back from the <br />curb. There are service station signs at the corner which are <br />even closer, but apparently operate under a different setback <br />requirement. <br />It would be a hardship to place the existing sign 30' back from <br />the property line because it would then be located in a parking <br />lot aisle and would greatly disrupt traffic flow. In addition, <br />because of the higher terrain to the west and the landscaping <br />trees to the east, the visibility of the sign would be much less <br />than in its present location. Our request is for a variance to <br />permit an additional 4' by 10' sign face as shown on the attached <br />plan be installed on the existing pylon sign. This will still be <br />10' square feet less than the maximum size permitted. <br />Thank you for your consideration. <br />