AGENDA #5b

 

                                                              MEMORANDUM

 

TO:                  Mayor and Town Council

 

FROM:            W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager

 

SUBJECT:       Report on Petition Regarding Signage at Performance Automotive

 

DATE:             December 11, 2000

 

This memorandum responds to a petition that the Town Council referred to the Town Manager.  The petition requested approval of an additional ground sign for the Performance Automotive Company.

BACKGROUND

 

On October 23, 2000, Mr. Mark Moore brought a petition to the Town Council on behalf of the Performance Automotive Company (petition attached).  Mr. Moore requests that the Town approve an additional ground sign to be placed on the Performance Automotive site. 

 

The existing signage on the site was approved by the Appearance Commission in October, 1987.  Specifically, the Appearance Commission approved a Unified Sign Plan for Performance Motors that allowed a “wall” sign for each of the four brands of cars sold on the site (Acura, BMW, Chevrolet and Subaru).  The “wall” signs consisted of ground signs that were interpreted at the time as being wall signs because they were situated adjacent to retaining walls in front of the buildings.  In 1991, the Appearance Commission upheld this interpretation and approved a fifth “wall” sign for Saturn.

 

We note that, in 1998, the Town Council combined the former Appearance Commission and former Design Review Boards into a new advisory board, the Community Design Commission. At this time, the Council shifted the approval of signage to Town staff. 

 

PROCESS

 

In accordance with the Town’s Development Ordinance, sign applications are submitted to Town staff for administrative review and approval.  The formal process consists of an applicant submitting a Sign Application with appropriate materials and application fee, and then Town staff making a determination of approval, approval with conditions, or denial.  In the event that a Sign Application is denied, an applicant could choose to appeal the decision to the Board of Adjustment.

 

Applicants may also choose to request a letter of determination from the staff regarding the applicability of the Development Ordinance to a particular signage issue.  If the applicant does not agree with the staff interpretation outlined in the letter of determination, then the applicant could also choose to appeal the staff interpretation to the Board of Adjustment.

 

DISCUSSION

 

At the present time, we have not received a Sign Application or a request for a Letter of Determination from the petitioner. 

 

Based on the materials submitted to the Town Council, we do not believe that the proposed sign would meet the requirements of the Town’s Development Ordinance.  In particular, Article 14.13.8.1(a) of the Ordinance requires that:

 

“The message of ground signs shall be limited to the name(s), trademarks and servicemark(s) of the establishment(s) located on the zoning lot and/or of a multi-use development located thereon, except that ground signs identifying theaters or service stations may also identify the current presentation(s) or fuel prices, as appropriate, and that ground signs identifying places of worship may also provide information related to the place of worship and its activities on the zoning lot.”

 

Accordingly, we believe that the appropriate content of a ground sign on this site would be limited to the name of the business (Performance Automotive) and its appropriate servicemarks (Acura, BMW, Chevrolet, Saturn and Subaru).  We also do not believe that “Preowned No Risk Used Cars & Trucks” meets the definition of a servicemark.  In addition, we note that if the proposed sign were interpreted to fulfill the message requirements of the Development Ordinance, then the dealership could also proceed to ask for additional ground signs for the Parts Department, the Service Department, etc. 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

We recommend that the Council take no action at this time. 

 

ATTACHMENT

 

1.      Petition from Mr. Mark Moore (p. 3).