Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sign Design Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
TAB denies I-15-facing freeway sign and other sign variances, allows additional monument signs under conditions
Summary
The Enterprise Town Advisory Board denied most sign variance requests for a proposed office/retail warehouse complex near I-15, rejecting a freeway-facing sign and reduced setbacks while allowing an extra monument sign under staff conditions.
The Enterprise Town Advisory Board on May 14 voted to deny most of a developer's requested sign variances for a proposed office/retail warehouse complex fronting Interstate 15, but approved an increase in the number of on-site monument signs per staff conditions.
Applicant Jay Heller described the project and signage requests, including a freestanding sign along I-15 with an electronic message unit, a reduced setback for that sign, and an additional monument sign along local streets. Heller said the electronic message unit would be a "16 millimeter color LED" and that the signs would not be internally illuminated; landscape lighting would be used for monument signs. He said the project frontage totaled about "1,915 linear feet" and that the design team had reduced several elements earlier in the project's review.
Board members raised concerns about visual impacts to nearby residential areas, the precedent of allowing a large I-15-facing sign in that corridor, and possible distraction to freeway drivers. One board member said the "freeway sign is just not appropriate," and others questioned the reduced 2-foot setback request and the overall size of the freeway sign (discussed in the record as increasing from about 100 square feet to roughly 648 square feet). The board noted prior concessions by the applicant on building heights, illumination and color palette, and reciprocity with neighbors such as Brownstone.
After discussion and no public opposition at the podium, a motion carried to deny sign review requests 1, 2 and 3 (including the freeway sign, reduced setback and electronic message-unit allowance) and to deny the request identified as sign review 5; the board approved sign review 4, allowing an additional monument sign, subject to staff conditions and clarification that the approval be limited to monument signs. The board's action was recorded as denial of most requests and conditional approval of increased monument signage.
