Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning committee denies Dodge store sign variance request
Summary
The Tupelo Planning Committee unanimously denied a request from Dodge’s stores to allow a 59.24 sq ft ground sign (option 9) at a new Gloucester Street location, after city staff said the sign’s electronic components exceed the code’s 40% electronic‑area limit and variance criteria were not met.
The Tupelo Planning Committee voted unanimously May 4 to deny a variance that would have allowed a 59.24‑square‑foot ground sign for a new Dodge store on Gloucester Street.
Nat Leathers, representing Dodge’s stores, told the committee the sign’s movable electronic numerals total roughly 39.16 square feet and argued that if only the electronic portion is counted the display would fall under the city’s 40‑square‑foot limit: “If you look at that sign, the actual… numerals of each of those 4 blocks that would move, you come up with a 39.16, which is actually less than the 40,” he said.
City staff recommended denial. Mr. Faulkner, presenting the staff analysis, said the code treats a sign’s copy as the minimum bounding box around the electronic elements and that, as drawn, option 9 includes a full‑color message center and price blocks that push the electronic area well over the 40% allowance: “There is one set of criteria for the total size of signage…and out of that maximum, then there’s a 40% of that that can be electronic,” he said, adding that the drawing appears to put the proposal above that threshold.
Faulkner also said a basic standard for granting a variance is a factor outside the applicant’s control that prevents compliance; staff found the applicant had not demonstrated that requirement. Committee members expressed sympathy for the applicant’s visibility concerns but agreed staff’s technical reading of the sign area and the variance standard weighed against approval.
Scott Davis moved to deny the variance for option 9; Lehi Mart seconded. By a show of hands the committee voted to deny the application unanimously. Tanner Newman noted the applicants have a three‑day appeal period to take the matter to the city council.
The committee’s decision only addresses option 9. Newman and the applicant said option 8 — an alternative that removes part of the lower gas panel and had been approved administratively within a 15% administrative flexibility — remains available to the applicant.
