Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates Chase Bank sign variance and seeks concessions; action tabled
Summary
After extended debate over sign size, placement and precedent, council declined to approve Chase Bank’s request tonight and moved to table the variance, asking staff and the applicant to draft ordinance language that could include removing a monument sign as mitigation.
Council members engaged in a lengthy discussion over a variance request from Chase Bank to install a secondary façade sign facing a rear drive where visibility to customers on the HB side is limited. James Mcnite, speaking for Chase, said the two‑sided building configuration left the bank unable to reach customers from that side and argued a rear sign would correct a practical visibility problem.
Several council members pushed back, noting the city and Chase had previously negotiated sign placement, that unauthorized signage installed earlier had been removed, and that approving an exception could set an undesirable precedent. Council members proposed mitigation such as removing the freestanding monument sign, an ATM surround sign and some vinyl window coverings in exchange for a rear façade sign, and asked staff to draft ordinance language to reflect any conditions.
A motion to deny the variance failed; council later moved to table further consideration so staff can draft formal ordinance language and any proposed concessions. No final variance was approved at the meeting.
Council members emphasized consistent application of the newly updated sign ordinance while also acknowledging the applicant’s legitimate visibility concerns; staff will return with final ordinance language and any mitigation conditions.
