Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission declines to recommend sign-variance for proposed Clipper convenience store
Summary
The Jasper City Planning Commission on June 23 voted not to recommend a requested variance to the sign ordinance for a new Clipper convenience store; staff said the applicant failed to show the hardship required by the sign code and commissioners cited inconsistent precedent and measurement questions.
Get email alerts on the Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Jasper City Planning Commission on June 23 voted not to recommend a variance to the city sign ordinance requested by Champagne Toasters LLC for a proposed Clipper convenience store at the Highway 515/108 intersection.
Scott Leaf, representing Champagne Toasters LLC, asked the commission to allow additional wall signage and a small 11.7-square-foot “flyby” sign for a single-tenant store. “We own and operate 24 convenience stores,” Leaf said. “On this one…the subject of our variance application is for signage on this new build for Clipper…we’re requesting is to have a sign there on the side facing 515…and then also a small fly by cafe.”
Planning staff presented the application and found the variance criteria were not met. “The applicant has not met the criteria for his sign variance as no hardship is evident,” Mary Elizabeth said, recommending denial under the sign code. Staff noted the parcel is zoned C2, is on water and sewer and that variances are limited to the minimum relief necessary; staff additionally said a condition—if the commission were to find merit—could limit total wall sign area to 200 square feet and cap the number of wall signs.
Commissioners raised two central issues: whether the requested signs were consistent with other nearby sites and how sign area should be measured. Some commissioners cited nearby Quick Trip and other developments where sign enforcement had been historically lax; others said that past inconsistencies did not meet the legal hardship requirement for a variance. Commissioners also discussed whether measuring the entire rectangular elevation or only the actual logo/lettering would change the total allowed sign area.
The commission considered a motion to approve the variance with a condition limiting total wall sign area and number of signs, and then a motion not to recommend approval. A motion not to recommend the variance carried, and the planning commission will forward a negative recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will make the final decision at its July 6 meeting.
Record details: the applicant reported three wall-mounted Clipper signs roughly 12 ft by 2½ ft and a separate flyby sign of about 11.7 sq ft; staff emphasized the code’s hardship standard and proposed the 200-square-foot wall-sign cap only as a possible limiting condition, not as staff’s preferred outcome. The commission’s action was a nonbinding recommendation to City Council, not a final denial by the city.

