Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local business owner asks council to reconsider sign ruling after other freestanding signs appeared
Summary
Nathan Pollock told council his business’s freestanding sign was ruled nonconforming and denied an appeal in 2022 while similar signs appeared elsewhere; he asked the council to review permit records and inconsistent enforcement.
A local business owner asked the council to review a sign-enforcement decision he said has unfairly singled out his business. Nathan Pollock (6153 Massachusetts Avenue) told the council he sought zoning approval in late 2021 for a freestanding sign but was told in April 2022 that his sign was nonconforming; his appeal to the council on May 3, 2022, was denied, he said.
Pollock said he has since found examples of freestanding signs that appear to have been installed in 2021 or 2022 — including one at Keiser University and another at the Hacienda — and he provided permit-excerpt copies and Google Street View images to show timing. "Patriot Stogies, a veteran owned business in your city," Pollock said as he asked the council to reconsider enforcement in his case and to review what he described as an imbalance in applying sign code rules.
Council members and the city attorney discussed abatement and enforcement history for the property; the city attorney said the sign had been found illegal but was under an abatement order that had been extended, and enforcement would resume on expiration of the abatement. Council members suggested the broader sign ordinance and enforcement procedures may be worth additional review to avoid imposing unnecessary costs on new businesses.
No formal action was taken at the meeting; council members asked staff to follow up on the permit timing and abatement status associated with Pollock's property.
