Loading...
VI.I. Sign Variance – Hennepin County; Anderson (CR 2015-068)May 27, 2015 � SIGN VARIANCE — HENNEPIN COUNTY Council Report 15-68 Proposed Action Staff recommends the foIlawing motion: adopt �t.esolution 15-47, den.ying a Sign vaniance at 1011 First Street South. At the Zoning and Planning meeting, Mr. McNeil moved and Mr motion to adopt Resolution RZ15-10, recommending denial of a sign Street South. The motion was approved unanirnously. Andrew seconded a variance at 101 l Pirst Overview The building at 1011 First Street is now a site %r Hennepin County Serviees. At one tiirie Wells Fargo Bank occupied more of the building than it currently does. The only signage on the building now is ac�vertising for Wells Fargo. Hennepin County Services rr�flved in last year and has no signage on the building. The proposed Hennepin County sign is 5' x 5`, which is 2S square feet. The sig� is proposed to be located on the southwest corner af the site. The building is zoned B-2, Central Business. This zoning district allows two square feet per front foot of building. The building's front yard is 11`" Avenue. The �auilding is 145 feet along 11`" Avenue. The site is allowed 290 square feet. The building currentty has 462 square feet of signage. The propased sign would be on a 5' x 2.25' pedestal, for a total height of approximately seven feet. Primary Issues to Consider • What is the zoning of the property, and how has the Carnprehensive Plan designated the subject site? • What does the ordinance requare? • What are the specifics of the applicant's request? • What practical difficultzes does the property have? � Are there options for Hennepin Caunty withaut a varianc�? • What was the discussion at the Znning and Planning meeting? SupAorting Dacuments • Analysis of Issues Sign plans Resolution 15-47 `1� �+ � � Nancy . Anderson, AICP Citv Planner Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted; YIN Source; Related Dacuments (CIP, ERP, etc.): Notes: CRI 5-68 Page 2 Primary Issues to Consider • What is the zoning af the propert,y, and now has the Gomprehensive Plan designated the subject site? The subject property is zoned B-2, Central Business. The Comprehensive Plan has de�ignated the site as Commercial. • What does the ordinance require? The ordinance allaws two syuare feet oF signage per front foot of building. The site is currently aver on signage by 172 square feet. • What are the specifics of the applicanNs request? The applicant is requesting a 5' x 5' sign located on t%e southwest corner of the site. The propased sign will be non-illuminated. • What practieal difficulties does the property have? The new state statute requires three standards for the granting of a variance. The three requirements are: 1. Practical difficulties cited in connectian with the granting of a variance, i.e. property awner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control; 2. �`he plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created hy the landowner; and 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The applicant does not meet the three requirements to g�-ant a variar�ce. T�e building is over the �llowed square footage for signage, Uut the landowner will not remove signage to accommodate the new occupant in the building. The location of the sign is also nat ideal. Cars going north on 11t�` Avenue will see the sign, but coming from other sides the sign will not be visible. • Are there options for Hennepin County withoat a variance? Signs under six square feet do not require a permit. Si�ns fewer fihan six square feet could be erected over both the north and south doors to provide signage for Her�nepin County. • What was the discussian at the Zoning and Planning meeting? Ms. Anderson reviewed the reasans for the staff recommendatian af de�ial. Mr. Kerssen stated that the sign d�es not meet the criteria for grantin� a variance. Mr. Vaske, representing Henneprn County, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Vaske stated they wanted to replace the "For Lease" sign with the proposed sign. Ms. Andersan noted that the CR15-68 Page 3 "For Lease" s�gn was an illegal sign that never got a persnit and should be removed. The Cammission discussed other alternatives for signage on the b�aildin�. Mr. Kerssen noted that this was not the forurri to solve the signage issues for the building. Alternatives Approve the sign variance variance. By approving the sign variance, Hennepin Council will be able to erect the sign as proposed. If the City Council considers this alternative, findings will have to be identified that support this alternative. 2. Deny the sign variai�ce. By denying the sigi variance, Hennepin County will not be able to erect the sign as proposed. 3. Continue far further information. If �he City Council indicates that f'urther information is needed, the item should be continuec�. CITY OF HOPKINS �IENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO: 15-47 RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A SIGN VARIANCE WHEREAS, an application for Variance VN15-1 has been made by Mi�e Vaske on behalf of Hennepin Caunty, and WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows: 1. That an application for Variance VN15-1 was made by Mike Vaske on behalf of Hennepin County a� April 23, 20� 5; 2. That the Hopkins Zonirzg and Planning Commission, pursuant to mailed notice, held a meeting on the application and reviewed such application an May 2b, 2415: all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; and, 3. That the written comments and analysis of t�ae City staff were considere�. NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT RES4LVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS, MINNESOTA, that application for Var�ance VN15-I ta allow more signage than allowed at 1011 First Street South is here}�y recommended Foz- denial based �n the following Findings of Fact: 1. That the applicant does not have a circumstance pecu�iar and unique to the parcel and that the property owner has reasonable use of the property. 2. That the excess amount of sigmage on ihe site was created by the landowner. BASED ON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT, the City Couneil of the Gity of Hapkins, Mirinesota, hereby determines that the literal enforcement of the amount of signage would not cause practical difficulties because of circumstances �nique to the subject property, that ganting af the requested variance to the extent necessary to compensate for such practical difficulties is not keeping with the intent af the Hopkins City Code, and that the variance of an additional 25 square feet of signage is not reasonable. Adopted this 2nd day of June 2015. Eugene J. Maxwell, Mayor ATTEST; Amy Domeier, City Cierk � �F3ennepFn 4 �+�i aa��A:,r �4rw�:�� :.�;": �'� "�1f�.�,g,. �t��""IIF�' '.��.f�.�:�..", . ^�n������e��4§�r�'�9,4 rt:.r.R�4sP'��, rsa][ef t?6 �FCryi��3^a,av �:caw;r�� � „� �� 4� ���R ���°��- 1 r'�` �jjrt_�a ��ElLevation_.__. „ ,-- / - Ssale ].�1.-0. Side Pra9ile Stsk: I"=1'-0' D/F lfon-tlfuminated Monumerrt (A� Emc pan mmrial OA90' AiLMIXVY %U14ySPA1NfE� FAffifl7EC1UAA1 BR01lff Fr � _I. Hennepin Courtry West Hu6 BUilding O �p�k �� � PesHrrer- LS U1IMIFIARREMRflIENN1l I�YtAQEiIfS APPi1E17 i6MdttFCUlIlII�RWliN FNlI€L INSERT. FIRSf aob numn�. 52533 SURfFfER1RIIF.DTUMAtt]IRCBLIIE. I Da�e. OL23.l5 �6asesWrt , �e�l R!v 7 FABA14'A7ED0�'9p'ALUMINtlMtOVEIi�UP Re++3 NWELS c.. n �[. F Mit711 41RECY ELIBFD 031' I i� 'i+i' � � archetype fe.aaA.e�,. � H+��W� Homo4 SNp 45t NS }6W ( [wN�� ... ��._, I3tf"eCi+peSllw I 452M19601 � u�c� �c. neq➢e v1 T�.edn AOWa.Cp Trac Hl � De5[siP�n� fliulAnyl(+d 4lprtumml F.,g,_. i.l �t� . , �s �. �- '�� . r� '. , : !'T�•"` � t . y . 3a,r +'- • �• `k y' � . _ . . , • s�.r ,� �, .: ' `� � - .- •� �, �!� p � - � Y _ _ . ��. Y ' •'� ,y _ , �. � t , � �`"�f � }��t i � `�' : �, l+�i�' � �iti + .�. ��+ 91 i`� `' � s ` `-'-' � � . ! +� • i r �.' ,Y '� . � � . x��`{� ��i'�`i., - -i .a. -�- '"�•f�` �r :�iqi '.ti� . �. ;�• '4�, �� �' • • � fr��• ".tir74 � ..=4''1� . -k� � , *:P '}'tv_ � • ";r�,�' .A.. . .�41. � . t - . � . . ��`+��:y �j ' - , ' . .`y,� il . . ,,'_t•R�', 5�� ' '�- �4��+'p . .* `r � i5� �'f� . r � 4 �'�';� �• � . #Mr 7��.M � �� �,i E , -r �' � ��M� • � j , , nf'' . _;."i'i/ ` � � ? ��� . �� `��' � . _ � . _.� a�...,... ,,,,.-:�.� . � -- -- ._ . , . 1 . . . . _ , 1 . - - _ . '"t � . . � . ..��.-?r m�i, ? �� "' _ � --- _rf-�. �-- � ���_� — " r--�' -z: .i '_ ,}' ; - • . ., - . - � f� . - � ��3--�1�..,.7''�."S ' _ -�J�"I�'^. _,_I'.'_.'1':Y, � � � '�'�;�` �6ti,