HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.a. Request by Dr. Kurt Walter-Hansen for a Ground Sign Setback Variance 9ROSEMOUI ` T EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
Board of Appeals and Adjustments Meeting: November 26, 2013
Tentative City Council Meeting (If Appealed): December 17, 2013
AGENDA ITEM: Case 13-35-V Dr. Kurt Walter-Hansen AGENDA SECTION:
Request for a Ground Sign Setback Public Hearing
Variance.
PREPARED BY: Jason Lindahl, A.I.C.P.
AGENDA NO. 5.a.
Planner
ATTACHMENTS: Site Location Map, Aerial Photo, Survey, APPROVED BY:
Sign Plans
RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION to approve a ground sign setback variance from 10
feet to 5 feet along South Robert Trail and from 10 feet to 6.6 feet along Lower 147th Street
West to allow a new ground sign in the same location as the pervious non-conforming
ground sign at 14685 South Robert Trail, subject to the following:
1. The proposed ground sign shall comply with all sign regulations including but not
limited to:
A. The proposed sign will have a masonry base equal to at least fifty (50) percent of
the sign face. The masonry base shall extent to the top of any support columns
and be no further than two (2) inches from the bottom of the sign cabinet.
B. An area not to exceed sixteen (16) square feet within the freestanding sign shall
be allowed for continuous display (no flashing, scrolling or other animation) of
electronic or nonelectronic changeable copy identifying current fuel prices in
accordance with Minnesota state statutes section 239.751.
SUMMARY
Applicant & Property Owner: Dr. Kurt Walter Hansen
Location: 14685 South Robert Trail
Property Size: 21,805 Square Feet (0.5 Acres)
Comp. Guide Plan Desig: C - Commercial
Current Zoning: C-3, Highway Commercial
The applicant,Dr. Kurt Walter-Hansen,is requesting a ground sign setback variance to locate a new
ground sign in the same location as the previous non-conforming ground sign on the former Marathon gas
station property located at 14685 South Robert Trail. Staff recommends the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments approve the variance request based on the findings detailed below.
The proposed sign would meet the current height and materials standards and be approximately 30 square
feet smaller than the former sign. The sign size is under the current one hundred (100) square feet
maximum size ordinance standard.
Should the Board of Appeals approve the setback variance, the applicant plans to construct a twenty (20)
foot high sixty-two (62) square feet ground sign (see attached plan). The sign includes one logo and one
static LED gas price sign. It should be noted that dynamic (electronic) signs are prohibited in this
location, as it was determined that dynamic product advertising should not occur Downtown. However, as
more gas stations move to electronic gas pricing display versus the readerboard variety,modifications to
the ordinance might need to be made. Staff is comfortable in supporting electronic gas pricing, so long as
no product advertising (except gas pricing) is allowed. The plan calls for the sign cabinets to be supported
by two steel posts that will be covered by brick columns as required by the zoning ordinance. There will
be ten (10) feet from the bottom of the sign cabinet to the ground elevation to allow for visibility which is
important since the sign is located close to the Lower 147/Hwy 3 intersection.
BACKGROUND
The village and township of Rosemount merged in January of 1971. The merged Village of Rosemount
officially became a statutory city in January of 1975. The Village's first zoning ordinance was adopted on
October 19, 1972. The subject property was platted as part of Auditor's Subdivision No. 1 in 1906 and
the existing gas station building was constructed in 1958. Therefore, the subdivision and development of
this property pre-dates formation of the City and establishment of city development regulations. As a
result, there are no records of the original approvals for the subject property.
The Marathon gas station site closed in the spring of 2011. Shortly after closing, the real estate company
marketing the property removed the existing ground sign and painted over the signage on the canopy
covering the gas pumps. According to the applicant, the existing ground sign was located approximately
five (5) feet from the eastern (South Robert Trail) property line and six and one-half(6.5) feet from the
southern (Lower 147th Street West) property line. Consequently, the existing ground sign did not meet the
current ten (10) foot setback requirement for ground signs and was non-conforming.
The applicant purchased the subject property in October of 2012 or at least twelve months after the
Marathon gas station closed and the existing ground sign was removed. According to Minnesota Statute
462.357, Subdivision le, any non-conformity that is discontinued for a period of more than one year must
meet the current zoning standards. However,in this case staff supports the applicant's request for a
variance to locate a new ground sign in the same location as the former non-conforming sign based on the
findings detailed below.
It should also be noted that the City granted a similar ground sign setback variance for Master
Transmission in November of 2011. Granting the variance for Master Transmission does not set a
precedent requiring the City to grant this request. However, staff did support the Master Transmission
variance and some of the same conditions apply to the current request.
ISSUE ANALYSIS
Legal Authority. City review of a variance application is a Quasi-Judicial action assigned to the Board of
Appeals and Adjustments. Generally,if the applications meet the review standards the variance must be
approved. The standards for reviewing variance are detailed in Section 11-12-2.G of the City Code and are
based on the standards set forth in Minnesota State Statute 462.357, Subdivision 6. In Summary,variances
may be granted when the applicant establishes there are "practical difficulties"in complying with the
zoning regulations. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. In addition, the
2
Board may choose to add conditions of approval that are directly related to and bear a rough
proportionality to the impact created by the variance. The standards for reviewing a variance application
and staff's findings for each are provided below.
1. Is variance in harmony with purposes and intent of the ordinance?
Finding The variance request would allow a new ground sign in the same location as the former
non-conforming ground sign. The purpose and intent of the setback regulation is to create a
uniform location standard,insure adequate visibility, and provide sufficient area for ancillary
activities such as landscaping and snow storage. The design and location of the proposed sign
should not impact visibility or area for ancillary activities and will position the sign with a similar
setback as the commercial uses north of the site,in the DT—Downtown zoning district.
2. Is variance consistent with the comprehensive plan?
Finding The subject property is guided C - Commercial by the Comprehensive Plan. This section
of the plan emphasizes broader location,utility, and land use criteria as opposed to the more
detailed development standards found in the zoning ordinance. The proposed setback variance
does not conflict with the development characteristics emphasized by the Commercial section of
the Comprehensive Plan. As a result, staff fords the variance consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
3. Does proposal put properly to use in a reasonable manner?
Finding Staff finds that a ground sign is a reasonable accessory use for a commercial property. In
addition, the proposed location is reasonable in that it will allow the new sign in the same location
as the former non-conforming sign with a similar setback as other freestanding signs in the
surrounding Downtown district.
4. Are there unique circumstances to the properly not created by the landowner?
Finding Staff finds the subject property is a shallow rectangular shape that is significantly smaller
than neighboring commercial properties. According to the survey, the subject property is 150 feet
deep while the neighboring commercial properties to the north are over 300 feet deep. The
existing building and canopy above the gasoline pumps cover over seventy (70) percent of the
property. As a result, the subject property has limited viable locations for a freestanding sign that
would also meet the ten (10) foot setback requirement.
5. Will the variance, ifgranted, alter the essential character of the localiy?
Finding Staff finds the requested reduction in setbacks from the south and east will not alter the
essential character of the neighborhood. The subject property is bordered by the DT—
Downtown district to the north and south. The Downtown district has zero foot building and
ground sign setbacks while the C-3 district requires a minimum 10 foot ground sign setback.
Should the Board of Appeals grant the variance, the proposed ground sign would have a similar
setback to existing ground signs on neighboring properties in the Downtown zoning district.
3
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of a sign setback variance to construct a new ground sign in the same location
as the previous non-conforming ground sign on the former Marathon gas station property located at
14685 South Robert Trail. This recommendation for approval is based on the information submitted by
the applicant and findings made above. The proposed sign would meet the current height and materials
standards and be approximately 30 square feet smaller than the former sign and the current one hundred
(100) square feet maximum size standard. Should the Board of Appeals approve the setback variance, the
proposed sign will be required to meet all other current sign regulations. One exception is that staff is
recommending to allow the applicant to have electronically changeable copy for gas price advertising,
although other product advertising is prohibited, consistent with the intent of the ordinance.
It should be noted that decisions made by the Board may be appealed to the City Council by the applicant,
the Zoning Administrator, a member of the City Council or any person owning property or residing within
350 feet of the property affected by the decision. All appeal requests must be filed with the Planning
Department within ten (10) working days of the action by the Board of Appeals and Adjustments.
4
Hansen Variance Request
tS '?I
CAT J
r
l
C,t WC 1044.
orp
/
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a Map Scale
legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning 1 inch = 184 feet
verification. Dakota County assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data. 11/13/2013
09
7
0
P (J 8
8 Ill�
q
I.,
eW;,
MI Z-I S x
rn O- i
0 TN5IZ
in n ;. o
P
8
$
I;',
s
S (i
• x —_x EXISTING FENCE x x ---
aao
089 I--
7 Z ti
m t,
o=�"c
P CO-NI ;
CD Z t./ 8
Ill 8
L.__ y
L
V,
POSSIBLE IP UNDER
BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY N0 I I IIE
/
1 922.5.5 0
>5.5, 27.50 PLAT
�—x x EXIS�ING FENCE , % 55.00 PLAT
x __x x� 5.5i<
n —x x —x _
Z x I x x x1_
l
c
o l„)
8 •
Ia /
jl/
Y 46.1
r Z - - -
N p
a
N z -----°, • �` 69.24
O r .3.2
23.1
zs
a' O -F,. r
FWrch f-I P _ £ 0 -
wa $ cn —I r u
s a Z O c
-II N I C
n° / CO
CJi
56'6b — 72.3
gi
co
LS
• :GAS PUMPS p, •�;I- U.
''I' �• 1
O A O I
? `-OTERNEAD CANOFT. .,, - -
, �27.50 PLAT . :.
'-. T_-�„ J ,s nl, 55.00 PLAT f
\\` AAII -1-92.50.nn
CONCRETE CURB
m _ _ ROBERT TRAIL SOUTH
Hansen Sign Variance - 14685 South Robert Trail
le too
.,,
,,
,. ..„ , V
F ill
, , -, i ,.,,...,,, ,„,-,,,,1:141.*pr. .
, , ,,,,
, ,,,, -,..i,f,,,,,i, ,,, L , , ,, , ,
, . .,
s
. i
r
• aa^ " ..
' �° �Rik "`
u°� e' y,; C ` ,tt, Is
ii,
.. 1"
1
ea 4
N, .t
rr ,c„ .,
,.,
l
m
a.sd lilt
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a Map Scale
legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification. 1 inch = 40 feet
Dakota County assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data. 11/20/2013
4. e
y
N.
O 'a
Q.
Po
A.
CD
CIA
0
/ ,
crq
, '11,14 , 4, i I 1 ■' ', ; ' '
CA
o
o
h f
o
o i .1:1 Pl.„
I 9
i �'.�µ
Pa
CD
NO '-+
O
w
'y- s - ,€
' +° ° n �'
2
,gam ,I �- fl 5 .
015,E v, �• c` y -9
�* 1, vt ! ,,' .. , .ter r __ _
� '. , s
I
r' .r�,,ui+• - D/F CABINET wart DIGITAL
6�' ;. a --,, ' PRINT LOGO ON POtYCARLiONATE
a''•r -
INTERNALLY LIT.
"'a A-• ( MATCH PLATE MOUNTED
. I TO EXISTING STEEL
■
.
Y '
i S °
r 11 '! .- LEDgaspriceunits
+. ;:-. 1225•x 238Yx 1.2 deep
,i.=k t ?x-J ai" 'I - e I — 61mm
1 f �a a ; mounted to faces
t
-4- ^` . .1 d "� 1 - with WI coRY faces•
' whhvhrylccPY
• f ,,TY, 3( - '1
1 I" MI —'1
. IT
6-r — --
–
i
1,
6'x6"x5/16"sgtube
Sec.Mod 12.5
77.
E �
1
r* t I
1
eroal
•-4.z.a,,P,',:=:,,, 4 Ce74LI,'‘ed
P h- I
Scale 1/2°=1'0" I
,rip
,t-A,,,,,, vielel- 1/4 ,
.4 p - L.cry, •