The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC83035 - 7/14/83 - 4301 68th AvePLANNING COMMISSION FILE CHECKLIST File Purge Date: L) FILE INFORMATION Planning Commission Application Number: PROPERTY INFORMATION Zoning: C-� PLAN REFERENCE Note: If a plan was found in the file during the purge process, it was pulled for consolidation of all plans. Identified below are the types of plans, if any, that were consolidated. • Site Plans • Building Plans • Other: FILE REFERENCE Note: The following documents were purged when this project file became inactive. We have recorded the information necessary to retrieve the documents. Document Type Date Range Location Agendas: Planning Commission Office Minutes: Planning Commission -I I r-A �-n City Vault Minutes: City Council 7 I City Vault Document Type Number Location Resolutions: Planning Commission City Vault Resolutions: City Council City Vault Ordinances: City Council City Vault CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION Application No. 83036 Please Print Clearly or Type Street Location of Property 4301 - 68th Avenue North Legal Description of Property Owner Iten Leasing Company Lot 1, Block 2 Northtown Plaza 2nd Addition Address 6701 Brooklyn Boulevard Phone No. 561-9220 Applicant Paul Desvernine/Iten Leasing Co. Address same Phone No. type of Request: Rezoning x Variance Special Use Permit Subdivision Approval Site &.Bldg. Plan Approval Other: Description of Request: Variance from the Sign Ordinance. The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center, within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing state- ment,• the actual costs incurred by the City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the processing of the application. Such costs shall be in addition to the application fee described herein. Withdrawal of the application shall not relieve the applicant of the obligation to pay costs incurred prior to withdrawal. Fee $50.00 Receipt No. 51771 Date: • (_ / _� cr /;' PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Dates of P.C. Consideration: —I- y - f 2; Approved Denied L-- this day of following conditions: CITY COUNCIL ACTION Dates of Council Consideration: cant's Signature 19 , subject to the al run Approved Denied this 6;� day of 19 3 , with the following amendment: _ Lie P/I Form No. 18 (over please) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 55430 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL Prior to submission of an application for plan review and approval, prospective applicants should arrange an informational meeting with the Planning Staff to discuss preliminary plans and to become familiarized with applicable ordinance and policy provisions. Three (3) copies of the following documents and information shall be submitted, at least 14 days prior to the date of the regular Commission meeting, concurrent with —filing the application (required documents must be consistent with ordi- nance and policy provisions before an application may be accepted): 1. A certified site survey drawing by a registered engineer or land surveyor showing pertinent existing condition, accurately dimensioned. 2.* An accurately scaled and dimensioned site plan indicating: a) parking layouts including access provisions; b) designations and locations of accessory buildings; c) fences, walls or other screening, including heights and type of material; d) outside lighting provisions, type and location; e) curbing. 3.* A landscape plan showing areas to be sodded or seeded; location, size and species of trees and shrubbery. 4.* Building floor plans, elevations, sections and specifications, including materials proposed. 5.* Existing and proposed land elevations, drainage provisions, and utility provisions. 6. Additional drawings, plans or information deemed necessary by the Secretary. *Must be prepared by a registered architect or,person registered with the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyors, and said drawings/plans shall be so certified. NOTE: Upon approval of plans by the Council and prior to issuance of permits, a Performance Agreement as to approved site imprgvcc.ents and a supporting finan- cial guarantee, in an amount to be determined by the City, are required. Accept- able financial instruments include cash escrow; certificate of deposit; and performance bond. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. Questions should be directed to the Planning and Inspection Department. P/I Form No. 19 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83036 Applicant: Iten Leasing Location: 4301 68th Avenue North Request: Sign Variance The applicant requests a variance from Section 34-140 , Subsection 3 . A . (3) to allow a roof sign more than 6' above the roof -line and more than 26' above the first floor level at the old Servomation building located at 4301 68th Avenue North. The property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded by 68th Avenue North on the north, by Iten Chevrolet on the east and south, and by a commercial building on the west. Roof signs are permitted in lieu of permitted freestanding signs provided the height and area of a freestanding sign is not exceeded. The Sign Ordinance allows roof signs to project not more than 6' above the roof -line of a building, provided this height is no greater than that allowed for a free- standing sign (in this case, 261). The applicant wishes to retain the existing sign board which extends to approxi- mately 36' above the first floor and 22' above the roof -line. The allowable size of a freestanding sign for a building of 15,000 sq. ft. is 190 sq. ft. in area. Signs, as permitted by the City's Sign Ordinance, are listed as accessory uses in the Zoning Ordinance and must conform to these standards as well. The existing gign board is a nonconforming use which has not been used for a sign board for over 2 years. Under the Zoning Ordinance, nonconforming uses which cease for over two years may not be resumed, but must conform with the requirements of the City ordinances. The applicant has submitted a letter ( attached) in which he argues that the existing sign structure is an integral part of the building and is needed to over- come the building's poor physical location. He states that relettering the existing sign structure is the most economical way to achieve exposure. He also states that granting the variance will improve business in Brooklyn Center and that their plan will promote the value of surrounding property and benefit the public welfare. He concludes by saying that, without the proposed sign, it is questionable whether the entire remodeling project can be economically justified. The Sign Ordinance stipulates that a variance from its provisions may be granted after demonstration by evidence that all of the following are met: 1. A particular hardship to the owner would result if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out; 2. The conditions upon which the application for a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land or the use thereof for which the variance is sought and are not common, generally to other property or uses within the same zoning classification; 3. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood. 7-14-83 -1- Application No. 83036 continued The applicant alleges that a hardship will result if the letter of the regulations is enforced in that the project may become nonviable. We have heard this refrain before: "if only I could have a bigger and higher sign, my business would prosper and the whole community would benefit." Unfortunately, the economic benefits may well be spent elsewhere while the aesthetic impact is definitely felt within the community. We must remember that the purpose of the Sign Ordinance is to allow "necessary visual communication," not profit maximizing communication or some other financially based criterion. Staff would assert that signery 6' above the roof -line, or a freestanding sign of 190 sq. ft. in area and 26' in height, does allow for necessary visual communication in this case and that this standard presents no hardship to the proposed use than it does to other uses within the City. As to uniqueness, the situation in question is certainly not unique. There are many businesses in Brooklyn Center which do not abut directly on a major thoroughfare; yet they conform to the City's Sign Ordinance (e.g. the other busi- nesses on 68th Avenue North) . And it is certainly conceivable that a sign within the restrictions of the Sign Ordinance would be visible from the site to Brooklyn Boulevard. Finally, we believe that the current oversized sign board is a detriment to the public inasmuchas it exceeds the community standards for roof signs and imposes more excessive advertising in an area of the Boulevard that is already heavily signed. We believe that granting this variance will lead others to want the same excessive signery; and the City will be hard pressed to deny their appeals if the variance is granted in this case. Although there are obviously costs associ- ated with altering the sign, we feel that the Sign and Zoning Ordinances should be strictly followed in this case to assure equitable treatment to all businesses in the City. Denial of the variance request is, therefore, recommended on the basis that the Standards for Sign Ordinance Variances are not met. 7-14-83 -2-