HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC83041 - 8/4/83 - 5532 Brooklyn BlvdPLANNING COMMISSION FILE CHECKLIST
File Purge Date:
FILE INFORMATION
Planning Commission Application Number: A3uy�
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Zoning:
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 811/-3 City Vault
Minutes: City Council *&3 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. 83041
Please Print Clearly or Type
Street Location of Property 5532 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brnnklyn Center, Minnacnta
Legal Description of Property Registered Land Survey #1419, Hennepin Count, MinnPcnta
Tract A together with an undivided point 1400 Percent (.L) interest in tract F and T_
Owner Mr. and Mrs. WEstly Yee
Address 5532 Brooklyn Boulevard Phone No.(612) 561-7100
Applicant Zantigo Mexican Restaurants
Address 4640 West 77th Street Suite 160, Edina, Minnesota Phone No(612) 831-4045
Type of Request: Rezoning
Y
—X— Variance
Special Use Permit
Subdivision Approval
Site &.Bldg. Plan Approval
Other:
Description of Request: Variance to allow roof signs in addition to a freestanding identi-
fication sign.
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. (a I � 13
Date: - July 19, 1983
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Dates of P.C. Consideration:
Approved Denied
following conditions:
cant's Signature
this day of 19 , subject to the
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Dates of Council Consideration:
. Chairman
Approved _ Denied this _ - day of 19 , with the following
amendment:
- - -Clerk
PJI Form No. 18 (over please)
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 83041
Applicant: Zantigo Mexican Restaurants
Location: 5532 Brooklyn Boulevard
Request: Sign Variance
The applicant requests a variance from Section 34-140, Subsection 3.A.(3) to allow
for a roof sign in addition to a freestanding identification sign at the proposed
Zantigo Restaurant (presently Happy Dragon) at 5532 Brooklyn Boulevard. The
property is zoned C2 and is bounded by the Green Mill restaurant on the north, by a
private service road on the east, by Farrell's on the south, and by Brooklyn
Boulevard on the west. The Sign Ordinance states that "each establishment or enter-
prise eligible for a freestanding sign may instead elect to have a roof sign for
identification (in lieu of a freestanding identification sign), provided that the
sign does not extend more than six (6) feet above the roof line or more than the
respective height as prescribed in Table 34A, whichever is lesser, and further
provided that the sign does not exceed the respective area as prescribed in Table
34 A." The proposed sign does not extend more than 6 feet above the roof line nor
is it too large in area, but it is not in lieu of a freestanding sign. It is in
addition to a freestanding sign. Therefore, a variance is being sought essentially
to allow an extra sign, although the same sign would be permitted if it were located
below the roof line.
The applicant has submitted a letter (copy attached) in which he addresses the
Standards for a Sign Variance (also attached). The applicant explains that the
chimney wall sign (which lies above the roof line - see elevation attached) and the
building design are standard features of Zantigo restaurants. He states that
eliminating this sign would create a particular hardship to their building design.
The applicant also argues that the location of the standard Zantigo chimney wall
sign is unique to the Zantigo building. He points out that other restaurants
in the area do not achieve a similar image or design and, therefore, do -not need
a sign located above the roof line. Finally, the applicant states there will be
no detrimental effect resulting from the sign.
Staff are opposed to the granting of the requested variance because allowing both
a freestanding and a roof sign for the same property would seriously undermine the
Sign Ordinance. Regarding hardship, it appears to us that a smaller chimney sign
could be placed below the roof line or that the chimney could be moved somewhat
westward to allow the same sign below the roof line.
The building is not really unique, nor is the parcel of land on which it is located.
Many buildings have distinctive treatments along the roof line which, by themselves,
attract attention to the building. Such treatments do not justify extra signery
above the roof line.
Finally, we would argue that it is detrimental to allow both a freestanding sign
and a roof sign to a single, small establishment (establishments with 400' of
frontage on two major thoroughfares are entitled to an extra freestanding or roof
sign). Such a variance would open a floodgate of demands for additional signery not
now permitted under the Sign Ordinance. Action on this application should serve as
a signal to other potential applicants that additional.,signs beyond what is com-
prehended by the ordinance, will not be permitted. Denial is, therefore, recommended.
I
•
I
•
I
ar