Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator. Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc.

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator. Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc."

Benedict Edward Pitts
5 years ago
Views:

Date Application Received: 04/17/17 Date Application Considered as Complete: 04/17/17 60 Day Review Period Expires: 06/17/17 To: From: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members Doug Reeder,

1 Date Application Received: 04/17/17 Date Application Considered as Complete: 04/17/17 60 Day Review Period Expires: 06/17/17 To: From: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc Date: 15 May 2017 Subject: # , Jim Kirkland, 1955 Shoreline Drive, Variances Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting variances in order to install a new monument sign. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. Background The property is a marina. They have had an existing free standing pylon sign identifying their site since the late 1980 s/early 1990 s. The current owners refaced the existing sign when they purchased the property as new pylon signs are no longer permitted. At this time they wish to remove the outdated pylon sign with a new low profile stone monument sign. Variances are requested for setback, hardcover, and height from grade. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section , , & Setbacks: B 2 Required Proposed Street 10 3 Lakeshore Applicable Regulations: Sign Criteria Minimum Clearance from Grade Variance (Section ) The applicant is proposing a low profile monument sign which will be a total of 40 inches tall. Because their goal is to keep it low, they are requesting variance from the ground clearance requirement for the sign copy area. The code requires a minimum of 20 inches of clearance from grade for the sign copy area, they are proposing 16 inches of clearance. The 20 inch requirement is to facilitate placement of plantings around the sign. Street Setback Variance (Section ) The applicant is requesting a variance to permit the new monument sign to be located 3 feet from the street property line where a 10 foot setback is required. The sign will be 20 feet from the fog line on Shoreline Drive. Lake Setback & Hardcover Variance (Sections & )

2 FILE # May 2017 Page 2 of 4 A majority of the improvements on this property are within the 75 foot setback from the lake, consistent with the use of the property as a marina. The proposed sign will be located 60 feet from the OHWL where a 75 foot setback is required. A variance allowing 15 square feet of hardcover is also requested. Governing Regulation: Variance (Section ) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. According to MN Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The variances requested are consistent with the general intent of and are in harmony with the Ordinance. The lake setback and hardcover variances are reasonable and necessary as the majority of the property is within 75 feet of the lake. The signage is proposed as far from the lake as can be reasonable and still be functional. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances resulting in a permit for construction signage supporting a marina within the commercial marina zone (B 2) are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The request to permit construction of a sign within the lakeshore setback appears to be reasonable. Also reasonable is that the sign proposed is low profile and will result in a minimal handover increase. The area available to locate the sign is narrow and the encroachment to the street setback is reasonable considering the 20 foot setback from the traveled roadway. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The property owner purchased the marina after it had been developed and the site layout is existing. The property owner did not create the circumstances. and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The requested variances will not alter the character of the neighborhood. The lake setback and hardcover variances are reasonable and necessary as the most logical location for the entry signage is near the read and within the 75 foot setback of the lake.

3 FILE # May 2017 Page 3 of 4 Additionally City Code provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as the use for signage is an allowed use in the B 2 District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The location and nature of the property necessitate the proximity to the lake. The need for identification, parking, and vehicle maneuvering on the property creates increased difficulties which drive the sign location and improvements toward the road. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The marina property is generally unique in the immediate neighborhood. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. This statement is true. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. This statement is true. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The size of the Property; the proximity to the lake and County Road 15; the need for site identification and access create practical difficulties affecting the Property; the variances are necessary and not merely serve as a convenience to the owners The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Practical Difficulties Statement Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Practical Difficulties Analysis Staff finds the site s orientation squeezed between Shoreline Drive and the lake serve as practical difficulties supporting both setback variances as well as the hardcover variance. Additionally the width of the shoulder supports the installation of the low profile monument sign within the required setback. Although the sign will be 3 feet from the property line it will be

4 FILE # May 2017 Page 4 of 4 10 feet from the curb and 20 feet from the fog line. The ground clearance requirement conflicts with the applicant s desire to have a low profile sign. A fence located at the same setback could be 42 inches tall, the sign is proposed at 40 inches. Public Comments Hennepin County has submitted comments relating to the sign location and expressed no concerns (see Exhibit H). To date, no additional public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Exhibit B. Exhibit C. Exhibit D. Exhibit E. Exhibit F. Exhibit G. Exhibit H. Exhibit I. Application Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Proposed Survey/Site Plan Proposed Plans and Elevations Material and Plant Details Aerial Photos Comments from Hennepin County Property Owners List Plat Map

8 NSMSB, LLC PC Exhibit C # N DENOTES PROPOSED TRACT 3 LOCATION ( SEE SPECIAL NOTE ) FIELD BOOK PAGE FIELDWORK CHIEF: DRAWN BY: DRAWING NAME: JOB NO. FILE NO. CHECKED BY: REVISIONS BOUNDARY SURVEY SURVEY FOR: PROPERTY ADDRESS: NSMSB, LLC 1955 Shoreline Drive Orono, Minnesota Tyler Street NE, Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota PHONE: (612) FAX: (612)

12 PC Exhibit D Plans

18 File # [Total Pages PC27] Exhibit E #

21 Sign to be removed New Sign Location

22 New Sign Location

23 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Michael D Olmstead "Jim Kirkland" Melanie Curtis; ""DAVID KIRKLAND"" RE: 1955 Shoreline Dr. Orono entry sign Thursday, April 13, :40:13 PM Jim, Hennepin County does not have an issue with the placement of your new monument. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Mike Olmstead Permits Supervisor Hennepin County Transportation - Operations (cell) (office) From: Jim Kirkland [mailto:jim.nsmsb@mediacombb.net] Sent: Thursday, April 13, :55 AM To: Michael D Olmstead <Michael.Olmstead@hennepin.us> Cc: Melanie Curtis <MCurtis@ci.orono.mn.us>; ''DAVID KIRKLAND'' <KIRKLANDDM@GMAIL.COM> Subject: 1955 Shoreline Dr. Orono entry sign Hello Mike I m working with Melanie Curtis at the City of Orono on a new entry sign for our marina property at 1955 Shoreline Drive in Orono. The proposed new sign location requires a variance from the City s code and we are submitting an application to the City for that. In connection with that, Melanie suggested that I send to you the variance package, for your information, and I ve attached it here. I ve also attached a digital copy of our site survey. If you have any questions or concerns about the proposed sign and its location, we would appreciate your input. Our application goes before the Orono City Planning Commission on May 15, and the full City Council on June 15. Thank you in advance for your help. Jim Kirkland North Shore Marina Smiths Bay jim@nsmarina.com

24 Disclaimer: If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly delete this message from your computer system.

25 PC Exhibit H #

27 PC Exhibit I #

REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION

REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 10 August 2015 ITEM NO: 12 Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Jeremy Barnhart RJO Planning Department Report Title Community Development