The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About13.C.1. Appeal of Board of Adjustment and Appeals Determination t3,C~ [ , I I I CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum CASE NO.: 07 -003 TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Dir. f11vt-- RE: Appeal of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals Determination on Signage located at the new High School on 1 ih Avenue MEETING DATE: January 16,2007 INTRODUCTION ISD 720 filed an appeal of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals (BOAA) decision concerning a variance to allow signage with a scrolling message board. Because there was confusion on the part of the applicant regarding when the appeal would be heard, on January 2,2007, the Council tabled the matter to January 16,2007. The proposed location for the sign is at the new High School currently under construction at 100 l7tlJ. Avenue West. At the December 7 BOAA meeting, the Board denied the request for variance, determining that the request did not meet all of the criteria required for granting the variance. The applicant has noted in their appeal application that without the variance that the sign does not meet the needs of the school district. The applicant further notes that the proposed sign would be similar in nature to the sign at the existing High School on 10tlJ. A venue. The sign at the existing High School is a legal nonconforming sign (meaning that it no longer complies with the current ordinance requirements). A copy of the December 7, 2006 Variance staff report to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals is attached for the Council's reference. ALTERNATIVES 1. Uphold the determination of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for the Council's consent agenda that is consistent with that decision. 2. Uphold the appeal of the applicant, thereby granting the requested variance, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for the Council's consent agenda that is consistent with that decision. 3. Table the appeal for additional information. ACTION REQUESTED Offer a motion directing staff to prepare a resolution for action at the next meeting, and move its adoption. Julie Klima Planner II H:\CC\2007\Ol-16-07\appeal sign variance ISD720 01162007,doc #(p CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum CASE NO.: 06-090 TO: Board of Adjustment and Appeals FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Variance to Allow a Sign with a Scrolling Message MEETING DATE: December 7, 2006 REVIEW PERIOD: October 26, 2006 - February 23, 2007 Site Information Applicant: ISD 720 Property Owner: ISD 720 Location: 100 lih Avenue West Current Zoning: Urban Residential (R-IB) Zone Adjacent Zoning: North: Urban Residential (R-lB) South: Jackson Township West: Urban Residential (R-lB) East: Urban Residential (R-lB) Compo Plan: Institutional MUSA: The site is within the MUSA boundary. DISCUSSION ISD 720 has submitted a request for a variance to allow signage with a scrolling message board. The sign is proposed to be located at the new High School currently under construction on 1 ih Avenue West (see Exhibit A for location). The applicant is proposing 2 potential locations for the sign. Proposed location A is south of 1 ih A venue near the school building and proposed location B is at the southwest corner of 1 ih A venue and County Road 79, In their application, ISD 720 notes that the intent of the message board is to communicate school and community events to the general public. The City Code specifically prohibits signs with a scrolling or moving message board. The following is language from the CO.de. Subd. 2. Prohibited Signs. C. Message boards that provide any flashing, blinking, revolving or moving messages or graphics. 1 Consistent with past practice, city staff informed the applicant that an LED reader board would be acceptable but that the message could only change once every 24 hours. The applicant wishes to have the message change on a more frequent schedule. FINDINGS: Section 11.89, Subd. 2, of the City Code contains provisions for the granting of variances only if all of the following circumstances are found to exist. Staff has provided draft findings for purposes of discussion by the Board. The Board may use or modify these draft findings as it sees fit, as well as propose other findings. Criterion I: The strict enforcement of the ordinance provisions would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Undue hardship means the following: I.A. The property ill question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls; Finding I.A. The property can be put to a reasonable use as a high schoolfacility with signage that meets the requirements of City Code, 1.B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property; Finding J.B. The plight of the applicant is not due to circumstances unique to the property. The circumstances are based on the applicant's desire for an alternative form of signage that is not allowed by City Code. 1.c. The circumstances were not created by the landowner; Finding 1. C. The circumstances were created by the applicant/landowner as a result of the applicant's desire for signage that varies from the requirements of the City Code. loD. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and Finding J.D. The variance would alter the essential character of the locality in that the property is located within and surrounded by residentially zoned properties, A sign of this design is not consistent with the intent of the residential signage regulations as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. 1.E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations do not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Finding I.E. The problems are not a result of economic considerations. Criterion 2: It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. Finding 2. The proposed variance would not be in keeping with the spirit and intent of Chapter 11 (Zoning) in that it would allow signage that is inconsistent with City Code requirements, 2 Criterion 3: The request is not for a use variance. Finding 3. The request is not a use variance. Criterion 4: Conditions to be imposed by the Board, of Adjustment and Appeals will insure compliance to protect the adjacent properties. Finding 4. No conditions are proposed. Criterion 5: Variances in the flood plain overlay zone also shall meet the following criteria: Finding 5. (Not applicable since the property is not within the flood plain overlay zone) ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve Resolution No. PC06-090, a resolution denying the variance request to allow a scrolling message board at the High School on 1 ih A venue, and move its adoption. 2. Approve the variance request to the signage as requested and direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings as proposed by the Board, and move its adoption. 3. The Board may table the request for additional information. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends Alternative No.1, approval of Res. No. PC06-090, as presented. ACTION REQUESTED Offer a motion approving Resolution No, PC06-090, a resolution denying the variance request to allow a scrolling message board at the High School on 1 ih Avenue, and move its adoption. ~fdf; !GiL~ Planner II h:\boaa-pc\2006\12-07\var isd 720 high school sign 06090,doc 3 RESOLUTION NO. PC06-090 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, DENYING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A SCROLLING MESSAGE BOARD AT THE HIGH SCHOOL ON 17TH AVENUE WHEREAS, ISD 720, applicant and property owner, has filed an application dated October 26, 2006 for a Variance to allow a scrolling message board sign at the new High School on 1 ih A venue under the provisions of Chapter 11 (Zoning) ofthe Shakopee City Code; and WHEREAS, this parcel is presently zoned Urban Residential (R-IB); and WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as attached on Exhibit 1; and WHEREAS, notice was provided and on December 7,2006, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals conducted a public hearing regarding this application, at which it heard from the Community Development Director and invited members of the public to comment. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: That the application for Variance is hereby DENIED, based on the following findings with respect to City Code Sec. 11.89, Subd, 2, "Criteria for Granting Variances." Criterion I: The strict enforcement of the ordinance provisions would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Undue hardship means the following: 1.A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls; Finding J.A. The property can be put to a reasonable use as a high school facility with sign age that meets the requirements of City Code. 1.B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property; Finding 1.B. The plight of the applicant is not due to circumstances unique to the property, The circumstances are based on the applicant's desire for an alternative form of signage that is not allowed by City Code. 1.c. The circumstances were not created by the landowner; Finding 1. C. The circumstances were created by the applicant/landowner as a result of the applicant's desire for signage that varies from the requirements of the City Code, 4 1.D. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and Finding J.D. The variance would alter the essential character of the locality in that the property is located within and surrounded by residentially zoned properties. A sign of this design is not consistent with the intent of the residential signage regulations as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. 1.E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations do not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Finding LE. The problems are not a result of economic considerations, Criterion 2: It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. Finding 2. The proposed variance would not be in keeping with the spirit and intent of Chapter 11 (Zoning) in that it would allow signage that is inconsistent with City Code requirements, Criterion 3: The request is not for a use variance. Finding 3. The request is not a use variance. Criterion 4: Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will insure compliance to protect the adjacent properties. Finding 4. No conditions are proposed. Criterion 5: Variances in the flood plain overlay zone also shall meet the following criteria: Finding 5. (Not applicable since the property is not within the flood plain overlay zone) Adopted by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the City of Shako pee, Minnesota, this 7th day of December, 2006, Chair of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals ATTEST: Community Development Director 5 Shakopee - Location Maps Page 1 of 1 ~ N _ Subject Property . SHAKOPEE w-_.:l:!(/. .E ......... Shakopee Boundary COMMVNtTYPJUDESlNCB 1857 S c=J Zoning BOUndary c=J Parcel Boundary Variance to Sign Ordinance 'ht+.-. .// ~<' ,,,"'<' ",.,,/,,1-,<> vnn""l1nf'.,t;r'lnrn!:ln/rn!:ln !:I en ?titlp='T!:IM !:Il1I"'P-l-tn+S:i OTl-l-nrrllnl'lnr.p.~ 1 on 1 /?OO/'l /~'"~ ,",'~__O',", " \, bXHI BIT Br ST, PAUL, MN MINNESOTA OFFICE W~ln WOLD ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS PALATINE,IL 305 ST, PETER STREET TROY, MI ST, PAUL, MINNESOTA 55I02 DENVER, CO TEL: 65I.227.7773 FAX: 651,223.5646 . . . fle.",:+VO Ml~ ~,,(. \4 ~ 36 S '1 ~t ALUMINUM COPING BRICK #2 (DARK) ..;.. - "'i'\"'"_~___"11' .'-"1_" II" 9~' ,-~""'''__~'~~4>Ull."lr!l.U!!:~~~ 1 l::-- '- ELECTRONIC SIGN (NJ.CJ ~ 38 If ARCH. PRECAST SHAPE #1 - SEE DETAIL 11/3-1 BRICK #1 (LIGHT) ARCH. PRECAST SHAPE #1 - SEE DETAIL 11/3-1 BRICK #2 (DARK) 8" HIGH LETTERS; 12" HIGH LETTERS; 3'-0" "OPTIMA" FONT "OPTIMA" FONT 13'-4" SUBJECT: SITE @ DATE: 4/18/05 COMMISSION NO: 042025 FSK REVISIONS ffi SI #67 REV. DATE 10/10/06 136 $,\IS07201HS_NEl'M2025'DETAILS\21007 .D~ HAYE <> 10190/2006 () 16.56.33 0 MI'1O ExHIBIT B2- MINNESOTA OFFICE WQLD ST. PAUL, MN WOLD ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS ELGIN, IL 305 ST. PETER STREET TROY, MI ST, PAUL, MINNESOTA ;5102 DENVER, CO TEL: 651.227-7773 SLOPE MET AL COPING TOTAL FAX: 651.223,5646 - OF 1"-FROM HIGH POINT TO - LOI^I POINT ASSEMBLY FASTENED I^lITH SCREI^lS 1/2" PL Y!^lOOD !^lOOD BLOCKING 3 /4" PL YI^IOOD I^l/ 2- 3 /8" X 6" LONG "" T.O. MASONRY ANCHOR BOL TS PRE-FINISHED METAL COPING 108'-8" CONTINUOUS KEEPER MAINTAIN 3 /8" GAP - PROVIDE SEALANT BETI^lEEN I^IOOD AND BRICK, PROVIDE FLEXIBLE FLASHING UP AND OVER BRICK AND CONC. BLOCK TO PROVIDE /^lEATHER TIGHT SEAL VERTICAL REINFORCING, 2-#5 @24" OC VERT 8" CONC. BLK. 2" AIR SPACE BRICK #2 (DARK) q, T.o. BOND BEAM 100'-0" ~ T,O, FOOTING 96'-6" #5 @ 32" O.C. VERT. DOI^lELS HOOK DOI^lELS 12" AT FOOTING STEEL MONUMENT SIGN SECTION 3/8" = 1'-0" SUBJECT: SITE @ DATE: 4/18/05 COMMISSION NO: 042025 FSK REVISIONS ffi SI #67 REV. DATE 10/10/06 137 S,IISOnOlHSJlEW\4202S\DETA1l.S\:21008DHG MAre <) 10/301200601(;,56,6 () MHO ~-"",,,,,,,~,- - - .._..............-...--~ L ""'-~... . ,..,..__..___....._.'t""............_..,_,._...""'..~......-.""-...,.,...... . t"",.....w....,.,."'......."'...,"-"'''''_........, ....,..~...,..<"',_"..,...",...=~~"._""..~...,,'~,,~~.'"........."..r --r. - L~'~'oJ --. - ..".--.....-.........--............,""..................- .,........ _..."'..~ I j ., .~ :1 , I ,~ f t .! (/ 0 0 - r ~ . un -C ~ ;5 ::f 3- 0 \ (/ _"""'~.........~-....u""'._ .-- V1 L () (' L -~ A - ? I L0 ""'0 :; I ; ~ 6 ...... P , ~ w -s; 0 I ~ -0 P 'iLl) ~ , , "1.:\ t'" < r I ~ [ .,....,. I - .J I f1 S (J'- t) f -\) 0 .' c::::::) j -- L. ~ .c :C ?f L ".. .1 ( r L; f'" J> .I Lf fJ-- ~ I V- .--\ <" r , / 0 I ,<:"" ~ f' n I v r- I 0 r -V $-) " ""----... j ~ t,., ....l- it . J ...." -t) ~\ t> .tt::- - "...- fi ~ /! fl- ~ J( t:> ""', J f& ") ij", I if) -ff, 'i- > t I' rJi - I J) rJ.~,.,- ( r \ i ~ r -- a- I - '- {:) () - j ~ ! ~ t. ..$._ -.\ .>'" i f\ . P, '" ~i 't' r .....,., tn -- f) f ':;? r~ 'Ii'~ ..- ~"). r- -;,L ..J-. . , .f/I .y LA " f; !f .c..') -I . ~ ~ If r:o ! i! -;. iJj" ,,..,,.. -(- 2~~ ;--- (,rl , +.. 2.. I :D ! ,. r I .! , 01\> o I fi ! ""Q j l 5 . :f 1 ..""'-.~~~C1 fl 1 1 -.--............... 1.. l ~,...._-",. I ~~1 ~._--- ._~~~ - . I - ~ $lJ-'~ 11+)(9 --~_.. __b:- h.t..~~oJ --..---- " J --- , I r- ~..",'" ) E:/C H- I 13 iT C- City of Shakopee Memorandum TO: Julie Klima, Planner II FROM: Joe Swentek, Project Engineer SUBJECT: Variance for Electronic Sign with Scrolling Message (New High School Site - 1 ih Avenue and County Road 79/Townline Avenue) PID NO.: 27-913083-0 CASE NO.: 06090 DATE: November 9,2006 The application indicates a request to allow for a single electronic sign with scrolling messages. The electronic sign is proposed to be located in one of two locations. The fIrst location is adjacent to the 1 ih Avenue right-of-way nearest the new high school building, approximately midway between County Road 77 (Koeper Avenue) and County Road 79. The second location is in the southwest corner of the County Road 79/17th A venue intersection. Recommendation Should the City of Shakopee recommend approval of the variance request, the engineering department suggests the following conditions be attached: L No portion of the electronic sign, above ground or below ground, shall be located within the City of Shako pee's or Scott County's rights-of-way/easements. 2. The electronic sign shall not be located within the City of Shakopee's/Scott County's approved sight triangles. 3. The location ofthe electronic sign sha.ll not require any land disturbing activity affecting the storage capacity ofthe existing storm water basins. 4. The applicant shall provide a detailed drawing showing the proposed location of the sign. 5. The applicant shall work with the City of Shakopee and Scott County to locate the sign in an area so as to minimize potential impacts to public utilities. C:IDocumcnts and Seltings\JKJimalLocal SettingslTemporary Internet FilesIOLKAICase.Number.06090.Variance.ElectronicSign (17th Ave HS).doc Page I of! NOlJ-2?-2006 13:32 SHAYD~EE PUBLIC UTILITIES 9524457767 P.07 \ ' bKHIBIT D SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION " L i g h tin g theW a y - Yes t e r day, T 0 day and Bey 0 n d 77 MEMORANDUM TO: Shakopee Community Development Department FROM: Joseph D. Adams, Planning and Engineering Director SUBJECT: 5T AFF REVIEW RECORD COMMENTS for: Variance for electronic sign with scrolling message board CASE NO: 06090 DATE: 11/27/06 COMMENTS: The Option B location either has or will have padmount switch equipment installed in the utilities easement, as a pal't of SPU's UG electric distribution system. Post Office Box 470 + 255 Sarazin Street + Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-0470 (952) 445-19B8 . Fax (952) 445-7767 www.shakopeeutilities.com TnT,",' n fA,., .~l<~ft:(, p..... 6 )JC Sc..L.:A lr GXHIBiT 1- LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13, Township .115, Range 23, Scott County, Minnesota, and of the North Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 13, lying southerly of the following described line: Beginning at the northeast corner of said North Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence westerly to a point on the west line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, distant 175.81 feet south of the northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, and said line there terminating; Together with the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 13; Together with that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 13 which lies northerly of the following described line: Commencing at the southwest corner of the W est Half of said Southeast Quarter; thence along the west line thereof, North 02 degrees 20 minutes 10 seconds west, assumed basis of bearings, a distance of 2003.07 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 87 degrees 36 minutes 00 seconds East 952.94 feet to the northwest corner of the south 780.00 feet of the east 390.92 feet of said Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence South 98 degrees 36 minutes 54 seconds East 392.21 feet to the northeast corner of said south 780.00 feet of the east 390.93 feet, and there terminating; Excepting therefrom the following described parcel previously conveyed in Doc. No. 363111: Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 2, SOUTHVIEW HEIGHTS, Scott County, Minnesota; thence South 89 degrees 31 minutes 37 seconds West, plot bearing, along the westerly extension of the north line of said Lot 1, a distance of 50.00 feet to the west line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence North 00 degrees 24 minutes 05 seconds [West] along said west line a distance of 54.19 feet; thence South 86 degrees 49 minutes 10 seconds [East] a distance of 415.69 feet to the intersection with the northerly extension of the easterly line of said Lot 1, Block 2; thence South 09 degrees 49 minutes 05 seconds East along said northerly extension of the easterly line a distance of 28.00 feet to the northeast corner of said LotI; thence westerly along the north line of said Lot 1, a distance of 368.97 feet to the point of beginning. Subject to roads. PARCEL AREA: 4,127,241, square feet (94.7484 acres), including area contained within road easements