Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.C.1. Appeal of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals Determination by WAM Fitness-Res. No. 6768 S c./. CITY OF SHAKO PEE Memorandum CASE NO.: 08-024 C.OI'~ ~ r,:'r;~~I~ ll. i'i~tt\J TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Kyle Sobota, Planner I RE: Appeal of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals Determination by W AM Fitness DATE: April 22, 2008 INTRODUCTION Mark Allison, representing W AM Fitness has filed an appeal of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals (BOAA) decision that denied a variance to allow additional wall signage at 205 First Avenue East. On April 8, the City Council heard the request for appeal by the applicant and directed staff to prepare a resolution upholding the determination of the BOAA. Attached is a copy of the resolution for Council's consideration. AL TERNATIVES 1. Offer a motion to approve Resolution No.6768, and move its adoption. 2. Direct staff to prepare a resolution granting the appeal of the applicant. 3. Table a decision and request additional information from staff and/or the applicant. ACTION REQUESTED Offer a motion to approve Resolution No. 6768, and move its adoption (Alternative No.1). ~~ lyle obota. Planner I 0'. c · /~ CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum CASE NO.: NA C. ',' i~ '.:' ..... ..~."..'1"'1.... 'Ill.. "'1lII '. ,,;' ~ .- ,c" ....' ~ #- . 'v&;~;';':'~~ J TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director RE: Direction regarding possible text amendment related to sign regulations for the Downtown Business (B-3) Zone DATE: April 22, 200S INTRODUCTION: On AprilS, the City Council heard a request for appeal by a potential tenant of River City Centre in the B-3 Zone, and directed staff to prepare a resolution upholding the determination of the BOAA. That resolution is on the Council agenda for action on April 22nd. Since AprilSth there have been discussions with some of the Council members in which it was indicated that there may be some interest in amending the sign regulations to address the allowed signage for business complexes in the B-3 Zone. This item is being brought to Council to get specific direction regarding whether to proceed with the text amendment process. ALTERNATIVES: I. Offer a motion directing staff to proceed with the process of preparing and having reviewed a draft text amendment related to signage for business complexes in the B-3 Zone. 2. Offer a motion providing other direction to City staff. 3. Take no action on the request, or offer a motion directing that no further action be taken. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer a motion directing staff to proceed with the process of preparing and having reviewed a draft text amendment related to signage for business complexes in the B-3 Zone. ~ ./7 // / // 0___--___ ? .// 7V~~~_?~//~ R. Michael Leek Community Development Director RESOLUTION NO. 6768 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKO PEE UPHOLDING THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS DECISION REGARDING A VARIANCE FOR A 31.8 SQUARE FOOT WALL SIGN AT 205 FIRST AVENUE EAST WHEREAS, W AM Fitness, applicant, and Shakopee EDA, property owner, have filed an application for an appeal of a determination by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals under the provisions of Chapter 11, Land Use Regulation (Zoning), of the City of Shako pee City Code, Section 11.90 (Appeals); and WHEREAS, the subject parcel is presently zoned Central Business District (B-3) Zone; and WHEREAS, the subject parcel of land for which the request is being made is legally described as: See Attached Legal Description; and WHEREAS, on April 3, 2008, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals (BOAA) reviewed a variance request to allow a wall sign larger than City Code allows at 205 First Avenue East, at which time it heard from the Community Development Director or his designee and invited members of the public to comment; and WHEREAS, the BOAA denied the variance request at their April 3, 2008 meeting; and WHEREAS, the applicant timely appealed the determination of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the appeal of the applicant at their meeting of April 8, 2008; and WHEREAS, the City Council's reached the following findings with respect to the request: NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: That the application for Variance for additional wall signage 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: I.A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use ifused under conditions allowed by the official controls: Finding l.A. The property can continue to be utilized as a commercial development with signage that would adequately identifY the site yet comply with the regulations as stated in the City Code. The site is allowed sufficient square footage for the applicant to adequately advertise the business consistent with the City Code requirements. LB. The plight ofthe landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property; Finding l.B. The plight of the applicant is not due to circumstances unique to the property. The circumstances are based on the desire for additional sign age beyond what is allowed by City Code. The building is located near the Intersection of the CSAH 101 Bridge and First Avenue and offers adequate visibility for this business. the location of the proposed sign would also be the most visible location from the intersection. 1.c. The circumstances were not created by the landowner; Finding l.e. The circumstances were created by the applicant as a result of the applicant's desire for signage that is larger than the maximum allowed square footage. 1.D. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and Finding l.D. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. 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 l.E. The problems do not extend beyond 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 additional signage beyond what is allowed by City Code. Criterion 3 The request is not for a use variance. Finding 3 The request is not a use variance. Criterion 4 Variances in the flood plain overlay zone also shall meet the following criteria: Finding 4 (Not applicable since the property is not within the flood plain overlay zone.) Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held the _ day of April, 2008. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Case log #08-024 , 4Ift;/ cb( f11frJ{ 0 F CE bt4 L , DE5C tel PTi & I\.) EXHIBIT B That part of Blocks 3 and 4, vacated Lewis Street, vacated Sommerville Street and vacated alley, all contained within SHAKOPEE CITY according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the Southeasterly comer of Block 3, Shakopee City; thence North 80 degrees 06 minutes 40 seconds East assumed bearing along the easterly extension of the southerly line of said Block 3 a distance of 46.34 feet to the point of beginning; thence South 80 degrees 06 minutes 40 seconds West along the southerly line of said Block 3 a distance of 668.40 feet; thence North 09 degrees 53 minutes 19 seconds West a distance of 58.43 feet; thence along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 85.00 feet, a central angle of 80 degrees 04 minutes 12 seconds and an arc length of 118.79 feet; thence along a compound curve concave to the south having a radius of 557.15 feet, a central angle of 9 degrees 55 minutes 49 seconds, and an arc length of 96.56 feet; thence North 80 degrees 06 minutes 40 seconds East tangent to said curve a distance of 289.31 feet; thence along a tangential curve concave to the south having a radius of 272.84 feet, a central angle of24 degrees 12 minutes 29 seconds and an arc length of 115.28 feet; thence South 75 degrees 40 minutes 50 seconds East tangent to said curve a distance of 62.00 feet; thence along a tangential curve concave to the southwest having a radius of 75.00 feet, a central angle of65 degrees 47 minutes 30 seconds and an arc length of 86.12 feet; thence South 09 degrees 53 minutes 19 seconds East tangent to said curve a distance of 32.68 feet to the point of beginning.