09-04-13 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –September 4, 20133 City Planner Streff provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings 1.The property is located in the B-2 Zoning District and within Sign District 4. 2.The existing service station on the property operates under the conditions of a special use permit/conditional use permit and conforms to the uses in the B-2 Zoning District. 3.The existing pole sign on the property is considered a legal non-conforming sign due to its type, sign copy area, and height. 4.The proposed change in signage to the existing pole sign would still render the sign to be a legal non-conforming sign. 5.The existing sign located in the northwest corner of the property is 15’ feet 10” inches in height and has a total sign copy area of 84.50 square feet. 6.The proposed section within the existing sign to be replaced with a digital price sign is 15.35 square feet with twenty-four (24) inchtall letters. 7.The proposed change in signage should not conflict with the intent of the zoning ordinance, comprehensive plan or Guiding Plan for the B-2 Zoning District. 8.The proposed digital price sign should not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose of the zoning district or current land use in which the property is located. 9.The sign will be used to advertise the price of petroleum products on the property located at 1306 County Road E. 10.There is an existing electronic message board located on the property in the northeast corner used to market the auto repair shop just south of the subject property. This off- premise electronic message board is approximately twenty (20) square feet in size. Variance Findings: 1.The proposal is generally in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance because the ordinance generallyallows flexibility for signage related matters. 2.The sign copy area is not being increased in size, which should minimize visual impact of the digital LED price sign on adjacent property owners and the traveling public. 3.The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan because it allows the reasonable use of commercial property. 4.Signs are permitted and reasonable uses within the B-2 Zoning District. 5.Unique circumstances as it relates to signage affect the use of the lot as a functioning service station. Safety of the station attendant and the security of the store pose unique circumstances for the applicant and property owner when digital technology is not utilized. 6.Since the sign remains static the majority of the time and only displays the cost of one petroleum product, the sign is unlikely to have a negative impact on the property or the neighborhood. 7.The sign as proposed would be visible from County Road E, which abuts Highway 51; however, the sign and its intensity should not affect the area as the sign has technology in place to adjust its brightness during daylight and evening hours. 8.The proposed variance for the digital LED price sign does not appear to be based on economic considerations alone. City Planner Streff explained the findings of fact for this variance request support a recommendation for approval. However, if the Planning Commission chooses to make a recommendation for denial, the Findings of Fact would need to be amended to reflect the reasons for the denial.