Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7E, Planning Case 09-007 Site Plan Review for 3585 Lexington Avenue North .. _HILLS Request for Council Action Prepared By: Meagan Beekman Council Meeting Date: May 11, 2009 Approve Planning Case 09-007 for a Site Plan Review at 3585 Lexington Avenue North Based on the Findings of Fact and the Submitted Plans as Amended by the Six Conditions in the May 11, 2009, Report to the City Council. Budgeted Amount: N/A Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A Recommendation: Approve Planning Case 09-007 for a Site Plan Review at 3585 Lexington Avenue North Based on the Findings of Fact and the Submitted Plans as Amended by the Six Conditions in the May 11,2009, Report to the City Council. Supportin!! Documents: 1. May 11 th memo from Meagan Beekman 2. Draft Planning Commission Minutes for May 6, 2009 3. May 6, 2009, Report to the Planning Commission - http://www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us ~ ~~LLS MEMORANDUM DA TE: May 11,2009 FROM: Mayor & City Council Meagan Beekman, City Planner ~ TO: SUBJECT: Planning Case #09-007 Arden Plaza 3585 Lexington Avenue North Site Plan Review - Sign Standard Adjustment Request Motion to Approve Planning Case 09-007 for a Site Plan Review at 3585 Lexington Avenue North Based on the Findings of Fact and the Submitted Plans as Amended by the Six Conditions in the May 11, 2009, Report to the City Council. Back2round The applicant is proposing to designate an area located within 15 feet of their driveway entrance along County Road E as an acceptable location for the placement of permitted portable signs. This designated area would be shared amongst the businesses of Arden Plaza, and would be used for advertising. The sign standard adjustment would allow for a single permitted portable sign to be placed within this designated area at a time. The signs would be standard static signs, would not exceed six square feet, and would not be lit. This kind of sign is currently allowed by the Sign Code without a permit. Presently Arden Plaza has two monument signs that advertise the businesses in the building. One is located adjacent to the entrance along Lexington Avenue, and the other is located on the comer of County Road E and Lexington. Advertising on these signs is shared amongst the tenants of Arden Plaza and allocated by Wellington Management Company. Businesses in the building have had an ongoing issue with getting visibility from County Road E particularly from drivers heading east. There is no monument sign located here. As a result Staff has heard concerns from tenants about the ability to be seen by potential customers due to the topography City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 11,2009 \ IMetro-inet.us lardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases \2009\09-007 Arden Plaza Site Plan Rel'ieH'_Signage (pending)\051]()9- CC Report - Arden Plaza Sign Site Plan Reviel-v.doc Page 1 of3 of the site, the location of the office buildings, and the hidden nature of their businesses from County Road E. While a permanent solution for the visibility, and ultimate viability, of the businesses in Arden Plaza is needed, the applicants and tenants are proposing this as a temporary solution until the redevelopment of the site takes place. At that time a permanent solution can be found and the sign standard adjustment would no longer be needed. According to the Sign Code, businesses may place two portable A-frame, T-frame, sandwich, or other similar signs that do not exceed six square feet, and are not illuminated, within fifteen feet of their primary entrance during regular business hours. These signs do not require a sign permit. Staff has interpreted the definition of ""primary entrance" to mean a businesses' primary door, and that interpretation has not changed. This sign standard adjustment would allow for the placement of one of these signs within fifteen feet of Arden Plaza's primary driveway along County Road E, rather than within fifteen feet of the doorways. Only one of these signs would be permitted at a time in this location. Approval of the sign standard adjustment would not impact the regulations regarding temporary signs or any other signage that requires a permit. The applicant has submitted a letter explaining the request and a site plan of the existing property identifying the requested designated area. (Attachment B). Findin2S of Fact The Planning Commission offers the following eleven findings of fact for City Council review: 1. The property is located in the B-2 Zoning District. 2. Arden Plaza is a conforming use in the B-2 Zoning District. 3. Portable signs that do not exceed six square feet are permitted without a permit. 4. Properties in Arden Hills are permitted to have two of these portable signs located within fifteen feet of their primary entrance. 5. The applicant is proposing to designate a specified area within fifteen feet of their primary driveway along County Road E for the placement of one permitted portable SIgn. 6. The sign would not be visible from residential properties. 7. Section 1260 of the Sign Code permits deviations from the Sign Code through the site plan review process. 8. The topography of the Arden Plaza site, the location of the office buildings, and the placement of the tenants significantly limits the visibility of the businesses from County Road E. 9. The proposed sign is for a conforming use in the B-2 Zone. 10. The sign would not have a negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole. City of Arden Hills City Council Meetingfor May 11,2009 \\lvletro-inet.uslardenhillsIPlanningIPlanning Cases \2()()9\O9-()() 7 Arden Plaza Site Plan Reviev.:_Signage (pending) 1051 109 - CC Report - Arden Plaza Sign Site Plan Review.doc Page 2 of3 Recommendation The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case 09-007 and recommends approval (4-1) of the Site Plan Review/Sign Standard Adjustment based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as amended by the following six conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission. 2G One permitted portable sign that does not exceed six square feet, is not illuminated, and is displayed only during regular business hours shall be allowed at a time in the designated area within fifteen feet of the County Road E driveway. 3. The sign shall not be placed in the right of way. 4. The sign shall meet all other requirements of the Sign Code. 5. This approval shall not impact any temporary signage requirements of the Sign Code. 6. The sign standard adjustment shall expire upon the implementation of a new monument sign on the site or within two years of the date of issuance, whichever comes first. Options 1. Approve the proposal as submitted. 2. Approve the proposal with conditions. 3. Deny the application with reasons for denial. If the City denies the petitioners request, ".. .it must state in writing the reasons for the denial at the time it denies the request." 4. Table for additional information. Deadline for A2encv Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on April 22, 2009. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by June 21, 2009 (60 days), unless the city provides the petitioner with written reasons for and additional 60 day review period. The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments A - May 6, 2009 Draft Planning Commission Minutes B - May 6, 2009, Report to the Planning Commission - http://www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 117 2009 \\Metro-inet.uslardenhillsIPlanning\Planning Cases\2()()9\09-007 Arden Plaza Site Plan Review_Signage (pending)\05//()<) - CC Reporl- Arden Plaza Sign Site Plan Revi~'.doc Page 3 of3 Attachment A Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes From May 6, 2009 May 11, 2009, City Council Meeting Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - May 6, 2009 Plannin2 Case 09-007: Si2D Standard Adiustment: Arden Plaza: Wellin2ton Mana2ement Companv - Not a Public HearinJ! City Planner Beekman explained the applicant has requested a site plan review for a sign standard adjustment that would allow for a deviation from the sign code for the location of permitted portable signs. She stated the applicant is proposing to designate an area located within 15 feet of their driveway entrance along County Road E as an acceptable location for the placement of permitted portable signs and this designated area would be shared among the businesses of Arden Plaza and would be used for advertising. She noted the sign standard adjustment would allow for a single permitted portable sign to be placed within this designated area at. a time; the signs would be standard static signs, would not exceed six square feet, and would not be lit. City Planner Beekman then presented the application. City Planner Beekman stated the sign code allows for adjustment if criteria number one or two is met and the required criteria number three is met. She stated in this case, criteria number one and three are most applicable. She stated Staff recommends approval of the sign standard adjustment based on the findings of fact, the submitted plans, and the following six conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission. 2. One permitted portable sign that does not exceed six square feet, is not illuminated, and is displayed only during regular business hours shall be allowed at a time in the designated area within fifteen feet of the County Road E driveway. 3. The sign shall not be placed in the right of way. 4. The sign shall meet all other requirements of the Sign Code. 5. This approval shall not impact any temporary signage requirements of the Sign Code. 6. The sign standard adjustment shall expire upon the implementation of a new monument sign on the site or within two years of the date of issuance, whichever comes first. Commissioner Modesette asked if the proposed signs would be sandwich board type SIgnS. City Planner Beekman replied in the affirmative, and added the signs could not exceed six square feet and only one sign at a time could be placed in this location. She noted the tenants will be required to work out whose sign is placed in this location at any given time and the City would not regulate that aspect of the sign placement. She reiterated this is intended as a temporary solution and the sign standard adjustment will expire upon the implementation of a new monument sign on the site or within two years of the date of issuance, whichever comes first. Commissioner Holewa asked about the right-of-way and whether consideration was given to signs being placed in the right-of-way. City Planner Beekman replied signs would not be placed in the right-of-way and noted the sidewalk is on Arden Plaza private property. Commissioner Zimmerman asked if this request falls under the clear vision area ordinance in place for intersections such that the sign would not block the view of traffic trying to enter County Road E. City Planner Beekman replied the proposed project does not contradict with the clear vision ordinance, and that signs placed in this area would be required to meet the requirements of the ordinance. Commissioner Zimmerman stated he would like to see a condition added that states that the sign cannot be placed such that it will block visibility exiting the development, particularly since there is a sidewalk in the vicinity. City Planner Beekman stated that such a condition could be added, although this is currently covered by the zoning ordinance. Chair Larson asked if the sign would be required to be removed after business hours. City Planner Beekman replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Holewa requested clarification regarding the six square feet on the signage and whether this pertains to only one side. City Planner Beekman replied that the total square footage only counts on one side; in other words, if a sandwich board is used, the six square feet is calculated on only one side of the sign and not both. Commissioner Zimmerman asked if a portable sign that comes on a trailer and is four feet high by eight feet wide, similar to one that had been sitting on the comer at County Road E and Lexington Avenue preciously, would be permitted. City Planner Beekman replied this type of sign is explicitly prohibited in the City's sign code in all areas. Commissioner Thompson expressed concern regarding the quality of signs to be used and stated the City's ordinance is such that if a sign is broken or otherwise in disrepair, the City can enforce the ordinance and require the owner of the sign to remedy the situation. She stated she is concerned about the sign looking tacky, e.g., letters missing, and felt there was not enough language in the conditions to address this and to ensure that the sign looks professional. City Planner Beekman stated in terms of upkeep, that is regulated by the sign code and if a sign is broken, cracked, or falling over, one of the City's public works staffwould pick it up or bring it into the business. She stated in terms of letters falling off, the Code requires that the signs be kept in a well maintained fashion. Commissioner Thompson asked if a condition should be added that the City can rescind the sign standard adjustment if there are issues with the business owner not taking the sign down at night. City Planner Beekman stated if the conditions are not followed, then the sign can be revoked, similar to a CUP violation. She stated this is standard language and if there are concerns about maintenance, the Planning Commission can add a condition that specifically deals with that concern. She added in terms of the structure of the sign, she felt comfortable with Staff having enough power to enforce the conditions with the existing Sign Code regulations. Commissioner Holewa stated he was under the impression that there is a health club business in this development that operates 24 hours per day. He expressed concern about "normal business hours" because this would mean the health club could have a sign in place 24 hours per day, representing their normal business hours. He stated he would be more inclined to include language that specifies permitted hours for placement of a sign or that a sign needs to be taken down by 10:00 p.m. He also asked about the small signs that have been placed along Lexington Avenue that advertise specials. City Planner Beekman replied she has seen those signs and they are illegal. Commissioner Modesette moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmerman, to recommend approval of Planning Case 09-007, for a Site Plan Review at 3585 Lexington Avenue based on the findings of fact, the submitted plans, and the six conditions in the May 6, 2009, Planning Case report. Further discussion: Chair Larson stated concerns were expressed regarding hours of display of the sign and maintenance of the sign; Staffhas indicated they feel certain this can be controlled through the ordinance. Commissioner Holewa stated he wants the businesses to do well and to give them a chance to advertise, but felt the permitted signs could be tacky. City Planner Beekman stated one of the concerns is that Staff was seeing signs put up before that were illegal and were removed by the City; the owners came forward and asked how they could legally advertise and this is an attempt to accommodate their request on a temporary basis. Chair Larson stated there are plans to erect a monument sign within the regulations of the ordinance when the property is redeveloped. He added he felt this was a viable means of allowing advertising that is not too intrusive. Commissioner Zimmerman concurred and stated illegal signs have been used in the past and if the City can help benefit the business owners by allowing them to have an A-frame sign placed by the road so their business is better recognized, itwas the least the City could do to help them out. The motion carried 4-1. Commissioner Holewa opposed. This Planning Case will be reviewed at the Monday, May 11, 2009, City Council meeting. Attachment B Report to the Planning Commission From May 6, 2009. Available online at: http://www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us May 11, 2009, City Council Meeting