pf_02924 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

2.4 Representatives of the Minnesota Department of Public Service - Weights and Measures and Vision World, Inc. have been working with City staff on the potential placement of this sign for several months. The possibility of including the names of tenants on the main building identification sign was suggested by staff and discussed with the applicant; however, the applicant was not in favor of this action. The possibility of placing a sign on the building as wall sign was also discussed. 2.5 Section 1009.08, City Code, allows one pylon or ground sign per property with a maximum size of 100 feet per face in a B4 zoning district. Section 1009.09 indicates that one pylon sign is allowed for each interior or corner lot. Pylon signs are considered to be structures, and as such, have the same setback requirements as a building (30 feet in a B4 zoning district). Section 1009.03 requires ground signs to be set back a distance equal to one-half of the setback for a pylon sign in the same zoning district, which would be 15 feet. Section 1013 outlines the criteria and procedure for considering a variance. JJ1 STAFF COMMENT 3.1 In reviewing this request, staff made the following findings: 1. Section 1009.09, City Code, allows one pylon or ground sign for each interior or corner lot in a B4 zoning district. 2. The proposed sign would be the second ground sign for this property, which is a corner lot. 3. Section 1009.03 requires ground signs to be set back a minimum of 15 feet from the front property line (street right-of-way line). The proposed location of the second ground sign does not meet the setback requirement of 15 feet from the west property line; therefore, the sign location would also require a variance from the setback requirement to reduce the setback to less than five feet. In addition, in order to be classified as a ground sign, the sign would need to be mounted on the ground attached to footings or a base with no open space between the ground and the sign face. 4. There is no hardship or practical difficulty that would justify granting the variance. The names of tenants could be incorporated into the existing ground sign which is used for building identification or additional signage could be placed on the building as a wall sign. 5. The proposed variance is not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Title 10 of the City Code (Zoning). PF#2924 - RPCA (07/09/97) - Page 2 of 3