Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 09/09/1999 APPROVED MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS & APPEALS THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1999 7:30 P.M. CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road BOARD: Kathy Nelson, Chairperson; Cliff Dunham; William Ford; Louis Giglio; Ismail Ismail; Michael O'Leary and Mary Vasaly STAFF: Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator Carol Pelzel, Recorder GUESTS: Scott Palmer, Construction Manager for Best Buy and Bill Erickson,representative of Lawrence Sign CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL—PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present: Kathy Nelson, William Ford, Ismail Ismail, Louis Giglio, Michael O'Leary and Mary Vasaly Absent: Cliff Dunham 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion/Second: Ismail/O'Leary, to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried, 6-0. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of August 12, 1999 Ford pointed out that any reference to borderline variances with regard to Request#99-14 should be changed to shoreline variances. Motion/Second: Vasaly/Ford, to approve the August 12 minutes as corrected. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Giglio abstaining because of absence from that meeting. Minutes Board of Adjustments &Appeals September 9, 1999 III: VARIANCES Request#99-15 by Best Buy Company for 10050 Crosstown Circle for approval to install a 187 square foot wall sign on the northeast wall of the building (Code maximum is 50 square feet). Scott Palmer, Construction Manager for Best Buy Company, explained that Best Buy has recently purchased this building at 10050 Crosstown Circle and they are now requesting a variance for letter set signage on the northeast side of the building that faces Highway 169. Bill Erickson, representative of Lawrence Sign,presented a sample of how the sign would look under the current City Code and how it would look as proposed. Mr. Erickson explained that they are proposing 4' 6"high individual illuminated letters to solve the problem of readability from Crosstown 62 and Highway 169. The building is 86 feet from grade and is built on a hill that restricts the visibility of the allowed sign. Ms. Nelson asked why a sign is needed on this side of the building. Mr. Palmer explained that it is very difficult to see their building when proceeding west on Crosstown and that is the direction from which you approach their building. Mr. Palmer stated that they do have vendors coming from the airport and it is difficult to see the building when coming from that direction. Mr. Erickson explained that the building does sit back approximately 600 to 1,000 feet from the roadway. He indicated that the largest sized letters they could put up is 4'6"because of the wall space. Ms. Vasaly pointed out that the proponent does have signage on the street side that would adequately identify the building. Mr. Lawrence explained that they do have a permitted 36 square foot sign on the west side of the building. The parking garage parallel to Highway 212 also has a 50 square foot sign on it. Ms. Vasaly asked what the proponent feels is the hardship being created by the ordinances. Mr. Lawrence said it would be the lack of adequate identification from Highway 169 and Crosstown. Ms. Vasaly asked why this building needs to be identified from that location. Mr. Lawrence pointed out that they are allowed to have identification on that elevation but the allowed size is not adequate. The identification is needed for people coming west on 62 and north and south on Highway 169. Mr. Ismail asked what this building is used for. Mr. Palmer explained that it is a general office use and houses Information Systems and E-Commerce. Mr. O'Leary explained that the proponent indicated the reason this sign is needed is to allow people coming from the airport to locate their building. He pointed out that if someone is coming from the airport they would more than likely use Interstate 494 and Valley View Road, which is a much shorter route. 2 Minutes Board of Adjustments &Appeals September 9, 1999 Ms. Johnson presented her staff report stating that this is a new building location for Best Buy and is located on a ten-acre site. The building is approximately 170,000 square feet in size. Both the Planning Commission and City Council approved the six-story building earlier this year. Ms. Johnson stated that Best Buy has received sign permits to install a 50- square foot ground sign at Crosstown Circle and a 50-square foot wall sign on the parking deck structure. Central Bank, located on 212 and Shady Oak, does have a larger wall sign than is allowed, however, that was permitted by a variance request by Marquette. Ms. Johnson said the only other similar condition is US Bank's five-story building that has a sign 140 square feet in size. Ms. Johnson explained that the hardship for this request is the distance the building is setback from the highway and the height of the building. Ms. Johnson indicated that the City in the past did discuss changing the Code to use a sliding scale that would take into account building size,but has kept the code as is and reviews requests on an individual basis. Ms. Vasaly asked if the proponent would be allowed to illuminate the sign being proposed. Ms. Johnson responded that they are. Ms. Vasaly she feels the only way they can grant this variance is if there is a particular hardship to this property. Mr. Ismail asked about lighting. Mr. Erickson said they would be using fluorescent tubes for lighting using the Best Buy yellow. Ms. Nelson opened the public hearing. Having no one appear before the Board, Ms. Nelson closed the public hearing. Mr. O'Leary said he is concerned that the lighted sign will create a distraction on an already busy highway. Mr. Giglio said he sees no reason to have the sign lit at night. Mr. Palmer indicated that the lighting of the sign is normally placed on the energy management system and is turned off at approximately 1:00 a.m. Mr. Erickson said they could put in dimmer bulbs which would result in a less fluorescent tube. Mr. Ford said he generally supports this variance. The building is set back quite a distance from the highway and he does not feel that this sign would be a distraction. There are a couple of banks in the area that have similar sized signs and this would be in keeping with similar properties. Mr. Ford said he feels the intent of the ordinance would apply more to a building that is closer to a street. Mr. Ismail said he agrees with Mr. Ford and he is proud that the City of Eden Prairie has Best Buy in the neighborhood and he does not have a problem with the sign as requested. Mr. Giglio said he does not feel the proponent needs to have the sign lit until 1:00 a.m. and would like to see it turned off at 9:00 p.m. He would also like to see the lighting kept to a minimum. Mr. Giglio said he too could support the request. 3 r Minutes Board of Adjustments &Appeals September 9, 1999 Ms. Vasaly said she cannot see what the hardship is and has a hard time imagining that a bigger sign is needed here. She said she feels the stated hardship has been the convenience for people to find this building and even that has not been demonstrated this evening. Ms. Vasaly said she feels if this Board grants this variance, they may not be able to refuse other similar requests for buildings that happen to be located close to a major highway. Ms. Vasaly said if the readability from Highway 169 and Highway 212 was vital, this request would make sense. However, the site has permits for 2 signs at this time. Mr. O'Leary said he too is unable to see the hardship. In regard to the banks having larger signs, they do have people coming to their facility on a regular basis. He feels the sign would do nothing more than advertise for Best Buy. This particular building is not retail. Mr. O'Leary said he also feels that this sign would be a distraction to a roadway that is already backed up and congested. Ms. Nelson said she feels the proposed sign size looks too large for the wall. She said she could see 3' 6" letters, which would also give them more readability than the size allowed and she would be in favor of a sign approximately 140-square feet in size. Mr. Palmer explained that they have looked at this sign very closely and they have found that the 4' 6" letters seem to be more in scale with the building. Mr. Palmer said he also understands the Board's concern for safety, however, he feels there may be a greater safety hazard if the letters are smaller and the commuters try to figure out what the sign reads. Mr. Palmer said they can probably agree on something in between 3'6" and 4'6" sized letters. Mr. O'Leary asked if this variance were granted,would the proponent be willing to have this variance reviewed a year from now. Mr. Palmer stated that the sign is very expensive and they would not want to take the risk of being told a year from now that the sign would have to be removed. Mr. O'Leary said he has a real concern about the traffic in that area. Mr. Palmer said they would be willing to use limited lighting and to turn the sign off at 9:00 P.M. Ms. Johnson noted that the location of the building was a result of the trees and topography Motion/Second: Ford/Ismail, to approve Variance#99-15 with the following modifications: letters be no more than 4 feet high for a total not to exceed 150 square feet; the sign lights be turned off at 9:00 p.m. and turned on at a reasonable hour and, the lighting for the sign be the minimum necessary for adequate lighting with the hardship being the building being set back so far from traffic. Motion carried, 5-1 with Vasaly voting nay. IV. OLD BUSINESS 4 Minutes F Board of Adjustments &Appeals September 9, 1999 Mr. O'Leary asked what took place at the City Council meeting regarding Variance#99-14 by Matt Strodel. Ms. Johnson explained Mr. Strodel did appeal the Board's condition that the variance be granted for a five-year period. Ms. Nelson reported on the meeting with the City Council for Chairs of various commissions and the Council's intent to reorganize the structure of some of the commissions. This Board's makeup and responsibilities have not been changed, however, the Planning Commission has been assigned a much broader review responsibility including parks. The Planning Commission will also review variances for planned unit developments. Ms. Nelson said this Board will be reviewing fewer items. V. NEW BUSINESS Ms. Johnson reported that she has not yet received any variance requests for the month of October, therefore, there may not be a meeting in October. IV. ADJOURNMENT Motion/Second: Ford/Ismail, to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 p.m. Motion carried, 6-0. 5 APPROVED MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS & APPEALS THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1999 7:30 P.M. CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road BOARD: Kathy Nelson, Chairperson; Cliff Dunham; William Ford; Louis Giglio; Ismail Ismail; Michael O'Leary and Mary Vasaly STAFF: Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator Carol Pelzel, Recorder GUESTS: Scott Palmer, Construction Manager for Best Buy and Bill Erickson, representative of Lawrence Sign CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL—PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present: Kathy Nelson, William Ford, Ismail Ismail, Louis Giglio, Michael O'Leary and Mary Vasaly Absent: Cliff Dunham I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion/Second: Ismail/O'Leary,to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried, 6-0. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of August 12, 1999 Ford pointed out that any reference to borderline variances with regard to Request#99-14 should be changed to shoreline variances. Motion/Second: Vasaly/Ford, to approve the August 12 minutes as corrected. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Giglio abstaining because of absence from that meeting. Minutes Board of Adjustments &Appeals September 9, 1999 III: VARIANCES Request#99-15 by Best Buy Company for 10050 Crosstown Circle for approval to install a 187 square foot wall sign on the northeast wall of the building(Code maximum is 50 square feet). Scott Palmer, Construction Manager for Best Buy Company, explained that Best Buy has recently purchased this building at 10050 Crosstown Circle and they are now requesting a variance for letter set signage on the northeast side of the building that faces Highway 169. Bill Erickson, representative of Lawrence Sign, presented a sample of how the sign would look under the current City Code and how it would look as proposed. Mr. Erickson explained that they are proposing 4' 6"high individual illuminated letters to solve the problem of readability from Crosstown 62 and Highway 169. The building is 86 feet from grade and is built on a hill that restricts the visibility of the allowed sign. Ms. Nelson asked why a sign is needed on this side of the building. Mr. Palmer explained that it is very difficult to see their building when proceeding west on Crosstown and that is the direction from which you approach their building. Mr. Palmer stated that they do have vendors coming from the airport and it is difficult to see the building when coming from that direction. Mr. Erickson explained that the building does sit back approximately 600 to 1,000 feet from the roadway. He indicated that the largest sized letters they could put up is 4'6"because of the wall space. Ms. Vasaly pointed out that the proponent does have signage on the street side that would adequately identify the building. Mr. Lawrence explained that they do have a permitted 36 square foot sign on the west side of the building. The parking garage parallel to Highway 212 also has a 50 square foot sign on it. Ms. Vasaly asked what the proponent feels is the hardship being created by the ordinances. Mr. Lawrence said it would be the lack of adequate identification from Highway 169 and Crosstown. Ms. Vasaly asked why this building needs to be identified from that location. Mr. Lawrence pointed out that they are allowed to have identification on that elevation but the allowed size is not adequate. The identification is needed for people coming west on 62 and north and south on Highway 169. Mr. Ismail asked what this building is used for. Mr. Palmer explained that it is a general office use and houses Information Systems and E-Commerce. Mr. O'Leary explained that the proponent indicated the reason this sign is needed is to allow people coming from the airport to locate their building. He pointed out that if someone is coming from the airport they would more than likely use Interstate 494 and Valley View Road, which is a much shorter route. 2 Minutes Board of Adjustments &Appeals September 9, 1999 Ms. Johnson presented her staff report stating that this is a new building location for Best Buy and is located on a ten-acre site. The building is approximately 170,000 square feet in size. Both the Planning Commission and City Council approved the six-story building earlier this year. Ms. Johnson stated that Best Buy has received sign permits to install a 50- square foot ground sign at Crosstown Circle and a 50-square foot wall sign on the parking deck structure. Central Bank, located on 212 and Shady Oak, does have a larger wall sign than is allowed,however, that was permitted by a variance request by Marquette. Ms. Johnson said the only other similar condition is US Bank's five-story building that has a sign 140 square feet in size. Ms. Johnson explained that the hardship for this request is the distance the building is setback from the highway and the height of the building. Ms. Johnson indicated that the City in the past did discuss changing the Code to use a sliding scale that would take into account building size, but has kept the code as is and reviews requests on an individual basis. Ms. Vasaly asked if the proponent would be allowed to illuminate the sign being proposed. Ms. Johnson responded that they are. Ms. Vasaly she feels the only way they can grant this variance is if there is a particular hardship to this property. Mr. Ismail asked about lighting. Mr. Erickson said they would be using fluorescent tubes for lighting using the Best Buy yellow. Ms. Nelson opened the public hearing. Having no one appear before the Board, Ms. Nelson closed the public hearing. Mr. O'Leary said he is concerned that the lighted sign will create a distraction on an already busy highway. Mr. Giglio said he sees no reason to have the sign lit at night. Mr. Palmer indicated that the lighting of the sign is normally placed on the energy management system and is turned off at approximately 1:00 a.m. Mr. Erickson said they could put in dimmer bulbs which would result in a less fluorescent tube. Mr. Ford said he generally supports this variance. The building is set back quite a distance from the highway and he does not feel that this sign would be a distraction. There are a couple of banks in the area that have similar sized signs and this would be in keeping with similar properties. Mr. Ford said he feels the intent of the ordinance would apply more to a building that is closer to a street. Mr. Ismail said he agrees with Mr. Ford and he is proud that the City of Eden Prairie has Best Buy in the neighborhood and he does not have a problem with the sign as requested. Mr. Giglio said he does not feel the proponent needs to have the sign lit until 1:00 a.m. and would like to see it turned off at 9:00 p.m. He would also like to see the lighting kept to a minimum. Mr. Giglio said he too could support the request. 3 Minutes Board of Adjustments &Appeals September 9, 1999 Ms. Vasaly said she cannot see what the hardship is and has a hard time imagining that a bigger sign is needed here. She said she feels the stated hardship has been the convenience for people to find this building and even that has not been demonstrated this evening. Ms. Vasaly said she feels if this Board grants this variance, they may not be able to refuse other similar requests for buildings that happen to be located close to a major highway. Ms. Vasaly said if the readability from Highway 169 and Highway 212 was vital, this request would make sense. However, the site has permits for 2 signs at this time. Mr. O'Leary said he too is unable to see the hardship. In regard to the banks having larger signs, they do have people coming to their facility on a regular basis. He feels the sign would do nothing more than advertise for Best Buy. This particular building is not retail. Mr. O'Leary said he also feels that this sign would be a distraction to a roadway that is already backed up and congested. Ms. Nelson said she feels the proposed sign size looks too large for the wall. She said she could see 3' 6" letters, which would also give them more readability than the size allowed and she would be in favor of a sign approximately 140-square feet in size. Mr. Palmer explained that they have looked at this sign very closely and they have found that the 4' 6" letters seem to be more in scale with the building. Mr. Palmer said he also understands the Board's concern for safety, however,he feels there may be a greater safety hazard if the letters are smaller and the commuters try to figure out what the sign reads. Mr. Palmer said they can probably agree on something in between 3'6" and 4'6" sized letters. Mr. O'Leary asked if this variance were granted, would the proponent be willing to have this variance reviewed a year from now. Mr. Palmer stated that the sign is very expensive and they would not want to take the risk of being told a year from now that the sign would have to be removed. Mr. O'Leary said he has a real concern about the traffic in that area. Mr. Palmer said they would be willing to use limited lighting and to turn the sign off at 9:00 P.M. Ms. Johnson noted that the location of the building was a result of the trees and topography Motion/Second: Ford/Ismail, to approve Variance#99-15 with the following modifications: letters be no more than 4 feet high for a total not to exceed 150 square feet; the sign lights be turned off at 9:00 p.m. and turned on at a reasonable hour and, the lighting for the sign be the minimum necessary for adequate lighting with the hardship being the building being set back so far from traffic. Motion carried, 5-1 with Vasaly voting nay. IV. OLD BUSINESS 4 Minutes Board of Adjustments &Appeals September 9, 1999 Mr. O'Leary asked what took place at the City Council meeting regarding Variance#99-14 by Matt Strodel. Ms. Johnson explained Mr. Strodel did appeal the Board's condition that the variance be granted for a five-year period. Ms. Nelson reported on the meeting with the City Council for Chairs of various commissions and the Council's intent to reorganize the structure of some of the commissions. This Board's makeup and responsibilities have not been changed, however, the Planning Commission has been assigned a much broader review responsibility including parks. The Planning Commission will also review variances for planned unit developments. Ms. Nelson said this Board will be reviewing fewer items. V. NEW BUSINESS Ms. Johnson reported that she has not yet received any variance requests for the month of October, therefore, there may not be a meeting in October. IV. ADJOURNMENT Motion/Second: Ford/Ismail, to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 p.m. Motion carried, 6-0. 5