Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutX-B-01 Variance - Monument Sign - The Confluence (200 2nd Street West) City Council Memorandum To: Mayor Fasbender and City Council From: Justin Fortney, City Planner Date: November 21, 2022 Item: Resolution: Variance #2022-56 – Freestanding Monument Sign – 200 2nd Street West Council Action Requested: Review and act on the attached resolution granting a variance to City Code Chapter 155.05, Subd. 155.08, Subd. (D)(8)(c) – Freestanding signs are prohibited in the East 2nd Street Historic District or on properties zoned DC Downtown Core. Adoption of the resolution requires the support of at least six of seven Councilmembers. Background Information: The DC, Downtown Core zoning district does not allow monument signs since development in the district is to occur up to the lot lines. The Confluence building was pre-existing and has ample room for a monument sign and had one previously for decades. Additional information may be found in the attached November 14th Planning Commission Packet. Financial Impact: N\A Advisory Commission Discussion: The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the variance at the November 14, 2022 meeting with limited discussion. No one from the public spoke for or against the item during the meeting besides the applicant’s representative. Council Committee Discussion: N\A Attachments:  Resolution: Variance  Planning Commission Staff Report – November 14, 2022 X-B-01 HASTINGS CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO._________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO THE NUMBER OF MONUMENT SIGNS ALLOWED IN THE DC DISTRICT LOCATED AT 200 2ND STREET WEST AS REQUESTED BY CONFLUENCE DEVELOPMENT LLC. Council member _______________________ introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: WHEREAS, Confluence Development LLC, property owner, seeks to construct a +/- 5-foot tall monument sign on property generally located at 200 2nd St W and legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, GREAT RIVERS LANDING, Dakota County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, The Subject Property is Zoned DC, Downtown Core per Hastings City Code Chapter 155.01 (A) - Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, Hastings City Code Chapter 155.08, Subd.(D)(8)(c) – does not allow one Freestanding sign in the DC Downtown Core district; and WHEREAS, The Property Owner seeks a variance to that same chapter Subd. to allow one monument sign; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2022, the request was reviewed by the Planning Commission of the City of Hastings, as required by state law, city charter and city ordinance; and WHEREAS the Planning Commission recommended approval of the request to the City Council subject to the findings of fact contained herein; and WHEREAS the City Council acting as the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeals has reviewed the request and concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOLLOWS: X-B-01 That the City Council hereby approves the variance as presented to the City Council based on the following findings of fact: 1. The site was not originally developed for commercial use or contiguous with the commercial district making for a peculiar situation. The owners would have practical difficulties with advertisement and directing patrons without a freestanding sign to overcome the poor visibility of the site from the commercial downtown. To achieve wayfinding between the site and downtown, a freestanding sign with visibility is necessary and practical. 2. This site is uniquely developed in the district. There are no other sites within the DC district that have yard space to locate a freestanding sign. 3. The owner doesn’t seek to obtain the variance exclusively to increase the value or income potential of the lot, as the variance is necessary to construct a modest decorative sign for wayfinding. 4. Granting of the variance would allow for the placement of a freestanding sign in much the same location as a previous freestanding sign that existed for many decades without issue. 5. The proposal would not impair light, air, congestion, fire danger, public safety, or property values within the vicinity, as the proposed sign is relatively small and located in the general location of a previous sign that caused no issues. 6. The purpose and intent of the ordinance is to limit freestanding signs from locations that do not have accommodating space for them and would not need them due to the pedestrian nature of a historic downtown. The subject property has a great deal of front yard space for a freestanding sign and will be visited by patrons in vehicles more than foot traffic. 7. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan with having consistent guidance and zoning. 8. The proposal puts the property to use in a reasonable manner as, the site has had a similar freestanding sign in the same general location for many decades. 9. The practical difficulties were created by the official controls being written for a unique historic downtown and later applied to properties in a different location that developed differently. The applicant cannot accomplish the proposal under the current ordinance requirements. 10. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed freestanding sign is a decorative masonry monument sign that compliments area building materials. Being +/- five-feet tall and under 50 square feet, the proposed sign would comply with the strictest of monument sign regulations for any district in the City, including residential. There had been a larger monument sign in this general location for many decades. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOLLOWS: Approval of the variance is subject to the following conditions: X-B-01 1. Conformance with the City Council Staff Memo and plans dated November 21, 2022. 2. Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; construction of the sign must occur within one year of this resolution or the approval is null and void. Council member __________________ moved a second to this resolution and upon being put to a vote adopted by _____ present. Adopted by the Hastings City Council on November 21, 2022 by the following vote: Ayes: Nays: Absent: ATTEST: __________________________ Mary Fasbender, Mayor ________________________________ Kelly Murtaugh City Clerk I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above is a true and correct copy of resolution presented to and adopted by the City of Hastings, County of Dakota, Minnesota, on the 21st day of November 2022, as disclosed by the records of the City of Hastings on file and of record in the office. _______________________________ Kelly Murtaugh City Clerk (SEAL) This instrument drafted by: City of Hastings (JJF) 101 4th St. E. Hastings, MN 55033 X-B-01 To: Planning Commissioners From: Justin Fortney, City Planner Date: November 14, 2022 Item: Variance #2022-56 – Freestanding Monument Sign – 200 2nd Street West Planning Commission Action Requested The Planning Commission is asked to review the following variance request of Confluence Development LLC and make a recommendation to the City Council. A variance to the number of freestanding signs. Chapter 155.08, Subd.(D)(8)(c) – Freestanding signs are prohibited in the East 2nd Street Historic District or on properties zoned DC Downtown Core. Background Information The DC – Downtown Core zoning district was created to regulate land uses of the historic downtown and new adjacent construction. The downtown has not been rezoned to DC, but the district has been used for new development in the greater downtown area. The DC district is generally supportive of new downtown expansion and assures development standards that are similar to the existing downtown. These would include uses, density, setbacks, and similar. It generally allows all the typical uses that have operated downtown. However, there are a few ancillary DC district regulations that may have unintended restrictions when used in other areas or with existing buildings outside of the historic downtown. The historic downtown and new construction in the DC districts are generally built up to the lot lines. This would not allow for a monument sign. The former Hudson Manufacturing building was not originally constructed as a downtown commercial building, so it followed a different form. There is ample area for a monument sign and one had historically existed in the same general area as proposed. There are no similar situations that exist in the district. Variance Definition Variances are deviations from strict compliance of City Code provisions. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals may issue a variance upon determination of findings of fact and Planning Commission Memorandum X-B-01 conclusions supporting the variance as established in Chapter 30.02, Subd. F of the City Code. Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeals Hastings City Code Chapter 30.02 establishes the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeals and appoints the City Council and Planning Commission to facilitate the Board’s roles and duties. Applications for Variances require Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeals review. Variance Review City Code Chapter 30.02(F) establishes the requirement for granting variances. The Planning Commission (acting in part as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals) may consider variances to the Zoning Code that are not contrary to the public interest where owing to special conditions, and where a literal enforcement of the provision of the City Code would result in practical difficulties. Variances may be granted providing the following has been satisfied (staff review appears in bold italics): (1) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographic conditions of the land involved, a practical difficulty to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out; The site was not originally developed for commercial use or contiguous with the commercial district. The owners would have practical difficulties with advertisement and directing patrons without a freestanding sign to overcome the poor visibility of the site from the commercial downtown. To achieve wayfinding between the site and downtown, a freestanding sign with visibility is necessary and practical. (2) The conditions upon which the petition for a variance is based are unique to the tract of land for which the variance is sought and not applicable, generally, to other property with the same zoning classification; This site is uniquely developed in the district. There are no other sites within the DC district that have yard space to locate a freestanding sign. (3) The purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land; The owner doesn’t seek to obtain the variance exclusively to increase the value or income potential of the lot, as the variance is necessary to construct a modest decorative sign for wayfinding. (4) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the vicinity in which the tract of land is located; Granting of the variance would allow for the placement of a freestanding sign in much the same location as a previous freestanding sign that existed for many decades without issue. (5) The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the vicinity; The proposal would not impair light, air, congestion, fire danger, public safety, or X-B-01 property values within the vicinity, as the proposed sign is relatively small and located in the general location of a previous sign that caused no issues. (6) The variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of ordinance; Yes, the purpose and intent of the ordinance is to limit freestanding signs from locations that do not have accommodating space for them and would not need them due to the pedestrian nature of a historic downtown. The subject property that has a great deal of front yard space for a freestanding sign and will be visited by patrons in vehicles more than foot traffic. (7) The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan; Yes, the Comprehensive Plan guides this area as mixed use. (8) The proposal puts the property to use in a reasonable manner; Yes, the site has had a similar freestanding sign in the same general location for many decades. (9) There are practical difficulties in complying with the official control. “Practical difficulties”, as used in connection with the granting of the variance means that: (a) The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control; Yes, as stated in number 8 above. (b) The practical difficulty is caused by the provisions of this chapter and has not been created by any persons presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land; The practical difficulties were created by the official controls being written for a unique historic downtown and later applied to properties in a different location that developed differently. 1. A practical difficulty is not present if the proposal could be reasonably accomplished under the current Ordinance requirements. The applicant cannot accomplish the proposal under the current ordinance requirements. (a) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed freestanding sign is a decorative masonry monument sign that compliments area building materials. Being under five feet tall and under 50 Sq Ft, the proposed sign would comply with the strictest of monument sign regulations for any district in the city, including residential. There had been a larger monument sign in this general location for many decades. (b) Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The applicant has not stated any financial reasoning for the variance. (c) Practical difficulties include inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Not applicable. X-B-01 NOTIFICATION Property owners within 350-feet of the subject property were notified of the variance request and staff has not received any comments. RECOMMENDATION Approval of the variance is recommended based on the preceding findings of fact and subject to the following conditions. Conditions 1. Conformance with the Planning Commission Staff Report and plans dated November 14, 2022. 2. Approval is subject to a one-year Sunset Clause; if progress on the proposal is not made within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void. ATTACHMENTS  Aerial Photo  Site Plan  Zoning Map  Monument Sign Graphics  Site Photo Aerial Photo X-B-01 Site Plan Zoning Map X-B-01 Architectural Drawing below Rendering X-B-01 Previous Freestanding Sign View from Street X-B-01