4.1. BASR 12-28-1999 ( �
Item # 4.1.
ity of
ElkRiver MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Adjustments
•
FROM: Michele McPherso ,'irector of Planning
DATE: December 22, 1999
SUBJECT: Case Number V 99-17
Request by Applebees Restaurant for a
Sign Variance
Request
The applicant requests a variance to allow a fourth wall sign so that the business may
be identified from Highway 169. Section 900.22.04.D.iv of the City Code limits the
number of wall signs in the C3 Highway Commercial District to three.
Location
18891 Freeport Street
Zoning/Land Use
C3 (Highway Commercial)/HB (Highway Business)
Attachments
• Location Map
• Proposed Sign Drawing
• Applicant's Hardship Statement
• October 19, 1998 City Council Minutes
History
Applebees was constructed in 1997. At that time, wall signs were approved for the
south and west sides of the building. The sign on the west side of the building has
been determined to be two signs by staff. A monument sign was also approved.
In 1998, the applicant requested a variance to allow a fourth sign on the rear of the
building. Both the Board of Adjustments and the City Council denied the request. The
• Council concurred with the fact that visibility was poor and would g row worse with the
construction of the 169 pedestrian bridge, however, they denied the request and
13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • TDD &Phone: (612)441-7420 • Fax: (612)441-7425
Memo to the Planning CommissionN 99-17
December 22, 1999
Page 2
suggested that the monument sign be relocated to the Highway 169 frontage. The
•
applicant agreed to relocate the monument sign from Freeport Street to the Highway
169 frontage.
Since 1998, the applicant has attempted to relocated the monument sign to the 169
frontage, however, has been unable to due to a large utility easement and water main
that is adjacent to the rear of the property and parallels 169.
Analysis
Prior to the granting of a variance, the Board of Adjustments must determine that the
following five conditions are met:
1. Literal enforcement of the ordinance will cause undue hardship.
2. The hardship is caused by special conditions and circumstances, which are peculiar
to the property and the structure involved and which are not characteristic of, or
applicable to, other lands or structure in the same area.
3. The literal application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the petitioner
of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this
ordinance.
• 4. The special conditions and circumstances are not a consequence of the petitioner's
own action or inaction.
5. The variance will not be injurious to or adversely affect the health, safety or welfare
of the residents of the city or the neighborhood where the property is located and
will be in keeping with spirit and intent of the ordinance.
Literal Enforcement
Literal enforcement of the ordinance would prevent a fourth sign from being placed on
the building. However, there are signs on two other sides of the structure, one of which
could be located to the desired location. In this instance, the applicant has claimed a
predominantly economic hardship as the reason for the request.
Special Conditions
Staff concurs that it is difficult at best to see the building, however, many of the
obstructions to visibility were in place at the time the building was constructed. For
example, the pine trees along 169. There is a very small "window" of opportunity for
southbound traffic on 169 to see the building and the proposed sign location (a banner
is currently displayed in the location of the proposed sign). The construction of the
Memo to the Planning CommissionN 99-17
December 22, 1999
Page 3
water tower and pedestrian bridge has, to some extent, compounded the visibility
•
problem.
Deprivation of Rights
Denial of the variance would not deny the applicant's ability to have signage. They
have the option of relocating a sign from another part of the building to the desired
location. Elk Park Center, zoned PUD, has signage on both sides; however, it is limited
to two signs per tenant, well within the ordinance requirements.
Applicant's Action or Inaction
The applicant has stated that the adjacent strip mall to the south blocks the original
signage on the building. The mall, while closer to 169, is actually lower than
Applebees. At the time the mall was being constructed, the applicant could have made
plans to relocate one of the signs to a more advantageous location.
Adverse Impacts
Placing an additional sign on the structure would not adversely affect the residents of
Elk River; property to the east is commercial in nature. A new, illuminated sign in the
proposed location, could pose a traffic hazard to motorists on 169 trying to read the
• sign within the small window of opportunity that exists. This would be a new element in
the landscape.
Recommendation
While staff is sympathetic to the applicant's plight, they have not met the five conditions
for granting a variance. The applicant could explore other forms of advertising,
including temporary signs (inflatable, located on the roof) or relocating an existing sign
from the west side of the building. Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustments
deny the request to allow a fourth sign on the building.
•
'-.A i' 0W*t-.2S0i.?''1 v:.M71et-49 7.i m4.V0 e•1.i.V0.O- 4•.■...
.3 .,(.7.•4.,•g t.a;Z.::I..N1..A,■.,v I..P—.0.,0."i"g1m'r11ii1oltu1m i 1"l_f
ri:IkiL ite-.rAv ray pe l,C•i g iol 1l■ivM1Pli1•AP11ii.riE i1l1 iifi l3ikt1
0ry ir,0,,i_svteytir„)i',;l.1•;
'
10 (4.4:,i,,1L,k4.(•_4..1—■....
z-
4 . viAk r,F1_2er,44..r4a.-,4101g1■171;.120,3,1•.7 t:.t,I0,,•.A„,„c4N.,'6.4.c'ag'0..,.l..a.1-'0lr
1 1 i 1'
NI
hl'.. L .t”■ .. .ImarZillinallt•War ‘‘Zi:Z11111..- 1 ' ' • .51.: Ill"irilf; W÷111.-,..jr%Wrrlirl$,01411 r.41.....
71PRIZN41111111111111111 . , I trif Alre. .. ■40
• P-'` Tkiijiii 1,
ii; ..ot ..,APRIL .4- 4i_tifterr
re4,10,04 I.4 11:: 31,, t4U Ilic lart . iii"" Er=71
--"7 .lib • v.v., ' .. ....reAt — f. ,iht -.1.1.; :::= all,F
. MIMI Elk • •
. EMMA 7:-.' team LOCATION ..„,..... =mile.. 1111166.111141,,qium
". IN ED AlliMia a 1 ' 13 11, ..C 47* 41111111111146V
et pa! 44...rver•sente
0.iimi.... - .. .-,..I. •I:i.11 --; iiiKii„.......,,,,11,a , \\•:. .. viii.. 4:4-ils... t akonv. 4•
Ric Imo .id*.
' trtik■' A..7 emi - lkto . '"'"'"attilAINITA9 4 ell
v:441 . ibilk vs la V'Yro .iiin 7,
/1111111■110
_.. .. ______
rmakiirsainiv.iavverw..:!
L ...1 1I t.g.1a11e.1a 1i:4,1lt3i4m46.It•;,P,a,,*4,1P44AA.I1W.tb°t.i.t,N7.;1,„',4.1".1.Ni1 tf.:.._1,,,,
A* s.,I1.t.A 4'Ps..''f u°\T1'rC..\o4S\.1.1 i.v3.-.:\‘•F INIzb.,I.ia.IIuT"g..F.7 lr t r1 oeh a!il 6!6h.im_. __ii_-••8i'•`_.i_•iai'r:.b m ila4 mle•IdW•i'r-NI'.,7.'Z..'I'P'I'a 1 l-i.v..,..;
,.1=.:pPaAr=r..•,-7.;m:._:-.-.zI:•-i.,,':1:.:._.,:_.==.2 t-;.11:A.-2 1-::,.4.l.it-::aI.,i7.-.-.,.;heirr,1V-r.17i..-.1,,l•e,mi.,1,ii0i-1it_m.mi-4 4t,3.1gDL.i-_1cz.,ii.i7ii,1:oai.a,lai_c-:.u:E•_.-,m,"l l;.iik 1n[1-t,r 1:p t 4:_.4 4l:.1 gSt1:;.VP,41.',_,,A..ir3:t1,,*.0.
.,-..t..,,4.4.,,1..„4,‘1,4,_./c.-.--4 4,-:°,,-_..•u_7,,i I..-,_■•.y,..r..,o!•E_,it_,k,-1,R„uiL,-,.1 l.„..IwL o
.,...j.A:,.%‘s Pa t.,i',i■f?•o lk,'d,i l;ia.,',i nw-•.v.4
.•
Wo t iIi.',N-.a;rr•i.i,,Mn,3 V.e gpV-.Iw0.:dt
:1Iii: Arire srIiP0L„.,re1.,iiva r•,g.Iu..a:7$.tvM 1 i.,1.•,1n4.s.0 u,itt rut?
•s7.
4 1-rp-
;1e146.4 a7l1r1Pi'•..41
e4l
.4e 01\,11
1 141
1 1 i
N -.-"Tiriri salitle...•57-'4”
--' ,74' 4444711, ode' Millmiii!NIX i mil: `I:VI il tjaimpr...7 1 Er-7. ...,112WAII c,..; *. II: .
ti 4 I/10A,..74111i St .1;7 :'4 . 4 ,44;-0 It c144,7,4 ,, 111 sari .
170 ill ...4'... 'on Igip%` -1,11'lliiiiiiiiiiifaxt ..A‘‘.,.v t;oi
•
1"....., „ as 1...il 4,-, --0 'v.. .- .i:mu. al.: ..i.art. k •.,., „„,,. „
§illes -- / it ill jii,,_,..:-."„___„„..14411:Zils is 4,, gar . ...ti-fie:412 ‘;..■ ...„
.44%_;•'•
tit, ! l■Z\ 111111,:::-..-'4. r-I '
v. : ri) /f°: w •-. Nr1.-4.....1 .- .:‘.:,.., ,,,„.. •
\''.4. S.\ I. • ' n';‘,.: .., Ai.),,,,
I _-.._ • •\ - ..%. •.. Jr
----- ear
7-411111-1•1P-00-11111HM-M11-111111.....4M1-
.11 .10 \ A 1 PUD
•
?71 Ric
. .
•
vs: . ..,,
CP .
. . , 47....._ •
. ,.
. . 1,0-'1/4 ''''' •
........... •Y. .,:'•‘•.',;;
Vic, s., •
-. .... zo no >I lb, TI Z I Z I 0$ 441 Z1 -41 Pi Z1
/ - •\ }
t^\... S.c. .
\(s LOCATION IN\T
City of ' .t...- MAP
•
-Ai .
Elk : 'River o •
13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 2.90 CASE: V qg Im. 17
Elk River, MN 55330
...
0 0
II 1 1 I ril I ill
000 u
• . , ( Q, /A
i _ :.„.... _,.: i 1 I ; 1 it it 1 1:110 1
i
$I ,i = :111 ii '(t ii i . k l
: o i,i. 31 i
Ili; I
I
Ise i f I ' ti Ia s. { n i i i
ii
Is 1,ii !I i Igo ,, IP ! ef-.:.. 1 :,.4, li, t
Uhliiii : i 'Ii' Ili ;ill li "4,
ii; :'F' ii �ti. r
'' ii i i 3 =F i `t.`. ^^{.. o
11 g
, :5 ' ■ I G
is ii 'i t'
I. yii H is . F �.Sr .... ..._.�y.{<ii' . ' i ;,_ i
=i
r
� 3i � nif=
3i 1111 i III' iE ..�
LM tt .3 11 il' 3p 11111. ell f
3 7 }
fa I I : is . i 1„
-0". 11.1 MI Ili 1111 [.'. -` 1 11 1 I 1 111 1:U.--,5t Ili i M *--,
0 4 . : ; .i i. E.4" i ; ii
Hirt.
el.
.,..... : .: : : : , :, r,,,; ; � , t i •I— i i j 1 i . ---- w
$% i xm j f I I a= i
mp . I ? II 1 :47, 1 1 1 l : ! t i Ili is !i 11 i I ,Spp3 i 1 „c
4 _.t 1 it i it ! zE ' .'f
r" ` i _a i _ i
, f C� Id,iEs
of( -I. i .i -61111 j , i i` 3 1I I
ift
T .* i 3 : I i i
;h.
- n .A /a . l 1 :' i , E 1 I•ii,
Q
3 I, 11 I O
'`, ,le ' _ ,: i i j i s ;i 11 1 ' 1 it }
0E1 i i iisi 1 v,,1
ill i ii III :
iii i
i
i
## i3 ,III 1t i `i ill
1i4 ; i hid
• ,;,,,,._:.„ i...it li ( !!!! I;i 1! 1 J. )I 1 tir .i id
i .
•
ELK RIVER APPLEBEE'S
• VARIANCE APPLICATION
NEW SIGN
1. We request the variance due to the decline in business. Construction of the strip mall
has blocked all original signage to highway 169.
2. High embankment and recent construction has blocked all signage visible to highway
169.
3. All other properties along highway 169 have visible signage. New construction has
blocked all four original signage.
4. Petitioner was not aware that construction of the strip mall would block original
signage.
5. Adding signage to the back of the building would in no way affect the health, safety,
or welfare of the residents and neighbors of Elk River.
0
•
City Council Minutes . Page 4
October 19, 1998
•
4.10. Consider EVP Opticon System
City Engineer Terry Maurer indicated that the city has received approval from
MnDOT to proceed with the bidding process for the EVP Opticon System.
COUNCILMEMBER HOLMGREN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 98-114 APPROVING
THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS IN
THE MATTER OF THE EMERGENCY VEHICLE PRE-EMPTION /LED SIGNAL INDICATORS
IMPROVEMENT OF 1998. COUNCILMEMBER FARBER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE
MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
5. Open Mike
No one appeared for open mike.
6.1. Request by Robert & Joyce Danforth for Easement Vacation, Public Hearing Case
No. EV 98-7
Planning Assistant Scott Harlicker indicated that Robert and Joyce Danforth have
made application for the vacation of a roadway easement on Lot 11 and a
portion of Lot 12, Block 2 in Palmer's 1st Addition. Scott Harlicker reviewed the staff
report on this issue.
• Mayor Duitsman opened the public hearing. There being no one for or against the
matter, Mayor Duitsman closed the public hearing.
COUNCILMEMBER DIETZ MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 98-115, CASE NO. EV 98-7,
FOR VACATING A ROADWAY EASEMENT ALONG THE SOUTH 17 FEET OF LOT 11,
BLOCK 2 PALMERS 1ST ADDITION AND THAT PART OF LOT 12, BLOCK 2, PALMER'S FIRST
ADDITION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THAT THERE ARE NO BURIED UTILITIES WITHIN THE ROADWAY EASEMENT BEING
VACATED.
2. THAT THE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT REMAIN IN PLACE.
COUNCILMEMBER FARBER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
6.2. Request b pp lebee s for Variance nce to Sian Ordinance, Public Hearin Case No.
V
98-9
Planning Assistant Scott Harlicker indicated that Applebee's has made application
for a variance to the sign ordinance. The applicant is requesting to add one
additional wall sign located on the rear of the building facing Highway 169. The
applicant claims that the hardship is due to lack of visibility from Highway 169 when
traveling south. Scott Harlicker indicated that the Board of Adjustments voted to
deny the request because the applicant did not meet the criteria for granting a
variance.
Mayor Duitsman opened the public hearing.
City Council Minutes • • Page 5
October 19, 1998
Evelyn Witson, business owner, indicated that Applebee's does not wish to remove
existing signs from the building as it will deface the building. The Council suggested
allowing Applebee's to remove the monument sign from Freeport Avenue to the
back of the building.
Following discussion it was the consensus of the Council that visibility of the
restaurant was difficult for those traveling south on Highway 169 and that the new
bridge in 1999 will make the visibility worse. The council consented to allow the
existing monument sign on Freeport Avenue to be moved to the rear of the
building as long as this is consistent with the CUP and no utilities are impacted.
There being no further comments for or against the matter, Mayor Duitsman closed
the public hearing.
COUNCILMEMBER HOLMGREN MOVED TO DENY THE VARIANCE FOR A 4TH WALL SIGN
REQUESTED BY APPLEBEE'S BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS:
1. LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL NOT CAUSE UNDUE HARDSHIP.
THE APPLICANT COULD MOVE ONE OF THE OTHER SIGNS TO A LOCATION THAT IS
MORE VISIBLE FROM HIGHWAY 169.
2. THE LITERAL APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE WOULD NOT
DEPRIVE THE PETITIONER OF RIGHTS ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME
DISTRICT UNDER THE TERMS OF THIS ORDINANCE. OTHER BUSINESSES ALONG
HIGHWAY 169 MADE A MARKETING DECISION TO PLACE ONE OF THEIR ALLOWED
SIGNS SO THAT IT WOULD BE VISIBLE FROM HIGHWAY 169.
3. THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES ARE A CONSEQUENCE OF THE
PETITIONER'S OWN ACTION OR INACTION.THE FACT THAT THE APPLICANT DID NOT
FORESEE THE IMPACT THE RETAIL CENTER WOULD HAVE ON THE VISIBILITY OF THEIR
SIGNAGE IS A RESULT OF THE APPLICANT'S INACTION. HOWEVER,THIS COULD BE
ADDRESSED BY RELOCATING ONE OF THE EXISTING SIGNS.
COUNCILMEMBER DIETZ SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
7. Other Business
7.1. Review of Park Bond Referendum Informational Video
City Administrator Pat Klaers updated the Council on the park bond referendum.
He indicated that a video has been put together in order to help the public
become more informed about parks in general and the referendum question prior
to the election. The video was viewed by the Council.
7.2. Request Purchase of Vehicle for Building Maintenance Worker
City Administrator Pat Klaers requested Council authorization to allow Phil Hals to
attend a State of Minnesota Auction in anticipation of purchasing a van for the
Building Maintenance Worker. Pat Klaers indicated that the van will cost
approximately$7,000-$9,000.
i