VARIANCE BOARD REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

Transcription

1 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call & Introductions VARIANCE BOARD REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, October 7, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. Roseville City Hall Council Chambers, 2660 Civic Center Drive 3. Review of Minutes: September 2, Public Hearing Planning File : Request by PPF RTL Rosedale Shopping Center (c/o Morgan Stanley Real Estate) on behalf of Rojo Mexican Grill, Rosedale Mall, for a sign variance to Section C.4 to allow a sign above the parapet wall at 1705 Highway Adjourn Future Meetings: Planning Commission & Variance Board (tentative): November 4 & December 2 City Council: October 5, 19, 26 & November 6, 16, 30 Be a part of the picture.get involved with your City.Volunteer. For more information, contact Kelly at kelly.obrien@ci.roseville.mn.us or Volunteering, a Great Way to Get Involved.

2 Variance Board Meeting City Council Chambers, 2660 Civic Center Drive Draft Minutes Wednesday, September 2, :45 p.m Call to Order Chair Murphy called to order the Variance Board meeting at approximately 5:45 p.m. and reviewed the role and purpose of the Variance Board. 2. Roll Call & Introductions At the request of Member Murphy, City Planner Thomas Paschke called the Roll. Members Present: Chair Robert Murphy and Alternate Variance Board Member Michael Boguszewski Members Excused: Vice Chair James Daire and Commissioner Chuck Gitzen Staff Present: City Planner Thomas Paschke and Community Development Director Paul Bilotta 3. Review of Minutes MOTION Member Boguszewski moved, seconded by Member Murphy to approve meeting minutes of July 1, 2015 as presented. Ayes: 2 Nays: 0 Motion carried. 4. Adjournment Chair Murphy adjourned the meeting at approximately 5:48 p.m.

3 Agenda Date: 10/07/2015 REQUEST FOR VARIANCE BOARD ACTION Agenda Item: 4 Division Approval Agenda Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item Description: Request by PPF RTL Rosedale Shopping Center (c/o Morgan Stanley Real Estate) on behalf of Rojo Mexican Grill, Rosedale Mall #668, for a variance to Section C.4 to allow a sign above the parapet wall of the tenant space (PF15-020) The action deadline for this request, mandated by Minn. Stat , is November 7, GENERAL SITE INFORMATION Applicant: Cunningham Group, Inc. Location: 1705 Highway 36 Property Owner: PPF RTL Rosedale Shopping Center c/o Morgan Stanley Real Estate Land Use Context Existing Land Use Guiding Zoning Site Rosedale Mall RB RB North Rosedale Commons, Crossroads of Roseville, Wells Fargo Bank, Buffalo Wild Wings, Vitamin Shoppe, Guitar Center, RB RB Premier Bank, and 2 small multi-tenant buildings West Chili s Rosedale Marketplace, Fairdale Shoppes, Starbucks RB RB East Snelling Avenue, MnDOT Water s Edge, and single family residences O/LDR O/BP/LDR-1 South Highway 36, BMO Harris Bank, Planet Fitness/Sports Authority, Rosedale Towers, Rosewood Village Condos, Sienna Green CB/O/HDR CB/O/BP/HDR-1 NATURAL CHARACTERISTICS: The site is a fully developed shopping center with limited green space and landscaping. PLANNING FILE HISTORY: PF3608 Planned Unit Development Amendment for Plaza Addition PF Preliminary Plan and Planned Unit Development Amendment and Addendum for 141,000 sq. ft. retail addition, parking deck, and parking lot/site improvements; currently under consideration. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING Action taken on a variance request is quasi-judicial; the City s role is to determine the facts associated with the request, and weigh those facts against the legal standards contained in State Statute and City Code. PF15-020_RVBA_ Page 1 of 4

4 DETAILED PROPOSAL AND ZONING ANALYSIS The applicant proposes to install a cantilevered sign on to the building façade of the existing tenant space. Since such a sign would extend above the height of the parapet it would be deemed prohibited by our Sign Code (see references below). The sign plan and written narrative detailing the proposal is included with this report as Attachment C. City Code C.4 (Prohibited Signs) states: No sign shall extend above the roof line of a building (roof sign) C.8 reads: The following specific signs shall be prohibited: off-site, flashing, mobile/portable, roof, rotating, and painted signs, banners and billboards. Rosedale tenant signage is guided by a Master Sign Plan (MSP). Tenants with exterior public entry/access are allowed signage equal to up to 2.0 sq. ft. of wall signage for each lineal foot of building/tenant front. In the case of the former Romano s Macaroni Grill, the MSP supports a maximum of 128 square feet of exterior wall signage for this space. In reviewing signage options for Rojo Mexican Grill, Cunninghan Group completed an exterior façade study to determine the most appropriate location for the new signage based on exterior design and sign visibility. This study determined that the northern half of the east facing tenant space is the most appropriate. Although there is space to locate a sign on the former façade where the existing Macaroni Grill sign is currently located, this location is mostly obstructed by the east entrance to the mall. Locating further north on the building façade allows for greater visibility, however, even the northern location, comes with challenges. For example, the building is not designed structurally to support the sign without extensive modifications as the area lies over the freezer and cooler portion of the restaurant. The proposed sign is designed with a cantilever of 29 inches and would extend above the parapet 24 inches. PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS AND VARIANCE ANALYSIS In review of the Zoning Ordinance, specifically Chapter 1010, Sign Regulations, the City Planner has determined that the proposed sign requires a variance, as its proposed installation will cause the sign to extend above the parapet wall and thus be deemed a roof sign under the Zoning Ordinance. REVIEW OF VARIANCE APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS: Section C of the City Code establishes a mandate that the Variance Board make five specific findings about a variance request as a prerequisite for approving the variance. In the case of the Rojo Mexican Grill sign, the proposal requires a variance from C.8 of the Roseville Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, the Code prohibits a number of signs, including roof signs and signs that extend above the exterior façade or building wall. The applicant also seeks approval to install a sign in a location that causes the installation of a projection sign on the façade and extends 24 inches above a portion of the parapet wall. Planning Division staff has reviewed the application and offers the following draft findings. PF15-020_RVBA_ Page 2 of 4

5 a. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan, does not include any specificity with respect to signs or signage, however, the Planning Division staff finds that the proposed new sign is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Commercial Goals and Policies in that it represents continuing investment in an existing commercial property. b. The proposal is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the zoning ordinances. Planning Division staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinances because the Sign Regulations Chapter of the Zoning Code supports wall signage for all commercial properties, and, although in this specific instance the sign that is proposed happens to be one that is prohibited. This is largely due to construction challenges for wall mount sign and the location of the sign functions more like a wall sign than a roof sign. c. The proposal puts the subject property to use in a reasonable manner. Planning Division staff believes that the proposal makes reasonable use of the subject property because the proposed sign is placed in a location that can be viewed by customers and is installed on the portion of building in a manner that does not require major architectural and engineering modifications. In addition, the location of the sign should not create any negative impacts for traffic or adjacent properties, since the business can only be accessed via a large private parking lot and ring road d. There are unique circumstances to the property which were not created by the landowner. Planning Division staff believes that the unique circumstances that justify the approval of the requested variance in this case are tied to the original design of the tenant space in relationship to the cooler and freezer areas, which limit placement of signage and how it is installed on the building exterior. Existing landscaping also hampers customers from viewing the sign, which, given the limited number of trees on the site, does not make practical sense to remove just to see a sign. The location is also not the typical roof sign, but is larger than other parapets and serves a similar purpose to a wall sign. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Supporting the proposed sign and allowing it to extend 24 inches above the parapet of the tenant space façade has very minimal impact to the City. The proposed sign is well below the overall façade or parapet height of the restaurant s exterior elevation and even further below the height of the tenant spaces on either side. Also, the sign would be viewed only from customers using the east parking lot. These items in combination have been deemed to not alter the essential character of the locality. Section (Variances) of the City Code explains that the purpose of a variance is to permit adjustment to the zoning regulations where there are practical difficulties applying to a parcel of land or building that prevent the property from being used to the extent intended by the zoning. The proposal appears to compare favorably with all of the above requirements essential for approving variances. Roseville s Development Review Committee (DRC) met on October 1, 2015, to discuss this application, where members indicated support for the sign and the variances necessary to support its installation. PF15-020_RVBA_ Page 3 of 4

6 PUBLIC COMMENT At the time this report was prepared, Planning Division staff has not received any communications from the public about the variance request. RECOMMENDED ACTION Adopt Variance Board Resolution 116 (Attachment D) approving variances to C.4 (Prohibited Signs) and C.8 of the City Code to allow Rojo Mexican Grill to install a wall sign the extends 24 inches above a portion of the tenant spaces parapet wall at tenant space #668 Rosedale Center, subject to the following conditions: a. The Rojo sign will be limited to the location, dimensions, and square footages depicted on the attachment. b. The sign must receive an approved sign permit for a sign no greater that 24 inches above the parapet wall in the location depicted on the attached illustration. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS a. Pass a motion to table the item for future action. Tabling beyond November 4, 2015 will require extension of the 60-day action deadline established in Minn. Stat b. Adopt a resolution to deny the requested approval. Denial should be supported by specific findings of fact based on the Variance Board s review of the application, applicable zoning or subdivision regulations, and the public record. NEXT STEPS The decision of the Variance Board is final unless an appeal is filed. The appeal period remains open for 10 days from the date of the decision, and an appeal may be made either by the applicant or by another Roseville property owner. An appeal must be submitted in writing to the City Manager by noon on October 19, 2015 for a hearing before the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Prepared by: City Planner Thomas Paschke Thomas.paschke@cityofroseville.com Attachments: A: Area map B: Aerial photo C: Narrative/plans D: Draft resolution PF15-020_RVBA_ Page 4 of 4

7 COUN TY FAIRVIEW AVE N 1777 Attachment A for Planning File AMERICAN ST 1567 TRAN 2440 COUNTY ROAD B2 W County Road B2 FAIRVIEW AVE N 1705 Highway Highway Highway 36 SNELLING AVE Highway 36 N 2305 Location Map Prepared by: Community Development Department Printed: September 22, 2015 LR / LDR-1 Site Location Comp Plan / Zoning Designations Data Sources * Ramsey County GIS Base Map (8/31/2015) For further information regarding the contents of this map contact: City of Roseville, Community Development Department, 2660 Civic Center Drive, Roseville MN Disclaimer This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepancies are found please contact The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes , Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided. L Feet mapdoc: planning_commission_location.mxd

8 SNELLING AVE N MILLWOOD AVENUE W Attachment B for Planning File FAIRVIEW AVE N N ST COUNTY ROAD B2 W CO FAIRVIEW AVE N Location Map Prepared by: Community Development Department Printed: September 22, 2015 Site Location Disclaimer Data Sources This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, * Ramsey County GIS Base Map (8/31/2015) information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to L be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare * Aerial Data: MnGeo (4/2012) this map are error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purpose For further information regarding the contents of this map contact: requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepancies Feet are found please contact The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes , Subd. 21 (2000), City of Roseville, Community Development Department, and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agrees to 2660 Civic Center Drive, Roseville MN defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided.

9 Attachment C

10 Attachment C

11 Attachment C

12 EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE VARIANCE BOARD OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE Attachment D Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a public hearing was held at the regular meeting of the Variance Board of the City of Roseville, County of Ramsey, Minnesota, on the 7 th day of October, 2015, at 5:30 p.m. The following members were present: and the following members absent: Variance Board Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: VB RESOLUTION NO. 116 A RESOLUTION APPROVING VARIANCES TO C.4 (PROHIBITED SIGNS) AND C.8 OF THE ROSEVILLE CITY CODE AT 1705 HIGHWAY 36, ROSEDALE MALL #668, ROJO MEXICAN GRILL (PF15-020) WHEREAS, City Code C.4 (Prohibited Signs) states: No sign shall extend above the roof line of a building (roof sign); and WHEREAS, City Code C.8 reads: The following specific signs shall be prohibited: off-site, flashing, mobile/portable, roof, rotating, and painted signs, banners and billboards; and WHEREAS, Rojo Mexican Grill, proprietor locating in Rosedale Mall #668 (former Romano s Macaroni Grill) desires to install a wall sign that would extend above the parapet wall height of their tenant space; and WHEREAS, the portion of Rosedale Mall where Rojo Mexican Grill will locate is legally described as: PIN: Lot 3, Block 1, Rosedale Center Fourth Addition WHEREAS, City Code (Variances) establishes the purpose of a VARIANCE is to permit adjustment to the zoning regulations where there are practical difficulties applying to a parcel of land or building that prevent the property from being used to the extent intended by the zoning; and WHEREAS, the Variance Board has made the following findings: a. The code-compliant manner in which to meet the requirements of C.4 (Prohibited Signs) and C.8 has been determined to be overly-burdensome for this situation. Such limitations/restrictions represent the practical difficulty of the variance request and the proposal appears to compare favorably with all of the above requirements essential for approving variances; Page 1 of 4

13 Attachment D b. The Comprehensive Plan, does not include any specificity with respect to signs or signage, however, the City finds that the proposed new sign is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Commercial Goals and Policies in that it represents continuing investment in an existing commercial property and its placement functions as a wall sign. c. The proposal is consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinances because the Sign Regulations Chapter of the Zoning Code supports wall signage for all commercial properties, and, although in this specific instance the sign that is proposed happens to be one that is prohibited, the Code cannot account for all circumstances that tenants encounter with building design. This is largely due to construction challenges for wall mount sign and the location of the sign functions more like a wall sign than a roof sign. d. The proposal makes reasonable use of the property because the proposed sign is placed in a location that can be viewed by customers and is installed on the portion of building in a manner that does not require major architectural and engineering modifications. In addition, the location of the sign should not create any negative impacts for traffic or adjacent properties, since the business can only be accessed via a large private parking lot and ring road e. The property possesses the kind of unique characteristics that justify the approval of the requested variance in this case are tied to the original design of the tenant space in relationship to the cooler and freezer areas, which limit placement of signage and how it is installed on the building exterior. Existing landscaping also hampers customers from viewing the sign, which, given the limited number of trees on the site, does not make practical sense to remove just to see a sign. The location is also not the typical roof sign, but is larger than other parapets and serves a similar purpose to a wall sign. f. Supporting the proposed sign and allowing it to extend 24 inches above the parapet of the tenant space façade has very minimal impact to the City. The proposed sign is well below the overall façade or parapet height of the restaurant s exterior elevation and even further below the height of the tenant spaces on either side. Also, the sign would be viewed only from customers using the east parking lot. These items in combination have been deemed to not alter the essential character of the locality. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Roseville Variance Board, to approve a Variance to C.4 (Prohibited Signs) and C.8 of the City Code for Rojo Mexican Grill, proprietor locating in Rosedale Mall #668, 1705 Highway 36 subject to the following conditions: a. The Rojo sign will be limited to the location, dimensions, and square footages depicted on the attachment. b. The sign must receive an approved sign permit for a sign no greater that 24 inches above the parapet wall in the location depicted on the attached illustration. Page 2 of 4

14 Attachment D The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Variance Board Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor: and voted against; WHEREUPON said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Page 3 of 4

15 Attachment D Variance Board Resolution No. 116 Rojo Mexican Grill Rosedale Mall #668, 1705 Highway 36 (PF15-013) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified City Manager of the City of Roseville, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of said Roseville Variance Board held on the 7 th day of October, 2015, with the original thereof on file in my office. WITNESS MY HAND officially as such Manager this 7 th day of October Patrick Trudgeon, City Manager Page 4 of 4