Laserfiche WebLink
Nonconforming Use Variance Request – Valtinson Sign (386 Cleveland Avenue) <br />Planning Commission Report; 8-18-20 <br /> <br /> <br />Page 12 <br />Template Approval <br />Motion: <br />(not recommended) <br /> “I move that we recommend the City Council approve the requested 12-foot <br />variance from the 20’ height maximum, and a 27-square foot variance to the <br />36-square foot maximum based on the following findings of fact:” <br />o (provide findings to support your conclusion) <br /> <br />Template Denial <br />Motion: <br />(option 1) <br /> “I move we recommend the City Council deny the requested 12-foot variance <br />from the 20’ height maximum, and the 27-square foot variance to the 36- <br />square foot maximum, based on the following findings of fact:” <br />1. The request does not meet any of the three conditions outlined in Section <br />8-460(2) to qualify for a change to a legal nonconforming use. <br />2. The request is not in line with the intent of the zoning code as B-1 signage <br />is not intended to face the freeway, and is not intended to be sized for <br />anything more than a local street. <br />3. B-1 signs, even 20-feet in the air, are not allowed to exceed 36 square feet, <br />and the proposed additional 12 feet of height does not justify a near <br />doubling of the sign size. <br />4. The plight of the landowner is not unique as they are subject to the same <br />restriction that all other properties with legal nonconformities face: the <br />inability to expand the nonconformity. <br /> <br />Hybrid <br />Approval/Denial <br />Motion: <br />(option 2) <br /> NOTE: this option would require the applicant to amend the application and <br />seek a conforming sized sign using specific dimensions. <br /> “I move we recommend the City Council deny the height and size variances <br />as requested by the applicant, but approve up to an 11-foot variance to sign <br />height to allow for construction of a 36 square foot dynamic electronic <br />display ground sign, based on the findings of fact listed on pages 11 & 12 of <br />the report and subject to conditions on pages 12 & 13 as may have been <br />amended here tonight.” <br /> <br />Suggested Findings <br />of Fact for Hybrid <br />Approval/Denial: <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />In General: <br />1. The subject property is zoned B-1, Neighborhood Business District, which <br />caters to businesses serving the immediate area. <br />2. Freeway signs are not and have never been an allowed sign type in the B-1 <br />zoning district. <br />3. The existing wall sign, despite being a freeway sign, was permitted by the <br />City in 2003, and is therefore considered a legal nonconforming sign.