Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION <br />RESOLUTION NO. 735m03 <br /> <br />CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW <br />COUNTY OF RAMSEY <br />STATE OF MINNESOTA <br /> <br />RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR 100 SQUARE FEET OF ADDITIONAL <br />EXTERIOR BUILDING SIGNAGE AT 2214-2222 COUNTY HIGHWAY 10; <br />PLANNING CASE NO. VR03-006 <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the applicant, John Kopas, has applied for a variance from the <br />maximum wall-mounted signage allotments for the building located at 2214-2222 County <br />Highway 10; and, <br /> <br />WHEREAS, Section 1008.09 of the Sign Code indicates that the maximum wall- <br />mounted signage for a commercial building is 100 square feet per business occupant; <br />and, <br /> <br />WHEREAS, Mr. Kopas requests an additional 50 square feet per corner business <br />occupant-Abbey Carpet and 3 Seasons and 4 Sunrooms; and, <br /> <br />. WHEREAS, Section 1008.16 of the Sign Code indicates that variance requests be <br />treated as any other variance request as articulated in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of <br />the Mounds View Zoning Code; and, <br /> <br />WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, the Planning Commission is to review a <br />standard set of criteria, of which all must be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the <br />Zoning Code. <br /> <br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission <br />makes the following finding of facts related to this request: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1. The building at 2214-2222 County Highway 10 is in need of additional exterior <br />wall-mounted signage on the north and south building elevations to provide <br />enhanced visibility adjacent to larger developments which may obscure the <br />subject property. <br /> <br />2. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant <br />of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in that the City has approved <br />similar variances in the past for reasonable sign variance requests. <br /> <br />3. The special conditions or circumstances necessitating the variance request do <br />not result from the actions of the applicant. <br /> <br />4. Granting the variance would not confer upon the property owner a special <br />privilege in that every property owner has the right to apply for a variance to <br />improve the function and viability of their business. Neither would such approval <br />confer a special treatment as similar reasonable variances have been granted in <br />the past. <br />