The URL can be used to link to this page

87-1348 WHITE - CI,� CLERK PINK - FINANCE G I TY OF SA I NT PA U L Council CANARV - DEPARTMENT - B`UE,. �MAVOR FIIe NO. � /�� L � � ncil solution Presented By I � Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS , Grand Central G M & H, Inc. , 788 Grand Avenue, Saint Paul , Minnesota, had applied for a sign variance under the provisions of Sec:,ion 66.409 0� i,�� Saint, Paul Legislative Code for the purpose of �err�li't-cing an e;�isting business sign to remain in place on property located at 788 Grand Avenue , the property being leaally d�scri�ed as Lots 11 and 12 , Block 8 , Summit Park Addi'cion; and WHEREAS , the Zoning Comi�ittee of the Planning Commission conducted public hearings on this application on May 14 and June 4, 1987 at which time all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS , the Saint Paul Planning Commission by its Resolution No. 87-55, adopted June 12, 1987 , denied the application for a variance of the provisions of Section 66.409 based upon the following findings of fact: (1 ) The subject globe sign is unique to a district where all new signs erected since the special sign district for Grand Rvenue was established and is not flush to the building and projects beyond 18 inches from the facade. The applicant states that his building is difficult to see when traveling from east to west and therefore an unusual sign is needed, however, the marquee upon which the globe sign extends is large and does have many special lights and appears to reduce the need for an additional unusual sign. (2) The globe sign is more than 15 times the gross surtace display area as that permitted by the sign ordinance. Its positioning above the existing nonconforming marquee is unambigu- ously prohibited. It is two feet beyond the height standards ior a sign in the special sign district. It is therefore clearly COUNCILMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays in Favor Against BY Form Approve by ity Attorney Adopted by Council: Date Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY By Approved by Mavor: Date Approved ayor for Submission to Council By BY WMITE - CITV CL,-�.K COUflC1I ///jjj PINK - FINANCE G I TY OF SA I NT PA U L � CANARV - DEPARTMENT ��/�� BLSIE' - MAVOR File� NO. :- �` � � Council Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date contrary to the intent of the sign ordinance, does not reflect a concern for the visual environment and it does not maintai� the general character of the surrounding area. and, WHEREAS , Grand Central G M & H, Inc. appealed this decision of the Planning Commission to the Saint Paul City Council pursuant to the provisions of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and the City Council conducted a hearing on this application on ,7uly 22, 1987 at which time all interested parties were heard and at which time the City Council did consider the testimony sub- mitted to the Zoning Committee, the Planning Commission reso- lution, and the testimony presented at the July 22nd hearing and based thereon, does hereby RESOLVE , that the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby affirm the decision of the Planning Commission in this mat�er and does hereby concur in the findings made and de�ermined by said Commission; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED , that the appeal of Grand Central G M & H, Inc. be and is hereby denied; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to Grand Central G M & H, Inc. , the Zoning Administrator, and the Planning Commission. 2. COUNC[LMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas Drew Nays �a �_ [n Favor Rettman Scheibel �_ Against By 5onnen Weida Wi180ri SEP 15 1987 Form Approv y City Att ney Adopted by Council: Date Certified P�ss by Council Se tary BY � By Appr e by ;Vlavor: Date _ ��` � i 1987� Approved b Mayor for Submission to Council By PUBIISH�D S E P 2 6 1987 . � ` �{ . � � - �� ._ i ��, r „�' %'� ^�-r r ! . � . . � � �, t� r .. � .)� . f �� A f �� § F ;� r�� q �i`� 9 � Y H �F'� . � � .. ` r ��4 �... � 1 y. { 3�� y .i � . . . . � � � � i� � ,.., ' . ,. .� , ..' ..� , `. I. �Y' ;�..� �. ... ' �'. .. ... • �•. ;.. ` .f� ' ...�. �. . . _ � �, : ` .� �' . 4 1+ � � r � . L��' � .•�,� '�+ � i I �' . 1 � '� � � � . �' ��d �` i , � � � �,� � t�� - +\ , i ' �� J"t; Y _ �J�t� irffl � r R � '�� ( ` i � . ' �� a � _ �� ` � � �� t � � �� .� � ' � 'j ��`� ;.P/�� 1Ji'� , i= ( .> � .r i ��. ' iD�� nF1�►�J{�� ' '`t L }K .'� �� '�� ..1. � ' � 2 J1 N .� q/liF�� 1 - r � { �, 'Y � / ��-s �� ,). �� . � .� 4 � � '�� `F '�- �'t�;�1�, l�s��i t.�&I►�� `�.�► ��h"��A�t ��. .s�i: �' ti,��j �� r G �. #-:�t � a�x'e� ��a d�sion c� Ct� ��.C��+� r�iar3t+� ,.: � �.a i(� �'�+t� ;`+a� <�C�r �a+�►L�'�` 119� t�r;e�l=�;. ,� �' �`�' r � , �� . �i�l �p� p?��a.�'C�'.�� : �s:�i�arr. :�i � � '� _ � . �' � � ° a; '°�►'�`°'�'� �°��` - , f , .y 'X � ; :s � , , �� 'S .} � . � _S �n ✓,t :1 ,1*;� . -��'��+'I'.�: '�� f� ' q� +?. ; 1` �� - f�� .:.� � �# � . , : , -�' . . ,,.. ., � � � ... �. . . �� • ; ' .,,� _ . � �� ,.� , '. , . . .. r ':i[ \ _ .. ,.I�� ..: . � �� , t i.�. , t ��s�i ' �� r , ' i � � , , , " . . , � g . , , �,r � ` ��t � ��, i - � i , r t�� _� �,� � �� y��ri # } ,� ' � ` � a � � �� - �1 . �: ` .:r �.' � �.� 1 � � '.t � `� �. � @ ".� �; .' : , ' ' i � i. � � �t .• � .. `� � P. � ��,. d�" .'�'�_ Y -� I t � ,� r/ . �, i ; `- �� - . . !'..'~ �� i y� �� ..- _/ / - '�i y �' # - t �r �� f ~1� � �'�-R I ' � f �� . . , .. ... .; 9 " � ,� .. ` k ,}f '' � ��'+ ,Ae '�� _ ,y i' , '`� �i ;� � � �-r�Y�, �� a- 7 1 '�, '� '.1 ' ` . � � 'r � � .y S F : ��..� ' r 1 f � � ;( l �` ��.�` �.- ' � � -�$ t, ti'}�. t t a3z` � S 1 r � � � � . � ,+ , ! � _�� :ti�lr ✓ .S �` � ' �� t ��kR�A� t f �� { _I ' . � / Y ' ! ,�� '' t 1 �'., i _ , I*, c� x�y� I � �s.' + L. . "`�, �. � �, � _ .;.� � y `° � 7. 'L . i'�. :'� . . .. ,� . . .. . . . . .. . / . . . . „ ,_ _ F.. ,. ~M. _ . _, s . �... .�.... _. .,.�.,.� .�x c. .+'F� �� .q ,.+d'". � i ��t ,, ' � ��:, � � � �'�"J�-/.�� 4'` �, ` � CITY OF SAINT PAUL a ��`,� ; DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT +� ° �� o DIVf$ION OF PLANNING ,.s• 25 Wat Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesofa 55102 612-22&3270 GEORGE UTIMER MAYOR July 15, 1987 �� ,. -� Albert Olson, City Clerk � Room 386, City Hall = � Saint Paul, MN 55102 RE: Zoning File #10157 - G.M. & H. Grand Central • . City Council Hearing: July 21, 1987 PURPOSE: Appeal of Planning Commission's denial of a sign variance. Variances required: placement above the marquee (not permitted) ; height above grade, 20 ft. permitted, 22 ft. proposed; and gross surface display area, 24 ft. permitted, 201 sq, ft. proposed. PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION: Deny (10 - 4) ZONING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Deny (4 - 2) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deny SUPPORT: None. OPPOSITION: One letter was received; District 16 spoke. Dear Sir: On May 14 and June 4, 1987 the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this sign variance. The petitioner testified. A representative from the District 16 Council testified in opposition. At the close of the public hearing, the Committee voted 4 to 2 to recommend denial of the sign variance based on staff findings. On June 12, 1987, the Planning Commission upheld the Zoning Committee's recommendation on a vote of 10 - 4. On June 24, 1987, the applicant filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision. Please see the attached memo which addresses the chronology of the events of this case. The appellant asserts that nine errors of fact and/or procedure were committed by the Commission: 1. The measurements of the Zoning Administrator are incorrect. 2. The permit was issued in error and never withdrawn. 3. The permit was properly approved. . � . � �`�i..3�� Zoning File #10157 July 15, 1987 Page �ao 4. The variances applied for were denied without proper investigation. 5. The sign has unusual conditions existing around it. 6. The sign conforms with the design of the building. 7. The sign is not objectionable to adjacent property owners. 8. The sign does not violate Minnesota State Statutes. 9. There was no provision existing at this time for review by the special sign district. This appeal is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on July 21, 1987. Please notify me by July 20, 1987, if any member of the City Council wishes to have slides of the site presented at the public hearing. Sincerely, �� I Donna Datsko Planner II DD:rm Attachments r.r,.; . ;i�'1�175�f'. . .t,til,�� ` ,. y ;"�•';:._? APPLICAT':.ON FOR APPEAL ZONING OFFICE USE ONLY C��7:/; '.� � CITY OF SAINT PAUL R�CE�V ED Fi le # I��S� _ _ . JUN 2� 1987 Application Fee S t S � O D �� ZONING Tentative Hearing Date '-2 �$ Application is hereby made for an Appeal to the paragraph o the oning o e under the provisions of Chapter 64, Section , to appeal a decision made by the Board o oning Appeals � � Planning Comnission on�t,�H Q (L , 1 Zoning Administrator (date of decision) Planning Administrator _ Other _ A. APPELL NT /� N� 1 �, ��; �� T-� �, Oaytime phone ?2 7 "73�-g Name��-�p�r� l.� sa.T� Address � d �r-��.�_�-� � P � ' -��Zip CodeSS I a ,�___�_ kv►e \1, l`'�g7 B. DECISION BEING APPEALED � G Zoning File � I�j Z�nin� file name . Property Address/Location l7 � � � �� - - Legal description L,�� _41�o C � C. GROUNDS FOR APPEAL (Use additional sheets if necessary. ) (Explain why you feel there has been an error in any requirement, permit, decision or refusal made by an administrative official , or an error in fact, procedure or finding made by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Planning Comnission.) � ��.� P�S r.�L�.��—n l�-e(1� o � � �--T v . � y1�i k 1 r r�u' , � a '�-- �� 0 l� . L� K� GDr�C� l��lS e�tSf"t ay�oc�.•� (�f � If you have any questions, please contact: � � i natur App icant s g St. Paul Zoning Office 1100 City Hall Annex 25 West Fourth Street �� 2N�� Saint Paul , Minnesota 55102 Date ent (298-4154) �, �.�� Iiai� ��L� y[s=-i_ 9�82 tl� t r ,��, ti•,_. � , �. � y ,. �, i � � � �: ��; � f: � � I S'. ' �. � � � ;. i � �.� � � �•. � � a . r � « � � � � . � �� i:� � ;: t - ,,. �� , i. , ; . . ._ ; . t _. } • . , �� ,r� j - ��'��`� . . • C� � - . . � � tiF �� ' �+Q . ��" Cov� �o r v4 S w ( � '�-'�'+ '�, C��J �' !/� . . , � : 0 � ��. �Dc.�.� �� l✓t . , � � - � ��, ✓�0 0�D � C C"t� o✓�c.� �p� e '�"c> J . 0`}�2� r� Z,r�l� ot� nc � S � ' �C er1 � , . � � � ,--- `J � • -�-� r�o e-S �o'�- v t o ��.�'�._ � �w n? • �c�'�c7�. . t � . ��r� w�s ✓�o Q�'o u c S c od� �e � tS-� ,� , � .- , � Q.�- '�'I� i S -�t,w.� �t'' �'�� (Ay - . � / -}-�.�.. SPe c ��. s c v� � cS1-�t �-�- . � � � � ; ----____ � z��iNG �tL E ��►�.Z . r. � , 1 � _ • , , _ t � i _ � ''' . I ` _ . . , � .. ' ' � � -13�� . �� , _ � , , ZONING COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT FILE #10100 1. APPLICANT: Grand Central/G.M.& H. DATE OF HEARING: 5/14/87 2. CLASSIFICATION: Sign Variance 3. LOCATION: 788 Grand Ave. (southside between Grotto and Avon) 4. PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 5. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 11 and 12, Block 8 Summit Park Addition 6. PRESENT ZONING: B-2 ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 66.409 7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: DATE: 4/28/87 BY: Donna Datsko �. A: PURPOSE: To permit an existing business sign to remain in place. Variances required: placement above the marquee (not permitted) , height above grade is 22' (20' permitted) , and gross surface display area of 41.5' (24' permitted) . B. PARCEL SIZE: The parcel is composed of two lots and has 80' of frontage on Grand and a depth of 150' ; total parcel area is 12,000. C. EXISTING LAND USE: The property is developed as a one story restaurant and nightclub and has a surface parking lot. D. SURROUNDING LAND USE: North: Commercial East: Commercial South: Residential - West: Commercial E. ZONING HISTORY: In December, 1986, the applicant received approval through the Grand Avenue Special Sign District review to install a sign at this location which would pro,ject no farther than the existing nonconforming marquee. The sign was a 7' globe with letters pro�ecting from the surface about 6" . The subsequent placement of the sign was 11" beyond the marquee. In January, 1987, the Planning Commission denied a sign variance to allow the applicant's globe sign to pro�ect beyond the marquee. F. ZONING CODE CITATION: Section 66.407, Variances. The Planning Commission shall have the authority to grant variances from the strict applications of this chapter for unique signs or unusual conditions pertaining to sign needs for a specific building or lot provided that (six other) conditions must be met, (see #4 below) , G. FINDINGS: 1. After failing to receive a sign variance to permit the applicant's globe sign to pro�ect beyond the marquee, the applicant repositioned the letters and the sign so that the sign conformed to that requirement. 2. The Planning Administrator notified the Zoning Administrator that the sign still did not conform to the requirements of the sign ordinance and that in fact, the permit to install the sign had been issued in error. Requirements which are not met by the applicant's sign include (1) placement above the marquee (not permitted) , (2) height above grade is 22' (20' permitted) , and (3) gross surface display area of 41.5' (24' permitted) . 3. The applicant does not agree with this determination and has requested a new variance which would permit the globe sign to remain in place and which recognizes that the sign as placed does meet the conditions of the original permit. � � � ��- i��'� , � � File #10100 Pag� Two 4. The Planning Commission may grant variances for signs if they find that (1) the signs are unique or that there are unusual conditions pertaining to the sign needs for a specific building, (2) the signs are not contrary to the general intent of the Sign Ordinance, (3) the signs would not create a hazard, (4) would not violate Minnesota State Statutes, (5) would not be ob�ectionable to ad,jacent property owners, (6) would not affect residential property through excessive glare and lighting, and (7) would be in keeping with the general character of the surrounding area. S. The globe sign is unique to a district where most signs are flush to the building or project 18" from the facade. The applicant has stated that his building is difficult to see when �traveling from east to west and therefore the unusual sign is needed. However, the marquee upon which the globe sign extends above is large and does have many small lights and it appears that condition would reduce the need for an additional unusual sign. 6. The intent of the sign ordinance is to "encourage a concern for the visual environment which makes the City a more desirable place to live, work and visit." The Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan states that the intent of the plan is "to reduce . . . chaotic diversity of signage that impairs the effectiveness of signs identifying businesses, to provide design standards for signs to increase their legibility and impact and to create a more desirable and memorable image for Grand Avenue." The globe sign has nearly twice the gross surface display area as that permitted by the sign ordinance. Its positioning above the existing nonconforming marquee is unambiguously prohibited. It is two feet beyond the height standards for signs in this special sign district. It is, therefore, clearly contrary to the intent of the sign ordinance, does not reflect a concern for the visual environment and does not maintain the general character of the surrounding area. H. STAFF ANALYSIS: The permit which was granted to the applicant was issued in error; the sign does not conform to the intent and purpose of the ordinance and is contrary to the � �, concept of special sign districts. The applicant has not shown that the sign needs of the building are unique or shown that hardship was established; and therefore, this request does not meet the standards by which sign variances are granted. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on staff findings 1 through 6, staff recommends denial of the sign variance. i� . ��--�� ` . ; � : � 'REso�uTtoN 1Z� 'D�NY VARtI�tvGE , , , city of saint paul R'�"`�'T � 2 planning commission resolution � file number 87-55 . � �te June 12, 1987 WHEREAS, Grand Central/G.M.� H. � file #10100� has applied for a Sign Variance under the provisions of Section 66.409 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, for the purpose of permitting an existing business sign to remain in place on property located at 788 Grand Avenue� legally described as Lots 11 and 12� Block 8 Swnmit Park Addition; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission on May 14 and June 4� 1987� held a public hearing at which all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard pursuant to said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.300 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code; and WHEREAS� Saint Paul Planning Commission� based on the evidence presented to its Zoning Committee at the public hearing as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact: 1. After failing to receive a sign variance to permit the applicant's globe sign to project beyond the marquee� the applicant repositioned the letters and the sign so that the sign conformed to that requirement. 2. The Planning Administrator notified the Zoning Administrator that the sign still did not conform to the requirements of the sign ordinance and that in fact� the permit to install the sign had been issued in error. Requirements which are not met by the applicant's sign include (1) placement above the marquee (not permitted) � (2) height above grade is 22' (20' permitted) � and (3) gross �urface display area of 201 square feet (24' permitted) . 3. On March 9, 1987, the Zoning Administrator notified the applicant (1) that the original permit was issued in error� (2) that the permit issued January 22, 1987 was revoked and (3) that the sign must be removed or a new variance application received which was specific to the current (altered) sign. 4. The applicant requested a new variance for the altered sign which would permit the globe sign to remain in place. (continued) moved by CHRISTENSON seconded by LEVY in fav�or— against— � , .:,,. ;. , � ►�: ; ; �. " � ,:; , �,. �i-' � , t>�: .�� ; � � + N. 1 �, 1 � ' � ' � � f, �... �:" i � , ♦ 1 �'.. �...".. i�' f :. f��•�� ..�•.�.�'��. �. .' !.. ��.�.� �:. :.. . . . -- - , : . �1`,��' � , � , 5. The Planning Commission may grant variances for signs if they find that (1) the aigns are unique or that there are unusual conditions pertaining to the sign needs for a specific building, (2) the signs are not contrary to the general intent of the Sign Ordinance, (3) the signs would not create a hazard� (4) would not violate Minnesota State Statutes� (5) would not be ob,jectionable to adjacent property owners� (6) would not affect residential property through excessive glare and lighting, and (7) would be in keeping with the general character of the surrounding area. 6. The globe sign is unique to a district where all new signs erected since the � special sign district was established are flush to the building or pro,ject 18" from the facade. The applicant has stated that his building is difficult to see when traveling from east to west and therefore the unusual sign is needed. However� the marquee upon which the globe sign extends above is large and does have many small lights and it appears that condition would reduce the need for an additional unusual sign. 7. The intent of the sign ordinance is to "encourage a concern for the visual environment which makes the City a more desirable place to live, work and visit." The Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan states that the intent of the plan is "to reduce . . . chaotic diversity of signage that impairs the effectiveness of signs identifying businesses, to provide design standards for signs to increase their legibility and impact and to create a more desirable and memorable image for Grand Avenue." The globe sign has more than 15 times the gross surface display area as that permitted by the sign ordinance. Its positioning above the existing nonconforming marquee is unambiguously prohibited. It is two feet beyond the height standards for signs in this special sign district. It is, therefore, clearly contrary to the intent of the sign ordinance� does not reflect a concern for the visual environment and does not maintain the general character of the surrounding area. NOW� THEREFORE� BE IT RESOLVED� by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, that under the authority of the City's Legislative Code� the application for a Sign Variance to allow the existing globe sign to remain in place at 788 Grand Avenue is hereby denied. t � � . .. ! . . � � � � � . Y' � � ' I @ '.. t E . � � � � � � � � � - i � ,,. I . � � . .. ... ., . ; ' . . � � � � � �l/�� ' � MINUTES OF THE ZONING COMMITTEE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, SAINT. PAUL� MINNESOTA ON JUNE 4� 1987 P$�,SENT: Mmes. Tracy and Zieman; Messrs. Christenson, Ferderer, Levy and Repke of the Zoning Committee; Mr. Segal, Assistant City Attorney; Ms. Lane of the Division of Housing and Building Code Enforcement; Ms. Datsko, Ms. Murray, Mr. Ryan and Mr. Wiederhorn of the Planning Division staff. ABSENT: Ms. Morton and Mr.. Neid. The meeting was chaired by James Christenson. Grand CentrallG.M. & H. (#10100) : A Sign Variance for property located at 788 Grand Avenue to permit the existing globe sign to remain in place; three variances required. The applicant was present. There was opposition present at the meeting. Ms. Datsko reviewed the zoning history and the staff report with a recommendation for denial. She distributed a memo describing the Grand Central sign calculations based on figures from the original approved sign design and figures of the actual placed globe sign. She stated these calculations were based on measurements made by Rich Thompson, P.E. � of the 2oning Administrator's office. Discussion followed relative to the measurements of the globe, the marquee� the sign structure� and the definitions of those terms as stated in the zoning code. Richard Kadrie, 310 Cedar Street, an attorney representing Grand Central, questioned the method by which globe measurements were taken. Tony Gagliardi, 500 Hopkins Street, manager of Grand Central, stated his sign measurements differ from those of the City. Jack Sjoholm, 951 Lincoln, president of the Suauuit Hill Association� stated that there was absolute unanimity of neighbors in opposing the sign based on the Grand Avenue special sign district ordinance. He said this opposition was both technical and aesthetic. • Hearing no further testimony, Mr. Christenson closed the public portion of the meeting. Mr. Repke stated that there was no question about nonconformance with the Grand Avenue sign ordinance; however, he questioned the height and width of the globe and whether or not the globe was an extension of the marquee. Ms. Lane described the process by which Rich Thompson measured the globe and marquee. � Mr. Segal asked for review on: 1) what was the error� 2) when was the error discovered and what was done by the City� 3) what did the permittee do when notified� and 4) was the permit revoked. , .;:, . � �;;� -I ti,. ,. . ! i •r i. .. � ,. � ' � � . �� , . � � � � . . . _„.�' � �::. :�., • • � . � , �-�y-�3��' File �ioioo Page �►o Ms. Datsko replied that the sign which was installed did not meet specifications (height� display area and projection over marquee) of the eign that was approved by the permit. The City notified the applicant upon inspection of the sign; the applicant then made application for a variance which was denied by the Planning Commission. The sign permit which was issued in error was revoked on January 22, 1987. The owners then repositioned the sign. On March 9� the Zoning Administrator sent a letter to the applicant indicating the three reasons why the globe sign was still nonconforming and asked the applicant to remove the sign or apply for another variance. Mr. Segal stated that because the permit was revoked on March 9� 1987 there ie no "grandfathering" possible and the sign would have to be removed or a variance granted. Ms. Zieman made a motion to recommend denial based on staff findings tbat the applicant does not meet criteria to grant the three variances requested. Mr. Levy seconded the motion which passed on a roll call vote of 4-2 (Ferderer, Repke) . Submitted by: Approved by: . , - �� " �� Donna Datsko ames Christenson, Chairman :'y� 'l' `. �� . � !. I � ,;� r � ,� � ,);. % �: q� � � �:.� �.. i t. t f � �. j'' `� '' ' . . �� '� ? y'. I ) �� " .' ��'. ,.�, . .. ... . ., . � �y �� ` MINUTES OF THE ZONING COI�iITTEE L/� . CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, ST. PAUL� MINNESOTA ON MAY 14� 1987 PR�SENT: Mmes. Morton and Zieman; Messrs. Christenson� Ferderer, Neid and Repke of the Zoning Committee; Mr. Segal� Assistant City Attorney; Ms. Lane of the Division of Housing and Building Code Enforcement; Mmes. Datsko, Drummond, Lexau, Murray; Messrs. McGuire, Ryan and Soderholm of the Planning Division staff. A�SENT: Ms. Tracy; Mr. Levy. _ i� The meeting was chaired by Gladys Morton, Chairman. Grand Central�G.M. � H. (#10100) : A Sign Variance for property located at 788 Grand Avenue to permit the existing globe sign to remain in place; three variances required. The applicant was present. There was no opposition present. Ms. Datsko showed slides of the site and reviewed the staff report with a recommendation for denial. She described the zoning history of the marquee and globe and stated that at present the globe does revolve but does not project over the marquee. Ms. Datsko stated that a letter was received from the Summit Hill Association recommending denial of the variance; one other letter recommending denial was received and two phone calls from neighbors opposed to the variance were received. Discussion followed relative to the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Ordinance and the manner in which the Grand Central permit was granted. Richard Kadrie, 310 Cedar Street� an attorney representing Grand Central, � distributed pictures of other Grand Avenue business signs. He stated that Grand Central had the sign installed following issuance of a City permit and the globe was reduced in size from eight feet to seven feet when an error in dimension was brought to their attention. Mr. Kadrie stated that the globe was the original ball but that in order to make it conform to the permit, the projecting sign letters were placed directly on the globe. He questioned the manner in which the height measurement of the sign was done. Hearing no further testimony, Ms. Morton closed the public portion of the meeting. Mr. Neid made a motion to recommend layover of the variance to June 4 to allow staff time to secure calculatio�is for the height and the surface area of the globe. Mr. Christenson seconded the motion which passed on a voice vote of - 5-1 (Ferderer) . Submitted by: Approved by: O►�►KIti-��- ` M � li!"N�� Donna Dat�ko G dys Morton, Chairman ,..__._.__.__. ._ . . ...�..... .. . .__,_-_,. .__. ---- . . � . _ :..- _ _.... .__... ..-. .....,.._..__. � .___ -„-._.. -r. .�,:. -- ..r;. ,�;;,,;:: ,. , �;,�!. « a , r �' "�t'f"�i`'' �,: . ,* �'1!'r. i; �^ � ` j��it. I ih � t ' r f . ';��'., . �i:', � ' ,�. _. . . � .S.Y..�.�- . „ � . i• ~ta . :�� _�/_/,3�d� � . � , CITY OF SAINT PAUL INTERDEPARTMENT/1l MEMORANDUM T0: Zoning Committee FROM: Donna Datsko, City Planner DATE: June 4, 1987 SUBJECT: Grand Central Sign Calculations The following calculations are based on either figures from the original approved sign design or on figures of the actual placed globe sign, as calculated by Rich Thompson, P.E. , of the Zoning Administrator's office. Original Approved Design globe - 7' globe with pro�ecting letters - 8'3” height of sign - 20' letter height - 1'6" circumference of sphere - 3.14 x 7' - 22' maximum amount of letters visible from any point - 1'6" x 8'3" - 12 sq.ft. gross surface display area* (for letters of sign only) - 1'6" x 22' - 33 sq.ft. (for entire sphere) - 4 x 3.14 x 12 - 151 sq.ft. Existing Sign i� globe - 8' � height of sign - 22' letter height - 1'6" circumference of sphere - 3.14 x 8' - 25' maximum amount of letters visible from any point - 1'6" x 8' - 12 sq.ft. gross surface display area* (for letters of sign only) - 1'6" x 25' - 38 sq.ft. (for entire sphere) - 4 x 3.14 x 16 - 201 sq.ft. *Section 66.109 Zoning Code Definitions. Gross Surface Display Area. The entire area within a continuous perimeter enclosing the extreme limits of such sign, but in no case passing through or between any element of the sign. The background on which s sign is placed sha11 be enclosed within the perimeter when the background is an integral part of the sign display surface. When signs are painted on or applied directly to a building, the perimeter shall include all elementa of the sign together with the background of a different color than the natural color of the building. The perimeter shall not, however, include supporting framework or bracing when not used as a sign display area. (emphasis added) ZONING FILE Qo ,�. � : : 1� � � � __� � � � .. �� :;�r 71�,7' 1' i � i . 1 � �:'A �, .. ; . I �\. ,� � i { I ; 7 �, J _ I _ �' � r {' • 1 �3 � . �� .. . - �3'. . .. . .� . . � , . . v = � .A vt �is :ti:.'�c. ^ s„ � ' ; ' : r t v� ; �. ' �_ � . �^.�. �-\C l�t,�, �"�1W i � l C • ! � 4 ..' o.:,� '�C ' � � ./� � � �. ♦- � CI ,�i ;fr L �+ „X � ` Fi 'r 3" L �� ar. +r �, � .� � _wG. rwx "'� r X � , '„ �'r,�:. ,�. - �.: ;. �.,#r:. rr�t: � . „r ` .. a� ti' .r'�i� , Y ri�, �� .7.-T 3 s•� h) ;�� f t � t �►..• .'�. �/t,� .> :��1t 3� 1 h ,.w ' � ;:� . � .;; r •• . ., ..a 7:cw�r).�� *, � � �'�• -1 r ...•♦ .-,� 4.i'. . . � t�wr w S :. �. C.'� + i�.: �J��y�r/� 1. , w�..ri- .M.I�Y r � . ,�� •• � �� .. . �� i.. . � 'L t. .�r... _ �/'�/'�` _`S; • , . 'L �RI�.�_� il. . .� . .. . . _ �� ... - . � �: .. � ... . . . . � ��'�� , ri•�". wr, , . . . • .�. . .. . ', ... � f-i. .t 1'�Yi•7' rH �`i i, ' ... _ : . • . '.. . � ..t y. .. • ': .•. y .;.r% ��'�..�-� , r � .. - ` � �.. . . � � ,.`�. YY � �' . M . � � . ... - . ��..S y . � . . .. _ . �' f...'� . . ;� �"1 , �.� ! . . . _ .. 7 L :1r �� . . . . � � . . ' _ . . . ✓ i . . .. � •.�-.. :�'�--'`: ..�v�r-` . . . � .,�,._ , _ Y. .. V . . ,• . .. : . ... y. . .. ��, �r,_ . �� - ' . ... -; .. `. ., L ' : � f '{-� 1� _ 1�� "��. '�.fl:...t_f. � . . : � ' ,, � � ., __, - _ - � -� . . .� , . � . . �-s � � : : �- � � . . . : �,ti,� K- e�. .�i � ; . . . . ' , _ . . . ... . ' .. . :1� . . . . . �� OR��,�� 4�ov� DESw►N . .. . .• . ----1,: :'' - . � �.�-:i. -_-�-- -. . _ ....._.:,..:._.�:..��+r.�1,•....��.�_��..___:..-::.-��-.__•.__.__Y y• �--.. � . 7 . � ... , .. .. . � ' ��r I . _ .i;.t, . ._ . ` ,. .' . . . . ::, . . ,.a*� �`- ... _ _, � .... ' �. .. • _ jy� y .. . � _ ,� . '. ' - . • � �,.- , . � , '�� t '"a. . .._�� ^ .� .�_._...__. ._� t ,��._.._. . .. .. �- `�' 1, • . . " __ ... .L1Jy .. `\ ( • I� ' , �� T� -- ,'•,-� � ,' .yFC 1. • ,� , ; { i lf� � I� w � . . - . . � I � . r, , �. �_: ., �.,t ��: -_. . �� i �.. ' r� �l� � �r �` • , �. � ,- - -- • i � . � - � : . , .., , . .. . ,.___.__.._. :� .. � � .; . . � . .. , f �,`r - . . � ''�+ � . ... . � _- , . ' ` • . . i J. ' � � . . : ' �I�`��N - , • ..' P.�...r��. . . _.. \. .� .{� . . . . . � . -/` � .. � .._. . � � �_ �: - "`� - � '� ,. � .�: � � ' r . . - � . . , . .. ,... ' � �• . -J��•, �`--' .��. . ... •,.. - .. . �� -��•------•___.—_ , _._:•J�.�.� �. . . � : � . . . � ?l+t�' . :.. � .. .. p!I�r .....»„�, ,� •.f . .. . . . . . . , .� . . .' _ .. � � .. . . i �r '.►,.� S�• ... ..��....m�`��.� -..�_. . . r . � .. . . , . .. . ..- r, . .. . , .. . .. . ) "x,::n ..^ , � 1''K ' _. �,�. , _ • , ' . - ' � r!'� _p.�,�� t tl '2 . . .. . � _ ..-+. . 4 . . � . �� . , �- y' .. � . .. � - -r�.':.....�- � . � . � _•' . . . . . . _l �Y�'a;-'"!x-..i.� ._=y�1' �.�'��` _._.�_�__.. .. -..� __. .._::=`._Y -. � . . . . - "" . _. . . ' . . " " •F •�� ', r. � . ' . � �. .. _ r ' .. . ".» .. _ .. ....�, -+t.�,,.—�.-''.+..��.L�....,,�..+-�-- • .-�..... ... ' . . • . • . C '. � . , . _ y � • . , . ' ' . . . . - - :l•' . . ... _ __. .. , . ' �' . . . __ �� ; �� _��--• •-. - '' . . . .. , . .. .. _ . _ . . _ . . _ . . -- . _ A. .. ...•.. �... . . � . �__ -_._ - � .i ._... ._ ' ... ... . _ . .-... .. � . . ..- . . ' . '_ _j.. . , .. _y+ _ .' - . .. � . . - . . . . � � . . -�.�� - . .. � . . . .... . .�. . .. . . . , .. - �. : . _ , . . .. . .. . ._.. t �..i�.'.,,�T....^ .r • . . . � _ �' . ,. . . . . . . , , ' • • .. . ..� . (�� --�� " �'Y. . � � ' ' ' . � . �� . , �,� i� � . A � . � , , � . ' , � ' " •: » �.��,1 �,�,1', .. ' . . . . � s. �. ' .� . . � • . . � ' � .. �'�. . . ' �� . .. . � ' � '� �.� ' • , � , , J ,. r..•I • � ' . , .�y� N.. '` . . . . � ' ... . .. -� '� � � � . I'' 4 b�fi, , . , . . • . . . . . � � � . � � I. . ; ' _.'Y v� .. � ' j• � . �� Y�� . . . . • � . ��'.�� " - . . . . . -- . +� F�LE� O �00 . . ,.� . . .,� . . ': . , i: ' `� . .. •. . ' . . ' ' ' . .. � • . .. , . • . '4 Y �•�+ ' � . ,. � ' . ' � ' � . �.'` _... . .f .. �. . •• - � � ._ . . . � ' � . "\ � . ' � ' . . �.� � . . . � � ' . • . '!`.: . �R�ti�1 _ 1 ,� l t , r �:. y: � /�. ti•. 1 ' � � i •' � � 1 A, .� � 7 � �� .. :.,. � . ,.�„ . I . �� ,.. .... .. 1 � � : � �� - . 8�i�iNc, U�'. c�lwlai,o�,s c�F ��3T I 1J C1 �p`� , „ 8-0 � i3,,��, I . . � � � . � . I'-6" 7'-a" . ' � • . ' �� • � ' � � � ' ; • , . • ` , . { f•; , , • _ -, • • • .. . . . . ,�; • •� , . , '. � ' • 3'-1 ,� � . . �• . . ; . . . . . - ; ' . , " . . � . . `' • ' • r- � ` t . . � , . . , . , �' . . , � :4�� ` ', 2�-0�� , � 22'-p�� - . : • . , � . . , , . . , . ;. . � � . � � . � • � ' - .� � . -� � ' . . ' ' � ". . , � � ' � , , • � �. � � •, � � , � , � . ' . � - � � � .� . � . .� - � ,,• . , , , - , • � : - � . � � �_�� . . . . _ .` . � . . . �� 1'SS C-r. R��! D ,A�E ''�A R�r'��t�- 1Jo�-rH ��..�.v�►'r`�ot�� ; ---- ------____------_____.__ __ 'S121�8-�► � :� ��:;��`_� ' ' �� r �.� 1.4I 00_ -- � , _ � r. � � _�__ --- _ .______._ E . �� _ � -- � .��-- y�-1� � l�U.L . � � 1` ' . '� � " �� ;�� ' t y; �& � �: ; '., . � .�r:� � � ,, � . . �� . . �'` : � : � : 3 � � FfLE �°t°° ' . ..� ZC71�f�1G , �, ,.. , � , ?�: , ` ` ��-�3�� CITY Of S^INT PAUL � INTERDEPARTMENT/1l MEMORANDUM May 27, 1987 T0: Wendy Lane � � FROM: Rich Thompson, P.E. � RE: 788 Grand Ave. - Restaurant Sign The dimensions shown on your sketch labeled "Partial North Elevation" and dated May 21, 1987 are in keeping with those obtained by me by photo- grammetric scaling of building photos and verified by actual measurement �- _` of accessible elements and by indirect measurement of the "globe" sign, using a right-angle pentaprism. I estimate that the margin of error should be no more than three or four inches in the worst case and less than that for most of the dimensions. /krz � , � � ;{ � . • � .' # ! ,s. . , ,,r,� ; � ,.' , �. , � ,• ..t, . a � ` ; ' :. , :. _ 3� a � �; �� . . . .., � , ` �� . �� '� ' CITY OF SAINT PAUL �..., ,.. J '� ' DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES :• u��o : BUILDING INSPECTION AND DESIGN DIVISION �••• City Hall,Saint Paul,Minnesou 55102 612-298�212 � CEORGE LATIMER MAYOR March 9, 1987 Anthony Gagliardi and Robert Hall Grand Central 788 Grand Avenue St. Paul Minnesota 55105 �RE: 788 Grand Avenue Gentlemen: The present globe sign was erected on the basis of a plan approved by the Planning Division. The existing sign does not conform with: (1) the originally approved plan, which indicated a 7 foot globe instead of an 8 foot globe; - (2) The Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan, which permits a total gross surface display area of 24' for a projecting sign (41.5' existing) , and limits the height for projectit�g signs to 20' above grade (22' existing), also, , it is the Planning staff's opinion that the intent and purpose of the special plan are not met; and (3) the zoning ordinance, which prohibits the placement • of a sign above a marquee. The sign permit which was erroneously issued was revoked on January 22, 1987. `. An application for a variance to the sign ordinance was denied on January 9, 1987 � by the Planning Commission. An appeal was not filed. The sign was altered (moved back on the marquee and letters moved closer to the surface of the ball) '_� but remains in substantial conflict with the plan, the Grand Avenue criteria, � and the zoning ordinance. You are hereby ordered to remove the sign within 10 days or process a variance application specific to the current sign and its nonconformance with the ordinance and special district sign criteria. If the sign is not removed, or new variance application received within 10 days specified, a court appearance violation citation will be issued. Sincerely, ' �i Jan P. Gasterland Zoning Administrator JPG/WL:km cc: Peggy Reichert, Planning Division Jerry Segal, City Attorney's Office --�----`--~---------.-r- Sue Flinch, City Attorney's Office � ' �� ' �. y ' ��,,, 'I .:, '` � � ;;.,� :! a �y �al f�� $�t 1.Q.1�.— . • , �. ' Y ' } � .l � S ,`a• � - � � , . ,Y .: � `{ ; , �r �J • . � C�� . , � �q , 1 � ��:��'�� .E �' ZONING BOARD „ ' I b�. 1 pD " : :�:; ''` ` APPLICATION FOR ZONING NCE�-A-RtA�6E CITY OF SAINT PAUL , ; , � A VARIANCE OF 20NING CODE CHAP i ER ,SECTION�P�1F��i�PH IS REQUESTED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE POWERS VESTED IN THE BOARD OF ZONING AP— PEALS TO PERMIT THE ON PROPERTY . ..::, � DESCRIBEO BELOW. � A. Applicant; NAME• E ADDRESS � ` � - T1.w'Z� -�r� � �.��. ��. � � DAYTIME TELEPHONE NO. 7�7 — ZIP CODE � 1. Property interest of applicant: (owner,co�tract purchase�,etc.l • �•�,'.� t ;,. 2. Name of owner (if different) ��'�'^" � G` ` � 'u�(�i �� t��. L�_ � t��; �� :�� :�'. � B. Property Description: ADDRESS I 1. '' 1. . Legal descriptio�: LOT BLOCK AOD. t y 2. Lot size• �'� 3. Present Use Present Zoning Diat. ;,� , . C. Reasons for Requesr. � i . 1. Proposed use S� q� (�� 1 J L � .:;,. ;. Z. What physical characteristics of the property prevent its being used for a�y of the permitted utas ,�;;�., ` I�• in your zone7 (topography,soil conditions,size and shape of lot,etc.) ' � � S�a�r-e F��t e o F s� h . � 1� `� ��, ( � � Z- `LGr��r�G: oYl� • �� r(�-. QrW��l'U SI�Y'` a1�oUP (�'r C� P� r • � 3. State the`apecific variation requested,giving distances wher ae ppropriate. � i`. l . 5n . ��'�C"C�� S • � �; � 2• a� Sa�fi e C� � r �# 2. . I �°,: . i ;:�� : 4. Explain how your case conforma to each of the followinp: I x • , a. That the:trict application of the provi�ions of the Zoning Ordiancs would retult in pscuNer '. or exceptionel practical difficultie�,or exceptfonel undue herdship�. I � �CI�E '. �L�c \1 � S � r � c.� �, c( �'e �J � H� � � � � ' ,ti.'' � � �i l�GVr �y(G C�{ , �� l � � ; � `� � �� (£ C� c , ,� �� r.. � ��' r c.� c- �".`J � . oa s , at the pranting of a variance will ; � , ' i :� � not be a substantial detriment to 41�1,� JH�tIHN1:E *17Q,[� , public good or a substential impeir- �uC'T��C(�L �E1'jQ„QQ . � `. �, mant of the intent and purposeof �ASH TI� �1?O.QO � �' ,. - • the Zoninp Ordinancs. t,H(�N��, *�� i � . /` •,L. . I ' __ a /1 f� � NOTE: THIS WILL NOT BE PROCESSE%WJTHOUT A COMPLETE SITE PLANI � � � , / ,� ,/y � � Signeture`� l�, ��/!-' ! I ./L(.�-�.�.�-Y � � ✓ � Date Received I .. � Y � _.. ! f .�.� I I f • � � � ' , ' .,. j - ' ' . .. . + . '. . . . �. . .�,� . � .. , , r r � , ; � � ,Z�iV� NG �f LE f0T � � �� O �U�1 o�2�t l� rII C� C�N1��-. �:�� j ��;�� o�� -n� �ri�t� /�r�..��L�'z �' ��OLc-c.PiLc.�C� � . y � , � �GC�� U�/CP �� G�z 6��c.._� , `TI-� �1��' ��( �� .�'��s /_ ''l `/ � �LZt� �Y � ��?G� C> T�'�J' / � !� / �,c.� u.� ��-��-- �x� �� .��e.�E�- , �ts��-l.c., —f Cz,�e c%� G�c��-1 cv, �,,e-� � ; ' .- �� . �a,c�� s � � . � ��t�� - ,; ► ��-� ��,�,r, �'- , � � � � � . f�,��s .��:�t'� ou �- ��ss��'�-t ��1� , � - �`t��Z.p�v/ 1y��7 ��72��c1s� _ ; �—. � �� ' �v� `! �f - ,��.�� /.� fZ.��'I. �/oJ_.- � � , :�� oi��/ . � C��,-��=�c S ) � 1 MR I��IR�; ARI,4 A$p3TOL(�� , . 5301 L.A'�:�Si�E AVE NURT� ,� ' r.<; �, :, u1NN 55•�z� � ,�, ; � i � �; �, � � j ; ;� , � ;j � til �' � r, � � � � - p, ', � 'D �. .i :� . . � � �� f 4 -1 �� ; ' �. . � -�� . . . .. .. ��%.i ` � � �� . �.� � _ ' . .. � '.. ��:��',. ' , p�/ ,/ . � � —/ � 11 / �`� • � , : > p , a� � �1� — ' M ,� 'i.�''c"�t 11 �i�t r� d �..� RECEIV�ED 28 uctobcr �yt�e MAY 14 1987 r�d��: ad�t��-� ZONING Pl�r..:ing an3 Econc,rr�i�� I)r-�r�:�oprnent 2�; w. �tr� st. St. Paul, MAI 551�2 n��n�- t�dz�:, Tr,e r�ew si�;r� at Grar1�3 i:r:�-,t.��-�;l �,rds di�>cussed at the Zor,ing and L�rir1 U�e Curi�rnitt.�r. .;lt;�,ougr� wF� are not all thdt w�ll ver. �,F�d ir� l,l-�e r�i��:ti�::� af t.ht_; 7,rr,ir�� Code, wE were sur�.�rised tl��t a I�r��jectirig �' i�i. :��t t.hai: si�� ar�d in that locatior� could t��e a le�al �Ui�;�r�. t i. �:er�tairil;>> is riot. in the sgirit of i:he i?rar,d �VP111�P ;;i�r..�:�r Flar�, vrl,rth�r or not that specific tj��'F' 'J��:� c`:.�Uilrf'a:�Ell. P1��r�:�t. r��lx:� us �_ir�dez•:;t,;;,.: t;l-,E; rat:irr�ale thdt werit irit� approvir,,; 1:1-�i� gartic�alar ..>i�t-,. Si,-ir.-c:rr:l`,r �r�_��ar:� , I��_itl�� Hrrr�:,t;rc,n�, i�i;, ti>>_�rnrrrit Hi.).l 1?s�,r-,ci�.-l.i�_�r,;Di:�;�t;rict lr; � �� ' .. i . � w ' . ,' .. � ' l .� . . � , .." .'.i'. f '� � i � � •�'. � .. '.� t: . , >.. _ . , . . . � . �. � �� ,, � . n,,c�y-i.�� , � �'�� i ��.� � O� oo 4 Jarivary 198? Re: 'L�nir�g File #1UO3� RECEIVED 'L«ning Corr�mittee of tl�e PlUnr,in� Cc�;�;wis�ion MAY 14 1987 City Hall Arir,ex St. Paul, A1Ad 55102 ZONING Dear Cornrait.tee Merr�bers : Sir�ce October neigr��or:� i.r, tr�e Surr.rr,it FIill drea have b�en di��u��ir�g the ri�w ;i�r� at iarar�r� c��ntral at 788 Grand. ��ur fir:st cr�ric�:rri was tt��t it did r�ot ��:ern to us to coriforrn ta the urarid Averiue Si,�na�e ordir,�c��_. We include a copy ��f corresp�mdencE rr�ar�din� that i�,�.xe. _ i� rlc�w vre :��e thai� tYir� :;ign �l�.�r�:� ir,deed vii�late the �.%,or,ir�g r•ode b;� elever� inches . 4J�� bel it�� tr,at it is an inappropriate �ign for iararid f�ver�u� b;r rr,�.►ct�i raore f�-lai7 P].PVPrl inches. Hr��ording to 1_.t,e Grand :ivenue Distr�ict Sign Plan: 1 } " ti,iGr,:� tEiat pru�iF•t:i. over a public r. ight-of-vray sti<�11 hdv��• � m�:�irnurn �;r��.�:.: s�.xrf�cY cli.sF�lay area of twelve sq�.i:�r-e feF;t. " If area sti 11 equal� pi tirnes the ra.dius sq�aare<], t.�,��n t..r�i;� ::�i�r� i� 50. 24 �quare feet; four tim�s the `ct��.�I'U��1'] :1t.t�= �1'GF�. �l.U�?1(.: t�::�_:i. 1S IlU� £L�f�Y'BS.°"iEd 111 �.�1F' �IdCl� but t4-�at: �,�oulci a�.��edr t,o bc an e�ren greater vialation} . , 2y "'1'r,r� r��n�st: ��oii,t, ur, �:, pi'U.]YCtir�� ign sriall be rio triclr�:: tliziri t;t-��rit:;,� fee�t ,,l'�i�v�:.- �;rtz�lt:. " Tli�; Gr•and Ceritr`al ;i�ri i„ �-,l��fio,.�:�ly r��r��r thdr, tt,is . , - - . . 'c.�1` L �r�:.�(_! C'f::.1.`�(;fl:: . I_11 'c:11 C ]. f:l�Jll �.t.l � �-1�: i'lr;;;t 1��'t.lf,'.`.i �i11C t. lE' :..;�:L'�JII�� '�.�C1:_� L��ltlll I)� �:�t�.' il�. l-�;�'1�!(.JI.'�1�:.!�.+1� � �:�lt: ZiUCllClj� %1CI�i 1�<1T1(� . , . . ��:;�.' �,'Olfifllll,l..i:.'l.' (�1' `��{�f',:�1.11 :-;�t,l.':li.'�.�. � f`) �1�t::; {"Ill i�7.��-:kJl.'I"1Lit:1Vr.:' f.�l�l�, �t.CJ 1•r..r.l�_i��•:;1 �:1��,i%..�1 �.�1' 1.11 i:, :> i,,;,c, v-.ti. i;��,�:_•�:�. :?111� '�•T'trl,'J. .Ja�:�� , ;i��1�� 1�i,. .Ir . . �"t_�:tii 1 c�r,ir�L ;,i:r! I,:,r,cj (1::;�.� i.:;_irrun i�f-1.;,�, • :��_irur��i t Fi i. i. 1 �'�;::��r,;:� i��.i,i�:�t, � � � � � .1 ' � k ,+ � :I � � 'i ' ' � 1 1 f . f � � -., ; _ :: , _ , � . .. . . . �,`-�� : . - �----.__._._.___._ _. . * -�.__ __ �;�;��T� ,� y" � _._.._-_.._._ ___ : i � ��.� lo 00 �� summit hill R EC�1 V� • • D assoc�at�on MAY I4 f987 13 May 1987 Z�N�NG Re: Zor,ing File #1CJ10�� - Zoning Con�mi.ttee of the Planr,ir��6 Cornrnis�ion City Hall Ar�r,ex St. Paul, MN 55102 DFar Coir�rnittee Member�, The u^ranci Avrnue Special aic;r,��r- ur�linar.lce was cirafted after prolonged discus�i��n b;� harrl-wor�:in� ruambrrs uf t.l,e community, both busine�s people and residerits, whc�se ir,tr<r�e�•ts tranacend the irit.er�ests of the ir�dividual busine;s uvaner. We �inder:�tand tl-�at each bu�irle�� r�wrier seEks to have � sigr� that stan�::l:� out ��bove all uther�. But tr,e danger in thi� i�� that, an enclle;� �;arne c,f or,e-�_�pIflfiTlShip ��an er,sue, to no orie' s b�neFit. At :,orne point tr.r lin�� m�_�st be drawn. The Land i1:,e Cott�rnittee c-�f the ��_i�nri�it Hill Assr�ciation r.�pposes �ranting a varian�e c,ii ttii� :;ign, �s �;rr-� r,r�ve r,r� c+t;r,er variarlee request� that hFive r_ome before us . We have r�•or,�i�trr,tly oppos�ca t.l-;i:� par.tic:ul�r .:i�n at this locatiori sir�ce it, erectir�ri. It violat�� the c�.irrr�nt t�rdir,ar,ce in at least tr,ree raajur� way� . Plr�s�. sec; �1 rr��:,re r��raplE:t.E: UZSCUaaior� af �urnrr�it Hill ' s positir,r, ir, the attacr,��d uorrc�pur�rlr_-r,ce. In �hort, Summi�ll eontinues its �t.rong c��:�o�itior� tc� triis sigi� of ��ratid Ceritral '�. Si -err_l;,j yo�_ir,•, � ck j�riolri , Jr. , �«ir oning and c�,d iJ:�e Cornmittee Surnrriit Hi 11 A.s�ociatior�/Ui�•trict l� Cauncil Enclo�ureN summit avenue ramsey a� __ a� � � district 16 � �`'�' rN Q�eay�� return address: 928 lincoln avenue, saint paul, minnesota 55105 � „ �. �. � � ,� _ .f ;; j. f �� ` � , � F 1 } �. , r . � :. � '. i ; ,: , ! � . . . • �. �: . , � � . � �-��3�y . � . . . RESo�.�noN To �EN� V�4'R,.�AI�C�.��E�t"*� I city of saint paul planning commission resolution ' P��oN o�� rn��u� file number 8�-°2 . �.j„}e January 9, 1987 �.iQl WHEREAS, Grand Central, file #10036, has applicd for a Sign Variance under the provisions of Section 66.409 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, for the purpose of allowing an existing business - sign to rem$in in use on property locatcd at ?88 Grand Avenue Iegally described as Lots l l and 12, Block 8, Summit Park Addn.; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Committce of thc Planning Commission on January 8, 1987 held a public hcaring at which all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard pursuant to said application ia accordance with the requirements of Section 64.300 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code; and , WHEREAS, Saint Paul Planning Commission, bascd on the evidence presented to its Zoning Committce at the public heariag as subsequently reflocted in the minutes, made the following findings of fact: 1. The Grand Central restaurant installed an 8', white, opaque globe sign on an eaisting nonconforming marquee about six weeks ago. Thc applicant's sign design was reviewed and approved by City for the Grand Avenue Special Sign District. When the City's inspector visited the sitc, it was noted that the globe extended beyond the marquee by 11" and that the actual globe was larger than that approved by the City. 2. The applicant has stated that the globe design was based on the old Universal sign of the � 1940's and that he believes the style of sign reinforces the image of the club. He stated that the plan which was approved by thc City was incorrectly drawn and that the sign company responsible for the drawing has since gone out of business. He also stated that it would be a significant hardship to be required to remove the sign because it was very eapensive. 3. Three variances are required if the globe sign is permitted to remain: gross surface disnlav area - 24' (12' per side) permitted for a projecting sign, actual sign - 41.5'; t�roiection bevond the buildins� - 4' permitted, actual sign projects 8'; and olacement above the marauee. The Planning Commission may grant variances for signs if they find that (1) the signs are unique or that there are unusual conditions pertaining to the sign needs for a specific building, (2) the signs are not contrary to the general intent of the Sign Ordinance, (3) the signs would not create a hazard, (4) would not violate Minnesota State Statutes, (S) would not be objectionable to adjacent property owners, (6) would not affect residential property through excessive glare and lighting, and (7) would be in keeping with the general character of the surrounding area. (continued) moved by Morton seconded by _ Le�y in fav�or 1.- against- ,\ � � �, � � . �� . , � ; . � { f i �, : ;, � � � I ;'s . � : ,� t �.. � . 1 , r•; � , ,_ .::. . ! : :• - I � :.. . . . J . . ��3�� ` • . city of saint paui plaru�ng commission resolution � f�e number � date File �10036 Page 2 4. The globe sign is unique to a district where most signs are flush to the building or project 18" from the facade. The applicant has stated that his building is difficult to see when traveling from east to west and thcrcfore the unusual sign is needed. However, the marquee upon which the globe sign extends above is large and does have many small lights and it appears that condition would reduce thc need for an additional unusual sign. S. The intcnt of the sign ordinance is to "encourage a concern for the visual environmcnt which makes the City a more desirable placc to live, work and visit." Signage in excess of two timcs that permitted in the district docs not reflect a concera for the visual environment. Further, the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan statos that the intent of the plan is "to reduce ...chaotic diversity of signage that impairs the effectiveness of signs identifying businesses, to provide design staadards for signs to increase their legibility and impact and to create a more desirable and memorable image for Grand Avenue." An 8' opaque, white globe sign which has twice the gross surface display area as that permittcd in the Code, projccts 4' beyond what is permitted and is placed above the nonconforming marquee (permitted projection is 4', marquee actually projects 7' 4") does not meet the intent of the Spccial District Sign Plan. � 6. The District 16 Community Council has stated their opposition to the sign variance. 7. The sign is illuminatcd from within thc globe and therefore does not adversely affect residential properties through excessive glarc and lighting. It does not create a hazard nor violato state statutes. 8. The importance of maintaining a specific sign character for the area is reflected in the Special District Sign Plan which was a result of business and residential property ownors working together. A sign which does not meet the intent and purpose of tha plan is not in keeping with the general character of the surrounding area. 9. Hardship which results from requiring an cxisting sign to be removed or replactd is self- imposcd if that sign does not correspond to the sign design which was approved by the City. (continued) moved by 5econded by in fav�or_____ against- { . ,� � � , ;. � ,,; � i � � � �: i � , ,�. ; ;. ; . r 1 � , � , _ � . ,.�. .,,' 1 �� . , .. �� , `� . ��: i , . . - � , ��-�.�� ; - , . . M city of sair�t paul planning commission resolution . file number � date File �10036 Page 3 � __ ,� NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, that under the authority of the City's Legislative Code, the application for a Sign Variance at 788 Grand Avenue is hereby dcnied. moved by 5econded by in fav�or- against_____ �: � , . ;. _ , � , , ! ;. � , :,.. s . ,t 1�� .. . Y �'�`�I. ;� , . . ' .. ' . W ' I �3j t 1��'f 9 � � � I ll.' a .. . . � . .. . ... . ... . . . .. ...... .. , ; � . � �,=-�-�3�y , . � � MINUTES OF THE ZONING CONIIvIITTEE ! CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA ON JANUARY 8, 1987 ` : Mines. Morton, Summers, Trac and Zieman• Messrs. Christenson, Lane ran �_ y , t , Lcvy, Neid and Repke of the Zoning Committee; Mr. Segal, Assistant City Attorney; Ms. Lane of the Division of Housing and Building Code Enforcement; Ms. Murray, Ms. Datsko and Mr. Soderholm of the Planning Division staff. ABSENT: None The meeting was chaired by Gladys Morton, Chairman. GRAND CENTRAL (#]00361: A Sign Variance for property located at 788 Grand Avenue to allow an existing business sign to remain in use. The applicant was present. There was opposition present at the hearing. Ms. Datsko showed slides of the site and reviewed the staff report with a recommendation for denial. Ms. Datsko stated that the District 16 Community Council sent a letter opposing the sign; also one letter opposing the sign was received today; in addition, three very firm phone calls were received from neighbors on Lincoln Avenue stating their concern about the sign and registering their disapproval of the variance. Richard Kadrie, 310 Ccdar Street, attorney for Grand Central, commented on the report in two areas; he stated that the original plan was approved in shape (globe) and that the owners over the last two months have spent considerable money erecting the sign. He stated that there was an error when the plan was originally drawn and instead of the g�abe� C being 7' 1" or 2", it happened to be 8' and that after the globe was erected, these errors were found. Mr. Kadrie stated that the plan was approved by Mr. Basten of PED design staff. The owners of Grand Central have on various occasions encouraged Ms. Armstrong, Summit � Hill Association, to bring any problems to their attention, that they want to get along with � the neighbors and also to please the shoppers and travelers patronizing Grand Avenue I businesses. Mr. Kadrie stressed the uniqueness of the sign and the lack of any hazard from the sign, the investment of thousands of dollars, and the approval of the basic plan with the exception of the 11" variance. He asked the committee to take these things into consideration when voting on the variance. Nancy Ruhl, 332 Fullcr Avenue, general manager of Grand Central, addressed the cost of the sign, stating that additional expenses were incurred when the first company contracted to install the sign went out of business after having been paid and that a second company had to start alt over again. Mr. Neid asked about the date the contract was originally drawn considering that the permit was requested in October, 1986. Mr. Kadrie responded that it was St. Paul Sign Company and that the original proposal was drawn February 2, 1986. Jack Sjoholm, 951 Lincoln Avenue, chairman of the land use and zoning committee of the Summit Hill Association. He stated that the neighborhood is uniformly and unanimously opposed to the sign, that any time the sign is observed a person is looking at 48 square feet plus of lighted globe which is in excess by four times what the sign use ordinance permits. He statcd that the Summit Hill Association was ncver involved in the approval process� thAt thc sign violutcs the 1983 ordinance and voiccd conccrn that a precedent was bcing sct if a � variance would be approved. � I. �� f � � � ' i.� I . 4 �: � , ' '� ��. � ,j:. � ' j °' ;: �. , �� ..- �- ,,i ' 4 i 1 - . . . 1' . E . , . ._ �.. � � ��' ��y� . .. 'Pilc #10036 Page Two � �:•.' Mr. Repke asked Mr. Sjoholm to clarify whether or not if would be all right to replacc the � 8' ball with a 7' ball. Mr. Sjoholm replied that it was his understanding that no sign should eatend more than 20' above the right of way and that this sign is clearly over the top of the building, that it is in over 20', and that he fcels the area of the square feet of the sign should be taken into consideration. Margaret Gadient, 809 Lincoln, voiced two concerns about the globe: first, that it is not in keeping with the character of the Grand Avenue Sign d;strict, and second, that procedures which allowed this sign to be installed on Grand Avenue are faulty. She stated that an opportunity for review should be allowed where residents are able to lodge reasonable objections to signs before a substantial amount of money is investcd. Mr. Christenson asked for a review of the original approval for the sign. Ms. Datsko referred to the staff findings and stated that the sign originally approved by Mark Basten in the PED's design section was a 7' diameter globe. The sign which was installed happened to be 8' in diameter; when a building inspector examined the site, the sign was found to be in violation of the approved plan which "flagged" the sign as having some problems. Upon examining the code, there appeared to be more problems than just the 11" of overhang; it had problems for gross surface display area, for projection beyond the building and placement on top of the marquee. Mr. Segal stated that as he understands it, the permit has not been revoked so that as long as the permit is in effect, Grand Central could still bring the sign into compliance. If the City determined that the permit was issued in error, the City would have to bring actio �.' revoke the permit. The question before the committee is to determine whether or not to grant the variance, then the determination would have to be made as to whether or not the permit can/should be revoked and what action would be taken by the building code division. Mr. Rcpke asked that if the committee did not grant the sign variance, then Grand Central would still be able to bring the sign into compliance with the permit which was granted which was to take off an 8' ball and replace it with a 7' ball. Mr. Segal replied yes, unless action were taken by the City to revoke the permit. Hearing no further testimony, Ms. Morton closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. Ms. Zieman asked about the frequency of requests for sign variances on Grand Avenue and why the request wasn't brought bcfore thc zpning committee in the first place. Ms. Datsko responded that this is the second or third variance request that the Planning Commission has actually heard. Any Grand Avenue business which wants to put up a sign within the special sign district boundaries has it reviewed by staff to see if it meets the requirements and if it does, the applicant goes to the building department to get a permit. If there is something wrong with the proposed sign (insofar as it doesn't meet that special sign district plan), then reasons are given, and thc applicant can apply for a vaciance. The building department would examine the full sign ordinance to see whether or not any proposed sign would meet the ordinance in general. Ms. Zieman asked about notification given to the eommunity regarding special sign district reviews; Ms. Datsko responded that to this point there was no community involvement but after this case there will be. l � ,�.. _. , � . . i � .,. � �� ' �. i , �. _ � , C � I � ' I . 4j � i �.� � � ,�. � t .,i . � � ��' � � 1 i }. . � � `�.�. t a � . 3 �'� .: � � �.�`�•� � r` . � . � � � �-�� . � _ ., . . � File �10036 � Page Three Ms. Summers made a motion to recommend denial based on staff findings S, 7, 9 and 10. Mr. Levy seconded tho motion, which passed on a roll call votc of 8 to 1 (Repke). Submitted by: Approved by: '� � 4 y� � � O►n.►v`'� °�7� ��--- �� /,jl� cn L—" Donna Datsko " Gladys M�n, Chairman �� C ' � � . � � � � � :�., 1 ; � :� +.. � i . :�:; .., �• '� .. , :..f ti: 1 1 ( ;' 1 � � 7 . .. , � ..'........ . �, �1`�-�,�� . � .ep��n.y..� .y. l i f � ,. ��. `' � i �• .��' �, TM . , .4 ' � � . � �, ' !l. ��' e � �r •+ . . � ��5��.�.. i : .. 1 {.: r"+ +„vT'" '4�«5�'�� ,., rt,+ •a�:«e7. ,`.' ��!' lL'E'�,�.> r,y'�,� "�•n��L4'�� ,y w!q�.#}ti�i}+I+n�� w .l. "y..�,."r` .�'!4'y.i�"„+{ Rw:-t+�,y11�l�y,►tl'Yr 'u . ,y �.t S' ��a�''�+�,'�' � . � "li� � ' a . . ��...�"'f�N��y�} '�lid,, q 9 w�H '�TY+lL �»k4�,� j,}� `�:,A.� .�7r .�� 1 .t1j�''�^'u7 �'�- }'t ,��„k. t�w . . M � �,��`".r�i'4�� ,�'�r+k�+�Pd��+a��(��'�uu'{��s.`r„ "ir r�t��,,,. � s , :: .» w a ''►•, F!4 i , � {".+.,.' �: '. ,} ��' ��`y, r t �+..°��I�h �.l�,:^ h^-;� Mr M�. a�.� ,{•� . h, � ..�'4�� - . ,..c�.'�r6�t��I��{�+r4a �,�p �,'�"'�t! ,f,�-�r�.� ��;t� �, . . , � �# •�_ Pi�,�.!�.1i��.�!'�i�Y11n.�t'��!►.'�1'N'ti+"+u �.�, �, ,. !�fiM .�} h � �,.: .y r.�� ,,+,+�y�a��. �: 'q+.4 �� .�Irwt:.f'�� U 1� r�'fl�` „�}7'�;,'� SI''�. + ,�i+ � � . t � �� .f'. y "�; _ .. . »�� bf 1 . .Iia.. ' �L^ Y.,.��. 1 �,.,ii��M��h.��39 ��.�� J t�1�� .1; <'A �:'1a ��J M1 �':. � �... T". .�? . � , -j.n d .� t r �'�.� ;Va.�.� qyµ...(�. ..- ,. '.i,:t. .. �1J I 1 .Y J � �� a � J'. y � ' �. � ��{ � � �� . ��.� � M ' �4 i�'� �?��y`G1��i:g�y`,•..t.�'i�1'..r.��5�4��.��rU�t'��I +�. �N �" 'b-. i��e'�� _� . �� Q� � � �,�,�� e-*«.a. �.. . .� a.. r v�r� . , ., . „. . . � ��.., � r 4�r 1� �.+M � t�.r itJ� J �. �4� �' l.G..�.'p t� .��N „rd,•� �:"7V' �' �c! � �� .�� .. �� .l� � fi Y.1 i�l N K�-�. J-�.. � �� . � �' 4 �' :�� F.G;,.��" " " �t ke ft ti Q' � .I c � i J..�,icS�" .: w.. . . . .. y ,. .' p,t.� � �`� ��. r k .i,gs�. ic�. AM .� .1 .. • �' .�:; .. -� � .�. , °'�' � n X � � � �i �`rti : ,�.��f".+ p 1 ,�a� Vyj ,� rww �". ^�:��►K'� .-r�"yv;� �N.�t� x�.: �a�t,W y �.«[.r R -�py .ti. �;'� '.3arr. �+'+^ .s't as`;M�r'�^ c R�t n ��* �:+��R�� .y�l '� `� Eg! ►t •'+r , 3 r?{, y,`___T q,, ,ta ;�a�'`= �'� '�'• .;•h• 1'.p � . ��,s r' k� .�`'T k. . :� ,�r +�t `i�.� .-! .- j.�. S . �.� ^". '"'' ''�� '< <,°�' .��, ,. � y�i�AYTIIIAE�E�.i.�PN��l��lb�� .�� '�� ` `" - �'� ��"". ��-(i �{.��...x1 � l�� f � Ih �� w,�1i.�`. t a�y'Y3.•, : i. :..,_2 .�.,y�� .!:].+1b1:.�T ��.y..+��{��., +r�.;.N "4.w� :��.�%' �.i:.�N : �,��:'N' � -�{}.. �� '.1t"�''''�N:J��T 7'r,�.; �{.M,"� -��.� '��,'��I�R,�!Tr"tl{T��r ;'�L�..�^�/�.� ' r.'jf. � ��f[;rw��'��. �,ilP�h a�iru�..�.1i �MiKT h��'°!'+��..,�u��'"� It 1�t�i .y;, � ,.�v ,�.µ �#'. . ��. �.�? fi� �f .� `-�b �, �y-+gi:.�.y� ..fn''!�'P! :'�1:+�',�'x�i-��.�:� r+p�,�, s, ,;��h�b� •-1 s •� i� t�,.2" �'�'."+;� f�^��. ix � ..F.� i r 4 � rvF � �k �- :� r''". /�Q�} 1' C 3� � /.� .!R'r 4, r, � a+a.,: �'w��. ��M�t��,�aw1�i�.��w;N.�. � �',�� !1'�t�V.��}n� � �1a a:�. } .�r��:x. ad�'S.'�+�,�',� �y�.a" � �� . �'�.5�,�;�� ' �. '. _„ ,,�� . �: r��:�w� �� r r��:.t� � .�_ �y�y � , . � {s�;,,, }w��,� ;�� ..� '.��-,.r�,��S ;�� , ��,y.�" res•N�.r � w�:, ti.� �.'' �.S ,.�_�� ..�1' }n'��'�"4T.�pf�ylllll�N?��f1�1 +�F .•a i6�. r�' �'nt'FF.�i�u�.l��;,.�b..��i`-�:?i k�n. i . : � . � ' � � w M ..a ,1 .,. . ... .� .. �i 1'� 4 �7�p p' 'IR �!T'_N} . � � �:: 't �l .�. �t p � �, 4,� �' r'� f �`� ��1(��Ofl! +�� °�� +%/�,��j�° , '� "zy'q,r�Y�'�'�"�' a. p\ � Yrr yi.;��Yh :� t 1 i. ..�l�K t t .t'wi* �',I.� .,� >�+ �"'�4^�'��' ��;4 � c Y'�,,��>4�{.k .� '�rt��"bY+ .t.'� ' a �, '�:t ''�� i �':x �'S�`�ti�,;f�`;. w�a :a iZt�`�!Ct.,µ� 1 M '�� r,a��' v.:'�+' '� . • �i ? • '�i.�„»e ,t�y �, � ,' ei! .:Yi; � �,�tr'.r'�',�at�� , � �.'�.t'. , . + .;�F��.YiY�dpCNptloil �+0�- � � ' � '�• ` . . + ,, '� ��,✓. � �Jty��C'� .<< �i�'.� y .I' r ?�:..,� -. t„ g,y,�M'� � � J ,�y� 'S J/ ..�f,a . .. ' y y F t a �Z";%. � l.Y� s.`^ �� t�; 5 nt'�,� a�f� ��,wf�..�5�' t �: yr �'-+' � � . . ,� °�.�rx„ � fVa t;iL �`� ��# '-�`,Y�','��i"¢'��`,��,�'ta'�"�y',�7„'4"'.�'.��:V.�� ', . �r�. �{ �r k ;� � ��'1� � � .-.. 4�.� .�y`��.� � �+�n,r`+c tx. s 1 LY � �. � ,r ` •Yf'Y�t.'T.� r:l��1' ti'kit'ro w� kl � w' r .�t „��- +z >�� a y` t ;;,��, `` '�� 4y,�. n,F��'r r�� ,1�- x .,� � •�� y� �..�`'�'�,fY , - s �� •�nt,lJ�s� Q "�� i.p�rt;�1it�p�1R�� '�i r, n.,,. ` . y .. : • '. . ' ' —A► � •. �• f � . �, . � ..r .� " H � �S � � �R S� .�� 9 :` � �4�i�� 7fi�, w� v i1�"q$'f< -.��}S 1�y� .� .. � �� t- . � `.rir +aA�e�q1��for Rsquatl r }i i � aL y o�}';.lY�� 'S+� y n..�N ti*�i �!'�xaa+"�,s a�1 �c+.w s � r., !, . .. :.f:�. i.h.lf.� i � ,µn. � ..,..1;. .�!•+t i �'�.µ � � 4.'. p�,��11N. .:�� 7 Tt'.�Y" ; �:,��r �*h�!� ,�"i.�r�rjt ft r�} . ° r5 � '4�'3�,�,,y"„�,i�t� �rµi-M.'.. �•�.1:':� . ..M . t t (: �M �� ✓� y:�� .; q � ��,,.. y.,'; +� y �. . �'� ��C �a1.,� i�� o. . t� A � . . 't �.� '* �- Ik ��: � '+ i,. '� ai � � �� '� � ��hn' et�(olti�, t'��*, ♦ ��.,.�i R'�y�,�rt�,�y*k{ •':.. • �r �. �jn,�r.,�:k. � �� e �, If{�t � t",s«. ,tj,1� � d �+f�.'! ,�a. � i�'�' ,...� . � , . _ . .-� ,s !, � '',�� r tr��.s',�y ;- w�i#"a� M d,: �i' t"�iqeL��i .a�x ��r� �J +�r.�i P�,�� =` � � �1::�Iy1��,��y� �� '�r'� � • ..� F��,t,'�y �' � .'$� r k' ..+T.'S "� /� Y° `fa' ..,r` ♦...�r�AT'�..: �[, .y,1 1* 4 ,y..y"I�v ti.,�� t r�� +1�"S*�"P"li�,rY�k�.+w,A�. W i.'. r .� r.� i t 4{` � d �14 r s .sr�y « / .. �'�i.. �'` ,i�.c: n .r � } �� i ,� . . .�1'.: M'�� f. !l' r '�"r�M i . /y� l ��-• b:.� : � W` �. .. - . .� .. . . . . ..�` '' � .. " ' . INL phytlql O}!M r t�b bN11 W�d f O�tM 1�►nN�1� ... . ., � ;:�t,,i� ;'W, d�anc:t��i�tlp � p OPiRY Onvrn 0 _or�nY . . ` h"�++. � � i.11�y0u�iW1N LDpOpr•Ph1�.�c11 ogndilon��W��nd�h�p.of lot,�u! v�a ��+& ;'�,fir ��',t , .. , � .1,� . , J� f R , /� ti ' �7��/1, + �^�p 1•:+ G,.J � y �y,.:...�R h7�.411r' � s•^ y ,�. `"V. ' �� r t�{r�it �'� �� 4'�� r,�Y��`1 y' .�'.t'�'� 4Qilr !' i>4 "rvJVt'(vS �'1�a�"4ri�"�'�g„� •� �.� �4.._yv, ��i��''� / �`��,,� � ..i,i� a � e I'�:�' 7 y�&,�!M* r..y.. �4.J�� fl r�,�.�'�� ,�1 t+.�.Y�f.. .♦ � • . . d.tp e i ..,c Hr � � 1 ' � .�' 4 r � + t M.,, ,nt w Jii k 1� r x '��:�p�1 6.�' �';:. . � �� . � .. `� �p l%."1 ».,f ' ' � .��.^, a ��:ma �� ;� � ,. �^k9-e4t� � , f ,�>>k ��'.�y�.��, �� 1.� '�I�t' . �r Aa�r ��Y '�, .� .r ..s I� ' 7 1 ... '. 'A y . �+ V �-� k:�,r � 4� y} �"�'�'�� 'r� ` M. <,c '' ,r.•,� {f' w'�'�",� , `�dM�!IC MKI�tIOfl fpWit�d�.tVi �q�OM M111� O�f� t,��.`,�' M^r, ��;: `�, ";�`;� ''�r -s�, `yti,t• i�.� ; :� r,�° c1w�, �" o�� `.'9:;��.zh'��s �� .. .■ p�. .. , ti:�� ;��,��',� ��r�, ��-'�r,,��'�{�r��9k1!yA?. .Y�'�a 1�;. ;t,t+�°�"'s'��'��f - , '•I y'. w •1l�� , i ,' �r, � �H.J� , �� `� ,��...{��•/K �A..��T,�I•.�� t��' a �.� (/�� .�M. I. w r y . ' �.�•' 1. .� .1� ..�� '\ :1 . � ..y I� . . .'• ,�• � �T�-��rw r �!�4 'S' ✓r . � � .� y 'k.�' • .:. .. . . . , 1-, '- v L . � " ,, • ♦1 �1f}.+r � l . � 1 j'��x.m t /11�' I".4^�' .++a c,�,..,_'.�-'-»+r Y��;;:�t.L,..;.r.�(ip 1,.-.M,•d-.f+- �:�. ..4. �� .�r-. .i:f .:.�y-.�.Ry-� .�wuq,a� � .. �� r1a,y ,i N1. 1 r1,�'it.t'wTMfy'''w^'r � �� '`n" � ;5'�`"� .��r.�n�If.YOYf C�M CW1fpfRlt�D NC��At��OW�fl/�.��6v`�N{ .r ��,j,'�,?n'..�• {� i;;: T {T� ��ttN[7,� '��i�.`�111tL.. r�lk rt" � �t�M4�1�1� �'., a�,F i , . w,.. ;: � . � . . t .q::� M, '-�a!:+-�.R,t�, ..++r r� �. <s � �" .'♦ � tu� w ,ya � - ��:;'% ,r � 3� �ti i ... ,� ,�.. . w�. .r',�� ,. �-.' .. . -- .:.�dA i q � M "� �', . } a �w r a F.. • p; +h.�d '�t.` � �4 " > Y' r}�n.' I�.�''f.i 3�► , �«w4� a �'n1��N�4'{�'�. ��C�OfI q(�N��Wli��N 2011�f1Q��WOY�1��1��f +. n �"ry J Y' . .r !�( f'G F� i r� i �°I y , � � � � r h'1� •. L a t.,. ,,,,f• 7' e6,i��.�..r�.+rS��5.�,�h y� ,.�`� o�w`'.��,� .pr sxc*ptla►�1�nctlal difflcultiN�+4f�xCrP�aMl undW jP� ,'�<�s�.c ,."�+� ��, ,r.: � J '^ '�� t#..�'<�.•� 1�h,»�^` '�;� y ��,y�7,:yT t�a'�'�f r 7�',C�.��4�. v � ��1�+� b�• +�" �ry ��{.�" � . ��. z i � 5� � �` ,f '� ��'!',y�,,� ,�Q w Y A �� S i PR'��r� �r _` ' v�?.A .i. ` • ' ' � .`t"s•': �t z�':To�'t�T t�� R�t��'*-5��p�� • � „��L'�piT�r .� Y � l w..�r l� � 4 '�� ?CI 1 fM -'c� ��. . �N A�: k� ; . .: � r {. „, � � r� � L -.YT �v r .� . .�" ,C r�� r. y C,� �� ,.r ..��}�{�.. ; Y `� � � . �w, � t,� . f't . r . IL t"� .r +.7ri1��. � + ��0.�-...K � t� f a 4. ,�' t1. {t.� .. • r • :� ti- Wytt � r � .�4_i.4'.,q":��"i�{ . X' ., , r ;�,i r :1 r .i ,`'��,�, f r,.�+(� t�+ ,? ti.{�'°�, f,t.0{6ASNIEifS 11SENONl1. 5f,r ,� ,+';� ''a �; �. �., , , ,� '' ��N � �r�i d�ilt• �,,,y7� ; �' � ,:.�.. � _ , ...,� ,''x'� tr��r ;��F� nqR b +�' b�ntLl d�strhr{Mt io� r� ,s�w� ;�4�` ��v��y_r�y � i�� : �� ikr �'�� C�� '.!' 4�fC��*�M1�•N!�!.R��41��. �� A � �Si�. ��y� '-�4 � 7N`. .S. ;=r1'ti' �"�-� `"t•,� � �. ; � Y' � �rr , � � � J 'i •�,, „,,,,i�i�'1�s'� ,� �}. f�,'11,�11t�If'��L��.��,,�,�� .i. �,�.• j e.� •.l�.ta." v�!. _ . .. .. , �. :''A" ,y.t'�Sht;F?'� �.�0� ��.ei?. � r., ,ar.nt ].�� "`w� ..: :i. nl� �d1� P�.�r � �j�, i�v'}��N � � � . .,�• r�.,g q ! ��; �� . + r. I+�,j ',�i ��'� ti ,: � �, ',.��' � .&1 ��' ti L��T�RF,7' ..w� L�� L�1. � ''V��T ,�ir'��' i�,��N• � 7� `*�h7�+ly � IM1/r��!��.nG..�i��i, ,�j'+ � �' '- � � �' �. .��.��.-+ �' 7 .M n�� .wy� �� n� �f .w',f i� 1, �� ♦ � i�� '�WI{{l�iW�^'�'��K�.^NTM1�3��r:i!,�'��1��I,I��fi� «.:^y'. ��'i ..�' .c. � .�N h�uv'�.K� �ar �'��l��`�Ir!�ti'�'�"��{,.�'�� ''Yw r�t�,+�'M�� M'',,,�, ` � ' {[,}r� .,.,1,1��,��1M.��y��r.� `� M��n;y f ir ' ,�.1� �'�Q' I��1�M'l�f,��.rMM��(�,{ IJ4�K�i�. ,M4l 1 �h{' ��1�/1�,!�rl• �r .� � • ,�� 1 ��yr��i�..j_„l�1��r;�� ..��+��y1,11�1�y��7 �� ' .,.�� .�' O :.� .."� y' � ,i IMP�; � �l�i� K" .�lry 4 � r�'��0 �?� � � y r� ��,. � ',�,�. . l 4 -i��'' "�I�r•,�� .�.��.�i'�;�:�y�t'�"s?''.,,,,,,'�"'��''r � y +�� 9F �Y� ,+.�;��'�i 1 3�jt,�- a �j ��., � ,wdL»��,� .�. �. .N . �`,��, .r,�,��.� , .� .,� �,�,,, : , y,�,�,�'r,.1,'r ^" �",�S:4}.� �fi '"',{,��I's�.��a}I t� wAr�`� , ' 9� � �, 11�.� w� M�J,�Iq�.�lt y F� �� r:l • �y'�.� ,g ++h 1r!' � �'•IIr:. .Lq�'.+,�� +�.i.�. Y,. . M� �'f�. 2�w�A/,�.t1.l�l� !'yt�.� �'w�.ti.1�I' � 1 vi q+ii!'}kf.�..'!1'rr.y''.'v7S�S�i��j.:4��i.!r'.`.F'��r d��..Ki�SMilsii � ' i �.'.�.r � .. � � � , . � I ( .. . �. . .�� } .• 1 • ' � .. . ; _ . , _. . : ., ''_' ,. , , GENERAL BUILDING PERMIT s , . . . . • , , � CITY OF SAINT PAUL � � �• � DEPARTMENT ' r // ,_ � ��7"� DIVISION OF HOUSING AND BUILDING � CODE ENFORCEMENT � 445 CITY HALL ' , � � � � ' � ST.PAUL,MN 5b102 � � ��-• � / t Permit o. S /, � ,I � �� PLAN NO. r �t D CRIP N OF Pq0 ECT l � ? � 0 /v ODATE ' WNER � ' �' � ' AOWNERSADDRESS �� G�� v� — �-QLD TYPE OF �E RM I r ❑ NEW TYPE CONST. OCCUPANCY ❑ BUILD ❑ANO E'XC. ❑ PL.ASTER R ❑DRYWALL ❑FENCE W I��t,l+ W�5 �'-oR. ❑ ADDITION ❑ALTER ❑REPAIR ❑ MOVE ❑WRECK �t"} '�, ��ED NUMBER STREET IOE CROSSSTREETS ��G�l • e �'�` WARO LOT BLOCK AOOITION OR TRACT WIOTH DEPTH SIDE LOT CLEARANCE BUILDING LINE FRONT REAR LOT STRUC- W�DTH LENGTH HEIGHT STORIES TURE � � o -� / -7 � STIMATED VALUE BASEMENT TOT L L()O� � I�� ❑ YES ❑ NO SQ. FT. � INC B SEMENT �to� DETAILS& FiEMARKS: � \I .,:f � b -- � � � �� , `.�c. . � �j �� A HITE � �^ z J� / v � O RACTOR ' � ;� AD RESS&21P �� MASONRY /\ STATE ,,,�� PEHMIT FEE �� VALUATIO �✓ . PLAN CHECK ,.:'c:i;�,`�iJ�36c�.(;i:�,,,;i'�'i L�i_;1>� STATE �'") � t�i:�'. vluii.Ci �:.L.�11 SURCHARGE ♦ �J � ;�,�,,!{ ��,��1�i-�1�=��i� � Ci'J .v TOTAL FF - 1 ,��T~- ��•�� r ".,a�;'r! TI� !rk0.SQ APPLICANT CERTIFIES THAT ALL IN• CHrIhIGE *�O.O� FORMATION IS CORRECT AND TH ALL PERTINENTSTATE REGULATI S CASHIER USE ONLY -_ AND CITY ORDINANCES WILL BE COM• WHEN VALIDATED THIS IS YOUIi PERMIT `� PLIED WITH IN PERFORMING THE WORK FOR WHICH THIS PERMIT IS ISSUED. St.Code ��G"�i' ~ ADDRESS AUTHORI�IGNAT E OF JUB � y e ! � I 4 � �' � �' � �' I ',1. . � ! . ;.. '.1'.;'. f,. �':' i f. ,''�: •`.�' ?._ '. .:�. ..` �: _. .:. '��• T .. ]�'� . . '.' ;` ;�� '.,'.'�: � _"�� '.��.' � -� ...:�'..� . � I.._ �i.:.;.'. '.-. _._ '!'..!.'i .�..' .� , � � � �i � r' ..�.��, - - -� � 1 �� ---� �� I __ � ------ � � 1' �� d • � �� ( 6 �;� ► � a0 �� . • • ; � � d dm . �;,�� ' �� . �. " � ■�� !�, , II p . � ,. , ■�■ � ■�� , • �' ,� • • [ � ,�q�► • ;1 . �I�� '�1 � � , o �j!� r!'I �► - . d � , t�,� �, ;. - - _.. � � n � ----.--- _�____-.--�_� �i _.._.— ' _ ; , �a� �_ 1� . ► � • • � � • • � � • �. �� • • �� • • • �,�� • • • � �« '�� • • ��. _ �. ► , ...� � . . , ► • • • • � • • • • • • e • • • • • � • • � • • . . • • • • • . • • • • • s �� • • • • � • s� • • • • M • • • • • • • • • • • o • • • � e � • • • • • �I � T � • A � • • � • • • • • � • • • • • • • • � • • � • • • • • • • • • • • � • • • • • • • • • • • • • � � • • • • • • • • • • • � � • • � • � � • � � � � - ■ . �� ' � � � : • � � - . . i,// � . _ . � . � • • • 1 • / / / � � � . • • � • ' � � � I • � • � � � � � . � ` � , • � . � . . : • • - � � � � . ' �� ' /�� . �� CITY OF SAINT PAUL INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM FI��D " � ' �'_ - -- -' �_. .� T0: Members of the City Council FROM: Donna Datsko, City Planner� DATE: July 16, 1987 SUBJECT: Grand Central Sign Variance Appeal, zoning file #10157 This memo was separated from the packet of information you received yesterday for the Grand Central sign variance appeal. The following chronology lists the actions taken by both the appellant and various City departments in the course of the year and one half that the appellant's sign was being discussed. December 1985 Building department notified property owner that business signs erected on the property require approval by the Planning Administrator prior to issuance of any building permit. March, 1986 Grand Central submits globe sign design for Grand Avenue Special Sign District review; plan reviewed and approved by PED design staff. October� 1986 Building permit issued by Housing and Building Department for globe sign. Building department inspector reviews installed sign and notes that it violates one condition of the permit -- the sign overhangs the existing marquee by 11". Property owner is informed that the sign must be repositioned or a variance secured from the Planning Commission. November, 1986 Property owner applies for variance to permit 11" overhang. Jane:ary 9, �987 Zoning Committee of Planning Commission reviews the application and determines that in addition to noncompliance as to overhang, the sign also violates the sign ordinance for total gross surface display area and placement on top of the marquee; the committee recommends denial on a vote of 8 to 1. The Planning Commission denies the sign variance on a vote of 15 to 1. However, because the permit was not yet revoked by the City, the applicant had the option to bring the sign into compliance with the original permit. The applicant repositions the globe sign to eliminate the 11" overhang. � . � , � �,3 y� � File #10157 July 16, 1987 Page Two January 22, 1987 The Zoning Administrator informs the property owner that the building permit for the globe sign was issued in error and that the sign does not conform to the City's sign ordinance or to the specific provisions of the Grand Avenue Special Sign District Plan guidelines. The sign permit is revoked. March, 1987 The Zoning Administrator informs the property owner that the altered sign -- sign moved back on the marquee to eliminate the overhang and projecting letters repositioned on the surface of the sphere -- remains in substantial conflict with the Zoning Ordinance and the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan. The owner is ordered to remove the sign within 10 days or file a variance for the altered sign. April, 1987 The owner files a new variance for the altered globe sign. June, 1987 The Zoning Committee reviews the new variance application and recommends denial on a 4 to 2 vote. The Planning Commission denies the variance on a 14 to 4 vote. July, 1987 The property owner files an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to the City Council; nine errors of fact or procedure are delineated in appellant's application. - DLD:ws ��"'.��Y . A G E N D A M A T E R I A L S COUNCIL ID�� '' _ DATE RECEIVED � S� � AGENDA DATE AGENDA ITEM 4� SUBJECT cr.0 -�-�«-� -Q Q °f" � J ORIGINATOR � CONTACT RESEARCH STAFF ASSIGVED DATE SENT TO C,�ERK �� COWi CIL ACTION � MASTER FILE 3NF0 AVAILABLE . �s�� _ - - � _ ...,�.�-.._..- . � � � ORD'IRESOL. �� DATE FILE CLOSED � _- ,�- , ,.�1 ' �. ��i 4, � . . A ••\ , V . . . �,3y� ' � T. PAUL � CITY COUNCIL - PUB�IC HEARING NOTICE ZONING -- - �.� To: Property owners within 350' ; FIL E N 0. 10157 Representatives of District 16. pqGE PURPOSE Appeal of a Planning Commission denial of a sign variance. LOCATION - ' 788 Grand Avenue (south side between Grotto and Avon) PETITIONER G,M. & H. GRAND CENTRAL H E A R I N G Tuesday July 21, 1987 10:00 A.M. , Cit �ouncil Chambers, 3rd Floor City Hall - Court House QUESTIONS Zoning 29s-4154 (Donna Datsko) Contact the Zoning Sectinn of the Planning and Economic Development Department, Room 1101, City Hall Annex, 25 W. 4th Street, St. Paul, Minnesoia 55102 Legal Description: Lots 11, 12, Block 8, Summit Park Addition �� r . c- -� r= (./l..I 7 Cj _ :.i i �. f., �7 _ f= - .�,, t._, r,.� Notice sent 7-10-87 - -., �- a :..,� --.., . --, _. . �, .� rT, �:� ----�