7.2. SR 01-22-2013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The burden on proving practical difficulties is on the applicant: "...the petitioner establishes that there are practical difficulties..." Emphasis added. The petitioners written arguments start on page 2 of their memorandum dated November 28, 2012. This memorandum is found in the Board of Adjustments packet dated January 8, 2013. Staff's analysis of these arguments is found in the staff report in this same packet. During the Board of Adjustments meeting, the petitioner raised a number of additional arguments. 1. The oil change aspect of the operation was a different occupancy, and therefore entitled to 200 square feet of signage. 2. The oil change /car wash building is on its own lot of record, and entitled to a free standing sign, which they are willing to `give up' in favor of a wall sign. 3. The business needs signage to succeed, and not granting the variance will destroy the business. 4. The signs needed to be visible from Highway 10. While these are fair opinions, they do not satisfy the requirements of a variance. The opinion of staff and the Board Adjustment is that the applicant has failed to successfully satisfy the criteria required to warrant a variance. In response to these additional comments: Signage in the applicable zoning district (C -3) is based on occupancy. The central question is what constitutes `occupancy ?' The code defines Occupancy as "...the portion of a building or premises owned, leased, rented, or otherwise occupied for a given use." Is the sale of four different brands, car washes, and now oil changes equal to six different occupancies, and therefore each occupancy is permitted 200 square feet of signage? The Board of Adjustments is of the position that this did not apply to the accessory car wash and oil change facility as the original use was a car dealership. 2. The project is either based on the approved plat of Jabez or it isn't. The expansion of the parking lots to the north of the car dealership building are appropriate if the approved plat is recorded and in effect. However if the plat is not recorded, these expansions are illegal by virtue of accessory parking lot without a principle structure and setback infringement. 3. The sign ordinance imposes fair and reasonable signage limitations on all businesses. It is the property owner's choice of how signage is distributed. If the Council is of the position that there are two occupancies in the building, they are limited to 400 square feet total for signage, where the applicant is requesting 484 square feet. If the Council believes there is one occupancy, they are grandfathered in for 272 square feet. 4. Regardless of sign size, the amount of visibility from Highway 10 is very limited due to the car dealership /car repair business at the NE corner of Highway 10 and 1715` BACKGROUND In 2006, the city approved a land use amendment, rezoning, preliminary /final plat, and conditional use permit for the expansion of the Cornerstone Auto Dealership, then known as Elk River Ford. This project was to be completed in phases. In 2006 and 2007, portions of the project were completed, N: \Departments \Community Development \Planning \Case Files \Variance \V 13 -01 Cornerstone Auto \V 13 -01 Cornerstone Auto SR to CC 1-22 - 13.docx