Planning Commission - 06/22/2020APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, JUNE 22, 2020 7:00 PM—CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Ann Higgins, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr,
Michael DeSanctis, Rachel Markos, Carole Mette,
Lisa Toomey, William Gooding
CITY STAFF: Julie Klima, City Planner; Matt Bourne, Manager of
Parks and Natural Resources
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Chair Pieper called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL
Commission member DeSanctis was absent.
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Farr to approve the agenda. MOTION CARRIED
8-0.
IV. MINUTES
MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by Markos to approve the minutes of May 26,
2020. MOTION CARRIED 8-0.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
EP HIGH SCHOOL SIGN PUD AMENDMENT (2020-05)
Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 66.6 aces
Planned Unit Development Amendment with waivers on 66.6 acres
Eric Taucheck, from Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc., displayed a PowerPoint and
explained the application. He displayed the layout of the proposed face-
illuminated signage for the Performing Arts Center and showed its location with
day and night views. He displayed the street view as well. Taucheck explained the
Performing Arts Center currently had only one sign that was not visible from the
road or the entrance. Eden Prairie Schools wished to install a permanent sign to
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 22, 2020
Page 2
add visibility and help visitors find the Performing Arts Center, which would
decrease vehicle confusion in the parking lots. The existing PUD would be
amended to increase the total amount of square footage allowed for signage along
with the total number of signs permitted. This meant an increase of the total
allowable sign area from 268 square feet to 371 square feet, and an increase of
permitted wall signs from six signs to seven signs. The proposed Performing Arts
Center sign would be 102.8 square feet. Taucheck displayed the inventory of
existing signage with their locations.
Farr asked what triggered the application, the applicant or the City. Taucheck
replied he was contacted by the School District, so he did his due diligence and
research, and concluded this PUD process as most appropriate.
Klima presented the planner’s report. Currently on the site was a temporary
banner which was not permitted by Code. The School District and its
representative contacted the City to find out what was permitted and what process
to go through. Back in 2001, the District received approved for a PUD waiver for
six signs totaling 268 square feet in size. This proposal was a change to seven
signs at 371 square feet for permanent signage. This application, as Taucheck
stated, also addressed traffic confusion. Staff recommended approval.
Mette noted the staff report mentioned the Code allowed 50 square feet of wall
signage per frontage and asked where this restriction came from, the Zoning Code
or PUD restriction. Klima replied this was part of the Public Zoning District.
Alison Roberts, resident at 7314 Hames Way in Eden Prairie Commons across the
street from the high school, spoke for herself and on behalf of neighbors about the
concerns about possible light wattage and the possible intrusiveness of the sign in
a residential neighborhood. She gave the Vikings stadium in Eagan as an example
of signage that triggered complaints after installation, and added the residents
were not necessarily against signage at the Performing Arts Center.
Taucheck replied there were two ways to control the sign: hardwire it to a
timeclock or utilize a photo eye. He stated a timeclock would be more
appropriate; streetlights could possibly trigger a light-sensitive hardwire sign to
illuminate inappropriately at night. He offered to provide the specific metric of
illumination later.
Farr asked for and received confirmation the sign was an internally illuminated
behind a diffused, translucent panel, not a direct line-of-sight of LED diodes.
Mette asked if the other signage on the building of the high school was of the
same style. Taucheck replied it was in a cabinet form, whereas the new sign
would be a channel letter set rather than cabinet signage. The fonts, however,
would match.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 22, 2020
Page 3
MOTION: Gooding moved, seconded by Toomey to close the public hearing.
MOTION CARRIED 8-0.
Mette expressed support for the application, but added the square footage increase
proposed for the new sign compared to the current square footage allowed was
too large compared to the existing signs. She stated it was not necessary to
include the school text since the logo was included. The text could be shortened it
to “EPHS,” since this was the Performing Arts Center sign. Since the school text
letters were taller than those of the Performing Arts Center on this new and largest
sign, she was not clear if this was a school sign or an Arts Center sign.
Kirk replied Eden Prairie had a reputation of being difficult to navigate and
expressed approval for the largest sign, given the size of the facility and of the
campus. Gooding agreed with Kirk that Eden Prairie needed wayfinding signage.
In addition, the Performing Arts Center did not operate every night of the week,
so the sign did not need to be illuminated all of the time, and it did not seem to be
a sign for the school. Farr noted he drove by this site twice a day and wayfinding
was indeed a problem for residents, as well as for visitors from out of town. He
thought signage was important, and agreed with Gooding it, being event-driven,
was appropriately served by a timeclock. He approved of the text letter height, but
also agreed with Mette that the sign did not also have to include the Eden Prairie
High School text.
Farr stated the applicant could have come to the commission with a sign that
would identify the fork in the road to arrive at either the Performing Arts Center
or the school. Mette agreed with Farr that the size of the Performing Arts Center
font was appropriate but the school’s text was not. She did not, however, find this
a reason to deny the application, and emphasized it was not the commission’s role
to redesign the sign. Mette suggested if the commission approved the signage as
is, the applicant could make the sign smaller and omit the school text. Farr
concurred there was no compelling reason to object to the size or illumination of
the sign. Higgins agreed with leaving the final decision up to the School Board in
continuing communication with staff. She added she also found the site a
challenge to navigate when she visited with her grandchildren.
Mette asked if the PUD application allowed for the redistribution of square
footage, such as reducing the size of the largest sign and then adjusting the rest of
the square footage of the total 103 feet for the other signs accordingly. Klima
replied the PUD specifically allowed the stated number of signs and square
footage, did not allow the redistribution of dimensions, unless an existing sign
was not large enough to reach the 103-foot total. Pieper stated he understood the
overall concerns but this was a large building and the sign was appropriate for it.
Mette replied she would make the motion, and reiterated her thought the School
Board could make the final decision to modify the size and/or the text or not.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 22, 2020
Page 4
MOTION: Mette moved, seconded by Kirk to recommend approval for a
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 66.6 aces and a Planned Unit
Development Amendment with waivers on 66.6 acres based on plans stamp dated
June 5, 2020 and the staff report dated June 2, 2020. MOTION CARRIED 8-0.
VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT
VII. MEMBERS’ REPORTS
Farr stated he found, while driving around the City, many non-conforming signs. He
reiterated the Planning Commission was an advisory committee and not an enforcement
committee. He noticed a number of banner signs not in compliance with the City
ordinance, evidently to increase business visibility during this time of the Covid-19
outbreak. While he agreed the commission should support Eden Prairie local businesses,
he wished to know if there was leniency being granted or if the commission could inform
the businesses and vendors these signs were non-conforming.
Klima replied that the City Manager had issued an order to loosen temporarily signage,
parking requirements and outdoor dining during the pandemic. The businesses would be
expected to again be compliant with Code after the emergency was over. She noted that
enforcement practices in Eden Prairie are not proactive, but reactive as a result of
information. Signage updates are a part of the planning divisions workplan.
Farr agreed with the passive enforcement and stated he wished to increase awareness.
However, he was concerned that lack of awareness led to noncompliance. Pieper
suggested the City needed to get through the pandemic first and then address this. Farr
clarified non-conforming signs were an issue before the pandemic. Kirk agreed with Farr
that ordinances should be enforced, but also agreed with the City Manager’s softening of
the rules at this time: he could understand taking liberties but business owners should
remember this was temporary and only allowed up to a point. The implication was, when
the emergency ended, compliance would be enforced. Non-compliance at this time had to
be reasonable, and he wished the commission to communicate how it understood
business needs at this time, and compliance would again be expected after the pandemic
was over.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Toomey to adjourn. MOTION CARRIED 8-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:37 p.m.