Loading...
Planning Commission - 08/23/2004 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MONDAY,AUGUST 23, 2004 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road BOARD MEMBERS: Ken Brooks, Larry Kacher, Vicki Koenig , Kathy Nelson, Peter Rocheford, Fred Seymour, Ray Stoelting, Jon Stoltz, William Sutherland STAFF MEMBERS: Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources Al Gray, City Engineer, Mike Franzen, City Planner I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL Chair Stoelting called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Commissioners Brooks, Kacher, Nelson, Rocheford, Seymour, Stoelting, Stoltz, and Sutherland. Absent: Koenig II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Brooks, second by Seymour, to approve the agenda. Motion carried, 8-0 III. MINUTES A. COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 9, 2004 MOTION by Brooks, seconded by Seymour to approve the minutes. Motion carried 8-0. IV. PUBLIC MEETINGS V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ASI JET CENTER HANGAR by ASI Jet Center. Request for Site Plan Review on 0.75 acres. Location: 14801 Pioneer Trail(Flying Cloud Airport). Bill Blair and Keith Nelson presented the project. Mr. Blair stated the one issue that has not been addressed is the building signage. He said they are not at that stage but there will be signage on the building in the future which will comply with the City's and MAC's requirements. Mr. Nelson described the building construction elements. Franzen stated the staff recommendation is for approval. He said the design framework manual for the airport is to usually improve the appearance of hangars Planning Board Minutes August 23, 2004 Page 2 by adding stone or brick and landscaping around the buildings. This proposal is consistent with the manual. Stoelting opened the meeting to the public. There was no public input. Nelson asked what type of planes are stored in the hangars and why the need for expansion. Mr. Nelson responded that most of the hangars accommodate single engine small planes. There are a number of corporate entities looking to house their jets. This hangar can hold up to a Gulf Stream 4 of 5 which is the typical size of a corporate jet. Nelson asked how many planes the current hangars have and how many jets will this new hangar accommodate. Mr. Nelson stated approximately 11 or 12 currently. Nelson asked why they were building a new hangar now rather than waiting a year until sewer and water will be hooked up. Mr. Blair responded the airport has preliminary commitments for potential tenants with corporate jets. He said these types of clients don't want to wait a year. Also, there are plans to clean up the area and a majority of the old galvanized hangars will be removed. Nelson asked if the current well will accommodate the new hangar. Mr. Blair responded there is no running water or bathrooms in the hangars. He said there will be sprinkler hookups for use in the future. Stoelting asked about the sprinkler system and whether there would be water to them. Mr. Blair responded the hangar will be build with the sprinkler system which will be dead headed until the water hookup is available. Stoelting asked whether there would be planes stored there and about runoff and drainage. Mr. Blair responded there would be planes stored there and the floor drains will go into a tank which would be pumped out periodically. Brooks asked if there is vacant land at the airport for future hangars. Franzen responded there is some acreage facing Hennepin Village which is twice the size of the hangar area currently existing. He said the concern was sight lines and, as a result, berms are planned. Franzen said the capital improvement plan for sewer and water is scheduled for 2005. He said staff is encouraging MAC and the airport to make improvements of the facilities and are supportive of making those changes at this time rather than waiting for utilities. Kacher stated in order to accommodate the new hangar; two of the old ones will be demolished. He asked whether the new hangars will replace those. Mr. Blair responded that on the north end of the two existing hangars there will be some remaining while 3/4 of the old hangars will be removed. Planning Board Minutes August 23, 2004 Page 3 MOTION by Brooks, second by Seymour, to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 8-0 MOTION by Brooks, second by Sutherland, to approve a request for Site Plan Review on 0.75 acres,based on plans dated August 9, 2004, subject to the recommendations of the staff report dated August 20, 2004, to the City Council. Motion carried, 7-1, Nelson voted nay Nelson stated she thought they should wait for the utilities. She said it's not good to be without fire protection and a year is not a long period of time. B. BEST BUY by BBE Properties. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 5.39 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 5.39 acres, Zoning District Change from Office to Commercial Regional Service on 5.39 acres, Site Plan Review on 5.39 acres, and Preliminary Plat on 5.39 acres into one lot. Location: 7901 Flying Cloud Drive. Tim Palmquist of BBE Properties presented the project. He stated they have been working with staff to resolve differences in design. He said most of them have been resolved, including the loading area, driveway access and the front yard setback. He stated the remaining issue to discuss has to do with the signs affixed to the building. He stated he believes Best Buy is in compliance with the sign code but staff is seeing it differently. Mr. Palmquist introduced Paul Anderson who could help answer questions. Mr. Anderson displayed the color version of the site plan for the building. He said they incorporated the comments from the previous meeting into the building. He said they have broken up areas of the building with architectural elements and it makes the building more interesting. He said staff has agreed with all the changes but the issue is still the building signage. Stoelting asked whether the were looking at the signs as only 300 square feet of wall signage and that meets City Code. Mr. Palmquist responded that was correct. He said the sign on the front is 247 square feet, the rear sign is 297 square feet and the right and left elevation signs are 132 square feet each. He stated the additional calculations include the blue which City staff says is part of the sign. Stoelting asked why they needed to include the blue wedge. Mr. Palmquist responded it is part of the Best Buy corporate identity. He stated the entrance wedge is important and they want to use it. Franzen stated that the location of the building was appropriate for commercial zoning. He said they wanted the project to be consistent with the development standards the City requires for commercial areas such as Fountain Place and Slumberland. He continued they are consistent in that they have a turn lane for Planning Board Minutes August 23, 2004 Page 4 traffic; they have architectural variety, a variety of perennial plants, and strong sidewalk connections which are important for walkable communities. He said there are waivers and the staff agrees with all of them except the sign which has the blue wedge and yellow ticket. He said the purpose and intent of the sign code is to encourage creativity and free choice while having standards so the public is not endangered, distracted or annoyed by unsafe communication facilities. He said signs need to be of a certain size but Best Buy could shrink the size down or do something similar to Target where they decided not to put signs on some walls but larger ones on different elevations. He stated staff recommends approval with the exception of the sign waiver and recommends compliance with the sign ordinance. Stoelting opened the meeting to the public. There was no public input. Kacher asked why this didn't come up at the informational meeting. Franzen responded that the details at that time weren't available. The informational meeting was to discuss the rezoning only. Kacher asked about the Home Depot sign. Franzen responded they went with a smaller square footage on the sign. He said the only sign larger than 300 square feet is the Target sign but the total square footage was not in excess of 1,200 square feet. Target elected not to have signs on some walls in exchange for a larger sign on one wall. Kacher asked Mr. Palmquist how important is the blue. Mr. Palmquist responded it is very important and the blue wedge was part of the original submittal. He continued it is an integral part of the building and there are numerous examples of other businesses that are prototypical. He said the question is what is a sign and what is part of the building. Nelson asked why the blue isn't part of the awnings. She said she didn't like the blue wedge. She said the side elevation signs are fine but the front has too much blue. She said they could incorporate the blue in the awning and other architectural areas. She said many businesses changed prototypes when they located in Eden Prairie and seem to do very well. She continued the blue doesn't need to be behind the signs at all and there definitely needs to be less blue on the front of the building. Mr. Palmquist stated they had gone from their prototype to adapt to what the City wants. He said he would be fine with the blue awnings but didn't want to eliminate the other blue areas. He said City Code has language regarding parapets, marquees, and canopies as separate from sign elements. Brooks stated the signs seem to be a major issue and there is a considerable size difference between what Best Buy is asking for and what the sign code allows. He asked what materials the blue wedge consisted of. Mr. Palmquist responded it consists of metal studs, insulation board, and stucco like materials and is considered Planning Board Minutes August 23, 2004 Page 5 part of the base building. Brooks stated it is not made of your typical signage materials. He said he thinks the blue looks good and the design gives the building an identity. He said he sees this as a challenge for the staff and proponent to work out. Franzen stated the blue wedge is a symbol and the code says symbols are a sign. Brooks asked if that were the case whether anything that draws attention to a sign is considered part of the sign. Franzen responded staff looks at the company's corporate identity and what is the actual physical sign on the building. He said banding and logos unique to a company are considered part of the sign. He stated the sign ordinance is set up for identification of a building. He continued if they reduced some of the blue, they can still draw attention to the building and meet the sign code. Rocheford stated he liked the blue because it signifies Best Buy. He said signage is meant to attract people to a building and they may want to evaluate this. Sutherland stated he's sensitive to the idea of corporate identity. He said the City has taken an understated approach to signage in Eden Prairie and commerce continues. He said he would like a more moderate design worked out between the proponent and the City staff. Mr. Palmquist asked Todd Hartman of Robbins and Kaplan to explain why they feel they are in compliance with the sign code. Mr. Hartman stated Best Buy is distinctive because of its corporate trade dress. He said all they have for their identity is the blue wedge with the yellow ticket. He said he didn't see elements as part of the sign and the sign code didn't state color would be an element of a sign. He said the blue is part of the wall of the building and they believe the yellow part is the sign. Stoelting asked if they need signs on all four sides of the building. Mr. Hartman responded it's needed to identify the building as Best Buy. Stoelting asked whether removing one of the signs was an option they would consider. Mr. Palmquist responded they would not be agreeable to removing any of the signs. Brooks stated it appears the gap is huge whereas code limits it to 1,200 square feet, Best Buy is asking for 3,800 square feet of signage. This is a major difference and will take considerable give and take to come to agreement. Kacher stated it seems this falls into a narrow definition and there should be some flexibility. Planning Board Minutes August 23, 2004 Page 6 Stoelting stated he would like to see the proponent come back after working with staff on the signage. Stoltz asked if they left the front elevation sign as it was, would they eliminate the blue on the sides and rear elevations. Mr. Palmquist responded they had talked with staff about blocks or bands of color. Stoltz asked about the Richfield store and whether it was similar to this one. Mr. Palmquist responded the Richfield store has a blue wedge but it is more three dimensional. Stoltz said he felt the blue should not be counted as signage. He said the City needs to be flexible. He stated he is fine with the proposal and the signage. Sutherland stated he likes the look of the building with its breaks in the fagade. He said he's very sensitive to corporate identity but is leaning to agreeing with the City. He recommended approving the building but addressing the signage at a later time. Seymour agreed that the building looks good but he said he considers the blue as part of the sign. He stated the City and proponent need to work together so the blue doesn't appear to be part of the sign. Mr. Palmquist stated there are areas of the country where they have made the changes according to certain requirements but the Eden Prairie store is not that type of product. Nelson said she would agree with the City and believes there is room for adjustment. She said she would be fine with voting for a standard sign or to a continuance. She said she doesn't want to see other companies come in with requests in excess of the sign code requirements. Brooks said the blue is made of different materials than the sign and he would be agreeable to approving the project and address the sign issue later. He said he didn't believe the blue was part of the sign. Kacher stated he would support the entire project including the signage. Rocheford asked why the right elevation sign didn't have the blue. Mr. Palmquist responded it's directly above the loading dock and it wasn't working out. Rocheford stated he would support the project but the proponent needs to come to an agreement with staff on the signage. He said he believes the sign ordinance needs to be reviewed. Franzen stated he'd like to keep the sign ordinance and any discussion of it separate from this project. The Board should discuss the sign code separately. He said he Planning Board Minutes August 23, 2004 Page 7 would like to move Best Buy along with the rezoning and let them start building and address the sign issue later. Stoelting stated he liked the design of the building. He said he is concerned because this is a prominent building and there seems to be a lot of tension around this signage issue. He said there needs to be give and take and a compromise agreed to. He said they need to be clear as to what they want and they can't have everything they're asking for. Brooks asked Stoelting if he is counting the blue as part of the signage. Stoelting responded he is because it surrounds the yellow ticket. He said he feels comfortable approving the project and returning to the sign issue. Mr. Palmquist stated they are willing to compromise but there is a lot to come to agreement on. He said he's concerned about the signage issue and if they remove the wedge what that will leave them with. Stoelting asked if they would change the blue to another color. Mr. Palmquist stated they have in the past if there was an ordinance prohibiting certain colors or a review board with certain standards. Stoelting asked if they would be willing to change the color to gray. Mr. Palmquist responded they would not. Stoelting stated if seems that if it were part of the building they would be willing to change; since they won't change the color, it must be part of the sign. Mr. Hartman asked what the process would be for this project. He said if they advance with an approval. He stated they won't break ground with such an important issue unapproved. Franzen stated if it's simply discussing trading signs similar to Target, they can come back at the next meeting and then to the Council in late September or early October. He said if they are looking at doing it as proposed they are looking at a major philosophical shift in the Sign Code. He continued the community has a certain look and feel and signs are an important part of that. He said if the Board wanted to discuss changing the Sign Code it would delay the project. Mr. Hartman stated there has been a lot of a philosophical discussion on the code. He said he wants to work at resolving this issue. He stated they believe they are interpreting the code appropriately. He said they would like to move forward with a contingency that the signage and waiver be addressed at a future time but, in any case, they would like to move forward to the September 21st City Council meeting. Mr. Hartman asked if the Board approved the project but not the waiver, would it be possible for them to go to the Council for their consideration. He asked if at some point the staff and Best Buy worked out an agreement could the City Council then Planning Board Minutes August 23, 2004 Page 8 pass the waiver. Franzen responded procedurally an option would be to continue the item to the next board meeting which would be September 13 and publish the legal notice for the September 21 Council meeting. Mr. Hartman stated that would be agreeable. Seymour stated that if they continue the project he would like to know if they are going to have the same situation with some of the Board agreeing with the blue and others disagreeing with it. He said if the code is to be followed how will they come to an agreement. Nelson stated she has faith in Best Buy and they will work to get it done. MOTION by Nelson, second by Brooks to continue this item to the September 13, 2004, meeting. Motion carried, 8-0 Nelson commended staff for seeing fewer banners around the City. VI. MEMBERS' REPORTS VII. CONTINUING BUSINESS VIII. NEW BUSINESS IX. PLANNERS' REPORTS Franzen stated there won't be any new public hearings for September 13,just the Best Buy project. X. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Nelson, second by Brooks to adjourn. Motion passed, 8-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m.