Loading...
040108 planning commission CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH NEW HOPE, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 1, 2008 City Hall, 7 p.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CONSENT BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING PC08-04 Item 4.1 The New Hope Planning Conm1ission met in regular session pursuant to due call and notice thereof; Vice Chair Oelkers called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Present: Paul Anderson, Pat Crough (arrived 7:23 p.m.), Sandra Hunten, Roger Landy, Ranjan Nirgude, Bill Oelkers, Tom Sclm1idt, Steve Svendsen Absent: Jim Brinkman, Kathi Hemken, Jeff Houle Also Present: Curtis Jacobsen, Community Development Director, Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant, Jason Quisberg, City Engineer, Eric Weiss, Community Development Intern, Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary There was no Consent Business on the agenda. Vice Chair Oelkers introduced for discussion Item 4.1, request for front yard variance to allow an addition onto the existing building, 4500 Quebec Avenue North, Conductive Containers, Inc./Brad Ahlm, petitioner. Mr. Curtis Jacobsen stated that the petitioner was requesting a six-foot front yard setback variance from the 30-foot requirement. The property is located in an industrial zoning dish'ict. Adjacent land uses include industrial to the north, south, and southwest, city park to the northwest, railroad tracks to the immediate east with single family and multi-family residential east of the railroad tracks. The site contains 139,185 square feet or 3.1 acres. The current building has 36,655 square feet (7,070 square feet of office and 29,285 square feet of warehouse). The expansion would bring the building area to 41,431 square feet (9,221 office and 32,210 warehouse). Upon completion of the expansion, the site area would contain building coverage at 30 percent and green area, including the storm water drainage pond, at over 50 percent. The proposed design would allow the largest possible expansion on the site for both office and warehouse and provide for required parking. The petitioner's narrative explained that CCI services the U.s. electronics indush'y as a maker of static protective packaging for static sensitive electronics. CCI manufactures specialty corrugated cartons and thermoform plastic containers. CCI indicated it expects continued steady growth. The proposed expansion would accommodate the business needs for three to five more years. CCI brings 50 jobs to the city and is a long standing member of the community. The requested variance would expand the existing building by 26 feet across the western length of the building and would increase the warehouse space by 2,925 square feet and the office space by 2,151 square feet. The building and entry would have a more modern and ath'active look, and additional parking would be provided. Property owners within 350 feet of the site were notified and the city received no comments. Mr. Jacobsen explained the purpose of a variance was to provide relief from the strict application of the terms of the zoning code to prevent undue hardships or mitigate undue non-economic hardship in the reasonable use of a specific parcel of property, A variance shall not be approved unless a finding is made that failure to grant the variance would result in undue hardship on the applicant. A hardship may exist by reason of a physical condition unique to the property, GUillot alter the character of the area, impair light and air to the property, increase congestion on public streets, or increase the danger of fire or endanger public safety. The development review team discussed the project and was supportive of the expansion. It offered comments including the internal use of space, truck circulation, directional signage, drainage calculations, parking lot lighting and photomeh'ic plan, landscaping, additional handicap stall, trash enclosures, signage, and fire lanes. The Design and Review Committee met with the applicant, discussed the aforementioned items and also indicated that traffic circulation should be signed as one way, requested a landscape plan and schedule, flaring ingress/egress curb cut for driveway and ease of truck circulation, and outdoor storage. Mr. Jacobsen stated revised plans were submitted subsequent to those meetings. The total square footage of the expansion would be 3,432 square feet with two levels of office space. The expansion would extend the existing building within 24 feet of the front property line, requiring a six-foot variance. The required front yard setback is 30 feet. The site plan indicated 58 parking spaces. The applicant calculated the parking spaces based on office and vvarehouse, which would require 47 stalls. There would be some manufacturing on site; therefore, the parking need should be recalculated. Site plans illustrated adequate on-site maneuvering for large trucks, and on- site directional signage. The south edge of the parking lot should have a flat curb to assist with snow removal in this area. A large storm water pond on site is adequate to handle any increase in run-off from the site. No additional storm water fee would be required. The existing parking lot does have storm water pooling issues that must be addressed. Exterior building lighting indicates compliance with city code. The proposed canister directional down lights and decorative lighting would be acceptable. Per the photometric plan, the south/southwest portion of the parking lot shows inadequate lighting for safety purposes. The photometric plan also indicates light spillage onto Quebec Avenue at the northwest corner of the site. The landscape plan does not indicate what landscaping is to be removed or saved, size of plantings, and does not incorporate landscaping between the parking lot and street. Shrubbery plantings must be a minimum of 24 incl1es in height. The building exterior would comply with the objectives of the new design Planning Commission Meeting 2 April 1, 2008 guidelines. New building materials include concrete masonry units, metal cap flashing, stucco above and below second story windows, new aluminum windows, and metal accent panels beside the windows. Two wall signs approximately 32 and 60 square feet would comply with signage standards. One sign would be placed on the west wall and the second sign over the entry on the south wall. Signage appears to be down lit using decorative canister or lantern style lights, Due to the building addition, the fire deparh11ent cOlmection would have to be relocated. Mr. Jacobsen reported that the planning consultant reviewed the criteria for a variance and found that the south portion of the lot provided a storm water pond that served beyond this individual site. The expansion would not alter the essential character of the area, would not impair access to light or air, create congestion, increase danger of fire or endanger the public safety, would be the minimum action required to eliminate hardship, and is an allowed use in the district. The project is in general compliance with the design guidelines, The main building entrance is located off of the parking lot and the design guidelines would require the location off of Quebec Avenue, The design guidelines require review by the Planning Commission for projects increasing the building size by 25 percent or more of the existing building, This project does not meet the threshold for Plalming Commission review under the design guidelines due to a building area increase of less than 10 percent. However, due to the fact that this was the first industrial expansion proposed since the adoption of the design guidelines, staff recommended that the Design and Review Committee and Planning Commission review the plans utilizing the design guidelines. Mr. Jacobsen explained that the proposed CCI expansion was consistent with the goals in the city's comprehensive plan for in place expansion within the industrial zoning district. The site contains a regional pond that created a physical hardship for the placement and expansion of this building. The Design and Review Committee and staff recommend approval of the variance subject to the conditions as listed in the plalming report. Mr. Brad Ahlm, Conductive Containers, lnc., 4500 Quebec Avenue North, approached the podium to answer questions of the Commission. Commissioner Schmidt questioned what the long-range plan was if CCI outgrew the building in another five years. Mr. Ahlm stated that New Hope is a good, centrally located place for the employees. If possible, they would look into purchasing another building in close proximity to their existing building, with offices in one building and manufacturing in another. Discussion ensued on whether or not the pond could be downsized. Mr. Jason Quisberg, city engineer, indicated the storm water pond was a regional pond and was appropriately sized to meet the requirements of the city's Surface Water Management Plan for this area. Mr. Ahlm added that at the time of the pond construction, utilities and the city's sanitary sewer line, Planning Commission Meeting 3 April 1, 2008 rulming east/west, were located between the existing building and the pond. Mr. Ahlm indicated they would take appropriate measures to correct the dark areas with regard to parking lot lighting at the time of the expansion. Vice Chair Oelkers reported that the lighting had been discussed at the Design and Review Committee meeting and the petitioner could work with the Police Department to determine if additional lighting on the building or a pole light in the parking lot would be most effective for security purposes. Vice Chair Oelkers questioned whether the petitioner was in agreement with the conditions listed in the plalming report, and Mr. Ahlm indicated he would comply with all of the conditions. Commissioner Svendsen initiated discussion on the landscaping plan. Mr. Al Brixius, planning consultant, reported that the revised site plan indicated which h'ees would be saved and which would be removed during the consh'uction process. The planting schedule does not specify the size of the foundation plantings, which must be a minimum of 24 inches at the time of planting. The design guidelines would require additional landscaping to screen the parking lot along the street. The Commission agreed that shrubs along the front of the building may be better than over-story trees, due to the fact that there would not be a great deal of room for tree growth in the reduced setback area along the street. Mr. Brixius indicated that the site plan shows the shrubs ending at the front door and a condition of approval should include the shrubs extending the entire length of the front of the building. It was noted that there are two trees located near the monument sign. Commissioner Svendsen recommended flaring the ingress/egress curb cut and Mr. Ahlm responded affirmatively. Rooftop units would be screened with the parapet and in accordance with the city code and design guidelines. Commissioner Nirgude reminded the petitioner of the noise ordinance with regard to the rooftop equipment. Mr. Brixius added that the number of proposed parking stalls would be adequate even after recalculating for the manufacturing on site. Three handicap stalls are shown on the site plan. Vice Chair Oelkers stated that Commissioner Brinkman sent an email to citv staff indicating support for the project. No one was in the audience to address the Commission. Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen, to close the public hearing on Plalming Case 08-04. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Commissioner Hunten stated that the storm water pond utilized a large area of this site, which did not leave much usable land for expansion purposes. The Commission concurred that the pond and public easement for the sanitary sewer proved to be a hardship for CCI and a variance was the best Planning Commission Meeting 4 April 1, 2008 alternative for expansion. Mr. Brixius added that the rear yard setback for indush'ial properties adjacent to a railroad track was 10 feet which was a reduction from the normal 30-foot rear yard setback. He suggested that at some time in the future the Codes and Standards Committee may want to consider reducing the front yard setback requirement for industrial properties. Motion Item 4.1 Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner Landy, to approve Planning Case 08-04, request for front yard variance to allow an addition onto the existing building, 4500 Quebec Avenue North, Conductive Containers, Inc'!Brad Ahlm, petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall illustrate the amount of on-site manufacturing for an accurate parking calculation. 2. Sanitary sewer manhole casting shall be adjusted per the city engineer's memorandum dated March 12,2008. 3. Approval of the exterior light fixtures including Downlight 2, Option 2. 4. All dumpster, pallets, waste material and other materials shall be stored within the building. 5. The landscaping plan to be revised to illustrate: a. Existing landscaping to be removed through building construction and site grading. b. All foundation landscape shrubs shall be 24 inches in height at installation and extend landscaping across the full western (front) of building. c. The applicant shall provide a plan for a landscape hedge along the west side of the parking lot. 6. Flare curb cut radius at ingress/egress. 7. Screen rooftop equipment by parapet walls. 8. Provide additional parking lot lighting and revise photometric plan. V oting against: Absent: Motion carried. Anderson, Crough, Hunten, Landy, Oelkers, Nirgude, Schmidt, Svendsen None Brinkmal1, Hemken, Houle V oting in favor: Vice Chair Oelkers stated that this planning case would be considered by the City Council at its meeting on April 28, 2008, and asked that the petitioner attend that meeting. PC07-10 Item 4.2 Vice Chair Oelkers introduced Item 4.2, discussion of sign code update, city of New Hope, petitioner. Mr. Alan Brixius explained he had made the following changes the Commission requested at the March meeting: 1) Temporary Sign - a sign erected for an event occurring for a period of time not exceeding 10 calendar days. 2) Permit Not Required - temporary signs six square feet or less in size, not to exceed three feet in height, only in residential zoning dish'icts. Said Plalming Commission Meeting 5 April 1, 2008 temporary sign shall not be erected for more thal1 10 calendar days. New temporary signage language was inserted into dish'ict sections (R-O/R-B and LB/CB/and I dish'icts). A definition for "light projections signs" was added to the definition section. And, light projection signs were added to the prohibited signs section. Mr. Brixius reviewed the balal1Ce of the sign code update with the Commission. He explained highlights of the sign code beginning with district regulations. Within the Rl, R2, R3, R4, and R5 districts, except for uses specified elsewhere, additional regulations include one sign per property totaling 16 square feet with a maximum height of eight feet. A subdivision or multiple family site having not less than five lots or dwelling units may have one sign per lot sh'eet frontage, not exceeding 48 square feet, and limited to eight feet in height. For subdivisions of less than five lots, one sign would be allowed per subdivision or lot for frontage to a major collector or arterial street. Sign area shall not exceed 32 square feet and be limited to a height of eight feet. Sign can be displayed up to 24 months or until building permits are issued for 85 percent of the lots or dwelling units within the subdivision. Government buildings, public parks, schools, and churches are allowed two wall signs with a combined area up to 15 percent of the front face or 250 square feet. One freestanding monument sign for each principal building on a lot is permitted, except two signs on corner lots. Signs shall not exceed 100 square feet and are limited to 12 feet in height. One changeable copy sign per property is allowed provided it meets certain criteria as outlined in the sign code. Within the RO and RB districts which include multi-family and retail/office buildings, additional regulations apply. Total area of all signs on a lot shall not exceed 15 percent of the total building fa<;:ade fronting not more than two public streets. One freestanding sign is allowed per lot with up to 100 square feet each side and a maximum height of 30 feet. Single occupancy buildings are allowed not more than two wall, canopy or marquee signs, except for a corner lot. Individual signs are limited to 100 square feet. One changeable copy sign per property is allowed subject to specific criteria. Images and messages displayed must be one static message to another with no special effects and can change no more than once every five second. The illuminated face of a changeable copy sign shall be no closer than 100 feet from any residential zoning district unless screened or limited to operation between 6 a.m. and 11 p.m. Illumination must not exceed 500 lumens per square foot of the sign face, Glare calmot exceed one foot candle measured at the centerline of a public street. Changeable copy signs are not permitted as window signs. Discussion ensued regarding illumination and the possibility of limiting 500 lumens to the p.m. and brighter in the daytime due to sunshine. The use of a light meter would be utilized by inspectors in determining brightness and conformance with city code. Mr. Brixius explained that within the LB, CB and I districts, additional regulations apply. The total area of all signs displayed on a lot shall not exceed 15 percent of the total building fa<;:ade fronting not more than two sh'eets. One freestanding sign per lot is allowed with an area of not more than Planning Commission Meeting 6 April 1, 2008 100 square feet on each side. The ma-'(imum height would be 30 feet. Wall signs for single occupancy buildings would be limited to two signs per building, except on a corner lot or through lot. The area of individual signs shall not exceed 15 percent of the front face of the principal building or 250 square feet. State statutes mandate that gas stations post prices of gasoline, therefore, the code section regarding accessory signs to gas sales is more specific than other content neutral sections of the code. For signs accessory to multiple OCCUPal1CY businesses and industrial uses, including shopping centers, with two or more businesses, a comprehensive sign plan must be submitted for the entire site including information as outlined in the sign code. Freestal1ding signs for shopping centers containing more than four separate Occupal1cies may erect one freestal1ding sign per sh'eet frontage. Each ground sign may be 200 square feet in area and 30 feet in height. In lieu of multiple freestanding signs, the shopping center may have a single sign not to exceed 300 square feet in area. Nonconforming signs, after May 30, 2008, may not be changed to another nonconforming sign, structurally altered except to bring into compliance, expanded, re-established after its removal for 30 days, or re-established after damage of more than 50 percent of the sign replacement cost after a period of 180 days. Sign variance criteria remain the same as the existing code. Discussion ensued on signage allowed in the event a big box store would locate in New Hope. The city would try to utilize the design guidelines in conjunction with the sign code. Commissioner Nirgude wondered whether the city had any recourse in requiring property owners to maintain signage and Mr. Brixius stated that was covered in the general provisions of the city code. The Commission concurred with the sign code as written and the changes as explained previously. Motion Item 4.2 Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen, to approve Planning Case 07-10, sign code update, city of New Hope, petitioner. V oting in favor: Anderson, Crough, Hunten, Landy, Oelkers, Nirgude, Schmidt, Svendsen None Brinkman, Hemken, Houle V oting against: Absent: Motion carried. Vice Chair Oelkers stated that the sign code would be considered by the City Council at its meeting on April 28, 2008. Design and Review Committee Item 5.1 Commissioner Svendsen reported that the Design and Review Committee met in March to review the CCI plans. Mr. Jacobsen added that several pre- application meetings were scheduled. Staff expected that at least two of the projects would move forward for the May Planning Commission meeting. The committee would be meeting to review plans on April 17. Codes and Standards Commissioner Landy stated that the Codes and Standards Committee did Planning Commission Meeting 7 April 1, 2008 Committee Item 5.2 Comprehensive Plan Update Subcommittee Item 5.3 OLD BUSINESS Miscellaneous Issues NEW BUSINESS Motion to Approve Minutes ANNOUNCEMENTS ADJOURNMENT Planning Commission Meeting not meet in March. Commissioner Anderson commended the Codes al1d Stal1dards Committee, consultants and staff for their work on the sign code update. Commissioner Landy reported that two open houses were held in March for the Comprehensive Plal1 update al1d several residents attended each day. Comments received included retaining the strong industrial base in the city and city officials maintaining its fiscal responsibility of city funds. The Plarming Commission al1d City Council will review the Comprehensive Plan update in May. There was no old business. There was no new business. Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen, to approve the Planning Commission minutes of March 4, 2008. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Vice Chair Oelkers invited commissioners to attend training offered through Government Training Services. Mr. Jacobsen reminded commissioners of the Remodeling Fair on April 5 at the Crystal Community Center. The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Q~~s;~ Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary 8 April 1, 2008