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