Loading...
7. Request for Sign Height Variance to Allow Three 8ft high Entry Monument Signs, Galpin Blvd and Hunter Dr., Hwy 41 and Longacres Dr and Longacres Dr. and Galpin Blvd; Lungren Brothers ConstructionCITY OF PC DATE: 8/2/95 CC DATE: n C CASE #: 95 -3 -3 Sign By: Rask:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Variance request for a sign height variance to allow three eight (8) foot high entry ' monument signs at the intersections of Highway 41 /Hazeltine Boulevard and Longacres Drive, Galpin Boulevard and Hunter Drive, and Longacres Drive and �-- Galpin Boulevard. Z LOCATION: Meadows at Longacres, intersection of Highway 41 and Longacres Drive (existing Q sign); The Woods at Longacres, intersection of Galpin Blvd. and Hunter Drive ' V (proposed sign); and future Longacres Drive and Galpin Blvd. (proposed sign). M APPLICANT: Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. 935 E. Wayzata Blvd. Q Minnesota, MN 55391 ' (612)473 -1231 i PRESENT ZONING: ' ACREAGE: DENSITY: la Iw 1� PUD -R, Planned Unit Development - Residential Woods at Longacres, 112 acres (115 lots) Meadows at Longacres, 127 (net) acres (112 lots) ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- PUD -R, Residential Single Family S- PUD -R, Residential Single Family E- RR, Residential Single Family/Vacant W- RR, Residential Single Family/Vacant WATER AND SEWER: Available to the Site. Action by cry AdinlrUratar Udcrse 1 ✓ 7�wA T1h MC-0 Date submitted to ComnvH" Date Submitted to Cout►d PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The entry monuments are proposed to be located in the center medians at the entrances into the subdivisions. The monuments are part of an overall entrance design consisting of stone columns, a split rail fence, and landscape plantings. ' 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential REGIONAL PARK DRIVE LAKE HARRI$ C ON ON flaw J — � ,� LOCATION OF SIGNS /tom V T E HIGH AY N 0. 0) McIL111 �TIM OD I V 82ND STREET c u 1 1 1 L n Lundgren Bros. Sign Variance August 2, 1995 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20- 1301(2), Signs Allowed in Agricultural and Residential Districts, "Area identification/entrance signs. Only one (1) monument sign may be erected on a lot, which shall not exceed twenty -four (24) square feet of sign display area, nor be more than five (5) feet high. Any such sign or monument shall be designed so that it is maintenance free. The adjacent property owner or a homeowners association shall be responsible for maintenance of the identification/entrance sign. Such sign shall be located so as not to conflict with traffic visibility or street maintenance operations, and shall be securely anchored to the ground. BACKGROUND On May 9, 1994, the City Council approved the final plat for the Meadows at Longacres. An ' entry monument was shown on the preliminary plat at the intersection of Highway 41 and Longacres Drive, however, no details on the type or size of the sign were provided at the time of plat approval. In September of the same year, the applicants erected a monument sign at the Highway 41 entrance. Staff was unaware that a permit had not been issued for this sign. ' On June 27, 1994, the City Council approved the final plat for the first phase of The Woods at Longacres. Once again monument signs were shown on the preliminary plat, but no sign details provided. In July of 1995, Lundgren Bros. contacted the city with regards to placing a ' similar monument sign at the southern Galpin Blvd. entrance. Staff informed the applicant that a sign permit would be required. The applicant submitted plans showing a monument sign approximately eight (8) feet high with a twenty -four (24) square foot display area. Staff denied the permit application as the sign did not conform to ordinance requirements. At this time, staff verified the height of the existing sign at the Highway 41 entrance and found that sign to be eight (8) feet high with a twenty -four (24) square foot display area. Staff directed ' the applicant to either reduce the height of the existing and proposed signs or apply for a variance. t The applicants reasons or justification for the sign variance are based on aesthetics of the design. The intent was to design an entrance gate to give the user a feeling of passing through and between architectural forms and a sense of entry. The center monument was ' designed with the curved top to enhance and provide visual softening to the overall structure rather than placing a flat cap on the monument. (See letter from Ernst Associates dated July 24, 1995.) ANALYSIS Based on the criteria provided in the ordinance, staff is recommending denial of the variances. Neither the size, physical surrounding, shape, or topography prevents the placement of a sign Lundgren Bros. Sign Variance August 2, 1995 Page 3 which meets ordinance requirements. The applicants proceeded to construct the entry monument on Highway 41 under the assumption that the sign was approved along with the preliminary and final plat. As mentioned above, staff could find no records of sign details or any other evidence showing that the sign was approved. Generally, staff reviews signs separately through an administrative permit. Whereas, a clearly defined hardship may not be apparent, the applicants have attempted to create an entrance theme which takes into account the natural features and scale of the site, which includes approximately 225 lots. The applicants indicated in their appeal that the height variance is needed to enhance the project by providing architectural details such as an arched top, planter box, and natural stone. The entry monument, split rail fence, and stone columns create an aesthetically pleasing entrance design. The design takes into account the surrounding area by making use of appropriate scale and materials. Construction materials are durable and maintenance free and should provide a long lasting appearance. The proposed entry monument will not obstruct the view of the traveling public, increase congestion, or endanger the public safety. In addition, the sign area is twenty -four (24) square feet, which meets the minimum requirements of the sign ordinance. Should the City Council recommend approval, staff has provided a motion for consideration by the Council which recommends approval with two (2) conditions to ensure compliance with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. FINDINGS The Planning Commission shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre- existing standards in this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre- existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. Comment: Whereas, there may not be a clearly defined hardship, the applicants wish to create a more aesthetically pleasing entrance design which takes into account the natural features and the use of appropriate scale and materials. The construction materials are durable and maintenance free and should provide a long lasting appearance. Lundgren Bros. Sign Variance August 2, 1995 ' Page 4 Finding: The applicant has not demonstrated a distinct hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. Neither the size, physical surrounding, shape, or topography prevent the placement of a sign which meet ordinance requirements. The applicant would have ' reasonable use of the property with a five foot high sign. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, ' generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. Finding: The conditions upon which this petition is based are applicable to other ' properties in this same zoning classification. C. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or ' income potential of the parcel of land. Finding: The purpose of this variance does not appear to be based upon a desire ' to increase the value or income potential of the property, but rather add architectural design quality to the entrance theme. ' d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self - created hardship. Finding: The alleged difficulty or hardship appears to be self - created, because the applicant could have reduced the overall height of the sign while maintaining the same size area. ' e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. ' Finding: The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other lands because the sign does not obstruct the view of the traveling public, and it is setback over 100 feet from the highway. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent ' property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increases the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair ' property values within the neighborhood. Finding: The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public Lundgren Bros. Sign Variance August 2, 1995 Page 5 safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE On August 2, 1995, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the height variance requests for entry monument signs at the Meadows at Longacres and the Woods at Longacres. The Commission recommended denial of all three variances with a vote of five (5) to one (1). The Planning Commission concurred with the recommendation of denial, as presented in the staff report, and did not find a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. The Commission expressed a concern that a variance based on aesthetic considerations alone was not consistent with the requirements specified in the ordinance. A discussion occurred concerning the ordinance requirements at the time the sign on Highway 41 was constructed, which was before the latest sign ordinance amendments. The height requirement for entry monument signs was not clearly spelled out in the previous sign ordinance. As part of the recent amendments, staff clarified this section of the ordinance. The applicants designed and constructed their signs on what they thought were the ordinance requirements at the time. Because of the way the sign ordinance was written, it is understandable how someone could have interpreted the sign ordinance to have no height requirement for entry monument type signs. However, the applicants did not request or obtain a permit, therefore, staff did not have an opportunity to review the sign prior to construction. RECOMMENDATION Whereas, there may not be a clearly defined hardship, the applicants have attempted to create an entrance theme which takes into account the surrounding area by making use of appropriate scale and materials. The applicants indicated in their appeal that the height variance is needed to enhance the project by providing architectural details such as an arched top on the monument, planter box, and natural stones. In addition, the sign meets all other ordinance requirements pertaining to sign area and design criteria. Therefore, staff has provided a motion for consideration by the Council which recommends approval of the variance with two conditions. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council denies the variance request for a eight (8) foot high entry monument sign for the following reasons: Lundgren Bros. Sign Variance August 2, 1995 Page 6 1. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. 2. Neither the size, physical surrounding, shape, or topography prevent the placement of a sign which meet ordinance requirements. 3. The alleged difficulty or hardship appears to be self - created, because the applicant could have reduced the overall height of the sign while maintaining the same size area. Should the City Council grant the variance for the sign(s), staff recommends the following motion: "The City Council approves the variance request for three eight (8) foot high entry monuments as shown on the attached plans, and with the following conditions: 1. The Development Contracts shall be amended to allow signs within the public right - of -way. 2. The homeowners association shall be responsible for maintenance of the entrance monuments." ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning Commission minutes dated August 2, 1995 2. Application dated July 25, 1995 3. Letter from Lundgren Bros. Construction dated July 24, 1995 4. Letter from Ernst Associates dated July 24, 1995 5. Map showing entry monuments CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 2, 1995 Chairwoman Mancino called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Nancy Mancino, Jeff Farmakes, Ron Nutting, Mike Meyer, Bob Skubic, and Craig Peterson MEMBERS ABSENT: Ladd Conrad STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Planner II; Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner II, John Rask, Planner I; and Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: LUNDGREN BROS. REOUEST FOR A SIGN HEIGHT VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN 8, FT. HIGH ENTRY MONUMENT SIGN TO BE LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF GALPIN BLVD. AND HUNTER DRIVE AND HWY. 41 AND LONGACRES DRIVE. John Rask presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Do any of the commissioners have questions of staff? Peterson: Is the actual, having looked at it, is the actual, what is over 8 feet? Everything? I mean you look at the lights. Rask: That's pretty much measured from the back side of that sign up. Peterson: So from the curb. Rask: Yeah. So if you took it from the top of that planter box, you're probably about 7 feet. Peterson: So the actual lights, the lighting and the sides are actually much higher than that? Rask: Yeah. Yes, they are. The stone columns there? Peterson: Yeah. Rask: Yeah. Mancino: John, how long have we had that sign ordinance? Because I know Lundgren Bros have been building in Chanhassen for a while. How long have we had the sign ordinance that gives the height? 11 C Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 1995 Rask: Actually that part of it, when we updated the sign ordinance earlier this year, back in January, that was one of the areas that remained unchanged. Those requirements, we did clean it up a bit. A little bit, the language of it but those requirements have been in place ever since we've had the sign ordinance here. Mancino: Oh, okay so throughout the years through Willow Ridge, through most of their developments in Chanhassen, that's been the ordinance? Rask: Correct. Yeah, the 5 feet has been in place. Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any other questions of staff? Thank you very much for the staff report. Does the applicant wish to address the Planning Commission? If so, please come up. State your name. Mike Pflaum: My name is Mike Pflaum. I'm a Vice President of Lundgren Bros. I'm here tonight with one of my associates, David Hinners. I was the project manager for the Meadows at Longacres. The 1st Addition and ... to express my contriteness in failing to obtain a sign permit. To clarify, I have been around for a while. I have obtained sign permits for other signs and basically, in the context of the development problems that occurred with that particular project, we felt because of numerous reviews that had been already undertaken with the city, that we were doing something that was going to be acceptable but I flat out forgot to get a sign permit for that particular sign. And just as a point of clarification, we've got a copy of the city ordinance in our office. The whole thing, and it's necessary because ordinances change, to have the pages sent out from time to time from the Planning Department and other departments. I know for a fact that the version of the sign ordinance that we have in our book, which is dated, does not say anything about 5 foot high signs. It says that public institutional signs may be no higher than 5 feet or residential area identification signs. All it says is the maximum sign area is 24 square feet. Now that is not an excuse. I'm not going to try to make an excuse but that's to correct the statement that I heard. The fault still is our's knowing that permits are required. Should have taken the proper steps to assure that the submission would be made and if the submission had been made, that would have been discovered. But it wasn't and we've got to try to carry on in some fashion. Dave is going to present more information on the site, and the reasoning behind why the sign that's in place, is what it is. I think there's a substantial hardship on the Highway 41 side. I think that sign can be justified and Dave will make that point I'm sure. Beyond that, one of the reasons I'm not working on the Meadows at Longacres 2nd Addition, or Woods is that I'm getting old and I forget things. With that having been said, I've temporarily stepped back and would like Dave to kind of take you through our reasoning. Mancino: Thank you. 2 Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 1995 David Hinners: I'm David Hinners. I'm with Lundgren Bros. I want to first of all, before I go any further, explain the sunglasses. I just recently had eye surgery and my left eye is sort of out of sorts so out of courtesy to you all, I'll keep it covered up. I had my choice between the sunglasses or a pirate's patch and I felt the sunglasses were a little bit less, I'm more comfortable with sunglasses. I hope that's okay. Longacres is a project that's approximately 225 lots in size and is approximately 200 acres in size. It's composed of basically two components. We have the Meadows at Longacres, which is the western side of the project, and then we have the Woods at Longacres, which is the eastern side. This is Galpin Boulevard right here. This is Highway 41 here. Our project has three entrances internally to the project. One is off Highway 41 at Longacres Drive. This is Longacres Drive. And it exits or enters off of Galpin Road and Longacres Drive. That's entrance number two. And our third entrance will be down here off of Hunter Drive, which is in our 1 st Addition to the Woods. At the present time we are building houses in the Meadows at Longacres 1st Addition. We are currently under construction, under development, streets and utilities at the Longacres 2nd Addition. Additionally we are under development with street and utilities and a Parade house in the 1st Addition of the Woods at Longacres. Because of the three entrances that we have, and the size of the project, we wanted to make a strong statement as one enters into the project. We feel that the Longacres Project, because it's a beautiful site. Very wooded. A lot of wetlands. That we wanted to use a material that is made of, in design, and sort of rural in context and for that reason we selected a fieldstone type of monument coupled with fieldstone columns and incorporated a split rail fence and the appropriate landscaping to match those. The entrances all come off of main roads, highways if you will. Posted speed on TH 41 is 55 mph and I believe it's 45 mph over on Galpin so the highway speeds are quite significant. The other thing that one notices as you drive down Highway 41 is the fact that there's a lot of woods and vegetation that come right up to the right -of -way. There's virtually a curtain of trees and vegetation as one goes down the road and as one travels either north or south on Longacres, if you're turning from the north going south, you actually start to decline in elevation as you enter into the area of the entrance to Longacres. As shown from the south going north, it's just the opposite obviously. But the point I'm making is that as you're driving down the road, that you see a curtain of trees and occasionally an opening where there is either a driveway or something. We have that same constraint here on TH 41 in that there, and I'll show you on a slide here in a moment when I'm taking about. But I'm going to use terms like a window, or sense of arrival and entry. Those are key. A lot of money and time and effort was put into the design of our entrance features. We put a lot of effort into that. It's almost like the nameplate on a house. It's something that's a statement. It's something that we want our customers and we want obviously the city and our customer's guests to feel that when they arrive at the project, that they have this feeling of passage and arrival as they enter into the project. And we feel also that the entrances should all be identical in design and that they should all be of the same shape and scale and proportion and the reason for that is that Longacres is the project, even N 1 L Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 1995 though there may be the Woods at Longacres and the Meadows at Longacres. It's still Longacres and we want people to arrive either at this entrance or those entrances to know that they're in the same project. The scale is important in design to create the feeling of arrival and passage. As one enters a development, we feel that the subdivision name needs to be prominent. We feel that one needs to know when one enters and when one is leaving so that entrance is extremely important. And we feel that to reduce the height of the monument to 5 feet would seriously jeopardize, not only the design characteristics of our entrance, but would also be a hinderance to what we're attempting to achieve with this sense of arrival and presence. I'd like to do the slides here if I could. Now I can't focus in on anything so, can you see that? Mancino: That's fine. David Hinners: When we, is it possible to dim the lights a little bit? This is the entrance sign on Longacres Drive at Highway 41. The picture is taken standing right in front of the flower bed, looking in an eastward direction at the sign base and what's applicable about this photograph is I wanted to show the fieldstone, the copy, the logo. How the arch is in relation to the width and how everything is proportioned. We feel that this proportion is extremely relevant. Mike Pflaum: Before you change the slide Dave. The topic and matter at hand is strictly this element of the entrance. There was some comment earlier about the columns. The columns are not part of the entrance monument. The columns are not in question here. The big question is the fieldstone wall that bears the name. David Hinners: Right. The 8 foot dimension goes to here. As John pointed out earlier, it was an issue that the back of the sign I believe up to the top of this. The 5 foot level is approximately to here, so in order to bring, in order for this sign to be in compliance, this arch would need to be down here, which would force this copy down into this range here, which makes it very difficult, I think, to be able to read at a significant distance that one's going to be viewing the sign from. I included a couple of slides here to show how the entrance feature, the center island entrance feature is in relation to the other elements in the entrance design. As Mike pointed out, we're basically containing ourselves with the center island median. However, I think it's important to point out that that has been designed as an integral element in the overall design. The top of the arch is the same level as the top of the two side columns. The pre -cast concrete columns that are here. There's another one right here. 4 � i Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 1995 Mike Pflaum: Dave, you might point out the trees that are actually behind the monument on the median. It's tough if somebody hasn't seen that on site. It looks like those trees might be along the boulevard. They're actually the backdrop for the entrance monument. David Hinners: You can sort of see them there. There's several large poplar trees that sort of frame the entrance monument. This is another view of it. I'm standing now right at the edge of the curb on TH 41 looking in and as you can see, the center island median monument is in relation to the proportion of scale to the columns and the columns in turn are proportion in scale to the fence, which is 4 feet, 6 inches tall. Another view of the monument. As I was pointing out earlier, as you go down TH 41. This is the view from the north, looking south. You can see how the elevation is declining in there, but the curve in the trees is what I wanted to point out in this. As you're driving down TH 41 at the posted speeds, you just don't see that entrance until you're right on top of it. And second of all, if you can notice in the break of the trees on the left, you can see a couple of the columns over there. You can see that it's a lesser elevation than the road. That decline in elevation further hinders the readability of that sign if the sign is reduced. Mike Pflaum: Before you switch that. The center line of Highway 41 is over 100 feet from the sign, which is a long, long ways. This is by way of saying that a sign that is slightly larger than 5 feet might be perfectly appropriate at a location that far from the public street. David Hinners: This is a view from the south, viewing north and our entrance is off to the right. Again, the idea is to show the narrow window in which one has to view, and not taking the entrance. And then I'm standing directly across the street and that is basically what I term the window and it appears for only a moment as you drive by on the road. As you can see, even from this distance, the size of the sign. If we were to bring that down, as I indicated earlier, the copy would be just above the tops of the flowers and in winter if there was any sort of a snowfall, this sign, you wouldn't be able to see the sign at all. This is a picture of a vehicle that is traveling south that is in the window and the idea is to give you the location where someone is driving on the road may not be absolutely sure where Longacres Drive is. There is a left hand turn lane there, that if any of you have had the occasion to drive down there, I think you'd see what I mean. It comes upon you very fast. Mike Pflaum: Before you switch the slide there's two things I would say. One thing is, if the commissioners have driven TH 41 past the project, or maybe even driven into the project from TH 41, and are aware that Longacres Drive is going down hill off of TH 41 and by going down hill off TH 41, it again recommends a slightly higher sign to be seen by passing vehicles. The other thing that I want to point out. Dave has mentioned that it's hard to see the entrance. One of our sales people who sales out at that site, was in a very serious automobile accident out in front as she was stopped with her turn signal on waiting to turn 5 r n Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 1995 into the site and was plowed into from behind by a guy towing a trailer. People don't even see this intersection coming down TH 41. That's a different issue from the sign but it is certainly evidence that her car was totaled. I mean she was lucky she wasn't killed. But that is basically a blind sort of intersection because of the fact that Longacres Drive is falling away from TH 41 on down. No matter what kind of monument you've got there... David Hinners: In that regard, I think the sign needs to be as large as it is so that when one is looking, one isn't spending time searching for the words. One can see it as they turn right in. I was going to mention that any of you who have ever gone out, especially in the evening to try to find a house and all you have is a number and the house numbers are so small you can't read them. Or the signs, the street signs are so small that they're illegible. So it makes it very difficult and very frustrating. I've had to even stop my car, get out my flashlight and walk up and look at it just to see it. Identification signs should be simply that. They should identify and be large enough to be legible. We feel that a 5 foot height in our instances, not only on the TH 41 entrance for the two Galpin Road entrances, that they should be of a larger size to be legible and also be readable. Again, to recant what Mike had said earlier. We regret that we have to come to you at this time to discuss this topic but here we are and in all honesty, we did think that we had the approval to proceed when we did. We would respectfully request that the City of Chanhassen approve the request for Lundgren Bros to have a sign height variance to allow the 3 entry monuments at the intersection of TH 41 and Longacres Drive, Galpin and Hunter Drive and Galpin and Longacres Drive, to remain at the size that is designed and is represented by ... Thank you. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. Mancino: Thank you. Are there any questions for the applicant? Seeing none, thank you. Mike Pflaum: Could I ask a question of staff? Mancino: Yes. If you could ask that of me and then I'll direct it. Thank you. Mike Pflaum: Madam Commissioner. The question is this. How many signs could we have within this project? It's two PUD's and I know what the old sign ordinance that I've still got in the book but I think that there is benefit to the city, obviously. There are many benefits to the city in having large planned unit developments. One of the benefits that I can see here is if in fact we would, me or other developers, plural, would have the opportunity to put up many signs within this project. It would seem to me that the city would probably benefit by having fewer signs. Maybe larger signs. Rather than having many signs and smaller. It just so happens that we've acquired a large piece of property and are developing it as a unified whole. Actually it was two separate PUD's, as I'm sure the commission knows. Two separate PUD's were assembled and they have become Longacres and Longacres with some R Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 1995 stub neighborhoods. So that's a benefit. It seems to me that there probably could be 10 different neighborhoods. 10 different entrance monuments. So I don't know what, is this true? Mancino: Well I think the question isn't how many. It's really the height variance at this point. Mike Pflaum: I know, but I'm not talking. I understand. The matter before you is the height variance. I'm talking about benefit to the city. Mancino: Appreciate it, thank you. May I have a motion to open the public hearing. Nutting moved, Meyer seconded to open the public hewing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hewing was opened. Mancino: This is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak on this issue, please come up and state your name and address and any views that you may have on this. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing? Meyer moved, F.-umakes seconded to close the public hewing. All voted in favor and the motion cwiied. The public hewing was closed. Mancino: Thank you. Commissioners comments, and please remember that the public hearing is closed so that no one from the audience is to speak after the public hearing is closed. Comments from commissioners. Jeff, you worked on the sign ordinance forever and a day and know it probably backwards and forwards. Could I ask you to give some comments on what's before us tonight. Farmakes: I do not have total recall of every ordinance, as I'm sure. Mancino: Every line of the ordinance? Farmakes: Every line of the ordinance but I think what's before us is a variance, and we have an established criteria of what that is. In this case I think clearly the criteria isn't being met, and I think that the staff has pointed that out pretty clear. The argument is that, as I understand it, is that there are other reasons of benefit that are being explained to us. However, when we look at these things as a matter of procedure, every sign could be built as the client would like it and then can come back and say, well this serves our needs better. It serves the city better. It's a safer sign. The way to correct that, if there is a problem, is to go back into the ordinance and then look at what is established. There's no such thing as a 7 Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 1995 perfect ordinance. That's why we're constantly changing things. They were changed a while ago. The ordinance was passed a while ago. The issue of more signs and so on isn't really relevant to what's before us. Although the amount of signage in both size and quantity could curtail to get the job done but be low impact. Height is an issue of signage, just like it's an issue in building. There's building codes that governs the buildings that Lundgren builds, and those are established over years and procedure with either safety or fitting in with rules that govern congregations of people. It makes for stable property values and it makes for a way to resolve issues of conflict. As a matter of consistency, by making variances of this nature once something is built, and it doesn't conform to what the rules are, it seems like a trifle matter. But in fact we deal with this every day when we're here in establishing what a community believes is in it's best interest and then asking people who build here to follow that. I think this, as it was explained, this is a mistake and it's a mistake however that seems to fit better with the logo and it's an attractive sign but the issue I think goes beyond that here. It's not, it really now is not the aesthetics of the sign. The issue is one of, if a variance is made for this sign, then what about the next sign or what about the other 15 signs that were made by other developers. We ask one developer to follow the criteria and the other, through an error, doesn't have to. But I think that I will fall back on what we've relied upon is a set of criteria. We've asked staff for this and what is the criteria for granting variances of this sort and I think clearly it's not meeting that criteria and I believe in any one case, if it doesn't meet it, we should not grant variances to remain legally consistent. That's it. Mancino: Bob. Skubic: I agree with Jeff and I see, sort of see an element where styling is taking precedence over function here. It's certainly a larger logo. The name is easily accountable. That doesn't mean ... easier to see over a distance... point was brought up that the sign was 100 feet back from the center line to a highway. If that's one of the issues, I don't know what the minimum setback for that would be. If that's another parameter that I think could be used to satisfy that issue of visibility. Mancino: Craig. Peterson: I also agree. I think it's more of an aesthetics issue than it is probably an issue of trying to find where you're going. I generally don't look for logo signs when I'm looking for a house. I drove by there tonight. I wasn't looking for the sign. I was looking for the street sign to bring me into the project so I see it really is, even though a mistake was made, I see the two additional signs as being more of an aesthetic issue as you come into the property than I do anything else, and I don't see a need for a variance for aesthetics. Mancino: Ron. 8 Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 1995 Nutting: This is a tough one for me. I understand the criteria necessary for a variance. I understand staffs recommendation. You can't excuse not getting the permit. Mistakes happen. I don't have a problem with the sign. I think, having driven by it myself, aesthetics can be part of why a variance is granted. It's not, invariably everything is aesthetics to a certain extent. Staff, in their report, say that it doesn't meet the criteria but that they're making appropriate use of scale and materials. If this were before me originally for a variance, I think I probably would vote for it. So I'm going to buck the trend. Mancino: Okay. You're welcome to. Mike. Meyer: It just sounds like they made a mistake and are actually asking us to compound it by doing it two more times. The sign isn't in compliance and I guess from our point of view, we should be looking at enforcing the rules in place. I too think the sign is a good looking sign but I don't think that's the issue. That's all I have. Mancino: Thank you. I think the staff report was well written. Thank you John for the findings of fact and I also feel that, like everyone here, that the sign that is up on TH 41 is an attractive, well designed sign. However, it doesn't meet our existing sign ordinance and I think the findings of fact here show that we really don't have grounds to grant a variance. So with that, may I have a motion. Farmakes: I make a motion that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council deny the variance request for an 8 foot high entry monument sign on the staff report dated August 2, '95 for the following reasons, 1 thru 3. Mancino: Is there a second for the motion? Meyer: Second. Mancino: Any discussion? Farmakes moved, Meyer seconded that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council deny the wuiance request for a eight (8) foot high envy monument sign for the following reasons: 1. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. 2. Neither the size, physical surrounding, shape or topography prevent the placement of a sign which meet ordinance requirements. 9 Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 1995 3. The alleged difficulty or hardship appears to be self - created, because the applicant could have reduced the overall height of the sign while maintaining the same size area. All voted in favor, except Ron Nutting who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. Mancino: And could you please state your reasons. Nutting: I think as I indicated in my comments, I think I would vote for a variance. I think ' that's the issue. The criteria are one thing. What makes sense in terms of the scale of the project is just the way I feel. Mancino: Okay, thank you very much. Does not pass. When does this go to City Council? Rask: Actually it's going first City Council this month on the 12th. So it'd be at the very next one. Mancino: Okay, thank you. So please go ahead to City Council. PUBLIC HEARING:, f BLUFF CREEK GOLF COURSE HAS SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION FOR AN, INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR THE FILLING AND STABILIZATION OF AN EXISTING. RAVINE ON BLUFF CREEK GOLF COURSE. DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE RAVINE,, ' THIS PROJECT WILL BE ONGOING AS CLEAN FILL BECOMES AVAILABLE. THE INTERIM USE PERMIT WILL BE REVIEWED ANNUALLY., Public Present: Name Address Jim Sabinske 775 Creekwood Gary Anderson 725 Creekwood Dale Gunderson 845 Creekwood Gloria & Spencer Boynton 777 Creekwood ' Claire & Anne Vogel 815 Creekwood LaVi & Mike Lynch I Dave Hempel presented the staff i on this item. 10 FROM CITY OF CHANHASSEN 07.17.1995 13:05 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 4 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 66317 (612) 937.1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION David Hinners for P. 4 ' APPLICANT Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc OWNER Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. ADDRESS 935 East Wayzata Boulevard ADDRESS: 935 East Wayzata Boulevard R Wayzata, MN 55391 Wayzata, MN 55391 TELEPHONE (Day tl ne) 473 -1231 TELEPHONE: 473 -1231 ' 0a:npr6hpnsive Plan Amendment 11._____ Vacation of ROW /Easements 2. Condltin all Use Permit 12. Variance ' 3. Interim U e Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non -oonf rming Use Permit 14, Zoning Appeal 5. ?lar,; gad ' nit Development 15.__ Z( Nng Ordinance Amendmem I 7. Sign Pei falls ' 8. Sign Pla Review , Notifbation Signs 9. Site Plan eview s Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** UP /SPRNACNAR/%& E :P/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SLJE;) 10. Sut.." n TOTAL FEE $ q _ . O A lief if all �-oporty owners within 300 t %%A a1 the boundai a the property must I 1u +it)d %I ,+ Pe application. ' ad �rlss of :h ►� p� �. i �r$t bs subfv►itt �. 634" X 11" k6ducod copy of transparenc; for i „cii plan shoat. ' NOTE - When mut,1 ale applications sire processed, the i� rjproprlak fee shad tae charged for each app ication. Escrow will be re.;uired for other apps %ations throujlh ib! devalop;T,% crnvact ' i , FROM CITY OF CHANHAS!C.N 07.17.1995 13:05 i PROJECT r l4ME Longacres � I LOCATION ! T4wv 41 and Gamin Road, Chanhassen, MIN ' LEGAL DESCRIP7 N The Meadows at Longacres and The Woods at Longacres PRESENT ZONING R -1 . REQUESTED ZONI1,4Q PRESENT LAND U E� DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND JSE DESIGNATION Single Family Residential Same REASON FOR THIS REQUEST Sign' Ordinance Variance Request P. 5 This application rrusj be completed In full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Departmen to determine the specific ordinanca and procedural requirements applicable to your application. !This Is to certlfy that I am making" application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed In my name and I am the party F hom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached i, copy of proof of wnership (e,ther co *)y of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreer ;:ant), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fe +) owner iias also signad this application. , i will keep myself lit ormed of the deadlines for subrrnl v ion of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that addl:ional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to prow ied with the study. The documents and Information i have submitted are true and ;;arrect to the best �f my knowledge. Signature of Applicant . " 4 Date A ; Signature of Fee 0i or iication Received on % / �` Fee PaMt . ' Receipt No.�.�' " �J r The applicant shoL Id contact staff ;or a copy of IWO staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the ,mooting. If not co^ i actod, a copy ov Po report will W 6,Nalh)d Uw the app4cunt's address. i LunDGR(n BROS. CONSTRUCTION INC 935 E Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata Minnesota 55391 July 24, 1995 Ms. Kate Aanenson City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Longacres - Entrance Monument and Sign Permit Dear Kate (612)473-1231 Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. is respectfully requesting that the City of Chanhassen grant a variance to the current sign ordinance. We believe that entrance monuments to the Longacres project are vitally important. These identifications are important to the residents of the subdivision as well as emergency vehicles and personnel. There are three planned entrances to Longacres. It is our desire that the three entrance features be identical. This creates a uniform concept and a cohesive theme. One of the entrance monuments is currently constructed on Longacres Drive at Highway 41. There will be another identical monument at the other end of Longacres Drive at Galpin Road. The third will be south at Hunter Drive and Galpin Road. The justification for the variance request is based on the aesthetics of design. All of the features from the landscaping plant selection to the placement of the features all relate to one another. I V A feel that to adhere to the strict confines of the sign ordinance would negatively affect the integrity of the design. The attached letter from Gene Ernst of Ernst Associates explains the design criteria. We feel that the current sign on Longacres Drive is well designed and well constructed. It will be maintained by the Longacres Homeowners Association. It will not impair the supply of light, air or congestion on any public street. It is our desire that the City of Chanhassen allow Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. to construct two additional entrance monuments and signs to the Longacres project such as the one currently constructed. Ms. Kate Aanenson July 24, 1995 Page 2 Should there be any additional information needed, or if there are any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, LUNDGREN BROS. CONSTRUCTION, INC. xowy" David A. Hinners Ernst Associates 24 July 1995 Mr. David Hinners Lundgren Bros. Construction 935 E. Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata, MN 55391 Ref: LongAcres - Entrance Monuments Dear David: As per your request, I will try to outline the design criteria for the entrance monument. In discussing the design there has to be a certain amount of intuitive feeling that goes into the overall design of these entrances. The location of the Hwy. 41 monument required some special care and attention given to scale because of its proximity to faster moving traffic and the grade separation from Hwy. 41 down to the monuments. Distance back from the existing roadway was great, so scale and proportion became a very important part of the design. Many people driving by the monument at the present time probably are not aware that they are 7' to the bottom of the precast cap. It was important to keep this in mind to insure that we had designed a monument with good height, proportions and massiveness to visually identify this entrance. The drop in elevation from Hwy. 41 down to the monuments reduces the height and visual impact that we felt was necessary for this entrance. This required raising heights on certain elements to overcome that problem. The intent was to design an entrance gate to give the user a feeling of passing through and between architectural forms and a sense of entry. We did not feel we could achieve that experience by only enlarging the columns on each side and leaving the center island sign lower. The center monument was designed with the curved top to add some uniqueness and visual softening to the overall structure rather than placing a flat cap on the monument. The sign lettering and logo size was important because of the distance the sign had to be viewed from Hwy. 41. That in turn dictated the amount of surface area on the sign to accommodate the size of letters that have been installed. The size of those letters dictated the amount of width and height that we felt was needed to display that type of message. The type of plant material that we wanted to use in front of the sign also was part of the decision making process for the height of the sign. We didn't want the planting to cover up the logo. I feel that the sign in its present state is the correct scale and proportion for the type of entrance that we were trying to achieve. We wanted it to appear somewhat prestigious but not over pretentious in its character and its appropriateness for a rural setting. The stone LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ■ LAND PLANNING ■ 122 WEST SIXTH STREET ■ CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318 ■ PHONE 612- 448 -4094 Ernst Associates ' Mr. David Hinners 24 July 1995 Page 2 was intentionally selected to introduce a natural stone that is typically found in the rural areas, and also to give it a substantial, durable and long lasting appearance. The split rail fence was used to provide a rustic and more natural feeling to the entrance design and experience. I think a strong theme for this project has been established with the Hwy. 41 entrance and feel it important to repeat that same concept at all main entrances to the LongAcres project. I feel this is important to carry through the continuity of design not only in materials but in form and scale for clear and easy identification as a user arrives to the site from different directions. I would hope that the city will allow the existing sign to stay and two additional signs be constructed in the same design ad size to carry through continuity on this project. Best regards, ' ERNSJASSOCLATES ' Gene F. Ernst GFE:cb 'J tma ��� } E'arisr.. 1 Alk 10, At 00 , r• i 0 5 � 1 � ,II , � '` �. . to .��'I � ' 11 • �� E ZL l 1�i;" j4 ! �A#'tffl 1 •1 lid lw' r� 1 111 ii l is .2 C 0 U) 0 CL 0 L. M r� 1 111