PC Minutes 4-21-09
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 21, 2009
Chairman Papke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Kurt Papke, Denny Laufenburger, Dan Keefe and Kevin Dillon
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Mark Undestad, Debbie Larson and Kathleen Thomas
STAFF PRESENT:
Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; and Angie Auseth, Planner
PUBLIC HEARING:
ARBORETUM TIRE & AUTO: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW AN ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTER SIGN WITH VARIANCES AS PART
OF A MONUMENT SIGN ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT,
PUD, LOCATED AT 8175 HAZELTINE BOULEVARD. APPLICANT/OWNER:
MICHAEL SCHLANGEN, PLANNING CASE 09-04.
Angie Auseth presented the staff report on this item.
Keefe: You know I just need a little bit more on the three dimensional lettering. It isn’t clear, I
mean do we have a picture of that or do we have, I mean how do you describe that again to
understand the…of the variance?
Auseth: A lot of times it’s embossed and so it sticks out a portion just to give that kind of a
visual interest and an overall aesthetic appeal to the signs.
Keefe: And is that, would that part be in the upper part of the sign then? Kind of where it says
Arboretum Tire and Auto.
Auseth: Yes.
Keefe: Is that what the proposed, is where it would be? Okay.
Auseth: Yes, Arboretum Tire and Auto would be the half inch dimensional.
Keefe: Okay. And right now the sizing is, the ordinance allows for what?
Auseth: It has to be a minimum half inch depth and this one is flat. Completely flat panel.
Dillon: So I’m, I’m sorry.
Keefe: Go ahead.
Planning Commission Meeting - April 21, 2009
Dillon: I don’t, so do you have an example of what’s acceptable and what’s like not because in
my mind’s eye I’m not getting it.
Auseth: Okay. What’s acceptable is the half inch, so it has to be either pushed out a half an inch
or it can be recessed back the background. So the actual letters.
Dillon: But these are electronic. You push the elect.
Auseth: No. No, just the.
Keefe: It’s not the electronic part. It’s the part above that.
Auseth: The black letters.
Dillon: Oh, I got it. I thought you were talking the electronic messaging.
Keefe: And so what they’re proposing is it to be flat?
Auseth: Yes.
Keefe: Why don’t we like flat? I mean just out of curiosity.
Auseth: Just to provide that interest.
Keefe: Okay. It’s more of an architectural or a.
Auseth: Architectural feature.
Keefe: Yeah, okay. Alright. That’s all I have for questions.
Laufenburger: Are there, does the existing monument sign have raised lettering on Arboretum
Tire and Auto?
Auseth: The existing sign.
Laufenburger: You had a picture of that in here. Yeah. Is that raised lettering? Or dimensional.
Auseth: That one I don’t recall but I know the signs around the Holiday station does have the
half inch embossed lettering on it. There’s several other signs around the city that also include
that.
Laufenburger: There’s also some signs, monument signs that are just flat without the raised too I
don’t suppose. It would be important for me to know whether or not those are flat or whether
they’re raised.
Auseth: We can.
2
Planning Commission Meeting - April 21, 2009
Laufenburger: Or maybe we can ask the applicant.
Auseth: Yes.
Laufenburger: Okay. I had another question for staff. Angie. In the conditional use permit for
the electronic sign, message center, the language stipulates the electronic message center sign
will not use animation, flashing, scrolling or other special effects that will create a traffic hazard.
Auseth: Correct.
Laufenburger: Now I know this has been the subject of planning commission discussion. Has
the applicant agreed that they will not use scrolling in this or are they anticipating that if at some
point in the future the ordinance is changed that scrolling would be allowed? Can you speak to
that?
Auseth: During our discussions with the applicant we went through the current standards and
gave them those saying these are the current standards for an electronic message center and they
must be complied with.
Laufenburger: The applicant’s prepared to comply with that? Okay. Those were my only
questions.
Dillon: Is the tan a requirement of this or is it a suggestion?
Auseth: It’s more of a suggestion. Another suggestion as an alternative could have been
providing a masonry foundation, something of that sort of staff thought that pulling that tan color
in would be an alternative to that request. Just to kind of bring the building and the sign closer
together to have them aesthetically compatible.
Dillon: Okay. So does, alright again we’re, it’s a request but it’s not a requirement?
Auseth: It’s not a condition of approval.
Dillon: Okay. Because I mean you know beauty’s in the eye of the beholder here and you know
I could see if the red and the blue and all of that of the electronic messaging were consistent with
the façade of the building, you know then you’ve got a nice like story but since they’re different
colors, I mean I think you know making the tan, just because the tan ties in with the building
front you know looks off kilter to me but I don’t think we, or the staff should be like you know
getting down to the details of the color or something like that but that’s just my opinion. So then
were these samples of the letters that came around, which is acceptable and which is like not?
Auseth: Both of those are raised lettering, which is what we would, what staff is saying is what
is required.
Dillon: And.
3
Planning Commission Meeting - April 21, 2009
Papke: Actually staff isn’t saying it. It’s the ordinance.
Auseth: The ordinance, yes. Thank you.
Keefe: Okay. And what he’s proposing is flat.
Dillon: Okay. That’s all the questions I have.
Papke: All I had was, have we made this kind of a request, the color request before of other
applicants for LED signs? This one seems a little novel to me.
Auseth: No and it wasn’t just because of the LED portion. It was just tying the overall sign into
the aesthetics of the building.
Papke: Do other businesses within that same business park have a similar color scheme to what
you’re proposing or is it consistent with the other businesses in the area?
Auseth: Some do. Some don’t. Some are more, more like the existing sign. More red.
Papke: Alright. That’s the only question I had. Anything else for staff before I move on? If the
applicant would like to step up to the podium and color in the lines for us, we’d greatly
appreciate it. State your name and address for the record please.
Mike Schlangen: My name is Mike Schlangen and I’m at 1941 Melody Hill Circle in
Chanhassen. And to answer your question from before, right now it’s a flat panel that we have
on there.
Laufenburger: On the top.
Mike Schlangen: On the top and what I like about it is, it’s very easy to clean. You don’t get the
dirt and grime and stuff on there and to me it looks more aesthetically appealing than having the
raised lettering that’s on it. The sign on the right, that she was talking about, to me it doesn’t fit
in with the colors and stuff that we use for our business and as I was listening to you guys talk I
thought there might be something that would work for both of us. If we want the building to tie
in with the sign, if you look at that picture on the bottom, right above it there’s a sign that’s all
in, you can’t see it very well from that picture but it’s all in red as well and to get it.
Laufenburger: Mike are you referring to what we see in the upper left corner? Is that correct?
Mike Schlangen: Up in the corner, yep. But anyways what we would do is, is blend that in with
the sign itself and have the Arboretum Tire and Auto in red, if we want the aesthetics of that to
be compatible. I think that would work. I haven’t checked on that but it seems like something
that would be a pretty easy change. We changed the dimensions of the sign. Made it a little bit
smaller than the previous sign because with the LED it would only take 25% of the entire sign.
And then we also had to move the sign down because the pole was showing and that’s something
that the city had required wasn’t able to be done so we moved that around. But as far as the flat
4
Planning Commission Meeting - April 21, 2009
panel, that’s something I’d like to see. I think it looks better. I think it’s more aesthetically
appealing and it just over time I think it wears better.
Papke: Okay. Anything else?
Mike Schlangen: No. Did I answer, that was the only question that you had right?
Papke: Okay, Kevin do you have any questions?
Dillon: I don’t have any questions.
Laufenburger: What are you doing right now to change your signage?
Mike Schlangen: If you look back at the other one, what we do is we just go out there and
change the lettering manually. And one of the reasons that I want to go to an LED sign was,
when you’re coming from the north, you’re coming over the hill and you can’t really see our
place until you’re almost by it. And when you’re coming from the south, I used to have the
convenience store where the Holiday is right now too and we used to be above to cross market a
little bit so I’ve used both of the signs for both of the businesses. But now that I don’t have that
business anymore, with having those other two signs in the way and not getting any advertising
off of that, that’s the only one that you see so it kind of, it’s kind of hidden a little bit by those
other two signs. As a matter of fact we’ll get customers that come into our place on occasions,
they’ll be in 2-3 times for propane or whatever and we must have 30 sets of tires stacked out in
front and they’ll say you guys sell tires here? You know that type of thing and we’re not a
national chain or anything else and so you know it’s something that I think is important for us to
have that information out in front of the customers. That’s it, thank you.
Papke: Just one second.
Keefe: I’m fine.
Papke: I just had one question for you. In your letter to staff you gave a slightly different reason
for objecting to the raised lettering. Essentially what you were saying there is you were trying
to, you didn’t want to accentuate the name of your business.
Mike Schlangen: Right.
Papke: And rather you wanted to promote the, what you were selling that particular week or
offering on special or whatever.
Mike Schlangen: Exactly.
Papke: And that’s a little bit different from what you were saying before about the cleanliness
factor.
5
Planning Commission Meeting - April 21, 2009
Mike Schlangen: Actually what I’d like to do is just have an LED sign and I have nothing out
there, but the City does not allow that.
Papke: Right.
Mike Schlangen: And it would be nice to do that and then just have a sign on the building but
that’s not something that’s allowable as far as our business. You know we have to compromise
on that and just have the tire and auto out there.
Papke: Alright.
Mike Schlangen: But as far as the size of the, we maneuvered the size of the tire and thing that’s
on the sign you know because that’s required as well and we made all those changes so.
Papke: Yeah, in your discussion with city staff were you aware that you could reasonably, if
cleanliness is an issue and cleaning, were you aware that you could recess the letters instead
because then you wouldn’t have the cleaning problem. You’d have a flat surface. It’s just the
letters would go instead of stick out.
Mike Schlangen: You’re still going to have a little bit of that issue because you’re going to.
Papke: A little bit. You’re going to get some accumulation in there, yeah. Somebody’s got to
go in there you know once or twice a year and clean out the letters a little bit.
Mike Schlangen: Right. It’s the same principle as washing your car around the bumper and
around the windows and stuff you get.
Papke: Exactly.
Mike Schlangen: To one person it means nothing and the next person it’s just nice to have it so.
Papke: Sure. Okay. Alright, thank you. Okay, bring it back to the commission for discussion.
Start with you.
Keefe: Yeah, just a couple of thoughts on, you know I guess for variance we, well let me start
with the conditional use. I think I don’t have a problem with the conditional use. The one thing
I guess I would like to see is have the applicant work with the city in terms of styling and design
and making it compatible so you know. And then in regards to the variance, they really got to
prove hardship you know. I’m kind of scratching my head around hardship on this one. I’d be
interested in your thoughts on that but I’m not really seeing it.
Papke: Yeah. Yeah. One thing just occurred to me as you were speaking, you know this site is
getting back to approving the conditional use permit per se. Has the Arboretum itself
commented on this at all? Have they, because this is you know pretty close to the Arboretum
and you know flashing LED signs versus the Spring Peeper Meadow across the street. You
know quite a contrasting situation and I’m just curious whether.
6
Planning Commission Meeting - April 21, 2009
Auseth: We didn’t receive any comments from them.
Papke: So.
Al-Jaff: They did receive a notice. They are within 500 feet.
Papke: Okay. Alright. Sorry to interrupt.
Laufenburger: I don’t have any comments.
Dillon: I’m totally fine with the conditional use permit. I do, I would agree it’s kind of hard to
prove a big hardship with the variance. I get a little, I mean you know within reason I don’t
think we, the City needs to be providing you know aesthetic opinions. I mean there’s some basic
guidelines. I mean if it’s too gawdy or too something I mean, I don’t know where you draw the
line on that stuff but I mean kind of, I think we’re splitting hairs on tan versus white for
background and that would be.
Papke: Well there are situations with design standards for instance where in the past we have,
you know we’ve been, where we’ve stepped into that…
Dillon: I know there’s some buildings and there’s certain materials and what not.
Papke: Right.
Dillon: I’m familiar with that but in a situation like this when it’s a pretty, it’s kind of a nit.
Papke: Yeah, well it sounded like the applicant was willing to work on other approaches. I think
the, if we can all agree that the goal is worthwhile. Getting the sign to tie in with the building, it
sounds like the applicant is willing to look at some different avenues and it doesn’t seem like
that’s out of the picture…
Dillon: Yeah.
Papke: Okay. From my perspective I’m fine as long as the Arboretum you know didn’t have
any concerns with this, since they’re right across the street.
Dillon: They’ve been here before for these things so they must read the stuff.
Papke: Yeah, yeah.
Mike Schlangen: I have talked to the Arboretum about it too. They had no objection to it.
Papke: Okay, great. But similar to what Dan was saying, I have a difficult time with hardship
here. You know this is something that is part of our city code and we expect all the businesses to
comply with that and a number of other businesses have been able to do so. It doesn’t seem
7
Planning Commission Meeting - April 21, 2009
particularly onerous so I’m okay with the city’s proposal so with that I’ll entertain a motion. If
someone would like to make one.
Keefe: I’ll go for it. Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve
Conditional Use Permit to allow an electronic message center on a monument sign for
Arboretum Tire and Auto, located at 8175 Hazeltine Boulevard and deny sign variance from the
individual dimension lettering, minimum ½ inch depth, Planning Case #2009-04 and adoption of
the attached Findings of Fact and recommendation with conditions 1 through 3.
Dillon: Second.
Keefe moved, Dillon seconded that the Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow an electronic message center on a
monument sign for Arboretum Tire and Auto located at 8175 Hazeltine Boulevard and
deny a sign variance from the individual dimension lettering, minimum ½ inch depth,
Planning Case #2009-04, and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and
Recommendation, with the following conditions:
1. The sign shall comply with standards for electronic message center signs as outlined in
the City Code.
2. “Arboretum Tire & Auto” must be individual dimension letters a minimum ½ inch deep.
3. A sign permit must be applied for and approved prior to installation.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Laufenburger noted the summary minutes of
the work session meeting dated April 7, 2009 as presented.
Chairman Papke adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 7:25 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
8