Memo Sign Grant ProgramII. OVERVIEW
PS02296A
February 29, 1996
CITY OF HOPKINS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Paul T. Steinman, Community Development Specialist
SUBJECT: Sign Grant Program
I. PURPOSE OF MEMO
The purpose of this memo is to provide an update on staff's
research and discussions regarding possible changes to the
Sign Grant Program.
In February 1996 the Council briefly discussed this issue
specifically with regard to changing the boundaries of the
Sign Grant Program. Staff indicated at that time it would
research this matter, review it with the HBCA, and then
bring it back to the City Council. Since this meeting, the
Program has been discussed at both the staff level and with
HBCA. HBCA has stated they wish to discuss various aspects
of the Program in more detail before making a
recommendation.
Staff is suggesting that the general effectiveness of the
overall program should be discussed in conjunction with
changing the boundaries of the program.
III. PRIMARY ISSUES TO CONSIDER
• Has this program been effective?
The current guidelines of the program basically allow any
type of sign that meets the zoning code size requirements
to be approved for a sign grant. This broad guideline has
led to the funding of signage which potentially has not
met the initial goals of the program.
The initial goals of the program were to provide funding
for signage which maintained and protected the historic
nature of the downtown area. To accomplish this, very
specific design criteria for signage was in place;
however, the eligibility guidelines were broadened later
on so that more sign grants could be undertaken.
Memo to Mayor and City Council, February 29, 1996 - Page 2
Staff has discussed over the past several years the
possibility of implementing stricter guidelines for this
program. These strict guidelines may be as simple as
eliminating plastic or back -lit signage from eligibility.
In staff's research, it has been apparent that the program
may be providing little upgrading of signage over and
above what would likely have been undertaken without the
grant program.
PS02296A
• Should the boundaries of the Program be changed?
Staff's comfort level with expanding the program
boundaries greatly increases if certain changes were made
to the Program eligibility guidelines to ensure that a
real benefit was being provided to the public through this
program.
In researching the issue of boundary expansion, staff has
been working under the assumption that any significant
annual increase in the budget for this program may be
unlikely. This being the situation, if the program .
boundaries were expanded without implementing stricter
guidelines, the budget for this program would likely be
depleted in the early months of each year, with little or
no significant visual impact.
• What was the response from the HBCA Economic Development
Committee?
Staff discussed this issue with the HBCA -EDC on February
23, 1996. There appeared to be general support for
implementing stricter eligibility requirements for this
program, and then potentially expanding the boundaries of
the program.
The EDC was also very supportive of maintaining the
program in some form. It was their general feeling that
the Sign Grant Program, although it may not at times
provide a significant visual impact, still does provide a
benefit to the small business owners. It was also
suggested that this program is a significant public
relations advantage for the City of Hopkins as compared to
other communities.
Other discussion by the EDC referred to future meetings
whereby they volunteered to conduct a further review of
staff recommendations for stricter eligibility
requirements for this Program. A possible schedule for
accomplishing this would be as follows:
March 7 EDC reviews issues with HBCA Board
of Directors
Memo to Mayor and City Council, February 29, 1996 - Page 3
PS02296A
March 14 Board of Directors reviews issues with
HBCA general membership
EDC reviews staff proposals for stricter
guidelines and makes a recommendation to
HBCA Board of Directors
March 22
April
May 7
V. ATTACHMENTS
HBCA Board of Directors discusses this
issue, and then presents to HBCA general
membership
City Council takes final action on
changes and modifications to the
program, upon consideration of HBCA
comments /position
IV. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, staff feels that in conjunction with .
completing any changes in the eligibility requirements for
the Sign Grant Program, it is probably logical to also look
at the overall program and its effectiveness to date.
Staff also feels that it is important for the HBCA general
membership to provide its response to proposed recommended
changes to this program.
Minutes of February 23, 1996, HBCA Economic Development
Committee meeting
1
.5re+)
6-RA1 r
Present: Nelson Berg, Dale Poste, Mark Senn, Paul Steinman, Doug McDonald,
Elly Barth, Katherine Schipper, Eileen Harvala (City of Hopkins)
Staff: Cynthia Sweet
Nelson Berg called the meeting to order at 7:40 a.m.
Berg rccapped the C/I program. Overall sentiment was that the program was well done
and beneficial. The C/I program sparked ideas of possible programs regarding other
issues, Steinman suggested a possible tenants point of view for future programs.
Sweet presented the C/I survey results. They were as follows:
8 completed surveys / 300 (approximately)
2 negative responses that wanted no involvement
6 favorable responses that would be involved
HBCA recognized this attempt as unsuccessful, but decided not to let this issue drop.
Ideas to better this process will be discussed in the future.
Senn had no news to report about the Hopkins Spring Thing to be held March 2" and 3
Questions and organizational details have been referred to Kathleen Taber the
independent contractor for this event.
PROS FOR SION GRANT
promote "quality /character
good will
perceived upgrades signs
jump start improvements ie: Cty. Rd. 3
incentive to locate / expand in Hopkins
GM Ulf
Hopkins Business & Civic Association
Economic Development Committee
February 23, 1996
Steinman presented the Sign Grant program to HBCA and asked for ideas and comments
regarding the current program and possible future direction of that program. The HBCA
took no formal action on the Sign Grant program other than to wait until actual issupsaals s
are given to HBCA to discuss. Steinman will bring salsto the next meeting. The
discussion that is still on the table is as follows:
CONS AGAINST SIGN GRANT
budget
no current standards
signs would go up without grant
fairness of limited area?
landlord vs. tenant
bad P.R. if cutback
OPTIONS
• Maybe don't cancel sign grant program, just fine tune the regulations and expand to
whole city. (with idea that stiffer regulations stretches the money further)
• Expand areas
• Target Co. Rd. 3 (2 -3 year project) possibly even Shady Oak?
� R$4T
• Combine with Facade Program
• Tighten Guidelines
Notes:
• No tax increment dollars can be used for grant programs.
• Sign Grant is spending approximately $7,000.O0/year currently with a $5,000.00/ycar ?
budget that is already exceeding maximum limits.
Harvala presented the 1995, 1996 City of Hopkins "report card ". The report card will be
presented in the HBCA Newsletter. Hopkins Highlights, City Annual Report, Sun Sailor
? ?, and possibly MN Real Estate Journal. Included in the report will be a "Mini- tours" on
Paper, photos, quotes, economic strategic plan, and letters of acknowledgment. Schipper
volunteered to assist Harvala with the project. The 1995, 1996 Development Report Card
goes as follows:
1995 Development
Wendy's (Tim H.)
Lomrnen
Maetzold Field
E Main St
Smith Relocation
Hitching Post
Abes (Facade)
Best Steak (Facade)
Hopkins Auto Body (94 ?)
Dale Feste
Mirror & Glass
Bakery
1996 Develonntent
ground breaking for theater 3/28/96
RL Johnson
Co. Rd. 3 project (Phase I)
Pines
Pines
Art Center
Diamond Labs
Boston Gardens
Tails
Town & Country Dodge
Justus Rental Center
Hennepin Cty. Site
Note: No representatives from the East side of town were available for any additional
development reports.
Steinman repotted a brief City of Hopkins update. The Arts Facility will have
informational meetings both Tuesday, February 27th at 7:00 p.m., at Hopkins City Hall
and Sunday, March 3c at 3 p.m. at Hopkins Spring Thing. A preliminary development
agreement with Real Estate Equities for redevelopment of the Pines has been signed.
Over the next five months, research and surveys will be happening prior to the signing of
an actual development agreement. This project is estimated to be about 7.5 to 8 million
dollars. The Hennepin County option was also briefly discussed. The option date will
expire July I The council will meet with five potential developers on March 6' The
Diamond Labs project is scheduled for permit approval on March 19. The development
report card for Hopkins was expanded by Steinman to include the following:
1995 Building Permit Property Valuation
$681,000 New Building Commercial
$2.2 million Commercial Additions
$666,000 Industrial Additions
$552,000 New Residential
$1.6 million Remodeled Residential
$81 million Additions to Residential
Projected 1996 Prooertv Valuation
If plans and permits go as indicated, the 1996 figures should be approximately three times
the 1995 figures.
There being no other business, the meeting was adjourned by Berg at 9:15 a.m.