020608 planning commission
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 6, 2008
City Hall, 7 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER The New Hope Planning Commission met in regular session pursuant to
due call and notice thereof; Chair Hemken called the meeting to order at
7 p.m.
ROLL CALL Present: Paul Anderson, Jim Brinkman, Kathi Hemken, Jeff Houle,
Sandra Hunten, Roger Landy, Ranjan Nirgudé, Tom
Schmidt, Steve Svendsen
Absent: Pat Crough, Bill Oelkers
Also Present: Kirk McDonald, City Manager, Curtis Jacobsen, Community
Development Specialist, Eric Weiss, Community
Development Intern, Steve Sondrall, City Attorney, Alan
Brixius, Planning Consultant, Jason Quisberg, City Engineer,
Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary
CONSENT BUSINESS There was no Consent Business on the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING
PC08-01 Chair Hemken introduced for discussion Item 4.1, request for variance for
lot area to allow a lot split, 3957 Winnetka Avenue North, Kingsman LLC,
Item 4.1
petitioner.
Mr. Curtis Jacobsen reported that the request is for a lot area variance and
site plan review to allow a lot split and the development of two single
family homes. The property, located on the southwest quadrant of 40th
and Winnetka avenues, is in an R-1 single family residential zoning
district. Adjacent land uses include industrial to the east across Winnetka
Avenue, single family to the west and south, and R-2, single and two-
family residential to the north. The site contains 15,940 square feet. With
the lot split, the proposed eastern lot would contain 8,980 square feet,
requiring a 520 square foot variance, and the western lot would contain
6,960 square feet, requiring a 2,540 square foot variance. The proposed
homes would be split level designs between 1,000 and 1,200 square feet.
Approximately 75 to 81 percent green space would remain after the lots
are built out. The lot currently has an older two-story house that has not
been maintained. The city has previously approved several lot area
variance requests to promote new home construction.
In mid-2007, the city and property owner discussed the potential sale of
the home to either the city or a private developer. Upon further review, it
was determined it would not be financially feasible to acquire the site,
clear the lot, and construct one home. To be cost effective, a lot split
would be necessary or rezoning the property to R-2 to construct a
twinhome. The City Council indicated this should be a private sector
project. City staff contacted several developers and Kingsman LLC
expressed an interest. Kingsman has entered into a purchase agreement
to purchase the property if they can obtain the necessary variances.
Kingsman would demolish the existing structure, including the garage,
split the lot into two separate parcels, and build a single family home on
each lot. The driveways for both parcels would access onto 40th Avenue.
Mr. Jacobsen stated that Kingsman was requesting a lot area variance due
to the fact that the area of the new lots would be smaller than city code
requirements. All setbacks would be maintained, including five feet on
the interior lot line (garage side) of each lot, 25-foot front and rear yard
setbacks, 10-foot side yard setback (house side) on the west side of the
western lot, and 25 foot corner lot setback on the east lot line of the
eastern lot adjacent to Winnetka Avenue. The developer would make
every effort to save as many of the existing trees as possible. An example
of a garage forward, split-level house design was shown. Two to four
bedroom designs could be offered, depending on whether or not the
entire house was finished.
Property owners within 350 feet of the property were notified. One family
visited city hall to inquire about the request.
Mr. Jacobsen explained the purpose of a variance was to permit relief
from the strict application of the terms of the zoning code, to prevent
undue hardship on the applicant in the reasonable use of a parcel of land,
and circumstances unique to the property. The lot split would not be
granted without the approval of the variance for lot size. The lot split
should not alter the essential character of the neighborhood, impair
access to light and air, increase traffic, or endanger public safety. It
should be the minimum action required and be an allowed use in the
zoning district.
The Design and Review Committee considered the variance request and
discussed with the developer the lot size, house design, setbacks, sewer
and water services, utility and drainage easements, trees, driveway
placement, and impact on adjacent properties. The developer intends to
create two lots that meet all other zoning code criteria for the R-1 district.
Two split entry homes with two-car garages would be constructed that
contain 1,000 to 1,200 square feet of finished floor area. The
redevelopment would improve safety by removing a driveway access
onto Winnetka Avenue. This redevelopment would also help stabilize
home values in the neighborhood by replacing one marginal home with
two new houses at current market values.
Mr. Jacobsen requested the Planning Commission determine whether the
variance should be approved with or without conditions. The planning
consultant had recommended several conditions in his report.
Commissioner Svendsen pointed out that once the lot split was complete,
the legal front yards, narrowest street frontage, would be oriented toward
40th Avenue, rather than Winnetka. The rear yards would be toward the
2
Planning Commission Meeting February 6, 2008
south.
Discussion ensued on the five foot setback along the common lot line and
the correct setback for livable space located behind the garage. Mr.
Brixius explained that the setback for living space above a garage was five
feet and living space behind the garage was 10 feet.
Commissioner Brinkman questioned whether the developer had
considered constructing a twinhome. Mr. Jacobsen stated that early
discussions included rezoning the property and constructing a twinhome
or splitting the lot and constructing two homes. Mr. Long indicated from
previous contact with the City Council that the council members were not
in favor of that type of twinhome construction, due to the potential for
one unit offered as rental property.
Commissioner Anderson inquired if the 1,200 square feet included the
garage and the response was the 1,200 square feet was all living space.
Mr. Peter Long, president of Kingsman LLC and resident of New Hope,
came forward.
Commissioner Houle stated that at the Design and Review meeting a
minimum of 1,000 to 1,200 square feet of living space had been discussed.
Mr. Long stated he was comfortable with a minimum of 1,000 square feet.
Home designs and square footages change depending on the number of
bathrooms and bedrooms offered and what the market dictates. He was
hoping for some flexibility on the home size. The homes would probably
have approximately 1,200 square feet finished space upstairs. The same
amount of space would be available in the lower level, which could be
finished at a later date.
A question was raised why the lots were different sizes and Mr. Brixius
stated corner lots require larger setbacks, therefore, the lot along
Winnetka needed more square footage. Mr. Long added that the homes
would be priced at approximately $225,000 to $240,000.
Chair Hemken wondered whether Mr. Long had any objection to the five
conditions as recommended by the planning consultant, and he replied
he did not object to the conditions.
Commissioner Nirgudé wondered whether the developer had an
objection to the condition for a house design with the garage on the side
of the house allowing the house to be moved forward and increase the
usable area of the rear yard. Mr. Brixius interjected that another house
design may fit on the building pad better so as not to encroach into the
rear yard setback. The future homeowners want to add a deck to the rear
of the home as well. Mr. Long indicated plans could be adjusted to meet
that requirement.
Chair Hemken inquired if anyone wished to address the Commission.
3
Planning Commission Meeting February 6, 2008
Mr. Tom Wiblishauser, 3867 Winnetka Avenue North, asked that the five
conditions be read.
Mr. Jacobsen read the conditions, which included:
1.The house design and site plan demonstrate full compliance with
required R-1 setbacks.
2.The house design be changed with a garage on the side of the house
to allow the house to be moved north toward 40th Avenue to
increase the rear yard setback and usable rear yard to the south.
3.Lot access must be obtained from 40th Avenue and meet the city’s
required curb cut setback from public intersections.
4.The existing curb cut on Winnetka Avenue shall be removed by the
developer.
5.The developer shall be responsible for all costs for installation of
utilities.
Commissioner Houle pointed out that the survey showing the lot split
already met numbers 1, 3, 4, and 5 of the conditions. Mr. Brixius stated
the survey did not indicate the house positions on the site. Upon his
review of the survey, the house plan depths looked like they would
exceed the building envelope. Houle reiterated that four of the conditions
had been met.
Mr. Wiblishauser questioned the distance between the two houses and
whether the garage would be even with the back living space along the lot
line. Mr. Brixius stated that city code allowed living space above a garage
to be five feet from the property line, but living space for the principal
structure must meet the 10-foot setback. Mr. Long explained that the
homes would be in an L-shape so the living space behind the garages
would be 10 feet from the property line and the garage portion would be
five feet from the property line. Commissioner Houle mentioned that the
Design and Review Committee had asked the petitioner for some typical
house plans, therefore, the design of the homes to be constructed on these
lots may differ somewhat from the plans included in the planning report.
Mr. Long would need to submit construction plans, which would be
reviewed by the building official, to be sure the house met code
requirements.
Mr. McDonald stated that, per city code, the lot split would be
accomplished administratively. Mr. Jacobsen added that the applicant
would be responsible for a park dedication fee in the amount of $1,500 for
one additional new lot, which should be a condition of approval. The
petitioner would also be responsible for the sewer access charge (SAC).
Mr. Dan Jurek, 7900 40th Avenue North, stated that this would be an
asset to the neighborhood. He was concerned that there may be exterior
storage in the area between the homes and wondered if one house could
be shifted to provide more green space. Mr. Jurek commended the
4
Planning Commission Meeting February 6, 2008
developer on the proposal.
Commissioner Svendsen stated that the exterior storage ordinance should
help alleviate any storage between the homes. Commissioner Nirgudé
added that the planning report indicated there would be 75 to 81 percent
green space provided on the properties.
Mr. Wiblishauser added that he was satisfied and would inform other
neighbors of the redevelopment plans.
Mr. James Chapman, 7909 40th Avenue North, stated his property was
directly to the west of this site. He stated he and his wife had many
concerns, but after learning more about the project, they approved of the
plans. He stated that the city and neighborhood should benefit from this
project.
Mr. Thom Burns, 3949 Winnetka Avenue, located directly to the south of
this property, stated he was in favor of the project.
No one else in the audience wished to address the Commission.
Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Brinkman,
to close the public hearing on Planning Case 08-01. All voted in favor.
Motion carried.
Motion Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner Landy,
Item 4.1 to approve Planning Case 08-01, request for variance for lot area to allow
a lot split, 3957 Winnetka Avenue North, Peter Long/Kingsman LLC and
Stanley and Carol Gerger, petitioners, subject to the following
conditions:
1.Minimum 1,000 square feet of finished first floor area.
2.Payment of $1,500 park dedication fee for the new lot.
Mr. McDonald clarified that the motion did not include the planning
consultant’s recommendations.
Voting in favor: Anderson, Brinkman, Hemken, Houle, Hunten, Landy,
Nirgudé, Schmidt, Svendsen
Voting against: None
Absent: Crough, Oelkers
Motion carried.
Chair Hemken stated that this planning case would be considered by the
City Council at its meeting on February 25, 2008, and asked that the
petitioner attend that meeting.
PC08-02 Chair Hemken introduced Item 4.2, Review of city of Plymouth
Comprehensive Plan update, city of Plymouth, petitioner.
Item 4.2
5
Planning Commission Meeting February 6, 2008
Mr. McDonald reported that all cities are required to update their
comprehensive plans and that cities adjacent to New Hope would be
submitting plans in the next several months for review. McDonald added
that past practice had been for staff and the planning consultant to review
the plans, submit comments to the Planning Commission in the form of a
resolution, then have the Commission adjust or approve those comments
and forward the resolution to the City Council for an official response.
Plymouth submitted two large notebooks that included its comprehensive
plan, which were submitted to the planning consultant for a brief review
and report preparation. City staff also reviewed Plymouth’s submission.
The Planning Commission should discuss the plan and approve or
modify the draft resolution. The City Council could then ratify or adjust
the Planning Commissions recommendations, and the city will submit
comments to the city of Plymouth and the Metropolitan Council.
Mr. Eric Weiss stated the city of Plymouth submitted its Comprehensive
Plan update for review by the city of New Hope, as an adjacent city. A
resolution was prepared with New Hope’s comments. State statute and
the Metropolitan Council require all municipalities in the metro region to
update their comprehensive plans every 10 years. Plymouth updated its
plan in 2000, but the Met Council is requiring that all plans be updated by
the end of 2008. State statues also require that adjacent cities review and
comment on the plans during the six-month review period. Plymouth
and the Met Council will consider comments from New Hope.
Mr. Weiss explained that staff and the planning consultant reviewed the
Plymouth Comp Plan, which presented no major concerns to New Hope
related to land use or utilities. No other comments, changes or actions are
recommended on behalf of the city; therefore, staff recommends approval
of the resolution.
One area of concern noted by the planning consultant was the forecasted
traffic counts at intersections along Highway 169. This wouldn’t be an
issue to raise with the city of Plymouth, but New Hope may want to
revisit the projected traffic numbers related to its Comprehensive Plan
update.
Commissioner Brinkman agreed that the forecasted traffic volume
seemed questionable. He wondered what agencies, such as MnDot or
Hennepin County, use these numbers and if the city was assessed on
these numbers. Mr. Brixius responded that the city engineer could re-
examine the forecasted traffic volumes to determine if the numbers were
correct or may need adjusting. The county also would be receiving copies
of comprehensive plans to review and would be compiling its own
forecasts to determine area needing improvements. Hennepin County
and the city may need to share in any improvements to the road system.
Commissioner Svendsen wondered were the traffic count was taken and
the answer was that the counts were recorded just before the ramps and
could include inbound and outbound traffic in both directions.
6
Planning Commission Meeting February 6, 2008
Commissioner Hunten questioned who utilizes the traffic count
information. Mr. Brixius replied that these are anticipated trips per day
on those streets. The forecasts are completed to determine future
transportation needs within the community. Medicine Lake Road in
Plymouth is a residential street and Medicine Lake Road in New Hope is
the introduction to Midland Shopping Center and industrial parks in
New Hope and Golden Valley.
Mr. McDonald asked the city engineer to re-examine the forecasted traffic
volumes outlined in New Hope’s Comprehensive Plan.
Commissioner Houle initiated discussion on transit issues for east/west
corridors that were identified in New Hope’s plan review. Mr. Brixius
stated that a revision discussed for New Hope’s plan was a greater
emphasis on east/west corridors blending into Plymouth, which may be a
comment to add to the resolution for Plymouth. Houle agreed that New
Hope should comment to Plymouth that information on east/west
corridors was lacking in its plan.
Mr. McDonald stated that the planning consultant had mentioned storm
water in his report. McDonald said he revised the Planning Commission
statement in the resolution to include that the cities should work together
cooperatively in resolving and addressing storm water issues, such as
problems at Northwood Lake due to water flowing from Four Seasons
Mall into the lake and the city of Plymouth not taking any corrective
measures to solve the problem. Mention was made that the Four Seasons
Mall may be redeveloped in the future.
Commissioner Houle questioned whether or not Plymouth had
mentioned affordable housing, if it was meeting Metropolitan Council
goals, the location of the projects, and if the projects bordered New Hope.
Mr. Brixius stated that land uses along the New Hope/Plymouth border
were not changing significantly. Plymouth had identified the potential
redevelopment of the shopping center, and the area north of Bass Lake
Road/Highway 169 changed from commercial to commercial/office.
Those changes would be complimentary to New Hope’s border. Brixius
indicated there was an affordable housing segment to Plymouth’s plan.
Commissioner Schmidt mentioned that Walser Chevrolet near Highway
169 and Bass Lake Road had closed. Many of the old buildings along the
highway between Bass Lake Road and Rockford Road have had a facelift
or some redevelopment had occurred.
No one in the audience wished to address the Commission.
Motion by Commissioner Brinkman, seconded by Commissioner
Schmidt, to close the public hearing on Planning Case 08-02. All voted in
favor. Motion carried.
Motion Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen,
7
Planning Commission Meeting February 6, 2008
Item 4.2 to approve Planning Case 08-02, review and approval of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 08-01 regarding comments on the
Plymouth Comprehensive Plan update, city of Plymouth, petitioner,
subject to the addition of:
1. Greater emphasis on blending east/west corridors between
Plymouth and New Hope.
2. The cities should work cooperatively in resolving and addressing
storm water issues.
Voting in favor: Anderson, Brinkman, Crough, Hemken, Houle,
Hunten, Landy, Nirgudé, Schmidt, Svendsen
Voting against: None
Absent: Crough, Oelkers
Motion carried.
Chair Hemken stated that planning case would be considered by the City
Council on February 25, 2008.
Design and Review Commissioner Svendsen reported that the Design and Review Committee
met in January to review the lot split. McDonald stated that at this time
Committee
staff was not aware of any applications for March. The committee would
Item 5.1
be contacted if a meeting was necessary.
Codes and Standards Chair Hemken stated that the Codes and Standards Committee would be
meeting on February 13 to continue its review of the sign code and
Committee
discuss the revised swimming pool definition.
Item 5.2
Comprehensive Plan Commissioner Landy reported that the City Council reviewed the city’s
Comprehensive Plan update at its work session in January. Open houses
Update Subcommittee
are scheduled for March 6 and 8 and invited all commissioners to attend.
Item 5.3
OLD BUSINESS There was no old business.
Miscellaneous Issues
NEW BUSINESS
Motion to Approve Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Brinkman,
Minutes to approve the Planning Commission minutes of January 8, 2008. All
voted in favor. Motion carried.
ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Svendsen reported that his work phone number had
changed and would contact staff with the new number.
Mr. McDonald stated that the annual State of the City presentation would
be held on February 12 and all commissioners were invited to attend.
Chair Hemken added that Mr. McDonald would be addressing the
League of Women Voters on February 21.
Mr. McDonald reported that staff was conducting interviews for the
position of community development director.
8
Planning Commission Meeting February 6, 2008
ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 7:53
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary
9
Planning Commission Meeting February 6, 2008