050509 Planning
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
City Hall, 4401 Xylon Avenue North
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. CONSENT BUSINESS
4. PUBLIC HEARING
Request for conditional use permit to operate an animal kennel facility,
9440 Science Center Drive, Hearing and Service Dogs of 1vlinnesota,
petitioner
Request for conditional use permit for personal wireless service antenna
tower, 5040 Winnetka Avenue North, FtvIHC Corporation for I-Mobile
Central LLC, petitioner
5. COMMITTEE REPORTS
(f) 4.1 PC09-04
. 4.2 PC09-06
5.1 Report of Design and Review Committee - next meeting May 14, 7:30 a.m.
5.2 Report of Codes and Standards Committee
6. OLD BUSINESS
6.1 Miscellaneous Issues
o Planning Commission review of past planning cases
o PC07-15, New Hope Bowl, 7107 42nd Avenue
o PC08-07, Northrup, 4551 Flag Avenue
7. NEW BUSINESS
7.1 Review/Approval of Planning Commission 1vlinutes of April 7, 2009
8. ANNOUNCEMENTS
9. ADJOURNMENT
o Petitioner must be in attendance at the meeting
Planning Commission Guidelines for Public Input
The Planning Commission is an advisory body, created to advise the City Council on land use. The
Planning Commission will recommend Council approval or denial of a land use proposal based upon
the Planning Commission's determination of whether the proposed use is permitted under the Zoning
Code and the Comprehensive Plan, and whether the proposed use will, or will not, adversely affect the
surrounding neighborhood.
The Planning Commission holds informal public hearings on land use proposals to enable you to learn,
first-hand, what such proposals are, and to permit you to ask questions and offer comments. Your
questions and comments become part of the record and will be used by the Council, along with the
Planning Commission's recommendation, in reaching its decision.
To aid in your understanding and to facilitate your comments and questions, the Planning Commission
will utilize the following procedure:
1. The Planning Commission Chair will introduce the proposal.
2. City staff will outline the proposal and staff's recommendations and answer any questions from the
Planning Commission.
3. The petitioner is invited to describe the proposal, make comments on the staff report, and answer
questions from the Planning Commission.
4. The chair will open the public hearing, asking first for those who wish to speak to so indicate by
raising their hands. The chair may set a time limit for individual questions/comments if a large
number of persons have indicated a desire to speak. Spokespersons for groups will have a longer
period of time for questions/comments.
5. When recognized by the chair, the person wishing to speak is asked to come forward and to give
their full name and address clearly. Remember, your questions/comments are for the record.
6. Direct your questions/comments to the chair. The chair will determine who will answer your
questions.
7. No one will be given the opportunity to speak a second time until everyone has had the opportunity
to speak initially. Please limit your second presentation to new information, not rebuttal.
8. At the close of the public hearing, the Planning Commission will discuss the proposal and take
appropriate action.
A. If the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve or deny a request, the
planning case will be placed on the City Council agenda for the next regular meeting. Usually
this meeting is within one to two weeks of the Planning Commission meeting.
B. If the Planning Commission tables the request, the petitioner will be asked to return for the next
Commission meeting.
Memorandum
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Curtis Jacobsen, Director of Community Development
Date:
May 1, 2009
Subject:
PC 09-04, Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota Update
Planning Case 09-04 was tabled at the April 7, 2009, meeting until the Planning Commission meeting of
May 5. On April 16, the issue was reconsidered at the Design and Review Committee meeting with the
city attorney in attendance to assure that all legal issues were taken into consideration.
The initial application had the applicant proposing to build out a project in multiple phases over
potentially many years based on their submitted concept plan. It is not legal for the current Council's
action to bind future councils. Therefore, the city attorney recorrunended that a concept of multiple
buildings/uses on the site which were not clearly authorized by ordinance was problematic.
The applicant agreed to authorize up to a 60-day extension on the 60-day rule, which was approved by
the City Council on April 27. The 60-day rule extension expires on July 11, 2009.
In an effort to resolve all issues prior to submission to the Council, the applicant has submitted revised
plans that call for a conditional use permit, variance and text amendments to the city code. The
submitted plans will lll.COrporate all previously proposed amenities into the existing building. The
existing buildlll.g will be remodeled to accommodate; offices, break room, accessible rest rooms,
obedience h'aining, two placement h'allllllg rooms, trallwlg apartment, guest room, caretaker aparhnent,
isolation kennels, isolation exercise room, regular exercise room, medical and grooming room, dog
kitchen, kermels, warehouse/garage space, and spare office space. The only exterior expansion on the site
will be for the covered outdoor runs.
The plans suggest that the kermels vdll be built in two phases with ten per phase. The size of the future
phase of kennel expansion on its own will not trigger site and buildlllg plan revie\v but simply the
application for a building permit. The text amendments will be needed to accorrunodate; authorizlllg a
caretaker unit at a keml.el operation and the incorporation of a guest room. A variance vvill be needed to
accOlmnodate two dogs per kemlel as proposed by the applicant.
Please refer to the April 7 Planning Commission packet for the application, origlllal plans and narrative
for this project.
1
Memo
PC 09-04 Update
May 1, 2009
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend the Council approve the text amendment,
variance and conditional use permit for Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota.
Attachments:
. Resolution
· Floor Plan
· Master/phase 1 Plan
· NAC Memo CUP
· NAC Memo text amendment
· Proposed Ordinance
· Application Log
G: \ CommDev\ PLANNING \ REPORTS \ PC 09-04 Service and Hearing Dogs \ PC 09-04 :tvIE.tvIO Update 5-5-09.doc
2
City of New Hope
Resolution No. 2009-
Resolution approving conditional use permit, variance and
text amendment as applied for by Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota
9440 Science Center Drive (Planning Case No. 09-04)
WHEREAS, an application for a conditional use permit, variance and text amendment to
allow the Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota, a Minnesota Non-Profit, to
operate a dog kennel and training facility at 9440 Science Center Drive was
received on March 13, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered this application on April 7 and again on
May 5, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted the required public hearings and gave the
application a full and complete review for compliance with city code.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Ne\-\' Hope Planning Commission of the city of
New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, that they recommend the followillg to
the City Council:
1. Approval of the conditional use permit to allow a dog kennel and traill.ing
facility on industrial (I) zoned property.
2. Approval of the variance to allow Hearill.g and Service Dogs of MiImesota to
keep two dogs per kennel for socialization purposes. The keml.els are
adequately sized.
3. Approval for addiIl.g text to specifically allow a caretaker aparhnent in
conjunction with kennels ill. the industrial zone.
4. Approval for adding text to specifically allow a guest room withiIl. a kennel,
the guest room shall only be used by persons obtaiIwl.g services or receivillg
trailwl.g from the kemlel facility.
Adopted by the Plamwlg Commission of the city of New Hope, HemlepiIl COlmty, Milmesota
this 5th day of May, 2009.
Plcu:ming COlmission Chair
Attest:
Plamwl.g Commission Secretary
G: \ CommDev \ PLAl'JN1NG \ REPORTS \PC 09-04 Service and Hearing Dogs \ Resolution for Approval5-5-09.docx
I!m ~ I
!I!lll i
d
.:- ~.
" ,
I
~
I
J
i')l~
'''_I'oJ[~
0-
I
I
~-7!
J )( 1
k:._~
I
g
~
~
2
f'-";J
)(1
_oj
D".
r:t~
'.
::;~
:c
4~
~
@
;:g
Da~
1~~
.~?
~ -;:<
;D~)o
" i~~
~ I~~
,"-~
I )( I
\c._~
~1l
: ~l'
I '
I
: I
L_..;
~-...
I
I
~
';:::J
-<
!~
!C
f;:::J
i~~~~
~~~~!
00":;-
~;;:_o
15~~~
i:S~~
~t 8~~
!~ ;r
:= mI.!'
SS ~~
. ~<
:' >g
o
!~~~ ~
~~~~ ~
~~!~
~~~~
g::. :':!
L
1'--;"
I ;( I
~-~
Il ~ ,----,
r:1
C'r? b
c--o ;_
~~ .;:,~
L~. 6l/'J
.. t1~-
::" H3:&... ~
mml
:[[:i ~ ;
fl!iii ~
"i'; ,
I~ I ~
,,E "
It ~
f
B ~ g
-? I
;E!'f
c,
2.
ii'
~
)>
l\.)
o
i(
rn
-<
z
C)
-<
rn
<Jl
INDEPENDENCE AVENUE NORTH
--0~n~n<g>n~n-.,.-, _
I j-' '-0 '-0 0" 1?d!! 8 '+0,
o ~ I~q
: r -' '" "--<.- "c '
L ,I r
- j r' '
~) ',\ -, <? :1 1 t
"-+, I \ : \""' :1 i ~
I \1 \ c--------"i I t
,~\ t
~ ~-11 O,!)tr.1 I ~
'r-P ;;;;:~ "",i;; , ..--' I t
'~-r ?_"l 8bE) , J' I"
;--- . ~~ ~~jZ I t
1,-1-0 ~"9 ~"'''': 1 I I
,-;..( >-~, .....
"hr-'f''''W~ ''''' 1 I
I-_t:--' ....'.:..'-"1 ,'V I t
I't:t ' :::j : 'fl' t
I . \,( __ II r t
'-h --~ -~ " " t
'~~!J;c..:- " I, t
t -~l '0/ @j Ql i I ; I ; ; i i [ I ~)>
i0i' r "" " '" " I I I~
f ~ " I , I I ~
I:-_J H9 1)~1 I b
I ~-I- ,>L!J~' 11111111 I I .
t:- '\ 'Ifi"i : !~: 1111' I III t S
, r 0lR,., I I !
:[=@r \, l 1 : t
I /lliLLLlLlIIIIIIIIIII 1 , I
:~I 1:1
I. 1 I I '
'I I I ' I
! I : I ! I
I' 1 ~ L
'FiL'. L -- -- -- -- ~ riFT
I 0' I
I / f I
I l. J
o.
~ ,"
11-__n n ~q n
,
<2>
~ti~tHj ~~ ;Sli;;~!l~ j:i!J:= fi?o$':"'!J'!:".lo.;a!-l:-
~~ s~ ~ ~~ i ~ l~ ~~ ~~E~ ~ ~~ ~ g g ~ ~~9 ~ ~~
,,*'a~a~ ^~!il" ..~~~.~~~~~~~..
~;;. ~:i' E.~.,~S~g>.os~~... ~C"~~
~~ >ii e~~8~~~g~-, a;;~~ ':ie~..
,. ~< ~'="O;;8.,.d~.>~ 00.;'
.0 "H..... "38~~" '8.-<
g~ ~a ~\)~~~15gg~aG~I'I~~ ;::3;t~G
~" >. I> ~; ~;8~~.~~ ~ ~;;;~
($ ~.J '~>e;;:.:sgg~:i~5 ;i ..,~
;i ;; G~l\~~g~r =i~g ;t ~~
~ .s ~g;g }1~~ ~;::~~ := ~~
~ ~ ~~~o .h ~;;O;> ! 0
. . ~~~~ ~;'~ ~;! ~ ~
~~ ; ~ ~~~ ~ ~
I:I~ > 8 ~>3 ;;
~~i}i ~..~ ~
Vl
n
fii
z
n
f'1
n
f'1
Z
--;
f'1
;::)
C1
;::)
<'
f'1
@
NORTH
1-~~-~-~()>--<rI;I~~-~1 ~'.
I ~.---..., g"
, ,.. /""'I I " ,
, r- . ." .--. I I ,.....
Ii ( I I !
: i I I 1 I
110 '0: I t
, b r' ' , t
I I 0 I II
, iJ> .-/ I"
I 0 I I t
, , t
! ~ [f1 !
'.J 0 I I L
W0 II Ii
I I " I ' I':
I ' I ~
I I I I ~
1 1 I t
: 1 1 ' t
I I I I t
, <$l I ' t
i-r8 I i I
1 1 , t
: I 1 I t
I I i I I
, 1 6,,"~~ t
:"'~1 "-"n-"~ L
err i
, . ,
I' L.__ ---'fo-J J'
I~~
Q--- --L--
<8>
Q <r1<J> ,
I' "H!i;j II 0i
1~~6:1o.~eJ ~ I
IM~1!l1~~err~1 I ~ \
<fv "<3>
~~LllillJ;jli ---I
~111111~1~
<3> ;::;;. lq
II~ IIIIIIIH~
,
INDEPENDENCE AVENUE
~
"
L--___.J
Vl
n
A
z
n
f'1
n
f'1
Z
--;
Si
~
<'
f'1
"
;31
q~
r;;
;il
f
7'
ffi
lJ
~
r;;
()
("\
g
~
f;
;:S
@
t)"
f!::
~
;;
C
;::::J
~J:ti1;;
. i~~c
~. ~?~
~~;;t~~
~.;"
~~~~
~.~
0--
~ii
~G<.
2;~
;~
8~
:;;$
o
rn
H
_0
~~
i~
o
.
~
~~g:; f
.~~~ ~
~-~.
~i!a
;. ~~
~~~~
g=
.~.,.- >
h~u ~
-I',~~ .
f~l;H ;;
[~ l>l~ g
~H'~! e
mli~ ~
H:.! ~
Sf!
~I!!
~!it ?'~
!! ~ "*
l? ~~
. ~ ~
~~
> .
,
i
~
."
<II
::lj;
~~
r::lr:l
_;0
n
~~
l
~
U1
lJ
t-.J
i\lORTHV\f~ST ASSOCIAT~D CQNSULTAN ~r I_NC.
4800 Olson MemoriaIH ighway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, M r\! 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners@nacplanning.com
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Curt Jacobsen
FROM:
Alan Brixius / Laurie Smith
DATE:
April 27, 2009
RE:
New Hope - Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota; Conditional Use
Permit
FILE:
131.01 - 09.03
BACKGROUND
The Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota non-profit organization is requesting
approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) to operate a kennel facility located at 9440
Science Center Drive. The facility would be used for housing and training dogs involved
in the program. The applicant is proposing to move into the facility immediately upon
approval with future remodeling and expansion as funding allows. The site contains
approximately 4 acres and is zoned I - Industrial. Dog kennels are a permissible use
within the I District upon approval of a conditional use permit.
The application was reviewed at the April 7, 2009 Planning Commission meeting.
Following discussion at that meeting and comment by the City Attorney, the applicant
has submitted revised plans indicating the location of a caretaker apartment and guest
room within the existing building. The applicant is also requesting approval of a text
amendment which would allow for caretaker apartments and guest rooms as conditional
accessory uses to an animal kennel in the I District.
ANAL YSIS
Proposed Use. The proposed use is a dog kennel and training facility for hearing and
service dogs. The dogs are trained to assist people with special needs. The enrolled
dogs live and train at the facility until they are fully trained and placed with a waiting
applicant. The applicant is proposing to initially remodel the existing building on the site
to include the following elements:
Offices
Meeting rooms'
Training rooms
10 kennels with attached outdoor runs
Veterinary care
Indoor loading and unloading for transport vans
General warehousing
"Mock-up Apartment" for training use
The applicant is requesting conceptual approval of additional elements that will be
added as future phases, including the following:
Dog arrival/isolation building and garage
Caretaker apartment and guest room
Dog arrival/isolation kennels
Additional dog kennels/dog runs (up to 20 total)
Parking lot expansion
Each dog kennel can hold up to two dogs. Initially the facility would house ten dogs at a
minimum with room for up to 42 dogs upon future expansion. Section 4-20(e)(16)a of
the Zoning Ordinance requires animal kennels to provide one kennel per animal. The
applicant is proposing to have up to two dogs per kennel, which does not meet Zoning
Ordinance requirements. As such, a variance is being requested to allow for Hearing
and Service Dogs of Minnesota to keep up to two dogs in each kennel. The applicant
argues that the proposed kennels greatly exceed the minimum required area and that
the service dogs benefit from being housed together. The proposed kennel
arrangement appears to be unique to this use.
The proposed animal kennel and associated veterinary care use can be accommodated
via the existing Industrial zoning designation. Animal kennels are listed as a permitted
conditional use in the I District and Veterinary clinics are a permitted use in the I District.
The applicant is requesting a text amendment which would list two additional conditions
for a dog kennel to include the allowance of a caretaker apartment and a guest room.
The proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment is attached.
Animal Kennel Requirements. Section 4-20(e)(16) of the Zoning Ordinance outlines
the required conditions of approval for animal kennel facilities. The following compares
these pertinent zoning ordinance requirements and the applicant's proposal:
1. The facility's minimum size must provide for 75 square feet per dog exclusive of
office space or storage areas. The facility must provide one cage or air kennel
per animal.
The applicant is proposing to have 246 square feet of space per dog for
kenneling, veterinary, training and kitchen functions. Each kennel will have 108
2
square feet of area including the outdoor dog run area. A variance is being
requested to allow for up to two dogs to be housed in each kennel. The
partnering of the dogs is part of the social training for the service dogs. Since the
facility is proposing to provide kennel space which is in excess of the City's
standard of 75 square feet per dog, staff believes the variance to allow two dogs
per kennel is warranted.
2. The zoning ordinance requires at least 100 square feet of outdoor exercise area
per dog. Outdoor exercise areas must be fenced with a three-foot vegetative
buffer and must be cleaned of animal waste regularly.
The applicant is proposing to have an outdoor exercise area of 21,725 square
feet which equates to 517 square feet per dog at maximum capacity. An eight
foot chain link fence surrounding the outdoor exercise area is proposed. The
applicant is proposing to add two additional planting areas of three evergreen
trees each along the length of the fence to provide screening while reserving
some open spots for security visibility. The applicant states that animal wastes
are picked up immediately and disposed of using the sanitary sewer system.
3. The facility must have a proper ventilation system.
The facility is planned to have a separate ventilation system and atmosphere for
the indoor potion of the kennels in compliance with Ordinance requirements and
other applicable Codes.
4. A sufficiently sized room/cage separate from the main facility shall be provided to
adequately separate sick or injured animals.
The applicant is proposing to provide a separate room for veterinary services and
states that sick or injured dogs are properly quarantined.
5. Wall finish materials below 48 inches in height shall be impervious, washable
materials. Floor finish shall be sealed concrete or other approved impervious
surface. Liquid-tight curbing, at least six inches high, shall be installed along
shared walls for sanitary confinement and cleaning.
Kennels are to be constructed of Mason FRP metal and polyethylene/fiberglass
reinforced plastic that is fully washable. Kennels are to be cleaned daily with
industrial disinfectant and are pressure washed weekly. A six inch liquid-tight
curb is not proposed as the kennel system that is being used offers the same
protections using a different design element.
Lot Area and Setbacks. The proposed use is consistent with the lot area and setback
requirements of the I District.
'1
.)
Building Design. The existing building is constructed of concrete block. The applicant
is proposing to construct the initial building expansion to be used for the dog runs using
decorative concrete block and a prefinished metal roof. Proposed building materials are
consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and the New Hope Design Guidelines for
industrial buildings. Future phases of the building expansion will be reviewed at that
time.
Access/Parking. There is an existing 34-stall paved parking lot located to the east of
the existing building. According to the applicant, 12 to 15 parking stalls are needed to
accommodate staff and visitors on a daily basis. Future phases of the proposal include
an expanded parking area to accommodate 75 cars plus five additional garage spaces.
The applicant notes that the facility would host graduation ceremonies twice a year as
well as occasional volunteer training and recognition events. There is an existing gravel
"overflow" parking area which can accommodate an additional 40 cars. On street
parking is available along Science Center Drive. The applicant proposes that additional
off-street parking arrangements will be made ahead of time to accommodate increased
traffic during these large events.
Lighting. The applicant is proposing downcast wall pack lights above the rear service
doors and along the east building fagade. Future plans may include additional parking
lot lighting when those areas are improved and/or expanded.
Signage. The applicant is proposing to install a new monument sign adjacent to the
driveway access off of Science Center Drive. The existing monument sign located in
the southwest corner of the site, visible from Highway 169 will remain and will
presumably be refaced. Prior to alteration of the existing sign or installation of a new
sigh, a sign permit shall be reviewed and approved by City staff.
Trash Encolsure. A trash enclosure was not indicated on the submitted plans. Trash
containers must be stored inside the building or contained and fully screened in a trash
enclosure which is constructed of materials to match the building.
Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control. No grade changes are anticipated with the
initial phase of the project. Grading, drainage and erosion control matters are subject to
review and approval of the City Engineer.
CON CLUSION/RECOM MENDA TION
The training facility proposed by Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota is consistent
with Zoning Ordinance requirements. The proposed kennel, animal daycare and
caretaker apartment uses are permitted conditional uses in the Industrial District. The
proposed veterinary use is a permitted use in that district. Future phases of the facility
are generally consistent with ordinance requirements and will be further reviewed prior
to construction.
4
If the Planning Commission and City Council find the proposal to be acceptable, City
staff recommends approval of the proposed variance based on a finding that the
applicant exceeds the required amount of kennel space per dog and that the kennel
arrangement is unique to this particular use and approval of the conditional use permit
subject to the following conditions:
1. Grading, drainage and erosion control matters are subject to the review and
approval of the City Engineer.
2. The facility shall have a ventilation system which is complies with Section 4-
20.(e)(16)d of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. Animal wastes shall be removed and properly disposed of daily.
4. The facility shall be properly licensed per Section 7-4 of the City Code.
5. Prior to hosting of a large event, a parking plan shall be implemented, subject to
City approval.
6. Prior to the alteration of existing signs and/or the erection of new signs on the
site approval of a sign permit is required.
7. Future phase plans are conceptual. Any additional site alterations shall be
processed as a CUP amendment and must be reviewed and approved by the
New Hope Planning Commission and City Council.
8. Approval of a variance to allow two dogs per kennel.
5
NORTHW~ST AS5QqIAl~.f) CQNS.V~T~N 51 If'.JC.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, M r\l 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners@nacplanning.com
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Curt Jacobsen
FROM:
Alan Brixius / Laurie Smith
DATE:
April 27, 2009
RE:
New Hope - Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota; Industrial District
Text Amendment
FILE:
131.01 - 09.03
Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota is requesting a text amendment which would
allow caretaker apartments and guest rooms as accessory uses to an animal kennel.
Animal kennels are permitted by conditional use permit in the Industrial District.
Caretaker apartments are currently allowed in the Industrial District as part of a mini
storage facility. Given the nature of the proposed use and its location in the Industrial
District, staff feels that the proposed caretaker apartment and guest room uses are
appropriate.
Attached please find a proposed ordinance text amendment which would allow
caretaker apartments and guest rooms as uses accessory to an animal kennel in the
Industrial District. The Planning Commission will consider this request at their meeting
on May 5, 2009.
CITY OF NEW HOPE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 2009 -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT SECTION OF THE CITY
CODE ADDING ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RELATING TO THE ALLOWANCE OF
ANIMAL KENNELS AS A CONDITIONAL USE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF NEW HOPE ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 4-20(e)(16) of the New Hope City Code shall be amended to add
the following:
I. Caretaker apartment. If an "on-premises" caretaker dwelling unit is provided
on site, construction of said dwelling unit shall conform to all design standard
regulations for multiple-family dwelling units of the Minnesota State Building
Code and the New Hope Zoning and Building Code. Two off-street parking
spaces and one garage stall must be provided for the caretaker dwelling unit.
The minimum dwelling unit and room floor sizes shall be controlled by subsection
4-3(b )(2)b of this Code.
m. Guest room. If a guest room is provided within the kennel facility it must
meet efficiency unit size requirements as listed in subsection 4-3(b )(2)b of this
Code. One additional parking stall must be provided for the guest room. Guest
rooms shall only be used by persons obtaining services or receiving training from
the kennel facility.
Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage
and publication according to law.
PASSED this 26th day of May, 2009 by the New Hope City Council.
Kathi Hemken, Mayor
ATTEST:
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
(j)
u
m
o
)>
r
N
o
Z
Z
G)O
u=i
::0-<
00
Oil
mz
Om
C:2:
::0
mI
(j)0
)>u
um
u
!::
o
~
o
Z
r
o
G)
0 :J () )>
<.0 CQlu
I 3 :::!:u
0 0"0= )>
-I>- :J I
CD
...,
0))> Z<.O$: I u)>Z
->. - CD -I>- -. CD ::rCLQl
Nu~-I>-:JQl ~ ~ :3
I CD O:J...,
;j CD I (j) rn s' CD CD CD
en
<.O""o()Oco en
I en "0 -. ~ Ql
CJ1 CD SJ2 Ql :J
65 ",.,0 CL )>
0) C;i CD (j) "0
-1>-0 CD "0
~CD :2 o' OJ
:J -.
~ () Ql
~ CD ;l
0 0
..., 0
<' co
CD en
0
-To
W O"""QlO
-- ,<CDUQl
->. ()()U~
W
-- -. SJ2. = CD
0 -z~~ 0
<.0 o..~
0
:J
~ S' <= :J ~ 0
Ql-ToE00QlQl
cnQ-gcncrr
3:3CDCD~)>
CIi' ~.o :J "0 0
en -. ~. ~ "0
S' ~ ..., =
co CD ()
CL Ql
;l
CJ1 CD=CLO
-- >< :3 Ql Ql
->.
N "0 -. '< ~
-- ::;' ,....... ....... (D
0 CD -. m
<.0 en 3 0)
CD ?
-.J CDCDCLO
-- >< >< Ql Ql
->.
->. ~. CD '< CD
-- ..., :J
0 CD en 0) Il
<.0 en -. 0
o I
:J
-I>- CDO~)>O
-- :i -To Ql "0 Ql
N
co CD enu~
-- :J :J=CD
0 ~. 0 ~ G)
<.0 o :::!; :J
:J ::!:l.......
CD
CL
-.J OCDCQlO'O
-- ..., >< :J () ..., CD
->.
->. ~CDCL:::!;()Ql
-- Ql:JCDO;::;:CL
0 -. en ..., :J '< = I
<.0 < -. :J
~ ~ CD
QlCLQlO
uCDuQl
u:Ju~
ff CD' <3 CD
Ql CL < Q. -
gg:~-Z
:J CD 0
...,
~eno
o CD Ql
)>:J~
"0 ~ CD
""Q. CD Q. L
-. en ~
()u'<
Ql 0
;l:J
en
CD
OJ
o
><
CD
en
:p
o
Ql
:J
CL
m
I
Il
~
Ql
~
Ql
'<
en
0"
CD
~
CD
CL
o
~
:2:
::r
~
::r
CD
...,
g:
CD
o
g:
CD
...,
0"
o
><
CD
en
Ql
...,
CD
::h
(i)
CL
o
~
CL
CD
"0
CD
:J
CL
en
o
:J
g:
CD
()
~
en-
"0
...,
o
()
CD
CL
C
...,
CD
en
Ql
:J
CL
g:
CD
CL
Ql
CD
o
-To
Ql
en
"0
CD
()
::;;
o'
Ql
"0
""Q.
o'
~
o'
:J
~:-;rG):-nfT1 !=J0~;J>
:::!:r-ir-i-i-iQ.rrr)>
:3 CIi' ::r CIi' ::r 0 0 tll CIi' CIi' CIi' en
CD ....... CD ....... CD () (') ....... ,....... .- ,....... fQ.
= g: () g: () Ql Ql ~. g: g: g: co
:3cP;::;:CD;::;:00:JCDCDCD:J
'< '<cc CD
;::;:CL::lCL<::--OJCLCL)>Ql
CD Ql ::l CD 5. Ql Ql 0 Ql Ql "0 ()
-6CD5i~~CDCD><CDCD-g,::r
=1' :f ..- :: 0 g: s: C"') = g: () DJ
rn~2:lcDs;CDcP' cDCDgJ:g
. .-"-c"< mm=h (").-=:
::r v :J e 0 0 .- Q. ;::;: -:J ()
cP cP CL -' I I ::r-z'< Ql
-To~cPCLCLCD ...,Ql:::!;
Q. Q ~ )> Ql Ql ~ en CD :3 0
-Z cP Ql "0 '< '< 3' ~ @ _CD :J
en <= :J "0 CD CD ~ -. Ql
cP-',<=:i ~<Ql:J
:J cP cP () CD ()::r CD CL C
~CL>< Ql:J OCD CLCL::l
:J cP ~ ;l ~. S' () )> <= CD ::>
o Ql SJ2 0"0 Q.^u cD en g
:::!: 9:: ~ '< _:J C CIi' "0 Ql en ...,
~ S' 0-' ::l CL - = "0 Ql .
w ~ ::l 0" CD ...,- () :J
o ~v :J Ql CD CD Ql ""Q. CL
-To 0 = co ~ en :J o'
-. - -; ....-+- 5' - _ ........ ru u
Cil-i<::::r ()~:J~::r
::r <:: Ql () Ql ~ 0 -. 0
Ql cP Ql ~o (i)CD ~~:J
51 CL <' Ql C :J 0.: o' CD
o' Ql ~ 0) ;l CL - CD ~
:J ::;<. 0 S' Ql g ~
~LJ I -,; --. :J"'
~o -. CL CO CL en Ql
:J Ql=t'QlC~
g:OJ '<O'<()CD
cPO cP3~::r.o
)> =- ~ <= Ql~.
"0 w -' :J...,
"0:3 :JCD ocP
= C ~. CL :::!; CL
() en 0 Ql ()_.
gJ- :J'< _CD~
_C'l u-To Qlo
.~ ~g, en3
;::;: -' -. 0 ~. Ql
_. cP 0 ~ co_
en 0- CL -. :J o'
O-cP Qlc6 0:;::J
cP-To "0 ~
~Q ""Q.g: CD ~
-. cP CD' CD Ql ffi
=s: (J):::h :g
~cP ~o Ul =:3
w ~ () CIi'
C'lCL -0) Qlen
-. Ql ::r 0 ~-.
-Z CD CD I O' :J
:J -. Ql CL :J cp
0:J uQl Ql
- OJ ""Q. ':::. :J =;;
~ ~ o' 3' CD g:
-<,"cP ~_;::;: ~CD
_ en 0 _. :J ()
mm :J:J c;::;:
" ():3'<
cPO ---.c O"CO
en.. -i CL CD-'
mil ::rCD ...,~
51- CDQl Qlen
-. 0 CL - :J
0_"" Ql - CLen
:J _. ~ () C
-To CD Ql CD ()
~. m -. (i) ()::r
g:u :J:J O:J
-. "0 OJ CL ..., 0
:J= om CL~
~ ~ ><"" Ql o'
150- G)CL =CD
_ (i) Ql en:".
-. - 3 '< C ~
~OJo c~ g3
en CD C
=>< - .0 en
:3I () c~
;::;:. 0 CDCL
-.........:3 :JO
0" CD ~en
~ 0" g-o
m CD Ql:1E
Ui" 0' CL -.
o -,; :=:.......
CD :J ::r
:J _ CD -.
o ::r en :J
S; CD 0.....
CD' CL :J 0
en ~ me-
- CD :JC
15 S' CD !!!.
)> OJ ~~
-0 0 -. tJl
-0 >< :J tJl
= CD CD
C'l en . Q.
gJ m tll
~ '<
0" Ql tJl
cP :J tll
-To CL _
Q Il <ii
CD ...:.- ...,
- ....
::r ::r
cP CD
Planning Case:
Petitioner:
Address:
Request:
PLANNING CASE REPORT
City of New Hope
Meeting Date:
Report Date:
May 5, 2009
May 1, 2009
09-06
FMHC Corporation, as agent of T-Mobile Central LLC
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
Conditional use permit for personal wireless service antenna tower
I. Request
The petitioner is requesting a conditional use permit to allow a personal wireless service antenna tower
in the industrial zoning district at 5040 Winnetka Avenue North.
II. Zoning Code References
Section(s) 4-3(1)
4-20(e)(8)
4-33
Ill. Property Specifications
Zoning:
Location:
Adjacent Land Uses:
Site Area:
Plamlli1g District:
Specific Information:
Planning Case Report 09-06
General Provisions - personal wireless service antemla towers
Industrial CUP - personal wireless service antemla towers
Administration - conditional use permit
I, industrial
East side of Winnetka Avenue between 49th Avenue and CP Rail Road tracks
Industrial to the northwest, north, east and south, and R-l, R-2 and R-O to the
west and southwest.
Approximately 140,400 square feet or 3.22 acres
The site is located within Planning District 5. The Comprehensive Plan calls
for redevelopment and maintenance of the city's ill.dustrial areas. While not a
redevelopment project or true expansion project, the proposed tower will
include site maintenance includill.g new bituminous, clearill.g of brush and
removal of graffiti. The project is generally ll1 compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
The site houses office and storage facilities for Victory Packaglllg. The T-
Mobile tower is proposed for a 40' by 40' area to the east of the buildil1g lll.
the rear of the property. The area is well hidden from the street and a
majority of adjoining properties as berms around the railroad tracks and
vegetation provide screening. The leased area will be secured by barbed-wire
fencing and accessed via an access easement and utility easement. The
existing gravel drive will be replaced with bituminous as part of the project.
Page 1
5/5/09
IV. Background
T-Mobile is aggressively pursuing tower sites as demand on cell phone providers has increased as
more consumers decide to maintain cell phone-only households. This results in a greater need for
coverage inside buildings. Advanced technologies have also put increased demand on cell phone
companies for greater coverage. T-Mobile is looking to fill existing coverage gaps by constructing new
towers and co-locations on existing towers. There currently is a coverage gap between the tower at
Victory Park and the tower in Crystal that would be filled by the proposed tower.
The city and T-Mobile previously discussed a tower site at the New Hope Ice Arena, but those talks
unexpectedly fell through and the new location was later proposed. T-Mobile and their agent have
expressed that there is no interest in locating at the ice arena. An agreement between T-Mobile and
Victory Packaging will be secured.
T-Mobile has a collocation at the cell tower at 29th and Hillsboro avenues in New Hope. The building
official and Public Works department have both stated that there have been continuous issues in
dealing with T-Mobile at that site. The company has failed to secure a needed utility easement with the
property owner despite repeated requests from city staff. In addition, T-Mobile did not secure the site,
which under Federal Homeland Security requirements for water tower sites, is required. T-Mobile has
also not responded to requests to fix this issue. As such, city staff is hesitant in granting an additional
CUP for a cell tower, and is recommending a site improvement agreement be secured as part of the
project's approval.
V. Petitioner's Comments
In 2006, the usage of cell phones met and then exceeded landline phone usage and is now the primary
way Americans communicate by phone. To keep pace with the dramatic increase in consumer demand
on wireless networks in more residential areas, T-Mobile USA, Inc. is making a committed effort to
remedy and fill in areas experiencing spotty coverage, poor call clarity and dropped calls.
The expanding wireless infrastructure is vital in providing quick assistance when emergency situations
arise. To fully support the E911 system capabilities and to enhance public safety in the residential
neighborhoods and area near the Victory Packaging property, T-Mobile's engineers have selected it as
the best location option within T-Mobile's desired coverage radius.
VI. Notification
Property owners within 350 feet of the property were notified and staff has received no corrunents.
VII. Development Analysis
A. Zoning Code Criteria
Sec. 4-3(1). General Provisions - personal wireless service antenna towers
(1) Purpose and intent. The purpose of this section is to establish predictable, balanced
regulations for the siting and screening of wireless communication equipment ill order to
accommodate the growth of wireless communication systems withll1 the city while
protecting the public against any adverse impacts on the city's aesthetic resources and the
public welfare.
Planning Case Report 09-06
Page 2
5/5/09
(3) Personal wireless service antenna towers. Personal wireless service antennas erected on
an antenna tower may be allowed as a conditionally permitted use within industrial zoning
districts, provided they comply with the following standards:
a. Unless the antenna tower and land is under the same ownership, written
authorization for antenna and antenna tower erection shall be provided by the
property owner as well as the applicant.
b. All obsolete and unused antenna towers shall be removed within 12 months of
cessation of operation at the site, unless an exemption is granted by the city manager
or designate. The removal shall be the joint and several responsibility of the antenna
tower owner and land owner.
c. All antenna towers shall be in compliance with the Minnesota State Building
Code and all other applicable federal and state regulations and permits.
d. Structural design and construction plans of the antenna towers shall be in
compliance with manufacturer's specifications and shall be verified and approved by
a registered professional engineer.
e. When applicable, proposals to erect new antenna towers shall be accompanied by
any required federal state, or local agency licenses.
f. The city may authorize the use of city property for an antenna tower in
appropriately zoned districts in accordance with the procedures of the City Code.
The city shall have no obligation whatsoever to use city property for such purposes.
g. Antenna towers shall maintain a minimum setback to the nearest property line of
75 percent of tower height and a miIlirnum setback from a building in the same lot of
50 percent of tower height. The setback requirements may be reduced if the
applicant provides documentation by a registered engllleer that any collapse of the
tower will occur in a lesser distance under all foreseeable circumstances. The setback
requirements shall not be reduced below the collapse area of the tower or the
minimum setback requirements of the base zoning district, whichever is greater.
h. All antenna towers shall maintain a min.irnum separation of 1,000 feet from
existing towers at the time the conditional use permit is approved.
i. Maximum height of a two antenna array tower shall be 145 feet. A tower
providillg for three or more antenna arrays may have a maximum height of 165 feet.
j. Antenna towers shall not be artificially illuminated unless required by law or by
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to protect the public's health and safety.
k. No advertising message shall be affixed to the antemla tower. The
owner/operator of the tower shall place a sign, not to exceed two square feet, on the
fence surroundlllg the associated ground equipment. This sign shall identify the
owner of the tower and emergency and maintenance contact lluormation.
1. Antenna towers shall be painted silver or have a galvanized finish to reduce
visual impact, unless otherwise required by federal law.
Planning Case Report 09-06
Page 3
5/5/09
m. Antenna towers shall be of a color and configuration as to minimize adverse
visual effects in order that such facilities harmonize with the character and
environment of the area in which they are located.
n. A security fence eight feet in height shall be provided around the base of the
antenna tower. A locked anticlimb device shall be installed on all towers extending
12 feet above the ground.
o. Transmitting, receiving and smtching equipment, whether self-contained or
located in a. free-standing equipment building, shall be located at the base of the
antenna tower and shall be screened from view from residential uses and public
rights-of-way.
p. If a new antenna tower is to be constructed it shall be designed to accommodate
at least two antenna arrays including, but not limited to, other personal wireless
service companies, local police, fire, and ambulance companies.
q. The conditional use permit provisions of section 4-33 of this Code must also be
satisfied.
Sec. 4-20(e)(8). Industrial CUP - personal wireless service antenna towers
(e) Conditional uses, 1. The following are conditional uses in an I district: Requires a conditional
use permit based upon procedures set forth in and regulated by sections 4-30(c) and 4-33 and
performance standards set forth in section 4-3 of this Code.
(8) Personal wireless service antenna towers. Personal wireless service antenna towers in
conformance with subsection 4-3(1) of this Code.
Sec. 4-33. Administration - Conditional Use Permit.
(a) Purpose. The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide the city with a reasonable and
legally permissible degree of discretion in determiIling the suitability of certalll. designated uses
upon the general welfare, public health and safety. In maki1lg a determination to allow a
conditional use permit application, the city may consider the nature of the adjoinll1g land or
buildings, silnilar uses already in existence and located on the same premises or on other lands
close by, the effect upon traffic into and from the premises, or on any adjoiIllil.g roads, and any
other factors bearing on the general welfare, public health and safety from the approval of the
conditional use permit.
(b) Procedure. An application for a conditional use permit requires a public hearing and shall be
processed pursuant to the provisions outlined in subsection 4-30( c) of this Code.
(c) Criteria for decision. The planning commission and city council shall consider possible adverse
effects of the proposed conditional use. In determining whether to approve or deny a conditional
use permit, the city council and planni1lg commission shall find that the conditional use permit
complies with the following criteria. The burden of proof demonstratill.g compliance with the
following criteria shall be the responsibility of the applicant.
(1) Comprehensive plan. The proposed action has been considered lll. relation to the
specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official
comprehensive municipal plan of the city.
Plarming Case Report 09-06
Page 4
5/5/09
(2) Compatibility. The proposed use is compatible with adjacent present and future
anticipated land uses.
(3) Performance standards. The proposed use conforms with all applicable performance
standards contained in this Code.
(4) No depreciation in value. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the
area in which it is proposed.
(5) Zoning district criteria. In addition to the above general criteria, the proposed use meets
the criteria specified for the various zoning districts.
(8) In industrial districts (1):
a. Nuisance. Nuisance characteristics generated by the use will not have an adverse
effect upon existing and future development in adjacent areas.
b. Economic return. The use will provide an economic return to the community and
be commensurate with other industrial uses for which the property could feasibly be
used. In considering the economic return to the community, the planning
commission and city council may give weight to the sociological impact of a
proposed use, both positive and negative.
B. Development Review Team
The Development Review Team met on April 15 to review the proposal and was generally
supportive of the project but had the following comments:
a. Tower must comply with l,OOO-foot rule
b. Provide elevation/photo of equipment regarding color, cabinet, security, fencing
c. Will there be an emergency generator
d. City code requires industrial district to have parking/maneuvering/drive areas
surfaced with bituminous (gravel area may have been bituminous at one time)
e. No curbillg on site
f. Drainage swale runs through site - provide information on how the site will be
drained
g. Provide detail on finish grading
h. Provide information on tree removal/site restoration/ground cover
1. Clean up old timbers/debris on site
J. Building tagged with graffiti on east wall- must be removed
C. Design and Review Committee
The Design and Review Committee met on April 16 to review the proposal and meet with the
applicant. The Committee recommended approval with a site improvement agreement and
fill.ancial guarantee required as a result of past workiIl.g experiences with T-Mobile.
Planning Case Report 09-06
Page 5
5/5/09
D. Plan Description
1. Zoning Section
The proposed use is permitted as a conditional use permit in the industrial zoning district.
The proposal meets all of the requirements for a CUP. Please refer to memos from the
applicant and city planner for further detail on compliance with code requirements.
2. Setbacks (Building Placement)
The project meets all required setbacks, including setback required for cell towers. The
tower, proposed as 110 feet, has the following required and proposed setbacks:
I Required Setback Proposed Setback
Setback from Lot Lines - 82' 6/1 88'9/1
75% of height
Setback from Buildings on ........, ........,
:J:J :J:J
Same Lot - 50% of height
3. Circulation, Access, Traffic and Emergency Vehicle Access
A 20-foot wide access easement will be secured by T-Mobile from the property owner that
will run from the existing curb cut on Winnetka Avenue to the rear of the building along the
south property line. A turnaround area will be provided for T-Mobile trucks near the leased
area. Traffic to the tower site will be minimal - only a handful of times per month at the
most. The site has adequate access.
4. Curbing, Sidewalk and Pavement
The applicant has stated that as part of the lease agreement with the property ow-ner, the
property owner has agreed to re-pave the existing gravel drive to the south of the building.
The area had previously been paved asphalt but had deteriorated to gravel through the
years. The new bituminous will extend further east than the existing gravel as to provide a
turnaround surface for trucks servicing the leased tower area. No curbillg or sidewalk
improvements are proposed.
5. Parking
No parking is required for this improvement. T-Mobile service trucks will have adequate
space to temporarily park vehicles in the existing drive area.
6. Building
a. Elevation
The cell phone tower will be a 110' monopole with galvanized finish. The T-Mobile
antelmas will be located at 107' with potential co-locations at 95' and 83'.
b. Site Plan
The tower and equipment will be contained within the 40' by 40' leased space. An
eight-foot chain link fence with barbed wire will surround the site. The tower
Planning Case Report 09-06
Page 6
5/5/09
equipment and emergency battery will be stored in a cabinet. The leased space has
ample room for two potential co-location cabinets. The area will be access'ed by a
locked gate.
7. Landscaping and Screening
The existing vegetation will be cleared and removed. No additional plantings are proposed
or recommended. The area is well screened from adjoining properties. The base of the tower
site is not visible from the street or nearby residential properties.
8. Lighting Plan
No tower lighting is proposed nor required by Federal Aviation Administration
requirements.
9. Sound Plan
No issues related to sound are expected. The tower will have a battery powered-backup
energy supply in emergency situations. No generator is proposed. The applicant stated that
in extreme emergency situations a backup generator may be required if the battery was to
run out. If such a situation was to arise, the applicant has stated they would provide
generators within the requirements of city code.
10. Signage
The only signage proposed is identification and emergency and maintenance notification
signage as required by city code.
11. Utility Plan
A ten-foot wide utility easement will be secured by the applicant for elech'ical
improvements. The easement will run along the south property line flanking the access
easement.
12. Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control
Some grading and drainage work will be necessary for the proposed improvements. The
city engineer has reviewed the proposal and does not recognize any issues. The site drains
to a wetland area to the east. Appropriate erosion control measures need to be taken prior to
disturbance of the site.
E. Design Guideline Compliance
The New Hope Design Guidelines Compliance Checklist summarizes development
guideliIles and standards including appropriate and aesthetically pleasing architecture and
site design. Those items in the Design Guidelines have been reviewed and the proposal has
been considered ll1 compliance with the Design Guidelines.
F. Staff Considerations
Comments from the community development staff, city plaml.er, building official, city
attorney, city engineer, police department, and West Metro Fire are lllcorporated into the
report.
Planning Case Report 09-06
Page 7
5/5/09
VIII. Summary
FMHC, on behalf of T-Mobile, has made an application for a conditional use permit in the industrial
zoning district to allow for a cell phone tower at 5040 Winnetka A venue N. The applicant has
submitted a narrative and information showing the proposal is in compliance with the requirements of
the conditional use permit for this use. A 110' monopole tower will be constructed on the east end of
the property. The base of the tower and tower equipment will be screened from adjoining streets and
residential areas. The tower will have the potential to include two co-locations along with T-Mobile
antennas.
Due to past work relations vdth T-Mobile at other city cell tower sites, it is recommended that a site
improvement agreement and financial guarantee be required.
IX. Recommendation
City staff and the Design and Review Committee generally approve of the proposal and recommend
approval with the following conditions:
1. Enter into site improvement agreement and provide financial guarantee.
2. Gravel drive on south end of the property shall be replaced with bituminous surface.
3. Properly clear out timbers, plant overgrowth and debris from site.
4. Erosion control measures shall be approved by the city before any clearing activities
commence.
Attachments:
e Application
e Applicant narrative
o Property owner/occupant support letter
e PCS Broadband License
o Maps/aerial photographs
e Plans
o Planning Memorandum (April 14, 2009)
e Engllleering Memorandum (April 13, 2009)
e Application log
Planning Case Report 09-06
Page 8
5/5/09
~~ PLANNING
RECEIVED APR 10 ;2009
-
APPLlCA TJON TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL
City of New Hope, 4401 Xylon Avenue North, New Hope, MN 55428
Basic Fee Deposit
Case No. o 9-() to
Date Filed ;j/cl/o 7 0-1/ :1-.).)- q>;;O.-
Receipt No. /0 dJ 3 0
Received by ~
v
Name of Applicant: FMHC Corporation, as agent for T-Mobile Central LLC
PID 08-118-21-23-0002
Street Location of Property:
5040 Winnetka Avenue North, New Hope MN 55428
Legal Description of Property:
The North 265 feet of the West 558 feet of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 8, Township 118, Range 21, except the East 7 feet of the West 40 feet thereof,
in Hennepin County, Minnesota. TORRENS Property.
OWNER OF RECORD: Name: New Hope Partners, Limited Partnership, a Texas limited partnership
Address: 3555 Timmons Lane Suite 1400 Houston, TX 77027
Home Phone: 713-961-3299 Work Phone: 763-537-9664 Fax: 713-961-3284
Applicant's nature of Legal or Equitable Interest:
Leasehold Interest
Type of Request: (pertaining to what section of City Code)
Conditional Use Permit for a Personal Wireless Service Antenna Tower (Section 4-3 of New Hope's Zoninq Ordinance)
Please outline Description of Request: (use additional pages if necessary)
Please see the attached Proposed Use and Project Description for a full explanation of the proposed installation.
Why Should Request be Granted: T-Mobile has determined there is a need in the City of New Hope ~nrl i< working tn hrinO thR hRnRfit< nf <".mIR<<
wireless coverage and enhanced E911 capabilities to its residential neighborhoods. The addition of this site will ensure uninterrupted superior wireless service to the
surrounding residential neighborhoods and thereby provide greater competition in the wireless marketplace. See attached narative for further explanation.
(attach narrative to application form if necessary)
1-09
Applicant acknowledges that before this request can be considered and/or approved, all fees, including the
basic zoning fee and any zoning deposits (as outlined in the attached application materials) must be paid to
the city and that, if additional fees are required to cover costs incurred by the city, the city manager has the
riqht to require additional payment.
The city hereby notifies the applicant that state law requires that the development review be completed
within 60 days from the citis acceptance of this application. If the development review cannot be
completed within 60 days, regardless of the reason, the city shall extend the review completion deadline
an additional 60 days as also permitted by state law. Development review shall be completed within 120
days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant in writing. The Community
Development Department will notify you of all meetings. D \ .
~Q..w R'€ ~o.{'~~s. \-"'Y1''\. ~~ "o('...I.c~ '('$;: "",, f'
:. ""-s CA V'f. l '* '(\C. .
Signed:
eY"'-.--\:
FOR CITY USE ONLY
Evidence of Ownership Submitted:
Yes_ No_ Required_
Certified Lot Survey:
Yes_ No_ Required_
Legal Description Adequate:
Yes_ No_ Required_
Legal Ad Required:
Yes_ No_ Required_
Date of Design & Review Meeting:
Date of Planning Commission Meeting:
Approved: _ Denied:_
By Planning Commission on:
Approved: _ Denied:_
By City Council on:
Subject to the following conditions:
. RECEIVED APR 1'0 .
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
STATEMENT OF PROPOSED USE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
NEED FOR INCREASED COVERAGE IN NEW HOPE
T-Mobi1e USA is the United States operating entity ofT-Mobile International AG, the
mobile communications subsidiary of Deutsche Te1ekom AG (NYSE: DT). Deutsche Te1ekom is
one of the largest telecommunications companies in the world, with nearly 120 million customers
worldwide. T -Mobile USA's headquarters are located in Bellevue, Washington with a Minnesota
office located at 8000 W 78th St in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
In 2006, the usage of cell phones met and then exceeded landline phone usage and is now
the primary way Americans communicate by phone. One out of every eight American homes
(13.6%) had only wireless telephones during the first half of2007; that number jumped to nearly
one out of every six (15.8) during the second half of2007. To keep pace with the dramatic
increase in consumer demand on wireless networks in more residential areas, T -Mobile USA, Inc.
("T -Mobile") is making a committed effort to remedy and fill in areas experiencing spotty
coverage, poor call clarity and dropped calls.
The expanding wireless infrastructure is vital in providing quick assistance when
emergency situations arise. T-Mobi1e typically handles more than 60,000 emergency 911 calls
everyday across the country and the caller location system called Enhanced 911 ("E911") is
providing better connection between the emergency responders and distressed wireless callers.
E911 ensures that each emergency wireless call is routed to the most appropriate dispatch call
center while also providing a call-back number to the dispatcher as well as information about the
approximate location of the distressed caller. To fully support the E911 system capabilities and
to enhance public safety in the residential neighborhoods and area near the Victory Packaging
property, T -Mobile's engineers have selected it as the best location option within T -Mobile's
desired coverage radius.
T -Mobile and its affiliates have acquired licenses from the Federal Communications
Commission ("FCC") to provide personal wireless service throughout the United States. These
licenses include the City of New Hope and the remainder of the Minneapolis-St. Paul
metropolitan area, as part of an integrated nationwide network of coverage.
LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
The subject of the Conditional Use Permit application is Victory Packaging, located at
5040 Wilmetka Avenue North, New Hope, Minnesota 55428. Victory Packaging is legally
described as "The North 265feet of the West 558feet of the Southwest ~ of the North'rvest ~ of
Section 8, Township 118, Range 21, except the East 7 feet of the West 40 feet thereof, in Hennepin
County, Minnesota. TORRENS property." For the full legal description, please see the attached
Exhibit C: Victory Packaging Legal Description. According to the Land Use and Zoning Map, the
Victory Packaging property is zoned as Industrial.
Victory Packaging
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
1
D Low Density Residential
Low Density I Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
_ Commercial
_ Commercial Mixed Use
_Industrial
IlIlI Pubic & Semipublic
Parks & Recreation
Waler
Q Outside City Umits
PROPOSED TOWER
T -Mobile Central LLC is proposing to erect a one hundred ten (110) foot wireless
communications tower to enhance T-Mobile's digital network in New Hope's nearby residential
neighborhoods. The proposed tower is a monopole type tower. T-Mobile's antennas are to be
mounted on a low profile antenna mounting platform with a centerline of one hundred seven
(107) feet. The monopole is designed to structurally support the collocation of comparable
antennas for two additional carriers. Future equipment will be located below T-Mobile's
antennas with proposed antenna mounting centerlines of ninety five (95) feet and eighty three
(83) feet, to allow for sufficient separations and avoid interference. Additionally, a four (4) foot
tall lightning rod will be attached at the top of the monopole.
The monopole will be designed in accordance with the Electronic Industries Association
Standard EIA-222-F, "Structural Standard for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting
Structures." This standard is modeled after the ANSI A58.1 standard, which is now known as
ASCE-7. The monopole and location meet the setback requirements ofthe City of New Hope's
ordinance, but for further protection, the monopole is theoretically designed to collapse upon
itself in the event of an unlikely tower failure.
T-MOBILE'S ACCESSORY EQUIPMENT
T-Mobile's accessory equipment will be located on the rear side of the Victory Packaging
building and enclosed within the proposed forty (40) foot by forty (40) foot equipment compound
area with sufficient ground space for the comparable ground equipment of two additional carriers.
For security purposes, the equipment compound area will be enclosed with an eight (8) foot tall
chain link fence and three strand of barbed wire will run along the top of the fence.
TYPICAL PROCESS FOR SITE LOCATION
When T -Mobile becomes aware of a need to increase coverage in a specific area, Radio
Frequency (RF) engineers generate propagation studies to determine the location needs specific to
the area such as the required height and desired latitude and longitude. In determining site
requirements, T -Mobile's RF engineers consider the area topography, the location of existing
antenna towers, surrounding obstructions and coverage and capacity needs. RF engineers then
identify a Search Ring which is a geographic area which potential sites may be located to
effectuate the maximum amount of coverage to the desired area.
Victory Packaging
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
2
Once the Search Ring is identified, T -Mobile employs a site acquisition specialist to
locate the possible sites within the Search Ring. The site acquisition specialist first looks for
existing towers within the search ring where T -Mobile can collocate its antennas. Collocation on
an existing tower is preferred because it cuts the cost of new construction and minimizes the
number of towers in a local zoning jurisdiction. If no existing towers are available for collocation
within the Search Ring, the site acquisition specialist then looks for the best option for locating a
new tower that will satisfy the local zoning requirements and that best fits the surrounding area.
In planning for the construction of the new tower, T-Mobile's construction architects and
engineers, design a tower that will allow for future collocation of additional wireless carriers'
antennas.
SELECTION CRITERIA FOR VICTORY PACKAGING SITE
After generating a propagation study, T -Mobile's RF engineers identified the need to
improve indoor coverage within the residential and commercial areas along Winnetka Avenue. A
map of the desired coverage area for this New Hope Site can be viewed at Exhibit E: Letter from
T -Mobile's RF Engineer. The Victory Packaging property was selected for its location near the
center of the issued desired coverage area and also to meet the zoning regulations of the City of
New Hope.
T -Mobile is proposing a monopole tower designed to meet the zoning requirements and
T -Mobile's needs in a location that will minimize its visual impact to the surrounding area. The
proposed monopole and security fence are located on the rear side of the building and so the
equipment and base of the monopole are screened from Winnetka Avenue. The Victory
Packaging property and T-Mobile's site plan for the future collocation of two additional carriers,
reduces the need for additional towers in the area while also meeting T -Mobile's needs to provide
better service to residents and visitors to the community.
TYPICAL ACTIVITY AT A T-MOBILE SITE LOCATION
The proposed antenna and equipment will not be staffed on a daily basis. Upon
completion of construction, the site will require only infrequent site visits (approximately one to
four times a month). Access to the property will be via a twenty (20) foot wide access and utility
easement over the existing bituminous access road on the property. The site will be entirely self-
monitored and is connected directly to a central office where sophisticated computers will alert
personnel to equipment malfunction or breach of security. For purposes of security and safety,
the forty foot by forty foot (40' x 40') leased equipment area located on the rear side of the
building will be enclosed by an eight (8) foot chain link fence with three strands of barbed wire as
proposed in the site plan. Please see Exhibit F for the Professional Engineer Site Plans &
Elevation Drawings.
BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
The proposed facilities will be designed and constructed to meet applicable governmental
and industry safety standards. Specifically, T -Mobile will comply with all FCC and FAA rules
regarding construction requirements, technical standards, interference protection, power and
Victory Packaging
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
3
height limitations, and radio frequency standards, Any and all RF emissions are subject to the
exclusive jurisdiction of the FCC which sets and enforces very conservative, science-based RF
emission guidelines to protect public health. T -Mobile operates all its wireless facilities well
below FCC requirements.
CONCLUSION
T -Mobile looks forward to working with the City of New Hope to bring the benefits of
seamless wireless coverage and enhanced E9ll capabilities to its residential neighborhoods. The
addition of this site will ensure uninterrupted superior wireless service to the residential
neighborhoods in East Central New Hope and therefore provide greater competition in the
wireless marketplace.
Victory Packaging
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
4
RECEIVf:f1 APR 10 'Z009
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
APPLICABLE ORDINANCE
The City of New Hope's City Code specifically governs the location, height, and
construction of Communication Towers. The applicable zoning ordinance and submittal
requirements are located in the City Code and Zoning Ordinances, Section 4-3 for the City of
New Hope. Please find below in bold text, New Hope's Personal Wireless Service Antennas and
Towers Ordinance, and in italicized text, an explanation of how T-Mobile's proposed antenna
installation complies with each section of the ordinance.
Sec. 4-3. General provisions.
(I) Personal wireless service antennas and towers.
(1) Purpose and intent. The purpose ofthis section is to establish predictable,
balanced regulations for the siting and screening of wireless communication equipment in
order to accommodate the growth of wireless communication systems within the city while
protecting the public against any adverse impacts on the city's aesthetic resources and the
public welfare.
T-Mobile agrees with the goals of the City of New Hope and strives to achieve the above
objectives in constructing a successfitl tower site. Increased cell phone coverage and enhanced
digital service will provide the neighborhoods and communities in East Central New Hope with
the added protection and safety of enhanced 9-1-1 service and less dropped calls in case of
emergency situations.
(2) Personal wireless service antennas. Personal wireless service antennas erected
on an antenna support structure may be allowed as a permitted secondary use in all zoning
districts by administrative permit and provided they comply with the following standards:
T-Mobile is not proposing to locate antennas on an existing antenna support structure
and therefore standards for an administrative permit do not apply for pwposes of this
application.
(3) Personal wireless service antenna towers. Personal wireless service antennas
erected on an antenna tower may be allowed as a conditionally permitted use within
industrial zoning districts, provided they comply with the following standards:
a. Unless the antenna tower and land is under the same ownership, written
authorization for antenna and antenna tower erection shall be provided by the
property owner as well as the applicant.
Victory Packaging
5040 Winnetka A venue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
5
A letter of written authorization from the Vict01Y Packaging landlord is included as part
of this application as Exhibit G: Letter of Authorizationfrom Property Owner.
b. All obsolete and unused antenna towers shall be removed within 12
months of cessation of operation at the site, unless an exemption is granted by the
city manager or designate. The removal shall be the joint and several responsibility
ofthe antenna tower owner and land owner.
T-Mobile and the property owner are aware of the removal requirements for obsolete
and unused antenna towers and have entered into a lease agreement in which T-Mobile agrees to
be liable for the removal or cost of removal of the tower.
c. All antenna towers shall be in compliance with the Minnesota State
Building Code and all other applicable federal and state regulations and permits.
T-Mobile will fully comply with the City of New Hope's building and inspection
requirements as well as all Minnesota State Building Code construction standards and other
applicable federal and state regulations and permits.
d. Structural design and construction plans of the antenna towers shall be
in compliance with manufacturer's specifications and shall be verified and approved
by a registered professional engineer.
The site plans submitted with this application have been provided for zoning review and
approval purposes only. Upon approval of this application, T-Mobile will file for a building
permit and provide the building inspector with structural design and construction drawings
verified, approved and signed by a registered professional engineer to show compliance with
manufacturer's specifications and wind loading requirements.
e. When applicable, proposals to erect new antenna towers shall be
accompanied by any required federal state, or local agency licenses.
T-Mobile is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") to provide
personal wireless service throughout the United States and a copy ofT-Mobile 's FCC license has
been included as part of this application as Exhibit H' T-Mobile PCS Broadband License.
f. The city may authorize the use of city property for an antenna tower in
appropriately zoned districts in accordance with the procedures of the City Code.
The city shall have no obligation whatsoever to use city property for such purposes.
Victory Packaging
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
6
T-Mobile is proposing to locate the antenna tower within an industrial zoning district
and on private land, which is a permitted use with approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
Therefore the above allowance to locate an antenna tower, within appropriately zoned districts
and on City property, does not apply for purposes of this application.
g. Antenna towers shall maintain a minimum setback to the nearest
property line of 75 percent oftower height and a minimum setback from a building
in the same lot of 50 percent of tower height. The setback requirements may be
reduced if the applicant provides documentation by a registered engineer that any
collapse of the tower will occur in a lesser distance under all foreseeable
circumstances. The setback requirements shall not be reduced below the collapse
area ofthe tower or the minimum setback requirements ofthe base zoning district,
whichever is greater.
The proposed antenna tower is one hundred ten (110) feet in height and so the minimum
setback to the nearest property line is eighty-two and one half (82 0) feet. The proposed tower is
a distance of eighty-eight feet and eleven inches (88' - 11 ") from the nearest property line to the
south. The minimum allowed setbackfrom a building in the same lot isfifty-five (55) feet. The
proposed antenna tower located so that it meets the minimum setback distance from the building
offifty five (55) feet. Although the antenna tower does meet the minimum setback requirements,
the monopole structure is theoretically designed to collapse upon itself in the unlikely event of a
tower failure.
h. All antenna towers shall maintain a minimum separation of 1,000 feet
from existing towers at the time the conditional use permit is approved.
T-Mobile is not aware of any existing t01vers within a one thousand (I 000) foot radius of
the proposed tower base at the VictOlY Packaging property.
i. Maximum height of a two antenna array tower shall be 145 feet. A tower
providing for three or more antenna arrays may have a maximum height of 165
feet.
T-Mobile 's proposed tower will be designed to be structurally support a total of three
antenna arrays and the proposed height of one-hundred ten (II 0) feet does not exceed the
maximum height of one hundred sixty-five (I 65) feet as allowed for antenna towers capable of
supporting three or more antenna arrays.
j. Antenna towers shall not be artificially illuminated unless required by
law or by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to protect the public's health
and safety.
Victory Packaging
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
7
T-Mobile will comply with all Federal Aviation Administration guidelines and
requirements. No artificial illumination or strobe lights are required by the Federal Aviation
Administration in the construction of a one hundred ten (110) foot tall tower. Therefore no type
of lighting is proposed to be attached to the monopole.
k. No advertising message shall be affixed to the antenna tower. The
owner/operator ofthe tower shall place a sign, not to exceed two square feet, on the
fence surrounding the associated ground equipment. This sign shall identify the
owner of the tower and emergency and maintenance contact information.
T-Mobile will fully comply with the above restriction of advertising messages placed on
the monopole structure or the equipment fence area. No signs, pictures or messages will be
attached to the proposed tower or the security fence enclosing T-Mobile 's equipment. However,
T-Mobile will comply with the owner identification sig11age and emergency and maintenance
notification sig11age as required above. T-Mobile will also comply with any sig11age regulations
and/or requirements of the mamifacturer and Federal, State and local authorities.
I. Antenna towers shall be painted silver or have a galvanized finish to
reduce visual impact, unless othenvise required by federal law.
T-Mobile is proposing that the monopole will have a galvanized finish to reduce the need
for ongoing maintenance of the tower's finish and to reduce the visual impact of the antenna
tower. If the City feels that another color or treatment better blends into the surrounding area, T-
.Mobile will work with the City to look at alternative treatments that will accomplish the desired
color andfinish.
m. Antenna towers shall be of a color and configuration as to minimize
adverse visual effects in order that such facilities harmonize with the character and
environment ofthe area in which they are located.
T-Mobile is proposing that the monopole have a galvanizedfinish to reduce the need for
ongoing maintenance of the tower's finish and to reduce the visual impact of the antenna tower.
The tower is located in an industrially zoned district and the galvanized finish fits the character
of the surrounding environment. If the City feels that another color or treatment better blends
into the surrounding area, T-Mobile will work "vith the City to look at alternative treatments that
will accomplish the desired color andfinish.
n. A security fence eight feet in height shall be provided around the base of
the antenna tower. A locked anticlimb device shall be installed on all towers
extending 12 feet above the ground.
T-Mobile is proposing to enclose the base of the antenna tower and ground equipment
compound area within an eight (8) foot tall chain link fence and to run three strands of barbed
Victory Packaging
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope. Minnesota 55428
8
wire along the tower of the fence. To prevent climbing on the monopole, T-Mobile will not install
climbing pegs below twelve (J 2) feet. If the City requires additional anti-climb devices for
monopoles, T-Mobile will work with the City to ensure that the monopole is not climbable.
o. Transmitting, receiving and switching equipment, whether self-contained
or located in a free-standing equipment building, shall be located at the base ofthe
antenna tower and shall be screened from view from residential uses and public
rights-of-way.
T-Mobile is proposing to locate its accessOlY ground equipment cabinets within the 40' x
40 'fenced in compound area at the base of the antenna tower. The proposed location of the
equipment compound is on the rear side of the VictOlY Packaging building and will be adequately
screened from Winnetka Avenue by the building. The view of the equipmentfrom other directions
1vill be screened by the existing woods and brush located around the compound.
p. If a new antenna tower is to be constructed it shall be designed to
accommodate at least two antenna arrays including, but not limited to, other
personal wireless service companies, local police, fire, and ambulance companies.
T-Mobile is proposing to construct a new antenna tower that will be capable of
accommodating a total of three arrays of antenna panels similar to the antenna equipment that T-
Mobile is proposing to mount on the monopole. Although accommodation may not be limited to
personal wireless service antennas or emergency communications systems, before mounting
anything to the monopole it will need to pass a structural analysis to show that the monopole is
capable of supporting the wind loading of the antennas or systems.
q. The conditional use permit provisions of section 4-33 of this Code must
also be satisfied.
T-Mobile is making this application for a Conditional Use Permit before constructing the
proposed antenna tower and will also comply with the Conditional Use Permit provisions of
Section 4-33 in order to obtain the Conditional Use Permit.
(4) Commercial and public radio and television transmitting antennas, and public
utility microwave antennas and related antenna towers. Such antennas shall be considered a
conditionally permitted use within the I-I and 1-2 districts of the city and shall be subject to
the regulations and requirements of section 4-33 ofthis Code. Commercial and public radio
and television transmitting, public utility microwave antennas and antenna towers shall also
comply with the following standards:
T-A10bile is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC ') to
provide personal wireless service throughout the United States. Therefore this section of the
Victory Packaging
5040 Winnetka A venue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
9
zoning ordinance, regarding public radio and television and utility microwave antennas does not
apply for purposes of this application.
Victory Packaging
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
10
-l
~
o
9':
CD
3' 3' 3' (')
g- < g-5;
= CD ---,
~ ~ ~ ~
to coco.......
::D () (')
<D 0 0
f!!. 3 <
g- 3 ~
::I <D PJ
::::: Ci co
e?. ![ CD
-i
~
o
Q:
10
- - - -0
:::l :::I ::i ""'"'t
g- < g 0
= (!l = '"0
9: ;;r. 9: 0
::l C) ::l en
<0 co <0 <D
::0 0 Cl.
(!l 0 0
2? 3 0
~ 3 <
3. ~ CD
-. C')-,;
!!!. 0;' Ol
- to
<D
Memorandum
To:
CC:
From:
Date:
Re:
Kelly Swenseth, FMHC
Alan Roberts, RF Engineering Manager, T -Mobile USA
Joshua Mathews, Senior RF Engineer, T-Mobile USA
3/20/2009
Victory Packaging Monopole, New Hope MN (AI00759E)
I am the Senior Engineer responsible for the design and location of this proposed site. I have been
doing wireless network design for 12 years, and have planned and built hundreds of sites. It is my
intention to describe the goals and objectives of this particular location and to examine the other
possible locations we've considered in this area.
With the growth in telecommunication, the need for coverage has grown too. Most of our customers
are demanding better in-house and in-building coverage. Our drive test data, coverage analysis, and
customer complaints, and personal experience have revealed the need for coverage improvement
along Winnetka Avenue North.
Our primary objective with this site is to provide improved inbui1ding coverage in the commercial
and residential areas along Winnetka Avenue North between Highway 10 and approximately 46th
Avenue. The most important design criteria for this site, is the proximity to the target area. Due to
the substantial losses our signal incurs penetrating buildings, this new site must be within or as close
to the target area as possible.
The candidate that I've selected to pursue is a new monopole located at Victory Packaging at 5040
Winnetka Avenue North. This is located within our target area, and will fulfill all our original
design criteria. There are no existing antenna structures that would be suitable for our use.
The frequencies used by our equipment will be restricted to the bands as follows:
Transmit: PCS B block (1950 to 1964), PCS C4 Block (1980 to 1985), AWS RJ-E (2140 to 2145)
Receive: PCS B block (1870 to 1885), PCS C4 Block (1900 to 1905), A WS RJ-E (1740 to 1745)
These bands apportioned to T-Mobile by the FCC are well isolated from other bands used by public
safety communication systems. There have been no incidences of interference with public safety
systems on our existing sites, or any interference with consumer radio, television, or similar services.
April 8,2009
City of New Hope
Planning and Development Division
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE: Proposed T-Mobile Monopole
Property Owner: New Hope Partners, Limited Partners
Property Occupant: Victory Packaging, L.P.
Property: 5040 Winnetka Avenue North, New Hope MN 55428
Dear Members of the New Hope Planning and Development Division:
T-Mobile recently approached Victory Packaging, as Property Occupant and New Hope Partners
as Property Owner with a proposal to erect a 110' monopole with antennas on the rear yard of
the Property in order to improve wireless coverage in the area. As the local president of Victory
Packaging and a limited partner in the Property ownership entity - New Hope Partners, I support
T-Mobile's proposed installation.
We have reviewed and approved T-Mobile's site and building plans. New Hope Partners intends
to enter into a lease agreement with T-Mobile to allow for location of the monopole and
accessory equipment. As a representative of the ownership and occupant, I support the proposed
installation and encourage the City of New Hope to review and approve the necessary zoning
and building permits.
Sincerely,
/~~~
~e Hag~~ (f
~ ::;;
President - Minneapolis
ULS License - PCS Broadband License - KNLF224 - T -Mobile License LLC
ULS License
PCS Broadband License - KNLF224 - T-Mobile License LLC
Call Sign KNLF224 Radio Service CW - PCS Broadband
Status Active Auth Type Regular
Market
Market MTA012 - Minneapolis-St Paul Channel Block B
Submarket 29 Associated 001870.00000000-
Frequencies 001885.00000000
(MHz) 001950.00000000-
001965.00000000
Dates
Grant
Effective
07/18/2005
01/05/2008
Expiration
Cancellation
06/23/2015
Buildout Deadlines
1st
06/23/2000
2nd
06/23/2005
Notification Dates
1st
07/07/2000
2nd
OS/23/2005
Licensee
FRN
0001565449
Type
Limited Liability Company
Licensee
T-Mobile License LLC
12920 SE 38th St.
Bellevue, WA 98006
ATTN Dan Menser
P: (425)378-4000
E: dan. menser@t-mobile.com
Contact
T-Mobile License LLC
P: (425)378-4000
E: dan. menser@t-mobile.com
12920 SE 38th St.
Bellevue, WA 98006
ATTN Dan Menser
Ownership and QuaiificaUons
Radio Service Type Mobile
Regulatory Status Common Carrier Interconnected Yes
Alien Ownership
Is the applicant a foreign government or the representative of No
any foreign government?
Is the applicant an alien or the representative of an alien? No
Is the applicant a corporation organized under the laws of any No
foreign government?
Is the applicant a corporation of which more than one-fifth of No
http://wireless2. fcc. gOY IUlsApplUlsSearch/license.j sp ?licKey=8 901 &printable
Page 1 of2
8/21/2008
ULS License - PCS Broadband License - KNLF224 - T-Mobile License LLC
Page 20f2
the capital stock is owned of record or voted by aliens or their
representatives or by a foreign government or representative
thereof or by any corporation organized under the laws of a
foreign country?
Is the applicant directly or indirectly controlled by any other Yes
corporation of which more than one-fourth of the capital stock is
owned of record or voted by aliens, their representatives, or by
a foreign government or representative thereof, or by any
corporation organized under the laws of a foreign country?
If the answer to the above question is 'Yes', has the applicant
received a ruling(s) under Section 310(b)(4) of the
Communications Act with respect to the same radio service
involved in this application?
Basic Qualifications
The Applicant answered "No" to each of the Basic Qualification questions.
Tribal Land Bidding Credits
This license did not have tribal land bidding credits.
Demographics
Race
Ethnicity
Gender
http://wireless2.fcc.gov /UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=890 1 &printable
8/21/2008
I,..,., I
0430J
I _
, 5426
5420 5419 5418
5414 5413 5413 5414
~ 5406 s.ul9 5409 5410
i 5400 s.ul1 5401 54.10
z
::l Z ~
5325 en 5330 5337 5329 5336
~
5319 5324 5331 5325 533C
(J
5318 5325 5321 UJ 5324
In
UJ
5317 ::l 531B .
a
5313 5312
5309 5306
5305 5300
5301
5-120 I -';';',,1
5416 5417
5410 5411
5406 s.ul7'
5400 s.ul1
B201
5201
5147
5242 5249
5230 5243
5224
521B
5212
5206
5121
~~:!~~~ ~~g~~;:;s
~gi:~~~ ~~~~~~
5130
51ST AVE N
,../ Cl) .... U') ,.. Cl) ....
"t"'"'QQ~;;;QQ
~I~ ~,.. ,..~~
504D
~ ~~g~~g; ~
~ ~~ ~~~~:g
5000
5{JTH AVE N
B119 4965
~ .~ 4965
Cl) C>
...
iQ'
Il')
...
'l:i
0::
d
~
4
I
00
<0 ...
N C>
:Q ~
7B20
7720
7700
7620
7640
4a56 4S57
4848 4B49
4840 4841
4832 4833
4S24 4825
4816 4817
480B 4S09
. 4800 4801
--
1
4856 I 7901
4848 4849
4840 4841
4S32 4S33
4824 4825
4S16 4817
480B 4S09
4800 4801
49TH
;z
UJ
~
;z
~r-
48TH
AVEN
z
5361 5354
5355 5~
5349
5342
5343 Z 5336
5337 ~ 5330
5331
5325 < 5324
~ 5318
5319 s: 5312
5313 en
z
5307 .iij 5306
0-
5301 300
53N
5242 ~
,.
5236 .
7400
;z
UJ
~
Hennepin County Property Map Print
Page 1 of 1
Hennepin County Property Map
Tax Year: 2009
Toe data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a lice.nsed
land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only.
Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible fur any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives.
~
C/)
-l
J>
<
fit
z
9
"I"
;:;-
...~
"
~
rw",! '01'"=
'""=1' ,,~[; ,,;
r i f ~!
i ~'h
....~~
:;g~
~e~
1~I~p
:::.;l
!
nr.::l';: ~y "<
."":;.oIr~-r::">:~#'T:." ."
~,; <t r../'. ;:.1 II.". J"
~\'--'~_-:'''''li
H
~:.:.
~~
;0:4
~~
.,
;'$.
",
~~
~ e
, ' i i
;~-7' ""_'0'1'7
'1!4';;' ' ".'
aTf~-J'f //..,~" ' "~,I
"I ,ri " 1-' ,c,":::,;,,:"~"" ".i,1C~ .."." ~i(
~!' P!j~c I -,,--- -- ~ii
III " f:' ~,ti
ill .,,,1 " " i"
l U l~ -'- I "
h ,"', I j
ii" I I ! {
," "I ' "
fit I I I ,,!;!
1'.1 .. ;"1 ' , ,~
n' ' . '
~" k I " , !'
. , ." ' -I
, i II I : ,,"
"" I . I" I~ ,,' Ii
!. . I ~ . '. ~i ~ '"
, L leI.! i. "'
1H-~."'::'::1"'" I "j
n.. ., , . I "". , C1
"~I I'" "\1 '<
IU I" i'
, ,I. li I '7 --T--
ill ~:E'" ".11 i~~ ;
'I' "I." i~ ~ ,."- ,-- '
, I I'" Ii' o~"' "'~ E~' ~ ~I: -:
'I . ,"I' "~.' ,,,," >'
II " I~~~~e~' ~~ E1' ~ ~; ,-
I.i I~ I~~, :~~ ~: J~ ~i~ ~ ~,,,m i
,.1'1 ' I,,'H"~~' .0 <-' . -' ~. '
II~ I ,_, "(~ ,". I" ~ I. .,.' I
I " " I'i'!' l" ," ',;' '! ,: : ,/
1 : I ;'~el BS ll' -a~ ~<a ~~~; /.1/
I '.. 'I~," '. .,' ",' . I
1"'1",,,.'7 ~,~' ~~., -
" , 0, ,,' C' ., " I
'i"A'!! 'I I 'j;' ,
n ~,,;~ !, /'._--.0," ~) ~g !
1, ' , ' .. o~.,,~~' -" "
,is;,: ~ /l -,- "L i
. ",-" ",b., _('J" -. '..-- '
../,., 'i1' /'IIJ --.... .'
1to-'~.:i ',~ "" ' / i' -- - - i "
l'i..~!' -~'-~' ' ,
'l'i'J;+:V".~i; .",1 " ,~ i i'i
r l"al'1~"; ~.~... ., ..J, i" ' ,
!!~g~~<~;'::;~ ~~:i.; ," i IU
';\.',) .'. ....~1 sou,"'. _." .' .. ..... '." ' c ~
f' ..."'~ )',., -~',_.. ' ,"
" I 'i r!, i'IM j ,~.i
;;g ,7 l a~:!j- '-1 r
. ~ ~~. " -'. ~".,~~i : I~J\
~ ~. l~ "."~ I,
i i~ ':". ,J, ! '!~~ k'rl \
,~_~ F.~ ".-;R~ I'
..,:;,~",,! _~ l ~ 5 I" . "i'
, : \
I I
I '
V.,~.';F~~;ji:J~,~~I~:':I~~'J' __. _ _
!____J
,'.~~/r~~:'?'<J:;:,I~":.:.~~tfir::'II'[ ~
NORTH
W!f:JNETKA AVENUE
[~:-:::':;;;:;;;'~i~~'
~\r--- ~ ~
"tJ
;0
~
'"
gj
,...
-
Q
~
~
'"
32
~
[;!lQr.
l)ts~
~H~
~~~~~
~H~~
~..~~ 1
:: ~ ';:I
~
b
-
~~
~i
~~
'-
;~
:p
;~
~~
'..:"
to',:,.\::>"O,
()
,~
'-"
.,
"
, .--"
,
j ~
-i~":"
~ ~:!-
~._~~
~ ~~
.. .t.""
't
l'
~
~
"
~
,
~-
~,
~~:.:..
'/'"
(i
';.~
i
,
:,i ~-~
~:~ '";'
.;, .
I"....
r
t:
t )
~,
"
t
'--
I
".l,
.r'
~~ ,
!l,t': :~
,~ '
~~ ~'
:1'_
\;~
~~ ~
~--~~
:~~
~ml
~i
.
~
'I
~
,
1.'
~
~:
.''1
~~
~
rTli!
UlJ t ; ~ 0 " B V- Q 0
I pi ! !l ill!
Q
(0)
. <,
~~
~"
s:~
i~
~"
"~
~~
~~
~
o
~
5
~
..
~
~
~
~
o
~~
~~
,,,I.'
~~
~~
a~
~~
~
~;;,
~~
e~
q
;>J
m
<
in
i5
2
'"
"'
C
'"
<
m
-<
-n
o
'"
II>
C
:n
<
m
-<
-n
o
'"
ji
~
@
~
rr,
~
~
~
o
e
;,jj
~:
, ,
~ ,
J.~
:::; :;. ~
p,. ~ ~
.~ j ~
!~ ~ ~
....:.0. .. s:l
~! ~ :
~'. , ~
~: ! ~
~[ ~ ~
~~ ~ ~
;;l 1 ~
.~ ~ 3
i2 i ~
~j ~ ~
~H !
~" $
".~ ~
n ~
~! =;
?.;: ~
~~ ~
~~.
H
'"
.
!
,
..
,/ !
~rlX;"'lIJr"'j'I"",n:nCT~,",,,!l.JoI'f'~4i,"
~ "'If "?,NJIIf.# W,II~" ':l' !I:(: II :.,. '10'1 Pi7 JI
~Q1 ~~;'l e~!'I "'" ~~i. k r" ,..~ ~ fil :;:;g [p.:
S9 Ea3'l X'1"S' Sf 8!!~ ~ ,,~ ~~~: ~"~l !~~ ~:~
-.. aot.; it : ~ g,~. 2 lt~ -:;.Il '\?" _ _ < l...~
~~ :~l 'l'! j n' ~ ~~ ~~.t'f'\h'!b-!l:,.A~
ii s.j -~li "} n~ : l'.~',t~. I;; -'.;.~~
I ~ "ll L J : k~ll.f!<r~;.t'i''"'~1'''':'
... ...-" 11:-.. - ,Q,- <;;~./.... r: ~ ,-.. ._
i. l>~ S,. ' ~[ 2>,-,-..1. I !"",.'-'-'4,,-
~~ ~~! l~~ 1 tF! ~~ Jr l~~t1~~ \.1~~
j! te[ h! ;;i! ~~,::,,~ cl;',::~! ~~j ~
.. t~' ." > ~,! :"'~:' r'[i51) ijA ,=
~ .~~ ;! '1 I ~:' f;..t"" ", i -' ['1'1 :-'1':;:
, ~'!~~! ~ ~i!: ~~;;!!\. '..'. '-~ h/',~~:,-
'i <;- Ii I!',":- J ...~;! Ii ~~.f'" t_ ""S ~,::-
, I" l-~ I 'il' - "':ty,i.... A' b'
~ -;i 'J.~~ I ~...~ &' ~_~.;..K.,~,J ~~..~..,,"~,. ~~ ,,,;t:i
:r ~\~ ~~! ~l f to: /f,~..., f~!~:t2 t:1,\"Va;:
l ~~i ~ [ .. f~~ ~ r~ 1.'([ ,ul~~"I,~:if~' ~f
:t t3" :'r ~ !Slf ~;;~ i. ,.~H~lj' r\ ~,.
~ ~~~ ~~ ~ q!'! ; g~ l;\ j;isi II Ol~ ~J
~ !~~ ~~" ~l] =- ~~ ~ ~;ii:. t ::3:
~ ;~~ ~~! ~:~ i rl ~ H~t i ~~
~ !;rr. ~~ ~~ ~ t~ } ii:~~. ~ l;
* al ~ ! ~ ~~ ~ ~ ;. i~~~~! r ~~
;' HI ~ ~ ~l , n~:. I ~ ~~
; ~;! ~ a ~~ : I ~r~;;' 1 ~ t.~
~ ~t~!= !~ I t~rj ~ ~!
~ l~~} 5a;e ~ ~"
~ ~~ ~~ '"a ~ ~ ..;
~ ~:: ~ ~ ;; s & ~ ~~
"...~ ~Q ~ ::"~
~:
"
~.
~i
'1
n
'-'
i ·
ii
i;
-.
~
~
f
I
t
l"
!
I
!
1
..
i.
W
t
r
!!rr~~~ tl~; ~:[p
FI,h h8~ ~ m
J!;ilZ ; ;~~ ~ ;~~
"lh' ~"'~ I' 'il
fii'.' ~ii H.~~ i ~~
;;;~~ ~~1! 't~~
'~:i' ,'R '.
h~' I Flu .~
Il_~" I'" .~
'l'i1l fP= ,.
~,~~.~ ._1. 15 ~"
,.'!-' >'~ i< 'or
wI-' ~4" ~1!..~ b~
ijR I" ,_, !,~
'i'Ri~~ ft, ',I
;:.,g i~! l.
!J~m ,Ia (3
~:i3~~~ f~: ;~
!-!"e.ll:' ~~~ H3
;~i!l~~ H; j1
:~~;;lt~ }~s. _~
1"'~e.<t9 ':~'~ p::~
l-':c-~Il: ..;:;t; QI!
. f~l ~~ ~;.~ ~~
:~:~8 If> =~
2o~i\i";:. ~ i~ _;
a~~!~ ~~2 ~it
~ ~~~~ ~~! !;
..~S"..." ;rt... ,~
g~![~ ;-'~ i?
r'~! i; If:f !!
~r~~5 -~~- l~
I
I~ i1
,
.
~
I ~
;:
~ ~
. ~
l
~
r:;
i
~
c.~b.t
~;~l
:i~l
i~~~:
; :~i
U'
d]
HI
~~~
!.~;,
o~ \
,.i
~i~
;:!)"
H!
i:~l
oi!1';
i~~
~...~
Pt3
. '.
~~~
~~~
.>,
~1';-
~~~
.' N,"P'~
g;;~. g~~'3.ij
~~~ir;.f ~S:;i>'~"~
l3i: ~~! ~ a t ~~~z
il~;~:; 3g;~h';
.R.,... .'..."
~~~.~I n,!~"
IitllS3;: ~~~"O::7:i-
".a., '~t;,~,
:a~n: ~~.,~la
l~;~~; ~[a !~~H
i~~",c3 ~O~C...3l\
~:;'l' tl.. "~":;!'
.~.~ is ii~~^h,.
ll';tB",! It '....~3!')!:
~~e~~~ ~;~~~~~
l::.sir>~ ....;~t .
~i[~a ~~~fl~!!
~~~ rt r~~ i ~}~
~~:: t.; ~sj .J;;>~
fo; ~ lit::!:J g .,....i::s:
:-~l}it.;;; a:2 'I ~~~~
~:iB i~[~~~~
!'~~i[ ;i~!,~:s
~~!5~ \1~lAS:~!2.
~f~ i~ i~~ - ~tl
~!:~l ~~;h'!
~~;;2" ..~ 1l rl...
~~.ir; ~;~!~l
~2Q;i -~~B~
Is",. ~~r.'-
i Q it ~;..
, Q
~~~ U'~ n'
;~qi ;J~ ~i
:il' i ~~ -; t
H' ~8~ j~
~:~ ~!; t
f;'~ ~~J i~
'i~: ~~~ d
:1" d. "I
~;; 1 04 ~!j ~
;'1" (", ~.
.:~! .1~ ~.
c:l:r llo "i "'I;
s~e ,~. ~.
:--;3 ..l9 :>i
b:-l~ ~: ~t
l'.!~ h ,1
?;: il~:
!~! !!~!
H ~ i~ ~.
~~! i ~ i
~;~ 2! ~
ri~ ~~ ~
~"i i~ ~
~~
~:
e=
"
"
,0
-,
~::
f~
~r.
:i~
~^
~i
j1
~
@
r:::
r,.,
~
:b:
....
~
>J
~~~
~ ;}~
ci']l~
~~~
~'i
"
:n
o
Z c.n rR
co 0 :n
:E i5 ~
6=:; g
'tl -. 0
J' S ~
a: ~ j;}
5' Co!
::11>
" <
'" <:>
0::1
~c:
'" co
OlZ
~o
"'::!.
",::r
~
I ;;
~~",,~~?1
i.~~~~~
~~~~:7,g
~~~ti:re.
....Duol;;!3'Q
~ ~~ ~~ &'
_heo.9.;-
J~~~~i
~ ~
,
:2
-
.
8
11
R
III
II
1.
Cl
,."
Z
,."
'"
,.
r-
Z
o
-i
,."
Ul
v
!> !" , :'"
~!~~~g~ ~~~~~ g5~~ ~~~~~
~'" ~-8 ~.a~2 ~~"8 a"~'8
a:~F~l;I~= ~:;:;r:= . $~= g~fia=
?~%~~~5 . em ~i!~5 .~;;'5
~mi; ili; ~m ~i:~;
~~~~~~ ~~~g ~;~~ ~~~~~
! i!i!! II!! I Ii! i~!!
",g~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ :"~~~i
~~M M' ~ q..
?
mEi~
m~1i
:m~
",;:;~. ~
~~~~;
8Eg~a
-;/:':<(5
~~~~~
n<:~OM
I!~i;
~g~
III .
~ t:i ;::?!" po;-<
i m: ;!i~; m ili m;!i m
~ ~~~~ ~~~~5 ~.~ ~;fi g~~~~~ :~~
~ ~~=g . ""n" a~~ 'M" ~~~~~M Alig
~ ~;i~ ~~~~. ~i ~~~ ~I~~~; ~~~
~ g5g 2~;:1: ~~ ~~~ ~~F~~~ ~~~
~ =~?i ~l:~~ ~E -=::a s=~'2~E: or~
~ m m~ ~~ ;!~ i;~lij m
!O 00< 8g0' "M =M ~""'"-r
; i~j ;~Ij Ii i~ t~~ H
ff
.......oS tS
s:ii ~
i~~~ ~
"8a~ Ii
~m ;
1m;
~~: '
i~i
;
i
,
i
'"
i
~
~
1l
~
6
~
:~~;Iii
i~o~~ag
"~~3..
. 5~~~g~
~~:;;I=aa
.~~~~~
~~::=Q;:
~Og~":
mm
g~~:~~
~~;I;~
~g p
~ fi
~:~~~~~ ~~~
~:!~~.~ illS,
~;~~a~~ ~~~
~:.%~~~ k
~M~8"0~ ~..
"'F50~:i.... a1V"'
g.~il.~~ ~~~
~~~g~~?l ~gg
~~:i;;! ~~~
~oliaa> ~"
"gm .~
:g;gB~ g~
~~;~~~ ~~
~ So .
-0
n
o
o
,."
Ul
,.
Z
o
Ul
-t
,.
Z
o
,.
'"
o
Ul
~~~~~::::~~~~~ ~~
~s$M~~R~88~~5~ ~a
";mmj~ii~~ ~~
~~~~~~~~~~~g~~ e~
g>~gBa~E~~~3a~ ~;
~g~~~B~g~~i=~8 ~E
~~~~~~~~~~~~~S Og
~~~~Sg~~~E8~3e ~~
IE!irmrii: i~
5-=-i nCg g ~ ~
Ii r "~ I
r-
,."
Cl
,."
Z
o
m~I.-
. -I
i ~
13 ~
~ 0 S
G ~
>
'"
~~I>
i~ *
~: !
~ ~i
g~ I~
;;oS;
g:
.R
~~
I!
Qj
I I QI.[i,
'~\N~~~ i
[ T "
[ T f.
[ ;
iI
,
F
f+
r "1
o
cr
~.
t Ai
(D
Ul
n
o
-0
,."
o
-"
Ul
c:
-0
-0
!:{
.
@
><
i"i1'i
,0
~2
85
ri~
~:
~~
~G
'M
~;
~~
0"
;~
>,
~~
n
g~
a~
o.
ij
Ii.
;~
~6
~~
.
!
~nu ~ ~n~ ~
.~~~" ~ g~q 9
~ ~ ~ ~"~
E ~ ~ ~
.. "" ;;'l
< ,.;
n .
9 0
~ ~
gl8 " 8 818/"/88 ;/;1; ; ; ;/;1;1 ;1; 2
~~I~B~U~HHH~ H~
ggggg~ggr:;~~~~~~j; ~~;
SIIIUIPIU n Iln nl~ I p n
"aaa~a~~LnnLoLa
=::0==::0==,.=:::',.__:::':1:1;:;==_ !:f
1< ~ . . , . . . . n , < 8 ~ 0 2 20 -
IS 9 g ii! 1i ~ S" p i;: g ~ ~ ~ ... ~ ~ ;, .. i3 _
II' . d " ~ n g n ~ ~ ~ ~ " ii ~ ~
" ~ ""<Cg OM %OOOd
S? a ~~~~..B~r. 5$~;!!i!
a ~ g~~~~:. ~~~ i!
~ > ~3~gs~ ~~~
i a ~a"'~~':::' ~~=
II~!~ Gg
, (:::l
I~ 818 8 8 8/8 8 8 ; ; ;1;1; ; ; ; 8 ;
I~ i i ~ ~ ~ i ~ i ~ ~ i i ~ ~ i i ~ i
06006000 ~i"1i"1r:;j:;...,..0i"'r
=="'''':::0''''''''' ;#
al~lglglg ~Ialala g a al81alalalalgla
"@p~HP~p3~~@~n
a ~MaMafi__~~MM~M_M
;#ggg",g;;:aggggggggggg
-
"
~
o
~
~
;::
%
<
"
'!
.
~
~
i!
";' . '1"1'1="
Pi ~ ;: rSi:i~ g
"~ ~ gd~ ~
g ! P ~ ~
" . ~ (j
,.. ~ ~
~. ~
c ~ '"
~. ~
~ ~
~
~
.
~
g
~
gl 8181 8181 81 al81 21 8181;\ ;\'1;\;\;1;\ ;181;
~~U~~~UiPBqH~i~
ggggfJgggggFt"''''~i'''rF:F::f::gM
slll!IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!III!I!I!I!I!I!III!
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !I~I~I~I n
'.~ ~ g ~.~~ ,,"
~ ~ ~ d" n
~ >- a~::; ~!:'l
; ~ ~ ~ ~j
s ! ~ g ~~
i ~ G I
$18181818181818\;1;1;1;1 ;1;1;1;1;\;
e:=:=:=::::::3==~~l::l::l::l::!:;!:;l::l::
~~~~~qh~nn~@~@
g~ggggg ,.....,.,1"1...,.,):;. f:i
alai 8 lill al~ I ~I ~I ~Ial a I ~I ill al a I alill Ii
""iM'_M~_~'MM"~_M
LUI~~~~llIlIgn
-
.
!l
~
.1:::=
%in
:~~
~~"
!!~~-
~~~
-;
-0 '
Ii
~~~
~g~
~~~
~~
e;.>
~
~
::::
-0
'"
2
,."
n
-i
-i
,."
,.
;::
g~~~
~~~~~
~~5 ~
:;~ ~
~~. ~
.a~
i
~,~~
~i~ ~
ii>6l'l
5>"
i~~
.~~
!
~
>V
~
;
-",- ~
:!:~
~.' i'i
~~~ -
"'>-;!i
~~~
%
;1
~
I.
II
n!ii
p~
p~
all
~
"
II i
~;. i~
~~
H
gh
~~
gg
I
I
!
jj
Ul
::;
,."
o
;;;
,."
n
-t
o
Z
Ul
.8;:~
ia~~
(j-"
~g:~
~;...~
~;~
i5~~
~~~
Q3a
~a~
~~:
~~~
~i.
?~~
f'
:~
~I
.-c::uc:o~~
j~~~~
~8~~~
3 _'1:1
.... !!l::l::';
" ~~~
a~
~
!~
"
;
()
o
U
I
I'l
:::0
Ul
~
I'l
o
Z
rr1
(")
}>
r
r
~~
an
F.
;:~
:~
~:;
tt~
~~
o
'"
,.
::E
Z
Cl
Z
o
,."
X
0000
~,.,....",
--'2
~i;~
~~~i
h ~
g~ ~
. .
a 6
a .
~ ~
:: I!
~ ts
~ G
I.'I....~ .... III "" ., '" ... '" '" '" ~ !:1 ~"'lII~~'" '" !:']:1
H~ H H H H ~ ~ HUm n~
g 00 0 = gOO 0 0 6 ~ 0 0 gggOgO 0 gg
! ~N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ gea~i~ ~ ~I
,,22 """"""""""" 222222 " ,,~
l II I I I 1 I I l I I I I 1IIIIl 1 I
"j1l!i~!1;:;I;'l~~~ ~E ~"':lE8~8~s~"'E~E!;1!1!l1E!!l !:1~~~"!1"~
~~;;~~UR~~~ 1j~ ~~.'h~G~~-ii- R~R_Bu~"~"_
~~,,~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~Mh~~mmm~~~
~gg" .~s.." ~:hj~.8 "~a.a.~S~."M"~~"~"
~~~.~ .~.~~~ ~~~G3G~ a~i13~.e.~~gh:~~~~
"ij~~ il.il.) ".~~~~~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ~,~"p~~~
09$1; ~"'g"''''~ f- =<;:J"'~- F a - .. BfiFI;'l~~ - =<
~g~~ ~M~~ m"H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i~n~ I ~
. , ...._ e . R R " , . . .g'" M n
~ B~ ~l!!~~_l:: ::; !:; :! ::! ~ ~ :II! f! ~S?~~p~~ 3 :1
" h M%'%'8 " a " " ~ ~ s , "0"" ~ >
~ ~~ ~~,,~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~~. 2 ~ ~
3 ;:;'" ~ ~ a g ~ ~ ~ 0 g ~ a l5 ~ ~
~a~:a:~~ ~- ti
a ~.
8
El
El
~~
~ 0
~cr
Ui 1-1 0
;:: i-==l
~ (D
R II
..., .
~m~~~~~~
~g~;~~~;;"
. ~S"~!ll~a;;;~
~~ga5~~~~
~o.g...~~
~!llA~S:~O;;!';;
~~~~g~~;~
:~a~~=8~~
~~;,~~~~~~
.""~~~, .
.~?'!~al~
:8...~:>OH'" la
_?~6.'" =
"~g~~S;~~~
i 2 G"
~ I f ".-
! II ~~J
E 1::1:..
~ !!;!
o i~:~
g ~r;.:
1 !i ~H:
! r' ....,
I · 1m
! ~ I~ "'~
. !! - .'l'
. ~ H'
~ ~ l::>1
~ I I I\d !
o I ' ,~, ,
'. il
o
i" i
, ,
El
j~~~~
~8a~r;
~ ;;,~
~ 5i~i.~
~~
5,;
J:;;
,.
OJ
OJ
'"
,."
<
~
o
z
Ul
s ~~~~~~~ ~g ~~~~iP~ ~J~~~ ~~I~~~P~~ ~
i!@ ~ ~ ~~i s~~~ 8gg~a ~~g e~~8~12 ega~ ~ ~
~~a~i~~i~~"'~~~~~ :~~g~~~~~~~g=~~
g~8 Sa a :sz}l = g~'" ~~ a
"'5 1:: z
i ~. < C ~ Op"~' ~~', e% 5 c~ ~ ~". nn n~ ><:.. >
a ~ ~ c Wi~ -"'fj"'" >- _2C~= ii1(>C...
" ~~~I!~m m~m~mm~~n
go J!i1 d<'b. :4 ::I!:;~~'" "0'"
ij ~; ~ ~"~ ~Q~ S~ii~" !~~~~!"
g ,~ 5 ~ !'; s~i'~g~
i ~ .. ~ g. .~;
· 11 ~ ~i ~
. ~- '"
s
~-
~'~~~;;~F~~~~
gaa~""...
on "I'"
~s:~ gg ..~
o "'."n 0
... ~ i~
.-
'I
. -
<:
~
"ll Z
:0 m
E :E
m ::t
o 0
-< "ll
- m
~>s
. .0
"0-<
"''''0
m"':o
z"'",
m "tl
:0 ,.
" 0
... '"
z ,.
o '"
.... -
rn 25
--
~
~
o
zO
!i1,;
z
a~
~s
~~
Zz
me
iSM
~~
.111
s"
S
,.
o
...
'"
'"
j
:1
I Q
I, I
= ~
o e
19 n I
I~ ., "
l~ :~ ~
Ii g~ ,..
!" ;y! <
L",,,,,,.,,,, "1"""
WINNETKA AVENUE NORTH
r-.--'-------~~~~~------ ____J,
I ~ ; I I
! - I !
'.: r~., - - ----L.....:
,~ I ,
D=="''''''~'' A I
d1 t\
\':' Q Q [
~ ~ ~ I
()".. ~ ~ ~ !
u~ ~ ~ ~ :
E~tJ ~ a 9
....~ 5 B E
, , ,
N ~ 0
I
I
I
I
I
I
~Q I
~;; I
!\i~ I
d ~
~o !~
.';) I~
g l~
~ I;
~ I~
~ I'
. I
I
I
I
o I
g I
/ " I
\ ~ I
",' I .
) \, I ~ ·
.~ \ \ I . ~6~ i
~\ \, 1~ ~
\ '\ 1- = .
\.. .
........~ "'-4\_-
~- -, I
..... ! ) s--" I
! \ g"f ;;q~ " I
r.8'-1'. ~~s 6~""" I
\ I \ I _ _ J $~~ ";;,, I
",I \" ~ / i ~~r--. I
'-"'I r.: Q / " . . I . I
II \ ~;;,~ '\'>. ~Ig a ~ 0 I
II \ ~iU \ >g8 I
1/1 ~ = I '\ ~u ~ ~ I
,II \ ,\ I
~-1------~~~-1----1------'~-~
v
(J1
UJ
-4
~
r'1
Z
C
r'1
Z
o
;;:;
:2
'/~'
,
01
:i
:;1
~I
~
~i
,
O:~: RiO.i CF .....1' 4"'0: J
----------
,,..
~
::::;
!tn
!;;j
~~i~
~
.
5
i
g
!l
~
~
m
8
m
m
~
o
cT
..... e
p..oo-I
(D
m.
1
!
I~
.
1
::-
9
:il
!l
m!
!3i~
~;"i!
~i~~
Jill
il;
H1
Ii
-Is
~
z
m
::;
:l:
o
"
m
~>~
~o~
"..,0
'-"'Jl
>.." <
z "
::-
(")
'"
::-
"
Z
"
Ii
f'
In
;
'1
1
~
o
zO
!i!~
",z
0'1
~s
~I
~M
o
>~
~.
:--
~
;;:
z
Z
t'l
>
'"
o
t""'
Ui
;;:
>
;;:l
:01
t'l
...,
. .
."
il
'l[
.1 I J.
II
,,..
~
"
i
i
g
;;
~
f1-
~~
~a
~ff
~tJ
~
~
~
~
~
.Ii!
'"",
"
"'-,
''"'',
'""
~
~8~
~'=
itJ
------'"ll
T:-m~~---1:(l '
/ : Xl
n, : I'
it ! "II:
, . ,
: : I'
f ,,'-,' : "
, ,
, , "
L__________________J ! :
~ ~ XI
, ~nf i f I,
~~T' c~g =0 O~ Xl
.'8 ~? "'F II
~~~ g~~ B~::~~
/ ~~~ ~8~;~ ",
J nM., -.~.= I'
(:I V g=,,:oo~
" _MOM_ ,
,... ~
~. r----:i---:-------n--1 :
, e.' 'I
I i~ g I X
.....! ~~ ~~ ! I,
---------l g~S: ~2 ~~ : I
: ~~~: a~ ~~ rs... 1 xII
r---,..---'l ~ r \:!g 65 I
:212~ ~'" ~~ 1 I
I -= 1 ~ II I l:;~ gV 1 Xl
t---t---o, , == 'II
I i; --.J l
, , ,
__________..l I I Xl
_+-~_1~~~-+_~----:m-:-h-~~---JJ '
- - --- - - - -- - _ __ _ _ __ ___ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ JJ
('d~
It!
-,
"'"
e ,
_=_J
.e
,,~
8M
~~
~~
~\
~~~
~r;l$
;Ig
So-
~~~
~~~
M
'"
t>
[3
M
~
,,~
~r
~
..
9
"
"
~
I
Ifl
N
h
n
n
!
I
I!I
~
I!I
I!I
~
o
~
10=1 0
F===d
(D
Ill.
!~!
!l'~
!l,1I"'s:
1~1.
!iii
.,..'1
1m:
~g-<i'
2.1!'i'
i}:
;f!
!i
f'
Ii
j
.
;::
z
Z
t"'l
>
'tl
o
r:-'
Ui
;::
>
;0
?':
t"'l
>-3
T-W3U: Zi'-c"
4e'-{I"1I';;)i;I.V.S<:NO
,-......
~~~
fg~
dQ
..~
>;;.~
~u
1
!
I~
~
~l>
=:
Ii
~
z
m
:;:
m :t
Z 0
> ril
:n '
",.<
m.....5
co-<
~~~
" "
... ,.
,. n
z '"
,.
Cl
Z
Cl
~
\1
zO
>1~
zz
on
~~
~~
Zn
Zz
nc
~n
o
>~
z
--
~
. i!
0"
il
I
,."
o
....
"'
"'
"
N
,
~m,.,.~ '~pJI!JJqljl.~III~llllljl~llllllI~Jlll "0'11 ~ I I I II 11 J l,i 1,1 [_I I.! :J"a"!i I ! ! I j I I 1 ! ~ J ~
)> I .. v ~ 1 Q
I I I -I. I
I I I ~ ~ llQ"-a-'ltPo:r-wcar.;::~NdfC>'Cl'"1'-wcau:;.o.1"Oi."l.I.S I
'" 1C7'-:;' ~......~ or T-WCOU:: ""'1"01"5" ~ ! co
9 ~'-o. ~ CF 11.:n;;;:r CO-lOCArol: .....nx'V.S I
l!J'-O" COiTU'L"<! cr n..~ c:l-l.CC\itR.....-rp.,vs !
~ i
~ ~ --, '
~ c ~~S , I
i ~g~ L-.., i ~,
l 21> ~i'j I g~ 5
g ~~=~-:ru' , .'. ~~ ~.~ r-
'" =--- II . ". 1i~
> """-.......' !1+ ~. -~
~ -~IRll' - \ ~.
p _--JI :,1 . l
I I'" ~"S~lb - -ill r-m' em-' =
. ~!O' .~ ~~r----"He- ! ! 1 !
1111111111 1".11 ]0 "~J-~--'-' 1...,...'.,...1,,'.... ' " ' , , '..'
~I\ \ 1\ j I Z ""br:"",?, A ! ! ! ! I '
1\ ~ \ ~! ] I ~--j l__j ~ >7
I I 8 ~~ _ , t I _( ~~
I '~I II'.' i~~ 5 ~ I ~ H "~
I I I ~ ! 8::~ " ' I il ~~ q~
~ r ~~~ Q. 21 ~ qs ~ -
I II r---- g': " ~ i ~ \1
i !i! i , i ii' .
I
B ~~~ i
m ~~~ i
8 -~ g~~ ~ I
_ '.0 5 '
... 1""1 E!r:;!~ :': _:
z ~.::... ""... ., Ii
III ~ r-~7-----." ~ " ~;d I ~_-
:::0 ~....__~..._........ ~
III ""<r-~-...,-1~. nO" I ".
~ '" ~----.---J I n 05" ~,.
~ ~ i:~" I S ~ j" !~~
:: r- I""~:'=~:::;::'=":'....c gg~ ! .: ...;; 6 6'E~
Z . "<.~.~] -, L~"n I Ii ~,,-."
Z. ~ L .:;-- ':'7___ ;;j~ - ~ ~ i 9 ~~ ~~ ~~~
t"l 0 0 J ,? · g ~~"" Ea"
> '" z ;;j~ n' & r: := ~;;; ~ ~ ~ '"
~ ~ Jg (5 5 .:: S; '2;$
ocr" "-~-'"--"". - ... - ",,) c-'
.. c'--.--""~11 - _Ii" · ' /
t" - ""'"'~-"'-l" s "" . ~
: ~ ~ ----~~~~ " -.:::--~-=- ~= ,I' - r!
f; C'D ~ ,~=5-~'t:i g III ~ \ 'I I I~ ~
~ ~~ r-~-.,----.-f1, , II i + ' I
. t"l II ~ ,,"'-';:::===~:;' e '. ~
.. ~. ~ LS~_'...:..''::=.;::'''- I ! I .....
;;~gi~m.~ "'..\ I I~ ')
~~~;~~~S~8 "1 I
~~~~.-'g~= '; iF ~ "..c II
~C,.."'~~ '"'a ~$: "05 $1
a~;:i~;~~ ~~ g~ _ ~ .. ~~ '" ~~
(!C~!~e:~g \:is ~~ j~~ 6 ! ...'\, ~~ ...
::~;g~~:~ ~~ aR a~~ ~ f" ~E ~ : ~~ ~;
~a~I~!~~s ;:;~ ~~( ag~&ag~ : ~; ~
~o"'8S~~" ;; as" ".~.~. I " .
! =921;;',;: ~ 3~~ ;!{ll:(~;~ I ~
ai"""~g~~ I ~~~ ~~U"~ .
;;;~~~i~,;~~ \ a~~ o6~:~" I
.-<-~:;oi.e '" ~li~d58 'I
E ~g~~" ;l~ ~~ ~:i=i:~~
! G ~ ~~~~S.: ' ~: _~~ -I"' -I" - ~ l-
i I f ...- n _~o" ~ I F,~OoJ
S ~~f g~.~8~ ;;~~.~ ". ~ . ~ "
E iL:~ ~;~aa ~F;~~a ~ - ;; ~ ....
. I fjH ~E;~8 ,,:~~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ "
: II'::: ...~g!:1~ ~ I !f~"'t1~ ~ ~ ~ 1i ~ ~ ~
o i~i [ ~~~!i:~ ~ III ~~ E;~ ~o ~c i j ~c i ~ :::J
:5 ...-::~~ 8i!:i~i's:: a ~'"l ~:) ":::!... 0 ...
o 2:r",,!- 8~"~2 - !! ~~ i i ~ ~
1 Ii a~: ~a~~" i" 8~ 9 ; 0 0 ~ ~ <!
! I' .".1. %~-B" I" ~9 " " '" >!
j'~f-f D~ ~... :4 i:1=i ~ 6 8 B B E in
I I~ I~ '!~!? ~ ;1 :: : : : : ~~
. ~ tfi i ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~~
~ :::! !"'~ -! ~=
a !1 II !' I ! li-
ol;~g~~
:~ 5 fJ ~ :1:: I~ ~ ~
, 'I ' , I I - ." " ~ ;; ~ I ~ ~ Ii ~ ~
;I 01 01.( 01 ... II - @~ f'l j:l .,. ~3 f'l?'" 6~ ...~~ ~ ~ .. ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ::l
... ... a n...:;:l ... ~ ... .... 3 .. ~ ... 6 ~
<: >" ,J .5~o~ .. .~~ ~. ~~.~~ _: ~ ~ ~ ;; ~ ~ N
5 8 il;; ,," ~S ~o R~~" ". 8~og 8: a ~ 5 J, a J,
~ ~ ~ 8 .: ~ ~~ t! 6~e'" ~~ t!~Sl ~< . ss~~ _~: $: ~ E: ~ $: ~ ~ 3
C " n le ~ n ~ ,~ .~- i a ."~.n ~"-" ~., J ". i: c
~ · g.. = '" . . ~u 11' .~; %~ 0;= -~ ~~g5 ~~" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ il ~"" ~
7 ~ :'l ffi II ~". ~~ s ~t~ ~~ a ~ ~o lio~~ ':~!' .. ~
a 0 m =< 0 .. _ 0=" ". . ".- .go. ",~. I I I ~
a -;; g Z :t I -Ill~ ~ z ~ ~; ~ Ii' ~ .~ ~ ~ gJ ~"::i. ~15~' q q G q q q ! ~
. $ ZO ~ 0 ~ IBli' 0 '~li ~~ ~ i ~ ~~ g ~ ~= .~~: ~~~!.. "n ~
a li!l1'" Z ;ll II-g ill I ='.lic~oacOn ag~ ~~ g: lil'i' II ,I, ~ g
~ :1: ~ CS I ~ ~ ~ ~ q ~ "; ?i ~ ~ ~g ~ ~E ~~~8 ~C? d: g li a :: e :: ~ ~ >1 ~ ~ ~ 11: a ~ i! c = ~ ~ -
;~:J ~ ~ 5 . ~ r--f--! f;:; ~!:l~!g ~~ 8~1~ ;:;~ E: @ a
::: !" l' -< 0 -< ~ I ~ >! ~ I ~ ~ ~~ <.'. d ~.ii ==~. ,I r - -1-1-1- -1-1- - -1-1- - -1- - . ~ ~
c ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ . in ~ ~ ~e g a ~ I"' ~ ~~~l;l ;- ~ I t; ~ t;. ~ ~ t; ~ ~ ~ ~ t; ~ ~ t; ~ t; t; ~. ~ ~
~ ~ ~~ !ll ~ I, I~ , IP i~ n I ~ ~!~! i ~I~I~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ q "
~ - ;: 5 ill S;l 2 2 ~u "< 8 ;; 5~~~ J' S !l 0.' I
;;;J m ,.... := ~o Gl J'l ............ 0 =:5 0 a ...
;: ;; ~ "~~3 n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;; ~ a 8 ~ ~ ~" g
--. g 5 Hn~'IHn~HaHo g
....~ z -< -< -< -< -< -< ,..
1-- AJII;:I.C;::I...e:IQI.D:
~.em:l:
..'llln_____l :..---J ..'___ _1 ~ i=
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners@nacplanning.com
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Curtis Jacobsen
FROM:
Alan Brixius
DATE:
April 14, 2009
RE:
New Hope - T Mobile Tower at 5040 Winnetka Avenue
FILE NO:
131.01 - 09.04
BACKGROUND
FMHC Corporation (the applicant) and New Hope Partner (property owner) are
requesting a conditional use permit to place a personal wireless service tower at 5040
Winnetka Avenue. The site, 5040 Winnetka Avenue, is zoned I, Industrial District. This
zoning district allows personal wireless towers as a conditional use permit.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
a. Property Owner's Permission. The property owner has signed the application
form and provided a letter authorizing T Mobile to pursue the conditional use
permit on their property at 5040 Winnetka Avenue.
b. Removal of Obsolete Towers. This is a new tower. The applicant recognizes
its responsibility for removal of the tower if it becomes unused.
c. Compliance with Building Code. The City Building Official will respond to this
issue.
d. Compliance with Manufacturer Specifications. The tower construction
drawings shall be certified by a structural engineer prior to submission for a
building permit. The City Building Inspector shall review both the plans and
installation.
e. Federal, State, and Local Licenses. T Mobile is licensed by the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC). A copy of their license has been provided.
f. City Property. The proposed site is not City-owned property.
g. Setbacks. The proposed tower height is 110 feet. The following setbacks are
required for a tower of this height:
Required
Setback
Proposed
Setback
Setback from Lot Lines (75% of height)
82.5 feet
88.9 feet
Setback from Buildings on Same Lot
(50% of height)
55.0 feet
55.0 feet
h. Tower Separation. The applicant is unaware of any other towers within 1,000
feet of the proposed site. The applicant is responsible for locating area towers
and demonstrating compliance.
I. Tower Height. The proposed tower height of 110 feet meets City standards.
j. Tower Illumination. No tower lighting is proposed.
k. Tower Signage Restriction. No advertising signage is proposed. Signage
identifying tower and equipment ownership and contact information must be
posted.
I & m. Color and Appearance. The tower shall have a galvanized finish to reduce the
visual impact of the tower. The applicant should provide a color example or
photograph of a similar tower for Planning Commission review. The equipment
at the base of the tower shall be located in a 40 foot by 40 foot fenced area in the
back of the industrial site. The existing building and existing landscape screens
the storage area from Winnetka Avenue.
n. Security Fencing. The applicant is proposing to enclose the tower and ground
mounted equipment in a 40 foot by 40 foot fenced area. An eight foot chain link
fence with barbed wire at the top is proposed. This type of fencing is permitted
in the industrial zoning district, provided the barbed wire does not extend over
property lines.
o. Equipment. The applicant is proposing ground mounted equipment at the base
of the tower. More information should be provided regarding the cabinets
pertaining to color, appearance, and cabinet security. The applicant states that
the existing building and natural landscape will screen the tower base and the
ground equipment from adjoining properties.
p. Co-Location. The tower design will have the capacity to accommodate three
antenna arrays.
2
SITE ACCESS
The site plan illustrates a 20 foot wide access easement extending from Winnetka
Avenue along the south lot line to the tower location. Another 40 foot by 40 foot access
easement is being proposed south of the fence enclosure for vehicle maneuvering.
The drive lane south of the building and tower location are illustrated as gravel surface
and class five turnaround area. Section 4-3(e).4.h.11 requires all parking areas,
driveways, and driveway aprons in an industrial district to be constructed and surfaced
with concrete, asphalt, or other hard surface in compliance with City construction
standards. The driveway and vehicle turnaround areas should be paved. Concrete
curbing around these areas may not be required.
SITE PREPARATION AND RESTORATION
The site plan illustrates that both the tower area and the vehicle turnaround area extend
into a wooded area of the site. A grading plan should be provided that illustrates:
1. The area to be clear cut, grubbed and de-stumped to illustrate construction limits.
2. Finished grades and drainage patterns for the tower site and turnaround area.
3. Narrative of the tree removal process to insure the tree debris is not left on site.
4. Description of site restoration for areas that will be disturbed during construction.
CONCLUSION
The tower application fits the zoning and site conditions. The driveway along the south
side of the building is gravel with some damaged bituminous on the west side of the
building. The proposed application provides an opportunity to correct this non-
conforming condition.
Additionally, we raise issue as to how the rear yard of the site will appear after
construction with tree removal, grubbing, and grading. There should be a final
restoration plan.
3
Memorandum
TO:
Curtis Jacobsen
FROM:
Jason Quisberg
CC:
Eric Weiss, Roger Axel, Guy Johnson, Paul Coone
DATE:
April 13, 2009
SUBJECT:
T-Mobile Monopole - 5040 Winnetka Avenue (PC 09-06)
Our File No. 34-Gen NW8.09.01
We have received plans for the proposed T-Mobile monopole (antennae) to be constructed on the
Victory Packaging property located at 5040 Winnetka Avenue North. The following comments
should be considered in the review of this application.
1. The project area appears to drain east to the low, wetland area. It does not appear there
would be any drainage concerns caused by the proposed improvements.
2. The appropriate erosion control measures need to be in place before any disturbance to
the existing vegetation takes place. The extent of the disturbance to is unclear. Erosion
control measures should be approved by the City before any clearing activities commence.
End of Comments
Please contact me at 651-604-4938 with any questions or concerns.
2335 Highway 36 W
51. Paui. MN 55i 13
Tel 651-636-4600
Fax 651-636- i31 i
\\~~w.bonestroo. com
:It Bonestroo
(f)
-0
m
o
)>
r
N
o
Z
Z
QO
-0=1
;:0-<
00
0"11
mz
Om
c~
;:0
mI
(f)O
)>-0
-om
-0
r
o
~
o
Z
r
o
Q
0 :J a )>
c.o cQ)u
I 3 <::!:u
0 o-gT' )>
0')
(1)
...,
0 ZCJ1-1"11 -o)>z
co (1) 0 '$ :::J0..Q)
I ~-!O>$I g ~ 3
->.
->. 00
~~~O (1) (1) (1)
co (f)
I (f)
N "0 -.(1) 0
->. _(1)~O~
I
N $~gs"8 )>
w
I z6)"'iQ.] "0
0 "0
0 c.n )> ~ <::!: 0' OJ
0 (;, < r g
N Q)
-!O> CD r. :2-
N:JOQ)
COC (f)
CD Q)
Z co
CD
:2-
0
-M
-!O> 0-"'" Q) 0
-- ,<CDuQ)
c.o Q. ~ ~ CD
--
0
c.o -<: <' a 0
CD Q)
o...:::::!:
0
:J
~ S' 5' :J ~ 0
Q) -M Q) 0 Q) Q)
cnQ.-+g:cnro
33mCD~)>
(ii' 9l..o :J "0 0
(f) -.~. -"0
S' g ..... =
co CD a
0.. Q)
:2-
0') CD =0..0
-- x 3 Q) Q)
co
-- "0 -. '< _
0 :::;" .-.. ,....,.. CD
c.o CD -. m
(f) 3 0')
CD ?
co CD CD 0..0
-- -6 ~~ 9l
-..J
-- :::;. gs (1)
0
c.o CD (f) 0') "11
(f) -. 0
o I
:J
CDO~)>O
X-MQ)UQ)
CD (f)""Q.-
:J -. CD
(f) :J a Q
_. 0 Q)
o <::!: :J
::s :::!'!.-+
CD
0..
OCDCQ)O'O
..... X :J a ..... CD
~CDo..<::!:aQ)
Q):J CD 0;::;.:0..
-. (f) ..... :J '< = I
< -. :J
g; g (1)
Q)0..Q)0
uCDuQ)
u:Ju-
~ 0' a CD
Q) 0.. < Q. -
g5'~-<:
:J (1) 0
.....
-(f)0
o CD Q)
)>:J_
"0 - CD
""Q. m Q. L
-. (/) .........
au'<
~ 0
;:!..:J
(f)
CD
OJ
o
x
CD
(f)
)>
(;
Q)
:J
0..
m
I
"11
~
Q)
:[
Q)
'<
(f)
0-
CD
~
CD
0..
o
?-
~
:::J
CD
5'
CD
.....
5'
CD
~
:::J
CD
.....
0-
o
X
CD
(f)
Q)
.....
CD
~
CD
0..
o
~
0..
CD
"0
CD
:J
0..
(f)
o
:J
.-
:::J
CD
Q.
-<:
(f)-
"0
.....
o
a
CD
0..
C
.....
CD
(f)
Q)
:J
0..
5'
CD
0..
Q)
CD
o
-M
Q)
(f)
"0
(1)
a
::;;
0'
Q)
"0
""Q.
0'
9l
o'
:J
~:-;r:0:-nrn OO!JJ;t>
<::!:r-lr-l-l-lc..rrr)>
3 (ii' :::J (ii' :::J 0 0 ~ (ii' (ii' (ii' (f)
CD .-+ CD .-+ <D () (') ....... ..-. .-+ .-+ ~.
= 5' a 5' a Q) Q) ~. 5' 5' 5' co
3CD;::;:CD;::;:(')('):JCD(1)CD:J
'< '<cc CD
;::;.:0..30..~--OJo..o..)>Q)
CD9l CD=9l9l0Q)9lua
XCD5i11i-CDCD><CDCD~:::J
~. == .-+ == :J .-+ ~ ,...... .-+ = (") OJ
..... -' Q) :J ~ :::J -' ~J :::J -' Q) "0
mQ)aCD::;;CDCD CDCD:Ju
. :::""""c'< eJ)'m=;'(') (").-+=:
::r U :J .-+ 0 0 .-+ _0 ;::;.: --=- 0
CD CD 0..:::J I I :::J-<:'< -' Q)
-MCD CD 0..0.. CD .....Q)<::!:
Q. ~ ..... )> Q) Q) _ (f) CD 3 9
-<: CD Q) "0 '< '< 3' gs ~ _CD -'
(f) = :J "0 ~ CD - -. Q)
CD-''<= -<Q):J
-CDCDaCD a:::JCDo..r-
;:!.. 0.. X Q) :J _. a CD 0.. 9- S
:J CD CD :2- !:!2. :J Q. )> 5' cD 5-
OQ):Jo-OQ.'^uCD(f)CD
<::!: 9: (f) '< :J C (ii' "0 (f).....
~ -'CD=' Q' 3 "u g. ...,= ~ -@i ~ .
o. -'Q)CD CDQ)""Q.o..
-M . 0 = co ~ (f) :J -.
-. - -" S" - .-+ ....... ?;5 -0
Cii-l<::5' a~:J_:::J
:::J < Q) a Q) - 0 -. 0
Q) CD Q) -0 CD (1) _9:J
Q. 0.. <' Q) ~ :J 0. 0' -' CD
o' Q) CD 0') ;:!.. 0.. - CD ':-""
:J -CD :-' 0 S' Q) g -
I --0; --...... ::r
0- -. 0.. co 0.. (f) Q)
:J Q)=!'Q)C-
5'OJ '<o'<Q.m
CDO CD:J(f)-'..o
.,..,x ~:::. Q)c
y - CD:::J :J:::;'
"0_ :JCD OCD
~g !:!2.0.. <::!: 0..
a (f) 0 Q) a_.
~- :J,< .(1)~
:-+8 "00' O)~
- CD- (f)3
;::;: :::j :J. a !:!2. Q)
_. CD 0 ~ co_
(f) 0- 0.. -. :J o'
o-CD Q)~ "",:J
CD-M "0 ~
(f) ~ "0 = (1) ~
::. CD (5' cD Q) 8l
= s= en::n :g
:::JCD CD 0- Ui = ~.
0.. - a(f)
a -0') Q)(f)
-. Q) :::J 0 --.
-<: CD CD I o' :J
:J -. Q) 0.. :J cp
0:J uQ) Q)
- OJ ""Q. 2. :J::;;
o 0 0' -. (1)-
:Jx Q)3 ~:::J
-<"CD <::!:;::;: CD
_ (f) o~. :J a
Q)m :J:J c;::;.:
^ a 3'<
CD 0 .........c o-co
(f)..... -I 0.. CD-'
Q)"11 :::JCD .....(5
Q.- CD 0) Q)(f)
-. 9 0.. = :J
o _' Q) 0.. (f)
:J _. _ a C
-M CD 0) m a
S;. Q) =. CD a:::J
="0 -':J O:J
=. "0 OJ 0.. ..... 0
:J= 0Q) 0.._
- 8 x..... 0) 0'
CD:::Jo- ,......0.. =CD
- UJ Q) (f).
- CD '< C-.
-'. 3 (f) -
~oOJ c' g3
(f) (1) C
=x - ..o(f)
3I a c-
;::;.:. 0 (1) 0..
......... 3 :J 0
g (1) ~ (f)
- 0- (1)0
Q) CD O)::E
(j) 0' 0.. -.
o ..... =.....
CD :J ::r
:J _ (1) -.
o :::J (f) :J
::;; CD 0 ...>.
0' 0.. :J 0
(f) 9l 0) c"
- CD :Jc
~ S' (1) !:!!.
~ :J
)> OJ -(1)
"0 0 -. (Jl
"0 X :J (Jl
= CD CD
a (f) . c..
~ m n>
- '<
0- Q) (Jl
CD :J n>
-M 0.. _
~ "11 ct
CD ...:........ -t
- ......
:::J ::r
CD (1)
Memorandum
From:
Planning Commission
Curtis Jacobsen, Director of Community Development
May 1, 2009
To:
Date:
Subj ect:
Miscellaneous Issues
NOTE: The purpose of this miscellaneous issues memo is to provide commissioners with additional
detail on Council/EDA actions on Community Development related issues or other city projects.
1. April 13 Council/EDA meeting - The following planning/development/housing items were
discussed:
. PC 09-03, resolution approving conditional use permit amendment for the YMCA, 7601
42nd Avenue to provide outdoor recreational opportunities: Approved, but change
condition #3 to read "The fence along 42nd Avenue North will be decorative metal picket
rather than chain-link fencing."
o Discussion regarding the possible acquisition of 4424 N evada Avenue: This property is ll,
foreclosure and tenants are to vacate by May 1. COlmcil will discuss possible acquisition ll,
the future, see attached Council request.
2. April 20 Council Work Session - The following plarming/development/housing items were
discussed:
. PC09-02, discussion regarding proposed Ord. 09-03, an ordinance amending Chapter 2 of
the New Hope Citv Code bv establishing an Administrative Fines Enforcement Program:
COlmcil was concerned with language related to 1.mpaid fines being assessed against
property tax rolls and recommended verbiage change in the ordinance.
o Discussion regarding effectiveness of current graffiti ordinance and provide guidance
related to ordinance update: Council directed city attorney to clarify the five-day rune
period in the ordinance for property owners to remove graffiti.
2. April 27 Council/EDA meeting - The following planning/development/housing items were
discussed:
o Update by Planning Commission: Chair Oelkers gave the presentation.
e Resolution proclaiming the week of Mav 3 - 9 as Building Safetv Week in the city of New
Hope: Approved, see attached resolution.
e Project #845, resolution approving plans and specifications and ordering advertisement
for bids for Winnetka Avenue infrastructure project: Approved, see attached COl.illcil
request.
Miscellaneous Issues
Page 1
5/1/09
· Projects #791 and #807, resolution awarding contract for the preparation, planting, and
three-year maintenance of the Wincrest regional pond and the Northwood east sediment
pond to Applied Ecological Services: Approved, see attached Council request.
· PC 09-04, resolution extending 60-dav time limit required by Minnesota Statutes 15.99,
Subd. 2 for the response to zoning application requesting a CUP, rezoning and site plan
review for 9440 Science Center Drive: Approved, see attached Council request.
· Ord. 09-03, an ordinance amending Chapter 2 of the New Hope Citv Code by establishing
Administrative Fines Enforcement Program: Adopted, see attached Council request.
· Ord. 09-04, an ordinance amendment Section 9-90 of the New Hope City Code regulating
abatement of graffiti: Adopted, see attached COlmcil request.
· Motion approving establishment of an off-leash dog park area at Civic Center Park for a
trial basis during 2009: Approved, see attached COlmcil request.
3. Codes and Standards Committee - The Codes and Standards Committee did not meet in April.
4. Design and Review Committee - The Design and Review Committee met in April with the
applicants for the T-Mobile and service dog CUP requests. Two pre-application meetings are
scheduled on May 1, and staff will contact the committee if a meeting is necessary.
5. Planning Commission Vacancy - The city will place the following advertisement ll1 the Slm
Post and on the city's website: "The City Council encourages residents and business people to
apply to serve on a New Hope city commission. The city has an opening on the Planning
Commission. Meetings are usually held one evening per month. A complete commission
description and application is available by calling the city clerk at 763-531-5117, or on the city's web
site at www.ci.new-hope.rnn.us. The application deadline is April 30. Appointments vvill be made
by the City COlmcil following applicant interviews." While Mayor Hernken suggested reducing the
size of the commission, the rest of the Council indicated it felt the more community lll.put, the
better.
6. Planning Commission Minutes - The April 7 Plam1ing Commission minutes are included for
your review prior to the Plaml.lll.g Commission meeting. Please remember that all approved
minutes are on the city's web site.
7. If you have any questions on any of these items, please feel free to contact city staff.
Attachments: 4424 Nevada Avenue
Plam1ing Commission update power point
Building Safety Week resolution
Winnetka Avenue infrastructure project
Wlll.Crest and Northwood pond projects
60-day time extension for Hearing & Service Dogs
Adminish'ative Fines Enforcement Program ordiIlance
Graffiti ordinance
Off-leash dog park
4/7/09 Planning Commission 1vlinutes
Miscellaneous Issues
Page 2
5/1/09
Memorandum
To:
William Oelkers, Chair
From:
Planning Commission Members
Curtis Jacobsen, Director of Community Development
Date:
May 1, 2009
Subject:
Planning Commission Review of past Planning Cases
Attached for your information and possible selection of cases for review at future meetings are lists of
the planning cases from 2007 and 2008. Many of the cases over the last two years were either City of
New Hope ordinance changes, comprehensive plan reviews for neighboring communities or plaID1ing
applications that did not proceed for any number of reasons.
Staff selected for review on May 5, PlaID1ing Cases 07-15 and 08-07. For the June meeting staff would
recommend reviewing Plarming Cases 07-03 (Karges) and 08-04 (CCI) as by then the projects including
yard work should be complete. Possibly for July if we have a meeting Planning Cases 08-05 (Total Care
Assisted Living) and 08-06 (Holiday StationStore) could be reviewed.
Planning Case 07-15
This case as you may remember was an application by Greg Bender of New Hope Bowl for a conditional
use permit to allow the installation and operation of two outdoor sand volleyball courts durll1g the off
season down time of the bowling operation. The application proved to be fairly controversial with
neighboring residents, mainly abutting the site to the east.
The eight Planning Commission/City Council approved recommendations are attached along with
photos taken of the 2009 installation. All recommendations were complied with during the 2008
volleyball season and will be monitored agalll during the 2009 season.
Neither city staff nor the police department received any complaints regarding the operation of the
volleyball courts at any time during the 2008 volleyball season. It appears to be a very nice amenity for
the area and quite successful.
Planning Case 08-07
This case as you may remember involved Jeff and Tammy Northrup at 4551 Flag Avenue proposll1g to
do a major addition to their home and it required a rear yard setback variance. The addition to the home
was 1,294 sq. ft. to the existing home of 1,079 sq. ft. TIley also proposed an addition of 597 sq. ft. to the:ll-
garage that originally was only 445 sq. ft. The project did not cause any controversy as it progressed
1
through the planning process. The exterior of the home is complete and the yard had, as of last fall
received a rough grading. The house looks exactly like the plans that had been submitted for it and the
only condition imposed on project has been met. The condition was to move the existing shed five feet
away from the property line.
For a single family home project, it was somewhat complicated by the irregular shape of the lot and the
high percentage of lot coverage. The high level of lot coverage made this a very congested site during the
construction process. The project was completed in four and one-half months and the city received no
complaints from neighbors during the construction process. Only the final grade and planting grass or
placement of sod remains to be completed.
As many of you may be aware, there is an ongoing civil lawsuit between the home owner and the
builder related to the construction project. The law suit had nothing to do with the planning process or
planning approval. The contractor who helped the homeowner through the plam1ing process was
contacted and he was very complimentary of the city's planning process.
Attachments:
· 2007 Planning Case List
fi) 2008 Planning Case List
fi) PC Report 07-15 New Hope Bowl
Cil 2009 Photos of Volleyball Court
fi) PC Report 08-07 4551 Flag Avenue
Cil 2009 Photos of house
2
)>
'"'0
:::!.
N
co
N
o
o
CD
N
o
o
--.J(")
-0;::;:
r'<
)>0
zoo+,
zz
-C'D
z~
GJ:c
(")0
)>"0
UJC'D
m
UJ
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-..j -..j -..J -..J -..J -..j -..J -..J C')
, I I , I , I , )>
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO -..j (J) Ul +:>. W 1'0 ->. en
m
=l:I:
0 0 0 0 +:>.:s::; WClJ "'-'-..j:s::; u)>
;:;: ;:;: ;::::+: ;:;: NCD W= C-..jill ..... <
'< '< '< '< ->':J ->. - :J 0 ~. ill
0 0 0 0 -..J:J -..j^ <' O'g ..... - '"'0
m~ -. 0 m
-+. -+. -+. -+. OJO CD .j::>. C CD :J
Z Z Z Z o 2. :JCO Ul 1'0:3 2!.I -l
CD CD CD CD o - (f) CD ill :J :::::j
~ ~ ~ ~ :J CD cO' (f) -0..0 0.0
CD 0 :J O)>CD co :3 0
I I I I )>:J'" )> 0<< CD CD Z
0 0 0 0 < C OCDCD (f) m
<
u U "D "D CD ..... CD ..... :J 0 ::tl
CD CD CD CD :J Q.. :J o-C"D -
C ...J C o..CD:3 )>
CD CD co CD 0
Z ---- :J 0
- ::tl
m
en
en
(f) )> "DClJ ...-. m ::J::tl 0 '<< Cf) u
:::r() ill C ;:D>< 0. CD C ill ill OJ ill
C () ..... -. <- a.. ::l.
"'0: C = u u -
() CD ____CD (f) <9. ill - ::tl
-(f) 0. ill ..... ;:D
C (f) 0' ::ro ill :J u m
..... 0 CD U ..... -. C :3 () C 0
CD ..... 0. - ill (f) CD
_. CD (f) CD 0
(f),< ()- - OC :J I c:
ill ill 0 0. ..... m
~:J ..... -.(f) CD CJ)
ill ~CD
00. co ::l.(f) ill -l
:J .....
I CD () -.
-:J
;:D 0 ;:D
, ClJ ,
->. ->.
N
0
Z
m
)> )> )> )>
co 1'0 1'0 1'0 '"'0
--- - --- --- C')
CO (J) (J) (J)
--- --- --- ---.
0 0 0 0 )>
-..J -..j -..J -..j C")
::l
0
z
0)> 0)> O~O)> ;:D)> ;:D)> ;:D)>;:D)>~;:D)>
.....co .....-..j .....N.....CO CD 1'0 CD 1'0 CD UlCD w:3 CD 1'0
0._ 0.___ f=l-.j::>.o.___ (f)___ (f)___ (f)___(f)___CD(f)___
0""'" 01'0 0001'0 01'0 01'0 ->. 1'0 1'0
-..jw -..Jw coco-;-J::::! -..j22 -..j22 0.j::>.0(J)=0(J) C')
,--- 60 -..j----..j---:3-..j--- C')
00 I 00 '0 '0 ~ 0 L. 0 -. w 0
N-..j ->.-..j ~ w-..J ~-..j W-..j (J)-..j-..j-..J-co-..J )>
-..j
-+. "D C")
"D "D CD
- >< ::l
u -
C (J) 0
o 0 Z
0.
ill
'<
ill ~ 0 () ill ~ 0 0 s:
co _. 0.: o (f) 0.:
~.= :3 '< = 0.
:J"D :J "Dill..... :J :J en
-.0 0 -.....CD 0 0 C')
:J (f) - CD 0.< - - m
- -.
1'0 ~. "D CD ~ CD "D "D r-
..... o ~ ..... ..... r-
00- 0 0 0
0,< () * ill () () )>
~o. CD _.(f) CD CD Z
CD CD CD
(ii' 0. (f) (f) 0. 0. m
() 0 0
C 0 c:
(f) :J
(f) en
)>
-0
:::!.
N
OJ
N
o
o
CD
N
o
o
""'-!("')
"tl;:;:
r'<
)>0
Z-+.
ZZ
_CD
Z~
G>:r:
("')0
)>"0
en ('0
m
en
~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 C')
-...j -...j -...j -...j -...j -...j
, , , , , , )>
->. ->. ->. ->. ->. 0
../:>. W N ->. 0 CO en
m
:j:j:
-...jG)Z cor -...jOJG) () () () ()
~(i)I NO -...j""0 ;:;: ;:+ ....... ;:;:
o~ ocu- '< '< '< '< "'tJ
-...j co OJ ->'('0 00..0.. 0 0 0 0
..., m
../:>.OJO w= ../:>.()o.: -... -... -... -... -;
NCD~ cou NOco Z Z Z Z
:J - ....... -. ~~CD -;
o..~Ro ::::J ,...,. CD CD CD CD
"?' (f) G) ~ ~ ~ ~ 0
)>CDr )> -.
< ..., 0 < :J ..., I I I I Z
CD 0
CD C C 0 0 0 0 m
:J :J :J u u u u u ;;:0
c
c co CD CD CD CD CD --
CD CD $: )>
Z Z Z 0
0
;;:0
m
en
en
Cf) () (j) G) ~. m I Cf) q(f)I
U C -0 ..., co- (') cO' CD ~ 0
::0 u .?J 0 :J ~ o :J :J -. ,...,.
c 3 q- ~() (')3,...,. ;;:0
() I < u -'3 c m
::::J o ~ CD 0 c3 _.0- 0
C ::::J cu 0 ..., -. ~o.. ......._:J(f)
U 0 :::!. 3 cu (') CD co cu c
3 cu .......
or u :J m
CD :J CD :::!.m c 00.. en
(') (f) u
0 CD ~ 0 0.. 0 -;
(') ::l cu (f)
(') .......
CD
() ::0
OJ ,
->.
N
0
Z
m
)> )> )> )>
->. ->. co co "'tJ
-- ->. -- -- C')
co -- co co
-- O'l -- --
0 -- 0 0 )>
co 0 -...j -...j
-...j C')
~
0
Z
::0)> ::0)> )> 0)> 0)>0)>
CD CD->. co ..., c.n ""w""co
(f) ->. ~N -- 0..__ 0..__0..__
-- N . N ~NON
0->' --
0->. -...j O-...j co../:>.-...j-...j C')
co:!: -...jO -- co -- -- , -- C')
'0 , -- 0 ,0 ,000
~co ->.0 -...j oco oco../:>.-...j )>
-...j-...j W N
O'l C')
~
0
z
c.n::o OZ 0 (f)::O OU c.n S
I CD -"'0 0.: fiiCD ...,""i\3
Cf< g- :5. .......co o..g.co en
N-' :J C C 0-' --
OCD 3 ~. 0 (0- -...jQ:~ C')
o~ CD 0- ....... (f) ~ , ....... m
co CD o CD u CD 0 ,...,. r
0.. ..., 0.. co CD r
-... (') CD 0 3
0 (') < (') 0- )>
..., c -. CD '< U Z
U uo.. CD (f) m
cu CD 0.. ,...,.
() .......:J cu 0
0 -.(') ,...,. C
~ CD CD
:J en
)>
'"0
:::!.
N
CD
N
o
o
CD
N
o
o
00(")
-0;::;:
r'<
;t>0
Z""""
ZZ
-(I)
Z:E
G'>:J:
(")0
;t>"C
en CD
m
en
0 *0 0 *0 *0 *0 *0 *0 *0 *0 0 *0 (')
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 )>
-'" -'" -'" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N -'" 0 CO CO 9( (j) 01 .j:>. W 1'0 -'" C/)
m
=t:l:
.
.j:>.-I COG) 01"'" WI coO ..j:>..C- --JOI NCf)...., ..j:>..O 01< I] WI]
CO' -'"0 (J)~ COo OOJ 01 CD -'"co --JCDO 010 -..jCD '< CO CD
.j:>.$: 00 01 -. 0- O:J Ol~ CO-,= W-,....... O:J 0-, 01.......
COo OQ.. O:J 0'< 0-' -'"Qo OOJQ.. 0:5. OJ OQ.. ON' 3 -..jCD ""C
~~ .j:>.CD .j:>.:JOJ ~@O -0 0 -, m
rg-: NCf) -0 "-1 oC ~r
0- :J _. o$: N Q.. '< C Q. :J :J C ....,
C CD ;::;:!OJ ....... ....... -. ....... ~OJ -.Ul OJ ~~ ....... -. 0 -I
:::J3 CD'< :J -. ~ =..: :J Cf) :J -, CD <' :::J :J :J
Ul :3 I :J :5. --- - )>3 Q.. ....... :J CD uCD 0 :JtO
)>OJ CD....... NCD OJ m. )> :J -. CD 0
OJ < :::!. OJ OJ .......'< -, < 3 )> ~ ~ 0 ~<D 0 ....... Z
:J CD ....... ~3- "'r )> CD'< < 0 '" Ul 3 '"
CD :J OJ Ul )>0 -'CD m
OJ OJ g ~ OJ .. < :J Z o Ul OJ
Z:J )>5: CD :J Ul )> ~ < ;:L 55 Ul -0 22
I OJ OJ :J C 0 C ....... CD OJ I]
)> - -, < CD C CD -, CD Q < CD )>
I] CD CD -, zS: CD Q.. :J -. OJ
3 CD Z CD C :J I] 0
'" :J OJ -, :J r CD ~ '" :J
U C :J Z --- 0
OJ ~ C C _. Ul ~
Ul CD 0 -0 0 CD :5. :::tl
Ul Z:::J :::J Z :J :J m
OJ C C to 0 C/)
Q.. -, () C/)
0 () '"
-, :::J
0 <<;;0;;0 <Cf) ()O 'Q3< ~< Ul () Ul Cf) 0 'Q3< OJ)> ;;0 <
C OJ OJ 01 CD OJ OJ Oc -, OJ -, OJ OJ~oOJ c -, OJ OJ 3 CD OJ
I] () :::!. - N () I] cl] Q.. :::!. Q.. :::!. m~<D1] I] Q.. :::!. () CD :5. -,
OJ OJ 0 0 ~;;o ~I OJ OJ OJ "':J CD roo :::tl
.......:J OJ~;;o
....... CD () C :J :J :J to :J -5Q.. ~ :J m
0 CD I () () -, () ()
~ CD CD I] CD OJ Ul___Qo 0 0
CD CD CD CD :::JtO CD f58 CD
CD OJ U - ;;0 OJ X :::!. I I - OJ 0 C I ..!- c:
-, Ul_ 1'0 Ul-o C Q..UlC -0 0 m
CD OJ I CD OJ 3 -, -, :::J - ~I] ....... C/)
3 -....... ....... CD CD Ulg;1] -,
3 :J OJ OJ 0 0 -, Ul -I
CD 0 CD ~. -, -, 3 :J OJ -0
:J CD ....... .......
....... :J 0 _Ul CD 0 ~
.......:J -,
;;0 - ;;0 ;;0 ;;0 0 - - ;;0
1'0 1 I 1 OJ 1
-'" -'" -'" -'"
N
0
Z
m
)>)> )> )> )> )> )> )> )> )> ;;0)> )>
-'" CO -..j -..j --J 01 01 -..j ..j:>.. W CDN 1'0 "'C
0--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ~ Ul___ --- (')
___(J) CO CO CO (j) (J) CO -'" I]~ (j)
-..j--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- .
___0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 )>
OCO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO OCO CO
CO (')
CO :::!
1
0 0
-'"
z
;;0)>"'" ;;0)> ;;0)>"'" ;;0)> ;;0)> ;;0)> ;;0)> ;;0)> ;;0)> ;;0)> ;;0)>
CD-,"CO CD-..j (l)CO-..j CD -..j CD 01 (1)01 CD -..j CD..j:>.. CD ..j:>.. CDN CD 1'0
UlO--- Ul___ Ul______ Ul___ Ul___ Ul___ Ul___ Ul___ Ul___ Ul___ Ul ___
1'0---1'0 1'01'0 1'01'01'0 1'01'0 NN 1'01'0 1'01'0 1'01'0 1'0-'" 1'01'0 1'01'0 CJ
0-'"01 O~ o 01 CO O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ O:t: O~ O~
0~C3 --- --- CJ
00 000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
COOCO COCO CO COCO COCO COCO COCO COCO COCO COCO COCO COCO )>
~CO 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I
-'" -'" -'" CO CO -'" --J 01 W W (')
.j:>. 0 -'" 0 (!) 0 0 N CO (J) 01 :::!
.j:>. (J) (J) 01 -..j
0
Z
0 0 \}j ~ )> s:
n: :J -0
I (' -0 C/)
:J :::J \}l ~ -,
0 0 0 (')
....... Q.. t ~ < m
-0 ~ ^ OJ r-
-, ~~
0 CD r-
() ~ X )>
CD '2. z
CD -, m
Q.. ~ CD
;'l' Q.. 0
c:
(\ C/)
Planning Case:
Petitioner:
Address:
Request:
UPDATED PLANNING CASE REPORT
City of New Hope
Meeting Date:
Report Date:
January 8, 2008
January 4,2008
07-15 UPDATED
New Hope Bowl and Lounge, Inc.
Greg Bender, owner/operator
7107 42nd Avenue North
Site plan review and conditional use permit for outdoor recreation, two sand
volleyball courts,
I. Request
The petitioner is requestill.g a site plan review and conditional use permit for outdoor recreation (two
sand volleyball courts) in the community business (CB) ZOnlll.g district, pursuant to Section 4-3 of the
New Hope Code of Ordinances.
II. Zoning Code References
Section(s) 4-16 (e) (3)
4-33
III. Property Specifications
ZOnlllg:
Location:
Adjacent Land Uses:
Site Area:
Buildll1g Area:
Lot Area Ratios:
Plannlllg District:
Specific Information:
Conditional Use Permit - Outdoor sales and services
Administration - Conditional Use Permit
Community Business District (CB)
Located on the south side of 42nd Avenue North and east of rvlaryland
Avenue North, immediately adjacent to the city of Crystal.
Commercial to the north, commercial and multi-family to the west,
residential to the south and residential to the east in the city of Crystal.
106,355 square feet or 2.44 acres
27,160 square feet (140 X 194)
Buildll1g 25.5%
Green Space 10%
Parkll1g 64.5 %
11
The proposed sand volleyball courts would be set up on the north side of the
building III the existing parking lot and be for seasonal use only, from May 15
to August 15. After that date the courts would be removed until the next
volleyball season.
Updated Planning Case Report 07-15
Page 1
1/4/08
IV. Background
The petitioner has been in discussions with staff since mid-July regarding the possibility of adding
outdoor sand volleyball courts at his business. The off season for bowling is May to late August and the
petitioner's goal was to generate some business during the off season to maintain his trained staff.
The petitioner came before the Design and Review Committee in October and was asked to provide
additional information for the committee. The time to provide this additional information delayed the
prOCeSSlll.g of the application by one month. The petitioner waived the 60-day rule as it applied to his
project and the City Council approved the extension of the 60-day rule on November 26. All pertinent
information requested by the committee is now a part of the application packet for your review.
At the December 4 Planning Commission meeting concerns were raised that the Commission felt
deserved to be addressed and they directed that a neighborhood meeting be scheduled prior to the
next Plalming Commission meeting to discuss these issues. Due to the additional month's delay, this
planning case will have to proceed to the City Council at its January 14 meeting to meet the timellll.e of
the 60 day rule as extended.
V. Petitioner's Comments
From September through mid-April our facility is heavily used. During that time we have
approximately 200 people on our slowest days and 500 people on our busiest days. In the summer
months most people begin to hear the call of outdoor activities, and our buslll.ess decliIl.es dramatically
to approximately 50 people per day. Durlllg the months of May through August we propose to erect
two temporary volleyball courts.
Matches will begin at 6:30 p.m., 7:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. We will close the courts and turn the lights off
at 10 p.m. Play will begin approximately May 1 and end on August 26.
BENEFITS: We will be able to retain 6-12 employees throughout the smmner who we would otherwise
have to layoff at that time. This will most certainly bring a new group of potential customers not only
for our business, but for other local buslllesses as well. Most importantly, it will help the bowlll1g
center remain strong and viable in an industry that is not only challenged by a four month "slow"
period, but also by changing demographics.
VI. Notification
Property owners witlwl 350 feet were notified, including tll.e city of Crystal, all.d staff received
comments botll. for alld against tlle proposed outdoor volleyball use. The residents said tl1ey would
attend tlle public hearlllg all.d voice tlleir concerns. One e-mail was received and provided to the
Plamling Commission at the last meeting, one letter was given to tl1e city at the end of the
neighborhood meeting and an additional two e-mails have been received Sll1ce the neighborhood
meetlll.g, both are lll.cluded lll. tll.e packet.
VII. Development Analysis
A. Z0ni11g Code Criteria
Sec. 4-33. Administration--Conditional use permit.
(a) Purpose. The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide tll.e city Witll a reasonable and legally
permissible degree of discretion in detennilling the suitability of certalll. designated uses upon the general
Updated Planning Case Report 07-15
Page 2
1/4/08
welfare, public health and safety. In making a determination to allow a conditional use permit application,
the city may consider the nature of the adjoining land or buildings, similar uses already in existence and
located on the same premises or on other lands close by, the effect upon traffic into and from the premises,
or on any adjoining roads, and any other factors bearing on the general welfare, public health and safety
from the approval of the conditional use permit.
(b) P1'ocedure. An application for a conditional use permit requires a public hearing and shall be
processed pursuant to the provisions outlined in subsection 4-30(c) of this Code.
(c) O'iteria for decision. The planning commission and city council shall consider possible adverse effects
of the proposed conditional use. In determining whether to approve or deny a conditional use permit, the
city council and planning commission shall find that the conditional use permit complies with the
following criteria. The burden of proof demonstrating compliance with the following criteria shall be the
responsibility of the applicant.
(1) Comprehensive plan. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific
policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official comprehensive
municipal plan of the city.
(2) Compatibility. The proposed use is compatible with adjacent present and future anticipated
land uses.
(3) Performance standards. The proposed use conforms with all applicable performance standards
contained in this Code.
(4) No depreciation III value. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area lll.
which it is proposed.
(5) Zoning district criteria. In addition to the above general criteria, the proposed use meets the
criteria specified for the various zoning districts.
(7) In busllless districts (LB, CB):
a. Traffic. The proposed use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion.
b. Nearby residences. Adjacent residentially-zoned land will not be adversely affected
because of traffic generation, noise, glare, or other nuisance characteristics.
c. Effect on other businesses. Existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected
because of curtailment of customer h'ade brought about by lll.trusion of unduly heavy non-
ShOpplllg traffic or general unsightliness.
4-16 (e) Conditional uses, CB. The following are conditional uses lll. a CB district: (Requires a conditional
use pennit based upon procedures set forth III and regulated by sections 4-30(c) and 4-33 and performance
standards outlined III section 4-3 of this Code).
(3) Outdoor sales and services, accessory. Open or outdoor service, sale and rental is an
accessory use lmder a conditional use permit provided that:
a. Area limit. Outside services, sales and equipment rental cOlUl.ected with the prll1cipal
use is limited to 30 percent of the gross floor m:ea of the prll1cipal use.
Updated Planning Case Report 07-15
Page 3
1/4/08
b. Screened from residential. Outside sales areas are fenced or screened from view of
neighboring residential uses or an abutting "R" district in compliance with subsection 4-
3( d)(3) of this Code.
c. Lighting shielded. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the light source shall
not be visible from the public right-of-way or from neighboring residences and shall be lll.
compliance with subsection 4-3( d)(5) of this Code.
d. SUlfacing. Sales area is grassed or surfaced to control dust, mud and to provide a clean,
attractive and usable surface.
e. Parking. Does not take up parking space required for conformity to this Code.
B. Development Review Team
The Development Review Team met to discuss the application on October 17 and was generally
supportive, but had questions regarding:
Cl Temporary lighting
· Drainage
Cl Containment of sand
e Employees outside as crowd monitor
Cl Details of deck expansion
C. Design and Review Committee
The Design and Review Committee met with the applicant on October 18 and discussed the
Development Review Team's concerns and also requested that the applicant provide more detailed
plans and specifications for their review both on the court and regarding the lighting of the courts.
The petitioner was requested to return to the November 15 Design and Review COlmmttee meetlllg.
At the November meeting, the petitioner provided additional detailed plans, photometric plans and
an updated narrative. The Design and Review Committee was generally supportive of the
application.
D. Plan Description
The proposed volleyball courts would be regulation size (30 X 60) with appropriate safety zones on
all sides of the court. The total area including the safety zones would be 100 X 80 feet. The court
would have wood edging to contain the sand with a filter fabric under the sand to contalll. it Withlll
the court area. Court exterior fenclll.g would be mounted to 12 foot alumill.um poles with all
proposed lighting mounted at or near the building.
This proposal has the court being set up each sprll1g and removed each fall. With this proposed
schedule of operation the parking stalls taken up by the construction of the court would once agalll.
be available for the fall bowlers to use for parklll.g.
E. Design Guideline Compliance
Not applicable.
F. Plarmlll.g Considerations
City plarmer comments are incorporated into the report.
Updated Planning Case Report 07-15
Page 4
1/4/08
G. Building Considerations
Building official comments are incorporated into the report.
H. Legal Considerations
See letter from City Attorney related to noise.
1. Engineering Considerations
Not applicable
J. Police Considerations
Comments from the Police Department are incorporated into the report.
K. Fire Considerations
Comments from West Metro Fire-Rescue are incorporated into the report.
L. Neighborhood Meeting
See attached neighborhood meeting memo by staff.
VIII. Summary
The petitioner is proposing to install seasonal sand volleyball courts at New Hope Bowl. The volleyball
season would be from May 1 to August 26, which is the off season for bowling. The petitioner believes
that even with the additional customers created by volleyball the average day would still be slower and
a less intense use of the site than it is during the bowling season. Staff's review of the parklll.g situation
would suggest that New Hope Bowl has adequate parking during the summer months for the uses
proposed.
IX. Recommendation
Staff recommends the Plam1ll1g Commission recommend approval to the City Council with the
followlllg conditions:
1. On site traffic circulation patterns must be mallltained and the east property liIl.e shall be posted
as a fire lane.
2. Court lighting shall be directional toward the courts and shall not exceed that shown lll. the
photometric plan submitted with the application.
3. Court lighti1lg shall cease at 10:00 pm.
4. No public address system shall be authorized.
J. The petitioner shall be responsible for court security and no direct court access from the parklllg
lot shall be allowed.
6. Petitioner shall police the grounds twice per week for h'ash.
7. Petitioner shall reduce the size of the proposed deck as discussed at the neighborhood meeti11g.
The deck shall be only 15 foot deep X 40 foot long and be located 40 feet from the northeast
corner of the building.
Updated Planning Case Report 07-15
Page 5
1/4/08
8. Petitioners shall make the east building exits, exit only, including the installation of panic
hardware.
Attachments: Application
Petitioner narrative
Site maps
Court plans
Deck plans/modified deck layout
Lighting plans
Planner's memo
City Attorney letter
Excerpt from Code Section 8-8
Maps showing proximity of speakers at public hearing and neighborhood meeting
Neighborhood meeting sign in sheet
Neighborhood meeting memo by staff
Crystal resident letter
Crystal resident e-mail
Crystal resident e-mail
Photos from east side of building
Application Log
Updated Planning Case Report 07-15
Page 6
1/4/08
Planning Case:
Petitioner:
Address:
Request:
PLANNING CASE REPORT
.
City of New Hope
Meeting Date:
Report Date:
May 6, 2008
May 2, 2008
08-07
Jeff and Tammy Northrup, property owners/petitioner
Chalee Dennis, contractor
4551 Flag Avenue North
Variance to rear yard setback requirement.
I. Request
The petitioner is requesting a 20 foot rear yard setback variance, to allow an addition to an existing
garage, currently aligned five feet from the rear property line.
II. Zoning Code References
Section 4-5 (f) (4)
Section 4-36
III. Property Specifications
Zoning:
Location:
Adjacent Land Uses:
Site Area:
Buildlll.g Area:
Lot Area Ratios:
Plamwlg District:
Planning Case Report 08-07
R-l Zoning District - Setback
Administrative - Variance
R-l, slllgle family residential
Southwest quadrant of 46th and Flag Avenue North
Residential III all directions.
Irregular shaped lot approximately 12,227 square feet
Existing house and garage is 1,524 square feet
Existing House: 1,079 s.f.
Existi1lg Garage: 445 s.f.
Total proposed house 2,818 square feet
Proposed house addition: 1,294 s.f.
Proposed garage addition: 597 s.f.
Buildlll.g area: 24 percent
Paved area: 5 percent
Green area: 71 percent
No.7
Page 1
05-02-08
Specific Information:
The official front of this lot is on Flag A venue, that being the narrowest
frontage on a street. The house was originally built to facing onto Flag
Avenue and was set as though Flag was the front, which made the official
back yard a side yard, and the five foot side yard setback was used for
placement of the garage. Officially, the garage is built 20 feet inside the rear
yard setback.
IV. Background
The house and garage were originally built in 1968. The lot is irregular in shape and only has a 70 foot
frontage onto Flag A venue, The current owner purchased the property in 2000. The applicant is III the
process of making significant improvements to the property. They have submitted a request to add on
major additions to both the house and garage. The garage addition would be 28 X 21 and the house
addition would be an "L" configuration with one portion 20 X 26.5 and the other portion 8 X 22. The
current garage is five feet from the south property line (the official rear line) and it is proposed to
continue on this alignment. The proposed house addition projects lllto the official side yard and does
not present setback concerns.
The city last approved a similar variance in November of 2006 at 913134 V2 Avenue North.
V. Petitioner's Comments
Weare requesting a variance to our property, 4551 Flag Ave, Lot 1 Block 4, Holiday Hills. This request
is needed lll. order for us to begin a remodeling project on our home. Currently, the property's rear
yard setback is legal non-conforming. The code states that the rear yard setback should be 25 feet.
Currently, the setback is a little less than six feet. Our plan is to add more square footage to
accommodate for our growing family. Included in this remodel project, we are extendlllg the garage
further back towards the side yard setback. We will be followlllg tll.e same line as the existing side of
the garage, but because of the garage currently belllg legal non-conforming, anythlllg we add to the
garage will require a variance.
This remodel project also meets the following criteria:
\) It will not alter the essential character of the locality.
\) It will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially
increase congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public
safety.
\) It is the minimum action required to eliminate the hardship.
o It does not llwolve a use which is not allowed witlwl. the respective zoning district.
VI. Notification
Due to tlle fact that a legal notice was not published, the public hearlllg will be conducted at the May 27
City Council meeting. A letter from the neighbor irrunediately adjacent to the garage addition has
submitted a letter of support for the project.
VII. Development Analysis
A. Zoning Code Criteria
Planning Case Report 08-07
Page 2
05-02-08
The purpose of a variance is to permit relief from the strict application of the terms of the Zoning Code to
prevent undue hardships or mitigate undue non-economic hardship in the reasonable use of a specific parcel
of property and where circumstances are unique to the individual property under consideration and the
granting of a variance is demonstrated to be in keeping mth the spirit and intent of this Code.
An application for variance shall not be approved unless a finding is made that failure to grant the variance
will result in undue hardship on the applicant, and, as may be applicable, the following criteria have been
met:
1. A hardship may exist by reason of a physical condition unique to the property and results III
exceptional difficulties when using the parcel or lot within the strict application of the terms of this
Code. Physical hardships may include lot shape, narrowness, shallowness, slope, or topographic or
siInilar conditions unique to the parcel or lot. Undue hardship also includes inadequate access to
direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Economic conditions alone shall not constitute an undue
hardship if reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of this Code.
2. The undue hardship is unique to the parcel or lot for which the variance is bell1g sought and is not
generally applicable to other properties within the same zoning distrIct.
3. The hardship or circumstances unique to the parcel or lot has not been created by the landowner or
any prevIOUS owner.
4. Additional Criteria. The application for variance shall also meet the following criteria:
a. It will not alter the essential character of the locality.
b. It 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 safety.
c. It is the minimum action required to eliminate the hardship.
d. It does not involve a use which is not allowed within the respective zOlWlg district.
B. Development Review Team
The Development Review Team met on April 16 to discuss the application and was generally
supportive of the request for in-place expansion of an existing home and conformity with the goals of
the city's Comprehensive Plan to encourage reinvestment in the city's houslll.g stock. It was
recommended that the existi1lg shed either be relocated or removed.
C. Design and Review Committee
The Design and Review Committee met on April 17 to discuss the application and was generally
supportive of the proposal and also recommended that the storage shed .be either relocated or
removed.
D. Plan Description
The petitioner is propOSlll.g an addition to the house and garage at 4551 Flag Avenue North. The house
addition would be lll. an "L" configuration on the north and west side of the existing home. One
portion of the "L" would be 20 X 26.5 feet and the other portion would be 21.67 X 8 feet. The garage
would have an addition added on the west side in alignment with the existi1lg garage that would be 28
X 21 feet. Additionally, the contractor has stated the house and garage would have a whole new roof
Planning Case Report 08-07
Page 3
05-02-08
including: change of roof pitch, new shingles, new fascia and soffits. The exterior of the home would
have all new siding including some stonework and decorative shakes.
E. Design Guideline Compliance
The Design Guidelines do not apply to single family homes.
F. Planning Considerations
City planner comments are incorporated into the report.
G. Building Considerations
Building official comments are incorporated into the report.
H. Engineering Considerations
City engineering comments are incorporated into the report.
1. Police Considerations
Comments from the Police Department are incorporated into the report.
J. Fire Considerations
Comments from West Metro Fire-Rescue are incorporated into the report.
VIII. Summary
The petitioner is planning to make a substantial investment in their New Hope property. The petitioner
is planning a major addition to the house and the garage to make both more conducive to a groWlll.g
family's needs. The expansions will include a totally new roof with an increase in the roof pitch, ne"w
shingles, new soffit and fascia. The exterior of the house will get new low-maintenance sidll1g that
incorporates architectural accents of stone and shakes. The application is compliant with the
Comprehensive Plan and also with the City Council's Mission, Vision and Goals for the city.
IX. Recommendation
Staff and the Design and Review Committee are generally supportive of the application and
recorrunend approval and offer the following ful.dings of fact to support this variance approval:
1. The buildlll.g expansion is consistent with the residential goals of the New Hope
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The variance and buildlll.g expansion will not alter the character of the neighborhood.
3. The variance will not impair light or air to adjoinlll.g properties.
4. The variance does not present a public safety issue.
6. Past zoning interpretation resulted in the placement of the house. This results III a physical
hardship that prevents the home expansion without approval of a variance.
Attachments:
Iil Aerial photos
Iil Certificate of survey
Iil Certificate of title
o Petitioners correspondence
Iil Application
El Address/Zonlll.g location maps
El Floor plan
Iil Neighbor correspondence
o Plalmer's report
Iil List of similar varial1ces
9 Application log
Planning Case Report 08-07
Page 4 05-02-08
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTI-I
NEW HOPE, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428
PLANNING COMtv1ISSION MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
CONSENT BUSINESS
PUBLIC HEARING
PC09-03
Item 4.1
April 7, 2009
City Hall, 7 p.m.
The New Hope Planning Commission met in regular session pursuant to due
call and notice thereof; Chair Oelkers called the meeting to order at 7 p.m.
Present: Paul Anderson, Pat Crough, Jeff Houle, Sandra Hunten, Roger
Landy, Bill Oelkers, Tom Schmidt, Steve Svendsen
Absent: Jim Brinkman, Ranjan Nirgude
Also Present: Curtis Jacobsen, Director of Community Development, Eric
Weiss, Community Development Assistant, Steve Sondrall,
City Attorney, Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant, Jason
Quisberg, City Engineer, Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary
There was no Consent Business on the agenda.
"
Chair Oelkers introduced Item 4.1, request for conditional use permit
amendment to provide expanded outdoor recreational opportunities related
to the day care facility, 7601 42nd Avenue North, YMCA of Metropolitan
Minneapolis, petitioner.
Mr. Eric Weiss, stated the petitioner requested an amendment to its existing
conditional use permit (CUP) for day care facilities to allow for a splash pad
area on the north side of the property and an enclosed outdoor play area for
the existing on-site day care on the south side of the property. The site is
zoned community business and adjacent land uses include CB to the north,
east and west and industrial to the south and east. There is a pond to the
southwest that is owned by the city, YMCA and school district.
The at-grade splash pad area contains slides, fountains and areas that spray
water. The entire front yard would be enclosed by a five-foot fence and the
splash pad would be enclosed by a separate three-foot fence. The area along
42nd Avenue would be screened with additional landscaping. The play area
on the southern portion of the property would be completed in three phases.
The area closest to the building would be for children ages two to five and
new play equipment would be installed. The second phase would be the
southernmost portion of this area and remain an open laVv"ll area for games.
The third phase would be the middle section for children ages five to 12.
Each area would be surrounded by a three-foot fence and the entire area
would be enclosed by a five-foot fence.
The Northwest YMCA is affiliated with the YMCA of Metropolitan
1vlinneapolis and Greater St. Paul. The New Hope location has been in the
city since 1976. It operates athletic and aquatic facilities, as well as
educational, youth and recreational programming, and a child day care. This
child care facility is the largest in the Twin Cities YMCA system and is
allowed by CUP. The petitioner desires to amend its CUP to include
landscaping and outdoor recreational improvements. The improvements
would enable the Northwest YMCA to better meet the needs of its members.
The improvements would ensure compliance with state and local regulations
for licensed childcare outdoor recreation and expand summer youth
program activities.
Property owners within 350 feet of the site were notified and staff received
no comments.
Mr. Weiss reported that the Northwest YMCA met all requirements of the
city code for the day care facility and for the conditional use permit
amendment, including consistency with the comprehensive plan,
compatibility with the neighborhood, performance standards, traffic, etc. The
existing day care facilities are permitted under the YMCA's current CUP
agreement, but due to the fact that those facilities are proposed for expansion,
the applicant must enter into an amended CUP agreement that includes the
expanded facilities.
The Design and Review Committee met with the applicant and revised plans
and narrative were submitted subsequent to that meeting. The proposed
expansions meet the CB district setback requirements. No changes to the
parking lot were proposed. Pavement upgrades and areas of expansion are
proposed for both improvement areas. The splash pad would expand the
impervious area by approximately 1,200 square feet. Additional sidewalk
improvements are included in the south-end expansion area. Both the north
and south areas would be secured and surrounded by a five-foot, vinyl clad,
chain-link perimeter fence. The splash pad and separate age group play areas
would be enclosed by a separate three-foot chain-link fence. The splash pad
area would be accessible from the inside of the building. The southern play
area would be accessible from inside the building and a staff-monitored,
exterior gate to be used for parent drop-off and pick-up. The splash pad
would be utilized during the day in the summer months. The hours of
operation would be 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. The building footprint would remain the
same. The splash pad and play areas are considered landscaping
improvements. Any future interior remodeling included as part of the capital
campaign would require building permit approval.
The splash pad area would be screened by existing and proposed trees and
shrubs. Flowers would be planted along the fence near the parking lot. The
southern area is currently well landscaped. No lighting improvements are
proposed as the areas would be utilized during the daylight hours. A wall
pack would be added in the front area for security purposes. Noise is not
anticipated to be an issue due to the location of the facility and the
surrounding commercial uses. No additional signage was proposed.
The YMCA proposed to remove the berm on the north and the entire front
yard would be re-graded to drain toward a catch basin near the northwest
comer of the building. The southern area would be graded and drain toward
an infiltration basin. Mr. Weiss stated that the city engineer had indicated
those improvements would be adequate for the site.
Planning Commission Meeting
2
April 7, 2009
In summary, the YMCA proposed to construct two outdoor recreational
areas for use by its day care programs and members. A splash pad area
would be constructed on the north end of the building and the existing play
areas on the south end of the building would be renovated to provide
updated playground equipment and separate the lawn into three play areas.
These improvements are considered an expansion of the existing day care
facilities and this application would amend the existing conditional use
permit. Mr. Weiss stated that the proposal met the conditions of the CUP, the
expansion would be an improvement to the day care facility and be an asset
to the community. Staff recommended approval of the request.
Commissioner Hunten initiated discussion of the fence along 42nd Avenue.
Mr. Weiss confirmed that there would be a five-foot fence along 42nd
Avenue. The applicant initially had proposed heavy landscaping along the
fence, however, the Police Department suggested cutting back on some of the
plantings to allow open space for police officers to view the area when
driving by the site.
Commissioner Schmidt questioned the security of the play area to the south
and whether or not the five-foot fence Vias adequate.
Chair Oelkers questioned when the different phases would be completed.
Mr. Weiss responded that the splash pad would be completed by July 2009,
as well as the play area closest to the building. The other two play areas
would be completed as funds become available through the YMCA's fund-
raising campaigns.
An explanation of the splash pad and equipment was requested.
Mr. Brian Kirk, YMCA employee, came forward to answer questions of the
Commission. He thanked the Commission for considering their request and
stated the YMCA was excited about the project. He explained that the splash
pad would have no standing water; therefore, no lifeguard would be
required. The water is sprayed out from the fountain, play structure or down
the slide, caught in a shallow catch basin, filtered, and re-circulated. There are
a series of drains in the concrete pad area where the pad slopes down to the
drains. The equipment would be 21 feet high at the top of the spout that fills
the splash bucket. The bucket fills and disperses the water over a canopy that
splashes the water to different areas. As the water gets to a certain level in the
bucket, a bell rings so the children know when it will tip and water will
splash. No music would be played.
Commissioner Houle questioned the color scheme of the equipment and
recommended using primary colors.
Commissioner Houle inquired who would be utilizing the splash pad. Mr.
Kirk answered that the YMCA has the licensed child care center that operates
year round. During the summer, the YMCA operates summer camps,
including day-long, on-site programs, and for children that are on site before
and after field trips to other locations. These areas would be open to these
Plarming Commission Meeting
3
April 7, 2009
"campers," the regular day care children during the week, and YMCA
members, both during the week and on the weekends. Houle questioned
whether or not the number of children in either the day care or summer
programs would be increased. Mr. Kirk stated that he hoped there would be
some increase, but felt it would be difficult to measure as far as parking. The
existing building is large and sized to be a fitness center with gyms, studios,
racketball courts, etc. Attendance by members decreases significantly in
summer during the day, therefore, the children's programs would fill that
time.
Commissioner Houle stated that during the Design and Review Committee
meeting there was mention of a six-foot decorative fence along 42nd Avenue,
which has now been changed to a five-foot vinyl-chain-link fence. Mr. Kirk
confirmed that the change was partially due to financial reasons and also due
to the fact that the balance of the property would utilize the vinyl, chain-link
fence. He stated he felt the landscaping would be a pleasant addition. Houle
mentioned that 42nd Avenue was a primary commercial corridor in New
Hope and asked the petitioner to reconsider utilizing decorative fencing. He
did not want to set a precedent for other property owners. Mr. George
. Watson, Brauer and Associates, stated that the cost difference between
decorative and chain link fencing ;was approximately 50 percent. For
example, the decorative fence may be $60-75 per lineal foot versus $25-30 for
chain link fencing. For the street frontage on 42nd Avenue, the difference
could be approximately $2,000. Commissioner Hunten stated that she felt the
existing black vinyl chain-link fence was fairly attractive. Mr. Watson stated
he felt the black vinyl fence somewhat visually "disappeared" with plantings
around it. He added that there was some discussion at the Design and
Review meeting as to the height of the fence and five feet had been agreed on.
Mr. Watson stated that landscaping was planned for the north side (street
side) of the fence.
Commissioner Svendsen stated that the planting schedule and plan did not
match and inquired whether there would be eight or 10 black hills spruce
planted on the west property line and the answer was eight. Mr. Watson
stated that they had tried to comply with the request by the Police
Department with the shorter plantings and over-story trees along the fence at
the front of the property. They were planting the spruce along with west
property line between the YMCA and auto repair facility. Svendsen inquired
of the irrigation system for the landscaping and was informed that the site
was currently irrigated and that system would be adapted to meet the new
landscape requirements.
Commissioner Svendsen questioned how the depression in the southern play
area would drain. Mr. Watson responded that there would be a structure and
outlet at a lower elevation which would go under the trail into the pond so
that, in the event of a large storm, the water would not flow over the trail. He
noted that the depression was sized larger than required for this site.
Commissioner Svendsen suggested the YMCA work with the city engineer
on finalizing these plans.
Commissioner Sclunidt inquired of staff regarding decision to change to
Planning Commission Meeting
4
April 7, 2009
chain-link fencing. Chair Oelkers stated he remembered the Design and
Review Committee suggesting a six-foot, one-inch picket metal fence along
with plantings. Commissioner Hunten added that as a parent she felt heavier
screening along 42nd Avenue was desirable so other children walking along
the sidewalk would not try to get into this area without going through the
building. Oelkers stated that the Police Department had been consistent with
all applicants and screening requirements to allow some open space in the
landscaping. The YMCA has suggested heavier understory plantings with
taller over-story trees so police officers can use flood lights at night to see into
the site.
No one was in the audience to address the Commission.
Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, to
close the public hearing on Planning Case 09-03. All voted in favor. Motion
carried.
Commissioner Houle reiterated that he did not want to set a precedent by
allowing chain-link fence along 42nd Avenue, which is a very visible
commercial corridor. He stressed he did not want to detract from the value of
other neighboring properties. The origi..nal plans indicated a decorative fence
with vertical pickets. He stated he understood the money issue, but the entire
chain-link fence could not be hidden with plantings. Chair Oelkers agreed
that chain link fence was not appropriate along 42nd Avenue. He suggested
the Commission make a recommendation to the Council and let the Council
make the final determination on the fence. Commissioner Hunten stated that
she would be upset about a regular chain-link fence, however the black vinyl
coated fence looked nice. The fence was there to protect the children. :Mr.
Weiss commented that the design guidelines could be amended to include
further explanation on fencing requirements.
MOTION
Item 4.1
Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner Landy, to
approve Planning Case 09-03 request for conditional use permit
amendment to provide expanded outdoor recreational opportunities
related to the day care facility, 7601 42nd Avenue North, YMCA of
Metropolitan Minneapolis, petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
1. Update landscape plan/planting schedule with correct number of trees
and incorporate the original irrigation system and proposed
modifications for the current planting schedule.
2. Coordinate with city engineer on proposed pond in the southeast
comer of site to assure no water flows over the trail.
3. The fence along 42nd Avenue should be decorative metal picket
rather than chain-link fencing.
Voting in favor:
Anderson, Crough,
Schmidt, Svendsen
None
Brinkman, Nirgude
Houle, Hunten, Landy, Oelkers,
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Planning Commission Meeting
5
April 7, 2009
Chair Oelkers stated that this planning case would be considered by the City
Council at its meeting on April 13 and asked that the petitioner attend that
meeting. He added that this would be a great addition to the facility.
PC09-04
Item 4.2
Chair Oelkers introduced Item 4.2, request for conditional use permit to
operate an animal kennel facility, 9440 Science Center Drive, Hearing and
Service Dogs of Minnesota, petitioner.
Mr. Curtis Jacobsen, stated that the petitioner was requesting a conditional
use permit to operate a kennel and training facility in an industrial zoning
district. Industrial land uses surround the property. The site contains 4.3
acres and the existing building contains 21,700 square feet. Lot area ratios
include 12 percent building, 12 percent paved, and 76 percent green/gravel
area. The primary goal of planning district no. 3 is to preserve and enhance
the industrial land uses. Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota is a non-
profit entity which provides training to dogs that assist persons with special
needs. The existing building at 9440 Science Center Drive has been vacant for
the past two years. The site is under-utilized from a development standpoint
and could accommodate a more intensive use. Property owners within 350
feet of the site were notified and no comments were received.
,.
Animal kennels are allowed by. conditional use in the industrial zoning
district and must meet specific conditions as follows: 1. A minimum of 75
square feet must be provided for each dog. The applicant proposed to
provide 246 square feet of space per dog for kenneling, veterinary care,
training and kitchen functions. Each kennel would have 108 square feet of
area including the outdoor dog run. 2. No ancillary services are proposed for
this site other than training. 3. The applicant is proposing an outdoor exercise
area of 21,725 square feet, or 517 square feet per dog, at maximum capacity
(100 square feet per dog is required). An eight-foot chain link fence would
surround the outdoor exercise area. Two additional planting areas of three
evergreen trees each along the length of the fence would provide additional
screening. Animal waste would be picked up iffiJ.llediately and disposed of in
the sanitary sewer system. 4. The petitioner indicated the facility would
provide a ventilation system to prohibit the transmission of odors or
organisms between tenant bays. The facility temperature would be
maintained between 60 and 80 degrees Fahrenheit. 5. A separate area in the
building would isolate sick or injured animals from healthy animals. In the
future, the petitioner intends to construct a separate building to quarantine
animals and provide a caretaker unit. 6. The kennels would be constructed of
Mason FRP metal and polyethylene/fiberglass reinforced plastic that is fully
washable. Kennels would be cleaned daily with industrial disinfectant and
pressure washed weekly. A six-inch liquid-tight curb would not be utilized
as required by code due to the fact that the kennel system being used offers
the same protection using a different design element. 7. Animal waste would
be removed from kennels daily and waste outside would be cleaned up
immediately. 8. The applicant would apply for appropriate licensure. 9. The
applicant would provide the city with at least 14 days' notice if the animal
kennel intends to vacate the premises. 10. The facility must provide adequate
lighting throughout the interior of the facility. The applicant indicated they
would add several wall packs on the back of the building by the dog runs.
Planning Commission Meeting
6
April 7, 2009
The Design and Review Committee met with the applicant and reviewed the
proposal. The applicant submitted a revised narrative indicating compliance
with all zoning code requirements. A 20-foot deep kennel annex on the north
side of the existing building would be constructed, which would be
compliant with city code setback requirements. The first phase would not
require any modification to access or circulation patterns on the site. The
existing lot would provide for current parking needs, and the eastern gravel
area would provide for overflow parking. The existing one-story building is
constructed of brick on the front comer and painted block for the balance of
the building. The proposed annex at the back of the existing building would
be 20 feet deep, painted decorative block, prefinished sheet metal cladding,
standing seam steel roofing and overhead garage doors. The annex would be
enclosed by chain-link fence which would enclose the outdoor exercise area
for the animals. The existing building would contain office space, training
and exercise areas, meeting rooms, veterinary care, warehouse, storage, and
. garage space for the vans.
Mr. Jacobsen reported that the applicant proposed to remove several
nuisance type trees behind the building and plant two additional clumps of
evergreens to the west of the rear yard fencing. These two clumps would
provide some screening and allow adequate visibility for police to monitor
the back of the site. The applicant desired to have visibility to the street for
training the dogs. Additional wall packs would be added near the kennels for
security purposes. The dogs are well trained and have a handler with them
while in the outside exercise area. The location is isolated within the
industrial park so there would be no disturbances to residential properties.
The existing sign on the southwest comer of the site would be refaced and an
additional sign would be added near the ingress to the site. No changes are
proposed with regard to utilities. Loading would take place either in the
storage area or near the delivery door. The trash container would be inside
the storage area and there would be no outside storage. No grading or
drainage changes have been proposed. The proposal fits within the
requirements of the design guidelines.
In summary, Mr. Jacobsen stated that the applicant is a non-profit
corporation. They are requesting a conditional use permit to allow a dog
kennel and training facility at 9440 Science Center Drive. A small building
addition on the north side of the building would be constructed for 20 dog
kennels and dog runs. The proposal meets the requirements of the CUP. The
applicant suggested future expansions of the facility may include an
accessory building or an addition that would house a caretaker unit with
guest rooms and an isolation kennel. The parking lot would also be
expanded at that time. Only the first phase of the proposal should be
considered at this time. Future phases would be considered as a CUP
amendment. Mr. Jacobsen stated that staff felt the proposal met all the OJP
requirements and recommended approval of the request.
Chair Oelkers and Commissioner Houle pointed out that at the Design and
Review Committee meeting the applicant had indicated he wanted
conceptual approval of a master plan, specifically the applicant wanted to
Planning Commission Meeting
7
April 7, 2009
construct a separate building to house the caretaker in the future.
Commissioner Svendsen added that he thought the applicant wanted to
know if the conceptual plan was workable as a whole and whether it could
be completed in phases. Future phases would be brought back to the
Planning Commission and City Council for formal approval.
Mr. Peter Hilger, Rylaur Consulting and volunteer architect for Hearing and
Service Dogs, came forward and introduced AJ, Mr. Al Peters, and Mr.
Richard Garon, building owner.
Mr. Hilger stated that Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota was asking for
long-range plan approval, not in detail, but in function. The reason for this
was that as a non-profit they were making a significant investment in the
building and hoped to be in this location for a long time. It was essential that
certain conditions could occur on the site in the future. The most critical
function would be the quarantine area. He explained that when dogs are
brought in from a shelter, they need to be quarantined for a period of time to
be sure they are healthy and not spreading disease to the other dogs. It may
be possible to have the quarantine area in the existing building, however, the
best practice is to have a separate facility. When funds are available in the
future, they would construct a separate building to house up to six kennels
for quarantine and related vet facilities for those dogs. Attached to that
building would be a caretaker facility,. which would be similar to mini
storage where there is a caretaker living on site. A caretaker on site is
important as the dogs are inside all night. Ancillary to the caretaker facility
would be guest rooms for the clients, who live a long distance from the
training facility, that need to be trained for a period of time with the dog and
a trainer. These clients, in most cases, are disabled and the units would be
appropriately designed for them and convenient to the training facility. Mr.
Hilger added that, as he understood the city code, the caretaker facility is
allowed in the industrial zoning district. He thought the industrial zone
allowed hotels, which could apply to the guest rooms. He was requesting
Commission approval of the concept. He realized there were design issues
that needed to be addressed latter. The site allowed ample room to make
adjustments to their proposaL They would also have room to expand the
offices or kennels to the north of the existing building. He reiterated that they
were asking for long-range master concept approval so when they come back
to the city to amend the CUP in the future, it could be accomplished.
Mr. Steve Sondrall, city attorney, stated it would not be feasible for the
Planning Commission to recommend, nor the City Council to agree, to some
type of long-range plan for which the city had not seen a plan. The current
City Council could not bind a future Council to something that it may not
want to do. Zoning codes change. The Commission could only approve a
plan that was before them, and not offer an advisory opinion or guarantee
that a future use would be legally binding or acceptable. Any plan the
applicant brings to the city in the future would be reviewed under the
current ordinances. Commissioner Oelkers pointed out that a plan for the
future layout of the site had been submitted and wondered whether or not
the Commission could approve that subject to design approval. Mr. Sondrall
maintained he did not feel it would be appropriate to approve a potential
Plarming Commission Meeting
8
April 7, 2009
future plan at this time. The Commission could approve the annex, which
would be constructed in the immediate future. If a plan had been submitted
with a building that would be constructed in a reasonable period of time,
approval would be appropriate, but the Commission could not approve a
plan for a future use that it had not seen. Mr. Jacobsen reiterated that the
Commission could approve the current plan, and indicate to the City Council
that, from the discussion regarding future plans, the Council could imply to
the applicant that under the current ordinances in the city, the future plans
may be acceptable. The city could not approve something that does not yet
exist. Mr. Hilger stressed that they had to know they could do something on
the site prior to purchasing it.
Discussion ensued on zoning changes and publication of notices for either a
specific property or an entire zoning district.
Mr. Hilger maintained that the opinion they would like from the city was
that if they brought in a plan that was fully compliant that they could have an
outbuilding with a caretaker facility. Mr. Sondrall stressed that the city could
not give an opinion like that. When properties are purchased, businesses take
a certain amount of risk in determining the use of a particular building. There
is no guarantee prior to the purchase of the property that the future
expansion would be allowed. The Commission could only react to the
current proposal. Mr. Hilger asked for concurrence of his interpretation of
the code. Mr. Sondrall stated he did not concur with the residential use of the
property. He thought the caretaker unit may be acceptable, but not the guest
rooms. He suggested that staff and the planning consultant review the
request.
Commissioner Houle asked the applicant whether they were on a specific
timeframe or if the Commission could postpone a decision and bring the
issue back at the May meeting. Mr. Hilger stated they wanted to close on the
property prior to June 1. Mr. Jacobsen stated that if this matter was brought
back to the Commission in May and approved, it could be heard by the City
Council on May 11, which would be within the 60-day timeline.
Commissioner Houle asked for a recess to talk to the petitioner.
Chair Oelkers called for a recess at 8:12 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at
8:17 p.m.
Mr. Jacobsen corrected his previous statement regarding the 60-day time
limit which would expire prior to the Council considering this planning case,
therefore, an extension would need to be approved. Mr. Hilger stated he was
agreeable to furnishing the city with a letter requesting an extension. He
added he would like to review the zoning issues with staff and consultants
and bring a revised plan back to the Commission.
A question was raised whether or not a plan could be approved if the
applicant brought back a plan with the outbuilding they plan to construct.
Or, if approved, what would happen if the building was not constructed
within the next few years? Mr. Sondrall stated that if a conditional use permit
was not acted upon the CUP dies by operation of law after one year. The
Planning Commission Meeting
9
April 7, 2009
applicant would have to apply for another CUP when ready to construct the
accessory building. Chair Oelkers recommended that the applicant, staff, and
consultants meet to work out the details.
Commissioner Svendsen called attention to the ventilation systems - one for
the dog area and another updated system for indoor truck parking in the
warehouse -and reminded the petitioner that any rooftop units needed to be
screened from the public right-of-way. Mr. Hilger stated that new ventilation
equipment would be used for the kennel area. The truck area only needed an
exhaust system. The existing rooftop units are not screened, but allowed
through sightlines.
Mr. Hilger stated that the interior design may change somewhat. He added
that they do not plan to remove cottonwood trees during phase one, only if
or when an accessory building would be constructed. He mentioned that city
ordinance required one dog per kennel, however, he pointed out that they
house two dogs per kennel for training socialization purposes.
Commissioner Houle questioned whether retail sales were allowed in an
industrial district and it was determined that if the sales were accessory to the
principle business it was allowed. The applicant would be selling leashes and
other related items.
Commissioner Landy asked for clarification on the non-profit business and
inquired where it gets the dogs and how the dogs and clients are paired. Mr.
Alan Peters, executive director and founder of Hearing and Service Dogs of
Minnesota, stated that they continuously receive applications from potential
clients. They are always checking animal shelters for new candidates. They
have a breeding program and work with approximately 80 puppy raisers.
Puppies are raised in people's homes and donated back to the program when
they are about 16 to 18 months of age for final training. Total training takes
about two years. Depending on the need, a mobility-needs client and service
dog train together approximately three weeks. The client and dog come
together to meet and learn the basics, which is the time where the client
would stay on site. After three or four days on site, the training continues in
the client's home environment and surrounding area.
Commissioner Anderson questioned night security. A security system would
be installed. The building is sprinkled. The caretaker concept would add to
the security especially in an emergency, as well as the extra benefit of
someone on site for maintenance issues. The caretaker would live on site in a
small apartment. Mr. Sondrall stated he felt this would be similar to a
caretaker unit at a storage facility which was acceptable with the city code.
He pointed out that as a general rule, performance standards could be varied,
but not use standards. If a particular use was prohibited in a zoning district, a
variance could not be granted to allow it.
Commissioner Houle questioned the no parking signs along Science Center
Drive and if this area was required. Mr. Jacobsen responded that the
applicant had indicated they would visit with the business to the south to
determine if they could utilize some of its off-street parking. It may be
Plarming Commission Meeting
10
April 7, 2009
MOTION
Item 4.2
COMMITTEE
REPORTS
Design and Review
Committee
Item 5.1
Codes and Standards
Committee
Item 5.2
OLD BUSINESS
Miscellaneous Issues
Item 6.1
Planning Commission Meeting
possible that the Police Deparbnent could provide bags for the signs during
weekend graduation ceremonies.
Mr. Jacobsen mentioned that there would be an eight-foot chain-link fence
around the entire back of the property for security purposes. The kennels
would be locked as well. Discussion ensued on the request by the applicant
that the police K9 units not enter the building and whether or not this had
been discussed with the Police Department. Mr. Jacobsen replied that the
police do not go into a building unless there was a specific need. Generally,
the police have emergency numbers to contact the owner first. They may
enter only if they suspected a break in or an alarm was sounding.:Mr. Hilger
indicated the reason they do not want the police dogs in the building was in
case of disease. Mr. Sondrall added that the city and Police Department could
not guarantee that the K9 units would never be in that facility. If there was a
public safety reason, the K9 unit would enter the building.
Motion by Commissioner Houle, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen, to
table Planning Case 09-04 until the May 5 meeting, request for conditional
use permit to operate an animal kennel facility, 9440 Science Center Drive,
Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota, petitioner.
..
Voting in favor:
Anderson, Crough, Houle, Hunten, Landy, Oelkers,
Schmidt, Svendsen
None
Brinkman, Nirgude
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Chair Oelkers recommended that the applicant meet with the Design and
Review Committee on April 16 at 7:15 a.m.
Commissioner Svendsen reported that the Design and Review Committee
met with representatives of the YMCA and Hearing and Service Dogs. :Mr.
Jacobsen mentioned staff conducted three pre-application meetings and
thought at least one would move forward. The committee would be
contacted if a meeting was necessary on April 16.
Commissioner Schmidt reported that the Codes and Standards Committee
did not meet in March.
:Mr. Jacobsen stated he could give a brief update on previous planning cases
as requested at the last meeting. Chair Oelkers stated that due the time he
preferred to hold the updates to the next meeting. He suggested reviewing a
couple items per month to learn how the projects progressed from a planning
standpoint and the positive and negative parts of the projects. For example,
he wondered whether the finished Village on Quebec project looked like it
did when presented to the Commission or if the front yard setback variance
for Conductive Containers worked out like expected. He suggested staff
provide a few photos of the projects and a short report of the original request
11
April 7, 2009
provide a few photos of the projects and a short report of the original request
and outcome, and the minutes from the meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
Motion to Approve
Minutes
Item 7.1
Motion by Commissioner Schmidt, seconded by Commissioner Landy, to
approve the Planning Commission minutes of March 3, 2009. All voted in
favor. Motion carried.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chair Oelkers announced the Business Forum on April 8 at 7:30 a.m.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
CjJ~S;~
Pamela Sylvester
Recording Secretary
"
Plarming Commission Meeting
12
April 7, 2009