120109 Planning0�
To:
Planning Commission
Cc:
Steve Sondrall, City Attorney
Al Brixius, Planning Consultant
From:
Curtis Jacobsen, Director of CD
Date:
November 23, 2009
Subject:
PC 09 -06, T- Mobile Antenna at 5040 Winnetka Avenue North
On May 5, 2009 the Planning Commission tabled Planning Case 09 -06, a request for a conditional use
permit for personal wireless service antenna at 5040 Winnetka Avenue North, FMHC Corporation, agent
of T- Mobile Central LLC, petitioner. On June 8 the City Council approved a sixty day extension running
through August 7, 2009. On July 13 T- Mobile through their agent requested an additional 60 day
extension. At the July 27 City Council meeting the Council acting on Attorney Gordon Jensen s advice
the Council that rather than granting another 60 day extension offered to waive the 60 day rule with the
applicant's consent. The applicant agreed verbally to waiving the sixty day rule and provided a letter to
that effect on July 30
The reason this item was tabled generally revolved around the displeasure of the Planning Commission
with how the contractor of T- Mobile had left a prior installation at the city water tower incomplete. All of
the work at the water tower has been completed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and the
city engineer.
At this time the application is before you once again for consideration. To refresh your memory T- Mobile
is proposing to install a 110 foot monopole style tower to the east of the building at 5040 Winnetka
Avenue North. The complete installation is on private property and no public right -of -ways will be
disturbed by the construction of the tower or its accessory fence and equipment building.
City Attorney Sondrall will be in attendance to answer any questions you may have regarding
requirements for bonds related to this application.
All pertinent handouts are being provided to the Commission again for your convenience.
Attachments: Application
Applicant's narrative
Planning Case Report 09 -06
Location maps
Drainage map
Planning Consultant Report
City Engineer Report
Coverage maps
Licensing and safety info
Digitally represented tower image
Letter of support — property owner
Excerpt of Planning Commission minutes, May 5, 2009
Excerpt of City Council minutes, June 8, 2009
Letter FMHC, July 13, 2009
Excerpt of City Council minutes, July 27, 2009
Letter FMHC, July 30, 2009
Engineering plans (signed)
Application log
2
Basic Fee Deposit
Case No. Cq 9-6
Date Filed 4 lA
Receipt No. rL1 3 -
Received by
Name of Applicant: FMHC Corporation, as agent for T- Mobile Central LLC
P1D 08- 118 -21 -23 -0002
Street Location of Property:
5040 Winnetka Avenue North New Hoe 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)
Conditi Use Permit for a Personal Wireless Service Antenna Tower (Section 4 -3 of New Hope's Zon ina 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 d e termined there is a neat{ in the City of New Hopp and is working to hri 8 the henafits of ceamlacc
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
right 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 city's 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.
N Q e a c arre �S l .•m. dam. r C'c%
Signed:
•�,r a ��c-e c e S� e rg`
Applic J Other than Owner (print or
Evidence of Ownership Submitted:
Certified Lot Survey:
Legal Description Adequate:
Legal Ad Required:
Date of Design & Review Meeting:
FOR CITY USE ONLY
Yes No Required
Yes No Required
Yes No Required
Yes No Required
Date of Planning Commission Meeting:
Approved: Denied:
By Planning Commission on:
Approved: Denied:
By City Council on:
Subject to the following conditions:
�•,�,M i 1 ''t 1 . , N 1 1 101
1 1 0 1 0
T- Mobile USA is the United States operating entity of T- Mobile International AG, the
mobile communications subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom AG (NYSE: DT). Deutsche Telekom 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 of 2007; that number jumped to nearly
one out of every six (15.8) during the second half of 2007. 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- Mobile 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.
The subject of the Conditional Use Permit application is Victory Packaging, located at
5040 Winnetka Avenue North, New Hope, Minnesota 55428. Victory Packaging is legally
described as "The North 265, feet of the West 558 feet of the Southwest'/ of the Northwest'/ of
Section 8, Township 118, Range 21, except the East 7 feet of the West 40 feet thereof, in Hennepin
County, Minnesota. TORRENSproperty." 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
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 of the 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 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.
,.� J . �
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 2
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
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.
! . ! . ! . .
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.
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.
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
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.
T- Mobile looks forward to working with the City of New Hope to bring the benefits of
seamless wireless coverage and enhanced E911 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 4
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
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.
(1) Personal wireless service antennas and 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 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 successful 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 ofenhanced 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 an 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 far an administrative permit do not apply for purposes 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 5
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
A letter of written authorization from the Victory Packaging landlord is included as part
of this application as Exhibit G: Letter of Authorization from 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
of the 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 of T- 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 O
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
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 of tower 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 of the tower or the minimum setback requirements of the base zoning district,
whichever is greater.
The proposed antenna tower is one hundred ten (I 10) feet in height and so the minimum
setback to the nearest property line is eighty -two and one half (82 '/) 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 setback from a building in the same lot is fifty -five (55) feet. The
proposed antenna tower located so that it meets the minimum setback distance from the building
of fifty 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 towers within a one thousand (1000) foot radius of
the proposed tower base at the Victory 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.
7 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 (110) feet does not exceed the
maximum height of one hundred sixty -five (165) 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
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 (I 10) 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 of the 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 willfully 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 signage and emergency and maintenance
notification signage as required above. T- Mobile will also comply with any signage regulations
and/or requirements of the manufacturer and Federal, State and local authorities.
1. Antenna towers shall be painted silver or have a galvanized finish to
reduce visual impact, unless otherwise 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 and finish.
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.
T- Mobile is proposing that the monopole 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.
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 with the City to look at alternative treatments that
will accomplish the desired color and finish.
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
wire along the tower of the fence. To prevent climbing on the monopole, T- Mobile will not install
climbing pegs below twelve (12) 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 of the
antenna tower and shall be screened from view from residential uses and public
rights -of -way.
T Mobile is proposing to locate its accessory 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 Victory Packaging building and will be adequately
screened from Winnetka Avenue by the building. The view of the equipment from other directions
will 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 -1 and I -2 districts of the city and shall be subject to
the regulations and requirements of section 4 -33 of this Code. Commercial and public radio
and television transmitting, public utility microwave antennas and antenna towers shall also
comply with the following standards:
T- Mobile is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission ( "FCC') to
provide personal wireless service throughout the United States. Therefore this section of the
Victory Packaging 9
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
zoning ordinance, regarding public radio and television and utility microwave antennas does not
apply for purposes of this application.
Victory Packaging 10
5040 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
Meeting Date: May 5, 2009
Report Date: May 1, 2009
Planning Case: 09 -06
Petitioner: FMHC Corporation, as agent of T- Mobile Central LLC
Address: 5040 Winnetka Avenue North
Request: 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) General Provisions — personal wireless service antenna towers
4- 20(e)(8) Industrial CUP — personal wireless service antenna towers
4 -33 Administration — conditional use permit
III. Property Specifications
Zoning: I, industrial
Location: East side of Winnetka Avenue between 49th Avenue and CP Rail Road tracks
Adjacent Land Uses: Industrial to the northwest, north, east and south, and R -1, R -2 and R -O to the
west and southwest.
Site Area: Approximately 140,400 square feet or 3.22 acres
Planning District: The site is located within Planning District 5. The Comprehensive Plan calls
for redevelopment and maintenance of the city's industrial areas. While not a
redevelopment project or true expansion project, the proposed tower will
include site maintenance including new bituminous, clearing of brush and
removal of graffiti. The project is generally in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
Specific Information: The site houses office and storage facilities for Victory Packaging. The T-
Mobile tower is proposed for a 40' by 40' area to the east of the building in
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.
Planning Case Report 09 -06 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.
V1. Notification
Property owners within 350 feet of the property were notified and staff has received no comments.
VI1. Development Analysis
A. Zoning Code Criteria
Sec. 4 -30). 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 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.
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 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 of the tower or the
minimum setback requirements of the base zoning district, whichever is greater.
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.
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.
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 antenna tower. The
owner /operator of the 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.
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 switching 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, I. 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 m
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 determining the suitability of certain designated uses
upon the general 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) 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 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.
Planning 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 (I):
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 1,000 -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 curbing 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
i. 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
financial guarantee required as a result of past working 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:
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 owner, 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 curbing 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
antennas 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
Required Setback
Proposed Setback
Setback from Lot Lines -
826"
88'9"
75% of height
Setback from Buildings on
55'
55'
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 owner, 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 curbing 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
antennas 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 accessed 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.
S. 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 electrical
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
guidelines 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 in compliance with the Design Guidelines.
F. Staff Considerations
Comments from the community development staff, city planner, building official, city
attorney, city engineer, police department, and West Metro Fire are incorporated 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 Avenue 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 with 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:
• Application
• Applicant narrative
• Property owner /occupant support letter
• PCS Broadband License
• Maps /aerial photographs
• Plans
• Planning Memorandum (April 14, 2009)
• Engineering Memorandum (April 13, 2009)
• Application log
Planning Case Report 09 -06 Page 8 5/5/09
8201
5201
5447
8320 8316 4
�. 5033
8324 �� 8312 5025
8308 5017
830 5009
4989 5001
4965
57
5121
N w e vr — a
OOOOOO
tp of
eo«�eoaoa000
aio�i�oNioNia�
t�n� pmg
y 4992
4973
8119 4965
4857
4856 7901
4998
49D0 o X N 4901
SOTH AVE N
y 4992
4973
8119 4965
4857
4856 7901
�= 4986
4965
O c�
z ao 0 4965
> 4956 4957 z
f�
r
4960
4957
d 4972
4957
4972 4941
4949
4948 4949 < ��
4949
4824
4825
z 4824 4825
4940 4941
4816
4817
164 4933
co
^
4933 495 4948
4941
4808 4809
z 4800
4932
4933
4925
AVE N Z
4924 4925 hR c � 4940
R
X25
4916
4917 �3 4916
4932
:427 1406 i 5425 5426
1 54.3 ST RAPHAEL DR.
5417 5420 5425 5420 5419 5448 5361
5413 5414 5413 535
_ 5416 5413 5414 5355
5409 5406 5409 5408 5409 5410 59
ELM G VE A 54111 5400 5401 5400 5401 "10 � 5'
5325 5330 5337 z 5348 5329 5336 5337
z 5331
L-- — Q
o° 5319 5324 5331 '� 5342 5325
53 5330 5331 Q 5330
^ ; 5318 5325 5336 5321 m 5325
cc
� 5324 g 5324
5307 5312 5319 0 5330 5317 W 5318 5319 5348
7825 7800 5306 5313 5324 5313 5312 5313 = 5312
to 5218 Ltc` o° 5307 5318 5309 5306 5307 w 5306
5212 �' ~' `" 5312 5305 &
7801 h 5300 5301 300
5206 ��_
5221 k 5301
4z' 5306 53?
5200 `-
5201 7606 600 5242 5249
°' 5236
5230 5243
~ ? ^ ^
5261
0° < 5224 5237
5' 1 ^ r'c� ^ ^ 5251 5230
5237 5218 5231 5224
It! 5218
5212 5225
'C ^ 5206 5219
20 5213 5212
5:
5130 � �` ^ °�°' ^� 520Q
5207
760 7535 7531 5201 52T052
5000
0 4917
8 4
X 490 90 9 �0 4908 4924 4909 7820
68200 0 w � o
40 cc 4
49D0 o X N 4901
4856
4857
4856 7901
4848
4849
4848 4849
4840
4841
4840 4841
4832
4833
4832 4833
4824
4825
z 4824 4825
4816
4817
4 4816 4817
co
^
4808
4809
4808 4809
z 4800
4801
4800 4801
4 TH
AVE N Z
n
4948
7720 7700 7620 7b40
49TH AVE N
48TH CIR N
7400
G'
I I
�
I
't"o.
EW
22
. Lam-
W�'
s
ASSOCIATE NORTHWEST CONSULTA
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners @nacplanning.com
•'� i
TO: Curtis Jacobsen
FROM: Alan Brixius
DATE: April 14
RE: New Hope — T Mobile Tower at 5040 Winnetka Avenue
FILE NO: 131.01 — 09.04
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 Proposed
Setback 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.
L 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.
K
l
R
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.
2335 Highway 36 W
St, Paul, MN 55113
TO NX !
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
Tel 651- 636 -4600
Fax 651- 636 -1311
www.bonestroo.com
S=
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.
�;
�
'
�'
S.
!. 3
.,�
l
� _
�'
w
To: Kelly Swenseth, FMHC
CC: Alan Roberts, RF Engineering Manager, T- Mobile USA
From: Joshua Mathews, Senior RF Engineer, T- Mobile USA
Date: 3/20/2009
Re: Victory Packaging Monopole, New Hope MN (A100759E)
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 inbuilding coverage in the commercial
and residential areas along Winnetka Avenue North between Highway 10 and approximately 46`
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 R3 -E (2140 to 2145)
Receive : PCS B block (1870 to 1885), PCS C4 Block (1900 to 1905), AWS R3 -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.
ULN License - FUN Broadbaml License - K1VL1'LL4 - I - iviooi>e License LL\.
ULS License
Call Sign
Status
Market
Market
Submarket
KNLF224
Active
Radio Service CW - PCS Broadband
Ruth Type Regular
MTA012 - Minneapolis -St Paul Channel Block B
29 Associated 001870.00000000 -
Frequencies 001885.00000000
(MHz) 001950.00000000 -
001965.00000000
Dates
Grant 07/18/2005
Effective 01/05/2008
Buildout Deadlines
1st 06/23/2000
Notification Dates
1st 07/07/2000
Licensee
FRN 0001565449
Licensee
T- Mobile License LLC
12920 SE 38th St.
Bellevue, WA 98006
ATTN Dan Menser
Contact
T- Mobile License LLC
12920 SE 38th St.
Bellevue, WA 98006
ATTN Dan Menser
Expiration 06/23/2015
Cancellation
2nd 06/23/2005
2nd 05/23/2005
Type Limited Liability Company
P:(425)378 -4000
E:dan.menser @t- mobile.com
P:(425)378 -4000
E:dan.menser @t- mobile.com
Ownership and Qualifications
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
1 Rr,V t v1 -
http:// wireless2. fcc. gov/ UlsApp /UlsSearch /license.isp ?licKey = 8901 &printable 8/21/2008
ULS License - PCS Broadband License - KNLF224 - T- Mobile License LLC; rage z of
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. fec.gov /UlsApp/ JIsSearch /license. j sp ?licKey =8901 &printable 8/21/2008
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION:
OFFICE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
Excerpts from "Radio Frequency Safety Frequently Asked Questions"
ARE CELLULAR AND RCS TOWERS AND ANTENNAS SAFE?
Cellular radio services transmit using frequencies between 800 and 900 megahertz
(MHz). Transmitters in the Personal Communications Service (PCS) use frequencies in
the range of 1850 -1990 MHz. Antennas used for cellular and PCS transmissions are
typically located on towers, water tanks or other elevated structures including rooftops
and the sides of buildings. The combination of antennas and associated electronic
equipment is referred to as a cellular or PCS "base station" or "cell site." Typical heights
for free - standing base station towers or structures are 50 -200 feet. A cellular base
station may utilize several "ornni- directional" antennas that look like poles, 10 to 15 feet
in length, although these types of antennas are becoming less common in urban areas.
In urban and suburban areas, cellular and PCS service providers now more commonly
use "sector" antennas for their base stations. These antennas are rectangular panels,
e.g., about 1 by 4 feet in dimension, typically mounted on a rooftop or other structure,
but they are also mounted on towers or poles. The antennas are usually arranged in
three groups of three each. One antenna in each group is used to transmit signals to
mobile units (car phones or hand -held phones), and the other two antennas in each
group are used to receive signals from mobile units.
At a given cell or PCS site, the total RF power that could be transmitted from each
transmitting antenna at a cell site depends on the number of radio channels
(transmitters) that have been authorized and the power of each transmitter. Typically,
for a cellular base station, a maximum of 21 channels per sector (depending on the
system) could be used. Thus, for a typical cell site utilizing sector antennas, each of the
three transmitting antennas could be connected to up to 21 transmitters for a total of 63
transmitters per site. When Omni- directional antennas are used, up to 96 transmitters
could be implemented at a cell site, but this would be very unusual. Furthermore, while
a typical base station could have as many as 63 transmitters, not all of the transmitters
would be expected to operate simultaneously thus reducing overall emission levels. For
the case of PCS base stations, fewer transmitters are normally required due to the
relatively greater number of base stations.
The signals from a cellular or PCS base station antenna are essentially directed toward
the horizon in a relatively narrow pattern in the vertical plane. The radiation pattern for
an omni - directional antenna might be compared to a thin doughnut or pancake centered
around the antenna while the pattern for a sector antenna is fan - shaped, like a wedge
cut from a pie. As with all forms of electromagnetic energy, the power density from a
cellular or PCS transmitter decreases rapidly as one moves away from the antenna.
A, • . -
• D
#00007.08C
Consequently, normal ground -level exposure is much less than exposures that might be
encountered if one were very close to -the antenna and in its main transmitted beam,
Measurements made near typical cellular and PCS installations, especially those with
tower- mounted antennas, have shown that ground -level power densities are thousands
of times less than the FCC's limits for safe exposure. In fact, in order to be exposed to
levels at or near the FCC limits for cellular or PCS frequencies an individual would
essentially have to remain in the main transmitting beam (at the height of the antenna)
and within a few feet from the antenna. This makes it extremely unlikely that a member
of the general public could be exposed to RF levels in excess of these guidelines due to
cellular or PCS base station transmitters.
When cellular and PCS antennas are mounted at rooftop locations it is possible that
ambient RF levels could be greater than those typically encountered on the ground.
However, once again, exposures approaching or exceeding the safety guidelines are
only likely to be encountered very close to or directly in front of the antennas. For
sector -type antennas RF levels to the side and in back of these antennas are
insignificant.
ARE CELLULAR AND OTHER RADIO TOWERS LOCATED NEAR HOMES OR
SCHOOLS SAFE FOR RESIDENTS AND STUDENTS?
As discussed above, radiofrequency emissions from antennas used for wireless
transmissions such as cellular and PCS signals result in exposure levels on the ground
that are typically thousands of times less than safety limits. These safety limits were
adopted by the FCC based on the recommendations of expert organizations and
endorsed by agencies of the Federal Government responsible for health and safety.
Therefore, there is no reason to believe that such towers could constitute a potential
health hazard to nearby residents or students.
Other antennas, such as those used for radio and television broadcast transmissions,
use power levels that are generally higher than those used for cellular and PCS
antennas, Therefore, in some cases there could be a potential for higher levels of
exposure on the ground. However, all broadcast stations are required to demonstrate
compliance with FCC safety guidelines, and ambient exposures to nearby persons from
such stations are typically well below FCC safety limits.
CAN LOCAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTAL. BODIES ESTABLISH LIMITS FOR RF
EXPOSURE?
In the United States some local and state jurisdictions have also enacted rules and
regulations pertaining to human exposure to RF energy. However, the
Telecommunications Act of 9996 contained provisions relating to federal jurisdiction to
regulate human 'exposure to RF emissions from certain transmitting devices. In
particular, Section 704 of the Act states that, "No State or local government or
instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of
,-A31 T-MOBILE
MINNETONKA BLVD
#00007.08C
personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio
frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's
regulations concerning such emissions." Further information on FCC policy with respect
to facilities siting is available in a factsheet from the FCC's Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau (see www.fcc.gov /wtb
T-MOBILE
12201 MINNETONKA BLVD
0000
WHO I Electromagnetic fields and public health Page 1 of 3
Fact sheet 'N" 304
May 2006
Electromagnetic fields and public health
Base stations and wireless technologies
Mobile telephony is now commonplace around the world. This wireless technology relies upon an extensive network of fixed antennas,
or base stations, relaying information with radiofrequency (RF) signals. Over 1.4 million base stations exist worldwide and the number
is increasing significantly with the introduction of third generation technology.
Other wireless networks that allow high -speed internet access and services, such as wireless local area networks (WLANs), are also
increasingly common in homes, offices, and many public areas (airports, schools, residential and urban areas). As the number of base
stations and local wireless networks increases, so does the RF exposure of the population. Recent surveys have shown that the RF
exposures from base stations range from 0.002% to 2% of the levels of international exposure guidelines, depending on a variety of
factors such as the proximity to the antenna and the surrounding environment. This is lower or comparable to RF exposures from radio
or television broadcast transmitters.
There has been concern about possible health consequences from exposure to the RF fields produced by wireless technologies. This
fact sheet reviews the scientific evidence on the health effects from continuous low -level human exposure to base stations and other
local wireless networks.
Health concerns
A common concern about base station and local wireless network antennas relates to the possible long -term health effects that whole -
body exposure to the RF signals may have. To date, the only health effect from RF fields identified in scientific reviews has been
related to an increase in body temperature (> 1 °C) from exposure at very high field intensity found only in certain industrial facilities,
such as RF heaters. The levels of RF exposure from base stations and wireless networks are so low that the temperature increases are
insignificant and do not affect human health.
The strength of RF fields is greatest at its source, and diminishes quickly with distance. Access near base station antennas is restricted
where RF signals may exceed international exposure limits. Recent surveys have indicated that RF exposures from base stations and
wireless technologies in publicly accessible areas (including schools and hospitals) are normally thousands of times below international
standards.
In fact, due to their lower frequency, at similar RF exposure levels, the body absorbs up to five times more of the signal from FM radio
and television than from base stations. This is because the frequencies used in FM radio (around 100 MHz) and in TV broadcasting
(around 300 to 400 MHz) are lower than those employed in mobile telephony (900 MHz and 1800 MHz) and because a person's height
makes the body an efficient receiving antenna. Further, radio and television broadcast stations have been in operation for the past 50 or
more years without any adverse health consequence being established.
While most radio technologies have used analog signals, modern wireless telecommunications are using digital transmissions. Detailed
reviews conducted so far have not revealed any hazard specific to different RF modulations.
Cancer; Media or anecdotal reports of cancer clusters around mobile phone base stations have heightened public concern. It should be
noted that geographically, cancers are unevenly distributed among any population. Given the widespread presence of base stations in
the environment, it is expected that possible cancer clusters will occur near base stations merely by chance. Moreover, the reported
cancers in these clusters are often a collection of different types of cancer with no common characteristics and hence unlikely to have a
common cause.
Scientific evidence on the distribution of cancer in the population can be obtained through carefully planned and executed
epidemiological studies. Over the past 15 years, studies examining a potential relationship between RF transmitters and cancer have
been published. These studies have not provided evidence that RF exposure from the transmitters increases the risk of cancer.
Likewise, long -term animal studies have not established an increased risk of cancer from exposure to RF fields, even at levels that are
much higher than produced by base stations and wireless networks.
Other effects: Few studies have investigated general health effects in individuals exposed to RF fields from base stations. This is
http: / /www. who. int /mediacentre /factsheets /fs304 /en/print.html 5/12/2009
WHO I Electromagnetic fields and public health
rage /_ oz .5
because of the difficulty in distinguishing possible health effects from the very low signals emitted by base stations from other higher
strength RF signals in the environment. Most studies have focused on the RF exposures of mobile phone users. Human and animal
studies examining brain wave patterns, cognition and behaviour after exposure to RF fields, such as those generated by mobile phones,
have not identified adverse effects. RF exposures used in these studies were about 1000 times higher than those associated with general
public exposure from base stations or wireless networks. No consistent evidence of altered sleep or cardiovascular function has been
reported.
Some individuals have reported that they experience non - specific symptoms upon exposure to RF fields emitted from base stations and
other EMF devices. As recognized in arecent WHO fact sheet "Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity ", EMF has not been shown to cause
such symptoms. Nonetheless, it is important to recognize the plight of people suffering from these symptoms.
From all evidence accumulated so far, no adverse short- or long -term health effects have been shown to occur from the RF signals
produced by base stations. Since wireless networks produce generally lower RF signals than base stations, no adverse health effects are
expected from exposure to them.
Protection standards
International exposure guidelines have been developed to provide protection against established effects from RF fields by the
International Commission on Non - Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP, 1998) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic
Engineers (IEEE, 2005).
National authorities should adopt international standards to protect their citizens against adverse levels of RF fields. They should
restrict access to areas where exposure limits may be exceeded.
Public perception of risk
Some people perceive risks from RF exposure as likely and even possibly severe. Several reasons for public fear include media
announcements of new and unconfirmed scientific studies, leading to a feeling of uncertainty and a perception that there may be
unknown or undiscovered hazards. Other factors are aesthetic concerns and a feeling of a lack of control or input to the process of
determining the location of new base stations. Experience shows that education programmes as well as effective communications and
involvement of the public and other stakeholders at appropriate stages of the decision process before installing RF sources can enhance
public confidence and acceptability.
Conclusions
Considering the very low exposure levels and research results collected to date, there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak
RF signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects.
WHO Initiatives
WHO, through the International EMF Project, has established a programme to monitor the EMF scientific literature, to evaluate the
health effects from exposure to EMF in the range from 0 to 300 GHz, to provide advice about possible EMF hazards and to identify
suitable mitigation measures. Following extensive international reviews, the International EMF Project has promoted research to fill
gaps in knowledge. In response national governments and research institutes have funded over $250 million on EMF research over the
past 10 years.
While no health effects are expected from exposure to RF fields from base stations and wireless networks, research is still being
promoted by WHO to determine whether there are any health consequences from the higher RF exposures from mobile phones.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a WHO specialized agency, is expected to conduct a review of cancer risk
from RF fields in 2006 -2007 and the International EMF Project will then undertake an overall health risk assessment for RF fields in
2007 -2008.
Further Reading
ICNIIZI' (1998) wNvw icnir oruldocumentslemfgdL12
IEEE (2006) IEEE C95.1 -2005 "IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency
Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz"
Related links
- B stations & wireless networks• EXposures & health consequences
http: / /www. who. int/ mediacentre /factsheets /fs304 /en /print.html 5/12/2009
WHO I Electromagnetic fields and public health
Eq nolok, � !� P.- -.1
Jlej R ivit
Wj-jQj),an
_ Ra dio Frccf
For more information contact:
WHO Media centre
Telephone: +4122 791 2222
E-mail: nlzciiaingpiriesi
Contacts I E_maill sc ams. I E'nP I EAQ5 ;Feedback 1 jLfiyq_cy I LRS
C WHO 200
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs
I �
.5 -
5/12/2009
. . . .. w.....� : ..
................. ... \.zd.� ». � « d.. . .... .....
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,
Jae Hagberg
President — Minneapolis
Ms. Swenseth stated that the planning report indicated the property owner
was responsible for the development of the access road and to re -pave the
road; however, T- Mobile would be responsible for that work per the lease
agreement with the property owner.
Chair Oelkers suggested tabling this planning case. He asked the petitioner
to attend the next Design and Review Committee meeting and provide a
schematic of how the tower would look from Winnetka Avenue, a statement
regarding the 1,000 -foot cell tower separation, and information on all other
outstanding issues from the previous meeting.
Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen, to
IEm.4,2 table Planning Case 09 -06, request for conditional use permit for personal
wireless service antenna tower, 5040 Winnetka Avenue North, FMHC
Corporation, agent of T- Mobile Central LLC, petitioner.
Voting in favor: Brinkman, Houle, Hunten, Landy, Nirgude, Oelkers,
Schmidt, Svendsen
Voting against: Crough
Absent: Anderson
Motion carried.
Chair Oelkers stated that the petitioner should meet with the Design and
Review Committee on May 14 to address the concerns of the Commission.
Mr. Jacobsen requested a letter requesting a 60 -day extension to the 60 -day
rule for approval of the planning application.
Chair Oelkers thanked the audience for their input and informed them the
Planning Commission would discuss this issue again on June 2 and make a
recommendation to the City Council. The Commission was bound by city
code and, if the request met the ordinance requirements, the Commission
had to recommend approval. The City Council would make the final
decision.
COMMITTEE
REPORTS
Design and Review Commissioner Svendsen reported that the Design an d Review Committee
Committee met with representatives of Hearing and Service Dogs and T- Mobile. Mr.
Item 5.1 Jacobsen mentioned staff conducted several pre - application meetings but
didn't know yet if any would move forward. The committee would be
meeting again with T- Mobile on May 14. Chair Oelkers suggested staff check
with the city attorney to determine what conditions could be attached to this
application and an amount to recommend for the financial guarantee/bond.
Codes and Standards Commissioner Schnudt reported that the Codes and Standards Committee
Committee did not meet in April.
Item 5.2
OLD BUSINESS Mr. Jacobsen gave a brief update on previous planning cases as previously
Planning Commission Meeting
9 » } 5; 2009
M
Mr. Steve Sondrall, city attorney, stated an ordinance amendment has been
prepared to address the caretaker apartment and the guest room within a
kennel. He stated the conditional use permit incorporates the property uses.
Mayor Hemken inquired regarding the effectiveness of a conditional use
permit. Mr. Sondrall explained that the CUP runs with the land so if the
property was used by another future owner for a similar use, the CUP would
remain in effect.
Mr. Sondrall noted that while Hearing and Service Dogs of Minnesota is a tax
exempt organization, it would still be required to pay for special assessments
(such as street projects).
RESOLUTION 09 -72 Council Member Elder introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 8.1 adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT, VARIANCE AND TEXT AMENDMENT TO OPERATE A
KENNEL FACILITY IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT AT 9440
SCIENCE CENTER DRIVE, HEARING AND SERVICE DOGS OF
MINNESOTA, PETITIONER." The motion for the adoption of the foregoing
resolution was seconded by Council Member Lammle, and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Hemken, Elder, Hoffe,
Lammle; and the following voted against the same: None; Abstained: None;
Absent: Stauner; whereupon the resolution was declared duly_�d and
adopted signed by the mayor which was attested to by the city clerk.
Mayor Hemken moved Item 10.1 forward on the agenda as the ordinance
relates to the planning case 09 -04.
ANIMAL KENNELS Mayor Hemken introduced for discussion Item 10.1, Ordinance no. 09 -05, an
Item 10.1 ordinance amending Chapter 4 of the New Hope city code by adding
additional conditions relating to the allowance of animal kennels as a
conditional use in the industrial zoning district.
ORDINANCE 09 -05
Council Member Lammle introduced the following ordinance and summary
Item 10.1
ordinance for publication purposes and moved their adoption:
"ORDINANCE NO. 09 -05, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4
OF THE NEW HOPE CITY CODE BY ADDING ADDITIONAL
CONDITIONS RELATING TO THE ALLOWANCE OF ANIMAL
KENNELS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING
DISTRICT." The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was
seconded by Council Member Elder, and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof: Hemken, Elder, Hoffe, Lammle; and the
following voted against the same: None; Abstained: None; Absent: Stauner,
whereupon the ordinance was declared duly_ passed and adopted, signed by
the mayor which was attested to by the city clerk.
CUP T- MOBILE
Mayor Hemken introduced for discussion Item 8.2, Resolution extending 60
Item 8.2
day time limit required by Minnesota Statutes 15.99 Subd. 2 for response to
zoning application requesting a conditional use permit, 5040 Winnetka
New Hope City Council
June 8, 2009
Page 4
Avenue for T- Mobile for a personal wireless service antenna (New Hope
planning case 09 -06) FMHC Corporation representing T- Mobile.
Mr. Curtis Jacobsen, director of community development, stated the 60 -day
extension would extend the review time line to August 7, 2009.
He noted an error in the first paragraph of the resolution (name of
organization) would be corrected.
RESOLUTION 09 -73 Council Member Elder introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 8.2 adoption: "RESOLUTION EXTENDING 60 DAY TIME LIMIT REQUIRED
BY MINNESOTA STATUTES 15.99 SUBD. 2 FOR RESPONSE TO
ZONING APPLICATION REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT, 5040 WINNETKA AVENUE FOR T- MOBILE FOR A PERSONAL
WIRELESS SERVICE ANTENNA (NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE 09 -06)
FMHC CORPORATION REPRESENTING T- MOBILE." The motion for the
adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Council Member Hoffe,
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Hemken, Elder, Hoffe, Lammle; and the following voted against the same:
None; Abstained: None, Absent: Stauner; whereupon the resolution was
declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the mayor which was attested
to by the city clerk.
WATER QUALITY Mayor Hemken introduced for discussion Item 8.3, Motion authorizing the
POND preparation of a feasibility report for construction of a water quality pond in
Item 8.3 the area of 45th Avenue and Winnetka Avenue (improvement project no. 855).
Mr. Jason Quisberg, city engineer, explained that staff is asking the Council to
consider improvements to an existing ponding area near 45th and Winnetka
Avenue that would establish a new regional water quality pond. He stated
the proposed improvements would provide both water quality and water
quantity benefits. He stated in regard to storm water issues the target is to
address excessive discharge rates from District SC -A5 discharging to Crystal
and reduce local flooding at the intersection of 45th and Xylon Avenues. The
improvements would add water quality treatment in District SC -A5 tributary
to Memory Pond. Mr. Quisberg stated the proposed improvements would
expand flood storage and restrict discharge out of 45th Avenue pond, provide
additional trunk storm capacity in 45th Avenue upstream of the 45th Avenue
pond, and excavate wet ponding volume in the 45th Avenue pond.
Mr. Quisberg stated the project is included in the Shingle Creek Watershed
CIP and tentatively slated for construction in 2010. He noted the watershed
has requested a feasibility report for the project be presented to them by June
25, 2009, and the project would be partially funded through the watershed's
CIP. He explained that a portion of the project would be completed
concurrently with 45th Avenue road improvements. He reviewed the
proposed project schedule.
MOTION Motion was made by Council Member Hoffe, seconded by Council Member
New Hope City Council June 8, 2009
Page 5
New Hope City Council
Attn: Curtis Jacobsen, Director of Community Development
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
Phone: 763- 531 -5119
Email: ciacobsen@ci.new-hope.mn.us
ci.new- hope.mn.us
July 13, 2009
New Hope City Council,
FMHC Corporation
2901 Metro Dwe
idle 776
BI()ctt>'Ilw ic)n, MN 5,5125
r.•rc� 952 f331 10.13
In a letter dated May 14, 2009 and addressed to Curtis Jacobsen, T- Mobile asked the Planning Commission
to continue T- Mobile's application (Planning Case 09 -06) for a Conditional Use Permit at 5040 Winnetka
Avenue North and to extend the deadline an additional sixty days beyond the original sixty day time frame
set forth by Minn. Stat. § 15.99. This extension to the review period was requested in order to allow T-
Mobile's design firm enough time to complete the design of the road and a grading /erosion control plan and
so that the Planning Commission would have sufficient time to review the completed plans.
T- Mobile's original application was submitted on April 10 `h , 2009 and so the City would have been
required to make a decision on the case by June 9, 2009. After the sixty day extension, the date for the City
to render a decision on T- Mobile's application would be on or before August 8, 2009. On July 7` the
Planning Commission passed a motion to deny T- Mobile's application because T- Mobile was not able to
supply the grading and erosion plan and access road design in time for a complete review. The Planning
Commission's recommendation to deny the application will be considered by the City Council on July
27th.
T- Mobile's design firm has been working on the grading and erosion plan and the design for the improved
access road. T- Mobile does expect to have completed plans ready for the City's review by the 22 °d of July.
Since this is so close to the August 8 deadline for the City Council to take action, T- Mobile would like to
request an additional sixty day extension in order to allow enough time for the Design and Review Board
and Planning Commission to fully review the plans. Another sixty day extension would allow for the City
Council to make a final decision by October 6, 2009.
At the July 27` City Council meeting please consider T- Mobile request that to grant an additional sixty day
extension and to remand the Conditional Use Permit application (Planning Case 09 -06) back to the
Planning Commission for a full review and recommendation before the City Council takes action on T-
Mobile's application.
Sincerely,
Kell} Y'r nseth
FMHion
290 1 Metro Drive, Suite 225
Bloomington, MN 55425
Office: 952.831.1043
Fax: 952.831.0623
Cell: 218- 791 -0382
kswensethnfmhc.com
The Council welcomed Hanson Family Investments to New Hope.
RESOLUTION 09 -98 Council Member Stauner introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 8.1 adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANNING CASE 09 -10,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) AMENDMENT FOR ADDITIONAL
OUTDOOR STORAGE AT 8401 54TH AVENUE NORTH, HANSON
FAMILY INVESTMENTS /MASTER TRANSFER, APPLICANT." The
motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Council
Member Elder, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in
favor thereof: Hemken, Elder, Hoffe, Lammle, Stauner; and the following
voted against the same: None; Abstained: None; Absent: None; whereupon
the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the mayor
which was attested to by the city clerk.
PLANNING CASE Mayor Hemken introduced for discussion Item 8.2, Resolution approving the
09 -06 extension of the review period for planning case 09 -06, T- Mobile's application
Item 8.2 for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a new cell tower at 5040 Winnetka
Avenue North, FMHC, petitioner.
Mr. Curtis Jacobsen, director of community development, stated on June 8 the
Council granted an extension of the planning case review until August 7. He
stated the applicant is requesting an additional 60 -day extension. He
commented on the applicant's slow response in submitting the requested
information to the city. He advised the Council that he recently received the
information the planning commission had requested and a letter requesting
an additional 60 -day extension of the review period.
Ms. Kelly Swenseth and Ms. Amy Dresch, representing the applicant,
addressed the Council.
Attorney Gordon Jensen advised the Council that rather than taking action to
grant another 60 -day extension, it may be more appropriate to waive the 60-
day rule. The applicant agreed to such action.
RESOLUTION 09 -99 Council Member Stauner introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 8.2 adoption: "RESOLUTION APPROVING THE WAIVER OF THE REVIEW
PERIOD FOR PLANNING CASE 09 -06, T- MOBILE'S APPLICATION FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) FOR A NEW CELL TOWER AT
5040 WINNETKA AVENUE NORTH, FMHC, PETITIONER)." The motion
for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Council
Member Lammle, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in
favor thereof: Hemken, Elder, Hoffe, Lammle, Stauner; and the following
voted against the same: None; Abstained: None; Absent: None; whereupon
the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the mayor
which was attested to by the city clerk.
OPEN FORUM Mr. Mike Klein, 3217 Gettysburg Court, requested permission to address the
Council at this time as he arrived at 7:05 p.m. and had missed the Open
New Hope City Council July 27, 2009
Page 7
Curtis Jacobsen, Director
Community Development
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
Phone: 763 - 531 -5119
E -Mail: ciacobsen @ci.new- hope.mn
July 30, 2009
Dear Mr. Jacobsen,
FtAHC Corporation
2901 Metro Drive
Suite 225
Bloomington, MN 55425
v,w,v.fmhc.com
phone 952 831 1043
Mx 952 831 0623
On July 27, 2009, Kelly Swenseth and I attended the New Hope City Council meeting on behalf of T-
Mobile to respectfully request a second sixty (60) day extension to the time limit set forth in Minn. Stat.
§15.99 in order to allow sufficient time for the City to review the road design and the grading /erosion
control plan that was submitted on July 15, 2009. Upon review of our request, City Attorney Steve
Sondrall advised the City Council that T- Mobile be allowed to continue the review of their zoning
application only upon the receipt of a waiver of the sixty (60) day time frame set forth by Minn. Stat.
§15.99.
Let this letter serve as notice that T- Mobile will agree to waive the sixty day time frame set forth by
Minn. Stat. §15.99 in return for allowing T- Mobile's zoning application to continue the review process. It
is T- Mobile's hope to complete the zoning process for the subject application within the next ninety (90)
days.
Should you have any questions or comments, please call me at 952 - 831 -1043
Sincere)
J A mID sdi
FMHC Corporation
T- Mobile Acknowledgement:
By:
Mark Holm
Its: Real Estate Manager
Date: q l � 10�
x
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT DATA
X.RCtpN EEASE ml[F:
EY2awa (7ASf mau: so• -o' ..s• -a•
O
"m imp
O
mublie
zT0 -r�[� E ua M
a E vt Wid
Pte'
SONrc rvPc
RIKX 4Awf:
@5a3 K
QEE'NIEAi: 906 FEET (NAw EE)
•
•
GENERAL
NOTES
SCOPE OF
SUPPLY
PROJECT TEAM
'""t0F'm �aT.,xx,r.
N
•
1. f!rt CONmAarOR 9WL amEFriE AW -T NL SxK NOIOt,
'� Ora xIS E Sa1LL ales ATiExiNrE r4 E B£ 20.ELV
ts. mxlRrcras swu xyEET' M ExPxEEa . CEiNES wE
saNypEgEp ar5aw0, uxSaEE tqi rA2awtaK, OR NOE
M ratOwsc i/NLC Oc)IxUiES
' M SaE mEC3X $aME Of rdtN
ME aEaaMplaFS OP dTF1R.
MLL PaECEOF n!,' aSOAEWMNS
FMM1Ex INgLVEp x MAETIxC
ralNp Or ietx SOME ar aW0.i.
rNq PapiEfT.
EIEmSNrtns ONrwc
^.
P ' 'I N« "'
-
rwnmN .4aN5. uErXaoS.
atl PJa Nx Di THE Mao ONOW M aaxrRaai.
taxes pKTmYaI ram m.CICE. 6 a0ra(9 MaF'MKa
aRMI wEMED ro SXOr rxE Erg MX a
� �. IdNOrt uovrx raaz Nar a Ixnym As aNrr
x RAW LANG
SITE
rt*wwEV
CO- LOCATION
SITE
T_ C r%ll 4 mrax. NC
/a wNESrwuN Nn+Etf55 cow I%r�m sMR xf
.]]]o sf, seu silgEi
�"� •" seooE NrNa.'raa. Nx »a13
mnmcmx.
'
coxraAarai sx.0 rai M »e mE ro Nt r mE
x. na�' a�`rr rnr roirta: ncN. ¢ECIwcN.
su.,cc. Nro woTxE mom.amN.
,E Em Irw EEEiarmaXZ wu iwrwrs uraum s+wE eE
Tfiarcv er M canwclw eErmE mxsmuciiarE E
r
ers Furrow.
Nr SmAEUV er
T -uoalf mNnaACrar
r -iwaEE rax,nanan
ers vu2aa�
EuwNNEV o
r-Nmu
tmla.cma
nm
aNlanw
E. +ruxr xons.
-
e
M NXnr.Oidt ry Au�f <anomOXS
""''
P !v/ES. mMUCts �Orssd6. ER. Swtt BE
� � r0 M ENw6a eErM2 FaOC.LEDwe Nrtx
CrortFK 9W rqw TI M mr
Noorx nws eAr1 of Nrzf efxa2 FaarsFnEle wrx
M rwwr.
t 9rx FuThUar idxdTON
FalenE aae.NT PVN A--)
(
PIMIL. GwrR - e.rrEn6.S
CMrW4rw a'ONIXKrOR
T -NOME eoxmaexm
NTaIE
- cdnWCTIXt
Bn FurTceN r nw
rvN9A pHwEt Fprta�
t /azwl
rI51mE cr.nr _ wmwES
a IS G
T -40ME
i- N'irRt
eoNnunvn
mNraanaa
rNr naPE raarNEns
NE Hr c N" 3"3{"ie NORTM xe¢
SITE DIRECTIONS
.. M NNmx.SVn arNA vav2tt NE aPrNS raw Ow.cf
1 >. ML Svl1 W I881CMrgM ,GEU a!i M OMwwC4
AaE caesowm Nxsrnvcrlai mrroNms. r M
CamuRaN x aESmxs amN PW m w E tt N N Na,
ors ue cls
T ` � E
SrtF EFRCNNS: _
, s
�� � m
pp
riXG+ wv Ocaw M.W Ca+SmIKOa+ aNV OwWE ro
ENPefxT•
m[ fTRMEIR SxNt 6E NBBE,m TOa aA.wnGEYIlxs BEEaR
x2 to
T -Na4tE eON a ttON
M ME
u RttA xfN a mrrNrwr Emm<
A�£ME Oan � NNE�n4 MEMUf x� Oa o
15F5 r0
y
r2N ar0 oosac caxsrMr10u, 4maraaF. Orz
SxNE eE IwEwiEiY aEFARA 01+ aEF1ILF11 ro M
PROmETn10 wEX NOM
Ny aaF
i -uoat£ aarrlaKfOn
flupEr �
r -xOWf
CIXTINLNa
EGw. FlFxn f xONAa, mG
I]N MEa xraE£T xE Ox6T
SaE On iK Rigir
sATEPa<igN aF M iFNNrt fA @AArta Ow2N. On
ca+ RPrE3ExiaM, ai M Fw9rr'+E o< nN:
mreroa
IE. M a00RN, a1 SSWt rPMOE all KC65AaT BmOaNC.aasEA
non . invwlG MaNaf16 M OixFA SUFFatr rai aLL
nESa aEOwNw M s,NE.
Wt6
W par W5[ aurUEEa)
T_prpaiE CmTOESCTOe
r -NmEf <ona.cTOw
ulA paw Nom ANRrCN)
enaawwa +ors Em ewx
i_upltf
r -went
EPEnxtaM
cc«aAtaw
A82 rm
,w.PMIR. w SSal3
3. �CaxmKipl SwLL BE E rOa. tW 9NYE
/. Mw rwttt. tIPPoRA. df s+mraR
�,rrw
19. �MRItAfD wN5 SIMLL 9E adr p A FVN BOY .xa
CBE aT /LL CCwS1wICMx SErs
mNaaw3 a mY
Rrt aaalmpxG rurrwrl5
NaBE NrzNrBa Nw�" ° " ° "
CPaf W.'rM CdaW[rdl
NMawc waE ! ea.aeR
` one
Mraicrm
GU a Haas aTroaE xww
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
� aENm
NIM wf : t K m�i/u+laN�
ww NwrNN n mw ea+all� ae eowlfrt se* air•
wlai+ln Nwwnw Prtc k eweNEr
coNm.c+Oa ellXra.nm
..walpf ssOCE (EO>r ro rw)
ewrwerw
ewmerax
jgy, Jy_EStS y.__�
pVS
hw CmES NEt 6b -{5{ -amt
aeumrxcE a M Nowt uNUa ma cawmaer.
Pww wrta wLL Ic lslorls. muicA aro aS.NU camas
f wnr«sc ar Au ncs. n2sE oaf ro aE wa M
rNwanu eaweE (EVFE ro T«n
ariTwcraa NNntY.TOn
w� �e uwEa liow)
mNaNCrort
cwiacro.
�
�'+ESr > snm
rw rnEf I -coo -x u -,les
_
e. M caxinrcrM sxxE r¢NV.c xi aEeeml rw rASTC
t2an/N ews. NNr aNEE ramasE
c or rxE xa swoeNm+axr,
rAVCCauE e5oam (ro.En)
maweroN NNeweiaa
'
coNmrnm
caNm¢rca
Eves N ssE»
WING INDEX
g
.we afN+ely Mawnmr
r io� ° ,` A m ° r.E�uowe
EfneE
eaEiiueroa ealmnon
umrnwaNO w.r
NN2anme
eairn¢roa
.turn
m�israu E.,n � -w u mnfro,
�"
CODES AND STANDARDS
aanaaawEtoeN
9�E"«"'
mNEa owcaNxecr a Nclu eoY
NNaCM aonwmm
mNra.cra cwm.croa
mxrrasTaa caxw.wTaa
s .arN
FaNEX vscoNNECr f NETEn rn
NErEN
mnN m
a�m�noa
"`"a
aniw.cma
ABBREVIATIONS
- -S C , ..... Pwfer w.aaN..nal .ro cuEan Nmfs
� ° oT'e 3 s oN.a�afn,
ro -c ..... caw.lc Aro Ems9x caxma raAn
�'OTJrna
M caxra�cm soft sNECU+wo mE aNxEnY maPEmr
axSralKaON IPA Sw11 afPEAtE .Nr Ou11etEU
T. moEEnrr a M aNrrrE ro Owo+iN. caanan as aEirTn.
Tll SxNI CpYly nrN M rArEST 100r1m
M rouo.wa waaaas:
, 4 Ea
us'^ NaRr
unurr
��
"
&DO. C� 011E WP MrLE(PwnNG
e. uTa eum iEP +coot ret w noon
���
-AI ..... raaEMU rn01g1anM rN0 iaNEV EtMrgN
naNaao wxwwa
a. a u M lemorrseulT M M aaxmmioa m
I (aNENraAN sacErc Eaa rE3rML ww wmwx :)
cu�rc Uz
An .uraN,`rm aiicX
aarcNw - .y n) - i E«.NEn* owcr naN rA,rs
� t }ALL�ExSrINC uiRal6 MIEINwt 9KwN aEAfi
ro mmER rrNN Enw aNNU M
2 (waecri ca +IErE w�murr�
�
WATER TOWER
SITE
ROOFTOP
517E
� . MAE1E
�
aivyux Ncn
wuam a2s (I) - CNMi ftM ,E
Swlr. eEMI atl FYF05E5 fm PdaNf M
�tKENFHr a' VIxa43 aP OrNm PNPEnr'T ONIaetE w
J. (l r6anRE a" 52Ei CPCaIElclgH)
rtes ( /Ea m
aEN
Evw19R0 OY wsE4tID M
ab
Evwo9[a Nr
MSrHEm BY
OSICUr MCbE0.
cOHER. COxlaati0a NT CMPq
OETeI
! EIEVnIa1 Tlr]
srxwxo _ A3 n) - si«ww s2 NrenCrtNrert 4EaAUrtr3
CYSMwaTgN fTM THE [YEMION OF wwE
9. roa SxN1 9E aEmalawE M iNE CCNIRf1E
E. xOaO IBC (w)EmurdNE MidxC COOE)
n xNa (arF IM wmwL 3iNad0x sFOrtiaiUM
ers PNrEOaN
Ers F4rrEM iaalWEUlI
COIIrwc1M `CaMnaCIM
aOa'IOP rNriOW
wvraP NaUxN Rfb /anMlufXT
T , N IceNx
i- (q1E
mxlnrLTae
mxmKM
a.NOFa
our m0 n
Ori mN rFxIM1YnEa
nNaNO - us 01 - STNpN® RNENa srtcFarars
EI M s (I) - STaaWO IILCIwGt mECS1CAM�S
xTMW _ � (I) - 51are]rA0 uRm RNY sPECN141pNs
SC<a� a�F M 312 MlL M AB 6 w mm'aETi wro
UMaE M[ ME 6 N,N1tTED OfR UA.G
0. 4R (^'si0u2 OF [LLLrwG. b0 6EC ENWEw#)
NEe. pN.rdrNA EEECrEa%sE moEl
ta.
OWa6E G (taTrtrylEim)
i -NOBet mNraaC,gr
rlwcxxs aaET (E'011Er1/R].m)
r -NOBYE
CaNxP.sCroa.
ppwj
�wNa ' uKNE(x)
SlNUKO - E35 (II - aNOMA Na1c OMY f On011lad,a
StaSxwN IIOwt 9vit caNmNN m M u8c. arp
(wtenW EELCmRN, xNerACIMFN3 A53a1a1pN1
Puacay cAA2i - B1rrEnw3
T- IIE9it COxMMa+
r1drAE Grbtr - BNrpe6
r -,r dEE
mNlaKipl
Er Ei£trmEK
Nnrwv - Ea (r) - t CcNV ebTawion
LL�r�wireR ma d1a f00m. ataW wm M cauEaxsSO
'
xE�sc
2 (wtNwaE trECiwra sNEry Tow45on)
(m[wAE101ar. SMtTV iaN xfAmry AaMxtaenM)
ers fmtflS
r -taatE CaNrnAaral
EIS CseaErs
i -Naau
aoNaacTai
NR N�KI rw19Ex 3wnOr
E4 aFNrgX es ra.
EpmNpr I
2r,
Ta wNw
- ns hl - fP#vfla Nwfixa ewNc
M ca+maa Nw ALL 1 � � �I.
1.. UL (UWEnrw2% Ueaaaraw6 Nt.I
..°wlUflC ItGN. Nab Nro oapxN#TS
alirErtra
coy �E
i -iww.E minNtial
T -MOBIL MMRrCmR
rN2MU
WaR U8E
i -uOR(
T -WiEE
aaim.V3ae
CPV,aNCiOE
avSrrlG P eM2Ki
u �
aE.Y
It
as ) - FAmvo rne.Tiaxs mEVrlrutNws r0a
r Y
Nlm art EaaM �EaM a il[NEaw 0.vvM 6 dmtrsrtw
.srlw.a CiEtfx
T -Naar( NutN.ttxaa
wM9t CaafS
i -NgNyf
r rve2m PTC 2 �/4[a'0.
�
Nam -Nis (1) - si ttfcrw4t mmrr.ila+s rcx[wE
cn (mw) x,,cunwns. affix ro n2 mom 3ECrwN
LEGEND
ua. µw HNE ...unEa)
i -Naa1f mNlaACroc
uN, (Ives «asf NIRN,ER)
i -weu
aONInACrOR
cnmarnoa
x ( .crA< w� r- '"r*'r¢m srEU
siNaw - Nx3 0> - Vx- cacrwsmN mR .unoxs
rx. M eaxrwelae awL aerxx axo FAY Iva NN PEawr5.
xnt .alem
eNmmay Nos Nw cTrx
SaE CmapwC wIaEN3
T -wmf mNm.eral
CPRRIRM marrtaClM
aavawry lass ron coax
r -weaE
rnnPAman
� ulE.a am w
NR NFTN
r..oNm _ avrnaE m2s mar ,
�� SSS (,) - 5<� CoxsaNCrAx SaECraNNS
Eta Na) xvSE'EEnOxS twaE4rnv rOR W6NruA1¢
M i12 rant aMl eCWOE THOSE w M Caxr tt M
Ny. ro M awxw.
) DETAIL
Sac b101+i0wG w miKS
/rrtaeEa Amcxmlrs
CPSIMC(Oa mMlaxalal
SnE tAgEmxE NsrEquN3
512 amUNErW uarffiNS
mxlwctm EbilwaNP
CaxPKim
c°"a'c'a'
' , tSLT]iNnOUx TrP
"�rs-
O.O. d EE E y/e �
snrOlm - sn (r) - mI1oN�E EmrNEre nr:awN
iJ. EMO aubEJOax XaTE e¢embreE O.Q oawwie SCiaf,
rNO OEEM aw,d1O3 XNE PBEENRwE OsPJt 5>rLL
S1
ootER)
aNrExl{s 1101Nndra FMf t BaaaxEi
COxwAtron CaEiwCEat
<aNtanlaa OOMP4'Iax
/Nldrll YgINSNG rirE < BaaCNf
aNr1M C00% ARAOiw[Bj5
CaN,RCroa
Ca'i
mlroacaW
OPaPaaaa
RFD'0. Ptama� ^ dt taa:
vea�iu
srAWNm - Sas <r) - SrANONm WarIrEM M2aau [Nm+sw t
� Orarrws, aceN .myacr or xi oNExlaa+s w
w i'wa'orP- mcerxir rwrm. m xm rleaurz
a`�i+dlwvv r �aNOw, oEry. ws auNN
�"f OasNrIIC
.yccme Emu aMi ro nm)
<axw.aoE Nrmanw
aoEm;aaro rawt
mamrnm
Evnwcroa
tw
ii n " r � wrmowuE*m
32P1 aq , MESS WaL OaVEn4E
snrwm - s,s (, «..v.0 amaE mESUxws
_
) »'ar[wx�ioa nu m wRe twEn
S
ulr 3aE OR MWaa Nn carT5lw.Crla1
alrA M Nxuaacr a CRAw116 ormaal5 NaK exvi
vITSN.v reruT arnut rRm oivamwat
CWY AnAExrNFNrs (rorfN
esxtf
CVSwaaroa CEMWCmN
NNavCraa eONmKrw
sRNaaN
rasp ascoralEa a IErEa cos
Onx�wnoe
eartEacmt
c
SsMM
x�r�n ��
SrArOrm - sss ftl - n r�BV�ncanmr t aw�Om a�wrt¢ +xwc t
g
a, mlmaCtat SXNl +Foes M aCaeT af' Nrt COFlKIS
cxeca,mcT Nn.�ars .NOM
4eWf, IRrFe
1 1 A SECTION
wMiFaaMa Nowt
srErwt
COMMCIOR mx@K'IOa
ewm.eEw ecxm.eroa
IE211
UM)Ir
URIrY
r Sx�aUR. �SIHIR'aMAI�
:..�.e
�� - 1� (r) _ STN9w0 exly eHIE MilWnaa srtamtruR
(I) -
wia a my uas
TtSn caenmxs rw" ro' malt M Moat w avBS2T4
51
yarn aaroNNicr : NETa eox
<wrvTCroa caimdcroa
or. rM
rl
� _ ~ mm's
mlwuM alcanO +STN vNrs
Sds (,1 - e
s
r� s � a
x�ilwmal
nmNms - sn m- sa,eNw � as sramx mxrnnc
NE2n
urnm
a s�N1E mM05wec
euNr av ma�sE�
al
- los (II �_ r�in Cate ase saneN EawNdr
n
��
E MfaE
6 �'-
NEW HOPE • VICTORY PACKAGING
r1(IiiSE
6Y6 Eat rmmSN.
in5,a
Tavm venue Na EapBBt canaoE un
-
° oA ^
^faaNS
�`, I /IT/OE
z
r7'i Mo
® ■ ■ e ■
r i Nw«aNV05�
NwET No s IcNr ro yr r 1gB OwN.wE. ma Mw
„NE TM ytv..ao N cas!nwnw ar
s owNnw. nc waww wwEEs
W w uiwAn�, r1°I�>Frrnc^wrim
. a IN""'°I ". E " 4 "'^
A10759
PROJECT INFO. & GENERAL NOTES
` „ /IB E
1
Nw ro aEw a .a a a m N Es
tai xar eE aEr+mmn cam TENT M
ortoeaE elsmsn ar mECnr a woaECnr. xoa
Ia1t Nrr waNVSE anm T+N NSea E
�y�Ea
.�,
^
to .^w
_
�
5040 WMNETKA AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE. MINNESOTA
mNd d -a
MINNEAPOLIS MARKET
( �� Old
� A7075 &T1 2
°
_d
a a s ]
0
YYgg
ik
I i
_ _ _ _ Er>sRRa mortmr ua
_ — _ _ _ _ — _ _ _ _ — —. — — — ` ,
urs�.c evam +uanow mcz
— — — ' - 1 -
cmm avn]m
mnw mw rmsa. tsx ar
•
�� ( '
'
a
smrc mrn >EOesra e]
� E+nnw
n
woocco/anrsn
-
I S
LZiJ :) ( aam m i
xcrwn7 � r _,. x +a . w•
a
51ST AVENUE NORTH a @� L wa
E"" "�—I
t I *a°°rtawvoa°°'EiaR.'n' �t I • -� (,.:. s IL
�' _
W ¢ �It t L if
0
4
z } 'N
y 0+>
,
�� �� (J) EllL]MC iRARgyquEAe
f%h �S�KE m�5 ] KCE� aaw
T ulanr EASFMF r � t_YCTE JC . w' aRIRnRPaS .tNiRF
veMS]>a rx]o �me mcRnE {w�xp[p mRmw.aRi uM wFA (vRrn+am er toxma.]aR)
(PbA M o�F. Aw>Se (RE>]a ro o A,o>]e -G roR WRE w.ORU.Ma)
aur>Fn (im} -U
RTE MEpAM>JIaR)
SITE PLAN
scat: � •w'ro� ro xxva�
Hots
+ Eme:o4 rsow cao-]m sam, a
' ro m�romn >eoaocnHmr .00 rm .EZr a r -unxe canrwxo.
i
z
r
>. wn. >p
x �c a �a,w -
orsnwxo ar coasnecno,
A
��iuwm suesrwrw4r m oRFaa co«oma« � caerR�>croR .
s. J� -,wenc � owx EauwEx> r ers wr maw m �rs
•w
a
■ ■ ® ® ■ ®
1 j
o,s awawc ws Rm eEw ,sai, w
eaa=ERrc or r_evsaE - �ac>vws
vYoa�0 W oTSCEwro.
nc .nw ar rRe oavo. >K eoa,ovn
wo
». r.w• a m. > w« s.n .,,.,.„,,,
.,e ab, i a, . ew kw,e "'v�w...•...i
�
NEW HOPE •VICTORY PACKAGING
SITE PLAN
, j
� ��mFc
rswm ra mowsa
O1 `
] AJN
/➢aF0 P.w�a �uU EaJ9CX NHIR0. f,N+
v
r. nfRan
v
�„
a HR]cR
�
�i /�a/ae'
® �
axca ro Rrnw m wa everts >avJ
]w rt. ear et REeaw�, cwm ,e]n
m �� � � �� �'�� �
Mt PweaSE
}� u.sR�
�� �"�'+`� �
a
5040 WINNEif(A AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE. MINNESOTA
H4 .«a Ne�s
MINNEAPOLIS MARKET
nw onm awR ,n1p, rt s
i5
�
uarmRA10759-Cl
k
E, .
I t I
■ ■ .. Mobile6l
MINNEAPOLIS MARKET
NEW HOPE VICTORY PACKAGING
A10769
ENLARGED SITE PLAN
5040 WINMETKA AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE. MINNESOTA
ex4A
TE Z' : -
-------------- -------------------- f
L---Y
- 7, "1
T.-
-----------
i -4pg1f t -4 i6g -----------
7
Sift.
I t I
■ ■ .. Mobile6l
MINNEAPOLIS MARKET
NEW HOPE VICTORY PACKAGING
A10769
ENLARGED SITE PLAN
5040 WINMETKA AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE. MINNESOTA
ex4A
TE Z' : -
x
L---Y
- 7, "1
T.-
Sift.
PI 1.
ENL.R.In
I t I
■ ■ .. Mobile6l
MINNEAPOLIS MARKET
NEW HOPE VICTORY PACKAGING
A10769
ENLARGED SITE PLAN
5040 WINMETKA AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE. MINNESOTA
ex4A
T
I
;3
cm�ac7
I
wag wz» anxramnexr (mnbnu)
.aawn/eamt
\ L � I 9oxsr 1
/ '
uartxas r+ex
>9ads 1 1 1
\ i 9o`db�� 1 - 7
t:zmr ttcwu m Pw+s)
o
i / I i � > .Dab"En "`iRU3x �
Y> 3' wMa oa sTea
� rtxcc can w+ mwx
eodJr 9 D8 j L
e.attni amr�iu vm x+na>a soi
90655 //, Wi
/
.T
i
Uer3� rnO�Ra�c b l ! d y� 9039 1
-n'.�ra'" I
�
* 11 - •905.8
z�
3
,'
... •
Em3wG DuwR.n BnUNIxIXS ; -
l i' :905.1 I ;
,,5
�\
1 fi,� Ue Aa x -'" 0. 00 � 906.0 gO h 4 i
r - abet[ +x' woc WnxixaE wxi95 aoro
(]' Brtuwm05 O.Q e`�m 6]' CwraKt�
1 / \
e+rsr>m
! 1 / _ 9 / wlOmD/RUSN ` I
SILT FENCE DETAIL
> 49x50 -
\0 r axano;. m rs I
! ` 0
ner3i
•
'
B
9`"'__
0 1
wrUwwal3 OWa e' >LAEatiE - I
SrEEtPO3re wM nE w srn�i�OSS!. wm xDC rMCS
\ �
/ \`, .-- 9.y
_ .,. , , / s¢ efrW (vxmx2u er earmYKn) I
I - \
].AMi� i R'ncE .Ramat m Macn'3 vnaicrnne wnRn
A `%AOtS —•- __— � _ (t9.. _ p0 _ J. _`t
`
•-t I
` x906.8
W.wrr m urm>a
r 059
i .. n 0.9 1M0 0 060
�OSI cwrWwa
)
� x9066 � 0070 d0 �
A :
p 0`
/
_ - ___ - _ _ - ___`ae _ _ _ _ ~
-
L - -_ no*ac vaoeE. ewe �
, so6.s_� e
"'`
''+aorcc'� :i ° m °L CU.0 `v�m
• j
" - --
_ --=
s _/ - -J__ _
1
u� emus �> i. i
_ -
l >90].5 908 >
-�' � '> ^'
r _r' ^_________1 X908 -_ �_- '- y 9 �•
i CaaMa<rw Sank Waa't tIX.rmx3 wm F]EV>.np3 m NL Cw31ac yMlrE3 wM
- -_
M6 atm3cnW urattt cbwwaES Pwm ro cwimucnan.
(vewW9 umavauh
acr.'nDx m a+arDrr) SMTwa
PnOP.]sc0 ca'NUa (T+i+)
(PPGAE9 Br caartRx:rOa)e
].� Eaosd al.raa, wEA3UaE3 soy{ bC wSTw(p Nm a meaaADx Pea+ is
IS M�W[�Fe Mf Po1ENn4 E�AO�soxngx.5 PD NNTMIFG UxR cYM31auCKx
cn+y€i
..5 m , w.w.:s .n: aam DrOfp9PaD°xi3crCd'.ouWmr+aee3x war
G�DING
ANO EROSION CONTft01„ P{ eN
�: '� " -o- (e :i-•].�
d wnass enlxwsc wac Swsnxc TmoRePxr aw awnarz sx>u nDT
ee umrco er consmucnw, -, amras
cmnx/cmu sr>u, mr m PaESa.c casm+c m¢s.
wm c �� w ra sr n �� ro nee rs.wx awwr. rat sn.u. a6srRs
rcanem asncan er ca n c al.
I
-
+ -+ /r anaw+aDS
ewwa aawsc
+ rn :lywxa,3 Pa „<
cbyns6 n ne�aert o ae u'r'ea
Pm s9usla: rJU
rr 3
IHIHI I III
` c u r raa �.¢ c�osaaE�D nresrwn>uv
r. mm A reaeuwc wD °Nar"ac:s snow ax Me mrowc axu
.aixa'r'oew,a: R am�.aaa � smawxDac xnr
wu vamearr� cara.croe sr.0 Wi ar.D+s. .no asPOSe m>aus. amrsr,
>a�a :mus
- 2. — m- ww.cmr°��oev m` srxD�+w�sv'"sa
MFES RUST m OMLA mews nui Wsi BE a3sOxED Rar ME s2 ro
6anw ° n °"z M3°pa�w+6a 'AZ Dm aTw ar -ac
i
CH I
9. a aDn Pai ucy. ron3 xD PambsD aw as3 S o.w a ca a c Pax a3
srtn wnoc aaa3 DMCnwsc xarta.
�rexns raa3e
D� �a a D_r53]
_
/ -
e\ BITUMINOUS SECTION
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
w rou ra¢ I_ew- >n -++aa
NEW HOPE - VICTORY PACKAGING
'
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ !+ 1
■
M
ww.ar wm a tsxr ry nE eDmoaw+ roa Mew
Do.maD.� ysc w.o w� a
."'bm `a« w Ma R,..c Me w.w.m PaDwus
w awe« amuesr wm .
wa.. tM w u.,... eA�..,.,1
n.. m a. s,w. w y:.,..m,.
6..,;«.
.a.a..
x. Kaw]s
„
4x
+ /nta9
..�.
A10759
GRADING AND
ER OSION C ONTROL PLAN
.____.. _ _
AVENUE NORTH
5040 WINHOPE,
iii.., l!
o .11 Mt eE �aOarCN CmYD. tFNr a
.ae e D a m aP n. R aroma r.
wa wx: PuaPm3 aria Mw w.a rt n
_- Ii
x>
MINNEAPOLIS MARKET
NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA
uaD� ` � �z
�'s
LNA/TMA REQUIREMENTS
i1PE ryiRprSj
ENFI90KI308 1xAtTUa PER SF[iat
ENFx00.5xxOp LNyMA PER SECNK
ExaT9prSxluP IMIITU4 PLN SECiw Top
EEPZOpnx3w Irw/FM +Pm smw
6nFnaslxup 1N,m,6 xa sErmR
EM3MSINP 1NAON. PFA lFLxOR x50•
T: *rn:� snL ure -uxaxt .NTOa��s
aF Insratxs � ""
3. ¢� uE PF [MFaKEaS OORr1ar ro wwfa
e*P amrtR.r .r vrt rva""'n v e'
NOTES
ro we mm REOE6FN /swp locam lams a o1a.N¢
aPwrxn rPwm6w>Mr Fao lEErr .es. s r -uoPa6 coww.®.
i- uOP.tE 110' -0' u9xwaE 3. npaG Pd[ TMSMnEa ON RAna SmE OF
x. Emrp10 OFUpOEp prtWm0U4 exria+ t -4.T' AE FdCFO OOUNTRA
>�Bf P[Mgm pr COIaPACIOR.
PPF�D 05Na0F0 eY Ca6NN41pN aCTm[5 SwLI X
sxresramai+ xe OwtINFy COnpIgN (e, OwOUCmaT
r -uamtE r- o•aoE
plRaAOE Ma'E
(mOVaxxp pr cwFwcrw)
"row (.rWNUNR FENCE
pnaplD NME
Fn cwFNtfwJ
r -u p' -0' Mw CIwFRMR FEKE
a /�S�STTUxp4 JJ RRS
D
'FOP YuaE n60aupa0rl aL£Eµ N SrMOUN Cwano CSS.
SwLL eE +M � C�4
F aNRialn CaaE ltNaNS x.K BFFN a?FxMAPD eASEO w THESE ¢
1 � N eE u�sm Foa�FAPPnrmP�. 00[ ro Mvn mn Na,4 P C
i68�i 1kD � CFAE tENCTNS PEPwE VRr wm FPW IE�wnS
z. rL aRTQ+N4eoz uar.- ro pE caw ceom Ar nx4>: (!J
lapr6Pn usN6 + /x• RME R1c ¢ccxPivL rAw_
a. B�.SE w �(axrtNrx.ln¢)
C. AT ETS tl9aR ComE<igN PORrt
!. /x1[Mr /Cbx C.e1.E4 Su L MUTE wdAO :vR wOUNOEO
NiaFE i5J PCRPS d' xORf A! Faw«s:
<dpi�cii�xaNCR lE+RrJ ONE FNO YEOYNIULLY
P. BoFxW a xtlp4a, aN: ENO uECNNPC.µ1Y CaMC20 N
C. �n+0 �fl CaukCiWP aaxr.
6. ANTENNA SECm eE uGSUarD wFFN nOxE xwM K SNOW
C91 ANTENNA REQUIREMENTS
APr
inE
cowl ueE
EIXnVUM tit)
�Cx�w
tOwl
caE
Cape CWE
X61
cONMCiiOx
MRax
IU'
>/0
aEp
Al xM146- 6516 -RIF/
a
a!
xU'
>/p'
JPF7E Pxp
R6
IU'
r/p"
045m �
ax
sr
pro•
6oLe1E aFn
e: -five a
rvvE
•
uFN+x
m'
rA'
(s7 aF0 /aur
-
p
Iss'
3 /6'
(N Pm /6wr
w
1 /•'
to w CODE
G
sGtF: 1 /. �1 -O a x1 �.
Rx
n
1 /p•
xwlE rEMDN
-6s16
us'
F /p•
n
rss•
3/a•
z w.aF
fix nreA- 6s16 -axu
xap
p
n
Iu•
x /6'
67 mLOR /6w.
Pr
rro•
� c
N.xu- 6616 -Pxx
Syp
p
3 /p'
auw eLUe
rim
®-
mFw
, m wwMSE6
1!s'
r /p•
aaeE duE
Cx ruB.t- 6516 -a3N
]AO'
p
U I3
16
(31 5114 /dGv
Ib'
x/e
IN -v—
'FOP YuaE n60aupa0rl aL£Eµ N SrMOUN Cwano CSS.
SwLL eE +M � C�4
F aNRialn CaaE ltNaNS x.K BFFN a?FxMAPD eASEO w THESE ¢
1 � N eE u�sm Foa�FAPPnrmP�. 00[ ro Mvn mn Na,4 P C
i68�i 1kD � CFAE tENCTNS PEPwE VRr wm FPW IE�wnS
z. rL aRTQ+N4eoz uar.- ro pE caw ceom Ar nx4>: (!J
lapr6Pn usN6 + /x• RME R1c ¢ccxPivL rAw_
a. B�.SE w �(axrtNrx.ln¢)
C. AT ETS tl9aR ComE<igN PORrt
!. /x1[Mr /Cbx C.e1.E4 Su L MUTE wdAO :vR wOUNOEO
NiaFE i5J PCRPS d' xORf A! Faw«s:
<dpi�cii�xaNCR lE+RrJ ONE FNO YEOYNIULLY
P. BoFxW a xtlp4a, aN: ENO uECNNPC.µ1Y CaMC20 N
C. �n+0 �fl CaukCiWP aaxr.
6. ANTENNA SECm eE uGSUarD wFFN nOxE xwM K SNOW
C91 ANTENNA REQUIREMENTS
ANlpw
cowl ueE
EIXnVUM tit)
�Cx�w
turni
coot NOE
I t i
J
Ill __ (
EIXnVUM tit)
C9 GY
L'1
�
t !
�
f '•
OOWMTiLT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
rvvE
•
uFN+x
/�
A � EAST
ELEVATION
ENLARGED ELEVATION
NOFE: rN3 1paFlt olvpi
oEWNlxMan WRFOSE! 6MT, rt 5 RaExgp
9Wt rt % 1NTaPaflED �A rOVER OEA:x.
l uwrsz w �
xC2 -ep1 S6F[�
-
131
I!!'
w
1 /•'
to w CODE
G
sGtF: 1 /. �1 -O a x1 �.
Oa Ea O1SVaF, SNn.CNRK � F
Of9w 9ui1 BE 09WEtf0
NEW HOPE • VICTORY PACKAGING
rim
®-
mFw
, m wwMSE6
A10759
ANTENNA INFO. & TOWER ELEVATION
obile:6
�
mom
5040 WINNETKa AVENUE rvOftfH
MINNEAPOLIS
t
r . (:e (5 lt
�
n
NEW HOPE. MINNESOTA]
MARKET
'^ "'
'""°'"
� °"'"'�
�a
■
I
CITY OF NEW HOPE
SPECIAL ZONING PROCEDURES APPLICATION LOG
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
Appli-
Applicant
Date
Date Applicant
Date 60-
Date 60-
Date
Deadline
Date city
Date city
cation
application
was sent
day time
day
Applicant
for city
approved or
sent response
number
Name
received
notice
limit
extension
was notified
action
denied the
to Applicant
Address
by city
that required
expires
expires
of
under
application
Phone
information
extension
extension
was missing
or waiver
09 -06
FMHC Corporation, as agent of
4/9/09
6/8/09
8/7/09
T- Mobile Central LLC
5 —/ /� 9
5040 Winnetka Avenue N
J
New Hope, MN 55428
(
08- 118 -21 -23 -0002
94JL
X 11 t ej)
Boxes A -C and E -F will always be filled out. Whether the other boxes are filled out depends on the city's procedures and the date of a specific application.
A. Assign each application a number.
B. List the Applicant (name, address and phone).
C. List the date the city received the application.
D. List the date the city sent the Applicant notice that required information was missing. If the city gives such notice, it must do so within 10 business days after the
date in Box C. If the time clock is "restarted" by such a notice, assign the application a new number and record all subsequent deadlines on a new line.
E. To calculate the 60 -day limit, include all calendar days.
F. To calculate the 60 -day extension, begin counting from the day following the first 60 -day limit, include all calendar days.
G. The city will notify the Applicant by mail that a 60 -day extension period applies to the application. (The date in Box G must come before the date in Boxes E and F.)
H. List the deadline under any extension or waiver.
I. The city must act before the deadline. (The date in Box I must come before the date in Boxes E or F, or, if applicable, Box H.)
J. List the date that the city sent notice of its action to the Applicant. It is best if the city not only takes action within the time limit, but also notifies the Applicant before the
time limit expires.
To: Planning Commission
Cc: Steve Sondrall, City Attorney
Al Brixius, Planning Consultant
From: Curtis Jacobsen, Director of CD
Date: November 24, 2009
Subject: Regulating Setbacks for Temporary Signs
The City Council referred the subject of Temporary Signs and setbacks to the Codes and Standards
Committee for review. On November 18 Codes and Standards discussed this subject.
The basis of the referral from the Council was for complaints based on enforcement. The inspectors had
been asked to be proactive in the enforcement of city ordinances. During the summer months signs are a
constant throughout the city. Although the city places notices in all city publications about sign
regulations there are always a number of people who knowingly or unknowingly violate the ordinance.
Staff asked the Codes and Standards Committee to reflect on the rationale for the ten foot setback. The
commonly held belief was that it was to get the signs back off of the public right -of -way. At ten foot of
setback the signs are still in the right -of -way and potentially would have to be setback up to 17 feet from
the curb to be out of the right-of-way.
The Committee wanted to know what neighboring cities were doing and essentially their ordinances
were the same as New Hopes. It was noted that neighboring cities apparently do not enforce their
ordinances on sign setback because staff has witnessed signs in all neighboring cities that were placed
right up to the curb.
The proposed ordinance amendment for review by the Planning Commission is designed to eliminate an
unnecessary nuisance to city residences and make city ordinance more in line with the enforcement
policies of neighboring cities. This will significantly reduce the staff work load associated with sign code
enforcement and should reduce or eliminate complaint the Council receives related to this subject.
Attachments: Draft Ordinance (Relined version)
Draft Ordinance (Clean copy)
Staff memo
City Attorney memo
ORDINANCE NO. 09-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING NEW HOPE
CODE SECTION 3- 500)(2) REGULATING SETBACK
REQUIREMENTS FOR TEMPORARY SIGNS
The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains:
Section 1 . Section 3 -500) "General regulations" of the New Hope City Code is hereby
amended by amending subsection (2) to read as follows:
(2) Setbacks for Ttemporary freestanding signs in residential zoning districts not
requiring a permit_
a. Temporary freestanding signs as described in subsection 3- 50(OL22) of this Code '' " " " " "- Formatted: Numbered+ Level: 1 +
shall be set back a minimum of tern -two feet from the back of the curb anless or Numbering Style: a, b, c, ... + start at:1 +
Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.83" + Tab
behind a sidewalk if one is present at the sign location in which ease the sign after: 1.08" + Indent at: 1.08
* beset hbae > a > :^a ,1,,, ^:a�,„ ^" and the sign's placement in the two foot
setback would impede or interfere with the use of the sidewalk
b All other temporary freestanding signs described in subsection 3 -50(f) of this
"' ""
Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 +
Code shall be setback a minimum of ten feet from the curb or behind a sidewalk
'.,
Numbering style: a, b, e ... + Start at: 1 +
Alignment: Left +Aligned at: 0.83" +Tab
if one is present at the sign location and the sign's placement in the ten foot
after: 1.08" + Indent at: 1.08"
setback would impede or interfere with the use of the sidewalk.
Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
c. On all corner lots, temporary freestanding signs not requiring a permit shall not
Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 +
be ermitted within feet of an corner formed b the intersection of two
20 ft
p Y Y
Numbering Style: a, b, e ... + Start at: 1 +
Alignment: Left +Alignd at: 0.83" +Tab
streets or the rights -of -way of a railway intersecting a street. The 20 feet shall be
after: 1.08" + Indent at: 1.08"
from the back of the curb of the intersecting streets or railway right -of -way and
t Formatted: Bullets and Nu mbering
the third side formed by a straight line connecting the corners of each 20 -foot
point as measured along the property lines.
Section 2 . Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and
publication.
Dated the day of 2009.
Kathi Hemken, Mayor
Attest:
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
(Published in the New Hope - Golden Valley Sun -Post the day of 2009.)
P..ATfORNLV SASH CLIF.,NTF1MF C'IrVOF NEW ItOPE '99- 4GIi9(AMF,NDTEFvIPStCN)� INMa AMFNDEETBACASDI. C
—1—
ORDINANCE NO. 09-
The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains:
Section 1 . Section 3 -500) "General regulations" of the New Hope City Code is hereby
amended by amending subsection (2) to read as follows:
(2) Setbacks for temporary freestanding signs in residential zoning districts not requiring
a permit:
a. Temporary freestanding signs as described in subsection 3- 50(f)(2) of this Code
shall be set back a minimum of two feet from the back of the curb or behind a
sidewalk if one is present at the sign location and the sign's placement in the two
foot setback would impede or interfere with the use of the sidewalk.
b. All other temporary freestanding signs described in subsection 3 -50(f) of this
Code shall be setback a minimum of ten feet from the curb or behind a sidewalk
if one is present at the sign location and the sign's placement in the ten foot
setback would impede or interfere with the use of the sidewalk.
c. On all corner lots, temporary freestanding signs not requiring a permit shall not
be permitted within 20 feet of any corner formed by the intersection of two
streets or the rights -of -way of a railway intersecting a street. The 20 feet shall be
from the back of the curb of the intersecting streets or railway right -of -way and
the third side formed by a straight line connecting the corners of each 20 -foot
point as measured along the property lines.
Section 2 . Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and
publication.
Dated the day of , 2009.
Kathi Hemken, Mayor
Attest:
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
(Published in the New Hope - Golden Valley Sun -Post the day of , 2009.)
P ATTORNEY\SAS\I CLIENT FILES\2 CITY OF NEW HOPE\99- 40149(AMEND TEMP SIGN) \ORDINANCE -AMEND SETBACKSD2.DOC
—I—
To: Codes and Standards Committee
Curtis Jacobsen, CD Director
Cc: Steve Sondrall, City Attorney
Al Brixius, Planning Consultant
Roger Axel, Building Official
Chuck Tatro, General Inspector
Pam Sylvester, Administrative Support Specialist.
From: Eric Weiss, CD Assistant
Date: September 4, 2009
Subject: Temporary Signs
t
Per the direction of the City Council, the Codes and Standards Committee has been
requrested to review the code section regulating temporary signs. The current code
requires temporary signs be placed ten feet behind the curb unless a sidewalk is present,
in which case the sign must be set back behind the sidewalk. Corner lots require a 20-
foot corner triangle setback.
The Council and staff have received numerous complaints about the enforcement of this
ordinance. At a recent Council meeting, a resident questioned the reasoning behind the
ten -foot setback, and as a result, the Council requested the Codes and Standards
Committee review the issue. The Committee should discuss whether or not the code is
justified and if any changes are recommended for the sign code.
Attachment:
- Sign code excerpt
G:\CommDev \Eric W\Codes and Standards \9.10.09 \Temporary Signs.doc 1
1 M K ' 1 ,
AMANDA M.FURTH
GORDON L. JENSEN'
ADAM J. KAUFMAN
MELANIE P. PERSELLIN'
STEPHEN M. RINGQUIST'
STEVEN A.SONDRALL
Attorneys At Law
November 23, 2009
Curtis Jacobsen
Community Development Director
City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
8525 EDINBROOK CROSSING, STE. 201
BROOKLYN PARK, MINNESOTA 55443 -1968
TELEPHONE (763) 424 -8811 $ TELEFAx (763) 493 -5193
e -mail law@ j spattorneys.com
Writer's Direct Dial No.: (763) 201 -0211
e -mail sas@jspattorneys.com
'Real Property Law
Specialist Certified By
The Minnesota State
Bar Association
'Licensed in Illinois /Colorado
3 Qualified Neutral Mediator
under Rule 114
Re: Proposed Ordinance Amending Section 3- 500)(2)
Regulating Setbacks for Temporary Signs
Our file No.: 99 -40149
Dear Curtis:
In follow up to the November 18 Codes and Standards meeting, attached is a proposed ordinance
Amending New Hope Code Section 3- 500)(2) Regulating Setback Requirements For Temporary
Signs. As we discussed, the proposed ordinance reduces the setback for small temporary signs from
10 feet to 2 feet unless placement of the sign would interfere with a sidewalk. In that case it would
be setback behind the sidewalk.
Keep in mind this setback applies only to small temporary signs not requiring a permit as described
in 3- 50(f)(2) of the Code. These signs are six square feet or less in surface area that do not exceed 3
feet in height. What we are describing here is your typical garage sale sign. Also, they cannot be in
place for more than ten calendar days.
However, §3 -50(f) also applies to larger signs that do not require a permit such as "for sale" or "for
lease" signs, noncommercial speech signs and official signs. The latter signs can be as large as 64
square feet. We didn't discuss these types of signs at the November 18 meeting. For these larger
signs I think we want to maintain the 10 foot setback requirement.
Hopefully this change will relieve some of the complaints staff receives regarding setback
enforcement provisions of the sign code. Call if you have any questions or further modifications.
Very truly yours,
Steven A. Sondrall
Enclosure(s)
cc: Eric Weiss
Al Brixius
P. Attomey \SAS\l Client Files42 City of New Hop699- 40149(amen temp sign) \ltr C. Jacobsen - amend sign code setbacks.doc
Memorandum
To: Planning Commission
Curtis Jacobsen, CD Director
Cc: Steve Sondrall, City Attorney
Al Brixius, Planning Consultant
Roger Axel, Building Official
Chuck Tatro, General Inspector
Pam Sylvester, Administrative Support Specialist
From: Eric Weiss, CD Assistant
Date: November 23, 2009
Subject: Corner Lot Definitions
0�
Per former Chair Oelkers' direction, the city's planning consultant has provided a memo
outlining the reasoning behind the city's existing front yard definition (see attached).
Chair Oelkers' request was a result of the various setback variance requests the city has
reviewed in the past few years. As stated in the planning consultant's memo, the recent
variance requests were justified and would have been required even if the front yard
definition were changed.
The Codes and Standards Committee discussed the matter at its November 18 meeting
and determined the ordinance should remain as -is. The Committee did make a
recommendation that future corner lot variance application reports shall be handled
exclusively by staff to reduce applicant's costs. The planning consultant was in
agreement.
Attachments:
- August 3, 2009 NAC memo
G:\CommDev \Eric MPlanning Commission \12 -1 -09 \Corner Lots.doc
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone. 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners @nacplanning.ccorn
TO: Curtis Jacobsen
Eric Weiss
FROM: Alan Brixius
DATE: August 3, 2009
RE: New Hope — Corner Lot Definition
FILE NO: 131.00 - 09.03
Recently, the City has encountered a number of variance requests for homes on corner
lots that want to expand. The need for variance has typically been due to the house
orientation and the application of City setbacks under the City's definition of lot front.
While the City does not regulate the house orientation on a corner lot, it does define the
lot front as follows:
"Lot front means the front of the lot shall be, for the purpose of complying
with this Code, that boundary abutting a public right -of -way having the
least width."
This definition guides the application of the required setbacks within a respective zoning
district producing the largest building envelope for a corner lot. This definition also
maintains a uniform front yard setback with adjoining interior lots within the same block.
The attached exhibit illustrates the application of R -1 setbacks to a standard R -1 corner
lot. Lot A follows the established lot front definition. Lot B applies the setback having a
home oriented to a side street dictating the front yard. This graphic illustrates the
difference in building envelope and compatibility with adjoining interior lots.
R -1 DISTRICT
Lot/Setback Standards ,
Lot Area: Single Family Lot
9,500 square feet
Lot Width: Comer
90 feet
Setback:
Front Yard:
25 feet
Side Yard — Interior:
1015 feet
Side Yard — Corner:
20 feet
Rear Yard:
25 feet
I have previously debated this definition with Doug Sandstad in the 1980s. The zoning
definition provides the largest building pad and maintains the setback within adjoining
interior lots. This definition does not dictate orientation of home or home design. As
such, the definition provides the greatest flexibility in using a corner lot.
The recent variance requests were justified. A change in the lot front definition would
not have eliminated these applications.
N
30'
5'110' UItAc# 1 .. 20: tt>
}` ..
C vl�tc
30'
cn
-I
X
m
m
4
i r `• � G �'s # 'Y4 . � t *,d s ,
4F. � Ff: ���d�t [ �: •�-. � ii c� �� 1
4
( 30 '
� ¢ j
-
r`t Y"dl. , ;J G ti #J-sFF fCiG #y" J
G 2
1" = 50'
NOTE: R -1 DISTRICT SETBACKS APPLIED
20'
To: Planning Commission
Curtis Jacobsen, CD Director
Cc: Steve Sondrall, City Attorney
Al Brixius, Planning Consultant
Roger Axel, Building Official
Chuck Tatro, General Inspector
Pam Sylvester, Administrative Support Specialist
From: Eric Weiss, CD Assistant
Date: November 23, 2009
Subject: Review of Commercial Planning Goals
0�
Per the direction of Commissioner Houle, staff has attached information from the newly
adopted Comprehensive Plan relating to planning of commercial districts. Commissioner Houle
has requested the Planning Commission review the Comprehensive Plan goals and discuss
steps the Planning Commission could take to encourage redevelopment. Commissioner Houle
would also like to have a discussion about the specific properties highlighted in the
Comprehensive Plan for redevelopment /maintenance, most notably in the City Center area.
Planning Tactics
The survey participants identified two voids in the City's available housing. The first void
was high value housing options. Most of the City's existing housing stock consists of
moderately priced homes. More affluent residents seeking move up housing options often
must look to neighboring cities for this housing opportunity.
The second housing void identified through the survey was the need for life cycle housing
opportunities. Specifically mentioned was the need for more housing that will be attractive
to the City's empty- nester households or independently living elderly residents. This
perspective must be balanced with the reality that the City has 43 percent of its housing
stock as multiple family housing and a significant portion (12 percent) of this multiple family
housing is designed and marketed as elderly housing (people that are 60 years and older).
In review of the City's current residential issues, the survey, tour participants, and City staff
identified housing and yard maintenance, redevelopment, condominium conversion, and
greater housing diversity as primary objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Update.
Commercial
New Hope's commercial areas presented the greatest concerns for survey and community
tour participants. The City's shopping areas display a declining, outdated commercial
image through building appearance, vacancies, and an erratic commercial land use pattern
that provides little continuity or business interchange among commercial areas.
The local business people interviewed in 1998 indicated that New Hope has a different
retail trade area than what existed 30 years ago when most of the City's shopping areas
were new. New Hope no longer has strong homogeneous trade area demographics due to
the aging of the City's population, out - migration of affluent households, and new growth in
Plymouth and Maple Grove. Based on these changing demographic trends, the local
business people interviewed suggested that the center of their original trade area has
shifted west over the past 25 years. This shift in trade area complicates their ability to
compete with new retail establishments.
The building appearance, site design, and vacancies associated with older City commercial
areas detract from the attractiveness and vitality of these commercial sites. The majority of
the survey and community tour participants suggested that the City must pursue
commercial redevelopment to change the image of New Hope's shopping areas. Specific
redevelopment target areas include the Winnetka Center, Kmart site, Midland Shopping
Center, and freestanding commercial sites along Bass Lake Road, 42 Avenue, 62
Avenue and Winnetka Avenue.
,/ ( N City of New Hope Comprehensive Plan Update
Planning Tactics
138
Planning Tactics
Community tour participants also identified that the City's erratic commercial development
pattern segregates the various commercial areas within the City. This development pattern
works against business cooperation, business interchange, and a cohesive community
identity. Past City promotional efforts have focused on the 42 Avenue
commercial area. Businesses in other areas of the City do not feel that they have received
the same attention from the City.
To improve the image of New Hope's commercial areas, community tour participants
suggested re- establishing an attractive streetscape theme within the 42 Avenue/
Winnetka Avenue commercial area. A unifying streetscape theme could be extended to the
other commercial areas of the City to provide a more cohesive community image.
The City's industrial land uses are a strong component of the City. Due to the limited
supply of vacant industrial land, future industrial growth will consist of in -place expansion of
existing industries or redevelopment of obsolete industrial sites. To encourage continued
economic development and business retention, the City must examine means that will
serve to accommodate the in -place expansion of existing industries and be responsive to
the changing needs of the local businesses.
Community Facilities
Overall, the survey participants were very complimentary of the City's community facilities
and services, specifically City Hall and the park system. The following community facilities
received specific comments through the survey.
The City's park system received high praise. Continued upgrades were encouraged to
maintain the park system's high quality, safety, and user friendliness. As a fully developed
community, the City must remain proactive in the implementation of its parks capital
improvements plan as a means of keeping the New Hope parks system contemporary with
regard to condition of the parks and modern equipment. The majority of survey participants
could see no further recreational programs they would add to the current offerings.
Community tour participants did suggest the need for a skateboard facility in one of the
City's parks. There is also a need for trails for pedestrians and bicyclists that connect
parks, schools and other community destinations. The local trail system should be
connected with the regional trail system to provide access to destinations beyond the City's
boundaries.
( City of New Hope Comprehensive Plan Update
Planning Tactics
139
�1 ., • , ual• ` °� ,a�.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Miles Base Map Bonestroo Rosene Andedink B Associales
December 2008
147
ingle Family Redevelopment
tlottununnn
:�puu;!unnunnnnunmm�uu■
.... : J A I V
C Re
isn
� � t
..iii ==
■tin .1,:
,. /Ilr�l. r.• �� ° � - ��
1;aaaaa■■�,m111
Renovation, Improvement
• •-
wK"
X11 /1
/
■m /11
d�
r►
/IOYtIOIIO::
- /i
- IIt1191
/Itilmn�=
►
pot
Needed
- �''
n
,i
■ ■O• ; �yn -+ -
p,■■■■ In r� �. ♦
Ilnt•a : ♦ ♦
• _ . , _
.,
♦
,,,,un/ :a1nf0 �. �a
/Arnr�:na.aa `! +�
. Oq /.' /■
- IIlf�i /,
_ 411111►
►. ,
► ►� \,�rr
i� C-
I
- Idlwla
:■■■tlt.
/lnl ��'�� i i� �: ��`� �'.
Ilir. ..
s.
••t
in■, ri :nl..nnnntll:
:1OIIO
� T I, ieG
.noon
�► ♦Ii .:. i��
one .b. o....• a� <�i
- • - • • -
•_
�
: :i nlll
.� l�
p
i�
t • Ir��f1r-71pR.
.. .
Medium De nsity
+�
�
tub_
■lau. ::.:VI
_� .Ii►
..
• ::►
-
�:
Inn■
_�I� �
• - -
111.
.
anOaaaf/
,x nnnta
•• ap
In Place Industrial Issues
• �i
r :
�$4�:iA/
Irregular City Bounda
c
.• oalr....
Single Family Redevelopment
:au
►1111
::: -..
a.
•
E•'�a
'•.'�:..�
.motion
Appearance of Back
- -- .o`:O:•
:
f Shopping Center
- -.- -.. •...
.u►ai: �. +� mot
j mIr , ..
miv
�;,,
91111111110 allnn...
+�,, it
... .. _ uuun..
•
. door Stora
• - . - -
..:
► ,y ,; rrl ■a11►
c .. .
/ry:., .. ..mrlulrlrm
fw i�6a .'' •nnunn
■•1■rrrrrlm■...: ► .Ilrr
nuunuum .�
''
�
�alr �w
- n► a�.nru • anon
on
=°
,.,. . •,, . •
♦ • • • . •
r 1)
��� nn
non• �: �•.
�� :�
., � �;...
,�,
nm n.l ■■glrllm# Clla I, I I I r
- -
�
,��
. Intersecti
• u1u 4aa��O
Q •
•
�
�Illl.� t1 rrc nrr•1.
nn
+n.
1
•
� IIIIllnl ► pin ��
- - - • • •
,\��
♦ ♦
�I. 111■ nl► \�
�I.'�\� \ :
1�. ��i
= /Idsrin , Q
•
•. - .. . .
:':.�►�- �:
= :.InrO.,..0
a.•::•• _.: !�
nnnn
-Iona.
Inglis
=
. - - . - - . .
- G�'.: . _■. •nm _•
�...ra'�O���II - ::
flmu•.u�•.
....root,. •• _
-
nt G�.:•'.,.. :
fun ■►
G�i
n.•p �y��....•,'.4 .:.
.,untm„
1 uuna ,t • -Into.
ago
I
:
..uuw
'
/siu�►
.uu
....umm
�
�1 ., • , ual• ` °� ,a�.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Miles Base Map Bonestroo Rosene Andedink B Associales
December 2008
147
ingle Family Redevelopment
tlottununnn
:�puu;!unnunnnnunmm�uu■
-
C Re
isn
� � t
..iii ==
Renovation, Improvement
N••a
►
r �i'. ♦ 4�■', u�
tlU .. Ii1 ,
r ', 11 • J` �
G �imr .� tl.
rir,nr _ ■a .^I _p •: Aa
Needed
:•r
OJ Op i•ai
_•:,.•�; ,rte!
,,,,un/ :a1nf0 �. �a
/Arnr�:na.aa `! +�
117,11
Use of Bus Garage Site
s.
In Place Industrial Issues
• . _
::: is � �rll����l1
t • Ir��f1r-71pR.
.. .
Medium De nsity
+�
�
tub_
■lau. ::.:VI
_� .Ii►
..
• ::►
-
�:
Inn■
_�I� �
• - -
111.
.
anOaaaf/
,x nnnta
•• ap
In Place Industrial Issues
• �i
r :
�$4�:iA/
Irregular City Bounda
c
.• oalr....
Single Family Redevelopment
:au
►1111
::: -..
-
•
E•'�a
'•.'�:..�
.motion
e
Appearance of Back
- -- .o`:O:•
:
f Shopping Center
- -.- -.. •...
.u►ai: �. +� mot
�;,,
91111111110 allnn...
...
... .. _ uuun..
_ �-
. door Stora
• - . - -
n.. ..rm
-.,►\
/ry:., .. ..mrlulrlrm
fw i�6a .'' •nnunn
■•1■rrrrrlm■...: ► .Ilrr
nuunuum .�
•
r 1)
��� nn
■/t �n
n■
,�,
nm n.l ■■glrllm# Clla I, I I I r
,r�i11
�
�
�.I..
. Intersecti
�1 ., • , ual• ` °� ,a�.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Miles Base Map Bonestroo Rosene Andedink B Associales
December 2008
147
Land Use
COMMERCIAL
Commercial uses occupy 4.5 percent of the City's total land area. The vitality and image of
the City's commercial area is a primary concern of the City. New Hope's shopping areas
display a declining image through building appearance, vacancies, and erratic commercial
land use patterns that provides little continuity for business interchange between the
various commercial areas.
In an effort to respond to the commercial land use concerns related to the function and
vitality of the City's commercial areas, the following strategies will be implemented:
In 2007, New Hope established Community Design Guidelines to be adopted as part
of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The primary purpose of the Design Guidelines is
to:
• Reinforce the community's vision for development.
• Foster high quality architecture and site planning.
• Encourage creativity in accomplishing design goals.
• Protect public and private investment in buildings and infrastructure.
The Design Guidelines establish architectural, site design, and performance
standards in the following areas:
a. _Buildinq Design. Fagade treatment, ground level expression, window and
door openings, roof design, building materials, color, and franchise
architecture.
b. Building Placement /Site Design. Parking areas, parking structures,
pedestrian areas, common space, landscaping, site improvements, and
preferred trees.
C. Lighting. Fixture design, light levels.
d. Signage. Wall signs, sign design, illumination, freestanding signs.
e. Streetscape Treatment. Hierarchy of streets, gateway, parkways,
commercial streets, local streets, sidewalks, and transit facilities.
Stormwater Treatment. Impervious surface, alternative technologies,
detention ponds, infiltration, bio- filtration, multi - functional systems, and
rooftop collection.
f City of New Hope Comprehensive Plan Update
Development Framework
215
Land Use
The application of the Design Guidelines is intended to improve the identity and
environment of the City's commercial, industrial and high density residential areas.
These guidelines establish New Hope's vision for future site improvements, new
development, and redevelopment efforts throughout the City.
2. Redevelopment efforts in commercial areas shall promote commercial land uses as
a first priority. However, the City will consider the introduction of compatible and
complementary alternative land uses as part of the commercial redevelopment
projects if it will enhance the commercial vitality on a City -wide basis.
3. Aggressively pursue the redevelopment and /or renovation of the Winnetka Center,
Kmart Center, Midland Center, and the shopping center at Winnetka Avenue North
and 62 Avenue North to enhance both the physical appearance and tenant
composition of these centers in an effort to improve the customer draw to New
Hope's commercial areas.
4. Coordinate and integrate redevelopment efforts to include all of the shopping
centers in the City Center area of New Hope to promote easy access, shared
parking and pedestrian movement between the shopping centers to promote
business interchange between these shopping centers.
5. As opportunities present themselves, redevelop and assemble small commercial
sites to create larger commercial lots capable of accommodating contemporary
office, retail, and service providers. Specific land assembly target areas include
sites along Bass Lake Road east of Winnetka Avenue, 42 Avenue east of the
railroad tracks, and Medicine Lake Road east of Hillsboro Avenue.
6. Work cooperatively with the City of Crystal to establish a cohesive commercial
image along Bass Lake Road between Winnetka Avenue, and Highway 81.
7. Consider a reduction in the shopping center parking standard and promote shared
parking arrangements in an effort to reduce parking lot size and create additional
commercial building sites that would complement the shopping centers.
8. The City will promote a business friendly attitude through the community promotion
and ongoing examination of City regulations impacting businesses (e.g., zoning,
signage, business licensing) to keep New Hope businesses competitive with
adjoining communities.
9. To enhance the commercial image and to unify the identity of New Hope's
commercial areas, the City will implement a uniform streetscape design to establish
a common design theme throughout the various commercial locations.
City of New Hope Comprehensive Plan Update
;y � ( Development Framework
vr
216
Land Use
In addition to the general commercial land use recommendations, the Land Use Plan calls
for the following changes in commercial land use patterns:
1. The commercial area at the southwest corner of West Broadway and 62 Avenue is
proposed to be redeveloped as mixed use.
2. Commercial land uses have been expanded along the east side of Winnetka Avenue
just north of Medicine Lake Road to include a non - conforming multiple family site.
This land use change is proposed to establish a contiguous land use pattern along
Winnetka Avenue between Medicine Lake Road and Terra Linda Drive.
3. Commercial land uses have been expanded to two sites located at the corner of
Hillsboro Avenue and Medicine Lake Road.
MIXED USE
The commercial land use description on pages 215 -216 recommends the pursuit of
redevelopment of select City Center commercial sites. Within the City Center area, the
promotion of commercial land uses is the City's first priority. However, the City may also
consider the introduction of complementary, alternative land uses that will enhance the
areas and provide support for the commercial use. Commercial mixed use land use
category maintains the commercial land use as a priority but may also allow for residential
land uses in an integrated site design. Residential densities that may be considered within
a mixed use redevelopment would be medium density housing at 10 units per acre or high
density housing options at 23+ units per acre.
The City has not immediate plans for a mixed land use redevelopment within City limits.
This land use category gives the City the flexibility to consider alternative land uses when
City Center redevelopment opportunities become available.
Any future Comprehensive Plan amendments to allow a mixed land use for the City Center
will require City approval of a redevelopment master plan. Through the redevelopment plan
review, the City will define the balance between commercial and residential land uses and
the range of residential densities that may be allowed.
City of New Hope Comprehensive Plan Update
Development Framework
217
Land Use
COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT
TARGET AREA ACREAGE
Maintenance 3.74 acres
Redevelopment 45.63 acres
Maintenance / Redevelopment 15.10 acres
Maintenance includes upkeep, improvements, renovation, or rehabilitation of existing
commercial buildings. No expansion of the existing buildings is anticipated.
Redevelopment of commercial areas is anticipated to achieve between 25 percent to 30
percent building coverage, resulting in between 496,000 to 596,000 square feet of new
commercial, retail, service, or office floor space. The identified redevelopment sites are
currently active retailing locations. The City has no definite timeframe for redevelopment.
The City has also identified 15.10 acres of commercial property as Maintenance /
Redevelopment. These sites are a lower priority for the City. The City will emphasize
maintenance until an opportunity arises to promote a larger redevelopment project.
City of New Hope Comprehensive Plan Update
a Development Framework
218
Uto =014XIL
r4
oo
2
Redevelopment
Maintenance
Maintenance/ Redevelopment
Water
Outside City Limits
F
0.25 0.5 0.75 1
mmm -- PINNOWIMM i Miles
NORTHWEST ASSOCIAtgP CONSULTANTS, INC
lap: Bonestroo Rosene Anderlink & Associates
December 2008
219
GOLDEN VALLEY
To: Planning Commission
From: Curtis Jacobsen, Director of Community Development
Date: November 25, 2009
Subject: 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.
November 9 Council /EDA meeting The following planning / development/housing items were
discussed:
• Project #845 Resolution approving a joint powers agreement between the city of New
Hope and the city of Brooklyn Park for the Winnetka Avenue infrastructure
improvements Approved, see attached Council request.
• Public Hearing - Resolution authorizing the issuance_ a sale of health care facilities
revenue bonds (St Therese Home Inc) in one or more series, and authorizing the
execution of necessary documents Approved, see attached Council request.
2
3
• Discussion regarding the recipient of the Fall 2009 New Hope Outstanding Business
Award Selected Arc Value Village as the fall recipient.
November 16 Council work session - The following planning /development/housing items were
discussed:
• Project #842 Update on the City Center redevelopment by Ryan companies See attached
Council request.
• Review of on -sale intoxicating liquor license requirements See attached Council request.
• Discussion regarding Planning Commission vacancy - Staff was directed to contact the
three persons interviewed in June of the vacancy to determine whether they are still
interested in serving on the Planning Commission, and to advertise the vacancy in the event
there are other persons in the community who may be interested in submitting an
application.
November 23 Council /EDA meeting - The following planning / development/housing items
were discussed:
• Presentation of the Fall 2009 New Hope Outstanding Business Award to Arc's Value
Village Presentation of award.
Miscellaneous Issues Page 1 10/30/09
4. Codes and Standards Committee - The Codes and Standards Committee met in November to
discuss the following issues: solicitors licenses, massage parlors, temporary signs, vacant
property registration, rental registration, and corner lots. Two items will be placed on the
December Planning Commission agenda (temporary signs and corner lots).
Committee meetings will now be held on the third Wednesday of the month at 6 p.m.
Committee members will be contacted for either a December or January meeting.
5. Design and Review Committee - The Design and Review Committee met in November with
the Clearwire applicant.
6. Commission Re- appointments - The three -year terms for Commissioners Landy and Houle
expire on December 31. Letters have been sent to inquire if they are interested in re- appointment.
7. Miscellaneous Article - Minimal Impact Design Standards: Enclosed is information regarding a
new stormwater runoff program.
7. Planning Commission Minutes - A copy of the July 7 minutes are attached for your review.
Please remember that all approved minutes are posted on the city's website.
8. If you have any questions on any of these items, please feel free to contact city staff.
Attachments: Winnetka Avenue infrastructure improvements
St. Therese Home revenue bonds
Fall outstanding business award
City Center update
On -sale intoxicating liquor license ordinance
Planning Commission vacancy
Memo from Wenck Associates
July 7 Planning Commission minutes
Miscellaneous Issues Page 2 10/30/09