080311 planning commissionCITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 3, 2011
City Hall, 7 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER The New Hope Planning Commission met in regular session pursuant to
due call and notice thereof; Chair Houle called the meeting to order at 7
p.m.
ROLL CALL Present: Paul Anderson, Jim Brinkman, Jeff Houle, Sandra Hunten,
Roger Landy, Ranjan Nirgude, Sunday Onadipe, Tom
Schmidt, Steve Svendsen
Absent: None
Also Present: Curtis Jacobsen, Director of Community Development,
Steve Sondrall, City Attorney, Eric Weiss, Community
Development Assistant, Pamela Sylvester, Recording
Secretary
CONSENT BUSINESS There was no Consent Business on the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING
Item 4.1 Chair Houle introduced Item 4.1, discussion regarding ordinance
amendment to allow variances, city of New Hope, petitioner.
Mr. Curtis Jacobsen stated the Codes and Standards Committee discussed
this issue in July. Variance requests came to a standstill last fall after a
Minnesota Supreme Court decision where the Supreme Court narrowly
interpreted the statutory definition of undue hardship and whether or not
there was a reasonable use of the property in the absence of the variance.
The new law changes that factor back to the reasonable manner
understanding and allows counties and cities to work under the same
standards and flexibility. The major verbiage change in the proposed
New Hope ordinance amendment substitutes "practical difficulties" for
"undue hardship" and complies with state code. The criteria utilized in
evaluating variance requests remain the same. This ordinance
amendment once again gives cities the ability to offer residents a variance
to city code for a specific project that may not meet all the requirements
of the city code.
Chair Houle questioned if other cities are adopting this language into
their ordinances. Mr. Jacobsen indicated that some cities are making
changes to their ordinances and some are utilizing the state statute. New
Hope has always had variance language in its code, which is why it is
proceeding with the ordinance amendment. Mr. Steve Sondrall, city
attorney, stated that the language was taken from the new law.
Commissioner Svendsen inquired if the state law mentioned wind energy
and Mr. Sondrall indicated that was not in the code.
There was no one present in the audience wishing to speak at the public
hearing.
Motion by Commissioner Schmidt, seconded by Commissioner
Brinkman, to close the public hearing regarding Planning Cast 11 -04. All
voted in favor. Motion carried.
MOTION Motion by Commission Landy, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, to
Item 4.1 approve Planning Case 11 -04, ordinance amendment to allow variances,
city of New Hope, petitioner.
Voting in favor: Anderson, Brinkman, Houle, Hunten, Landy, Nirgude,
Onadipe, Schmidt, Svendsen
Voting against: None
Absent: None
Motion approved.
The City Council will discuss the ordinance amendment at its meeting on
August 22, 2011.
Planning Case 11 -05 Chair Houle introduced Item 4.2, discussion regarding ordinance
Item 4.2 amendment to clarify Sewer Access Charge (SAC) responsibility, city of
New Hope, petitioner.
Mr. Jacobsen stated that the Metropolitan Council was responsible for the
treatment of waste water (sewage) and had the ability to levy charges on
cities. The two main charges are for flow and sewer access. The flow is the
usage charge to anyone connected to the metropolitan waste water
system. The sewer access charge (SAC) is a charge established to provide
for reserve capacity in the metro waste water system. The MCES's policy
is to charge these SAC fees to cities and cities can either pass the fees
along to the property owner or absorb the fees. New Hope has always
passed the fees along to the property owner or developer.
Mr. Jacobsen stated that the city's ordinance had not been changed since
1973 and the proposed ordinance would update the language and clarify
that the property owner /developer would be responsible for all SAC
charges from the Metropolitan Council. Currently, the charge is $2,230
per SAC unit.
Recently, the Met Council conducted an audit at the city and determined
that several businesses that had made improvements in the last several
years owed additional money for SAC fees. One company only added a
shower stall to a restroom and an additional SAC was charged. New
Hope Bowl added a volleyball court and expanded the deck and an
additional SAC was charged due to the additional seating area. A
restaurant expanded into additional space and was charged an additional
eight SAC units. The businesses can challenge the Met Council and
occasionally the fees are reversed.
Planning Commission Meeting 2 August 3, 2011
Mr. Jacobsen explained briefly how SAC fees are determined. Single
family homes are charged one SAC unit. Fees for offices, restaurants,
commercial and industrial buildings are triggered by plumbing
modifications to the building. Fees are collected for new construction or
remodeling at the time a building permit is issued.
Plans for modifications or new construction are sent to the Metropolitan
Council to make a determination on the number of SAC units to be
collected by the city. Commissioner Nirgude inquired how the Met
Council found out about the modifications to the buildings. Mr. Jacobsen
answered that the city is required to report monthly the number of
permits issued and SAC fees collected.
There was no one present in the audience wishing to speak at the public
hearing.
Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen,
to close the public hearing regarding Planning Cast 11 -05. All voted in
favor. Motion carried.
MOTION Motion by Commission Landy, seconded by Commissioner Brinkman, to
Item 4.2 approve Planning Case 11 -05, ordinance amendment to clarify Sewer
Access Charge (SAC) responsibility, city of New Hope, petitioner.
Voting in favor: Anderson, Brinkman, Houle, Hunten, Landy, Nirgude,
Onadipe, Schmidt, Svendsen
Voting against: None
Absent: None
Motion approved.
The City Council will discuss the ordinance amendment at its meeting on
August 22, 2011.
COMMITTEE
REPORTS
Design and Review Commissioner Svendsen reported the Design and Review Committee did
Committee not meet. Mr. Jacobsen added that staff would be meeting with two
Item 5.1 potential applicants at the pre - application meeting on August 5.
Codes and Standards Chair Houle stated that the Codes and Standards Committee met to
Committee review the two issues discussed at this meeting. Mr. Jacobsen stated that
Item 5.2 staff would be scheduling another meeting in the upcoming weeks.
Chair Houle mentioned that Commissioners Johnson and Skalland, both
members of the Codes and Standards Committee, had resigned from the
Commission since the June Planning Commission meeting. He inquired if
any other commissioners would be agreeable to sit in with the Codes and
Standards Committee until additional commission members were
appointed by the Council. Commissioner Landy indicated he would sit in
at the meetings. Commissioner Svendsen stated he may be available for
Planning Commission Meeting 3 August 3, 2011
evening meetings, if needed. Mr. Jacobsen stressed it would be best if at
least three to four commission members attended the committee
meetings.
Mr. Sondrall added that there should not be a quorum of the Planning
Commission serving on a committee, due to the fact that it could then be
considered a regular Planning Commission meeting to conduct business.
Members could be assigned as "floaters" but only four members
(assuming nine commission members) could attend the committee
meeting. A suggestion was made to have a regular meeting date /time, and
if a meeting was not needed, to cancel it. A meeting was scheduled for
Tuesday, August 23, at 5:30 pm.
Chair Houle reminded commission members to be sure to contact staff if
they know they cannot attend a committee meeting. Mr. Jacobsen added
that commissioners can email comments to staff if they cannot attend a
meeting. If additional information is needed on a particular project,
please contact staff and it can be emailed to the entire commission.
NEW BUSINESS
Approval of Minutes Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Brinkman,
Item 6.1 to approve the Planning Commission minutes of June 7, 2011. All voted
in favor. Motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS Chair Houle initiated discussion regarding the developer roundtable and
Miscellaneous Issues stated he felt it was a positive meeting with good ideas exchanged.
Developers had indicated interest in apartments or a senior housing co-
op. A very large parcel would be needed for big box retail. For
neighborhood retail, smaller parcels would be appropriate.
Commissioner Hunten added that the size and demographics of New
Hope may provide a good opportunity for senior co -op housing.
Commissioner Brinkman initiated discussion on the appraisal process for
Kmart and the vacant Wells Fargo bank building. Mr. Jacobsen indicated
that the City Council had authorized staff to obtain appraisals for both
properties and staff would take the information back to the Council once
it was received.
ANNOUNCEMENTS There were no announcements.
ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 7:47
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Pamela Sylvester
Recording Secretary
Planning Commission Meeting 4 August 3, 2011