1993 PlanningCITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 xFr_,ON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
PC 93-01(3.1)
REQUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT
TO ~T~W A
HOME OCCUPA-
TION, 4448
INDEPENDENCH
AVENUE N.
January 5, 1993
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Cameron.
Present: Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen,
Watschke, Lifson
Absent: Gundershaug
Also present: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant
Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant
Chairman Cameron introduced Planning Case 93-01 and Kirk McDonald
reviewed the request for a conditional use permit for a home
occupation to conduct a computerized tax preparation business out
of a home on a part-time basis from January through April. He
noted that the petitioner indicates that there will be no employees
hired, no visible signage, and probably no more than two customers
per day will be served as work will be by appointment only from
9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. He explained that the conditional use
permit is necessary because customers and vehicles do visit the
site, and at two customers per day staff feels that negative impact
will be minimal, although they request that all customers be
required to park in the driveway.
Dung Tien Van, petitioner, came forward at the request of the
Chairman.
Commissioner Zakquestioned the petitioner regarding some vehicles
parked in the driveway when she drove by the residence, noting that
one vehicle looked as though it had not been driven for a long
time.
Mr. Van replied that it was his daughter's, but that it was being
removed.
Commissioner Zak confirmed that there would be only 2 customers per
day, but questioned what the petitioner would do if his business
would begin to add more customers every day.
Mr. Van indicated that he would have to consider renting office
space.
Commissioner Zak confirmed there would be no external or internal
changes to the home and asked if the petitioner intended to put up
any signage or make any changes in wiring to accommodate a
computer.
Mr. Van stated that he did not plan to put a sign on the front of
his house, and would maybe circulate some fliers to advertise his
business. He added that he will be using a personal computer so no
extra wiring is needed.
Commissioner Zak questioned if the petitioner planned to have any
employees and he confirmed that he would be working alone.
Chairman Cameron asked if the petitioner is an accountant and if
this will be his only job and how he will seek customers.
New Hope Planning Commission -1- January 5, 1993
Mr. Van replied that he works nights at another occupation and this
will be specialty work which he will do in the morning and early
afternoon and most of his customers will be friends and family.
MOTION Motion by Co~nissioner Zak, second by Commissioner Underdahl, to
approve Planning Case 93-01 subject to the following conditionss
1. Evidence of ownership of the property be submitted to the
City ·
2. Any signage to be posted must comply with City Code standards.
3. K limit of two (2) customers per day with cars to be parked in
driveway.
¢. Ho truck or'pickup del£veries at the site.
5. Annual inspection by staff.
Voting in favors Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Caueron, Cassen,
Watschke,
voting aga£nsts Hone
Absents Oundershaug
Motion carried.
Chairman Cameron advised the petitioner that the City Counc£1 will
consider the case for final action on Monday, January 11th.
PC 93-02(3.2) Chairman Cameron introduced Planning Case 93-02 and Kirk McDonald
REQ~FEST FOR reviewed the request for a conditional use permit to allow open
CONDITIONAL USE accessory storage for overnight parking of trucks. He referred to
PERMIT TO ALLOW a request for a parking lot setback variance that was granted for
OPEN ACP~ESSORY this property in September of 1992 in conjunction with the Bass
STORAGE FOR Lake Road project. He noted that the petitioner is a tenant in
OVERNIGHT PARK- that building and the application is a result of citations being
ING OF TRUCKS, issued by the Inspections Department. He explained that the
870! BASS LAKE petitioner currently parks 3 vehicles overnight on the property and
ROAD claims the vehicles are single-unit service trucks essential to
their normal course of business in transporting equipment and
materials from the warehouse to various job sites in the metro area
and are parked there only when not in use. He pointed out that
open and outdoor storage is not a permitted use in the I-1 District
and only allowed as a conditional use, and he further noted that
there are adequate parking spaces provided on the site. He noted
that staff is concerned regarding where the vehicles are currently
parked in the center of the south parking aisle as they may inter-
fere with maneuvering of larger trucks coming into the site, and he
added that staff suggests moving the vehicles to the southwest
corner of the site. He called attention to the fact that addition-
al storage that occurred on the site, which brought about the
citations, has been cleaned up.
Chairman Cameron asked for clarification that storage referred to
in the request is for trucks only and not materials stored inside.
Mr. Gary Libra, comptroller for Protective Surfacing, Inc.,
addressed the Commission and stated that the trucks are essential
to the business and it is necessary to park them at a location
accessible to the warehouse in order to expedite loading materials
for use at various job sites. He noted that the owner of the
building feels that there can be a problem for his own business,
Twin City Acoustics, if the vehicles are parked as suggested by
staff and he emphasized that his company has been parking their
trucks in the current spot for five years and have had no trouble
with semis going in and out.
New Hope Planning Commission
-2-
JanuazT S, 1993
~OTION
Chairman Cameron questioned what iSstored in the trucks overnight
and if there might be a safety/security issue.
Mr. Libra stated that most times theY are empty and nothing of
value is stored in the trucks overnight, although they may do
loading at night because they resurface concrete floors in
commercial buildings and often have to work when the buildings are
closed down evenings and weekends.
Chairman Cameron asked where they prefer to park and was informed
by Mr.' Libra that their preference was as originally diagramed.
Commissioner Sonsin asked for clarification of a notation on the
diagram and was informed it indicates additional landscaping recom-
mended by staff to help screen the storage. He wondered if the
trucks could be parked further to right than noted on the diagram.
Mr. Libra pointed out that the parking shown is closest to their
loading dock.
Commissioner Sonsin wondered how long they had been parking on the
site, if they planned to increase the size of their trucks, where
trucks have been parked previously, and if there have been any
complaints regarding noise, etc., on the trucks being parked there,
other than the City citation.
Mr. Libra replied that the previous owner used the area for parking
trucks prior to their taking over the business so it has been about
six years. He explained that the citations were a result of some
barrels being left outside and affirmed that there would not be a
future occurrence.
Commissioner Sonsin asked if they had any concerns about the
requirement for additional landscaping and screening.
Mr. Libra stated that the owner of the property, who had to be out
of town and could not attend the meeting, did not seem to have a
concern regarding it and did call staff before he left town.
Chairman Cameron emphasized that the planting of the trees is a
condition of the approval and if the planting is not confirmed to
the City Council it may not be approved.
Commissioner Sonsin questioned what would happen if final approval
was not granted by the Council and the petitioner indicated they
would not be able to remain at that location as it is necessary to
have the trucks accessible to their warehouse.
commissioner Lifson confirmed with the petitioner that the trucks
are not always parked there every night and weekends as they
sometimes remain on job sites.
Commissioner Cassen confirmed there is sufficient lighting provided
for the trucks to be coming and going and loading every night and
that there is sufficient screening so the lights do not affect the
surrounding properties.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Zak, to
approve Plann£ng Case 93-02, subject to the follow£ng conditions~
1. Limit of 3 trucks to be stored on the site in the southwest
corner of parking lot, per enclosed staff sketch.
2. Spaces to be signed and striped with details to be worked out
with Building Official.
New Hope Planning Commission -3- January 5, 1993
PC 93-03(3.3)
REQUEST FOR
TO REZONE
PROPERTY FROM
I-1 LIMITED
INDUSTRIAL TO
R-0 RESIDEN-
TIAL-OFFICE TO
AT.T~W A CHURCH
EXISTING BLDG.
AT 8801 BASS
LAKE ROAD
New Hope Planning Commission
Voting in favor= Underdahl, Zak,
Watschke, L£fson
Voting against= None
Absent= Gundershaug
Motion carried.
All vehicles to be licensed and oPerable.
No other outdoor storage allowed.
Owner o£ building agrees to additional landscaping (two 2-1/2"
Colorado Spruce) to be planted in southeast corner of lot to
help screen storage.
Annual review b~ staff.
Sonsin; C~eron; Cass.n;
Chairman Cameron confirmed with staff that if Protective Surfacing
leaves the building, the conditional use permit is no longer valid
as it goes with the business only, not the property.
Mr. Libra interjected that Protective Surfacing, Inc. was the
predecessor company and asked that the name be corrected to PSI
Concrete Surfacing, Inc.
Chairman Cameron called for Planning Case 93-03 and welcomed Alan
Brixius, City Planner, who addressed the Commission on the subject
of property rezoning.
Mr. Brixius noted that this request is located adjacent to the
property referred to in the previous case and also in an I-1
Limited Industrial Zoning District, and the application asks for a
rezoning of the property to an R-O Residential-Office District. He
pointed out that when the initial application was presented the
applicants were led to believe that the R-1 District was the most
appropriate to allow for the use of a church and school and, in
retrospect, it turned out that the R-O Residential-Office District
would offer more compatible land use pattern than the R-1 and the
application was then changed to reflect that. He added that the
original application included a request for a conditional use
permit and site/building plan review/approval, but that request has
been withdrawn to focus on the zoning change, and if the zoning is
approved there will be a subsequent request for the withdrawn
issues. He stated that Medicine Lake Church is proposing to rezone
a 4.2 acre parcel to include provision of a church with an assembly
area of 276 seating capacity, a school for grades K through 8 with
a maximum enrollment of 225. He pointed out the proposed site plan
showing access points off Bass Lake Road, parking arrangement, and
the western half of the site for playground area accessory to the
school facility.
Mr. Brixius outlined the criteria generally used by the City for
consideration of rezoning: first, a determination as to whether
the current zoning was originally a mistake for the area and
incorrectly applied; and secondly, whether the character of the
area has changed, justifying or warranting a change in zoning. He
referred to the Comprehensive Plan of 1975 which designated the
area for industrial and business type operations and outlined a
number of specific land use policies, focusing on the Science
Industry Center as an industrial area for the community to.provide
jobs and tax base, and the concept plan was proposed to achieve a
relationship of land uses for a business campus in the area. He
noted that there was a modification in 1979 with the eastern
portion of the industrial park being zoned to R-4 to include the
-4- Jnnuar~ 5, 1993
Pheasant Park Apartments, contrary to what was shown in the
concept, but details on that rezoning are somewhat vague and
history of 13 years has.diminished recollections on that rezoning~
however, since 1975 the area has been basically utilized for
industrial operations and the character of the site has remained
unchanged since 1979, with the Post Building maintained as an
industrial site and functioning well within the I-1 District
standards. He added that these characteristics suggest that the
I-1 zoning originally applied was the correct zoning for the area
and it was not a mistake.
Mr. Brixius then addressed whether there has been a change in the
character of the area. He noted that there has been a number of
applications before the City as far as rezonlng industrial land for
residential zoning for consideration of a church or other types of
facilities, with pheasant Park as one example but more recently the
Church of the Open Door whichwas interested in locating in Science
Industry Center at a more centralized location. He pointed out
that the City discussed the possibility of a text amendment to
allow churches within an industrial zoning district, but upon
researching the issue and making a finding it was determined that
church type operations in industrial type facilities were not
necessarily a compatible land use mixture and also presented a
concern regarding a potential for a declining tax base by allowing
them to come into underutilized industrial buildings, therefore the
text amendment was not considered or approved.
Mr. Brixius then referred to a vacant land study conducted in 1989
to quantify any remaining vacant supply of land and identify
corporate land uses in the area. He identified one of the subject
sites as the parcel immediately east of the applicant's site and
pointed out that in consideration of the area a limited industrial
or office type arrangement was proposed. He noted that the vacant
land study also established policy and priorities for the Science
Industry Center as a continued area for tax base, employment
opportunity, and promotion of economic development.
Mr. Brixius called attention to a similar 1989 request, although in
a different area located on Winnetka Avenue, where an I-1 Limited
Industrial area was rezoned R-O to accommodate the relocation of
Holy Nativity Church. He emphasized that while there are
comparisons that can be held up to this case as far as being in the
periphery of an industrial area and being across the street from
low-density residential uses, it should be recognized that the Holy
Nativity situation was part of an economic redevelopment scheme for
the Winnetka/36th Avenue area where the church previously existed
in a somewhat substandard building and in a flood plain, and the
Winnetka site became a relocation site with some offsetting circum-
stances that are not necessarily applicable in the current case.
Mr. Brixius referred back to the question of whether the character
of the area has changed and pointed to the surrounding land uses
such as single family uses oriented to the local streets and
separated from the site by Bass Lake Road, industrial development
existing on the east, vacant land zoned for industrial on the west,
and R-4 on the south providing some separation and argument for
compatibility, but he noted the isolation of the corner lot raises
some question and concern. He noted the even though the current
building was originally established for limited industrial and has
New Hope PLanning Commission -5- Januar~ 5, 1993
been used in that fashion prior to the current application, and
along with a feeling that, with what has been submitted by the
applicant, conversions can occur in a manner which may function for
the church facility, the R-O does accommodate some commercial
activities that if in the event the church failed or did not
continue the use, the site could be reutilized, however the
flexibility of the I-1 does provide some additional incentive to
let it remain. He added that performance standards to comply for
a CUP, such as lot area, setbacks, etc. can be met by the church
under the R-O, but a number of issues do remain unresolved because
no final drawings have been submitted. He emphasized that
redevelo~nent of the building will not depreciate the value of the
building, but it remains as a consideration that a change from a
tax-paying base to non-profit base is a concern in times when local
revenues are diminishing. He pointed out that there are utilities,
services, and transportation available to meet the needs of the
site and it can accommodate both types of uses, and there would not
be a compatibility issue, with the exception of the introduction of
children or bicycle traffic in the area of high traffic streets.
Mr. Brixius concluded that in determining any land use change
within a community it is always a legislative decision on policy
determination by the Planning Commission and City Council, however
New Hope has been very specific on conditions under which they will
grant a rezoning so it is the feeling that there was not a mistake
in zoning when initially applied and the character of the area has
not changed significantly to warrant a change from I-1 to R-O.
Chairman Cameron invited persons speaking for the petitioner to
present their case.
Mr. Tim Keane, of Larkin & Hoffman law firm from Bloomington,
introduced himself and several representatives from the church. He
confirmed that the issue is for rezoning only and that the
conditional use permit and site/building plan review matter will be
continued to a future Planning Commission meeting pending the
outcome of the land use request. He pointed out that the R-O
District being requested is, as stated in the purpose of the text
of the zoning ordinance, a transitional district, one that is
intended to accommodate transitional uses, and he believes it is
appropriate to the site. He listed the surrounding uses and
emphasized theirs is an institutional use that will serve a variety
of functions for the community, and in context of land use patterns
the use that is being proposed and the transitional nature of the
R-O District, it is a site that is intrinsically well-suited. He
indicated that the church would not have identified the site and
entered into a contract to purchase the facility if it was not
well-suited to the church's needs. He referred to the zoning
criteria as mentioned by the Planner, and inferred that maybe there
was a mistake in the zoning ordinance in that there may not be
enough zoning classifications or districts to accommodate institu-
tional church uses. He noted the previous requests of churches for
rezonings, text amendments, etc., mentioned in the staff report and
in meetings with staff, that would allow church institutional uses
within the community and suggested that maybe when the City
developed its land use plan and zoning scheme it was a happenstance
of the development pattern and was a mistake that there are no
sites in the community to serve the institutional church needs, so
New Hope Planning Commission -6- Januar~ 5, 1993
rather than dismissing that it may not have been a mistake, he
requested that consideration be given to that fact.
Mr. Keane continued, speaking to the focus on the tax base and the
loss of tax revenue if the use is converted to a church/school
institutional type use. He urged that, even though fiscal issues
are legitimate and important for the community, the bigger picture
and qualitative aspects of the requested land use be considered in
that the church will be a significant community resource.
Mr. Eldon Nelson, 8616 40th Avenue North, New Hope, introduced
himself as a member of the congregation and a member of the
Development Committee for the church, and thanked the Commission
for the opportunity to present their request. He outlined facts
about the congregation, but requested a correction in the staff
report regarding the comment that they operate a full-time Bible
School and dormitories and a 4-year seminary, noting that the
reference is to their national church organization and not a part
of their individual church and they do not intend to include such
items at their site. He stated that they do operate an academy
with grades K through 8 which includes families from outside the
church as well as their own members. He added that they are
currently in leased facilities and have been looking for property
of their own for some time because the national church body is
encouraging them to do so as they need to utilize more space on
their present campus. He emphasized that the Post property is
attractive to them because of its location, which is central to the
constituents of the congregation as well as members of the academy,
and accessible and easy to find and visible to the community to
carry on its' ministry. He noted that they have 175 students in
the academy at the present time and now meet in St. Louis Park
which means they have to bus children there daily and academy
parents have asked to have it more centrally located. He commented
that they have set caps of 225 enrollment for the academy and they
do not anticipate becoming a megachurch. He urged approval of the
zoning because of the recognized fact that a church is an asset to
the community.
Chairman Cameron questioned why they prefer moving into an
industrial building versus building they own new facility on a
vacant site.
Mr. Nelson replied that property is difficult to come by in an
established area such as New Hope and their present location in
Plymouth, and sites that are central to their constituents are not
available.
Chairman Cameron confirmed that there were no other persons waiting
to address the Commission on behalf of the church.
Commissioner Sonsin offered his comments on the issue, restating
the City's criteria for rezoning and presenting the question that
if property rezoning is approved, will it actually be the kind of
rezoning desired for the property. He emphasized that once it is
decided that current zoning is incorrect the issue then becomes a
question of what the correct zoning is and the decision will be
influenced by whatever particular applicant is requesting rezoning.
Commissioner Sonsin continued his comments stating that from his
years of service on the Commission and the Planner's report, his
New Hope Planning Commission -7- Janu&r~ 5, 1993
viewpoint is that there was not a mistake in the zoning of the
property, that it was designed to be an industrial area and the
busy Base Lake Road isolates it from the residential area to the
north. He stressed that the City has proudly created and main-
rained a balance between its various zoning districts and therefore
does not take rezoning reqUests lightly. He further stressed that
he does not see that there has been a change in the character of
the area to prove the zoning was incorrect. He re-emPhasized his
qUestion of what is the right use for the sight if it is decided it
was zoned incorrectly to begin with, and in addition he qUestioned,
as a taxpayer and citizen, the loss of the tax revenue withOut some
kind of compensation or offset for the community as was realized in
the case of Holy Nativity Church where the exchange of a tax-exempt
property for a tax-producing one was balanced out. He addressed
the issue of a school locating on the site and called attention to
the heavy and fast traffic coming off Highway 169 that potentially
could create a possible tragedy in connectioni with addition of
school children on the site.
Mr. Nelson replied that they understand the concern of the City
regarding the tax base, but they feel that the loss of revenue will
be balanced by the participants in the church and school doing
business and shopping within the community which will provide an
economic benefit.
Commissioner Watschke qUestioned staff regarding what is included
in an R-O zoning and wondered if the church decides to move out and
an industry wished to locate on the site what procedure follows.
Mr. Brixius listed the permitted and conditional uses allowed in an
R-O District and noted that it is intended to be a transitional
district that allows for high-density residential and iow-density
commercial'activities, and the rezoning process would be reqUired
if it were to revert back to industrial.
Commissioner Zak voiced her reservations regarding safety because
of the addition of buses, parents in cars, and other traffic using
the common egress on to the busy Bass Lake Road. She added her
concern regardingthe loss of a revenue-producing tax base.
Mr. Nelson responded that the former Post Publishing Company
produced a higher volume of traffic in and out of the site than
that which they would generate. He noted they have 2 school buses
which will go in and out twice a day and 15 private autos drop off
and pick up children on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, and 12 on
Tuesday and Thursday.
Commissioner Cassen qUestioned the number of staff and hours of
operation, and what types of evening activity there will be.
Mr. Nelson replied that there are 9 full-time staff and probably
would generate up to no more than 15 vehicles at any one time. He
noted the church office hours would be 8=30 a.m. to 4=30 p.m. and
the school hours are 8=30 a.m. to 3=00 p.m., with normal mid-week
congregation and committee meetings being conducted but not
generating large numbers of people.
Commissioner Lifson addressed a qUestion to staff regarding if the
judgement criteria is derived from precedent, and was assured by
the-Chairman that a long history of serious consideration to pre-
vent random development produced the criteria which guides today.
New Hope Pl&nning ~ommission -8- J&nuaz-~ 5, 1993
Mr. Brixuis commented that in a fully developed community where
land use patterns have been established, the historic growth is
generally reflected in the two Criteria areas.
MOTION
COMMITTEE
REPORTS (4)
Design and
Review (4.1)
Commissioner Underdahl wondered if the North Ridge expansion could
be considered a notable character change of the area and how the
zoning was applied in connection with a church that was formerly
located on Boone and Bass Lake Road.
Mr. Brixius responded that at the time of the North Ridge expansion
and the Chardon Court addition which replaced the church, the land
was zoned R-1 and the rezoning was considered appropriate based on
the proposed and adjacent land use patterns.
Chairman Cameron cautioned that the zoning goes with the property
and that is the reason careful consideration is necessary in any
rezoning. He stressed that even though it is not the issue here,
consideration of economics is also important since different values
are attached to different kinds of zoning. He firmly stated his
opposition to the request for rezoning of the property in question
and defended the current industrial designation and that it is, in
his opinion, an inappropriate place for a church on a busy street
and in an industrial area. He agreed that in today's economy it is
probably more economical to take an industrial building and turn it
into some other use than it is to build a new church building and
it' would not be a problem if all the criteria were met, but it is
his feeling that the City has to be ca=eful how they allow the
buildings to be used and it would not be a good planning decision
to allow a church on that piece of property.
There was no one else to address the Commission and the Chairman
called for a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Cassen, to
recommend denial of Planning Case 93-03 for a text amendment to
rezone property.
Voting in favor: Zak, Sonsin, Ca~eron, Cassen, Lifson
Abstaining: Underdahl, Watschke
Voting against~ Hone
Absent: Gundershaug
Motion carried.
Chairman Cameron informed the petitioners that their case will
still be considered by the City Council on Monday, January 11th.
He assured them that they will find a suitable piece of property on
other vacant land.
Design & Review met with Medicine Lake Church in December.
Codes and
Standards (4.2)
OLD BUSINESS(S)
Misc. Issues
New Hope Planning Commission
Codes & Standards set a meeting date for January 19th to continue
discussion on apartment conversions.
Commissioner Sonsin asked for an update on the plumbing home
occupation and was informed the Council referred it to the Attorney
to draw up findings of fact.
Commissioner Sonsin also questioned if anything further has
developed with K-Mart Corporation regarding the parking lot.
-9- Januar~ 5, 1993
Other commissioners expressed dissatisfaction with the looks of the
K-Mart property and the lack of cooperation to spruce it up and Mr.
McDonald agreed to contact K-Mart and pursue the issue.
Chairman Cameron offered the suggestion to consider establishing a
Commission policy to grant verbal recognition to businesses and
industries in the City that keep their properties in good
condition.
NEW BUSINESS(&) Commissioner Zak noted to the Secretary that she was the one who
excused herself from Planning Case 92-36 instead of Commissioner
Underdahl. The December 1, 1992, Planning Commission minutes stand
corrected. No questions or comments on other minutes.
ELECTION OF Chairman Cameron noted that officers are to be elected at the
OFFICERS beginning of each year and called for nominations for officers for
the coming year.
MOTION Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, with unanimous second, to re-elect
the three current officers for another year=
President= Robert Cameron
Vice Chairman= Robert Gundershaug
Third Officer= William Sonsin
Voting in favor= All
Voting against= None
Absent= Gundershaug
Motion carried.
ANNOUNCEMENTS(~ Commissioner Gundershaug will be absent from meetings for the first
three months of the year.
ADJOURNMENT(8) Meeting unanimously adjourned at 8=20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucille Butler, Secretary
New Hope Planning Commission -10- January 5, 1993
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING C~ISSION MINUTES February2, 1993
CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7=00 p.m. by Chairman Cameron.
ROLL C~T~. Present= Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke
Absent: Underdahl, Gundershaug, Lifson
Also present: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
PC 93-04(3.1)
REQUEST FOR
COMPREHENSIVE
Sim PLAN,
2720 NEVADA
AVENTJE No
Chairman Cameron introduced Planning Case 93-04, noted the
petitioner was not in attendance, and called for a motion to table
until later in the meeting.
MOTION
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Watschke, to
table Planning Case 93-04 until later in the meeting.
Voting in ~avor= Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent: Underdahl, Gundershaug, Lifson
Motion carried.
CO~9~ITTEE
REPORTS (4)
Design and
Review (4.1)
Design & Review did not meet in January.
Codes and
Standards (4,2)
Commissioner Sonsin reported that at their meeting in January the
Committee discussed the apartment conversion issue at length and
agreed there should be an informal Commission discussion of the
Codes & Standards report and ordinance recommendations before it is
presented at a formal public hearing. He outlined the City's.
concerns regarding numbers of people in high density housing where
apartments are being converted, plus concerns regarding loss of
amenities like game rooms, pools, parking, open space, etc. to
accommodate new units. He explained that the City had implemented
a moratorium on apartment conversions until April 13, 1993, so that
the Planning Commission could study the issue. He added that the
Planner had spent a great deal of time looking at a number of ways
to address this subject and keep everyone satisfied, recognizing
that landlords have to make changes to keep up with the times, and
his decision was that the best solution was to make the conversions
subject to certain controls. He pointed out the recommendations
apply to any building with 8 or more dwelling units and limits the
number of 3 or more bedroom units to 40% of the total number of
apartments within a single building.
Kirk McDonald noted that they had looked at the possibility of
requiring a conditional use permit or variance procedure for each
conversion but the conclusion was that it was simpler to amend the
performance standards.
New Hope Planning Commission -1- February2, 1993
OLD BUSINESS(5)
Mist, ~ssues
NEW BUS~NESS(6)
ANNOUNCEMEI~S ( ?
PC 0:3-04 (:3.1)
REQUES~ FOR
COMPREliENS TVS
SIGN PLAN,
2720 NEVADA
AVENUE NORTH
MO~ION
Chairman Cameron questioned if other cities have studied the
subject, and Mr. McDonald pointed out the great amount of paper
work that has been presented from the Metropolitan Council, plus a
study done by the City of Brooklyn Center. The Chairman further
questioned if staff is agreeable with the recommendations.
Mr. McDonald indicated that in their discussions they had talked
about setting a standard of 50 square feet per unit for rec areas,
or a maximum of 1500 square feet. He stated that the decision on
the 1500 square foot maximum, which would be adequate for a 30-unit
building but probably not for a 100-unit building, was not really
finalized and questioned if it should be eliminated or retained.
The consensus was that the 1500 square foot maximum should be
eliminated. Mr. McDonald further noted the 40% limitation to
prevent a complex being totally converted to 3-bedroom units and
the consensus was that it should remain.
Chairman Cameron wondered if there needs to be a stricter standard
in upgrading apartments which would include safety and fire issues
that could be incorporated into the code and Mr. McDonald offered
to review this issue with the Director of Fire/Safety/Inspections
and the Building Official, however he indicated that he felt these
matters were already incorporated into the fire and building codes.
Commissioner Sonsin recommended a formal public hearing on the
matter be scheduled for March 2, 1993, so the moratorium on apart-
ment conversions, which expires on April 13, 1993, will not have to
be extended. He then complimented the Planner and staff for the
amount of work spent on studying the apartment conversion issue.
Staff informed the Commission that Medicine Lake Church formally
withdrew their rezoning request, that the City has drawn on the
Letter of Credit for Winnetka Commons in settlement of all
expenses, and the van issue has been settled in the Goldman case.
Commissioner Sonsin informed the Commission that Codes & Standards
will study the 35% green area requirement in industrial districts.
Ail minutes accepted as printed.
None.
Chairman Cameron requested that the table of Planning Case 93-04 be
continued until the next meeting, since the petitioner had not
arrived.
AD;o~(8)
Respectfully submitted,
Lucille Butler, Secretary
New Hope Planning Co--ission
Motion and second by unanimous vote to table for one month.
Voting in favor: Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent: Underdahl, Lifson, Gundershaug
Motion carried.
Meeting unanimously adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
Februar~ 2, 1993
CTTY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNZNG CGO~ZSSZON MINUTES
CAT`T` TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
PC 93-04(3.1)
REQUEST FOR
COMPREHENSIVE
SION PLAN,
2720 NEVADA
AVENUE N.
MOTION
March 2, 1993
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Cameron.
Present: Lifson, Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Watschke
Absent: Zak, Gundershaug, Cassen
Also present: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant
Steve Sondarall, City Attorney
Alan Brixius, City Planner
Chairman Cameron introduced Planning Case 93-04 and Kirk McDonald,
Management Assistant, outlined the request for comprehensive sign
plan approval to allow K.C. Development a total of 34 square feet
of signage, which would consist of four (4) face panels, 2 being
3'x3' each and 2 being 4'x2' each. He pointed out the location of
the signs over the middle of the main set of exterior doors and
noted that they are for business identification only and the plan
meets all sign code criteria.
Mr. Harry Johnson, representing K.C.Development, was present to
answer questions from the commission.
Commissioner Sonsin confirmed with th® petitioner the location of
the signs, and that there will be only 4 signs, all made of wood
and plastic with a white background and colored lettering, and no
illumination. He also questioned the petitioner if the materials
being used would be subject to discoloration from weather, etc. and
was assured they are treated to prevent such conditions.
Chairman Cameron asked if signs would be added for future tenants.
Mr. Johnson replied that the building is at capacity with the four
tenants and no signs would be added unless one tenant leaves.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Watschke, to
approve, as submitted, Planning Casa 93-04 requesting comprehensive
sign plan approval.
Voting in £avor~ Lifson, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Watschke
Voting againsts None
Absents Zak, Gundershaug, Cassen . ~'.
Motion carried.
PC 93-05(3.2) The Chairman introduced Planning Case 93-05 and Mr. McDonald
REQUEST FOR reviewed the request for a conditional use permit to allow a home
CONDITIONAL USE occupation to conduct a jewelry business out of a home. He indi-
PERMIT TO A?~W cated that the request resulted from a complaint received by the
A HOME OCCUPA- General InspectOr, followed up by an order for the owner to
TION, 8132 complete a "Home Occupation Affidavit", and the determination by
46-1/2 AV. N. staff that because of the traffic and "sales on the premises", a
conditional use permit was required. He further stated that the
business was formerly operated out of rented office space in a
commerical building, but moved to the home due to financial
considerations, and the petitioner has operated there for the past
13 years and was unaware he was in violation of any ordinance.
New Hope Planning Commission -1- March 2, 1993
MO~ION
New Hope Planning Commission
Mr. McDonald continued stating that the clients come to the home by
appointment only to view samples and catalogs of jewelry, place
their order, and return to pick up their merchandise. He noted
that clients come one at a time, with an average of 3 to 5 clients
per week for a maximum of 20 to 40 minutes, there are no truck
deliveries, no business signage on the property, and no advertising
through newspapers. He informed the Conunission that hours or
operation had not been confirmed with the petitioner.
Mr. Merlin Holtz, petitioner, introduced himself and responded that
hours will be 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., but occasionally a customer wants
to come on the way home from work, between 5 and 6 p.m.
Chairman Cameron asked the petitioner if this is his only job and
the petitioner replied that it is.
Convnissioner Sonsin confirmed with the petitioner that only one
customer at a time visits the house, there is no staff, customers
park in the driveway, only deliveries are orders shipped by UPS or
U.S.Mail, and no open advertising is done.
Mr. Holtz pointed out that all orders are small packages and do not
require delivery trucks, and he does not advertise his business.
Conunissioner Sonsin further questioned the petitioner regarding
square footage of space used for the business, outdoor signage,
what kind of jewelry is sold, if any jewelry manufacturing is done
on the premises using chemicals or metals producing hazardous
waste.
Mr. Holtz replied he only uses a small 56 square foot space for an
office, has no outside nor inside signage, does not manufacture any
kind of jewelry, uses only samples and catalogs from which
customers place their orders and return to pick them up.
Commissioner Underdahl questioned if the 3 to 5 customers might be
there at the same time and if there might be more than 5 that will
want to come during a week.
Commissioner Sonsin also questioned if customers might all want to
come on the same day.
Mr. Holtz replied that he takes customers by appointment only and
he arranges the schedule so there is not more than one at a time
nor all on the same day.
Commissioner LifSon wondered what kind of complaint generated the
action and staff pointed out that the information came from a
telephone call to the Inspections Department.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Lifson, to
aprove Planning Case 93-05, subject to conditi°ns~
1. Total number of customers at the home limited to ? per week,
no more than one at a time, parked in the driveway, with no
truck deliveries.
2. Area of home devoted to business use not to exceed 30 sq.feet.
3. No exterior s£gnage.
4. Annual inspection by staff, and CUP exp£rea if home is sold.
Voting in favors Li~son, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Watschke
Voting againsts None
Absents Zak, Gundershaug, Cassen
Motion carried.
-2- March 2, 1993
PC: 92-11(3.3)
REQUEST FOR
· EX~ AMENDMEN~
REGARDTHG
APARTMBMT
C~ONVERS~ONS
Chairman Cameron introduced Planning Case 92-11 and Alan Brixius,
Planning Consultant, outlined the background of the request which
originatedfrom staffs' concern regarding the number of requests in
late 1991/early 1992 to convert 1 & 2 bedroom apartment units into
3 & 4 bedroom apartments to accommodate a market demand for larger
units for larger families, which led to a moratorium on conversions
until the issue could be studied and Council's direction the
Planning Commission to investigate and consider the impact of
apartment conversions that increase the number of bedrooms per
unit. He noted that a great deal of time was s~ent and research
done on the study to prepare for this public hearing. He reported
that notices had been sent to all 77 apartment owners/managers
informing them of the public hearing and most responses have been
positive. He stated that the Minnesota Multi-Housing Association
is in agreement with the proposed text amendment. He further
reported that Brooklyn Center had done a highly-detailed study on
the same issue and that report plus information based on studies by
the Metropolitan Council were used for background information. He
pointed out that this amendment will help the managers/owners of
apartment units meet a need for avoiding overcrowded apartments.
Mr. Brixius continued his report stating that census data indicates
that the number of persons (1.87) per dwelling unit within the City
is significantly less than found in neighboring communities, but
the City does have a number of elderly rental housing developments
which contributes to that low number of person per unit. The City
appears to have a sufficient supply of rental housing with the mean
number of rooms at 3.7 (not including bathrooms, utility rooms or
pullman kitchens), but over the past several years there has been
an increased demand for larger units due to an increase of single
parent families, indicating a need for reinvestment in multi-family
housing structures built during the 60's and a greater tendency
toward satisfying households with children.
Mr. Brixius reported that consideration was given to using the
conditional use permit arrangement to allow apartment conversions,
but staff, City Attorney, and Building Official all felt that the
CUP process would not be equitable and could discriminate between
old and new apartment complexes, thus it was the general concensus
of staff that the best approach was to amend existing performance
standards. Codes a Standards discussed the issue at length and the
amendment is tailored to include their comments. He went on to
explain the new performance standards that essentially implement
four new standards=
1. Prohibit conversions in non-conforminq buildinqs:
Apartment conversions that increase the number of
bedrooms per dwelling unit would be prohibited for any
complex that did not conform to performance standards
(zoning standards such as parking, open space, building
setbacks, etc.) except through the variance process.
2. Increase the amount of ogen space per unit for four or
more bedroom units= The existing ordinance requires 500
square feet of open space per unit for I to 3 bedrooms
and. the proposed ordinance would maintain these
standards but require 600 square feet of open space per
unit for 4 or more bedrooms.
New Hope Pl&nning Commission
-3- March 2,1993
3. Require a defined active recreation area to accommodate
children= This new section would require each multiple
family building or complex of 2 or more buildings
containing 8 or more units to provide a visually defined
or fenced active recreation area. The size of the
recreation area would be determined by multiplying the
number of dwelling units times 50 square feet, exclusive
of parking/loading areas. This section is not appli-
cable to R-5 Senior Citizen or Physically Handicapped
multiple family dwellings. This requirement is intended
to impose design features that will cater to the needs
of children.
4. Sets a limit of no more than 40% of the total number of
apartments Der buildinq for three or more bedroom units=
This new section specifies that apartment complexes with
eight of more dwelling units may have up to 40% of said
dwelling units as three bedroom apartments. This
requirement is intended to avoid high concentrations of
three bedroom units an dto allow the supply for such
units to be dispersed evenly throughout the community's
multiple family dwelling stock.
Chairman Cameron asked if this issue had been looked at in any of
the surrounding suburban areas.
Mr. Brixius referred to the Brooklyn Center Study and pointed out
that their approach was more aggressive, but in New Hope it was
felt that the issue would be best addressed through existing
building codes and amendment of existing performance standards.
Vi Underdahl questioned the application of the performance
standards regarding handicapped housing and the exemption of
recreation space required.
Mr. Brixius stated that the recreation area requirement had been
exempted for handicapped housing units because it was not felt
there was a need and because the City had been involved in the
development of the only handicapped housing complex in New Hope and
a recreation area was not required for that complex.
Commissioner Underdahl responded that handicapped persons may have
children residing with them and that she felt that the Commission
may want to consider some provision for their recreation.
Mr. Jim Traen, Co-Manager at Wincrest Apartments, introduced him-
self and asked how the Brooklyn Center Study was more agressive.
Mr. Brixius replied that the Brooklyn Center code authorized con-
versions a cup, but that numerous structural changes and funda-
mental elements, such as soundproofing, etc. were involved.
Mr. Traen asked what number of complexes in New Hope conform to
present code.
Mr. Brixius answered that the majority of complexes conform to
current regulations since New Hope has a long history of enforcing
zoning regulations.
Mr. Traen then questioned if all open space requirements were
required 20 to 25 years ago, and Mr. Brixius responded that he felt
they were.
New Hope Planning Commission -4- March 2, 1993
Mr. Leon Fisher, owner of Wincrest, then addressed the Commission
and stated that a 1990 study indicated only 37 3-bedroom apartments
were available in New Hope, 1,086 I bedroom, and 1,132 2-bedroom,
and he felt that larger units provide decency standards so that
older children can have their own bedrooms. He recommended several
changes to the ordinance, including allowing non-contiguous
recreation areas (such as separated pool and tennis court areas) to
be addeed together to meet the open space requirements. The
Commission, Planner, and Attorney agreed that the ordinance was not
intended to require one large contiguous recreation area and the
ordinance would be modified to include Mr. Fisher's recommendation.
Mr. Fischer then questioned the 40% limit on 3-bedroom units per
building and stated that he felt it was better to group families
with children together rather than spreading them out.
Commissioner Underdahl referred to the suggestion that 3-bedroom
units be stacked on one another and stated she felt the 3-bedroom
unite should be located on the lower level for the purpose of
chidrens' access to the outside. She also questioned Mr. Fischer
about storage, as children need a place to put bikes and wagon as
well as a place to play.
Mr. Fischer indicated that most apartments have garages, and that
there is more security in garages.
After further lengthy discussion it was the general consensus of
the Commission to approve the ordinance as presented, with the one
change regarding non-contiguous play areas, with the final wording
to be determined by the City Attorney.
MOTION
CO~ITTEE
REPORTS (4)
Design and
Review (4.1)
Codes and
Standards (4.2)
OLD BUSINESS(S)
Misc, Issues
NEW BUSINESS(S)
ANNOUNCEMEI~S(7
AD~OURHMEH~(8)
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Lifson, to
recommend approval as submitted with the one change amending
Section 2(3)(c), that recreation areas need not he contiguous.
Voting in favor= Lifson, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent= Zak, Gundershaug, Cassen
Motion carried.
Mr. McDonald requested that this item be delayed from going to the
Council until March 22nd, due to the City Manager's absence from
the March 8th Council meeting.
Design & Review did not meet in February.
Codes & Standards will meet in March to study the I-1 green area
requirement.
No discussion.
Ail minutes accepted as printed.
None.
Meeting unanimously adjourned at 8=05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucille Butler, Secretary
New Hope Planning Commission -5- March 2, 1993
PLANNIN~ COI~ISSION MInuTES
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AV~u~ NORTH
~NEPINCOURTY, MINNESOTA
ROLL C~LL
April 6, 1993
The Commission convened at 7:00 p.m.
Present:
Absent:
Also present:
Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen
Lifson, Zak, Gundershaug, Watschke
Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant
Due to lack of a quorum (5 needed) it was unanimously agreed by
those present to suspend the meeting until a poll of the absent
members could be taken to set a date when a quorum would be present
to continue the meeting. Following a telephone poll on April 7,
1993, the decision was made to continue the meeting at 7:00 p.m. on
Thursday, April 8, 1993. The petitioners were notified of the
continuance.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucille Butler, Secretary
New Hope Planning C~4sson -1- Aprll 6, 1993
C~TY OF N~' HOPE
4401 XYI~VHNU'~NORTH
~P~N COUITFY, M~I~ESOT~
PLANNIN~CO~ISSIONNTWUT~S April 8, 1993
~. ~ O~ The continuation of the April 6, 1993 meetin~ was called to order
on by Chai~an C~eron at 7=00 ~.m.
RO~ ~nn Present= Lifson, Zak, C~eron, Cassen, Watschke
~sent= Underdahl, Sonsin, ~undershaug
Also present: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant
PUBLIC
~r~RIN~S
PC 93-07(3.1)
REQUEST FOR
CONDITIOI~L
USE P~RMIT TO
~W Ou'r~R
DI~ AT 7600
42~ AV. N.
Chairman Cameron introduced Planning Case 93-07 and Kirk McDonald,
Management Assistant, outlined the request for a conditional use
permit to allow outdoor dining at The Sunshine Factory. He pointed
out that the City amended the Zoning Code in 1991 to allow outdoor
dining as a conditional accessory use that is permitted with
specific conditions, as identified in the ordinance. He noted that
the property is located in a B-4 District and surrounded by B-4
uses, with the exception of I-2 to the north and east. He
explained that the Sunshine Factory was constructed in 1975 and a
large addition was added in 1986 and now they wish to erect a 1,200
square foot seasonal temporary deck on the southeast front corner
of the existing building and would measure 27 feet in width by 5:0
feet in length, constructed of aluminum supports with 5' x 20'
removable cedar deck panels, similar to the construction of a dock,
and the outdoor area will be surrounded with 42" tall wood lattice
panels/ redwood posts and would blend with the existing building.
Entrance to the outdoor dining area would be from .inside the
restaurant by removal of an existing window and installation of a
service door to the deck. The deck would have a seating capacity
of 58 and furni-ture would be white resin tables and chairs and 60-
inch table umbrellas. Food and beverage service would be from the
main restaurant and hours of operation would be the same as the
main restaurant. Design & Review met with the petitioner on March
18th and requested changes showing the removal of indoor seating
and a note on plans regarding the outdoor speakers and changes were
included in the packet report.
Mr. McDonald pointed out that the major issue was in regard to the
parking requirements, as the ordinance requires additional parking
to be provided for outdoor seating. 30 additional spaces will be
required with the addition of the deck and 7 spaces would be lost
where the deck is to be built, leaving a shortage of 37 parking
spaces. It is planned to remove 24 seats inside the building and
convert the space to a recreation area, which frees up 8 parking
spaces, plus the industrial business to the north has submitted an
informal agreement to allow 25 spaces in their for the use of
Sunshine Factory employees to park, so the shortage drops to 4
spaces. He explained that the Commission could opt to allow either
a variance or a formal shared parking arrangement by conditional
use as allowed in the ordinance, and he made a staff recommendation
to allow a trial basis for an informal parking arrangement with a
stipulation that if it does not work there will have to be some
changes made in the future.
Randy Rosengren, representing the Sunshine FactOry, called atten-
tion to the letter he included with the request which pointed out
the customer count, showing that there are times when parking need
is excessive due to banquets and special events. He stated that it
is at those times that they use the shared parking .arrangement with
Oildyne, which has been in place for several years, but that at
other times the need for extra parking is not necessary, such as
during the summer months when business is at a decline. He
emphasized that the need is not for more seating area, but in
response to a survey of their customers, the demand was overwhelm-
ingly for outdoor dining facilities in the summer months. He
explained that the deck would be structured for easy removal during
times when it is not needed or used and the parking utilized.
New Hope Pl~--~ng C-~4eslon -1- Aprll 1, 1993
Commissioner Cassen requested an explanation of the landscaping.
Mr. Rosengren pointed out that the deck will be erected on top of
the current asphalt parking lot, so permanent landscaping cannot be
planted, but a perimeter of redwood supports and lattice work to
provide screening will be erected around the L-shaped deck and a
series of planters with geraniums and other ty10es of plants will be
installed along the inside surface of the top rail, plus some type
of easily removable basket or bucket containers with small trees
and plantings will be set around on the deck.
Commissioner Cassen questioned if the ~m~rellas will contain any
advertising, if an outside bar and cooking facilities are planned,
and where the trash containers are to be located.
Mr. Rosengren replied that they had originally planned to utilize
the umbrellas for advertising as is the custom in some other out-
door seating areas until he noted the restriction in the staff
report, and he questioned the concern regarding the use of
advertising, although he agreed if it is a code restriction he will
accept it. He assured that no outside bar or cooking facilities
are planned and he pointed out trash container locations.
Commissioner Cassen expressed concern over the outdoor speakers
causing excessive noise and Mr. Rosengren assured they will be
controlled by the same sound system as used indoors and at a level
for background music so people can talk.
Commissioner Cassen then referred to the parking issue and wondered
when the heaviest volume of parking occurs.
Mr. Rosengren replied that the lunch hour most often produces a
heavier volume of parking and to his recollection they have never
exceeded the parking capacity maximum for summer evenings.
Chairman Cameron requested an explanation of the lighting to be
used for the deck and wondered if any floodlighting will be used.
Mr. Rosengren answered that the basic table lighting will include
citronella candles for insect control, and there are 40-watt bulbs
installed at intervals around the soffit of the building which they
hope will be adequate. He suggested that if that lighting is not
adequate they might consider adding some minor low-voltage lights,
such as small Christmas tree bulbs, around the perimeter of the
deck, but they do not plan any permanent significant increase in
lighting.
Chairman Cameron confirmed the hours of operation will be the same
as the inside restaurant facilities.
Commissioner Zak asked for explanation of the space separating
customers on the deck from vehicles, even though the deck is
proposed to be enclosed, and the spaces between the tables situated
on the deck, plus the height of the umbrella canopies and the per-
centage of the dining area size.
Mr. Rosengren confirmed all questioned spaces and umbrella heights
and dining area.
Commissioner Zak questioned what will remain when the deck is
removed.
Mr. Rosengren explained that all that will be visible will be a rim
joist attached to the building but it will be painted to match,
plus 12" circular frost footings that have to be set in flush with
the surface of the asphalt, but will be painted black the same as
the asphalt.
Commissioner Zak further confirmed the width of the service door
and that the entrance to the deck will be level, that no food
service will be available after 11=00 p.m. and bar service will
continue to 1=00 a.m.
Chairman Cameron referred to the letter of agreement on the parking
and questioned if it was adequate or if an official legal agreement
should be part of the condition of approval.
New Hope Pl~-ing C-~ssion -2- April 8, 1993
Commissioner Watschke observed that the petitioner had made an
extreme effort to make the structure removable to incorporate
seasonal parking and the informal shared parking agreement has been
in place for a long enough period of time to show good faith on the
part of both parties, but he suggested possible inclusion of a
recommendation that if in the future the agreement is revoked and
parking becomes a problem it can be addressed by the City, through
reduced inside seating or removal of the deck.
Commissioner Lifson asked for a confirmation from staff regarding
the numbers in gains and losses to reach the final parking
shortage.
Commissioner Watschke wondered if it was absolutely essential to
require a variance for the lack of only 4 spaces.
Chairman Cameron replied that the Commission must be concerned with
technicalities of the ordinance and be cautious not to violate it.
Commissioner Zak wondered if the conditions should include addition
of trees on the east side to screen the industrial building and
Commissioner Watschke responded that he thought the plantings
proposed will be adequate.
Mr. Rosengren pointed out that the sight line from the deck is well
above the median, and also at this time it is not known if this
will be a successful venture, but if it works he assured that the
addition of more screening would be considered.
MOTION Motion by Commissioner Watschke, second by Commissioner Cassen, to
approve Pl---lng Case 93-07 subject to the following conditions:
1. Seasonal variance for parking shortage of 29 spaces (only 4
spaces short when informal shared parking agreement with
Oildyne for 25 spaces takaninto account). If City determ/nes
that parking is inadequate, an off-site parking agreement or
additional reduction of inside seating must be provided.
2.Umbrellas at dining tables shall not include advertising.
3.~xcessive volume on outdoor music speakers is prohibited.
4.Annual review by staff.
Voting in favor= Lifson, Zak, Cameron, Cassan, Watschke
Voting against= None
Absent: Underdahl, Sonsin, ~undershaug
Motion carried.
PC 93-08(3.2) The Chairman introduced Planning Case 93-08 and Mr. McDonald
REQUEST FOR presented the overview of the request, noting that the site has
CONDITIONAL been vacant for the past 8 years and the City has been working with
USE PERMIT, Valvoline Instant Oil over the past year on the sale/ development
VARIANC~ FROM of the property, and a public hearing was held on December 14,
LOT FRONTAGE 1992, regarding the sale of the property to Valvoline Rapid Oil
DEFINITION AND subject to certain conditions, one of which was that adequate
REAR YARD SET- ingress/egress access be provided to the All Star Sports site west
BACK R~QUIRE- of and adjacent to this parcel. He explained that the facility is
MENT, AND allowed by conditional use in the B-3/B-4 Districts and the CUP
SITE/BUILDING request is routine with all conditions met except the 22,500 square
PLAN REVIEW foot lot area requirement, which is an existing non-conformity. He
APPROVAL TO discussed the variance requests regarding the lot frontage defini-
~?~W CON- tion or rear yard setback, pointing out that 42nd Avenue is the
STRUCTION OF official front yard but the plan shows the building to face Nevada
OIL CHANGING Avenue, and if the Commission does not wish to accept a variance to
FACILITY AT the lot frontage definition a 15-foot rear yard variance on 41-1/2
7305 42ND AY. Avenue is needed. He described the 1,273 square foot proposed
facility to be similar to others located throughout the metro area.
He pointed out that an existing curb cut on Nevada Avenue would be
shifted 30 feet to the south, which would improve a non-conformity,
and line up with a revised All Star Sports curb cut to the west,
with entrance to the facility off of Nevada, around the front of
the building into the service bay area, and 17 parking stalls
provided. A total of 44 trees and shrubs would be added along the
northeast and northwest, with considerable landscaping in the rear
to screen the apartments across 41-1/2 Avenue on the south.
New Hope P]m--ing C~4ssion -3- April 8, 1993
MOT'tON
Mr. John Kosmas, of K.K. Design, introduced himself as representing
Rapid Oil and noted in some places it is known as Instant Oil, but
all are owned by Ashland Oil Company. He described their typical
building style and the "blue-band", red barrel type of trademark
identification, and explained all the signage which will conform to
the City Code, plus entr~ and exit signs. He pointed out the plan
for blending of the All Star Sports building and the Rapid Oil
building, the common drive area, the green and landscaped area, the
parking stalls and stacking space, entry to and exit from the
facility, noting that customers will be able to pull in and remain
in their cars while being serviced. He reviewed the plans for
landscaping with assurance it will be sprinkled, and he called
attention to the addition of downlighting. He further stated that
the easement agreement .for All Star Sports has been initially
drafted but was not officially available for the meeting, though he
assured it would be ready before the permits are applied for.
Commissioner Cassen asked confirmation of the trash enclosure, what
type of and when deliveries are anticipated, type of trucks making
deliveries, how new and use oil is handled, rooftop equipment
matching building, outside steps to pit area safety features such
as "employees only" or "no admittance" signage or gate.
Mr. Kosmas replied that the trash enclosure will be similar to the
structure, with metal gate and open top~ supplies come from a local
warehouse and brought in regular city-type trucks (no semis), fresh
oil is delivered in bulk and stored in the lower level and waste
oil is retained until pumped out, with proper ventilation for Fire
Marshall requirements~ exhaust system on top or side will match the
huilding~ outside steps are lighted to identify if anyone is in the
area and they have used a chain across for closure, but they have
not had a problem thus far so nothing was included.
Commissioner Lifsonquestioned if there was consideration given to
use of speed bumps on the access to Ail Star Sports to slow traffic
using it.
Mr. Kosmas replied that they had not considered it yet since the
traffic count is not that of a typical shopping center area, but
they will study it and address it if it becomes a problem.
Commissioner Zak confirmed with the petitioner that there will be
no outside storage or sales.
Chairman Cameron questioned staff why a fence is not required on
the south side where it backs up to the apartments and suggested
more screening along the property line.
Mr. Kosmas explained what is planned for the area and indicated
that they might he willing to interchange some of the proposed
landscape.
Commissioners Zak and Lifson asked for clarification of the
difference between the variance for the lot frontage definition and
the variance to the rear yard setback requirement and the
Commission confirmed among themselves that the 15-foot variance to
the rear yard setback was the acceptable choice.
Motion by Commissioner Cassen, second by Commissioner Lifson, to
approve Pl---ing Case 93-08, with a 15-foot variance to the rear
yard setback requirement, and subject to the followlng conclitions:
1. One deciduous tree to be deleted [rom south yard behind
build/ng and four 4-£oot pine trees to be added to screen fro~
apartment building.
2. Survey to be submitted showing shared access easement withAl1
Star Sports and evidence of title recording.
3. ~--ual staff inspection.
Voting in favor= Lifson, Zak, Cameron, Cassan, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent= Underdahl, Sonsin, G~ndershaug
Motion carried.
Chairman Cameron welcomed the petitioner to New Hope.
New Hope Plm--~ing C-~ssioner -4- Apr~l 8, 1993
PC 93-09(3.3)
REQUEST FOR
SITE/BUILDING
PLAN REVIEW
APPRO%-AL FOR
A ~TAREHOUSE
ADDITION AND
A VI~RIANC~ TO
REQUII~EMENT IN
I-1
INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICT AT
5001 BOON~ N.
Chairman Cameron introduced Planning Case 93-09. Kirk McDonald
explained that Lakeside Ltd. is requesting site/building plan
review approval for the CoDstruction of a 30,000 square foot
warehouse addition t0the rea~ ~f ~he~r existing building and some
interior remodeling to accommodate company growth and increased
employment, and a minor variance to the 35% I-1 Zoning District
Green Area Requirement. He noted that the existing building was
constructed in 1966 and this will be the first major addition. He
pointed out that the proposed revised plan shows that with the new
expansion 33.29% of the parcel would contain green area, thus a
1.71% variance from the 35% green area requirement is needed. He
called attention to the topography of the site which has large
grade changes which call for a retaining wall with wetlands and
pond behind the site. Exterior construction materials for the
addition will be painted precast concrete panels with rake finish
with prefinished metal flashing, and while the existing building is
block and the finished surface textures will not match, the color
will. He further noted that there will be some public utility
improvements, including a new 8-inch watermain from Boone Avenue to
serve 3 new hydrants on the south side of the building, a new storm
water drainage system on the back to drain into the wetlands pond,
a 14' retaining wall with railing on the south side of the property
to be designed by a structural engineer. Two major improvements
will include shifting of trucking operations 300 feet west of the
current location, providing more safety and adequate maneuvering
space, and the addition of a new parking lot in the rear of the
building to address current on-street parking problems. The plan
also includes a new walkway for employees to the building and new
landscaping to be added to the front of the property, and concrete
curb and gutter to be installed around all new bituminous areas.
He called attention to two conditions suggested by staff that need
to be addressed, i.e. the plan does need to be approved by the
Shingle Creek Watershed District and if the employee number
increases new plans must be submitted.
Leith Dumas, Opus Corporation, designer and contractor, pointed out
new design, safety, and drainage features of the project.
Chairman Cameron asked what kind of product was manufactured at
Lakeside and was informed it was plastic advertising signs.
Commissioner Watschke requested the petitioner to point out the
site lighting on the plan and the proof of parking.
Mr. Dumas noted the lighting which will be relocated and made into
doublehead lights for more illumination on the lot, and he stated
the parking count has been modified and now meets the ordinance.
Commissioner Watschke posed a question to staff regarding the
condition that new plans have to be submitted if employee count
changes, and how will it be known if the employee numbers grow.
Mr. Dumas confirmed that there are seasonal highs when extra
employees are needed, but at those times extra employees are bussed
in from temporary services, and heemphasized that the extra square
footage being added is for a consolidation of off-site warehousing
space to aid in efficiency of operations, not for the need of more
employees.
Commissioner Watschke confirmed new rooftop equipment to be added
will be painted, and also requested a discussion of the retaining
wall and additional landscaping.
Mr. Dumas pointed out that in order to move trucking to the back
and in trying to solve the drainage problems the grades needed to
be adjusted, making a large long retaining wall necessary, which
will be built of keystone concrete block with a cyclone tYl~e fence
on top. He explained the current landscaping in front and the
addition of 10 Blackhill Spruce in the back.
Commissioner Cassen suggested some type of UNo Trucks" signage be
used to keep trucks from entering on the north side after removal
of the dock and Mr. Dumas agreed to accommodate such signage.
New Hope Pl~---ing C-~4ss~on -5- April 8, 1993
MOT~ON
PC 93-10 (3.4)
REQUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT
TO ALLOW A
HOME OCcupA-
TION AT 3732
FLA~ AV. N.
New Hope Plm~ing C~4esion
Chairn~an Cameron confirmed that the 30,00 square foot addition
being requested reflects the size building needed for raw material
storage and a size that would fit onto the current building and was
not influenced by the green space restriction of the code.
Motion by Commissioner Watschke, second by Commissioner Cassen, to
approve plmn-~ng Case 93-09 subject to the following conditions:
1. Drainage plan to be approved by Shingle Creek Watershed
C,mmv4 asion.
2. New plans to be sut~itted if per~-ent employee count exceed
261 and sta£f to check ~--ually on any parking pro~l~ and
verif~ ~loyee count.
3. 'No Trucks' signage to be installed at north entrance.
Voting in favor: Lifson, Zak, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent: Underdahl, Sonsin, ~undershaug
Motion carried.
Chairman Cameron called for Planning Case 93-10. Kirk McDonald
presented the request by a resident to conduct a business out of
his home under conditional use permit. He stated that the applica-
tion was initiated because of a complaint to the City although it
is not believed to have been a complaint from neighbors, but
possibly from a competitor. The business, known as R.C.Fasteners,
services residential builders in the field, with the garage used
for minor repairs and storage of fasteners, such as nails, and
staples, and the petitioner stated in the application that the
business is not visible to the neighborhood since there are no
employees and no signage. He requested the petitioner give an
explanation of' the business.
Mr. Robert Cairns described the air driven pneumatic tools, small
portable hand held type, which are used in building houses. He
explained that he started the business in November of 1992 and it
is basically selling and delivering, or repairing, tools in the
field for about 75 home builders, and he pointed out that it is his ~-~
feeling that the complaint was registered by his former employer.
He assured that he wants to conform to all the codes of the City.
He outlined the procedure for his business, which basically is in
response to calls from builders who need nailers, nails and
staples, portable air compressors, etc., and he then picks
equipment up from wholesalers located throughout the metro area and
delivers to the job sites, or repairs tools on job sites as needed~
he receives calls at night, sets up a schedule for the next day,
and picks up what is needed and delivers to the ~ob sites in his
suburban truck. He added that he has a mobile phone to communicate
with builders in the field so they can reach him for emergencies.
He emphasized that there is little need to store fasteners in the
garage and when he gets a call for volume materials he picks up and
delivers right away, so there is no need for storage.
Chairman Cameron confirmed that all orders are received by phone,
no materials are stored on site, and no one comes to the home to
get supplies, no machinery is used, no noise or waste is generated,
and almost all repairs are done in the field although one or two
might occasionally be repaired in the residence garage. He
questioned why it is being considered as a home occupation.
Commissioner Watschke confirmed that the suburban was the only
vehicle used for the business.
Commissioner Zak questioned if the petitioner uses or stores
soldering or welding equipment or hazardous materials.
Mr. Cairns responded that it is illegal to weld on any air vessel
and he does not own a welder, and the only thing he handles is
waste oil which he takes to an oil depository. He further stated
that because of the demand on his time for the selling and deliver-
ing of materials he sublets some repair work out to others. ~-~
Commissioner Watschke wondered if more builder customers are added
would he need to hire help to meet the demand, if inventory is
stored in the garage, and if he rents out any type of equipment.
-6- April 8, 1993
MOTION
REPORTS (4)
Design and
Review (4.1)
Codes and
Standards (4.2)
Mr. Cairns replied that the business might possibly grow although
he has been in business for 7 years, formerly under the auspices of
two other companies, driving their vehicles instead of his own, but
he pointed out that bUilders come and go and the n-mbers change
from time to time so he didn't anticipate an increase, and he
indicated that if he were to experience major growth he would
probably look for an additional garage for storage. He stated that
currently materials are kept in his truck and he has a variety of
kinds to accommodate roofers and finishers, etc., and that his
garage is a typical family garage with bikes, lawTLmowers, etc. He
affirmed that he sells new air guns from wholesalers and obtains
occasionally a used gun from a pawn shop when someone requests it.
Mr. McDonald suggested that as protection for the petitioner a
conditional use permit be issued so that in case of further
complaints it can be shown that he is in compliance with regula-
tions, and a condition be added for annual inspection by the City.
Chairman Cameron concurred that the issuance of a conditional
permit would adequately protect the petitioner should his business
grow and necessitate addition of employees.
Motion by Commissioner Zak, second by Commissioner Lifson, to
approve PIA--ing Case 93-10, subject to conditions:
1. ~--ual review by City staff.
2. =um to expire if h~ne is sold.
Voting in favor= Lifson, Zak, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent: UnderdAh], Sonsin, ~undershaug
Motion carried.
Design & Review met and discussed the Sunshine Factory, Valvoline
Rapid 0il, and Lakeside Ltd.
Codes & Standards requested input from the Commission regarding the
Planner's Report on the I-1 Zoning District green area requirement
and all were in agreement with the report. Codes & Standards will
meet again on April 20th for further study and review of the issue
and plan to make a recommendation to the Commission in May.
OLD BUSINESS(5)
Misc. Issues
Mr. McDonald noted that Gethsemane Cemetery has requested the City
Council to extend their 2-year CUP to allow them adequate time to
develop final building plans.
NEW BUSINESS(6) All minutes accepted as printed.
ANNOUNCEMENTS(7 None.
ADJOURNMenT(8) Meeting unanimously adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
,,..';' ,::/.
Lucille Butler, Secretary
New Hope PiA----ing C--~uission -7- April 8, 1993
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
PC 93-06(3.1)
CONSIDERATION
OF ORDINANCE
AMENDING
SECTION 4.145
OF NEW HOPE
ZONING CODE
BY REDUCING
GREEN AREA
REQUIREMENT
IN I-1 ZONING
DISTRICT
May 4, 1993
Chairman Cameron called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and welcomed the return
of Commissioner Gundershaug after an extended absence.
Present: Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke
Absent: Lifson
Also present: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant
Chairman Cameron introduced Planning Case 93-06 and in the absence of Alan
Brixius, Planning Consultant, the ordinance amendment to reduce the green area
requirement in the I-1 Zoning District was outlined by Kirk McDonald, Management
Assistant. He reviewed the action taken in connection with Planning Case 92-35,
Request for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit to Allow Expansion of Outdoor
Storage Area and Increase in Trailer Limit, and Variance to Green Area Requirement,
3531 Nevada Avenue North, noting that the Planning Commission reviewed the request
on December 1st and recommended approval on a split vote (the petitioner was
requesting a 2% green area variance) and at the January 11th meeting the City Council
passed a resolution that extended the existing conditional use permit for outdoor
storage for three months and increased the trailer limit to 5 and tabled the request for
an amendment to the CUP to allow expansion of the outdoor storage area and the
variance to the green area requirement for 3 months so that the I-1 35% green area
requirement could be studied. He stated that staff was directed to study the I-1 green
area requirement with the Planner and Codes & Standards Committee and to bring a
recommendation back to the City Council from the Planning Commission regarding
whether the existing 35% requirement should be changed or not. He compared the
current ordinance requirement calling for not less than 35% green area and the
proposed Ordinance 93-04 amendment to Section 4.145 which reduces the green area
requirement to 20%, and which also requires that the required green area should be
emphasized in the front and side yards abutting streets and residential property.
Mr. McDonald pointed out that Codes & Standards Committee has studied the I-1 green
area requirement over the past several months in conjunction with City staff and the
Planner, and that there was a general consensus that if a reduction in the percentage
of green area was to be recommended, then the reduction should be of a fairly
significant nature so as to allow existing businesses in the I-1 Zoning District the
opportunity to expand. He noted that among the topics discussed were: 1) the fact that
the continued granting of variances to the green area requirement was not the proper
zoning tool to utilize, as no non-economic hardship could be proven; 2) the discrepancy
in having a "green area" requirement in only one zoning district in the City; 3) the
number of properties that would be brought into conformance if the green area standard
were reduced; 4) the percentage of green area that should be recommended (why
20%); and most important, 5) the fact that New Hope is nearly a fully developed
community and maintaining existing businesses and encouraging growth to maintain
a stable tax base is important so that businesses that want to expand wont necessarily
move to a new location outside the City. He added that there was a consensus that
maintaining aesthetically pleasing industrial areas was also very important.
Mr. McDonald stated that the Codes & Standards Committee requested the Planner
explore other options/trade-offs that might be utilized in the regulation of green space,
i.e., additional landscaping in exchange for reduced green area, etc., and they also
requested that the Building Official prepare a list of businesses that have inquired about
expansion in the past but who have been restricted from expansion by the I-1 35%
green area requirement.
New Hope Planning Commission -1- May 4, 1993
Mr. McDonald called attention to the Consultant's Report and noted that the Committee
sought input from Commission members at the April Planning Commission meeting on
a possible reduction on the I-1 green area percentage requirement, and although
several Commission members were reluctant to change a long-standing requirement,
most members agreed that the Consultant's Report contained some good points and
that the City's zoning standards need to be updated periodically to address changing
conditions in the City. He outlined the points from the Planner's report regarding the
changing of the community, consistency of the ordinance with the Comprehensive Plan,
existing development conditions in the City, other cities' green area requirements, the
inappropriateness of the variance procedure, the predominance of the I-1 District in
New Hope, which covers 94 of the 123 industrial sites, and performance standards
exclusive only to the I-1 zone such as lot coverage, 35% green area, no employee
parking in front, and detailed landscaping plans. He pointed out that the current
provision was originally put in place to enhance aesthetic quality of I-1 lots, to insure
proper setback and screening between industrial development and less intense land
uses, and reduction of on-site storm water drainage, but it does limit the usable and
buildable areas of I-1 lots and prohibits future expansion and building alterations without
a variance. He also pointed out that the current regulation does not dictate the location
of the required green area so it can be created anywhere on the site to comply with the
code, even at the rear of lots where it is cannot be seen. He emphasized the
diminishing land supply in New Hope, which reduces the opportunity for economic
development in new industrial expansion and therefore the City has to rely on
expansion of in-place businesses for new industrial growth, and the 35% green area
requirement discourages private reinvestment in industrial sites.
He stressed that the Vacant Land Study suggests that zoning policies should be
reviewed on a regular basis in response to the changing needs of the community, and
the Planner recommends that an ordinance amendment to promote and encourage
private development is consistent with community land use goals. He reported that an
inventory was done on existing developed industrial sites and 83% are located in the
I-1 District, with 40 sites falling below the current green space ratio and existing as non-
conforming sites which cannot expand without a variance, and the consensus of the
Committee is that there are other performance standards, such as setback,
landscaping, screening, building coverage, and the strict review process which New
Hope has, that can be used to prevent over-utilization of sites. He pointed out that
New Hope is unique in restricting a green area standard to a single zoning district and
most surrounding communities address green requirements through performance
standards, with the exception of Brooklyn Center which has a requirement of 15%
green space in I-1 Districts. In conclusion he stated that the City Attorney was present
at the final Codes & Standards Committee meeting and drafted the ordinance
amendment language which is presented in the Committee's recommendation that the
green area ratio in the I-1 District be reduced from 35% to 20%, and added that if the
Commission desires, a change of a lesser degree could be considered, but he
emphasized that the change should be significant enough to provide some flexibility for
future growth of existing businesses.
Mr. McDonald added further that the Twin West Chamber of Commerce has become
aware of this issue and has sent a letter to the Mayor and the Chairman of the
Planning Commission supporting the proposed reduction.
Commissioner Sonsin, speaking for the Codes & Standards Committee, emphasized
the consensus that the I-1 green space should be reduced and reviewed the reasoning
for the 20% standard as the equivalent for enforcing all the other performance
standards. He added that the Committee feels that green space requirements in other
zoning districts should be studied in the future.
Commissioner Zak stressed the importance of controlling expansion through
performance standards as opposed to relying on past tradition for green space
requirements.
New Hope Planning Commission -2- May 4, 1993
MOTION
COMMI'R'EE
REPORTS (4)
Design and
Review (4.1)
Codes and
Standards (4.2)
OLD BUSINESS(5)
Misc. Issues
ANNOUNCEMENTS(7)
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Commissioner Watschke questioned how existing businesses would be made aware
of the ordinance amendment and Mr. McDonald suggested that the City Newsletter,
which is mailed to businesses as well as residents, would carry a report on the change.
Commissioner Underdahl expressed her agreement to rely on performance standards
in light of the dwindling vacant land supply.
The Commission unanimously agreed that, when all the facts were considered, change
has to come.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Zak, to recommend
approval of Planning Case 93-06, Ordinance 93-04 Amending Section 4.145 of the
New Hope Zoning Code By Reducing the Green Area Requirement in the I-1
Zoning District from 35% to 20%, as drafted by the City Attorney.
Voting in favor: Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen,
Watschke
None
Lifson
Chairman Cameron commended the Codes & Standards Committee on their efforts and
the Committee in turn highly commended the Planner on his guidance.
Design & Review did not meet as there were no cases pending.
Codes & Standards held their final meeting on the I-1 Zoning District green area
requirement and are ready to take on the next issue.
Commissioner Underdahl questioned why Public Works property was being utilized for
the Senior Services project and Mr. McDonald explained that the Public Works/Custom
Mold outlet and the property at 5425/5501 Boone Avenue were being platted under one
plat, even though the two uses are located on separate sites. Ownership of the
property is not an issue with platting, i.e., a plat can contain parcels owned by different
parties.
Commissioner Underdahl wondered about the Community Center survey and Mr.
McDonald indicated that the Citizen Advisory Commission is still studying it and will
make a report to the Council in June.
Commissioner Cassen questioned if the City would be involved in the Mielke Field and
was advised it will require a conditional use permit if the decision is made to locate a
football field at Cooper High School.
Mr. McDonald informed the Commission that he had included information on
Gethsemane Cemetery as a prelude to a request for a Planned Unit Development
which will come before the Commission in the near future. Commissioner Underdahl
wondered if Gethsemane Cemetery has considered an entrance on Boone Avenue
rather than heavily traveled 42nd.
All minutes accepted as printed.
Mr. McDonald announced that the new front entrance for City Hall will be open on
Monday, May 10th.
Chairman Cameron noted that the April Planning Commission had to be rescheduled
because of lack of a quorum and implored the Commissioners to make sure they let
staff know of their absence ahead of time, so that meeting adjustments can be made
in advance and petitioners not inconvenienced.
ADJOURNMENT(8) Meeting unanimously adjourned.at 7:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,.,
Lucille Butler, Secretary
New Hope Planning Commission -3- May 4, 1993
CiTY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER Chairman Cameron called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
June 1, 1993
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
PC 93-14(3.1)
REQUEST FOR
PRELIMINARY
PLAT APPROVAL
FOR MINNESOTA
SUN ADDITION
8801 BASS LAKE
ROAD
Present: Lifson, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen,
Absent: Zak, Watschke
Also present: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant
Chairman Cameron introduced Planning Case 93-14 and called on Kirk McDonald,
Management Assistant to outline the case.
Mr. McDonald stated that the petitioner is requesting subdivision and preliminary plat
approval of Minnesota Sun Addition, which includes the property on which the existing
Post Building is located at 8801 Bass Lake Road and the vacant property just west of
the Post Building, in order to split off and create a new I-1 parcel for development. He
called attention to the fact that earlier in the year a request for rezoning of this property
to R-0 (Residential-Office) was denied by the Planning Commission. He pointed out
the neighboring I-1 zoned areas on the east and west and the R-1 and R-4 residential
zoned areas to the north and south. He noted that an I-1 business is interested in
locating on the vacant portion of the subdivided parcel and if the plat is approved a
request for site/building plan review/approval will be presented to the Commission in
July, therefore the petitioner is formally requesting that the Commission waive review
of the final plat in order to expedite the sale of the property so that construction can
begin before fall. He outlined lot areas and noted the two proposed lots meet all
requirements. He pointed out that as routine policy a preliminary plat must be
submitted to City Department Heads, City Attorney, City Engineer, utility companies,
and Hennepin County for review and he addressed their comments regarding access
onto Bass Lake Road opposite Decatur Avenue, continuation of sidewalk along Bass
Lake Road, extension of water service to the lot, review/approval by Shingle Creek
Watershed and DNR if construction encroaches into abutting wetland, temporary
construction easements, Hennepin County right-of-way and utility permits needed,
updating of the plat drawing to reflect the right-of-way taking by the County, restoration
of areas disturbed by construction, a minor adjustment to legal description on final plat,
evidence of title, removal of blacktop across east lot line. He stressed that a request
for a left turn into Lot 1 off Bass Lake Road must be submitted to the City by June 4th
so that the City can notify the County by June 7th to incorporate the change into the
1993 Hennepin County Bass Lake Road Improvement Project which is scheduled to
begin this summer.
Chairman Cameron questioned the urgency of submitting the turn lane request.
Mr. McDonald explained that since the final plans for Bass Lake Road have already
been approved by the City Council and the bid awarded, final changes have to be
added as an addendum to the contract and early June is the deadline for proposed
changes.
Dennis Panzer came forward and introduced himself as the property selling agent with
the Shelard Group. He commented that Mr. McDonald covered the explanation of the
request sufficiently, and he went on to stress the importance of the pre-approval of the
final plat.
Commissioner Sonsin questioned who might be occupying the current and proposed
sites and was advised by staff and Mr. Panzer that it is not known who will occupy the
current building, but the potential owner of the new office/warehouse building will be
Metro Siding.
New Hope Planning Commission -1- June 1, 1993
MOTION
Commissioner Sonsin noted that the Council will not be meeting to approve this request
until June 14th and wondered if the June 7th deadline requirement can be
accommodated without prior Council approval.
Mr. Panzer indicated that he has conversed with Dave Schmidt, Design Engineer for
Hennepin County, and has been assured that it can be done.
Mr. McDonald explained that all the petitioner needs to do is submit a letter to the City
requesting that the City forward the access request to the County.
Commissioner Sonsin further questioned the petitioner on the various issues addressed
by Mr. McDonald in his presentation and listed in the staff report and was assured they
would all be addressed and resolved in the final plat.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Lifson, to approve
Planning Case 93-14, requesting plat approval for Minnesota Sun Addition, with
waiver of the final plat review by the Planning Commission, subject to
conditions:
1. Full access to Lot I must be located directly opposite Decatur Avenue.
Any request to alter the design of proposed Hennepin County Project 9014
to provide a protected left turn into Lot I must be submitted to Hennepin
County by June 7, 1993. A written request and drawing for a proposed full
access curb cut opposite Decatur Avenue must be submitted to the City
by Friday, June 4th. The access onto County Road 10 (Bass Lake Road)
to be reviewed and approved by Hennepin County and be coordinated with
the improvements for Bass Lake road scheduled this summer.
2. The dimensional error involving the 2.42 foot jog in the west lot line be
corrected in the final plat.
3. Blacktop be removed across the east lot line and end at least 5 feet from
the new lot line.
4. Acceptable evidence of title be submitted.
5. The developer will be responsible for continuing the sidewalk construction
along Bass Lake Road to the west line of Lot 1, Block 1.
6. Extension of water service for Lot 1, Block 1, as part of the Bass Lake
Road Project. The cost for the water service will be the responsibility of
the developer.
7. This plat abuts a protected DNR wetland. In accordance with Shingle
Creek Watershed, all new development abutting a DNR protected wetland
shall provide treatment for storm water runoff. Therefore, this plat and all
new construction must be reviewed and approved by the Shingle Creek
Watershed and the DNR if any construction encroaches into the abutting
wetland.
8. The City is proposing improvements to the trunk sewer located along the
south line of this plat. Although sufficient permanent easement exists, all
temporary construction easements shall be provided in conjunction with
the plat approval.
9. The plat drawing should be updated to reflect the latest right of way taking
by Hennepin County as part of County Project 9014, intersection at Boone
Avenue and signal interconnect at International Parkway/Gettysburg
Avenue.
10. Appropriate utility permits be obtained from County prior to beginning
construction.
11. The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within
County right of way.
Lifson, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen
None
Zak, Watschke
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
New Hope Planning Commission -2- June 1, 1993
PC 93-15 (3.2)
REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE TO
REAR YARD SET-
BACK REQUIRE-
MENT AND SITE/
BUILDING PLAN
REVIEW/APPROV.
TO CONSTRUCT
NEW OFFICE/
WAREHOUSE
BUILDING AT
3940 QUEBEC N.
Planning Case 93-15 was introduced by the Chairman and Mr. McDonald presented
the request by Paddock Laboratories for site/building plan review/approval and a
variance to the rear yard setback requirement to allow construction of a new 70,750
square foot office/ warehouse building on the former Minnegasco site on the new
Quebec Avenue Extension. He stated that the Company has outgrown their existing
site located at 3101 Louisiana and desires to develop a new facility. He noted that
surrounding land uses include a railroad between residential to the east, a cemetery
to the south, a church on the west, and I-1 warehouses across Quebec to the north and
the development proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He reviewed the
site information (noting the 60% green area), and the proposed square footage of
office/warehouse/production/laboratory areas. He pointed out that all setback
requirements are met with exception of the rear yard next to the cemetery where a 15-
foot variance is needed in order to situate the building away from an area of poor soil
and groundwater conditions, and these circumstances are in accordance with Code
requirements for a variance. He explained that Design & Review had met with the
petitioner in May and that all issues discussed have been addressed in revised plans
in accordance with recommendations, such as parking, landscaping, signs, curb cut,
gutter, paving, and truck turning radius. He called attention to the City Engineer's
recommendation that some minor additional storm sewer construction be done to
convey stormwater runoff to the retention pond and added that staff would also like a
sidewalk connecting with the church's walk be constructed as part of the development.
He further called attention to identification of Outlot A on the existing plat and stressed
that Code does not allow construction on an outlot, therefore staff recommends
petitioner have the plat revised to identify the property as Lot 2, Village Industrial Park,
as a condition of approval and that the plat revision be administratively approved.
Bruce Paddock, owner of Paddock Laboratories, introduced himself, architect Mark
Longworth, and builder David Hunt, and stated they would address any questions.
Commissioner Gundershaug asked the petitioner to review the history of his business
in New Hope and was informed they moved to their existing location at 3101 Louisiana
in 1983, and have been before the Planning Commission and City Council twice since
for expansion approval, but with continued growth and expansion they have now out-
grown that site and have purchased the site in question to construct a new building,
although they are prepared to support both sites for possibly another year.
Commissioner Gundershaug asked if there are plans for future expansion on the new
site and cautioned that if there is expansion there will have to be expanded parking.
He questioned what the hours of operation will be, number of employees, and number
of trucks per day. He also asked if anything is planned to address the concern
expressed at Design & Review about the long bare expanse on the south side of the
building, if rooftop equipment will match the building, what lighting is planned, if refuse
will be screened, where snow storage is planned, and if a directional sign indicating no
trucks will be installed at the west driveway.
Mr. Paddock replied that he planned on being in business for many years and his five-
year projection calls for sales to double, employment and productivity to increase, and
the site was purchased with growth in mind, this being Phase I of their future plans.
He explained their hours of operation cover a rotating schedule with the office open
8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m, production running from 7:30 a.m. until 3:30 p.m., and until the
new facility is complete they have an extra shift that works from 1:00 p.m. until 7:00
p.m. He added that at the current facility they are short of parking, but they do not
expect a problem when the new one is built. He estimated the number of trucks in and
out at about 12 to 14 per day.
Mr. Longworth addressed the issue regarding the south side of the building and
displayed a layout of the elevations with plantings and building color to enhance the
view, rooftop equipment painted to match the building, and architectural lighting on the
building pointing up on the building. He confirmed downlighting in the parking lot, snow
storage on green areas, and directional sign for trucks.
New Hope Planning Commission -3- June 1, 1993
MOTION
PC 93-16(3.3)
REQUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT
TO ALLOW
OUTDOOR DINING
AT NEW HOPE
CITY CENTER,
4219 WINNETKA
Commissioner Gundershaug reminded the petitioner regarding the storm sewer request
from the City Engineer. He also noted staff's request for sidewalk continuation to the
church property.
Mr. Longworth confirmed his awareness of the storm sewer request and indicated that
they will comply with the sidewalk request.
Commissioner Gundershaug confirmed that the landscaping would be sprinkled and
complimented the petitioner on the impressionable job in preparing and presenting their
plans and in cooperating with recommendations made by Design & Review.
Commissioner Underdahl questioned if it was a two-story building and Mr. Longworth
explained that it was but that even though the outside will look completed, the interior
will be unfinished until future office expansion is needed.
Commissioner Lifson questioned if the building could be moved forward to avoid the
rear variance and Mr. Longworth responded that they originally had it located more
toward Quebec Avenue, but the Building Official had a concern about using more green
space in the front of the building since there was enough green area to the back.
Commissioner Sonsin voiced his confirmation of Commissioner Gundershaug's
expression of appreciation and added that Paddock Laboratories has always kept an
impressive site and he looks forward to their continued presence in New Hope at their
new location.
Motion by Commissioner Gundershaug, second by Commissioners Underdahl/Lifson,
to approve Planning Case 93-15 requesting Site/Building Plan Review/Approval
to Construct a New Warehouse/Office Building and Variance to Rear Yard
Setback Requirement, subject to conditions:
1. Performance bond/development agreement be submitted for major site and
boulevard work; amount to be determined by Building Official and City
Engineer.
2. Sidewalk to be installed.
3. Plat to be administratively revised from Outlot A to Lot 2.
4. City Engineer issues to be addressed/resolved.
Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen
Voting against: None
Absent: Zak, Watschke
Motion carried.
Chairman Cameron called for Planning Case 93-16 and asked Mr. McDonald to review.
Mr. McDonald explained that Taco Johns/Subway was granted a conditional use permit
in 1991 for a convenience food establishment at City Center and is now requesting a
conditional use permit for an outdoor dining area as allowed by the code amendment
passed in 1992. He noted that the outdoor dining area will be a 5-sided area located
in front of the establishment in an existing green landscaped area on the sidewalk at
the inside corner of the center where the sidewalk has a greater width than the
perimeter sidewalk. He added that the area will be surrounded by almost 300 square
feet of landscaped area consisting of a berm and plantings around the perimeter and
an entrance at one point on the west side, colored patterned concrete floor to match
existing building brick on Mall, two 4-person and three 2-person tables and seats of
concrete, 36" aisle widths, colored umbrellas, trash receptacles of concrete, no outside
bar or wait stations, 30% square footage requirement of the existing restaurant is met.
He noted that no extra parking is required since the parking standards were defined for
the shopping center under the PUD approval. He concluded that Taco Johns will be
responsible for maintenance and cleaning of the area and have submitted a letter to
that effect.
Randy Newberg from Rust Architects addressed the Commission and indicated that
Timothy Johnson, owner of Taco Johns, was also in attendance.
New Hope Planning Commission -4- June 1, t993
MOTION
Commissioner Cassen wondered if there would be additional lighting in the area for
safety purposes inasmuch as the hours of operation indicate they would be open past
dark.
Mr. Johnson replied that they feel the canopy lighting will be sufficient.
Commissioner Cassen suggested that the lighting be observed as part of the annual
review by staff and if any problems in regard to safety arise, that additional lighting be
considered. She then questioned if the level of the colored patterned concrete floor of
the outdoor dining area would be the same as the sidewalk and if the seats were going
to be bolted down so they cannot be moved.
Mr. Newberg responded that the floor will be the same level, but that there will be a
berm covered with landscape materials and plantings and surrounded by a 4" brick lip.
He noted the tables and seats will be one unit and heavy enough so they are
immovable.
Mr. McDonald confirmed that the ordinance states that the outdoor furniture can remain
all year around if it is bolted down or immovable.
Commissioner Cassen questioned if there is only one refuse container and asked for
confirmation that Taco Johns/Subway will be responsible for the maintenance and
cleanup of the area.
Mr. Johnson confirmed that there is an additional trash container in front of the
entrance to the main restaurant as well as in the outdoor dining area and they will have
people keeping the area free of trash.
Commissioner Cassen confirmed that the umbrellas on the tables will be colored but
will be free of advertising.
Chairman Cameron questioned how the plantings and landscape will be maintained and
was advised that the plants that have been chosen are drought resistant, but the owner
intends to maintain them.
Commissioner Sonsin wondered if any cement has to be torn up to provide this dining
area and was informed that a landscaped area already exists there and the dining area
will be created within that area. He also questioned if people would be apt to cut
across the planted areas in the winter time.
Mr. Newberg assured that there will be enough plantings to discourage traffic cutting
through the area and with' the tables left there the snow would probably pile high
enough so people will go around rather than through the area.
Commissioner Underdahl wondered if the area would be shoveled and Mr. Newberg
stated that it is planned to leave the area packed with snow and the 4" brick lip around
the edge will be a stop for shoveling snow off the sidewalk between the area and the
building.
Commissioner Gundershaug wondered if any other requests for outdoor dining at the
Center may be forthcoming and Mr. McDonald responded that Applebee's could decide
to try it, but there is no current indication of such plans, although it is the Center owner
who must make the application.
Motion by Commissioner Cassen, second by Commissioner Gundershaug, to
approve Planning Case 93-16 requesting a conditional use permit for an outdoor
dining facility at City Center for Taco/Johns/Subway, subject to conditions:
1. Umbrellas at dining tables shall not include advertising.
2. Annual review by staff.
Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen
Voting against: None
Absent: Zak, Watschke
Motion carried.
New Hope Planning Commission -5- June 1, 1993
COMMITTEE
REPORTS (4)
Design and
Review (4.1)
Codes and
Standards (4.2)
OLD BUSINESS(5)
Misc. Issues
NEWBUSINESS(6)
ANNOUNCEMENT
ADJOURNMENT(8)
Design & Review met on the Paddock Labs and the Outdoor Dining cases.
Codes & Standards did not hold a meeting.
Chairman Cameron raised a question about excess banners and signage at Tires Plus
and if Autohaus was making any progress. Mr. McDonald agreed that he would check
on Tires Plus and he stated that Autohaus was planning to finish the front portion of
their development by fall.
Commissioner Sonsin raised a question regarding home occupations and if the
ordinance may be too restrictive in the light of today's trends for people to work at
home-based occupations and should a more realistic approach be considered. After
discussion it was the consensus that maybe staff should be undertake a study to see
what other communities are doing regarding the subject.
All minutes accepted as printed.
No determination has been made on the need for a July meeting, but Commission
members are to be notified of the decision after the June 11th deadline for applications.
Meeting unanimously adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucille Butler, Secretary
New Hope Planning Commission
June 1, 1993
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER Chairman Cameron called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
July 6, 1993
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
PC 93-12 (3.1)
REQUEST FOR PRE-
LIMINARY PLAT
APPROVAL OF
SCIENCE INDUSTRY
CENTER 3RD ADDI-
TION AT 5425/5501
BOONE AND 55001
5430 INTER-
NATIONAL PKWY.
MOTION
Present: Underdahl, Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron,
Watschke
Absent: None
Also present: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant
Gundershaug, Cassen,
Chairman Cameron introduced Planning Case 93-12.
Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, presented the request by the City of New
Hope and Senior Outreach Services for preliminary plat approval of Science Industry
Center 3rd Addition, which includes all of the vacant parcel at 5501 Boone Avenue
North and the north 75 feet of 5425 Boone Avenue North, which the City has acquired
through eminent domain/condemnation process to facilitate construction of the Care
Break Adult Day Care Center to be built in the fall and operated by Senior Outreach
Services. He called attention to the fact that one of the conditions for rezoning of the
property to R-5 and site/building plan review approval for the Adult Day Care Center
(Planning Case 92-23) was that the property be platted and construction initiated
within a two-year period. He noted the other two parcels included in the plat are the
existing Public Works Department property at 5500 International Parkway and the
north 129 feet of 5430 International Parkway, also know as Outlot A, Custom Mold
Addition, which was split off and sold to the City and combined with the Public Works
property when Custom Mold purchased 5430 International Parkway for their building
expansion. He stated that the purpose of this request is to finalize the consolidation
of all noted properties into one plat to be known as Science Industry Center Third
Addition. He added that the City has now developed a plan for Public Works to utilize
the property, including construction of a salt storage building, which will be considered
on the agenda in Planning Case 93-17. He continued, stating that all properties are
currently zoned I-1, but the Boone Avenue property will be officially rezoned from I-1
to R-5 when the Day Care Center construction is completed. He outlined area and
width requirements of City Code and compared them to the plat, pointing out that it
will consist of two parcels, Lot 1, Block 1, combining the Public Works property with
Outlot A, Custom Mold, and Lot 2, Block 1 combining the two Boone Avenue
properties and noted that all requirements are met.
Mr. McDonald went on to say that the plat contains the proper drainage and utility
easements as required by City Code. He noted that the plat was submitted to all
department heads, utility companies, Hennepin County, City Attorney, City Engineer,
and Building Official and no comments were received from utilities or County but
recommendations were made by the others, which included submitting the plat to
Shingle Creek Watershed for review, resolution of the parking lot encroachment
problem on the north, addition of easements that staff was not aware of, and owner
name on plat be changed to New Hope Economic Development Authority and City
of New Hope instead of Housing and Redevelopment Authority. He pointed out that
staff is not requesting waiver of final plat review and the Final Plat will be considered
by the Commission in August after all the suggested corrections have been made.
No comments regarding the case from Commissioners or audience.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Underdahl, to approve
Planning Case 93-12, subject to the inclusion of recommendations and
corrections requested by City Engineer, City Attorney, and Building Official in
the Final Plat.
New Hope Planning Commission -1- July 6, 1993
PC 93-17 (3.2)
REQUEST FOR SITE/
BUILDING PLAN
REVIEW/APPROVAL
TO ALLOW CON-
STRUCTION OF
PUBLIC WORKS
SALT STORAGE
BUILDING AT 5500
INTERNATIONAL
PARKWAY
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Underdahl, Lifson, Zak, Sonsin,
Cassen, Watschke
None
None
Cameron, Gundershaug,
Planning Case 93-17 was introduced by the Chairman and Mr. McDonald presented
the request by the City of New Hope for site/building plan review/approval to allow
construction of a salt storage building and related site improvements at the Public
Works site. He stated that the City is proposing to construct a salt/sand storage
dome on the east side of the site behind the existing building and is also proposing
to develop the newly acquired property on the south to accommodate the storage of
excavated materials, street construction materials, and a sludge drying pit, plus
additional landscaping, concrete curb and gutter, and fencing to match existing are
also proposed. He noted that the Code does allow government and public utility
buildings and structures as permitted uses in the I-1 District and that all setback and
height requirements for such are met. He explained that public hearing notices are
not required for site/building plan review/approval but the two properties that would
be most affected by the construction, North Ridge and Custom Mold, were sent
copies of the staff report. He displayed pictures and drawings of the dome and stated
that the addition of this facility will bring the City into compliance with State
requirements to reduce and minimize the pollution of diluted salts after rain or snow
events, to prevent salt from entering the storm water system, and reduce negative
environmental effects and problems which result from outside storage of the
materials. He called attention to outdoor storage bins which will be located at the rear
of the property and explained they will be used to separate and store various
materials needed for City projects thus providing for a neater appearing storage area.
He stated that Design & Review had met and discussed a number of things such as
additional landscaping in front yard, additional spruce trees along the berm separating
the Day Care Center, other trees in front yard, new fencing and repaired fencing
which will match. He described the circular dome-like building of pre-stressed
plywood skin panels with brown asphalt shingle roof and built on a cement base. He
added that the entire area will be blacktopped with appropriate concrete curb and
gutter. He pointed out the fencing to be installed and also a sludge-drying pit to be
installed in the southwest corner of the site with a PVC connection to the existing
sanitary sewer to hold excavated material from vacuuming of lift stations until it is
dried and then hauled to Metropolitan Waste Control.
Chairman Cameron confirmed with staff that the storage is not something new, but
a better way of handling excavated materials.
Commissioner Watschke questioned if there was a problem with odors related to the
sludge and staff assured that if there was it was minimal and there have been no
complaints, but if it should happen, the problem would be monitored and corrected.
Commissioner Watschke wondered how the project was being paid for and Chairman
Cameron wondered what the cost will be, and staff acknowledged it comes out of the
Public Works Capital Projects Fund, not the General Fund, and the cost will be
approximately $150,000.
Commissioner Watschke questioned if the fencing would be slatted and if there was
plenty of snow storage space and staff assured that the fencing would match existing
and that there is plenty of space.
Commissioner Zak commented on the condition of the parking lot and wondered if it
will be resurfaced and restdped; staff suggested it could be added as a condition if
the Commission desired.
Commissioner Zak also wondered if the 6' fence height was considered safe and staff
explained that it meets the code requirement and a variance would be required to
make it higher.
Commissioner Zak confirmed with staff type of material, construction of storage bins.
New Hope Planning Commission -2- July 6, 1993
MOTION
PC 93-18 (3.3)
REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE TO 35'
REAR YARD SET-
BACK REQUIRE-
MENT TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF
3-SEASON PORCH
AT 4058 ENSIGN
MOTION
Commissioner Sonsin discussed with staff the amount of salt and materials used
during winter months.
Commissioner Lifson questioned the condition of the paint on the outside of the
existing Public Works building, and wondered if the City should try to be consistent
in the way all property owners are dealt with and request that the conditions include
repainting.
Motion by Commissioner Watschke, second by Commissioner Gundershaug, to
approve Planning Case 93-17 requesting Site/Building Plan Review/Approval to
Construct a Salt Storage Facility at Public Works Building, subject to the
following conditions:
1. New fencing to be installed and existing fencing repaired and all to match.
2. New area be blacktopped and concrete curb and gutter installed and
existing paved area be resurfaced and repaired and entire site striped in
accordance with the site plan.
Existing Public Works building be repainted.
Underdahl, Lifson, Zak, Sonein, Cameron, Gundershaug,
Cassen, Watschke
None
None
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Chairman Cameron called for Planning Case 93-18 and asked Mr. McDonald to
review.
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Mr. McDonald explained the request for a 7' vadance to the 35-foot rear yard setback
requirement to allow construction of a three-season porch on the east side of the
home, with an elevated deck on the north side of the porch, both to be located 28 feet
from the rear property line. He explained that open porches and decks are allowed
as encroachments on the setback, so the deck does not require a variance, however
when they are enclosed a variance is needed. He noted that some type of hardship
is a requirement in granting a variance and suggested that the original placement of
the home on the lot could be considered a hardship, since the rear yard is only 48
feet deep. He noted that addition of the porch with fireplace and elevated deck will
improve the values in the area rather than diminish them and staff considers this to
be a minor variance. He commented that the plans did not specify types of materials
to be used and suggested that the Commission confirm that with the petitioner.
Commissioner SonSin clarified with the petitioner that the materials would be wood
siding exactly like the house and not look like it was added on, same color, same roof
line. He also requested staff to define "site plan declaration" and was informed by
staff that if a site plan is available, it is acceptable rather than require a homeowner
to obtain a costly certified survey.
Commissioner Watschke questioned if the fireplace projects into the side yard
setback and was assured it was clear.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Zak, to approve
Planning Case 93-18 requesting a variance to the 35-foot rear yard setback
requirement at 4058 Ensign Avenue North, subject to conditions:
1. Owner to provide, sign, and date a "Site Plan Declaration".
2. Building materials for porch to match existing structure.
Voting in favor: Underdahl, Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug,
Cassen, Watschke
None
None
Chairman Cameron noted that the Council will not hear the case until July 26th.
New Hope Planning Commission -3- July 6, 1993
PC 93-19 (3.4)
REQUEST FOR CON-
DITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO ALLOW
OUTDOOR STORAGE
AT 9151 INTER-
NATIONAL PKWY.
MOTION
Chairman Cameron called for Planning Case 93-19 and Kirk McDonald outlined the
request for a conditional use permit for outdoor storage to allow installation of three
(3) silos for bulk storage. He explained that Construction Technology has a 5-year
lease on the building which has stood vacant for several years and they plan to install
three 10-foot diameter, 35-foot tall silos on the south side of the existing warehouse
in which to store dry product materials which will be mixed inside the building for use
as mortars and grouts, then bagged and shipped to distributors. He outlined the
issues discussed by Design & Review that there will be basically only 1 flatbed or
bulk trailer per day loading and making deliveries (none at night), only 5 employees
at the site, trash dumpster inside the building, adequate turn around area in the rear
for trucks, silos to be set on concrete piers below the frost line, existing building to
be painted to match the silos, additional screening to be added to the front of the
property. He noted that Code does allow 35' tall structures and that similar structures
were approved several years ago at the adjacent property.
Sara Wojtowicz, representing Construction Technology, introduced herself presented
revised plans showing the addition of conifers along the railroad side and removal of
several parking lanes to accommodate trucks using the large overhead door.
Commissioner Gundershaug confirmed with the petitioner that a dust collector will
prevent dust, that there will be no major or damaging noises, deliveries will be made
during normal working hours of 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., building and tanks will be
painted either bone or gray and will match, trash will be stored inside, parking is
adequate, 5 to 7 employees, existing signage will be used, no rooftop equipment to
be added, parking lot to be restriped, and a landscape schedule provided.
Chairman Cameron asked for a description of the products that are made and the
petitioner explained that cement is blended with dry chemicals into various types of
materials for tile and other installations, bagged, and shipped out to distributors.
Commissioner Sonsin questioned if this was an existing business and petitioner
explained it was a start-up business as she has been a distributor of this product for ~-~
several years and is in the process of moving into the building with the blending
equipment already installed and the dust collector to arrive shortly and silos will be
erected upon approval of the request.
Commissioner Sonsin asked for an explanation of request for the Fire Department to
approve a Special Hazard Permit and staff explained that it was a recommendation
by the Building Official for the dust from the dry mix.
Commissioner Sonsin queried staff regarding adding the condition that the CUP will
expire if the petitioner vacates the site and petitioner affirmed that her lease requires
her to remove the silos and patch the holes if she leaves.
Commissioner Underdahl questioned if trucks would be driving on the grassy area
around the silos to unload materials into the silos and the petitioner explained that
they there will be 25-foot hoses which attach between the trucks and a pneumatic
blower which blows the material into the silos.
Motion by Commissioner Gundershaug, second by Commissioner Cassen, to
approve Planning Case 93-19 requesting a conditional use permit for outdoor
storage to allow installation of three (3) silos for material storage, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Restriping (in white) of parking lot this summer.
2. Silos and building to be painted to match.
3. Five (5) additional conifers (5' high) to be planted between the silos and the
front property line.
4. Fire Department to approve special hazard permit.
5. Annual review by staff.
6. CUP to expire and silos to be removed if petitioner vacates property.
New Hope Planning Commission
-4- July 6, 1993
COMMITTEE
REPORTS
Design and
Review (4.1)
Codes and
Standards (4.2)
OLD BUSINESS
Misc. Issues
NEW BUSINESS
ANNOUNCEMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
Voting in favor: Underdahl, Lifson, Zak, Sonsin,
Cassen, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent: None
Motion carried.
Chairman Cameron welcomed the petitioner to New Hope.
Cameron, Gunderehaug,
Design & Review met on the salt storage site/building plan review and the request for
outdoor storage/silo installation.
Codes & Standards did not hold a meeting., but will be considering the home
occupation issue later this summer/fall.
Commissioner Sonsin questioned what is going to be done with the Electronic
Industries site once the building is demolished. Staff explained that the long term
goal is to demolish all 3 industrial properties on teh north side of 42nd Avenue and
encourege development of the site with B-4 uses.
Commissioner Gundershaug and Chairman Cameron discussed with staff the
possibility of changing the procedure for minor variances, such as routine porch and
deck additions, so that they could be more efficiently handled without requiring
petitioners to attend meetings. Staff replied that the City Attorney is not in favor of
changing the current vadance procedure. Chairman Cameron wondered if the
agenda format could include a consent item whereby routine minor variances could
be handled in a simple manner, after study and assurence by staff that there are no
special problems in a specific case. Staff agreed to research the matter.
Chairman Cameron questioned if anything had been done regarding the Tires Plus
signs as there were still in place and staff responded that the Building Official had
recently ordered the signs removed and revoked their sign permit applications for one
year.
All minutes accepted as printed.
Staff reminded the Commissioners of the New Hope Annual Appreciation Picnic on
July 27th and urged their presence as a plaque will be presented to Gall Friedrich for
his years of service on the Planning Commission.
Chairman Cameron announced he would not be present for the August meeting.
Meeting unanimously adjourned at 7:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucille Butler, Secretary
New Hope Planning Commission -5- July 6, 1993
,CITY OF NEW HOPE
~1 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN ,C~NTY,, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 3, 1993
CALL TO ORDER Vice-Chairman Gundershaug called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
CONSENT
ITEMS (3.1)
MOTION
Present:
Absent:
Also present:
Lifson, Underdahl, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke
Zak, Cameron
Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug announced that the petitioner for Planning Case 93-11,
Gethsemane Cemetery Planned Unit Development, has requested the case be tabled
for one month so there will be no public hearing on it at the present time and those
in the audience to hear that case are free to leave rather than sit through the meeting.
He announced that no further notices will be sent so interested persons should make
a note to return on September 7th.
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug introduced the list of Consent Items as listed and stated
that all items will be enacted by one motion unless requested by any Commissioner
or citizen that an item be removed for discussion. It was clarified that a motion for
approval would be subject to conditions requested by staff for each case.
Commissioner Sonsin requested that Planning Case 93-12, Science Industry Center
3rd Addition Final Plat, be removed for discussion.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Casen, to approve all
remaining Consent Items listed for Planning Cases 93-20, 93-21, 93-23, 93-25,
subject to conditions recommended in the individual Planning Case Reports.
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Lifson, Underdahl, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke
None
Zak, Cameron
PC 93-20
PC 93-21
PC 93-23
PC 93-25
PC 93-22 (3.2)
REQUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO ALLOW
Request for Variance from Driveway Parking Area Setback Requirement to
Allow Replacement of Blacktop and Widen Curb Cut, 4301 Nevada Avenue
North, James/Verle Fackler, Petitioners
Request for Variance to Rear Yard Setback Requirement to Allow Construction
of a Porch, 3501 Xylon Avenue North, Michael Banker, Petitioner, subject to the
conditions: 1. Professional detailed plans submitted prior to the City Council
meeting; 2. Porch design and materials match/blend with existing structure.
Request for Preliminary Plat Approval for Northwest Church Addition, 8624 50th
Avenue North, Northwest Church of Christ, Petitioner, subject to the conditions:
1. Comments/recommendations from City Attorney, City Engineer, and Building
Official be incorporated into the Final Plat; 2. Final Plat be submitted to
Planning Commission for review/approval.
Request for Preliminary Plat Approval for Carol James Addition, 7105 62nd
Avenue North, Caro; James, Petitioner, subject to the conditions:
1. Con~mentslrecommendations from City Attorney, City Engineer, and Building
Official be incorporated into the Final Plat; 2. Final Plat be submitted to
Planning C~mmission for review/approval.
Vice Chairman Gundershaug informed the petitioners that the City Council will
consider their cases individually on August 9, 1993.
Planning Case 93-22 was introduced by the Vice-Chairman and Mr. McDonald
presented the request for conditional use permit to allow erection of a 60-foot
communication support structure and antennas, which include a 48-foot tower with
12-f0ot antennas, for effective and reliable amateur transmission and reception under
New Hope Planning Commission -1- August 3, 1993
ERECTION OF
COMMUNICATION
SUPPORT
STRUCTURE
AND ANTENNAS
AT 3877
INDEPENDENCE AV.
New Hops Planning Commission
F.C.C. regulations. He noted that City Code requires a conditional use permit for .
radio towers in excess of 35 feet. He explained that the petitioner is a licensed
amateur radio operator with an F.C.C. radio station license for his residence, and has
indicated that the support structure is a sturdy well-designed commercially manufac-
tured amateur structure which will be installed according to all manufacturer's
guidelines.
Mr. McDonald pointed out that the tower and antenna would be located in the center
of the fenced rear yard of the petitioner's home, installed on a concrete pad and have
40' *support ties. He noted that the existing house meets all setback requirements.
He stated that several residents have visited City Hall to review the plans, five letters
have been received in opposition to the request, and one neighbor living directly
across the street and the City's Director of Fire & Safety have written indicating
support. He listed the major concerns of the residents are possible tower collapse,
an attractive nuisance, diminished property values, and unsightly visual appearaance.
He outlined the City's criteria for a conditional use permit to provide the City with
reasonable and legally permissible degreee of discretion in determining the suitability
of certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health, and safety. He
explained that the City, in determining if a conditional use will be allowed, may
consider the nature of adjoining land/buildings, whether of not a similar use is already
in existence and located on the same premises or lands close by. He noted that the
City has granted approval to similar installations in the past for businesses and
single-family homeowners, a recent one of the same height in 1982 located at 8500
33rd Avenue North. He called attention to information submitted by the petitioner
regarding towers and amateur radio operations.
Kirk Pengelly, Jr., petitioner, introduced himself, and directed attention to a correction
in the guy support structure as originally referred to in the staff report and it will be
a self-supporting structure so the 40' guying cables will not be installed.
Commisisoner Sonsin asked for background as to petitioner's purpose in becoming
an amateur radio operator.
Mr. Pengelly replied that he has been an amateur radio operator since 1976, allowing
him reliable communication world-wide, as he is involved in Civil Service groups that
provide emergency communication both locally and internationally, such as Army
MARS which provides normal and emergency Army communication on a nightly basis
and Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service which is involved with the Skywarn
national weather service. He stated that his ability to communicate reliably and
effectively directly relates to the height of the antenna, with F.C.C. granting him
heights as high as 200 feet if he lived in an area where it is permissible, however
New Hope's zoning rules are restrictive to that possibility.
Commissioner Sonsin questioned the height of the current antenna located on the
existing house, including the house height, and also the reasoning for the decision to
install the tower in the rear as opposed to the side yard as was done at the 33rd
Avenue installation referred to in the introduction.
The petitioner confirmed it to be about 25 feet, with the house being at 15 feet in
height with the antenna attached to a 15-foot mast on a porch which is lower than the
house. He explained that it is a 2-meter antenna more for local communication and
there is a wire antenna that stretches across the property between the trees. He
expressed his surprise that an installation was allowed in a side yard and stated that
he preferred to keep a clean look from the street by installing it in the rear yard.
Commissioner $onsin confirmed that it was a commercially-manufactured structure
and not a do-it-yourself project, and he asked if a contractor would be doing the
assembly and if there will be any kind of safety inspection done after it is installed.
Mr. Pengelly replied that it is a commonly used type of installation and he and fellow
members of a radio club he belongs to will be assembling it as they have done many
times in the past, but the follow-up inspection would be in accordance with City
requirements.
-2- August 3, 1993
Commissioner Sonsin confirmed with staff that a final inspection by the Building
Inspector would be required. He asked the petitioner if he had consulted with neigh-
bore regarding his plans and Mr. Pengelly stated he spoke with several he knows
well, but he has only been there for a short time and he was uncomfortable about
approaching others as he was aware there would be some controversy.
Corn_missioner Sonsin called attention to the concern of neighbors regarding the
visual aspect detracting from the property and he suggested some additional
screening around it or locating it in a less visual area in the yard. He noted that he
had visited the site and felt there may not be adequate screening existing currently
for some of the neighbors. He added that at one time he had personally experienced
living near a similar tower installation and never heard complaints regarding property
values or disruption.
Mr. Pengelly defended his selection of the placement and stated there are some tall
shrubs along his fence line and some crab-type trees in neighbors' yards, and he
indicated that he can barely see some of the homes from his yard. He agreed with
the staff recommendation for a 6' security fence. He added that he had researched
property values around the 33rd Avenue installation with Glenn Busitzky, principal
appraiser in charge of assessements for New Hope, and learned that property values
there for 1980, 1985, and 1990 have all increased at a average of about 21.6%. He
offered printed information confirming his statement. He concurred that his property
lacks vegetation and that he would consider putting in added screening.
Commissioner Gundershaug questioned if the facility would be used commercially
and the petitioner informed him that as amateur operators they are not allowed to
commercially use their equipment. Mr. Gundershaug also questioned what hours the
radio is used and the petitioner replied it is used typically in evening hours.
Commissioner Gundershaug further questioned the petitioner regarding interference
to television/radio reception and if corrections can be made to prevent disruption.
Mr. Pengelly affirmed that at one time a close neighbor had a problem which was
subsequently worked out, and he has now installed the proper grounding that is
required by F.C.C. and has also installed proper filtering on his transmission lines.
Commissioner Gundershaug questioned how critical the 60' height was as opposed
to a 40' installation, noting that if a 60' tower fell it would conceivably fall across
several neighbors' property, while a 40' installation would not.
The petitioner conceded that a 40' tower would suffice, although most operators
prefer the taller height.
Commissioner Lifson asked what minimum tower height would work, and wondered
if the petitioner was aware of the maximum height of 35' code allowance.
Mr. Pengelly advised that the frequencies used by emergency communications
around the country work on a half wave length which requires a 60-foot height, and
some communities in the area have set their height limits at that to accommodate this
type of communication. He stated that he was not aware of the 35' height allowance
and explained the higher tower would give him better performance, but the minimum
height for his operation would be 40 feet.
Commissioner Watschke wondered why he has not requested the taller tower before
now and the petitioner explained that it is a technical issue since the effectiveness of
radio signals is based on a sunspot cycle which operates 11 years and it is nearing
the bottom of that cycle in the next few years, as that cycle decreases, it gets
increasingly harder to communicate. He added that he moved here from Duluth and
has been doing a lot of work on his house as the got settled into the community and
until now has not had the time to concentrate on his hobby.
Commissioner Watschke questioned if there are other options to use and was
informed there is nothing as reliable for effective communication.
New Hope Planning Commission -3- August 3, 1993
Commissioner Underdahl complemented the petitioner on the interesting information
made available to the Commission and confirmed that, from the material offered in
the packet, she understood that the lower the tower the more it would interfere with
televisions and radios, so the higher the better. The petitioner stated that was
common in older types of radios but the type of equipment available today exceeds
or meets the F.C.C. standards so there is not a lot of interference problems.
Mr. I~engelly stated that he would be happy to discuss interference problems with
anyone who cared to give him a call.
Commissioner Watschke clarified that the heights being discussed included total
height, including antenna, not just tower height. The petitioner explained the tower
is made up of 8' sections and 6' or 7' of masting is needed on top to secure the
antenna and he would be willing to remove the top 8' section to drop the structute to
a 40' with the masting on top bring it to a total of near 50'.
Commissioner Gundershaug interjected that when he referred to the possibility of the
tower toppling to the ground he was considering the total of all equipment that is
associated with it.
Mr. Pengelly stated that the towers are designed to handle 18 square feet of antenna
at over 70 miles an hour of wind and the towers are designed to bend rather than
shear off at the bottom and the chances of it dropping over the property line are
extremely Iow.
The Vice-Chairman invited persons desiring to speak to this issue to come forward,
sign in, give their names, and be heard.
John Libra, 9217 Northwood Parkway, stated he has lived in New Hope for 23 years
and lives directly behind the petitioner and although he has big trees in his yard, the
trees lose their leaves in the winter and the tower will be very visible then. He spoke
against the request as he feels it will depreciate the value of his house. He added
that he is not against the shortwave radio and if a smaller antenna could be used on ~
the roof he would not object, but he is against the big tower in the yard.
Glenn Farmer, 9201 Northwood Parkway, claimed that he had formerly lived near a
large ham radio operator in another community and when that was working there was
poor reception on radios or TVs. He added that all kinds of wires are very visible in
the area now and he hopes NSP would soon put all wires underground, but he can
see over to the petitioners property and the tower will be in his view when he goes
out on his patio, therefore he feels very strongly that it will not enhance the value of
his property. He stated that all property values have gone up and it is fallacious to
believe that the property values in the area will increase after this tower is put in
place.
James Fackler, petitioner for another case on the agenda, stated that he has no
interest in the case but wanted to know, out of curiousity, what sort of a foundation
anchors the tower. The petitioner answered it will be a 4' concrete base.
No further input from the audience was forthcoming so the public hearing was
considered closed and turned back to the Commission.
Commisisoner Lifson and Commissisoner Underdahl confirmed that if the petitioner
were to consider a 35' tower no conditional use permit would be required and he
could put it wherever or whenever he wanted to as long as he has a building permit
and remains within the setback requirements.
Commissioner Cassen explained that she is a real estate professional and stated
that, based on her experience, she did not feel this installation will impact property
values in the area as far as depreciation, especially if the view is screened properly.
Commissioner Gundershaug expressed his opposition to the 60' height and would ~'"~
prefer the 40' height with considerable screening and fencing.
New Hope Planning Commission -4- August 3,1993
MOTION
PC 93-24 (3.3)
REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE TO 35'
REAR YARD SET-
BACK REQUIRE-
MENT TO ALLOW
BEDROOM/BATH
ADDITION AT
3233 GETTYSBURG
Commissioner Sonsin suggested the petitioner make an effort to meet with neighbors
who have voiced concerns over the visual aspect before the Council meeting on
August 9th and see if they can work out more details for satisfactory screening. He
added that he agrees in the basic idea of the amateur radio operation and it does
serve a valid civic and civil defense purpose as well as a hobby.
Commissioner Watschke expressed the opinion that screening would have to be at
least 25 to 30 feet tall to be effective.
Commissioner Underdahl expressed her amazement in reading through the packet
material of the numerous instances where amateur radio operators have been of
great service in natural disasters and stated she was not aware of all the services an
amateur radio operator performs in a time of emergency. She suggested the
neighbors be informed of this information also.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Underdahl, to approve
Planning Case 93-22 with the following conditions:
1. Installation of six (6) foot tall type fence around rear yard or at least the
base of the tower.
2. Tower not to interfere with neighbors radio/TV reception.
3. Annual review by staff.
4. CUP to expire and petitioner to remove tower from property if petitioner
moves from property.
5. Additional landscaping to be installed in the rear yard to provide adequate
screening of the tower base.
Voting in favor: Underdahl, $onsin, Cassen
Voting against: Lifson, Gunderahaug, Watschke
Absent: Zak, Cameron
Motion failed.
Vice-Chairman called for Planning Case 93-24 and asked Mr. McDonald to review.
Mr. McDonald explained the request for a 16' variance to the 35-foot rear yard
setback requirement to allow the addition of a master bedroom/bath. He pointed out
how the unique shaped lot, the placement of the house on the lot, and the area where
the addition is to be located all create the need for a setback of only 19 feet.
Penny Pomije was called before the Commission and she stated that they have lived
in New Hope for about 4 years and want to add on to make a nicer, larger home, and
remain in New Hope.
Commissioner Sonsin stated that he received the notice regarding this case because
he lives within 350' of the property, although he is not able to see the property from
his location, but he had walked over to the site and checked it out. He confirmed with
the petitioner that a privacy fence was going to be built around the brand new pool.
He expressed concern about the petitioner's usage of the back yard with a patio,
pool, spa, and the new addition tending to create a relatively small back yard area.
Ms. Pomije replied that she felt there was plenty of yard area and the addition is
being placed in a little used area, and didn't feel it will create a cluttered feeling but
will make their home nicer.
Commissioner Sonsin questioned staff regarding the setback for the pool and was
informed the setback is to the edge of the pool, not the patio. He inquired of the
petitioner if they had talked to neighbors about their addition.
Ms. Pomije stated they have spoken with the neighbors directly behind them, one on
the southwest side, and one next door on the east and stated they have had positive
acceptance of their plans.
Commisioner Gundershaug confirmed that the addition will maich the existing house
in color and materials and roof line.
New Hope Planning Commission -5- August 3, t993
MOTION
PC 93-11
REQUEST FOR
PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT
CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT
APPROVAL FOR
GETHSEMANE
CEMETERY
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Abstaining:
Absent:
Motion carried.
In response to the Vice-Chairman's call for interested persons, Mr. Ron Young, 3229
Gettysburg Court, appeared before the Commission and stated that he is the
neighbor to the west and the petitioner had not talked with him. He expressed his
view that he is not against all the additions made to upgrade the home, [}ut he has
a complaint that they did not speak with him and are using his property to bring in
materials and have created some problems with the driveway and lawn. He recalled
that the former owner of the home had put an addition on and came to him and asked
if he minded if they drove on his lot during construction because the neighbor to the
east refused to let them drive in his side, and they promised to fix it up but it took two
years to get things repaired. He indicated they have had some problems with them
and does not feel it is his place to go speak to them, but he would like some
assurance from their contractor that the property will be restored. He added that
there is also a drainage problem for days after a rain because since the prrevious
construction was done, it all slopes to his side of the driveway and he would would
like that situation corrected when repairs are made this time. He commented that he
does not object to the project because the addition will screen the noise from the
poos, but he would like some reassurance of what is going to be done.
Commissioner Gundershaug consulted with staff regarding the City's part in
addressing the issue regarding restoration of the property. He then recalled the
petitioner to address the neighbor's concerns.
Ms. Pomije indicated that she had relied on the pool contractors to discuss the use
of the west side with Mr. Young, and she apologized that they had not done so. She
stated that she was not aware they had driven on his lawn, but assured that they will
resod and take care of any damages done to the property.
Commissioner Sonsin encouraged the petitioner to again talk to neighbors and
indicated he had learned of someone who was upset about the project.
Several Commissioners consulted with staff about the restoration of property, the
drainage, and a time limit being made a condition of approval.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Underdahl, to approve
Planning Case 93-24 requesting a 16' variance to the 35-foot rear yard setback
requirement at 3233 Gettysburg Avenue North, subject to conditions:
1. Architecture/materials of addition to match existing structure.
2. Petitioner's and neighbor's property to be restored to original pre-
construction conditions (including drainage) within 30 days of completion
of construction.
Lifson, Underdahl, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke
None
Sonsin
Zak, Cameron
The Vice-Chairman urged the petitioner to be present at the Council meeting on
Monday, August 9, 1993.
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug requested a formal motion for the tabling of Planning
Case 93-11 as the petitioner has requested that it be tabled for one month.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Cassen.
Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Casaen, Watechke
Voting against: None .
Absent: Zak, Cameron
Motion carried.
New Hope Planning Commission -6- August 3, 1993
PC 93-12
REQUEST FOR
FINAL PLAT
APPROVAL OF
SCIENCE INDUS-
TRY CENTER
3RD ADDITION
MOTION
COMMITTEE
REPORTS
Design and
Review (4.1)
Codes and
Standards (4.2)
OLD BUSINESS
Misc. Issues
NEW BUSINESS
ANNOUNCEMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug called for Planning Case 93-12 which was requested
to be removed from the Consent Items.
Commissioner $onsin stated that he had requested removal because he had
concerns about approving the Final Plat since there are questions regarding an
encroachment on the parking lot of Public Works property, and the Shingle Creek
appro_val. He was assured by staff that these were development issues, not plat
issues.
Cqmmissioner Cassen raised the question regarding State law no longer permitting
the filling of wetlands.
Mr. McDonald answered that there is controversy whether that has been a wetland
or not and after a great deal of reseamh the conclusion is that the wetland was not
there originally, and does not require mitigation.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Underdahl, to approve
Planning Case 93-12 for Final Plat Approval of Science Industry Center 3rd
Addition, subject to the following conditions:
1. Encroachments on parking lot be reviewed with owners.
2. Shingle Creek Watershed Commission will formally approve the
recommendation that the filling of the wetland on Lot 2 will not require
mitigation.
3. If it is determined that an easement is required for the NSP buried cable, the
Final Plat be revised to show said easement.
Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent: Zak, Cameron
Motion carried.
Design & Review met with the Cemetery and will meet with them again before the
September Planning Commissions meeting.
Still planning a meeting on home occupations.
No discussion.
All minutes accepted as printed.
Commissioner $onsin expressed thanks to the City for the Appreciation Picnic.
Meeting unanimously adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucille Butler, Secretary
New Hope Planning Commission -7- August 3, 1993
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 7, 1993
CALL TO ORDER Vice-Chairman Gundershaug called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
PC 93-26 (3.1)
REQUEST FOR
PRELIMINARY
PLAT OF VILLAGE
INDUSTRIAL PARK
2ND ADDITION
3940 QUEBEC N.
MOTION
Present:
Absent:
Also present:
Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke
Underdahl, Cameron
Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant
Elizabeth Stockman, Planning Consultant
Steve Sondrall, City Attorney
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug called for Case 93-26 and Kirk McDonald, Management
Assistant, reviewed the request for a preliminary plat for Village Industrial Park 2nd
Addition, noting that the purpose of the plat is to change the current legal description
of the property where Paddock Laboratories is constructing their new facility from
"Outlet A, Village Industrial Park" to "Lot 1, Block 1, Village Industrial Park 2nd
Addition". He explained that at the time of approval of the Paddock request for
site/building plan review and variance to the rear yard setback requirement to allow
construction of a new warehouse/office building, the existing plat identified the
property as Outlot A and since the Zoning Code does not permit building construction
on an outlot staff recommended that the plat be administratively revised from Outlot
A to Lot 2, but later the petitioner and the City agreed that the proper procedure was
to replat the property and go through the regular public hearing process. He pointed
out that the 327,555 square foot pamel, which is part of the former Minnegasco site
located on the newly constructed Quebec Avenue extension, contains only Lot 1,
Block 1, with all lot width and area requirements for the I-1 District met, and only
several minor revisions are being recommended. He stated that the petitioner is
requesting that the Commission waive their review of the final plat so that Council can
approve the final plat on September 27th and building construction can begin this fall.
Commissioner Sonsin questioned if the petitioner was in agreement with the drainage
and utility easements requested along the south lot line and also the request of the
City Attorney for updated evidence of ownership.
Bruce Paddock, owner of Paddock Laboratories, answered that they have concerns
about drainage on the site and have no problem with the easement for such drainage,
and also they will take care of the ownership update.
Commissioner Sonsin questioned staff if a number of the ordinance requirements,
such as existing sewer and watermains, topographical data, building setback data,
etc. which were noted by the City Attorney, should be shown on the final plat to get
it approved, and was advised that they are preliminary plat recommendations but do
not need to appear on the final plat.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Lifson, to approve
Planning Case 93-26, subject to the conditions:
1. 10-foot wide drainage and utility easement be provided on the south line.
2. Updated evidence of ownership be submitted.
3. The Planning Commission agrees to waive its' review of the final plat so the
final plat can proceed directly to the City Council to expedite this process,
due to the simplicity of the plat and the minor revisions requested.
Voting in favor: Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent: Underdahl, Cameron
Motion carried.
New Hope Planning Commission -1- September 7, 1993
PC s3-27
REQUEST FOR
SITE/BUILDING PLAN
REVIEW/APPROVAL
TO ALLOW BUILDING
ADDITION AT 9101
SCIENCE CTR. DRIVE
MOTION
The Vice Chairman introduced Planning Case 93-27 and Mr. McDonald explained the .. °
request for Site/Building Plan Review for a building addition. He outlined the plans
for a 7,217 square foot addition to the shipping/receiving area in order to consolidate
the shipping functions at Avtec Finishing Systems, a plating company that receives "'""~
shipped-in products for plating and then ships them back out. He explained that
because the addition exceeds 10% of existing building size it requires site/building
plan review/approval, but the expansion is routine and meets all I-1 setback require-
merits as well as all of the zoning code standards such as adequate parking spaces
and a 66% green area. He noted that the Design & Review Committee requested a
revised floor plan which was submitted, and the petitioner confirmed that building
materials will be painted to match existing building, the addition will match the existing
building in height and no new rooftop equipment will be added. He pointed out the
addition of 6 new 8' x 9" overhead doors, with existing overhead doors being left in
place for ventilation purposes, addition of two docks and one ramp, and relocation of
dOwnlights to the new addition. He added that the property shares a driveway with
the adjacent warehouse to the west and the only changes recommended by staff are
the addition of a group of ONE-WAY driveway signs in the trucking area which will
force all trucks to enter at the eastern driveway and exit around the southwest
building corner, then out the shared (west) drive onto Science Center Drive.
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug called upon the petitioner to answer questions and
asked if he was familiar with the staff recommendations regarding the signs.
Jack Jarrard, with Olson Company, general contractor for the project, answered that
he was aware of the staff recommendations and had no problem with them.
Commissioner Cassen asked the petitioner if the refuse storage was all inside the
building and none outside the building, and questioned if there will be any problem
in complying with the requested signs.
Mr. Jarrard stated there are some steel beams and miscellaneous equipment stored ~_..,.
outside the building currently, which will be removed at the time of construction in
order to accommodate the new building, and he pointed out that the internal refuse
area will be located along the eastern dock for easy access. He explained that most
of the truckers are currently oriented to the plan as shown, but for an occasional
trucker new to the area, the placement of the signs is necessary.
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug questioned the number of trucks per day that come onto
the site and wondered if they have a problem with trucks stacking up and waiting.
Mr. Jarrard referred the question to Bob Yunker, petitioner representative in the
audience, who came to the map and pointed out that the entry area is wide enough
for someone to pass if necessary, emphasizing that the trucks move through quite
fast and they do not have a stacking problem, and he estimated about 30 trucks per
day go through the site,
Commissioner Sonsin asked what kind of plating is done there, if any type of
hazardous waste is generated and, if so, how is it handled.
Mr. Yunker answered that they do a variety of different platings such as electrolysis
nickel, barrel zinc, anondizing, black oxiding, conversion coatings, and others, with
their primary markets in the computer industry and special machinery industry, and
· he added that they do not do chrome plating, bumpers, etc. and are strictly into
industrial plating of machinery parts for large and small machine shops, IBM, Hewlett
Packard, electronics companies, etc. He replied they do generate hazardous waste,
but they use the US Filter Recovery Center in Roseville and meet all EPA standards
on sewer and air emissions, and are monitored very closely.
Motion by Commissioner Cassen, second by Commissioner Watschke, to approve ~_~
Planning Case 93-27 with the following condition:
New Hope Planning Commission -2- September 7, 1993
PC 93-28 (3.3)
REQUEST FOR
SITE/BUILDING PLAN
REVIEW/APPROVAL
TO ALLOW CON-
STRUCTION OF NEW
GAS PUMP ISLAND
CANOPY AT 4200
WINNETKA AV.N~
1. Addition of four (4) on-site metal traffic signs (maximum 6 square feet each)
to be placed as follows:
A. "AVTEC TRUCKS" at eastern drive facing Science Center Drive.
B. "ONE-WAY" on eastern edge of eastern driveway, near parking lot.
C. "ONE-WAY DO NOT ENTER" at southwest corner of building, across
drive.
D. "NO AVTEC TRUCKS" on wester edge of westerly shared driveway,
facing Science Center Drive.
Voting in favor: Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent: Underdahl, Cameron
Motion carried.
Planning Case 93-28 was introduced by the Vice-Chairman and Mr. McDonald
presented the request for Site/Building Plan Review/Approval to allow installation of
a new gas pump island canopy at the Unocal Station on 42nd and Winnetka Avenue.
He outlined the petitioner's proposal to remove the existing fuel islands, replace them
with three (3) new islands and multi-product dispensers, a new 120-foot long, 28-foot
wide, 17-foot high, fueling canopy which would be located on the southwest corner
of the site over the new islands, and new green area with curbing. He described the
canopy as of steel construction painted blue/white/orange, a communication system
via an intercom built into the fuel dispenser and base station controlled by a cashier,
and all downlighting. He noted that a number of items were discussed with Design
& Review which included additional interior and exterior curbing, a green perimeter
landscaping strip, revised parking layout, detail of canopy light fixtures, hours of
operation, delivery transport route, trash enclosure, signage, and snow storage, and
revised plans were submitted with the changes and additions requested. He pointed
out that there two driveways, one on the north and one on the east, which are used
by adjacent businesses and the easements for the driveways have been added to the
plan and labeled as "easement for driveway access" and "driveway access-no
easement". He called attention to several minor revisions/additions that staff would
like on the plan, mainly 45-degree parking be changed to 90-degree stalls, parking
at southeast driveway entrance on 42nd moved by 20 feet, a detailed landscape plan
and schedule be submitted, and a revised illumination contour drawing for the canopy
with. photometric detail be submitted.
Don Egerer, the Uno-Ven property owner, and his son Scott responded to the Vice-
Chairman's questions regarding the submitting of landscape plan and the parking
revisions. The Egerers nodded that they did not have a problem with the parking and
Scott Egerer presented a preliminary landscape plan.
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug advised the petitioners that the plan was too sketchy
and requested that a detailed schedule showing types of trees and shrubs be
submitted before the case is presented to the City Council.
Commissioner Cassen reminded the petitioners that a revised illumination contour
also needs to be submitted before City Council. She confirmed that there was not
a problem with changing the angle of the parking stalls or the moving of parking away
from 42nd Avenue by 20 feet. She questioned what is proposed for canopy signage
and ground signage.
Scott Egerer explained that three (3) 36" diameter discs inscribed with "76" on them
will be installed on three comers of the canopy and he explained the color
combination to be used, showing pictures of other installations with the signs. He
indicated there would be no new ground signage.
Commissioner Cassen questioned if the landscaping would be sprinkled and the
petitioner indicated they were trying to fit an irrigation system into their budget for the
project.
New Hope Planning Commission -3- September 7, 1993
MOTION
PC 93-11 (3.4)
REQUEST FOR PUD
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF
A MAUSOLEUM AND
OFFICE BUILDING
AND VARIOUS SITE
IMPROVEMENTS AT
8151-8161 42ND AV.
Commissioner Sonsin asked for clarification of the driveway easements and
wondered if the two restaurants would have a problem if the driveways were
removed.
Scott Egerer explained that there is an easement on the east side towards the Port
Arthur restaurant, but the north side is just an access and curb cut that was put there
some time previous and there is no easement of record. He stated that they did
consider enlarging the service station and using that area, but staff has encouraged
them to keep it open if possible and they have agreed to do that for the time being.
He pointed out that Hardee's on the north has its own driveway and Port Arthur has
the easement so he did not think there would be a problem. He explained that a
portion of the area south of the curb cut is not used because of several bad potholes
and they have shown the curb moved to the north and a new green area there to
remedy the problem. He added that the Uno-Ven real estate people are trying to
work out agreements with the restaurants for the use of the driveways.
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug expressed his concern regarding the lack of a
landscaping schedule since it had been stressed at Design & Review that it was a
critical element in approval of the request. He indicated that he was reluctant to
move ahead without it, but the fact that plan presents a big improvement for that
corner of the City prompts him to rely on the petitioners to meet with the Building
Official as soon as the next day and get a schedule made up and listed on the plan
and presented to City Staff by noon on Friday, September 10th. He urged the
petitioners to include sprinklers to guarantee that the landscaping would remain green
and healthy.
Commissioner Sonsin agreed with the Vice-Chairman's comments and stated that he
would support the same suggestions regarding the submittal of plans and use of
sprinklers, and he emphasized that the Council will not approve incomplete plans.
Scott Egerer thanked the Commission for their patience and explained that their ~-'-.
problem is that their engineer is located in Chicago and it is difficult to coordinate
things to meet deadlines, but he assured that they would comply with the request.
Motion by Commissioner Cassen, second by Commissioner Watshcke, to approve
Planning Case 93-28 with the following conditions:
1. Parking be revised, per 8A and 8B of staff report.
2. Landscape plan schedule to be submitted prior to Council meeting.
3. Revised illumination contour be submitted prior to Council meeting.
4. Signage limited to three (3) round 36" diameter "76" signs.
Mr. McDonald interjected a clarification of what is meant by revised illumination
contour, noting that the drawing only shows an overlapping of lights and no additive
foot candles for the 27 downlights as indicated.
Voting in favor: Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watshcke
Voting against: None
Absent: Underdahl, Cameron
Motion carried.
The Vice-Chairman asked Mr. McDonald to present Planning Case 93-11, a request
for a PUD Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a mausoleum and office
building at Gethsemane Cemetery.
Mr. McDonald explained that the Cemetery has presented a conceptual master plan
of the overall site with detailed development plans for the mausoleum and office
facility portions. He noted that cemeteries are allowed by conditional use permit in
the R-1 Zoning District, but due to the scope of this development with multiple
buildings, a variety of uses, and phased development plans, it was recommended by
staff that it be handled as a Planned Unit Development. He pointed out that concep-
tual approval for the entire site and development stage approval for the first stage of
New Hope Planning Commission -4- September 7, 1993
development ara the items being considerad at this time. He explained that staff, City
,Attorney, City Engineer, Building Official, and Design & Review have been working
with the Cemetery for some time addressing a broad range of issues that needed to
be considered in a project of this magnitude. He noted that the City is very
supportive of the plan and Phase One development. He emphasized that the PUD
process of the zoning code intends to allow for flexibility in development, so some
specific plans for development in the first 5 years are not available at this time, but
will be brought back for approval befora they ara initiated. He listed primary
components of the Phase One portion, that is construction of the mausoleum and
office, and other components such as enhancing the existing main entrance, con-
struction of fencing and landscaping along Winnetka and 42nd Avenues, signage,
construction of monuments, and other site featuras, such as benches, statues, etc.
pointed out the intended location and size of the office building and mausoleum. He
described the building materials for the office as a wood frame building with a stucco
exterior and granite accents designed to counterbalance the mausoleum, which is the
main featura of the development. He stated that the mausoleum is designed for
above-ground entombments, with 1,080 concrate crypts and 600 cremation niches,
half accessible from the outside and half from the inside, and contains a small space
in the center for conducting funeral services. He added that both buildings meet the
height and setback raquirements. He further stated that PUD raquiraments and the
zoning ordinance requira a 25-foot roadway width and the cemetery planners
submitted a detailed study showing that the majority of cemeteries in the metro area
have a 20-foot width, so a compromise was raached whera the roads in front of the
main building will be 24 feet wide and the remaining roads at 20 feet. He went on to
say that since the intersection at Xylon Avenue will be reconstructed and the second
phase of cemetery construction includes moving the main cemetery entrance to Xylon
Avenue, the City wanted some right-of-way dedicated for that purpose and the
Cemetery has agraed and has included it on the plans. ,A major issue dealt with
storm drainage and wetland as the City is putting together a Stormwater Management
Plan and is very concerned about ponding, however the Cemetery has agraed that
the delineation of the wetlands will be coordinated with the completion of the City's
stormwater plan which will be ready later in the year. Another issue was that of
public water, that is, if the buildings should be sprinkled or a watermain loop in-
stalled, with the Fire Chief insisting that one or the other is needed. He concluded
stating that all of the components will be integrated into a planned unit development
agraement to be drafted by the City Attorney and be executed between the City and
the Cemetery.
John Bergly, Planning Consultant for the Cemetery, introduced himself and Chuck
Beechler, Attorney for the Cemetery, and explained that two of the Cemetery's
representatives could not be in attendance. He complimented Mr. McDonald on a
fine job of prasenting the overview of the plan and raferrad to the staff recommend-
ations, noting their agraement with basically everything in the raport, with a few
exceptions. He called attention to #3 regarding delineation of the wetlands, stating
that has been completed and they expect to have a survey raport raady for Council,
and #.4 ragarding the ponding araas for surface water drainage, pointing out the araa
outlined on the plan and the easement dedicated for it and assuring their intent to
include it on the master plan in conjunction with the completion of the City's Storm-
water Management Plan. He then addrassed item #9 regarding the fence line set-
back, stating that there will be some problems along Winnetka Avenue because of
the narrow space that now exists between the fence line and the edge of the graves.
He stressed that space is needed to maneuver machinery around the graves and if
the fence is set back 10 feet it would put it at the very edge of the graves. He went
on to the Phase One conditions, stating they agrae with all of them, except ~4 which
states that the Cemetery would put in the loop watermain, but they are comparing
costs between the loop water system and the sprinkling of the buildings and would
like to have the option for either one left open. He commented on the right-of-way
New Hope Planning Commission -5- September 7, 1993
issue, stating that it has been resolved with the provision of 17 feet of additional right-
of-way in the center and tapering down to 0 feet, 400 to 500 feet east and west of
Xylon Avenue.
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug queried the City Attorney regarding how to handle the
water question in presenting the case to the City Council if a decision on sprinkling
or water loop is not made before the Council meeting, and was informed that the
motion could include an either/or basis.
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug then questioned the petitioner regarding the Winnetka
Avenue setback and the highlighting of the entrance on Winnetka with monuments,
noting that the City's intent is not to accentuate it, but have it Iow key.
Mr. Bergly advised that any further setback will not be possible and it would be
detrimental to set the fence inside existing mature landscaping. He stated that they
would like to upgrade the Winnetka entrance, but if staff feels the plan shown is too
elaborate they will reconsider.
The Vice-Chairman asked for a show of the elevations and Mr. Bergly pointed out that
all elevations will be the same on the north, south, east, and west, but the front
elevation will be higher over the entrance, and east and west entrances will have fiat
roofs. The center will be a trussed area about 35 feet high with a copper-colored
roof. He pointed out that they would like to provide a Iow illumination of lights at night
so that the higher center portion will resemble a crown on the mausoleum, with a ring
of lights around the roof. He described the interior gathering area consisting of
marble, stone, and carpeting, and the walkway around the exterior. He described the
office building and noted the two buildings will be united by the color scheme.
The Vice-Chairman requested an explanation of the timeframe of various phases and
Mr. Bergly complied noting they are trying to develop Phase One with the existing
entrance and the mausoleum and office building to the right so that it gives the
impression that the expansion is part of the existing cemetery and not detached from ~-'~
it, and maybe in 5 years or beyond the Xylon Avenue entrance can be built, then
Phase Two would be an expansion to the south side and Phase Three would be the
central area, with Phase Four to the west being the last portion to be developed, but
it is dependent on need.
Commissioner Sonsin asked for a definition of the terminology in reference to the
crypts.
Mr. Bergly explained the differences between mausoleum and lawn crypts, and set-in
vaults and he added that a trend is beginning for use of monuments on graves as
opposed to flat headstones.
The Vice-Chairman asked if the Planner had any comments on this case and Ms.
Stockman commented that this project will be a positive addition to the City and the
applicant has done a good job addressing numerous issues, but she has a concern
regarding phasing and she would like to see some type of detailed timeline or a
condition that insures when the next development stage will proceed.
Mr. Bergly emphasized that improvements are dependent on sales and growth and
agreed with the concern particularly as far as it concerns the public with the
entrances, the drainage, etc. and he feels those concerns have been covered. He
commented that PUDs are not designed for cemeteries as they need some flexibility
to adapt and the PUD staging process cannot be applied in planning a cemetery's
future. He noted that they made choices for the Phase One process and will bring
others at a later date and they prefer not to be tied down to specific dates.
Vice-Chairman Gundershaug confirmed with the City Attorney that, even though there
is not a timeframe, the City is protected under the PUD because the development '.
plan is basically what has been presented and, if that is acceptable, it can be passed
along to Council.
New Hope Planning Commission -6- September 7, 1993
MOTION
Commissioner Sonsin clarified that there will be concrete curbing throughout the
development and added that the Commission would like to see the dead trees
removed and replaced the petitioner assured that' would be done.
Mr. Bergly commented that the Cemetery is as concerned as the City about making
their development attractive and it has been greatly improved over the past years.
The Vice-Chairman asked for guidance from the Planner regarding the fence line set-
back on Winnetka Avenue, whether it should be 5 feet, 10 feet, or remain as exists.
Ms. Stockman answered that appearance-wise and construction-wise it can be varied
rather than a straight shot, but a minimum of 5 feet is needed, and if the new fence
is placed along the existing fence line it would be okay.
Mr. Bergly responded that 5 feet would be very tight to get machines around the end
of a grave, and even though a fence along the sidewalk is not a desirable situation,
they do not have any more room along that end.
Motion by Commissioner Gundershaug, second by Commissioner Watschke, to
approve Planning Case 93-tl subject to the following conditions:
1. Relocation of the main entrance to be in alignment with Xylon Avenue
occurs at the time of and is coordinated with City/County improvement of
the Xylon intersection or no later than ten (t0) years from the date of
concept plan approval.
2. All roadways are concrete curbed and surfaced with asphalt to match those
already existing.
3. Delineation of wetland areas along Boone Avenue is completed as part of
future development phases in accordance with the Wetland Conservation
Act and is submitted for review by the Bassett Creek Watershed District and
concept plan approval is subject to change based on future delineation of
wetlands during subsequent development stages.
4. The establishment of easements over wetland ama/swales be agreed to as
deemed necessary by the City Engineer for comprehensive stormwater
drainage purposes and escrow money be deposited as determined by City
staff to guarantee dedication and construction of the ponding area.
5. All other drainage and utility issues are reviewed and approved by the City
Engineer.
6. Flexibility is permitted by the City Council through the PUD which allows
on-sits signs as proposed by the applicant.
7. Detailed site plans are submitted with each subsequent development stage
of Phase One which ara consistent with the approved concept plan.
8. The existing chain link fence along the perimeter of the property is removed
and replaced with another constructed of high quality materials reviewed
and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council as part of
future development stages.
9. The fence line on Winnetka Avenue remain at present set back and the
Rockford Road and Boone Avenue fences be set back a minimum of ten
feet, as measured from new property lines after the dedication of additional
right-of-way.
10. Detail landscaping plans (coordinated with fencing plans) are submitted
showing the type and location of vegetation intended around the periphery
of the site for review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council as part of future development stages.
11. Sidewalks are installed along one side of the (new) main entrance and
entrances along Boone and Winnetka Avenues to the intersection of the first
cross street.
12. The stockpiling of soil from grave sites and subsequent filling of land be
permitted and utilized to shape future on-site development areas, provided
easement and wetland area are not filled or obstructed.
New Hope Planning Commission -7- September 7, 1993
COMMITTEE
REPORTS
Design and
Review (4.1)
Codes and
Standards (4.2)
OLD BUSINESS
Misc. Issues
NEW BUSINESS
ANNOUNCEMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
13. Revised concept plan with stormwater retention pond and revised Boone
Avenue entrance to be incorporated into PUB document.
14. In the event that the 30-foot roadway easement on the south side of the
cemetery property is relinquished by the City, as 5-foot drainage and utility
easement will be maintained.
Phase One Conditions:
1. The temporary office facility is removed with 14 days after issuance of the
new office building occupancy permit (weather permitting).
2. All section features, monuments, and similar structures on site be set back
a minimum of 30 feet from adjacent property lines.
3. All proposed roadways are concrete curbed, and surfaced with asphalt.
4. Loop watermain and 2 hydrants to be installed or buildings to be sprinkled
in conjunction with construction of office building and mausoleum.
5. A schedule of anticipated construction timelines for remaining Phase One
elements is submitted to the City for review.
6. All of the above stated conditions be incorporated into a Planned Unit
Development Agreement to be drafted by the City Attorney and executed by
representatives of the Cemetery and the City, with an appropriate type of
financial security to be provided, as determined by the City Engineer, City
Attorney, and Building Official, and agreed to by the Cemetery.
Voting in favor: Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent: Underdahl, Cameron
Motion carried.
Mr. Beechler, Attomey for the Cemetery, asked to clarify their intention that only if it
is economically feasible to do so, they will try to coordinate the new entrance with the
City/County development of the intersection at Xylon Avenue.
Design & Review met with the Site/Building Plan Review cases and the Cemetery.
Commissioner Sonsin announced that he will be meeting in a working session with
City staff, City Attorney, and Planner on September 15th for a preliminary discussion
on home occupations and Codes & Standards will study it in October.
Commissioner Sonsin referred to a staff recommendation in the Uno-Ven case that
a study be initiated regarding an ordinance change to establish guidelines for future
gas pump canopy requests and indicated Codes & Standards will pursue it.
Commissioner Sonsin then raised the issue of the radio tower case that was before
the Commission/Council in August and wondered if a study on that would be in order.
No discussion.
All minutes accepted as printed.
None.
Meeting unanimously adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucille Butler, Secretary
New Hope Planning Commission
-8-
September 7, 1993
.r~ ~ CiTY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLO' .N.'~VENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER Chairman Cameron called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
October 5, 1993
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
PC 93-29(3.1)
REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE TO
3S-FOOT REAR
YARD SETBACK
REQUIREMENT
AT 7608 48TH
CIRCLE
Present: Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen,
Absent: Lifson, Watschke
Also present: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant
Chairman Cameron introduced Planning Case 93-29 and called on Kirk McDonald,
Management Assistant, to review the case.
Mr. McDonald stated that the petitioner is requesting a 10-foot variance to the 35-foot
rear yard setback requirement to allow construction of a 12' x 12' 3-season porch on
top of an existing deck, located 25 feet from the rear yard property line. He noted that
open porches and decks are allowed as encroachments on yard setbacks, and the
existing elevated deck is in compliance and requires no variance, but porches which
become enclosed are not exempt from yard setback requirements and therefore a
variance is needed. He explained that the irregular shape of the lot required the home
to be located near the north lot line in order to comply with the front yard setback
requirement, but the porch will have little impact on neighboring properties as the most
impacted home directly to the north is separated by a 230 foot distance, and trees
between the homes provide a good buffer. He stated that the masonite :siding will
match the existing home and he presented elevation drawings and photographs of a
similar installation which were provided by the contractor.
Chairman Cameron questioned if staff has a problem regarding the safety and strength
of the elevated structure in regards to snowfall weight.
Mr. McDonald replied that the Building Official's concern is that materials of the addition
be architecturally compatible with the existing structure, and staff has a concern with
the shed style fiberglass roof because it was not compatible with the gabled asphalt
shingle roof on the house.
Mr. Kuo Moy, property owner, appeared before the CommissiOn to answer questions.
Commissioner Sonsin confirmed with the petitioner that the photographs were of an
installation at 2931 Boone Avenue in New Hope, but that Mr. Moy's would be very
similar in appearance with shed roof line and fiberglass roof. He stated that the
variance as requested does not present a problem, but the fiberglass roof does not
meet the requirement that materials for the addition be architecturally compatible With:~':
the existing building so it looks well-designed rather than something added on::-"He
asked why asphalt shingles to match the existing roof were not being used.
Mr. Moy commented that he chose fiberglass to allow more sun and light to come in.
Mr. Rick Arntson of Remodeling Specialists, 4224 Lakeside Avenue, Brooklyn Center,
contractor for the job, was asked to come before the Commission and confirm that he
had done the job shown in the photographs. He stated that Mr. Moy's house is stained
green and the fiberglass will be green also. He emphasized that Mr: Moy's addition will
be more secluded and not as noticeable as the house pictured.
Mr. McDonald interjected that the house on Boone Avenue did not require a variance
for the addition and architectural compatibility comes under scrutiny when a variance
is required, as the City has more discretion regarding materials and design.
New Hope Planning Commission -1- October 5, 1993
MOTION
PC 93-30 (3.2)
REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE TO
SIGN AREA
REQUIREMENT
AT 7112 BASS
LAKE ROAD
Commissioner Zak stated that she drove by to inspect the site and noted that the house
has an ivory stucco exterior with green trim, but she could not see green siding.
Mr. Arntson explained that the front is stucco with green stained cedar trim and the
back and sides are masonite siding with the same green roof.
Commissioner Zak added that she would like to see the roof line match the existing
home.
Commissioner Gundershaug asked the petitioner if he has any objection to using an
asphalt roof.
Mr. Arntson explained for Mr. Moy that the addition will be on the north side where
there is little sunlight and they would like to use it for plants.
Chairman Cameron suggested constructing a gabled, asphalt shingled roof with
skylights if light was a major concern.
Commissioner Gundershaug questioned the pitch of the roof needed for one type of
construction as opposed to another if the underneath structure would then have less
strength for the lighter roof.
Mr. Arntson explained that snowload is the same for both types of roof, but the
deadload of the roof is increased with plywood plus shingles.
Commissioner Zak suggested a greenhouse-type of addition be considered if it is to be
used primarily for plants.
Commissioner Sonsin and the contractor explained to the petitioner that he could let
the case proceed with the chance of denial by both the Commission and the Council,
or he could request that it be tabled for a month while he reconsiders if he would like
to resubmit a new plan with an asphalt shingle roof, or he could withdraw his request
and not build the addition.
Mr. Moy emphasized that he wanted to build the addition so that he could sit in it and
enjoy his yard free from mosquitos, and nodded that he was agreeable to tabling the
case for one month to redevelop his plans.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Cassen, to table
Planning Case 93-29 for one month.
Voting in favor: Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gunderehaug, Cassen
Voting against: None
Absent: Lifson, Watschke
Motion carried.
Planning Case 93-30 was introduced by the Chairman and Mr. McDonald explained
that the request by Ponderosa for a variance to the sign area requirement was an after-
the-fact application since the sign has already been erected and they are asking to
keep the sign in place. He stated that the property owner recently had a scenic mural
painted on the front of the building with PONDEROSA STEAKHOUSE lettering without
making application for a sign permit, although a building permit was issued for interior
remodeling, and the Building Official informed them to have the sign removed or make
application for a variance. He quoted the sign ordinance defining a sign as any writing,
pictorial representation, emblem, trademarks, banners, lights, etc. to attract the public,
whether it be attached, painted, or represented on a building, structure, or ground, and
limiting front wall signs for single occupancy businesses to 125 square feet. He noted
that the City Attorney, Planning COnsultant, and staff have measured the sign and
agree that the total area of the sign is 484 square feet, with the entire mural considered
part of the sign, so a 359 square foot variance is needed. He added that the petitioner
states that the mural is their corporate image.
New Hope Planning Commission -2- October 5, 1993
MOTION
Laurie Cruikshank, General Manager for the New Hope Ponderosa Steakhouse,
introduced herself and passed out a booklet pertaining to their mural. She apologized
for the oversight and stated it was not intentional as was indicated by the letter from
the Building Department. She stated that the building plans were submitted to the City
with the sheet showing the mural and the permit was issued with no mention of the
mural, thus it was ordered by the corporate office for installation and installed on
August 6th. She continued that they were not aware of the issue until the company
they were working with tried to contact the City on September 6th to obtain a permit to
move the marquee and put on new sign facings to go with their re-imaging and was
informed that no permit would be issued until the illegal wall sign was removed.
Ms. Cruikshank stressed that the mural is a standard of the corporate image and is
intended to enhance the front of the building as well as promote the new western
interior. She explained the company's desire to perk up the 20-year old building which
is in a good area, but in need of a new image, and she emphasized that they are
located in a unique location where all businesses around them are located in Crystal
and are allowed banners and pictorial signs, and people often think they are in Crystal,
even though they are in New Hope. She added that the sign was put up with the
understanding that it was already approved along with the main permit.
Chairman Cameron expressed dismay in the size of the sign and that the contractor
assumed the sign was approved along with the building permit. He emphasized that
the New Hope Sign Code is very distinct in that the purpose of signage is to indicate
to people where businesses are located and not meant for advertising. He added that
other businesses have had to undo signs because the ordinance does not allow them.
Commissioner Sonsin commented that he was impressed by the sign, but the law does
bear weight on what is allowed since signs in New Hope are considered for business
identification only. He expressed fear that granting of a variance of that magnitude
would be setting a precedent in the City. He asked what their next step would be if the
Commission and the Council deny the variance.
Mr. Don Sturms from Maintenance Department of Metromedia Corporate Office,
introduced himself and acknowledged that they have alternate plans to cover a denial,
including removing the letters and leaving the pictorial. He noted that the material in
the sign is not paint, but a form of pvc material designed for this kind of application and
designed to last a lifetime. He stated, in event of denial, they will try to come up with
a different design to stay within the City's restrictions, although they feel the sign is a
part of the company image they wish to maintain, and it is a matter of interpretation as
to what constitutes a sign, letters and/or background graphics. He added that they do
have two already installed in the area, in Phalen Park and Spring Lake Park. He
defended the contractor and stated that he had nothing to do with the sign, only the
remodeling, and the corporate office ordered a company out of Dayton, Ohio, to install
the mural as there was no stipulation on the permit against it.
Mr. McDonald interjected that the City Attorney would still consider a mural as a sign
even if the letters were removed and again quoted from the Sign Code definition.
Commissioner Underdahl asked if there was a Plan B and Mr. Sturms indicated they
would try to design one that would stay within the 125-foot requirement, but it will leave
the front of the building looking old and requiring painting every two years.
Commissioner Gundershaug expressed his opinion that he does not mind the sign and
other Commissioners agreed it is impressive, but it is still considered against the Code,
and to approve it would establish a precedent.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Cassen, to deny
Planning Case 93-30 requesting a variance to the sign code area requirement.
Voting in favor: Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen
Voting against: Gundershaug
Absent: Lifson, Watschke
Motion carried.
New Hope Planning Commission -3- October 5, 1993
REQUEST TO
REMOVE PLAN-
NING CASE
93-29 FROM
THE TABLE
FOR RECON-
SIDERATION
MOTION
COMMITrEE
REPORTS (4)
Design and
Review (4.1)
Codes and
Standards (4.2)
OLD BUSINESS(5)
Misc. Issues
NEW BUSINESS(6)
ANNOUNCEMENT
ADJOURNMENT(8)
Mr. Arntson and Mr. Moy returned to the Chambers and requested to have Planning
Case 93-29 removed from the table.
Chairman Cameron called for a motion to remove Case 93-29 from the table,
Commissioner Sonsin made a motion for removal, and with no objection from the
Commission, no formal vote was taken on the motion.
Mr. Arntson announced that the Mr. Moy had decided not to wait another month, but
would revise his plans in accordance with the recommendations of the Commission.
Chairman Cameron informed them that the Commission would approve the revised
verbal plan calling for a gabled asphalt roof matching the existing structure, but new
plans must be submitted and approved by staff prior to the Council meeting.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, second by Commissioner Cassen, to approve
Planning Case 93-29, subject to the condition:
1. Revised plans be submitted showing proposed addition to be compatible
with existing dwelling with gabled roof and asphalt shingles rather than
shed-type fiberglass roof.
Voting in favor: Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen
Voting against: None
Absent: Lifson, Watschke
Motion carried.
No cases, no meeting.
Commissioner Sonsin noted that he met with City staff, City Attorney, and City Planner
to discuss possible changes to home occupation ordinance. Codes & Standards will
meet later in the month to study these changes, and also consider a revision to the
ordinance regarding canopies at gas stations.
No comments or questions on new or old miscellaneous issues.
All minutes accepted as printed.
Meeting unanimously adjourned at 7:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucille Butler, Secretary
New Hope Planning Commission -4- October 5, 1993
CITY ~OF'N~*~OPE~ ~ ~r
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
November 2, 1993
City Hall, 7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
The New Hope Planning CommissiOn met in regular session pursuant to due
call and notice thereof; Chairman Cameron called the meeting to order at
7:00 p.m.
Present:
Absent:
Also Present:
Underdahl, Zak, S°nsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen,
Watschke
Lifson
Kirk McDonaldi~.Management Assistant, Alan Brixius,
Planning ConSultant
CONSENT
PC 93-34
Item 3.1
Chairman Camer°n introdUced the Consent Item as listed and stated all
items will be enacted bY One motion unless requested by any Commissioner
or citizen that a'n item be removed for discussion. It was clarified that a
motion for aPproval woUld be Subject to conditions requested by staff in
each case.
MOTION
Consent Item
3.1
Motion by Commi.ssi°ner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner
Gundershaug,
to approve Planning Case 93-34, Request for 7-foot Variance to 35-foot
Rear Yard Setback Requirement to Allow Porch Addition at 8309
Northwood Parkway, Richard Kleinbaum, Petitioner, subject to conditions
recommended in the individual planning Case Reports.
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug,
Cassen, Watschke
None
Lifson
PC 93-33
Item 3.2
Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 3.2, Request for
Rezoning from R-l, Single Family Residential Zoning District to R-0,
Residential-Office Zonin~..District, 7901 28th Avenue North, Paul T.
Wrobel, D.D.S., Petitio'n'~'~~'~
Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant reviewed the case by stating that
the petitioner is requesting the rezoning of this parcel of property from R-l,
Single Family Residential, to R-O, Residential Office, to allow total
professional office occupancy of the building. The property is currently
zoned R-l, Single Family Residential, and a special use (conditional use)
permit was granted by the City in 1963 to allow a portion of the home to
be used as a dental office. Currently the main floor of the home is utilized
as a residence and the walkout basement is used as a dental office. The
property is located on the corner of 28th Avenue and Winnetka. The
request is to expand the existing dental office to both floors of the building,
New Hope Planning Commission - I - November 2, 1993
while eliminating the residential use. The petitioner states in a letter that
a dental office in his residential building was appropriate and appreciated
for the past 29 years where he has had a successful private dental office.
He states that the location of this building on Winnetka Avenue and
immediately adjacent to the Midland Shopping Center now makes the entire
building more useful for professional business rather than residential. The
applicant states that he wishes to abandon the present living quarters
within this building. He is requesting permission for total professional
occupancy of the building. Dr. Wrobel came to the City Council in 1963
when the lot was vacant and requested approval for the construction of a
"combination dental office and home" on this property and it was
approved. Construction began the next spring on the building that is now
on the property. Dr. Wrobel feels that the request should be granted to
provide a necessary change in the usage of the site as appropriate for the
location. Mr. McDonald stated that in his report he has explained the
current land uses. The lot currently contains approximately 16,500 square
feet and the building contains 1,150 square feet per floor for a total of
2,300 square feet. The building does meet all of the setback requirements,
being setback 35 feet from 2$th Avenue and 50 feet from Winnetka. The
site contains 8 parking spaces, 4 in the driveway off of 28th Avenue and
4 in the drive/parking lot off of Winnetka.
Petitioner, Dr. Wrobel told the Planning Commission that he has been in
this residence for 30 years and has been a very successful business. He
said the value of the building as a residence is not anywhere near the value
of it as it could be for a professional building and that is why he wants it
considered for a total professional building. He went on to say that this
property is an excellent buffer between the commercial and R-2 and R-O
across the street on the southeast corner. He said it has been an attractive
building, well-kept and has not been an interference with any other
neighbors. He said it has been very well maintained as both a residence
and a professional office building and would be more conducive to the
transition stage from the residential (R-l) which now does not accept a
dental office and only an R-2 would accept a use such as a dental office.
He stated that there would be no intrusion onto a residential street or into
the residential area. There can be sufficient space for the number of
parking spaces that would be needed for total usage of the building as a
professional building.
Chairman Cameron informed Dr. Wrobel how the Planning Commission
approaches any request for rezoning. He stated that the City has been
zoned in a certain way for a number of years and a Comprehensive Plan
has been developed with a lot of time and energy considering zoning.
Chairman Cameron stated the City is not interested in value as a criteria for
rezoning and is not out to increase or decrease property values. What the
Planning Commission looks at is land use and the appropriateness of land
use for the property in question and the surrounding property owners.
Chair Cameron stated that the Planning Commission has only rezoned when
they are convinced that either there was a mistake originally or that the
character of the property or the surrounding property had changed.
Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant with Northwest Associated Consultants
New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - November 2, 1993
presented his report regarding the property in question. He stated that
there are a number of criteria that the City uses in evaluating any rezoning
request. First, was the original zoning of the property a mistake; second,
has there been a changing character in the area that justifies a change in
land use intensity and five additional criteria outlined in the zoning
ordinance to assist the Planning Commission in making a judgment on the
first two. Mr. Brixius said the site in question is zoned R-1 and is abutting
an R-1 and R-2 District to the north and east. It is oriented both to 28th
Street and Winnetka with a second use. Based upon the surrounding land
uses, the Comprehensive Plan and this historic use as a single-family
residence it does not appear that the R-1 was a mistake in zoning. The use
of the walk-out basement as a dental office was a conditional use permit
allowed in that district in 1963 and as a result the zoning does seem
appropriate. Mr. Brixius stated that over the course of years since the
original use went in, the City adopted its Comprehensive Plan in 1975 and
it suggested that the southern tier of lots facing on 28th Street should be
a medium density residential district with the exception of the site in
question, twin homes have been developed in that area so that basically
the Comprehensive Plan has been effectuated. Mr. Brixius stated that 28th
Street is a residential area. He said that the first floor use is oriented
toward 28th Street and does blend well with the twin homes and single
family homes to the north. Dr. Wrobel's dental office is oriented toward
Winnetka and has commercial characteristics which are not consistent with
the City's current home occupation ordinance but would blend well with
both the Midland Shopping Center and Winnetka Center.
Mr. Brixius stated that the land use goals and policies are specific as far as
intrusion on single family or residential areas and basically promote the
protection of the character of residential areas. Mr. Brixius stated that
commercial goals discourage linear expansion of commercial areas or
fragmented spot or uncoordinated commercial development. He stated that
in this regard the proposed zoning is questionable under those policies. He
went on to say that permitted uses are quite different between the R-1
District, which is a single-family Iow density residential district, and R-O
Zoning District. He said the R-O District is a transitional land use district
and is intended to be utilized between Iow density single family areas and
commercial areas to provide some transitional arrangements. Mr. Brixius
stated the concern the City does have with the other criteria for evaluating
the proposed rezoning is whether the site can adequately meet the
performance standards of the proposed zoning district. Based on
conversion of this home to a dental office, it would need 14 parking stalls.
These parking stalls would have to meet all of the performance standards
with regard to setback, access, etc. He said reviewing the site plan, it
appears that there is some questions as to whether they can adequately be
provided.
Mr. Brixius stated that full consideration would have to be given to zoning
standards. He said he does not believe that R-1 zoning is a mistake from
the past use, but the changing character is something that has to be
evaluated and a determination made as to what is the predominant use of
the site, is it a dental office, or a single-family home and how does it best
fit within the neighborhood. Mr. Brixius stated that without a clear
New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - November 2, 1993
definition of this and clear definition that the site could meet all of the
performance standards, Northwest Consultants cannot support the
rezoning of the property.
Commissioner Sonsin asked about the use of the property immediately to
the north across 28th Avenue, which is zoned a single-family residential R-
1, but contains a chiropractor in the bottom floor of that building. He
inquired if the chiropractor would now request a rezoning. Mr. McDonald
replied that they have not submitted an application that he is aware of.
Commissioner Sonsin asked Dr. Wrobel if he has made firm plans to sell the
property and vacate the premises if the rezoning is approved. Dr. Wrobel
replied that first he had to know if the City would rezone the property so
he would know which way he could go. He said if the zoning remains R-l,
it obviously eliminates any kind of change. Commissioner $onsin informed
Dr. Wrobel that if he wanted the Commission to pursue consideration for
request for rezoning, plans would have to be submitted showing what was
to be done to the property to make it into a professional office.
Commissioner Sonsin stated he is not supportive of a rezoning without
seeing plans. Dr. Wrobel stated he would be glad to submit a more
detailed submittal. Commissioner Sonsin suggested tabling this matter for
a month or so to give Dr. Wrobel a chance to work with City staff on
rezoning issues.
Commissioner Zak stated that she feels it is definitely a residential area and
the small parking lot that abuts Winnetka blends in with Midland but the
basic north front of the residence does look like a residence and the rest
of the neighborhood is either the twin homes or single family residential.
She said she could not see a lot of compatibility if the whole building is
changed to a professional building and parking would be a major problem.
Commissioner Underdahl stated she understands his request for total
professional office occupancy of the building and doesn't think it would be
totally incomPatible. She said that maybe Dr. Wrobel could look into this
matter with City staff to determine what options there are for the property.
Commissioner Gundershaug stated that he sees a transitional piece of
property at this point. He said he didn't believe it would be compatible to
R~O and meet all of the requirements for an R-O zoning. He stated he
could see an R-O there if it did not require a single variance. It would have
to meet all criteria.
Commissioner Cassen stated she feels it is a transitional piece of property
and if it could meet all of the performance standards of an R-O she would
not have a problem with it. She stated parking on 28th Avenue would be
a problem because of it being residential and would want that vacated and
have the entrances on the Winnetka side.
Commissioner Watschke stated he has the same concerns as Commissioner
Underdahl with how the architecture of the building would change. If all
the parking is on the Winnetka side, there would be accessibility problems
to the upper level. He stated that the Commission also has to look at what
New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - November 2, 1993
other permitted issues are in an R-O zone. He stated he feels the
Commission needs more information on this issue.
Chairman Cameron stated he feels that zoning goes with a piece of
property forever. Right now there is a nice home on the property, but once
the rezoning is in place and meets the criteria of City, anything can go on
that piece of property that meets the R-O District standards. He stated he
is opposed to the rezoning even if he works with the City staff.
Dr. Wrobel stated he would like the Planning Commission to table this item
and enable him to work with City staff to see what is required to have it
rezoned as an R-O and that a more detailed submittal would be made in the
future.
MOTION
Item 3.2
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin to table Planning Case 93-33, Request for
Rezoning from R-1 to R-O for one month until the December 7, 1993
Planning Commission meeting, seconded by Commissioner Gundershaug.
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion Carried.
Underdahl, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke
Zak, Cameron
Lifson
PC 93-35
Item 3.3
Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 3.3, Request for
Rezoning from B-l, Limited Neighborhood Business Zoning District, to B-2,
Retail Business Zoning District, 7811/7821 82nd Avenue North, Oliver
Tam/Tam's Family Partnership, Petitioner.
Planning Consultant, Alan Brixius presented the background of this
planning case. He said the applicant is requesting a rezoning from a B-1
to a B-2 use. B-1 zoning is Limited Neighborhood Business District and is
somewhat restrictive in the variety and number of commercial uses that are
allowed. B-2 is Retail Business District is much broader and allows a
greater variety of uses. The request for this rezoning is due to the fact that
this small shopping center has some vacancies and problems that have
been long standing. Mr. Tam is requesting the rezoning to allow greater
flexibility in the uses that may locate in the shopping center and increase
the commercial viability of the site. Mr. Brixius said specifically there is a
graphics business which prepares film for printing but there is no on-site
printing done and a drycleaning/laundromat which would include
processing. Reviewing the B-1 District, it allows for commercial offices
as a conditional use and when the definition of professional offices is
looked at, it is believed that a broad range service type definition could
encompass the graphic arts use and could incorporate this use under the
current zoning. Mr. Brixius reported that the B~I district also allows for
laundromats and drycleaners provided processing is not done on site. To
increase the viability of this site there are a number of other options
available. One is to re-explore the B-1 district to expand the permitted uses
or to look at the rezoning. Mr. Brixius reiterated that one of the zoning
criteria is whether or not there is a past zoning mistake. Based on the
history of this area, at one time the entire 60th Street corridor was
proposed for commercial development and the City looked at changing the
New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - November 2, 1993
zoning. In 1961 it was proposed that only the area near Broadway and
near Boone be zoned for commercial operations. This was contested in
court by the owners of the 62nd/Winnetka site and the court ruled in favor
of the property owner to have the area zoned for commercial uses. In
compliance with the court,'the City established the commercial zoning and
historically this site has continued to experience problems as far as
operation and tenant retention is concerned. Mr. Brixius stated he does not
think the past zoning is a mistake in view of the surrounding land uses
which are primarily residential although they provide a variety of densities.
The B-1 District is a neighborhood commercial operation and this area is
isolated from other commercial areas and is oriented toward the
neighborhood service. In reviewing the character, it is not believed that
there has been a significant change in character in the area in that the
surrounding land uses basically have followed the 1975 Comprehensive
Plan and are still residential in character. Mr. Brixius stated that market
changes have occurred that make it more and more difficult for these
smaller centers to survive so a determination will have to be made as to
whether market alone is a changing character that warrants rezoning
consideration. Mr. Brixius stated he believes that the B-1 district would
accommodate Mr. Tam's first tenant concern for allowing a commercial
office or service use under the commercial office by conditional use permit
in the B-1 district. The processing element of a drycleaner would not be
provided for. The other option would be to expand the B-1 district uses in
order to promote economic development. Reviewing the B-2 district, it
would be an expansion of commercial uses from basically six to 40. 40
additional land uses that may be allowed in that district through the
rezoning would not necessarily be in the best interest of the area. Mr.
Brixius recommends that consideration of either maintaining the B-1 and
accommodating the petitioner through the conditional use permit or
consider the second option of potentially expanding the number of uses
within the B-1 district.
Commissioner Underdahl asked how the market changing affect this
particular property. Mr. Brixius say there are more and more competitive
facilities and this will mean that it will be harder to find tenants and then
it becomes an economic issue.
Mr. Oliver Tam addressed the Planning Commission saying that he has
been renting the property out to various businesses, and these businesses
ran into trouble financially and had to vacate the premises. Mr. Tam stated
he is aware of the City's concern and the neighbor's concern in that they
do not want too much traffic in the area. He said he is looking for another
laundromat to come into the building. He said maybe if the zoning is
changed, he would have more opportunity to find a tenant.
Chairman Cameron stated he was very sympathetic to the problems with
that property but did not think rezoning is a solution. He said maybe Mr.
Tam could get assistance or help from the EDA or County to make that an
economically viable commercial corner.
Commissioner Gundershaug stated that he does not have a problem with
expanding the conditional use portion. Commissioner Sonsin said that this
New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - November 2, 1993
issue should be taken to Codes and Standards to evaluate what uses might
be appropriate for that district and make a determination at a later date as
to how the district could be amended.
Cai Herman, resident of New Hope, introduced himself to the Planning
Commission and stated he is the owner of Vivid Graphics and would like
to rent space from Mr. Tam. He said he works with advertising companies
and printing companies doing film assembly. Mr. Herman stated he does
not have a retail business and traffic would be minimal. He said as far as
office equipment is concerned, he would have a scanner, an image setting
machine, and a computer. Two or three people would be employed. Mr.
Herman said he feels his business would add to the residential area and be
an asset to the neighborhood.
Mr. Brixius informed the Planning Commission that he feels this would be
a commercial office space business and within the B-1 district, it would be
a conditional use permit. He said he believes the current ordinance would
accommodate Mr. Herman's business.
Commissioner Underdahl stated that maybe the better idea would be to
expand the B-1 usages. She stated she would hate to see 40 different
uses be allowed in that small an area in that residential area.
Commissioner Underdahl suggested using a CUP now and have Codes and
Standards study expanding B-I.
Mr. Herman stated he would like to move in right away to start painting
and cleaning up the office space. Chair Cameron replied that Mr. Tam
owns the building and he can work with the City to get a conditional use
permit, but the zoning will not be changed and if Codes and Standards is
going to look at the whole City ordinance for B-l, it will take some time.
Mr. McDonald stated that the case could be split into two parts, one the
expansion of the uses and the drycleaning and the other is the commercial
office. Mr. McDonald stated that the rezoning or code amendment has
been advertised for and therefore a conditional use permit could be
granted. Mr. McDonald stated that the City does want to help the owner
fill the center, but if a conditional use permit is granted some problems
have to be addressed at the site. Mr. McDonald Said that conditions are
set with conditional use permits so besides an annual revue some
assurances will have to be given that the site is maintained better and that
codes are followed. Mr. McDonald indicated that the parking lot at the site
needs resurfacing/repair and striping.
Mr. Tam stated that they have had continuing problems with their
dumpsters. He said he only visits the site every two months or so, but
assured the Commission that he would see to it that the dumpster problem
would be taken care of either by talking to his collector or one of the other
nearby businesses. Chairman Cameron suggested that Mr. Tam come in
to City Hall and talk with the inspector to make sure the lines of
communication are open.
New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - November 2, 1993
MOTION
Item 3.3
AMENDED MOTION
Item 3.3
SECOND MOTION
Item 3.3
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Gundershaug,
to approve Part A of Planning Case 93-35 with approval of a conditional
use permit for operation of a professional office/graphics business subject
the following conditions:
The trash dumpster problem (being returned to the
enclosure after dumping) being resolved by the owner.
Annual review of the property.
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug,
Cassen, Watschke
None
Lifson
Mr. McDonald asked for clarification on the parking issue. He said that the
Commission is approving the CUP for the graphics business which will go
to the City Council on Monday. The second part of this planning case is
the study of the B-1 uses which could take more than one month and may
not be back before you at the next meeting. Mr. McDonald stated the
parking lot should be put in good repair and striping within the next
year.
Motion by Commissioner Underdahl, seconded by Commissioner Zak to
amend the motion approving the conditional use permit to include the
parking lot being resurfaced and put in good repair and striping within one
year.
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug,
Cassen, Watschke
None
Lifson
Chairman Cameron informed Mr. Tam that the City Council will hear the
case Monday night, November 8, 1993 and advised him to be at the
meeting to discuss this case with them.
Motion was made by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner
Zak to refer Planning Case 93-35 Part B to the Codes and Standards
Subcommittee for study of the issue of expanding B-1 Zoning District
permitted uses.
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Motion carried.
Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug,
Cassen, Watschke
None
DESIGN & REVIEW
COMMITTEE REPORT
Item 4.1
No report.
New Hope Planning Commission - 8 - November 2, 1993
CODES & STANDARDS
COMMITTEE REPORT
Item 4.2
OLD BUSINESS
Misc. Issues
Item 5.1
NEW BUSINESS
Item 6.0
ANNOUNCEMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Sonsin reported that Codes and Standards Committee did
meet around the 15th of October and discussed several issues including
the home occupancy ordinance changes which are included in the packet
and second was the overall issue of canopies at gas stations. Preliminary
discussions were started with regard to the Ponderosa sign variance.
Commissioner Underdahl questioned the restriction of parking only in the
driveway of the home with a business. She asked why it was so limited
and why there could not be one or two places on the street to park.
Commissioner Sonsin said to allow parking on the street would not be
feasible as the parking and traffic in the neighborhood should be kept at a
minimum. The ordinance is enforced on a complaint basis and is not
proactively enforced by the City, so if there is a neighborhood business and
the people who work there are residents of the house or the building and
up to one other person who is not a resident working there, there should
be very little traffic, if any, from customers.
Commissioner Zak questioned the amendment to the home occupation
regarding commercial delivery services and the committee had talked about
restricting it. The City Attorney did not include that in the ordinance. Kirk
stated he would contact the City Attorney regarding the amendment.
No discussion.
No discussion.
No announcements.
Meeting unanimously adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Recording Secretary
New Hope Planning Commission - 9 - November 2, 1993
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
December 7, 1993
City Hall, 7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
CONSENT
The New Hope Planning Commission met in regular session pursuant to due
call and notice thereof; Chairman Cameron called the meeting to order at
7:00 p.m.
Present:
Absent:
Also Present:
Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke
Gundershaug, Underdahl
Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Alan
Planning Consultant
Brixius,
There were no consent items on this agenda.
PC 93-33
Item 4.1
Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.1, Request for
Rezoning from R-l, Single Family Residentia Zoning District to R-0,
Residential-Office Zoning District, 7901 28th Avenue North, Paul T.
Wrobel, D.D.S., Petitioner
Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant reviewed the case by stating that'
the petitioner is requesting the rezoning of this parcel of property from R-l,
Single Family Residential, to R-O, Residential Office Zoning District. Mr.
McDonald stated there was a lot of discussion on this case last month with
a presentation/report by the Planning Consultant. The case was tabled and
several of the Commissioners were opposed to the rezoning and other
Commissioners stated they would give further consideration if more
detailed plans were submitted. He said a letter was sent to Dr. Wrobel and
revised plans were submitted and the Planning Consultant prepared an
updated report.
Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant, presented a brief overview of the site
plan. He stated that the site is residentially zoned and is being used as two
uses with the first floor being a single residential family home and a dental
office on the basement level. The land uses to the north and west are
residential in character. The building is currently oriented toward 28th
Street for the residential purpose and Winnetka Avenue for the dental
office. Mr. Br,!x~s stated, at the last meeting questions were raised as to
the capabilities Of the site to provide adequate parking in fUll comPliance
with the City codes. The Site plan attempts to demonstrate that with ten;.:
parking spaces on the Winnetka side, but it is reliant on twO parking spaces
in the garage and two spaces is for in front of the garage. Mr. Brixius
stated this does not fully comply with code as by ordinance the City
requires all parking spaces to have direct access for backout onto a public
street. In this regard, tandem parking and garage parking raises questions
of compliance. Mr. Brixius stated that at the last meeting there Was
discussion concerning limiting the impact of any kind of commercial
operation on 28th Street as this street is more residential in character. Mr.
Brixius stated that his office developed an alternative plan which showed
an expansion of the Winnetka parking to provide two additional stalls, still
reliant on two stalls in the garage, or providing off-street parking by
expanding the driveway parking which would be consistent with City code.
New Hope Planning COmmission - I - December 7, 1993
Mr. Brixius stated both of these options raise questions as to whether the
site has some limitations such as grade and other concerns. Mr. Brixius
showed the Commissioners a photograph which demonstrated the
topography starting at the first floor which slopes down toward the
shopping center and as a result there is a need for a retaining wall to
provide the required parking which would have access off Winnetka
Avenue. Mr. Brixius said the retaining wall would have to be pushed back
further into the slope and there are some physical limitations as to whether
this could be accomplished. If this were the case, only two additional
parking spaces could be provided and the garage parking would still have
to be utilized to meet City code requirements. In addition to this, it appears
that a handicapped stall would have to be provided so additional
dimensional widths would have to be considered. Mr. Brixius said that
basically a land use question still has to be addressed. He said that parking
would meet minimal City standards, although some exceptions and
flexibility would have to be considered as far as the garage parking and
some alteration to the site plan would have to be made to accommodate
the balance of the parking. Mr. Brixius stated that the site size conforms
with the R-O District, however, the past land uses remain the same and in
evaluating this, the Commission is going have to determine whether the
original zoning was proper and if the character of the area has changed to
justify the rezoning and whether the site can adequately accommodate a
full commercial activity on this site.
Chair Cameron asked if the City would have a problem with another dental
office going on that site. Mr. Brixius replied that if the use remained the
same, and not expanded in size or character, there would not be an
application change. Mr. Brixius stated that under the current home
occupation code, a dental office would not be a permitted home
occupation, however, the City would recognize the existing conditional use
that was passed and allow it to continue to operate the same as it does
today.
Petitioner, Jean Wrobel, 17230 §th Avenue North, addressed the
Commission stating that she had contacted the City Engineer who provided
names of several engineers/surveyors, one of which drew up the plans for
the retaining wall. Mrs. Wrobel stated that they have no intention of
making this a commercial property. She said that they would like to have
another dentist come into the practice and help out so they would need to
have some expansion. She stated there is no intention on their part in
changing the front of the building. She said there is handicapped access
in the back of the building so people would not have to go up any stairs.
Chair Cameron commented that when residents asked for a rezoning, it is
the most serious issue the Commission can consider. He said zoning goes
with the property and could radically change the value of the piece of
property. Chair Cameron said there are other options for the Wrobels to
pursue to get another dentist on the site. Chair Cameron said that to
rezone the property would be the most radical request. Mr. Brixius said
that right now the dental office exists as a legal non-conforming use and
under current code, it cannot be expanded without bringing it into
conformity with the City's zoning requirements. He said if it were rezoned
to a R-O, it cannot be on condition of a specific use. When the zoning is
changed, the Commission is making a finding that the uses that are allowed
in a district are acceptable in that area. He said contractual zoning is not
a legal means of accomplishing this.
New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - December 7, 1993
Chair Cameron stated he is not convinced that this is a reasonable request.
He said he thinks it is spot Zoning and does not think this piece of property
can adequately handle the kinds of uses that a R-O would put on it. He
said he is absolutely opposed to rezoning this piece of property.
Commissioner Cassen stated she has a concern with traffic on 28th
Avenue as it is a main residential area. She said two additional parking
spaces could be added, but there is no turn around and cars would have
to back out unto 28th Avenue. She said usage of the driveway on 28th
Avenue would be a problem. Commissioner Cassen stated that the
driveway couldn't be blocked and there must be access in and out
according to City ordinance.
MOTION
Item 4.1
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Zak, to deny
Planning Case 93-33, Request for Rezoning from R-1 to R-O.
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke
None
Underdahl, Gundershaug
PC 93-35B
Item 4.2
Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Planning case 93-
35, Request for Rezoning from B-l, Limited Neighborhood Business Zoning
District, to B-2, Retail Business Zoning District, or Code Text Amendment
or Conditional Use Permit to Allow Laundromat/Drycleaning (with
processing) Business to locate at 7811/7821 62nd Avenue North, Oliver
Tam/Tam's Family Partnership, Petitioner.
MOTION
Item 4.2
Motion by Commissioner Lifson, seconded by Commissioner Sonsin, to
table Planning Case 93-35, as petitioner was not present. Planning Case
93-35 will be put on the January 4, 1994, Planning Commission agenda.
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion carried.
Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke
None
Underdahl, Gundershaug
PC 93-31
Item 4.3
Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.3, Planning Case 93-
31, Request for Amendment to Home Occupation Ordinance, City of New
Hope, Petitioner.
Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, briefly outlined the Amendment to
the Home Occupation Ordinance. The Codes and Standards Committee has
been reviewing the "home occupation" ordinance since September and the
purpose of the review was to determine if the existing ordinance needed
to be updated/revised to address changing trends in the work force or to
determine if the current ordinance adequately addresses these trends. Mr.
McDonald stated that four changes are being recommended to the Home
Occupation Ordinance. He said the Codes and Standards Committee is
trying to be proactive on this issue due to changing work force trends. The
four changes would be to permitted home occupations. The first is traffic
and parking. The recommendation is businesses would not alter traffic
patterns in the neighborhood and not create a traffic demand in excess of
what can be accommodated in the driveway. The change will not require
people to park in the driveway. The second change is employees. Mr.
McDonald stated the Committee would like to see the code be more flexible
to allow one employee residing off of the premises. He said as the
New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - December 7, 1993
ordinance reads now, no employees would be allowed except those who
live at the premises. The third change would be a clarification of sales on
the premises. This would clarify the types of vehicles that could drive
down City streets and stop at a home in conjunction with home
occupation. The change would be that there would be no vehicles larger
than a step-van. The fourth change would be an addition of absolutely no
outdoor storage connected with any home occupation.
Commissioner Sonsin commented that this amendment would bring the
City code up to the realities of the time in which we live. He said the
nature of the workplace and the nature of the home workplace has
changed dramatically. He said this might cut down on some of the home
occupation cases the Commission has dealt with which are just formalities
in that there has not been a problem, simple that the person does not meet
the criteria of an ordinance that was written years ago. Commissioner
Sonsin stated that when the ordinance was written, the home occupation
was much different than what is being seen today.
Chair Cameron stated he is concerned about the employee section of the
amendment. He said he does not feel the City should take the position that
they are encouraging home occupations. He said once you allow
employees to come into the home, it becomes more of a business than a
home occupation.
Mr. Brixius stated that this may offer some incubator benefit to the
community because once these business expand beyond the limits of home
occupation they come into commercial areas. Mr. Brixius stated that the
number of employees was discussed quite extensively and felt that given
that concession, there had to be some different performance standards to
address the concerns and problems that were faced in the past in regard
to parking, type of vehicles that can come into the neighborhood and
outdoor storage issues. Mr. Brixius stated that first and foremost was the
objective to maintain and protect the neighborhood as far as it being a
residential environment and with giving the flexibility on the number of
employees, the committee felt it was covered with other performance
standards.
Commissioner Cassen stated she sees some grey areas in the difference
between employees and independent contractors. She said she is
concerned about having control over this. Commissioner Cassen stated
that a number of people who have home occupations have hired
independent contractors but are not necessarily employees but do visit the
house on a regular basis. She stated she would rather not see an
employee come to a home occupation on a daily basis.
Mr. McDonald stated that the home occupation ordinance is enforced on
a complaint basis only. He explained that if a complaint from a neighbor
comes in, a home occupation affidavit is sent out and the resident has to
answer certain questions and from that point on it is determined whether
it is a permitted or conditional use.
Chair Cameron stated he feels you can never write enough rules to cover
all contingencies. He said he feels this is saying that the City of New
Hope is relaxing the rules on home occupations. Chair Cameron stated he
is not so sure that the City should be encouraging home occupations.
Commissioner Sonsin said he feels the City is allowing people the
New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - December 7, 1993
opportunity to do something that they want to do in a way that does not
affect the neighborhood, and cuts down on planning cases that the
Commission does not need to see.
Commissioner Cassen stated that a person who wishes to add another
employee or expand their home occupation business is not right, because
the City would lose control and get out of hand.
Commissioner Watschke stated there are probably a number of home
occupations in the City now and if there are no complaints, it is no big
deal. He suggested letting the ordinance stand unless there is a complaint.
Chair Cameron suggested taking each of the four changes to the ordinance
separately when voting on the amendment changes.
MOTION
Item 4.3
Sections I & 4
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Lifson to
amend Section I - Traffic and Parking - and Section 4 - Outside Storage in
Section 4.038 {3)(b) of the New Hope Code.
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent;
Motion carried.
Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke
None
Underdahl, Gundershaug
MOTION
Item 4.3
Section 3
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Lifson to
amend Section 3 - Sales on Premises - in Section 4.038 (3)(e) of the New
Hope Code.
MOTION
Item 4.3
Section 2
Voting in favor: Lifson, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke
Voting against: None
Absent: Underdahl, Gundershaug
Motion carried.
Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Zak to amend
Section 2 - Employees - in Section 4.038 (3)(c) of the New Hope Code.
Voting in favor:
Voting against:
Absent:
Motion tied/defeated.
Lifson, Zak, Sonsin
Cameron, Cassen, Watschke
None
DESIGN & REVIEW
COMMITTEE REPORT
Item 5.1
Design and Review met but the case is still under consideration.
CODES & STANDARDS
COMMITTEE REPORT
Item 5.2
Commissioner Sonsin reported that the Codes and Standards Committee
met on November 17 to discuss the gas canopy revisions, the B-1 and B-2
revisions, and to talk about the Ponderosa sign. Mr. Brixius stated that
regarding the Ponderosa sign, he is trying to determine how to make
distinctions between wall graphics, murals and advertising signs. He said
it is such a thin distinction that he does not know if it is in the best interest
of the City to expand the signage requirements. Mr. Brixius stated he
would be giving information to the Codes and Standards Committee and let
them decide if they want to modify it.
Commissioner Sonsin reported that the Committee has given the City
Planner a list of ideas that the Committee has drawn up on expanding
permitted uses in the B-1 Zoning District.
New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - December 7, 1993
ANNOUNCEMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Sonsin reported the gas canopy issue has expanded because
in doing surveys of existing gas stations, a lot of sign code violations were
discovered. Mr. Brixius said they have split the gas canopy issue into two
parts - one to address the canopy location and size and the other part is to
address the signage requirements. New Hope Code has specific provisions
that address commercial signage, both size and location and number and
special provisions on canopy signage and also something specific to
automobile service stations with gasoline sales. Mr. Brixius said he did not
think the modifications would be that significant. Commissioner Sonsin
stated that the Codes and Standards Committee would be meeting again
on December 16.
Mr. McDonald informed the Commission that both parts of the gas canopy
issue will be brought back to the Commission for preliminary review in
January and get input, then have an informational meeting and invite all
gas station owners for their input.
Commissioner Cassen reported that she has been appointed to the Co-op
Northwest Community Revitalization Board of Directors. She explained this
is 5-City housing program for Iow to middle income and handicapped
persons.
Meeting unanimously adjourned at 7:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jayne Ferry
Recording Secretary
New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - December 7, 1993