Loading...
042004 planning CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH NEW HOPE, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 20, 2004 City Hall, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDERThe New Hope Planning Commission met in special session pursuant to due call and notice thereof; Chairman Svendsen called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Anderson, Barrick, Brauch, Buggy, Hemken, Landy, O’Brien, Oelkers (left at 8 p.m.), Svendsen Absent: None Also Present: Kirk McDonald, Director of Community Development, Doug Debner, Assistant City Attorney, Mark Hanson, City Engineer, Amy Baldwin, Community Development Assistant, Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary CONSENT BUSINESS There was no Consent Business on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARING PC04-06 Chairman Svendsen introduced for discussion Item 4.1, Request for platting of property, rezoning, Comprehensive Plan amendment, and Item 4.1 concept/ development stage planned unit development approval, 5620 Winnetka Avenue North, Armory Development/Master Development Group, Petitioners. Mr. Kirk McDonald, community development specialist, thanked the commission for calling a special meeting to review this application. Mr. McDonald stated the petitioner was requesting rezoning of property from CB, community business, to PUD, planned unit development, Comprehensive Plan amendment, and concept/development stage planned unit development approval to allow construction of 44 rowhouses, two-story rowhouses, and two-story townhome units in six separate buildings. A condominium plat plat would be required as a condition of approval. Condominium plats are generally completed after the project is done and the plat would be submitted at a later date for Planning Commission and City Council approval. The property is located on the east side of Winnetka Avenue approximately 400 feet north of Bass Lake Road. Adjacent land uses include community business to the south, high density residential to the north, community business and senior/disabled residential across Winnetka Avenue to the west, and city of Crystal single-family homes to the east. The site contains 137,976 square feet or 3.17 acres. The proposed building area would cover 35 percent of the parcel and the green area would be 24 percent, and the impervious surface including the parking lot would cover 41 percent of the site. This site was included in the Livable Communities Task Force study area and Armory Development was selected as the preferred developer for this site by the City Council. This was one of the concepts that was preferred and recommended by the task force. McDonald explained that the city had been working with the developer for over a year on this site. The developer has a purchase agreement on the property. The City Council had reviewed preliminary concept plans and approved a preliminary financial agreement with the developer with the creation of a new tax increment financing district. The agreement was based on 44 units with no storm water pond on the site and the developer would make a cash contribution for ponding. McDonald explained that the city would utilize the developer’s pond contribution along with other resources from the TIF District to make improvements to the Wincrest Apartments pond. McDonald gave a brief explanation of the existing pond and the flow of runoff from the site. The city’s plan would be to make a long-term infrastructure improvement along with this project whereby a new storm sewer would be routed north on Winnetka Avenue and empty into the Wincrest pond. City staff met with the owner of Wincrest Apartments and he was agreeable with the city making improvements to the pond and providing the city with an easement over the property at no cost to the owner of the apartments. All of those improvements would need to be worked out. The survey work on the pond would need to be completed and it is anticipated that the area of the pond would be increased to have a greater holding capacity, which should be a benefit to New Hope and Crystal residents. McDonald added that the city’s storm water ordinance allows for ponding to be provided on the site or a payment be made in lieu of ponding. The property is currently occupied by a stand-alone commercial building. The applicant proposed to remove all existing buildings and parking areas to accommodate the redevelopment of the site with urban-style townhomes. The applicant revised the plans several times to address issues identified during the review process. Mr. McDonald stated that housing units would be divided into six buildings with a design that allows for flexibility in the construction process and creates green space around each unit. The plan creates higher density housing in a layout that would maintain a sense of spaciousness and openness. Two of the buildings would front Winnetka Avenue and consist of 12 rowhomes approximately 1,500 to 1,800 square feet each, with main entries on Winnetka and parking at the rear of each unit. The units would be priced between $180,000 and $220,000. Four of the buildings would be set in the center of the site and would be phased in during the sales cycle. These homes would consist of two-story units approximately 1,700 to 1,900 square feet and would be priced from $190,000 to $230,000. The exterior of the units would be a mixture of brick and stone material, cedar trim, clad windows, hardi-plank, and vinyl or comparable material siding. There would be professionally designed and installed landscaping throughout the site. The interior of the units would have upgraded standard finishes, including hardwood flooring, custom designed cabinets, and energy efficient stainless steel appliances. The developer hoped to break ground in the summer of 2004 with the first units ready for occupancy in the spring of 2005. The development would be maintained over the long-term by a condominium association that would govern the entire parcel and the 44 townhomes. The developer felt one condominium association would best govern the project. Each townhome unit would be individually owned and maintained, but condominium association rules and regulations would establish guidelines for maintenance and upkeep of the building’s exterior, landscaping, parking stalls, and private streets. The association would charge monthly dues to each homeowner to cover the costs of the shared maintenance and improvement expenses. If snow loading on the site exceeded the snow storage areas, the snow would be hauled off the site. Property owners within 350 feet of the site, including the city of Crystal, were notified of the original public hearing and city staff also sent a notice of the continuation. The city received some calls from Crystal residents and Crystal city staff who identified concerns with headlights coming out of the 2 Planning Commission Meeting April 20, 2004 three curb cuts on Sumter Avenue and drainage concerns. Crystal staff asked to be included in the ponding improvement project. Mr. McDonald explained that the development proposal would require a change of the city’s land use plan. The Comprehensive Plan land use plan suggests commercial land uses at the corner of Bass Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue. The Livable Communities Task Force identified the Franks Nursery site as a redevelopment target site. After task force review, it was suggested that a redevelopment with medium to high-density residential land use was appropriate for this site. The planner indicated that the past review of the potential land uses for this site would suggest that the proposed land use was appropriate and the land use change should be pursued. In the evaluation of a PUD, comparisons were made to the city’s R-4, high-density residential zoning district. The three criteria for a residential zoning change include: is it necessary to correct a past zoning mistake, has the character of the area changed, and is the change consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The planner indicated the character of the area had changed to warrant consideration of a Comprehensive Plan amendment and the change in zoning and proposed redevelopment was consistent with the land use objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. McDonald stated that the planner compared this project to recommendations in the 1997 Life Cycle Housing Study, which recommended higher value, move up housing and owner-occupied, attached housing. New Hope contains approximately 50 percent single- family homes and 50 percent apartments. There are relatively few townhomes or condominiums. This project would provide upscale urban- style townhomes, which had been a recommended housing type for empty nesters looking for a maintenance free life style. McDonald explained that staff and consultants had met previously with the applicant and discussed the plans in detail and most of those recommendations had been incorporated into the plans. The Design and Review Committee generally reviewed the plans prior to the Planning Commission meeting and revised plans were submitted incorporating the Committee’s recommendations. Due to the tight timeline of this application, revised plans were not submitted. The Design and Review Committee should give feedback to the applicant and voice any concerns it has with the plans. Access to the proposed development would be from both Winnetka and Sumter avenues. The development would be served internally with private streets. The total site area is approximately 138,000 square feet and locating 44 townhomes on the site would result in a gross density of one unit per 3,167 square feet or 13.9 units per acre. The applicant was requesting density flexibility through the PUD for this type of density. The zoning ordinance provides that within residential districts, buildings and structures of any type and the parking area shall not occupy more than 65 percent of the lot area or have less than 35 percent open space. The proposed development would allow for 24 percent open space and the developer is requesting flexibility on this requirement. The front yard setback requirement is 25 feet from the property line and the proposed setback on Sumter Avenue is 16 feet. The front yard setback on Winnetka Avenue is 30 feet and the proposed setback is 15 feet from the property line. The urban style planning pushes structures closer to the street for an urban type feel. The planner felt the proposed setback on Sumter Avenue was appropriate due to the fact that only four units would be abutting Sumter Avenue. The planner indicated that a reduced setback was acceptable if it provided an attractive urban streetscape appeal. The architecture and appearance of the proposed townhome units abutting 3 Planning Commission Meeting April 20, 2004 Winnetka Avenue should complement the sidewalk areas and landscaping and provide an attractive urban feeling along the street. The reduced setback along Sumter Avenue was appropriate as a means of conserving space within the overall development. In this area, only side elevations of two buildings are exposed, limiting the number of units directly fronting along Sumter Avenue to four units. The side yard setbacks from the adjoining properties are greater than 10 feet with the exception of the northwest property line near Wincrest Apartments. There would be a 10- foot separation between the two townhome buildings located along Winnetka Avenue. McDonald stated that after much discussion at a staff level and the Design and Review Committee, the feeling was that this separation was adequate. The building official also felt the separation was adequate. The site would be served by a single access from Winnetka Avenue and three access drives from Sumter Avenue. The Winnetka Avenue access would be shared with the funeral home. Staff encouraged the developer to pursue joint access with the funeral home, which has been accomplished. To address concerns regarding the use of the funeral home parking lot by through traffic, the applicant was proposing to install “No Thru Traffic” signs so anyone coming into the development knows to turn north into the development. The applicant enlarged the turning radius from Winnetka Avenue to 20 feet to address concerns regarding vehicular maneuverability. Traffic would be able to circulate through the site by utilizing one of the three accesses on Sumter Avenue. The radius on all the curves was increased to 20 feet. The city realized that the accesses along Sumter need to be approached with sensitivity to the existing single family homes on the east side of the street in Crystal. McDonald showed a site section map to demonstrate vehicle headlights toward the adjacent property at each access. McDonald stated that staff had hoped to provide one access on Sumter, however, the fire department and police department did not feel that was acceptable. The internal private streets are 22 feet wide. McDonald stated that the plans indicated approximately 8,700 square feet of snow storage scattered throughout the site. The condominium association rules would dictate that snow be hauled off the site if the snow could not be contained in the specified areas. The zoning ordinance requires one enclosed parking space and one and one-quarter surface parking spaces for each unit, for a total of 99 spaces. Parking on the site would include 88 enclosed parking stalls, 80 tandem parking, and 15 guest parking stalls. McDonald indicated that when the City Council saw the preliminary plans where some of the units had a one-car garage, the Council requested that each unit have a two-car garage and the plans were revised to address this concern. Some of the units have side-by-side garages, and some of the units have tandem garages where one car is parked in front of another. The Design and Review Committee and staff are satisfied with the sizes of the garages. Sidewalks were provided from the entrance of the individual townhome units to the driveway areas. Each townhome unit along Winnetka Avenue has a sidewalk that extends and connects to the existing sidewalk on Winnetka Avenue. The plans also illustrate a sidewalk extending from Winnetka Avenue to the internal private drive at the northwest side of the site and a sidewalk from Winnetka Avenue along the northern side of the Winnetka Avenue access drive. Staff and Design and Review felt it was better to have more green space throughout the site rather than additional sidewalks. 4 Planning Commission Meeting April 20, 2004 The applicant identified approximately 800 trees, shrubs and perennials to be planted on the site. All landscaping would be irrigated. An enlarged entry plan was submitted indicating the placement of gas meters and air conditioning units in relation to the proposed landscaping. Ten trees along the north property line would be retained. The caliper of the shade trees was increased per the recommendation of the Design and Review Committee. A number of over story trees along the north property line would be retained. Infill landscaping would provide a visual screening of the Wincrest Apartments. A streetscape plan along Winnetka Avenue would incorporate swamp white oak trees along the front of the 12 townhome units. A similar streetscape was proposed along Sumter Avenue. Plant materials for shade trees meet city requirements. The applicant would utilize a series of shrubs along the foundations of the buildings. The plans indicate that a retaining wall and fence along the north property line would be removed. The applicant was proposing monument signage for the development on the north side of the entrance on Winnetka Avenue and at the middle entrance along Sumter Avenue. The signs would be six feet in height and eight feet in length, and constructed of durable materials and supported by stone columns. The sign face would consist of vertical siding to match the building exteriors, painted wood trim, aluminum flashing and die cut aluminum letters. The signs would be placed outside the visibility triangles. Other signage throughout the development would include “no thru traffic” and “no parking fire lane” signs. The applicant proposed two architectural styles within the subdivision. One would be a back-to-back type structure and the other would be a row style townhome structure incorporating a combination of two story end units and three story interior units. The Design and Review Committee discussed the exterior treatment with the applicant, who had incorporated some of the recommendations in the plans. The lighting plan indicated two different light fixtures at 10 locations. The photometric plans indicated lighting of varying intensity measuring a maximum of 0.8 foot candles on the northern property line, 0.3 foot candles on the east, 0.5 on the south and 0.0 on the west property line. The New Hope code states that lighting in a residential district can be no greater than one foot candle at the property line. Three of the light fixtures have one lamp and seven fixtures are a two-lamp type. The applicant indicated on the site plan the location of mailboxes and building address signage. McDonald added that staff felt this proposal was an excellent development and the applicant had done a good job with the plans. Staff was recommending approval subject to the conditions in the planning report. Mr. Mark Hanson, city engineer, explained that there would be a sanitary sewer connection in Winnetka Avenue and that would extend into the property. Each of the buildings would be served by one sewer service. The water main would connect to the existing water main in Winnetka Avenue and loop through the site to Sumter Avenue. Each building would be served by one water service. Storm water from the existing Frank’s site currently drains overland to the northwest corner where a storm sewer takes the runoff through a storm sewer in Winnetka Avenue and through the Wincrest Apartments site to the pond north of the apartments. The proposed storm sewer would be similar, however, there would be storm sewer constructed in the low pointes in each of the three east/west streets through the site to take the runoff through the storm sewer to the northwest corner and connect to the storm sewer in Winnetka and then to the Wincrest pond. Hanson stated that the city would construct additional storm 5 Planning Commission Meeting April 20, 2004 sewer to capture water from surrounding properties along Bass Lake Road where there has been flooding problems in the past, and take all that water through the Wincrest Apartments site and discharge the water into the pond north of the apartments. The pond would also be enlarged to increase the storm water capacity from a 10-year event to a 25-year event. The city is currently developing plans for those infrastructure improvements, and once the plans are done, bids would be sought. A question was raised as to where the water flowed after leaving the Wincrest pond. Hanson responded that there was a pipe in 58th Avenue that went into the city of Crystal. The storm water was directed to a pipe in Bass Lake Road to Middle Twin Lake. He added that the size of the pond would be increased by 25 percent. Hanson stated that Shingle Creek Watershed did not need to review this plan due to the fact that the project was under five acres. However, a report for the Livable Communities redevelopment area was developed for the watershed showing ponding proposed for the entire area. Mr. Charlie Nester, one of the partners at Master Development Group, approached the podium. He introduced Doug Hoskin with Armory Development, Patricia Fitzgerald with Master Development Group, and Jeff Wrede with Toushie Montgomery Architects. He indicated they had been working with city staff since January 2001 and the project had gone through many variations of the plans since that time. He stated that original plans had 65 units which had now been reduced to 44 units and garage space increased. The development group felt that the product offered met a need in the city and was a competitive product and different from the Ryland development. Mr. Jeff Wrede of Toushie Montgomery Architects, stated that there were two styles of buildings: back-to-back townhomes and see-through townhomes. There would be four back-to-back townhome buildings, which have octagonal spaces on the end units. Vertical vinyl siding elements were incorporated in elevations. There would be small patios off the dining rooms of the units. The end units were a little larger, more luxurious, and sell for a higher price. The center units would be smaller. The back-to-back buildings would be located in the interior of the site. The two buildings facing Winnetka Avenue contain six units in each building. A brown and rust color palette would be utilized on those buildings. On the internal elevation, there would be decks off the living rooms, which are located over the garages. The elevation facing Winnetka incorporated stone at the corners, as well as unique octagon spaces on the corners. A number of different window styles would be used. Vertical siding would be used as accents. Vegetation had been added along Winnetka. Wide trim has been added to the windows and doors for a different effect. Decks and outdoor porches have been added to the Winnetka elevation. Many of these items add cost to the buildings. They were trying to keep the price competitive with the Ryland development, however, these units would be more expensive. Discussion ensued on the design of the units and whether guests would use the Winnetka entry door or enter from the garage side of the building. A question was raised whether a fence would be installed along the Winnetka side of the site and the response was negative. Mr. Nester interjected that the design of the townhomes was urban in character where the buildings were pushed near the street with a front entrance for visitors and street traffic and the garage side would be used if visitors parked in the driveway. Commissioner Hemken was concerned that residents would store items by the back door in view of traffic along Winnetka Avenue. Nester stated that outside storage concerns could be addressed in the condominium documents and bylaws. Mr. Wrede added that he imagined occupants 6 Planning Commission Meeting April 20, 2004 would keep outdoor patio furniture in that area. Commissioner Barrick initiated discussion on the common utility rooms. Mr. Wrede stated that each building needed a water room and an electric room and he indicated on the site plan where those rooms were located in each of the building types. He stated that the water service enters the building, the water meter and sprinkler riser would be located in the water room. The room would be heated so pipes do not freeze. The electric room contains all of the electric panels and the main distribution panel for the building. Commissioner Oelkers commended the developers on the plans and he stated he felt the architecture and development was great. (Oelkers left at this time). Discussion ensued on the headlight issue for cars exiting on Sumter Avenue. Mr. Wrede replied that the north drive would have a six percent grade downward so headlights would be driven down toward the street. The center drive would be a two or three percent grade down. The south drive would have a grade sloping up and would be a concern. The developer suggested adding landscaping across the street to alleviate the headlight problem. He stated that other plans showed a dead end at that location with knockdown bollards for emergency access only, however, police and fire requested three access points along Sumter. He felt that the south access could possibly have less traffic due to the fact that the center drive had more garages located along it. He stated he felt the Winnetka access would be the busiest. A question was raised whether those streets could be one-way. Mr. Wrede didn’t know how that could be enforced and there may be a lot of violating of the one-way signs. Mr. Nester added that issue would be driven by public safety officials rather than the developer. They would address the slope at that access through additional grading or landscaping. Traffic studies would be completed for that area as well to determine where the majority of the traffic would enter/exit. The city engineer added that residents would probably be more inclined to enter the site from Sumter and exit onto Winnetka Avenue. Commissioner O’Brien asked for clarification on the see-through building elevation along Winnetka Avenue and whether there were balconies above the doors. He questioned the patio areas on the end units adjacent to Sumter and whether any type of divider between the units would be installed for privacy. Mr. Wrede explained that a portion of the building juts out approximately five feet to divide the two patios. A suggestion was made to add a lattice or screening to add a better sense of privacy between the two units. O’Brien questioned how the shared driveway would be maintained and whether there was an easement in place. Mr. Nester indicated there was an existing easement for the driveway that had been in place for the last 35 years. That driveway is currently shared with the Frank’s site. Chairman Svendsen asked that the front elevation on the architectural plans where it states vinyl siding be corrected to say stone. Barrick initiated discussion on the type of family that would be attracted to these units. Mr. Nester stated that generally a diverse population purchases the units. There may be first time homeowners or transitioning empty nester residents; single working women are attracted to this type of maintenance free housing. He stated that there may be families with young children or a single adult with teenage children. Barrick did not see seniors purchasing these units with stairs. Nester stated that older seniors are not attracted to this housing type, however, early retirees may be. One-level 7 Planning Commission Meeting April 20, 2004 homes require a lot of land. Barrick wondered where children would play and why there were so many parking stalls and so little green space. Nester responded that earlier plans had fewer guest parking stalls with more green space. Commissioner Anderson pointed out that in urban developments such as this in other areas of the country parents took their children to a neighborhood park. It was mentioned that Elm Grove Park would be the closest park and would be upgraded with the Ryland development. Commission members stressed that children would need to cross Bass Lake Road to utilize that park. The developer mentioned that they would be paying a park dedication fee. Mr. Nester added that offering a play area within a condominium development was a large insurance liability, not so much for the association families, but with neighborhood children utilizing the equipment. Barrick asked for clarification on the private drive verbiage and was told that term referred to the internal street system. O’Brien questioned who determined when it was time to haul snow away. Mr. Nester stated that would need to be worked out with city staff and could be written into the condominium association rules. Commissioner Anderson initiated discussion on why the police and fire departments were requesting three accesses on Sumter rather than utilizing the knockdown bollards as featured on an earlier plan. Svendsen answered that it was an accessibility issue, as well as providing room for garbage trucks, delivery trucks, etc. Chairman Svendsen asked if anyone in the audience would like to address the Commission. Ms. Julie Siekkinen, 5660 Sumter Avenue in Crystal, came forward. She stated that the project looked good. Her main concern was the curb cuts on Sumter and headlights shining in the windows of the homes on the east side of the street. She stated her home was located just north of the north access and headlights may not affect her as much as her neighbors, especially the home across from the south access point. She questioned whether the street lights would be as bright as the lights that Frank’s Nursery had and the response was the light would be less. Ms. Siekkinen inquired as to the construction process and where trucks would enter the project site. Mr. Nester stated that the curb cuts on Sumter would be constructed at the same time and they would instruct construction crews and trucks to utilize Winnetka Avenue. He added that periodically there may be some traffic on Sumter. Ms. Siekkinen was concerned that the 15 guest parking spaces may not be enough and whether the developer envisioned overflow parking on Sumter Avenue. At this time, overflow parking from the funeral home and sometimes from the apartments takes place on Sumter Avenue. Mr. Nester responded that each unit would have four parking stalls and could utilize the guest stalls as well. New Hope and Crystal both have parking restrictions on residential streets between 2 and 6 a.m. With the additional curb cuts, it may push the overflow parking further north on Sumter. Ms. Siekkinen wondered if there was an area for walking dogs and was informed that the condominium documents would address this issue, as well as the number and size of animals. Ms. Patricia Fitzgerald of Master Development stated in their other condominium projects, they were restrictive with pets, but felt it was important for owners to keep their pets. The number of animals was restricted to two, such as two small dogs under 25 pounds, or one dog and one cat. There would be restrictions on picking up after the animals and excessive noise was cause for fines, and the pet could be removed by the association board if it was 8 Planning Commission Meeting April 20, 2004 troublesome. A neighboring resident could call the association if there was a problem. Svendsen interjected that the city does have an ordinance for picking up after the animal and keeping the pet on a leash. Svendsen questioned Ms. Siekkinen if she had received adequate notification for the date change for the meeting. She responded that she had talked with city staff and did remember getting the notice in the mail. There being no one else in the audience to address the Commission, the public hearing was closed. Motionsecondedto by Commissioner Landy, by Commissioner Anderson close the Public Hearing on Planning Case 04-06. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Commissioner O’Brien questioned the developer if they would be willing to work with the neighbors across Sumter if a problem arose with regard to headlights by installing additional screening or shrubbery and Mr. Nester responded that they would work in good faith to resolve any issues. Svendsen reiterated that the verbiage for private drives be labeled as private streets in the conditions for approval, limit construction traffic to Winnetka Avenue, and to provide a divider for the patios on the end units of the back-to-back buildings. He initiated discussion on parking restrictions on the private roads after 2 a.m. Mr. Doug Debner, the assistant city attorney, responded that the guest parking stalls would be considered off- street parking and would not be subject to the 2 a.m. parking restriction. MOTION Motionsecondedto by Commissioner Landy, by Commissioner Buggy, Item 4.1 approve Planning Case 04-06, Request for rezoning, Comprehensive Plan amendment, and concept/development stage planned unit development approval, 5620 Winnetka Avenue North, Armory Development/Master Development Group, Petitioners, subject to the following conditions: 1. Execute PUD development agreement and provide the appropriate financial security for site work (amount to be determined by building official and city engineer). Comply with city engineer recommendations, per April 15, 2004, 2. attached correspondence. Approval of plans by building official. 3. Comply with West Metro Fire recommendations, as stated in 4. report. Comply with planner recommendations/conditions: 5. (1) Site Plan a. Site density shall be 13.9 units per acre. b. The site shall include a minimum of 24 percent open space. c. Setbacks shall not vary from the setbacks illustrated on Sheet L1.0 as revised 3/26/04. d. All proposed townhome units shall have a minimum width of 21 feet. (2) Access and Circulation a. The site will be served by a single access street to Winnetka Avenue and three access streets to Sumter Avenue. The site will be served internally by private streets. Private streets shall be a minimum of 22 feet in width. 9 Planning Commission Meeting April 20, 2004 b. The applicant will install “No Thru Traffic” signs to address concerns regarding use of the funeral home parking lot by through traffic. c. The applicant will install “No Parking Fire Lane” signs along the internal private streets at locations approved by the city engineer. The applicant will incorporate additional “no parking fire lane” signs along the center internal street and midway along the side of each internal perimeter street. d. All snow storage for the site shall be accommodated on site. The homeowners association shall keep the internal streets free of snow. e. The applicant shall provide additional screening or take such other measures as may be required to mitigate the impact of vehicle headlights on adjacent property fronting Sumter Avenue to the east on the site. (3) Parking a. No parking will be allowed on private streets. (4) Landscaping a. Retaining walls are subject to review and comment of the city engineer and Public Works. b. Fencing must meet the requirements of the New Hope Zoning Ordinance. c. The applicant shall correct discrepancies between plan and schedule. d. All green spaces shall be irrigated. (5) Signage a. Monument signage must meet required setback and avoid traffic visibility triangles. b. The applicant shall provide details for all address signs. Unit addresses must be clearly visible from main drive aisles. c. The applicant shall submit revised plans illustrating a signage plan indicating the location of all “no parking fire lane” signs to be posted. (6) Lighting a. The applicant shall submit revised plans illustrating details for all proposed light fixtures. b. All light fixtures shall be hooded and direct light downward. c. The applicant shall provide lighting for all guest parking areas and directory signage. (7) Buildings a. The applicant shall submit revised plans clearly illustrating a stoop, landing or patio in conjunction with the side doors for the end units. (8) Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control. a. The adequacy of all proposed grading, drainage and erosion control is subject to the review and approval of the city engineer. b. The applicant shall provide storm water calculations. (9) Utilities. a. The applicant shall provide separate utility connections for each townhome unit. Alternatively, the applicant shall adequately address condominium ownership of the townhome units. b. Overhead utilities on the site shall be buried. 10 Planning Commission Meeting April 20, 2004 (10) Homeowners Association a. The homeowners association documents are subject to approval by the city attorney. b. The homeowners association documents shall be filed with the final plat. (11) Subdivision a. The applicant shall submit a preliminary or condominium plat in accordance with the requirements of the New Hope Subdivision Ordinance. (12) All construction traffic to be routed along Winnetka Avenue. (13) Patio divider to be added on end units of back-to-back buildings. Voting in favor: Anderson, Barrick, Brauch, Buggy, Hemken, Landy, O’Brien, Svendsen Voting against: None Absent: Oelkers Motion carried. Chairman Svendsen stated that the City Council would consider this application on April 26 and requested that the petitioner be in attendance. ANNOUNCEMENTSThe next Planning Commission meeting would be held on May 4. McDonald added that he may request the Design and Review Committee meet regarding the issues at the Mid America Financial Plaza building. Staff was trying to coordinate on a Codes and Standards Committee meeting. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester Recording Secretary 11 Planning Commission Meeting April 20, 2004