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