Loading...
1994 Planning CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 4, 1994 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, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke Gundershaug, Zak Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant There were no consent items on this agenda. PC 93-33B Item 4.1 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.1, Request for Rezoning from B-l, (Limited Neighborhood Business) Zoning District, to B- 2, (Retail Business) Zoning District, or Code Text Amendment to Conditional Use Permit to Allow Laundromat/Drycleaning Business (with Processing) to Locate at 7811/7821 62nd Avenue North, Oliver Tam/Tams Family Partnership, Petitioner. Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, reviewed the case by stating that the petitioner is requesting rezoning of property 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 for drycleaning/laundromat businesses (with processing) at the small center at 62nd and Winnetka. Mr. McDonald reminded the Commission that this planning case was split into two parts at the November Planning Commission meeting, "Part A" included the graphics business which was approved as a CUP under the professional office category and the Commission tabled the "Part B" of the request to allow the drycleaning/laundromat business (with processing) for study by the Codes and Standards Committee and Planning Consultant. The petitioner was not present at the December 7th Planning commission meeting, thus the request was tabled until this meeting. A laundromat is currently allowed as a permitted use in the B-1 Zoning District but the code specifically says "not including commercial processing on site". Mr. McDonald said that basically what the Planner and Codes and Standards Committee are recommending is that the zoning code be amended to allow processing on the site. The major decision has to be made as to whether it should be a permitted or conditional use, and this goes hand-in-hand with the B-1 and B-2 permitted and conditional uses study that Codes and Standards have been conducting. Mr. McDonald feels that they are recommending that the processing be allowed as a permitted use. He said the Commission will need to determine if they want to approve this single amendment to the B- I Zone at this time or wait until the February meeting and make the change in conjunction with a number of other B-1 uses. Allan Brixius, Planning Consultant, stated that he has had a chance to review both the drycleaning element as well as the expanded B-1 uses and generally in discussion with Codes and Standards, there was an New Hope Planning Commission - 1 - January 4,1994 opportunity to determine what types of characteristics associated with drycleaning had the most concerns. The identified concerns were the potential for pollution emissions and noise considerations. Mr. Brixius said the MPCA was contacted and discovered that the concern with drycleaning facilities is the a pollutant generated as an emission product known as percholorethylene (PCE). It is considered one of the most hazardous air pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act. Minnesota has a standard for emission control that is stricter than the federal guidelines. Drycleaners in Minnesota are held to a higher standard than nationwide. Mr. Brixius stated there are emission control devices that are available, both carbon absorbers and refrigerator condensers that help monitor and relieve the emissions on these and also new technology to enhance the performance of these emission control devices. In addition, drycleaners are required to have weekly records of their emission controls so there is a record for periodic inspection by the MPCA. Mr. Brixius went on to say that in a survey of surrounding communities it was found that drycleaners were considered to be a neighborhood compatible activity and others have taken a more restrictive approach by limiting size. Mr. Brixius said he believes the use is compatible within the B-1 neighborhood area and recommends that a change in the zoning be made to accommodate this, but the question raised in Codes and Standards is to whether this should be a conditional' use permit which would have to come through the Planning Commission each time one of these would want to open within a B-1 District or make it a permitted use. What we are looking at, Mr. Brixius said, is limited number of B-1 locations, the size would not be very large and the consensus after discussion was a permitted use would probably be the most appropriate. Commissioner Sonsin asked Mr. Tam, the petitioner, where he was in this particular request in terms of do you have a specific tenant, do you have a lease signed? Mr. Tam replied that since the last meeting, he talked with the potential renter about the possibility of doing the drycleaning on site and he was pleased that the City would allow him to do this on site. He said he does not have the lease in hand, but it will depend on the outcome of the approved usage. If it is permitted for the drycleaning on site, the tenant will sign a lease. He also indicated if he can get some sort of indication from the City that some kind of drycleaning will be allowed on site, he will sign the lease and open the business for a drop-off and pick-up in the beginning and eventually would like to do the processing on-site when it is permitted. Commission Sonsin asked Mr. Tam how soon he would like to move on this. Mr. Tam replied he would like to open up in about 60 days. Commissioner Sonsin said that as long as there is no great urgency here and the Codes and Standards Committee is actively wrapping up its B-1 uses study and modifying the list for consideration at a February public hearing, he would like to see this case tabled for another 30 days so it can be taken up after the entire usage list is revised. Chair Cameron asked for input from other Commissioners, or if they had a problem with this recommendation. The Commissioners replied they are comfortable with this. Chair Cameron suggested to Mr. Tam that the perspective tenant call Mr. McDonald and he can verify the direction in which the Commission is going and tell him if there will be a text change next month. MOTION Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Underdahl, New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - January 4, 1994 Item 4.1 to table Planning Case 93-35B, Request for Rezoning from B-1 Zoning District to B-2 Zoning DiStrict, or Code Text Amendment or Conditional Use Permit to Allow Laundromat/Drycleaning Business (with processing) to locate at 7811/7821 62nd Avenue, North for one month. Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Watschke Voting against: None Absent: Zak, Gundershaug Motion carried. Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, PC 94-01 Item 4.2 Chair Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Planning Case 94-01, Request for Site and Building Plan Review for Building Addition and Conditional Use Permit for Deferred Parking, 3216 Winnetka Avenue North, J.R. Jones, Petitioner. Mr. McDonald gave an overview of this planning case by stating the petitioner is requesting a Site and Building Plan Review for construction of a two level warehouse addition and a Conditional Use Permit for Deferment of Required Parking. He said J. R. Jones Fixture Company has been before the Planning Commission previously and is proposing to construct a 132' x 62' (17,000 square foot) two-story warehouse addition on the east side of the existing building. The present building was built in 1963, with subsequent expansions in 1968, 1979, 1990 and 1992. The proposed 17,000 square foot addition, combined with the existing 80,000 square foot building, will bring the total building size to 97,000 square feet. In 1992 the petitioner requested a minor green area variance or parking variance and this Commission granted and the Council changed it to a deferred parking conditional use permit. Two facts have changed since that application: 1.) the green area requirement in the I-1 Zoning District was reduced from 35% to 20% and 2.) the petitioner pursued the acquisition of the two vacant lots to the north (Lots 1 and 2, Pazandak Addition). The petitioner is now in the process of preparing a preliminary plat which will combine all three of these parcels. The plat has not been submitted yet but the recommendation is to go ahead with this and any approval of the site and building plan review should include platting as the condition. Mr. McDonald said the plans show a new two-story (8,500 square feet per floor) warehouse addition on the east side of the existing building that will be used for the storage of bulk items and finished work. The addition will be constructed in an area that is presently used as green area, but with the acquisition of the property to the north, the green area requirement is easily met as the plan shows 46% green area. The building materials will be painted concrete block to match the existing building with color clad fascia. Other improvements include an improved front entrance on Winnetka Avenue. The most southerly curb-cut near 32nd and Winnetka will be shifted farther north, a greater distance from the intersection, and the northerly curb-cut will be shifted farther north, providing a greater distance between the entrance and exit. New concrete curb and gutter will be installed in the front drive area, with the exception that bituminous curb will be installed in the area of the deferred parking for ease of future parking expansion. Four handicapped parking stalls will be installed on the front/side of the building and the present parking in the front of the building on the circular drive is eliminated. New storm sewer/catch basins will be New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - January 4, 1994 installed to correct drainage problems in front of the building. Mr. McDonald stated that the Design-Review Committee met with the petitioner on December 16th and that a listing of issues discussed are incorporated in the staff report. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meeting. The revised plans include the truck turning radius as shOwn on the site plan, all building signs and square footages are shown, and also additional landscaping has been added on the Winnetka Avenue vacant lots and existing landscaping is shown. 26 new trees/shrubs will be added to the site (12 Norway Maple and 14 Yew) and 10 existing Spruce will be relocated. When petitioners met with Design and Review, they requested that the landscaping be extended up onto these vacant properties and they have been added to the plan. Mr. McDonald stated that as far as signage is concerned, the existing "J. R. Jones Fixture Company" wall signage on the north elevation is approximately 90 square feet. A new canopy facia will be added over the front entrance that may or may not be considered a wall sign (it could be interpreted as a logo or just decorative facia). The new facia totals 144 square feet. The two signs together (if the front facia is considered a sign) total 233.5 square feet. City Code allows not more than two signs and the total area of each sign cannot exceed 125 square feet or a total of 250 square feet. Mr. McDonald stated that City code allows not more than two signs in a total area and cannot exceed a total 125 feet so if this is counted as a sign, it exceeds the code requirements slightly, but that staff does not necessarily consider the front facia a sign and has no problems with the plans as presented. Mr. McDonald said the total number of parking spaces required by the City Code is 146 and the plan shows 92 spaces being provided and 55 spaces being shown as deferred parking. The company presently has 62 employees and the projected number of employees with the addition is 64. The company clearly does not need all the parking required by the City Code. Mr. McDonald stated there are two options to address: the parking issue, either grant the deferment for required parking as a CUP which staff is recommending, or consider a code text amendment for industrial parking requirements (which is addressed in another planning case on the agenda. Mr. McDonald said the other item to consider is the sidewalk. Staff had initially marked the plans to show a "future" sidewalk to be installed on the property along Winnetka Avenue and there was some discussion by City staff as to whether this was necessary or not. Upon further review by the City Manager and Building Official, there are sidewalks south of this site and also north of the site that leads to the shopping center so the City would like to make some kind of agreement with the property owner to have the sidewalk installed. 'Mr. McDonald stated that overall, staff feels this is a very good plan. Hal Pierce of Pierce Reese Architects approached the podium and answered questions from the Commission. Commissioner Cassen inquired about the curb cut on the south side that was to be a similar width as to the north side. Is it the same width? Mr. Pierce stated they are now the same size but at a different angle. Commissioner Cassen then inquired if there will be a one-way road sign at the entrance. Mr. Pierce stated there would be. Commissioner Cassen then inquired about the truck turning lane in the rear and the two parking stalls that had been removed. Mr. Pierce stated that the removal of the parking stalls was not necessary because the truck belongs to J. R. Jones and will pull into the doors on the lower level. Commissioner Cassen inquired whether this will be a comfortable turning radius. Mr. Pierce stated they worked with the engineer on this issue and they provided the appropriate turning radius. Mr. Pierce said this was New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - January 4, 1994 MOTION Item 4.1 PC 94-02 Item 4.3 probably the largest truck that will ever come onto the premises and this dock is seldom used. Mr. McDonald stated the Building Official was okay with the radius all0~d as their main loading facility is on the south side of the building. Commissioner Cassen also inquired about the refuse storage space. Mr. Robert Jones of J. R. Jones stated that all the wood products are recycled and stored indoors, the rest of the refuse is also in dump carts inside the building. Commissioner Cassen inquired where the new lighting will be. Mr. Pierce stated they would relocate the existing lighting but that was not shown on the plan. Commissioner Cassen suggested that the lighting be shown on the plan before they appear before the City Council. Commissioner Cassen asked if there would be concrete curbing in front and if future parking expansion would be bituminous. Mr. Pierce answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Cassen asked what was going to be done to the lot, whether it would be seeded or sodded? Mr. Pierce stated that anything that was disturbed would be sodded, and some seeding would be done on the hill, but plans are not to landscape. Commissioner Cassen requested that the deferred parking site be kept mowed and maintained. Commissioner Underdahl commented that when she was looking for the building today, until she got past the canopy she could not see the name of the building. Mr. Pierce stated that because of the full-grown trees you cannot see the front of the building but they will be transplanted. Commissioner Cassen stated that the sidewalk was discussed at Design and Review but felt it was not necessary because there is a sidewalk across the street on the west side but not on the other side, but did not realize at that time that to the north and to the south there is a sidewalk to the shopping center so a long term plan would be to continue with that sidewalk. Motion by Commission Cassen, seconded by Commissioner Watschke to approve planning case 94-01, of the site and building plan review and conditional use permit for the deferment of required parking for J, R. Jones addition subject to the following: The platting of all three lots into one parcel. Hennepin County approval of curb-cut changes. Performance bond to be submitted for improvements, amount to be determined by Building Official and City Engineer. Additional fee for deferred parking CUP be submitted to City. Installation of a sidewalk on Winnetka Avenue. City Engineer recommendations be incorporated in the plans. Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Watschke Voting against: None Absent: Zak, Gundershaug Motion carried. Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Chair Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.3, Planning Case 94-02, Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of J. R. Jones Addition, 3216 Winnetka Avenue North, J. R. Jones, Petitioner. Mr. McDonald stated that staff is recommending that planning case 94-02 be tabled for one month. New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - January 4, 1994 MOTION Item 4.3 Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Underdahl, to table Planning Case 94-02, Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of J. R. Jones Addition, 3215 Winnetka Avenue North for one month. Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Watschke Voting against: None Absent: Zak, Gundershaug Motion carried. Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, PC 94-03 Item 4.4 Chair Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.4, Request for Zoning Text Amendment to Amend Off-Street Parking Requirements for Industrial Office Space, 4700 Quebec Avenue North, Jesco Industrial Supplies, Petitioner. Mr. McDonald presented an overview of this planning case saying the petitioner is requesting a zoning code text amendment to amend the off- street parking requirements for office space from I per 200 square feet to 1 per 300 square feet or some other text amendment that would permit internal office expansion on the site without requiring the addition of more parking. Jesco Industrial Supplies currently operates out of a 29,300 square foot warehouse building at 4700 Quebec Avenue North and is requesting to convert 2,800 square foot of existing internal warehouse space into offices. The change in the building use will increase the parking demand on the site. Based on the City's parking standards, the facility after renovation would require 62 parking stalls. The parking provided on the site plan totals 50 stalls, or 12 stalls short of the requirement, and the usefulness of several of the spaces is questionable due to site constraints. Jesco has indicated that their total parking demand is far less than that required by City standards. They currently employ 27 persons and when the project is completed they will add 5 additional employees (for a total of 32) over the next 5 year period. Staff did not feel than an application for a variance from the parking requirements could be supported because there is no hardship, so the petitioner requested the City to re-evaluate the City's parking standards pertaining to office space and warehousing. Mr. McDonald said staff had referred this matter to the Planning Consultant to research. Allan Brixius, Planning Consultant, stated that this application has generated the need to take a look at the parking standards for warehouse and office use. Mr. Brixius said the Building Official also expressed his experience in regard to parking demands and the appropriateness of the parking arrangements. Jesco has stated that there parking needs are less than what is required by ordinance. In looking at their site plan, they are proposing an additional 50 stalls. Mr. Brixius stated that a site inspection was conducted and a historic review of past concerns showed that in 1987 there was a concern with regard to traffic movement along the eastern loading areas. The fence along the southern property line has restricted the traffic movements of larger trucks in that area and as a result the question is raised as to the appropriateness of the number of stalls located in these locations due to truck maneuvering space requirements. In evaluating the parking stalls. Mr. Brixius stated that office parking requirements that govern all office uses, regardless of the location, is 3 spaces plus 1 space for 200 square feet of floor area. The warehouse area requires 1 space per 1,000 plus 1 for each company owned truck. The review was to evaluate whether these are appropriate under current standards. If they are restrictive, there are New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - January 4, 1994 a number of applications that would actually benefit New Hope as a whole. Mr. Brixius went on t° say that as a fully developed community, there are a number of fully developed sites that have little opportunity for re- evaluation if held to the strict standard of the code. If our code is overly restrictive requiring parking stalls that are not utilized, New Hope is being wasteful in financial investment in these parking areas, both in the initial construction and maintenance as well as wasteful for land use. Mr. Brixius stated that in looking at the code, it must be recognized that New Hope is a fully developed community and the opportunity for re-investment becomes an important factor. He said that in evaluating New Hope's parking, he used three methods: (1) an APA (American Planners Association) reference that gave examples of other city regulations for similar uses; (2) ITE (Institute of Traffic Engineers) data from 1985 as far parking generation for these types of uses and also local community comparisons. In looking at the office use, the APA standard are broken down into three categories, general office, dental office, and medical offices. In a general office, they find that a 1 for 300 standard is fairly typical. For medical and dental offices the traffic demand is greater and standards are more restrictive. Mr. Brixius stated that in a comparison with other cities around New Hope, it is found that New Hope's 1 per 200 is the same in Brooklyn Park and Crystal. The remaining communities reduced their standard to 1 per 250 without the additional three stalls as required in New Hope. In warehousing, he said he has found that a 1 per 1,000 is a common standard, but a range is shown for 1 per 500 to 1 per 2,000. The community survey shows a diversity of standards ranging from 1 per 800 square feet to 1 per 2,000 square feet. Mr. Brixius recommended that parking for office and warehouse space be modified. He recommends that change for general office buildings be changed from I per 200 square feet to I per 250 square feet. He said this would be consistent with surrounding communities and closer to the standard that is being suggested by' APA and the Traffic Engineers. Mr. Brixius suggested that in warehousing, office related to warehouses or industrial activities, a I to 300 may be justified. He feels that in these areas there is less commercial customer contact. Aisc suggested is that the I per 1,000 square foot parking standard for warehousing be increased to I per 1,500 square feet. Mr. Brixius feels this flexibility gives the City some opportunity for re- investment in the existing facilities, helps Jesco and will also help J.R. Jones and he does not believe that this will result in a parking shortage. Chair Cameron inquired as to whether the Codes and Standards had reviewed this recommendation. Commissioner Sonsin questioned if the petitioner was now in conformance. Mr. Brixius said that it is his understanding that Jesco is conformance and also J.R. Jones. Chair Cameron said the Commission still has to deal with this ordinance which is a permanent condition for all the residents in New Hope. Chair Cameron stated he is convinced with the professional evidence provided, it is time to change. Commissioner Underdahl stated that some of these buildings could be sold to other companies for other uses and would there then be enough flexibility so that parking would be available. Mr. Brixius stated this is being looked at from the standpoint that the changes being made are more typical of the actual use. He said that the I to 250 is closer to what is actually going to be needed to meet a typical office demand and in the event the building is sold and the parking demand greatly exceeds what is on site, that will be dictated by the market. He said for the areas that are not yet developed, there is no concern that the new standards being established will cause a parking shortage for new development. New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - January 4, 1994 Bernard Herman, of Bernard Herman Architects addressed the Planning Commission and presented an overview of Jesco and introduced Dennis Phillips, the Vice President and General Manager to the Commission. Mr. Herman stated JescO needs a showroom to display their products. Mr. Herman said they are intending on upgrading and improving their office space. Chair Cameron asked for comments and suggestions from the Commission. Commissioner Underdahl asked if the questionable parking stalls will be eliminated. Mr. Herman stated that the parking stalls shown are useable but the current operation does not need them. MOTION Item 4.4 Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Underdahl to approve Planning Case 94-03, Request for Zoning Code Text Amendment, amending Section 4.036(10)(m) Section 1. "Office Buildings, Animal Hospitals and Professional offices to read as follows: "three spaces plus at least one space for each two hundred fifty square feet of floor space, and Section 4.036(10cc) Section 2. "Warehousing, Storage or Handling of Bulk Goods, amended to read: that space which is solely used as office ancillary to the larger warehouse facility shall provide one space of each three hundred square feet of floor area used as office and one space per each one thousand five hundred square feet of floor area used as warehouse, plus one space for each company truck (if not stored inside). Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Watschke Voting against: None Absent: Gundershaug, Zak Motion carried. Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, COMMITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Item 5.1 No report Codes & Standards Item 5.2 Chair Cameron asked City Planner Allan Brixius to review the gas canopy/gas signage ordinance. Mr. Brixius stated there are two issues at hand. The first is establishing performance standards that address the design parameters for canopies. Mr. Brixius said the amendment would be to Section 4.032(3k) - accessory building section. He said in establishing this the following was determined: established setbacks were reviewed and the recommendation is 15 feet. The 15 foot standard was determined appropriate by looking at existing gas stations having these facilities. Currently there is no setback for service station canopies. The placement of a cancpy would be prohibited in the rear yard or side yard which does not abut public streets. He said that they would like to move the gas sales away from uses that may not be compatible. The total height would not exceed 20' and provide a minimum clearance of 14'. The 20' standard is fairly typical with a one story type architecture that is found at these types of facilities. The canopy facia may not exceed 3' in height. Also established was a standard for illumination over canopies to avoid unwanted glare on surrounding properties or public right-of-ways. The signage standard is separated and was referenced in this code section. The next amendment that was changed was the conditional use permits for automobile service stations that sell gas and convenience stores that sell gas. Rather than have these standards reiterated in those districts, they just reference to the accessory building standards. He said that additionally New Hope Planning Commission - 8 - January 4, 1994 gas pump signage was reviewed. Currently, he said there are a number of provisions that already address this issue. Section 3.465 addresses all commercial single and double occupancy buildings. Under provision 5 of this is awning and canopy signs. He said that Codes and Standards are making a number of suggested changes to this provision: 1) location - deleting the existing provision and re-establishing location provision that says one sign per canopy facia fronting unto a street. 2) height - modified and eliminated restrictions on sign lettering by stating that the sign shall not project above or below the physical dimensions of the awning or canopy facia. 3) Use - the words lettering and letters were deleted and used the general word signage to allow for the use of Iogos and pictorial signage. 4) Maximum Signage - Per the request of the Building Inspector, a single sign standard was established so it would be easy to regulate and identify for any prospective developers (awning signs should not exceed sixteen (16) square feet and shall be allowed exclusive of maximum sign area for wall signs and free standing signs). Mr. Brixius stated that in addition Section 3.466 which addressed signs accessory to gas sales in conjunction with automobile stations was expanded to address gas sales in conjunction with automobile service stations or convenience stores. Provision 1 - oil racks was not changed. Provision 2- tire racks - the Codes and Standards wants this to be exclusive to automobile service stations not available to convenience stores. Provision 3 - Portable Signs, placards, pennants - was not changed, but a provision was added as Provision 5 which addressed information signage. This ,is intended to' address the operational characteristics of self-service facilities, signs denoting operational instructions associated with self-service gas facilities including gas pumps, air supply and car washes are exempt from the maximum sign area. Mr. McDonald said that if the Commission is agreeable, then letters will be sent out to all gas station owners in the City and an informational meeting will be conducted on this issue at the February 1st Planning Commission meeting and then schedule a formal public hearing on March 1st. Chair Cameron asked if all Commissioners were agreeable or if there were any questions. Everyone was agreeable, and Chair Cameron stated he felt this was a good idea. Commissioner Sonsin stated that Codes and Standards have also been reviewing the permitted and conditional uses in the B-1 District. Commissioner Sonsin said that Codes and Standards reviewed and discussed what are reasonable and permitted uses for a neighborhood business. The following is. a list of recommended permitted uses in a B-1 District: barber shops; beauty shops; essential services; convenience, limited merchandise, grocer stores (not supermarket type); cleaning (including pressing and cleaning processing); antique shops; art/school supplies, stationery stores; bicycle sales/repair; candy, ice cream, ice mil, popcorn, nuts, frozen desserts, packaged snacks, soft drinks; coin and philatelic stores; copy and printing service; fabric store; florist shop; gift or novelty stores; hobby stores; locksmith; toy stores, tailor shops; record/compact disc/video stores sales and rental; real estate sales, camera/photographic supplies/processing. Mr. Brixius stated the next issue that Codes and Standards reviewed is the wall sign study. Mr. Brixius stated that the report that was prepared does not have a final recommendation but rather opening up some dialogue as New Hope Planning Commission - 9 - January 4, 1994 ELECTION OF OFFICERS Item 8.0 MOTION Item 8.0 ADJOURNMENT to what options there may be. Mr. Brixius stated he would recommend changing the definition to give either an exemption or give specific identification to what would be considered public art or advertising. He said he would rather stay with the City's current definition and adjust performance standards. The options that have been identified are: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) No change - stay within existing square footage requirements of business signs.. Expand the total size requirements to allow painted graphics in association with letters/words/Iogos, potentially up to 50 percent of wall area. Limit the letter/wording size within the painted graphic through the use of a designated square footage requirement. Allow wall graphics in association with business identification signs, but exempt the background space when calculating the area of the sign. Allow painted wall signs as public art with no commercial intent/relation to on-premise businesses. Mr. Brixius stated that the Codes and Standards would appreciate direction on this issue from the remaining Commission members. Commissioner Watschke stated he was not in favor of having public art murals as art is very subjective. Mr. Brixius stated that as a government body we are "content-neutral" in that the only things that can be regulated is setback requirements, size and location. Chair Cameron said that maybe the ordinance should be looked at from a broader perspective. Commissioner Sonsin stated that Codes and Standards will be talking about this issue again at their January 20th meeting. Chair Cameron informed the Commission that this is the meeting that the annual election of officers is conducted for the Planning Commission for the coming year. Motion by Commissioner Cassen, seconded by Commissioner Underdahl, to appoint Robert Cameron, as Chair; Robert Gundershaug, Vice Chairman; as William Sonsin as the Third Officer, Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Watschke Voting against: None Absent: Zak, Gundershaug Motion carried. Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Mr. McDonald introduced the new Managers Department Secretary, Pam Sylvester, to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:35 p.m. /~espectfully s_~itted, //Jayne Ferry~-7~-~/~ New Hope Planning Commission - 10 - January 4, 1994 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 1, 1994 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: Lifson, Underdahl, Sonsin, Zak, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke Absent: Gundershaug Also Present: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant There were no consent items on this agenda. PC 94-04 Item 4.1 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.1, B-1 Zoning District Uses Study, An Ordinance Amending the New Hope Zoning Code by Amending the Permitted, Permitted Accessory and Conditional Uses Within the B-1 Limited Neighborhood Business District. Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, stated this review was initiated as a result of Oliver Tam's request in November to rezone his property at 62nd/Winnetka from a B-1 to a B-2 Zoning District. Codes and Standards has been studying this issue, as the Commission was not in favor of rezoning the property but indicated that they would consider an expansion of permitted and conditional uses in the B-1 District. Mr. Brixius stated that the Codes and Standards Committee have explored what uses were most appropriate for the B-1 District by reviewing the uses allowed in the B-2 District. The changes that Codes and Standards are suggesting include an expansion of the permitted uses in the B-1 District and include uses allowed in the B-2 District that the Committee felt were compatible with a "neighborhood" business district. Within the permitted uses the cleaning use has been modified to include all dry-cleaning facilities including the processing on site. The "mortuary use" has been eliminated. The Committee is recommending that 16 new permitted uses be allowed as listed below: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) Antique shops. Art/school supplies, books, office stationery stores. Bicycle sales/repair. Candy, ice cream, ice milk, popcorn, nuts, frozen desserts, packaged snacks, soft drinks. Coin and philatelic stores. Copy and printing service. Fabric store. Florist shop. Gift or novelty stores. Hobby stores. Locksmith. Toy stores. New Hope Planning Commission - I - February 1, 1994 MOTION Item 4.1 13) 14) 15) 16) TailOr Shops. Record/compact disc/video stores sales and rental. Real estate sales. Camera/photographic supplies/processing. The Committee is recommending no changes to accessory uses. The Committee is recommending that Conditional uses be changed as follows: 1. Allow for medical, professional and commercial offices with the same language that is used in the R-O District. The Committee did not feel that veterinary clinics were an appropriate use for that district so that use was not included. Additionally eliminated was the requirement that professional offices be locally oriented services that are provided primarily for the local area rather than for the entire community or region. The Committee felt that would be difficult to enforce or impose such a restriction, therefore, it was eliminated. ,. The Committee recommends adding a requirement that street access for commercial offices be provided by collector or arterial streets. The Committee also is recommending that a new section be added to require that buffer areas be installed wherever they butt up against a residential zoning district. Several minor changes were made to convenience food take-out so that some in-store dining would be allowed and, The Committee has also included the restaurant as a conditional use permit, With the elimination of mortuary from the B-1 District the Committee is recommending that this use be added to the B-2 District because Mr. McDonald stated that the only other existing mortuary in New Hope is located in a B-2 District next to Frank's Nursery. Commissioner Sonsin questioned whether banks and off-sale liquor stores are included as permitted uses, as inferred in the staff report. Mr. McDonald indicated that they are not included as permitted uses and that the actual ordinance amendment being considered immediately follows the staff report and is labeled Ordinance 94-02. Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Lifson, to approve Planning Case 94-04, B-1 Zoning District Amendments and B-2 Zoning District Amendment for Mortuaries as Submitted in your report. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Lifson, Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke None Gundershaug New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - February 1, 1994 PC 93-35B Item 4.2 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Planning Case 93- 3§B, Request for Rezoning from B-1 (Limited Neighborhood Business) to B-2 (Retail Business) Zoning District, or Code Test Amendment or Conditional Use Permit to Allow Laundromat/Drycleaning Businesses with Processing. Mr. McDonald stated that due to the fact that the Ordinance Amendment, that includes this case, was just passed, the requested use was approved but the requested zoning is denied. Staff is recommending that a formal motion be made so that the record is clear and this application is not left open. Commissioner Sonsin confirmed that the motion is to deny the rezoning. MOTION Item 4.2 Motion by Commission Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Zak to deny Planning Case 93-35B, Request for Rezoning from B-l, (Limited Neighborhood Business) to B-2 (Retail Business) Zoning District, or Code Text Amendment or Conditional Use Permit to Allow Laundromat/ Dry Cleaning Businesses with Processing. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Lifson, Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke None Gundershaug PC 94-02 Item 4.3 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.3, Planning Case 94- 02, Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of J. R. Jones Addition, 3216 Winnetka Avenue North, J. R. Jones, Petitioner. Chairman Cameron stated that there is a request to table Planning Case 94-02 for one month. MOTION Item 4.3 Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Casson, to table Planning Case 94-02, Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of J. R. Jones Addition, 3216 Winnetka Avenue North for one month, Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Lifson, Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke None Gundershaug INFORMATIONAL MEETING PC 93-32 Item 5.1 Mr. McDonald informed the Commission that a copy of Ordinance Regarding Proposed Zoning Code Performance Standards Regulating the Design and Placement of Gasoline Pump Island Canopies and Minor Changes to Sign Regulations for Gas Sales Facilities had been sent to all gas station owners in New Hope with a letter inviting them to attend this informational meeting and provide input on the proposed changes. No owners/managers were in attendance. One owner called to say he could not attend but wanted to be sent the minutes. Mr. Brixius gave a brief summary of the ordinance and stated that this ordinance is just going to establish performance standards for gasoline canopies not associated with a convenience food store. It will have minimal impact on existing facilities. The proposed setback requirement may make three existing sites slightly non-conforming. Other than that the Committee is basically broadening it to make it a little more manageable. New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - February 1, 1994 Chairman Cameron asked Mr. McDonald if there was a need to have the ordinance passed at this meeting and was informed that this was just an informational meeting and if the Commission is in general agreement with the proposed changes, staff will then publish notice for a formal public hearing for the March Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Brixius stated that non-conforming structures could continue to exist as long as they exist in that fashion and when they alter the site they would be asked to conform to the new code. The question was raised whether or not the non-conforming owners needed to be specifically notified. The only time when the non-conformance of any canopy is addressed is when there is an actual application for zoning approval. Mr. Brixius indicated that there are a couple canopies that are within six inches of the property line, so there would not be a substantial altering of the business, just moving the canopy back if a future application for site improvements was received. In some cases, where it is recognized that full conformance is not appropriate or possible, a variance could be granted as long as the degree of non-conformity is reduced. Mr. Brixius outlines the proposed changes, as follows: Canopy setbacks would be a minimum of fifteen (15) feet from the property line and adequate visibility both on and off site must also be maintained. Canopies would not be allowed in rear yards not abutting a public street. Maximum canopy height could not exceed twenty (20) feet, and would have to provide a minimum clearance of fourteen (14) feet. 4. Canopy facades could not exceed three (3) feet in height. o Reflected glare or spill light could not exceed five-tenths (0.5) foot candles, as measured on the property line when abutting residentially zoned property and one (1) foot candle measured on the property line when abutting other commercial or industrially zoned property. Signage would be allowed on the canopy in addition to wall and ground signage as permitted in the Sign Code. According to Mr. McDonald a survey, conducted by the Building Official, indicated that there were a number of problems with temporary signs at existing gas station sites. City staff is recommending that if these code amendments are approved that the new Code Amendments be mailed to all gas station owners along with a copy of the existing sign ordinance and inform owners that stations must be in conformance with the "temporary sign portion" of the sign code and that staff will be surveying the City this spring to check compliance. Commissioner Underdahl raised a question about the cigarette stands with their backs to the window with advertising on and inquired if this is illegal since it is showing through the window. Mr. McDonald replied that this would be considered a window sign and there is space allowed for window signs. New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - February 1, 1994 MOTION Item 5.1 CO M M ITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Item 6.1 Codes & Standards Item 6.2 MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Casson to move Planning Case 93-32, Proposed Zoning Code Performance Standards Regulating the Design and Placement of Gasoline Pump Island Canopies and Minor Changes to Sign Regulations for Gas Sales Facilities to the public hearing on March 1, 1994. Voting in favor: Voting against: Motion carried. Lifson, Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke None No report. Commissioner Sonsin referred the Commission to the packet regarding the Ponderosa sign. The Planning Commission indicated that it appears that Ponderosa has not asked permission to put up any of their signs in other cities. The sign in Spring Lake Park has not been questioned by the City. The other two cities that were approached said that the sign did not comply and a variance would not be appropriate. Commissioner Sonsin indicated that the Codes and Standards Committee is developing a list of various options which could include the granting of a variance or denying the application altogether and returning the matter to the Council. The Codes and Standards Committee is also considering different signage regulations for different zoning districts so if the City allows this it could be localized instead of opening it up to the whole City. Mr. Brixius is researching this option and stated it is not unusual for communities to have different zoning standards for different zoning districts. He stated that neighborhood commercial district is localized and generally doesn't need as much signage as a general business district. The Committee is also looking at the distinction of signage verses non-sign, wall murals. The Committee hopes to complete their study on this issue in the next month or two so they can get back to the full Commission with a report. Mr. McDonald announced that the Tires Plus truck is finally gone. It took time to have it removed due to the fact that a certified letter had to be sent. Mr. McDonald reported that the Wrobel issue will come back to the City Council at the next meeting and it is anticipated that the request will be denied and the City Council has also directed staff to look at alternate zoning options. Commissioner Underdahl inquired as to what happens if a resident, such as the Wrobels, is in violation of their agreement for that many years. Mr. McDonald said he did not know if the City required an annual review 30 years ago. Normally with the home occupations that are approved now, there is an annual review. There is a tickler file that once a year the general inspector goes out to do an inspection. Chairman Cameron asked if Mr. McDonald wanted to invite the Commission to the Land Use Planning Workshops. The Commission was told about the GTS Annual Seminar and informed that there was money in the budget for training Commissioners, so if anyone is interested this could be arranged. New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - February 1, 1994 ADJOURNMENT A question was raised by Commissioner Casson if the City, ordinance wise, can do anything about the "rat house." Mr. McDonald stated that the City would probably end up buying the property at a reduced rate and demolish the house. Commissioner Casson also wondered how it will be possible to keep the rats from moving to the neighboring houses and was informed that exterminators have been called in to handle this matter. Food was taken out of the house first, then poison was laid down. After a few days the dead rats were taken out of the house and more poison and liquid poison put down. Mr. McDonald indicated that if the house is not demolished it will need extensive rehabilitation. The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 7:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester Recording Secretary New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - February 1, 1994 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 2, 1994 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; Vice Chairman Gundershaug called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Absent: Also Present: Lifson, Zak, Cassen, Gundershaug, Watschke Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, There were no consent items on this agenda. PC 93-32 Item 4.1 Vice Chairman Gundershaug introduced for discussion Item 4.1, Ordinance No. 93-08, Amending the New Hope Zoning Code by Permitting Pump Island Canopies at Gas Stations and Convenience Stores as an Accessory Structure and Allowing Additional Signage on Canopies. and Ordinance 94-03, Amending the New hope Sign Code Regulating Canopy Signage and other Signage Accessory to Gas Sales at Service Stations and Convenience Stores With Gas Sales Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, stated this is the public hearing regarding proposed Zoning Code performance standards regulating the design and placement of gasoline pump island canopies and minor changes to sign regulations for gas sales facilities. Mr. McDonald reminded the Commission that in September, 1993, the Planning Commission and City Council approved a site plan for Uno-Ven Company to upgrade the Unocal station at Winnetka Avenue at Rockford Road. At that time City staff indicated that the existing City Code only establised minimal conditions for gas pump canopies for convenience stores with gasloline, which require a conditional use permit. Staff recommended that an ordinance change be initiated that establishes guidelines and performance standards regulating the placement of gasoline pump island canopies, specifically at gas stations, since the current regulations speak only for gas stations with convencience stores. The Commission agreed with the recommendation and referred the matter to the Codes and Standards Committee. The Codes and Standards Committee, the Planning Consultant, City Attorney and City staff have been reviewing/discussing options for the code amendments for the four months. The Building Official also completed a comprehensive site survey of all gas facilities in New Hope. Due to the fact that most sites in New Hope are already developed, specific attention was given to past development trends to avoid making existing sites become non-conforming or discouraging new site improvements at the existing stations. Mr. McDonald stated that after the study on gasoline canopies was completed, it was determined that gas sales signage issues should also be review/updated because in the survey it was found that there were some violations and staff felt the ordinance should be updated. What staff is presenting are two different ordinances one specifically for gas canopies New Hope Planning Commission - 1 - March 2, 1994 and one for signage at gas sales facilities. The Codes and Standards Committee is recommending specific performance standards/ordinance amendments that will regulate the setbacks, signage, height and lighting of all gasoline fuel island canopies. The Committee is also recommending several minor revisions to the sign regulations. Both code amendments have been reviewed by the City Attorney and have been put in ordinance format. Mr. McDonald pointed out that due to the fact that gas island canopies are accessory structures to gas sales facilities, and since gas sales facilities are already conditional uses in their respective district, the Committee does not feel that it is necessary to treat the canopy as an independent conditional use permit. The Committee and the Planning Consultant have recommended that the performance standards for canopies be included in the Zoning Ordinance section that addresses accessory buildings, uses and equipment. Mr. McDonald stated that the Codes and Standards Committee and staff support these proposed ordinance amendments to create some uniformity for gas pump canopies located at automobile service stations and convenience stores with gas. The Commission had reviewed these recommendations at the January 4th Planning Commission meeting and directed that an informational meeting be conducted at the February Commission meeting with all New Hope gas sales facility owners/operators invited to give input on the performance standards being proposed. No gas sales facility owners/operators attended that informational meeting. Public notice for this hearing was published in the official newspaper of the City and the changes would be effective in all B~3 and B-4 Zoning Districts. Mr. McDonald proceeded to explain the specific changes being proposed to the ordinances. In Ordinance 93-08, the first change has to do with setbacks. It now states that "canopy setbacks shall be a minimum of fifteen (15) feet from the property line. Adequate visibility both on and off site must also be maintained. Canopies shall not be allowed in rear yards not abutting a public street." The reason the 1 § foot setback was chosen was that in the past the setback rule for service stations has been 10 feet and 20 feet has been the standard for convenience stores with gas. In the survey that was completed it was found that the property line setbacks ranged from 6 inches to 35 feet with the average being 20.4 feet. In order to avoid establishing a number of non-conforming sites, staff recommends a standard canopy setback of 1§ feet. This would result in only three of the 15 sites becoming non-conforming and these would then be grandfathered. Also there is a stipulation which prohebits the location of canopies in rear yards not abutting a street. Staff is recommending this because it was felt that the impact of canopy structures should not be borne by neighboring property owners. Mr. McDonald said staff is recommending language that "maximum canopy height may not exceed twenty (20) feet, and shall provide a minimum clarance of fourteen (14) feet, and also canopy facade (the distance between the top and bottom of the canopy) not exceed three (3) feet in height." The regulated clearance minimum height for a gas pump canopy is 14 feet. This allows reasonable access for larger than average vehicles. The existing regulations do not limit maximum height. Codes and Standards felt that a maximum height of 20 feet for a separate or attached canopy would be sufficient to accommodate any necessary signage or roof pitch, while avoiding a disproportionate size relationship with the principal structure. Given the 20 foot maximum height and the 14 foot minimum New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - March 2, 1994 clearance, this leaves a six foot span between those two in which to construct a canopy. Codes and Standards felt it was necessary to limit the size of the canopy facade and is recommending that a three foot facade be the maximum height permitted on any side of a gas station canopy, so there will not be a six foot facade on a gas canopy. Regarding the lighting the Committee is recommending language that the "reflected glaor or spill light may not exceed five-tenths (0.5) foot candles, as measured on the property line when abutting residential zoned property and one (1) foot candle when measured on the property line abutting other commercial or industrially zoned property." Currently the ordinance allows one foot candle when measured from a public right-of-way and four foot candles when measured from a residential property. The research that was done in other communities shows that motor fuel service facilities can be illunimated sufficiently when levels are reduced to one foot candle on the property line and five-tenths on a property line when abutting a residential zone. These lowered levels of candle footage will reduce the amount of spill over light, without jeopardizing the subject property's visibility. Mr. McDonald explained the signage language says that "signage may be allowed on the canopy in addition to wall and ground signage." That is a change. Currently our sign drdinance allows a commercial site only two signs. These signs may consist of two wall signs or a combination of one wall sign and one freestanding sign. The sign area may not exceed 15% of the front wall of the principal building or 125 square feet. Because gas pump canopies are located in front of a principal building making it the most prevalent structure on the site, it would be logical to assume that most businesses would select a facade or canopy as a primary location to identify their business. The issue is whether or not to provide additional square footage to accommodate a canopy sign, or limit signs to two locations and calculate it within the overall signage requirements. The City staff recommended that additional square footage for a canopy sign be provided because it will simplify the review process. It will create one additional sign location on the property, but staff thinks it will simplify sign calculation. Instead of trying to add up the square footage of all the signs to see if it matches the 125 feet, staff will be taking the 125 feet and applying it to the wall signage. There will be a separate category for the gasoline canopy. The last two recommendations have to do with allowing gas canopies as accessory structures. There was a lot of discussion with Codes and Standards as to whether or not to limit the overall size of the canopy. It is felt that a canopy usually covers an area that is already paved and impervious. Limiting the area of the canopy offers no drainage benefits. The function of a canopy is to shelter the customer servicing their automobile and limiting the size could reduce the effectiveness of the canopy's function. Staff and Codes and Standards recommend that the canopy size be dictated by setback and size constraints, not by specific area or size standards. Mr. McDonald went on to explain Ordinance 94-03 - Amending Gas Canopy and Gas Sales Signage Regulations. In September 1993, the City of New Hope approved a site plan for Uno-Ven motor fuels station and included in their approval was four 36 inch round signs located o the facia canopy. The City Sign Ordinance limits canopy signs to 12 inches in height and requires that the canopy signage to be included in calculating New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - March 2, 1994 the maximum sign area of the permissible wall sign. While this signage did not fully comply with existing regulations, it was approved with the understanding that no other wall or ground sign would be allowed without variance. The current code, section 3.465 of the sign code, addresses signage accessory to single occupancy business uses. This section of the code has five sections in it: front wall signs; side and rear wall signs; ground signs; roof signs; awning or canopy signs. No changes are recommended for the first four sections. Mr. McDonald explained the changes being recommended for the section on awning or canopy signs. The ordianance currently states that "letters" may be painted or affixed to an awning or canopy. Codes and Standards is recommending that this be changed to read "signs." This way the sign can have numbers or letters or graphic display on canopies. The second change is location, which states "signs shall be limited to one sign per canopy facia fronting onto a street." Right now there is no regulation about how .many signs could be on each facia of a canopy. The Committee is saying one per side that faces the street. The current ordinance regarding height states that letters shall not be larger from top to bottom than twelve inches. The Committee is recommending that the language be changed to say that the canopy sign shall not project above or below the physical dimensions of the awnings or canopy facia. The next change is on use. The' change just references "signs" rather than "letters" to recognize pictorial signs or Iogos. The current ordinance on maximum signage states that lettering or letter shall be included in calculating the maximum sign area of the permissible wall sign. The Committee is recommending that awning or canopy signage shall not exceed sixteen square feet per sign. Also awning or cnaopy signs shall be permitted in addition to maximum sign area of permissible wall or ground signs. This change would establish a specific size standard for canopy signs. Under the section signs accessory to gas sales in conjunction with automobile service stations, a change is being recommended that would expand the regulations that would address gas sales at convenience stores. Currently it only addresses gas sales at automobile service stations. The phrase "and convenience stores with gas sales" has been added. No change is recommended under oil racks, portable signs, or gasoline and price sign. The only change under tire racks is that tire racks be allowed only at automobile service stations not convenience stores. Codes and Standards is recommending that a new section be added - informational signage. Signs denoting operations instructions associated with self service gas facilities including gas pump, air supply and car washes are exempt from the maximum sign area standards. This change establishes new provision addressing self service facilities. During the recent inventory of gas station sites by City staff, it was noted that several locations were in violation of sign regulations. It is staff's intent, if these ordinance revisions are adopted to again mail out copies of the new and existing regulations and to request voluntary compliance with the sign code regulations. Staff will be informing all owners/operators that a City-wide inspection will be made this spring to check compliance and that staff will write orders up for any violations, as the City expects compliance with the ordinance. It was recommended by Mr. McDonald that a motion be made for each ordinance. New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - March 2, 1994 MOTION Item 4.1 MOTION Item 4.1 Motion by Commissioner Zak, seconded by Commissioner Cassen, to approve Planning Case 93-32, Ordinance 93-08, Amending the New Hope Zoning Code by Permitting Pump Island Canopies at Gas Stations and Convenience Stores as an Accessory Structure and Allowing Additional Signage on Canopies. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Lifson, Zak, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron Motion by Commissioner Zak, seconded by Commissioner Cassen, to approve Ordinance 94-03, Amending the New Hope Sign Code Regulating Canopy Signage and Other Signage Accessory to Gas Sales at Service Stations and Convenience Stores With Gas Sales. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Lifson, Zak, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron PC 94-02 Item 4.2 Vice Chairman Gundershaug introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Planning Case 94-02, Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of J.R. Jones Addition. Mr. McDonald stated that the petitioner, Robert Jones/J.R. Jones Fixture Company, is requesting a Preliminary Plat Approval of J.R. Jones Addition. In January the Planning Commission and City Council approved the site and building plan review and a conditional use permit for deferred parking for purposes of construcing an addition to the existing building. The petitioner currently owns the property at 32126 Winnetka Avenue Northy on the northeast corner of Winnetka and 36th Avenues and this is the site where the addition will be constructed. The petitioner has recently purchased the two vacant parcels to the north of this site at 3224 and 3232 Winnetka Avenue North and these parcels are where the deferred parking area will be located. All three parcels need to be combines and replatted into one lot to accommodate the development and platting was a condition of the approval for the building addition. Mr. McDonald stated that the Preliminary Plat was submitted and has been reviewed by the City Attorney, City Engineer, Department Heads, utility companies, Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Mr. McDonald pointed out that this property is located in an I-1 Limited Industrial Zoning District and meets all the set back requirements. The plat includes what is currently known as Lots 1 and 2, Pazandak Additiona, and the existing J.R. Jones property. These three parcels would be cominged into one parcel which would be known as Lot 1, Block 1, J.R. Jones Addition, and said plat would contain 6.254 acres or 272,403 square feet. The zoning code states that "if the preliminary plat is approved by the Planning Commission and City Council, the subdivider must submit the final plat within 100 days after said approval. Copies of the final plat shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation, unless this requirement is waived by the Planning Commission during their review of the preliminary plat." The petitioner is requesting that the Planning Commission waive their review of the final New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - March 2, 1994 plat to expedite the approval process. Due to the simple nature of the plat, staff has no problem with the request and recommends that the Commission agree to waive it's review of the final plat. That way the preliminary plat can go the City Council on March 14th and the final plat on March 28th. When comparing the plat with the zoning requirements, the minimum lot area for an I-1 district is one acre and this plat exceeds six acres. The minimum lot width is 150 feet and the minimum lot width of this plat is 573 feet. Therefore, the lot area and minimum width requirements are met. The City Engineer, City Attorney, and Hennepin County all recommended that the developer dedicate an additional seven feet of right- of-way on Winnetka. The only other major issue is Northern States Power who is requesting 1 § foot easement along the north lot line of the existing lot due to the fact that this line feeds most of the commercial park along Winpark Drive. No comments were received from utlity companies other than NSP, nor did the Minnesota Department of Transportation have any comments. The only other comment was that the City Attorney stated that title evidence showing ownership of the property would be necessary at the time of the final plat approval. The petitioner is in the process of providing that. Staff is recommending approval subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report and that they are incorporated in the final plat and staff is recommending that the Planning Commission agree to waive it's review of the final plat. Mr. Lawver, attorney for J.R. Jones Fixture Company, Bob Jones is present also, asked the Commission to approve everything that is requested or as advised by the staff. Vice Chairman Gundershaug asked if the recommendations requested by the City Attorney, City Engineer, NSP, and Hennepin County are all agreeable with what they presented. Mr. Lawver confirmed that the recommendations are agreeable. MOTION Item 4.2 Motion by Commissioner Zak, seconded by Commissioner Cassen to approve Planning Case 94-02 with the following conditions: Developer has to dedicate an additional seven (7) feet of right-of-way along Winnetka from 32nd Avenue to a point approximately 320 feet north, the existing driveways to Winnetka must be removed, NSP is requesting a fifteen (15) foot easement along the north lot line which must be there, also title evidence showing ownership of the property will be there at the time of the final plat. The Planning Commission will waive it's review of the final plat. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Lifson, Zak, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron PC 94-05 Item 4.3 Vice Chairman Gundershaug introduced for discussion Item 4.3, Planning Case 94-05, Request for Conditional Use Permit to Allow Outdoor Storage, Collins Electrical Systems, Inc., petitioner. Mr. McDonald stated that the petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor storage. Collins Asociates/Collins Electrical Systems is in the process of purchasing the Standard Iron building at 4990 New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - March 2, 1994 Highway 169 and is requesting a conditional use permit to store company trucks, trailers, and equipment in the rear yard. The existing lot contains 163,000 square feet, with the building size beinn 13,800 square feet and occupying eight percent of the property. The rear storage area occupies 163,000 square feet, with the building size beinn 13,800 square feet and occupying eight percent of the property. The rear storage area occupies approximately 11 percent of the property and the remainder of the lot of about 53 percent is green area. The property is zoned I-1 Limited Industrial and is bordered on the north and south with I-1 properties, on the east by a DNR regulated wetland. The Zoning Ordinance requires 33 parking spaces for this property and 36 spaces are provided. The topography of the property is flat with a ditch that crosses the property in the northeast corner draining into the adjacent wetlant at the east or rear of the property. Open accessory outdoor storage is allowed as a conditional accessory use in the I-1 Zone providing that the area is fenced and screened from the view of neighboring residential uses and that the storage area is greased or surfaced to control dust. The other conditions to be considered are the nature of adjoining land or buildings, whether or not a similar use is already in existance, and the effect upon traffic. Other conditions to be considered are whether the proposed conditional use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, whether it is compatible with adjacent land uses, whether it would tend to depreciate the property values in the area. Also in the I-1 Zoning District some things to be considered are nuisance characteristics generated by the use should not have an adverse effect upon existing and future development, and that the use will provide an economic return to the community and commensurate with other industrial uses that the property could feasibly be used for. The petitoner met with the Design and Review Committee on February lOth and explained that the company is a commercial/industrial electrical contractor who has expanded into outdoor construction, including the installation of traffic lights, light standards, etc. The company desires to sotre up to 20 vehicles, 18 trailers and 11 bobcats/diech-witches/backhoes and other miscellaneous equipment, such as light standard storage in the rear of the building. The petitioner stated that 95 percent of the time the majority of the equipment/vehicles are staged at the job site and employees drive to and from the job site. The exception would be when a vehicle is in for repair or maintenance. Issues discussed by Design and Review included screening of the equipment, surfacing of the site, the wetland/drainage issues, truck turning radius, trash enclosure, snow storage, landsaping, lighting and curbing. The petitioner was asked to check with the Watershed District on the wetland issue. This was checked into and this issue does not require Watershed approval because it is such a small site. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the Design and Review that include the changes that were requested. Curbing has been added to the south side of storage area so equipment could not be parked right up to the property line, snow storage gates have been added, the truck maneuvering area has been revised to show adequate semi-truck turning room, the trash storage area is at the southeast corner of the building, a seven foot chain-link fence with barrier slats have been added to the north side of the building, a proposed future ponding easement will be on the north side of the lot, also a detailed landscape plan has been submitted showing significant existing landscaping around the perimeter of the New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - March 2, 1994 property and also an area in front of the building has been labeled "future landscaping and planting to be determined in this area after snow melts." New asphalt paving is shown on the plans in the storage areas, and three new light pole standards, as discussed in Design and Review, have been shown on the plan as well as a wall light on the east wall of the warehouse. Mr. McDonald stated there are really only two issues. The first issue being the landscaping. The Commission needs to decide if this will be left open, whether a particular dollar amount should be included, or should the petitioner resolve this issue with the staff once the snow melts. Also the City Engineer requested that an entire easement for the pond Iow area in the back be granted to the City providing the total easement. The petitioner has basically agreed to this. There is a concern that the City provide a legal description for the easement. Staff still has to identify the easement area. This could be approved with the understanding that easements will be granted and the terms of locating it and identifying it will be worked out prior the the City Council meeting. Mr. Halva, attorney for the corporation, also present is Richard Boe, stated that the easement will be no problem. He thought the City would provide the description, but said the surveyor could be called and this would be worked out. At this time the closing for this property is scheduled for June 1st. It is possible the closing could be sooner if the financing can be straightened out. As soon as the snow is off the ground, Collins Electric will have a professional landscaper look at the property. There is not a large area that can be dealt with other than an area in the front of the property. There is a possibility of rock and flowers being put in the easement area which is now grassed. The plan for the company is for an outside service to take care of the yard. There is an underground watering system on this property. Collins is anticipating approximately $500 to $1000 for landscaping. It is not known now what can be done with the easement area now existing. Commissioner Watschke asked about striping the vehicle storage area to identify it as it is not fenced in on the plans. Mr. Halva answered that their intent is to stripe the perimeter of the area to segregate this area from the rest of the property. The entire area within the fence is all paved. Commissioner Watschke also questioned whether the petitioner is aware of the sign ordinance in New Hope and if a new sign is needed the petitioner should talk with the staff. Mr. Halva answered that he has talked to Mr. Sandstad and they discussed the signage. The amount of signage that is allowed is more than what is needed. The petitioner is thinking about putting a sign on the upper part of the building in the rear with the company logo and possible some lettering on the front of the building. It is not anticipated that there will be a large amount of signage. Commissioner Watschke stated that the petitioner could work directly with the staff on the landscaping issue. Mr. Boe stated that because part of the property is county easement, he didn't think he could do any plantings. He may put in some sort of rock islands with some small plants, flowers or arbevitae and have the sprinkler system water these areas. Vice Chairman Gundershaug questioned the area of the fence. The existing fence will be moved 60 feet to the east and the new fence on the north exposure will have the visual barriers. For clairty on the plans, the fencing should be changed. New Hope Planning Commission - 8 - March 2, 1994 MOTION Item 4.3 COMMITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Item 6.1 Codes & Standards Item 6.2 ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Lifson asked about the equipment, whether or not this is always kept at the job site or stored at this location. The exception to this could be in the winter. The equipment in question deals with oudoor construction. The equpment is stored on the trailers, not individually placed side by side it it is on the property. Commissioner Lifson asked whether they have bought the property already. Mr. Boe stated that they have signed a purchase agreement and are proceeding to the closing. Commissioner Cassen asked about the slats on the chain-link fence and if these slats go all the way around the outside. Mr. Boe said the visual barrier slats are on the north side only. There is a building on oe side of the property with no windows facing the property, there are trees only on one side of the property, and buildings on another side of he property but close to Boone Avenue. This is not visual from the park area. Motion by Commissioner Watschke, seconded by Commissioner Cassen, to approve the conditional use permit to allow outdoor storage at 4990 Highway 169 North, Collins Electric, Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: that the installation of landscaping in th front area of the building be initially determined with staff and Collins Electric and that it be installed within eight months of approval date; and that the easement/ ponding area be expanded per the City Engineer's recommendation showing a new easement and legal description, and the terms of identifying the easement be finalized prior to the Council meeting. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Lifson, Zak, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron No report. The Committee is trying to set up a meeting with Ponderosa and will try to see if some kind of compromise can be made. The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Re_~_~ectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester Recording Secretary New Hope Planning Commission - 9 - March 2, 1994 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 5, 1994 City Hall, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 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. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen Lifson, Watschke Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Sarah Bellefuil, Administrative Analyst, and Alan Brixius, Northwest Consultants CONSENT There were no consent items on this agenda. PC 93-23 *Item 4.1 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.1, request for Final Plat Approval of Northwest Church Addition, 8624 50th Avenue North. Mr. McDonald explained that this is the final plat of Northwest Church Addition. This was considered last fall and was tabled due to the fact that there were a number of issues that needed to be addressed. The Commission requested that the final plat come back for review and approval. The basic issues were sOme changes in the legal description on the plat, easements that needed to be shown on the plat, and the major issue was storm drainage. Since last fall the City constructed a storm sewer improvement project in that area and the Church did agree to participate financially and their property was improved with catch basins and concrete curbing. Mr. McDonald stated that he reviewed all the final plat recommendations in the staff report with the Church and they are agreeable to all of the recommendations. Staff is recommending approval subject to 1) a landscaping buffer be installed between the house and the church, 2) all existing asphalt within three feet of the property line, both north and south, be eliminated, 3) the existing driveway connection between the church and the driveway serving the house be removed, 4) a portion of the driveway be reconstructed to adequately accommodate vehicle access to the existing garage - after talking to the church, this is already in place, 5) the church pays the consulting expenses incurred by the City. Chairman Cameron asked if the church has agreed to all these recommendations. He also asked what kind of landscaping buffer would be installed by the church. Mr. McDonald answered that staff asked the church to come up with a plan and present it to staff before it is installed, shrubs and trees, etc., no berming, just a vision site barrier. Commissioner Zak asked if permanent curbing was required. Mr. McDonald stated that there was some curbing installed with the drainage improvement. There is curbing on the east side. The parking lot is bituminous. Commissioner Sonsin asked if evidence of title was completed yet. Mr. McDonald stated that the City would not sign off on the plat until that is provided. This point can be part of the condition in the motion. Pastor New Hope Planning Commission - I - April 5, 1994 MOTION Item 4.1 PC 94-07 *Item 4.2 Copeland stated that this has already been submitted. Motion by Commissioner Zak, seconded by Commissioner Sonsin, to approve Planning Case 93-23, Final Plat Approval of Northwest Church Addition with the following conditions: 3. 4. 5. J A suitable landscaping buffer be installed on the north side of the church property to buffer the house from the church with plan submitted to and approved by City staff. All existing asphalt within three feet (north and south) of the new property line be removed. The existing driveway connection between the church and the driveway serving the house be removed. A portion of new driveway be reconstructed to adequately accommodate vehicle access to the existing garage. All consulting expenses incurred by the City as a result of this plat and drainage improvement be reimbursed to the City by the church. Provide evidence of title to the City. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Zak, $onsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen None Lifson, Watschke Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Planning Case 94- 07, Request for Variance to Allow Air Conditioning Compressor in the Side Yard at 3432 Ensign Avenue North, Michael Stiegler, petitioner. Mr. McDonald stated that the petitioner, is requesting a variance to the requirement that air conditioning cooling structures or condensers be located in the rear yard behind the rear building line to allow an air conditioner in the side yard less than five feet from the property line. Mr. McDonald explained that the purpose of this request is to allow the relocation of an existing air conditioner in the side yard that was displaced by a recent addition on the rear of the home. The proposed location of the compressor is on the north side of the property along the garage. This relocation leaves only three feet between the compressor and the property line and City code, besides not allowing the compressor in the side yard, requires a five foot setback. The property directly to the north has a garage and family room on the side of the house that would be next to the proposed air conditioning compressor. The bedrooms are on the opposite 'sides of both homes. Mr. McDonald referred to the petitioner's letter that was included with the report stating why the petitioner felt the compressor should be moved to the side yard on the north side of the house. The home was built in 1965; swimming pool built in 1972; addition built in 1993. The existing structure meets all setback requirements. The property is located in an R-l, Single Family Residential Zoning District and is surrounded by single-family land uses on three sides and Sonnesyn Elementary School directly behind the property to the east. The topography of the property slopes downward from a front yard elevation of 961 to 952 at the rear property next to the school property. New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - April 5, 1994 Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified, and the property owner directly to the north has inquired about the plans and expressed concern abOUt noise from the air conditioning compressor. Staff invited this property owner to be present at this meeting or submit a letter stating his opinion, which staff has not received. Mr. McDonald explained that City Code states that certain structural elements or equipment shall not be considered as encroachments on yard setback requirements, however, air conditioners are not allowed as encroachments in side yards, thus a variance is required. Section 4.032(3) of the Code, "Accessory Buildings, Uses and Equipment" further states that "no accessory uses or equipment such as air conditioning cooling structures or condensers which generate noise may be located in a required side yard except for side yards abutting streets and in such case the equipment shall be fully screened from view. This property is an interior lot and the side yard does not abut a street. Mr. McDonald stated in 1992, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve an ordinance amendment to the section of the City Code regulating air conditioner setbacks. The amendment addressed the replacement of air conditioning condensers currently located in side yards as non-conforming uses. The code amendment allowed people to replace existing units without application for a variance as long as certain conditions were met, but that code amendment doesn't address this situation because this is a relocation. In the staff report, the intentions of the City Code were outlined, the basic concerns being the noise and aesthetic problems. Mr. McDonald further explained this particular situation involves a neighbor's family room approximately 12 feet away. The petitioner and the neighbor, who came to City Hall, have had some conversation since staff spoke with the neighbor. The Building Official has spoken to both the petitioner and the neighbor about some type of acoustical barrier around the air conditioning unit. The petitioner, Michael Stiegler, explained the conversation with his neighbor. Mr. Stiegler stated that his neighbor and he are on extremely good terms and wants the situation remedied satisfactorily for everyone. Initially Mr. Stiegler told his neighbor he would not do it if they were opposed to it. City staff has come up with a design for the acoustic barrier. Mr. Stiegler has since learned that without a variance he could do something that would be worse for his neighbor, so Mr. Stiegler feels that his neighbors criticism has softened a little. The air conditioning unit could go in the corner by his family room and be within code without a variance. This would put the unit more in direct proximity with his neighbor's family room door and a barrier would not be necessary. This would be advantageous for Mr. Stiegler in that he would still have access to his side yard and he would not have to build a barrier. The new addition has a deck where the air conditioning unit could go, unfortunately he would have to take it down to put in the unit. Even putting the unit in this location, and building a barrier, the noise would still carry to the neighbor's family room. Mr. Stiegler has decided to continue with this petition to keep his options open. He would rather continue in the quieter way, which requires the variance. The reason the petitioner would prefer not to have the unit in the back yard is that all the bedrooms are in the back yard, and a fair amount of pool equipment has just been moved away from the house in New HOpe Planning Commission - 3 - April 5, 1994 order to free up the yard for some landscaping. The neighbor's air conditioning unit is on the other side of the house next to the bedroom. Mr. Stiegler's air conditioning unit was in the rear yard but further away from the neighbor. Commissioner Underdahl questioned whether air conditioning units are really that noisy. Mr. Stiegler said that they are getting a new unit which would be much quieter than their 15-year-old unit. The air conditioner is not running that often. Really only two months of heavy use and it is not running during the day while they are at work. Commissioner Underdahl asked if he will be building the barrier. Mr. Stiegler answered that he would be building the barrier if he does indeed go with the variance. Commissioner Sonsin asked Mr. Stiegler if he would consider putting the air conditioner further west, toward the front yard, along the garage to get it a larger distance away from the neighbor's family room. Mr. Stiegler said that moving the unit closer to the front probably would not matter since that space along the side is ruined by it anyhow so where it is along the garage doesn't matter. That would be a consideration. Would the barrier need to be longer if the unit was moved further west. Commissioner Sonsin said that the barrier needed to be around the unit no matter where it is located. Mr. Stiegler also mentioned that most of his neighbor's family room wall was chimney, but that the noise would probably direct itself at the door. Commissioner Cassen asked Mr. Stiegler if he would consider extending the privacy fence around the air conditioner so it is not viewed from the front. Mr. Stiegler answered that they were intending to do that anyhow, and bring it square with the front of the garage to add some additional storage space in the yard since that corridor would be obliterated by the air conditioner. The shrubs would not be needed then, just the fence. MOTION Item 4.2 Motion by Commissioner Underdahl, seconded by Commissioner Sonsin to approve Planning Case 94-07 with the following conditions: Submit detailed plans for an "acoustical barrier" to be installed along the north side of the equipment that is substantial enough to eliminate direct noise and substantially reduce the indirect noise at the property line, compared to a normal air conditioning installation. Agree to install and maintain the barrier within 14 days of the air conditioning installation. Agree to meet with the City Building Official and the neighbor to discuss the plan for the noise barrier and its paint/stain colors at least 14 days prior to the installation. (NOTE: ACOUSTICAL WALLS ARE SOLID AND DENSE, SUCH AS 2" X 6" Tongue & Groove Cedar or heavier. The bottom will be buried in the soil several inches and the top will be five or six feet tell to deflect most of the noise upward.) Face to be extended to front of garage to shield compressor from street or two 18 inch shrubs (lilac or spirea) to be installed six to ten feet west of air conditioning unit. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen None Lifson, Watschke New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - April 5, 1994 Motion carried. PC 94-06 *Item 4.3 Chairman cam~r0n i~tr0duced for discussion Item 4.3, Planning Case 94- 06, Request for Rezoning from an R-l, Single Family residential Zoning District to a PUD, Planned Unit Development Zoning District, at 2775 Winnetka Avenue North (7901 28th Avenue North), Paul T. Wrobel, petitioner. Mr. Brixius stated that the request is for rezoning from an R-l, Single Family Residential Zoning District, to a PUD, Planned Unit Development, Zoning District. In January and February, 1994, Dr. Wrobel requested a rezoning from an R-l, Single Family Zoning District to an R-O, Residential Office District. The Planning Commission recommended denial and the Council followed this recommendation with concern expressed over the expansion of commercial use. At the time of Planning Commission review and subsequently by the City Council, there were opinions expressed that the use as it exists today does not present a concern in that the use has existed since 1963 and has not stood out as a commercial site and has not been a problem area and suggestions were made as to how to accommodate the existing use without rezoning to R-O. At the request of Council, staff prepared options. First to look at a PUD Zoning District. This mechanism already exists in the City Code as a means to allow a mixed use zoning option. Second to rezone to an R-2 and amend the district to accommodate some commercial office use in that district. Concerns were expressed by staff as to that amendment opening up the rest of that district to other commercial operations. As a result staff made a recommendation to pursue the PUD option. Mr. Brixius explained that in the PUD, the first floor would be established as a residential use as it exists today, and the lower floor for a dental clinic. The PUD offers a mixed use arrangement. In evaluating the rezoning, staff does not believe there was a previous mistake made in establishing the R-1 District. However, the change of character, staff feels there is a difference between the PUD zoning that is being requested now and the previous R-O. The 1963 special use permit that allowed the dental clinic to establish the land use has been in character with the neighborhood and has contributed to the character of the neighborhood. In this regard staff feels that its continuation would not be out of character · and its discontinuation would actually change the character of the neighborhood. Staff feels there is some validation for giving consideration to this rezoning. Mr. Brixius explained in allowing for the use, specific performance standards that would be incorporated into a PUD agreement that must be followed. Those performance standards would outline the terms of the use and would include for residential uses: first floor would retain for residential use and occupance; residential access would be obtained from 28th Avenue; parking would be restricted to the driveway and garage area on 28th Avenue; access or entrance would not be shared with commercial use, future land use conversion would incorporate some flexibility and may include a single-family use or two-family use, to be consistent with the R-2 that exists on the west. Commercial land use restrictions would be: commercial land use would be limited to the lower floor of the building with no expansion on first floor, some flexibility was given on this if there is additional space on the lower floor that could be converted for the commercial activities; commercial access must be obtained from Winnetka Avenue; all commercial parking must be provided on site from Winnetka New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - April 5, 1994 Avenue, no commercial parking would be allowed on 28th Avenue, the residential driveway or the garage area; off-street parking must provide one handicap parking stall as van accessible; proposed parking configuration is revised so that off-street parking stalls are fully accessible at all times, in no case can parking block other stalls; it has to be demonstrated that the use does not require loading or the size of the use or the type of the use does not require any type of truck loading; provide trash enclosures, if trash is contained inside the building then this is addressed; no exterior lighting; any new on-site signage to comply with the sign ordinance; also expanded was the previous home occupation permit to allow employees not residing on the premises to work in the office area and also no restriction on the number of employees if all parking standards are met; to ensure that all conditions are upheld and recorded with the property, to enter into a PUD agreement with the City to address or to outline these conditions and make them run with the property. Chairman Cameron asked Dr. Wrobel if he was okay with all these conditions. Mr. McDonald stated that Dr. Wrobel was in agreement with the report. Commissioner Underdahl wondered if there is room enough for nine parking stalls as stated. Mr. Brixius stated that the existing parking will be adequate. The existing use and operation is not expanding. Chairman Cameron noted that the lower level does not specifically state dental, but office. Mr. Brixius stated that staff is allowing for some change. Commissioner Sonsin asked if a condition should be included for some type of annual inspection for this building. Commissioner Cassen asked Mr. Brixius to expand on no exterior lighting, is this parking lot lighting only, with building lighting being allowed for safety codes. Mr. Brixius stated that lighting associated with residential use would certainly be accommodated. Commissioner Gundershaug asked about laundry facilities for the residential level of the home. According to Dr. Wrobel right now laundry facilities are located on the lower level with access through the stairway and through the hallway into the laundry room. If there was a different type of business in the lower level that did not allow this, it could be changed. There is no outside access to the laundry room. Chairman · Sonsin stated that a provision could be included that no outdoor access or entrance will be shared with commercial use. Staff is not looking to disrupt the existing internal patterns, but it is not staffs wish to have traffic going through one or the other uses. The way the code is stated now is that commercial use cannot have access to the upstairs, but it does not say that residential cannot have access to the lower level so as it states now residential could use the laundry area in the lower level assuming the owners and tenants agree. Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Underdahl to recommend approval Planning Case 94-06 request for a PUD, Planned Unit Development Zoning District, rezoning at 2775 Winnetka Avenue subject to the following conditions: Residential: The first floor will retain residential use/occupancy; residential access must be obtained from 28th Avenue; residential parking will be restricted to the driveway and garage area on 28th Avenue; access or entrance to the commercial area will not be obtained through .the residential area; future land use conversion New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - April 5, 1994 MOTION Item 4.3 to residential may include single or two family residential; and CommerCial: COmmercial land use to be limited to lower floor of building and no expansion of use to the first floor; commercial access must be obtained from Winnetka Avenue; all commercial parking provided on site with access from Winnetka Avenue with no commercial parking allowed on 28th Avenue or residential driveway/garage area; the off-street parking lot is revised to illustrate one handicap parking stall that is van accessible, as required by Minnesota state law; the proposed off-street parking configuration to be revised so that all off-street parking stalls are fully accessible at all times and in no case may parked vehicles block access to other designated off-street parking stalls; the applicant must demonstrate that the property does not require a loading berth; the property is subject to annual inspection by City staff to insure that provisions being kept; owner must provide a trash enclosure for the commercial part; no commercial exterior lighting; any new on-site signage comply with applicable provisions of the City Sign Ordinance; employees are not required to reside on premises; no restrictions placed on the number of employees, provided that all parking standards are met; the applicant shall enter into a PUD development agreement with the City, to be prepared by the City' Attorney, and annual inspection by staff. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen None Lifson, Watschke PC 94-08 *Item 4.4 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Planning Case 94-08, Request for Site and Building Plan Review, Preliminary Plat to Subdivide Property, Conditional Use Permit for Shared Driveway Access and Variances to Lot Width and Parking Requirements for Construction of Office/Warehouse at 7300/7400 49th Avenue North, Hoyt Development/ J-S Winnetka, Inc., petitioner. Mr. Brixius showed a graphic on the overhead illustrating the location and configuration of the parcel located off of 49th Avenue and just north or Quebec Avenue. As illustrated on the screen, Hoyt Development wishes to subdivide the existing 19 acre parcel into two lots and one outlot. The outlot is on the western portion, Lot 1 is split with access off of 49th and Lot 2 is the remaining triangular piece abutting up against the railroad tracks. In consideration of this development proposal, a number of approvals have been asked for. First, preliminary plat approval; second, site and building plan approval; third, conditional use permit for a shared access; fourth, a variance from lot width, Lot 2 has less than 150 feet of frontage along 49th Avenue. Mr. Brixius continued with the review of the plat and a number of issues that were sited. Past history on this is that this was at one time looked at for an extension of Quebec Avenue and access by a cul-de-sac. In looking at this parcel, the development of Quebec Avenue involved the acquisition of the Jacobwith property. The Jacobwith property is not for sale at this time or in the past and the City or Mr. Hoyt have not been able to convince Mr. Jacobwith that it would be in his best interests to sell. Mr. New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - April 5, 1994 Hoyt has an immediate development interest in this property. An 80,000 square foot warehouse facility, and in light of the economic development opportunities that exist staff is going to look at this subdivision. Mr. Brixius went on to explain the lot area of both lots exceed the I-1 standards. The lot width for Lot 1 is 280 feet, Lot 2 however at 49th Avenue exists at 117 feet which requires a variance. In consideration of the configuration of the railroad tracks and the necessary setbacks for the buildings here staff feels that a variance for lot width is justified by physical hardship unique to this site and that the setback will not create any limitation due to the lot width, therefore, staff is recommending approval of the variance. Standard setbacks: front yard setback off of 49th is 50 feet; side yard setback is 20 feet; and rear yard setback is 35 feet. Both lots are capable of providing these required setbacks. Regarding the easement issue in Lot 2 there is a stormwater utility that runs north and south on the property. The concern with this utility is that it is approximately 200 feet from the western property line. Lot 1 is 280 feet in width and provides adequate setback for the buildings and provision of parking. If development does occur on this the 200 foot depth between the west property line and the easement could be a restriction. Staff just makes note that in approving the plat, and put it on record, that relocation of that utility may be necessary for future building location. Other utility easement issues are that each property line must have at least a 10 foot utility easement along all rear and other lot lines. At the site there is a railroad spur that runs through the property. In the legal description of the property there is no easement that establishes that railroad spur. Staff is concerned that at some time that spur access may be limited without an easement being established. The access easement of both Lots 1 and 2 are intended to have shared access off of 49th Avenue via a 32 foot curb- cut. Over this access easement, a description must be provided. Staff is also asking for covenants being posted against both properties limiting their access solely to this shared access point. Additionally there is wetland and ponding on the northern portions of the site that are required to implement the City Stormwater Management Plan and easements over these stormwater ponding areas are essential and will be required at the time of final platting. Mr. Brixius went on to explain that the City Engineer has reviewed the grading and drainage plans and his comments are enclosed in the packets regarding stormwater management in addition to the easements. Outlot A is being platted as an outlot via a recommendation from City staff. The intent of this outlot is to give the potential for some reuse in the future when the Jacobwith property or the property along 49th offers an opportunity for redevelopment. Then the City will have a site that is large enough to accommodate more contemporary industry. Staff indicated that there was concern regarding the curb-cut proximity to the railroad tracks and being jogged from Quebec. Mr. Brixius indicated that the City Engineer feels that the shared arrangement is more attractive than other alternatives that are available and feels that it is acceptable. Regarding the site plan review, Mr. Brixius stated that the proposed development would consist of a 78,400 square foot warehouse facility on Lot 1. This is a permitted use within the I-1 district. The site plan illustrates zoning setbacks, building height is not to exceed three stories, the proposed building is two stories with a 25 foot height which conforms to requirements, Most recently staff changed the office/ warehouse restrictions for parking and under these new rules the proposed building is New Hope Planning Commission - 8 - April 5, 1994 in conformance with the current parking requirements. The 90 degree parking as illustrated on the plan conforms with dimension and design standards. ApprOPriate handicap parking stalls must be shown on the site and curb must be provided along the driveway and parking areas. Mr. Brixius stated that concern is raised with the availability of snow storage on the site. Also there is concern between access easement and the parking area. There is a five foot island that is intended to separate parking and traffic lanes and to provide some snow storage. Staff feels that five feet will not perform that function. A suggestion is that parking on the east side of the building be angled at 60 degrees to allow a narrower parking lot. Chairman Cameron asked how much more area would be acquired with the angled parking. Mr. Brixius stated that this would provide an additional five feet, so there would then be a 10 foot island instead of five feet as originally proposed. Mr. Brixius explained that property access would be shared access. Staff requests that as a requirement of this that covenants be established that both lots are required to use that, Staff feels that a 32 foot wide access is appropriate, however, by ordinance it has to be approved by the City Engineer. The City Engineer, in his comments, has made this recommendation. Six loading berths are being provided at the north end of the building. Staff is requesting that maneuvering space be of adequate dimension to provide turn around even for the northerly most loading berth. An extension of the "hammerhead" was recommended. Trash enclosures must be identified if intended for exterior storage. There is some concern with the landscaping area, the junipers and the five foot curb island width. All signage must comply with City Ordinances. The petitioner conforms with the green space requirements. Mr. Brixius explained that during Design and Review there was discussion regarding a sidewalk between the building and parking area for pedestrian movement within the site. Mr. Brixius stated that generally the subdivision and the site plan that has been submitted basically fulfills some of the objectives that the City outlined as far as economic development. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject to the approval of the lot width variances and the modification of the plat in conformance with the recommendations outlined in the staff report. Chairman Cameron asked why Outlot A? Mr. Brixius answered that previously the plat was submitted without the outlot and Lot 1 extended in a flag shape. Staff's objective, with the building location as it is identified on the plat, was that access would be cut off and any future development hindered. The ultimate plans are to obtain the Jacobwith property and also there is a small industrial building immediately west of the Jacobwith property. The Jacobwith property is a residential in an industrial zone which is a non-conforming use and it is the goal to redevelop this property to a contemporary industrial use. Commissioner Gundershaug asked who owns the land in the meantime and was told that Mr. Hoyt owns this,, unless he would sell it with Lot 1. in the meantime this property is landlocked and just sitting on the tax rolls. Mr. Brixius stated that the alternative that was discussed by staff is that a combination or the use of the Jacobwith property individually would be very difficult, but if it is combined with the property to the west it is useable. As an outlot a building permit cannot be obtained until it is New Hope Planning Commission - 9 - April 5, 1994 platted again. Chairman Cameron stated he thought it makes sense to leave it independent so it is available if someone else is interested. Mr. Brixius added that the lot would require some land assembly latter on, but being attached to Lot 1 was not going to serve a purpose because the building would cut it off from the balance of the property. Commissioner Underdahl questioned who owned the industrial building west of the farm and if it is privately owned. Mr. Brixius stated he did not know the owners. Commissioner Underdahl also wanted to know if the land behind the building all the way to the railroad tracks is part of Lot 1 and if this is going to be developed or stay a grassy area. Mr. Brixius stated that this is now a wetland and is managed by the wetland conservation rules and also it was identified by the City's Stormwater Management Plan as a ponding area. Most likely it will continue to exist as wetlands. The area north of the railroad spur is designated wetland. Under the wetland rules it will stay open to this. According to Mr. Brixius, the City Engineer's report indicates that some wetlands are going to be filled but mitigation requires placement at a 2-to-1 ratio. There may have to be some expansion on the wetland in that case. Chairman Cameron asked about the railroad spur and if it is illegal. Mr. Brixius stated he did not know if the railroad did it by lease but apparently did not do it by easement or else it would have shown in the description or the survey. The concern that staff has is that there is access to the railroad by a spur to another property and without documentation of or permission for that railroad spur to continue to exist there that access may be eliminated. Staff is looking for a means to preserve that railroad spur. It is a functioning railroad spur. Mr. Brad Hoyt came to the podium to answer questions from the Commission. Hoyt explained the building elevations to the Commission. Commissioner Cassen asked if any other consideration was given about textured block to break up the long walls since the Design and Review meeting. Mr. Hoyt replied that the front of the building will have a curb and wall system on the two rounded corners with glass intersection, the east and west walls of the building will have, per staff recommendations, an accent stripe that will line up with the windows on the second floor of the building, that will go around the perimeter of the building which will be approximately 10 feet high. Commission Cassen asked about the color of the building. Mr. Hoyt stated that there was a meeting with the designer and expected some recommendations back soon. Neutral colors are expected. Commissioner Cassen questioned whether a sign would be installed stating "no trucks allowed." This should be shown On the plan that no trucks are allowed traveling east. Also brought up was if consideration has been given to sidewalk along designated off-street parking areas. Mr. Hoyt explained that this is something not ordinarily done because of the overhang of car bumpers and the sidewalks, in winter, are not maintained the way they should be and the parking lot area is generally a better place to walk because it is plowed and sanded. The sidewalk also takes away from the green area. The tenant doesn't have a strong desire for sidewalks so there is no strong urge to put it there. Mr. Hoyt stated that past experience is that employees generally do not use it. If it is a problem though, a sidewalk could be installed. Commissioner Cassen suggested that this still be considered since the building is so long. Commissioner Cassen questioned whether the exterior and down-lighting have been marked on the plans and where are they going to be. Mr. Hoyt New Hope Planning Commission - 10 - April 5, 1994 explained that the lighting would be downcast shoe-box style fixtures. What is usually done is a laminar plan which is furnished by the electrician. This provides lighting at the curb lines in the parking lot. There should also be lights over the exit doors, one on the west side and a couple on the east. The problem of snow storage was also brought up by Commissioner Cassen. The area between the loading dock and the car parking area and additionally there is an area to the north of the truck dock area that will be utilized for snow storage. It is not anticipated to use any area in front of the building for snow storage. Isn't the portion between the loading dock and parking area supposed to be landscaped or just grass. Mr. Hoyt explained that it should be grass as it exists now. It is delineated as a wetland and will stay as is at this time. The area with the landscaping is also designated as snow storage. Won't this disrupt the landscaping? Wilt the snow storage to the north of the dock area be sufficient? Mr. Hoyt replied that the snow storage would not interfere with the spruce trees in that landscaped area. Commissioner Cassen stated that the snow storage in the center island should possibly be moved to another location since there is not a lot of space there. Commissioner Gundershaug is concerned that there is not enough snow storage and moving the snow around on the lot could be difficult with the narrow driveway. If the snow is to be hauled away, it should be noted on the plan. This should all be taken care of before going to Council. Mr. Hoyt replied that he would get this taken care of before Council. Commissioner Cassen also asked if there would be a problem with angled parking so the island could be 10 feet wide. Mr. Hoyt replied that he had no problem with that. He also said that probably both parking areas would be angled to stay consistent. Commissioner Gundershaug asked if trash storage is outside or inside and Mr. Hoyt answered that it will be inside. There will be a bailer inside to take care of the cardboard. Commissioner Gundershaug stated that he is disappointed that all of the recommendations made at the Design and Review meeting were not incorporated into the plans yet. He felt that two weeks should have been enough time to get those changes made. Mr. Hoyt replied that there would be four roof top units, painted to match the building. There will be pylon signs used that will comply with the City Ordinance. Commissioner Underdahl asked if the only pedestrian doors are the one by the loading dock area and the two by the circle. Mr. Hoyt replied that there is an exit door on the west side, the main entry doors are on the southeast corner of the building, a fire exit door in the middle of the east side of the building, and a truck access door next to the loading docks. There is also a fire access door on the west wall. There are no doors on the north elevation. Commissioner Underdahl asked if snow could be stored on the other side of the driveway. Mr. Hoyt replied that is not part of his property. He will be the owner of the building and continue to own the land. Right now he feels snow storage is not a problem but will be checked into further as development of the balance of the property begins. Mr. Hoyt clarified questions that were raised earlier regarding the rail spur. New Hope Planning Commission - 11 - April 5, 1994 This exists today as a private document between the railroad and the property owners. He is in the center of it. The spur serves the warehouses to the west. Part of his purchase agreement with the Soo Line is that he cannot interfere with that. It is recorded as a document number, and he will get copies for staff and the City Attorney to review. As far as it being a rail spur easement, it all lies in an area that is not developed anyway. Chairman Cameron stated that staff and the Commission just wants to be sure it is legal and that this does not cause problems in the future. Mr. Hoyt said that his agreement with the railroad requires that he remove the paved area that currently runs along the tracks. Regarding Outlot A, this will just be left alone until the Jacobwith property becomes available. Chairman Cameron questioned how many people will be working at this location and was told there will be 75 employees. MOTION Item 4.4 Motion was made by Commissioner Cassen, seconded by Commissioner Gundershaug, to approve Planning Case 94-08 Preliminary Plat to Subdivide Property with the following recommendations: Co Ge The preliminary plat is modified to illustrate all required building setbacks. The following easements are to be established: 1. Drainage and utility easements at least ten feet in width along rear and other lot lines. 2. A rail easement over the rail spur which bisects the subject site. 3. An access easement over the shared access drive to provide joint access to Lots I an 2 and to accommodate loading movements. 4. Properly sized drainage, ponding and utility easements over the storm water ponding area must be established and dedicated with the final plat approval. Restrictive covenants be drafted/filed which require all access to Lots 1 and 2 to be achieved only via the proposed shared access. Such covenants should include a maintenance agreement which stipulates maintenance responsibilities for the proposed shared access drive. All covenants shall be subject to City approval. Provide City Attorney with an updated Abstract of Title for the abstract portion of the property and a Registered Property Abstract for the property in the Torrens systems. Change the approval and acceptance language for the City Council on the plat to the City of New Hope. Revise the preliminary plat to delete the dash line that is parallel to, and south of the railroad property line at the north of Lots 1 and 2. The entire area is now within a drainage and utility easement. Easement to be defined and recorded for the shared utility and driveway access. Waiver of review of the final plat of the Planning Commission. MOTION Voting in favor: Cassen Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, None Lifson, Watschke Motion by Commissioner Cassen, seconded by Commissioner New Hope Planning Commission - 12 - April 5, 1994 Item 4.4 Gundershaug, to approve Site and Building Plan, Conditional Use Permit for Shared Driveway, and Variances to Lot Width and Parking Requirements with the following conditions: Gm Je K. L. M. N. O. P. Time limit to complete the grading to be specified in Development Agreement and inthe event stockpiled material is hauled off-site, the specifics for that work shall be stated and reviewed by the City (working hours, dust control, etc.). The pond grading at a minimum include that which is required for this plat (Lots 1 and 2 and Outlot A). Ponding shall comply with the Shingle Creek Watershed and New Hope's Surface Water Management Plan. The pond grading by the developer at a minimum include grading Pond SC-P4.9 (Cells A and B) to allow development of Lots I and 2. The outlet pipe and control structure for Pond SC-P4.9 shall be constructed by the developer. The pipe size and outlet structure will be determined by the City in accordance with the Shingle Creek Watershed. The replacement of each wetland impacted by development shall comply with requirements under the Wetland Conservation Act (minimum 2 to I replacement). A small sediment basin shall be graded upstream of Wetland A collecting runoff from Lot I before discharging to Wetland A. All permitting requirements shall be approved before construction can begin. Erosion control and restoration shall be maintained and completed in a timely manner, as directed by the City. The existing driveway serving Lot 2 from 49th Avenue shall be removed. Due to the minimal street frontage of Lot 2 and the location of the railroad tracks, it is preferred from an engineering standpoint that the shared driveway, as proposed, be approved. The location of hydrants shall be reviewed with the fire marshall. Hydrant also to be installed on southeast corner of 5000 Winnetka property where water main connects. Parking layout on east side of building needs adjustment to permit a widened green strip along the shared driveway, with more than a line of 24 inch shrubs on a four foot strip of grass separating the large parking lot from a shared drive (to be shown on revised plans). Revised plans to show reconfiguring of the east parking lot to provide an angled, one-way parking arrangement to provide an additional five feet of green area width and a 10 foot island. Exterior lighting ("down-type") to be shown on revised plans. The site plan is modified to illustrate all exterior lighting locations. All lighting used to illuminate off-street parking areas must be hooded and directed to reflect light away from neighboring properties and public rights-of-way. Soils data to be provided on all three lots, per platting ordinance. Snow storage areas to be shown on revised plans in reasonable proximity to asphalt areas. Revised plans to be submitted showing similar lot lines, street curbs and building location between all plans. All off-street parking areas, including the shared access drive is provided a perimeter curb. The proposed 32 foot wide curb cut on 49th Avenue is subject to approval by the City Engineer. Consideration is given to providing a sidewalk along designated off-street parking areas. All site signage comply with applicable provisions of the City Sign New Hope Planning Commission - 13 - April 5, 1994 COMMITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Codes & Standards *Item 5.2 Ordinance. Developer to execute development contract and provide performance bond to the City (amount to be determined by Building 6ffii~i~l and City Engineer). Installation of "No Trucks East" signs at access on 49th Avenue. No outside trash storage. Voting in favor: Cassen Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, None Lifson, Watschke No report. Commissioner Sonsin reported that Codes and Standards met several times during the past three months regarding the Ponderosa wall sign. Another meeting involved Commissioner Sonsin, Steve Sondrall, City Attorney, Alan Brixius, City Planner, Kirk McDonald, Sarah Bellefuil, one Ponderosa manager (in attendance at this meeting), and a representative of Ponderosa from the Madison area. The purpose of that meeting was to look for some type of compromise. At the previous meeting of Codes and Standards, it was concluded that it would be recommended to have no change in the original recommendation on the variance on the existing sign and also not changing the code to include wall murals and signage for a lot of complex reasons. Given that situation Codes and Standards requested a meeting with Ponderosa to see if there was some compromise or middle ground to resolve this issue. At that meeting Ponderosa did share with those in attendance an alternative sign, exhibit C, which is in existence at several other restaurants, which would require only a minor variance to be in New Hope, or if the tree designs on either end would be removed, the sign would not even need a variance and would meet code. Ponderosa has let the City know they would like to proceed first to see what the vote is on the existing sign before submitting application for a revised sign. Codes · and Standards Committee unanimously is recommending that the Planning Commission support "no" on the variance request due to the immense size of variance that is being requested, due to the fact that the request was submitted after the fact, and given that the sign installed also violates the roof line portion of the sign code. The Committee finds that New Hope is consistent with signage in surrounding communities and are quite lenient than surrounding communities on the amount of signage that is allowed. The Committee feels that approving this variance or ignoring the sign, either one, would set a negative major precedent in the sign code that would not only affect our community but could also affect other communities in the future. A lot of time was spent trying to separate the wall mural and the letters on the sign. The issues that the Committee considered with the wall murals is that the signage by itself has to be content neutral. The content of the sign cannot be regulated other than limiting the sign to identification, limiting overall size of the sign, location, and number of signs. A wall mural cannot be regulated in any way except location and size. Then violations come into effect with free speech, political expression, etc. At this time the Codes and Standards Committee is not recommending any change in the sign ordinance to accommodate wall murals, art or other things. All members of the Committee agreed with the Commissioner Sonsin. New Hope Planning Commission - 14 - April 5, 1994 MOTION Item 5.2 ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Zak, to approve the report of the Codes and Standards Committee concerning Planning Cases 93-30 and 93-36 as submitted and recommends no change to the current Sign Code and denial of the variance request for the existing sign. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen None Lifson, Watschke Commissioner Underdahl stated that the City does appreciate that Ponderosa has upgraded their facility. Mr. McDonald stated that Super America will be back on the agenda soon. The City would rather have a business on this property than just have the land stay empty. The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester Recording Secretary New Hope Planning Commission -15- April 5, 1994 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 3, 1994 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, Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen Watschke Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Sarah Bellefuil, Administrative Analyst There were no consent items on this agenda. PC 94-09 Item 4.1 MOTION Item 4.1 PC 94-11 Item 4.2 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.1, request for conditional use permit for outdoor storage, Tarnan & Palanisami Partnership, petitioner. Mr. McDonald stated that due to the number of issues involved, the Design & Review Committee recommended to the petitioner that this case be tabled for one month so that staff can study the code requirements/ problems on adjoining properties and so the petitioner can come back with a better site plan. The petitioner agreed to postpone the request. Motion by Commissioner Gundershaug, seconded by Commissioner Sonsin, to table Planning Case 94-09, for one month. Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Gundershaug, Cassen Voting against: None Absent: Watschke Motion carried. Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Planning Case 94-11, Request for Request for Rear Yard Setback Variance, Site/Building Plan Review/Approval, and a Conditional Use Permit to Allow Construction of a Convenience Store with Gasoline. Mr. McDonald stated that the petitioner is requesting a conditional use permit to allow a convenience store with gasoline, a rear yard setback variance, and site/building plan review/approval to allow construction of a new service station. Super America is proposing to demolish the existing vacant gas station at the southeast intersection of West Broadway and 62nd Avenue and construct a new 2,489 square foot gas station/ convenience store. The plan includes a new 62' x 41' masonry building with awning, 74' x 31' (2,350 square foot) canopy, new identification/ directional signs, new trash enclosure, two concrete pump islands, new site landscaping, new curb cuts and elimination of non-conforming curb cut, restriped parking area and loading zone, and new site lighting. New Hope Planning Commission - 1 - May 3, 1994 Mr. McDonald explained the property was rezoned in 1979 to a B-3 Auto- Oriented Zoning District. Surrounding zoning/land uses include: R-4 High Density Residential (townhouses) to the east; R-5 Senior Citizen and Physically Handicapped Residential (new elderly apartment building) to the south; B-3 Auto-Oriented (Woody's gas/convenience store) to the west; and Brooklyn Park (elementary school) to the north. These plans are almost identical to the plans approved by the City Council in March, 1992, except this time no outdoor storage is being requested and no request for 24-hour operation is being made. Subsequent to the 1992 approval, Super America notified the City that they did not intend to proceed with construction on the site. Due to the fact that more than one year has lapsed since the approval was granted and because no extension was requested, Super America needed to complete another zoning application and receive City Council approval before they can proceed with construction. Mr. McDonald stated the purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to provide the City with a reasonable and legally permissible degree of discretion in determining suitability of certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health, and safety. In determining whether or not the conditional use is to be allowed, the City may consider the nature of adjoining land or buildings, whether or not a similar use is already in existence and located on the same premises or on other lands close by. Other general criteria to be considered when determining whether to approve or deny a conditional use permit include: 1. Comprehensive Plan. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official Comprehensive Municipal Plan of the City. 2. Compatibility. The proposed use is compatible with its adjacent land uses. 3. Performance Standards. The proposed use conforms with all applicable performance standards contained in the Code. 4. No Depreciation in Value. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. 5. Zoning District Criteria. In addition to the above general criteria, the proposed CUP meets the criteria specified for the various zoning districts: A. In Business Districts {B-l, B-2~ B-3, B-4): 1. Traffic. The proposed use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. 2. Nearby Residences. Adjacent residentially-zoned land will not be adversely affected because of traffic generation, noise, glare, or other nuisance characteristics. 3. Effect on Other Businesses. Existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected because of curtailment of customer trade brought about by intrusion of unduly heavy non-shopping traffic or general unsightliness. A Conditional Use Permit for Convenience Store with Gasoline is allowed provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Take-Out Food. Convenience/deli food is of the take-out type only New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - May 3, 1994 .. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. , and that no provision for seating or consumption on the premises is provided. Sanitation. That any sale of food items is subject to the approval of the City Sanitarian. Licenses. That the non-automotive sales shall qualify for and be granted an annual food handling, retail sales license or other license, as circumstances shall require, in addition to the Conditional Use Permit. Area. That the approximate area and location devoted to non- automobile merchandise sales shall be specified. Exterior sales shall be subject to a separate conditional use permit. Hours of Operation. The hours of operation shall be limited to six o'clock a.m. to twelve o'clock midnight unless extended by the City Council. Motor Fuel Facilities. Motor fuel facilities are installed in accordance with state and City standards. Underground fuel storage tanks are to be positioned to allow adequate access by motor fuel transports and unloading operations do not conflict with circulation, access and other activities on the site. Canopy. A protective canopy located over pump island may be an accessory structure on the property and may be located twenty feet or more from the front lot line, provided adequate visibility both on and off-site is maintained. Compatibility. The architectural appearance and functional plan of the building and site shall not be so dissimilar to the existing buildings or area as to cause impairment in property values or constitute a blighting influence within a reasonable distance of the lot. All sides of the principal and accessory structures are to have essentially the same or a coordinated, harmonious finish treatment. Dust Control and Draina.qe. The entire site other than that taken up by a building, structure, or plantings shall be surfaced with a material to control dust and drainage. Area.. A minimum lot area of 22,500 square feet and minimum lot' dimensions of 150 feet by 130 feet. The City Council may exempt previously developed or previously platted property from this requirement provided that the site is capable of adequately and safely handling all activities and required facilities. Curb Separation. A continuous and permanent concrete curb not less than six inches above grade shall separate the public sidewalk from motor vehicles areas. Landscaping. At the boundaries of the lot, a strip of not less than five feet shall be landscaped and screened. Light Standards Landscaped. Each light standard shall be landscaped. Access. Vehicular access points shall create a minimum of conflict with through traffic movement. Noise. Noise control shall be as required. Outside Storage. No outside storage except as allowed per the code. An enclOsed screened area is to be provided for rubbish and dumpsters. Staff finds that the only condition not met is "#10," area. The minimum street frontage dimensions are met, but the minimum lot area of 22,500 square feet is not met. The property contains approximately 19,200 square feet. The City Council may exempt previously platted property from this requirement if the "site is capable of adequately and safely handling all activities and required facilities." Staff recommends that this New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - May 3, 1994 property be exempted from the requirement due to the fact that the site is being totally redeveloped. Mr. McDonald pointed out the purpose of a variance is to permit relief from strict application of the zoning code where undue hardships prevent reasonable use of property and where circumstances are unique to the property. A hardship may exist by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of property or because of exceptional topographic or water conditions. The hardship cannot be created by the property owner and if the variance is granted, it should not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or unreasonably diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. Mr. McDonald stated the proposed Super America Station/Store meets all setback requirements except for the 35-foot rear yard setback requirement. Petitioner is requesting an 18-foot variance or about a 50 percent setback reduction. The existing building is non-conforming and meets no setback requirements. If this site is redeveloped as proposed, all non-conforming setbacks and non-conforming curb cuts will be corrected except for this one rear yard setback variance request. There is a significant distance (200 feet) between the proposed Super America and the building to the south and significant landscaping has been incorporated into the plan. The building proposed for the site is unique in the fact that it has a corner-cut, windows on two street sides, and is aesthetically pleasing. Mr. McDonald explained the petitioner is proposing to construct a 2,489 square foot building and a 2,350 square foot canopy. The building will have a corner entry at the northwest corner, extra glass, and special brick detailing on all sides. The plans show a pedestrian walkway (48" wide) striped area from 62nd Avenue to the store with ADA approved slopes, a new five-foot concrete sidewalk along West Broadway, and a temporary remediation building at the southeast corner of the site with finish colors to match the main building. The Design & Review Committee met with the petitioner on April 14th and a number of issues were discussed. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meeting. Parking. Fifteen parking spaces are required and 17 spaces are provided (nine in the parking lot and eight at the pumps). Hours of Operation. Will be limited to what is allowed by ordinance (6:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight). Outdoor Sales. No outdoor sales are being proposed. Liclhtin_ch The majority of the gas pump activity and gas canopy lighting is screened by the SA building from the townhouses to the east. The wooden fence at the east and landscaping will screen headlights from the same residential area. Lighting levels have been adjusted according to the Building Official's request. However, the rear wall light (east) is too bright. Change wattage or design to confine light levels to a maximum of one foot candle at the property line. Landscaping. A total of 182 trees and shrubs will be added to the site and the plan provides good buffers to both the eaSt and the south. New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - May 3, 1994 Traffic Data. Staff have enclosed the traffic data that was submitted in 1992 in the attached report prepared by Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. titled "Traffic Characteristics of Convenience Store with Gas Pumps." The conclusions of the report are that: 1. Convenience stores with gas pumps do not generate significant new traffic volumes on the street system. 2. Approximately 87 percent of the traffic entering/exiting the convenience store with gas pumps site is already on the street passing by or near the facility. 3. 80-90 percent of the approach/departure traffic to a convenience store with gas pumps is via a major street passing by the site. 4. The impact of a convenience store with gas pumps on the residential street system is not significant since the amount of new traffic generated is small through all periods of an average day and since primary approach and departure to the site is via a major arterial route. Tanker Circulation. A tanker circulation diagram has been provided, as requested, showing that trucks will enter on 62nd Avenue and exit onto West Broadway. Si~na~e. The following signage is proposed for the site: 1. Trademark Pole Sign at the corner of 62nd and West Broadway (130 square feet). 2. Canopy Signage stating "SUPERAMERICA" 1' in height x 10'-5" in length. 3. Building Wall Signage stating "SUPERAMERICA" (1'-3 1/2" X 12'-5") on the north and west building elevations and "SA" (2'- 1" in height and 4'-8" in length) on the northwest corner of the building. Mr. McDonald stated that several minor revisions need to be made to the signage and canopy to comply with City Code. Chairman Cameron asked for comments from Super America. Sam VanTassel, Real Estate Manager, came to the podium and stated that Super America does agree with the recommendations in the Planning Case Report regarding the lighting, canopy and signage and the requested changes will be made. Van Tassel gave a brief review of why this project was not completed two years ago stating financing being the biggest reason. Van Tassel also discussed the contaminated soil in this area and what is being done to remove and/or clean the soil that remains. Commissioner Gundershaug asked about the remediation building that will be in the back of the property and it was confirmed this would be concrete block with brick. There will be enclosed trash storage. Deliveries were discussed and vendors will be coming about twice a week during the day, groceries once a week, and gas deliveries depend on the volume sold, but Super America can specify what time deliveries will be accepted so very early morning hours and late night hours can be avoided. Ken Olson, Construction Manager, answered landscaping questions. There will be a fence installed along the south property line that will be six to seven feet high and landscaping in accordance with the fence. There will be landscaping along the east side to hide parking. There are no plans for any outdoor merchandise sales. The hours of operation are within code. Commissioner Gundershaug also asked if there would be any rooftop equipment and about the speaker system. Olson replied that there would be air conditioning and heating units on top of the building and these will New Hope Planning Commission -5- May 3, 1994 be painted to match. The speaker system used at Super America is strictly used for communication with the customer and the cashier. This will be kept at agreeable noise levels. There is no music or tapes, etc. that is played on the speaker system for Super America. An annual review is being requested. Commissioner Cassen asked what would be done regarding snow storage or if the snow would be removed from the premises. Olson replied that the snow would be hauled off-site. Bill Bahl, Operations Manager, came to the podium. Bahl responded to the snow question by saying that snow is removed from the premises unless it is only a one inch snowfall and then the snow is just pushed to the side and removed as needed. Commissioner Cassen also asked about an underground sprinkling system to maintain the shrubs and additional landscaping. Bahl replied that Super America normally installs underground sprinklers and the plan for this location includes sprinklers as well. Chairman Cameron asked who maintains the grass, shrubs, etc. Bahl stated that this work is contracted out on an annual basis. The shrubs are trimmed three times a year, the contractor maintains them, and takes care of winter protection. Chairman Cameron asked if anyone from the audience concerning this case wanted to address the Commission. Karen Walders, Lang Nelson, owners/operators of Broadway Village Apartments, which is within one-half block, and Anthony James Apartments, which is next door to the proposed Super America site, came to the podium. Walders noted an article from the Minneapolis paper that listed New Hope in the top five of the most preferable places to live in the Twin Cities. These people came to New Hope in their 3O's and 4O's and picked the areas and neighborhoods for their homes and a place to raise families. These people made sure the neighborhoods were well kept, that the city services were appropriate. The rest of the city services were left up to the city officials to make sure that there were no commercial or industrial properties next to residential homes. At this time these individuals have grown out of the need for individual homes and have grown into a need for a new type of housing. This is still a residential area. There are over 500 units of multi-family residential within a half block of that site. This is somewhere between 800 - 1,000 residents, of whom 80 percent or more are seniors. These people are now depending on the Planning Commission to deny this request so this neighborhood can stay residential with no commercial or industrial site next door to them. Walders stated that Super America will bring an element of people that currently is not in that neighborhood. With a commercial facility the quality of people cannot be controlled. It will also bring an increased probability and possibility of crime. It will bring a sound level that is not currently in this area, including traffic noise and speaker noise. It will bring views that the people of Anthony James Apartments and the people in the development behind the proposed Super America site did not bargain for when deciding to spend the rest of their lives there. It will also bring unattractive views. Anthony James is three stories high, but the grade makes the building almost four stories high. The people living there will have to look out onto the rooftop air conditioning unit, and the canopy, and the increased lighting. The scariest part will be the increased traffic at this site. Now Anthony James has only one egress and access to the site which is onto West Broadway. Broadway Village Apartments, 252 units, has the main access and egress onto West Broadway. Right now New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - May 3, 1994 it is hard to make a left turn into or out of either of those sites with the traffic. With the additional traffic for Super America there will be a danger for these people. Walders brought out for consideration petitions signed by residents from Broadway Village Apartments and Anthony James Apartments. These people do not want Super America in this residential neighborhood. There are 81 signatures from Broadway Village and 80 signatures from Anthony James for a total of 161 signatures who do not want Super America next door. Walders asked the Commission not to approve the variances that Super America is asking for and inflict upon the residents of this residential area what Super America will bring to them. The petitions were left with the clerk to become part of the record. Paul Brewer, of Lang Nelson, spoke to the Commission next. Since 1986 there has been a change in the community around this intersection. The City helped build Anthony James Apartments with the TIF funds to provide housing for seniors in this neighborhood. Lang Nelson feels now that the corner site should also have been purchased so these problems could have been avoided. Putting a gas station on that site is the wrong thing to be doing. Changing a setback from 35 feet to 17 or 18 feet is ridiculous, especially when this building is in direct conflict with the adjacent property. This site already has ground contamination and some soil has been removed but the contamination is still there. The temporary building may well be a permanent building and there may be a pump house there for quite some time. The storage tanks next to the property line also pose a new problem. Will there be more contamination from these? A gasoline station is not a friendly neighbor to a residential housing area. The Planning Commission has the opportunity to change this by denying this request for the variance. City Council has the opportunity to honor the Commissions denial. In addition to Anthony James, the City has just invested additional money in the Broadway Village Senior Center. This further accents that this area is geared toward the senior population. There is no way that anyone can say that Super America will not change the atmosphere for the Anthony James senior residents. There will be lights, noise and activity and this will not improve. Part of the problem will be in six months when Lang Nelson will be back .in front of the Planning Commission because the residents are complaining. City staff, Planning Commission, and Council will then say that nothing can be done since it was passed. The opportunity to keep Super America from building at this site is now. This site is too small to handle Super America and granting a large variance so it is even closer to a residential area is not good thinking. Brad North, Lang Nelson, stated that there have been a number of calls received complaining because of the fear of what will happen when Super America moves in with the extra noise, lights, activity from being open until midnight. This will cause a number of problems down the road that will be difficult to deal with. North stated that he is opposed to having Super America on this site because it is already congested with traffic and having Super America on this site will just make life harder for the senior citizens living next door. Dorothy Bramford, Manager of Anthony James Apartments, came to the podium to address the Commission. Bramford reported she has worked hard for seven years in this community to develop a wonderful place for the seniors to live. These seniors do not want the noise and traffic. The seniors are worried about the children crossing the street at this location for the school nearby. Bramford stated there could be a mass exodus of New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - May 3, 1994 people moving from these apartments because of not wanting to live next to someplace that noisy late at night and with all the extra lights from the traffic. Bramford explained that the seniors living in these apartments are paying $1700 - $1800 in real estate taxes per unit. These seniors deserve a quiet place to live. The seniors are worried that the noise from the tankers motors running at night will disturb them. Bramford asked the Commission to turn down ~he request for Super America. Louis Delvecchio, 6044 W. Broadway, a Broadway Village resident, moved to New Hope from Golden Valley. Delvecchio asked the Commission to consider who will be taking care of the extra pollution from the exhaust when cars are lined up waiting at the light on 62nd and West Broadway. It is almost impossible to make a right or left hand turn at this intersection now and with the extra traffic from Super America the turning will not get any better. Delvecchio also wanted to know who will be watching out for the children crossing the street to get to school in the morning and back home in the afternoon. Has anyone from the Commission been on this corner watching the traffic flow to see the congestion. Delvecchio is asking the Commission to say "no." Dave Tenner, resident of the area close to the intersection of 62nd and West Broadway, who is concerned with the small children that go to Lincoln School and need to walk past the gas station across the street from this site with all the cars in and out of that driveway. Also echoing the concern of people turning into the new apartment complex. The extra traffic from Super America will only make this worse. Another concern is putting another gas station there when the contamination from the other gas station is still not cleaned up. This does not make sense to put another potential disaster on the same site. Tenner stated his dislike of living so close to this contamination site and has considered moving because the contamination could be getting into his basement. Mary Ann Lemke-Groth, resident at Broadway Village, stated that Super America is a great store, but not here. This resident doesn't think it would raise the crime rate and they are not real noisy with loud music. Super America, however great they are, does not belong in this location. There are too many little children in this area, going to school, etc., and the seniors that have settled here should be respected. The seniors have put a lot of work into the community and do not need another gas station on this site. Ann Hanson, 6280 West Broadway, is concerned about the neighborhood and the traffic. Since the stop light went in on 63rd Avenue, it seems the cars race to make it through the light. Hanson is also concerned about the children in this area and doesn't feel Super America should be on this corner. Chairman Cameron brought the discussion back to the Commission and asked Kirk McDonald about the contamination. Has staff been working with the EPA, and every local, state, and federal agency to look at an appropriate way to control whatever degree of contamination that has been determined and the proper way to control this. McDonald stated that the City doesn't get involved with this and that the clean-up is between the property owner, who is responsible for the clean-up, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The MPCA is satisfied with the process and the plan submitted. The City has no problem with putting another gas station on the same site that is now undergoing clean-up from New Hope Planning Commission -8- May 3, 1994 previous contamination. Chairman Cameron was concerned if someone from the City would be watching if the gasoline would be flowing through the whole community underground or get into the watertable, etc. McDonald stated that the PCA requires monthly monitoring. The little house on the property is for this testing and will stay on the site until the problem is cleared up. The new stations have a lot more safeguards to prevent problems like this happening. Chairman Cameron questioned whether there was a gas station on this corner when the Anthony James Apartments were built. It was confirmed that there was a structure there but no operation. This site was zoned for a gas station. Chairman Cameron stated that the study used by staff shows that a gas station does not generate more traffic and that it just picks off the traffic already there. The study also shows that people will not go out of their way more than a block or two to a gas station. Chairman Cameron also noted that the school across the street is scheduled to close in a year or so. This issue should take care of itself. Commissioner Cassen asked for clarification on the deliveries at the off- peak times or at night. Can these times be controlled so the rumbling trucks and noise is not at night? Chairman Cameron asked for a statement from Super America for the record. Bill Bahl explained that Super America can dictate to the refinery what time the refinery trucks come. Bahl stated that trucks from Pepsi and Coke are route salesmen and Super America is pretty much at their whim. These salesmen start the routes at 7:00 a.m. and are back at the plant in Eagan by 4:00 p.m. so these soft drink trucks would be delivering during those hours twice a week. Bahl stated Super America would dictate to the refinery whatever time the neighborhood wishes. The preferable time would be 2:00 p.m. rather than 4:30 p.m. The only problem would be if the refinery could not deliver any other time. Super America would request off-peak hours and not very early hours or late night hours. Chairman Cameron indicated that the City would like a statement for the record regarding the delivery of gasoline. Bahl replied for the record that the gasoline delivery trucks would be delivering gasoline between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Chairman Cameron asked what Super America would estimate the traffic and number of cars serviced per day. Bahl answered that the report shows 11,000 cars per day go through this intersection and 1,000 cars per day would be more than enough to do business here. Commissioner Zak brought up the fact that there are several areas where code is not met for the conditional use permit under the zoning district criteria. Traffic will be affected, not necessarily an increase in number of cars, but certainly in the turning and stopping of the cars that regularly go by this area which will cause increased congestion. Also the nearby residences that are adjacent residentially zoned areas will be adversely affected in terms of traffic generation, noise, glare and other nuisances. Commissioner Zak stated she will not be voting for this. Commissioner Underdahl stated that the Super America store on West Broadway and Douglas Drive often has cars lined up along the street waiting to go in. Where will the cars line up at this location, on 62nd or West Broadway, without causing a lot of congestion. Another concern regarding the children is that even if the school will only be used for another year or so these children still live in this neighborhood and will have to deal with the traffic for several years. Commissioner Underdahl New Hope Planning Commission -9- May 3, 1994 will oppose this request. MOTION Item 4.2 Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Gundershaug, to approve Planning Case 94-11 for Rear Yard Setback Variance, Site/Building Plan Approval, and a Conditional Use Permit to Allow Construction of a Convenience Store with Gasoline, subject the following conditions: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Revise lighting plan, per Building Official recommendations, All signage comply with New Hope Sign Code. Annual inspection by staff. No outdoor storage. Hours of operation to comply with City Code. Development Contract to be executed with City and performance bond to be submitted (amount to be determined by City Engineer and Building Official). Canopy facade not exceed three feet in width. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Lifson, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Underdahl, Zak Watschke PC 94-12 Item 4.3 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.3, Planning Case 94-12, Request for Variance to Allow Air Conditioning Unit in Side Yard, Donald L. Ruch and Harold E. Teigen, Petitioners. Mr. McDonald stated the petitioner is requesting a variance to the requirement that air conditioning cooling structures Or condensers be located in the rear yard behind the rear building line to allow an air conditioner in the side yard less than ten feet from the property line. The purpose of this request is to allow the existing installation of an air conditioner in the west Side yard near the southwest corner of the house to remain in place. This is located in the "official" side yard, even though it is near the rear of the house. The petitioner states on the application that this is the best place for the air conditioner because it is not seen from the front yard due to the topography and is not in the way in the rear yard. Mr. McDonald noted the property owner directly to the west at 3350 Boone Circle has written a letter stating that they have no problem with the proposed location of the air conditioner and that the location is satisfactory to them. Another letter was received from the property owner at 8500 33rd Avenue North stating they have no objection to the placement of the air conditioner compressor. Mr. McDonald explained the specific variances being requested: 1. A two foot variance to the ten foot side yard setback requirement to allow an air conditioner eight feet from the property line, and 2. A variance to allow an air conditioner in the side yard. The existing structure meets all setback requirements. The property is pie- shaped with a 63 foot width/frontage onto Boone Circle and a length of 128 feet. The property is located in an R-l, Single Family Residential Zoning District and is surrounded by single-family land uses. The topography of the property slopes downward from a front yard elevation to the rear yard. Mr. McDonald stated the purpose of a variance is to permit relief from New Hope Planning Commission - 10 - May 3, 1994 strict application of the zoning code where undue hardships prevent reasonable use of property and where circumstances are unique to the property. A hardship may exist by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of property or because of exceptional topographic or water conditions. The hardship cannot be created by the property owner and if the variance is granted, it should not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or unreasonably diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. MOTION Item 4.3 PC 94-13 Item 4.4 Mr. McDonald noted the topography of the property and the shape of the lot could be considered as hardships. Also, in this particular situation the unit is not visible from the street and the adjacent neighbors have consented to the existing location. Motion by Commissioner Cassen, seconded by Commissioner Lifson, to approve Planning Case 94-12, Request for Variance to Allow Air Conditioning Unit in Side Yard. Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Gundershaug, Cassen Voting against: None Absent: Watschke Motion carried. Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Planning Case 94-13, Request for Code Text Amendment to PUD Area Requirement/Ordinance 94-06, An Ordinance Amending the New Hope Zoning Code by Establishing a Residential/Office PUD Zoning District and Eliminating the Area Requirement for Mixed Use PUD Districts. Mr. McDonald explained that staff is requesting that the Planning Commission and City Council consider adoption of the enclosed Ordinance No. 94-06, "An Ordinance Amending the New Hope Zoning Code by Establishing a Residential/Office PUD Zoning District and Eliminating the Area Requirement for Mixed Use PUD Districts." Mr. McDonald stated that at the April 5th Planning Commission meeting the Commission recommended approval of the Wrobel request for a rezoning from an R-l, Single-Family Residential, Zoning District to a PUD, Planned Unit Development, Zoning District allow a mixed use office/residential development on the site with office occupancy on the lower level and residential on the upper level. The uses would be limited in size and scope, and enforced through a PUD development agreement contract. Subsequent to the Planning Commission meeting the City Attorney discovered that the PUD Zoning District in the existing Zoning Code had a minimum size requirement of five acres. This obviously would New Hope Planning Commission - 11 - May 3, 1994 not work for the Wrobel property which contains 16,698 square feet (.38 acres). Staff contacted the petitioner and notified them of the problem and requested that the Council table the Wrobel request at the April 11th Council meeting so that the staff could pursue a code text amendment that would eliminate this area requirement. Mr. McDonald stated the proposed code text amendment was presented to and approved by the Codes & Standards Committee on April 21st. If the code text amendment receives favorable consideration by the Planning Commission, both the text amendment and the Wrobel rezoning would be considered by the City Council on May 9th. Mr. McDonald explained the Ordinance establishes a new Residential/ Office PUD District. At this time, the district will include only the Wrobel property. Therefore, it will have very limited application. However, there may be other corner lot properties situated on arterial streets with a mixed residential office use that could be rezoned to this district to maintain an existing use like the Wrobel property. Section 4.29A of the code establishes the district and the area. At this point it includes only Dr. Wrobe!'s lot. It reads as follows: Residential/Office PUD District. The followinq areas of the City shall comprise the R-O PUD District. This area is distinguishable from the R-O Zoning District in that all properties within the R-O PUD District are subject to a development agreement restricting use as a condition to this zoning classification. A certified copy of all development a.qreements shall be filed with the County Recorder per Minn. Stat. §462.36. (1) Lot 17, Block 3, Twin Terra Linda. To accommodate this district the City also must amend §4.195 of the Code. Said section imposes a five acre minimum land area before mixed use PUD zoning is allowed. Obviously, the subject property could not qualify if this requirement remains since it is approximately one-third acre in size.. The City Planner concurs that this requirement can be repealed. There are no mixed use land parcels within the City that are five acres in size to take advantage of the Code section as currently written. If the City desires to utilize this zoning concept to assist with legalizing uses like the Wrobel property, the area requirement must be removed. Section 3 of Section 4.195(2) of the City Code would be amended/deleted as follows: Section 3. Section 4.195(2) "Minimum Project Size" of the New Hope City Code is hereby deleted and repealed in its entirety. This ordinance would also amend Section 4.192(14) of the Code dealing with site improvement agreements to specifically require development agreements for PUD's that deal with other issues besides site improvements. The amendment gives us authority to incorporate use restrictions within the development agreements in addition to required site improvements. This gives the City the authority to incorporate the use restrictions within the development agreement which are filed with the property. New Hope Planning Commission - 12 - May 3, 1994 Section 2 of Section 4.192(14) of the Code would be amended to follows: e.~ !..~.;rcvc.m:nt Development Aqreement. Prior to a rezoning or the issuance of a building permit as part of a Planned Unit Development, the permit, applicant, builder, or developer shall execute and deliver to the Council a : .......... + development agreement ~'+--..-.--- ......... ..--.-...=.;'~:"" The agreement, shall detail all use restrictions and required on and off'site improvements conditional to the PUD rezoning or CUP approval. Th~- agreement shall provide for the installation within one year of the off-site and on-site improvements as approved by the Council, secured by a cash escrow or surety bond in an amount and with surety and conditions satisfactory to the City, to insure the City that such improvements will be actually constructed and installed according to specifications and plans approved by the City as expressed in such agreement. The amount of the bond shall be one and one-half times the estimated cost of the improvements as determined by the City Engineer or City Building Official. read as The Planning Consultant worked in conjunction with the City Attorney on the code text amendment and states in his memo that the basic intent of the amendment is to expand the applicability of the PUD zoning designation within the City. As currently written, the "five acre" requirement is considered highly restrictive and may not be applied to sites of a lesser size for which PUD zoning application would be preferable. As such its deletion is considered positive. Commissioner Sonsin stated Codes & Standards felt this ordinance would be a good idea and recommend approval. MOTION Item 4.4 A motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Zak, to approve Planning Case 94-13, Request for Code Text Amendment to PUD Area Requirement/Ordinance 94-06, An Ordinance Amending the New Hope Zoning Code by Establishing a Residential/Office PUD Zoning District and Eliminating the Area Requirement for Mixed Use PUD Districts. Voting in favor: Lifson, Underdahl, Gundershaug, Cassen Voting against: None Absent: Watschke Motion carried. Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, COMMITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Item 6.1 No report. Mr. McDonald mentioned that the Cooper Athletic Field should be coming up soon. Also there will be a new subdivision on 36th Avenue and Boone that will be on the agenda soon. Brad Hoyt is in touch with the people selling the Jacobwith property. The CUP outdoor storage case is being worked on regarding a neighboring business with a lot of outdoor storage and who does not seem to have a CUP and this is being checked out by the Building Official. The Codes & Standards Committee will be checking into this also and will be meeting to discuss this matter. Codes & Standards No report. Item 6.2 New Hope Planning Commission - 13 - May 3, 1994 MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Lifson will be moving June 1st to Golden Valley and stated he appreciated the opportunity to serve on the Commission. Mr. McDonald said an ad would be run in the paper for a new commissioner. There was some discussion whether or not to add two commissioners to keep an odd number for voting. It will be up to the Council as to how many will be appointed. Commissioner Cassen asked about the status of the house at 5009 Winnetka with the windows out and the house seems to be a safety hazard, A suggestion was made to have signs on the house and possibly a fence around the house because the City could be liable if someone should get hurt. Mr. McDonald stated that the Fire Department is using this house for training purposes. The house will be demolished after an environmental review of the property, which is done, and an analysis by the historical society stating that the property does not have historical Significance. The historical society is working on this study. When this is done then a 30-day notice has to be published in the paper and the house cannot be burned down until after that time. Commissioner Underdahl added that this house is over 100 years old. Also in a follow-up to an inquiry from Commisisoner Sonsin, staff stated that U.S. Swim does have a temporary sign permit for the gorilla on top of the building. The permits are good only three times a year for 14 days. The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester Recording Secretary New Hope Planning Commission - 14 - May 3, 1994 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 7, 1994 City Hall, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 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. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke Zak Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant, Mark Hanson, City Engineer, Steve Sondrall, City Attorney, Sarah Bellefuil, Administrative Analyst Chairman Cameron announced that Planning Case 94-18, Request for Conditional Use Permit to Allow Educational Classes at Beautiful Savior Lutheran Church, 3351 Independence Avenue North, Hope Alliance Chapel, Petitioner, will be tabled until July 12, 1994. A question was raised from the audience if comments could be heard. Chairman Cameron informed the audience that since the Commission did not receive an adequate application and plan for review, the public hearing will be on July 12th and comments could be heard at that time. CONSENT Chairman Cameron introduced the Consent Item as listed and stated it would be enacted by one motion unless requested by any Commissioner or citizen. It was clarified that a motion for approval would be subject to conditions requested by staff. PC 93-25 Item 3.1 Item 3.1 is requesting Final Plat approval for the Carol James Addition, pursuant to Chapter 13 of the New Hope Code, to allow a split of the existing large single-family R-1 lot into two parcels, with the new northerly lot retaining the existing single-family home and the new southerly vacant lot allowing for an additional residential building site. MOTION PC 93-25 Item 3.1 Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Cassen, to approve Planning Case 93-25, Request for Final Plat Approval, 7105 62nd Avenue North, Carol James, Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat illustration for the measured 275.61 feet of the centerline of Osseo Road be marked at the beginning of the measurement (the intersection of the centerline of Osseo Road and the north line of the Northwest Quarter, Section 5) and the end point of that measured line. 2. Completion of the title opinion by the City Attorney and any additional requirements called for by the title opinion. 3. Utilities to be extended in Louisiana Avenue by the City after the purchase of the property to properly serve Lot 2. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Zak New Hope Planning Commission - 1 - June 7, 1994 PC 94-10 Item 4.1 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.1, request for rezoning from R-l, Single Family Residential, Zoning District to R-2, Single and Two- Family Residential, Zoning District, 5009 Winnetka Avenue North, City of New Hope, Petitioner. Mr. Brixius, Planning Consultant, stated the City of New Hope is requesting a rezoning of the property located at 5009 Winnetka Avenue North from an R-l, Single-Family Residential, Zoning District to an R-2, Single and Two-Family Residential, Zoning District. Mr. Brixius explained that 5009 Winnetka Avenue North is a single family lot that currently contains a single family residence that is in a deteriorated state. The City acquired the property this spring as part of the City's scattered site/home ownership housing program with grant funds from the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency and the intent is to demolish the structure and build a handicapped accessible duplex and sell it to New Hope residents through the First Time Homebuyers Program. The construction will be funded in part with Federal CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) and HOME funds, in conjunction with the 5-City CO-OP Northwest housing consortium. The project promotes New Hope's goal of providing affordable housing home ownership opportunities to a variety of residents on a scattered site basis. The grants were written to include demolition by the Fire Department with the idea of saving on demolition costs and the opportunity to provide meaningful training to New Hope Fire Department personnel. In order to use federal grant funds for the project, specific guidelines must be followed and certain requirements met. One of these requirements is that an Environmental Review of the property be completed. Part of the review includes a formal approval from the Minnesota Historical Society stating that the site is of no historical importance. The City has just received the approval it needs from the Historical Society and has had the Environmental Review accepted by Hennepin County. Per Hennepin County and federal regulations, once the review is accepted the City must publish notice in the paper that the site will be redeveloped. This notice was published on May 18th and the house will be able to be burned/demolished after June 19th. Mr. Brixius reported the dimensions of the rectangular corner lot are 159' x 128' and the lot contains 19,200 square feet. The existing house is one and a half stories with an unfinished basement, and is in fair condition with a poor floor plan. There is also a 16' x 20' detached garage in poor condition. There is a gravel driveway off Winnetka and the landscaping is minimal. Mr. Brixius explained that the current zoning is R-l, Single Family Residential, which accommodates the existing use. The rezoning is being requested to allow for the two-family housing structure. The change in zoning would be to an R-2 zoning. In comparison, the existing zoning allows for single family detached dwelling, state care facilities, public parks and playgrounds, essential services and group care facilities. The only change that the R-2 would accommodate would be that it would introduce a two-family dwelling in the Zoning District. The lot size conforms with the R-2 standards. Mr. Brixius explained the criteria that the City has used in the past to determine whether rezoning was appropriate. In review of the Comprehensive Plan, existing land use patterns and past use of the subject property, it is apparent that the current R-1 zoning designation New Hope Planning Commission -2- June 7,1994 does not represent a past zoning mistake. Aisc in question is whether the character of the; a'rea ':Changed ~ to 'Warrant consideration of a zoning change. The site's current R-1 zoning is reflective of its historic use. Currently a 1900 era farmhouse exists on the property. The farmhouse is currently in a state of disrepair and poses a genuine health and safety concern. The character of the area in which the subject property is located has changed since initial development of the site and adjacent properties. Mr. Brixius explained some of the land use changes which have occurred in the area: 1962 1966 1969 1974 1979 1979 1980 R-3, townhomes constructed to the northwest of the subject property. R-O, dental office allowed south of subject site via special use permit (residential zoning retained). Dental office site rezoned to L-B, Limited Business. Dental office site rezoned to MR designation. Dental office site rezoned to current R-O, Residential Office designation. R-2, duplex constructed to the north of the subject property (variance for undersized lot approved). Townhomes to the northwest of the subject site rezoned from R-1 to R-3: The character of the area has evolved such that the allowance of townhome type development is common to the area. Mr. Brixius reported the proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. The City's 1976 Comprehensive Plan suggests the continuance of Iow density residential use of the subject property. While the two family units differ from the single family units to the west, the two family development on the property constitute Iow density as 9,500 + square feet of lot area per unit. This is consistent with minimum lot area standards of the remaining adjacent R-1 zoning to the west. The proposed use is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area. As part of the rezoning consideration, a determination should be made as to whether the proposed use can compatibly co-exist with surrounding land uses. The list of land uses and zoning designations located adjacent to the subject site are: North, R-2 Multiple Family Residential; South, R-O Commercial, East, I-1 Industrial; and West, R-1 Low Density Residential. Based on an examination of surrounding uses and zoning designations, it appears that the proposed use (twinhome) could compatibly exist on the subject site and is in character with existing land uses in the area. Mr. Brixius explained that the proposed use would conform with all performance standards contained herein. According to the Zoning Ordinance, 7,000 square feet of lot area must be provided for each two family unit. At 19,200 square feet in size, the subject site provides ample area to accommodate the proposed use. As a condition of building permit issuance, the proposed twinhome could be required to meet all applicable R-2 District performance standards. The twO-family complex will not over burden sewer capacity or water capacity. The addition of the two-unit complex will not over burden the traffic on the streets. Access to the twin home would be oriented to 51st Avenue and the access on Winnetka New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - June 7, 1994 Avenue would be eliminated. Mr. Brixius stated the proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. As noted previously, a dilapidated, older house currently exists on the subject property. It is believed that the removal of the structure and construction of the proposed twinhomes will only escalate property values. The proposed twinhome development will allow the City to address the health and safety concerns associated with the existing house while at the same time expanding available housing choices within the City. Mr. Brixius explained that to allow individual ownership of the two proposed townhomes, a subdivision of the subject property will be necessary. At 19,200 square feet in size, the subject site may successfully accommodate the minimum R-2 District lot size requirement and the minimum 7,000 square feet of lot area required for a two family dwelling unit. To be specifically noted in regard to the necessary subdivision is a required 50 foot setback from Winnetka Avenue. Depending on specific twinhome design, such a setback may affect the property division. This matter will be addressed at such time when the subdivision is pursued. Mr. Brixius explained that it is staff's opinion the character of the area has changed and that the proposed twinhome will be compatible with existing uses in the area. MOTION Item 4.1 Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Underdahl, to approve Planning Case 94-10, Request for Rezoning from R-l, Single Family Residential, Zoning District to R-2, Single and Two-Family Residential, Zoning District, 5009 Winnetka Avenue North, City of New Hope, Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 1. The future subdivision of the subject site to accommodate individual ownership of the twinhome units at the time the units are constructed. The future initiation of a rezoning of the twinhome site located northwest of the subject site from R-1 to R-2. Such a rezoning would resolve a non-conforming land use situation. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Zak PC 94-14 Item 4.2 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Planning Case 94-14, Request for Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site/Building Plan Review/Approval to Allow Expansion of School Uses in an R-1 Zoning District, 8230 47th Avenue North, Independent School District No. 281, (Cooper High School), Petitioner. Chairman Cameron withdrew from this case since he is an employee of District 281 and turned the meeting over to Vice-Chairman Gundershaug. Mr. Brixius stated that the petitioner is requesting an amendment to the conditional use they received for the school which is located in the center of the City and is zoned R-1. Within that Zoning District, the high school and its facilities are considered a conditional use. Previously both Cooper New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - June 7, 1994 and Armstrong High Schools shared a joint facility, Mielke Field, in the city of Crystal. With:the sale of Mielke Field, the relocation of the athletic complex for both high schools became mandatory. The School District is requesting approval to provide similar facilities at both high school sites to provide equal opportunities for recreation as well as competitive sports. Mr. Brixius indicated that the area is zoned R-l, which is single family in character. The issue that is being dealt with is the introduction of both day time and night time activities in a residential area. Through a conditional use permit the City has deemed the use appropriate within the district provided the conditions are met to warrant compatible land use management. The criteria for determining this is laid out in the zoning ordinance. The New Hope 1978 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as residential with specific language given to the Cooper High School facility. The New Hope Comprehensive Plan identifies the school site but does not give specific attention to the activity that is now being requested. Located in Planning District 13, this area is being characterized as a single family development with traffic generated in this area higher than traditional residential areas. The specific policies that cover land use characteristics in this area include: 1) preserving property rights and property values, 2) relate land use development with transportation needs, 3) share intensification of land use activities and related active support of service facilities, 4) protect Iow density residential neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible higher types by adequate buffering, separation or other land use categories, plan transportation facilities in a manner that is compatible with adjacent land uses to ensure the expansion of existing development with adequate off-street parking. In consideration of this type of facility the Planning Commission must weigh the athletic complex in conjunction with the objectives for this area of the community as well as planning policies. Mr. Brixius said the second criteria for evaluation is land use compatibility. He explained that City staff feels that there are a number of issues that need to be addressed as far as land use compatibility. Activities, land use features, site appearance, traffic, noise, lighting, and evening events need to be addressed. The School District has made an attempt in their design to try to minimize the extent of intrusion of the athletic complex through extensive screening, parking lot improvements, etc. All of the performance standards need to be met including parking, loading, and traffic concerns. Mr. Brixius stated that the proposed use will not tend to depreciate the area in which it is proposed. The introduction of the school facility will impact the area, yet there are no examples of direct depreciation of these complexes in other communities. This has not been explored any further at this time. The R-1 zoning criteria meets the criteria specified. Special criteria includes traffic concerns. Non-residential traffic is channeled into thoroughfares or onto a street abutting business or industrial uses leading directly to thoroughfares. The existing traffic pattern for this high school moves onto local residential streets before getting to collector streets, i.e., Winnetka and 49th. The proposed use will be sufficiently separated by distance and screening from adjacent residentially zoned land. The applicant has provided setbacks in excess of what is required by code and provides extensive screening and berming to try and minimize the appearance of the facility. The structure will have an appearance that will New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - June 7, 1994 not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. The School District has attempted to coordinate a blend between the existing high school site and the surrounding residential properties. Mr. Brixius explained that the setbacks have been met. The front yard setback on 47th will be 30 feet. The closest setback would be a 50 foot setback off of Zealand Avenue. There is an extensive berm and landscape plan being proposed for this area. Based on calculations by the School District's traffic engineer, the ratio used for parking is 4:1 or 625 parking spaces to accommodate full seating capacity of 2§00. A number of issues have been raised regarding dimension of parking stalls, number of stalls and location. There are 625 stalls shown on the site plan, including the elementary school, however, a number of the stalls do not meet minimum standards. The parking in back of the school is in a dead end area and lacks adequate dimension for the driveway. Additional parking would be required to provide for that shortfall. Parking lot improvements would be required by the City for this facility including proper dimensions, curbing, pavement overlay, stripping, and drainage concerns. Two bus parking stalls are shown on the plan. According to the school, this is the number of stalls needed for a football event. Additional busses might be required for regional meets, but generally the track events do not attract the same type of attendance and other areas of the parking lot would be available for parking. A proof of parking provision could be attached to the conditional use permit making it mandatory that if additional bus parking is needed on the site that the School District be obligated to provide more parking, if needed, after use for one year. Mr. Brixius noted some traffic concerns are that this will be a night time arrangement and disbursement of traffic will occur after an event. There will be heavy traffic using residential streets to get to collector streets. The school district has stated they are willing to provide personnel for directing traffic. There are still the issues as to how the traffic will get out of the site and how it will be released to the collector and arterial street systems. As shown on the plan, the parking lot consumes the entire south end of the lot. The potential for a 47th Avenue extension, which was identified by City staff, would not be an option in the future. Mr. Brixius stated that a number of issues need to be addressed regarding location of ponding areas, collection of water, and storm water improvements. Mark Hanson, City Engineer, will address these issues later. Mr. Brixius explained that the entire area is to be fenced with a six foot, black coated vinyl fence. There are no setback violations and it is appropriately located. The landscaping plan includes boulevard trees along the west and north property lines. An extensive slope will be worked into the bleacher area on the west side which will also be landscaped. At the time of planting the screening will reach a height of eight feet. There will be a visible structure above this including light poles and portions of the visitor seating. Lighting will be provided for night time use. The proposed lights will be 80 feet in height and will provide lighting across the field. It is indicated that there is a concern for light extending beyond the properties of the boundary. A light study has been conducted and it has been indicated that the lights will comply with the light standards stopping at the property line so as not to be an intrusion on the neighboring properties. A noise impact statement will need to be completed to provide some consideration to the potential noise sources and the affect on New Hope Planning Commission -6- June 7,1994 adjacent properties. Refuse and storage at this time are in open containers which should be screened.. The new activities at this site will include four football games each year plus girls and boys soccer events. To reduce the potential impact on surrounding areas, if approved, there should be some limitation on site with City approval. Mr. Brixius summarized by saying that with the sale of Mielke Field, the School District has limited choices for the establishment of an athletic complex that will serve the Cooper High School students. The Planning Commission needs to make a determination as to whether the provision of these athletic facilities and the benefits that they may have should be judged over the land use issues that have been identified and their compatibility in the neighborhood. There are still a number of outstanding issues with regard to grading, drainage, parking and traffic. Also there are issues on agreeable limitations on use, noise, and policing of the area. There are a number of options the Planning Commission could consider. The first option would be approval outlining the 16 items in the report that would be a condition of approval. The second option would be denial based on intrusion in a single family neighborhood, however, that option would need to be weighed against the loss of the athletic facilities. The third option would be to table this matter until outstanding issues are fully complied with and to the satisfaction of staff, Planning Commission and Council. Acceptability of this becomes an issue of concern for both the neighborhood and the City at large and determination will be left to the Planning Commission and City Council. Commissioner Underdahl questioned whether the 4:1 ratio applies only to schools or all businesses and why was the ratio changed from 8:1. Mr. Brixius answered that in comparison with other communities that the 4:1 ratio is for stadium seating. The 8:1 standard is antiquated and really does not suit the needs. It was established when more pooling was taking place and people relied less on cars. Parking should be provided with spaces that are comparable to the design standards. Commissioner Underdahl also wanted to know about the one year guarantee for the trees and what happens if the trees die after the guarantee. A nursery bond is usually required when purchasing trees and there is typically a one year warranty on landscaping. Mr. Hanson explained that Cooper High School and New Hope Elementary is included in the Shingle Creek Watershed and, therefore, the School District will need to comply with the requirements of the Shingle Creek Watershed. Specifically this will deal with water quality requirements. There has been some communication with the School District and the Watershed's engineer, Dale Claridge of J.M. Montgomery. The School District has a good understanding of what is required, however, no plan has been submitted to the Watershed for review. The first time this could be considered is at the meeting on the first Thursday in July (July 7th). Because the New Hope Elementary School has been included for the purpose of providing parking, staff recommends that the Elementary School's parking lot be included in conditions with the rest of the improvements. When looking at the drainage, the entire property is considered not just stadium location. The drainage that exists on the Cooper field now drains overland to 49th Avenue. There are some lateral storm sewers, but for the most part it is overland drainage to 49th Avenue across Boone to the wetland opposite Flag Avenue. The plan does show a small retention basin, however, hydraulic calculations have not yet been provided. A chamber is shown but no detail is supplied to show the water New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - June 7, 1994 quality portion. The Watershed will also have recommendations for these items. There is no information provided for the New Hope Elementary parking lot relative to storm water other than stating that the storm water will be handled appropriately. The other concern relative to drainage is on the north side of the school. The improvements and grading and how that drainage is to be taken care of is not clearly shown. This matter should be shown on the plan as to how drainage will be handled. There is a concern regarding the drainage on the southwest corner of New Hope Elementary and that should be considered as part of the drainage for the New Hope Elementary parking lot. Commissioner Watschke asked about the wet or dry ponding area to the northeast of the field. Mr. Hanson stated that a retention basin or dry basin is being shown. This means that the water,-as it comes off the school property, would be retained in this area during a big event and after the event the water would drain dry so it would be a dry basin. It would provide benefit to the storm sewer system in 49th Avenue because it would allow capacity in that storm sewer for the other drainage areas. As of this time the plan shows a dry retention basin. The Comp Plan for New Hope calls for a regional treatment facility, which would be a ponding area located near 49th and Flag. One of the requirements of the Watershed District is that the water quality requirement will have to be satisfied. Whether this is done through a grid chamber or in a catch dedication towards the regional facility that the City hopes to build based on the Comp Plan will need to be decided at a later date. Mr. Hanson stated that the traffic plan at a football event and the level of service at the major intersections is "B" or higher, with "D" being the highest and "A" or "B" being the more desirable level. The major intersections would be 47th and Winnetka, 47th and Boone, 49th and Winnetka, and 49th and Boone and these intersections do meet that level of service. The intersection that is most critical is 47th Avenue as it meets Winnetka. The east leg of this intersection may warrant some improvements to allow a right turn lane. At this point the level of service is a "C" and some turn lanes could make the traffic here move along smoother. The "C" level of service is still acceptable at this point. Staff is requesting the School District that Item 4 of the Management Plan also include monitoring traffic, not only near the school and coming out of the parking lot, but also at these intersections so that traffic can move onto the collector roads in a free manner. The parking layout of the New Hope Elementary parking lot and the Cooper High School parking lot and 47th Avenue and how all these will mesh together has not been addressed yet and staff recommends that these details be included in the plans. The football events will have a short term impact on the roads in these neighborhoods. The fact that Cooper is served by residential streets, constructed in residential right-of-way widths, which are minimum and road widths that are not as wide as hoped for is a concern. The football field and what it will accomplish will have an impact, but the daily impact is a greater concern. As improvements are considered in this area, the City, school and neighborhoods will have to work together to accomplish as much as possible. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug asked for a representative of the School District to come forward. The question was asked at this time if the School District representative had seen the staff report. Whitey Johnson, District Athletic Coordinator and Project Director for the New Hope Planning Commission - 8 - June 7, 1994 proposal of upgrading the athletic/physical education complex at Cooper High School, approached the podium. Mr. Johnson said he had not seen the staff report before this meeting. Mr. Johnson stated that District 281 has been under serious time restraints due to the late sale of Mielke Field, but students, parents, residents and administration have been working diligently and are all committed to completing the project. Once the drawings were finalized and the application was submitted to the City of New Hope, the premise of all the people involved was to communicate and cooperate to every possible extent. Fact sheets have been sent containing details of the proposal to all the homes surrounding the Cooper area. There was an article in the Post describing the proposal and referred to details. The District sent 47,000 copies of the District 281 publication "Vital Link" which were delivered to every household in the district describing the project. Another 500 letters were sent to homes surrounding the high school inviting the residents to informational meetings at the school. A total of 40 people attended these meetings. A student survey was completed at Cooper High School indicating a strong desire by the student body in favor of this project. A residential survey was conducted in over 500 homes surrounding the high school and an overwhelming majority of the people were in favor of the project. The School District has continued to listen to the City of New Hope planners and has made every effort to cooperate, revise, and resubmit. The School District has continued to listen to the neighbors in the immediate area of the high school and made every effort to cooperate while continuing to plan for an athletic/physical education complex that all the New Hope residents can be very proud of. Mr. Johnson thanked the Planning Commission for their efforts and consideration. Many meetings were held in consulting and drawing up the plans. The parking problem is understood and the 4:1 ratio is a concern, and if the City Code is 8:1 why is there pressure for 4:1 unless there is a separate code for stadiums. Mr. Johnson reiterated the fact that out of 365 days there are four football contests and seven soccer events, exclusive of tournament play. It is hoped that the planting of deciduous trees and pines and the berming will create an atmosphere that will be pleasing to the eye and that will screen the property efficiently to the people adjacent to the school property. The home bleachers have been moved to the east side of the field to allow the structure to be away from the Zealand Avenue residents, the speakers have been attached to the light standards on the west side of the property which will direct the PA system toward the school, and there will be a storage building under the main bleachers to hide it from view. Mr. Johnson stated that the school is trying to be up front in communicating the plans and cooperating with the City and residents. Response to the staff report was provided by Roy Anderson, designer, Anderson/Johnson Associates. Mr. Anderson stated that the dead end parking on the north and east of the building were shown as parking stalls on the plans but were not included in the traffic count. The traffic count exceeds the count required by the City. Mr. Dan Johnson, Civil Engineer, Anderson/Johnson Associates, stated that there has been a meeting with the Watershed District and this information has also been communicated to City staff. It was the Watershed District's recommendation that a grid chamber be installed. The Watershed is concerned with safety and the wet pond. There has been a lengthy discussion on wet ponds and their use in school projects. The school will be using an extended retention basin which stores water and then drains dry. A variance should not be necessary to satisfy the New Hope Planning Commission - 9 - June 7, 1994 storm drainage needs of this project. Most of the storm water quality concerns that the Watershed District has addressed pertain to the parking lot. This is where the grid chamber will be located. The extended retention basin is downstream and that will deal with storm water quality and some storm water retention to ease the Icad on the storm sewer system downstream. The storm sewer system on the site is undersized by today's standards and will not provide for that much rate of discharge from the site itself. Commissioner Gundershaug asked about the water problems on the southwest corner of New Hope Elementary School. Mr. Johnson stated that there has not been an ample opportunity to address this issue yet. At this time the School District knows there is a problem and this concern will be dealt with soon. Mr. Johnson also extended his appreciation to the staff for the cooperation shown to the School District and Anderson/Johnson Associates in helping to make this improvement happen. Commissioner Watschke asked about the dry ponding and the possibility of moving the discus and shot-put areas into that area to provide more screening along Zealand. Has there been any consideration regarding this? Mr. Anderson stated that this had been looked into. There had to be a trade-off in dealing with storm water issues or try and address site lay-out. It is most desirable to keep the track events on land that will be dry all the time instead of moving the event to the dry ponding area with the possibility that it will be holding water after a storm. The throwing and the landing areas of the shot-put are made of agrilime. Commissioner Watschke questioned the height and type of the trees. Mr. Anderson stated that the revised plan shows 3 inch deciduous trees and 8 foot coniferous trees. Commissioner Watschke brought up the traffic problem again and asked if there is a concrete plan to handle this problem after an event. Whitey Johnson stated that after discussing this with other schools in the Classic Lake Conference, a procedure that works well for the other schools is to put up "no parking" signs on the residential streets. The district is willing to cooperate with the City in doing this. A three-year attendance survey was completed at Mielke Field for Cooper football games 'and found the three-year average paid admissions was 700 people, adding another 200 for guests and employees, and another 200 for bands and cheerleaders, and another 30 percent for average size, or about 1500 people. Regarding the dispersion of traffic with 2500 people, the District is willing to barricade residential streets to local traffic only at the District's expense, along with having police reserve officers or volunteer people from the district on the streets to channel traffic flow and disperse it from the facility. Commissioner Watschke asked Mr. Johnson what the possibility is of double use at this site if Plymouth denies the Armstrong High School facility and whether there has been any exploration of putting a facility outside of an R-1 District and outside the the two cities. Whitey Johnson stated that the District is really committed to developing two sites of equal nature at each school. The District has looked at the possibility of building one facility on other land, but with the cost of the land plus building the stadium, the cost skyrocketed. Aisc the non-availability of the land prohibited this option. New Hope Planning Commission - 10 - June 7, 1994 Commissioner Watschke asked if there would be other community events held at the stadium in addition to the school events, and was told that at this time there is nothing scheduled. The facility could be available if the City wanted to use it, however, another governing body would have to make those decisions. Answering Commissioner Watschke's question regarding finances, Whitey Johnson stated that the School District has $1 million set aside for each of these projects. Street improvements, drainage, etc. come under the identification of capital outlay budget and there is money set aside for such types of improvements. Commissioner Watschke asked the Commissioners if hours of operation should be entered in the conditions regarding early morning band practice. Commissioner Sonsin asked about the traffic situation for a football game and how that might compare to a concert or play being held at the school or a winter indoor event. Whitey Johnson stated that there are approximately 2500 seats in the gymnasium and there have been events in the last two years that have had about 2000 people. Mr. Johnson stated that he has not had a complaint in his office where parking or traffic has been a problem. The auditorium seats around 900 people and has been filled sometimes three or four nights in a row and the parking lots have been filled for these events and there have been no complaints. The traffic getting out of the parking lots will be either on 47th to Boone or Winnetka or 49th. Some of the residential streets could be barricaded or personnel could be placed to help direct traffic. At graduation, the school does have school personnel directing traffic for the benefit of visitors. If Zealand and Virginia Avenues are barricaded and the traffic is directed to 47th, there could be problems here too since 47th is not a wide street. Commissioner Sonsin expressed concern there may be more football games at Cooper if Plymouth says no to Armstrong's request for an athletic complex. Also since Cooper and Armstrong will be having their football games at another field this year, could the District allow another school to use the Cooper field in the future. Commissioner Sonsin also questioned if the District will help pay for street improvements if this becomes necessary in the future. The other concern is the drainage issue which will have to come from Shingle Creek Watershed. Commissioner Sonsin stated that he received communications from Mr. & Mrs. Gale Frederich, 4781 Zealand and Mr. & Mrs. David Carlson, 4841 Zealand, and two phone calls from Mr. Clyde Morrison and a call from Vonnie Willenberg. Commissioner Cassen asked what the School District is planning on doing regarding trash and littering after the events and how this will be cleaned up. Whitey Johnson answered that the District is willing to help in any way possible and could hire personnel to help direct people from the parking lots in an orderly manner. The bleachers are self-enclosed so trash cannot be dropped between the seats. There will be receptacles around the concession and bleacher areas. There will be crews out very early the next morning to clean up the stadium. The District is willing to cooperate with the neighborhood also, and if there has to be a school clean-up crew to go out and clean up the neighborhood, this could be possible. Commissioner Sonsin stated that there have been some complaints from neighbors around the school sign on 47th and Winnetka that there are cans, cigarette butts, etc. around the sign. It seems that after an event New Hope Planning Commission - 11 - June 7, 1994 the trash and litter problem would be magnified several times. The District should see what kind of control can be put on this issue. Commissioner Underdahl stated that she received six calls at home, one from Mrs. Una Lamb and one from Mr. Hanna, who has had six mailboxes destroyed by kids running over them with cars. She questioned whether there is some type of responsibility that can be imposed on the kids to be good neighbors, and also if the track would be open on weekends and off- hours so the public could use the track. Whitey Johnson stated that the complex would help develop some school pride and school spirit and the neighborhood should be treated in a more mature fashion. There will be a limited access gate that would allow an adult to slide through to get on to the track to use it for walking or jogging. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug said a firm commitment is needed from the school board regarding the traffic concern. It would not seem likely that streets could be barricaded but that personnel at some of the intersections would be a good idea to direct traffic away from the residential streets, not as a City expense but as a school expense. Aisc a condition should be put on the conditional use permit request that the complex be used only for Cooper activities. Limiting the parking on the streets all around the school to protect the residential streets is good. Whitey Johnson stated the football game times are 7:30 to 9:30 p.m and the field is usually cleared by about 10:00 p.m. The middle school uses the facilities for track meets late afternoons and the New Hope Elementary School has a track meet in the spring and would use the track in the morning. There have been people from outside the District that have wanted to use the facility and they have been turned down in the past. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug questioned the landscaping. Roy Anderson stated that the size and type of trees were changed at the City's request. The trees on the berm will be spaced in a double row. When planted the trees will be 8 feet and grow to about 40 - 70 feet at maturity. An underground sprinkler system will be installed to keep up the landscaping. There will be a black-vinyl, chain-link fence to surround the complex to. protect the complex from damage and contain the events. The reasoning for the fence is to keep out vandals, not the community that would like to use the track. There will be a limited access gate on one end. Commissioner Watschke questioned if the discus and shot-put areas could be moved to the dry ponding area so the berm could be extended along Zealand. He asked if there could be more coniferous screening along 49th and the football field. Mr. Anderson stated that moving the discus and shot-put areas could be considered. Regarding the screening with the coniferous trees, the intent was to try to screen from the west and wrap the trees around the north end of the bleacher. The mounding will only be about two feet above grade, but the bleacher will extend only about two feet above the mound. The primary concern was to screen the bleacher area. Commissioner Underdahl stated that the school should be sure to trim along the fences rather than let the grass grow too long and become an eyesore. Commissioner Sonsin noted the two buildings with graffiti on them and asked if these buildings will remain and what can be done to keep the new buildings clean. Whitey Johnson stated that the two existing buildings will New Hope Planning Commission - 12 - June 7, 1994 be taken down. Hopefully the new complex will create some pride in the students and g~affiti will nothave to be dealt with. About the only things that can be done with that situation is to keep the area well lit and as secure as possible. A new product is being looked into that acts like teflon that can be put on the building to keep it graffiti free. At this time Vice-Chairman Gundershaug opened the floor to the audience. The following people voiced several concerns and are not in favor of the new athletic field: Don Hatra, 47th Avenue; Christine Powell, 8219 47th Avenue; Rebekah Adams, 4817 Zealand; Marie Hagfors, 4740 Virginia; Daryl Fields, 8224 49th; Allen Nelson, 4933 Wisconsin; Jean Fields, 49th Avenue; Theresa Inserra, 4940 Xylon; Al Fredrickson, 8508 Fairview; Curtis Mickelson, 47th & Utah; Dave Carlson, 4841 Zealand (submitted a petition); Clyde Morrison, 8038 47th; Gerry Blockey, 8267 Del Drive; Jessica Arnold, 8000 47th; and Lowell Campbell, 4849 Utah. The concerns expressed by these these people include: finding a way to use the old Robbinsdale High School stadium or finding another site for both schools to use; loss of value to homes in the area; increased trash in the neighborhood; more street repairs needed and loss of yards if street widening is needed on 47th; noise control/gunning car motors; increased crime with people hiding in the trees used for screening; parking problems on residential streets; drainage/ponding issues; additional taxes; additional events; renting the facility to other schools to increase revenue; increased traffic, both vehicles and pedestrians; the cost of two stadiums; money for upkeep; extra traffic during daytime events when the elementary children are around; high school kids yell at the elementary kids at bus stops and while walking to school; cars blocking driveways on the residential streets; different kind of people come to games (rowdier) than go to concerts, etc.; other schools have good exits to main streets; and sound system will reverberate off school and bounce back into neighborhood. The following is a list of people who came forward in favor of the new complex: John Lazar, 8808 47~; Jill Oldenkamp, student (petition submitted); Bob O'Hara, track coach; Scott Sorenson, student; John Olfke, football coach and teacher; Diane Reed, 6016 Boone; Barb Lehman, athletic director; Gary Holmberg, 4909 Douglas; Sean Willey, captain of the track team; Jim Dahle, acting superintendent; Paul Harder, 8508 49th. Some of the comments made by the people in favor of the new facility include: support an upgraded facility; time to change; Classic Lake Conference schools are all in residential communities; need fence for safety; athletics are a part of students life; students in our district should have the equivalent of what others have; facility will be part of the community; students should have something they can take pride in; district will make changes needed and meet everything the City proposes; make the facility contingent on Plymouth's approval for Armstrong; students are good kids and deserve the same opportunities that other students have; can use the field for physical education classes also; lives in Crystal and home values went up after the building of the community center and pool instead of down; the facility will pull the school and community together; more school pride and school spirit in having own field; school will cooperate with City; install policies not to rent field to other schools; district wants to be good neighbors; and what message is the community sending to kids when saying "no" to this facility. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug closed the public hearing at this time and brought the discussion back to the Planning Commission. New Hope Planning Commission - 13 - June 7, 1994 Commissioner Underdahl stated some concern that this sounds like a student/resident argument and not an aesthetic community situation. This is an issue of being able to live in the homes around the school comfortably, and how parents and residents can give the students the best. The Planning Commission and City Council will have to determine how to be equal to both parties. Commissioner Sonsin stated that this issue should be tabled for one month to find answers to some of the concerns regarding traffic, noise, and some of the environmental problems, and the impact of Armstrong's decision. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug als° expressed support in tabling this issue for two weeks or one month to obtain more answers to the major concerns. Answers need to be set forth on the 16 items the Planning Consultant reported on and the physical layout of the complex and traffic items. Commissioners Watschke and Cassen also agreed with the idea of tabling this issue for some time to obtain answers to some of the concerns. MOTION Item 4.2 Motion by Commissioner Watschke, seconded by Commissioner Sonsin, to table Planning Case 94-14 for Request for Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site/Building Plan Review/Approval to Allow Expansion of School Uses in an R-1 Zoning District, 8230 47th Avenue North, Independent School District No. 281 (Cooper High School), Petitioner, to July 12, 1994. Voting in favor: Abstain: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke Cameron None Zak PC 94-15 Item 4.3 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.3, Planning Case 94-15, Request for Preliminary Plat Approval for Kimball Addition, 8901 36th Avenue North, David M. Kimball, Petitioner. Ms. Bellefuil, Administrative Analyst, gave an overview of the planning case stating the petitioner is requesting Preliminary Plat approval for Kimball Addition, and a variance from the right-of-way width requirement. The purpose of the plat is to subdivide the existing 3.1 acre site into nine (9) single family residential lots and provide new R-1 residential building sites. Ms. Bellefuil stated the Preliminary Plat shows the nine lots being accessed via a cul-de-sac street off of 36th Avenue known as Decatur Court North. The new street is proposed to have a right-of-way width of 50 feet and the City Code states that minor streets or cul-de-sac or marginal access service streets are to have a 60 foot right-of-way, therefore a 10 foot variance from the 60 foot right-of-way width requirement is being requested in conjunction with the approval of the Preliminary Plat. Ms. Bellefuil stated the property is located in an R-l, Single Family Residential, Zoning District and surrounding land uses/zoning include R-1 single family homes to the north, across 36th Avenue; St. Joseph's Catholic Church (R-l) to the east; wetlands and open land (owned by the church and zoned R-l) to the south; and R-1 single family homes to the west along Ensign Avenue. The topography of the site consists of a large New Hope Planning Commission - 14 - June 7, 1994 slope which rises from 920 feet at the wetlands/drainage creek to 959 feet (a 39 foot change in 300 feet), with large trees surrounding the perimeter of the site. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff have received some comments/questions/inquiries from property owners residing on Ensign Avenue, whose homes abut the site. Ms. Bellefuil stated that the plat subdivides the property into nine (9) parcels. The nine proposed lots meet the Zoning Code lot area of 9,500 square feet, and lot width requirement of 75 feet, except for cul-de-sac lots which have a frontage of at least 40 feet, for the R-1 Zoning District. The setback requirements for the R-1 Zoning District are met. Ms. Bellefuil pointed out that the existing house on the site will be relocated to Lot 6, leaving eight (8) tots for new home construction. The utility connections (sanitary sewer and water) will be made from 36th Avenue. A storm sewer is not shown on the plan, but will be required, per the City Engineer's recommendations. The proposed roadway has been aligned with the Decatur Avenue intersection across 36th Avenue to the north, per staff's request. It is anticipated that the additional traffic generated will be minimal. Ms. Bellefuil explained that a minor variance is being requested to allow a 50-foot street right-of-way instead of the 60 feet required by City Code. The paved area of the roadway will be 30 feet wide, as is the normal requirement. The difference will be in the width of the boulevard between the street curb and the private property lines. Instead of 15 feet, the resulting boulevard will be 10 feet. There are a number of existing streets in the City built with this right-of-way width that present no problem. The City Code platting variance language allows for special circumstances, such as physical hardships such as topography. Staff finds that the variance is justified due to the creek and trees on the west and due to the lot depths. The City Engineer reviewed the Preliminary Plat and made the following comments/recommendations: Sanitary sewer and water is available in 36th Avenue. The connection and extension shall comply with New Hope Public Works. Wet tap connections are not allowed. The open cutting and immediate repair of 36th Avenue shall be coordinated with New Hope Public Works. MPCA, MWCC and MHD permits are required. 2. The plat shall be reviewed and comply with all requirements of the Bassett Creek Watershed. 3. Storm sewer catch basins are required in the southwest corner of the street intersection with 36th Avenue. 4. The walkout elevations on Lots 1-5 shall be a minimum of 1 foot higher than the overflow elevation over the Iow point in 36th Avenue. A minimum 25 foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be provided on the backside of Lots 1-5. It should be noted the open channel conveying drainage near the east lines of Lots 1-6 is a significant open channel conveying drainage from the Hidden Valley New Hope Planning Commission -15- June 7,1994 Park area. The City shall be aware the expectations of future residents abutting this channel may not correspond with the resources the City has to properly maintain this channel. In addition, future improvements in the channel may warrant tree removal, which also may not agree with future residents' expectations. Drainage and utility easements along common and rear lot lines shall comply with City requirements. The grading plan suggests the west half of Lot 8 will drain southwesterly, diagonally across the center of Lot 7. An easement over the center of Lot 7 protecting the overland drainage alignment is required or an additional storm sewer may be needed to properly drain this area. The grades through the overland drainage swale shall be 1% minimum. The street right-of-way dedication is 50 feet, which is less than the required 60 feet. It is typical for communities to require less than 60 feet of right-of-way for roads with a minimal amount of traffic. However, the street width (30 feet FF) and cul-de-sac radius (45 feet) shall comply with City standards. The street shall be constructed to a residential design section. 8. Erosion control shall comply with Hennepin County Soil Conservation District requirements. 9. A development bond plus 50% is required for the cost of all public improvements (utilities and streets). Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat of the Kimball Addition subject to the following conditions: 1. Final Plat to incorporate all changes recommended by City Engineer. 2. Registered Property Abstract showing ownership of property to be submitted with final Plat, per City Attorney recommendations. Development Agreement be executed between developer and City and performance bond (amount to be determined by City Engineer and Building Official) to be submitted to the City. 4. Petitioner requests that Final Plat review be waived and go directly to the Council on June 27th. Mr. Dave Kimball reported that exception is not taken to any of the concerns. Regarding the drainage easement across Lot 7, the drainage on this lot has been redesigned and the cul-de-sac has been lowered and the grading plan brings drainage from the lower point along the west boundary between Lots 8 and 9. The drainage swale will be 1.3 percent from the Iow point on the cul-de-sac. This has been addressed to eliminate any type of drainage problem behind that lot, which is the lowest proposed lot. This change has already been incorporated into the preliminary plat. With the walkout elevations being one foot higher than the overflow elevation of 36th Avenue, the swale is difficult to attain. According to Randall Hedlund of Hedlund Engineering, the overflow Iow point elevation was surveyed on 30th Avenue and was found to be 935.0 feet and the walkout elevation of the church directly across the ravine from the proposed walkout to be 934.8 feet. According to the stormwater report New Hope Planning Commission - 16 - June 7, 1994 MOTION Item 4.3 from the Bassett Creek Watershed, this area has a high water level of 928.8 feet with a storage volume of 5.76 acre feet. If the stormwater changes are never implemented as spelled out in the preliminary report, the high water level will be lower than it is at present. Storage volume at elevation 934 for the ponding area is approximately 15 acre feet. Because raising walkout elevations to 936 poses difficulties with existing trees, topography and available dirt, Mr. Kimball is requesting that the minimum walkout be 934. Mr. Hanson stated that these two points are agreeable from an engineering point of view. Commissioner Sonsin asked what will happen to the evergreens that are on the lot now and whether the trees will remain after redevelopment. Mr. Kimball indicated that two of the trees will need to be removed and relocated to another area close to 36th Avenue. Mr. John Arnoldy, 3532 Ensign Avenue North, came to the podium to speak for the surrounding neighbors affected by the proposed addition. The neighbors are concerned about the type and value of the homes that will be built on these lots and wonder if a covenant can be provided stating the proposed values of the new homes. Commissioner Cassen wanted to know if there would be any recorded covenants. Mr. Kimball stated that the City covenants are fine. Mr. Kimball noted that the values are not set by the builder but by the market. At this time the lot prices would dictate home values to be about $135,000 and $159,900. Typically the lot price is 25 percent of the price of the home. Mr. Kimball will be the sole builder in this addition. Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Underdahl, to approve Planning Case 94-15, Request for Preliminary Plat Approval for Kimball Addition, 8901 36th Avenue North, David M. Kimball, Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 1. Final Plat to incorporate all changes recommended by City Engineer. 2. Registered Property Abstract showing ownership of property to be submitted with Final Plat, per City Attorney recommendations. Development Agreement be executed between developer and City and performance bond (amount to be determined by City Engineer and Building Official) to be submitted to City. 4. Planning Commission will waive review of the Final Plat. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Zak PC 94-17 Item 4.4 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Planning Case 94-17, Request for Rezoning from I-1, Limited Industrial, Zoning District to R-l, Single Family Residential, Zoning District, 3043 Louisiana Avenue North, William & Louise Kranz, Petitioners. Mr. Brixius explained that the petitioners are requesting to rezone their New Hope Planning Commission -17- June 7,1994 property from an I-1, Limited Industrial, Zoning District to an R-l, Single Family Residential, Zoning District. The property consists of two well maintained, adjacent lots located at the southeast corner of the City on the edge of an I-1, Limited Industrial, Zoning District. The petitioners reside in a single family home on the south lot and desire to construct a new single family home on the north lot. Due to the fact that the property is zoned I-1 and the residential use is considered a non-conforming use, a rezoning to R-1 is necessary if a new home is constructed because City Code prohibits the expansion of non-conforming uses. Mr. Brixius explained that in 1960 the zoning map showed the prOperty as residential, which is the same as across the street in Crystal. The light industrial zoning was shown on the 1960 zoning map to the west. On the 1961 map there is retail business on the south and residential to the north, and in 1962 there are records of rezoning requests. In 1962 the City Council approved a request to rezone a tract of land directly south of the Kranz property from residential to light industrial, this did not include the Kranz property or immediately west or north of the property. In 1963 there was a request for rezoning north and west of the Kranz property from residential to general industry. At this time the Planning Commission and Council asked to secure a waiver to be inclusive of the Kranz property. The 1963 Council minutes indicate that this waiver was obtained and the rezoning was approved. The 1975 Comprehensive Plan Inventory indicates that there was a 1960 land use plan which designated this area for industrial development which is consistent with the 1963 zoning. The 1978 Comprehensive Plan also shows this area for mid-intensity industrial land use and as such the zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the past. With the 1963 rezoning the Kranz property became a legal non-conforming use and is governed under those rules of the zoning ordinance which indicate that it may continue in the same manner as existed on the day of rezoning. Mr. Brixius reviewed the rezoning criteria and questioned if the request resulted from a past zoning mistake. The subject property's I-1 zoning designation is reflective of the City's 1960 and 1978 Land Use Plans which suggested industrial land use of both the Kranz and surrounding properties. Because of obtaining a waiver it would seem there was no mistake made, and since Mr. & Mrs. Kranz had to sign the waiver, the rezoning was done with their knowledge and agreement. The inclusion of a single family home in an industrial area may be interpreted as a past zoning mistake and would be left to the Planning Commission to determine the issue. Mr. Brixius explained that the character of the area has changed in recent years as industrial development has occurred on previously vacant properties which surround the subject site. While the subject property does lie adjacent to industrial uses to the north, south and west, the orientation of the Kranz residence (toward single family homes to the east) and site landscaping do appear to minimize adverse impacts. Recognition should also be made that the residence is extremely well kept and is far from being considered a "marginal" structure worthy of removal for health and/or safety reasons. A determination will need to be made as to whether the introduction of another single family use in the area will be appropriate. The Comprehensive Plan is clear that this area is to be developed industrial. Mr. Brixius stated that as part of the rezoning consideration, a New Hope Planning Commission - 18 - June 7, 1994 determination should be made as to whether the proposed use can compatibly co-exist With Surrounding land uses. The subject site is bounded on three sides by light industrial uses and in this regard, some question exists whether an additional Iow density residential use may compatibly exist in the area. However, the orientation of the Kranz residence (toward single family homes to the east) and site landscaping currently serve to minimize adverse impacts from the adjacent industrial uses, Mr. Brixius reported the proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained herein. Neither the developed Kranz property nor the undeveloped property to the north comply with minimum I-1 District lot area requirements. In fact, at 12,500 square feet in size, it is questioned whether the vacant lot or even the combination of the two Kranz lots could realistically support a light industrial development (I-1 District requires minimum one acre lots). In this regard, a lot size variance would be needed to accommodate'industrial development. Both lots in question have, however, been found to comply with minimum R-1 District dimensional requirements. A determination needs to be made as to what is the bes, t use of the property as it exists. Mr. Brixius explained the two options available for this property. Specific development options include the following: 1. Reviewing the rezoning and giving approval and allowing a single family home to come into the area. Review combining or redeveloping the site with the existing house, the vacant property, and some vacant property from the adjacent industrial site and use it as an industrial location. Staff does not believe the past approval of the subdivision predated the City;s planning objectives or change the overall objectives for this area. If approval is given, it should be based on the criteria that the best use of the lot is residential. If denied, it would be based on past planning decisions that have been made in regard to industrial land use designations and future potential redevelopment of the site. Mr. Dave DaVinski, son-in-law, stated that Mr. & Mrs. Kranz have lived at 3043 Louisiana since about 1950. This area developed industrially during the 1970's and 80's, and the berming and screening required by the City, makes this a fine residential lot. There is an earth berm on the west side along with a fence and a natural tree line along the north side of the vacant lot that screens off the light industrial to the north. Since this is a non-conforming use, it is believed that the best use would be to have another residence in that spot and make this a conforming use as an R-1. In 1980 the Kranz's came to the City to get a variance to build an unattached garage in the back of the property, and there was a reference made by one of the Commissioners (Planning Case 80-37) to Mrs. Kranz to see if there was interest in having this land rezoned to R-I. Commissioner Sonsin stated that this is a very nice area, and he is concerned about the future and what would happen if Mr. & Mrs. Kranz would move out of the area. The Planning Commission needs to decide what is the best use of the property. It seems unnecessary to rezone a small pocket of property as R-1 in the middle of this industrial area. Commissioner Sonsin asked the petitioner what they would do if the New Hope Planning Commission - 19 - June 7, 1994 Planning Commission turns down their request. Mr. DaVinski stated there is no answer for this now. Ultimately at some time the land will go up for Sale and since there is not enough land for light industrial, the salability of the land would be in question. It needs to be determined what good the land is now other than rezoning it residential. Commissioner Sonsin stated that he is not in favor of spot rezoning, but would work with Mr. & Mrs. Kranz while they live there and to help meet their needs. Commissioner Underdahl asked the other Commissioners if it would be possible for the second home to be built if the property is not rezoned and was told that a use by a variance in a zoning district which does not permit the use is not allowed. Commissioner Gundershaug wondered, if the property remains the way it is, if anyone would buy it to add to their property. Mr. Brixius answered that if the property retains the industrial zoning it would take some land assembly including the Kranz house and the vacant parcel and some land that is currently owned by the property owner to the west to make it an industrial size lot. The green area has since been reduced so that may free up some of the other land for development purposes. The use will continue as non-conforming. The vacant lot is virtually without a'use at this time. MOTION Item 4.4 Motion by Commissioner r Underdahl, seconded by Commissioner Gundershaug, to approve Planning Case 94-17, Request for Rezoning from I-1, Limited Industrial, Zoning District to R-l, Single Family Residential, Zoning District, 3043 Louisiana Avenue North, William and Louise Kranz, Petitioners. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion failed. Underdahl, Gundershaug, Watschke Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen Zak (This case will be presented to the City Council on June 13th.) PC 94-18 Item 4.5 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Planning Case 94-18, Request for Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Allow Educational Classes at Beautiful Savior Lutheran Church, 3351 Independence Avenue North, Hope Alliance Chapel, Petitioner. MOTION Item 4.5 Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Gundershaug, to table Planning Case 94-18, Request for Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Allow Educational Classes at Beautiful Savior Lutheran Church, 3351 Independence Avenue North, Hope Alliance Chapel, Petitioner, until July 12, 1994. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Zak COMMITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Item 6.1 No report. Codes & Standards No report. Item 6.2 New Hope Planning Commission - 20 - June 7, 1994 MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES ADJOURNMENT No report. The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 11:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester Recording Secretary New Hope Planning Commission -21 - June 7,1994 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 11, 1994 City Hall, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 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. ROLL CALL CONSENT Present: Absent: Also Present: Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Sarah Bellefuil, Administrative Analyst, Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant, Steve Sondrall, City Attorney, Mark Hanson, City Engineer No consent items. PC 94-18 Item 4.1 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.1, Request for Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Allow Educational Classes at Beautiful Savior Lutheran Church, 3351 Independence Avenue North, Hope Alliance Chapel, Petitioner. Mr. McDonald stated that at the June 7th Planning Commission meeting staff recommended, and the Commission concurred, that this request be tabled for one month so that the petitioner could address the building code issues, provide more detailed plans, meet with the Design & Review Committee, and conduct a neighborhood meeting. The petitioner has completed all of these items and staff is recommending that the Commission now proceed to consider the request. Mr. McDonald explained that the petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to allow Hope Alliance Chapel/Beautiful Savior Lutheran Church to lease space to District No. 287 for purposes of conducting educational classes. This Conditional Use Permit Amendment is being requested by the board members of Hope Alliance Chapel as a joint effort with Beautiful Savior Lutheran Church, and Intermediate School District 287. The School District has identified a need to locate educational facilities outside the local schools to aid in the learning of students with special needs. The total number of students and staff for the facilities will be 50 individuals. Mr. McDonald noted that the petitioners state in their application that currently special needs students from New Hope and other adjacent suburbs are being transported by buses to a facility in Richfield. This cooperative agreement between the School District and the church would allow local students to attend school in their local area. The Beautiful Savior Lutheran Church is located on a 4.2 acre site with a sanctuary and educational wing. Parking facilities include a total of 181 stalls with 5 of those stalls being designated for handicapped parking. Students enrolled in the program will be bused to the facility by mini-buses or vans. It is anticipated that a total number of seven buses will be used for daily transport of students. Buses will load and drop off students at the northeast corner of the educational wing of the Church. In addition, it is anticipated that approximately 15 staff members of the School District New Hope Planning Commission - I - July 12, 1994 and visiting parents will utilize the parking lot during the normal business hours of the school. It is expected that there will be one delivery of food per day utilizing the same traffic route as the buses. Mr. McDonald went on to explain that the School District will be utilizing only the educational wing of the facility. There will not be simultaneous use of the facility by Hope Alliance and the School District. Mr. McDonald explained that the program is designed to serve K-6 grade Emotionally/ Behaviorally Disordered (E/BD) students needing a Level V service who are referred by their School Districts. Students are served based on a need for a more res-trictive setting. The students attend self-contained classrooms at a segregated site in which educational, behavioral, and social needs are addressed. Mr. McDonald stated the church site is zoned R-l, Single Family Residential, and is allowed under a previously granted Conditional Use Permit. The added school use would require an amendment to the existing Conditional Use Permit. The site is surrounded by R-1 Zoning District single family homes on the north, east and south and the site abuts Highway 169 on the west. Mr. McDonald said property owners within 350' of the request were notified about the June public hearing, at which time it was announced that this request would be tabled until July 12th. Several adjacent property owners have contacted the staff and indicated concern about this type of use in their neighborhood. A petition with 22 signatures was submitted to the City on July 8th opposing the use at this site. Mr. McDonald explained that public and private educational institutions limited to elementary, junior high and senior high schools are allowed by conditional use permit in the R-1 Zoning District provided that certain criteria are met. The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to provide the City with a reasonable and legally permissible degree of discretion in determining suitability of certain designated uses. The items to consider are the nature of adjoining land uses or buildings, whether or not a similar use is already in existence, whether the proposed use is compatible with adjacent land uses, and whether the proposed use would tend to depreciate property values in the area. Three other criteria to be considered for residential districts are: 1) traffic - that non-residential traffic be channeled onto thoroughfares and not onto minor residential streets; 2) screening - the proposed use is to be sufficiently screened by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned land so the existing homes will not be materially depreciated in value; and 3) compatible appearance. At this time there are no e~terior changes planned for the church;' The structure and site should not have an adverse affect upon the adjacent residential properties. Mr. McDonald reported that the Building Official confirmed all building code related issues have been or will be resolved. The architect for the project stated in a letter to the City that they will meet all applicable building code requirements for the area designated as E-2 Occupancies, which is a school occupancy. Mr. McDonald noted a neighborhood meeting was conducted on June 22nd. The adjacent property owners were notified. A synopsis of the questions asked/issues discussed was mailed back out to all property owners originally notified. New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - July 12, 1994 Mr. McDonald reported the major concerns that were discussed in that synopsis were ~he age of ~he studer~ts.~ .The petitioner clarified that the age of the children will range from 5:_ 12 years old. The student/adult ratio is about 2 1/2 students for one adult and professional staff will meet the vans and escort the students into school. The program will start with 25 and the maximum limit for people in the program is 50 (students and staff). It is anticipated that the school will lease the church space for five years. A hedge of shrubs will be planted on the north and south ends of the property to help screen residential views. The question of closing the south entrance to slow down drivers who speed through the parking lot is being explored. Mr. McDonald stated the petitioners met with the Design & Review Committee on June 23rd and discussed the following issues: explanation of program and shared use, number and ages of students, transportation/ traffic issues, hours of operation, outdoor recreation area, landscaping, signage, south driveway gate, refuse storage, snow storage, and neighborhood meeting. Revised plans were submitted. One of the major issues was landscaping. A hedge of 27 shrubs would be planted on the north and south ends of the site to screen the parking lot from the adjacent residential homes. Other landscaping will be placed along the south exit onto 33rd Avenue and around the site sign, and on the north side of the recreation area. Mr. McDonald also explained that the plans show two site signs, one each at the north and south entrances. Both signs currently exist and only the metal panel face on each sign will be replaced to state "Hope Alliance Chapel and Independent School District No. 287". The lettering will be painted (black) on a painted (tan) metal panel. The signs are in compliance with the Sign Code. The revised plans also include: the private resident locations near the site; snow storage; trash enclosure and existing storage building; four handicapped parking stalls with signs on the west side of the building; a 40 foot x 50 foot outdoor recreation area surrounded by a 4 foot fence on the southwest side of the building, which will have a shock-absorbing surface such as sand or wood chips; the plans clearly indicate the portion of the building to be used by School District 287 and the portion of the building to be used exclusively by the church; the plans clearly indicate the anticipated on-site school bus and delivery van route using the 34th Avenue entrance, with students entering the school on the east, and the vans exiting out onto 34th Avenue. In regards to the existing gates at the south exit, staff have enclosed prior minutes where these gates were discussed. If the residents in the area want the gate closed and the churchr'is agreeable, perhaps that should b® a condition of approval. Mr. McDonald stated staff feels that the petitioner has done a good job in addressing the numerous issues that were highlighted in the previous staff report. The Commission will want to carefully take into consideration the comments made by the neighboring property owners. Chairman Cameron asked for representatives of Hope Alliance Chapel to come to the podium. At this time Mary Zak removed herself from discussion or voting on this issue as she is a member of Beautiful Savior Lutheran Church. New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - July 12, 1994 Mr. Larry Brown, Project Engineer, introduced Michael Beuttner, Project Architect, Joe Kennedy, District 287 Program Supervisor, Missy Holbrook, administrator, Pastor Wendell Nelson, and Wayne Steege, Head Trustee for Hope Alliance. Mr. Brown stated that Hope Alliance is a quality organization and has tried to work with the neighborhood. Pastor Nelson talked with the people in the neighborhood after hearing that a petition had been started to ensure that the information was correct. After hearing the facts, some of the neighbors stated that they did agree with the program. One of the concerns was what kind of program this is and what it is all about. Mr. Kennedy explained that District 287 is an Intermediate School District that serves 13 school districts in the west metropolitan area. One of the major missions is to provide special education services for young people who have disabilities whose member School Districts are not able to meet the needs of these special students. This program focuses on elementary age students. These students would be coming from Osseo, Robbinsdale, West Tonka, mainly the northern and central suburbs. The students now are being served at a location in Richfield. The elementary programs have been in operation for about 10 years. Commissioner Gundershaug questioned again the hours of operation for the school. Mr. Kennedy stated that the hours would be 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. The School District has requested that teachers be allowed to come in a little earlier or to stay later if the need should arise, such as 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. This is primarily a nine month program. There are some summer programs that are half days for a few weeks at a time. The maximum number of staff/students at any one time would be 50. Students will be bused from the School District in which they live. The estimated number of buses per day would be seven. An average number for staff/parents per day would be 15. Commissioner Gundershaug wondered if Beautiful Savior would also be conducting programs during the week at the same time as the school and if there will be an overlap time where there would be considerably more activity with Beautiful Savior, Hope Alliance and the school all at the building at the same time. Mr. Steege stated the intent of the program is that Hope Alliance is buying the building and Beautiful Savior is moving out. There will be a transitional period where both churches would be holding services on Sunday morning. When the School District moves in, the educational wing would be theirs alone and Hope Alliance would not use that area. The transitional time could be from 6 - 18 months. Beautiful Savior has space to lease at the time the School District moves in and will run the business functions at this facility. The evenings and weekends would be open for both churches to use the facility. The time frame for this is open since the new church building is dependent upon a decision from the Planning Commission on this request. The three services on Sunday would be alternated with Hope Alliance using one of the time slots. It is.felt that two entrances would be better for circulation. A sign could be erected stating "right turn only" from one of the entrances for traffic entering Independence Avenue. Commissioner Gundershaug directed a question to staff regarding the gate on the south end of the parking lot. Has this gate ever been closed or how is the through traffic here. Mr. McDonald stated that when the church put on the addition years ago the gates were required. Several Council people later received complaints from residents that the gates were not remaining closed. Mr. Brown stated that the information they received from Beautiful New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - July 12, 1994 Savior regarding the gates is that Beautiful Savior has tried to keep the gates locked, ~but kids, come by and cut the padlocks, and then police officers need to come and enforcement has been a big issue. Hope Alliance is willing to padlock the gates again but enforcement will again be an issue. The existing signs will be utilized with some modification to the letters. The school will be using the same sign. Chairman Cameron questioned whether the school would be having any evening activities that would bring in additional parents and was told there are parent meetings that will be held 3 - 4 times a year. This will be coordinated with Hope Alliance's schedule. Commissioner Sonsin questioned if there are any problems in Richfield with the students attending classes there. Mr. McDonald stated that staff is not aware of any problems. Commissioner Gundershaug wanted clarification on the staff/student ratio. Mr. Kennedy reiterated that the ratio is 2 1/2 students per staff member. The students are constantly supervised in the classrooms, outside, on the way to and from the bus, and while riding on the bus. Commissioner Cassen asked if there is any sign that indicates "no through traffic." The safety of the children is at stake with cars traveling through the parking lot as though it is a street. Mr. Brown stated that at this time there are no signs. Commissioner Cassen recommended that a sign at each of the entrances stating "no through traffic" be put up. The gate should also be closed and enforced. Chairman Cameron asked if anyone from the audience wanted to address the Commission. Mr. John Rothstein, 3401 Independence, came to the podium. Mr. Rothstein stated there are two driveways on the north side and feels that this is a big concern. This area has many children walking to and from school and several buses pick up in the area. The extra seven buses for District 287 seem a little excessive for the narrow streets and the amount of children walking at that time of the day. Regarding the gate, Mr. Rothstein stated that Beautiful Savior told him that the police and fire department strongly urged them not to lock the gate. Mr. Rothstein feels the straight shot through the parking lot onto Independence is not acceptable. This not only applies to the cars cutting through at a high rate of speed, but also buses and cars leaving the facilities. The other entrance would force the vehicles to slow down to make the turn. This could be a dangerous situation for the walkers (kindergarten through 6th grade) going to Sonriesyn Elementary. Chairman Cameron asked Mr. Rothstein if he has experienced that a lot of cars do cut through the parking lot. Mr. Rothstein stated that last week a delivery truck also cut through the parking lot from north to south. Mr. Mike Koslaske, 3248 Independence, came to the podium and stated he is opposed to this use. Mr. Koslaske feels that trying to put a school facility into what is designed as a church should not be allowed. A major concern is traffic generated with the school with the extra buses and cars. At this time the major amount of traffic is on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings, which is normal and has been in place for years. Mr. Koslaske feels that adding weekday mornings and afternoons is too much additional traffic for a residential neighborhood. It may not be New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - July 12, 1994 feasible for the students coming from the south to use only the 34th Avenue entrance. More consideration should be given to this whole issue. District 281, in the near future, is considering closing Lincoln Elementary and possibly that site should be looked at to locate this facility. The District would probably look favorably on collecting rent monies for that building. Also the students would be in a school setting for learning and not trying to turn a church into a school. Mr. Koslaske is also concerned whether or not the children are supervised on the buses. Mr. Koskaske strongly urged the Commission to listen to the heartbeat of the neighborhood. Mr. Matt O'Connell, 3408 Independence, questioned the philosophy of separation of church and state with this whole issue. Mr. O'Connell also wanted to know if the age of the students has been put in writing and if this is guaranteed to always be the same. Mr. Steege answered that on the issue of church and state the leases between District 287 and public law require certain requirements be met that when a public school or any other public function is done in a church that any religious symbols and sayings are covered up. There are other requirements also that have to be met by law. The City will write the conditional use to indicate the age and number limits. Mr. McDonald agreed that if the Commission recommends approval, staff is recommending a Conditional Use Permit Agreement with an annual review so the gate can be checked annually or any problems with the neighborhood be considered. Mr. Brent Nelson, real estate agent for Beautiful Savior, indicated that land has been purchased but that construction has not yet been started. Construction will be started as soon as all approvals have been met with the Plymouth Planning Commission. Mr. Nelson commented that Beautiful Savior is a church with approximately 1400 members and Hope Alliance has around 150 members. Beautiful Savior has several daytime programs where there is traffic in and out during the day. There will be less traffic with the proposed use in the neighborhood. Chairman Cameron questioned the amount of time that both churches will be using the facility and wondered if one year is feasible and what will be done if something goes wrong with the construction. Mr. Nelson stated that there could be construction problems, such as a strike. Beautiful Savior has the land to go ahead with the construction and will not enter into this without the commitments for the financing. Utilities and road work have been started in Plymouth for the construction of the Beautiful Savior facility. Mr. Steege also stated that a lease would have to be entered into with Beautiful Savior for use of the building. Mr. Brown mentioned that when looking at the overlapping use of the facilities, it will depend on when ground can be broken for the new facility. Chairman Cameron discussed adding-'a time limit in the conditional use regarding this issue. The question was raised what would happen to Hope Alliance if District 287 is not allowed to use the educational wing. Mr. Steege indicated that the negotiations would have to start again because the income from the District would help in purchasing Beautiful Savior and the purchase of the building is contingent on District 287 using the building. Commissioner Underdahl wanted an explanation regarding the five-year lease with renewal every year. Mr. Brown reported that state agencies are only allowed to sign a one-year lease. A five-year lease can be signed but it is cancelable every year. If District 287 would lose the funding, the lease could be cancelled at the end of that time. The intention of District 287 is to stay in the building for the five years and possibly longer. Hope New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - July 12, 1994 Alliance wants and needs to have the school and this situation will be beneficial to both parties, .All three parties can benefit in this situation. ' Hope Alliance has been a part of the New Hope community for five years already. Commissioner Underdahl asked, if the neighbors found this unacceptable after one year, would the lease be cancelable at that time. Mr. Steege answered that realistically there cannot just be a neighborhood meeting where it is agreed this is unacceptable. This function is normal in a church since many churches have daycares or other such programs. It is unrealistic to have a large building such as this and use it only for a few hours on Sunday morning. This is tax deferred and the School District is tax deferred. This is a small program. Mr. Kennedy stated that the District has worked with neighbors in these kinds of situations and the result has been very positive. As far as students walking to school, bus routes, times of school starts, District 287 has been able to work with other neighborhoods successfully. MOTION Item 4.1 Motion by Commissioner Gundershaug, seconded by Commissioner Sonsin, to approve Planning Case 94-18, Request for Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Allow Educational Classes at Beautiful Savior Lutheran Church, 3351 Independence Avenue North, Hope Alliance Chapel, Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: Conditional Use Permit Agreement to be drafted by City Attorney be executed between petitioner and City that establishes conditions of approval and on-going operation of facility, including hours of operation,' limited to K-6 grade students, limited to a total of 50 staff and students combined. 2. The right turn sign be installed on the northerly exit to funnel the traffic onto 34th Avenue. 3. The gates on the south entrance/exit to be closed. 4. "No Through Traffic" signs be installed at 34th entrance/exit. 5. Bus traffic to enter and exit through north entrance. 6. Annual review by staff. Commissioner Underdahl questioned whether there can be some control over the children waiting on the corner for the bus or if hours of operation can change so the children are safe. Chairman Cameron replied that District'287 has stated they will work with the drivers of the vans and the times they arrive at Beautiful Savior to allow for the safety of school children who walk to school. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Abstain: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen None Watschke Zak This Planning Case will appear before the City Council on July 25th. PC 94-19 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Planning Case New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - July 12, 1994 Item 4.2 94-19, Request for Site and Building Plan Review/Approval for Building Addition, 7849 42nd Avenue North, Country Kitchen of New Hope, Petitioner. Ms. Bellefuil explained that the petitioner is requesting site/building plan review/approval for remodeling and building addition. Country Kitchen is proposing to construct a 990 square foot addition on the east and south sides of the existing 3,250 square foot restaurant, along with interior remodeling and other site improvements, including landscaping. The remodeling will be on the inside and outside of the current facility and will be a benefit to Country Kitchen and to 42nd Avenue. Ms. Bellefuil stated that the restaurant is located on a 47,200 square foot (1.08 acres) parcel on the south side of 42nd Avenue between the School District #281 Administration Building and Autohaus. The site is zoned B-4, Community Business, as is the majority of property on 42nd Avenue. The school property to the west and south is zoned B-4 (administration builUing) and I-1, Limited Industrial (bus garage), the property to the east is zoned B-3, Auto-Oriented, and the property to the north across 42nd Avenue is zoned B-4. Ms. Bellefuil noted property owners within 350 feet of the request have been notified and staff have received no comments on the request. Ms. Bellefuil reported the proposed addition on the east will include a new front entry/lobby facing east and will add additional seating. Extensive interior remodeling will take place in conjunction with the exterior addition. The addition and existing building exterior will be new and will consist of a gable entrance on the east, vinyl siding, cedar trim and lattice, and asphalt shingles. There will also be a concrete patio and decorative railings. The windows in the addition will be insulated/glazed to match the existing. The plans include expansion of the parking lot at the rear (south side) of the building to correct minor parking lot problems and will have a bituminous surface and curbing. The number of parking spaces provided with the expansion totals 83 and exceeds the Zoning Code requirement of 75. The expansion at the rear will provide additional customer parking and the plan includes the removal of asphalt to close to the property line at the northeast corner near the driveway. Ms. Bellefuil noted that other site improvements will include a new light pole in the rear parking area to match existing, new fence to screen the exterior walk-in cooler, new trash enclosure, and new handicapped parking stalls/signage. The existing pylon sign will remain in place. Landscaping improvements around the perimeter of the site are also proposed and will include'27 trees and 8 shrubs. The hours of operation for the restaurant will remain unchanged: 6:00 a.m. to midnight. Ms. Bellefuil stated that the Design and Review Committee met with the petitioner on June 23rd and discussed general items including building materials, parking, landscaping, signage, lighting, trash enclosure, etc. The petitioner confirmed that the roof top equipment would be enclosed. A landscape schedule was submitted subsequent to the meeting, per the Committee's request. Ms. Bellefuil reported staff only has a couple minor suggestions/revisions for the plans: New Hope Planning Commission - 8 - July 12, 1994 MOTION Item 4.2 PC 94-20 Item 4.3 Correct fence problems revealed by survey. The split rail fence at the south lot line is more than 10 feet onto the School District property. If it was installed by Country Kitchen, it should be removed. B. The barrier posts along the east side at the rear of the property are unsightly, serve no purpose, and should be removed. Chairman Cameron questioned what will prevent cars from driving over the curb in winter when packed with snow. Staff recommends approval, subject to the two items noted above. Mr. Jerry Chambers, owner of the property, came to the podium and noted two corrections in the report. The new building addition is 12 feet x 65 feet or 780 square feet. The existing curb is concrete and the new curb will match the existing concrete curbing. Mr. Kevin Tiffany, Country Kitchen franchisee, addressed the fence in the back of the property and stated that it belongs to the School District. It was placed there shortly after the road construction was finished when it was used as a driveway. The fence was placed there to prevent cars from using it. The barrier posts were placed there for the same reason. There is no agreement with Autohaus for them to use the back of the property as a drive through. Commissioner Gundershaug reported that everything talked about at Design & Review has been completed and this looks like a nice addition to New Hope. Motion by Commissioner Gundershaug, seconded by Commissioner Cassen, to approve Planning Case 94-19 for Request for Site and Building Plan Review/Approval for Building Addition at 7849 42nd Avenue North, Country Kitchen of New Hope, Petitioner. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen None Watschke This planning case will come before the City Council on July 25th. Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.3, Planning Case 94-20, Request for Preliminary Plat Approval, Site and Building Plan Review/Approval and Concept Planned Unit Development Approval to Allow Building Addition, 3920 Winnetka Avenue, 3941/3961 Quebec Avenu~i North, Kellison Company/Don Harvey, Petitioners. Mr. McDonald stated that the petitioner is requesting Preliminary Plat approval, site/building plan review/approval and concept Planned Unit Development approval to allow building addition on the east side of the building located at 3943 Quebec Avenue. The p~titioner is proposing the platting of property known as Don Harvey Second Addition, Block 1, Lot 1, which currently contains two industrial buildings of approximately 26,880 square feet each (2 buildings on one lot). In conjunction with the preliminary plat the petitioner is requesting "General Concept Stage" PUD approval. The site is zoned I-1, Limited Industrial, and the manufacturing warehouse use is a permitted use. New Hope Planning Commission - 9 - July 12, 1994 Mr. McDonald reported that the plat meets the zoning code requirements for lot size and width requirements in the I-1 Zoning District, which are one acre and 150 feet, respectively, as the single lot contains 292,224 square feet (6.8 acres) and has a width on Quebec Avenue of over 12,000 feet. Mr. McDonald stated per routine procedure, the plat was submitted to Department Heads, City Attorney, City Engineer, Hennepin County and other appropriate agencies for review and comment. Hennepin County reviewed the plat and commented that the developer should dedicate an additional seven feet of right of way for a total of 40 feet of right of way from and along the CSAH 156 centerline; the County is requesting access from the plat to CSAH 156 must be limited to Quebec Avenue. The existing driveway located approximately 220 feet north of Quebec Avenue must be removed. The City Attorney reviewed the Preliminary Plat and has requested that the legal description on the Preliminary Plat be revised and that abstract of title be provided. The Minnesota Department of Transportation had no comment on the plat. The City Engineer reviewed the plat and made several comments regarding drainage. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat subject to the recommendations being incorporated into the Final Plat. Mr. Brixius reported that in the meeting with the petitioner it was identified that the zoning ordinance requires a Planned Unit Development (PUD) if two or more structures are built on a single lot. Within the Limited Industrial Zoning District which allows the use, it also allows for a conditional use Planned Unit Development to accomodate this type of action. Planned Unit Development is reviewed in three stages. Concept review which allows for a public hearing and determination if concept is appropriate and features that need further attention. Development stage which is a more formal detailed review of specific site characteristics. And, final stage which works out the development contract and final agreements which are recorded with the County. Mr. Brixius stated this area is zoned I-1, Limited Industrial, which allows manufacturing as a permitted use and PUD/CUP. The site is 6.8 acres which exceeds the I-1 standards. It has proper frontage to meet the PUD standards of 200 feet. All buildings are located so that they conform to required setbacks. The proposed building expansion of 41,640 square feet brings the total lot coverage to 94,560 square feet of buildings. This represents approximately 31.7 percent of the total site. Reviewing the green area, there is approximately 1.8 acres of green space which is 26 percent of the total site and complies with Code. Mr. Bri~ius noted that the landscape plan shows some concerns that will need to be addressed. The site has had historical problems with upkeep and appearance. There have been past problems with outdoor storage, load area exposure and overall site appearance. The proposed building expansion exists approximately 20 feet below the grade of Winnetka Avenue, therefore, the rooftop equipment will be seen from Winnetka Avenue. There are some deciduous plantings proposed along Winnetka Avenue and it is staff's recommendation that there be additional plantings of conifer to provide additional screening from Winnetka Avenue. It is suggested that these plantings be put in now for maximum screening. The building is very long and staff is suggesting that there be additional plantings that offer some vertical dimension to the foundation planting. On the south side of the building, the foundation plantings may be New Hope Planning Commission - 10 - July 12, 1994 supplemented by additional overstory trees in green areas between the sidewalk and. building, Mr, Bdxius explained that the existing building has bituminous surrounding the entire building with little green space. The arrangement of the buildings provide little opportunity for landscaping. There are some landscape islands shown on the plans at the corners of the buildings, however, additional screening and landscaping around the periphery of the site is appropriate to enhance the overall appearance. The dimension between the parking lot and curb lines may not allow plantings around the building perimeter, but this would be possible along Quebec Avenue and the eastern portion of the site. The Building Official noted a significant 30 inch Oak tree at the east end of the ~ot. The grading plan should be adjusted to provide the proposed storm water drainage pond without losing this significant tree. Tree preservaton measures should be defined as part of the PUD approval which outline precaution to be used during construction to protect the tree. Chairman Cameron wanted to be sure the City Inspector would make certain these measures would be taken. Additionally, some type of irrigation system needs to be shown to be certain these plantings be maintained. Mr. Brixius went on to explain that 135 parking stalls are required based on the building size and uses and 165 spaces are shown on the site in combination and shared use between the buildings. The existing parking stalls between the buildings have no physical barrier between the building and parking stall. To avoid damage to the building or automobiles, curb stops should be provided for these parking stalls. The overall condition of the bituminous is in disrepair and measures should be taken to improve the entire condition of the parking lot. Mr. Brixius reported that additional doors are provided on the north side of the new building. The separation between the building and the north curb line is approximately 47 feet. Typically for 90 degree loading access in these sites the 47 feet would not be appropriate and the applicant is being asked to demonstrate how trucks will maneuver to access these doors or if only smaller size vehicles will be used. Mr. Brixius stated that one curb cut will be eliminated and relocated to the west side of the building. All curb cut locations are in compliance with City requirements. Staff suggested that, through signage, truck access should be directed to the second curb cut to avoid interference with automobile traffic both internally and with the church to the south of the building. All water flow is being directed to a pond in the eastern portion of the site and then by the sanitary sewer along Quebec Avenue to Old Dutch Pond. Mr. Bri~(ius explained that the building is very large in character and is of brick construction with exterior trim, decorative block, and with some window and vertical dimension. The petitioner has responded to some of the concerns discussed at the Design & Review meeting. The following recommendations were made after reviewing the plan: expand landscape plan; all roof top equipment must be enclosed or painted to match the building; all trash dumpsters must be enclosed and designed to match the building or located inside the building; overall site cleanup and elimination of all outdoor storage from the site. One additional item should be a specific painting program for the existing buildings and repair associated with this PUD arrangement. Mr. Brixius reported that staff is recommending that Conditional Use/PUD New Hope Planning Commission - 11 - July 12, 1994 concept stage be approved subject to the elements outlined in the planning report with the addition of a paint and repair program, and pavement repair throughout the parking lot. Both of these items should be addressed in detail with the development stage approval. Mr. Jim Kellison, a representative of Kellison Company and the owners of Winnetka Properties, addressed the Commission. Mr. Kellison stated he was under the impression that there would be Preliminary Plat approval as well as for concept and development approval based on the Design & Review meeting on June 23rd. Mr. Kellison explained that Versa Die Cast has been a tenant in one of the buildings for 10 years and occupies 26,800 square feet and about 4,000 square feet in the east building. Versa Die came to the owners of the property about two months ago and reported that because of growth requirements more space was needed. Additional equipment for Versa Die Cast has been ordered and will be delivered about the middle of October so time is of the essence. Chairman Cameron stated that the Commission was only prepared for concept approval at this meeting. Mr. McDonald stated that possibly development and final approval could both be accomplished at the August meeting. Mr. Kellison said that was fine. Mr. Kellison explained that in March a thorough review of the buildings was completed with regard to upgrading the buildings including painting, redoing the asphalt, additional landscaping, and fixing up the truck dock area. These items were put on hold when Versa Die Cast informed Winnetka Properties they wanted to expand. The plan is to upgrade the east building as well as the landscaping ,around the site. There will be windows on the south side of the building facing Quebec. As Versa Die grows and fills more of the space, there will be a mezzanine and additional offices will be created in this space. Currently Versa Die Cast has 65 employees and will increase that number to about 100 employees over the next two to three years. Regarding the specific concerns, the other building will be repainted, the asphalt will be repaired, and additional landscaping will be added. The existing building has asphalt completely surrounding it because of truck'traffic. The drive-in doors at the back of the building are meant for loading trucks and not semi-trucks. All the trucks that would be using these doors can make the swing in the area provided and this could be demonstrated, if needed. There will be additional screening along Quebec with wing walls being installed of the same material as the rest of the building that will project in about 22 feet and be about 22 feet high. Planter islands will be directly in front of the walls with landscaping. There will also be two trash enclosures installed. Mr. Kellison submitted a letter to the Commission which addressed some items in the planning report. A question was raised regarding the additiohal seven feet of easement required along Winnetka. Mr. McDonald stated that this is a county request and all properties need to comply with this request. MOTION Item 4.3 Motion by Commissioner Gundershaug, seconded by Commissioner Cassen, to approve Planning Case 94-20, Request for Preliminary Plat Approval, 3920 Winnetka Avenue, 3941/3961 Quebec Avenue North, Kellison Company/Don Harvey, Petitioners, subject to the following conditions: Preliminary Plat be revised to incorporate recommendations of Hennepin County, City Attorney, City Engineer and Planning Consultant and be re-submitted to City. New Hope Planning Commission - 12 - July 12, 1994 2. Final Plat to incorporate all recommendations and be submitted to Planning com~is~i'6n for review/approval. 3. Submission of a revised landscape plan that responds to landscaping recommendations outlined in this report. 4. Continuous concrete curbing be provided around the entire parking lot and drainageway areas. 5. Curb stops be provided in the parking stalls abutting the existing buildings. 6. Applicant demonstrate truck maneuvering patterns for trucks accessing the northern loading areas. 7. Truck traffic accessing the site be directed to the second curb cut via the use of directional signs. 8. Subject to the City Engineers comments of site grading, drainage and utilities. 9. All roof top equipment must be enclosed or painted to match the principal structure. 10. All trash receptacles must be enclosed. Trash enclosures must be designed to complement the principal structure. 11. Overall site clean up. Elimination of all outdoor storage from the site. 12. Submission of detailed signage plan which complies with City sign regulations. Chairman Cameron asked for comments or questions on the PUD concept approval. Commissioner Gundershaug questioned the process for the development stage. Mr. McDonald confirmed that the plans submitted will be developed exactly as on the plans. MOTION Item 4.3 Motion by Commissioner Gundershaug, seconded by Commissioner Cassen, to approve Planning Case 94-20, Request for Site/Building Plan Review/Approval, and Concept Planned Unit Development Approval to Allow Building Addition at 3920 Winnetka Avenue North, 3941/3961 Quebec Avenue North, Kal#son Company/Don Harvey, Petitioners, as further'recommendations of staff and planner. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen None Watschke This planning case will return to the Planning Commission on August 2nd. PC 94-14 Item 4.4 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Planning Case 94-14, Request for Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site/Building Plan Review/Approval to Allow Expansion of School Uses in an R-1 Zoning New Hope Planning Commission - 13 - July 12, 1994 District, 8230 47th Avenue North, Independent School District No. 281 (Cooper High School), Petitioner. Chairman Cameron withdrew from this planning case since he is an employee of District No. 281 and turned the meeting over to Vice-Chairman Gundershaug. Mr. Brixius explained that there was a public hearing at the June 7th Planning Commission meeting. The petitioner was asked to respond to a number of issues that were raised at that meeting from the Planning Commission and the audience. The issue being a Conditional Use Permit for an accessory building associated with a school facility. In considering a Conditional Use Permit, it is evaluated on the basis of zoning criteria. The proposed facility complies with the required side yard setbacks and all other setbacks. Parking has exceeded City standards, using the 1:4 parking space ratio, per maximum capacity and the applicant has demonstrated compliance with this. Mr. Brixius noted that in the Conditional Use Permit review criteria there are a number of issues that present themselves with regard to land use compatibility, and consistency with Comprehensive Plan policies. These issues still remain open for debate. The School District has attempted to respond to these issues through site design and an Operational Plan, which has been submitted for staff review. This Plan will be incorporated as part of the Conditional Use Agreement, if approved. Mr. Brixius reported that the Comprehensive Plan identifies the school site for public and semi-public land uses. While the athletic facility is considered a public/semi-public use, the Comprehensive Plan does not give specific attention to this type of use of the property. It also identifies that Cooper High School is within Planning District 13 and defined by New Hope Comprehensive Plan as a single family, Iow density area and gives attention to traffic concerns stimulated by the existence of the High School facility in that area. The Comprehensive Plan policies outline concern with the introduction of additional non-residential uses into this area and looks to preserve the single family character. The School District has attempted to design the facility with attention to reducing the aesthetic influence and impact of the facility in the area. The area is surrounded by a single family neighborhood. The character of this type of use is intense and will have impacts on the neighborhood on a periodic basis during the use of the facility, with the number of events being limited to Cooper events only. The means to limit the residential impact as far as noise, traffic, and aesthetic features are being addressed. Also considered are increased setbacks, berming, and landscaping. Mr. Brixius reported that in reviewing the site design, all of the setbacks are in ~xcess of what is required. The closest setback is from Zealand Avenue which is a 50 foot separation between the street right-of-way and the stadium facility. Vehicular parking was previously an issue and it has been demonstrated by the applicant that a one parking space can be provided for every four seats and the school will be able to accommodate the expected crowds. There are 628 properly dimensioned parking stalls provided on the plans, and this is exclusive of the northern parking area. Additionally there will be 26 handicapped parking stalls which exceeds the 25 required by the state. The Elementary School parking lot will be striped to accommodate the need to use this lot for parking. The school has asked for some flexibility on the construction of this lot so it can be budgeted into the overall capital improvement plan. This improvement will occur within the next two to five years. The City requested a more New Hope Planning Commission - 14 - July 12, 1994 specific date for this request. A plan was received that indicated snow storage would oC¢i~i ih the northern portion of the lot and staff recommended that snow storage be moved to the southern portion of the lot and away from the buildings to free up more of the parking areas. All parking lots meet the standard grade of five percent. The problem area on the north side of the school will remain and barricades will be used to limit access and this area will only be used as overflow parking. There is a dimentional requirement of a 24 foot driveway in the northern lot and the applicant has indicated a willingness to redraw the plan to comply with that standard. There were only two bus parking spaces being proposed and there was some concern that during major events the two spaces could be a problem. The School District has stated that there will be additional bus parking on the north side of the building. Mr. Brixius stated that at the last meeting traffic generation was a major issue for both the neighborhood and the Planning Commission. The School District has provided a Traffic Management Plan which will be a part of the Conditional Use Permit. Included in this plan is an educational campaign where the patrons of the game would be advised for proper methods of accessing and egressing of the site. The School District would provide a schedule of major events for each home in the residential area surrounding the facility. The scheduling of High School and Elementary School events will be coordinated so as to avoid parking and traffic problems. No parking will be allowed on residential streets and covers will be placed over street signs which will be the responsibility of the traffic management team. A team of attendants will be utilized to direct traffic both to the site and away from the site. Under the direction of the Chief of Police, barricades will be placed at the entrances of neighborhood streets, if requested. During the first year of operation, attendance, parking lot, and turning movement counts will be conducted and there will be an annual review by City staff. In reviewing the Traffic Management Plan, the City needs to be assured of adequate personnel to control and disseminate the traffic in a logical and efficient manner. Mr. Brixius went on to explain the fencing around the complex. At the request of the Planning Commission and Design & Review some changes in the fencing have occurred. The fence will be an eight foot high, black coated, chain link fence. Instead of extending the fence to the corner at 49th Avenue it will stop at the end of the shot put area and then continue east across the back of the stadium. This will afford the northern portion as open space in an attempt to leave this area for neighborhood use and reduce the closed in feeling. Mr. Brixius explained that a number of items have been identified with the most s~rious concern being the western portion of the parking lot. The applicant has provided additional plantings in this area to alleviate some of 'the concerns. Also it is recommended that some small shrubs and ground cover species be integrated into the design on berms or at the front of the stadium to add to the visual character on site. The lighting must not exceed four foot candles at the property line. The applicant has suggested that they will not exceed .85 at the curb line of Zealand and, therefore, are within City standards. Per the Operational Plan, the stadium lights will be turned off one-half hour after the completion of an event. The security lighting around the buildings will be left on and staff is requesting the location of these lights be indicated on the plans and submitted for review by City staff. The School District has indicated that after the installation of the public address system, adjustments will be made to comply with the New Hope Planning Commission - 15 - July 12, 1994 Pollution Control Agency and City guidelines. Mr. Brixius continued to explain that a concern of the City and the neighborhood is the refuse on the site and the surrounding area. The School District is suggesting that they will have a clean up program for both the stadium facility and the surrounding neighborhood. A litter control team will be out in the neighborhood by 8 a.m. the next day and will include Zealand Avenue North, 49th Avenue North, Virginia Avenue North, and 47th Avenue North. The methods for handling and controlling waste are specified in the Operational Plan. The School District has been asked to look beyond these streets for additional clean up complaints. The signage plan has not yet been submitted. City staff is asking that the School District be specific in defining the events, and this has been done. The exact number of games and types that take place on the site will be: four home football games and seven home soccer games exclusive of post- season competition as well as track meets during the day and the graduation ceremony in the Spring. Any additional activities beyond these initially approved by the City would require further consultation and formal approval by the City Council. This site will be used exclusively by Cooper High School. Mr. Brixius reported that staff is recommending, if approval takes place, that a specific agreement, allowed by the New Hope Zoning Ordinance, be developed and tied with the Conditional Use Permit that would tie in with the Operational Plan and Traffic Management Plan and give us assurances of enforcement. The issues remain the same, that is the introduction of a facility into a single family neighborhood and the land use issues still exist. The Planning Commission needs to weigh whether the provision of the facility can be accommodated in a manner that can compatibly co-exist in a single family neighborhood. If approval is given, it is suggested that the requirements outlined on page 2, 3, and 4 in the planning report be fulfilled which includes site design improvements, limitaton on events and traffic management plans. Mr. Mark Hanson addressed the drainage issues for the Planning Commission. There are four different drainage Watersheds that drain from the Cooper site. There is one area on the Elementary School grounds that collects water and this issue needs to be resolved. Another area off the Elementary School parking lot is sheet drainage which goes down to neighbors backyards on 46th Avenue to Virginia. Staff recommended that the School District define exactly what improvements will be done. A letter that was submitted by the School District does indicate storm sewers, grit chambers and curbing within New Hope Elementary. It is implied in this letter that these changes will be made on the plans by September, 1997. The area along Virginia Avenue provides no stormwater treatment of any type. The area where the construction is proposed allows an area for ponding which the District is going to do. The School District met with the Shingle Creek Watershed on July 7th and the Commission did not act on the project at that time since the request for the variance was not in order because the submittals of information was incomplete. This matter will be considered at the August meeting of the Watershed. There are three alternative for the school to provide water treatment and the school is doing one of them. The variance is still required because the balance of the site does not meet the requirements, nor do the grit chambers, etc. meet the requirements. The variance will be considered at the August meeting and at that time the Shingle Creek Commission will respond and send the information to City. Staff will then New Hope Planning Commission - 16 - July 12, 1994 act on the recommendation of the Watershed. Mr. Hanson commented on the traffic issue. These'streets are residential in width and section, but also in right-of-way and setback requirements to the homes that exist along these streets. These are not acceptable by today's standards, therefore, some improvements may need to be made to upgrade the streets. The Traffic Management Plan that the School District has provided, in writing, indicates improvements. Mr. Hanson qualified the suggestion that a right turn lane may have to be expanded on or better defined on 47th Avenue out to Winnetka along with a left turn lane. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug questioned who would determine that fact. Mr. Hanson reported that, based on the plan that was submitted, the City requested the School District to monitor the four major access points to the collector roads. There is not a collector road that serves this site directly. After the first few major events, if it is found that there is a substantial amount of stacking of traffic along 47th and that the right turn lane would provide a benefit, then a project would be initiated to deal with that issue. The City and School District would need to work together to accomplish that project..Corner Park is on the south side of 47th and Winnetka. It would be at the discretion of the City, based on the movement of traffic and/or delays at this intersection, to implement a right turn lane project. It is suggested that the first few events be monitored and if problems exist then the next year the project would be started. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug also asked about the variance needed by the District from Shingle Creek Watershed before proceeding. Mr. Hanson stated that the requirements for Cooper High School are no different than any other area. The legislature has mandated that new development and redevelopment comply with retention and water treatment. The responsibility of the Watershed, which consists of nine communities, is responsible for implementing that and insuring that the requirements are being met. If the requirements are not met, then a variance is needed. The Shingle Creek Watershed provides a recommendation to the City stating what needs to be done. The City Council can agree or disagree with these recommendations. In all cases in the past, the City has agreed with the recommendations of the Watershed. Since this process has been implemented, Mr. Hanson stated there has not been a request for a variance with any redevelopment in New Hope. The difficulty in putting a request together at the last meeting was that there were specific things not shown on the plans that staff could respond to. From an engineering standpoint, the School District is putting together the best plan possible in meeting the existing conditions. Commissioner Cassen wanted clarification on who would pay for the right turn lathe, if needed, at 47th and Winnetka and if the cost would be shared between the School District and the City. Mr. Hanson replied that first the need for the turn lane would be determined. If the evaluation showed that the need was the result of the School District, the City and School District would have to come to an agreement together. There would be an assessment process that could result where the City could implement the project and then assess the school. With past street improvements, the school has accepted those assessments. Based on the Traffic Management Plan, it is indicated that the school would work with the City to deal with this situation. Commissioner Cassen also wanted clarification on whether the land would come from the residents or from Corner Park. Mr. Hanson stated that the land would be taken from Corner Park if a turn lane is needed. New Hope Planning Commission - 17 - July 12, 1994 Commissioner Underdahl asked how the ground water affects the residents, if it floods basements, and if it would affect residents at the other end of the watershed when the water is released. Mr. Hanson stated that New Hope has heavy clay and movement of the water will be where there is the least resistance. It is difficult to know exactly where these areas are because of existing soil conditions. It is not believed that problems will result because of conditions with the school site and be a problem for neighborhood basement flooding. The drainage from the site now runs into roadways. There has been a berm built to help with some of the runoff from the Elementary School site. The storm sewer and grit chambers will be better and will need to be put in at the time of construction. The area in the Elementary School parking lot does collect water and is a problem because the area is not graded properly. Mr. Hanson stated there should not be any problem with the area in which the stadium would be built. The surface runoff in that area would be out to the street. The stormwater and traffic are two areas where it is hoped that many improvements would be made, but because of physical constraints and costs it is not possible to do everything and compromises will need to be made. Commissioner Zak questioned whether 47th Avenue would be widened and who would pay the costs for the improvement. Mr. Hanson explained that the difficulty in widening 47th Avenue would require the City to acquire property from residents. The ideal situation would be to make 47th Avenue a through street, however, because of where the Elementary School is located and the parking restriction this is not possible. Mr. Hanson also stated that if the City feels the street improvements needed are a direct result of increased traffic then an assessment to the School District would be warranted. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug asked for representatives of the School District to come before the Commission. Mr. Jim Dahle reviewed why the School District is requesting a Conditional Use Permit Amendment, the history of the Mielke Field situation, and the criteria used to present the plan being used. Super Value came to the School District several times in the 1980's to discuss purchasing the Mielke Field site which is about 6.5 acres in the city of Crystal and the offers were 'refused. About a year and a half ago the School District received a letter from the city of Crystal indicating that either Crystal or some of its agencies would consider a condemnation procedure in acquiring that land on behalf of Super Value. At that time the School District reconsidered the thinking regarding the sale of Mielke Field. In April, 1994, the sale was completed to Super Value for an amount of $1,650;'000. During the time of these procedures a plan was put together for the replacement of that facility. After the sale of Mielke Field, the School District adopted a plan which states that the District would provide two smaller sites at each of the two high schools. The first criteria was accessibility for all activities at each school. It could be used for all the purposes intended and that would mean physical education in the spring and fall, as well as track practice, track meets, soccer games, and football games. Many of these activities have been carried on at these sites or at the site in Plymouth, however, Armstrong High School does not have an all-weather track and that would be an additional facility that would be added. It would avoid transportation and walking delays and make activities more accessible to all students at both facilities. The second criteria has to do with cost. There have been some suggestions that the New Hope Planning Commission - 18 - July 12, 1994 School District should have acquired another piece of land and built a site that could be shated'b~ bbth schOols, however, the cost of the additional land, which would be between 10 and 15 acres, and the cost of the additional parking would have used all or most of the money from the sale of Mielke Field. This was not considered as a viable plan. There is also the consideration of additional cost to taxpayers to have a shared facility. If the School District would acquire another piece of property of that size, this land would then come off the tax roles which would have a negative impact on the City and county. These were the two major considerations when putting together the plan for a facility at both sites. Mr. Jerry Brill, attorney, outlined the balance of the presentation. The School District has every intention to cooperate with the City to meet the concerns that have been raised. The concerns that will be focused on at this meeting were the 14 points raised in the Planning Consultant's report to the Planning Commission. Mr. Roy Anderson and Mr. Dan Johnson are the engineering consultants for the District and will point out the revisions in the plans. Mr. Whitey Johnson is the project director and will discuss the operational issues which relate to the 14 points and are answered in the Operational Plan. Mr. Alan Klugman is the traffic engineer/consultant for the District and will discuss the Traffic Management Plan and the specific issues raised in the Planner's report. Mr. Brill stated it is the District's hope that some action will be taken at this meeting so the process can be continued at the City Council meeting, and if approved on July 25th, construction could begin. Mr. Anderson stated he would be responding to several points in the report submitted to the Commission this evening. Item #2 responds to the drive lane in the parking lot in the northwest corner of the school building. That parking lot was drawn to 24 foot drives, however, it was not dimensioned. The drive will be 24 feet to satisfy the City's requirement. Item #3 addresses the snow storage in parking lot C which was initially shown to be on the north side of the lot. There will be no problem storing the snow on the south side of this lot. Item #5 addresses bus parking space in the event additional bus spaces are needed. Additional space for bus parking has been made possible in the area to the rear of the building in parking lot A. Item #8 is suggesting additional shrubs and ground cover on the berm. Presently the plan calls for 126 good size trees in this area. It is felt that shrubs and ground cover are desirable but not appropriate for this particular use and the District respectfully requests that a compromise can be made on this item. Item #9 deals with the Lighting Plan which involves lighting the football field and security lighting. The Lighting Plan that was originally submitted will result in a 0.85 foot candle maximum measurement at the east curb line of Zealand Avenue North which is in compliance with the City's requirement. Security lighting will be mounted on the exterior of the proposed concession building. The type, size and location of the security lights will be submitted to City staff at a later date for review and approval as the building plans evolve. Item #10 regarding the public address system, as stated in earlier submittals the School District will adjust the decibel level to comply with the requirements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the City of New Hope. Item #12 states that signage will be in conformance with New Hope's City ordinances. Mr. Johnson responded to Item #7 dealing with the stormwater management area of the project. The District has three options to pursue relative to stormwater management concerns. Two of the options New Hope Planning Commission - 19 - July 12, 1994 involved a wet pond at the northeast corner of the development. The option the School District chose is to introduce a dry detention pond. This will restrict the rate at which the water can leave The site, backing the water up through the existing storm sewer system into a ponding area that would be located at the northeast corner of the site. The ponding area is designed to drain dry within a period of six hours or less. Runoff resulting from a two inch storm is the criteria for the Watershed's review. The rate the water leaves the site now is uncontrolled and this detention pond will significantly reduce the rate the water leaves the site and will improve the effect on downstream storm structures. The School District did meet with the City Engineer and the Watershed District. Submitted along with the report from the School District at this meeting is a letter from the Watershed District dated July 11th indicating that in principle the plan does meet the requirements of the Watershed. Formal action will be taken by the Watershed in August. Mr. Johnson went on to explain that in order to enhance the stormwater quality concerns, the District is proposing to install three grit chambers, which are large underground structures roughly 8 feet wide by 20 feet long by 9 feet deep. These structures will be collecting gravel and sands typically found on pavement areas and collecting those to minimize passage of those materials downstream into the wetland. Mr. Whitey Johnson discussed program related points in the Planning Consultant's report. Previously a Management Plan and an Operational Plan were developed which outlines the use of the complex, the lighting, the sound, the educational campaign, traffic, signage and graffiti. Item #1 states the project does comply with all Conditional Use Permit criteria which has been agreed on by both parties. Item #4 discusses the parking lot improvements at the Elementary School. The site will consist of perimeter curbing, storm sewer (extending out to the City storm sewer system), stormwater facility improvements (grit chambers) to enhance the quality of stormwater runoff and the planting of four over story trees at the south end of the parking lot. This improvement will be completed by September, 1997. A bituminous overlay to the existing parking lot will be completed within the District's normal replacement program. There is a substantial commitment being made to the development of the drainage and curbing of the New Hope Elementary parking lot. Item #6 relates to the use of ten policemen, reservists or attendants who will be provided for traffic control purposes, based on a maximum capacity event. Mr. Johnson stated the school would start with ten people for traffic control and adjust this number as needed. If the Commission needs to know the intersections where these people would be located, this could be shown through the Traffic Management Plan. Item #11 deals with the refuse. The School District will pick up trash following events,' trash will be collected prior to 11:00 a.m. the day after the event, the District will be responsive to specific littering complaints by property owners adjacent to the street which bound the high school. These streets are Zealand Avenue, 49th Avenue, Virginia Avenue and 47th Avenue North. Item #13 states that the exact number of formal events, on an annual basis, which will occur on the site are four home football games, seven home soccer dates, along with normal school activities, daytime track meets, post- season competition at the school and graduation. Any non-school activity will involve review and approval by the City Council. The Cooper High School facility will not be made available for use by Armstrong High School. Item #14 states that the School District will enter into a performance agreement to be recorded with the CUP that includes the provision of the Site Management Plan as well as terms for deferred site New Hope Planning Commission - 20 - July 12, 1994 improvements and appropriate financial securities. Mr. Alan Klugman, traffic engineer, prepared the Traffic Management Plan for the School District. Mr. Klugman stated that the correct number of attendants that will be available to direct traffic at the school after events is ten and this is being submitted to the City at this time. Part of the commitment of the Traffic Management Plan is to monitor traffic on an on- going basis, especially during the first year. All of the major approaches and major intersections would be counted. Along with that count there will be visual observations and technical analysis of what is going on. If a back-up.of cars at an intersection becomes an issue, this would be noted in the Management Plan. There may be other solutions to the back-up problems than just putting in a right turn lane. The traffic signal controller could monitor the light and could possibly give more green time to 47th Avenue. With the use of barricades and attendants, there may be an opportunity to direct people to other routes or hold people in certain areas. All of these options could be monitored annually and then discussed between the School District and the City staff to find the best solution. Commissioner Sonsin asked what the results were of the meeting with the City of Plymouth. Mr. McDonald answered that there is not a lot of opposition to the plan for an athletic complex in Plymouth, and this issue could be coming before the Plymouth Planning Commission at the end of July and on to the Plymouth City Council in mid-August. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug asked to have the traffic issue clarified regarding the attendants and/or barricades and what the plan is so the Commission and citizens will know. Mr. Klugman stated that the major locations for attendants will be at the intersections of 47th and Winnetka, 47th and Boone, 47th and Virginia, 47th and Zealand, and 49th and Zealand. The Management Plan lists ten locations which also include Aquila Avenue, Del Drive, Utah Avenue, Zealand Avenue and 48th Avenue North. Summing up the locations, there would be ten or fewer in which there would be barricades and/or attendants present. It will be determined between the School District and the Chief of Police which intersections demand attendants and which intersections require only barricades. There will be an annual review with the Chief of Police. Before the first event the District will meet with the Chief of Police and the Plan will be adjusted to the Chief's recommendations. The intersections will be monitored during each event to see if any changes need to be made. Mr. Johnson stated that the District is prepared to use the barricades to help direct the flow of traffic before and after the events. Those barricades will be lit with flashing lights, if used, and contain signs that state "local traffic only, no event parking." Vice-Chairman Gundershaug asked if the City would be resp~)nsible for tagging or towing cars parked on the streets around the site where the signs have "no parking" hoods. Mr. Johnson replied that the barricades and hooded signs would be placed on the streets one and one-half hours before the event. The City would be responsible for enforcement. The School District is willing to pay for the ten attendants or off-duty police officers, the reservists cannot receive payment. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug questioned how overflow parking would be handled. Mr. Johnson replied that off-site parking could be utilized at the administration office lot and then shuttle buses could transport people to and from the stadium. The other alternative would be on-site parking at the north end of the Elementary School playground area. The problem with that area would, be if the ground was wet from heavy rain, but if New Hope Planning Commission - 21 - July 12, 1994 conditions were right and with proper direction, there could be overflow parking on the playground area. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug requested that the contingency plan be put in writing. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug also wanted the School District to clarify who would be doing the clean-up of litter and trash in the area. Mr. Johnson replied that the maintenance staff will be taking care of the clean- up. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug also wanted specified, in writing, that the clean-up will take place after graduation, not only game events. The question was raised as to the procedure for taking care of clean-up on a residential property. Mr. Johnson stated that if there is a complaint from a resident and permission is granted for the District to go onto the property then clean-up will be done. The plan calls for clean-up of school property and residential streets only. A resident will need to call the school office and specifically request and gives permission for clean-up of their property after an event, Vice-Chairman Gundershaug questioned what will be done with the extra curbing needed along 47th Avenue at the Elementary School parking lot and when will this be done. Mr. Johnson stated that extra curbing, approximately 50 - 60 feet, would be added right away. The lot has been restriped for the 1994-95 school year. The striping of the Elementary School parking lot will be striped the following fall according to the plans submitted. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug asked about dates for completion of bituminous overlay. Mr. Johnson stated that in the ten-year projection there is no overlay for the Elementary School parking lot. The items that will be dealt with are a catch basin, seal coating and some playground overlay. The overlay of the parking lot will be done when needed, but it is felt at this time that seal coating is sufficient. Commisisoner Sonsin called attention to the Planning Consultant's report that states the use proposed is not compatible with the surrounding area. Commissioner Underdahl asked for clarification on the fencing and the limited access and what can be done to keep kids from climbing over the top. Mr. Johnson replied that a fence is put in place to deter people and possibly the public eye will keep people from climbing over. It is hoped that the limited access will be used by anyone who wishes to use the track. Commissioner Underdahl questioned whether this fence will have barb wire on the top. Mr. Johnson stated there will not be barb wire on the top of the fence. The limited access opening is approximately 18 inches and is located on the south end. Commissioner Cassen inquired who would pay for damage to personal properb/, such as mailboxes or trees, after an event if it is proven that students caused the damage. Mr. Johnson expressed that the judicial system would take care of this if it can be proven who is responsible. Commissioner Underdahl wondered why the stadium is being built with bleachers that seat 2500 people if the most that can be expected is 1000 in attendance. Mr. Johnson replied that when putting together the plans and looking at the seating capacity of other schools, the District wanted to be prepared to allow the students at Cooper the same opportunities as the opposing schools. The gymnasium seats 2500 people and there are times that every seat is filled. The athletic complex should have that capacity also. Mielke Field had a seating capacity of 7000. Commissioner Underdahl questioned why the decision was made for enclosed bleachers New Hope Planning Commission - 22 - July 12, 1994 which are ugly from the back side, Mr. Johnson replied that is one of the reasons the..home bleachers are being placed on the east side of the facility with the back to the school. The visitor bleachers have 10 rows and the home bleachers have 16 rows. The berming and trees should help take care of hiding the bleachers from view on Zealand Av. enue looking east. Commissioner Underdahl expressed concern that the enclosed bleachers will also cut down on the openness in seeing through them across the field. Mr. Johnson stated it was felt the enclosed, self- contained bleachers would be more amenable as far as maintenance and not allowing refuse to blow around. Commissioner Underdahl asked if the stadium would sit down lower than the rest of the area. Mr. Johnson replied that the field would be recessed two to three feet lower than the area at the ticket booth and concession stand. Commission Cassen commented on Item #13 in the District report that states "any non-school activity" and reported this should read "any non and additional school activity will involve review and approval by the City Council. The purpose of the statement "any non-school activity" was to eliminate the possiblity of the District coming into agreement with an outside agency and having an event in the complex, for example a drum and bugle corp state contest. Something like that would have to go through the City Council. Mr. Johnson clarified that this statement was intended to be for events other than the normal school activities as stated in the paragraph previous. Commissioner Sonsin asked what the plan is if one or both of the cities turn down the request for an athletic complex and is there a back up plan. Mr. Johnson replied that if approval is not given to upgrade the facility that the District would have to use the facility as it is. Commissioner Sonsin wanted to know if football games would be played at Cooper whether or not approval is given for the facility. Mr. Johnson stated that this question has not been addressed by the District. Commissioner Underdahl questioned whether or not the area will be cleared of students by the time the lights are turned off, which is to be one-half hour after the event is finished. Mr. Johnson reported that he has been the last person out of the stadium for the past ten years, and once the concession stand is closed and the PA system shut down the area clears quite quickly. It is possible there may be a work light on for a short time after that. Commissioner Zak asked about the shuttle parking and if the west side of the Elementary School was correct as stated in the reports. Mr. Johnson said that the shuttle parking would be at the administration building. Some overfl(~w parking would be on west side of the Elementary School on the north end of the play area. Commissioner Zak asked what the traffic count would be for a normal school day and if traffic would be considerably more during the concentrated game time and how many parking spaces there are now. Mr. Brixius reported that at this time the school has 381 parking stalls, the Elementary School has 167, six reserved spaces, 10 spaces impacted by light poles, and 12 spaces lost due to the new design for a total of 552 parking stalls. Commissioner Zak asked for the number and times of track meets. Mr. Johnson answered that the track meets are during the week with three female and three male meets, plus Hosterman Middle School uses the track for meets, plus the 5th grade from the Elementary School uses the track for one meet per year. The other meets are scheduled by the Classic Lake Conference and possibly a New Hope Planning Commission - 23 - July 12, 1994 coach may schedule a non-conference meet with another school on a non- conference basis. The amount of meets per week depends on the schedule but normally would be one or two per week. Commissioner Underdahl wondered how many post-season games are possible. Mr. Johnson stated that for football games there could betwo or three games, and in soccer there could be two or three games also. Commissioner Zak asked if any of the parking areas are screened. Mr. Brixius answered that the landscape plans have been enhanced to address some of the concerns along the western parking lot as far as necessary screening. Item #8 in the District report refers to the slope in the berm that is being provided along the western edge and that some Iow cover plantings be done. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug asked that anyone wishing to express their views could approach the podium could do so and asked that the audience respect the views of the speakers. Mr. John Lazar, 8808 47¥2 Avenue North, parent, Cooper neighbor, and co-chair of the Cooper Parents Organization came forward to address the Commission and asked for support for the Cooper upgrade and the project as a whole. Mr. Lazar presented a resolution prepared by the Cooper Student Government and Parent Advisory Board supporting the athletic facility and upgrade. The immediate neighborhood adjacent to the field was targeted for the drive, using the boundaries of 42nd Avenue on the south, the RR tracks on the north, Boone Avenue on the west and Winnetka on the east. As more volunteers came to help the boundaries expanded. Volunteers were solicited from the parent, booster organizations, coaching staff and the student body for a total of 66 volunteers. The drive took place on June 1st, 2nd, and July 6th and was very successful. Approximately 85.5% of the people contacted supported the resolution for a total of 941 signatures. Commissioner Underdahl asked how many of the homes that face the field showed support. Mr. Lazar stated that this was not his area and he did not have an answer for this question. Mr. Daryl Fields, 8224 49th Avenue, stated that the Planning Commission should listen to the neighbors whose homes are directly adjacent to the school and field. An good example of the traffic involved would be at graduation. This year there were 300 graduates x 8 people attending for each student or 2400 spectators plus the 300 graduates equals 2700 people total. Using the 1:4 car ratio this equals 675 cars which more than filled the parking lots and the overflow was out onto the residential streets. Mr. Fields questioned how this parking problem of cars on the streets would be controlled. Mr. Fields also feels that the property values of the homes adjacent to the stadium will depreciate in value. A realtor told Mr. Fields that his home would market for about $92,000 even after he has put in improvements of about $20,000, which is only a $3,000 increase from the amount of money paid for the house 20 years ago, and this is because of the proposed stadium addition to the high school. The question was asked why the School District did not keep up Mielke Field instead of letting it run down to the point of being condemned, and who will be taking care of two stadiums if one stadium could not be kept up. The expenses for the street improvements and watershed will not be inexpensive and where will the money come from for this. The superintendent was quoted as saying "every suburban school district has New Hope Planning Commission - 24 - July 12, 1994 gone through this,,sort ,0f process during the last five to ten years, we are not doing some(hing Unique, just catching up with other districts." Mr. Fields is questioning whether or not the School Board is keeping the other buildings up to code and keeping the buildings safe for the children. Chapter 469 of the State Statutes states that if one goverment body (City of Crystal) condemns another government body's property (District 281 Mielke Field) it is obligated to help finance a replacement for a like facility or property. If this angle were checked into, a new facility could be pursued with no cutbacks and no expense to the taxpayers. District 281 stated at the last Planning Commission meeting that they were trying to be good neighbors. During an earlier survey of homes in the area that there was found to be little opposition. This might have been because the survey was done during the day when very few people were at at home. At the last Planning Commission meeting it was stated that kids are encouraged to write graffiti on the buildings by the current field. Mr. Lev Buslovich, boys soccer coach, remarked that this is also a soccer stadium. At the present time the soccer team has to be transported to Mielke Field to play the home games. There are quite a number of fans that also need to drive to Mielke Field and a lot of the fans are students who do not yet have a driver's license. The parking is across 36th Avenue which is a dangerous area and also close to a liquor store. If the stadium is at Cooper High School, the students would be kept on school property. Soccer crowds will not affect the traffic that seems to be a big concern, nor should there be great deal of noise generated. Having the soccer games on a home field should attract more kids to become involved in these types of activities. At this time the football and soccer teams do not get to watch each other because of being at different locations. Commissioner Underdahl questioned whether the soccer games would need the same kind of lighting as football games. Mr. Buslovich replied that the games are at 5:30 and 7:30 p.m. and at that time of the year the second game needs to have lights. Mr. Rob Waddington, 8801 47th Avenue, has two students at Cooper who are involved in a lot of extra curricular activities, both music and athletics. Mr. Waddington read a letter from the Robbinsdale Music Booster Executive Committee which states "they endorse the plan for the athletic facility. The facility will beautify and enhance the area. The proposed athletic facility will build and foster pride in the student body, faculty, alumni and public sector of the School District." At the last Planning Commission meeting there was inferrence of objectionable behavior of the students. Mr. Waddington responded to this by saying these attitudes are not learned at school but in the home environments and from parents, neighbors and friends. The local schools cannot be blamed for all the social ills the community is suffering. The behavior expectations of the children should be continually communicated to them. This facility will add to the community, not as an opportunity to have more events there, but as another way to attract more good families into the New Hope/Robbins- dale Cooper High School community. If extra curricular activities are the other half of education, tl~en to have a facility such as what is proposed can only enhance that experience for the students. There are a lot of student leaders that come from these types of programs which teach discipline and commitment. These are qualities that future employers look for in employees. Today's student leaders are tomorrow's community leaders. Mr. Gary Fischer, 6011 Virginia, is a 17 year resident of New Hope, has New Hope Planning Commission - 25 - July 12, 1994 one student at Cooper who is involved in girls soccer and track and field and is in favor of this project. New Hope is a well planned, diverse, friendly community that provides space for diverse ages and activities. There are schools, parks, residential areas, industry and business. Twenty- three percent of the population in New Hope is 18 years of age or younger. New Hope is a good place to raise a family, open to economic growth, open to all people and open to healthy life styles. New Hope is not a retirement community. If the residents of the immediate area had the right of refusal over projects, New Hope would probably not have warehouses, industry, major roads of commerce, light poles next to tennis courts, athletic fields where adults could play evening recreational games because that would be objectionable to some people. The City has not said "no" to a fire station, swimming pool or parks because other communities have these facilities available. Most high schools in the metro area have athletic fields at the school site. The irritation that residents feel now will dissipate as all people work together. The New Hope Park and Recreation booklet encourages athletics of all kinds and teaches children how to play. Lets not tell our children to learn how to play soccer or football or be good at track or learn to play a musical instrument to be in the marching band, and then when the time comes for the children to perform they get sent somewhere else. Mr. Fischer asked the Planning Commission to vote positively on this issue. Commissioner Underdahl corrected Mr. Fischer by saying the facility is wanted, but not at Cooper. Mrs. Rebekah Adams, 4817 Zealand Avenue, informed the Commission that graduation night was also a special night for them as it was her son's birthday party. There were several carloads of people who thought they could park cars in and around her driveway. Mrs. Adams is also concerned that someone might try to climb the fence, fall and get hurt. The insurance company will then call for more preventative measures and the barb wire will be installed on the fence. A school does fit in a residential use in the community, but a facility with large lights and a great deal of noise does not. There is agreement that Cooper does need a facelift, but capital outlay does not only mean an athletic field, it could also be computer equipment or science lab equipment. Mrs. Adams encourages the Planning Commission to find what is right for this neighborhood but feels that the athletic facility should not be approved. Mr. Allen Nelson, 4933 Wisconsin, approached the podium and stated that the Conditional Use Permit should not adversely impact the value of the homes'. There should be some type of study put together that would analyze what impact the stadium will have on the value of the homes in this area, especially prospective buyers and mortgage companies. If this would ~lefinitely have an adverse affect on the home values, the City could not approve the facility which would in turn violate the City's standards. Mr. Nelson is concerned about the sewer issue and if the sewer is large enough to handle the increased amount of discharge from a facility of this size. After a Friday night game, will there be a phone number to call if a resident has a problem with trash on Saturday morning and where will this be published. Mr. Nelson mentioned that the Planning Commission needs to consider what the Conditional Use Permit requirements are and not make an emotional decision. Ms. Barb Connor, 6317 Quebec Avenue, Brooklyn Park, is president of the boys Booster Soccer Club, has a son who is a junior and plays soccer, and is in favor of the facility. New Hope Planning Commission - 26 - July 12, 1994 Mr. Clyde Morrison, 8038 47th Avenue, questioned whether this is a residential projeclfi M~;~ ~Morrison has lived in this location since 1967 and has four children who graduated from Cooper High S'chool. The noise level and sound level are bad now even during the school day with buses stopping and starting, cars and students. This will only get worse with games at night and a lot of people at the facility. Some of the cars parking on 47th Avenue overlap on his driveway which makes it difficult to get in or out. There is also a parking restriction on 47th between 7:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Have the pollution levels, noise levels, etc. been included in the traffic study that was done. Mr. Morrison expressed that schools should have adequate facilities, but other options should be checked out where there are main roads and better traffic control. Mr. Shawn McMillan, lives at 4809 Zealand, directly across the street from the proposed stadium. A letter was submitted to the Planning Commission and Council stating the reasons he is opposed to the facility. During all of the meetings attended, there have been more questions raised than answers. Mr. McMillan is asking the Commission to table this issue again until more answers can be given. The District should look at some neutral sites. Mr. Dick Rinehart, adaptive physical education teacher and shot/disc coach for 24 years, stated the track at the school does not stay empty nine months of the year. It is used in the spring and fall for classes. This is a high school which needs to have a place for the students for phy ed classes or to play football or to meet the track needs, just the same as a classroom or laboratory need materials. The area needs to have a fence around it because some of the activities can be dangerous for outsiders. Limited access is needed so the field/track cannot be destroyed by motorcycles. In Mr. Rinehart's experience all other school facilities in this conference have secure facilities. The athletic complex would help the image of Cooper and help teachers teach the students by upgrading the school. This is a residential area, but the bottom line is that this is a school and the students need an adequate place to play. Mr. Ert Jones-Hermerding, teacher, and whose son will be attending Cooper, responded by saying that this is a complex problem with difficult issues. Mr. Jones-Hermerding pointed out the planning Commission will need to make a decision based on how policy impacts people. The students who go to Cooper are part of the community also. The Commission will need to be courageous and look at the positive affect this facility could have on the community and not just all the negatives. Mr. Andy Ruhland, 4648 Flag Avenue, stated his family has lived in New Hope since 1975. Previous to moving to Flag Avenue four years ago, Mr. Ruhland lived next to Lion's Park with all the lighted tennis courts, skating and hockey rinks. There are also softball fields and basketball courts at this park, and with all of this activity came traffic and street parking. One of the main reasons for moving to Flag Avenue was that the house was close to Cooper High School, where his four children would be attending. Mr. Ruhland and two of his children were a part of the volunteer group that canvassed the area. The particular area canvassed was the north and south side of 47th Avenue from the school to Winnetka and north on Virginia. Of the 30 houses on the map, 16 had people at home. Of those 16 homes, six signed the petition and the other ten said no. This is a fair representation of a positive attitude of the homes that are immediate neighbors of Cooper High School. Some of the comments heard from New Hope Planning Commission - 27 - July 12, 1994 neighbors was "why do you have to do this, doesn't every high school have a facility" and "aren't our kids good enough to have the facilities that other kids have." Several people canvassed stated they had signed a petition about a year ago called "Mielke Field petition" and that it had been presented to them as a "save Mielke Field petition" and not an "anti Cooper facility" petition as it was presented in June to the Planning Commission. There is no date on the petition but according to some of the people who signed it was about a year ago. There are approximately 550 signatures, and after deducting the signatures of people who live in other communities, who no longer live in the area, and the signatures of people who didn't understand what they were signing on the first petition, etc. this leaves a total of 375 signatures. The kids who make up the Cooper student body deserve to have a good facility. Mr. Dave Carlson, 4841 Zealand Avenue, questioned bringing a facility into a residential neighborhood that will create extra noise, traffic, lights, and littering with no direct access to a collector level street. Mr. Carlson inquired as to how the neighborhood will be protected from the traffic penetration, and how the general welfare, health and safety of the neighborhood will be preserved, and some assurance to the homeowners that there will be no depreciation in home value. Mr. Carlson stated the first petition was presented to Mr. Dahle at one of the school board meetings. The stadiums at the other schools will not work in this neighborhood. The proposed seating capacity of the stadium is much larger than the number of people who have been attending any of the football games. There should be some compromising done between the School District and the community and possibly build something on a smaller scale. Mr. Dan Wrobleski, 4544 Rosewood Lane, is a coach for girls soccer, and was a resident of New Hope for 17 years. Change in a community is good. The proposed landscaping around Cooper and along Zealand Avenue will enhance the value of properties. The landscaping will hide the bleachers and should beautify the community. No one likes change but change is good and the facility at Cooper needs to be upgraded and everyone will be happy with the result. Ms. Barb Lehman, physical education teacher and athletic director, emphasized that there will be a variety of activities at this facility and serve a large number of students, not only high school students but also middle school and elementary school students. When out petitioning during the week, Ms. Lehman found a lot of people in favor of the facility and excited that they would be able to watch the events in their own neighborhoods. Many young parents were also excited about having this facility"for their children. This facility will make Cooper equal to the other schools in the Classic Lake Conference and will bring a great sense of pride to the students, staff, and community in general. Ms. Lehman urges the Planning Commission to recommend approval to the City Council. Mr. John Olfke, New Hope resident, football coach and teacher, mentioned that through athletics there are a lot of things learned that cannot be learned in the classroom, such as great memories, lessons, and important parts of. a students life. The football team would be very proud to play in a new facility and it is hoped that residents will come and watch. Mrs. Polly Mellem, teacher and volleyball coach, added that this issue needs to be approached in a positive light. There may be a few students New Hope Planning Commission - 28 - July 12, 1994 not behaving but there are hundreds of students who do wonderful things at the school, ori th~ attiletiC field, in extra-curricular activities and in other areas as well. This should be looked at as another way to involve more students in the positive things that are happening at Cooper and also as a way for the community to get involved with the school. Mr. Joe Buturak, 1979 Cooper graduade and assistant football coach, states he is a realtor and wanted to offer some assistance with with the property value questions. Mr. Buturak remarked that if the property next door is upgraded that also brings up the property value on your own property. There is no proof that this facility will decrease the value of homes in the area. Mr. Chris Woelfle, 5925 Quebec Avenue, student, mentioned that he is involved in several of the programs at the school, including leadership activities. Mr. Woelfle understands the concern for homes being devalued, but will settling for less for the athletic facility also continue through with settling for less in education. Education is not only a classroom thing but includes interaction with other people, dealing with discipline and self- respect, competition, and community members. This field is boosting school spirit and will give an opportunity for more people to attend and be a part of the students life at Cooper. Mrs. Pat Norby, 7908 50th Avenue, has been a resident of this area for 28 years. Years ago there was a fight just to keep Cooper High School in New Hope. The Planning Commission needs to make a decision for the greater good of the community which includes the completion of the Cooper field. The School District has made every effort to work with City staff to answer questions. Mrs. Norby mentioned the letter to the Planning Commissioners from the Mayor encouraging a "no" vote. The role of the Commissioners is to decide if the School District has met the codes of the City, answered staff's questions, and will the District work with the City on this project. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug closed the public hearing and asked for comments or questions from the Commissioners. Commissioner Sonsin stressed that this is a zoning case and the decision for a Conditional Use Permit needs to be made following the guidelines of the New Hope Code. It seems a mistake was made 30 years ago with the decision to put Cooper in a residential area with small streets serving the school. Commissioner Sonsin is of the opinion that a facility of this size cannot be built without it adversely affecting the value of the homes in the area. One of the criteria for the Conditional Use Permit is no depreciation in value. Another issue is compatibility and the fact that the way this facility is designed and the spot for which it is being proposed is not compatible with the surrounding area. There are no major streets close to the school to route the traffic. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug emphasized that a school and its accessory uses are a part of the Comprehensive Plan and can be in a residential area. All issues need to be addressed regarding the site including the berm and fencing. A football field is compatible with a school site, but the neighbors do need to be considered in making this decision. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug informed the public he is in favor of the facility with the stipulations noted in monitoring the traffic by using attendants or barricades, graduation should be included in the policing of traffic. New Hope Planning Commission - 29 - July 12, 1994 Commissioner Underdahl is in favor of a facility, but not at the Cooper location, The homes in this area have been around a long time and should not have property values lowered because of thi~ facility. The other schools looked at were not in totally residential neighborhoods with homes facing less than 75 feet from the edge of the field. Some of the fields had homes nearby but did have baseball or tennis courts buffering them from the football field. All of the other facilities have main access roads. All but one of the fields with fences have barb wire around the top. District 281 is not just Cooper, but Cooper and Armstrong together. Commissioner Cassen commented being torn by this issue. There are a lot of concerns which have been addressed and the School District has made an excellent effort regarding berming and screening the facility. The issue of the homes in the area still needs to be addressed and whether or not this facility will negatively affect the value. CommisSioner Cassen is in favor of the stadium but with controls as mentioned and making sure the controls are enforced. The community, City and School District will all have to work together to make this facility work. Commissioner Zak stated that the proposed use is not compatible with the neighborhood. The use is too intense for this area and the facility is too large. The depreciation of the home value is unknown at this time. The traffic impact will be too great also for this residential neighborhood. Commissioner Zak will not be supporting this facility. MOTION Item 4.4 Vice-Chairman Gundershaug emphasized that the the New Hope Comprehensive Plan identifies the School District site a public and semi- public use for schools in a residential area, that the design and the plan presented is compatible with the neighborhood, that the traffic plan attempts to minimize the impact on the area, and therefore, a Motion was made by Commissioner Gundershaug, seconded by Commissioner Cassen, to approve Planning Case 94-14, Request for Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site/Building Plan Review/Approval to Allow Expansion of School Uses in an R-1 Zoning District, 8230 47th Avenue North, Independent School District No. 281 {Cooper High School), Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project is found to comply with ail Conditional Use Permit criteria. 2. The drive lane between the two northern most rows of stalls in Parking Lot A is widened to the required width of 24 feet. The storage of snow within Parking Lot C occurs at the south end of the lot rather than on the north side which is closest to the building and activity areas. A definitive time frame is set for completion of parking lot and storm drainage improvements at the Elementary School site, a performance agreement is entered into between the School District and the City, and a security deposit is posted to ensure timely completion of scheduled work. 5. If, after the first year of operation, bus parking space proves to be inadequate, additional spaces are provided to accommodate them. 6. A determination of the number of policemen, reservists, or attendants which will be necessary is indicated as based on the number needed New Hope Planning Commission - 30 - July 12, 1994 at maximum capacity and is adhered to unless a smaller than expected croWd is present. The grading and drainage plan and all related issues, including trench drainage, underground grit chambers, and the proposed on-site ponding area, are reviewed by and subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Small shrubs and/or ground cover species are integrated into the design of bermed areas to minimize mowing on steep slopes and add to the visual character on site. 9. Any lighting used on site is arranged so as not to reflect onto adjacent property. 10. Adjustment of decibel levels from the loud speaker system is adjusted to be in conformance with City and Pollution Control Agency standards at the time of installation. A Noise Impact Statement is submitted if required by the City to further address related concerns. 11. The litter control team will clean up after game events, prior to 11:00 a.m. the next day, in areas designated but not limited to the following: Zealand Avenue North, 49th Avenue North, Virginia Avenue North, and 47th Avenue North. Any complaints by property owners outside of these designated areas shall also be the responsibility of the School District. 12. All signage which may be desired or necessary on site is reviewed and subject to the approval of the City. 13. The drainage plan shall comply with requirements of the Shingle Creek Watershed, including all conditions included with the variance. The impact of a dry detention basin versus a wet water quality pond or a cash dedication towards e regional water quality pond should be reviewed further bY the School District. 14. Parking lot and drainage improvements for New Hope Elementary School shall be specifically identified in writing at this time if the improvements are allowed to be delayed until 1997. 15. A Development Agreement be entered into between the City and the School District, prepared by the City Attorney, that incorporates all conditions and commitments made in the Operational/Management/ Traffic Plans. 16. Within one year a determination be made on a right turn lane, if so needed, on 47th Avenue with the cost possibly assessed to the District. 17. Outline clean-up procedures and the school administration publish a phone number that residents can use on Saturday. 18. That the Traffic Management Plan be updated to address the issues raised at the June Planning Commission meeting. 19. That a performance bond be provided for site improvements (amount to be determined by Building Official and City Engineer). New Hope Planning Commission - 31 - July 12, 1994 20. Annual review by City staff. COMMITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Item 6.1 Codes & Standards Item 6.2 MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES ADJOURNMENT Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Abstain: Motion failed. Gundershaug, Cassen Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin Watschke Cameron The City Council will hear Planning Case 94-14 on July 25th. No report. No report. No report. The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 12:30 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Recording Secretary New Hope Planning Commission - 32 - July 12, 1994 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 2, 1994 City Hall, 7:00 p..m. CALL TO ORDER The New Hope Planning Commission met in regular session pursuant to due call and notice thereof; Vice-Chairman Gundershaug called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Gundershaug, Watschke Cameron, Cassen Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Sarah Bellefuil, Administrative Analyst CONSENT No consent items. PC 94-20 Item 4.1 Vice-Chairman Gundershaug introduced for discussion Item 4.1, Request for Final Plat Approval and Development/Final Stage Planned Unit Development Approval to Allow Building Addition, 3920 Winnetka Avenue North, 3941/3961 Quebec Avenue North, Kellison Company/Don Harvey, Petitioners. Mr. McDonald asked that the Commission separate this request into two different motions, one for the plat and one for the PUD. Mr. McDonald reported that the petitioner is requesting Final Plat approval of Don Harvey 2nd Addition and Development/Final Stage Planned Unit Development approval to allow building addition on the west building. The concept plan was discussed at the July meeting. The petitioner is also proposing the platting of property known as Don Harvey Second Addition, Block 1, Lot 1, which currently contains two industrial buildings of approximately 26,880 square feet each (2 buildings on one lot). In conjunction with the Final Plat the petitioner is requesting Development/Final Stage PUD approval to construct a 41,640 square foot addition to the building at 3943 Quebec Avenue North where Versa Die Cast, Inc. is the tenant. Mr. McDonald stated the Planning Commission and City Council approved the Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development General Concept Plan approval at their July 12th and July 25th meetings, respectively, subject to the conditions contained in the planning case report. One of those conditions was that a revised Preliminary Plat be submitted that incorp(~rated the recommended changes and this has been done. Mr. McDonald stated that the site is zoned I-1, Limited Industrial, and manufacturing, warehouse and related offices are a permitted use in the district. Mr. McDonald stated that property owners within 350 feet of the request have been re-notified about Final Plat and Development/Final Stage PUD and staff have received no comments on the request. Mr. McDonald pointed out that the Final Plat meets the zoning code requirements for lot size and width requirements in the I-1 Zoning District, which are one acre and 150 feet, respectively, as the single lot contains New Hope Planning Commission ~ I - August 2, 1994 292,224 square feet (6.8 acres) and has a width on Quebec Avenue of over 12,000 feet. Per routine procedure, the Final Plat was submitted to Department Heads, City Attorney, City Engineer, Hennepin County and other appropriate agencies for review and comment. Mr. McDonald reported that Hennepin County reviewed the Final Plat and stated that their recommendations were the same as made on the Preliminary Plat review. The two major issues were that the additional seven feet of right-of-way on Winnetka Avenue be shown on the plat, which has been done, and also that the access be limited to Quebec Avenue and that the curb cut on Winnetka be eliminated, this access is to be removed and is shown on the petitioner's narrative and also on the grading and drainage plan. Mr. McDonald reported that the City Attorney reviewed the Final Plat and commented that the Final Plat of Don Harvey 2nd Addition is order from a legal standpoint. An Abstract of Title or Registered Property Abstract for the subject property must be supplied to the City Attorney prior to approval of the plat by the Council, or else the plat should be approved "subject to the requirements contained in the title opinion of the City Attorney." The City Attorney also mentioned in his comments that the property owner should be aware that the entire real estate taxes due and payable in 1994 must be paid before the Final Plat will be accepted for filing by the County. Mr. McDonald reported the City Engineer reviewed the Final Plat and commented that all drainage and utility easements along all lot lines and the pond are shown, and removal of the existing drive on Winnetka Avenue and Quebec Avenue shall be done in accordance with Hennepin County and City standards. The integrity of the existing sidewalk along Winnetka Avenue shall be constructed after removal of the existing drive. Mr. McDonald stated that Minnegasco reviewed the Final Plat and commented that there is an easement along the north line of the plat, which is the south 15 feet of the north 45 feet. The closest building is 52 feet away so the easement could be granted and there will be no interference with the building. This has been discussed with the petitioner and there is no problem at this time. The Planning Consultant also reviewed the Final Plat. Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat subject to the four conditions contained in the planning case report. Mr. Jim Kellison stated that there should be no problem with the easement. If there is a gas line there, adjustments will have to be made according to the depth of the line. MOTION Item 4.1 Motion by Commissioner Watschke, seconded by Commissioner Sons/n, to approve Planning Case 94-20, Request for Final Plat Approval for Don Harvey Second Addition, 3920 Winnetka Avenue North, 394113961 Quebec Avenue North, Kellison Company/Don Harvey, Petitioners, subject to the following conditions: Removal of the existing drive on Winnetka Avenue and Quebec Avenue shall be done in accordance with Hennepin County and City standards. The integrity of the existing sidewalk along Winnetka New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - August 2, 1994 Avenue shall be constructed after removal of the existing drive. 2. Appropriate Hennepin County permits be obtained. 3. Final Plat be revised to include Minnegasco easement. 4. Updated Evidence of Title be submitted to City Attorney. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Zak, Gundershaug, Watschke None Cameron, Cassen This Planning Case will appear before the City Council on August 8, 1994. Mr. McDonald explained the next part of this planning case is the Development and Final Plan Stage of the PUD. The purpose of the Development Stage is to provide a specific plan to the Planning Commission upon which the Commission bases their recommendation to the Council. The purpose of the Development Plan is to refine and implement what was approved in the General Concept Plan. The Final Plan is the Development Agreement and the documents that are recorded with the county. Mr. McDonald pointed out Development Stage Plan review criteria are listed in the planning case report. Mr. McDonald reported that the Design & Review Committee met with the petitioner on July 19th and a number of issues were discussed, including trash enclosures, the Ponding/drainage plan, setback of retaining wall on northwest corner of property, elimination of Winnetka Avenue curb-cut, sidewalk requirement, wing wall elevations, roof-top equipment, landscaping and irrigation, separation of truck and auto access, truck maneuverability, traffic directional signs, signage, lighting, building materials and architectural style of building. Mr. McDonald stated that revised plans were submitted by the petitioner as a result of the meeting which included the following changes (per the petitioner's letter): The retaining wall at the northwesterly corner of the new parking area has been moved so that it does not encroach into the easement area and is sufficiently set back from the property lines to meet City codes. Full elevations of the south side of the buildings and major portion of the site have been included in the drawings, including the wing walls in the alley between the two buildings. The petitioner agrees to paint all rooftop equipment on the new and existing buildings. 4.. The landscape plans have been redesigned to incorporate some of the comments made at the meeting as regards the screening from Winnetka Avenue and the foundation plantings. (The foundation plantings have been reduced to a certain extent in order to provide space for over-story trees adjacent to the west elevation of the New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - August 2, 1994 building.) , The petitioner agrees to provide irrigation for the foundation planting areas of the building ~nd adjacent lawn areas. It has been determined that the two grade level doors on the north elevation will not be used for entry of vehicles but will only be used for forklift maneuvering of materials off trailers to be moved into the building. The smaller of the overhead doors would also be utilized by UPS for parcel pick-up should such a need occur. The petitioner will sign the property to exclude trucking from the westerly driveway and allow it only to occur at the easterly driveway on Quebec Avenue for access between the two buildings and additional access to the north side of the new building by back- up maneuvering. Additionally, the petitioner will provide one way arrowing and signage to limit access along the north side of the new building. The petitioner agrees to remove the curb cut, sidewalk, curbs, and asphalt at Winnetka Avenue and replace the curb and sidewalk to City requirements. The revised drawings now reflect lighting for security and parking purposes. 10. The elevations of the building have been revised to reflect the perspective drawing and the pilasters have been redrawn to a new design for greater protection from damage at the auto parking areas and for more aesthetic appeal. Mr. McDonald commented that the petitioner has submitted a narrative as part of the PUD which indicates that, as a part of the expansion project, they will be renovating the existing buildings in the following manner: Repair the existing block as necessary and repaint all exterior surfaces. The painting will be coordinated to match the new building and blend properly around the east side of the east building. Repair/replace main doors, overhead doors, stairs and rails as necessary and paint to match new building. 3. Repair/replace dock bumpers and dock equipment as necessary. 4. Paint all roof top equipment on existing building. o Clean the asphaltic material from the loading docks on the east building. 6. Repair/replace broken light fixtures on building exterior. Patch, repair, seal coat, and restripe all asphalt parking and drive surfaces. o Install new curb (B-6/12) at the east boundary of the auto parking lot for the east building. New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - August 2, 1994 Provide a complete general clean-up of all stored materials, landscaping,~addresses, and signage. Mr. McDonald reported that the revised landscaping plan included 14 additional trees and shrubs along with some variances in the quantities of each of the species on the original plan. The revised plan brings the total of trees and shrubs to 238 compared to 224 on the original plan. Mr. McDonald stated staff received comments and recommendations from the City Engineer, Planning Consultant, and Building Official. The narrative that the petitioner submitted indicates support of all the recommendations and the drawings will be incorporated into the PUD agreement. Mr. McDonald stated staff recommends approval of the Development/Final Stage Planned Unit Development Plans, subject to the 17 conditions listed in the report. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug asked for the petitioner to come to the podium. Mr. Jim Kellison stated the only recommendation that is still an issue is the five feet of sidewalk all around the perimeter along Quebec Avenue. At this time there is no other sidewalk along Quebec Avenue from Winnetka to 42nd Avenue except for about 200 feet in front of the church. The petitioner does not feel it is appropriate for the landowner to have to pay the full price to have the sidewalk put in along Quebec instead of the other side of Quebec where there were recently two other buildings constructed. The petitioner states there is not an objection to being a participant in an assessment if the City does decide that at some date in the future sidewalks would be needed along this area. There is also no objection to doing some grading now to prepare for a sidewalk in the future. At this time the petitioner reported they do not have the cut sheets for the lighting for the parking lot. The plan is to put two two-headed light fixtures on the west side of the addition, one two-headed light fixture on the south side and a pole light near the main entry and a couple wall pack security lights near the overhead doors and the main doors. These lights can be shown on the plans by the time of the City Council meeting. Mr. Kellison explained the reason for the change of the false columns on the building is that there is parking along the front side of the building. The columns will have a rock-faced block part of the way and the top part will be a pilaster column look. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug questioned if the petitioner is aware of the 17 conditions. Mr. Kellison confirmed that they are aware of the conditions and the only condition that there is a problem with is the sidewalk issue. Vice-Cl~airman Gundershaug reported that the Planning Commission could not make that determination and this would need to be discussed at the City Council meeting. Commissioner Watschke wanted clarification on the Minnegasco easement, which is the south 15 feet of the north 45 feet of the property line. Mr. Kellison replied that the building will be 52 feet from the property line. There is 47 feet of pavement and five feet from the curb to the property line, so there is actually seven feet between the building and the south edge of the easement. This will be corrected on the Final Plat. Commissioner Watschke also wanted clarification on how the truck traffic will flow on the site. Mr. Kellison stated that all the truck traffic will be directed off of Quebec Avenue in through the area called truck alley. The New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - August 2, 1994 truck dock which is on the north side of the new building will be accessed by backing the truck into it. All traffic will exit out onto Quebec Avenue. There will be signs on the west driveway stating "no truck traffic." The dock is not used every day. Versa Die Cast has signed a lO-year lease. The truck dock is used to off-load ingots for die casting. Delivery trucks come in only two or three times a week from the same delivery service. Commissioner Watschke questioned the irrigation plan. Mr. Kellison stated that it would be impractical to irrigate the entire site. The plants that are being used are basically native indigenous types of plants that can be used without extensive irrigation systems. There will be some irrigation systems installed along the west and south sides of the new addition. This is the area where the plants that need irrigation will be planted. The rest of the plantings are indigenous dogwoods, viburnums, junipers and various types of coniferous and deciduous trees. Commissioner Watschke asked if the drainage pond outlet has been resolved. Mr. Kellison stated that there have been conversations with Dale Claridge and Mark Hanson and drawings have been submitted and there are no problems. The next Watershed meeting is August 1 l th at which time approval should be granted. Commissioner Watschke asked if the oak tree would be saved and Mr. Kellison confirmed that it would be saved. Commissioner Watschke questioned what the signage would be on the new addition or if it would change. Mr. Kellison replied that Versa Die Case will be the only tenant and that they will probably just take the existing lettering, which is City approved, and apply it to a new location. Versa Die Cast would have to come to the City and apply for signage changes, if any changes are warranted. Commissioner Watschke questioned the repainting and clean-up of the existing building. Mr. Kellison replied there will be repainting, fixing and clean-up done and curb on the east side of the parking lot. If there is good weather this fall, everything should be completed with the possible exception of some of the landscaping. It is possible that only one layer of asphalt will get laid this fall with the second layer applied in spring. Commissioner Watschke asked if the parking on the north side could be removed. Mr. Keilison stated that the recommendation was made to remove the parking at that location and this has been done. Vice-Chairman Gundershaug questioned whether a bond was needed for the landscaping. Mr. McDonald stated that the developer needs to sign a PUD agreement and submit a bond. MOTION Item 4.1 Motion by Commissioner Watschke, seconded by Commissioner Underdahl, to approve Planning Case 94-20, Request for Development and Final Stage Planned Unit Development Approval to Allow Building Addition, 3920 Winnetka Avenue North, 3941/3961 Quebec Avenue North, Kellison Company/Don Harvey, Petitioners, subject to the following conditions: Approval of the plans by the Shingle Creek Watershed Commission prior to the issuance of a building permit. The pond shall be designed to satisfy all quantity and quality requirements in accordance with the Watershed and City. .An outlet skimmer structure is required. The pond and lot shall be sized to provide New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - August 2, 1994 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. New Hope Planning Commission maximum storage ,while the storm sewer shall be located 10' behind the existing cOncrete curb, The new concrete curb construction along the existing south pavement shall be located to comply with the required setback requirements from Quebec Avenue. The curb along the existing east pavement may warrant storm sewer and a catch basin to collect and convey storm water to the pond. The pavement restoration shall account for traffic loading, subgrade conditions and the existing section. Total reconstruction is warranted in certain areas. Installation of a 5' wide concrete sidewalk (minimum 4" thick) along Quebec Avenue located 5' back from the existing curb providing a 5' wide boulevard to be shown on the revised site plan. In the event the sidewalk is not required at this time the boulevard grading along Quebec Avenue and irrigation constructed as part of the site improvements shall account for a sidewalk being constructed in the future. The retaining wall in the northwest corner of the new parking area shall be properly designed and comply with setback requirements and retaining wall details must be submitted. Removal of the existing drive on Winnetka Avenue and Quebec Avenue in accordance with Hennepin County and City standards. The integrity of the existing sidewalk along Winnetka Avenue shall be constructed after removal of the existing drive. Delete the "one-way" parking layout at north. Correct the dimension errors at north setback between the lot line and the building. ~ Submit traffic signage for all three driveways and the north end of the trucking driveway. Provide exterior lighting details, NOT shown on plans. East oak tree protection (fence) to extend to the tree crown (drip line). Signed architectural plans for the PUD must be provided. Submit tenant leasehold plan for both buildings, including areas and "uses". Clarify building interior used in building code terms. Continuous concrete curbing be provided around the entire parking lot. Elimination of all outdoor storage from the site. Submission of detailed signage plan which complies with City sign regulations. Developer must enter into a PUD Development Agreement with the - 7 - August 2, 1994 City, to be prepared by the City Attorney, and submit the appropriate bond with amount to be determined by City Engineer and Building Official. Development Agreement must be executed and bond submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit, Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Zak, Gundershaug, Watschke None Cameron, Cassen This Planning Case will appear before the City Council on August 8th. COMMITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Item 6.1 No report. Mr. McDonald reported that at this time there is no meeting scheduled for Design & Review. The cellular telephone tower that was approved in 1992 at Victory Park with a lease with the City and had the extension on the CUP, which ran out, will be back before the Commission. Another 100 foot tower proposed for the south part of the City may be coming before the Commission in September, along with two preliminary City plats. Codes & Standards Item 6.2 No report. Commissioner Sonsin stated that Codes & Standards will begin meeting again in September on several code issues. OLD BUSINESS Miscellaneous Issues No report. NEW BUSINESS July 12, 1994, Planning Commission minutes unanimously approved. No questions or comments on other minutes. ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Sonsin asked what happened with the Plymouth Planning Commission and the athletic complex for Armstrong High School. Mr. McDonald stated that Plymouth Planning Commission recommended approval. Commissioner Underdahl asked if other commissioners have had phone calls regarding the athletic complex. Commissioner Sonsin stated he has had three calls during the last week, basically asking why he voted against the complex. He gave them the information he had and recommended they attend the City Council. Commissioner Underdahl stated she has had five calls, four of whom were extremely upset. They were very intimidating, vindictive, and very spiteful. The chairman of the School Board called 17 days after the vote and he implied that the vote was under compulsion and he made many derogatory charges and questioned her integrity. The caller stated she would be referred to as anti-education because of her vote against the field. All the comments from the callers disregarded the research done for this planning case. After leaving the July 12th meeting, the District's attorney and Pat Norby made some disparaging comments to her. These are harassing calls and Commissioner Underdahl is wondering what to do about them. Commissioner Underdahl also stated that when she attended one of the informational meetings at New Hope Planning Commission - 8 - August 2, 1994 Cooper, Diane Reed called her a spy for attending the meeting. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 7:30 p.m. _R~e_.spectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester Recording Secretary New Hope Planning Commission - 9 - August 2, 1994 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 6, 1994 City Hall, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 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. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke Zak Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Sarah Bellefuil, Administrative Analyst CONSENT ITEMS PC 94-21 Item 3.1 Chairman Cameron introduced the consent items as listed for consideration and stated that all items will be enacted by one motion unless requested that an item be removed for discussion. Mr. McDonald stated in the staff report that this is a request by the City of New Hope for Preliminary Plat approval of City Center Addition. The property included in the plat includes all or a portion of Lots 11 - 18, Auditor's Subdivision Number 324. The City acquired these properties in conjunction with the 42nd Avenue Street Reconstruction Project and the purpose of the plat is to consolidate all of the parcels into one lot. For the past several years the City has contracted to have gasoline-impacted soils on the east side of the property removed in conjunction with an approved clean-up plan from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The City is now in the process of seeking an "all-clear" letter from the PCA and is marketing the property through Thorpe Bros., and the sale of the property will be less complicated if it is platted as one parcel. The report stated that the property is located at the northwest intersection of 42nd and Nevada Avenues. The property is located in a B-4, Community Business, Zoning District and surrounding land uses/zoning include R-4 apartments to the north, I-2, General Industrial, to the west (across railroad), B-4 to the east (Army/Navy Store), and B-4 to the south across 42nd Avenue (All Star Sports and Rapid Oil). The topography of the property is fairly flat with rising ridge on the east side. Mr. McDonald indicated in the staff report that the City Engineer reviewed the plat and commented that the right-of-way along 42nd Avenue should be dedicated to provide a uniform width of 2' between back of sidewalk and right-of-way line; a 20' wide drainage and utility easement should be dedicated over the existing 36" RCP storm sewer crossing the middle of the site and a minimum 5' wide drainage and utility easement should be dedicated along all lot lines and right-of-way lines; when the site is developed, access should be to the Nevada Avenue cul-de-sac, consideration should be given to improving the storm water flow from the Iow point in 42nd Avenue through this site, and the elevation of the lowest opening in the building should be 2' above the overflow elevation; if future development warrants reconfiguration of the cul-de-sac, a driveway easement should be maintained between the apartment complex and Nevada Avenue; and the ground water and soil contamination should be resolved in accordance with MPCA and City requirements. New Hope Planning Commission - I - September 6, 1994 The report stated that Hennepin County reviewed the plat and commented that the developer should dedicate right-of-way for CSAH 9 as shown on the preliminary plat; all access from the plat to CSAH 9 must be via City streets; all proposed construction within County right-of-way requires an approved permit prior to beginning construction which includes, but is not limited to driveway, drainage and utility construction, trail development and landscaping. The developer must restore all areas, within County right-of-way, disturbed during construction. The City Attorney reviewed the plat and found it to be in order from a legal standpoint. The City Attorney also noted that the City of New Hope is listed as the Owner and Developer and the title of all the relevant parcels of property is in the name of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of New Hope. The HRA should be the Developer, or the HRA can deed the property to the EDA and the EDA can then be the Owner and Developer. The plat needs to include the full extent of the fee title of the various lots, with the existing roadway improvements or easements shown as a dedication on the plat. Certain minor information required in preliminary plats by City Ordinance § 13.41 is missing, namely the location of sewer and water mains and the zoning classification. Because of ownership by HRA, no title work will be necessary. Hennepin County Surveyors will require a letter from the City Attorney regarding the status of the title which will be provided at the time of review of the final plat. The property is tax-exempt, so the plat can be filed without regard to the payment of real estate taxes. The Building Official reviewed the preliminary plat and commented that Nevada Avenue right-of-way is drawn out of scale or dimension. The south lot line may be inaccurate, as it is shown to not parallel the new sidewalk along 42nd Avenue. Perimeter easements and sewer easement bisecting the lot should be provided. He also recommended that the lot area be increased by reducing the cul-de-sac diameter on the south side from 60' to 54', where it will intersect with the southeast corner of the adjacent apartment complex lot. The Minnesota Department of Transportation and utility companies reviewed the plat and had no comments. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat of City Center Addition, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Attorney, City Engineer, and Building Official be incorporated into the Final Plat and that the Final Plat be submitted to the Planning Commission for review/approval. Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Underdahl, to approve Planning Case 94-21 Request for Preliminary Plat Approval for City Center Addition, 7300 42nd Avenue North, City of New Hope, Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 1. The right-of-way along 42nd Avenue be dedicated to provide a uniform width of 2' between back of sidewalk and right-of-way line. 2. A 20' wide drainage and utility easement be dedicated over the existing 36" RCP storm sewer crossing the middle of the site. A minimum 5' wide drainage and utility easement be dedicated along all lot lines and right-of-way lines. 3. At the time the site is developed, consideration should be given to improving the storm water flow from the Iow point in 42nd Avenue New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - September 6, 1994 MOTION Item 3.1 through this site, and at a minimum, the elevation of the lowest opening inthe buildingShal/be 2' above the overflow elevation. 4. In the event future development warrants reconfiguration of the cul- de-sac, a driveway easement be maintained between the apartment complex and Nevada Avenue. 5. The ground water and soil contamination be resolved in accordance with MPCA and City requirements. 6. The City should dedicate right-of-way for CSAH 9 as shown on the preliminary plat. 7. All access from the plat to CSAH 9 must be via City streets (Nevada Avenue cul-de-sac), as direct access from the plat to CSAH 9 will not be permitted by the County. 8. Necessary permits be secured from County for driveway, drainage and utilities prior to construction in future. 9. The developer must restore all areas, within County right-of-way, disturbed during future construction. 10. The City of New Hope is listed as the Owner and Developer and the title is in the name of the HRA. The HRA should be the Developer, or the HRA should deed the property to the EDA and the EDA can then be the Owner and Developer. 11. The illustration of the plat needs to be changed so that the underlying fee title to all of the relevant lots is included within the outer boundary of the plat, as the current illustration limits the plat to those portions of the subject property which are not affected by the street easements. The plat needs to include the full extent of the fee title of the various lots, with the existing roadway improvements or easements shown as a dedication on the plat. 12. The location of sewer and water mains and the zoning classification must be included on the Preliminary Plat per City Code 13. City Attorney to provide a letter regarding status of title at the time of review of Final Plat. 14. Correct Nevada Avenue right-of-way which is drawn out of scale or dimension. South lot line shown to not parallel the new sidewalk along 42nd Avenue. 15. Increase lot area by reducing the cul-de-sac diameter on the south side from 60' to 54'. 16. Final Plat be submitted to Planning Commission for review/approval. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Zak PC 94-22 ' Item 3.2 Chairman Cameron introduced Consent Item 3.2 Request for Preliminary Plat Approval for Camerons Addition, 6073 Louisiana Avenue North, City of New Hope, Petitioner. Mr. McDonald stated in the staff report that the City of New Hope is requesting Preliminary Plat approval of Camerons Addition. The purpose of.the plat is to create a new buildable parcel for the City's scattered site housing program. The City acquired the vacant HUD house at 7109 62nd Avenue in 1993 and it~is currently being rehabilitated with MHFA and CDBG funds for resale to first-time homebuyers. In the fall of 1993, the City approved the preliminary plat for the Carol James Addition, as the property owner at 7105 62nd Avenue (adjacent to 7109 62nd Avenue) desired to subdivide his property and sell off the back portion. This spring New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - September 6, 1994 the City purchased the rear portion of the property after the final plat was approved. The purpose of this plat is to split off the rear portion of the 7109 62nd Avenue parcel and combine it with the rear portion of the 7105 62nd Avenue parcel to create one new buildable lot which would have access off of Louisiana Avenue. The City has no immediate plans to build on the parcel, but will do so in the future with a variety of housing program grant funding sources. The report stated that the property is located just south of the southwest intersection of 62nd and Louisiana Avenues. The property is located in an R-l, Single Family Residential, Zoning District and is bordered on the south by a single family home and Broadway Village Apartments, which are both located in an R-4, High Density Residential, Zoning District. The property across 62nd Avenue to the north is Brooklyn Park single family residential and the property to the east across Louisiana Avenue is Crystal park property. The topography of the proposed future building site is flat with several nice trees toward the center of the site. The report further stated that the total area of the proposed plat is 26,043 square feet or .59 acres and the existing "L-shaped" parcel has a frontage width of 66.67 feet on the north (62nd Avenue), 100 feet on the east (Louisiana Avenue), a length of 166.67 feet on the south and a length of 240.63 feet on the west. The plat subdivides the property into two (2) parcels. Lot 2 meets the lot area and lot width requirements for the R-1 Zoning District. Lot I has 9,376 square feet and does not meet the minimum lot area requirement of 9,500 square feet. The reason that this situation developed is that the property owner at 7105 62nd Avenue only wanted to sell the rear 100 feet of his property. City staff was uncertain as to what the exact square footage of the two combined parcels would be until the area was surveyed/platted. It was the original intention to simply extend the rear dividing line straight into the next lot so that the newly created parcel would be rectangular in shape. Due to the fact that the square footage requirement is not met on the new parcel, the line will have to shifted in the final plat. The lot width for Lot 1, along 62nd Avenue, is 66.67 feet and does not meet the minimum frontage of 75 feet. This is an existing non-conforming lot and it is not possible to correct this non-conformity. No comments were received from Hennepin County or utility companies on the plat. The City Engineer reviewed the plat and made the following comments: Lot 1 does not comply with the required square footage (required 9,500 square feet, proposed 9,376 square feet). Sanitary sewer and water main service to Lot 2 must be satisfied by extending 160' sanitary sewer in Louisiana Avenue and connecting a 1" service to the existing 6" water main in Louisiana Avenue. The estimated cost for this work including utility construction and street restoration is ±$16,500. The southwest corner of Lot 2 does not naturally overflow to Louisiana Avenue. It is expected when Lot 2 is developed storm water will pond in this area. Approximately 350' of storm sewer pipe in Louisiana Avenue and along the south lot line of Lot 2 is required. In the event an easement can be ured from the property to the south approximately 230' of storm sewer F~:,e is required. The estimated cost for storm sewer is $7,000 to t~12,000. In the event the storm sewer is constructed along the south lot line of Lot 2, a 10' wide drainage and utility easement is required along the south lot line. Drainage and utility easements 5' wide should be provided New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - September 6, 1994 along all lot lines and right-of-way lines unless otherwise noted. As noted, a 3' wide drainage and utility easement is provided along the existing garage due to its location. Existing easements should be vacated as required. The report noted the City Attorney's comments of the preliminary plat. The City of New Hope is listed as the Owner and Developer and the City owns the real estate described by the metes and bounds legal description, which is the property known as 7109 62nd Avenue North. The New Hope EDA is the owner of record for Lot 2, Block 1, Carol James Addition. Therefore, either the City or the EDA will have to deed their portion of the property to the other so all property will be under common ownership, or the City and the EDA will both have to join in the plat as owners. The metes and bounds legal description needs to include a reference to the section, township and range. The proposed Lot 2, Camerons Addition shows an easement to be vacated. Both Minnesota law and the City of New Hope Code require certain procedures to be followed for the vacation of a publicly owned easement. The location of sewer and water mains and the zoning classification is missing on the preliminary plat. Because of recent purchases by the City, no title work will be necessary for this plat application. Hennepin County Surveyors will require a letter from the City Attorney regarding the status of the title which will be provided at the time of review of the final plat. With the recent platting of the Carol James Addition, the legal staff knows that all of the real estate taxes due and payable in 1994 on Lot 2,. Block 1, Carol James Addition have been paid in full. The taxes are also paid in full for the remaining property (7109), so taxes will not be an issue when the plat is filed. The Building Official reviewed the preliminary plat and made the following recommendations: The only adjustment needed is to the lot area for the proposed Lot 1. Adding 125 or 150 square feet can be done by changing the lot shape slightly. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat of Camerons Addition, subject to conditions from the City Attorney, City Engineer, and Building Official be incorporated into the Final Plat and that the Final Plat be submitted to the Planning Commission for review/approval. Commissioner Sonsin questioned what properties are being put together to make the one lot. Mr. McDonald answered that the City owns 7109 62nd Avenue and is splitting off the back portion of this property which will then be combined with the property purchased from part of Carol James property that was purchased this spring. This new lot will then be developed in the future with access to Louisiana Avenue. Commissioner Underdahl asked what type of building would be constructed on this property. Mr. McDonald answered that a single family home would probably be built, and if not single family then probably a duplex. At this time the City is only asking for platting of the property with no plans to build. The home on 7109 62nd is nearing completion and will soon be put on the market. Commissioner Sonsin questioned the size of Lot I and what will be done to bring the square footage up to code. Mr. McDonald reported that Carol James wanted to sell only the back 100 feet of his lot and until the preliminary plat was done the exact footage of Lot I was not known. It now seems Lot I is about 150 feet smaller than Code allows. In order to New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - September 6, 1994 bring Lot 1 to Code, the shape/size of Lot 2 can be changed by an amount to equal the shortage on Lot 1. MOTION Consent Items Motion by Commissioner Underdahl, seconded by Commissioner Gundershaug, to approve Planning Case 94-22, Request for Preliminary Plat Approval for Camerons Addition, 6073 Louisiana Avenue North, City of New Hope, Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 1. Plat be revised so that Lot I complies with the required square footage, per City Code, by changing the lot shape slightly and adding 125 - 150 square feet. 2. Sanitary sewer and water main service to Lot 2 be constructed when future construction takes place. 3. Storm sewer pipe in Louisiana Avenue and along the south lot line of Lot 2 may be required when Lot 2 is developed with the appropriate easement dedication. 4. Drainage and utility easements 5' wide must be provided along all lot lines and right-of-way lines. 5. Due to the fact that the City of New Hope owns the property known as 7109 62nd Avenue North and the New Hope EDA is the owner of record for Lot 2, Block 1, Carol James Addition, the City or the EDA will have to deed their portion of the property to the other so all property will be under common ownership. 6. The metes and bounds legal description needs to include a reference to the section, township and range, and minor corrections in legal description to be made. 7. An existing easement in the center of the proposed Lot 2, Camerons Addition, needs to be vacated. 8. The location of sewer and water mains and the zoning classification should be added to the plat. 9. City Attorney to provide a letter regarding the status of the title at the time of review of Final Plat. 10. Final Plat be submitted to Planning Commission for review/approval. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Zak The consent items will appear before the City Council on September 12, 1994. PUBLIC HEARING PC 94-23 Item 4.1 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.1, Request for Conditional Use Permit to Allow the Construction of an Equipment Shelter and the Erection of a 115' ESMR Cellular Telephone Antenna/Radio Tower, 5008 Hillsboro Avenue North, C-Call Corporation, d.b.a OneComm Corporation/Jonathan and Leah Miner, Petitioners. Mr. McDonald explained that the petitioner is requesting a conditional use permit to allow the construction of an equipment shelter and the erection of a 115 foot ESMR cellular telephone antenna/radio tower. OneComm Corporation is requesting the CUP to allow the location of an Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio (ESMR) cellular telephone antenna and cell site on property owned by Jonathan and Leah Miner at 5008 Hillsboro Avenue North. OneComm has authorized Buell Consulting to represent them in planning and zoning matters. New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - September 6, 1994 Mr. McDonald reported the petitioner stated in their application that they wish to construct a 100 foot steel ,self-supporting tower in the north corner of the Miner's property. This type of tower does not require guy wires. A triangular platform would be put at the top of the tower on which the cellular antennas would be attached. Initially, three 15 foot whip antennas would be installed. At some time in the future, the whip antennas would be replaced with nine 4 foot by I foot panel antennas. The overall height would be 115 feet. The antennas would transmit and receive Iow power (50 watts ERP) cellular radio signals. Mr. McDonald explained that the foundation for the tower would be a caisson type. The tower steel and foundation would be designed following specifications as determined by the tower manufacturer. These specifications take into account soils, local wind loading guidelines and the kind of equipment to be attached to the tower. The tower would not be required to be lighted according to FAA requirements. To minimize off-site visibility, the petitioner has indicated that the tower would be left in its natural galvanized steel color. Mr. McDonald stated that an unmanned prefabricated equipment shelter measuring approximately 11 feet by 20 feet by 10 feet high would be located at the base of the pole. The shelter is proposed to have a washed aggregate finish. The drainage of the site would not be changed and a parking space would be provided near the equipment shelter building. The site would only require single phase 200 amp electrical service and T1 telephone for utilities, which would be brought in underground. The site would be secured by a cyclone fence. Mr. McDonald explained that the existing trees along the east property line would be preserved for screening. Ingress and egress to the shelter would be by a recorded easement through Miner's property using the existing driveway from Hillsboro Avenue. The site would be visited approximately once a month by maintenance personnel using utility trucks. Mr. McDonald stated that the site is located in an I-1, Limited Industrial, Zoning District. All of the properties surrounding the site are I-1 Limited Industrial. An existing Cellular One self-supporting radio tower is located on the adjacent property to the north. This property was first developed in 1976, by Olson Concrete, the owner and occupant of the adjacent lot with the existing tower, which is 180 feet tall. The proposed building and tower meet or exceed the City's setback requirements. Mr. McDonald reported that property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff received an inquiry about the plans from the property owner to the north. Mr. McDonald informed the Commission that the proposed use should be compatible with adjacent land uses. The antenna is a compatible use in an industrial district and would not adversely impact the development of surrounding properties. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. Past applicants have submitted reports by real estate appraisal firms which state that they found no measurable impact to property values lying in close proximity to towers in either residential or industrial settings. Staff finds that the proposed use is compatible with all buildings in the area because there are outdoor storage areas for heavy equipment to the north and south and to the east is a wooded area and a large wetland buffer. Another Cellular New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - September 6, 1994 One tower is located on the adjacent property to the north. The proposed use should not cause traffic hazards or congestion as only one car per month will visit the building briefly. The equipment building at the base of the tower will be a prefabricated fiber-bond building constructed of concrete with a tan washed aggregate finish, intended to match/blend with the Olson Concrete building to the west. Mr. McDonald informed the Commission that the Design & Review Committee met with the applicant on August 18th and the issues discussed included: impact of tower on adjacent property, existing parking and access, fence enclosure, building details, lighting, total height and structural materials for tower, lease period, and snow removal. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meeting which include the following: 1. Site Area - 102,750 square feet or 2.36 acres. 2. Parking for existing site is shown - 54 stalls. This use will produce no net reduction of existing parking. 3. Ingress and egress access easement is shown on north side of property. 4. Tower and building to be located on 50' x 50' parcel, where trees are to be cleared. 5. Extent of existing trees on east property line are shown. 6. Underground telephone and electric service to building/tower are shown. 7. Fence detail/gate detail is shown. The petitioner will add to the existing fence on the north side of the property by installing an 8' high security chain-link fence enclosing the 50' x 50' compound. Also, a 12' gate with a 2' x 5' walk through snow gate is shown. 8. Service vehicle parking is shown. 9. Building floor plans have been submitted. 10. Antenna tower and building elevations have been submitted. 11. Building details are shown: precast concrete with exposed aggregate finish in a mesa tan color. One incandescent light with motion detector shown on building above door. 12. Antenna details are shown: 100' self-supporting tower with three 3" x 13'2" omni antennas. 13. The petitioner has also submitted structural drawings/data, soils data, and a wetland delineation report. Mr. McDonald reported that the City Engineer reviewed the proposed plans and made the following comments: 1. The 100 year high water level (HWL) for the adjacent wetland is estimated at 890. The proposed building and tower construction appears to be at 890. New Hope's Draft Surface Water Management Plan requires the lowest floors of buildings be 2' above the HWL. Therefore, it is recommended the building and tower be raised a minimum of 2' to elevation 892.1. A detailed grading plan is required noting the area to be filled. 2. The plan should be reviewed for conformance by Shingle Creek Watershed because it directly abuts a wetland. A delineation of the existing wetland has been done by OneComm. A review of the detailed grading plan once the filling has been accounted for must insure fill is not placed in the wetland. Fill placed in the wetland will require mitigation in accordance with the Wetlac Conservation Act. 3. Due to soil types in this area, the towel- and buildin~ may warrant piling. 4. Erosion control must comply with City and County requirements. 5. Screening with plantings along the wetland side would be desirable. New Hope Planning Commission - 8 - September 6, 1994 MOTION Item 4.1 Mr. McDonald reported that the Building Official reviewed the proposed plans and commented that the adjacent property to the north was issued a CUP for a 180' cellular tower in 1987, approximately 200 feet due north of the proposed tower. Both locations are in remote industrial areas, well buffered by the large state-regulated wetland just east of the towers. Both towers are more than 1,1 O0 feet from the nearest dwelling and residential zoning district. Both towers have a small manufactured equipment building that is unoccupied, inside a security fence. Both tower sites provide a gravel surfaced area with parking room for an occasional service vehicle. The proposed tower is the same traditional steel triangular base variety as the existing one next door. It is notewort~ that 'this proposed tower is 100 feet high, compared to the existing 1 ~ooter. Mr. McDonald stated that staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for OneComm Corporation to construct a 115' ESMR cellular telephone antenna facility and equipment building at §008 Hillsboro Avenue North, subject to conditions outlined in the report. Mr. Bill Buell, representing OneComm Corporation, came to the podium to answer questions from the Commissioners. Commissioner Watschke questioned the parking by the building. Mr. Buell explained the existing parking stalls are now at varying widths, but that the area totals 24 stalls. According to the plans, Mr. Buell went on to explain that there is 18-1/2 feet as an access area by the building. The remaining space will allow for 24 spaces which can be restriped. Mr. McDonald reported that a parking stall is to be 19' x 8'-9". Mr. Buell displayed some color pictures of what the building, tower, and panels would look like. The color of the building is Mesa Tan which matches the color of the Cellular One building to the north. The panel antennas are 12" x 48" and 5" thick. There would be three clusters of three for a total of nine antennas. These panels would be needed in about three years as the system matures and will replace the whip antennas. Commissioner Watschke suggested that the plans be revised to restripe the parking spaces to allow for the access area. Motion by Commissioner Watschke, seconded by Commissioner Sonsin, to approve Planning Case 94-23, Request for Conditional Use Permit to Allow the Construction of an Equipment Shelter and the Erection of a 115' ESMR Cellular Telephone Antenna/Radio Tower, 5008 Hillsboro Avenue North, C-Call Corporation, d.b.a. OneComm Corporation/Jonathan and Leah Miner, Petitioners, subject to the following conditions: 1. Building and tower be raised a minimum of 2' to elevation 892.1, per City Engineer. 2. Detailed grading plan be submitted noting area to be filled, per City Engineer. 3. Approval by Shingle Creek Watershed. 4. Erosion control must comply with City/County requirements. 5. Compliance with all State Building Code requirements, coordinated through the Building Official. 6. Annual inspection to verify the maintenance of the 8' high fence, enclosure, building and tower. 7. Development agreement and bond required to ensure timely completion of the work. New Hope Planning Commission - 9 - September 6, 1994 8. Restripe the easterly parking lane to provide 24 stalls that meet the City Code requirements. Commissioner Sonsin questioned if there will be a problem with all of the towers together and interference with each other. Mr. Buell stated that the FCC puts the burden on OneComm to protect the areas. Mr. Buell questioned Condition #7, Development Agreement and bond requirement. This condition will be looked into as there is not going to be substantial site improvements, but Mr. McDonald indicated that this is a routine requirement. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Zak This Planning Case will appear before the City Council on September 12, 1994. PC 94-25 Item 4.2 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Request for Conditional Use Permit to Allow Construction of a 95' Cellular Telephone Antenna Tower and a 12' x 24' Equipment Building, 5700 International Parkway (Victory Park), U.S. West NewVector Group, Inc., Petitioner. Mr. McDonald stated that this is a repeat from the fall of 1991 when the Planning Commission and City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit to allow U.S. West NewVector Group, Inc. to erect a 95' cellular telephone antenna tower on the north side of Victory Park and a 12' x 36' equipment building. The approval included a lease between U.S. West and the City whereby U.S. West would lease the property from the City for $9,000 per year. The tower was never constructed and the one-year time period lapsed, per the Zoning Code regulations. Mr. McDonald reported that the petitioner is back before the City requesting another conditional use permit to allow the construction of a similar 95' antenna tower and 12' x 24' equipment building. The location is the same as before and the petitioner is again requesting to lease land from the City on the north side of Victory Park, near the bend in the road of International Parkway. The former lease agreement has been updated. The antenna would be a self-support monopole (no support lines needed) and would be used for cellular telephone communications. The site would be accessed from International Parkway. The tower would have a grey finish and a small modular brick building would be constructed near the base of the tower, which would house cellular communication equipment on the site. Mr. McDonald noted the petitioner is proposing to lease the land from the City for a 20-year period (one 5-year lease and three 5-year options). In the 1991 lease agreement, the fee agreed upon was $750 per month/S9,000 per year. The petitioner has agreed to a similar lease with a five percent annual fee increase (from 1991) on the initial 1994 annual fee, or $826.90 per month/S9,923.00 per year. Staff is recommending that the revenue be dedicated to parks. The only other change is that the termination of the first 5-year term was extended to 1999 rather than 1997, due to the delay in executing the document. All other conditions New Hope Planning Commission - 10 - September 6, 1994 have remained unchanged. The City Attorney has prepared a revised lease and it has been forwarded to U.S. West for review. It is anticipated that the lease agreement will be approved by the City Council in conjunction with the CUP approval. Mr.. McDonald stated Victory Park is located in an I-1, Light Industrial, Zoning District and surrounding zoning/land uses include: Pheasant Park Apartments to the east (R-4) which would have a distance of about 800 feet to the tower, the park soccer/ball fields, International Parkway and I-1 zoning to the south, Snap-On Tools to the West (I-1), and warehouses across International Parkway to the north. Mr. McDonald reported that the plans, lease agreement, and staff reports on this application have been shared with the Director of Parks & Recreation and the chair of the Citizen Advisory Commission for comments and input. The petitioner's original location in 1991 was at the south end of the park near the fields and park building. At that time staff requested that the tower be moved north, away from the areas utilized by park users. The long-range park plan shows a future parking lot on the north end with two curb cuts. U.S. West will be providing one of the curb cuts, if the tower is approved. Mr. McDonald stated the plans are essentially the same as in 1991, with the following minor revisions: A. The original equipment building dimensions of 12' x 36' have been reduced to 12' x 24~. B. The original equipment building had a gravel type finish and the new building will have a brick finish. C. Tower is same height, 95 feet, with no support lines needed (grey finish). D. Chain link fence to be 7' in height, with no barbed wire or fence slats. E. Landscaping - same as 1991. F. Maintenance of area - U.S. West will hire a lawn service to maintain. G. Watershed District review/approval will again be required. Mr. McDonald pointed out that the Design & Review Committee met with the applicant on August 18th and the issues discussed included: equipment building size and color, height and color of tower, fencing, lighting, landscaping, maintenance, snow storage, lease agreement, and watershed review. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meeting which include the following: A. Snow storage area shown south of the entrance drive. B. Seven-foot chain link fence to surround tower (no barbed wire). C. Ninety-foot steel monopole with grey finish. D. Equipment building size has been corrected 12' x 24', with detail shown. E. Landscaping to include following: 11 American Alders, 4 Black Hills Spruce, 3 Amur Maples, sod to be installed within 6' of building and gravel area, provide 5,000 square feet of sod to be located by City, six inch gravel area to include weed barrier landscape fabric. F. Light on building is shown Mr. McDonald noted the City Engineer reviewed the proposed plans and made the following comments: 1. It does not appear that the survey prepared by E.G. Rud & Sons, Inc. in December, 1991, compares with the New Hope Planning Commission - 11 - September 6, 1994 site plan prepared by Design I dated August 16, 1994. It is recommended the survey and site plan agree with each other. Based on survey, it appears building and tower are on slope. A detailed grading plan is required. The high water level (HWL) for the pond is estimated at 890.2. Therefore, all grading and fil~ing must be above 890. The building should be a minimum 2' above the HWL. 2. The plan should be reviewed for conformance by Shingle Creek Watershed because it directly abuts a wetland. A delineation of the adjacent wetland is required to insure no encroachment in accordance with the Wetland Conservation Act. 3. Due to the soil types in this area, the tower and building may warrant piling. 4. The drive may be used by people using Victory Park. Proper signage may be required to restrict use of the drive to U.S. West employees only. 5. The curb cut at International Parkway should comply with New Hope Public Works. 6. The future parking for Victory Park is properly noted if constructed. A condition for approval should allow for future ingress and egress from the parking area through U.S. West's entrance and drive proposed as part of this project. 7. Erosion control must comply with City and County requirements. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for U.S. West for a 95' monopole transmission tower and equipment building at the north end of Victory Park subject to the conditions in the staff report. Mr. Bernie Wong, Director for U.S. West, came to the podium. Mr. Wong stated that U.S. West has no problems with any of the recommendations made by staff. Commissioner Cassen wanted confirmation that the 7' chain link fence would not have barbed wire on it, and this was confirmed by Mr. Wong. Commissioner Cassen questioned the lighting on the building. Mr. Wong answered that the light on the outside of the building is there in case someone would be there for emergency purposes at night, since in most instances a utility person would visit the site during the day. The light will not be left on all the time. There is no security light used at the sites because the doors are monitored 24 hours a day with another security system. Mr. McDonald stated that the Police Department reviewed this case and confirmed that the security/lighting system proposed is fine. Commissioner Cassen raised the question of whether the driveway would be blacktopped, and this was confirmed by Mr. Wong that the driveway would be blacktopped. Chairman Cameron questioned why this was not completed two years ago. Mr. Wong responded that there were other sites that needed to be finished first and by the time U.S. West was ready to begin construction at this site the conditional use permit had run out, Commissioner Cassen thanked the petitioner for bringing in the color pictures. MOTION Item 4.2 Motion by Commissioner Cassen, seconded by Commissioner Sonsin, to approve Planning Case 94-25, Request for Conditional Use Permit to Allow Construction of a 95' Cellular Telephone Antenna Tower and a 12' x 24' Equipment Building, 5700 International Parkway (Victory park), U.S. West NewVector Group, Inc., Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 1. Development Agreement and bond be required for all landscaping. New Hope Planning Commission -12- September 6, 1994 COMMITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Item 6.1 Codes & Standards Item 6.2 MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES 2. Approval of lease agreement and terms by City Council. 3. Maintenance agreement for the site between U.S. West and contractor be submitted to City. 4. Survey and/or site plan be revised to agree with each other, per City Engineer. 5. Detailed grading plan be submitted for review/approval by the City Engineer. 6. Plans to be reviewed by Shingle Creek Watershed for conformance to wetland regulations. A delineation of the adjacent wetland is required. 7. Evaluation of foundation area by soils engineer. 8. The curb cut at International Parkway shall comply with New Hope Public Works. 9. Erosion control must comply with City/County requirements. 10. Future ingress and egress from the parking area through U.S. West's entrance and drive is allowed by persons using Victory Park. 11. Driveway area to be of a bituminous surface. 12. Annual inspection by staff. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke None Zak This Planning Case will appear before the City Council on September 1 2th. No report. Commissioner Sonsin reported that Codes & Standards will be meeting on September 22nd and will be looking into four items, namely, front yard parking and outdoor storage in an I-1 District which is a carryover from last spring, furniture and appliance sales in an I-1 District which relates to A.C. Carlson and the impending move, and minimum area requirements for the keeping of animals and birds in an R-1 District. Chairman Cameron questioned if the towers are multiple uses on a single property. Mr. McDonald stated that the towers are generally considered accessory uses. This may be a topic for future study if the City receives more requests for towers. Commissioner Sonsin questioned Item #10 on Planning Case 94-25, U.S. West, stating "the Zoning Code does not clearly address a cellular tower and equipment building on City property regulated by the FCC. This is neither a 'Radio and TV Antenna Farm' nor a 'Cable TV Studio' (which are both I-1 permitted)." Commissioner Sonsin wondered if this is something that should be looked at in the future. Chairman Cameron suggested staff obtain information to how this is addressed in other cities. Mr. McDonald agreed that it would be easier if City Code had one section addressing these situations. Chairman Cameron questioned the monies used for City Hall Remodeling. Mr. McDonald stated that this is from old bond funds, such as old park bonds or swimming pool bonds, where all the money wasn't used. The remainder of the money was left in the bank to accumulate interest. These monies do not have to be used for the original purpose. New Hope Planning Commission - 13 - September 6, 1994 OLD BUSINESS Miscellaneous Issues NEW BUSINESS ANNOUNCEMENTS ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Gundershaug asked if A.C. Carlson bought another lot. Mr. McDonald stated that Mr. Carlson owns one lot on the corner and bought the westerly half of the Post property. No report. August 2, 1994, Planning Commission minutes unanimously approved. No questions or comments on other minutes. Commissioner Cassen questioned whether the Citizen's Advisory Commission is still visiting the parks and what has been reported about Dorothy Mary Park. This park is in very bad cOndition, with steps and the dock slanting, overgrown with brush around the steps, the paths need to be regraveled. Commissioner Cassen stated she has called to report this and nothing has been done. It seems that the improved parks that get the attention in summer are the ones with the ball fields. It seems that the only time any clean up is done is when a neighbor calls and complains. Mr. McDonald said that he will notify the Director of Parks & Recreation. Commissioner Watschke questioned if the City has an ordinance regarding property up-keep. There is a resident at 36th and Hillsboro that is not mowing regularly and keeping up with trimming of bushes. There was a pickup sitting in the grass for quite some time which has since been moved. Mr. McDonald reported that there is an ordinance which states vehicles must be parked on a hard surface and not on the lawn. There is also an ordinance regarding the length of grass, and after a certain height, the City can issue a notice for the resident to cut it or have the City cut the grass and send a bill for the work done. Commissioner Underdahl asked if the City trims right-of-way shrubs/trees that are blocking sight lines at intersections. Mr. McDonald stated that this should be the property owner's responsibility. Staff can follow up on this when Commissioner Underdahl provides an address. Commissioner Cassen suggested checking out 6000 Winnetka as there are 2 or 3 trailers and 3 or 4 vehicles that are not parked on an improved surface. The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 7:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester Recording Secretary New Hope Planning Commission - 14 - September 6, 1994 CiTY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 4, 1994 City Hall, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 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. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Landy, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke, Oelkers, Stulberg Underdahl, Gundershaug Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Sarah Bellefuil, Administrative Analyst, Valerie Leone, City Clerk OATH OF OFFICE City Clerk, Valerie Leone, administered the oath of office for the new Planning Commission members, Roger Landy, William Oelkers, and Richard Stulberg. Chairman Cameron congratulated and welcomed the three new Planning Commissioners. CONSENT ITEMS No Consent Items. PUBLIC HEARING PC 94-21 Item 4.1 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.1, Request for Final Plat Approval for City Center Addition, 7300 42nd Avenue North, City of New Hope, Petitioner. Ms. Bellefuil reported that this is a request by the City of New Hope for Final Plat approval of City Center Addition which is located at 7300 42nd Avenue North. The property included in the plat includes all or a portion of Lots 11 - 18, Auditor's Subdivision Number 324. The City acquired these properties in conjunction with the 42nd Avenue Street Reconstruction Project and the purpose of the plat is to consolidate all of the parcels into one lot. For the past several years the City has contracted to have gasoline-impacted soils on the east side of the property removed in conjunction with an approved clean-up plan from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The City is now in the process of seeking an "all-clear" letter from the PCA and is marketing the property through Thorpe Bros., and the sale of the property will be less complicated if it is platted as one parcel which is why the City brought the plat before the Commission. Ms. Bellefuil noted that the Preliminary Plat was approved by the Planning Commission and City Council on September 6th and 12th, respectively, subject to several conditions which were listed in the report. The following changes have been made to the plat since the Preliminary Plat was approved: 1. Adequate right-of-way along 42nd Avenue has been dedicated to provide a uniform width of 2' between the back of sidewalk and the right-of-way line. 2. A 20' wide.drainage and utility easement has been dedicated over the existing 36" RCP storm sewer crossing the middle of the site. New Hope Planning Commission - I - October 4, 1994 MOTION Item 4.1 3. A 5' wide drainage and utility easement has been dedicated along all lot lines and right-of-way lines. 4. The City has dedicated right-of-way for CSAH 9,. as was shown on the Preliminary Plat. 5. All access from the plat to CSAH 9 is via City streets. 6. The illustration of the plat has been changed so that the underlying fee title to all of the lots is included with the outer boundary of the plat. 7. The cul-de~sac diameter of Nevada Avenue North has been decreased on the south side form 60' to 54' to increase the lot area. Ms. Bellefuil noted that the City Engineer reviewed the Final Plat and commented that all conditions have been properly addressed and noted on the Final Plat. At the time of development, storm water drainage and utility service will need to be reviewed further. Ms. Bellefuil also noted that the City Attorney reviewed the Final Plat and commented that the designations for Lot 1, Block 1, need to be in solid highlighted letters. Also; the legal descriptions and plat illustration accurately reflect the information provided by City Attorney to the surveyor. Title evidence was reviewed and it was discovered that with respect to the West 1/2 of Lot 16 and all of Lot 17, the City actually owns the underlying fee title to the South 7 feet of the property by way of a Quit Claim Deed filed in 1967. The fee is subject to the existing roadway easement. The easiest way to clear this up will be for the City to deed its interest in the property to the HRA prior to filing of the plat. City Attorney to draft the necessary resolution and deed. The plat of City Center Addition can accordingly proceed without change. Ms. Bellefuil added that Hennepin County and the Building Official reviewed the Final Plat and had no additional comments. Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat of City Center Addition, subject to the recommendations by the City Attorney. Chairman Cameron noted that this plat was reviewed at the September meeting and asked for a motion from the Commission. Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Landy, to approve Planning Case 94-21, Request for Final Plat Approval for City Center Addition, 7300 42nd Avenue North, City of New Hope, Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: The designations for Lot 1, Block 1, be in solid highlighted letters. The City to deed its interest in the property (the West 1/2 of Lot 16 and all of Lot 17) to the HRA prior to filing of the plat with City Attorney to draft the necessary resolution and deed. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Landy, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke, Oelkers, Stulberg None Underdahl, Gundershaug This Planning Case will appear before the City Council on October 10, 1994. New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - October 4, 1994 PC 94-22 Item 4.2 MOTION Item 4.2 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Request for Final Plat Approval for Cameron Addition, 6073 Louisiana Avenue North, City of New Hope, Petitioner. Ms. Bellefuil stated that the City of New Hope is requesting Preliminary Plat approval of Cameron Addition. The purpose of the plat is to create a new buildable parcel for the City's scattered site housing program. The City acquired the vacant HUD house at 7109 62nd Avenue in 1993. This house is currently being rehabilitated with MHFA and CDBG funds for resale to first-time homebuyers. In the fall of 1993, the City approved the preliminary plat for the Carol James Addition, as the property owner at 7105 62nd Avenue (adjacent to 7109 62nd Avenue) desired to subdivide his property and sell off the back portion. This spring the City purchased the rear portion of the property after the Final Plat was approved. The purpose of this plat is to split off the rear portion of the 7109 62nd Avenue parcel and combine it with the rear portion of the 7105 62nd Avenue parcel to create one new buildable lot which would have access off of Louisiana Avenue. Ms. Bellefuil noted that the Preliminary Plat was approved by the Planning Commission and City Council on September 6th and 12th, respectively, subject to a number of conditions which are listed in the report. Ms. Bellefuil stated that the City Engineer reviewed the Final Plat and commented that utility service and storm sewer must be extended in Louisiana Avenue to properly serve Lot 1 when it develops. Ms. Bellefuil noted that the City Attorney reviewed the Final Plat and commented that the beginning and ending marks for the measurement of 275.61 feet along the centerline of the Osseo Road need to be placed on the plat illustration. The distance of 644.5 feet, as well as its beginning and ending points, needs to be placed on the plat illustration. This measurement begins at the intersection of the centerlines of Louisiana Avenue North and 62nd Avenue North and then proceeds to the east. The plat drawing appears in order, but the distance label itself and the beginning and end points needs to be added. The vacation of the utility easement located across the middle of the proposed Lot 2, Cameron Addition, has been commenced and will likely be concluded at the end of the public hearing scheduled for October 10th. The plat correctly omits this easement. The City Council has previously authorized transfer of the "7109" property from the City to the EDA. The plat correctly lists the EDA as the owner of all the land to be platted as Cameron Addition. City Attorney to prepare a deed running from the City to the EDA which will be filed just prior to the filing of the plat. Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat of Cameron Addition, subject to the conditions outlined by the City Attorney. Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Zak, to approve Planning Case 94-22, Request for Final Plat Approval for Cameron Addition, 6073 Louisiana Avenue, City of New Hope, Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 1. Vacation of utility easement in the middle of Lot 2. 2. Minor corrections to the Final Plat measurements/distances to be made, as noted by City Attorney. New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - October 4, 1994 Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Landy, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke, Oelkers, Stulberg None Underdahl, Gundershaug This Planning Case will appear before the City Council on October lOth, 1994. PC 94-27 Item 4.3 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.3 Request for Site/Building Plan Review Approval for construction of a 2,718 square foot office/warehouse/machine space addition and additional parking spaces, 9100 49th Avenue North, Englund Graphics, Inc., Petitioner. Mr. McDonald stated that the petitioner is requesting Site/Building Plan Review Approval for construction of a 2,718 square foot office/ warehouse/machine space addition along with additional parking spaces. Englund Graphics is proposing to construct the addition on the west side of their existing 14,550 square foot building, which would bring the total building size to 17,268 square feet. In addition, 22 parking spaces would be added to the site. The petitioner stated on their application that the building addition and added parking spaces are needed to accommodate company expansion. Mr. McDonald explained that the property is located in an I-1 Limited Industrial Zoning District and is surrounded by I-1 properties on the north (wetland), east (wetland), and west (vacant lot). The property south of the site, across 49th Avenue, is zoned R-l, single family homes. The Comprehensive Plan stresses the need for compatible businesses or industrial uses in this area (Planning District //9), with emphasis on buffering the residential area south of 49th Avenue. The original Englund Graphics building was constructed in 1984, with one addition being constructed in 1987 and this being the second addition. Mr. McDonald informed the Commission that staff considers this a routine site and building plan review request, as no variances are required and all setback requirements and other standards are met. Staff does not find that any problems are introduced with this addition, because the business has little trucking and no odors or noise, making it a good match to the residential area across the street. Mr. McDonald explained that the area of the site 2.2 acres, existing parking is 51 cars with additional parking being 22, which bring the total to 73 and this is in compliance with the code. The green area is always considered in the I-1 District with 20% being the City's requirement. The existing green area on the property is 51% of the lot and with the new addition and parking the green area will be reduced to 46%. Mr. McDonald added that the Design & Review Committee met with the petitioner on September 15th and issues discussed included: building materials and height of addition, number of shifts/employees, the need for additional parking, landscaping schedule (needed), truck deliveries, refuse storage, roof-top equipment, building and parking lot lighting and signage. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meeting. Mr. McDonald explained the plan details which included a landscape schedule showing the existing plantings of 43 trees and the petitioner is New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - October 4, 1994 proposing 11 new trees (10 Colorado Blue Spruce and 1 Red Maple). The plans also showed that new striping in parking areas and paving at the south parking area near 49th Avenue. Building addition to have facia to match existing building, top portion of building to be painted break-off concrete block to match existing building, lower portion to be single score concrete block to match existing; windows to be insulated glass in anodized aluminum frames. The revised site plans show inside trash storage in existing building. The petitioner stated that the number of employees has grown to 50 working on two shifts. Mr. McDonald noted the Building Official has recommended that two additional coniferous trees be added between the south parking expansion and 49th Avenue to provide more screening to the residential area on the south. Due to the proximity to the wetlands the Watershed District should review the plans. Mr. McDonald stated that staff recommends approval of the site and building plan review for the requested expansion of Englund Graphics subject to the recommendations of the Building Official and City Engineer. Chairman Cameron called upon the petitioner to answer questions. Mr. Edward Englund, President of Englund Graphics came to the podium. Commissioner Watschke questioned the transplanting of trees on the property. Mr. Englund answered that the trees are now in what will be the new parking area and will be transplanted to the south and west sides of the building. These are mature Blue Spruce about 12' in height. Mr. Englund also confirmed that there is no outside storage. Commissioner Watschke asked if there would be additional rooftop equipment and Mr. Englund stated there would be more equipment and it would be painted. Commissioner Watschke asked for confirmation that the new parking area meets code and Mr. McDonald stated that the parking stalls do meet the size requirements. Commissioner Watschke inquired of staff if it is necessary to plant two additional trees on the south side of the building besides what is being transplanted. Mr. McDonald stated that this was just a recommendation. Commissioner Watschke also asked if the Watershed has looked at these plans yet. Mr. Englund stated that Doug Sandstad was going to look into this with the Watershed. There is a minimal amount of parking being added that there should not be a problem. Commissioner Sonsin questioned if there would be any signage changes with this expansion. Mr. Englund stated that at this time there is no signage. After ten years the company may put a sign out in front which would be within City code. The proposal is for a sign about 20" x 30". Commissioner Sonsin reminded the petitioner to go through the building people to be sure it conforms to code. MOTION Commissioner Cassen stated that when driving past during the week there was a tractor-trailer in the parking lot and if it is common to have these in the parking lot. Mr. Englund stated that there is never any trucks parked in the lot unless waiting to get up to the dock. There are only delivery trucks that come to the site. Sometimes a driver will stop for a time before or after making a delivery to do some paperwork. Motion by Commissioner Watschke, seconded by Commissioner Sonsin, New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - October 4, 1994 Item 4.3 to approve Planning Case 94-27, Request for Site/Building Plan Review Approval for construction of a 2,719 square foot office/warehouse/ machine space addition and additional parking spaces, 9100 49th Avenue North, Englund Graphics, Inc., Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 1. City Engineer to review drainage issues and Watershed District, if necessary. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Landy, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke, Oelkers, Stulberg None Underdahl, Gundershaug This Planning Case will appear before the City Council on October lOth, 1994. PC 94-28 Item 4.4 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.4 Request for a 6' Variance to the Rear Yard Setback Requirement to Allow Construction of a 20' x 20' Garage Addition 29' from the Rear Yard Property Line, 4052 Cavell Avenue North, Robert Funk, Petitioner. Mr. McDonald reported that the petitioner is requesting a 6 foot variance to the rear yard setback requirement to allow construction of a 20' x 20' garage addition 29 feet from the rear yard property line. The petitioner is proposing to construct the 400 square foot garage addition on the rear (east) side of the existing garage. It would be an extension of the existing garage, which is attached to the home, with the driveway off Cavell Avenue. Mr. McDonald added that the garage addition would be located 20 feet from the corner side yard property line, similar to the existing garage, and meets the side yard setback requirements. The proposed addition would be located 29 feet from the rear yard property line and the rear yard setback requirement in the R-1 Zoning District is 35 feet, therefore, a 6 foot variance from the 35 foot rear yard setback requirement is needed. Mr. McDonald commented that the petitioner stated on the application that the addition is needed to keep boats and cars inside so that they are not left outdoors. Mr. McDonald stated the property is located at the northeast intersection of 40 1/2 Avenue North and Cavell Avenue, is surrounded by R-1 single family homes on the north/east/south/west. The topography of the property is nearly flat, but slopes downward toward the rear property line. Mr. McDonald pointed out that property owners within 350' of the request have been notified. Staff have received inquiries from neighbors who have concerns about the addition and possibly the impact of their views to the north. Mr. McDonald explained that the purpose of a variance is to permit relief from strict application of the zoning code where undue hardships prevent reasonable use of property and where circumstances are unique to the property. A hardship may exist by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of property or because of exceptional topographic or water New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - October 4, 1994 conditions. If the variance is granted, it should not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or unreasonably diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship. Other criteria to be taken into consideration was outlined in the planning report. Mr. McDonald reported the plans show that the garage addition will have lap siding to match the existing structure and asphalt shingles to match existing. The addition will have one window on the south side to match the south window of the existing garage, with a service door to the north. No overhead door will be located on the rear (east) wall. Mr. McDonald stated that the 6 foot variance is only a 16 percent reduction from the required setback. Many precedents exist for rear yard R-1 variances under 20 percent. The major concerns of the residents who inquired about the request had to do with their site line/views out the front of their homes to the north. The petitioner resides on a corner lot and the garage abuts the north side of 40 1/2 Avenue North. The fronts of the homes located on the south side of 40 1/2 Avenue directly face the garage and the proposed addition. The Commission will need to determine if the criteria for the granting of a variance are met in this situation or not. While the comments from neighbors should be taken into consideration, the degree of the variance should also be considered. While it could probably be argued that this is not a unique parcel, the petitioner could build a 14 foot addition without a variance. Mr. Robert Funk approached the podium to answer questions from the Commissioners. Commissioner Zak questioned the petitioner about where the boat and other items are currently being stored. Mr. Funk answered that the boat and car is in the garage now. Mr. Funk stated that he is paying for storage for another vehicle. The petitioner stated he bought the house in June and there is a trailer that is being stored outside. Inside storage is preferred to prevent theft and deterioration. Commissioner Zak wanted confirmation that there will be a service door on the north and no other doors. Mr. Funk remarked that the garage will be a drive through from the existing driveway two cars deep. Mr. Funk stated that there will be no removal of trees. The apple tree in the back yard will be about 10' - 15' away from the garage addition. Additional plantings were put in this fall. Commissioner Zak inquired if the siding and roofing materials will match the existing on the house. Mr. Funk stated that the siding and shingles will match. Chairman Cameron asked the petitioner what is the purpose of this 400 square foot addition. Mr. Funk replied that the purpose is to store vehicles and miscellaneous personal items (Ford Explorer, 20' boat, snowmobile trailer, and car) inside at the residence. The 20' length request for the addition is to accommodate the items to be stored. Chairman Cameron asked if anyone in the audience wanted to make a statement regarding this planning case. Mr. Lee Wilson, 8701 40 1/2 Avenue North, approached the podium and stated his opposition to this addition because the front window of his home faces this direction and the addition will obscure the view. Mr. Wilson stated that he also has to store personal items elsewhere and that New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - October 4, 1994 the garage will be extremely large in proportion to the house. Mr. Wilson is also worried about the aesthetics of this addition and the affect on the property value of his home. A compromise could be accomplished by adding a third stall to the side of the garage which would not need a variance or only add on 15' instead of the full 20'. Mrs. Wilson questioned the elevation in the back yard and how many rows of cement block would show above ground on the side of the garage. Mr. Funk stated that the back yard drops 8" in 20' so only one additional block in the rear would show above ground and one block on the side. Chairman Cameron asked if there would be additional shrubbery on the long side of the garage. Mr. Funk stated that there is already one tree on that side of the garage, there will be additional shrubbery planted, and there will be black shutters on each side of the windows to make this wall appear as part of the house and not just a long, expansive wall. Mr. Bill Palm, 8709 40 1/2 Avenue North, has the same concerns as Mr. Wilson with regard to the view out the front window of a very large garage. The Palms have lived at this address for 25 years. Mr. Palm felt that if there are so many items to store, Mr. Funk should have purchased someplace with a larger garage. This large addition will change the shape of the house and will not look like a natural part of the house. Mrs. Palm commented that there are garbage cans stored outside, and there has been other items left outside and the weeds have not been attended to. Mrs. Palm is also concerned with the obstructed view from their front window with the large garage addition. Possibly a smaller, scaled down size garage would be more appropriate for the neighborhood. Concern was also expressed regarding a change in value of homes in the area. Commissioner Oelkers questioned if there is an ordinance concerning the percentage of garage to house size. Chairman Cameron stated, and Mr. McDonald agreed, that there is an ordinance that pertains to detached garages but nothing dealing with attached garages. Commissioner Oelkers asked if the setbacks in the front and side yards have been met and it was confirmed that these setbacks are fine. MOTION Item 4.4 Motion by Commissioner Zak, seconded by Commissioner Sonsin, to approve Planning Case 94-28 Request for a 6' Variance to the Rear Yard Setback Requirement to Allow Construction of a 20' x 20' Garage Addition 29' from the Rear Yard Property Line, 4052 Cavell Avenue North, Robert Funk, Petitioner, subject to the following condition: 1. Addition building materials to match existing structure. 2. Shrubs be installed along south side of garage/addition and shutters be installed on south windows so that addition blends with house. Mr. Funk added that the plans are to build the garage next spring and later next summer will do more landscaping, put in a new sidewalk in front, add new bushes in front. The interior redecorating has been ongoing since moving into the home in June. Voting in favor: Voting against: Landy, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke, Oelkers, Stulberg None New Hope Planning Commission - 8 - October 4, 1994 Absent: Underdahl, Gundershaug Motion carried. This Planning Case will appear before the City Council on October lOth, 1994. PC 94-29 Item 4.5 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.5 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Commercial Recreation' Facility (Billiard Room) at Midland Shopping Center, 2703 Winnetka Avenue North, Dave Dahl/Gregg Kegley/Engelsma Investment Limited Partnership, Petitioners. Mr. McDonald reported that the petitioners are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow a commercial recreation facility (billiard room) at Midland Shopping Center. The petitioners are requesting to allow the conditional use of a billiard room in an 8,800 square foot leased space at Midland Shopping Center in the area adjacent to and just north of Cinema 'N' Drafthouse. The petitioner has revised their initial request from a 24- hour operation to 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m. Mr. McDonald informed the Commission that in addition to the rental of billiard tables, other services to be offered include: Retail: Purchase of billiard accessories; Pro Shop: Customers can have tips cleaned or re- tipped; Convenience Food: Frozen pizza, chips, pretzels, candy bars, fruit juices, and soda; and Video Machines: Dart machines, video games, and juke box while customers wait for a table. Mr. McDonald reported the proposed billiard entertainment facility will contain 29 tables (two different sizes) and focus on leagues and tournaments. A detailed list of house rules were provided and state that anyone under the age of 15 must be accompanied by an adult. No alcohol is allowed on the premises. Mr. McDonald stated that the petitioner feels that the granting of this request will enhance the business activity and customer traffic within the area increasing the marketability of surrounding retail leasable space. Kraus-Anderson Realty, owner of Midland Center, stated in a letter that a business of this nature would be complementary to the existing theater and serve as an additional traffic draw to the center, creating a more stable economic environment for the other tenants. The petitioner submitted detailed information regarding billiard operations which was included in the report. Mr. McDonald stated this property is zoned as B-4, Community Business, Zoning District. Surrounding land uses and zoning include R-2 duplexes to the north; Residential/Office, B-1 and B-3, Business/Auto and R-4 (apartments) zoning to the east across Winnetka Avenue; R-O zoning (Ambassador Nursing Home) to the west; and Golden Valley/residential across Medicine Lake Road to the south. The shopping center use was approved as a PUD and parking was based on a variety of tenant uses. The center has 250 spaces available and staff finds that this is adequate. Mr. McDonald reported that property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff have received no comments from neighbors, however, the Police Department has expressed concerns about the use and proposed hours. Mr. McDonald pointed'out the City Code defines "commercial recreation" New Hope Planning Commission - 9 - October 4, 1994 as a "bowling alley, golf, pool hall, etc." therefore staff has categorized this request as a commercial recreational use. Those types of facilities are allowed in the B-4 Zoning District as a conditional use provided that specific conditions are met. The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to provide the City with a reasonable and legally permissible degree of discretion in determining suitability of certain designated uses. In making this determination, whether or not the conditional use is to be allowed, the City may consider the nature of adjoining land or buildings, whether or not a similar use is already in existence and located on the same premises or on other lands close by, the effect upon traffic into and from the premises, or on any adjoining roads, and all such other or further factors as the City shall deem a requisite for consideration in determining the effect of such use on the general welfare, public health, and safety. Other general criteria to be considered when determining whether to approve or deny a conditional use permit include whether the proposed use is compatible with its adjacent land uses and if the proposed use will depreciate the value of the area in which it is proposed. Also under the business criteria, the Code states that existing businesses nearby should not be adversely affected because of curtailment of customer trade brought about by intrusion of unduly heavy non-shopping traffic or general unsightliness. Mr. McDonald stated that in addition to the above listed general CUP criteria, the specific criteria for a commercial recreational facility in a B-4 Zoning District are: Access to an arterial streets; proximity to residential; architectural compatibility, which is not an issue here because the shopping center is already at this location and this is not a new building. Mr. McDonald remarked that the Design & Review Committee met with the petitioner on September 15th. The majority of the discussion focused on hours of operation, but other issues discussed included: interior layout of facility, food/beverage service, signage which would have to comply with the shopping center's Comprehensive Sign Plan, trash receptacles/ dumpsters, house rules, concerns about loitering, number of employees and shopping center fire sprinkler system. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meeting which show emergency exits, front sidewalk trash containers, location of new dumpster enclosure at rear of building, table rental/refreshment counter, and video game area. Mr. McDonald commented that the Police Department prepared a report describing past and present billiard operations in the New Hope area and is concerned about the 4:00 a.m. revised closing schedule and feels that the closing time should be more compatible with other New Hope recreation facilities, which close between 10:00 p.m. and 1:00 a.m. Mr. McDonald commented that the Design & Review Committee requested staff to check the closing times of other New Hope recreation facilities, such as New Hope Bowl, U.S. Swim & Fitness and Cinema 'N' Drafthouse, and this was included in the planning report. While the Zoning Code does not state specific closing hours for billiard rooms, the City Attorney has prepared an opinion regarding whether the City can regulate the hours of operation for a pool hall located in the B-4 Zoning District. The Attorney states that the City does have the authority to regulate the hours of operation based on State Statute and based on the CUP general requirements criteria. Based on the concerns of the Police Department, the opinion of the City Attorney and the survey of hours of existing commercial recreational facilities, staff is recommending the following closing hours for this facility: Monday - Friday 12:00 a.m. and Saturday - Sunday 1:00 a.m. New Hope Planning Commission - 10 - October 4, 1994 Mr. McDonald informed the Commission that the petitioners submitted a narrative regarding concerns raised at the Design & Review meeting including loitering, littering, noisy gatherings, outside trash containers, curfew for underage people with identification checks being made after 10:00 p.m., people under 15 must be accompanied by an adult, permission was given by the owners of Midland Center to control the loitering in the parking lot. There was also an explanation of who the petitioner felt the customers would be during the late night hours. Chairman Cameron asked for the petitioners to approach the podium to answer questions from the Commission. Mr. Dave Dahl and Mr. Gregg Kegley came forward. Chairman Cameron stated that since this is a new type of operation and wanted to know why such a large number of starting rules are needed, who are the intended clients, why a 4:00 a.m. closing time is necessary, and what the operating procedure will be. Mr. Dahl passed out for the Commission a schedule of hours and who the clients would be during the day and evening hours. Mr. Dahl stated that he has talked to several officers in the Police Department and others in the community about the billiard room. A large percentage of the New Hope population is seniors who were once active in this sport. The target time for early morning and afternoon play would be for seniors. The billiard room would have to cater to everyone interested in playing this sport and not just one specific group of people. Chairman Cameron wondered if the petitioners were ever in this business before and was informed that they have not been in the ownership business before but have been involved in billiards for the past 15-20 years. Commissioner Cassen questioned the hours of operation, loitering, littering, noise. The house rules are appreciated and the promise to keep checking on the parking lot. Commissioner Cassen asked how the house rules will be enforced. Mr. Kegley, full-time, and Mr. Dahl, part-time, will be the on- site managers especially during the first year and will be in charge of enforcing the rules. There will be other employees to help out. Chief Kastanos was contacted regarding enforcing the rules. Kraus-Anderson was contacted and have given permission to control the loitering in the parking lot. Chief Kastanos informed Mr. Dahl that calls to the Police Department are encouraged if there is trouble outside. Mr. Dahl does not believe there will be trouble inside because of the house rules. For the success of the business, the house rules will have to be enforced. Commissioner Cassen questioned when peak times will be and who the customers would be at those times. Mr. Dahl responded that probably Friday and Saturday evenings would be peak times with all tables full from 8:00 p.m. to closing with a maximum crowd of about 70 people. Commissioner Stulberg raised the issue of reservations for tables or will people get tables on a first come first served basis so people will be waiting for tables in the parking lot or somewhere else. Mr. Dahl answered that names can be taken upon arrival and put on a list, and this is the reason for the video games, dart machines, etc. Commissioner Stulberg also wanted clarification on the capacity for handling the extra people waiting to get on the tables and what type of structure is there on table time or how quickly will the tables be turned over to those waiting. New Hope Planning Commission - 11 - October 4, 1994 Mr. Dahl stated that at this time there is not a rule that says a customer can only play for an hour at a time and then leave. The feeling is that most people will not wait for a pool table if there ire even a few others waiting. Commissioner Cassen raised the issue of taking care of the tables, retail, pro shop, food, etc. with only the three employees that were mentioned at Design & Review and also control the loitering. Mr. Dahl stated that at the beginning there will be three employees and as need arises more employees will be added. Mr. Dahl feels that is problems are dealt with strictly and efficiently from the beginning there will not be as many problems down the road. Commissioner Cassen also questioned what the trash enclosure/receptacles will be like. Mr. Dahl brought pictures of the existing trash receptacles which are made of metal. Design & Review advised Mr. Dahl to look at the receptacles at the shopping center at 36th & Winnetka and the receptacles there are made of plastic. It is not known at this time if Kraus-Anderson supplied the trash receptacles at Midland Center, but Mr. Dahl stated that receptacles can be purchased to match existing and to be sure the receptacles are big enough and heavy enough so as not to get moved or tipped over. Mr. Dahl informed the Commission that Kraus-Anderson told him that the 1995 budget includes lighting, trash dumpsters, and automatic fire sprinklers. Mr. Dahl indicated that the City would receive something in writing regarding these items. The trash dumpsters in the back are now enclosed, however Kraus-Anderson has stated they would build something bigger so a number of dumpsters can be put in the same enclosure. Chairman Cameron questioned when this would be done. Mr. Dahl stated that Kraus-Anderson would submit something to the City regarding this. Mr. Dahl stated that his business should not be contingent on what Kraus- Anderson's plans are for the Midland Center and the time line being used for cleaning it up. Chairman Cameron remarked that a business would not be held up because of the trash enclosure but that the fire sprinklers were very important. Mr. Dahl replied that the sprinklers in the section of the building to be used by the pool hall would be completed before moving in. Chairman Cameron informed the petitioner to let Kraus-Anderson know that a letter should be sent to Mr. McDonald at the City stating when the previous items would be taken care of. Commissioner Cassen wondered how the petitioner felt about the recommendations by staff of hours. Mr. Dahl replied that Friday should be considered a weekend night and Sunday a weekday night as far as closing and would request that Friday and Saturday would be the later closing times. The petitioner doesn't believe the business can survive closing at midnight. Commissioner Cassen questioned whether there would be any additional signage. Mr. Dahl stated that the business name would be on the signboard at the shopping center. At this time there are no plans to put a sign on the building. Commissioner Cassen reminded the petitioner that there is a sign ordinance and to contact City staff before putting up any type of sign. Commissioner Landy questioned if the petitioner has a business plan or has done any financial projections and was informed that the petitioners have done this. Commissioner Landy stated that no alcohol in the establish- ment is positive and questioned if there would be no smoking as well or if there will be smoking and no smoking areas inside. Mr. Dahl stated that it is too difficult to section off an area with only 8,000 square feet to New Hope Planning Commission - 12 - October 4, 1994 make a no smoking area, 'rhere will be new heating and HVAC going in all the spaces. There are four old bays which will become one and there will be five units to handle this space. Southerrand Engineering has confirmed that the heating, air conditioning and fresh air proposed for this space is sufficient. Since youths under 18 are not allowed to buy cigarettes, there should not be a problem with that age group smoking, however trying to stop adults from smoking probably will not happen. Possibly there could be a small separate area set aside for smoking. Commissioner Landy questioned the staff if there are any ordinances about the parking lot lights staying on until 4:00 a.m. and was informed that the only requirement is that the light does not spill over into the residential areas. Commissioner Landy questioned if a lease has been signed with Kraus-Anderson at this time. Mr. Dahl stated that negotiations have taken place but no lease has been signed yet. Commissioner Landy stated his fear at this point is that the pool hall would become a hangout for high school kids, gangs and other trouble will develop making this shopping center an unsafe area making other tenants move out. Will there be a clause in the lease that Kraus-Anderson can evict the pool hall in case there is a lot of trouble that is a direct result of the pool hall. Mr. Dahl stated that Officer Anderson talked to the Police Departments of other cities with pool halls that closed mainly because of poor management and not enforcing rules. Mr. Dahl stated that the lease being negotiated is for five years with a five year option and the petitioner does not want to sign a lease before the CUP is approved or if the CUP can be taken away after a year or two. Mr. Dahl feels that the annual review by staff is good. Mr. Dahl questioned one of the conditions in the report which stated that there should be no significant increase in the number of Police calls to Midland Center. Mr. Dahl stated that there are Police calls to the center now and his business is not open and the petitioner wonders what the City considers a significant increase in calls. Commissioner Landy wanted confirmation that Mr. Dahl could leave his full-time employment, if needed at the pool hall for a short time, and it was confirmed that the petitioner could do this. Commissioner Oelkers remarked that the back yard of the shopping center is rather shabby, with the green space not mowed, and trash all over the hill behind the bui'lding. Mr. McDonald stated that is one thing that Kraus- Anderson will need to address when contacting the City. Commissioner Oelkers also questioned why being open until 4:00 a.m. is important when league or tournament play is over long before that time. Mr. Dahl answered that leagues begin after dinner and not all tournaments are over at midnight. Most of the players involved in leagues or tournaments will stay and play after the regular league play or tournament is finished. Mr. Kegley interjected that in league play three - five games doesn't sound like much but this does take time. Commissioner Cassen asked what the timeline is for opening. Mr. Dahl answered that 60 - 90 days of work needs to be finished in the space before opening could take place, including HVAC, sprinklers, plumbing, carpet, electrical, etc., and that starts after approval of the CUP. The ideal situation would be to be open by Christmas break or the first of the year. The tables have been ordered at a cost of about $4,000 each. The manufacturer has 40 tables available now, but will not be ordered until after the Council meeting. Chairman Cameron asked if an operation this size could succeed without alcohol. Mr. Dahl confirmed that it could. The petitioner prepared a list New Hope Planning Commission - 13 - October 4, 1994 of 12 pool halls in the cities, with only one serving alcohol and who closes at 1:00 a.m. The average closing time is later than 1:00 a.m. Chairman Cameron questioned staff how Kraus-Anderson can be dealt with. Mr. McDonald stated that possibly this planning case could be approved subject to a written commitment from Kraus-Anderson. Chairman Cameron suggested that the petitioner contact Kraus-Anderson and inform them that the City is holding up this operation pending some commitments from the Kraus-Anderson and for them to call Mr. McDonald this week. Commissioner Landy noted that there still are a lot of questions that need to be answered by Kraus-Anderson. Mr. Dahl felt that his business would be hurt more by a delay in the granting of the CUP than Kraus-Anderson since the space has been vacant for several years. Chairman Cameron asked if there was anyone in the audience that wished to address the Commission regarding the pool hall, and being that there was none, the discussion came back to the Commission. MOTION Item 4.5 Chairman Cameron informed the petitioner that he would not vote for any hours beyond midnight and 1:00 a.m. and questioned how this will affect the operation. Mr. Dahl stated that, with the hours as stated in the report, most of the clientele would be kids because 18 year olds can stay out until midnight and then the adults need to leave also. Mr. Dahl feels it will be harder to succeed with the earlier closing time. Another point from Mr. Dahl was that if alcohol was served the closing time would automatically be 1:00 a.m., but the petitioner stated alcohol was not wanted. The number of problems a business has is determined by how successfully it is run. Mr. Dahl suggested that later hours would be granted at first and if this does not work out, then closing could be earlier. Chairman Cameron stressed that it was the desire of the City to have activity shut down and people off the street by midnight or 1:00 a.m. Mr. Dahl still questioned why the bowling alley has a 1:00 a.m. closing time or some other eating establishments can close at 2:00 a.m. Commissioner Sonsin stated that possibly some bending of the hours could be done but not until 4:00 a.m. First, because in the case of U.S. Swim & Fitness who did not have any business at the late night hours. The people who the petitioner wants to cater to until 4:00 a.m. were the same people U.S. Swim & Fitness wanted but do not exist in New Hope, at least not in enough numbers that would justify staying open. Second, this is a strip mall in a residential neighborhood, and if there are noise problems it will spill over to the residential area and there will be complaints from the residents. Third, another item to consider is the police report identifying problems with late night pool halls and, therefore, going beyond 1:00 a.m. is hard to consider. Motion by Commissioner Cassen, seconded by Commissioner Watschke, to approve Planning Case 94-29 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Commercial Recreation Facility (Billiard Room) at Midland Shopping Center, 2703 Winnetka Avenue North, Dave Dahl/Gregg Kegley/Engelsma Investment Limited Partnership, Petitioners, subject to the following conditions: 1. Hours of operation limited to 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. so that hours of operation are compatible with other New Hope businesses. New Hope Planning Commission - 14 - October 4, 1994 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Obtain appropriate business license from City Clerk with approval by City Council. Annual review by City staff. No significant incidence of Police Department calls to the business or Midland Center. Two heavy, secured trash receptacles installed on sidewalk near front entry, design to be consistent with others in shopping center. All signage to comply with Midland Center Comprehensive Sign Plan. Property owner to provide written commitment to work with City to resolve the following issues: A. To re-evaluate parking lot lighting for phased improvement to shield lights from residential areas and street and submit plan to staff within six months. B. To evaluate assortment of trash dumpster screenings and submit plan to comply with City Code and screened trash dumpster to be installed in rear of property, per plan. C. To complete automatic fire sprinkler system in building, per previous order, within 6 to 12 month period. Commissioner Sonsin stated there still are some unanswered issues that should be answered before this goes to Council. Chairman Cameron noted that Council will have benefit of the Planning Commission's discussion and they can table it if further study is needed. Commissioner Sonsin feels that the hours of operation issue has not been resolved yet nor has the police report issue and some positive comments been resolved. Mr. Dahl stated that the Design & Review Committee was given the list of pool halls and staff indicated they may contact these establishments. Mr. McDonald confirmed that several establishments were contacted and the Police Department also conducted research. Chairman Cameron noted that there was a choice before the Commission to pass for fail the motion and this would still move on to the Council. Commissioner Sonsin expressed concern that there were still some planning issues open and should be resolved before this planning case moves on to the Council. Mr. Dahl wished to go before the City Council this month rather than to table this issue at the Planning Commission. Commissioner Oelkers pointed out that he called several pool halls and stated that they were open until 2 or 3:00 a.m. during the week. This should not be an issue since the entrances are away from the residential areas. Commissioner Sonsin stressed that if a problem arises this will be an issue because the noise will carry over into the residential areas. Voting in favor: Voting against: Abstain: Absent: Motion carried. Cameron, Cassen, Watschke, Oelkers, Stulberg Landy, Zak Sonsin Underdahl, Gundershaug This Planning Case will appear before the City Council on October 10th, 1994. COMMITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Item 6.1 Chairman Cameron explained to the new Commissioners that the Planning Commission has two committees. Design & Review, who deal with construction, reconstruction or any physical changes to a property, anything to do with design, and they meet about two weeks ahead of the New Hope Planning Commission - 15 - October 4, 1994 Commission meeting. Codes & Standards, deals with the ordinances and technicalities. At some point in the next couple months the new Commissioners will be appointed to one of the committees. Commissioner Landy expressed interest in the Codes & Standards Committee. Codes & Standards Item 6.2 Commissioner Sonsin gave a report on the September 15th meeting. The Committee discussed four topics and came to a conclusion on two with the remaining two topics to be carried over to the October 13th meeting. The first topic discussed was the I-1 Zone front yard parking. The Code currently prohibits employee parking in the front yard. This is not being enforced or observed and no one is complaining at this time. The Committee felt that as long as the rest of the Codes are being met, it doesn't really matter if employees park in the front yard or back yard if the business does not care. Chairman Cameron interjected that the thought behind this was to not put parking lots in the front of the buildings. Commissioner Sonsin stated that there are not parking lots in front of the buildings but there are some businesses that do allow employees to park along the front of the building. The Committee felt that the employee parking restriction should be eliminated. Commissioner Sonsin reported that a resident is raising pheasants in his back yard on the east side of the City with DNR permission and sponsorship. The Committee felt that in a residential area the raising of fowl and farm animals is not appropriate and will not recommend a change in the ordinance, however, the current language in the ordinance does need some modification to bring it up to date. The Committee is recommending that the resident cannot continue raising pheasants in his yard. Commissioner Sonsin stated that the furniture and appliance sales in the I-1 District (A.C. Carlson) is still being refined. A.C. Carlson has purchased some land in the I-1 District, at Highway 169 and Bass Lake Road, and their current retail sales could not be done on this property. The selections the Committee is considering are to modify a definition and allow retail sales as a permited use, allow it as a conditional use, make no change, or rezone the property to B-4 where retail sales are allowed. The Commissioners are considering rezoning if it can be justified based on a change in the usage. It is not a desire of the Committee to spot rezone nor is it a desire to open up I-1 to retail sales. More research is being done with existing properties. Commissioner Cassen questioned some of the businesses in this area, such as Sir Speedy and Custom Glass, and retail sales being performed and why these businesses are being allowed retail sales. Staff will do some research with the businesses along Bass Lake Road from Boone to Highway 169. The desire is to not allow any retail sales in the I-1 District anywhere in the City. Commissioner Sonsin also reported that the Committee is working on the issue of outdoor storage in the I-1 zone. Commissioner Sonsin stated that the Committee is willing to look into the hours of operation issue for a commercial recreation facility in the B-4 zone, if the Council so directs. There is nothing in the code now, according to the City Attorney, that specifies hours of operation for a B-4 commercial recreation facility. MISCELLANEOUS Commissioner Landy questioned if it was the position of the Planning New Hope Planning Commission - 16 - October 4, 1994 ISSUES OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT Commission to request Kraus-Anderson come before the Planning Commission or Citizen Advisory Commission to look into the issues discussed earlier in the meeting and find a resolution. Chairman Cameron stated that it is the position of the Planning Commission to wait for issues to come in. Commissioner Sonsin questioned what is happening with Cooper High School and what the new proposal is. Mr. McDonald reported that the proposal is for 47th Avenue to be a through street from Boone to Winnetka, a cul-de-sac on Zealand Avenue, lowering the stadium 10', moving the home bleachers back to the west side, and increasing the berm. The seating capacity will remain the same. Commissioner Cassen stated that when driving by Mister Ed's, formerly Bose Donuts, at night she noticed how dark the parking lot is and felt that it is a dangerous situation. There seems to be no outside lighting at all. September 6, 1994, Planning Commission minutes unanimously approved. No questions or comments on other minutes. The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary New Hope Planning Commission - 17 - October 4, 1994 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 1, 1994 City Hall, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 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. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Landy, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cameron, Cassen, Watschke, Oelkers, Stulberg Zak, Gundershaug Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Sarah Bellefuil, Administrative Analyst, Al Brixius, Planning Consultant CONSENT ITEMS No Consent Items. PUBLIC HEARING PC 94-16 Item 4.1 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.1, Request for Zoning Code Text Amendment Amending Regulations Governing Off-Street Parking Requirements in the I-1 Zoning District, City of New Hope, Petitioner. Mr. Al Brixius reported that this issue has been discussed a number of times by Codes & Standards. Currently the I-1 Zoning District has special performance standards that include a special provision under front yard parking which restricts that no parking in the front of a building within an I-1 District be used for vehicles of employees. Customer parking in the front of the building is allowed, therefore some front yard parking is permitted. The problem with this is that once the parking is established there is no real distinction between customer or employee parking or other related uses. Staff have looked at this from a land use perspective and with limited land resources, alternatives to the efficiency of land use arrangement have been discussed. Codes & Standards had two options: repeal of that provision and allowing parking in the front yard for open use or to limit the amount of parking in the front yard. After discussion by the Codes & Standards Committee, it was determined that the repeal of the ordinance was more practical and more easily enforced and as a result that is the recommendation of the Committee. Commissioner Sonsin reiterated that just one clause in the ordinance is being abandoned. The decision of who parks where should be the decision of the property owner as the Planning Commission should determine if the parking itself is legal. Chairman Cameron questioned what the intent of the clause was when written. Mr. Brixius answered that the intent was to limit the amount of impervious surface in the front of the building and to focus the attention away from the front and keep the yard space open. In reviewing the industrial sites, the majority do provide some front yard parking. The Planning Commission and Council have been effective in ensuring that the front yard appearance of these buildings are adequately landscaped and enhancing the appearance. The ordinance states that the front parking should not be used by employees, but Commissioner Sonsin pointed out that it should be up to the employer/property owner who parks in front of the buildings. MOTION Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Underdahl, New Hope Planning Commission - I - November 1, 1994 Item 4.1 ~' to approve Planning Case 94-16, Request for Zoning Code Text Amendment Amending Regulations Governing Off-Street Parking Requirements in the I-1 Zoning District and to Delete the Clause That Says Employees Cannot Park in Front of the Building, City of New Hope, Petitioner. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Landy, Underdahl, Sonsin, Watschke, Oelkers, Stulberg None Zak, Gundershaug Cameron, Cassen, This Planning Case will appear before the City .Council on November 14, 1994. PC 94-30 Item 4.2 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Request for Site/Building Plan Review/Approval to Allow Construction of a 40,000 Square Foot Office/Warehouse (Paper Transfer) Facility and a Conditional Use Permit to Allow Outside Storage (20 Semi-Trailers), 7300 49th Avenue North, Hoyt Development, Petitioner. Mr. McDonald informed the Commission that staff is recommending this matter be tabled and have so notified the petitioner. Revised plans and detailed traffic data have not been submitted. The petitioner has been invited to come back to the Design & Review Committee later in November and appear before the Commission in December. Chairman Cameron asked what type of facility this will be and was told that this is a recycling transfer station. There will be a large amount of truck traffic at this site. Commissioner Underdahl questioned if there will be any odor problems connected with this facility. Mr. McDonald stated that the paper will be brought to the site and baled for shipment. There is no processing on the site. There is a CUP request for outdoor storage for 20 semi-trailers. Waldorf Paper will be operating at this facility. Commissioner Sonsin wanted to know if the outdoor storage request will conform to the proposed new outdoor storage ordinance. Mr. McDonald stated that he thought the 20 semi-trailers would exceed the proposed 20%, so a CUP would still be required. It will be up to the Planning Commission to approve or deny the request if other criteria are met. MOTION Item 4.2 Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Landy, to table Planning Case 94-30, Request for Site/Building Plan Review/Approval to Allow Construction of a 40,000 Square Foot Office/Warehouse (Paper Transfer) Facility and a Conditional Use Permit to Allow Outside Storage (20 Semi-Trailers), 7300 49th Avenue North, Hoyt Development, Petitioner. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carried. Landy, Underdahl, Sonsin, Watschke, Oelkers, Stulberg None ~Zak, Gundershaug Cameron, Cassen, COMMITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Item 6.1 · Commissioner Cassen reported that they met with Hoyt Development and looked at the plans that Mr. Hoyt had submitted. The main concern is the traffic with trucks using 49th Avenue and this being a residential area, both single family and apartments. Forty-ninth Avenue is a collector New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - November 1, 1994 street. Mr. McDonald stated that staff would recommend that the trucks go south on Quebec, which is an industrial area, to 42nd Avenue. Commissioner Cassen questioned what the tonnage is for 49th Avenue and if some type of restrictions can be enforced. This is a nine ton road with signage stating "no truck traffic." Commissioner Cassen reported that the paper facility will be using the rail in the future. The plans were incomplete and there was no landscaping plan presented at Design & Review. Codes & Standards Item 6.2 Commissioner Sonsin turned the floor over to Mr. Brixius for an explanation of the I-1 outdoor storage. Mr. Brixius reported that according to the Building Official there are several sites not in compliance with the outdoor storage ordinance. Many of the tenants move into a building and do not realize that a CUP is necessary to provide for outdoor storage. For better enforcement and future implementation, some limited outdoor storage may be acceptable as a permitted accessory use. Codes & Standards and staff feel that the outdoor storage should be kept at a manageable size, with a designated area that is properly screened, and limit the types of items that would be stored. The outdoor storage needs to be an accessory use to be sure that the items stored outside are related to the business. Accessory use is emphasized by limiting it to a percentage of the building. For permitted accessory use, the Committee suggests limiting the area to 20% of the building size. Codes & Standards and the Building Inspector suggested additional requirements such as screening, the outdoor storage area cannot occupy existing or required parking or loading areas, proper fencing to make sure that the area is a designated area of the site so that some of the outdoor storage does not overflow onto other areas of the site. Also the limitations on the outdoor storage should include hazardous waste materials as defined by Uniform Building Code or by the Fire Code and should be totally prohibited from any outdoor storage whether by conditional use or an accessory use. These items that represent a public safety concern should be stored within a building. It may be an accessory building, but storage should be enclosed in a building as fencing alone will not provide the security needed for hazardous items. Other items, such as dust control, are currently required in code. Mr. Brixius went on to explain that allowance for limited accessory use would be 20% of building size and would be a permitted accessory and anything above that amount would have to go through the conditional use permit process. Chairman Cameron questioned again how this will be enforced. Mr. Brixius stated that tenants will need to be notified of this change. At this time tenants do not want to go through the costly conditional use permit process for outdoor storage so, in some cases, the code is ignored. Mr. Brixius explained that it is the suggestion of the Building Official that by doing this on a permitted accessory use basis with these performance standards that compliance will be easier. Mr. McDonald stated that the City can do a special mailing to businesses to bring them up to date on the Code changes. This issue began with one business using a semi-truck to store insulation. It would be better for the City to deal with the minor storage issues with screening, surfacing, setbacks, etc. and handle the larger storage issues with a CUP. Mr. Brixius explained that there are some modifications to the language and that Codes & Standards will be looking at this issue again in November. Commissioner Underdahl wondered if this code will be updated from time to time and if the City staff will let businesses know of the New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - November 1, 1994 changes in the newspaper or City Report. Mr. McDonald stated that a direct mailing would be made to all businesses after the Code is amended. There is no regular City newsletter that goes only to the businesses, however all businesses do receive the regular City newsletter. Commissioner Underdahl suggested that possibly quarterly or twice a year the City should send a newsletter to the business community of the City. Commissioner Cassen questioned whether these businesses would be subject to yearly reviews. The review process would only be put in place if there was a complaint and if there is a violation, the business would have to come in for a CUP. The businesses with minor outdoor storage would probably be grandfathered in. In the future there will at least be a record of the businesses and what was agreed to regarding the outdoor storage. Commissioner Sonsin continued with the furniture and appliance sales in the I-1 District. Several approaches were looked into on this issue and research was done on the surrounding areas to see what would fit. A text amendment is being considered to make furniture sales a conditional use. Chairman Cameron questioned some other type of sales in an I-1 District, such as a greenhouse or rug sales and if each individual type of sales will need to be studied each time. He stated that the reason for the zoning areas is basically to govern traffic, parking, taxes, etc. To put a commercial business in an industrial area and pay less taxes, and where parking is not controlled like in a retail area does not make sense to him. This was the problem with S.R. Harris, a retail fabric store that opened in an industrial area, a few years ago. The building and site were not designed for retail, as the building was a multi-tenant building. The shared parking was not adequate and often filtered onto the street. Mr. Brixius noted that concerns have been recognized by the Codes & Standards Committee and have been discussed as to how to limit exposure. The first option looked at was different types of sales, such as lumber sales which has changed dramatically over the past few years with Knox and Menards having a full service retail establishment attached to a building materials supply. Even that type of establishment offers some type of appliance sales. The Committee looked at expanding this option to include furniture and appliances as a permitted use, but decided that this was too far reaching to allow this type of sales in the entire I-1 District and the Committee did not want to do that. The second option was a conditional use permit with an attempt to come up with specific conditions that would limit the geographic exposure as to where the businesses could be located so there would not be another S.R. Harris problem in the middle of an industrial park, competing with other industrial traffic and trucks. Mr. Brixius suggested one condition could be that the site must have direct frontage to a major collector/arterial street and could be located at the periphery of an I-1 or I-2 District. This would eliminate a number of locations. Mr. Brixius asked for other suggestions from the Commissioners, but stated that this was the only condition that seemed appropriate that would be geographically specific. The third option was a rezoning from I-1 to B-4 and the fourth option is not to make any code changes. Mr. Brixius displayed a graphic showing the corner site at Bass Lake Road and International Parkway which was identified in the vacant land study as being approximately one acre. This is a difficult site because of the setback requirements off of Bass Lake Road and International Parkway. New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - November 1, 1994 With the split of the adjacent property, the site has been expanded and has high visibility, goOd access, and it was thought that A.C. Carlson, a long-standing member of the community, would be a good fit for the site. In looking at the other sites along Bass Lake Road, there is Chippewa Graphics, and a multi-tenant building, which includes Twin Cities Temp, Twin Cities Acoustics, Insty Print, Protective Surfacing and Darryl Brinker. MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES To the south there is an R-4 area which is multi-family and Victory Park, both of which separate the land along Bass Lake Road from the rest of the industrial land. This area is somewhat separated and to make it more geographically specific Mr. Brixius remarked that to accommodate the site a rezoning may be appropriate. North of Bass Lake Road is a residential area so a commercial transition into this area may be appropriate. It was questionable as to whether rezoning should be pursued to make this geographically specific because it is not known what the full range of uses that is offered by Chippewa or the multi-tenant building and it is not the desire of the Committee to have these uses become non-conforming. The determination was made that the best method to provide for this would be a conditional use permit that would limit the geographic exposure as to where these facilities could locate. This type of furniture supply, if looking at A.C. Carlson or Wickes or Levitz, are housed in large buildings and do require a lot of parking, but shipments do include truck traffic which is not atypical of industrial areas. Therefore it was felt that furniture sales might be a good use at this site. Commissioner Sonsin stated that if furniture sales would be allowed at this site, then this is how it would be allowed. Commissioner Sonsin also stated that he still has some reservations about whether or not allowing A.C. Carlson on that piece of property is appropriate. The Planning Consultant stated that the Building Official also thought that furniture sales might be a good option for this property. Chairman Cameron asked what the requirements for parking would be. Mr. Brixiua stated that parking would be the same as for any retail activity with one parking space for every 200 square feet of building. Commissioner Watschke questioned the limitation on this particular geographical area and if there is any other areas that would also qualify for this type of option/zoning. Mr. Brixius explained that the areas would need to have major collector and arterial streets abutting the site, which would eliminate sites deeper within the I-1 Districts, and keep retail sales on the periphery sites of industrial areas rather than in the center. The major collector or arterial street sites would be alaong Bass Lake Road, Boone, and 49th in this I-1 District. Other sites would be along Winnetka and Medicine Lake Road. Mr. Brixius asked for input from the Codes & Standards Committee and the Planning Commission and if there were other conditions that could be imposed that would further reduce the number of sites. Commissioner Oelkers asked if 49th has the same designation as Bass Lake Road and was informed that 49th is a collector street and Bass Lake Road is an arterial street. Commissioner Watschke stated that the Bass Lake Road property has a buffer, however some of the other sites in New Hope may not have this type of buffer. Mr. Brixius noted that the A.C. Carlson type furniture store is a more acceptable use next to a residential area than an industrial use. Chairman Cameron questioned the one acre size lot which cannot be any bigger than where the business is now. Mr. McDonald confirmed that the lot is larger with the addition of the westerly side of the Post property. Even with the additional land, the acreage will determine the size of the building, along with the green space requirement and parking requirement. All of the other performance standards will be applicable along with the ones that would be added to New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - November 1, 1994 the conditional use permit, Commissioner Underdahl asked how big the combined lot is and was informed that the lot is about two acres, Chairman Cameron commented that this is not a .good case and the Commission is thinking of changing an ordinance for one local retailer who wants to do something and he is not in favor of this, Mr, Brixius noted that this is a vacant parcel of land and it will be complicated to do anything with it, There is still a strong argument that the three parcels along Bass Lake Road are separated from the balance of the industrial area and that even rezoning may be appropriate, A conditional use could also be suitable, Chairman Cameron reiterated that he is still not comfortable changing the ordinance to allow retail sales in the I-1 District, Mr, Brixius pointed out that the size and scale of any retail establishment will be dictated by the site size and the application of the parking and other performance standards, Commissioner Underdahl inquired if this would work if a buffer zone was required. Chairman Cameron responded that a lot of things could be worked in, but an ordinance should not be customized to fit one retailer. Commissioner Sonsin agreed that the ordinance should not be customized, but the issue before the Commission is if sales of this type will be allowed, how will it be accomplished. Carlson would have to come before the Commission in a separate case and make application and go through the review process. Even if the ordinance is changed, the Commission can still turn Carlson down if it is decided that furniture sales is not suitable on that particular piece of property, even though it might be allowed in the I-1 District. Commissioner Sonsin pointed out that Carlson should not be a part of this case since there has been no formal application at this time. Commissioner Oelkers noted that the piece of property is worthless as it is because of the size and he questioned that if the City has the opportunity to develop this property, why not work with a developer to do something with this property at the gateway to the City. Chairman Cameron stated that not every parcel in the City needed to be developed. Commissioner Sonsin stated that he is all for putting property to good use if it can be developed appropriately, but is not sure that putting a retail establishment on this site is the best use as this is not a retail oriented area. It is the job of the petitioner to make the case as to why their establishment is appropriate for the site. Commissioner Oelkers stated that he worked at 8701 Bass Lake Road for several years. Mr. McDonald stated that the City does not have any annual business registration. Insty Print is a retail business and Chippewa Graphics probably does some retail also. Mr. McDonald reported that the I-1 District does allow for 10% retail. Also professional offices are allowed in the I-1 District. Mr. Brixius noted that, after talking with the Building Official, there is some retail in this area and some service industry that would also fit into a Commercial Zoning District as well as the I-1. Insty Print is an example and profeSsional offices like Twin Cities Temp also fit into the B-4 District. After looking at the various options, the Committee looked at what the I-1 District already allows and found three options, one of which is consideration of rezoning that site. Codes & Standards did not want to pursue this option because that would intensify this issue to a greater degree. Another option is a conditional use permit which offers some degree of control. Mr. McDonald added that staff is looking for some input from the Commission so that the City can go back to A.C. Carlson and say that the City recommends that they apply for rezoning or a code amendment or that the Planning Commission is not receptive to any New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - November 1, 1994 changes in the current zoning. Commissioner Stulberg remarked that it was interesting that A.C. Carlson purchased the property knowing that something would have to be done before a store could be built. Mr. McDonald stated that Mr. Carlson has owned the corner parcel for a long time and City staff encouraged him to purchase the adjoining property because the one acre site by itself was almost worthless. Commissioner Cassen noted that just west of this parcel there is a glass retailer, a spa retailer and PEM Millwork. Mr. Brixius stated he did not know if they offer direct retail sales. As noted earlier the I-1 District does allow 10% retail sales along with the manufacturing of the product or product distribution. It was noted that PEM Millwork probably does most of their own manufacturing. The spa place may be a wholesaler or warehouse distribution type of business. It is not known if Chippewa Graphics has a great deal of retail sales directly on site so they were not grouped together with the other uses that were identified. Commissioner Oelkers stated that Twin Cities Acoustics has a large industrial storage area. Commissioner Underdahl noted that with the buildings there now, and with residential across the street, and being at the entrance to the City she did not have a problem with having the furniture store at this location. Commissioner Underdahl pointed out that the current building of A.C. Carlson does not look like a retail building. Mr. Brixius remarked that may be the reason they are wanting to build so that the new building will be more contemporary with more display area. Welcome Furniture does not have a large display area either and just corner windows. Commissioner Sonsin inquired what the consensus is on this and if Codes & Standards should keep pursuing this issue. Commissioner Oelkers stated that something should be done with this parcel of land as long as the building/business meets the codes and standards set forth by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Cassen stated that she has no problem with this as long as the retail sales are on the periphery of the I-1 District and not in the interior of the I-1 District. Commissioner Sonsin pointed out that the code change would apply to all of the I-1 District and not just the corner properties. If the code change would be made, then the code would apply to all properties that would be on an arterial street forever. Commissioner Watschke asked if a map could be put together showing the alternatives and buffers, and after reviewing the map there may be some definition that could be used. Mr. Brixius stated that the Committee could do an impact map that better shows the areas. One requirement could be to have frontage on a collector or peripheral street and if there are other additional conditions to be added, that could reduce the exposure further. The whole focus of the options considered by Codes & Standards went from the broad range and allowing it throughout the district to trying to limit the exposure by being geographically specific by rezoning a property. Since rezoning is not the preferred option, the middle ground has been considered. Chairman Cameron stated that the Committee needs to look at the options again as the Planning Commission is not yet ready to make a decision on this issue. Commissioner Watschke suggested this should be looked at more like defining a rezoning where there is a buffer. If a parcel is suitable for rezoning, but not wishing to do that, issue a conditional use but apply the rezoning thinking to the conditional use in coming up with the criteria. New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - November 1, 1994 OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Sonsin noted that a redraft from the City Attorney of the animal ordinance had been handed out before the Planning Commission meeting for the Commissioners information. A letter from a resident regarding On Cue Billiards was also handed out before the meeting. October 4, 1994, Planning Commission minutes unanimously approved. No questions or comments on other minutes. Commissioner Cassen asked about the traffic study. Mr. McDonald stated that the City is in the process of updating the Traffic Management Plan because the current plan is 20 years old. There will be a public input meetings for residents to point out t~affic problems. Commissioner Cassen questioned if the industrial areas would also be studied with the truck traffic impact in the residential areas because she has received several complaints regarding the truck traffic along Boone and trucks possibly taking shortcuts to the industrial areas from Highways 694 and 169. Mr. McDonald agreed that this will all be considered in the study. Mr. McDonald reported that a letter has been sent to business along Boone Avenue to let truck drivers know to use the main streets but this is difficult to enforce. Commissioner Underdahl questioned if the bus routes would also be studied, and reported to have heard that SuperAmerica trucks are using 62nd Avenue. Commissioner Cassen asked if the Planning Commissioners would also'have some input into the study. Mr. McDonald stated he would keep the Commissioners updated on the Traffic Plan. The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary New Hope Planning Commission - 8 - November 1, 1994 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 6, 1994 City Hall, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 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. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Landy, Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke, Stulberg Oelkers Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Sarah Bellefuil, Administrative Analyst, Steve Sondrall, City Attorney CONSENT ITEMS No Consent Items. PUBLIC HEARING PC 94-32 Item 4,1 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.1, Request for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow the Installation of a Liquid Propane Back- up System, 3943 Quebec Avenue North, Versa Die Cast, Inc., Petitioner. Mr. McDonald reported that the petitioner, Versa Die Cast, Incorporated and Winnetka Properties are requesting a conditional use permit to allow installation of a liquid propane back-up system. In August, 1994, the Planning Commission and City Council approved the Final Plat of Do,q Harvey 2nd Addition and a Development/Final Stage Planned Unlt Development to allow a building addition at 3943 Quebec Avenue North. The property, located in an I-1 Limited Industrial Zoning District, contains two industrial buildings of approximately 26,880 square feet each and the PUD included the construction of a 41,640 square foot addition to the building at 3943 Quebec Avenue North where Versa Die Cast, Inc. is the tenant. A number of site improvements were also included, including the construction of a retention/sedimentation pond at the east end of the property to resolve a long-standing drainage problem. The site improvements and building addition are currently under construction. Mr. McDonald explained that since the August approvals, the petitioner has determined that they want to install a Liquid Propane Back-Up System on the east side of the property near the new holding pond. Outdoor storage of propane or LP gas as an accessory use is allowed by conditional use permit in the I-1 Zoning District. Because the LP tank was not included in the original plans, a separate CUP application is necessary. The petitioner states on the application that the CUP request should be granted to relieve the economic hardship of manufacturing operation, to allow the use of interruptable gas and for energy conservation purposes. The site is surrounded by I-1 zoned property. Mr. McDonald pointed out that the I-1 Zoning District criteria states that the outdoor storage of propane or LP gas shall be allowed as a conditional accessory use provided it is used exclusively by the occupant of the site where it is stored for a use incidental to said occupant's business, it is not stored for wholesale or retail sale, and it must meet the following requirements: Location of not less than twenty-five (25) feet from any property line; Tanks shall be surrounded by twenty-five (25) feet of open area; Storage tanks shall be setback from existing structures; Shall not New Hope Planning Commission - I - December 6, 1994 interfere with site circulation; A wire weave/chain link security fence shall be required around all storage tanks; Certain requirements for valves and warning signage. Mr. McDonald stated the plans show that the proposed location of the tank is at the west edge of the new storm water retention pond on the east side of the lot. The 18,000 gallon cylindrical tank would be located in the rear yard, as Winnetka Avenue is considered the front yard. The tank would be located 100 feet from the east property line and will be setback 80 feet from the easterly building. The ponding and tank site will be surrounded by a six-foot chain link fence and the tank would set on concrete piers. The Building Official has confirmed that all other code requirements are met with this proposal. Mr. McDonald noted the only issue is that the tank is located in the ponding/drainage utility easement. There will be no reduction in the pond capacity. Under ideal conditions the pond easement would be separate from the LP tank. The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and does not have a major concern about the location of the tank next to the pond with the exception that the tank and all above grade plumbing be constructed higher than the overflow elevation across the driveway from the Versa Die pond to the YMCA pond, and staff feels this should be added to condition #3, Review by City Engineer. (This addition to the condition was received by staff after the report was written, and therefore included at the Planning Commission meeting.) That way if the pond ever did overflow, it would overflow to the driveway and north to the YMCA pond and not interfere with the valves and plumbing. Chairman Cameron questioned ~f the petitioner has seen this' proposal and is in agreement and it was confirmed that the petitioner is in agreement. Chairman Cameron also wondered if the City Fire Marshall has seen the plans and it was confirmed that both the Fire Marshall and Building Official have reviewed the plans. Chairman Cameron called upon the petitioner to answer questions from the Commission. Mr. Philip Bear, 230 Carriage Lane, Burnsville, came to the podium. Commissioner Zak questioned if this location was the only place left on the site to place this storage tank since the location is somewhat awkward from a visual standpoint. Mr. Bear answered that other spots meeting the requirements would be in the area described as the front yard. Commissioner Zak asked for confirmation from the petitioner that the elevation requirements from the City Engineer would be followed through. Commissioner Zak inquired about the proposed landscaping and what could be done additionally to screen the storage tank on all sides. Mr. Bear informed the Commission that the landscaping for the overall building project is not yet in the ground, but that Versa Die Cast is willing to add more shrubs, etc. Mr. McDonald noted that the original plan showed some plantings where the tank will be and wondered if these plantings will be relocated to the east. Chairman Cameron interjected that possibly more landscaping could be added to shield the tank aesthetically. Mr. Bear displayed a newer landscaping plan that showed more landscaping to the east of the tank. Commissioner Gundershaug commented that there should possibly be more landscaping done than what was proposed and to place more around three sides of the tank. The petitioner noted that it might be difficult to put plantings between the pond and the tank, due to the drop in elevation. Commissioner Gundershaug stressed that the tank should be hidden from.view. Mr. Bear confirmed that as much landscaping New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - December 6, 1994 will be done as necessary to be in compliance with what staff suggests. Chairman Cameron suggested that, if the Commission approves this, the additional plantings be added to the landscape plan before the City Council meeting so that Councilmembers can see exactly the plantings proposed. Mr. Bear agreed to submit a revised landscape plan and noted that there is a large oak tree on the east side of the tank as well. MOTION Item 4.1 Motion by Commissioner Zak, seconded by Commissioner Sonsin, to approve Planning Case 94-32, Request for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow the Installation of a Liquid Propane Back-up System, 3943 Quebec Avenue North, Versa Die Cast, Inc., Petitioner, subject to the following conditions: No reduction in storm water pond capacity. Additional landscaping to be added to screen the tank from the roadway. Review/approval by the City Engineer: Tank and all above grade plumbing to be constructed at an elevation higher than the overflow elevation across the driveway from the new pond to the YMCA pond. No additional outdoor storage allowed on property except for dumpsters (per City Code). Voting in favor: Landy, Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke, Stulberg Voting against: None Absent: Oelkers Motion carried. This Planning Case will appear before the City Council on December 12, 1994. PC 94-33 Item 4.2 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.2, Request for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Home Occupation for a Home-Based Mailing Service, 4801 Zealand Avenue North, Teresa Snell, Petitioner. Ms. Bellefuil stated that the petitioner is requesting a conditional use permit to allow a home-based mailing service. The business will provide smaller, local businesses with mailing services. The purpose of the business is to take mailings from small companies and "pool them" in order to take advantage of lower bulk mailing discounts that are normally available only to larger customers. The property is in an R-1 District and is surrounded by single family homes, with Cooper High School across the street, and House of Hope Lutheran Church southwest of the property. The business space would be located in the unfinished basement of the home. All access would be from the garage, into the kitchen and then directly downstairs. The equipment used for the business will include a computer, printer, letter folding machine and postage meter. The mailing service would be offered two (2) days per week, to insure that there are enough mailing pieces to qualify for bulk rates. The petitioner would pick up the mail to be processed from the companies, so increased traffic should not be a factor. Ms. Bellefuil added that the petitioner plans to have a business partner that would help when the demand gets to the point where it is too much for one person to handle. When the business can no longer be handled in the home, the petitioner states it would be moved into a rented office space. New Hope Planning Commission -3- December 6, 1994 The petitioner states on the application that this business would not have any impact on the neighborhood: no structural changes, no signs, no increased traffic, no noise factor, and that the business complies with all of the requirements of the "permitted home occupation" criteria except the "no employee" rule. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff have received no inquiries about this request. Ms. Bellefuil reported that staff finds this particular home occupation is not a permitted home occupation because it may require employees other than those living on the site, therefore, this home occupation must be conditionally permitted. Mr. Bellefuil pointed out that the Commission previously recommended that this employee requirement be amended, but the City Council did not agree with this recommendation. Mr. Bellefuil stated that staff finds that all other conditions are met, as no interior or exterior changes are required for this business within the home, traffic problems are not created, the business space is limited, and there are no direct sales on the premises. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for the mailing service home occupation with the condition that an annual inspection take place. Chairman Cameron called upon the petitioner to answer questions. Ms. Teresa Snell, 4801 Zealand Avenue North, came to the podium. Commissioner Underdahl asked if this business is in operation now. Ms. Snell answered that it is not and she does not have any of the equipment yet and there is no partner at this time. Commissioner Underdalal questioned how the mail will'be handled and if after the mail is brought iR would it be necessary for a truck to piCk it up. Ms. Snell replied that she will use a car to pick up the mail and deliver it to a bulk mail center. The mail will come from small businesses that do not have mailings large enough to qualify for the 200 piece bulk mail rates. There should never have to be anyone else dropping off or picking up mail at her home. Commissioner Underdahl asked for a time frame for adding another employee and was told that hopefully it would be within a year. Chairman Cameron stated that it is the hope of the Commission that the business is successful, but questioned if there would be a problem if the Commission put a condition of one employee for the first year on this CUP. Ms. Snell replied that this would not be objectionable. Motion by Commissioner Underdahl, seconded by Commissioner Landy, to approve Planning Case 94-33, Request for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow e Home Occupation for a Home-Based Mailing Service, 4801 Zealand Avenue North, Teresa Snail, Petitioner, subject to the following condition: Limit of one additional employee in the first year. Annual inspection. Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Motion carded. Landy, Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke, Stulberg None Oelkers This planning case will be heard by the City Council on December 12, New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - December 6, 1994 1994. PC94-09 Item 4.3 Chairman Cameron introduced for discussion Item 4.3, Planning Case 94- 09/Ordinance 94-17: An Ordinance Amending New Hope Zoning Code to Allow Open Outdoor Storage as a Permitted Accessory and Conditional Use Within the Industrial Zoning Districts, City of New Hope, Petitioner. Mr. McDonald noted that the City Attorney is in attendance to answer questions about this ordinance. This is a request initiated by the City of New Hope to amend the New Hope Zoning Code to allow open outdoor storage as a permitted accessory and conditional use in the City, subject to certain conditions. Mr. McDonald noted that, per the existing City Code, all outdoor open storage requires a conditional use permit. The amendment that is before the Commission now adds outdoor open storage as a permitted accessory use if it is less than 20 percent of the building size and meets certain conditions. Outdoor storage that exceeds 20 percent of the building size would still require a conditional use permit and be subject to the same conditions that are required now, in addition to several new conditions. Another important factor at this time are the limited amount of conditions for outdoor storage: screening from residential uses and surfacing to control dust. There are a number of requirements staff wishes to add whether or not the 20 percent is met. Mr. McDonald reminded the Commission that this began in spring when a business came in for a CUP for outdoor storage and City staff did a survey/ of all the industrial sites in the City and found that there is a lot of outdo(fr storage, which is typical in industrial areas, but a lot of it was never issued a CUP. A lot of the issues dealt with the semi-trailers parked on properties, etc. In many cases the outdoor storage represents only a minor portion of the site operation, so staff and Codes & Standards have been reviewing this issue for the past few months. The feeling is that a mandatory CUP process for minor outdoor storage becomes an encumbrance on enforcement and some outdoor storage should be allowed without a CUP, if specific conditions are met. This code amendment would allow open outdoor storage as a permitted accessory use under the following conditions: 1) it must be an accessory use defined by City Code; 2) maximum space of the open outdoor storage area may not exceed twenty (20) percent of the gross floor area of principal structure; 3) the setbacks of the open outdoor storage area shall not be located within any front yard or side yard abutting a public right-of-way and that open outdoor storage shall be set back five (5) feet from all side and rear lot lines and shall not be located within a utility or drainage easement; 4) the open outdoor storage area shall be surfaced to control dust. Mr. McDonald reported that the latest version of this code amendment was one of the issues discussed at the Codes & Standards meeting on November 28th. The two main issues discussed were the definition of "outdoor storage" and fencing. There were two options discussed for fencing. The first was no change in the originally proposed ordinance which requires all outdoor storage to be fenced. There was a lot of discussion whether there was reason to have semi-trailers fenced if parked on the property for storage. The alternative wording is as follows: "A wire weave/chain link security fence shall be required around the open outdoor storage area in conformance with §4.033(3)(c) of this Code. Open outdoor storage areas intended for the exclusive storage of semi- New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - December 6, 1994 trailers may be exempt from the required security fencing provided the storage area is delineated and the individual trailers are secured." Mr. McDonald continued with the screening/landscaping requirements, stating that open outdoor storage area shall be screened and landscaped from adjacent residential uses and public rights-of-way in accordance with the City Code; open outdoor storage area shall not utilize any required off- street parking, loading areas, or access areas; open outdoor storage areas shall not be used for storage of hazardous liquids, solids, gases or wastes. This provision does not prohibit the property owner from obtaining a conditional use permit for the outdoor storage of propane or LP gas; property owner shall keep the open outdoor storage areas free of refuse, trash, debris, weeds, and waste fill. These would be the conditions for anyone coming to the City for outdoor storage with less than 20 percent of the building size, and if after meeting all of these conditions, a CUP would not be necessary. If a business exceeded the 20 percent requirement, a CUP would be necessary and the conditions under the CUP process are identical to the conditions under permitted accessory use. Mr. McDonald noted that the other point of discussion at Codes & Standards was the definition about open outdoor storage which was never included in the Code before. The proposed definition is as follows: Any open land used or occupied for the purpose of outdoor storage of material, equipment, product or semi-trailers accessory to the principal use of the property. Outdoor storage shall not include the temporary parking of motor vehicles in designated parking stalls, or trucks being serviced in designated loading areas. Another recommendation from the Plannirtg Consultant is the insertion of "operating, licensed" just before motor vehicles, so that sentence then reads: "Outdoor storage shall not include the temporary parking of operating, licensed motor vehicles in designated parking stalls...". Chairman Cameron questioned if all City-owned facilities would comply with these new requirements and staff should be sure to look into this matter. Commissioner Sonsin explained that at the last meeting the Codes & Standards Committee asked the Planning Consultant and City Attorney to write a definition for "open outdoor storage". One of the questions to answer is if a secured, semi-trailer permanently parked on a site is considered outdoor storage and staff feels that it is. Commissioner Gundershaug noted that this issue started with the trailer parked at PEM Millwork, which is used for outdoor storage and also is a very visible sign for the business. Another question is whether the trailer needs to be screened from observation. Chairman Cameron questioned if there should be some notation regarding signage on the trailers at this time or just deal with the parked trailer in this ordinance. Commissioner Sonsin stated that since there is a good sign ordinance in place, that issue does not need to be addressed in connection with the outdoor storage issue. The City Attorney pointed out that the trailer is not considered signage. There are also several other businesses with trailers parked outside. Commissioner Cassen inquired as to how it would be possible to screen all of the trailers and how will these be policed. Commissioner Zak noted that the Planning Consultant indicated that there should be a clearly delineated area so that the storage trailers are not in the same lot with operating semi-trailers. Commissioner Sonsin stated that the question before the Committee was to define what exactly outdoor storage is, and the feeling was that a trailer New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - December 6, 1994 parked next to a building that never moves is outdoor storage. The issue, if the Commission agrees with that definition, is outdoor storage simply storage that is outdoors and has a fence around it b.ut is not a semi-trailer. Commissioner Sonsin feels that a trailer that sits outside and never moves is outdoor storage. Commissioner Underdahl added that a semi-trailer that is secured does not need the fence. Commissioner Sonsin emphasized the two points to consider are: 1) is the trailer that is parked and does not move outdoor storage, and 2) if that is the case, does this secured trailer (assuming that the trailer is secured) also need a chain-link fence around it for security reasons. The feeling of the Committee is that no fence is needed. Commissioner Gundershaug asked if the trailers that are used for outdoor storage need to be licensed. Mr. McDonald added that a time line should be added if a trailer is parked for one month or six months, etc. Commissioner Underdahl inquired if there is a code that states that even a car sitting in the yard needs to be licensed and would this apply to a parked trailer as well. Commissioner Sonsin noted that the trailer is not a motorized vehicle by itself and the cab would need to be licensed. Point two is a chain-link fence required for a secured trailer. Commissioner Cassen pointed out that the boat trailer that was parked in the yard on 60- 1/2 Avenue did not have a license and the City required the owner to get the trailer licensed or remove the trailer. Following that shouldn't all trailers parked in public view be licensed. Mr. McDonald added that the City should be able to require all vehicles used for storage to be licensed. Commissioner Cassen remarked that the City should be consistent with all trailers. Commissioner Underdahl stated that if the trailers are not licensed, the business might as well put up a building. Chairman Cameron wondered what the Committee is recommending and Commissioner Sonsi,q replied that the Committee is recommending to go forward with the point§ as discussed. Commissioner Cassen added that there should be a separate, delineated outside area. It is the recommendation of the Committee to take this issue to Council with a motion to approve. Mr. McDonald questioned if the Committee was recommending the ordinance as written and Commissioner Sonsin replied that was correct with the addition of "operating, licensed". Also that the secured trailer does not need to be fenced. Commissioner Stulberg questioned what the license would cost and if that would be cumbersome to a business that might have three trailers that are used for storage. Commissioner Sonsin replied that in order to be consistent the City would have to require that all trailers be licensed. That is also the cost for using a trailer for storage instead of putting on an addition to the building, which would be more expensive. Commissioner Underdahl questioned the fencing part of the ordinance and Commissioner Sonsin noted that the wording is correct as stated in the Ordinance No. 94-17. Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Zak, to approve Planning Case No. 94-09, Ordinance 94-17: An Ordinance Amending New Hope Zoning Code to Allow Open Outdoor Storage as a Permitted Accessory and Conditional Use Within the Industrial Zoning Districts, City of New Hope, Petitioner. MOTION Voting in favor: Voting against: Absent: Landy, Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke, Stulberg None Oelkers New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - December 6, 1994 Motion carried. This planning case will be heard by the City Council on Decernber 12, 1994. COMMITTEE REPORTS Design & Review Item 6.1 Committee did not meet in November since Hoyt Development did not submit revised plans. Codes & Standards Item 6.2 Commissioner Sonsin informed the Commission that Codes & Standards studied furniture and appliance sales in the I-1 District, specifically A.C. Carlson. On this issue the Committee did not reach a consensus so the Committee is asking for recommendations from the Commission as to how to proceed. The four options that were considered are: 1) do nothing, in which case Carlson may need to move somewhere else; 2) adding furniture and appliance retail sales as a permitted use by defining "building materials" to include furniture and appliances and this is not an option anyone on the Committee is recommending as it is not the desire of the Committee to open up all I-1 zones in the City to furniture and appliance sales; 3) allow furniture and appliance sales in the I-1 District as a conditional use with restrictions and the full Committee did not agree with this option; and 4) rezone the property, assuming Carlson proceeds, to a B-4, Community Business, where furniture and appliances are allowed as a permitted use. The Committee is asking what the opinion is of the Commission on the two viable options. Commissioner Gundershaug stated he is not in favor of spot rezoning b~t would be in favor of amending the zoning ordinance to allow furniture anti appliance sales as a conditional use in an I-1 District. Commissioners Cassen, Watschke and Stulberg all agreed with the conditional use. Chairman Cameron questioned if the Planning Consultant felt it is good City planning to handle the furniture and appliance sales in this way. Mr. McDonald stated that the Planning Consultant feels that there are arguments for either the rezoning or the CUP. Commissioner Sonsin stated that no one was in favor of adding furniture and appliance sales as a permitted use. It would be nice to be able to help out Carlson, who has been a long-time employer, but the City needs to do this in the most reasonable, City-wide fashion possible. Commissioner Stulberg pointed out that possibly rezoning that section of property along Bass Lake Road might not be such a bad idea, but that the CUP would allow the same thing and give a little more control so that might be the best solution. Commissioner Sonsin responded that when considering the spot rezoning, how far should the City go. Should just a couple parcels be rezoned or should several properties be rezoned. The original intent of the City Plan is that area should be a light industrial area and not retail sales. Commissioner Cassen stated that she does not have any objections to retail sales along major roadways, but that retail sales should not overlap into industrial areas. The CUP would allow these sales only along major collector streets. Commissioner Zak commented that the Planning Consultant had a good argument for rezoning the property. Commissioner Underdahl reported that the properties along Bass Lake Road are either business or residential except for the properties in question, which is also separated from the industrial park by Victory Park and Pheasant Park Apartments. Commissioner Underdahl pointed out all of the current zoning along Bass Lake Road and pointed out that some of the permitted I-1 uses that could locate on this site might not be as attractive New Hope Planning C6mmission - 8 - December 6, 1994 as a retail business type use and states she is in favor of rezoning the corridor on the east side of Industrial Boulevard to Boone Avenue and south of Bass Lake Road. Commissioner Sonsin stated that it is the feeling of the Committee to look at this issue one of two ways. It seems the feeling of the Commission is for a conditional use, but there is some feeling for rezoning as a possibility too. It is the opinion of the Codes & Standards Committee that A.C. Carlson should be encouraged, if they want to, to go ahead and initiate a formal request. Chairman Cameron questioned if staff should first initiate a code change and the Commission feels that a formal application should come first. Commissioner Underdahl asked if just the one parcel could be rezoned or if that is what is considered "spot zoning". Chairman Cameron pointed out that rezoning one parcel in the middle of another zone would indeed be spot zoning. The City Attorney emphasized that the legal definition of spot zoning would be an island of zoning in an incompatible area. It would not be considered spot zoning to rezone one parcel of property unless it was incompatible with the surrounding land uses. The determination of whether this is spot zoning is if zoning one parcel of property would be incompatible to the surrounding land uses to make it a pretext just to allow something there that is not compatible. Chairman Cameron questioned the Commission if anyone else was in favor of rezoning and no one else replied in favor of rezoning. Mr. McDonald stated that he would notify Carlson about the possible options. Commissioner Sonsin continued with the introduction of the keeping o,f animals and birds in a residential area. Mr. McDonald reminded the Commission that there is one resident in New Hope that is raising pheasants and that he has been tagged again. The Council directed the Planning Commission to study the requirements for the keeping of fowl and comparing the requirements to other neighboring cities. After reviewing the ordinance and noting that it contained language for hoofed animals, the Council directed staff to update the ordinance. The Codes & Standards Committee has been studying this issue for the past few months. Mr. McDonald noted that the ordinance now reads that "no person shall maintain only one animal or six fowl or birds, and the minimum lot area shall be not less than 54,540 square feet, and for each additional animal or bird, not less than 10,890 square feet." Therefore, a fairly large lot would be needed to raise animals or fowl. A survey was completed and ordinances were obtained from area cities regarding their regulations and it was discovered that most cities do not allow it at all or by CUP. Mr. McDonald stated the basic recommendation a couple months ago was that no change should be made to the intent of the current ordinance, as the Committee felt that the raising of fowl on a small residential lot should not be permitted. This proposed ordinance maintains that standard and does not change anything as far as the area requirements. The ordinance has been updated and some redundant sections or sections that are no longer applicable have been removed. Two sections of the regulations found in Chapter 9 of the Code have been deleted completely or moved to Chapter 7 which deals specifically with the animal ordinance. The matter of keeping of wild animals within the City was addressed unless the animal was caged or in a dwelling. A new section was added to this code that New Hope Planning Commission -9- December 6, 1994 would allow an owner or exhibitor of wild animals licensed under federal law or Minnesota Statue to exhibit an animal in the City as part of a show or parade without violating the ordinance. Another section of the ordinance, which is similar to Brooklyn Center, better clarifies the maximum number of dogs and cats that can be kept by any household. The current ordinance states that no person can have over four dogs or four cats over six months old. There is a reference in the ordinance about a 10 dog or 10 cat limit for a period of six months, which gives the owner of an animal time to give away litters of puppies or kittens. Mr. Sondrall interjected that it would be unlawful to have four or more, so the limit is three dogs or cats. Hoofed animals are prohibited from the City with the exception of one pot-bellied pig. Wild animals are prohibited except as household pets confined to a cage within a dwelling. The ordinance does not change the square footage requirements for maintaining fowl on a property. It also includes a provision that prohibits the combination of animals and/or fowl kept under conditions that constitute a nuisance, or endanger the health, safety, comfort or welfare of the public or animals or fowl. Mr. McDonald stated that the Codes & Standards Committee reviewed this proposed final ordinance at the November 28th meeting and recommended a couple of changes. One suggestion from the Planning Consultant dealing with Section 2 of the Ordinance was that a 20 pound weight restriction be added to wild animals and the provision also requires wild animals to be licensed and registered with the City in the same fashion as dogs. Section 3 of the Ordinance was modified to exempt licensed veterinarians, pet stores and research laboratories that keep and maintain animals fo, r legitimate commercial purposes because the majority of those are regulated by the FDA. The basic recommendation to go to the Council is that Codes & Standards have updated the Ordinance but do feel that the requirement on fowl should be changed. MOTION Motion by Commissioner Sonsin, seconded by Commissioner Gundershaug, to approve the following two code amendments: Furniture and Appliance Sales in the I-1 Zoning District, and the Keeping of Animals and Birds in Residential Zoning Districts. Voting in favor: Voting against: Abaent: Motion carried. Landy, Underdahl, Zak, Sonsin, Cameron, Gundershaug, Cassen, Watschke, Stulberg None Oelkers Commissioner Sonsin noted that the pool hall issue will be discussed at length at up-coming meetings. MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES Chairman Cameron noted that the 1995 elections will be held at the January meeting. Chairman Cameron informed the Commission that he will be leaving the Commission at the end of the year, as well as, Commissioners Zak and Watschke. Commissioner Gundershaug expressed appreciation for the years of service to the City by Chairman Cameron and the two Commissioners. OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS New Hope Planning Commission - 10 - December 6, 1994 ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary New Hope Planning Commission - 11 - December 6, 1994