080812 planning commissionCITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 8, 2012
City Hall, 7 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER The New Hope Planning Commission met in regular session pursuant to
due call and notice thereof; Chair Houle called the meeting to order at 7
p.m.
ROLL CALL Present: Jim Brinkman, Jeff Houle, Sandra Hunten, Roger Landy,
Ranjan Nirgude, Sunday Onadipe, Steve Svendsen
Absent: Paul Anderson, Christopher McKenzie, Tom Schmidt
Also Present: Curtis Jacobsen, Director of Community Development, Alan
Brixius, Planning Consultant, Steve Sondrall, City Attorney,
Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary
CONSENT BUSINESS There was no Consent Business on the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING
Planning Case 12 -07 Chair Houle introduced Item 4.1, request for text amendment to Section
Item 4.1 4 -20(e) conversion of warehousing to self- storage - conditional use permit,
conditional use permits for conversion of warehousing to self- storage
facility and outdoor storage, and site plan review, 5040 Winnetka Avenue
North, Todd C Jones /Premier Storage, LLC, petitioner.
Commissioner Landy disclosed that his son -in -law was one of the
partners who owned the property at 5040 Winnetka Avenue North. He
stated he had no financial interest or involvement in the partnership for
the property and would vote on the planning case unless there was an
objection. No one objected to his voting on this case.
Mr. Curtis Jacobsen reported that Premier Storage was proposing
acquisition of the building at 5040 Winnetka Avenue and converting it
into a climate - controlled, self- storage facility with outdoor storage, along
with a text amendment to update the city code. Two conditional use
permits would be required for the conversion of the warehouse to a self -
storage facility and for outdoor storage. A site and building plan review is
also required.
The site is located east of Winnetka Avenue where it intersects with 51st
Avenue. The property is zoned industrial. Adjacent land uses include
industrial to the east, south and north and residential to the west across
Winnetka Avenue. The site contains 3.15 acres. The building area is 38,180
square feet. Lot area ratios are 30 percent green space after the expansion
of the parking area and 70 percent hard surface. The parcel is located in
Planning District 5 and is guided for industrial land uses.
Mr. Jacobsen stated the suggested changes for the text amendment would
include a comprehensive security system as an alternative to a full -time,
onsite manager; upholding prohibited storage through rental agreement
prohibitions; removal of the requirement for routine inspection access;
and providing an option for bays with exterior access.
All setbacks are fully compliant with city code, circulation and site access
are adequate, curbing, sidewalk and pavement are compliant. This facility
is not intended for pedestrian traffic, therefore, pedestrian access would
not be provided on the site. Parking does not meet city standards for a
warehouse, however, the applicant indicated this self- storage facility
should fall under the "other" category, and in that respect parking would
be adequate.
The proposed floor plan illustrated the west exterior to be renovated with
EIFS (exterior insulation and finishing system) which meets city design
guidelines. The remainder of the building would be repainted to match
the front facade. Doors toward the old rail spur to the north would be
closed up permanently. The renovation would include the construction of
a second floor in the building with both floors dedicated to self- storage
units. Rooftop equipment would be screened and /or painted to match the
building.
Mr. Jacobsen reported the applicant had proposed an eight -foot, chain -
link security fence with slats for the perimeter of the outdoor storage area
east of the building. One row of three pine trees in the northwest corner
of the site has been proposed to screen the overhead doors, however, staff
feels that number should be increased. The proposed lighting plan would
cover all but the far eastern portion of the outdoor storage area. Lighting
cut sheets should be provided showing lights would be directed
downward. At the Design and Review meeting, the applicant indicated
he was trying to minimize the lighting to the back storage area to
accommodate the residential properties located to the northeast. The
applicant proposed signage in the front yard and would submit
information for the sign permit at a later date.
The building is connected to public utilities and the current connection is
adequate for this use. Snow storage was proposed in the storm water
pond area east of the outdoor storage area. In the event of a lot of snow, it
would be hauled off the site. The grading and drainage plan was
submitted to the city engineer and watershed commission and no major
issues were identified. The applicant must comply with the city engineer's
recommendations. The main loading and unloading area would be inside
in the drive - through aisle. A keypad security system would be installed in
the building. Trash would be stored inside the building. There are 62
outdoor storage spaces of various sizes proposed on the east side the
building.
The existing site generally meets the requirements of the design
guidelines. The building will be renovated to incorporate a new west
facade and the remainder would be painted to match.
Planning Commission Meeting 2 August 8, 2012
A new storm water retention and infiltration basin has been proposed for
the site along the east property line. Previously, no storm water treatment
had been provided on this site. Thirty percent of the site would remain as
green space after the addition of the outdoor storage area. The project
generally is in compliance with all review criteria as set out in the city
code.
The Design and Review Committee met with the applicant and revised
plans were submitted as a result of that meeting.
Mr. Jacobsen mentioned that the petitioner had indicated the proposed
project would give this 50 -year old industrial building an updated look
and new life. No subsidies are required from the city and the city's tax
base would be increased. The project would provide a quality, secure and
well- managed self- storage facility for New Hope and area residents.
Premier Storage indicated they are a Twin Cities based company and
have a long track record in warehouse conversion to self storage.
The petitioner proposed verbiage for the text amendment. The entire
building would be protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system. A
sample copy of the lease was provided, which indentified regulations for
access and the inspection of units for hazardous materials. The petitioner
was in the process of getting a railroad easement on the site terminated.
The existing cell tower easement would be assigned to Premier Storage at
the closing. The applicant provided information to substantiate the
reduced amount of parking. The turning radius from the inside drive
aisle to the outdoor storage area would be adequate.
The petitioner indicated the security system would have eight video
cameras that record 24/7 and could be viewed by the manager anytime.
There would be keypad controls on the entry door which, upon a lessee
entering, would also deactivate the alarm on that party's individual unit.
All entry and exit times are documented. The units could be accessed 365
days per year from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. The office hours are Monday through
Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. and weekends from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. These
times would be adjusted seasonally. The distance to the curb has been
increased on the northwest corner of the building due to concerns by the
Design and Review committee regarding the turning radius.
Mr. Jacobsen reported that a public hearing notice was mailed to property
owners within 350 feet of the site and a notice was published in the
official newspaper of the city. No comments were received.
Mr. Jacobsen stated that staff recommended approval of the text
amendment, the site and building plan review, and two conditional use
permits, subject to the recommendations in the planning report.
Providing the text amendment is adopted, the applicant has met most of
the conditions for the conditional use permits and site and building plan
review.
Planning Commission Meeting 3 August 8, 2012
Commissioner Hunten stated she was concerned that 12 trees would be
too many once they grew to full height and suggested that number be
reduced. Mr. Brixius, city planner, stated the front elevation shows the
main door and three overhead doors to the north of that. It was felt that
three trees was not enough to screen those doors from the street from day
one. Mr. Brixius added that the city did not have an issue with the
overhead doors facing Winnetka as long as they were screened from the
public right -of -way and residential properties. The recommended 12 trees
may be excessive, however, three would be inadequate. Hunten cautioned
that once the trees matured they would become unsightly. Brixius
continued by saying that the trees could be staggered so there would be
more space for the trees to grow. When the city reviews a new project or
new use for a facility, the screening is considered at day one.
Commissioner Hunten questioned whether the drive aisle was adequate
for trucks to pass through the building. She also questioned how people
would access the second floor. Mr. Jacobsen replied that there are two
lifts available for use in moving lessee's items to the second floor, as well
as a set of stairs on either side of the drive aisle. She confirmed that a
ventilation system would be required to remove exhaust fumes, and
questioned the type of slats in the fence.
Commissioner Brinkman inquired about the security system and the
number of cameras that would be provided at the rear of the building.
Mr. Todd Jones, Premier Storage, 150 West 81st Street, Bloomington, came
forward to answer questions of the Commission. He stated that the drive
lane in the facility would be 21 feet wide. There would be room for one
vehicle to be parked on one side of the drive lane with adequate room for
another vehicle to pass by it. There would be two material lifts in the
facility to be used for storage items, not for people. The controls are on
the outside of the lift. Mr. Jones stated they would be using vinyl slats in
the chain -link fence, which would screen the outdoor storage area and yet
allow air movement, per city code. The camera system utilizes eight
cameras. There would be at least one camera in the outdoor storage area.
The rest would be spread throughout the most important areas of the
facility. The cameras record 24/7.
Mr. Jones stated he had minor comments with regard to the staff report.
He clarified that there is a railroad spur track easement on the north side
of the property with six designated spots for parking in that area. His
attorney indicated that it was a non - exclusive easement and they could
use it for parking. The spur track has not been used in about 30 years. Mr.
Jones stated he would agree not to park in the existing railroad easement
until such time as he submits to the city documentation as to the vacation
of the easement by the railroad. His attorney has drafted an easement
vacation document and is working with the railroad. He agreed that until
the document was signed he would not allow parking in that easement
area.
Planning Commission Meeting 4 August 8, 2012
Mr. Jones stated the EIFS would totally change the front elevation of the
building and would be a significant investment in this property and did
not feel it should be hidden behind a large row of trees. The four
overhead doors would be scaled down in size from what is currently
there. He would agree to plant six 6 -foot trees in a V -shape pattern in
front of the building rather than the three 8 -foot trees suggested by staff.
Mr. Jones stated he could increase the lighting in the rear storage area,
but questioned whether the city considered the area parking or storage
due to the fact that there are different lighting requirements for each use.
An effort was made to provide enough lighting for outdoor storage. There
would be a bigger risk for vandalism if the area is lit so people can see
what is stored in this area. Mr. Jones commented that he has over 25 years
in this business and has knowledge of what has worked best in the past.
He stated he appreciated that staff was considering his request.
Commissioner Svendsen wondered whether the 9 p.m. closing time
would be needed year round. Mr. Jones responded that many of his
tenants are winter storage people who leave their vehicles in place until
spring, and the time may be adjusted seasonally.
Commissioner Nirgude inquired of the lighting at the other locations. Mr.
Jones replied that the Edina location is similar to this location. The
interior of the building has motion activated lighting. The exterior
lighting has sensors so the lights go on when it gets dark. In some cases,
the lights turn off at a designated time during the night. He added that in
25 years they have only had one break -in into a construction trailer,
allegedly by a former employee.
Mr. Brixius stated that the Design and Review Committee also had
concerns with too much lighting. The area is outdoor storage and the
lighting was intended to provide for security and for access to those
traveling through the building to the outside. Lighting would provide
coverage along the first drive aisle to the exit gate. Brixius remarked that
after hearing Mr. Jones comments regarding his experience and the
security at other facilities, staff would be comfortable with the present
lighting configuration. The light fixtures should be 90- degree cutoff and
the luminaries should not be seen by adjacent residential properties. The
lights could be dimmed down after 9 p.m. Mr. Brixius added that for
outdoor storage areas the police department indicated it liked some
lighting so the property can be viewed during patrol. The main concern
was that enough lighting was provided so that people exiting the building
have a visible line of sight to the exit gate.
Commissioner Hunten maintained that due to the building sitting lower
than Winnetka Avenue she felt there was no need for 12 trees to screen
the front of the building. Mr. Brixius stated that staff would be
comfortable with six trees in a staggered row. He explained that the
applicant was asking for a text change in the ordinance, which not only
affected this property, but all applications in the future.
Planning Commission Meeting 5 August 8, 2012
Mr. Steve Sondrall, city attorney, inquired whether there would be a CUP/
site improvement agreement and financial guarantee required to insure
the improvements would be completed on the outside of the building.
Mr. Jacobsen stated that site improvement agreements are required when
work is to be done in the roadway right -of -way. Mr. Sondrall then
inquired whether the applicant would need to provide proof of parking,
which was usually incorporated into the site improvement agreement.
Mr. Jones pointed out that the 23 projected parking spaces were for a
standard warehouse setting. He was proposing self- storage which falls
under the "other" parking category in the ordinance. Mr. Sondrall
explained that, if staff was not claiming this site as a warehouse, the
condition for proof of parking would not be required. Mr. Brixius
interjected that he would like the city to have the opportunity to require
additional parking if the seven existing spaces were not adequate in the
future. Mr. Sondrall stated that the city should then have a "proof of
parking" agreement with the property owner to ensure additional
parking would be provided in the future, if needed. This could be
accomplished with a certificate of filing. Mr. Jacobsen agreed this use fit
into the "other" category. He added that the city's inspectors check
annually on properties with a conditional use permit to be sure they are
compliant. There would be at least 10 parking spaces available inside the
building for vehicles that are being loaded or unloaded. Commissioner
Svendsen stated he agreed the building should be considered a storage
facility with less stringent parking requirements.
Commissioner Nirgude wondered whether there were federal or state
codes that the petitioner would need to comply with and what types of
items would be stored in the units. Mr. Jones responded that they were
required to comply with all local, state, federal and international laws. No
perishables or hazardous materials are allowed to be stored on site. Self
storage operators do not take care, custody or control of the items in the
space. The lease agreement indicated that food and perishables cannot be
stored on site. Commissioner Onadipe stated he did not see perishables
listed in the lease agreement. A suggestion was made to add no
perishables to the lease. Mr. Sondrall stated that the lease does contain a
"rules and regulations" provision which could include a rule that no
perishable goods be stored on site. The lease also includes a "right to
enter" and a "right to remove property" that may create a problem.
Commissioner Nirgude inquired whether or not the fire escape route was
well defined in the building. Mr. Jones replied that there are specific
requirements in the building and fire codes with regard to exit lights,
door hardware, and so on. Chair Houle interjected that construction
plans would be submitted to the inspections department for review.
There was no one in the audience wishing to speak at the public hearing.
Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen to
close the public hearing. All voted in favor. Motion carried.
Planning Commission Meeting 6 August 8, 2012
Motion #1 Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner
Item 4.1 Brinkman, to approve Planning Case 12 -07, request for text amendment
to Section 4 -20(e) conversion of warehousing to self- storage —
conditional use permit, Todd C. Jones /Premier Storage, LLC, petitioner.
Voting in favor: Brinkman, Houle, Hunten, Landy, Nirgude, Onadipe ,
Svendsen
Voting against: None
Absent: Anderson, McKenzie, Schmidt
Motion approved.
Motion #2 Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner
Item 4.1 Brinkman, to approve Planning Case 12 -07, request for a conditional use
permit for the conversion of warehousing to a self- storage facility, 5040
Winnetka Avenue North, Todd C. Jones /Premier Storage, LLC,
petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
1. City approval of the attached proposed zoning text amendment.
2. The self- storage facility shall be limited to self- storage; all other
uses shall be prohibited.
3. Applicant to provide an additional three spruce plantings to make a
total of six on the northwest corner of the lot to screen the exterior
loading area. Trees to be six feet high and stagger plantings.
4. The applicant provide screening for rooftop equipment for city
approval.
5. All approved paving and landscaping improvements shall be
completed prior to building occupancy.
Voting in favor: Brinkman, Houle, Hunten, Landy, Nirgude, Onadipe,
Svendsen
Voting against: None
Absent: Anderson, McKenzie, Schmidt
Motion approved.
Motion #3 Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner
Item 4.1 Brinkman, to approve Planning Case 12 -07, request for a conditional use
permit for outdoor storage, 5040 Winnetka Avenue North, Todd C.
Jones /Premier Storage, LLC, petitioner, subject to the following
conditions:
1 The applicant shall not stack items within the outdoor storage area
higher than eight feet. Boats and recreational equipment on trailers
shall be considered a single item.
2 No parking in railroad easement area until easement has been
terminated.
Voting in favor: Brinkman, Houle, Hunten, Landy, Nirgude, Onadipe,
Svendsen
Voting against: None
Planning Commission Meeting 7 August 8, 2012
Absent: Anderson, McKenzie, Schmidt
Motion approved.
Motion #4 Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner
Item 4.1 Brinkman, to approve Planning Case 12 -07, request for site and building
plan review, 5040 Winnetka Avenue North, Todd C. Jones /Premier
Storage, LLC, petitioner.
Voting in favor: Brinkman, Houle, Hunten, Landy, Nirgude, Onadipe,
Svendsen
Voting against: None
Absent: Anderson, McKenzie, Schmidt
Motion approved.
Chair Houle stated the City Council would consider these requests at its
meeting on August 27, 2012, and asked that the petitioner be in
attendance.
COMMITTEE
REPORTS
Design and Review Commissioner Svendsen stated the Design and Review Committee met
Committee with the petitioner. He suggested the Codes and Standards Committee
Item 5.1 discuss and potentially add language regarding "other" parking required
for self storage facilities. The Design and Review Committee also
discussed curbing around the outdoor storage area.
Mr. Jacobsen reported that an application may be submitted for a new
cell tower. Staff will contact committee members if a meeting is necessary.
Codes and Standards Mr. Jacobsen reported that there are several items still to discuss from a
Committee previous list. The potential cell tower applicant may be requesting a text
Item 5.2 amendment to reduce the 1000 -foot separation requirement as well as a
reduced setback from the property line. Mr. Brixius interjected that city
code allows for a reduced setback if the applicant can provide
information from an engineer stating the collapse zone is less than code
requires. A suggestion was made to provide information on the number
and location of existing cell towers in the city. Commissioner Nirgude
stressed that decreasing the separation distance and increasing the
number of towers in the city should be done only if it is a benefit to the
residents of the city.
NEW BUSINESS
Planning Case 12 -03 Chair Houle introduced Item 6.1, Discussion of City Center zoning
Item 6.1 revisions and stated that he would abstain from any discussion as he had
been approached by some people to put together some concept
drawings /plans for redevelopment and he did not want to give the
perception of influencing any discussion relative to the zoning for City
Center. Commission Brinkman was asked to chair the discussion.
Mr. Brixius stated that after discussion by staff, it was determined that
Planning Commission Meeting 8 August 8, 2012
some items belong in ordinance form, some in the Comprehensive Plan,
and others in the Design Guidelines. The study area contains a total of 93
acres and is divided into 34 different parcels with the superblocks at 35
and 24 acres each. The ordinance would need to be flexible in applying to
individual lots, as well as total block redevelopment. Winnetka and 42nd
avenues are both county roads and Hennepin County would dictate
access management, lighting, traffic control and overall design. Much of
what has come into the design for the City Center district was in
anticipation of heavy transit users. Incentives could be provided,
however, the city should not totally rely on transit ridership. The
ordinance provides for a vibrant destination for residents and visitors
and includes provisions for automobile traffic.
Mr. Brixius explained the changes to the Comprehensive Plan. A change
in the Land Use Plan adds a mixed use arrangement over the superblocks
with the anticipation that those areas would be most likely to have mixed
use operations, retail, and entertainment. When drafting the
Comprehensive Plan, it was anticipated the land use area would go
through additional study. The goals of the visioning study were adopted
as an appendix to the Comprehensive Plan. This was important from the
standpoint that within the metropolitan area the Comprehensive Plan is
the superior document to zoning. The zoning must match the
Comprehensive Plan. The amendment also expands the commercial
redevelopment target areas to include the City Center superblocks.
Planning District 11 encompasses all of the land in the study area. The
city should adopt the generalized land use plan as part of Planning
District 11. The reason being that there are areas deemed more suitable
for commercial and more suitable for residential. Within the visioning
study, the study indicated it wanted to preserve the 42nd and Winnetka
avenue corridors for commercial, with more mixed use operations further
away from the superblocks. Mr. Brixius questioned if the commissioners
were agreeable to opportunities for free - standing residential at
45th /Winnetka and 42nd / Xylon avenues. Commissioner Svendsen stated
he would be agreeable to residential at 42nd / Xylon avenues. Brixius
explained mixed use would be commercial on the first floor with
residential above. Commissioner Hunten stated she felt a senior building
would be good for the area as the people walking around the area would
probably be seniors as the younger people would tend to drive to a
destination restaurant or entertainment and then leave. Svendsen
reminded the commissioners that the corridor along 42nd would be
better for commercial uses than residential. A suggestion was made to
redraw the Generalized Land Use map to expand the commercial /mixed
use area along 42nd Avenue from Winnetka to Xylon. Freestanding
residential (apartments) would be allowed only along the northern
portion of Xylon and western portion of 45th Avenue. The freestanding
residential would be a conditional use and one of the conditions would be
meeting the location standards of the CC district.
The CC district had a lot of detailed provisions mandated as zoning
Planning Commission Meeting 9 August 8, 2012
ordinances, which would take a lot of imagination out of design for the
developer or architect. The architectural standards were removed from
the first draft to the city's Design Guidelines. The architectural guidelines
will be mandatory, but there are many ways for a building meet those
guidelines without requiring a variance.
Based on the vision study, the city desires to create a vital, active
downtown. Mr. Brixius stated he recommended removing uses that do
not fit that description, such as research facilities and allow them in the
industrial zoning district. He suggested that conference centers, printing,
publishing, and engraving under 2,000 square feet, and theaters be listed
as permitted uses. Administrative uses would include farmers markets
and outdoor seasonal sales. Home occupations would be removed from
this district. Outdoor dining would be allowed as an administrative use.
Commissioner Hunten questioned why a park 'n ride facility would be
allowed in the downtown area. Mr. Brixius answered that by drawing
people to the area for a parking facility also introduced them to the City
Center area and the businesses, services and entertainment offered. He
added that when looking at minimum parking standards, a parking
structure would more than likely be needed.
Mr. Brixius explained that a freestanding multiple family use would be
allowed by conditional use permit with criteria as to location. Live /work
buildings would allow walk -in customer businesses on the first floor and
upper floor appointment only customer businesses. Daycare provisions
were amended to remove the reference to outdoor recreation area. He
questioned whether or not veterinary clinics were appropriate for this
area, but built in standards to insure compatibility in multi tenant
buildings to protect against odor and waste.
The build to line would be required on both streets on corner lots. An
exception would be if the use was built into a plaza or entryway.
Commissioner Hunten stated she felt using the Metropolitan Council
urban environment and putting it into a suburban small town setting did
not make sense. She was concerned about visibility and traffic with
buildings so close to the street and moving all of the parking to the back
of the buildings. She also mentioned that too much space had been
devoted to bicycles when demographics indicate an older population. Mr.
Brixius stated that the vision study called for a very metropolitan, urban
design. If the corners are established and protected, the build to line
would not need to be the full length of the block and allowances could be
made. The gaps between buildings could be landscaped parking areas
with sidewalk connections to the businesses. He suggested leaving much
of the design component to the developers.
Commissioner Onadipe agreed flexibility in design was very important.
He added that the city draw on the components of the Met Council urban
image it could utilize. If the city is creating a transit oriented
development, people have to get out of their vehicles. A downtown
should have some urban image. People come to downtown for a reason.
Planning Commission Meeting 10 August 8, 2012
A park 'n ride facility brings more people to the area and they may utilize
the businesses in the area before going home.
Mr. Brixius stated that this ordinance would take a step back from the
hard and fast rules and provides a range of flexibility. With the
Comprehensive Plan and visioning study goals, which would be adopted
as part of the comp plan, the city can establish some of the bulk
components. The architectural standards were deleted.
There is a maximum and minimum range for parking. Mr. Brixius stated
that one change was to set the maximum as the standard. If the developer
provided documentation that they met the city's performance standards,
the parking could be reduced. He stated he would not recommend
reducing the parking standard to one stall per apartment without
knowing what amount of parking was needed. The developer would have
to provide the facilities with transit, access, shared parking or a parking
structure. If those criteria were met, then the parking standard could be
lowered.
Commissioner Hunten questioned why outdoor dining would be allowed
and Mr. Jacobsen interjected that other people in the visioning study
wanted outdoor (patio or rooftop) dining. Svendsen stated that he felt the
ordinance should be written to address today's market so the city is ready
for what a developer might offer. He added that he preferred having the
buildings closer to the road and the parking behind the buildings so there
is not a mass of parking along the street. Bicycle parking was included
with a graduated scale to a maximum of 12 stalls.
Mr. Brixius stated that he felt the original draft ordinance was overly
restrictive. He recommended adopting the vision study and the
performance standards as comp plan guidelines rather than hard and fast
rules. Rules were thought to be necessary so they address items staff and
the commissioners requested with regard to range of land uses, setbacks,
density, etcetera, in order to give developers greater flexibility.
New design concepts typically look at the attractiveness of the building,
but forget about the needs for trash, deliveries, ground equipment and
how those items fit into the design. There must be turning radiuses for
trucks and trash enclosures that are accessible. No changes were made to
the usable open space.
Commissioner Brinkman stated he would like to see some type of plan or
layout of what would be allowed and where.
Commissioner Svendsen recommended that the Commission review this
document once more prior to the public hearing. Commissioner Landy
suggested that the full Planning Commission review the final draft rather
than just the Codes and Standards Committee before the public hearing.
Mr. Brixius asked the commissioners to read over the draft zoning
Planning Commission Meeting 11 August 8, 2012
ordinance and bring specific concerns to the September meeting. Mr.
Jacobsen requested that if any commissioners had concerns with any part
of the draft ordinance to contact him prior to the next meeting.
Mr. Brixius added that commissioners may want to visit Burnsville's
Heart of the City development at Nicollet and Highway 13, which is a
development closer to what New Hope may want to accomplish in City
Center.
Item 6.2 Mr. Jacobsen reminded the commissioners of the dinner and workshop to
Navigating the New be held on August 21 and recommended that the commissioners attend.
Norm There will be a panel of experts to explain various aspects of
development.
OLD BUSINESS
Approval of Minutes Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner Landy,
Item 7.1 to approve the Planning Commission minutes of July 10, 2012. All voted
in favor. Motion carried.
ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Jacobsen inquired if any of the commissioners would be interested in
judging the RAVE! Award nominees and Commissioner Svendsen and
Chair Houle volunteered.
Chair Houle mentioned that the grand opening for the North Education
Center would be conducted on August 23.
Chair Houle announced that Eric Weiss had accepted another position
outside the city.
ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 9:10
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary
Planning Commission Meeting 12 August 8, 2012