Loading...
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