120313 planning commission
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 3, 2013
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; Chair Svendsen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL Present: Jim Brinkman, Mikel Dumonceaux, Wade English, Greg Gehring,
Jeff Houle, Sandra Hunten, Roger Landy, Christopher McKenzie,
Ranjan Nirgudé, Tom Schmidt, Steve Svendsen
Also Present: Curtis Jacobsen, Director of Community Development, Jeff
Sargent, Community Development Specialist, Steven Sondrall,
City Attorney, Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant, Debra Somers,
Recording Secretary
CONSENT BUSINESS There was no Consent Business on the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING Chair Svendsen introduced Item 4.1, Planning Case 13-10, request for
Planning Case 13-10 Comprehensive Sign Plan and site review for the remodel of Domino’s Pizza,
Item 4.1
2720 Winnetka Avenue North, Eric Stadtherr, petitioner.
Mr. Jeff Sargent, community development specialist, introduced planning case
13-10 which is a request for a Site Plan Review and a Comprehensive Sign Plan
for Domino’s Pizza at 2720 Winnetka Avenue North. He stated a site plan
review is required when modifications of or additions or enlargements to a
building occur. He stated a comprehensive sign plan is needed for multi-tenant
commercial buildings to ensure a consistent design for signs. He reviewed the
zoning code references for the site plan review and comprehensive sign plan.
Mr. Sargent indicated the property is currently zoned CB, Community Business
and is located at the northeast corner of Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka
Avenue North. He reported the adjacent land uses are Residential-Business to
the north, High Density Residential to the east, and Commercial to the west and
south. He stated Planning District 16 guides this site for commercial land uses.
Mr. Sargent reported the applicant is currently located in the Midland Shopping
Center. He stated Domino’s Pizza would utilize one-third of the building space
at 2720 Winnetka and would lease the remaining two tenant spaces to other
users.
He explained the applicant intends to upgrade the appearance of the building
by replacing brick with decorative stone veneer and EFIS panels, repainting the
remainder of the building to match the new materials, and extending the front
glass to the ground. He stated the property grounds would be upgraded by
resurfacing and restriping the parking lot, constructing a trash enclosure,
replacing the pylon sign, installing landscaping along the Winnetka Avenue
sidewalk, fixing the perimeter fence, and installing a bicycle rack.
Mr. Sargent stated a site plan review is needed to ensure there is adequate
parking for the property and to make sure the proposed building materials are
consistent with the New Hope Design Guidelines. He stated the change in
property use triggers the need to review parking calculations, and the applicant
could either assume the retail/shopping center ratio of 1:200 (20 required
parking spaces) or use square footage estimates based on use areas for the
proposed restaurant (41 required parking spaces). He noted the site plan reflects
a total of 54 on-site parking stalls which meets the minimum requirements.
Mr. Sargent reviewed the building materials and color schemes. Next he
reviewed the site circulation and traffic and noted Domino’s Pizza delivery
personnel and employees would park in the back and access the building from a
rear door. He stated movement of delivery traffic should not conflict with
patrons accessing the front doors. Mr. Sargent stated although the applicant was
not required to submit a landscape plan, the applicant does intend to upgrade
the landscaping along the Winnetka Avenue sidewalk with decorative concrete
and planters. He also reported the existing rooftop units will be screened from
view, and a new trash enclosure will be constructed to match the renovated
building.
Mr. Sargent illustrated building elevations and the proposed pylon sign which
incorporates an electronic message board. He stated the new pylon sign is a
double pylon sign that will have two posts instead of a single post. The sign will
be about twenty feet tall, and each tenant will have their individual space with
the electronic message board sign located at the bottom of the sign.
Mr. Sargent stated no hearing notice notifications are required for a Site Plan
Review request.
Mr. Sargent stated staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the Site Plan Review and Comprehensive Sign Plan with the
following conditions of approval:
1.A detail of the proposed screen fencing around the rooftop equipment
must be provided.
2.The parking lot must be striped.
3.A detail of the trash enclosure must be provided with elevations
indicating the building materials.
4.The existing perimeter fence must be repaired.
5.A detail of the planters and decorative concrete treatment along
Winnetka Avenue must be provided.
6.Lighting at the rear of the building must be 90 degree cutoff lighting as
to not impact adjacent residential properties.
7.The site plan must be revised to show the location for the new multi-
tenant sign that meets the required ten-foot setback from the property
line.
8.Sign permits must be obtained for all site signage.
Planning Commission Meeting 2 December 3, 2013
9.The new electronic reader board sign must comply with the signage
regulations as outlined in Section 3-50 (k)(3)f of the Sign Code.
Mr. Sargent reported staff and representatives for the applicant are present to
answer any questions.
Commissioners Brinkman, Hunten and Nirgudé questioned the positioning of
the sign on the property and the bicycle rack in the same location. It was noted
the sign would not block vehicular traffic and the sign would be visible to
vehicles traveling northbound and southbound.
Mr. Sargent indicated the new bicycle rack would be installed underneath the
new pylon sign.
Mr. Sargent stated all the parking lot and landscaping work would not be done
until the spring of 2014. The applicant stated they would do the renovations in a
timely and weather-friendly fashion.
Chair Svendsen requested the petitioner to address the Commission.
Mr. Eric Stadtherr, 809 Southeast Third Street, Palmer, Minnesota, acting as
representative for Domino’s Pizza and Kaukauna Properties in Minnesota, was
recognized.
Mr. Stadtherr stated he would like to purchase this property and update the
property.
Chair Svendsen and Commissioner Houle questioned the photometric plan
which showed about 3-1/2 foot candles at about 1-1/2 to 2 feet from the property
line.
Mr. Al Brixius, city planner, explained that the outdoor lighting ordinance does
recognize existing conditions and gives the applicant some grandfather rights
under the current conditions. He stated most of the light fixtures are existing
lights. Mr. Brixius indicated he is working with the applicant regarding the 90
degree cutoff lights by reducing clarity of the luminary cast toward the joint
properties. It was noted the lights are hooded and shielded providing downcast
lighting. He also noted the applicant is complying with required lighting for
sidewalk areas.
A discussion took place with Chair Svendsen, Commissioner Brinkman and Mr.
Stadtherr concerning the materials for the base of the new sign. Chair Svendsen
suggested Mr. Stadtherr provide the city with the full name of the proposed
product.
Chair Svendsen questioned the landscape plans for Winnetka Avenue. The
applicant explained he plans to install decorative, stamped concrete the width of
the parking lot and installing flower planters every fifteen to twenty feet. He
Planning Commission Meeting 3 December 3, 2013
noted the contractor will seek authorization from Hennepin County to allow
concrete to butt up to the existing sidewalk from the property line.
A discussion ensued about using a pervious material in this area instead of the
decorative concrete. Mr. Stadtherr noted he believes the concrete would require
less maintenance. Mr. Stadtherr expressed concerns regarding potential
vandalism of pedestrian traffic along Winnetka Avenue.
Commissioner Brinkman asked if there would be any outdoor dining at this
location and was advised there will not be any at this location.
Commissioner Nirgudé asked if the there would be new equipment added to
the rooftop equipment already in place. Mr. Stadtherr stated the existing
equipment on the roof will be replaced due to its deteriorated condition.
Commissioner Nirgudé inquired of the size and frequency of delivery trucks.
Mr. Stadtherr indicated that a semi truck comes twice per week at 4:30 am to
deliver food to the restaurant.
There was no one else in the audience who wished to speak at the public
hearing.
Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Houle, to close
the public hearing. All voted in favor. Motion carried.
Motion Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Brinkman, to
Item 4.1 approve Planning Case 13-10, request for Comprehensive Sign Plan and Site
Plan Review for remodeling of Domino’s Pizza, 2720 Winnetka Avenue
North, subject to the following nine conditions:
1.That a detail of the proposed screen fence around the rooftop equipment
must be provided;
2.The parking lot must be striped;
3.A detail of the trash enclosure must be provided with elevations indicating
the building materials;
4.The existing perimeter fence must be repaired;
5.A detail of the planters and decorative concrete treatment along Winnetka
Avenue must be provided;
6.Lighting at the rear of the building must be 90 degree cutoff lighting as to
not impact the adjacent residential properties;
7.The site plan must be revised to show the location of the new multi-tenant
sign that meets the required ten-foot setback from the property line;
8.Sign permits must be obtained for all site signage; and
9.The new electronic reader board sign must comply with the signage
regulations as outlined in our Sign Code.
Voting in favor: Svendsen, Brinkman, Dumonceaux, English, Gehring, Houle,
Hunten, Landy, McKenzie, Nirgudé, Schmidt
Planning Commission Meeting 4 December 3, 2013
Voting against: None
Absent: None
Motion approved.
Chair Svendsen stated that the City Council would consider this planning case
at its December 9 meeting and asked the petitioner to be in attendance.
Planning Case 13-09 Chair Svendsen introduced Item 4.2, Planning Case 13-09, request for rezoning
Item 4.2
and Comprehensive Plan Amendment 9390 and 9398 27th Avenue North,
Aaron Baruch, petitioner.
Mr. Jeff Sargent, community development specialist, stated planning case 13-09
is a request for rezoning and of the properties located at 9390 and 9898 27
th
Avenue North from LB, Limited Business to R-O, Residential Office; and
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide the properties from commercial to
high-density residential.
Mr. Sargent reported the zoning district classification is currently LB, limited
business, and the proposed zoning is R-O, residential office. He stated the
properties are located at the northeast corner of Hillsboro Avenue North and
27th Avenue North. He stated the adjacent land uses include high-density
residential to the north and west, medium-density residential to the east, and
the city of Golden Valley to the south. He stated the area is located in Planning
District 14 of the city’s comprehensive plan which guides this site for
commercial land uses.
Mr. Sargent reported the applicant has purchased the property at 9398 27th
Avenue North with the intent of constructing a 21-unit apartment building on
the site. He stated the site is currently occupied by a single-family house. The
current Limited Business zoning classification does not allow for high-density
residential. He stated the Comprehensive Plan guides the area for commercial
and requires an amendment to allow for the proposed use.
Mr. Sargent illustrated to the Planning Commission possible site plan and
building elevations as an example only. Mr. Sargent reminded the Commission
that the applicant is not seeking site plan approval at this time.
Mr. Sargent reported the Planning Commission and City Council must consider
the following factors when approving a rezoning request:
1. The character of the area has changed to warrant consideration of an
amendment. The findings show that the surrounding area has been
developed into medium and high-density residential uses. The
shopping center to the south which is in the City of Golden Valley is
marginal with an unusual mix of tenants and vacancies. He noted this
supports the idea that commercial uses on the subject property may
not be the best use and may not prosper well in the area.
Planning Commission Meeting 5 December 3, 2013
2. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific
policies and provisions and has been found to be consistent with the
official city Comprehensive Plan. The findings show the
Comprehensive plan guides this area for commercial use, and the
proposed use of the land as high-density residential is not consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan. He noted the Comprehensive Plan
would need to be amended to accommodate a high-density residential
use.
Mr. Sargent stated amending the Comprehensive Plan for high density
residential would be consistent with two housing goals: 1) provide a variety of
housing types, styles and choices to meet the needs of New Hope’s changing
demographics; and 2) maintain and enhance multiple family residential
neighborhoods. Mr. Sargent stated the applicant indicated the proposed
apartments would be market-rate with higher-end amenities, providing a
different option than what is available in the area. He also reported the multiple
family neighborhood would be enhanced by a new housing complex.
Mr. Sargent reviewed the site plan and noted the property of 9398 27 Avenue is
th
35,154 square feet in area. The R-O Zoning District would allow for up to 1 unit
per each 2,200 square feet of land. He stated the calculations would permit the
applicant to construct a 16-unit building. He noted the applicant is proposing a
21-unit building.
Mr. Sargent stated that the zoning code allows a 20% density bonus increase if
the property includes items such as durable exterior building material,
underground parking, the incorporation of a recreational area (indoor or
outdoor), and is located within 300 feet of a public transit. He pointed out that
even with the bonus the applicant would only be allowed 19 units on the
property.
He stated the applicant has requested staff to review a possible text amendment
that would increase the density allotments in some residential districts. He
explained that staff will discuss this issue with the Codes and Standards
Committee on December 10. Staff will get feedback from that committee to see if
this should be presented to the Planning Commission for further consideration.
Mr. Sargent noted when considering rezoning it is necessary to ensure the
existing business (State Farm Insurance) at the 9390 property does not become
non-compliant. He stated the State Farm office use would be a permitted use in
the R-O zoning district.
Mr. Sargent informed the Commission that the applicant has expressed interest
in purchasing the State Farm property with the possibility of building on that
property also.
Mr. Sargent stated property owners within 350 feet were notified by mail and a
public hearing notice was published in the SunPost. Staff has received no phone
Planning Commission Meeting 6 December 3, 2013
calls or objections regarding this proposal.
Mr. Sargent stated staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend
approval for rezoning the properties located at 9390 and 9398 – 27th Avenue
from LB, Limited Business to R-O, Residential Office. He indicated staff felt it
was prudent to include the property located at 9390 – 27th Avenue in the
rezoning request in order to maintain zoning consistency in the area.
He stated staff also recommended that the Planning Commission recommend
approval for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the properties located at
9390 and 9398 – 27th Avenue to re-guide the properties from commercial to
high-density residential.
Commissioners Schmidt, Houle and Hunten asked if this was the same location
where the SuperAmerica was denied a while back. Mr. Brixius indicated it was
denied due to a variety of issues such as lighting issues, size, traffic and other
gas stations in the area.
Commissioner Houle questioned if staff contacted the property owners at 9390 –
27th Avenue and whether the owners are aware of or in support of this
proposal. Staff indicated the contact the city had was through the notification
process and the SunPost which is required by State law. Staff reiterated that the
city would not be making the property non-conforming by rezoning it.
Commissioners Hunten, Landy, Chair Svendsen and Mr. Brixius discussed the
notification to the owners at 9390 27th Avenue and the size criteria for 19 or 21
units. Mr. Brixius stated the density issue will be referred to the applicant, and
the Planning Commission will eventually consider the site plan. He noted it is
prudent to change the zoning of the properties.
Chair Svendsen asked the petitioner to address the Commission.
Mr. Aaron Baruch, 9705 29th Avenue North, was recognized and offered to
answer any questions.
Commissioners Landy and Houle questioned the petitioner’s plans for a 19-unit
apartment versus a 21-unit apartment and asked for an update regarding
purchasing the other property. Mr. Baruch stated his goal is to construct up to a
21-unit complex if it fits within the city guidelines. He stated his intention of
contacting the owners of 9390 27th Avenue. He stated the property is currently
for sale, and the owners are aware the property may be rezoned.
There was no one else in the audience who wished to speak at the public
hearing.
Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Houle, to close
the public hearing. All voted in favor. Motion carried.
Planning Commission Meeting 7 December 3, 2013
Chair Svendsen noted rezoning of the parcels will benefit the city as it will offer
broader options for future development.
Commissioner Houle commented that in the past the Council has not been in
favor of higher density. Chair Svendsen mentioned the Met Council is
promoting higher density.
Commissioner Houle expressed concern that staff did not directly contact the
owners of 9390 27th Avenue regarding the potential rezoning issue. Mr. Curtis
Jacobson, director of community development, stated the applicant had prior
conversations with the owner. He noted the owner was mailed the official legal
notice from the city.
Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Gehring, to
approve Planning Case 13-09, request for Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan
Amendment 9390 and 9398 – 27th Avenue North.
Voting in favor: Dumonceaux, English, Gehring, Hunten, Landy, McKenzie,
Schmidt, Svendsen, Brinkman
Voting against: Houle, Nirgudé
Absent: None
Motion approved.
Chair Svendsen stated that the City Council would consider this planning case
at its December 9 meeting and asked the petitioner to be in attendance.
Planning Case 13-08 Chair Svendsen introduced Item 4.3, Planning Case 13-08, an ordinance
Item 4.3
amending the New Hope Zoning Code defining driveway and regulating
driveway surfaces and exterior storage surfaces.
Mr. Sargent explained the city does not currently require paved hard surface
driveways within its R-1, Single Family and R-2, Single and Two Family
Residential Districts. He stated staff has concerns related to neighborhood
design, runoff from gravel driveways, and motor fluids being absorbed into the
ground.
He stated the Codes and Standards Committee met on this on April 10, 2013,
and determined some ordinance changes were appropriate. He reviewed the
amendments:
1. The first ordinance change provides a definition for driveways in
Section 4.2.
2. The second amendment will require hard surface driveways for all
lots within the city of New Hope. Driveway design standards would
be outlined for both the sub-base and surfacing.
3. The third amendment addresses front yards and side yards abutting a
street for exterior storage. It would require paved surfaces for storage
of recreational vehicles on the street side of any home. These changes
will only be applied with new construction or when a driveway
Planning Commission Meeting 8 December 3, 2013
permit is requested for an alteration or expansion. There are legally
non-conforming properties that the city has to be aware of. He stated if
someone currently has a gravel driveway they can improve that
driveway as far as adding more gravel on it. If they would come in for
a driveway permit to widen or change it, the city would require that
driveway at that point to be a hard surface driveway.
Commissioner Houle asked what situation would cause the third amendment to
take effect. Mr. Sargent stated a resident that is currently in compliance with
storing their recreational vehicle on the side of their property could continue to
store it in the same location until they came in to the city to request a permit for
a hard surface for any particular reason. At that point the resident would need
to put in a hard surface driveway.
Various scenarios of RV parking were discussed.
Mr. Brixius stated the city is setting a standard for all new construction that
anything new has to meet the hard surface driveway criteria. He stated if a
property owner requested a permit to correct an existing non-conforming
condition the city will review the property on a case by case basis.
City Attorney Sondrall suggested cobblestone be eliminated from the draft
ordinance.
There was no one else in the audience who wished to speak at the public
hearing.
Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Houle, to close
the public hearing. All voted in favor. Motion carried.
Motion Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Brinkman, to
Item 4.3 approve Planning Case 13-08, ordinance 13-12, an ordinance amending text in
three areas in Section 4-2 of the New Hope City Code providing a definition
for driveways, requiring paved driveways for all lots within the city and
addressing front yards and side yards abutting a street for exterior storage,
and that the term cobblestone be deleted from the proposed ordinance.
Voting in favor: English, Gehring, Houle, Hunten, Landy, McKenzie,
Nirgudé, Schmidt, Svendsen, Brinkman, Dumonceaux
Voting against: None
Absent: None
Motion approved.
Chair Svendsen stated that the City Council would consider the ordinance
amendment at its December 9 meeting.
COMMITTEE REPORTS Commissioner Brinkman stated the next meeting will be held on Tuesday,
Codes & Standards
December 10, 2013. Mr. Jacobsen reported there will be three items on the
Planning Commission Meeting 9 December 3, 2013
Item 5.1 agenda.
Design & Review Mr. Jacobsen stated there may be one or two items moving forward to the
Item 5.2
Design and Review Committee.
NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Schmidt mentioned a recent article on the Star Tribune’s website
titled “Botched Bloomington Kitchen Project Leads to Charges Against
Remodeler.” He stated the article noted some cities do not prosecute unlicensed
remodeling contractors. City Attorney Sondrall advised that the city of New
Hope does prosecute for offenses.
OLD BUSINESS Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Houle, to approve
the Planning Commission minutes of August 7, 2013. All voted in favor.
Approval of Minutes
Item 7.1
Motion carried.
ANNOUNCEMENTS Chair Svendsen welcomed Deb Somers to the Planning Commission.
Chair Svendsen reminded everyone to respond regarding their interest in the
Crossings Tour on Saturday morning, December 7, 2013. Mr. Jacobsen stated he
has received six responses from interested Planning Commission members to
date.
Commissioner Schmidt commented that The Claws restaurant is open, and he
inquired when the Goose Egg Restaurant may open. Mr. Jacobsen stated the
restaurant owner is still obtaining the financing.
ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Houle, to close
meeting. All voted in favor. Motion carried.
The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Deb Somers, Recording Secretary
Planning Commission Meeting 10 December 3, 2013