060314 planning commission
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA 55428
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 3, 2014
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, Wade English, Greg Gehring, Jeff Houle, Roger
Landy, Christopher McKenzie, Tom Schmidt, Steve Svendsen
Absent: Mikel Dumonceaux, Ranjan Nirgudé
Also Present: Jeff Sargent, Director of Community Development; Stacy Woods,
Assistant City Attorney; Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant; Chris
Long, City Engineer; Debra Somers, Recording Secretary
CONSENT BUSINESS There was no Consent Business on the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING Chair Svendsen introduced Item 4.1, Planning Case 14-06, request for a
Planning Case 14-06
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to convert a warehouse into a self-storage facility,
Item 4.1
known as Park Place Storage, 4630 Quebec Avenue North, Paul Jorgensen,
petitioner.
Director Sargent explained that the petitioner’s case, Park Place Storage, was
requesting a CUP to convert a warehouse into a self-storage. A CUP is a land
use designation in a zoning ordinance that is specifically permitted as long as it
meets certain standards. The zoning references included Section 4-33
administration – CUP and Section 4-20 (e) (15) – warehouse conversion to self
storage.
The property is located at the east side of Quebec Avenue North, south of 49th
Avenue North. Adjacent land uses are industrial to the north and south, single-
family to the east, Sunnyside Park to the west. Current zoning is I, Industrial
and the property is in Planning District 9N. The comprehensive plan supports
business condominium conversion in this area.
Director Sargent stated the applicant would like to convert the warehouse to self
storage condominiums known as Park Place Storage. The building is 61,000
square feet and would be divided into 35 units. The units would be for sale, not
for lease, and the size of each unit ranges from 600 to 4,000 square feet. He
added the unit prices range from $100-$125 per square foot.
The facility would have a full-time caretaker living on-site. A security system
would include indoor and outdoor cameras, service door key fobs, garage door
remotes and individual security systems for each unit. An association of owners
would be formed and by-laws would govern types of items that could be stored,
putting the responsibility for upkeep of the property onto the owners.
Director Sargent described the zoning analysis for circulation, access, traffic and
emergency vehicle access. The applicant relocated two driveway access points
onto Quebec Avenue North. There will be a one-way traffic flow system around
the south side of the building and there will be two internal drive aisles in to the
building. Other access features included a working turn radii for a 30-foot truck
access and there will be cross driveway easements needed on the northeast
corner of the property.
Mr. Sargent reported current conditions on the property include an existing
driveway on the north side of the building and two entrances in to the parking
lot to the south side. The applicant plans to remove the northern access point
and installing two new access points in the middle of the building which will be
in line with the two drive alleys that will be going through this building to
access the storage units. The applicant will remove one of the two driveway
aisles onto the south side of this property.
The circulation within the property will be two-way traffic for circulation
throughout the parking lot. To gain access to the building, the traffic would
come from the south and be diverted along the east side of the building to gain
entrance in to the overhead doors on the east side. The current unpaved
property that on the east side of the building will be paved to help with the
circulation. Currently this is an open access point to the property to the north. A
cross driveway easement for both users to use the driveway in this area will be
required.
Director Sargent pointed out that the property does not have curbing around the
perimeter of the lot and the change of use would not require an upgrade, as the
property is legally non-conforming. Parking requirements call for one parking
stall for each 300 square feet of office and one parking stall for each 1,500 square
feet of storage/warehouse space. This equates to 47 stalls on the south side of the
property. The Planning Commission should take into consideration that the type
of use for the property dictates a low level of traffic and the city does not
anticipate all 35 owners, or so, to be there at the same and using the parking. The
caretaker residence will need also place to park. The initial plan is for the
caretaker to use an interior storage unit for garage space, but may need to use
one of the outside parking spaces in the future.
The second floor will be used as the caretaker’s residence.
Director Sargent indicated there were no city requirements for the addition of
new landscaping, however; the applicant felt it was necessary to install more
landscaping given the appearance of the property. The applicant plans indicate
11 new evergreen trees along the west side of the building used to add aesthetic
appeal to the property. The applicant will retain all existing trees and will trim
them where needed. A rain garden will be added along the south property line.
Planning Commission Meeting 2 June 3, 2014
As far as lighting, Director Sargent mentioned the applicant would install new
parking lot lighting to meet the city’s minimum code requirements. The
applicant would reposition the wall mounted lights to be located directly above
the overhead doors. All other lighting requirements meet City Code for their
allowable foot-candle readings at the property lines and public rights-of-way.
Director Sargent commented that disruption to the site during grading, drainage
and erosion control would be minimal and included some installation of new
bituminous on the northeast portion of the site. The rain garden would be
located along the south property and will help collect some of the property’s
water and mitigate it for proper filtration.
Regarding the design guidelines, Director Sargent stated that the applicant
would repaint the building, add a color band along the top part of the facade
and add an architectural element to the entryway. The building facade would
change less than 25% of the total building and the metal siding used is
considered an accent material. The building meets the city’s design guidelines.
Staff feels these changes are a great addition to the building.
The property is zoned I which is Industrial. The CUP allows for conversion of
warehouse space into a self storage facility in the Industrial zoning district.
The following are the conditions of approval for self storage uses in the
Industrial District:
1.On-Site Manager Required. A full-time on-site manager must be
employed to manage the facility, control access and supervise
operations during all open hours in full compliance with the CUP. The
applicant indicated that he will live on the premises in the second floor
apartment as the on-site manager.
2.Fire Sprinkler System. The building shall be equipped with an auto-fire
sprinkler system approved by the fire department adequate to protect
all storage within the building. The applicant is working with West
Metro Fire and Rescue to ensure that the building has adequate fire
suppression facilities.
3.Prohibited Storage. Storage of any hazardous materials, chemicals,
gasoline or flammable liquids is prohibited in any storage space, except
for normal household quantities. The condominium will adopt by-laws
that govern the types of materials to be stored in the units. The by-laws
are subject to review and approval by the city.
4.Prohibited Uses. Any and all commercial, industrial or residential use
other than storage is prohibited within the self storage facility. The
applicant was made aware of this requirement and will incorporate it
into the association by-laws.
5.Storage Access. Storage spaces must be accessible only from the interior
Planning Commission Meeting 3 June 3, 2014
of the building. Accessibility from the exterior of the building to any
storage space may be approved if the access units are fully screened
from residential uses. The exterior access for the proposed use is not
adjacent to residential uses or the public right-of-way.
Director Sargent listed a few findings for the CUP:
1.The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2.The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding and anticipated
land uses.
3.There is no anticipated depreciation of value in the area due to the
proposed use.
4.The use complies with all other zoning regulations as set for in the
zoning code.
5.The proposed use will not generate nuisance characteristics on the
surrounding areas.
6.Staff feels that there will be a positive economic return on the proposed
use.
Director Sargent reported that the property owners within 350 feet were notified
by mail, which was actually extended more to the east. The public hearing was
noticed and published in the Sun Post. Staff has received no phone calls or
objections regarding this proposal.
In summary, there is there is a CUP being applied for to convert a warehouse
building located at 4630 Quebec Avenue North into a self storage facility. Staff
recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval based on the
conditions of approval as outlined in the staff report.
Chair Svendsen asked if the Commission had any questions for staff.
Commissioner Houle questioned the zoning code 4-20 (e) (15a) that requires
an on-site manager but says nothing regarding a residential caretaker. He
believes there are no grounds to allow a residence with this application.
Al Brixius, city planner, stated there is a provision in the zoning code where, if
this was an application for new construction, it would be a mandatory
requirement to have a caretaker apartment on-site. The provision
Commissioner Houle cited included not only a full-time manager but security
systems as well. As staff progressed through this element they felt, as part of
the security component and relating back to the previous conversion, the
opportunity to have a full-time caretaker on-site was appropriate for this type
of use. As such, it is allowed within the district under mini or self storage. The
difference is that one is a conversion and the other is new construction of a
facility. The opportunity to have this apartment on-site is fitting within the
district and for similar uses.
Commissioner Houle asked if staff could pick from different sections of the
zoning code and ignore other requirements for the residential manager.
Planning Commission Meeting 4 June 3, 2014
Mr. Brixius pointed out that from a land use perspective, Commissioner Houle
could look at this and say because it is not specifically identified it should not
be allowed at all. From staff perspective it is already allowed in the district. If
it were new construction it would be mandatory within the district. The
opportunity to have this only contributes to its function and operation and
ensures a better level of security. From that standpoint, staff believed it fit
within the context of the ordinance. Staff did not ignore the other
requirements. Those security systems are also in place but staff did not feel it
was a negative aspect to have a chance to even enhance it further.
Director Sargent pointed out that if this is a point the Commission wants to see
addressed further, staff can take those specific requirements, as outlined in
that Section, and make them conditions of approval for this application.
Commissioner Houle asked if there were other provisions under Section 7 and
whether staff had met all of those requirements.
Mr. Brixius assured that staff met all of the requirements such as building
location, building length, storage, snow storage, fire hydrant, sprinkler system,
fire alarm, driveway location, parking, building appearance, prohibited uses,
and prohibited storage.
Commissioner Houle asked why staff would not do a text amendment adding
the caretaker residential provision to 4-20 (e) (15a) as part of the application.
Mr. Brixius believes staff can certainly process a text amendment, however he
feels that staff is going beyond the ordinance in addressing this issue. The city
has not mandated a caretaker apartment for a conversion of an existing
building, but the availability of a caretaker apartment and 24-hour supervision
of this facility goes beyond the city’s standard security requirements.
Director Sargent indicated the easiest solution to this would be to cite both
sections 4-20 (e) (7) and 4-20 (e) (15) as a condition of approval.
Commissioner Brinkman asked why, in recommendation number two, it states
rental agreement when this is a purchased unit.
Director Sargent explained the condition of approval was taken verbatim from
the ordinance. The crux of that condition is the storage of hazardous materials
that the city does not want.
Mr. Brixius pointed out he should have changed the language to reflect a
condominium ownership rather than for rental units and the condition of
approval will reflect the ownership aspect in the resolution.
Ms. Woods clarified a condominium unit can be rented out if the declaration
allows it. So that is something that will have to be addressed whether the owner
Planning Commission Meeting 5 June 3, 2014
of that condominium unit is allowed to rent out that unit to someone else under
the condo Association declaration and by-laws which would be approved by the
City Attorney, Planning Commission and City Council.
Commissioner Houle, referring to recommendation number two, asked if the
West Metro Fire Department inspected the units yearly for this use. Under an
ownership situation would this be different than a rental unit?
Mr. Brixius indicated that this would be different as each unit would be
individually owned so the overall building loses some if the control of what
happens in an individual space. Staff indicated that inspections will have
specific rules for operation as far as stacking the materials, the type of materials,
and everything else is done.
Commissioner Brinkman asked how the taxes on these units were determined
and who pays the taxes.
Mr. Brixius explained that all the taxes will be divided in a fashion that is
distributed to the condominium ownership based on individual units and when
they share the common space. Hennepin County will enforce the collection of
the taxes.
Commissioner Houle stated that all units are accessible from the interior of the
building with the exception if the exterior doors are fully screened from
residential and the public way. The units on the south side of the building, in
particular the one in the middle, how would the overhead doors be screened
from Quebec Avenue North?
Mr. Brixius advised the middle unit is an existing condition at this time. There
will be a new garage door for the individual garage for the tenant so that unit
will not count. Mr. Brixius feels that the orientation of the existing doors to the
public right-of-way makes them compliant with the Code in regards to
screening.
Chair Svendsen asked the petitioner, Paul Jorgensen to come forward to answer
questions or make comments.
Mr. Paul Jorgensen, 6415 County Road 15, Corcoran, was recognized.
Chair Svendsen asked if the snow removal storage would be on-site.
Mr. Jorgensen replied the snow storage would be the south area near the truck
dock area, but he does not plan to truck snow to an off-site location.
Commissioner Svendsen commented that should the city get a large amount of
snow that the customers could not park on the city street.
Mr. Jorgensen stated that at his other sites he has had 5-6 cars maximum at a
Planning Commission Meeting 6 June 3, 2014
time as the business does not generate that kind of traffic.
Commissioner Svendsen questioned garbage at the site. He asked if the
individual condominium owners are responsible for their own garbage.
Mr. Jorgensen stated that there are no public garbage receptacles and that each
owner is responsible for their own garbage. The on-site resident generates very
little garbage and would cart it out also.
Commissioner Houle asked what the typical use of the units would be.
Mr. Jorgensen expressed that the usual items are in the units are from
individuals garages that are full. Items included boats, cars, Christmas trees,
decorations, pictures, household items, things children bring back from college,
extra items when residents downsize from homes to apartments/condominiums,
furniture.
Commissioner Houle asked whether the list of prohibited materials would cause
a concern.
Mr. Jorgensen stated that the list is fairly common at all the associations that no
flammables or toxic materials can be stored.
Commissioner Landy questioned what could deter someone storing hazardous
chemicals. Landy asked what could prevent such things as a meth lab in one of
these units.
Mr. Jorgensen stated that owners purchase the unit, putting their money down
and their name down. The sale goes through a title company so in a rental your
fear would be who this person is. He explained that 95% of the units are sold.
Mr. Jorgensen has been in business for fifteen years and over 650 units and he
has never had problems. He would not allow it and his customer next to such a
unit would not allow it.
Commissioner Houle asked if an owner subleases, is that rental agreement
subject to review by the association or is that a private transaction between the
owner and the lease.
Mr. Jorgensen responded that most of the time the lease is to a father, brother, or
family member.
Ms. Woods added that the declaration could require that any lease by an owner
of a condominium unit needs to be approved by the association.
Commissioner Landy asked whether the applicant was agreeable to the list of
conditions imposed in the Conditional Use Permit.
Mr. Jorgensen replied the language was very similar to other sites he has done.
Planning Commission Meeting 7 June 3, 2014
Commissioner Brinkman asked why the driveway to the building on the north
side of Park Place Storage would be kept open.
Mr. Jorgensen responded that the driveway is for emergency vehicles.
Commissioner Houle asked what rights, if any, of the association or West
Metro Fire Department is there to inspect units annually.
Ms. Woods stated that the protection is more in terms of having those
provisions in the declaration that governs the properties. So enforcement is
somewhat morphed by the association.
Commissioner Brinkman had a question about the flow within the building,
the applicant has two entrances on the east side does the far entrance take you
in and the other takes you out.
Mr. Jorgensen explained that owners would go in on the east side and go out
onto Quebec Avenue North there are two alleyways for a one-way traffic flow.
Commission Brinkman questioned how many of the loading docks on the
south side of the will remain.
Mr. Jorgensen does not perceive the docks being used.
Commissioner Houle asked about the middle bay, noting the ordinance
requires those doors to be fully screened from the right-of-way, if there any
reason that could not be reconfigured so access is only off of the interior aisle
rather than the exterior on that south end.
Mr. Jorgensen responded it gets into usable square footage and value. That
particular bay would not be as usable because by changing the layout
direction, the unit would become so larger and there are already larger units
on the north side and the mix does not work well.
Commissioner Houle stated that the alternative is to screen from the right-of-
way the doors on the south side per the language in the ordinance.
Chair Svendsen invited the public to come forward and address the
Commission.
The following persons addressed the Planning Commission:
Susan Wittig, 4625 Oregon Avenue North;
Marty Schmitz, 4609 Oregon Avenue North;
Jim “Randy” Sweazey, 4656 Oregon Avenue North;
John Wittig, 4625 Oregon Avenue North;
Dean Landree, 4632 Oregon Avenue North;
Planning Commission Meeting 8 June 3, 2014
Concerns included the following:
1.Parking lot lights on the east side of the building shine into the
neighbor’s living room and bedroom room windows. There is no
screening in the winter once the leaves are gone.
2.Truck/vehicle noise at all hours of the night.
3.Need to screen two new doors on the east side of the building from
neighbor’s decks and living rooms.
4.Too much traffic.
5.Sewer line without grates on the east side of the building with cause
backups in sewer line.
6.Loud noise from roof vents, air conditioner and compressor left on the
roof from the prior owner.
7.Storage units to be open 24-hours. The city has strict noise rules from
10:00 pm to 7:00 am.
8.Loading docks are like an echo chamber.
9.Clarify the meaning of residential in the language of the owner
agreements.
Chair Svendsen kept the hearing open in order to answer questions by audience.
Questions were addressed to Mr. Jorgensen.
Chair Svendsen wrote down all questions from public. He called the petitioner
forward and addressed each question as follows:
Chair Svendsen addressed Susan Wittig’s question about the lights shining into
her bedroom. Chair Svendsen made a statement regarding the city ordinance
concerning the foot-candles, which is the measure of how much illumination
there is, is set by code that it cannot be above .4 foot-candles at the property line
abutting a residential.
Mr. Brixius explained that currently the light fixtures on the building have
exposed luminary. New lighting on the building would require 90 degree cut-
off fixtures.
Chair Svendsen asked Mr. Jorgensen if this made sense to him. Mr. Jorgensen
indicated that he used the downcast lighting at other facilities. Chair Svendsen
asked Mr. Jorgensen if he would be opposed to having a normal policy of
dusk to 10:00 p.m. and from there they would be on a motion sensor for the
lights on the east side of the building facing the resident area. Mr. Jorgensen
remarked that the lights are on for security either you want them or you don’t
want them. He did say he would be open and listen to the argument and leave
it to staff to give him further direction.
Chair Svendsen stated that Ms. Whittig’s other question concerned truck
noise. She is going back and citing the 24-hour operation at Twin City Poultry.
Chair Svendsen stated to that this business was substantially different than
Park Place Storage. Mr. Jorgensen replied that his business is storage for cars,
boats, etc. He is not Twin City Poultry and the freezers come off the roof. He
Planning Commission Meeting 9 June 3, 2014
will have heat and cooling located on the center of the building roof. It will be
nominal, just enough to keep the humidity out of the units. Mr. Jorgensen
thinks his business would be an excellent fit. He feels anything put in there
would be a lot more intensive than what his business would do.
Chair Svendsen acknowledged Ms. Whittig’s question regarding the storm
drain line and stated that the City Engineer would review it.
Chair Svendsen continued stating the other item was screening of the east side
doors. Ms. Whittig’s concerns regarded the newly added doors to the east side
of the building and the potential for noise and light pollution.
Chair Svendsen mentioned that the railroad’s proximity to the property line
would make additional screening along the east property line difficult. The
Code also does not require screening of the building.
Commissioner Houle mentioned that if Mr. Jorgensen planned to add trees
along Quebec Avenue North and asked if it would make more sense to add
trees on the east side for some screening if there is room.
Chair Svendsen replied that if the petitioner added trees to the back of the
building it would be in the middle of the rail spur.
Chair Svendsen continued to address questions from the public specifically
from Mr. Schmitz who was concerned about vehicle lights aimed at his house
when customers access the property. Chair Svendsen indicated that staff
would look into the possibility of requiring screening in the area.
Commissioner Houle questioned whether the ordinance requires screening a
parking lot.
Mr. Brixius explained that the ordinance is requires the screening of a parking
lot from an abutting residential use. In this case, the railroad right-of-way
separates the uses, and therefore the parking lot would not be required to be
screened.
Chair Svendsen asked a question of Mr. Schmitz as to why Mr. Jorgensen
wants to live there. Mr. Jorgensen stated they have six locations and he spends
much of his time in his vehicle 24/7 if he is not at home for work. He would
like to have his office below and his residence above so when he hits home he
is home. He can finish his office work and be at home at the same time. When
he read the city ordinance he realized it was possible and it worked for this
building.
Mr. Jorgensen does have a staffed office below that is 1600 sq. ft. and there is
someone there at this time. He could not say there would be someone there
24/7. There are regular office hours from 8-5 p.m., five days per week. On
weekends Mr. Jorgensen does go north to the lake, that is why he met both
Planning Commission Meeting 10 June 3, 2014
sides of the ordinance with security systems, internal security systems on the
unit, door locks, etc. Mr. Jorgensen will try to be there full-time but Saturdays
and Sundays he may not.
Commissioner Houle stated the ordinance requires a full-time on-site manager
to manage the facility, control access and supervise operations during all open
hours.
Assistant City Attorney, Stacy Woods, added that the office is not going to be
open 24 hours. Commissioner Houle remarked that the ordinance does not
just say the office, it says the facility. Mr. Brixius conceded that Commissioner
Houle should impose what he feels are appropriate requirements.
Chair Svendsen continued with the next comment which regarded benefits to
the neighborhood. The difference between a vacant building, not paying taxes
and building who is paying taxes is one benefit. Mr. Brixius stated the change
in use from a production, assembly and processing that will not run full shifts
on a regular basis to a self-storage facility which will be a lower volume traffic
generator, lower volume of intensity those types of arrangements are more
certainly a bit more beneficial to the neighborhood than what was there in the
past, whether it was the popcorn facility or the poultry facility. Staff does not
anticipate that there is going to be any processing odors, noise, vibrations in
that respect.
Chair Svendsen stated the other item was snow storage. He raised the issue to
Mr. Jorgensen and advised that he could use the rain garden in the winter for
snow storage. However, because of the close proximity of the parking lot to
the property line, on-site snow storage could pose a problem.
Chair Svendsen addressed Mr. Sweazey’s question regarding food storage and
vermin running around the property. Chair Svendsen believes the change in
use is going to extremely make the vermin unlikely, but not go away 100%.
Mr. Jorgensen added that they have Adams Pest Control on all of their sites.
He also mentioned they do not have food storage. The unit owners do not
want wires on their vehicles destroyed by vermin. He does not think this will
be a problem.
Chair Svendsen mentioned that Mr. Sweazey also questioned the maintenance
of the exterior including the exterior of the garage doors and making sure they
don’t squeak terribly in the middle of the night. Mr. Jorgensen responded by
stating just like the condominiums people would live in there is an association
with board members that tell him what to do as far as maintenance, putting
together a reserve fund, insurance, having the annual meeting. The Board
gives Mr. Jorgensen direction on what needs to be done.
Chair Svendsen continued by pointing out that Mr. Whittig questioned the
cold storage compressors. Mr. Jorgensen answered that by stating these will be
removed inside and outside. Director Sargent stated the HVAC units would be
Planning Commission Meeting 11 June 3, 2014
in compliance with the city’s minimum building requirements. There are
located in a spot on the building that will not be visible from Quebec Avenue
north or the east side of the building. The units will be painted to match or
screened from abutting residential view as part of the city’s conditions of
approval. The types of units going in the facility will be sized appropriately to
give the minimum heating and cooling that is necessary to keep that building
from getting too humid during the summer and too cold during winter. It will
not be sized up as a production facility may need nor will they be freezers as
Twin City Poultry would have needed. These will be normal functioning
heating, ventilating and air condition units that a regular, industrial building
would utilize.
Chair Svendsen believes he answered Mr. Landree’s questioned concerning
climate control and noise by covering the things that were there, are not going
to be there and the way the new HVAC equipment will be run. Chair
Svendsen also stated the ordinance does not allow businesses to be run out of
the storage facility. It is a storage facility and a business can buy a unit and
utilize that within the confines of the by-laws.
Mr. Schmitz expressed concern over the inspection process of the units to
ensure that no illegal storage of materials was taking place.
Mr. Brixius informed Mr. Schmitz that the whole building will be inspected by
the city through a business certificate of occupancy so it will go through a full
check. All internal improvements will be reviewed through a building
inspection and building permits. All fire codes will have to be complied with
and demonstrated before any units are available for sale. So there will be an
overall inspection.
Mr. Brixius stated there will be association documents that will be reviewed
and subject to the city’s approval. These will be reviewed by the city attorney
and approved by the city council. He made notes of some of the things to
make sure are included into the association documents, not just the
prohibitions but maybe a maintenance plan and response there is a contact
person and response in the event there are complaints and concerns. Each
additional improvement that is added will be reviewed and approval by the
inspection department of the city in accordance with all the city’s ordinances.
Mr. Schmitz asked what prevents an owner from renting a unit out so no one
knows who is in that unit.
Mr. Brixius responded that condition number two could be tied to the by-laws
staff also would like to have an approved rental arrangement so that there is
some type of uniform agreement for any kind of rental arrangement.
Chair Svendsen asked if there was anybody else in the audience that would
like to bring something new regarding this project.
Planning Commission Meeting 12 June 3, 2014
Mr. Sweazey pointed out there was much talk about the applicant’s
investment, he asked about the investments the residents have made. He
asked why the applicant could run a 24/7 operation and why they would not
be regulated.
Commissioner Landy commented to the audience that to protect your
property you can always call city inspection or the Police, you can get in
contact with the city council or the Mayor.
Motion Motion by Commissioner McKenzie, seconded by Commissioner Landy, to
close the public hearing. All voted in favor. Motion carried.
Chair Svendsen announced the Commission would continue in discussion. He
reminded the audience that this case will be heard by the City Council on
Monday, June 23 at 7 p.m. The audience is invited to speak again because
what is decided here goes to the City Council and they make the final
decision.
Mr. Brixius addressed the Commissioners and stated that based on tonight’s
discussion and the comments of the public, changes to the staff’s
recommendations should be made.
1.In reviewing the application of the CUP would be per Sections 4-20 (e)
(7 & 15). He would like to make sure this is referenced to both
sections.
2.Mr. Brixius asked that the Commission would amend or allow staff to
amend recommendation number 2, not only to address the rental
agreement, but also have the same language be within the owner’s
Association by-laws and reviewed and approved by the city attorney.
3.Under recommendation number 12 the condominium by-laws, as
subject to the city attorney, Mr. Brixius would like to include
something that would have a site maintenance plan and a contact
person for the city in the event of nuisance or concerns that staff
would have a direct point of contact that being the site manager. Also
make sure that the Association documents include a maintenance
budget for the site and the building in the event there is a non-
compliance in that respect.
4.Mr. Brixius added a new number 15, the lighting on the east side of
the building be on motion detectors so they are not on 24/7.
5.Created a new number 16, based on the comments tonight, to ask that
staff investigate a potential for screening of the door locations on the
east side to see if anything can be done as far as landscaping or
fencing.
6.Created a new number 17, that the plan be modified to include snow
storage as shown on the plan.
7.Revise paragraph 12 it needs to have an insertion stating “the
condominium by-laws and declarations are subject to approval by the
city attorney”.
Planning Commission Meeting 13 June 3, 2014
Commissioner Houle suggested the screening on the east side, not only the
two garage doors, but the parking lot as well for vehicles heading east. Chair
Svendsen responded that the staff could look at this.
Motion by Commissioner Schmidt to table this topic to the next Planning
Commission meeting pending a better investigation of the possibility of
adding screening on the east side of the building not only for the two garage
doors but for the parking area on the south side of the building so as to lessen
the potential of headlights into residents homes.
Chair Svendsen asked for a second to the motion. There was no second to the
motion and the motion was denied.
Motion Motion by Commissioner Houle, seconded by Commissioner Landy, to make
Item 4.1 approval of Planning Case 14-06, with the eighteen conditions as stated in
the Commission’s packets and as amended by Mr. Brixius and the City
Attorney.
Voting in favor: Brinkman, English, Gehring, Houle, Landy, McKenzie,
Svendsen
Voting against: Schmidt
Absent: Dumonceaux, Nirgudé
Motion approved.
Chair Svendsen stated this Planning Case would go forward to the city council
on Monday, June 23, 2014 at 7 p.m. He recommended the audience get a good
list of questions and bring them forth to the City Council. He thanked
everyone for their time and input.
Director Sargent asked if staff could have the dissenting vote give reason for
the dissent for public record. Commissioner Schmidt stated he mainly felt yes
about the project, he just thinks the screening issue needs to be addressed
more thoroughly.
COMMITTEE REPORTS Director Sargent responded that staff had two pre-application meetings for
Design and Review
this month and both decided to postpone their application until next month.
Item 5.1
Staff met with Centra Homes for the redevelopment of the property for the
Winnetka Learning Center. Their representatives wanted some preliminary
background on what will be expected of them and their proposal which staff
provided.
Director Sargent stated staff met with representatives from Hy-Vee. Hy-Vee
will hold off on applying until the land is fully theirs and staff does not know
if that will happen yet.
Planning Commission Meeting 14 June 3, 2014
Codes and Standards Chair Svendsen announced that Codes and Standards has a meeting
Item 5.2
scheduled for June 11 at 5:30 p.m. Director Sargent will be putting the agenda
together this week and sending it out via email this week.
NEW BUSINESS Chair Svendsen would like to welcome Director Sargent in his new role. He
asked how the search was going for his old position. Director Sargent stated
that the city has hired a replacement for Community Development Specialist
position, who will be starting the early part of July.
OLD BUSINESS Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, to
Approval of Minutes approve the April 1, 2014 Planning Commission minutes.
Item 7.1
All voted in favor.
Motion approved.
Commissioner Houle abstained from approving the April 1, 2014 meeting
minutes because he was not at the meeting.
ANNOUNCEMENTS No announcements.
ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Deb Somers
Recording Secretary
Planning Commission Meeting 15 June 3, 2014