Item 7A: Ridge Square North Sign Plan Rescission at 12977 Ridgedale Drive

Dissent: None; unanimous approval

Moved by Commissioner Waterman [Timestamp not specified] · Seconded by Commissioner Henry [Timestamp not specified]

Staff presented a routine request to rescind the Ridge Square North sign plan. Commissioner Waterman noted receiving unsolicited feedback from community members expressing concern about the aesthetic quality of the South project renovation, stating that people generally preferred the original look and found the new signage harder to read. Waterman recommended the applicant work with city staff on aesthetic improvements but did not recommend pulling the item for extended discussion.

Item 8A: Bonaventure Shopping Center Sign Amendment for Fork Restaurant at 1641 Plymouth Road

Dissent: None; unanimous approval

Moved by Commissioner Henry [Timestamp not specified] · Seconded by Commissioner Waterman [Timestamp not specified]

Staff recommended approval of an amendment to the Bonaventure Shopping Center sign plan to allow a blade sign for Fork restaurant, replacing the closed Wineside restaurant. The property has evolved from an interior-facing mall (1970s) to an exterior-facing mall. Staff cited three reasons for support: attractive design, creative visibility from both south and east, and consistency with the sign ordinance (which would allow the blade sign if not governed by the sign plan). Applicant Bob Tinsley, an experienced restaurant operator, thanked city staff for collaborative problem-solving. No public comment was received.

Item 8B: Front Yard Setback Variance for Pool House/Gazebo at 5501 Nantucket Place

Dissent: Commissioner Minion voted against approval, citing the 12 ft setback as a 'stumbling block' and concern about precedent-setting. Commissioner Henry voted against approval due to public safety concerns.

Moved by Commissioner Minion [Timestamp not specified] · Seconded by Commissioner Brink [Timestamp not specified]

Applicants Dan and Katrina Phelps requested a variance to place a 14x24 ft screened gazebo 24.5 ft from the front property line (12 ft from curb), versus the required 35 ft setback. The property is located at the end of a culde-sac adjacent to Purgatory Park. Staff recommended denial, citing: (1) inconsistency with ordinance intent regarding building lines and separation from roadways, (2) no unique circumstances as the yard could accommodate the structure elsewhere, and (3) adverse impact on neighborhood character. The Phelps presented a compelling case emphasizing community building: they invested in a front porch to encourage neighbor interaction, installed a pool to give neighborhood children a gathering place, and positioned the gazebo to allow supervision of both the pool and the culde-sac where neighborhood children play. They provided letters of support from five neighbors, including adjacent residents. The applicants explained that alternative locations would require expensive grading work due to steep slopes, removal of existing pool decking and boulder walls, and would be wasteful. They characterized their property as having a practical backyard orientation toward the park rather than toward the street. Neighbor Allison Bang testified in support, noting the Phelps' transparent and thoughtful approach over a year-long process. The commission debate centered on three variance criteria: (1) reasonableness and consistency with ordinance intent, (2) unique circumstances, and (3) neighborhood character. Commissioner Waterman initially leaned toward denial but was persuaded by neighbor support and the culde-sac's unique characteristics. Commissioner Henry expressed safety concerns about the 12 ft distance from curb to structure, referencing the Park Tavern tragedy in St. Louis Park. Commissioner Minion cited the 12 ft setback as a 'stumbling block' and supported denial. Commissioner Brink remained undecided. Commissioner Hansen supported approval, noting the retaining wall provides additional vertical separation and the culde-sac presents a unique circumstance. Chair Maxwell supported approval, emphasizing the community-building aspect and the uniqueness of the culde-sac as a de facto neighborhood gathering space.

Item 8C: Preliminary Plat with Variances for Two-Lot Subdivision at 14705 Glendale Road (Corman Nolull)

Dissent: Commission was evenly divided. Commissioner Henry voted against approval, emphasizing preservation of neighborhood character and large lot sizes as defining features of Minnetonka. Commissioner Minion expressed ambivalence but leaned toward denial. Commissioners Waterman, Hansen, and Brink supported approval or were open to it, citing the narrow margin of non-conformance, quality design, and alignment with 2040 Comprehensive Plan goals.

Moved by Commissioner Hansen [Timestamp not specified] · Seconded by Commissioner Henry [Timestamp not specified]

Applicant Jesse Corman requested approval to subdivide a 0.99-acre property into two residential lots, each approximately 340 sq ft short of the 22,000 sq ft minimum lot area requirement. The property is located at the corner of Eden Prairie Road and Glendale Road, near Gatewood Elementary School and Glen Lake Golf Course. The site has relatively flat topography with 10 ft total elevation change and 45 regulated trees (37 high priority, 8 significant). The existing 1908 home (remodeled 1970) would be demolished. Staff recommended denial based on neighborhood character analysis: 57-58% of properties within 400 ft conform to the 22,000 sq ft minimum, meaning 42-43% are non-conforming. Staff concluded that since the majority of surrounding properties conform, the variance would alter neighborhood character. The applicant countered that neighborhood character should be measured only along Glendale Road and Chastic Way (the immediate neighborhood), where 19 of 30 properties (63%) are non-conforming. The applicant also noted that the proposed lots would have 155-165 ft of frontage, larger than 90% of other properties in the neighborhood, and that the 2040 Comprehensive Plan prioritizes infill and flexibility in lot sizes. Staff clarified that if approved, the city and county would require additional right-of-way dedications (7 ft from county, 10 ft from city), which would further reduce lot sizes and create a larger variance. The applicant explored purchasing adjacent land from neighbor Phil Bulmier but negotiations failed due to price disagreement. Bulmier testified that he was willing to sell for the right price but the offer did not cover his attorney's fees and other transaction costs. Neighbor Lacy Chamberlain testified in support, emphasizing the importance of maintaining neighborhood character and the charm of the 1908 home. The commission split sharply: Commissioner Waterman initially favored denial but was persuaded by the proximity to the minimum (340 sq ft short) and the applicant's quality design. Commissioner Hansen supported approval, noting the property needs revitalization. Commissioner Brink remained undecided, citing strong arguments on both sides and noting that the zoning ordinance update may reduce minimum lot sizes in 1-2 years. Commissioner Henry opposed approval, arguing that the ordinance exists for good reason and that a single large home would better preserve neighborhood character. Commissioner Minion expressed ambivalence, acknowledging the benefits of subdivision but concerned about neighborhood character. Chair Maxwell supported approval, emphasizing the culde-sac's unique characteristics and the applicant's quality design. A motion to recommend denial to city council failed 3-3. A subsequent motion to recommend approval also failed 3-3. As a result, no recommendation was forwarded to city council, which will hear the matter on July 14th.