Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
071012 Planning
r i , . r • . City of New Hope Meeting Date: July 10, 2012 Report Date: July 2, 2012 Planning Case: PC 12 -06 Petitioner: Jade, Inc./Jerry Showalter Address: 7900 Bass Lake Road Project Name: Jade Marathon expansion Project Description: Building expansion - convenience store Planning Request: Site plan review I. Type of Planning Request Site Plan Review 11. Zoning Code References Section(s) 4 -35 Administration - Site Plan Review III. Property Specifications Zoning: CB, community business Location: Northwest corner of Bass Lake Rd and Winnetka Ave N Adjacent Land Uses: Commercial to the immediate south, east, west, and north, multi- family residential just beyond commercial Site Area: 0.62 acres or 27,113 square feet Building Area: Existing: approximately 1,870.5 square feet (320 square feet convenience store) Proposed Expansion: 812 square feet (convenience store) Planning District: Planning District 1. The commercial properties at the northwest corner of Bass Lake Rd and Winnetka Ave are identified as marginal and renovation or redevelopment is encouraged. IV. Background The applicant is seeking to expand their convenience store floor print in order to increase their sales capacity and product line. Planning Case Report 12 -06 Page 1 7/5/12 V. Zoning Analysis A. Plan Description 1. Setbacks (Building Placement) The expansion will be on the eastern portion of the building. The existing and proposed building meets all setback requirements. 2. Circulation, Access, Traffic and Emergency Vehicle Access There are four existing curb cuts providing vehicle access to the property — two along Winnetka Ave N and two along Bass Lake Rd. Staff has some concerns about the safety of the accesses, in particular, the southern access along Winnetka Ave N, because of the close proximity to the intersection. While concerns exist, the applicant will not be required to make changes to access, although it is recommended. 3. Curbing, Sidewalk and Pavement Public sidewalk exists along Bass Lake Rd and Winnetka Ave N and the site is easily accessed by pedestrians. Because of the existing site layout and the lack of improvements (fence, wall, landscaping) to define the outer perimeter of the site, the potential for conflicts exist between pedestrians and vehicles, but as an existing condition these will be allowed to remain. It is also a rather difficult site to make improvements on which would reduce potential conflicts. A private sidewalk is proposed along the southern and eastern edges of the building. Ice and propane storage is proposed for the sidewalk along the eastern portion which would conflict with any pedestrian movement. It's recommended that the sidewalk be extended around the outdoor sales areas in a "tear drop" fashion to allow for better pedestrian movement. A disability access is also required. 4. Parking Between the auto repair /motor fuel station (11) and retail sales /convenience store (4) a total of 15 parking spaces are required. The site has approximately 25 stalls if the stalls within the fuel station area are counted and included in that figure (as has been done in the past). The proposal more than meets the requirements. There will be no changes to the parking. Parking and circulation on the site is somewhat erratic and less than ideal. Of most importance is highlighting the fact that the six parking spaces on the east side of the property are partially located within the public right -of -way. These spaces will be permitted to remain as a legal non - conforming use with the applicant understanding that if public improvements are proposed at any time in the future those spaces could be lost or disrupted at their expense. 5. Building a. Elevation (Design, materials and color). The expansion will consist of materials matching the existing building. The building is of brick and glass construction with a metal shake mansard roof. New signage is proposed on the south and eastern elevations (permit required). Planning Case Report 12 -06 Page 2 7/5/12 b. Floor Plan. The addition area will provide a larger convenience floor area as well as storage and cooler space. c. Roof Top. Rooftop equipment must be painted to match the building or screened from view. 6. Landscaping and Screening No landscaping is proposed as part of the project. The owners have attempted to make improvements to the green space at the corner but it has been disrupted numerous times during construction projects around the intersection. The green space is in the public right of way. 7. Lighting Plan As outlined in the submitted photometric plan, the applicant has met the city's minimum and maximum lighting standards. Details will be needed on the lighting fixtures which will need to be 90 degree cut -off and limited to a height of 25 feet. 8. Signage The new and existing signage will meet the district's sign limit of 15 percent of the front face of the building or 250 square feet, whichever is less. 9. Location of Services, Loading, Drive - through, Trash, Equipment and Outdoor Storage Areas Trash will be stored in an enclosure on the north side of the building. Trucks will service the convenience store through an access on the north side of the building. Gasoline service trucks will enter and exit the site utilizing the north and south ingress /egress along Winnetka Ave. 10. Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control No additional impervious surface is included in this project and therefore no watershed review is required. 11. Design Guideline Compliance The building expansion has been designed to match the existing building. The proposal generally meets compliance. B. Zoning Code Criteria 1. Site Plan Review. Modification of or additions or enlargements to a building, or buildings, accessory site improvements, and /or land features of a parcel of land that result in the need for additional parking or increase the gross floor area of the building by 25 percent or more require site plan review. The proposal will increase the size of the building by about 43 percent. Criteria. In making recommendations and decisions upon site and building plan review applications, the staff, planning commission and city council shall consider the compliance of such plans with the following standards: Planning Case Report 12 -06 Page 3 7/5/12 (1) Consistency with the various elements and objectives of the city's long range plans, including, but not limited to, the comprehensive plan. Findings. The city's long -range plan is for continued redevelopment, expansion, and renovation of the city's commercial areas. This proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (2) Consistency with the purposes of this Code. Findings. The proposal is generally consistent with the purposes of the Code. (3) Preservation of the site in its natural state, insofar as practicable, by minimizing tree and soil removal, and designing any grade changes so as to be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed or developing areas. Findings. The site is already nearly fully impervious and preservation is not a concern. (4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of buildings and open spaces with the terrain and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the proposed development. Findings. Staff believes the proposal for site and building is adequate and will be of a harmonious nature, especially when considering the small site. (5) Creation of a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features including: a. Creation of an internal sense of order for the various functions and buildings on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community. Findings. The internal site circulation is less than ideal but is functional and as an existing condition will be allowed to remain. b. Appropriateness of the amount and arrangement of open space and landscaping to the design and function of the development. Findings. No useable open space exists. c. Appropriateness of the materials, textures, colors, and details of construction as an expression of the design concept of the project and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neighboring structures and functions. Findings. Building materials are to match existing. d. Adequacy of vehicular, cycling and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking, in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian, cycling and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking so as to be safe, convenient and, insofar as practicable, compatible with the design of proposed buildings, structures and neighboring properties. Planning Case Report 12 -06 Page 4 7/5/12 Findings. The site has adequate maneuvering for vehicles and trucks. Staff has observed moderate pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Because of the existing site design any improvements may have minimal impact on improving safety and reducing conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles. (6) Creation of an energy - conserving design through design, location, orientation and elevation of structures, the use and location of glass in structures, and the use of landscape materials and site grading. Findings. Due to limitations of the existing site and building the inclusion of energy- conserving design is difficult. (7) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provisions for such matters as surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air, and those aspects of design, not adequately covered by other regulations, which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Findings. Neighboring properties should not be affected by the proposal. C. Design and Review Committee The Design and Review Committee met June 14, 2012, to consider the proposal. The committee was generally supportive. 1. Type of Approval a. Site plan review — quasi - judicial 2. Timeline a. Date Application Deemed Complete: June 8, 2012 b. End of 60 -Day Decision Period: August 7, 2012 c. End of 120 -Day Decision Period: October 6, 2012 VI. Petitioner's Comments Petitioner's comments are attached. VII. Notification Site plan review does not require notification of neighboring properties. Staff has received no comments in regards to the project. VIII. Summary The Jade Marathon gas station, located at 7900 Bass Lake Rd, is proposed to be expanded by nearly 43 percent with the addition of 812 square feet of storage and convenience store space. The expansion will have minimal impacts on the site. Issues exist with vehicular circulation, parking, and conflicts with pedestrians but because of the existing conditions it is difficult to make improvements and none will be required of the applicant. Planning Case Report 12 -06 Page 5 7/5/12 IX. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the site plan review with the following conditions: 1. Applicant to enter into site improvement agreement with city (to be prepared by the city attorney). 2. Applicant to provide financial guarantee /performance bond for site improvements (amount to be determined by city engineer and building official). 3. Through approval of this plan, the property owner is hereby put on notice that at any time in the future, the section of right -of -way that is encroached upon by the parking spaces is needed for any public improvement, the parking stalls may be lost or disrupted, at the owner's expense. 4. The applicant to provide a revised plan that shows a proposed sidewalk tear drop expansion on the east side of the proposed addition and disability access ramp locations. 5. The applicant to paint the rooftop equipment to match the building. 6. Lighting fixtures to be 90 degree cut -off and limited to a height of 25 feet. Attachments: • Application • Plans • Location maps • Planning consultant memorandum (June 26, 2012) • Design and Review meeting notes (April 12, 2012) • Application log Planning Case Report 12 -06 Page 6 7/5/12 PLANNING APPLICA TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL City of New Hope, 4401 Xylon Avenue North, New Hope, MN 55428 Case No. Basic Fee Deposit Date Filed 3:2 Receipt No. a() Received by Name of Applicant: � of� -1y7 e- - PID- Street Location of Property: - 7f,oev Legal Description of Property: 1�` L T� rt��. 03' /� `nJv��� �au �f1'' �t l�'i'P�'N�� r'' � w� �s ,� �r.�d �jr - � jra�S"o f t-lp cy k . OWNER OF RECORD: Address: CIO )Ixazk Home Phone: Work Phone: Fax Applicant's nature of Legal or Equitable Interest: N #'�? /- 11A t ' C .1 Type of Request: (pertaining to what section of City Code) J4 — :'lease outline Description o Request: (use additional pages if necessary) Vhy Should Request be Granted: "I V attach narrative to application form if necessary) 1-09 RECEIVED JUN 2 2 2012 Jade Auto Service C -Store Addition For the Design and Review Committee 6/21/12 There will be two mechanics that both work Monday through Friday, one from 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM and the other from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM. Only one person will cashier at a time, and a cashier will be present from 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM. The most employees working at any point will be four, and that will only be for a short period of time during shift change. The parking spots in the northeast corner of the lot will be designated as employee parking. The gas tanker will enter the northern curb cut of Winnetka Ave. It will pull up parallel to the east side of the building, then back up to the tanks. After delivering the gas, the tanker will exit the southern curb cut on the Winnetka Ave. side. Coke and Pepsi trucks will enter through the norther curb cut on Winnetka Ave. and pull up next to the east side of the building. The deliveries will be walked to the storage room door. The trucks will exit the southern curb cut on Winnetka Ave. Frito and Farner- Bocken (grocery supplier) both drive smaller trucks that will enter through the northern curb cut on Winnetka Ave. and park parallel to the north side of the new addition. All deliveries will be brought in through the storage room door and will be scheduled for off -peak hours. The parking along the east property line will remain as it currently is until Winnetka Ave is widened. The parking will remain a two -way layout, as will the traffic flow. VILLAr7E GRFF COURSE ST. THERESE 8130 NURSING HOME BOB' 8000 8119 Lij 5630 ro 7910 co 0) 1910 5618 Do z ca 7900 C) 5610 SDDI To 8011 8009 7901 8007 1 55501 5559 55 H-53 9 5540 5537 55 5531 5524. 5519 7940 5513 5509 5,512 5501 5506 54'x6 543 5500 5443 7 54,33 5437 54-36 5437 5437 5 4 30 5431 543 ) 5431 5430 5431 5446 NJ 5426 151)427 542 5427 E542;5427 544-0 5429 L 2 5 421 Z 5420 5421 5434 5427 554420 5421 :5 5 Z [ 416 �54 16 1 7 5 - LLJ 541' 1 54-17 - 5417 1 O sti a -i r, = 4 � 1 5420 5736 5732 5720 5'716 I. 5700 5704 5620 5600 7800 1 55501 5559 55 H-53 9 5540 5537 55 5531 5524. 5519 7940 5513 5509 5,512 5501 5506 54'x6 543 5500 5443 7 54,33 5437 54-36 5437 5437 5 4 30 5431 543 ) 5431 5430 5431 5446 NJ 5426 151)427 542 5427 E542;5427 544-0 5429 L 2 5 421 Z 5420 5421 5434 5427 554420 5421 :5 5 Z [ 416 �54 16 1 7 5 - LLJ 541' 1 54-17 - 5417 1 O sti a -i r, = 4 � 1 5420 ««� � ». DIN- \ . \ � .. . ... A.M. \ / +� ©1W RECEIVED JUN 08 2011 Rosa Architectural Group Inc. =4 ftft ftme ft ft4 Mhwmft ftW W 051-71V-7e fkx W7 1 1 0-M WINNETKA MARATHON C-STORE PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITION STUDY 7900 BASS LAKE ROAD NEW HOPE, MN 55428 VANGUARD CONSTRUCTION 2350 WYCLIFF STREET ST. PAUL, MN 55114 P L IT" XN W PROJECT NUWMF: 2122 DATI "7'20'2 y.. IL b BY, P RCSA REM-30w; "vomm sm mm Al Rosa Architectural Group Inc. >u St ftAwo td w, -rlv-nw fim WO-739-3= WINNETKA MARATHON C -STORE PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITION STUDY 7900 BASS LAKE ROAD NEW HOPE, MN 55428 VANGUARD CONSTRUCTION 2350 WYCLIFF STREET ST. PAUL, MN 55114 a PROJECT NUMBER: 21221 DOTE: 6/21 /2012 DRAWN BY: IL CHECKED BY: R. ROSA REVISIONS: 7R" AUNRNERM Im I Al I Rosa Architectural Group Inc. =4 ft" ftW St PmA Mhwoft WV ut wi-rv-nw f= W*-rlv-m WINNETKA MARATHON C-STORE PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITION STUDY 7900 BASS LAKE ROAD NEW HOPE, MN 55428 VANGUARD CONSTRUCTION 2350 WYCLIFF STREET ST. PAUL, MN 55114 if 1 0 ZTECT NUMBER: 2 221 F. 6/21 /201 DRAWN BY-. CHECKED BY, R. ROSA REVISIONS: Daivmy Tmm LftOAM KM Al I Rosa Architectural Group Inc. Gdr_Gn CvtGt cull t�Ix V_ =4 ftgsm u` WI bx WINNETKA MARATHON CSTORE CLE*ER PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITION STUDY 7900 BASS LAKE ROAD NEW HOPE, MN 55428 C d a a u E ff VANGUARD CONSTRUCTION 2350 WYCLIFF STREET ST. PAUL, MN 55114 :..::.: A2 ,EXISTING FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1 /e' = :b tau Vxn PAPER EXIST, PANTED MTL PATTERN MANSARD EXIST. PANTED MTL PATTERN M"AF4) $1;ZICK EXT. II STOIRAGI l__EXI$tWo(Is L__EXf5T.a_A56 DOOR L EXISTING EAST ELEVATION SCAL.E. Vir - t-(r (ON 1lxl7 PAPER) EAST. PANTED MTL SHAKE--\ PATTERN MANSARD EXISTING WEST ELEVATION SCAM V8' - T-0' (ON 71x17 PAPER) -EXIST. PANTED METAL SID$* N WE 2 oT PROJECT NUMBER: 21221 akm 6/7/2012 DPAWM BY- JL CHECKED OY. k ROSA RLMS)ONS; WINNETKA MARATHON C-STORE PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITION STUDY T I r 7900 BASS LAKE ROAD N I'T NEW HOPE, MN 55428 VANGUARD CONSTRUCTION —EXIST. 2350 WYCLIFF STREET BPJCK ST. PAUL, MN 55114 EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE. V8* - T-V (ON IW7 PAPER) A3 L-^N%i I It I MA I l fwn I I I ca-1 vm I I%Jlv SCAM V8' - T-V (ON 17x7 PAPER) Rosa Architectural Group Inc. W-ro' EXIST. BUILDING 29' -0* ADDITION 1W4 abft sirso at ft4 Aftvmft wm W WF-730-700 �-YACUU1 CLEANER EXIST. EXIST, STM TRA54 WINNETKA FNCLOSUIRE 0001_F42 LK MARATHON C-STORE PROPOSED BUILDING STORAGE ADDITION STUDY 7900 BASS LAKE ROAD NEW HOPE, MN 55428 VANGUARD EXIST. CONSTRUCTION TRANS. 2350 VVYCLIFF STREET ST, PAUL, MN 55114 EXIST. CAR WAI-44 SHOP AREA 5EVERAGES PRODUCT D15P. ZE $TOR PRODUCT DISP. Q LF WA�rrM TANIq LA W__ Din PFOJEM NUMBER: 21221 DATE: 6/7/201 DRAWN BY-. & 64'-( V EXIST. f3UILJ)M 20'-0' ADDITION CHECKED BY-, R. ROSA REVISIONS PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN FROPOSIM RjDM KM SCAM 1/8 = T-0' (ON 11x17 PAPM A4 fl;4-TINOED h'TL CAP WAQDIE FELOCATM) --/ vACUJm aEmER 'NEW PANTED HM. DOOR vTR*wm Lust PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION PANELS 1�n AP INI$WED SCALE VW - T (OM 11x1 PAPER) -NEW PANT ED k4WE -\ B0AFW VfRt sinw. f — -,k-,-NEW SISNAzIE JADE AUTO ,, 1 SERVICE F RELOCATED -i RELOCATED I LP - ,4K DISP. ICE STORL C14EST PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION SCALE- vfr - fz-0 (oh vxv - pApm) EX IST. PA INTED M SHAKE --\ PA MANSARD EXIST. 61 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE Vir = T-W (CW 11X17 PAPER) PAINTED 14 BOARD IR FAINTED WARDE WARD TRIM TM Rosa Architectural Group Inc. =4 mwft a ftsw st ftA *#Nab am W W7,9*-7M f= W739-M WINNETKA, MARATHON C-STORE PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITION STUDY 7900 BASS LAKE ROAD NEW HOPE, MN 56428 VANGUARD CONSTRUCTION 2350 WYCLIFF STREET ST. PAUL, MN 55114 .0, !F0 k �—'n 0 PROJE NUMBER: 21221 DAM. 6/7/2012 DRAWN BY.- ,t CHECKED BY- R. ROSk WASONS; PPO ELEVATM a Im AD ALLft U)Nxm Typ- C04CEALW L W 1644T ' Ty,sMF PROPOSED WES ELEVATION SCALE 1/8 - T-U' (ON VXV PAPER) NQ1'FiTH 1 -zLEVAT - F ,, - - ) , N SCALE. _W8' -.- f:-0' ify PAPER) PROF'OSED EAST E-LEVATI-CM SCALE 1/8' = f-O' (ON 11x17 PAPER) �P1160POSE-1) WEST ELEVATION SCALE. V8' = T-O' (ON 11x17 PAPER) Rosa Architectural Group Inc. 7084 Staft Strftq &. hf[A Mkmsoft 55718 w 661--738 -788S f= 651-74-3185 WINNETKA MARATHON C-STORE PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITION STUDY 7900 BASS LAKE ROAD NEW HOPE, MN 55428 VANGUARD CONSTRUCTION 2350 WYCLIFF STREET ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PROPOSED OxQtm ELEVATM A mm A& AW RECEIVED JUN 0 8 1012 P "P 30POS,ED 8`0 F:i'-,EV, TiON SCALE: ii '=- 1'-O' (6 11x17 - PAOE�0) - 7 --7. 7, �P1160POSE-1) WEST ELEVATION SCALE. V8' = T-O' (ON 11x17 PAPER) Rosa Architectural Group Inc. 7084 Staft Strftq &. hf[A Mkmsoft 55718 w 661--738 -788S f= 651-74-3185 WINNETKA MARATHON C-STORE PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITION STUDY 7900 BASS LAKE ROAD NEW HOPE, MN 55428 VANGUARD CONSTRUCTION 2350 WYCLIFF STREET ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PROPOSED OxQtm ELEVATM A mm A& AW RECEIVED JUN 0 8 1012 P "P 30POS,ED 8`0 F:i'-,EV, TiON SCALE: ii '=- 1'-O' (6 11x17 - PAOE�0) - LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE Symbol Label Oty Catalog Number Description Lamp File Lumens LLF Wafts ® EXt KAD 400M R4 5 Area Luminous, 40OW ONE 400 -WATT CLEAR KAD 400M " (PULSE START) MR, R4 Reflector, Full Cutoff MEETS THE 'NIGHTTIME FRIENDLY BT -37 PULSE START METAL HALIDE, HORIZONTAL POSITION. 38000 -(P IL - TA 0.65 456 CRITERIA ®® 012 1 KAD 400M RO Area Lurommoe, 40OW 0NE400-WATTCLEAR (PULSE START) MIL R4 Reflector, Full BT -37 PULSE START KAD 400M R4 36000 0.65 812 Cutoff MEETS THE 'NIGHTTIME FRIENDLY METAL HALIDE. HORIZONTAL POSITION. -(P F ] B5 TA CRITERIA K ACM 400M DP CONTOUR SERIES ONE 400 -WATT CLEAR EXBB 25 Pulse Sian CANOPY LUMINAIRE BT37 PULSE START KACM_400M 38000 0.65 456 W /DROP PRISMATIC METAL HALIDE, DP_(PUlse_Sia LENS. HORIZONTAL POSITION. rt)Jes FEN4154 X32 4'INDUSTRIAL ONE 54 WATT SYLVANIA CC 20 BMPCL ENCLOSUREFOR i} tAMP FEN4 1 2950 0.86 30 TSHO LAMP, SPEC�LAR 2 BfAPCLies BALLAST COVER AND POLYCARBONATE LENS EXOD 0 C 1 96 GENERALPURPOSE CHANNEL. B' 1 LAMP T12 ONE 75 -WATT TI2 SLIMLINE 96' LINEAR C 1 96.ies 6200 0.70 100 SLIMLINE FLUORESCENT. Outdoor LED WaOpack FF i OLW 31 'in Type 111 optics Nichia 219A 5000K OLW_31 3073 0.95 48.2 ® (2)ies WITH WHITE INTERIOR ONE GE 42 WATT CPFL GG 2 A812 E342WPL AND CLEAR VAPOR LAMP 5 ies 3200 0.75 39 TIGHT GLASS LENS EXHH 2 TFM 175M RB SPECIFICATION FLOODLIGHT, RB DISTRIBUTION, 175W ONE -1 175 -WATT CLEAR ED 7 METAL HALIDE, HORIZONTAL POSITION. TFM 175M_R 12000 B_(PROBE).ie 0.65 213 MH, W/ CLEAR LAMP. s MEETS THE 'NIGHTTIME FRIENDLY CRITERIA STATISTICS Description Symbol Avg Max Min Max/Min Avg/Mln Parkzwa a>6 DI:'e �%9 Gfad6 `y 19.7 to 94.5 to 0.01c N/A N/A Total Area @Grade } 4,6 fc 94.51c 0.0 to N/A N/A N OTES 1. Devi, and Associates, 1. does not assume responsibility forms Interpretation of this calculation, or compliance to local or state lighting codes and ordinances. 2. Lighting layout provided Is mi Intended for constnution documents but only to Illustrate the performance of the product. 3. AN readings /Calculations are shown @ grade. 4. FIxture mourning height can he found on the plan. S. Existing lighting actual types woo wn, footmmle values may vary. 'o.0 'oo 'cc 'oo 'o.o 'co 'Do 'o.a 'cc '00 'oD *o.o 'cc 'cc 'cc `o.o 'a.o b.o . co oo 'oa 'oo 'co uo 'o,o 'ou `o.o 'oc 'oo *co 'o.o 'o.p 'o.o 'u.D 'oc 'o.o 'o.o `co 'oc 'co 0.0 'co *oo 'oc 'ul 'o.1 'o.t 0.1 'off 'Do 'cc 'o.o 'off b.o 'D9 . cc 'o.o b.0 'o.,o 'oo, 'oo *co 'ou 'o.o o.o 'p.0 'oo 'co 'ao 'co 'o.o 'o4 'ou 'ul 'o.l 'a1 '0.+ 'oa *a1 `oa 'a1 '0.1 '0.1 'D.1 '01 'D.1 '0a 'p.1 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 0.0 'ao 'o.0 'oO 'oo 'ao 'oc ' c.p '0.0 'O.D 'o9 'p.0 'oa ` ol ci '01 '0.1 'o.1 'ol 'cl 'p.1 0.1 'o.1 '0.1 0.2 '0.2 '0.2 '0.1 '0.1 0.1 'cl 'oo 'off 0.0 'co 'o.0 '0.0 ' co '0.0 0.0 'oc 00 'co 'Op '0.f '0.1 ' 0.1 '0.1 ' 0.1 '0J '0.1 ' 0.2 '0.2 '0.2 '0.2 0.3 0.3 'Da '0.3 'p.2 '0.2 '0.1 '0.1 `. 'a0 '0.0 'cc '0.0 '. ' 0.0 00 'oo 'ci 0.1 0.1 'o2 0.2 02 ' o.2 '0.2 '02 '0.2 '0.3 ' 00 00 00 0.0 '0.0 ' 0.0 ' ' '0.3 0.6 0.9 '1.3 ' 1.6 1.1 '0.6 '0a '02 'D.Y '0.0 '0.0 co 0c '01'0.1''0.2 0.3 0.3 04 'a4 'OA '0.4 'OA '0.4 '0.6 * 11 '22..'3.7 '4.5 '3.3 'i,T '0.8 ' OA '02 'D.1 ''0.1 '0.1 '00 '00 '00 EXI 0.D 0,0 0.0 'op 0.1 0.1 0.2 ' 0.3 '0.4 '0.6 ' 0.8 '01 '0.7 '0.7 '0,7 '07 ' 09 `1.4 27 J 5.2 �4< 'S.2 '2.6 '1.1 `O6 ' 01 '0.0 '00 '0.0 '0.1 'O.t 'el 02 0.6 14 'S6 '2> `1.T 'Y.2 'De ' 09 ' i.1 'tti '31 "5.i '(. A. ' ;.) 3.3 ",a 08 ' 0.4 '0.3 02 ' O1 '01 'OA 'p.0 '1.3 '2J '62 'E9(4'4A 3 18 �.! 't a ' ' ' '0.0 ' 0.0 '0.0 '0.1 0.2 '0.3 X0.8 ® .. : 20 3 f 4.5 3.0 '1.5 '0.9 `05 ' 04: 8.2 ' 0.2 ' 0.1 '0.1 ' 00 '09 0.0 ' 0.1 ' 0.1 01 0.3 .'0.8 ` 1,3 '3.? " f: ®... 'e:5 '45 '�? X 13 '2 'oil ' 4 42 ' 45 '4.6 '3.0 '2d ' i6 ' pb 0$.'0.3 '02 ' 0.1 0.1 ' 0.1 'Ob 0.9 0.1 0.1 01:'0.3 c.o :3 '<.. - 8.n ... •? +_ f4 '.,o '...9 of '53 `53 '66 'a8 r '70 ' 31 ` 1.J '0.8 '05'�'O.S 402 -.. l o. 1 ' 01 " 'O.0 ' cc 'p1 'Oi 02 os ':.F J.. '¢ 4 ,. 3? - 9:? ' 5 " 9.5 ' 'f�eaFiX '3] _.. 1.9 '1,0 ' 0.6 ' of 02 02 Oi ' tit 0.0 'O1 0.1 0.1 02 03 C..° ^.0 tc 3E .�X %' „EXN ire: ' 5.0 G. '12 'p.8 'OS '03 02 O1 O/ 'Do 'tit 'Oi '0.f 02 J C >.> ' sa 2S 1.5 as 'O6 'or '0.1 0.1 02 03 OS -.n .. tic f, 5a.:•x 4.9 '4.0 ZB' '2r '1.3 '08 03 c, Fc. � ,C ',- , 0 '' 'd2 3.3 `21 1.2 ' 0.7 ' OA ' a.2 'O1 'o1 ' 0.1 0.1 ' 0.1 02 ' 02 '04 „4 '.. ^] ' .o <. y, ., ., s, .0 1u- ,, w 4A '0.0 3.3 20 ` 1.2 0.7 '0.4 ' 0.2 01 4 a.1 ''- . '0.1 ' 0.1 ' 0.1 '0.1 '02 '0.4 '08 Y 19 ' S2 'I'_6 56 1L.2 ' ta_: 33 12,21 +.1 ' 7 . t 'en ' S.4 ' 6+.43 44 22 f0 OS 03 02 '0.8 1a: ' } 1 "2 '.J 'o,0 1 01 'a, .2 o J y EX$B BB 4 . 1:..0 � EX1,.4 ' ' ' EXBB 8 I.c• 8 21 09 05 D3 '0.1 'O1 4 00 p6 La 33 �EX� ':�., .a�f"9t6�'� r 8 .e .o '14 S4 'oa '03 'oe '0.1 'ow Lip ° EXBB °a0 of 'oa 'o.t 'oz `0s -'oe 39 '14 E g' 1 , a3 "Y._• ..._ 7t66 EX'�8E" . " *1 '19 %o 'cs `D.3 e' °• . C8 DO '0.1 'O.r. `0 2 '0.4 ' 0.9 3.9 '7.3;112 4,1 ' 1 .'•.a 5,9 5y p.5 10'3.6 to '0.7 '0.4 '0.2 'a1 'p.t 'p.t 'DO ' Off - '0.1 ' 02 'o4 '0.7 2.6 ' a.1 6.1 ' 6.] ' 53 ' 68 '8.2 ' 9.6 `11 &. ^164 �` `CAl21{ 11x0'4.7 '2.1 ' 0.9 '0.5 'Oa '02 '01 at ' co 'OA '0.0 ' oC. ' oa 0.1 0.1 02 ' 0.3 ' a6 `t4 ' ZO 28 'S4 '25 ' 3.] ' 4.1. ' 4.7 �'5.0 ' ao ' 10.1 '100'].6 36 -'21 '1.1 ' 0.6 ' Oa. X0.2 'o.t ' 0.1 ' 0.1 'OA 'ON^'oe 'cc 'a0 0.1 'ol ' 0.1 0.2 ` 0.3 ' 0.> ' as '1.2 ' 1.6 '1,] '24 '26 ' 28 '2.8 '4.2 '4.0 '4.5 '3.0 '1.5 '1.0 '0.6 'OA ' ol, ' 0.2 '0.1 ' 0.1 ' 0.1 '0.0 ' p.0 ' 0.0 ' ac '0.0 '00 'oi ' 0.1 0.1 0.2 ' 0.4 0.5 ' c7 'u9 '1.1 ' 1.5 ' i,7 '1.8 ' Is '1.9 '20 ' 19 ' 1.7 ' 0.7 * 0.5 ' Oa ' 01 ` 0.2 ` 0.1 0.1 0.1 'co '00 'o.o '0.0 '0.0 'cl '0.1 ' O.t '0.2 '0.2 0.3 'aA * es '0.7 'De '1.0 'Ob '0.9 '0.9 '0.9 '0.9 0.7 '04 '0.3 '0.2 '0.2 '0.f 0.1 0,1 '0.1 'co 'cc ' 0.0 '00 'c0 'off 'Oi '0.1 'd, '0.1 0.2 'o.2 '0.3 '0.5 ' 0.6 '0.6 '0,5 'O.S '0a '0.4 '0.5 '0.3 '02 '02 '0.1 '0.1 '0.t '0.1 '0.1 0.0 'oo '0.o '00 'D.0 'OA ' 0.1 '0.1 '0.1 0.1 ' 02 0.2 '0.3 '0A ' 0.4 'p.3 'oa 0.3 'o.2 ' Oa 'c2 ' o.t ' 0.1 ' cl '0.1 0.1 ` 0.0 'oo 'o.o '0.0 0.0 0.0 c1 0.1 0.1 0.1 'O.t 'o.2 '0.2 '02 'a2 0.2 'O.t '0.1 '0.1 '0.1 0.1 '0.1 010 cc co '0A '0.1 0.1 'O1 o.1 '0.1 '0.1 0.1 o.l '0,t '0.1 0.1 'O.Y 'O.t '0.1 'off 0.0 'co '0.0 - 0A 'ou 'co off oc 'DO 'a1 'ol 'o.1 'o.1 '0.1 0.1 'at 0.1 'e, 'cc 00 'co 00 'oo 'cc 0.0 *ce b.o o.o 0.0 '0.0 ' ou ' cc 0.0 ' C.0 00 'o.t 'ct '0.1 'al 'off ' oa ' O.a '0.0 'o.o 00 00 0.0 ' OA 0.0 0.0 ` 0.0 ' oo ' oc ' co Plan View s_ 1':30' DA�9S ' ASSOCIATES, INC 6446 Plying Cloud Ur. Eden Prairie. AIN 952 -941 -0410 `` VJ i 1 L_J b O' CZ a L _Lm CZ J C O G m Z U W �J Designer A Date Jun 25 2012 Scale As Noted Drawing No. 1 of 1 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMENTS PROJECT: Jade's Auto Service C -Store Addition Site and Building plan review SITE: 7900 Bass Lake Road ZONING: CB, Community Business District USE: Proposed convenient store addition. Convenience stores are a permitted use within the CB zoning district. DISTRICT REGULATIONS: The proposed addition is on the existing business's site within the CB, Community Business zoning district. Re wired Proposed Compliant Lot Area None 0.62 Acres Yes Lot Width None 170 Feet Yes Addition Front 20 Feet 38 Feet Yes Yard East Addition Side Yard 20 Feet 79 Feet Yes South Addition Side Yard 10 Feet 62 Feet Yes North Addition Rear Yard 30 Feet 100 Feet Yes Building Height No More than 4 stories 16 Feet Yes or 48 feet Green Space None 16% Yes Parking Spaces Approx. 17 Yes ISSUES: Parking. The site plan shows no change in parking. The site has approximately 20 parking stalls with one handicapped parking stall. The plans also show that the parking stalls along the East property line extend passed the 3 ft setback requirement and into the Right -of -Way on Winnetka Avenue. 2,685 sq ft —10 %= 2,414 sq ft Retail Sales at 200 sq ft per parking space= 12 spaces + 2 service stalls at 3 spaces per service bay= 6 spaces Total= 18 spaces Parking and circulation upon the site is somewhat erratic and conflicting. In this regard, Planning staff has identified the following related issues with the parking and circulation of the site: • Parking spaces on the east side of the site extend into the Winnetka Avenue right -of -way. • When parking spaces on the southwest portion of the site are occupied, a "dead end" situation exists (for traffic entering the drive lane on the west side of the building from the north). • The northwest portion of the site is unusable for parking spaces, as it is devoted to the turning radius for car wash entrance. • The southernmost curb cut along Winnetka presents a concern, as it is situated in close proximity to the Bass Lake Road intersection. The particular concern is possible conflict with intersection stacking lanes. Since, the site creates a non - conforming situation with parking spaces that extend into the right -of -way and also provides congested circulation pattern, Planning staff has identified the following options to alleviate the situation: 1. The site is left as currently shown and the applicant is informed that the section of right -of -way, which is currently encroached upon by parking stalls, in the future may be needed for a public improvement. In this case, the parking stalls would need to be moved, at the owner's expense. Further, parking layout within the applicant's property would need to be reconfigured and the parking stalls encroaching on the right -of -way and would need to be re- located in compliance with City Ordinance. 2. The City may require the applicant to reconfigure the parking layout to remove and replace the parking spaces encroaching on the right -of -way, as part of the current expansion plans. Some options of reconfiguration may be: • Constructing a retaining wall on the west side of the property to allow for more parking and a wider drive lane on the west side of the building. • Removing the southernmost curb cut access along Winnetka Avenue and allowing for parallel parking in place of the curb cut. Curbina and Curb Cut. No new curb cuts are proposed. The southernmost curb cut on Winnetka Avenue raises concerns for access and egress to the site so close to the Winnetka Avenue and Bass Lake Road intersection (50 feet). A possible solution for the parking stalls encroaching upon Winnetka Avenue could be to remove this curb cut. This may provide for additional parking, as well as removing and conflicts this access and egress way creates. Sidewalks. The proposed sidewalk, on the west side of the building, appears to be wide enough to solely provide room for sales of LP and ice. A more desirable situation would provide a wider sidewalk with disability access points, to allow for safe pedestrian traffic around the front of the building. However, this would need to be accomplished while still providing for the parking stalls and a 24 foot drive aisle on the west side of the building. Off Street Loading/Truck Maneuvering_ The proposed addition does not appear to have any negative impacts on traffic circulation. The applicant should display any proposed loading zones around the new addition, so staff may identify any circulation conflicts. Trash Enclosure. The applicant has no new exterior trash containment proposed and the existing trash enclosure meets all requirements, therefore the applicant is compliant. Grading and Drainage. Grading and Drainage plans are to be determined for request and reviewed by the city engineer. Landscar)ina and Screenin The proposed addition does not create a need for additional landscaping or screening. The proposed addition is completely within existing impervious surface and would not convert any green space to impervious surface. The existing landscaping and screening is found to be sufficient, therefore the applicant is compliant. Fencing. The applicant's property is not subject to any fencing requirements as it is not abutted by any residentially zoned property, therefore the applicant is compliant. L� • No new exterior lighting is shown to be proposed or detailed. We ask that the applicant show all exterior lighting details that meet the minimum lighting standards of the outdoor lighting code in the performance standards of the zoning code: Maintained Footcandles for Parking Lot= 0.2 min Maintained Footcandles for Building Entrances= 5.0 Avg All lighting must be completely hooded and have a 90 degree cut off. Any free standing lighting or wall mounted must have details of mounting fixtures. The proposed addition plans show some new signage on the South and East facings of the building. The CB district standards allow for up to 15% of the total building fagade to be signage and the district regulations for wall signs are as follows: "For single occupancy buildings, not more than two wall signs per building, except in the case of a corner lot or through lot where wall signs may be installed on two facades fronting a public street. The area of individual signs shall not exceed the lesser of 15 percent of the front face of the principal commercial or industrial building or 250 square feet." Sin Area Compliant East Sin 66.50 Sq Ft Yes South Service Sin 17.50 Sq Ft Yes South "JADE" Sin 6.75 Sq Ft Yes The applicant should provide details of any existing signage on the canopy. This will provide staff with information to make a comprehensive review of the signage on the site. Rooftop Equipment. No rooftop equipment has been proposed. Any proposed mechanical rooftop equipment must be detailed and submitted for review. it must also meet the standards of mechanical rooftop equipment: • Does not exceed building height standards by 15 ft • Buffered so as to mitigate noise compliant with city code • Screened from adjacent streets 15 feet behind the curb or properties at the property line • Screened by the building parapet, or equipment should be grouped behind enclosure and set back a distances of one and one -half its height from any primary fagade fronting a public street • Screening shall be constructed of durable and permanent materials that are compliant with the primary building materials • Exterior mechanical equipment shall not be located on a primary building fagade. Architectural Standards. The proposed architecture of the building is shown to match the existing building. The applicant has displayed that the building is to be constructed of brick siding with a mansard roof and metal gable feature over the entry ways. This is found to be consistent with the architecture of the existing building, therefore the applicant is compliant. Attachments: • Plans (Dated: 06/07/12) • Site Photos DESIGN & REVIEW COMMITTEE June 14, 2012 Committee: Anderson, Houle, Nirgude, Onadipe, Svendsen The Development Review Team met on June 13 to consider a request for a site plan review for Jade's Auto Service C -store addition. Staff: Axel, Jacobsen, Korth, Rader, Surratt, Weiss Consultants: Brixius PLANNING CASE: PROJECT: ADDRESS: ZONING: PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: 12 -06 Site Plan Review 7900 Bass Lake Road CB, Community Business Winnetka LLC, Jerome Showalter Jade, Inc., Dean Showalter DESCRIPTION: The applicant desires to construct an 812 square foot building expansion onto the convenience store on the east side of the existing building. The Development Review Team was supportive of the request. The main concern was that parking along the east property line extends into the setback and right -of -way along Winnetka Avenue. This is an existing condition, however, the property owner should be made aware of the situation. a r • • • Discuss parking along east property line. Possibly change to parallel parking. • Consider one -way parking layout. • Additional parking on the west property line possible if stalls moved further to the west to provide better circulation on site. • Consider widening the sidewalk at the east side of the building - bump -out of sidewalk may be necessary near ice and LP storage. • Provide information regarding proposed loading area around new addition. • Provide details for all exterior lighting that it meets minimum lighting standards. Lights to be hooded with 90 degree cut off. • Provide details of any existing canopy signage. • Any proposed mechanical rooftop equipment must meet city standards. COMMENTS: • Existing curb cuts are compliant - consider removing one along Winnetka closest to the intersection for better traffic flow. • Trash enclosure located at rear of building. • No apparent grading /drainage change. • Landscaping is compliant. Potential additional landscaping if changes to parking along east property line. • Architecture of new addition to match existing building and is compliant. ATTACHMENTS: Application Northwest Consultants (planning) notes Maps NOTE: REVISED PLAN DEADLINE is Friday, June 22, by 3 p.m. Planning Commission, Tuesday, July 10, 7 p.m. City Council, Tuesday, July 23, 7 p.m. CITY OF NEW HOPE SPECIAL ZONING PROCEDURES APPLICATION LOG A B C D E F G H I J Appli- Applicant Date Deadline for Date 60- Date 60- Date Deadline Date city Date city cation application required day time day Applicant for city approved or sent response number Name received information limit extension was notified action denied the to Applicant Address by city Date Applicant expires expires of under application Phone sent notice of extension extension information or waiver was missing 6/8/12 12 -06 Jade Inc. Winnetka LLC 8/7/12 10/6/12 15409 Tarleton Crest N Maple grove 55311 763 - 494 -4634 w-612- 889 -2287 06- 118 -21-41 -0024 Boxes A -C and E -F will always be filled out. Whether the other boxes are filled out depends on the city's procedures and the date of a specific application. A. Assign each application a number. B. List the Applicant (name, address and phone). C. List the date the city received the application. D. List the date the city sent the Applicant notice that required information was missing. If the city gives such notice, it must do so within 15 business days after the date in Box C. If the time clock is "restarted" by such a notice, assign the application a new number and record all subsequent deadlines on a new line. E. To calculate the 60 -day limit, include all calendar days. F. To calculate the 60 -day extension, begin counting from the day following the first 60 -day limit, include all calendar days. G. The city will notify the Applicant by mail that a 60 -day extension period applies to the application. (The date in Box G must come before the date in Boxes E and F.) H. List the deadline under any extension or waiver. 1. The city must act before the deadline. (The date in Box I must come before the date in Boxes E or F, or, if applicable, Box H.) J. List the date that the city sent notice of its action to the Applicant. It is best if the city not only takes action within the time limit, but also notifies the Applicant before the time limit expires. To: Planning Commission Cc: Steve Sondrall, City Attorney Al Brixius, Planning Consultant From: Curtis Jacobsen, Director of CD Date: July 10, 2012 Subject: TIF Modification 0� The city has changed TIF consultants that we work with and this consultant, Stacey Kvilvang from Ehlers and Associates, has stated that there are potential problems with how our TIF documents are currently drawn up. These modifications presented tonight are intended to correct the issues she has identified and amend the budgets such that they can be spent in the priority areas identified for redevelopment in the Comprehensive Plan. These are old districts that are set to expire at the end of 2012, without the modifications some of the moneys that had been generated by these districts for city redevelopment projects would have to be returned to the county for redistribution to the various taxing jurisdictions. With these modifications the money will be spent on July 24 for the acquisition of the Kmart property. In 2013, the city portion of the tax revenue generated by these districts will be distributed to the general fund of the city and used to help hold down the tax rate and or any potential tax increases. PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 AND A MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 85 -1, NO. 85 -2 AND NO. 86 -1 CONFORM TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY. WHEREAS, the New Hope Economic Development Authority (the "EDA ") and the City of New Hope (the "City ") have proposed to adopt a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the 'Redevelopment Plan Modification ") and a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 85 -1, No. 85 -2 and No. 86 -1 (the "TIF Plan Modifications ") therefor (the Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan Modifications are referred to collectively herein as the "Modifications ") and have submitted the Modifications to the City Planning Commission (the "Commission ") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subd. 3, and WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the Modifications to determine their conformity with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as described in the comprehensive plan for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that the Modifications conform to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Dated: July 10, 2012 Chair ATTEST: Secretary DRAFT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION Lei M71MV UPI M-00im ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY OF NEW HOPE HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Adopted: Modification No. 1 Adopted: Modification No. 2 Adopted: Modification No. 3 Adopted: Modification No. 4 Adopted: Modification No. 5 Public Hearing: Modification No. 5 Adopted: E a— n H LE RS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE November 12, 1985 April 10, 1989 October 11, 1993 July 25, 1994 December 17, 2007 July 23, 2012 Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113 -1105 651- 697 -8500 fax: 651 - 697 -8555 www.ehiers- inc.com MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN Tax Increment Financiniz District No. 85 -1 (a redevelopment district) November 12, 1985 The Redevelopment Plan was modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority and Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 was established. April 10, 1989 The Redevelopment Plans and Tax Increment Financing Plans for Redevelopment Projects Nos. 80 -2, 81 -1, 82 -1, 85 -1, 85 -2, 86 -1, and Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 80 -2 (Hillsboro & 36th Avenue), 81 -1 (Senior Housing), 82 -1 (Northridge), 85 -1 (Elderly Apartments), 85-2 (42nd Avenue) and 861 (36th Avenue Apartments) were transferred from the HRA to the EDA. October 11, 1993 The Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 85 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 (Elderly Apartments) were modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. July 25, 1994 The Redevelopment Plans and Tax Increment Financing Plans for Redevelopment Projects Nos. 80 -2, 81 -1, 82 -1, 85 -1, 85 -2, 86 -1 and Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 80 -2 (Hillsboro & 36th Avenue), 8 1 -1 (Senior Housing), 82 -1 (Northridge), 85 -1 (Elderly Apartments), 85 -2 (42nd Avenue) and 861 (36th Avenue Apartments) were redesignated as the Master Modification and modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. December 17,2007: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 85 -1, 85 -2 and 86 -1, was modified to reflect increased project costs for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 85 -1, 85 -2 and 86 -1. July 23, 2012 The Restated Redevelopment Plan was modified to expand the Project Area to have the boundaries of Redevelopment Project No. 1 be coterminous with the corporate boundaries of the City, as can be seen in Appendix A. TIF District 85 -1 is being modified to identify parcels for acquisition within Redevelopment Project No. 1, the budget is being modified to reflect actual increment to date and increment expected through the remaining term of the District and to authorize the use of tax increments from District No. 85 -1 to be spent within Redevelopment Project No. 1. TABLE OF CONTENTS (for reference purposes only) Forward Section I - Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85-1 Subsection 1-1. Statement of Objectives ......................................... 1-1 Subsection 1-2. Sources of Funds/Bonds to be Issued ............................... 1-1 Subsection 1-3. Project Costs .................................................. 1-2 Subsection 1-4. Parcels to Be Acquired .......................................... 1-3 Appendix A Project Description .................................................... Appendix-A Appendix B Map of Redevelopment Project Area No. I and TIF District No. 85-1 ............. Appendix-B Appendix C Original TIF Plan and Prior Modifications to TIF District 85-1 .................. Appendix-C Forward The City established Tax Increment Financing District No. 85-1 ("District No. 85 -1 ") on November 12, 1985, within Redevelopment Project No. 1 and adopted the Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor. The City has since modified the Tax Increment Financing Plan on April 10, 1989, October 11, 1993, July 25, 1994 and December 17, 2007 (copies of the original TIF Plan and modifications can be found in Appendix Q. The City hereby further modifies the Tax Increment Financing Plan to increase the budget from the 2007 modification to reflect actual tax increment collected to date and tax increment expected through the remaining term of the District, to conform the budget to current Office of the State Auditor guidelines, to authorize the use of tax increments from District No. 85 -1 to be spent within Redevelopment Project No. 1, and to authorize acquisition of parcels within Redevelopment Project No. 1. The City does not propose to add any land to District No. 85 -1 nor does it anticipate additional development at this time which will result in additional tax capacity being captured within District No. 85 -1. Because no new land is being added to District No. 85 -1 and there is no additional development contemplated at this time which will result in additional captured tax capacity, the City does not believe this modification will have any fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions. Section I - Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 (AS MODIFIED JULY 23, 2012) Subsection 1 -1. Statement of Objectives Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 is being modified by the City Council to increase the budget to reflect actual tax increment collected to date and tax increment expected through the remaining term of the District, to conform the budget to current Office of the State Auditor guidelines, to authorize the use of tax increments from District No. 85 -1 to be spent within Redevelopment Project No. 1, and to authorize acquisition of parcels within Redevelopment Project No. 1. The EDA and the City desire to continue redevelopment and development of blighted, foreclosed and underdeveloped property in the City. New redevelopment opportunities have arisen in areas located outside of Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 and within Redevelopment Project No. 1. The proposed redevelopments will allow the City to acquire, rehabilitate, and /or demolish existing residential and commercial units, relocate existing businesses and residents, make necessary site improvements and resell the rehabilitated homes and /or vacant residential or commercial lots for development and allow the City to make necessary public improvements to roadways, sidewalks and utilities as required (see project description in Appendix A for further detail). Subsection 1 -2. Sources of Funds /Bonds to be Issued The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF Plan. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification. This provision does not obligate the City to incur debt. The City will issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are shown in the table below: The City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments from the District in a maximum principal amount of $2,550,000. Such bonds may be in the form of pay -as- you -go notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total bonded indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan as of the date of approval. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 1 -1 Subsection 1 -3. Project Costs The EDA and the City desire to continue redevelopment and development of blighted, aging, foreclosed and underdeveloped property in the City and Redevelopment Project No. 1. Acquisition, relocation, rehabilitation, demolition, construction, utilities, roadways, streets, sidewalks, public improvement costs and site preparation costs, and other costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The EDA has determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District and Redevelopment Project No.1 costs. Currently under consideration for use of funds outside of the District but within Redevelopment Project No. 1 is the acquisition of various parcels for redevelopment, road reconstruction and public improvements along Xylon Avenue from 42 ° Avenue to 46"' Avenue and along 45"' Avenue from Xylon Avenue to Winnetka Avenue and burying of existing power lines along Bass Lake Road from Winnetka Avenue to Boone Avenue. (see further description of acquisition, redevelopment and road and public improvements in Appendix A - Project Description). The City and EDA have studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 and Redevelopment Project No. 1. To facilitate the development or redevelopment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 and Redevelopment Project No. 1, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 and Redevelopment Project No. 1 is outlined in the following tables. USES OF FUNDS TOTAL Land/Building Acquisition $250,000 Site Improvements /Preparation $1,000,000 Utilities $250,000 Other Qualifying Improvements $750,000 Administration $300,000 PROJECT COST TOTAL $2,550,000 Interest 750 000 PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $3,300,000 The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total projected tax increments for the District as shown in Subsection 1 -2 Sources of Revenue. Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 1 -2 Subsection 1 -4. Parcels to Be Acquired It is anticipated that the EDA or City will acquire and reconvey parcels located outside of the District but located within the Redevelopment Project No. 1, including interior and adjacent street rights of way, as identified in Appendix B of this Modification. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the EDA or City only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: carry out land acquisition; demolition of structures; rehabilitation of housing and commercial units; relocation; construction of new residential and commercial units; site improvements; storm sewer improvements; roadway improvements, provide land for needed public streets, sidewalks, alley ways, utilities and facilities to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The EDA or City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Currently the City anticipates purchasing the following parcels outside of the District but within Redevelopment Project No. 1: r- 05- 118 -21 -22 -0063 7701 62nd Ave N Multi- family OS 118 -21 -22 -0064 7721 62nd Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0065 7741 62nd Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0066 7761 62nd Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0121 6108 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0122 6116 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0123 6124 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0124 6132 Sumter Ave N Multi - family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0125 6140 Sumter Ave N Multi - family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0126 6148 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0120 7801 62nd Ave N Commercial 18-118-21-11-0018 4301 Winnetka Ave N Winnetka Center V a y 18- 118 -21 -11 -0003 4201 Winnetka Ave N McDonald's 18- 118 -21 -11 -0016 4203 Winnetka Ave N City Center Mall 18- 118 -21 -11 -0012 4200 Xylon Avne N Bank 18- 118 -21 -11 -0013 4300 XylonAvne N K -Mart 17- 118 -21 -23 -0002 4148 Winnetka Ave N 281 Admin 17- 118 -21 -23 -0018 4124 Winnetka Ave N 281 Bus Garage ,i0 1.7- 118 -21 -23 -0001 7849 42nd Ave N Country Kitchen 17- 118 -21 -23 -0017 7701 42nd Ave N Abra z 17- 118 -21 -22 -0033 4211 Rhode Island Ave N Alex Audio U 17- 118 -21 -22 -0015 7820 42nd Ave N Gas & Splash (vacant) 17- 118 -21 -22 -0034 7700 42nd Ave N Universal Color c ` o 17- 118 -21 -24 -0004 7231 42nd Ave N Quick Mark (vacant) a . E 17- 118 -21 -24 -0108 7181 42nd Ave N Papa's Cafe "v 17- 118 -21 -24 -0007 7141 42nd Ave N Viking Liquor 19- 118 -21 -44 -0086 2703* Winnetka Ave N Midland Center *Address pending 0 20- 118 -21 -33 -0093 7800 27th Ave N BP 20- 118 -21 -33 -0082 2720 Winnetka Ave N Ronie's Market This list identifies parcels that the City or EDA will likely acquire. However, the City and EDA reserve the right to purchase other properties in Redevelopment Project No. 1 that may come available for redevelopment and /or public improvement purposes. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 1 -3 Appendix A Project Description Currently under consideration for use of funds outside of the District but within Redevelopment Project No. l is the acquisition of various parcels for redevelopment (outlined in Subsection 1 -4), road reconstruction and public improvements along Xylon Avenue from 42 °d Avenue to 46 "' Avenue and along 45 ' Avenue from Xylon Avenue to Winnetka Avenue and burying of existing power lines along Bass Lake Road from Winnetka Avenue to Boone Avenue. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 Appendix -A rUPTITTIVEV Map of Redevelopment Project Area No. 1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 Appendix -B Appendix C Original TIF Plan and Prior Modifications to TIF District 85 -1 City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 Appendix -C L RAFTFOR NG COMMISSION rem - • • - • • ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY OF NEW HOPE HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Adopted: Modification No. 1 Adopted: Modification No. 2 Adopted: Modification No. 3 Adopted: Modification No. 4 Adopted: Modification No. 5 Public Hearing: Modification No. 5 Adopted: T EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE December 23, 1985 June 22, 1987 April 10, 1984 July 25, 1994 December 17, 2007 July 23, 2012 Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113 -1105 651 - 697 -8500 fax: 651 - 697 -8555 www.ehlers- inc.com MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN Tax Increment Financing District No. _8.5_ -2 to redevelopment district) December 23, 1985 A Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan were adopted and Redevelopment Project No. 85 -2 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 (42nd Avenue) were created. June 22, 1987 The Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 85 -2 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 (42nd Avenue) were modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. April 10, 1989 The Redevelopment Plans and Tax Increment Financing Plans for Redevelopment Projects Nos. 80 -2, 81 -1, 82 -1, 85 -1, 85 -2, 86 -1, and Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 80 -2 (Hillsboro & 36th Avenue), 81- 1(Senior Housing), 82-1 (Northridge), 85-1 (Elderly Apartments), 85 -2 (42nd Avenue) and 861 (36th Avenue Apartments) were transferred from the HRA to the EDA. July 25, 1994 The Redevelopment Plans and Tax Increment Financing Plans for Redevelopment Projects Nos. 80 -2, 81 -1, 82 -1, 85 -1, 85 -2, 86 -1 and Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 80 -2 (Hillsboro & 36th Avenue), 8 1 -1 (Senior Housing), 82 -1 (Northridge), 85 -1 (Elderly Apartments), 85 -2 (42nd Avenue) and 861 (36th Avenue Apartments) were redesignated as the Master Modification and modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. December 17,2007: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 85 -1, 85 -2 and 86 -1, was modified to reflect increased project costs for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 85 -1, 85 -2 and 86 -1. July 23, 2012 The Restated Redevelopment Plan was modified to expand the Project Area to have the boundaries of Redevelopment Project No.1 be coterminous with the corporate boundaries of the City, as can be seen in Appendix A. TIF District 85 -2 is being modified to identify parcels for acquisition within Redevelopment Project No. 1, the budget is being modified to reflect actual increment to date and increment expected through the remaining term of the District and to authorize the use of tax increments from District No. 85 -2 to be spent within Redevelopment Project No. 1. TABLE OF CONTENTS (for reference purposes only) Forward Section I - Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85-2 Subsection 1-1. Statement of Objectives ......................................... 1-1 Subsection 1-2. Sources of Funds/Bonds to be Issued ............................... 1-1 Subsection 1-3. Project Costs ...................... ............................ -2 Subsection 1-4. Parcels to Be Acquired .......................................... 1-3 Appendix A Project Description .................................................... Appendix-A Appendix B Map of Redevelopment Project Area No. I and TIF District No. 85-2 ............. Appendix-B Appendix C Original TIF Plan and Prior Modifications to TIF District 85-2 . I ................ Appendix-C Forward The City established Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 ( "District No. 85 -1 ") on December 23, 1985, within Redevelopment Project No. 1 and adopted the Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor. The City has since modified the Tax Increment Financing Plan on June 22, 1987, April 10, 1989, July 25, 1994 and December 17, 2007 (copies of the original TIF Plan and modifications can be found in Appendix Q. The City hereby further modifies the Tax Increment Financing Plan to increase the budget from the 2007 modification to reflect actual tax increment collected to date and tax increment expected through the remaining term of the District, to conform the budget to current Office of the State Auditor guidelines, to authorize the use of tax increments from District No. 85 -2 to be spent within Redevelopment Project No. 1, and to authorize acquisition of parcels within Redevelopment Project No. 1. The City does not propose to add any land to District No. 85 -2 nor does it anticipate additional development at this time which will result in additional tax capacity being captured within District No. 85 -2. Because no new land is being added to District No. 85 -2 and there is no additional development contemplated at this time which will result in additional captured tax capacity, the City does not believe this modification will have any fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions. Section I - Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 (AS MODIFIED JULY 23, 2012) Subsection 1 -1. Statement of Objectives Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 is being modified by the City Council to increase the budget to reflect actual tax increment collected to date and tax increment expected through the remaining term of the District, to conform the budget to current Office of the State Auditor guidelines, to authorize the use of tax increments from TIF District No. 85 -2 to be spent within Redevelopment Project No. 1, and to authorize acquisition of parcels within Redevelopment Project No. 1. The EDA and the City desire to continue redevelopment and development of blighted, foreclosed and underdeveloped property in the City. New redevelopment opportunities have arisen in areas located outside of Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 and within Redevelopment Project No. 1. The proposed redevelopments will allow the City to acquire, rehabilitate, and /or demolish existing residential and commercial units, relocate existing businesses and residents, make necessary site improvements and resell the rehabilitated homes and /or vacant residential or commercial lots for development and allow the City to make necessary public improvements to roadways, sidewalks and utilities as required (see project description in Appendix A for further detail). Subsection 1 -2. Sources of Funds /Bonds to be Issued The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF Plan. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification. This provision does not obligate the City to incur debt. The City will issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are shown in the table below: SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL Tax Increment $12,000,000 Land Sale and Lease Proceeds $800,000 Interest $1,200,000 Total $14,000,000 The City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments from the District in a maximum principal amount of $13,000,000. Such bonds may be in the form of pay -as- you -go notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total bonded indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan as of the date of approval. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 1 -1 Subsection 1 -3. Project Costs The EDA and the City desire to continue redevelopment and development ofblighted, aging, foreclosed and underdeveloped property in the City and Redevelopment Project No. 1. Acquisition, relocation, rehabilitation, demolition, construction, utilities, roadways, streets, sidewalks, public improvement costs and site preparation costs, and other costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The EDA has determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District and Redevelopment Project No. l costs. Currently under consideration for use of funds outside of the District but within Redevelopment Project No. 1 is the acquisition of various parcels for redevelopment, road reconstruction and public improvements along Xylon Avenue from 42 " Avenue to 46 "' Avenue and along 45 Avenue from Xylon Avenue to Winnetka Avenue and burying of existing power lines along Bass Lake Road from Winnetka Avenue to Boone Avenue. (see further description of acquisition, redevelopment and road and public improvements in Appendix A - Project Description). The City and EDA have studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 and Redevelopment Project No. 1. To facilitate the development or redevelopment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 and Redevelopment Project No. 1, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 and Redevelopment Project No. 1 is outlined in the following tables. USES OF FUNDS TOTAL Land/Building Acquisition $1,000,000 Site Improvements /Preparation $8,000,000 Utilities $1,000,000 Other Qualifying Improvements $1,727,273 Administration $1.272.727 PROJECT COST TOTAL $13,000,000 Interest $1,000,000 PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $14,000,000 The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total projected tax increments for the District as shown in Subsection 1 -2 Sources of Revenue. Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 1 -2 Subsection 1 -4. Parcels to Be Acquired It is anticipated that the EDA or City will acquire and reconvey parcels located outside of the District but located within the Redevelopment Project No. 1, including interior and adjacent street rights of way, as identified in Appendix B of this Modification. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the EDA or City only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: carry out land acquisition; demolition of structures; rehabilitation of housing and commercial units; relocation; construction of new residential and commercial units; site improvements; storm sewer improvements; roadway improvements, provide Iand for needed public streets, sidewalks, alley ways, utilities and facilities to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The EDA or City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Currently the City anticipates purchasing the following parcels outside of the District but within Redevelopment Project No. 1: *Address pending This list identifies parcels that the City or EDA will likely acquire. However, the City and EDA reserve the right to purchase other properties in Redevelopment Project No. 1 that may come available for redevelopment and /or public improvement purposes. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 1 -3 05- 118 -21 -22 -0063 7701 62nd Ave N Multi- family a OS- 118 -21 -22 -0064 7721 62nd Ave N Multi-family Y 05- 118 -21 -22 -0065 7741 62nd Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0066 7761 62nd Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0121 6108 Sumter Ave N Multi - family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0122 6116 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0123 6124 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0124 6132 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0125 6140 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0126 6148 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0120 7801 62nd Ave N Commercial v , v 18- 118 -21 -11 -0018 4301 Winnetka Ave N Winnetka Center v ar 18- 118 -21 -11 -0003 4201 Winnetka Ave N McDonald's 18- 118 -21 -11 -0016 4203 Winnetka Ave N City Center Mall 18- 118 -21 -11 -0012 4200 Xylon Avne N Bank 18- 118 -21 -11 -0013 4300 XylonAvneN K -Mart 17- 118 -21 -23 -0002 4148 Winnetka Ave N 281 Admin c 0 17- 118 -21 -23 -0018 4124 Winnetka Ave N 281 Bus Garage 17- 118 -21 -23 -0001 7849 42nd Ave N Country Kitchen 17- 118 -21 -23 -0017 7701 42nd Ave N Abra Z 17- 118 -21 -22 -0033 4211 Rhode Island Ave N Alex Audio 17- 118 -21 -22 -0015 7820 42nd Ave N Gas & Splash (vacant) 17- 118 -21 -22 -0034 7700 42nd Ave N Universal Color c `0 0 17- 118 - 21.24 -0004 7231 42nd Ave N Quick Mark (vacant) C ! 17- 118 -21 -24 -0108 7181 42nd Ave N Papa's Cafe 0 17- 118 -21 -24 -0007 7141 42nd Ave N Viking Liquor c 19- 118 -21 -44 -0086 2703* Winnetka Ave N Midland Center =� Io 20- 118 -21 -33 -0093 7800 27th Ave N BP 20- 118 -21 -33 -0082 2720 Winnetka Ave N Ronie's Market *Address pending This list identifies parcels that the City or EDA will likely acquire. However, the City and EDA reserve the right to purchase other properties in Redevelopment Project No. 1 that may come available for redevelopment and /or public improvement purposes. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 1 -3 Appendix A Project Description Currently under consideration for use of funds outside of the District but within Redevelopment Project No.1 is the acquisition of various parcels for redevelopment (outlined in Subsection 1 -4), road reconstruction and public improvements along Xylon Avenue from 42n Avenue to 46" Avenue and along 45"' Avenue from Xylon Avenue to Winnetka Avenue and burying of existing power lines along Bass Lake Road from Winnetka Avenue to Boone Avenue. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 Appendix -A Appendix B Map of Redevelopment Project Area No. 1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 Appendix -B Appendix C Original TIF Plan and Prior Modifications to TIF District 85 -2 City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 Appendix -C DRAFTFOR PLANNING COMMISSION • • • =7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY OF NEW HOPE HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Adopted: Modification No. 1 Adopted: Modification No. 2 Adopted: Modification No. 3 Adopted: Modification No. 4 Public Hearing: Modification No. 4 Adopted: EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE June 23, 1986 April 10, 1984 July 25, 1994 December 17, 2007 July 23, 2012 Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113 -1105 651 - 697 -8500 fax: 651 - 697 -8555 www.ehlers- inc.com MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN Tax Increment Financine District No. 86 -1 (a redevelo district) June 23, 1986 A Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan were adopted and Redevelopment Project No. 86 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 (36th Avenue Apartments) were created. April 10, 1989 The Redevelopment Plans and Tax Increment Financing Plans for Redevelopment Projects Nos. 80 -2, 81 -1, 82 -1, 85 -1, 85 -2, 86 -1, and Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 80 -2 (Hillsboro & 36th Avenue), 8 1 -1 (Senior Housing), 82-1 (Northridge), 85-1 (Elderly Apartments), 85 -2 (42nd Avenue) and 861 (36th Avenue Apartments) were transferred from the HRA to the EDA. July 25, 1994 The Redevelopment Plans and Tax Increment Financing Plans for Redevelopment Projects Nos. 80 -2, 81 -1, 82 -1, 85 -1, 85 -2, 86 -1 and Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 80 -2 (Hillsboro & 36th Avenue), 8 1 -1 (Senior Housing), 82 -1 (Northridge), 85 -1 (Elderly Apartments), 85 -2 (42nd Avenue) and 861 (36th Avenue Apartments) were redesignated as the Master Modification and modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. December 17,2007: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 85 -1, 85 -2 and 86 -1, was modified to reflect increased project costs for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 85 -1, 85 -2 and 86 -1. July23, 2012 The Restated Redevelopment Plan was modified to expand the Project Area to have the boundaries of Redevelopment Project No.1 be coterminous with the corporate boundaries of the City, as can be seen in Appendix A. TIF District 86 -1 is being modified to identify parcels for acquisition within Redevelopment Project No. 1, the budget is being modified to reflect actual increment to date and increment expected through the remaining term of the District and to authorize the use of tax increments from District No. 86 -1 to be spent within Redevelopment Project No. 1. TABLE OF CONTENTS (for reference purposes only) Forward Section I - Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 86-1 Subsection 1-1. Statement of Objectives ......................................... 1-1 Subsection 1-2. Sources of Funds/Bonds to be Issued ............................... 1-1 Subsection 1-3. Project Costs .................................................. 1-2 Subsection 1-4. Parcels to Be Acquired .......................................... 1-3 Appendix A Project Description .................................................... Appendix-A Appendix B Map of Redevelopment Project Area No. I and TIF District No. 86-1 ............. Appendix-13 Appendix C Original TIF Plan and Prior Modifications to TIF District 86-1 .................. Appendix-C Forward The City established Tax Increment Financing District No. 86-1 ("District No. 86 -1 ") on June 23,1986, within Redevelopment Project No.1 and adopted the Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor. The City has since modified the Tax Increment Financing Plan on April 10, 1989, July 25,1994 and December 17, 2007 (copies of the original TIF Plan and modifications can be found in Appendix Q. The City hereby further modifies the Tax Increment Financing Plan to increase the budget from the 2007 modification to reflect actual tax increment collected to date and tax increment expected through the remaining term of the District, to conform the budget to current Office of the State Auditor guidelines, to authorize the use of tax increments from District No. 86 -1 to be spent within Redevelopment Project No. 1, and to authorize acquisition of parcels within Redevelopment Project No. 1. The City does not propose to add any land to District No. 86 -1 nor does it anticipate additional development at this time which will result in additional tax capacity being captured within District No. 86 -1. Because no new land is being added to District No. 86 -1 and there is no additional development contemplated at this time which will result in additional captured tax capacity, the City does not believe this modification will have any fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions. Section t - Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 (AS MODIFIED JULY 23, 2012) Subsection 1 -1. Statement of Objectives Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 is being modified by the City Council to increase the budget to reflect actual tax increment collected to date and tax increment expected through the remaining term of the District, to conform the budget to current Office of the State Auditor guidelines, to authorize the use of tax increments from District No. 86 -1 to be spent within Redevelopment Project No. 1, and to authorize acquisition of parcels within Redevelopment Project No. 1. The EDA and the City desire to continue redevelopment and development of blighted, foreclosed and underdeveloped property in the City. New redevelopment opportunities have arisen in areas located outside of Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 and within Redevelopment Project No. 1. The proposed redevelopments will allow the City to acquire, rehabilitate, and /or demolish existing residential and commercial units, relocate existing businesses and residents, make necessary site improvements and resell the rehabilitated homes and /or vacant residential or commercial lots for development and allow the City to make necessary public improvements to roadways, sidewalks and utilities as required (see project description in Appendix A for further detail). Subsection 1 -2. Sources of Funds /Bonds to be Issued The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF Plan. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification. This provision does not obligate the City to incur debt. The City will issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are shown in the table below: The City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments from the District in a maximum principal amount of $6,800,000. Such bonds may be in the form of pay -as- you -go notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total bonded indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan as of the date of approval. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 1 -1 Subsection 1 -3. Project Costs The EDA and the City desire to continue redevelopment and development of blighted, aging, foreclosed and underdeveloped property in the City and Redevelopment Project No. 1. Acquisition, relocation, rehabilitation, demolition, construction, utilities, roadways, streets, sidewalks, public improvement costs and site preparation costs, and other costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The EDA has determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District and Redevelopment Project No. l costs. Currently under consideration for use of funds outside of the District but within Redevelopment Project No. 1 is the acquisition of various parcels for redevelopment, road reconstruction and public improvements along Xylon Avenue from 42 ° Avenue to 46 ' Avenue and along 45 Avenue from Xylon Avenue to Winnetka Avenue and burying of existing power lines along Bass Lake Road from Winnetka Avenue to Boone Avenue. (see further description of acquisition, redevelopment and road and public improvements in Appendix A - Project Description). The City and EDA has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 and Redevelopment Project No. 1. To facilitate the development or redevelopment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 and Redevelopment Project No. 1, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 and Redevelopment Project No. 1 is outlined in the following tables. USES OF FUNDS TOTAL Land/Building Acquisition $500,000 Site Improvements /Preparation $3,000,000 Utilities $500,000 Other Qualifying Improvements $2,000,000 Administration $800,000 PROJECT COST TOTAL $6,800,000 Interest $2,000,000 PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $8,800,000 The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total projected tax increments for the District as shown in Subsection 1 -2 Sources of Revenue. Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 1 -2 Subsection 1 -4. Parcels to Be Acquired It is anticipated that the EDA or City will acquire and reconvey parcels located outside of the District but located within the Redevelopment Project No. 1, including interior and adjacent street rights of way, as identified in Appendix B of this Modification. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the EDA or City only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: carry out land acquisition; demolition of structures; rehabilitation of housing and commercial units; relocation; construction of new residential and commercial units; site improvements; storm sewer improvements; roadway improvements, provide land for needed public streets, sidewalks, alley ways, utilities and facilities to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The EDA or City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Currently the City anticipates purchasing the following parcels outside of the District but within Redevelopment Project No. l: 05- 118 -21 -22 -0063 7701 62nd Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0064 7721 62nd Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0065 7741 62nd Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0066 7761 62nd Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0121 6108 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0122 6116 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0123 6124 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0124 6132 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0125 6140 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0126 6148 Sumter Ave N Multi- family 05- 118 -21 -22 -0120 7801 62nd Ave N Commercial *Address pending This list identifies parcels that the City or EDA will likely acquire. However, the City and EDA reserve the right to purchase other properties in Redevelopment Project No. 1 that may come available for redevelopment and /or public improvement purposes. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 1 -3 18- 118 -21 -11 -0018 4301 Winnetka Ave N Winnetka Center u ..a 18- 118 -21 -11 -0003 4201 Winnetka Ave N McDonald's 18- 118 -21 -11 -0016 4203 Winnetka Ave N City Center Mall 18- 118 -21 -11 -0012 4200 Xylon Avne N Bank 18- 118 -21 -11 -0013 4300 Xylon Avne N K -Mart H; 17- 118 -21 -23 -0002 4148 Winnetka Ave N 281 Admin 17- 118 -21 -23 -0018 4124 Winnetka Ave N 281 Bus Garage 17- 118 -21 -23 -0001 7849 42nd Ave N Country Kitchen 17- 118 -21 -23 -0017 7701 42nd Ave N Abra u , - ;17- 118 -21 -22 -0033 4211 Rhode Island Ave N Alex Audio c i 17- 118 -21 -22 -0015 7820 42nd Ave N Gas & Splash (vacant) v 17- 118 -21 -22 -0034 7700 42nd Ave N Universal Color ° ,a C ;17- 118 -21 -24 -0004 7231 42nd Ave N Quick Mark (vacant) a 17- 118 -21 -24 -0108 7181 42nd Ave N Papa's Cafe 'B 17- 118 -21 -24 -0007 7141 42nd Ave N Viking Liquor 19- 118 -21 -44 -0086 2703* Winnetka Ave N Midland Center I20- 118 -21 -33 -0093 7800 27th Ave N BP 20- 118 -21 -33 -0082 2720 Winnetka Ave N Ronie's Market *Address pending This list identifies parcels that the City or EDA will likely acquire. However, the City and EDA reserve the right to purchase other properties in Redevelopment Project No. 1 that may come available for redevelopment and /or public improvement purposes. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 1 -3 Appendix A Project Description Currently under consideration for use of funds outside of the District but within Redevelopment Project No. l is the acquisition of various parcels for redevelopment (outlined in Subsection 1 -4), road reconstruction and public improvements along Xylon Avenue from 42 Avenue to 46"' Avenue and along 45"' Avenue from Xylon Avenue to Winnetka Avenue and burying of existing power lines along Bass Lake Road from Winnetka Avenue to Boone Avenue. City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 Appendix -A Map of Redevelopment Project Area No. 1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 Appendix -B Appendix C Original TIF Plan and Prior Modifications to TIF District 86 -1 City of New Hope Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 Appendix -C DRAFT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION M e MUMEMEM New Hope Economic Development Authority City of New Hope Hennepin County State of Minnesota Adopted: Modification No. I Adopted: Modification No. 2 Adopted: Modification No. 3 Adopted: Modification No. 4 Adopted: Modification No. 5 Adopted: Modification No. 6 Adopted: Modification No. 7 Adopted: Modification No. 8 Adopted: Modification No. 9 Adopted: Modification No. 10 Adopted: Modification No. 11 Adopted: Modification No. 12 Adopted: Modification No. 13 Adopted Modification No. 14 Adopted: Modification No. 15 Adopted: Modification No. 16 Adopted: Modification No. 17 Adopted: Modification No. 18 Adopted: Modification No. 19 Adopted: Modification No. 20 Public Hearing: Modification No. 20 Adopted: August 11, 1980 October 25, 1982 November 8, 1982 June 22, 1987 March 28, 1988 April 10, 1989 October 23, 1989 July 27, 1992 October 11, 1993 July 25, 1994 October 9, 1995 February 24, 1997 April 28, 1997 July 27, 1998 June 28, 1999 September 9, 2002 December 8, 2003 May 10, 2004 June 14, 2002 May 9, 2011 July 23, 2012 This document is in draft distribution to the County and the School District. The City and the HRA may make minor changes to this draft document prior to the public hearing. 1 Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113 -1105 (651) 697 -8500 fax: (651) 697 -8555 www.ehlers- ine.com Table of Contents (for reference purposes only) Section 1- Municipal Action Taken ................................................... ............................1 -1 Section - I ntroduction .................................................................... ............................... 2 -1 Section 3 - Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 ................................................. ............................... 3 -1 Subsection3 -1. Definitions ....................................................................... ............................3 -1 Subsection 3 -2. Statutory Authority ....................................................... ............................... 3 -3 Subsection 3 -3. Statement of and Finding of Public Purpose ............. ............................... 3 -3 Subsection 3 -4. Statement of Objectives .............................................. ............................... 3 -4 Subsection 3 -5. Statement of Public Facilities and Costs to be Financed .........................3 -7 Subsection 3 -6. Funding of Developments and Redevelopments ...... ............................... 3 -7 Subsection 3 -7. Environmental Controls .............................................. ............................... 3 -7 Subsection 3 -8. Proposed Reuse of Property ......................................... ............................3 -7 Subsection 3 -9. Open Space to Be Created ........................................ ............................... 3 -7 Subsection 3 -10. Administration and Maintenance of Redevelopment Project No. 1 ......... 3-8 Subsection3 -11. Rehabilitation .................................................................. ............................3 -8 Subsection3 -12. Relocation ....................................................................... ............................3 -8 Subsection 3 -13. Property Acquisition ....................................................... ............................3 -8 Subsection 3 -14. Modification of Redevelopment Project No. 1 ........... ............................... 3 -9 Subsection 3 -15. Description of Boundaries of Redevelopment Project No. 1 ................... 3 -9 Appendix ......................................................................................... ............................... A -1 Appendix ......................................................................................... ............................... B -1 Section 1 - Municipal Action Taken Based upon the statutory authority described in the Restated Redevelopment Plan attached hereto, the public purpose findings by the EDA and City Council and for the purpose of fulfilling the City's development objects as set forth in Restated Redevelopment Plan, the City Council has created, established and designated Redevelopment Project No. 1 pursuant to and in accordance with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.001 to 469.047 and 469.090 to 469.1082. Redevelopment Project No. 1 is being modified to expand the boundaries to be coterminous with the corporate boundaries of the City. The following municipal action has been taken with regard to Redevelopment Project No. 1: August 11, 1980: A Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan were adopted and Redevelopment Project No. 80 -2 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 80 -2 (Hillsboro &36th Avenue) were created. April 27, 1981: A Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan were adopted and Redevelopment Project No. 8 1 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 8 1 -1 (Senior Housing) were created. August 9, 1982: A Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan were adopted and Redevelopment Project No. 82 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 82 -1 (Northridge) were created. October 25, 1982: The Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 82 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 82 -1 (Northridge) were modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. November 8, 1982: The Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan. for Redevelopment Project No. 82 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 82 -1 (Northridge) were modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. November 12 1985: A Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan were adopted and Redevelopment Project No. 85 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 (Elderly Apartments) were created. December 23, 1985: A Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan were adopted and Redevelopment Project No. 85 -2 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 (42nd Avenue) were created. June 23, 1986: A Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan were adopted and Redevelopment Project No. 86 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 86 -1 (36th Avenue Apartments) were created. June 22, 1987: The Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 85 -2 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -2 (42nd Avenue) were modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 1 -1 March 28, 1988: The Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 81 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 81 -1 (Senior Housing) were modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. April 10, 1989: The Redevelopment Plans and Tax Increment Financing Plans for Redevelopment Projects Nos. 80 -2, 81 -1, 82 -1, 85 -1, 85 -2, 86 -1, and Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 80 -2 (Hillsboro & 36th Avenue), 81 -1 (Senior Housing), 82 -1 (Northridge), 85 -1 (Elderly Apartments), 85 -2 (42nd Avenue) and 861 (36th Avenue Apartments) were transferred from the HRA to the EDA. October 23 1989: The Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 82 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 82 -1 (Northridge) were modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. July 27, 1992: The Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 82 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 82 -1 (Northridge) were modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. October 11, 1993: The Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 85 -1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 85 -1 (Elderly Apartments) were modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. July 25, 1994: The Redevelopment Plans and Tax Increment Financing Plans for Redevelopment Projects Nos. 80 -2, 81 -1, 82 -1, 85 -1, 85 -2, 86 -1 and Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 80 -2 (Hillsboro & 36th Avenue), 81 -1 (Senior Housing), 82 -1 (Northridge), 85 -1 (Elderly Apartments), 85 -2 (42nd Avenue) and 861 (36th Avenue Apartments) were redesignated as the Master Modification and modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. October 9, 1995: The Master Modification, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. February 24, 1997: The Master Modification, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. April 28, 1997: The Master Modification, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. July 27, 1998: The Master Modification, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. June 28, 1999: The Master Modification, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs and increased bonding authority. September 9, 2002: The Master Modification was redesignated as the Restated Redevelopment Plan. The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 1 -2 reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs, increased bonding authority, the creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 02 -1 (Navarre Project) and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan. December 8 2003: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased geographic area, increased project costs, increased bonding authority, the creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 03 -1 (Special Law) (East Winnetka /Ryland Project) and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan. April 26, 2004: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased project costs, increased bonding authority, the creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 041 (Special Law) (Frank's Nursery Site) and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan. May 10, 2004: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased project costs, increased bonding authority and increased geographic area for Tax Increment Financing District No. 03 -1 (Special Law) (East Winnetka /Ryland Project). June 14, 2004: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased project costs, increased bonding authority and increased geographic area for Tax Increment Financing District No. 03 -1 (Special Law) (East Winnetka /Ryland Project). August 23, 2004: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased project costs, increased bonding authority, the creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 042 (PPL Project) and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan. December 17 2007: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 85 -1, 85 -2 and 86 -1, was modified to reflect increased project costs for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 85 -1, 85 -2 and 86 -1. December 8 2008: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including the Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased project costs, increased bonding authority, the creation of Tax Increment Financing District no. 08 -1 (Ryan City Center) and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan. May 9, 2011: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to reflect increased project costs, increased bonding authority, the creation of Tax Increment Financing District no. 11 -1 (Special Law) and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan. July 23, 2012: The Restated Redevelopment Plan, including its existing Tax Increment Financing Plans, was modified to expand the Project Area as can be seen in Appendix A. New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 1 -3 Section 2 - Introduction In August 1980 the City Council and HRA created a redevelopment plan and Redevelopment Project No. 1 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 and 469.090 to 469.1082, inclusive, as amended, in an effort to encourage development and redevelopment of certain areas within the City. . Subsequently the City established an EDA and on April 10, 1989 the HRA transferred control, authority and operation of its Redevelopment Projects and Tax Increment Financing Districts to the EDA. At the time of the transfer, the EDA reaffirmed the statement and finding of public purpose originally set for by the HRA. At the time of the adoption of the Plan, the EDA again affirmed the statement and finding of public purpose. The purpose of this Modification No. to Redevelopment Project No. 1 is to accomplish the following: 1. Expand the boundaries of Redevelopment Project No. 1 to be coterminous with the corporate boundaries of the City as shown in Appendix A. Modification No. -- to the Redevelopment Project No. 1 is comprised of Section 3 (subsections 3 -1 through 3 -15) which replaces in its entirety the original Redevelopment Plan. The prior documents, including modifications to the original Redevelopment Project No. 1 are attached as Appendix B for reference only. New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 2 -1 Section 3 - Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 Subsection 3 -1. Definitions The terms defined below shall, for purposes of this Redevelopment Plan, have the meanings herein specified, unless the context otherwise specifically requires. "City" means the City of New Hope. "Comprehensive Plan" Means the City's comprehensive plan which contains the objectives, policies, standards and programs to guide public and private land use, development, redevelopment and preservation for all lands and water within the City. "City Council" means the City Council of the City of New Hope. "Comprehensive Plan" means the documents which contain the objectives, policies, standards and programs to guide public and private land use, development, redevelopment and preservation for all lands and water within the City. "County" means Hennepin County, Minnesota. "Economic Development Authority" and "EDA" means the New Hope Economic Development Authority, also referred to as the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of New Hope, Minnesota. "Economic Development Authority Act" and `EDA Act" means the statutory provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 to 469.1082, inclusive as amended and supplemented from time to time. "EDA Commissioners" means the Commissioners of the EDA. "Enabling Act" means Minnesota Statues, 469.001 to 469.047, as amended and supplemented from time to time. "Land Use Regulations" means all federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, and plans relating to or governing the use of development of land in the City, including but not limited to environmental, zoning and building code laws and regulations. "Master Modification" means the combined areas subject to the Redevelopment Plans and Redevelopment Projects adopted and created prior to September 9, 2002. "Project" means Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the public improvements and facilities to be constructed therein, as more fully described in Subsection 3.5 of the Restated Redevelopment Plan. "Project Area" means the real property located within the geographic boundaries of Redevelopment Project No. 1. "Public Costs" means the costs set forth in the Tax Increment Financing Plan, and any other costs New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 3 -1 eligible to be financed by Tax Increments under the TIF Act, HRA Act or the Municipal Development District Act. "Public Improvements" means the public improvements described in the Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plans. "Redevelopment Plan" means the redevelopment project and the redevelopment plan initially adopted by the HRA and City Council on August 11, 1980 and as it shall be modified. "Redevelopment Project No. 1" mans the area previously included the Master Modification, hereinafter known as the Restated Redevelopment Plan, the additional area added at the time of the adoption of the Restated Redevelopment Plan and any area as may be added from time to time. "Restated Redevelopment Plan" mans this Plan as described in Article "School District: means Independent School District No. 281. "State" means the State of Minnesota. "Tax Increment Bonds" means any tax increment bonds or notes issued by the City to finance the Public Costs as stated in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. I and in the Tax Increment Financing Plans, and any obligations issued to refund such bonds. "TIF Act" means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1799, inclusive, as amended. "Tax Increment Financing District" means any tax increment financing district presently established or to be established in the future in the Project Area. "Tax Increment Financing Plan" or "Plan" means the Plans adopted by the EDA or City for any Tax Increment Financing District located in the Project Area. New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 3 -2 "Redevelopment Project No. I" means the Redevelopment Area Subsection 3 -2. Statutory Authority The Enabling Act authorizes the EDA, upon certain public purpose findings by the EDA and City, to establish and designate development and redevelopment projects within the City and to establish, develop and administer redevelopment plans therefore to meet the needs and accomplish the public purposes specified in Statement of and Finding of Public Purpose. The HRA Commissioners determined that it was desirable and in the public interest to designate a specific area within the corporate limits of the City as the Project Area and to establish develop and implement a plan pursuant to the provisions of the HRA Act, as amended and supplemented from time to tune. Upon its receipt of the Redevelopment Projects and Tax Increment Financing Districts form the HRA, the EDA Commissioners supported the HRA Commissioners' determinations pursuant t the provisions of the EDA Act, as amended and supplemented from time to tune. In accordance with the purposes set forth in the Enabling Act, the EDA and City have established the Redevelopment Project comprising the new expanded area described on the attached Exhibit A and has adopted this Redevelopment Plan therefore. Within Redevelopment Project No. 1, the EDA and City have created tax increment financing districts established pursuant to the Tax Increment Act to finance the public and private improvements proposed for Redevelopment Project No. 1. The public improvements may be initially financed from other City sources, including, but not limited to the use of improvement bonds issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, which sources the City may reimburse from tax increment proceeds derived from tax increment districts created within the Project Area. Any future tax increment district will be created at such time as will enable the EDA and City to capture the increase in taxable value of private improvements to be constructed within the Project Area. Subsection 3 -3. Statement of and Finding of Public Purpose In August of 1980 the HRA Commissioners of the HRA determined that there was a need to undertake certain actions designed to encourage, ensure and facilitate the private sector to (1) develop and redevelop underutilized and unused land located within the corporate limits of the City; (2) improve the tax base of the City, the County and the School District thereby enabling them to better utilize existing public facilities and provide needed public services; (3) improve the general economy of the City, the County, the School District and the State; and, (4) provide additional employment opportunities for residents of the City and surrounding area. It was found that there were certain parcels of property within the City which were potentially more useful, productive and valuable than was being realized under existing conditions and therefore were not contributing to the tax has of the City, the County, the School District and the State to their full potential. The HRA Commissioners determined that said parcels of property were deemed to be vacant, underutilized or blighted due to poor planning and subdivision and rezoning practices, and to existing structures which because of (i) dilapidation, (ii) obsolescence, (iii) overcrowding, (iv) excessive land coverage, (vii) inadequate land coverage, (viii) deleterious land use or (ix) obsolete layout, or (x) and combination of these or other factors, were detrimental to the safety, health, morals or welfare of the City, pursuant to the HRA Act, New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 3 -3 Therefore, the HRA Commissioners determined it was necessary to exercise its authority to develop, implement and fiance a Plan for improving the Project Area to (1) provide an impetus for private development and redevelopment; (2) maintain and increase employment; (3) utilize existing potential; and, (4) provide other facilities as outlined in Subsection 3 -5. The HRA Commissioners also determined (1) that the proposed development or redevelopment would not occur solely through private investment in the foreseeable future; (2) that the Tax Increment Financing Plans proposed herein were consistent with the Plan; (3) that the Tax Increment Financing Plans would afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the Project Area by private enterprise; and (4) that the Plan conformed to the comprehensive plan of the City. The HRA Commissioners further determined that the welfare of the City as well as the State required active promotion, attraction, encouragement and the development of economically sound housing, industry and commerce to carry out its stated public purpose objectives. Subsequently the City established an EDA Authority and on April 10, 1989 the HRA Commissioners transferred control, authority and operation of its Redevelopment Projects and Tax Increment Financing Districts to the EDA. At the time of this transfer, the EDA Commissioners reaffirmed the statement and finding of public purposed originally set forth by the HRA Commissioners. At the time of the adoption of the Plan, the EDA Commissioners again affinned the statement and finding of public purpose. Subsection 3 -4. Statement of Objectives The HRA originally determined, and its detenninations were reaffnmed by the EDA and City that it is necessary, desirable and in the public interest to establish, designate, develop and administer Redevelopment Project No. 1. The EDA and City determine that the establishment of Redevelopment Project No. 1 will provide the City with the ability to achieve certain public purpose objectives not otherwise obtainable in the foreseeable future without City intervention in the nonnal development process. These public purpose goals included; (1) restoration and improvement of the tax base and tax revenue generating capacity of the Project Area; (2) increased employment opportunities; (3) realization of comprehensive planning goals; (4) removal of blighted conditions; and, (5) revitalization of the property within the Project Area to create an attractive, comfortable convenient and efficient area for housing industrial, commercial and related uses. The EDA and City seeks to achieve the following program objectives: 1. Promote and secure the prompt development and redevelopment of property in the Project Area, which property is not now in productive use or in it highest and best use, in a manner consistent with the City's comprehensive plan and with a minimal adverse impact on the environment, which property is less productive because of the lack of proper utilization and lack of investment, and thereby promoting and securing the development of other land in the City; 2. Promote and secure additional employment opportunities within the Project Area and the City for residents of the City and the surrounding area, thereby improving living standards and preventing unemployment and the loss of skilled and unskilled labor and other human resources in the City; New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 3 -4 3. Secure the increase in value of property subject to taxation by the City, Independent School Districts No. 281 and Hennepin County, and any other taxing jurisdictions in order to better enable such entities to pay for public improvements and governmental services and programs required to be provided by them; 4. Provide for the financing and construction of public improvements in and adjacent to the Project Area necessary for the orderly and beneficial development or redevelopment of the Project Area and adjacent areas of the City; 5. Promote the concentration of new desirable residential, commercial, office and other appropriate development or redevelopment in the Project Area so as to maintain the area in a manner compatible with its accessibility and prominence in the City; 6. Encourage local business expansion, improvement, development or redevelopment whenever possible; 7. Create a desirable and unique character within the Project Area through quality land use alternatives and design quality in new and remodeled buildings. 8. Encourage and provide maximum opportunity for private development or redevelopment of existing areas and structures which are compatible with the Plan. 9. Create viable environments which would upgrade and maintain housing stock, maintain housing health and safety quality standards, and maintain and strengthen individual neighborhoods. 10. Stimulate private activity and investment to stabilize and balance the City's housing supply. 11. Eliminate code violations and nuisance conditions that adversely affect neighborhoods. 12. Revitalize property to create a safe attractive, comfortable, convenient and efficient area for residential use. 13. Recreate and reinforce a sense of residential place and security which creates neighborhood cohesiveness through City investment in neighborhood infrastructure and public improvements, including landscaping, park improvements, local street modifications to reduce traffic impacts, street repaving, curb and gutter replacement, and streetlight updating. 14. Encourage infill development and redevelopment that is compatible in use and scale with surrounding neighborhoods. 15. Rehabilitate the existing housing stock and preserve existing residential neighborhoods wherever possible. 16. Demolish and reconstruct, where necessary, aging residential buildings to preserve neighborhoods. 17. Removal of substandard and /or blighted structures. New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 3 -5 New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 3 -6 Subsection 3 -5. Statement of Public Facilities and Costs to be Financed The preceding objectives will be promoted by providing improvements and opportunities within the Redevelopment Project Area which may include various types of site improvements, land acquisition, redevelopment, demolition, parking, street, sewer, water and other public improvements. A description of the items of expenditure and the estimated costs can be found in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts created within this Redevelopment Project Area. Subsection 3 -6. Funding of Developments and Redevelopments To implement the established objectives, the EDA and City plan to utilize a number of public and private financing tools. Funding of the necessary activities and improvements in the Redevelopment Project Area is expected to be accomplished through, and is not limited to, tax increment financing, special assessments, state aid for road construction, proceeds from the sale of property, and federal and state grants. Any public facilities within the Redevelopment Area will be financially feasible and compatible with longer range development plans. Any acquisition of property for the public improvements will be done to provide the impetus for private development within the Redevelopment Area. Subsection 3 -7. Environmental Controls All municipal actions, public improvements and private development shall be carried out in a manner consistent with existing environmental controls and all applicable Land Use Regulations. Subsection 3 -8. Proposed Reuse of Property The Redevelopment Plan contemplates that the EDA or City may acquire property and reconvey the same to another entity or dedicate the property to permanent right -of -ways and easements needed for public improvements. Prior to fornal consideration of the acquisition of any property, the EDA or City will require the execution of a binding development agreement with respect thereto and evidence that Tax Increments or other funds will be available to repay the Public Costs associated with the proposed acquisition. It is the intent of the EDA and City to negotiate the acquisition of property whenever possible. Appropriate restrictions regarding the reuse and redevelopment of property shall be incorporated into any development agreement to which the EDA or City is a party. Subsection 3 -9. Open Space to Be Created Any open space within the Redevelopment Area will be created in accordance with the zoning and ordinances of the City. New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 3 -7 Subsection 3 -10. Administration and Maintenance of the Redevelopment Area Maintenance and operation of the public improvements will be the responsibility of the City Manager who shall also serve as Administrator of the Project Area. Each year, the Administrator of the Redevelopment Area will submit to the City Council the maintenance and operation budget for the following year. The administrator of the Redevelopment Plan will administer the Redevelopment Plan pursuant to the provision of the Enabling Act; provided, however, that such powers may only be exercised at the direction of the EDA. No action taken by the administrator of the Redevelopment Area pursuant to the above - mentioned powers shall be effective without authorization by the EDA. Subsection 3 -11. Rehabilitation Owners of properties within the Redevelopment Area may be encouraged to rehabilitate their properties to conform with the applicable state and local codes and ordinances, as well as any design standards. Persons who purchase property within the Redevelopment Area from the EDA or City may be required to rehabilitate their properties as a condition of sale of land. The EDA or City may provide such rehabilitation assistance as may be available from federal, state or local sources. A developer or redeveloper may be any person, business, corporation or government unit including the EDA or City. A developer or redeveloper may initiate a plan and participate with the EDA or City in the development or redevelopment thereof. Subsection 3 -12. Relocation Any person or business that is displaced as a result of the Redevelopment Program will be relocated in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 117.50 to 117.56. The EDA accepts its responsibility for providing for relocation assistance pursuant to the Enabling Act. Subsection 3 -13. Property Acquisition The EDA or City intends to acquire such property, or appropriate interest therein, within the Project Area as the EDA or City may deem to be necessary or desirable to assist in the implementation of the Redevelopment Program. New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 3 -8 Subsection 3 -14. Modification of the Redevelopment Project No. 1 The EDA and City reserve the right to alter and amend the Redevelopment Program and the Tax Increment Financing Plans, subject to the provisions of state law regulating such action. The EDA and City specifically reserves the right to enlarge or reduce the size of the Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing District, the Redevelopment Program, the Public Costs and the amount of Tax Increment Bonds to be issued to finance such cost by following the procedures specified in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, subdivision 4. Subsection 3 -15. Description of Boundaries of Redevelopment Project No. 1 The boundaries of the Project Area shall be expanded to be cotenninous with the corporate boundaries of the City as shown on the snap in Appendix A. The City and EDA has further detennined a need to expand the Project Area as described in Appendix A. hereof. The expansion is needed to address elements of blight and conditions that lead to the emergence of blight in additional areas of the City. Specifically, the City finds the following conditions within the expanded Project Area: New Hope Economic Development Authority Redevelopment Project No. 1 3 -9 Appendix A Boundary Map of the Redevelopment Project No. 1 Appendix A A -1 Appendix B Original Development Program and Modifications Appendix B B -1 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH NEW HOPE, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 5, 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: Paul Anderson, Jim Brinkman, Jeff Houle, Roger Landy, Christopher McKenzie, Tom Schmidt (left at 9 p.m.), Steve Svendsen Absent: Sandra Hunten, Ranjan Nirgude, Sunday Onadipe Also Present: Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant, Eric Weiss, Community Development Assistant, Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary CONSENT BUSINESS There was no Consent Business on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARING There were no Public Hearings on the agenda. COMMITTEE REPORTS Design and Review Chair Houle reported the Design and Review Committee did not meet in Committee May. Mr. Weiss stated staff met with three potential applicants at the pre - Item 5.1 application meeting last week and anticipate two of them moving forward, an expansion of the convenience store for the gas station at Winnetka Avenue and Bass Lake Road, and converting the building at 5040 Winnetka to a self storage facility. Commissioner Landy stated that his son -in -law works at the Victory Packaging facility and would abstain from voting if it was felt there would be a conflict of interest. Codes and Standards Chair Houle stated that the Codes and Standards Committee did not meet Committee and no meeting was scheduled at this time. Chair Houle inquired if Codes Item 5.2 and Standards would be reviewing items from the list of potential code issues that was provided several months ago. Mr. Weiss responded that there may be a couple comprehensive plan changes that need to be addressed first as they relate to Active Living Hennepin County (ALHC) activities. The city is involved with this organization that includes 13 Hennepin County cities. The group encourages being active. Complete streets is a component of active living, as well as the farmers market and community gardens. The City Center code is also an active living aspect. As part of the city's contract with ALHC, it receives money from Hennepin County, who receives funds from Blue Cross Blue Shield and the state. The city must adopt two different policies or comp plan changes. The two areas would include transportation relating to complete streets implementation and land use changes such as setbacks, parking, and so on. One policy idea may be to study the city's parking standards. Mr. Brixius interjected that the last time parking standards was studied, the stall dimensions were changed. Mr. Weiss added that the city would receive up to $7,500 through June 2013 by achieving ALHC's deliverables. NEW BUSINESS Item 6.1 Chair Houle introduced Item 6.1, Discussion of Shingle Creek 3rd Generation Shingle Creek 3rd Watershed Plan. Generation Watershed Plan Council Member Stauner stated that parking lots were one of the major impervious surfaces in the metro area as they relate to watershed issues. Council Member Stauner explained that the new rules proposed by the watershed commission would impact what the Planning Commission does. Most significantly would be the expansion of review requirements. Smaller projects would not require review by the watershed commission, however, city reviews would have to meet commission standards. The project at 62nd and West Broadway would be too small for the watershed review, but under the new rules, this project would have to meet its standards for infiltration and other storm water treatment. If the rules are adopted, city staff and the Planning Commission would have to be sure those requirements are followed. He stated that the watershed would likely schedule a watershed - wide meeting of representatives from all member cities. Council Member Stauner reported on a program in Sweden that utilized a rock base around the landscaping in place of curbing to the edge of the parking lot. The benefit in an urban environment was that it provided space where the tree roots could spread out and the rock base absorbs water and serves as water filtration /retention. Runoff from buildings, sidewalks and streets would be significantly reduced. The rock base may be beneficial to a project like 62nd and West Broadway where there would be tree screening along the parking area. Chair Houle questioned if Bassett Creek and Shingle Creek utilized the same rules for review, and he was told they use the same five acre minimum. If the new rules are adopted, Chair Houle wondered if every city would apply the standards the same. Council Member Stauner stated he thought that would be a discussion point for the commission. The infiltration requirement was straightforward — one inch of rain infiltrated within 48 hours. The added requirement of the post construction perk test would provide some policing of that requirement. Chair Houle confirmed that cities would review projects under five acres and the watershed commission would review projects over five acres. Council Member Stauner added that commission charges $1,500 fee per review. Due to the cost factor, smaller projects and single family homes would be left for the cities to review. Commissioner Brinkman wondered when the review is normally completed for a project. Chair Houle stated that most of the time the review happens before the Planning Commission meeting and is included in the planning report. Occasionally, the review takes place after the Planning Commission meeting and is a condition of approval. Council Member Stauner interjected Planning Commission Meeting 2 June 5, 2012 that it is beneficial to all parties to have the review of water treatment done early in the planning process. Council Member Stauner stated that there are a lot of impaired waters in Minnesota, and a lot of mandates are in process. There had been discussion regarding the Lake Pepin TMDL (total maximum daily load) and how that would impact the areas that drain into it. There may be mandated sediment and nutrient requirements in the future. Most developers are aware of the watershed's requirements and some are meeting the requirements voluntarily. Ron Clark Construction is proposing an underground system to treat the runoff rather than onsite ponding. Mr. Alan Brixius commented that New Hope's review process brings attention to these issues early in the process. During the pre- application meeting and at the Design and Review meeting, the developers are made aware of city and watershed requirements. The city engineer needs to stay abreast of what the new rules are so the developer can be educated and be sure the appropriate information is submitted. Mr. Brixius reiterated that New Hope has a very thorough step -by -step approach to the planning process. If there is anything specific related to watershed requirements, staff has the developer contact the watershed directly. Mr. Weiss added that staff relies heavily on the city engineer to complete the reviews. The engineer does the construction and post construction inspections and follows through with infiltration testing. Council Member Stauner stated that one of the new proposals is the soil compaction standards and soil amendment, which is currently being done in Washington state. The benefit to the developer is the offset of the half -inch of credit for infiltration, which in New Hope with heavy clay soils that may be significant. The new rule includes a requirement that the developer submit a soil management plan in order to get the credit. Currently, the city is does not require a soil management plan from developers or contractors that do private or city projects. Soil compaction impacts infiltration as a water management issue. Chair Houle inquired if the soil management plan was to be applied during construction to avoid compaction or for modifications to soils after the project was completed for better infiltration. Council Member Stauner stated that the rule had specific information regarding adding compost to loosen the soil. The plan must address the soil compaction during construction and the condition of the soil at the conclusion of construction. If the soil is loosened, the sod, trees and plants grow better because the roots can take hold. The goal of the soil compaction rules is to create a better soil environment to allow water to infiltrate and allow plants to absorb the water and put it back into the atmosphere through photosynthesis. A question was raised as to the softness of the soil and the potential for ruts and unevenness due to riding lawn mowers or landscaping equipment driving over the lawns. Commissioner Svendsen wondered whether Bassett Creek and Shingle Creek watershed differ in their review process and whether or not the Planning Planning Commission Meeting 3 June 5, 2012 Commission needed to look at projects differently depending on the location. Council Member Stauner stated that the watershed review process should be the same with the new rules. The one -inch infiltration requirement would be the same everywhere, but the soil compaction may be different. Svendsen stressed that the Planning Commission should be kept abreast of the rules for both watersheds in the city. Commissioner Anderson stated he was concerned with the cost issue for developers. Chair Houle suggested that the watershed commission put together a couple hypothetical projects with estimated costs and how the new rules would impact those projects, especially the composting component. Stauner noted that the soil compaction was not a mandate, but the developer would get a credit against infiltration if they complied with the requirement. Commissioner McKenzie pointed out that another large expense for developers is water quality structures or ponding on site, as well as maintenance or replacement later. Council Member Stauner thanked the Planning Commission for the good dialogue and useful information to provide to the watershed commission. Item 6.2 Chair Houle introduced Item 6.2, Discussion of City Center Zoning, PC12 -03 Mr. Eric Weiss stated that the review was started a few months ago and this discussion would begin with the parking standards. Currently, the code requires minimum parking standards. The major change for parking for this district would be to cap the maximum parking allowed. Mr. Weiss explained parking minimums and maximums for several different uses that would be allowed in the City Center district. Any residential use considered would be constructed with a minimum of 10 units per acre. The parking stall size is 8'- 7" wide by 19' long. Mr. Brixius interjected that most stalls are sized at 9' wide. Commissioner Anderson questioned whether there should be different sized stalls for compact cars or larger SUVs and the response was the stalls are one size due to drive aisles. It was suggested to keep the parking standards as proposed and revise later if these were found to be insufficient. Flexibility is key to the entire ordinance rather than having to approve variances. Mr. Weiss continued by explaining that parking minimums may be reduced by 25 percent if the principal use was within 800 feet of a public parking facility or public transit park and ride facility; if businesses purchased stalls in a parking ramp; or demonstrated to the Planning Commission and City Council that parking would be less than the requirement. Developers could go above the maximum if there was structured above or under - ground parking; a shared parking agreement was executed; parking was provided behind the building; access would be shared by at least two adjacent properties; or combining adjacent parking lots and pedestrian access points. Flexibility would be capped at 25 percent either above or below the standard. Discussion ensued with regard to removing the phrase "no surface parking or maneuvering within a required setback or between primary structure and the front lot line, except driveways" and adding "no surface parking or Planning Commission Meeting 4 June 5, 2012 maneuvering within five feet of the property line." Another item that would need to be addressed is "no surface parking on corner lots at the point of street intersections." Mr. Brixius added that the building setbacks to street side is a build -to range of 10 -25 feet, therefore, the building could be 10 -25 feet away from the street surface, which would not allow enough space for parking. If parking in front of the building was desired, the build -to range would need to be adjusted. Mr. Weiss reported that parking and loading may be located fronting a public street, street intersection, sidewalk or path if certain standards are met, such as landscaping yards seven feet deep along the public area and up to 10 feet if parking facility contained over 100 stalls. Commissioner Svendsen pointed out that providing the appropriate drive aisle width so traffic is not blocked when deliveries are being made should be considered. After some discussion, Mr. Brixius suggested that loading be kept separate and keep this code section for landscaping appropriate for parking areas. The existing ordinance specifies loading be a separate area from parking or driveway areas. A common service area area could be designed between buildings. There could be a more stringent requirements to build to and yet allow flexibility if screening, segregation, and non - interruption of traffic can be accomplished. Additional standards include screening consisting of a masonry wall, fence or hedge not less than three feet or 60 percent opaque, and screening of loading areas six feet in height. Mr. Weiss suggested adding "breaks in screening for pedestrian access every 75 feet." A tree should be provided every 20 linear feet. After some discussion, the consensus was to limit total parking or loading area fronting a street to 150 linear feet. Mr. Brixius cautioned that the City Center area is to be a compact site, therefore, allowances should be made so that everything would fit onto the site. Every time a landscaped island or other feature is added, the parking area is reduced. Appealing landscaping around the perimeter of the site that hides the parking area should comply with the intent of the code. Mr. Weiss explained that on- street parking along public streets abutting the use could be counted toward the minimum number of parking spaces, but could not be used when calculating the maximum. Parking requirements may be met on or off -site at a distance of 800 feet from the use. Parking located to the rear of the building may extend the entire width of the lot, except for the area required for screening or landscaping. Shared parking would be encouraged. A new requirement would include bicycle parking standards, such as one bicycle space per 20 automobile spaces or a minimum of two bike stalls, whichever is greater. Bicycle parking must be provided within view of the front entrance of each business and may be shared between businesses. As the city makes it easier for people to bike to their destination, there will probably be more people that do so. Discussion ensued on the appropriate ratio of bicycle to automobile parking stalls and the consensus was to leave it at 1:20. Weiss also mentioned that specific standards must be met with the construction of parking structures. Mr. Weiss stated lighting should meet current standards as well as a Planning Commission Meeting 5 June 5, 2012 maximum pole height of 20 feet which is more pedestrian scaled. Lighting would be permitted if it is enhancing specific architectural elements or adding visual interest. Lights should be shielded and could highlight certain areas of the building such as entrances, art, and special landscape features. The pedestrian areas should have higher illumination for safety reasons. Mr. Brixius commented that lights should be shielded where there would be residential above it. He wondered whether bulb or architectural lighting that would have the luminary as part of the accent would be acceptable. Stipulating no skyward lighting with any mixed use or residential development may be enough. Currently, developers can meet the green space requirements through setbacks, but it could be argued whether grass provides anything for the livelihood of the neighborhood for pedestrians. Usable open space would be required depending on the size of the building. The space could be located on the rooftop or enclosed on the ground floor. It should be accessible to all the users of the building and have amenities such as seating, plantings and be visible from the street or pedestrian areas. This requirement may need to be refined due to the fact that if the space is on the rooftop it will not be visible from the street. Floor area ratio (FAR) credits are allowed for developments that provide the usable open public spaces, which could include increasing the size of the sidewalk. Usable open space may encroach into the setbacks when the street side or side yard faces the street, sidewalk or path, when the interior side yard is set back three feet from property line or when adjacent to a non - residential zoning district. Mr. Weiss suggested adding the provision when not interfering with the sight triangle setback. Pedestrian and bicycle access should be provided so pedestrians are able to safely cross where there may be conflicts with other types of traffic. Landscaping must be consistent with the city's design guidelines. One shrub should be planted for every 10 linear feet of foundation. A suggestion was made to add irrigation of landscaped areas as a requirement. Buffering from residential uses would prohibit utilizing chain link or barbed wire fencing. Appropriate fencing types could include wood, vinyl and composite materials. All current design guidelines would apply to the City Center district. Mr. Weiss explained that signage would be somewhat more restrictive than other areas of the city. Wall signs would be limited to 150 square feet or five percent of the user's building wall area, whichever is less. Signs could project into the minimum setback by two feet as long as clearance was provided. Marquee signs would be allowed. A height restriction of 10 feet and 40 square feet in area would be applied to ground mounted signs. Discussion ensued regarding sign height and the consensus was the sign height would be limited to two stories. Mr. Brixius interjected that on a multistory office building not every business has an individual wall sign. If the business has its own exterior entrance, a sign would be allowed. For a building with a common entrance, code would allow building identification signage or a directory sign of businesses in the building. Mr. Brixius brought up the issue of potentially having a large business requesting a sign larger than 150 square feet. The reason most ordinances go to a percentage of the building is to Planning Commission Meeting 6 June 5, 2012 maintain some continuity. A larger building gets a larger sign and a smaller building gets a smaller sign, but proportionally for the sign face it remains equivalent. The consensus was to allow wall signage at five percent of the wall face. Mr. Weiss explained that the ordinance includes permitted, conditional, temporary and administrative uses. The ordinance traditionally has specific language for administrative and conditional uses and staff reviews the projects to see if they meet the standards for approval. Many times, conditions of approval are added to an application that are not specifically listed in the code for a CUP. Many other cities do not create conditional requirements but rather just list the conditional uses and include a clause outlining what will be considered when approving a CUP such as design, parking, landscaping, lighting, etc. Some cities do a combination where the use is listed and other times, if there are certain concerns such as noise, they will be spelled out in the approval process. Under a CUP, the Planning Commission and City Council may attach additional conditions that are deemed reasonable. Those conditions relate to controlling the area, bulk, height, location, ingress /egress, and considering different modes of transportation, fire protection, safety, parking and loading areas, utilities, fencing, screening and landscaping, and the design guidelines. Mr. Weiss explained that the conditional uses should be listed in the ordinance but would not need to have specific requirements listed under each heading unless there was a specific condition for that use. Mr. Brixius reported that state statutes are set up to allow permitted uses in certain zoning districts and conditional uses that are acceptable if they meet certain conditions. If the conditions are met, the use would be approved. Due to an activity or operation unique to a property, certain conditions may be necessary to make sure the use is compatible in the overall context of the district. A CUP is not discretionary it is legislative, if the applicant meets the conditions, the use is allowed. That is why, in the past, city code identified specific uses because it was felt that under certain circumstances a particular use would be allowed if the applicant addressed items such as noise, traffic, etc. Mr. Weiss added that if there currently was a use listed as conditional with no specific performance standards associated with that use, it should be moved to the permitted use section. Commissioner Svendsen stated he felt that it was better to provide a more comprehensive list than put out generalities. Mr. Brixius clarified that an application for a CUP would go through the process but, if there were no conditions to be met, then it would be the same as a permitted use. The city cannot arbitrarily say it does not like the location of a particular use if it was not pointed out in the ordinance or the plan. If an applicant proposes a use in a particular location and the conditions are met, then the city would be obligated to allow it. Specific uses could be identified in the plan or ordinance for fronting certain streets according to the hierarchy of the superblock. Mr. Weiss stated that the language of the ordinance could still be revised. The public hearing would be scheduled for July or August. Mr. Brixius stated the plan stipulates that the commercial core is 42nd /Winnetka avenues and questioned whether or not a free - standing, Planning Commission Meeting 7 June 5, 2012 multi - family residential use would be appropriate at that intersection or should it be located along the periphery. Either the plan would need to be more detailed regarding where specific types of uses would be located or details needed to be spelled out in the ordinance. At this time, there is no specific plan for the City Center area only a vision. Mr. Brixius clarified that mixed use, a commercial /residential building, would be allowed at the 42nd/Winnetka avenues intersection. The use in question was for a free- standing apartment building and whether or not it should be allowed on the main commercial corridor of the superblock. The commissioners agreed that the main commercial corridor was 42nd/Winnetka avenues and it should be protected as such. Chair Houle stated that he felt, due to traffic counts, that 42nd /Xylon should be commercial and allow more flexible uses at 45th /Xylon avenues. Commissioner Brinkman stressed that a potential plan for the entire block should be worked out rather than a piecemeal approach. Mr. Weiss stated that a market study to determine the economics and overall plan would be important. Mr. Weiss stated that a new concept for New Hope would be live -work buildings with units in which living and work spaces are integrated into the same unit, which can take various forms and different layouts. Group care and daycare facilities, senior /disable housing, PUD, recreational businesses exceeding 10,000 square feet, and veterinary care would also all be allowed in this district by CUP. The recreational business verbiage may need to be amended. Mr. Brixius wondered whether the daycare facility was something that would fit in the downtown area. The street access in the ordinance is existing language where daycares would be located on an arterial or collector street, which would be Winnetka and 42nd avenues. The consensus was to eliminate the street access language under daycare facilities. The farmers market and outdoor seasonal sales would be combined in the ordinance. Discussion ensued on the hours of operation relating to the 6 a.m. start time and it was decided to redefine this section. OLD BUSINESS Approval of Minutes Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen, to Item 7.1 approve the Planning Commission minutes of May 1, 2012, as amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried. ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Svendsen inquired whether or not the CVS had been approved with a condition that a paved walkway be installed from the corner to the parking lot. He stated he has seen people cutting through the grass area. Staff will check into this situation. The next Planning Commission meeting will be on July 10. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 4:�)4-4-, qA Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary Planning Commission Meeting 8 June 5, 2012