Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
070798 Planning
AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 7, 1998 CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. CONSENT ITEMS 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS * 4.1 Case 98-10 Request for Variance to Allow an Accessory Building (Gazebo Shelter) in the Front Yard of an Existing Principal Building, 7601 42nd Avenue North, Northwest Branch YMCA, Petitioner * 4.2 Case 98-12 Request for Conditional Use Permit to Allow an Extended Church Campus, 4741 Zealand Avenue North, Crystal Evangelical Free Church, Petitioner * 4.3 Case 98-13 Request for Site/Building Plan Review/Approval to Allow Building Addition, 4500 Quebec Avenue North, Conductive Containers, Inc., Petitioner * 4.4 Case 98-14 Request for City Engineer/City Council Approval of 32-Foot Wide Driveway or a Variance to Allow an Increase in Curb Cut Width to 38 Feet, 2720 Nevada Avenue North, Pipe Fabricators, Inc., Petitioner 4.5 Case 97-25 Ordinance No. 98-03, An Ordinance Amending the New Hope Sign Code, City of New Hope, Petitioner 5. COMMITTEE REPORTS 5.1 Report of Design & Review Committee - Next Meeting: July 16 at 8 a.m. 5.2 Report of Codes & Standards Committee - Next Meeting: July 29 at 7 a.m. 5.3 Report of Comprehensive Plan Update Committee - July 16 and July 30 at 5:00 p.m. 6. OLD BUSINESS 6.1 Miscellaneous Issues 7. NEW BUSINESS 7.1 Review/Approval of Planning Commission Mini~tes of June 2, 1998. 7.2 Review of City Council Minutes of May 26, and June 8, 1998. 7.3 Review of EDA Minutes of June 8, 1998. 8. ANNOUNCEMENTS 9. ADJOURNMENT *Petitioners are required to be in attendance '-:-=-, ~ a'-~.-.-x.~,, JULY ~i': E=. E.-_--- E: '> '- F;::::; ~ ':--- ..'C..,. PLANNING .:: ~E_~ :t,.._ ..-',-E£ ~"'~-', ~ ? .... ~.' 7:'~ ~ PC98-~2 ~ ~.~='":=:'~: 4741 Zealand Avenue N. : ;:_~_2:;i ~-~ Crystal Free Extended Campus I ZONING DISTRICT MAP :,-~'-~' 4.500 ~ebec Ave Conductive e-2 ~ ~ T~ ~ R~ti~ ~1 ~ ~~ Buenm ~3 ~ O~ ~ C~mun~ I-1 ~ I~ k2 ~ I~ ~/~ ~C98-[0 ,.. 7601 42nd Avenue -" PC98-14 ~'"~;~:~":"-~ i! 2720 Nevada Avenue " Pipe Fabricators 1 INCH- 2100 FEET CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning Case: 98-10 Request: Variance to Allow an Accessory Building (Gazebo Shelter) in the Front Yard of an Existing Principal Building Location: 7601 42"d Avenue North PID No.: 17-118-21-23-0007 Zoning: B-4, Community Business Petitioner: Northwest Branch YMCA Report Date: July 2, 1998 Meeting Date: July 7, 1998 BACKGROUND 1. The petitioner is requesting a variance to allow an accessory building (gazebo shelter) in the front yard of an existing Principal building, pursuant to Sections 4.22 and 4.032(3)(a)(b) of the New Hope Code of Ordinances. 2. Northwest YMCA, located at 7601 42°d Avenue North, is requesting a variance to place an accessory building in the front yard of the existing principal building. The subject site is classified as B-4 Community Business. The proposed building is accessory in nature, as it is subordinate to the principal building and does not exceed 30 percent of the principal building's floor area. Under the existing ordinance, accessory buildings cannot be placed in a front yard without a variance. 3. The multi-purpose/function gazebo would be permanent and replace the temporary plastic shelter used in the winter for Christmas tree sales. Warm weather uses will vary with gatherings/programming for families and children. The 45-foot hexagonal gazebo would be located at the northeast corner of the property and would take up 25 percent of the 180-foot front yard lot depth, but only two percent of the front yard lot area, which is 1.15 acres. 4. The long narrow parcel contains 8.8 acres, the "Y" building contains 62,000 square feet, and the proposed gazebo is 1,080 square feet. 5. The existing land use is commercial recreation in a B-4 Zoning District. Surrounding land uses and zoning include B-4 office building and I-2 General Industrial across Quebec Avenue to the east, I-1 Limited Industrial to the south, B-3 Auto-Oriented and I-1 Limited Industrial to the west, and B-4 Community Business District north across 42"d Avenue. 6. This property is located in Planning District #17 "City Center" of the Comprehensive Plan, which includes a number of recommendations for the commercial area. This specific area was designated as an "entertainment and recreation center." Therefore, this proposal is consistent with the 1978 Comprehensive Plan. 7. Currently 216 parking spaces exist on the site and no additional parking is proposed. Since the sale of Christmas trees is an existing site activity, there will be no additional traffic created by the development of this accessory structure. No additional parking is required on the site. 8. The topography of the northern 75 percent of the site is fiat except for a small berm in the front yard. The southern 25 percent of the lot drops off into a one acre ponding area at the west (rear) of the site. 9. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff have received no comments regarding this request. ANALYSIS ~ VARIANCE 1. The purpose of a variance is to permit relief from strict application of the zoning code where undue hardships prevent reasonable use of property and where circumstances are unique to the property. A hardship may exist by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of property or because of exceptional topographic or water conditions. The hardship cannot be created by the property owner and if the variance is granted, it should not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or unreasonably diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. 2. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. 3. Additional criteria to be used in considering requests for a variance includes the following and the Planning Commission/City Council shall make findings that the proposed action will not: A. Consistent With Purpose of Variance. Be contrary to the purposes of a variance. B. Li,qht and Air. Impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property. C. Street Connections. Unreasonably increase the congestion in the public street. D. Public Safety. Increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. E. Property Values. Unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the neighborhood, or in any other way be contrary to intent of City Code. 4. Per the Planner's Report, in order to receive a variance, an undue hardship must exist which is unique to the parcel. The configuration of the lot creates hardship for the property owner. The rear yard is currently in use as a recreation area, and therefore, the front yard is the only viable place for the proposed accessory structure. The accessory structure is open, and therefore, does not significantly alter the appearance of the principal structure. 5. The proposed 1,080 square foot gazebo will be 70 feet from the front property line, which exceeds the 50- foot setback minimum. The main issue is the front yard placement. The past temporary shelter for tree sales has raised some safety concerns for City staff, with extension cords being utilized from the "Y" building for holiday lights and basic illumination. This proposal would provide for a safer, more attractive permanent enclosure for tree sales and other uses and an electrical power box is provided. Staff also feel that the visual impact will be minimal, as no walls are proposed. Staff feel that the gazebo will improve the aesthetics of the property during the winter months, in particular. 6. Staff also feel that the additional investment will enhance the variety of recreational offerings and enhance pedestrian access to the Ky, with the use brought closer to 42"~ Avenue. 7. Since the existing building is 180 feet from the front property line and the City has begun to encourage more pedestrian-friendly uses, such as outdoor dining across the street, the gazebo concept seems reasonable. No reduction in green area will occur, since the existing oversized plaza will be replaced with a conventional sidewalk. 8. For the above stated reasons, staff is supportive of approving the vadance request. Planning Case 98-10 Page 2 7/2/98 SITE PLAN 19. Appropriate City staff and consultants met on June 16 to review the plans and issues discussed, including the proposed building materials (wood frame construction) vs. the recommended 42nd Avenue streetscape elements, berm relocation and landscaping, anticipated uses of building, details or electric and building separation issues between gazebo and potential future pool expansion. 10. The Design & Review Committee met with the petitioner on June 18 to review the plans. Similar issues were discussed including building uses, materials and dimensions, electric, berm, drainage issues, lighting, and landscaping. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meeting. 11. The revised plans include the following details: A. Buildin,q Location - The gazebo has been shifted 10 feet from the "future pool expansion," as recommended. It has also been shifted 20 feet east to improve sight lines from the "Y's" north windowed wall for security purposes. B. Buildin.q Materials - Color copies of several typical gazebo "kits" have been submitted, along with detailed specifications. There has been a lot of discussion at the staff level about the building materials. Several staff have no problem with a wood structure, as it would be similar to the outdoor dining deck at the Sunshine Factory. Several other staff feel strongly that the materials should be of a durable quality and match in color and design with the principal structure and 42nd Avenue streetscape materials (enclosed). It is staff's opinion that the proposed structure offers potential for the enhancement of the streetscape along 42n't Avenue and for the principal structure itself. According to the New Hope City Center Streetscape Master Plan, integration of the YMCA Plaza into the overall community streetscape is encouraged. To accomplish this end, architectural review by the Planning Commission is appropriate. Architectural and color integration with the principal structure and streetscape is strongly recommended, if possible. The petitioner indicates that they will use the RCP or Litchfield plan, based on cost. C. Li_qhtin~ - The gazebo lighting will be intedor with four 150 watt double flood lights. The petitioner states that the lights will be mounted so that light is cast within the structure. D. Landscaping - The petitioner has submitted a diagram of the landscape plan and indicated in their correspondence that they plan to implement the landscaping by summer 1999. The proposed landscaping plan is insufficient due to its lack of detail. Some additional screening will need to be provided in addition to the expansion of the existing berm. The site plan did not identify the contours or elevations of the berm, and should be noted in the landscape plan. A landscape plan should be submitted prior to or as a condition of approval of this application. The applicant has proposed completing the landscaping in 1999. The City is agreeable to this option, however, the posting of financial security is strongly encouraged to assure that the work is completed. E. Plaza/Sidewalk - Most of the 25-foot wide concrete plaza will be removed and be replaced with sod. A conventional five-foot wide sidewalk will be built adjacent to the parking lot for pedestrians moving from 42"d Avenue to the ,,y., F. Electric - The petitioner has confirmed that the only utility connection will be electrical, to an approved service panel for intedor lights and basic electric needs. G. Draina.qe - Per the City Engineer, a grading/drainage plan has not been submitted including building elevations and contours. However, it is implied drainage will be conveyed east to west around the shelter over the proposed sidewalk to the existing parking lot. The petitioner has indicated that McCrossan Company is developing the drainage flow and apparently will do the work. The reshaping of the northerly berm and construction of new sidewalk must be carefully done not to impact drainage. 12. The Planning Consultant has prepared the enclosed summary report for your information. Planning Case 98-10 Page 3 7/2/98 13. The Building Official has indicated that no New Hope precedents exist for a front yard gazebo private proPerty. The City park shelter hexagonal buildings are fully enclosed and have an expensive cedar shake roof. The "Lions" shelter at Northwood Park is an inexpensive gable shelter with basic asphalt-fiberglass shingles on the roof. This "hex" gazebo will look better than the "Lions" building, especially if roof support posts are laminated arched beams. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommend approval of the variance to allow an accessory building in the front yard, subject to the following conditions: 1. Before Council review, submit a written narrative that details the spectrum of likely, anticipated uses, hours of operation and public access. 2. Before Council review, submit a detailed landscaping plan showing the following: A. Number, species and size of trees to be denoted on the plan B. Elevation and configuration of berm to be specified on the plan C. Cross section elevation that illustrates how the accessory building and berm relate to the 42nd Avenue views. 3. Accessory building must be compatible in color and design to the principal building and 42"d Avenue streetscape, as approved by the Planning Commission. 4. Approval of a grading and drainage plan, subject to City Engineer review and comment. 5. Before applying for a building permit, submit a bond to ensure the installation of the erosion control, berm, sidewalk, and landscaping before May 15, 1999. Attachments: Address/Zoning/Topo Maps YMCA Correspondence Building Specifications: Ground Plan Framing Plan Section/Elevation Concrete Plan Color Photos Landscape Plan Grading Plan Site Plan Survey Planner's Report City Engineer Correspondence Updated Accessory Building Ordinance Excerpts: 42"d Avenue Streetscape Standards City Correspondence Application Log Planning Case 98-10 Page 4 7/2/98 '45 ~'. AVE :.~'- ~,, , ~, , ~~mmmM 45 TH ~~"~-~ x~{ ' FRED , J~ 4~r~ I ,. 450 I ~ 4~ ND ~VE. N. . ADM. > ~ ~ ' : II OFFICE N ~ ' 'LHO Ii SCHOOC BUS " ' : ?-',,~ 3 :~ 5999 -~ Single and Two Family Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential "Senior / Disabled" Residential ~esidontial Office R-O(PUD) Residential Office - PUD B-1 Limited Neighborhood Business ! ! ~-~ R-1 B-2 Retail Business B-3 Auto Oriented Business .... "< ........... =- [ ity c~ ............. -~ B-4 Commun Business ........ ~ .... ~- [" '; I-1 Limited Industrial ' ~ ~. ' '~-~' '~ _ .... --~' ~ ~ I-2 General Industrial ~ .......... Open Space / Public ; ~--__. ::.. 1 INCH = 1000 FEET ....... ' .... 0 10~ 2000 DA'I~ 0¢ I~'~OTOGI~I~'cly 3'-~-1991 OONTOU~ '"T~"'~." ' - -- ' I NEW HOPE, MINNESOT Northwe~ Branch YMCA of Metropolitan Minneapolis 7801 42nd Avenue North New Hope, MN 55427 Phone: 535-4800 FAX: 535-7006 Tim Bergstresser Executive Director MEMORANDUM DATE: June 25, 1998 TO: Doug Sandstad, City of New Hope FROM: Tim Bergstresser RE: YMCA - request for variance .- FILE #: 131,01-98.10 In response to our meeting of Thursday June 18: 1. LiQhtinQ of buildin¢3: Four 150 Watt adjustable surface mounted double floods will be installed with the building. They will be mounted so that light is cast within the structure. 2. Enclosed are 10 color cooies of the proposed buildings. We will use the RCP plan or Litchfield plan-based on cost. 3. Enclosed is a simple diagram of the landscape plan. We plan to implement the landscaping by summer 1999. 4. Drainage flow is indicated on the enclosed site plan. We are working with the McCrosson Company to accomplish all excavating and drainage flow. This can be checked by your inspection before any building construction begins to insure proper drainage. 5. To address security concerns, we will move the building approximately 20 feet to the east (towards Quebec) to allow for improved sight lines from within the building. 998 ll :3BAM FRQH LITCHF!ELD I~ I~ ~17 BA2 3939 P. 1 SPECIFICATIONS HEXAGONAL FREESPAN SHELTER Freespan Hexagonal Shelter available in 16 20', 25' 30' 35' 40' 45' 50 and 60' diameter spans Supporting columns are 6" x 8" nom., #2 or better southern yellow pine, S4S pressure treated to a retention of 0.4 per cubic feet with a 30 year guarantee against rot and decay. Columns pre-cu~ _and drilled at t'he factory. Column length allows_for four feet_.~n 9round installation and seven feet, six inches above ground. Roof decking shall be 2" x 5" nom. x 18', #Z or better, southern yellow pine with "V" joint face side. Laminated radial beams, perimeter beams, and purlins shall be fabricated of kiln-dried, stress-rated southern yellow pine lumber, with waterproof adhesive, architectural appearance 9rads, sealed and wrapped.. Members shall be pre-cut and drilled at the factory, ready for field assembly. The center compression ring shall be fabricated of steel plate. The beam-column brackets shall be steel plate welded assemblies. Steel.components primed and painted, gloss brown enamel. Purlin bracket hangers shall be formed galvanized steel. Fascia shall be 2" x 6" nom x 18' pressure treated pine Hardware attachments are zinc plated. Engineering certified for a 30 lb. live-load and 10 lb, wind load. Available with or without roof shingle package, consisting of; 235 lb. earth tone ftberg]ass shin'gles or cedarwood shingles, along with 15 lb. felt, nails and drip edge. Additional options include: * Steel Columns * Wood Cupola * Laminated Columns * Complete Oil Base Stain * Various Sizes * Double Shelters with 20' Conn. ~ Galvanized S~eel Columns · Other Sizes Available * Railings and Benches = Enclosure Panels * Skylights * Engineering for higher live - Cedar roof decking & fascia and wind loads aYailab]e ~ Pre-cut metal roof SPEC[F'[CAT%ONS SUBJECT TO CHANGE FOR PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT! I . , .';~;. . , · ,G-0~-1998 11:3GAM FF~I3N LITCHFIELD IND INC S17 S42 3939 P. 3 I 998 11:3~AM FROM LITCFFIELD IND INC B17 ~42 3939 'P'.4 r ~i~es Shown tO ~engm ~r ~ssmg. ~ul~ ~ u~ for 6-~$~1998 11:37AH ~ROIvl ~TCI-'-F~D ~ND ~NC ~17 ~42 3939 ~.~ , Industries,.Inc~ Bidding [ ] · or Design [ ] / t~ varyfl local ~eria, ~nter lines and/ siz~ are to change during ~der not ~ u~ for i~llation detaitswill ~ ~ ~nl ~rial deliver. =4I : 0 : T~ ; .~,, SC-6 Model 4 HEXAGONALS Options shown; fiberglass shingles Hexagonal Solid Arch #1800 Series The one piece solid arch columns and beams add strength and beauty to any park or play area. Features · Pressure T.reated on Lower Half Arch · Tongue-and-'Groove Roof Decking ~ Options . - -. ~, · Cedar Roof Decking and Fascia .~ · Cupola · Fiberglass Shingles · Cedar Shingles · Pre-cut Metal Roof Sizes · 20' · 35' · ~25' · 40' · 30' · 45' ~,.~- THE EXPERTS IN SHELTERS & SITE AMENITIES LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, IN~ I:. LAND ~0~ ~el ) (~ C~ty ~tor) ,~o,., ~i. ~. 324. ~ ~,,. ~e~a, ~ 617 e/10 f~ e~ ~ ~ , lot 1~ f~ ~ ~t l~e ~ ~tim; ~e a ~mm~t ~t f~ strut ~ utility - ; Ave. u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r '~,~ ~ E ~ to ~1~ ; : N NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS COMMUNiT~ PLANNiNG - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH PLANNING REPORT TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Jeffrey Schaumann / Alan brixius DATE: 30 June 1998 RE: New Hope - Northwest YMCA - Request for Variance FILE NO: 131.01 - 98.06 BACKGROUND Northwest YMCA, located at 7601 42nd Avenue North, is requesting a variance to place an accessory building in the front yard of the existing principal building. The subject site is classified as B-4 Community Business. The proposed building is accessory in nature, as it is subordinate to the principal building and does not exceed 30 percent of the principal buildings floor area. Under the existing ordinance, accessory buildings cannot be placed in a front yard without a variance. Attached for reference: Exhibit a - Site Location Exhibit B - Site Plan RECOMMENDATIONS The site plan has the potential to improve the 42nd Avenue streetscape. To insure the enhancement of the sites appearance, the following conditions are advised prior to the approval of the variance. 1. All accessory building lighting be internal and down-lit. 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 55416 PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 612-595-9837 E-MAIL NAG@ WlNTERNET.COM 2. A detailed landscaping plan showing the following should be provided. A. Number, species and size of trees should be denoted on the plan. B. Elevation and configuration of berm be specified. C. Cross section elevation that illustrates how the accessory building and berm relate to the 42nd Avenue views. 3: Accessory building must be compatible in color and design to the principal building and 42nd Avenue streetscape, as approved by the Planning Commission. 4. Approval of a grading and drainage plan, subject to City Engineer review and comment. 5. Posting of financial security to assure landscaping compliance. ISSUES ANALYSIS In order-to receive a variance, an undue hardship must exist which is unique to the parc~el (Section 4.22 of the Zoning Ordinance). The configuration of the lot creates hardship for the property owner. The rear yard is currently in use as a recreation area, and therefore the front yard is the only viable place for the proposed accessory structure. The accessory structure is open, and therefore does not significantly alter the appearance of the principal structure. Land Use Compatibility. The proposed structure offers potential for the enhancement of the streetscape along 42nd Avenue and for the principle structure itself. According to the New Hope City Center Streetscape Master Plan, integration of the YMCA Plaza into the overall community streetscape is encouraged. To accomplish this end, architectural review by the Planning Commission is appropriate. Architectural and color integration with the principal structure and streetscape is strongly recommended. The proposed accessory structure will accommodate winter Christmas tree sales. Said sales previously occurred within semi-trailers and plastic shelters with unsafe electrical attachments. The development of this structure will greatly improve the appearance and safety of mentioned tree sales. Off-Street Parking. Since the sale of Christmas trees is an existing site activity, there will be no additional traffic created by the development of this accessory structure. No additionally parking is thus required for the site. 2 Building Materials. Materials should be of a durable quality, and match in color and design with the principal structure and 42nd Avenue streetscape. Structure Setbacks and Height. The accessory structure meets all B-4 setback requirements and height requirements. Landscaping. The proposed landscaping plan is insufficient due to its lack of detail. Some additional screening will need to be provided in addition to the expansion of the existing berm. The site plan did not identify the contours or elevations of the berm, and should be notated in the landscape plan. The spectrum of activities potentially occurring within this structure will warrant screening. A landscape plan should be submitted prior to approval of this application. The applicant has proposed completing the landscaping in 1999. The City is amenable to this option, however, the posting of financial security is strongly encouraged to assure that the work is completed. Drainage. A drainage plan showing elevations and proposed grading must be submitted. Lighting. All lighting must be internally posted and down-lit. CONCLUSION We recommend approval of the variance given that the conditions outlined under the "Recommendation" section are met. pc: Doug Sandstad Mark Hanson City of New Hope SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-I SINGLE AND TWO FAMILY RESIOENTIAL R-2 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL HIGH 0ENSITY RESIDENTIAL R-4 SENIOR CITIZEN RESIDENTIAL R-5 RESIDENTIAL OFFICE R-0 LIMITED NEIGHBORHO00 BUSINESS B-I RETAIL BUSINESS B.2 AUTO ORIENTED BUSINESS COMMUNITY BUSINESS B-4 LIMITED IN0USTRiAL GENERAL INDUSTRIAL FLOOD PLAIN FP WET LAND W J ' ~Associated Consultants, inc. EXHIBIT A - SITE LOCATION EXHIBIT B - SITE PLAN ~ent By: BonestPoo & Associates; 6126474179; Jun-30-98 9:24Aid; Page 4./4 j Bonestroo "'-,~ ~-~ ~-* -~ ~ .,~,~,. ~ ,,. ~.~,~,v. ~.,,~,~,., ~_, ~,~,~ ~OS~ R~rd ~. ,~. fi... ~ ~ C.ok, ,E.. R~. ~. SCfl~iCfl,. P~. J.ry ~ ~Jr~. Ai~ ~cK ~t~ P~ E~i~ers & Architects o.,~.~ 5~ ,.~..~....,. ~, ~, s~, c,~.. u.. u,~... ~. M MO Kirk McDoa~/d I~ROM: Mark Hanson S~: ~CA V~ ~u~ (H~o~ Sh~) F~e ~ ~98-~) DA~t J~ ~. 1~8 We have reviewed the above request and recommend the following: · A sradin~/drainagc plan has not been submitted including building elevations and contours, However, it is implied drainage will bc conveyed east to west around the shelter over the proposed, sidewalk to the existing parking lot. McCrossan Com.nany is developing thc drainage flow and apparently will do the work. The ~shapi~ of the northerly beam and construction of new sidewalk must be caret'ally done not to impact drainage. 2335 q~V/eSt Highway 36 · St. Paul, I~'N 55113 · 612-636-4600 · Fax: 612-636'1~11 ' · ,~ RD 08', :39 r, u~, ,~ ORDINANCE NO. 98.-05 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE NEW HOPE ZONING CODE ~Y MODIFYING THE REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND GARAGES ~N RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS The City. Council of the City of New Hope ordains: Section 1, Section 4.032 (3) "Accessorv Buildings. Uses and Ecuil3me_n.t" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended by repealing in their entirety subsec"~ions (¢=) "Integral Part", (b) "Rear Yard Limitations", (c) "Garage Location Limitati.'on~", (d) "Further Location Limitations" and (f) "Area Limits, Storage". Section 2. Section 4.032(3) "Ac_ce_~__o~..Bui[di.ngs, .U.~e= and Equipment" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended by adding new subsections "Permitted Location~ and Setbacks", (b) "Prohibited Locations" and (c) '?ermiff. ,ed Sidevard Setback Variance" to read as follows: (2) Accessorv Buildin.(~s. Uses and EQuipment. An attached garage or attached accessory building shall be considered an intecjral part of the principal building. Attached ~ara.aes and attached accessory buildings shall meet all req~ _ui[ _ed__.buiidin~i setbacks of the appl!__cabJ.~.zoning ,,district. Deta_c..h_ed.Oamges and accessory buildings mu_st_cg_ reply with the location, setback, size an.d. area restri~_ons of this section. (a) Detached Structure Locations and Setbacks. Accesso.~/garages and.bui_!d!ngs, both attached and detached, a_re ~3erm~ed in side Yards and rear Yards. Detached_s_tru_otu_res__ am also subiect to the following setback c~nditions; (i) side yard interior 5 feet (ii).. side Yard_.abu_tting_~..s.taLe~ 20 feet {i_i~ side yard .a.b ..u~..'nq a collector or arterial street 30 feet (iv) ,all rear yards - ac~,e, sso, ry buildings 5 feet .(~).aii m_ar_y_a_rds - aamae ................................. !O..feet CD) Prohibited Locations. NO qa_r_~a_e_or accessory buiidin~i shall Jocated in any,front ~..rd.._o_f a_d~__n_a~le and utility easement, (o) ._~oia~ side .__ Yard _Gefi~__.~k. Variance. No.twith~,tandin9 ~4,032{'3)i'a'){ii) and (iii) of this Code. a .3 foot..va_d_ance_i_nt0...a r_eauired side..ya, rd.._abutfin~__..a__street, will be _~erm~ed for ..co_nstr~Iction of an. ~tccessqry_...buildina o_r aaraae subject to the t fo..'lowin~i conditions..and .~4.22 of this...C, ode: J~e 1998 Prqvared By: Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, .Inc. CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Acknowledgments ......................................... 3 List of Figures ............................................. 4 Executive Summary ........................................ 5 I. Introduction ......................................... 12 Purpose of Study .................................. , .............12 What is a Streetscape? .......................................... 12 Project Approach ............................................... 14 Process ...................................................... 16 II. Existing Conditions ................................... 17 District Identity ................................................. 17. Pedestrian Facilities and Circulation ................................ 19 Local History .................................................. 21 Character Elements ............................................. 23 Preliminary Issues .............................................. 23 Community Issues Workshop Summary ............................. 23 Ii!. Principles, Goals, and Objectives ....................... 27 Design Principles ............................................... 27 Goals and Objectives ............................................ 27 Design Framework Plan .............. : ........................... 28 ~ IV Streetscape Master Plan 30 , Phase One Recommendations .................................... 30 A. 42nd Avenue: Zealand to Winnetka Ave ................. , .... 30 B. Xylon Avenue: Civic Center ............................... 37 C. 45th Avenue: Residential and Open Space Corridor 41 Phase Two Recommendations .................................... 44 A. Winnetka Avenue: North of 42nd Avenue ..................... 44 -B. Winnetka Avenue: South of 42nd Avenue .................... 50 C. 42nd Avenue: East of Winnetka Avenue ..................... 52 Redevelopment Concepts ........................................ 59 V. Streetscape Elements ................................. 64 Principles ..................................................... 64 Design COncept ................................................ 64 Elements ..................................................... 65 PAGE CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SL~MMARY REPORT VI. Implementation ...................................... '74 Public Improvements ....................................... ~ .... 74 Phase One Summary of Costs .... · ................................ 74 Potential Funding Sources .................................... . .... 75 Private Improvements ........................................... 75 Estimated Maintenance Costs ..................................... 75 Requested Actions .............................................. 77 Conclusion .................................................... 77 VII. Appendix .................................... · ....... 78 Issues Summary ............................................... 78 Issues Workshop Summary ....................................... 80 Detailed Cost Estimates .......................................... 83 PAGE 2 CITY OF NEW , ~OPE CITY CENTER STRE~T3CAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY ~,EPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc. wishes to thank the following individuals for partiqipating in the design process and for providing their time, effort, and candid input into this collaborative effort. C_ity_Center Streetscape Master Plan Task Force Steve Svendsen ................................. New Hope Planning Commission Sharon Cassen .......................................... New Hope City Council Steve Reed ........................................ Citizens Advisory Committee Paul Anderson ............................................. Universal Color Lab Mike Diederichs ............................................ Universal Color Lab Harvey Becket ................................................ Marquette Bank Joel Bonenstingl ............................................ '... Marquette Bank Bob Sendelbach ................................................ Norwest Bank Thomas Walerius .......................................... School District #281 Robert Rappaport ............................................. Winnetka Center Mary Jean Kroll ............................................... Winnetka Center Kirk Malkowski ....................................... Gill Brothers Funeral Home Al Stabenow ..................... : ...................... Gethsemane Cemetery John Louris ............................................... Catholic Cemeteries John Cherek .............................................. Catholic Cemeteries Brent Lindgren .............................................. Hennepin County Todd Grugel ................................................ Hennepin County David Lasky ............................................. Lasky Co. Real Estate Madsa Lasky .............................................. Lasky Co. Real Estate Dale Jeske ........................................................ Resident Jeannine Clancy .......................... City of New Hope Di~rector of Public Works Tom Schuster ...................... City of New Hope Contract Manager and Forester Kirk McDonald .................... City of New Hope Community Development Director Shad French ........................ City of New Hope Parks and Recreation Director Doug Sanstad ................................... City of New Hope Building Official Mark Hanson ...................... Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates, Inc. Glen Gustafson ..................... Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates, Inc. Vincent Vander Top ................. Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates, Inc. Landscape Architectural and Urban Design Consultants: Dahlgren, Shardlow,-and Uban: Geoff Martin John'Slack Carissa SchivelY PAGE3 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN SU:,IMARY REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY t This report summarizes the analysis and mast.er planning phases of the City of Newt Hope's City Center Streetscape Master Plan. The catalyst for this project was the proposed improvement of 42nd Avenue, also referred to as Rockford Road and County Road 9, between Boone and Winnetka Avenues scheduled for construction in the spring of 1999. At that time the City recognized that the upgrading of 42nd Avenue presented an opportunity to improve the image and to set the stage for future improvements to the overall City Center Area. Purpose of Study This document represents the completion of a six month process to formulate a framework plan for streetscape improvements within New Hope's City Center Area. The project area includes: · 42nd Avenue from Gettysburg Avenue to Louisiana Avenue · 45th AVenue from Xylon Avenue to Winnetka Avenue · Winnetka Avenue from Quebec Avenue to 45th Avenue · Xylon Avenue from 42nd Avenue to 46th Avenue The ultimate challenge of this project is to balance the functional needs of vehicles with those of pedestrians to create a sense of person;~l safety and comfort while also celebrating the community's culture, fostering a sense of community pride, and unifying the appearance of the City Center as an "Urban Village." Project Approach To be successful in the long term, the streetscape must create an environment that reflects the vision and character desired by the community. The approach was tailqred to solicit the communities input and create a responsive plan that will assist the city in reaching informed decisions regarding the extent, character, costs, benefits, and maintenance concerns associated with the proposed improvements. Task Force The design process was overseen by the City Center Streetscape Master Plan Task. Force which consists of representatives from area businesses, residents, the New Hope City Council and Planning Commission, and city staff. Process At this point, the City of New Hope has completed the first two phases of the four phase Streetscape Design Project outlined below: · Phase One- Analysis. This phase focused on defining the communities issues and objectives, character districts, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, opportunities and other design parameters. · Phase Two- Master Plan and Preliminary Streetscape Design. This phase focused on preparing the preliminary design and master plan for the project area. Alternative concepts were explored and ultimately a preferred composite plan was recommended based upon input from the task force. PAGE 5 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT · Phase Three- Design Development and Construction DoCuments, and Bidding.' Upon authorization to proceed by the City, the consultant will prepare design~ development and construction documents for the first phase of improvements. · Phase Four- Construction and Site Inspections. Upon approval, the consultant team will assist with construction inspections. Community Issues Workshop Summary A Community Issues Workshop was held on February 24, 1998, to provide the residents of New Hope with an opportunity to voice their opinions on the issues, problems, and opportunities facing the City Center Area. Following is a summary of the results: A. Strengths/Opportunities · Small town atmosphere. Participants noted that they appreciated the small town feel of the city and should maximize this by promoting a village character in the City Center Area. · Infrastructure and traffic. Properly managing the high traffic levels and maximizing the use of the quality infrastructure in the area are seen as opportunities. · Development opportunities, Participants identified the need to incorporate destination businesses into the City Center area. This could be accomplished on vacant and underdeveloped property within the area. B. Weaknesses/Threats · Unattractive features. A number of aesthetically displeasing elements were identified within the City Center area including large expanses of asphalt, overhead electrical lines, fragmented buildings, and unattractive signage. · Need for identity. Participants noted a number of problems concerning the lack of an identity for the City Center Area including the lack of gateway features, lack of a central gathering space, and insufficient signage. · Lack of amenities. It was noted by participants that there is a lack of convenient access to recreational facilities and also insufficient commercial development to serve local needs within the area. C. Issues/Objectives · Development opportunities. The City Center Design process will afford the City an opportunity to consider development and redevelopment opportunities at several key sites within the City Center Area. · Central focus. One of the primary goals of this process is the creation of an area which can serve as a central focus for the community. Through the incorporation of design elements and additional facilities possibly including an outdoor market, pocket parks, a fountain, the community may be able to effectively create an identifiable "city center." Incorporating signage and improving linkages from neighborhoods are important ways to accomplish these objectives. · Aesthetics. Improving the aesthetic qualities of the City Center area is another area of focus. Options to accomplish this include burying utilities, developing a theme for building and landscape design, and promoting consistent signage. PAGE6 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT Design Principles The design principles listed below are intended to serve as a foundation on which to, base the design of the streetscape and guide future redevelopment efforts. · Reinforce a positive, genuine character. · Design a hierarchy of streetscape treatments. · Design a flexible palette of elements. · Integrate the need to move traffic with safety and aesthetic meeds of the streetscape. Goals · Utilize the streetscape design as a means of implementing an "Urban Village" theme. · Encourage a positive, vital, and unique image for the City Center Area. · Encourage appropriate redevelopment in the City Center Area. · Take advantage of opportunities for new development in order to effectively address the needs of the community. Streets_cape_Master Plan The area defined as Phase One is proposed t° be constructed in the Spring of 1999 and therefore received the greatest scrutiny from the Task Force. Following is a summary of the streetscape elements recommended by the Task Force for each segment in Phase One. PHASE ONE: RECOMMENDED STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS A. 42nd AVENUE: ZEALAND TO WINNETKA AVENUE. This segment is the primary east to west entry into the City Center. · Landscaped Medians. This concept incorporates three lan~lscaped medians within 42nd Avenue to define the gateway to the City Center and to reduce the perceived scale of the four to six lane road. · New Access to Applebees and K-Mart. This concept proposes that the access point just east of the bank would be closed and a new access point wouldbe incorporated just west of Applebees. This new access point would prevent traffic entering from 42nd Avenue from racing in front of Applebees. A second access point would be located just east of Applebees. Service access will still be maintained for K-Mart. · Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail and Boulevard. The Hennepin CoUnty Bicycle Transportation Plan includes a bikeway along the entire length of 42nd Avenue through New Hope. In addition, a bike lane along the south side of 42nd Avenue between Zealand and Boone Avenues is represented in the New Hope Transportation Plan. At this time it is uncertain if either of these plans will be implemented. However, it will be the intention of the master plan to explore means that will allow us to comply with either of these transportation plans if they are enacted. It is not the objective of the master plan to redesign these transportation plans. Rather, it is our goal to deal with regional bike trail issues. A ten foot bicycle trail and a ten foot boulevard are proposed on the south side of 42nd Avenue along the Gethsemane Cemetery property. This design configuration PAGE 7 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT meets the minimum standards establishe(~ by Hennepin County for mixed-use trails. A pedestrian/bicycle crossing would occur at the Xylon/42nd Avenue intersection. The bicycle trail and boulevard on the south side of 42nd Avenue will reqdire right- of-way beyond that already negotiated. The amount of right-of-way needed will range from five feet to eight feet. · City Center Sign. The body of the existing citycenter sign could be updated and redesigned to conform to a potential city center sign system. The existing brick base would be unchanged. Additional flowers and other landscaping is proposed to be added to punctuate this area as an entry to the City Center. The proposed entrance and landscaping for the Cemetery is included in the master plan. The new entrance is proposed to line up with Xylon Avert, ue and is 100 to 150 feet east of the existing City Center Sign. The proposed entry landscaping extends to the back of the sign and will form a very nice back drop. · Other Elements. A sidewalk and six foot boulevard will be provided on the north side of 42nd Avenue to provide access to City Center for residents to the west. New signs, boulevard trees, roadway lighting and additional landscaping will also be included. B. XYLON AVENUE: This street defines the west edge of the City Center and is the front door to civic uses such as the City Hall, Civic Center Park, the New Hope swimming pool, and the Fire and Police Stations. · Reduce width of Traffic Lanes, include Landscaped Medians, Widened Walks and Boulevards. The recommended plan for Xylon Avenue, calls for reducing the roadway width to include landscaped medians, sidewalks and tree lined boulevards. This treatment will create a distinctive character to the corridor, reduce the perceived width of the street, calm traffic, and provide an element of continuity between 42nd Avenue, 45th Avenue, and potentially Winnetka Avenue. Although the City staff respects the task force decision regarding medians., the staff has expressed concerns regarding the initial cost of construction and ongoing maintenance. · City Bikeway. The City Trail and Bikeway Plan designates a bike path through the project area from 46th Avenue south through Civic Center Park to 42nd Avenue. Options were discussed that include incorporating the bikeway or a spur into the Xylon Avenue corridor. · Bicycle Trail. This concept includes a ten foot bicycle trail and ten foot boulevard on the west side of Xylon Avenue. The bicycle trail should connect to the proposed City trail at 46th Avenue and go south through the park. Within the park, the trail should branch off at the swimming pool with one leg winding south through the park to Zealand Avenue and the other leg branching east to Xylon Avenue directly north of the swimming pool. The bicycle trail proposed on Xylon Avenue will travel south to the intersection of 42nd Avenue, where it will intersect with the proposed Hennepin County trail on the south side of 42nd Avenue. PAGE 8 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT · Pedestrian Crosswalk Between the Pool and K-Mart. A pedestrian crossing is proposed between the K-Mart parking lot and the pool. Safe sight lines and traffic calming measures need to be incorporated into the design to insure this crossing is as safe as possible. A table top design for the crosswalk should be considered to provide a visual and textural cue to motorists to slow down for pedestrians. The city trail proposed on Xylon Avenue must take into consideration the vehicular and pedestrian traffic in and out of the swimming pool/City Hall parking lot. This is a highly populated area during the summer months which could lead to potential pedestrian/bicycle conflicts. · Retaining/Seatwalls. Low serpentine concrete or brick retaining'walls are proposed at key areas along the east side of Xylon Avenue where earth may need to be retained due to the expansion of the walks and boulevards and also to emphasize entry points into the businesses. These walls will be designed to compliment the other streetscape elements and provide a distinctive image for the City Center area. · Pedestrian Level Lighting, Directional Signs, and Street Furniture. These Streetscape elements will be included to create a cohesive pedestrian friendly environment. C. 45th AVENUE: Residential and Open Space Corridor. · Reduce width of Traffic Lanes, include Landscaped Medians, Walks and Boulevards. The recommended concept for 45th Avenue includes narrowing the traffic lanes and putting the residual space into boulevards, v,)alkways and landscaped medians. · Park and Ride. The park and ride parking lot at the northeast corner of the Winnetka Center is not authorized by the property owners. The proposed bus shelter at this location may not be as critical if the park and ride is not included in future plans. · Wetland Interpretive Park. A small pocket park is proposed on the south side of the wetland. This space could incorporate a deck overlooking the wetland,'an arbor with seating areas and interpretiVe exhibits. Other enhancements that should be considered at the wetland include: removal of fences, dredging to create islands, and wetland plantings to improve the habitat. A crosswalk is also proposed across 45th Avenue from the shopping center to the wetland. · Parking Lot Screening. Additional landscaping and possibly a decorative retaining wall are proposed to buffer the north edge of the Winnetka Center parking lot. Phase One Summary of Costs The costs for the landscape components summarized in this Master Plan are separated between streetscape (outside curb) and medianscape (between median curbs including median curbs.) Cost estimates for street/signal, utility, storm sewer, ponding (Boone Avenue and 41st Avenue, 45th Avenue east of Winnetka Avenue) and bury overhead electric also are identified. PAGE 9 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT Character Elements t The City Center currently lacks a distinctive image. However, there are several eler~ents that in combination, begin to define the same components to build on to formulate a design vocabulary. The civic architecture of the City Hall, Police Department, Fire Station, pool buildings, and several of the existing commercial buildings utilize brick as a dominant building material. These elements should be reinforced and included in future public and private redevelopment efforts to foster a more distinctive image. Chapter five describes how these components influence the design of the streetscape and will be expressed through the materials, styling, and details of bus shelters, lights, paving, railings, and other streetscape elements. Preliminary Issues A listing of preliminary issues was identified at the project initiation meeting held with the Task Force on January 14, 1998. The issues are illustrated in Figure 6 and summarized in the Appendix. Community Issues Workshop 'Summary The Community Issues Workshop held on February 24, 1998, was intended to provide the residents of New Hope with an opportunity to voice their opinions on the issues, problems, and opportunities facing the City Center Area. Approximately 30 persons attended the workshop. The viewpoints expressed during this meeting reaffirmed a number of the issues noted during the project initiation meeting. Following is a prioritized list of the top five issues in each of the three categories. The number of votes received follows each of the statements. A. S_tmng t h s/QppoxtunJties Participants were asked to list the primary reasons for living, working, shopping, and playing in the City Center. Although the listed strengths and opportunities cover a broad spectrum, the issues that elicited the most consensus can be grouped into thi'ee main themes. They include: · Small town atmosphere. Participants noted that they appreciated the s~nall town feel of the city and should maximize this by promoting a village character in the City Center Area. · Infrastructure and traffic. Properly managing the high traffic levels and maximizing the use of the quality infrastructure in the area are seen as opportunities. · Development opportunities. Participants identified the need to incorporate destination businesses into the City Center area. This could be accomplished on vacant and underdeveloped property within the area. PAGE CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT Top five ranking strengths and opportunities and their corresponding votes follow: ~-~ · Small town feel and opportunity to create a village character (10) ~ · Good infrastructure (8) · Need destination businesses (6) · Improve traffic flow on 42nd (5) · Natural features - open space/parks/cemetery (4) B. ~LeaY~Qesses/Th reats Although the listed weaknesses and threats cover a broad spectrum, the issues that elicited the most consensus can be grouped into three main themes. They include: · Unattractive features. A number of aesthetically displeas!ng elements were identified within the City Center area including large expanses of asphalt, overhead electrical lines, fragmented buildings, and unattractive signage. · Need for identity. Participants noted a number of problems concerning the lack of an identity for the City Center Area including the lack of gateway features, lack of a central gathering space, and insufficient signage. · Lack of amenities. It was noted by participants that there is a lack of both recreational facilities and also insufficient commercial development to serve local needs within the area. Top five ranking weakness and threats and their corresponding votes follow: · Asphalt jungle (9) · Power poles (6) ~ · Lack of gateway features (5) · Lack of bike paths and bicycle commuting facilities (4) · Buildings fragmented (4) C. I s s u esLQbjer.~t i_v_es_ Participants were asked to specifically focus on those issues, objectives, and physical improvements which they would like to see addressed through the streetscape design process. This amounted to expressing a vision for what the City Center should look like in the future. Although the listed issues cover a broad spectrum, those issues ~Jpon which the greatest consensus was gained can be grouped into three main theme areas. They include: · Development opportunities. The City Center Design process will afford the City an_ opportunity to consider development and redevelopment opportunities at several key sites within the City Center Area. · Central focus. One of the primary goals of this process is the creation of an area which can serve as a central focus for the community. Through the incorporation of design elements and additional facilities possibly including an outdoor market, pocket parks, a fountain, the community may be able to effectively create an identifiable "city center." Incorporating signage and improving linkages from neighborhoods are important ways to accomplish these objectives. PAGE24 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STP, EETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMM~ RY REPORT · Aesthetics. Improving the aesthetic qualities of the City Center area is another' area of focus. Options to accomplish this include burying utilities, develq~ping a theme for building and landscape design, and promoting consistent signage. Top five ranking issues and objectives and their corresponding votes follow: · Redevelop key properties (14) - Kmart - Winnetka Center - 42nd & Quebec - Lasky Property - Hardees · Create a community gathering area and focus for the citY (12) · Create an outdoor market (4) · Bury all overhead utilities (4) · Hennepin County streetscape standards - are an issue (3) PAGE2~ CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT II1. PRINCIPLES, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES t 1 Design principles, goals and objectives are outJined in this section and will drive the qualitative and functional aspects of the streetscape design. The goals and objectives have been established through input from the task force, public participants, an analysis of the c(~rridor and safety and maintenance considerations. Design Principles The design principles listed below are intended to serve as a foundation on which to base the design of the streetscape and guide future redevelopment efforts. A. l~einforce a Positive Character · Create a spirited, progressive identity based on local character, history, and values. B. D_e_sign a_Hierarchy of Streetscape Treatments · Create treatments that emphasize the character of different districts. · Define approach routes and gateways. · Create strategically located gathering areas to provide a focus to the community and set the stage for cultural activities. C. D_esign_a Flexible Palette of Elements · Elements should adapt to different site conditions. · Provide continuity, yet foster variety and interest within the City Center. · Coordinate design of streetscape elements with promotional tools for the City. · Incorporate elements that enhance the winter streetscape. D. lntegr_a_te_tb_e Need to Move Tr~fety and Aesthetic Needs of the St r_e_ets_cape · Consider alternative forms of transportation, i.e., bicycles, buses, and in-line skates. · Create pedestrian friendly linkages between all areas within a five minute walk of the commercial nodes to minimize vehicular trips and to encourage walking. · Treat the transportation corridors as community links, not as a barriers. · Utilize elements such as lighting, trees, and other street furniture in appropriate areas to create a sense of human scale. Goals and Objectives The success of the streetscape design is dependent upon how well it responds to the goals and objectives of the community. Goals and objectives have a distinct and different purpose in the design and Planning process. Goals are broad, long range statements toward which planning efforts are to be directed. Objectives describe specific measurable guidelines which need to be accomplished in order to advance toward the overall goal. Following are the goals for the streetscape and supportive objectives defined by the Task Force: A. Goals 1. Utilize the streetscape design as a means of implementing an "Urban Village" theme. PAGE 27 CITY OF NEW HoPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT · Promote the small town character through the streetscape design{ · Establish linkages between.the City Center Area and the surrounding community. · Incorporate public gatherin§ spaces within the City Center Area · Improve pedestrian accessibility and safety. · Incorporate existing landscaping treatments into the proposed streetscape design. 2. Encourage a positive, vital, and unique image for the City Center Area. Objectives: · Strengthen the identity of the City Center Area through the use of design elements. · Create gateways into the City Center Area. 3. Encourage appropriate redevelopment in the City Center Area. Objectives: · Identify necessary infrastructure improvements and address them through landscaping treatments. · Address existing transportation and circulation barriers through infrastructur~ improvements. · Encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation in the City Center Area. 4. Take advantage of opportunities for new development in order to effectively address the needs of the community. · Promote the cooperation of the public and private sectors in implementing and maintaining the streetscape design. · Identify sites and encourage appropriate redevelopment within the City Center Area. · Establish guidelines to promote the use of consistent signage within the City Center Area. · Maximize the use of green space and the existing park system within the streetscape design. · Integrate existing natural features into the streetscape design. · Consider parking and traffic issues as they relate to the proposed streetscape design and infrastructure improvements. Design Framework Plan The Design Framework Plan illustrates a synthesis of the issues, goals and objectives, and the application of the principles established as part of the New Hope City Center Streetscape Master Planning Process. The Framework Plan also establishes a guide upon which to base the evaluation of concept alternatives (see Figure 7). PAGE 28 4401 Xylon Avenue North City Hall: 612-531-5100 City Hall Fax:612.5~'~-%36 New Hope, Minnesota 55428-4898 Police: 612-531-5170 Police Fax: 612-537-~174 Public Works: 612-533-4823 Public Works Fax: 612.533-7650 TDD: 612-531-5109 Fire Dep't. Fax: 612-531-5175 May 20, 1998 Mr. Tim Bergstresser, Executive Director Northwest Branch YMCA 7601 42"d Avenue North New Hope, MN 55427 Subject: Construction of Gazebo in Front Yard of the YMCA Building Dear Mr. Bergstresser: This letter is in follow-up to the meeting that you had with Doug Sandstad and me on Monday, May 18. I submitted your plans to the City's Planning Consultant and also discussed your request with the New Hope City Manager. The Planning Consultant confirmed what the Building Official said to you at the meeting, that the Zoning Ordinance currently prohibits the location of accessory buildings in the front yard of commercial buildings. Therefore, a location variance to locate the gazebo (accessory building) in the front yard is necessary. As we indicated to you, a variance would require Planning Commission and City Council approval per the schedule we provided to you. If you want to pursue this request, I would suggest that you contact Doug Sandstad, Building Official, at 531-5122, regarding the exact documents and number of sets of plans that are necessary for submission. As I indicated, if you want to submit an application by the June 12 deadline, the matter would be considered by the Planning Commission on July 7 and the City Council on July 27. If you submit your application by the July 10 deadline, the matter would be considered by the Planning Commission on August 4 and the City Council on August 10. The City Manager is in agreement that the YMCA should go through the Planning Commission and City Council process as this is the same process that is required for all industrial and commercial properties in the City. Regarding the application fees, the City Manager feels that the fees cannot be waived, due to the fact that this application will very likely result in additional consultant costs to the City from the Planning Consultant and City Engineer. Therefore, you should submit a $175 basic zoning fee with the application along with a $175 zoning deposit to cover outside consultant fees incurred by the City. Family Styled City /,,,~i.~,,~i',,V~ For Family Living Mr. Tim Bergstresser Page 2 May 20, 1998 We certainly are looking forward to working with the Y on this project. We like the concept and staff is initially supportive of recommending approval of the variance. Please contact me at 531-5119 if l can be of further assistance. -..~nc. erely, Kirk McDonald Director of Community Development cc: Dan Donahue, City Manager Mark Hanson, City Engineer Al Brixius, Planning Consultant Shad French, Director of Parks & Recreation Doug Sandstad, Building Official ( - CITY Of NEW HOPE , SPECIAL ZONING PROCEDURES APPLICATION LOG A B C D E F G H I J Appli- Applicant Date Date Applicant Date 60- Date 120- Date Deadline Date City Date City cation application was sent day time day time Applicant for City approved or sent response number Name received notice limit limit was notified action denied the to Applicant Address by City that required expires expires of under application Phone information extension extension was missing or waiver 98-10 Tim Bergstresser 6/11/98 8/10/98 10/9/98 Northwest Branch YMCA 7601 42nd Avenue North New Hope 55427 535-4800 fax 535-7005 YMCA of Metropolitan Mpls 30 south 9th Street 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 l0 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 120-day limit, include all calendar days. G. Despite the automatic extension, the City will notify the Applicant a second time by mail that a 120-day approval 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. I. 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. CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning Case: 98-12 Request: Request for Conditional Use Permit to Allow an Extended Church Campus Location: 4741 Zealand Avenue North P ID No.: 07-118-21-42-0030 Zoning: R-l, Single Family Residential Zoning District Petitioner: Crystal Evangelical Free Church Report Date: July 2, 1998 Meeting Date: July 7, 1998 BACKGROUND 1. The petitioner is requesting a conditional use permit to allow an extended church campus, pursuant to Sections 4.21 and 4.054(1) of the New Hope Code of Ordinances. 2. Crystal Evangelical Free Church is requesting a conditional use permit for the usage of the vacant Homeward Bound Facility as an extended campus, located at 4741 Zealand Avenue North. The compatible reuse of this facility is encouraged under the proposed Comprehensive Plan. The site is currently zoned R-I. Churches are allowed in the R-1 District under a conditional use permit as ~Public, Educational and Religious Buildings." 3. The growing church, one-half mile southwest of this site, wants to use this building for small group prayer and meeting space for youth, counseling, ministry training, committee meetings, office and equipment storage. 4. The parcel has a land area of 2.9 acres and the existing building on the site is 26,000 square feet in size. 5. The existing land use is a vacant former institution/care center for disabled children. 6. Surrounding land uses/zoning include R-1 Single Family/House of Hope Lutheran Church (CUP) to the north adjacent to the site; R-1 Single Family/Cooper High School (CUP) to the east across Zealand Avenue; R-1 Single Family/Highview School to the south adjacent to the site; and R-1 Single Family homes to the west across Boone Avenue. 7. The property is located in Planning Distdct #13 of the 1978 Comprehensive Plan, which identified no changes for this fully developed area. A caution about traffic volume (schools) was noted. 8. The lot is predominately green on the west and south sides. The overall slope is 15 feet east (Zealand Avenue) down to west (Boone Avenue). Many plantings are 25 years old, planted when Homeward Bound was built-(20 years ago) and a few original trees on the west side of the lot are mature. 9. The application from the petitioner states that ~Crystal Evangelical Free Church is proposing to purchase the Homeward Bound facility at 4741 Zealand Avenue North, as an extension of our main campus at 4225 Gettysburg Avenue. One of the contingencies of this purchase is a Conditional Use Zoning Permit from the City of New Hope. · Crystal Evangelical Free Church envisions using the Zealand location as an ~extended campus" for: 1) religious equipping and inspiration within the context of our youth and small groups, 2) social outreach in the context of personal counseling, guidance and Bible studies, 3) individual office space for some our full and part-time staff, 4) vadous committee meetings, and 5) equipment storage. · The "Extended Campus" concept would not be used for worship or large group settings, There are no rooms in the facility conducive for such use. There are only a few rooms that would permit modest sized gatherings in agroup context and these would never be used all at once. The property would not be used for children's or nursery ministries. These would remain on the main campus, as would the vast majority of ministry activity. · The property is bordered to the north by House of Hope Lutheran Church, to the east by Cooper High School, and to the south by Highview School (a small alternative school). Our proposed use is completely consistent with these other institutions. · All functions taking place on the extended campus would be church related and supported by the church." 10. The application further stated that "Crystal Evangelical Free Church is not intending to make any major structural changes to the facility. Our modification intentions are two-fold: 1) To do ongoing work to bring the facility up to current code standards, 2) To do ongoing work to bring the facility in line with its intended use. Future improvements would involve, though not limited to: · Modest Parking: The nature of Crystal Evangelical Free Church's unique use of this property would not product high density parking needs. The current 36 parking places would be. sufficient for most usages. To build in a "margin factor," additional future parking is planned - 30 additional spaces'would provide for 66 total spaces. This additional parking area would be appropriately landscaped in the middle ddveway section. · Occasional Shuttle Ministry: On an occasional basis, limited shuttle parking would be conducted from the main campus seven blocks away using professionally designed "walk-in" vehicles capable of carrying up to 21 people. · Main Bathrooms: Two main bathroom areas would be brought up to code (one located in the administrative section of the facility, the other in the main hallway of the four-unit section). These would be supplemented by existing pdvate bathrooms in each unit. · Re-roofing: The current roof is neadng the end of its functional expectancy, thus a re-roofing of both shingle and fiat roofs is planned. · Kitchen and Laundry: The kitchen area would remain as is, but the commercial washers/dryers in the laundry would be dismantled/removed and the room would be converted to an equipment storage area. · Soffit and Fascia Cladding: Existing soffit and fascia is showing wear - intend to repair and/or replace as appropriate. · Wood Panel Siding Replacement: The extedor wood paneling connecting the units is showing wear - intend to repair and/or replace as appropriate. · Concrete Sidewalk Replacement: Some sidewalk has become uneven and beginning to deteriorate - intend to repair and/or replace as appropriate. · Interior Lighting; Fluorescent light energy up-grade planned. · Resurface Interior Walls: Clean, repair, paint, or resurface existing walls. · Replace Select Exterior Doom: Some extedor unit doore are near the end of their functional expectancy - replacement planned. Planning Case 98-12 Page 2 7/2/98 · Remove Buried Fuel Tank and Diesel Generator: Planned removal of diesel Generator and under-Ground tank. Plan to replace with appropriate emergency liGhts." The petitioner states that "It is believed that such modifications would transform this former residential health care group home into a functional extended campus of Crystal EvanGelical Free Church for small groups and administrative use, and be a beautiful property, structure and ministry welcomed in the neighborhood. The use of these facilities, as described above, would diffuse ministry on our main campus in such a way as to minimize density, be consistent with previous use of the property and compatible with the surrounding properties, and would actually result in limited on-site presence for the vast majority of time throuGhout the week. It is an arrangement that would present a minimal number of complications and a maximum benefit to a majority of people. 11. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff have received no comments reGardinG this request. ANALYSIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1. The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to provide the City with a reasonable and legally permissible degree of discretion in determininG suitability of certain designated uses upon the General welfare,.'public health, and safety. In making this determination, whether or not the conditional use is to be allowed, the City may consider the nature of adjoining land or buildings, whether or not a similar use is already in existence and located on the same premises or on other lands close by, the effect upon traffic into and from the premises, or on any adjoining roads, and all such other or further factors as the City shall deem a requisite for consideration in determining the effect of such use on the General welfare, public health, and safety. 2. Other General criteria to be considered when determining whether to approve or deny a conditional use permit include: A. Comprehensive Plan. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official Comprehensive Municipal Plan of the City. B.Compatibility. The proposed use is compatible with its adjacent land uses. C. Performance Standards. The proposed use conforms with all applicable performance standards contained in the Code. D.No Depreciation in Value. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. E. Zoning District Criteria. In addition to the above General criteria, the proposed CUP meets the criteria specified for the various zoning districts: 1. In Residential Districts, R-1,2,3,4,5, R-O: a. Traffic. Non-residential traffic is channeled into thoroughfares or onto a street abutting business or industrial uses leading directly to thoroughfares, and not onto minor residential streets. b. Screening. The proposed use will be sufficiently separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned land so that existing homes will not be materially depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. c. Compatible Appearance. The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. 3. Per the Planner's report, in order to be given a conditional use permit, the applicant must show that the proposed land use is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, is compatible with adjacent land Planning Case 98-12 Page 3 7/2/98 uses, will not dePreciate the area, will be screened, compatible in appearance, and have traffic channeled into thoroughfares. 4. Adjacent land uses include House of Hope Lutheran Church, Cooper High School, New Hope Elementary School and some single family residences. The proposed usage of the si{e is compatible with adjacent educational and religious land uses. Activities at the subject site will be for small group meetings for educational and religious purposes. The facility will not be heavily used. The largest attendance at any one time is expected to be 120 individuals. 5. The Building Official indicates that the building meets the Iocational standards, as it is (no expansion is proposed). The pertinent questions are: A. Does the proposed use fall within the parameters of a "reli,qious buildin.q"? Crystal Free Church wants to buy and operate it with small group prayer and Bible study uses. It is adjacent to another church and two public schools. It will become an "extended campus" for Crystal Free Church. It seems most like a church. B. Are there other possible uses for the land? None of the seven permitted uses in the R-1 Zone are realistic. Among the most likely CUPs in the R-1 Zone are the church/school option. Rezoning is not likely. Most of the phone calls received regarding reuse of the land were institutional (prohibited), elderly day care (prohibited) and church-related (conditionally permitted). C. Are there any traffic, parking or compatibility problems that we can anticipate, and solve? No'heavy use of the property is planned, according to the narrative. Will this change? The addition of 32 spaces (future) is illustrated and much more land is available as green space. Some of the small groups of youth do not drive and will be bussed over from the main Crystal Free campus, six blocks southwest. The proposal seems compatible with the adjacent homes, schools and church. New trees along Zealand have been specified, should the parking expansion occur. 6. Based upon the comments by the Planning Consultant and Building Official, staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit. SITE PLAN/ISSUES 7. Appropriate City staff and consultants met to review the plans on June 16 and the major issues discussed included parking and traffic, shuttle bus, details on hours of operation/class sizes/programs, landscaping and sod issues, storm drainage, and fire lanes. 8. The Design & Review Committee met with the petitioner on June 18 and similar issues were discussed with the petitioner including: drainage, trash enclosure, landscaping, future on-site parking area/potential arrangement with School District, use of facility, shuffle bus, food service, fire lane, snow storage, and potential future street. Vacation issues were also discussed in greater detail. Revised narratives and documents were submitted as a result of the meeting. 9. The plans and narrative/documents include the following details: A. Structure Setbacks and Hei.qht - The Side/rear setback requirement for a CUP in an R-1 Distdct is 20 feet, exactly the setback of the facility. All other setback and height requirements are met or exceeded. B. Schedule of Activities - A typical schedule of activities for the proposed "Extended Church Campus" has been submitted. C. Shuffle Bus Route - The shuttle bus, presently owned by the church, will follow a specific route from Crystal Free Church along 42r~ Avenue to Boone Avenue, north on Boone to 47~', and east on 47t~ to Zealand. Planning Case 98-12 Page 4 7/2/98 D. Landscaoin~ - More details on existing and proposed new landscaping are included in the petitioner's revised narrative. The petitioner has stated that "Additional trees will be planted in conjunction with the parking expansion. The new trees will include four green ash with I ~/2" trunk size and two ornamental crab apple with 1 1/2" trunk size. The existing site has many mature trees of several varieties. Overstory trees on the site include: 43 deciduous trees and 34 coniferous trees with trunks ranging from 4" to 16". Shrubbery on the site' includes screening of air conditioning units, a line of 8' high shrubs along the Highview School property and miscellaneous decorative shrubs at the entrance. ^ line of mature ornamental crab apple trees on the House of Hope property along the north line of the property complement the overall appearance of the property. The south yard from the sidewalk and up the slope about 8' - 12' was redone at the time of the widening of 47~ Avenue, The grass was not completely established and through a hot, dry season soon after the repair, portions of it was lost. This portion will again be restored with seed, watering and regular maintenance." These are the landscaping items that the Design & Review Committee and staff requested be addressed. Staff will be recommending that the landscaping be completed within 12 months of approval of the CUP. E. Trash Enclosure - The existing trash enclosure located at the northwest corner of the parking lot is in need of repair. The petitioner has stated that "the screening will be painted and a gate comi~atible with the appearance of the fence will be installed with adequate hinging and latching to assure that the enclosure will be as attractive as possible. The existing fenced area used for screening of a generator and the garbage collection bins will remain. The church intends to remove the generator and use the enclosure for the garbage containers and possibly yard equipment. F. Parking - Currently, there are 36 parking spaces on the site plus two handicapped spacesl for a total of 38 spaces and the site plan shows the potential to add approximately 30 additional spaces in the future. The Planning Consultant has indicated that based upon the proposed facility usage, the peak usage of the facility will occur on Sunday and Wednesday. The peak usage will be approximately 120 individuals at a given time. This usage will be somewhat mitigated through the utilization of a shuttle bus between the Main Campus and the proposed Extended Campus. However, since ddership on the shuttle is unknown, we must assume all facility attendants are automobile commuters. According to the Zoning Ordinance, the required number of parking spaces for the proposed use is 40. The provision of additional parking will be needed to meet the expected demand of the facility. On-site traffic circulation patterns appear to be in order. Parking land widths and entrance widths meet or surpass existing regulations." It also should be noted that School District #281 has provided an informal letter of agreement to permit Sunday a.m. parking on its adjacent lot for 12 months. However, no conditional use permit for "off-site joint parking" has been requested since the need is not anticipated at this time. Such a CUP for parking Would require formal approval and a legally binding agreement to be recorded against the property titles. G. Draina.qe Improvements - A drainage explanation and agreement to make repairs has been submitted, in lieu of a new storm sewer system. The petitioner has stated that "A system of storm sewer will be built to directly remove water from the north side parking lot to the City storm sewer in Boone Avenue. Presently, the property retains much of the rainwater on the grassy portions of the west and south lawn areas. The hard surface parking areas to the east and north of the building drain around the building. A small portion of the Planning Case 98-12 Page 5 7/2/98 parking lot drains to the south of the building through a shallow slope parallel to the Property line which does not appear to have an excessive slope for drainage. It is well maintained and does not have any exposed erosion of soils. The greater portion of the parking drainage is to the north of the building and into a catch basin at the west end of the parking area. This leads to the west about 120 feet in a pipe which passes below the sidewalk and opens to the yard in an open air outfall. The remaining 140 feet to the west property line is drained through a shallow slope. This shallow slope through the grass shows that water has passed through and in some areas has washed out some of the soils in heavy rains, which will be restored in the construction." The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and narrative and his comments are as follows: "The existing drainage (including parking lot and building) from the site is conveyed overland across public sidewalks into public storm sewers in 47~ Avenue and Boone Avenue. An existing private storm sewer system (as-builts have not been provided) does convey drainage from the northerly parking lot and discharges on the ground near the common lot line between this site and House of Hope Church to the north (approximately 140' east of the sidewalk on Boone Avenue). From an engineering standpoint, it is preferred ovedand drainage from non-residential properties be conveyed in private storm sewers to public storm sewers in public rights-of-way (not over public sidewalks). The extension of a storm sewer from Boone Avenue collecting all drainage from the parking lot (reshaping of the southwesterly parking area may be required) is recommended. The proposed additional parking spaces will cause additional storm water runoff from the site.". H. Zealand Avenue Vacation - At the Design & Review Committee meeting, the City Engineer also recommended that the petitioner consider studying the potential future street vacation of that portion of Zealand Avenue north of 47"' Avenue. Per the City Engineer, "The attached sketch shows existing streets, parking lots, ddve aisles, and buildings based on the recent reconfiguration of Zealand Avenue and 4'~ Avenue due to the reconstruction of Cooper's football field. As noted, Zealand Avenue north of 47th Avenue is a dead end street terminating at the ddve aisles for Cooper's parking lot and this property. It would be desirable before additional parking spaces are constructed on this property that other parking lot configurations be considered between Cooper High School, Highview School, and this property. The parking lot configurations and/or arrangements between the property owners should consider vacating Zealand Avenue north of 47"~ Avenue as a public street (public utility easements would still be required over existing utilities). Additional parking spaces could be provided such that setback requirements from a public street would not be required and maintenance would be assumed by the adjacent property owners (Robbinsdale School District and Crystal Evangelical Free Church). Presently, Zealand Avenue north of 47"' Avenue is an extension of drive aisles serving parking lots with no public turnaround. To the extent it serves a public street is questionable." The petitioner responded in the revised narrative to this suggestion as follows: "The study as suggested at the review meeting will involve the cooperation of the three property owners presently connected with Zealand Avenue. These include the Cooper High School parking lot, the Highview School parking lot, and the subject property. I have quickly reviewed several design options for the realignment of driveways, roadway and property lines and would be interested in pursuing these further. Further discussion, however, should involve the other parties, and the City's Public Works and Engineering." I. The Fire Inspector reviewed the plans and made recommendations regarding fire lanes (yellow curbs painted) and signage and those recommendations should be part of the approval process. J. Overall, staff feel that the proposed use is a good fit for this site and compliment the petitioner on responding to a number of issues with a very thorough application. Planning Case 98-12 Page 6 7/2/98 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for the extended church campus, subject to the following conditions: 1. Parking lot expansion and landscaping be completed within 12 months of approval. 2. Installation of storm sewer, per City Engineer's recommendation. 3. Compliance with Fire Inspector's recommendations. 4. Explore feasibility of Zealand Avenue vacation. ~ 5. Execute CUP Site Improvement Agreement with City and submit performance bond for parking lot, landscaping and storm sewer improvements (amount to be determined by City Engineer and Building Official). Attachments: Address/Topo/Zoning Maps 6/26 Correspondence from Petitioner re: Design & Review Adjustments & Requested Documents · Response to Design & Review Comments · School District Letter re: Parking · Extended Campus Schedule, Activities, Hours of Operation, Size of Groups · Bus Shuttle Map 6/11 Application Excerpts · Facilities Use Proposal · Concept Plan · Site Plan · Floor Plan · Exterior Elevations · Site Survey · Topo Enlargement · Site Photos Planner's Report City Engineer Comments Fire Inspector Correspondence Application Log Planning Case 98-12 Page 7 7/2/98 NEW HOPE FAIRY IEII~ AVE. AVE. N COOPER CIR. 48TH AVE HIGH SCHOOL HOUSE OF HOt A'v'F... LU T H ERAN . CHURCH i 4~ TM AVE. '- ~. ~ AVE. ~ ~ NEW HOPE ~ ~ ELEMENTARY 4~ ~5 CiViC +~u, ~] CITY HALL , Crystal Evangelical. Free Church 4225 Ge~u~g Avenue No~th Minneapolis, MN 55428 612-533-2449 MEMO: DATE: June 26, 1998 TO: City Of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428-4898 FROM: Pastor Dave Rodquist Phillip D. Johnson Senior Associate Pastor Architect 536-3247 9116-34th Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55427 545-1072 SUBJECT: Crystal Evangelical Free Church Extended CamPus Conditional Use Permit Process Design-Review Adjustments & Requested Documents As per your request, please find attached: > Architectural Details & Adjustments Requested - Landscaping - Drainage - Garbage Enclosure - Study: Redesign Ensign Avenue from 47th to this Property > Letter from Robbinsdale School District 281 Thomas H. Walerius, Senior Associate for Business Services > Projected Schedule, Activities, Hours of Operation, Size of Groups - 1998-99 Sunday Worship Schedule Note: Only items highlighted in yellow are anticipated for the Extended Campus. '%. 0__.. ;r'cl~:~ - Highlighted Shuttle Bus Route (as submitted on June 11 & discussed at the Design & Review Hearing 6/18/98). PHILLIP D. JOHNSON/ARCHITECT 9116 34th avenue north, minneapolis, minnesota, 55427, 612-545-1072 CITY OF NEW HOPE 440'1 XYLON AVENUE NORTH NEW HOPE, MN 554Z8-4898 RE: CRYSTAL EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH EXTENDED CAMPUS COMMENTS:' Requested at the review meeting on june 18, '98 LANDSCAPING: Additional trees will be planted in conjunction with the parkng expansion. The new trees will include 4 green ash with 1 1/2" trunk size and 2 ornamental crab apple with 1 1/2" trunk size. The existing site has many mature trees of several varieties. Overystory trees on the site include: 43 deciduous trees and 34 coniferous trees with trunks ranging from 4" to 16". Shrubbery on the site includes screening of air conditioning units, a line of 8' high shrubs along the highview shcool property and miscellaneous decorative shrubs at the entrance. A line of mature ornamental crab apple trees on the House of Hope property along the north line of the property complement the overall appearance of the property. The south yard from the sidewalk and up the slope about 8'-12' was redone at the time of th~. widening of 47th avenue. The grass was not completely established and through a hot, dry season soon after the repair, portions of it were lost. This portion will again be restored with seed, watedng and regular maintainence. DRAINAGE: A system of storm sewer will be built to directly remove water from the north side parking lot to the city storm sewer in Boone Avenue. Presently the property retains much of the rainwater on the grassy portions of the west and south lawn areas. The hard surface parking areas to the east and north of the building drain around the building. A small portion of the parking lot drains to the south of the building through a shallow slope parallel to the property line which does not appear to have an excessive slope for drainage. It is well maintained and does not have any exposed erosion of soils. The greater portion of the parking drainage is to the north of the building and into a catch basin at the west end of the parking area. This leads to the west about 1 Z0 feet in a pipe which passes below the sidewalk and opens to the yard in an open air outfall. The remaining 140 feet to the west property line is drained through a shallow slope. This shallow slope though the grass shows that water has passed through and in some areas has washed out some of the soils in heavy rains which will be restored in the construction. GARBAGE ENCLOSURE: The screening will be painted and a gate compatable with the appearance of the fence will be installed with adaquate hinging and latching to assure that the enclosure will be as attractive as possible. The existing fenced area used for screening of a generator and the garbage collection bins will remain. The church intends to remove the generator and use the enclosure for the garbage containers and possibly yard equipment. STUDY: REDESIGN ENSIGN AVENUE FROM 47'tH TO THIS PROPERTY The study as suggested at the review meeting will involve the cooperation of the three property owners presently connected with Zealand Avenue. These include the Cooper High School parking lot, the Highview School parking lot and the subject property. I have quickly reviewed several design options for the realignment of driveways, roadway and property lines and would be interested in pursuing these further. Further discussion however should involve the other parties, the city public works and engineering. RODD I I,L D J L£ June 24, 1998 area schools Pastor David Rodquist Crystal Evangelical Free Church 4225 Gettysburg Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 Dear Pastor Rodquist: I want to assure you that the Robbinsdale School District will try to accommodate you as best we can regarding parking in the Cooper lot on Sunday mornings. The New Hope Park and Recreation does use the Cooper gym on some Sunday mornings during the year. They assured me that their need for parking space is limited to the east end of the lot. Therefore, we have no problem allowing you to use the west end of the Cooper lot from July 1, 1998, to June 30, 1999, on Sunday mornings. If you have any questions, please call me at 504-8037. Sincerely, Thomas H. Walerius Senior Associate for Business Services jk Education Service Center · 4148 Winnetka Ave. N. · New Hope MN 55427-1288 · (612) S04-8000 · Fax: (612) 504-8973 Crystal Evangelical Free Church Extended Campus Projected Schedule, Activities, Hours of Operation, Size of Groups Day of Week Group Activity Time Frame People Projections Facility Location Sunday Junior High Sunday Bible Classes 9:20 -10:30 a.m. 90 - 120 * Units: A, D, C Sunday Senior High Sunday Bible Classes ! I:00 a.m. - 12:!5 p.m. 90 - 120' Units: C, D, A Sunday Junior High Ministry Skill Training 5:00 - 6:00 p.m. 25 - 30 Unit: A Sunday College Sunday Bible Classes 8:00 - 9:45 p.m. 50 - 60* Units: C, D, Commons Monday Office staff Office Administration 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. I I - 16 Unit: D & Admin. Offices Monday Junior High Girls Sm. Group Bible Studies 6:30 o 9:00 p.m. 30 - 50 Unit: A Tuesday Office staff Office Administration 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. I I - 16 Unit: D & Admin. Offices Tuesday Single Adults Bible Study Group(s) 7:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. 30 - 50 Admin. Classrooms Wednesday Office staff Office Administration 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. I I - 16 Unit: D & Admin. Offices Wednesday Junior High Sm. Group Bible Studies 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. 30 - 40* Unit: A Wednesday Senior High Sm. Group Bible Studies 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. 50 - 80* Units: C, D, Commons Thursday Office staff Office Administration 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. I I - 16 Unit: D & Admin. Offices Thursday Adult Comm. Mtgs. Committee Meetings 7:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. 15 - 20 Admin. Conference Room Friday Office staff Office Administration 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. I I - 16 Unit: D & Admin. Offices Saturday No regular scheduled use. *Note: Intended shuttle bus use from parking lot of Main Campus. An Encouragement from Pastor Steve Iamve~'excitedaboutSundayNightWorshipandall ay that it represents... · God's Blessings Nigh t · Our Response · A Commitment to People o Fresh Visionforthe Future Worship & Thanks for being a congregation willing to go beyond the familiar, beyond the comfortable, beyond the secure. Thanks for being acongregation concerned ll lfl*'e--ows- -p about others and sharing God's great blessings with as many as possible. Thanks for being a congregation committed to sacrificing personal comfort for the cause of Jesus. Beginning Fall 1998 Our Master said, "To whom much has been given, much is required." We 'ye been given great blessings and now we can be a blessing to many others. Our calling is not based on maximum convenience to each one of us. Many are going to be asked to sacri- fice time and personal convenience to make Sunday Night Worship a reality. Some adult Sunday classes A Bold Commitment will be asked to change meeting times and make a new commitment to Sunday Night Worship. I and the tothe Future entire Ministry Staff wilt eagerly make these new com- mitments with you. I personally invite you to join: T h ~ C r y s t a I Evangelical Free Church "TEAM 500" qunaa,~ Ni~t Worship & F~wship' F owshipnday ( nday Why? How? elowslp In style ~d fo~, CEFC Sunday Night Worship must ~ flexible ~d adapt- ~gins Septem~r 13. able without wavehng in presenting a cle~ biblic~ 1998 ~d will continue ye~ round:~e complete Sunny message of love, ho~ and forgiveness in C~st. worship schedule will adapt ~d ad, st according to need. Sunday Night Wo~hip at C~stal Free Church 8:~ ~TAGE WO~ SERVICE presents an ap~aling Mtemative to m~y ~ople. Our · B~ic Minis~ to C~l~n (inf~t~ mo~ing worship celebrations will ~m~n ~e s~e 9:20 P~E A~ WO~ CELEB~TION (8:~, 9:20~ 11 :~ a.m.). Sunday Night will present ~ addition~ op~unity, complete wi~ dyna~c music, · Sing~etl~ao~ cle~ teaching, study ~oups ~d c~ldren's ~nis~es. · ~ngs Fo~ Cl~s · CWs~ Cl~sics CEFC continues to ex~fience 11:~ P~E A~ WO~ CELEB~ON vitfl ~d dyn~c ~o~. ~sently. ~ere is ve~ li~le ~m left av~lable on . ~om~ Sunny mo~ngs for new ~ends. ~ng ~ we~ ~ · S~c~ Cl~ A.M. cl~sr~m ~d space congestion m si~c~t ~ble~. · Fden~p ~s A.M. · Welcome To C~s~ CI~ Creative ~tematives ~ imitative. Sunday Night · Adult Bible Cl~s Wonhip ~d Fellowship will ensure ~at we do not have 4:45 ~ CRYST~ C~ to mm ~ople away by providing ~e frmework for · Se~ing a ~t ~ ~m 4:45- 6:~.m. (~ cost) continued dyn~c ~owth. 5:~ S~AY ~G~ C~ · ~n's Mi~ (~t - 6~ ~n,n~ ~ir · ~n up si~fi- ~Yom ~ s~ ~v~~ c~t s~ on · RM. ~ ~, B~ w~p T~ Sunny mornings to a<o~ visit~ ~d new · Re~ for Su~y NiSt friends in ~e ~st ~ssible way. · B~o~g ~ CI~ . · Allevia~ ~e impr<fic~ level of pm~m congestion. · s~ cl~ P.M. · ~vide ~ ~g wo~Mp ~ve ~ ~ of · Fd~p unex~t~ <h~u~g ~cMfi~ on S~y ~$. · Ad~t ~v~ ~{m~o~ ~M. · Offer a time to wo~p for ~o~ who Mve ~ · ~n~g . to ~ gone for ~e w~n~ ~:~ S~AY ~G~ ~g ~ WO~ · Extend m op~F f~ ~y m ~sit ~ ~ · ~ w~mp ~ a com~ ~g attending ~e~ pre~nt ch~h on S~y mo~gs. · ~ovide addi6onfl ~m~v~ f~ com~ning ~s~ md wo~p on ~e ~'s Day. · ~mt ~ (~ly y~g ~) Crystal Evangelical Free Church 4225 Gettysburg Avenue Nc~th Minneapolis, MN 55428 612-533-24~.9 Conditional Use Permit Application DATE: June 11, 1998 TO: City of New Hope 4401 Nylon Ave North New Hope, Minnesota 55428-4898 FROM: Crystal Evangelical Free Church 4225 Gettysburg Avenue North New Hope, Minnesota 55428 Stephen P. Goold, Sr. Pastor David Rodquist, Senior Associate Pastor Primary Contact Person Day Telephone: 536-3247 Fax: 533-0249 Phil Johnson, Consulting Architect SUBJECT: Possible Purchase of "Homeward Bound Facility" -- 4741 Zealand Avenue North, New Hope, Minnesota Purchase of Property Contingent on a Conditional Use Permit in the R-1 Zone. ITABLE OF CONTENTS APPLICATION > Attached "Description of Request" > Basic Zoning Fee & Deposit -- $450.00 > Certificate of Title SITE PLAN CONCEPT FLOOR PLAN & WRITTEN NARRATIVE > Addendum "A" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS CERTIFIED LOT SURVEY [As is available] > Photo Copy of 100 Scale > Photos of Chm'ent Facility 6/10/98 FACILITIES USE PROPOSAL by Crystal Evangelical Free Church Regarding Property Located at 4741 Zealand Ave. No., New Hope, MN GENERAL CONCEPT The proposed use by Crystal Evangelical Free Church of the property listed above would be consistent with past use of these facilities and consistent with the use of surrounding properties; (1) religious equipping and inspiration within the context of CEFC youth and small groups, (2) social outreach in the context of personal counseling, guidance and Bible studies, (3) individual office space for staff, (4) committee meetings, and (5) equipment storage. The "Extended Campus" concept would not be used for worship or large group settings. There are no rooms in the facility conducive for such use. There are only a few rooms that would permit modest sized gatherings in a group context and these would never be all at once. The property would not be used for children's or nursery ministries. These would remain on the main campus, as would the vast majority of ministry activity. SURROUNDING PROPERTIF3 The property is bordered to the north by House of Hope Lutheran Church, to the east by Cooper High School, and to the south by a small speciality school. Our proposed use is completely consistent with these other institutions. PARKING CONSIDERATIONS The nature of CEFC use of this property would not produce high density parking needs. People would not come to this site for worship. They would not come for long periods of time. They would not come in large numbers. Youth ministry does not produce large parking requirements by the fact that only juniors and seniors can have a drivers license. A shuttle bus for parking on the main campus, just seven blocks away, could easily be established where necessary for mid-week gatherings. CLOSING COMMENTS The use of these facilities as described above would diffuse ministry in such a way as to minimize density, be consistent with previous use and the surrounding properties, and would actually result in limited on-site presence for the vast majority of time throughout the week. It is an arrangement that would present a minimal number of complications and a maximum benefit to people. Concept Plan Potential Property for Extended Campus Crystal Evangelical Free Church is proposing to purchase the Homeward Bound facility (4741 Zealand Avenue North) as an extension of our main campus (4225 Gettysburg Avenue North). One of the contingencies of this purchase is a Conditional Use Zoning Permit from the City of New Hope. Intended Use Crystal Evangelical Free Church envisions using the Zealand location as an "extended campus" for: (1) religious equipping and inspiration within the context of our youth and small groups, (2) social outreach in the context of personal counseling, guidance and Bible studies, (3) individual office space for some of our full and part-time staff, (4) various committee meetings, and (5) equipment storage. The "Extended Campus" concept would rlO~ be used for worship or large group settings. There are no rooms in the facility conducive for such use. There are only a few rooms that would permit modest sized gatherings in a group context and these would never be used all at once. The property would not be used for children's or nursery ministries. These would remain on the mare campus, as would the vast majority of minisu3, activity. The property is bordered to the north by House of Hope Lutheran Church, to the east by Cooper High School, and to the south by Highview School (a small alternative school). Our proposed use is completely consistent with these other institutions. All functions taking place on the extended campus would be church related and supported by the church. Concept Plan & Future Modifications Crystal Evangelical Free Church is not intending to make any major structural changes to the facility. Our modification intentions are two-fold: (1) To do ongoing work to bring the facility up to current code standards; (2) To do ongoing work to bring the facility in line with its intended use (as described above). Future improvements would involve, though not limited to: Modest Parking: The nature of Crystal Evangelical Free Church's unique use of this property would not produce high density parking needs. The current 36 parking places would be sufficient for most usages. To build in a "margin factor," additional future parking is planned--30 additional spaces (as shown) would provide for 66 total spaces. This additional parking area would be appropriately landscaped in the middle drive-way section. Occasional Shuttle Ministry: On an occasional basis, limited shuttle parking would be conducted from the mare campus seven blocks away using professionally designed "walk-in" vehicles capable of carrying up to 21 people. (see Addendum Main Bathrooms: Two main bathroom areas would be brought up to code (one located in the administrative section of the facility, the other in the main hallway of the four-unit section). These would be supplemented by existing private bathrooms in each umt. Re-Roofing: The current roof is nearing the end of it functional expectancy, thus a re-roofing of both shingle & flat roofs is planned. Kitchen and Laundry: The kitchen area would remain as is, but the commercial washers/dryers in the laundry would be dismantled/removed and the room would be converted to an equipment storage area. Soffit & Fascia Cladding: Existing soffit and fascia is showing wear -- intend to repair and/or replace as appropriate. Wood Panel Siding Replacement: The exterior wood paneling connecting the units is showing wear -- intend to repair and/or replace as appropriate. Concrete Sidewalk Replacement: Some sidewalk has become uneven and beginning to deteriorate -- intend to repair and/or replace as appropriate. Interior Lighting: Fluorescent light energy up-grade planned. Resurface Interior Walls: Clean, repair, paint, or resurface existing walls. Replace Select Exterior Doors: Some exterior unit doors are near the end of their functional expectancy - replacement planned. Remove Buried Fuel Tank & Diesel Generator: Planned removal of diesel generator and under-ground tank. Plan to replace with appropriate emergency lights. It is believed that such modifications would transform this former residential health care group home into a functional extended campus of Crystal Evangelical Free Church for small groups and administrative use, and be a beautiful property, structure and ministry welcomed in the neighborhood. Closing Comments The use of these facilities, as described above, would diffuse ministry on our main campus in such a way as to minimize density, be consistent with previous use of the property and compatible with the surrounding properties, and would actually result in limited on-site presence for the vast majority of time throughout the week. It is an arrangement that would present a minimal number of complications and a maximum benefit to a majority of people. Photo Copy Lot Survey 100 Scale x '9 ~ x BOON[ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ")'"'~ ~ ..... ~'---'~'%.,'"" - .......... 4 ~'~'"'~'~'~'~ ..... ~"" i; i~ ' X ~'x, Potential Property for Extended Campus NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS COMMUNITY PLANNING DESIGN MARKET RESEARCH PLANNING REPORT TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Jeffrey Schaumann / Alan Brixius DATE: 30 June 1998 RE: New Hope - Crystal Evangelical Free Church - CUP FILE NO: 131.01 - 98.07 BACKGROUND Crystal Evangelical Free Church is requesting a conditional use permit for the usage of the vacant Homeward Bound Facility as an extended campus, located at 4741 Zealand Avenue North. The compatible reuse of this facility is encouraged under the proposed comprehensive plan. The site is currently zoned R-l. Churches are allowed in the R-1 district under a conditional use permit as "Public, Educational and Religious Buildings". Attached for reference: Exhibit A - Site Location Exhibit B - Site Plan Exhibit C - Proposed Facility Usage RECOMMENDATION The applicant is proposing to both purchase, occupy and improve the subject site. We feel that this is a good opportunity for the City of New Hope to compatibly redevelop the Homeward Bound Facility. To assure that the CUP adds value to the area, we propose approval contingent upon the following conditions: 1. Lighting be shielded. 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 55416 PHONE 6 ~ 2~ 595-9636 FAX 612-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC @ WINTERNET.COM 2. Parking requirements be met either through shared parking arrangements or the provision of additional parking spaces. ISSUES ANALYSIS In order to be given a Conditional Use Permit, the applicant must show that the proposed land use is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, is compatible with adjacent land uses, will not depreciate the area, will be screened, compatible in appearance and have traffic channeled into thoroughfares (Section 4.212 (1 - 6)). Land Use. The subject site is currently zoned R-1 with educational and church uses permitted as conditional uses. Land Use Compatibility. Adjacent land uses include House of Hope Lutheran Church, Cooper High School, Hew Hope Elementary School and some single family residences. The proposed usage of the site is compatible with adjacent educational and religious land uses. Activities at the subject site will be for small group meetings for educational and religious purpose. The facility will not be heavily used. The largest attendance at any one time is expected to be 120 individuals. Off-street Parking. Based upon the proposed facility usage, as outlined in Exhibit C, we have found that the peak usage of the facility will occur on Sunday and Wednesday. The peak usage will be approximately 120 individuals at a given time. This usage will be somewhat mitigated through the utilization of a shuttle bus between the Main Campus and the proposed Extended Campus (the route of which has been agreed to by City officials). However, since ridership on the shuffle is unknown, we must assume all facility attendants are automobile commuters. According to the Zoning Ordinance, the required number of parking spaces for the proposed use is 40 (Section 4.036 (10) (g)). Currently, there are 28 parking stalls, of which 2 are handicapped. The provision of additional parking will be needed to meet the expected demand of the facility. Shared parking for Sunday activities is possible with the High School, but Wednesday night activities still will need additional parking. The applicant has stated that 26 additional parking stalls will be provided as indicated on the site plan. The addition of these lots will sufficiently meet the City's standards. On-site traffic circulation patterns appear to be in order. Parking lane widths and entrance widths meet or surpass existing regulations. Signage. Signage appears to conform to the sign ordinance. Structure Setbacks and Height. The side/rear setback requirement for a CUP in an R-1 district is 20 feet, exactly the setback of the facility. All other setback and height requirements are met or exceed. Landscaping. The applicant will be required to complete the landscaping efforts as outlined on the site plan and within the applicants architectural detail and adjustments, including tree planting, reseeding of grass near 47th Avenue and landscaping on the i§land between the proposed parking spaces. Grading and Drainage. Detailed grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved by the City Engineer for the subject site. - Lighting. Lighting should be shielded from adjacent land uses. CONCLUSION We recommend the approval of the CUP contingent upon the satisfactory completion .of the items listed under the "Recommendation" section of this report. pc: Doug Sandstad Mark Hanson 3 ~ent By: BonestPoo & Associates; 6126474179; Jun-30-@8 4:08PM; Page 2/~ Eir~ ~ ~Jr~ PF · GI~ ~. COOK· EE. · ~0be~[ G. ~h~c~L, EE. · Jerry A. Bourbon, ~.. Re.ne Rabe~ ,. Rasene. ~. ~ 5us,n M. ,De,l~, CEA., Senior Consu~t, ~ ASSOCi~es RlC~r~ W. rosLer. EE., D~id O. [flskota. PG., ,heart ( ,uzsek. A,.A. - ~rK ~ Haft,on. %1~ P ~ll/lam~on. PE.. L.S. · ~erL [ Kut~lnith a A~es M. Ei~ · Michel R ~, ~. · · A[I~ eirk Sc~t. ~e. Engineers & Architects o-e,,: st. Paul. ~ester. wi,mar and s:. Cloud, MN · MIIwaa~. ~1 wee~te: w~.~onesemo, com M MO TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Mark Hanson SUBJECT: Crystal Evangelical Free Chm~ Extended Campua File 34-Gert (E98-21) (Homeward Bound - 47~..e~and Avenues) DATE: ~Iune 30, 1998 · We have reviewed the above pro[x~al and recommend the following: · The existing drainage (including parking lot and building)_.from the sim is conveyed overland across public sidewalks into public storm sewers in 47' Avenue aad Boone Avenue (see attached). An existing private s~orm sewer system (asbuilts have not been provided) does convey drainage from the nor, herly parking lot and discharges on ~be ground near ~he cxnnmon lot line betwenn this site and House of Hope Church to tbe north (approximately 140' east of the sidewalk on Boone Avenue). From an engineering standpoint it is preferred overland drainage from non-residential propertim be ~onveyed in private storm sewers to public storm sewers in public righ~-of-way (not over public sidewalks). The extension of a storm sewer from Boone Avenue collecting all drainage from the parking lot (red~ing of the sonthw~sterly parking area may be requinxi) is rr~:onm~nded. The proposed additional parking spaces will cause additional storm water nm off from the site. · The attacheA sketch shows existing streets, paddng lots, drive a/sles, and buildings based on the recent reconfiguraiion of Zealand Avenue and 47~ Avenue due to the r~constm¢fion of Coopor's Foofoall Field. Az notexi, Zealand Avenue north of 47~' Avenue is a dead end street terminating at the drive a/sle,s for Cooper's Parking Lot and this property.. It would be desirable befme additional parking spac~ ~xe c~ on ibis property that other parking lot configurations be considered between Cooper High School, Highview .School, and this pmpe~y. The part-~5 lot confi~ons and/or arrenge..ments between the property owners should consider vacating Zealand Avenue north of 4?' Avenue as a public slreet (public utility oasern~cs would still be required over existing utiliti~). Add/tional parking spaces could be provided such that setback requirements from a public street would not be required and maintenance would be assumed by the adjacent property owners (Robbinsdale School District and Crystal Evangelical Free Churoh), Pm~ntly, Zealand Avenue north of 47~ Avenue is an extension of drive aisles serving .parking lots with no public turnaround, To the. extent it serves as a publi~ street is questionable. 2335 ~r/est Highway 36. St. Paul, MN"55113 · 612~636-4600 · Fax:'~12-636-1311 ~ent By: Bonestroo & Associates; 6126474179; Jun-30-98 4:0gPM; Page 3/4 16 -.: ~ent By: BonestPoo & Assoc±ates; 6126474179; Jun-30-98 4:0gPM; Page 414 ,,,~ ~~~. ~~ ~ 4401 Xylon Avenue North City Hall: 612-531-5100 City Hall Fax: 612-531-5136 New Hope, Minnesota 55428-4898 Police: 612-531-5170 Police Fax: 612-531-5174 Public Works: 612-533-4823 Public Works Fax: 612-533-7650 TDD: 612-531-5109 Fire Dep't. Fax: 612-531-5175 June 12, 1998 Crystal Evangelical Free Church 4741 Zealand Ave. N. New Hope, MN. 55428 After reviewing the proposed plans for the above address the following will be required by the Fire Chief. · Fire lanes shall be established ( see proposed plans for locations ) all curbs for the fir~ lane must be painted yellow and NO PARKING FIRE LANE sings must be posted. · Fir lane signs must be at least a 18 gauge steel, Minimum size of 12"X18" with white background and red lettering reading ( NO PARKING FIRE LANE BY ORDER OF THE FIRE CHIEF) see attached hand out. Should you have any questions please feel fxee to call me at 531-5125. Kirk McDonald Director of Community Development S/~cerely, . Randy Kurtz Fire Inspector Family Styled City ~ For Family Living "SPECIFICATIONS FOR FIRE LANES AND SIGNS" 1 FIRE LAN~ Fire lanes as indicated on plans must be painted traffic type yellow, curbs to be painted where they exist, in the event there are no curbs the roadway is to be painted with a. mIDimum 4 inch wide stripe. All paint must be applied 'in sufficent quantity to form a clearly visible line. SIGNS Ail signs must be of at least 18 ga. steel, minimum size of 12" X 18" with a white background and red lettering reading: NO PARKING FIRE LANE BY ORDER OF FLRE C~Tk"NP or approved alternate wording. The location of all signs required is noted on the plan by a circled dash, all signs are to be post or wall mounted with the bottom edge of the sign 6 feet above grade. G - s,~ne direction One sign, aligned as dash - Two signs back to back on pole, aligned same direction as dash The type of sign to be used will be noted on the plan as type 1,2 or 3 as shown below. Type 1 Type 2 T3rpe 3 :/.-~ ~ ~ ~' I ,~! PAltlCING PARKING :J. FIRE SIGNS SIGNS .| LAHF. ""' ;/eY ono[R oF LANE LANE ;[FLEE CHIEF --,b. 4'"' ALL FT.R~ LAN~ S'Z'B~O MUST ST.~T,T. STBZPZNG MUST RS WEZTE[ CITY OF NEW HOPE SPECIAL ZONING PROCEDURES APPLICATION LOG A B C D E F G H I J Appli- Applicant Date Date Applicant Date 60- Date 120- Date Deadline Date City Date City cation application was sent day time day time Applicant for City approved or sent response number Name received notice limit limit was notified action denied the to Applicant Address by City that required expires expires of under application Phone information extension extension ,' was missing or waiver 98-12 Crystal Evangelical Free Church 6/11/98 8/10/98 10/10/98 4225 Gettysburg Avenue New Hope 55428 Pastor David Rodquist 535-6171 fax 535-1608 for 4741 Zealand Avenue property 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 l0 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 120-day limit, include all calendar days. G. Despite the automatic extension, the City will notify the Applicant a second time by mail that a 120-day approval pedod 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. I. 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. · CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning Case: 98-13 Request: Site/Building Plan Review/Approval to Allow Building Addition Location: 4500 Quebec Avenue North PID No.: 17-118-21-22-0035 Zoning: I-2, General Industrial Zoning District Petitioner: Conductive Containers, Inc. Report Date: July 2, 1998 Meeting Date: July 7, 1998 BACKGROUND 1. The petitioner is requesting site/building plan review/approval to allow a 9,470 square foot addition to the east/southeast sides of the existing building, pursuant to Section 4.039A of the New Hope Code of Ordinances. 2. In 1995 Conductive Containers, Inc. purchased the vacant industrial building at 4500 Quebec Avenue North. The City acquired the vacant property at 4400 Quebec Avenue North, south of the site, for the construction of a storm water retention pond. The City sold the vacant parcel to CCI at a reduced price in exchange for an easement over the pond, and the additional property allowed for future expansion needs. In July 1995, the Final Plat of CCI Addition was approved, which combined both lots under a single ownership. 3. This is a request for site/building plan review approval only. No variances are being requested and a public hearing is not required. 4. The property is located in an I-2, General Industrial Zoning District, and surrounding properties include I-2 General Industrial uses on the north, south, and across Quebec Avenue to the west, and R-4 high density residential (apartments) and R-1 single family homes to the east across the railroad tracks. CCI is a single tenant office-warehouse use, which is a permitted use in the I-2 Zone. 5. CCI is requesting approval to build a 9,500 square foot warehouse addition at the rear of the existing building and construct a small parking lot expansion. The existing site and property data is as follows: Percent Total Lot Area 139,185 square feet or 3.1 acres Building Area 25,000 square feet (existing) 24.8% 9,500 square feet (expansion) 34,500 square feet Parking Lot Area 25,606 square feet 18.4% Green Area 79,029 square feet 56.8% (including pond) 100% 6. The property is located in Planning District #15, which identifies a need to carefully buffer the industrie~ from nearby residential uses and ensure property maintenance. Per the Planner's report, "The current Comprehensive Plan allows for the 'continued industrial development in existing industrial parks...' The proposed Comprehensive Plan encourages the in-place expansion of industrial sites, and gives notice to the impacts of outdoor storage. The warehouse expansion would reduce the need for outdoor storage, thus advancing the interest of the proposed Comprehensive Plan." 7. No additional public utilities or services are anticipated with the expansion. A total of 29 parking spaces exist on the site and nine additional spaces are required with this warehouse expansion. The petitioner is proposing to add 11 parking spaces, for a total of 40. 8. The topography of the north half of the lot is flat and drains east to the railroad tracks and south to the new pond on the south half of the lot. 9. No public hearing is required for site/building plan review, therefore, no notices were sent. ANALYSIS 1. Staff considers this a routine request because it meets all basic site development standards and zoning criteria, including building setbacks, parking standards and building height. The Zoning Code requires site/building plan review approval for all building additions that exceed 10% of the existing building. 2. Department Heads and other appropriate City staff and consultants met to review the plans on June 16. Issues discussed included trash enclosure and exterior lighting details, replacement of landscaping after parking lot expansion, outdoor storage at rear of building, pond/spillway issues, and Fire Department questions regarding the height of the storage in the addition, and potential loss of access around the east side of the building. The existing building is sprinkled. 3. The Design & Review Committee met with the petitioner on June 18 and similar and additional issues were discussed including rooftop units, utilities to be shown on plan, landscaping, lighting, drainage, trash enclosure and ADA parking requirements. Revised plans were submitted as a result of that meeting. 4. The revised plans include the following details. A. Setbacks - The setbacks for the I-2 District are: Front Yard 50 feet Side Yard 10 feet Rear Yard 35 feet The Zoning Code also states that in Industrial Districts adjacent to railroads, the minimum side or rear yard setback from the lot line of the side or rear yard of the parcel adjacent to a railroad right- of-way shall be 10 feet. The existing building is located 10 feet from the north side yard property line and the building addition will have a similar setback on the north. The proposed building addition will be set back 15 feet from the east rear property line adjacent to the railroad. The proposed addition meets the setback requirements for the I-2 Zoning District. B. Trash Enclosure/Outside Stora.qe - The plans state that "CCI does not use outside trash dumpsters nor stores pallets or materials outside." C. Snow Storaqe - is shown on the south side of the parking lot expansion. Planning Case 98-13 Page 2 7/2/98 D. Buildin.q Materials The addition will have an exterior 8" x 8" scored block pattern to match the existing building. No windows are located on the north or east walls of the new addition. The west elevation will have an overhead door and the south elevation will have a steel stair and railing up to a service door. E. Parking Lot Expansion - There are 29 existing off-street parking spaces on the site located south of the existing building (per the petitioner's plan) and 11 additional spaces are being provided east of the existing parking lot between the building expansion' and the pond. These spaces exceed the number required by the Zoning Code. New concrete curb and gutter to match the existing will be installed around the new bituminous lot. The parking lot expansion will be graded to drain towards the northwest into an existing catch basin. F. ADA parking - Two ADA parking spaces are required. One is located at the front of the building on the west. The revised plans show a second ADA space angled against the south wall of the building. This is not acceptable to the Building Official because it blocks the 24-foot wide drive aisle. He is requesting that this space be eliminated and identified, signed, and striped elsewhere. G. Utilities - Existing utilities including storm and sanitary sewers have been identified on the plans near the addition. H. Landscaping - The plans show that an existing 16" Box Elder and 12" willows will be removed with the parking lot expansion. Other existing healthy landscaping on the site has been identified, including oaks north of the pond and ash trees in front of the building on the west. Areas disturbed during construction will be seeded in the rear of the building and be sodded south of the addition. Staff recommends that the petitioner provide replacement landscaping for any trees removed and that the new plantings be placed south of the parking lot expansion. I. Li~htin~ A wall pack light is shown on the south elevation of the building near the steel stairway/service door. J. Sprinkling - The plan notes indicate that the building addition will be sprinkled. The Fire Department recommends that the storage height in the new addition be limited to 12 feet, similar to the existing building, if the sprinkler density in the addition is the same as the existing building. 5. The Planning Consultant has prepared a report on this request, which is attached for your information. 6. The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and recommends the following: A. The parking lot expansion to the south and east directs a drainage internally to a catch basin as previously recommended (overland drainage to the pond has been eliminated). B. The existing sanitary sewer is shown on the site plan as previously recommended. However, it is recommended the recorded utility easements be shown on the as-built site plan once the project is completed. C. Adjustment of existing utility structures (manhole rims, etc.) shall comply with the final grades and be coordinated with Public Works. 7. It is staff's opinion that the petitioner has done a good job addressing the concerns and issues discussed by the Design & Review Committee. Planning Case 98-13 Page 3 7/2/98 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the site/building plan review for the building and parking lot expansion, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to building permit application, a revised site plan be submitted with the noted ADA parking correction. 2. Compliance with City Engineer's recommendations (6B and 6C). 3. Submit revised site plan showing replacement landscaping. 4. Compliance with Fire Department recommendations. 5. Site Improvement Agreement to be executed between petitioner and City with performance bond to be submitted for site improvement (amount to be determined by City Engineer and Building Official). Attachments: Address/Topo/Zoning Maps Lot Survey Parking Area Addition Plan Revised Site Plan Building Elevations Floor Plan Wall Sections Foundation Plan Roof Framing Plan Planner's Report City Engineer Comments Application Log Planning Case 98-13 Page 4 7/2/98 4S~TH AAg,_.I:L. ,, AVE. N. . PA~K ~4~ AVE~ N. +~o~ 5~o~ 7 TH ~ ~ 4~4~ , ~ 46 TH ~~~,~ ..... 1 ...... :. ~,, , I i~ ~ 42 ND ~VE. N. ~ ....... m '~ "':~ .... ~ R-2 Single and Two Family Residential ' ~ ": R-3 Medium Density Residential - - ~ ..... .... ~--'~;'~:~ R-4 High Density Residential ~i ~_.~_._ ~.._ _~ _: .:__._ _~ _ . . _, .,:' '4---~,~_~ -,~ R-5 "Senior / Disabled" Residential ~*~::[-~-~' -- - ..... ' ......... ~ R-O Residential Office ---~ ~ R-O(PUD) Residential Office - PUD ~ B-1 Umited ~oiohborhood Business :' ~ ~ R-~ B-2 Retail Business B-3 Auto Oriented Business ..................... B-4 Community Business ~_-.~ -.-~, . ..~--- ................. .j [~i?.: I-1 Limited Industrial ~-- -- -~T~_' '- ~-¥~ .' -'-i ,<~ ~: ' ' ' . _ _'__ :.._.fl:2.5~ .::: - m~ . ~ _._. :: :__-: :~ : .... :- -- u ,~ -"' I-2 General Industrial ~ :'~ ...._ ....... - ~- ' ......... Open Space / Public ~,,~___:.:~: _~ - :5 .... :--:':- "-:" '~_?i:--:- 1 I~CH = 1000 FEET -~_ ...~ -~¢~_ _ ....... .- ~ _ - -. :_. _:.'.- .... l [- :.'I ~. [': -'-- : I ~-..' : I%%. ~ I: I -~. I I , .-,-.: i " I ~ ', I I i I t ~--~--J ~ ..... T--~ Established in lg62 LOT SURVEys COMPANY,' I~C. LAND SURVEYORS REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA 7601 ~rd Aveuue Rorth I.~ S B~ ~ ~K ~, 4~ ..... / ~1t ~1' , ~~-- ~.~ · ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN ' MARKET RESEARCH PLANNING REPORT TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Madhu Singh / Alan Brixius DATE: 30 June 1998 RE: New Hope - Conductive Containers Inc.: Site Plan and Building Plan Review FILE NO: 131.01 - 98.09 BACKGROUND The City of New Hope has received a request from Conductive Containers Inc. to allow for 9,470 square foot expansion of their existing industrial building located at 4500 Quebec Avenue North. The applicant has met with the Design Review Committee and City staff on 18 June 1998. A revised site plan has been submitted by the applicant based upon the recommendations of the Design Review Committee and City staff. The existing structure on the subject site is a single tenant office warehouse for Conductive Containers Inc. The applicant is requesting an expansion to its existing structure. The warehouse expansion would reduce the need for outdoor storage, thus advancing the interest of the proposed Comprehensive Plan. Further, the Comprehensive Plan encourages the in place expansion of industrial sites and gives notice to the impacts of outdoor storage. The applicant has requested an expansion of 9,470 square feet (37 percent) of their existing industrial building. As the addition proposed is greater than 10 percent of the gross building, the applicant is required to obtain site and building plan review of the proposed addition. Attached for reference: Exhibit A- Location Plan Exhibit B - Revised Building Expansion Plan Exhibit C - Revised Parking Expansion Plan 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 55416 PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 612-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC@WlNTERNET.COM RECOMMENDATION Based on the following review, our office recommends approval of the site plan subject to the following conditions: 1. Relocate the new handicap accessible parking space closer to main building entrance. 2. Provide replacement landscaping for the removed trees subject to the approval by the City Forester. 3. The revised grading and drainage plan is subject to review by the City Engineer. 4. Any other City staff comments. ISSUES ANALYSIS Zoning. The proposed warehouse use is considered a permitted land use within the I J2, General Industrial Zoning District. Lot Size. The site area of 3.1 acres is well above the minimum requirement of the one acre requirement in the I-2 District. Structure Setback. The proposed site building meets all I-2 District setback requirements. With the proposed expansion along the east property line, the new reduced setback of 15 feet along the railroad is in conformance with Section 4.034 (6) of the Zoning Ordinance. Lot Coverage. The proposed addition and the existing structure together total 34,500 square feet. This constitutes approximately 25.5 percent of the total lot area. Green Area. Per Section 4.145 of the Zoning Ordinance, at least 20 percent of the lot area shall remain as a grass plot, including shrubbery, plantings or fencing, and shall be landscaped. The proposed site plan indicates 56 percent as green area of the total lot area. Therefore, the site plan meets the 20 percent green space requirement. Off-Street Parking Spaces. There are 29 existing off-street parking spaces including one designated for handicap. The applicant has proposed 11 more spaces with the proposed building expansion, bringing the total off-street parking count to 40. The addition of parking spaces counts to 40. The addition of parking spaces is consistent with the addition of floor area. The proposed plan meets all parking area requirements. 2 ' Handicap Parking. According to State law, 25 parking stalls and one handicap · '~ accessible parking space will be required. The applicant has revised the existing parking stall along the south building line to indicate a second handicap parking stall. Our office recommends that the handicap stall be moved to the west to be closer to the main entrance of the structure. Surfacing. All areas intended to be utilized for parking space and driveway shall be sbrfaced with material suitable to control dust and drainage. The site plan shows the surface to be bituminous paving and meets the City Code requirements. Striping. All parking stalls must be marked with white painted lines not less than four inches wide. Curbing. The Zoning Ordinance stipulates that all off-street parking areas must have perimeter curbing. To be noted is that this provision applies both to designated parking spaces and the proposed access drive. The revised plan shows a continuous curb along the entire parking lot and meets zoning requirements for curb design. Snow Storage. According to Section 4.036 (9)(g) of the Zoning Ordinance, a provision must be made in off-street parking areas for adequate snow storage or removal to ensure the required number of spaces are available at all times of the year. The revised plan identifies an area south of the existing parking area for snow storage and meets the standard requirement for the snow storage. Landscape Plan. The applicant has proposed removing two 16 inch box elder, 12 foot willow and five ash trees in order to locate the parking lot expansion. It is our recommendation that the applicant provide replacement landscaping for those trees along the south of the proposed parking lot. This is subject to review and comment by the City Forester. Building Material. The building plan indicates that the proposed material will be consistent with the existing building to bring uniformity to the entire structure. This is consistent with the City ordinance requirement. Lighting. The revised plan shows a wall pack light along the southern building expansion. The source of lights shall be hooded or controlled in a manner so as not to light adjacent property. No lighting will be provided along the eastern wall of the building so as to prevent any glare into the neighboring residential area and to discourage vandalism on the property. Trash. The revised plan has noted that Conductive Container Inc. does not intend to use outside trash dumpsters nor store pallets or material outside. All storage will be contained within the structure. 3 Grading and Drainage. The revised plans have addressed the issues listed by the City Engineer. These plans are further subject to review by the City Engineer for final approval. CONCLUSION Our office recommends approval of the proposed site plan subject to the conditions listed Within the recommendation portion of this report. pc: Doug Sandstad Mark Hanson 4 City ~ew Hope ~LE FAMILY R~SIOENTIAL R-I SINGLE AND TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-Z M~DIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL R-4 SENIOR CITIZEN RESi0ENTIAL RESIDENTIAL OFFICE R-0 RETAIL BUSINESS AUTO ORIENTE0 BUSINESS 8-5 COMMUNITY BUSINESS ~-4 LIMITED INDUSTRIAL GENERAL IN0USTRIAL F~OD PLAIN FP WET LAND W ' ::'"~ '" '~' "~':'~: "' rthwest !! ..... ~'-' ~ ' ~" 1 ! ! ' "l~ssociated , ~: "', '"~ "'I ~ '"" '" 'L~°nsu'tants' inc. £1HIBI! A ~.~. ..... ~ ~0o . oO · ... '. .. .. ~. I ~, ~, / ~ :..A¢2' . I00,0 ~, , EXI'IIIBIT B Sent By: Bonestr'oo & Associates; 6126474179; Jun-30-98 9:24AM; Page 3/4 RO~ ~' ~ ~E ~ s~ ~ wcrtf~ C.~.. s~l~ ~os~, Engineers & Architects ~'/~"': ~'' P.L ~c~tcr. W, lJm., .nd SL Clo~. ~. Milwdu,.*, W~ ~ www. b~e~tmn r~ MEMO TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Mark Hauson SUBJeCt: Conductivc Containers Inc. Building Expansion File 34-Gert CE98-23 ) DATE: June 29, 1998 We have reviewed the site plan for the above project and recomn~nd the following: The parking lot expansion to the south and east directs a drainage internally to a catch basin as previously recommended (overland drainage to the pond has been eliminated). · The existing sanitary sewer is shown on the site pkm as previously recomnwnded. However, it is ~commended the recorded utility easenwnts be shown on the asbuilt site plan once the project is completed. · Adjustment of existing utility sUuctutes (manhole rims,e~c.) shall comply with the final gradm and be coordinat~ with public works. Z335 ~W/est Highway ~6 ..... · St. Paul, MN 55113 · 612-&3&-~600 · ~ax: 612-636-1311 NeY~ Hooa Ou$i#e$$ Li#~ SUCCESS STORY Ho e con't... City Cooperation Brings New Business to New Hope PM. The In June of 1994. a access, it made no sense would ~nefit. event ~11 also feat~e music comply ~o~ ~ Con- for them to purch~e the ~e CiW Co~cil a~eed by the HiTops, a car show. ductive Con~ne~, Inc.. yacht 4500 Quebec to p~ue the idem which chil&en's g~es ~d more. contacted the City ~d b~g. resulted in acquisition of the The pu~ose of the indicated ~at ~ey were Co~ciden~ly, over ~e yacht p~el ~s spring, promotion is to educate negofiat~g to p~h~ ~e p~t yem the Ciw h~ been with ~e CiW ~d CCI residents about goods ~d v~t ~d~ b~ld~g ~g i~ p~l~ splining ~e cost of~e se~ices av~lable in New located at 4500 Quebec S~ace Water M~age- pro.ny. ~e City sold ~e Avenue No~. ~e merit PI~ ~d ~e vac~t entire p~cel to CCI and Hope and to encourage bulldog ~d ~n v~t property at 4400 Quebec CCI grated the City a support for local b~i- for over a ye~, w~ in need w~ identified ~ a ~ssible sto~ water ~nding nests. The ~p~gn will of repairs ~d w~ ~e h~ ~nding site. ~e e~ement over ~e ~u~em also allow the Ci~ ~d ~o-~irds of~e pro~ny. New Hope businesses to ~get ofv~d~ism. CCI CiW develo~d a concept CCI h~ already remodeled work together to improve was le~ing 15,000 sq~e pl~ whereby a ~e ~nd ~e bmld~g ~d moved i~ ~e ~mmercifl e~nomy of f~ ofm~ff~Wo~ could ~ develo~d on ~e o~ration to New Ho~ in space in Broo~yn P~k, ~n ~u~em ~nion of~e ~y. ~e ~~. Mdifion to ~eff f~iliw h~ Illinois, ~d ~e Que~ ~is promotion h~ ~n Avenue b~l~g wo~d w~ly received by New acco~te ~e~ exp~- Ho~ shopping cemer/~l sion needs. CCI w~ ~ . ~.. b~ess o~ers ~d'. prepped to p~ch~e the .. m~e~ ~d h~ ~e b~g ~d do si~fi~t sup~n of the New Ho~ ~t~offe~efiormm~el~g, Ci~ Co~cil. ~e Ci~ however, a problem exist~ re~ned ~e se~ices of~ ~a~ ~e e~g site ~ agency ~at h~ e~e~ive co~d not acco~o~te ~e ex~en~ in pl~g ~euve~g of~-s~ s~ifl even~ to help ~e semi-~cks ~ access to Ci~ ~d b~ines~s coordi- · e loading d~ ~out ~ nme ~e promotion. ufil~g a ~on of~e vac~t lot to ~e sou~ at ~e ~gn is ~ing -.: sup~ned by a combina- 4400 Quebec. ~e pr~- .~. eny at 4400 Quebec w~ tion of~ public ~d for sale, but CCI indicmed private ~din~. ~vate ~m they could not ~ord to ..: ~ ~_ ~. ~ding ~c[ffdes ~e sup~n p~ch~ ~e entire v~t . of Gold S~nsor busi- p~cel to acco~o~te pro~ to acco~odme. ~s c~mfive effort nests which ~11 ~ek ~chng n~, ~ ~e Ciw's st~ wmer . between th~ City ~d CCI pm~nenflyf~d on additibn to ~e P~c~e n~ds. ~e no.em pro~d~ a"~n-~n" billbomds ~d on a gpe- ~d:rep~r of~e building m ~on ~e pro.ny si~ion for ~ p~ies, ciflly~[~ion~ map of 4500 Quebec. CCI c~e could ~ combined wi~ the ~e development is a good :.NewHO~'s iemil co--u- ex.pie of one ty~ of to ~e concision tMt ~less pro~ to the north and .~sist~ce ~e Ciw c~ ,~ni~: ~ map ~1! ey could meet the Ci~ utilized to ad&ess CCI's provide to ~sist business -distributed to oyer 40.000 Code req~rements~n ~1 ~c~g'needs. In this way ex.sion ~d main~n a resets. ~cluding ~c~g both CCI ~d ~e City s~ong ind~fl ~ b~e.~ .S¥,ov .~'e., CITY OF NEW HOPE SPECIAL ZONING PROCEDURES APPLICATION LOG A B C D E F G H , i J Appli- Applicant Date Date Applicant Date 60- Date 120- Date Deadline Date City Date City cation application was sent day time day time Applicant for City approved or sent response number Name , received notice limit limit was notified action denied the to Applicant Address by City that required expires expires of under application Phone information extension extension was missing or waiver 98-13 Brad Ahlm 6/12/98 8/11/98 10/10/98 Conductive Containers Inc. 4500 Quebec Avenue New Hope 55428 537-2090 fax 537-1738 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 10 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 120-day limit, include all calendar days. G. Despite the automatic extension, the City will notify the Applicant a second time by mail that a 120-day approval 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. I. 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. CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning Case: 98-14 Request: City Engineer/City Council Approval of 32-Foot Wide Driveway or Vadance to Allow an Increase in Curb Cut Width to 38 Feet Location: 2720 Nevada Avenue North PID No.: 20-118-21-34-0017 Zoning: I-1, Limited Industrial Petitioner: Pipe Fabricators, Inc. Report Date: July 2, 1998 Meeting Date: July 7, 1998 BACKGROUND 1. The petitioner is requesting City Engineer/City Council approval of a 32-foot wide driveway, per Ordinance 4.036 or a variance to allow an increase in curb cut width to 38 feet, pursuant to Section 4.22 and 4.036(4)(h)(vi) of the New Hope Code of Ordinances. 2. The parking lot at Pipe Fabricators has recently been dug up for replacement and the tenant wants to widen the truck entry point to better accommodate semi-trucks/tractor-trailers. Trucks have been constantly damaging the yard next to the existing driveway upon entering and exiting the lot. The existing drive is 24 feet wide. 3. Pipe Fabricators is requesting to widen the drive to 32 feet and have a 38-foot curb cut. 4. City staff and consultants have reviewed the request and feel that it can be processed several different ways and this report is intended to cover processing the request both ways. Option 1 The City Code states that no curb cut access for commercial/industrial properties shall exceed 26 feet in width at the property line. The Code further states that curb cut widths not exceeding 32 feet may be permitted subject to review and recommendation of the City Engineer and approval of the City Council. The petitioner is requesting a 32-foot wide driveway, so one option would be to consider a driveway and curb cut the same thing and simply have the City Engineer recommend and Council approve the request. Option 2 However, the term "curb cut width" is defined in the Zoning Code as ~curb cut width will be measured at the property line on a curb face to curb face basis." While the petitioner is requesting a 32-foot wide driveway with a-35-foot radius, the distance from curb face to curb face at the property line is 38 feet. If the Zoning Code definition of "curb cut width" is to be applied as it is written, it is the Planning Consultant's opinion that, technically, a variance should be required. (Staff will be recommending that a future code amendment address this definitional issue.) 5. Pipe Fabricators is located north of Medicine Lake Road on the Nevada Avenue cul-de-sac in an I-1, Limited Industrial Zoning District. The office-warehouse use is a permitted use in the I-1 District. Surrounding properties in all directions are also zoned I-1. 6. The property contains 2.47 acres and the building contains 37,800 square feet (33,000 on the main level and a 4,800 square foot mezzanine level). Thirty-five percent of the property is green area. The warehouse space in the building is a single occupancy and the office space in the building is used'-'~', primarily by the warehouse tenant. Two offices are rented by a second tenant. 7. The property is located in Planning District #30 of the Comprehensive Plan, which anticipated routine industrial land uses and the present use is consistent with that plan. The Comprehensive Plan Update encourages the retention of industry, and by allowing better access to the site, the City would be promoting industry. 8. A total of 34-37 parking spaces are required, based on usage, and 40 parking spaces are shown on the plan for the current tenant (exclusive of outdoor storage). Fifty-seven spaces are available without outdoor storage. 9. The topography of the property is elevated five feet above the roadway, with some plantings along Nevada Avenue. 10. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified, including the City of Crystal, and staff have received no comments regarding this request. ANALYSIS 1. If the request is to be processed as a variance, the following criteda should be utilized. 2. The purpose of a vadance is to permit relief from strict application of the zoning code where.undue hardships prevent reasonable use of property and where circumstances are unique to the property. A hardship may exist by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of property or because of exceptional topographic or water conditions. The hardship cannot be created by the property owner and if the variance is granted, it should not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or unreasonably diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. 3. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. 4. Additional criteria to be used in considering requests for a vadance includes the following and the Planning Commission/City Council shall make findings that the proposed action will not: A. Consistent With Purpose of Variance. Be contrary to the purposes of a variance. B. Light and Air. Impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property. C. Street Connections. Unreasonably increase the congestion in the public street. D. Public Safety. Increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. E. Property Values. Unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the neighborhood, or in any other way be contrary to intent of City Code. 5. The Zoning Co(Je states that before the City Engineer recommends a curb cut exceeding the maximum widths, he shall consider the type of land use the curb cut will serve, the extent and nature of the vehicular traffic anticipated and the type and width of the street serving the property where the curb cut will be located. It is staff's opinion that properties with significant trucking need a 30' - 32' driveway, in general. The pdmary tenant, Pipe Fabricators, has significant trucking. Nevada Avenue is 30 feet wide. The relative narrowness of this street creates difficulty for semi-trucks entedng the site from the right lane without crossing the center line or the curb. When the turning radius of a 50-foot truck is applied to the site, it is clear that the 28-foot curb cut is insufficient for semi-truck access. Planning Case 98-14 Page 2 7/2/98 ,6. Appropriate City staff and consultants met to review the plans on June 16 and the City Engineer recommended increasing the turning radius. Other issues discussed included trucks being parked in the driveway, which should not be allowed for fire lane purposes, and outdoor storage issues. 7. The Design & Review Committee met with the petitioner on June 18 and issues discussed included defining the outdoor storage area, increasing the curb cut width, landscaping, lighting, trash enclosure an dire lane striping/storage. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meeting. 8. The revised plans include the following details: A. City Engineer Comments - The driveway entrance has been redesigned in accordance with the attached memo and recommendation dated June 17, 1998, and the discussion at Design & Review. The redesign provides for a 32-foot wide driveway and a 35-foot radius for the south curb. B. Landscaping - Additional existing landscaping detail has been illustrated on the site plan. Notes indicate that existing plantings will be trimmed and pruned; dead wood and plants will be removed, all bare soil to be sodded and existing mature trees to remain. Six new 2" ash are shown to be planted near entrance on south side. C. Photographs - Property and building photographs have been included on the revised site plan. D. Trash Enclosure - is shown on plan at southeast corner of property with outdoor storage screened on three sides with 8-foot slatted cyclone fence. A second enclosure is shown on the east ne. ar the loading docks. E. Fire Lane - is identified on plan, with driveway curb to be painted yellow and signs to be installed stating "No Parking, Fire Lane, by Order of Fire Chief." F. ADA Parking - Two disability parking spaces are illustrated at front entrance. G. Loading Docks - Short trucks have been noted using the east loading docks. H. Exterior Liqhtin~ - is identified on the south side of the building. 9. Outside pipe storage has been an issue at the property over the past year. The new site data and plan identifies 5,500 square feet devoted to outside storage at the southwest corner of the parking lot for current tenant. The area would have an 8-foot chain link fence with slats on the west/south/east sides. City Code allows outdoor storage up to 20% of the gross floor area in the Zoning District and the plan complies with that requirement (7,560 square feet would be allowed). Staff request that more detail be provided regarding the character and size of the storage items/materials. 10. The Planning Consultant has prepared the attached report for your information. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommend approval of the 32-foot wide driveway and a variance for the curb cut at the property line, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to building- permit application, petitioner to submit signed statement regarding nature and detail of outdoor storage. 2. Financial guarantee to be submitted to cover landscaping restoration, curb work and screening fence (amount to be determined by Building Official and City Engineer). Staff further recommends that the Codes & Standards Committee research the "curb cut width" definition to determine if an ordinance amendment is necessary. Planning Case 98-14 Page 3 7/2/98 I I Attachments: Address/Zoning/Topo Maps Site Plans Site Data Planner's Report 6/17 City Engineer Correspondence on Original Plan 6/29 City Engineer Correspondence on Revised Plan 6/18 Fire Inspector Comments City Code Excerpts re: Curb Cuts Application Log Planning Case 98-14 Page 4 7/2/98 7t08 -- ~ ~9~ 7 TERRA LINDA "~ -~ . ~ MEO~CINE ~ LAKE ~ ROAD ~m~mlm~mlm~m~m~m COUN~ 1:! .................... B-3 Auto Oriented Business "'~"~ B-4 Community Business ......... ~'-' ~ ~ I-1 Limited Industrial '.. ~'" x .~ ....... I-2 Gonoral Industrial I Public .,:~ · .~. .......... 1 INCH=lO00 FEET B-3 L I ~?.~ x -~,~.~,,~.,'~ ~' ~E-'W HOPE, MINNESOTA T 118 N - R 21 E SW 1/4. SEC 20 Site Data 33,000 SF Main Level 4.800 SF Mezzanine Level 37,800 SF Total Site Area - 2.47 Acres Building Oecuuancv Warehouse - single occupancy Office space primarily with the warehouse tenant. Two offices rented by a second tenant. Parking Re~_uired (Based on Square Footage with Warehouse Tenant Usage) Warehouse - 19.8 Cars (33,000 Gross Square Feet X .90 = 29700 Net Square Feet/1500 =19.8 Cars) Office - 14.4 Cars (4,$00 Gross Square Feet X.90 = 4320 Net Square Feet/300 = 14.4 Cars) Total Parking Required = 34 Cars Cprrent Tenant Usage Employees- 27 Day Time I0 Night Time 27 Employee cars + 10 visitor = 37 Required Parking Provided For current tenant with outdoor storage as shown 40 cars For future tenant without outdoor storage 57 cars Outdoor Storage Out door storage shown 55' X 100' = 5,500 SF Outdoor Stgrage Allowed 20% of gross floor area = .20 X 37,800 SF = 7,560 SF allowed NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS COMMUNITY PLANNING DESIGN MARKET RESEARCH PLANNING REPORT r TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Jeffrey Schaumann / Alan Brixius DATE: 30 June 1998 RE: New Hope - Pipe Fabricators Inc. - Site Plan Review FILE NO: 131.01 - 98.12 BACKGROUND Pipe Fabricators Inc., located at 2720 Nevada Avenue North, is requesting a variance to increase their curb cut from 28 feet to 38 feet at the from property line in order to accommodate semi-trucks/tractor-trailers. Under the Zoning Ordinance, any curb cut over 32 feet requires a variance. Attached for reference: Exhibit A - Site Location Exhibit B - Recommended Curb Cut Exhibit C - Turning radius with existing curb cut RECOMMENDATION We recommend the approval of a 38 foot curb cut, as indicated in Exhibit B, contingent upon the following conditions are met: 1. The curb cut provide a 35 foot turning radius along the south curb cut line. 2. The driveway is narrowed to a maximum 32 foot width measured 20 feet from the front property line. 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 55.416 PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 6'12-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC@WlNTERNET.COM I 3. Satisfactory landscape restoration. 4. Stripping and signage of the entry drive as a fire lane, as noted on the revised site plan. ISSUES ANALYSIS In order for a variance to be granted, an undue hardship unique to the property in question must be evident (Section 4.221 of the Zoning Ordinance). The right-of-way on Nevada Avenue North is 60 feet, with a 30 foot travel surface and 15 foot boulevards. The relative narrowness of this street creates difficulty for semi-trucks entering the site without crossing the center line or curb. Upon inspection of the site, we found that several sites along Nevada Avenue North were facing similar hardship. The inability of semi-trailers to enter the site without crossing the curb or center line is a hardship upon the property, thus justifying a variance. Since this hardship is not a unique characteristic to this lot, the Zoning Ordinance should be examined for possible changes. Land Use. The site is currently zoned I-1 Limited Industry. The proposed Comprehensi{/e Plan encourages the retention of industry in this district. By allowing better access to the subject site, we are in turn promoting industry. Off-Street Parking. Existing parking will not be affected. Additionally, semi-trailers are often illegally parked in the site entrance. This creates a further problem for semi-trucks and fire vehicles entering the site. This entrance must be stripped and signed as a fire lane to improve access and safety. Landscaping. A commitment on landscape restoration will be needed in regard to disturbed green areas. CONCLUSIONS We recommend approval of a 32 foot curb expansion, with a 35 foot turning radius given the conditions specified under "Recommendation" are met. pc: Doug Sandstad Mark Hanson City of New Hope ~NGLE FAMILY RESiOENTIAL R-I SINGLE AND TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-~' MEDIUM DENSITy RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SENIOR CITIZEN RESIDENTIAL R-5 RESIDENTIAL OFFICE R*O LIMITED NEIGHBORHOO0 BUSINESS S-I RETAIL BUSINESS B-2 AUTO ORIENTED BUSINESS COMMUNITY BUSINESS B-4 LIMITED INDUSTRIAL [- I GENERAL. INDUSTRIAL [-2 FLOOD PLAIN FP WET LAND W 'Associated ~ Consultants, inc. EXHIBIT A - SITE LOCATION GOLDEN .--,.,.---- ....... EXHIBIT B - RECOMMENDED CURB CUT EXHIBIT C - TURNING RADIUS WITH EXISTING CURB CUT ~,mstroo & Associates; 6126474179; Jun-17-98 5:08PM; Page 2/3 M. ~ettin. C.RA. Senior Consultants ~ A;$ocla[e Principal,: H~aro ~, Sanfo~. RE. · Kei~ A. Gordon, ~E, · Ro~e~ R, Pfctfcrfc. EE - Sidney R ~iUi.~un. EE.. L.S. · Robert F Kot~m~t~ - Aon~ M. Ring · ~irhn. I R Reu. EE. · FnniReer~_ & Architects offices: sc eaul, Rochester, Wmmar ~d Sr. O~ud. MN · M~lwau~ee, ~l ~sae: www. Oonescroo.com MEMO ;I'O: Kirk McDonald FROM: Mark Hanson SUBJECT: Pipe Fabricators [nc. (2720 Nevada Avenue) Driveway Variance to 38' wide File 34-Gen DATE: lun,e, ,],,?,,,,, 1998 ..... We have reviewed the above variance and offer the following comments: · Thc City required driveway width at property line is 32' wide which provides 2-16' wide driving lanes. To allow a wider width may encourage parking which is not recommended. · If the turning movement from Nevada Avenue is al issue it is suggested a 35' radius be provided in southeast comer of drive as shown on attached akctch. Fa-,,: ~'I;Z-636-151i' ~ent By: Bonestroo & Associates; 6126474179; Jun-30-98 9:23AM; Page 2/4 MEMO TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Mark H~on SUB. CT: Pip~ Fabricators I~iveway (2720 Nevada Avenue) Driveway Variance lrde 34-Gert (E9-22) DATE~ ~ne 29, 1998 We have reviewed the above teqeest and ~,ommend the following: · The driveway entrance has been n~leaigned in a~x~oManee with o~r memo and fe~om~on dated JIL~e ]7, 1~8 ~ the dL~q~oll at design/review. The redesign pmvide~ for a 32' wide driveway and a 35' ~__.d~ for the south curb. 2335 ~T/est Highway 36 · St. Paui~'~N 55113 ' 612-636-4600 · Fax: 612:'636'1311 4401 Xylon Avenue North City Hall: 612-531-5100 City I~all Fax: 612-531-5136 New Hope, Minnesota 55428-4898 Police: 612-531-5170 Polic~ Fax: 612-531-5174 Public Works: 612-533-4823 Public Works Fax: 612-533-7650 TDD: 612-531-5109 Fire Dep't. Fax: 612-531-5175 June 18, 1998 Pipe Fabricators Inc. 2720 Nevada Ave. N. New Hope, MN. 55427 Dear Mr. Finke: After reviewing your proposed plans for widening the driveway from 28 feet to 38 feet the following will be required by the Fire Chief. · The driveway shall be posted a ( NO PARKING FIRE LANE) All curbs for the driveway must be painted yellow and NO PARKING FIRE LANE sings must be posted on both sides of the driveway. · Fire lane signs must be at least a 18 gauge steel, Minimum size of 12"X18" with white background and red lettering reading ( NO PARKING FIRE LANE BY ORDER OF THE FIRE CHIEF) see attached hand om Should you have any questions please feel free to call me at 531-5125. Kirk McDonald Director of Community Development S,~erely' , .. Randy Kurtz Fire Inspector Family Styled City '~'~/~j~ For Family Living I I "SPECIFICATIONS FOR FIRE LANES AND SIGNS" FIRE LANES Fire lanes as indicated on plans must be pain%ed traffic type yellow, curbs to be painted where they exist, in the event there are no curbs the roadway is to be painted with a minimum 4 inch wide stripe. All paint must be applied~in sufficent quantity to form a clearly visible line. SIGNS All signs must be of at least 18 ga. steel, minimum size of 12" X 18" with a white background and red lettering reading: NO PARKING FIRE LANE BY ORDER OF FIRE CHIEF or approved alternate wording. The location of all signs required is noted on the plan by a circled dash, all signs are to be post or wall mounted with the bottom edge of the si~n 6 feet above ~rade. One sign, aligned same direction as dash - Two signs back to back on pole, aligned same direction as dash The type of sign to be used will be noted on the plan as type 1,2 or 3 as shown below. TyDe 1 Type 2 Type 3 ::J FIRE II ALL FIRE LANE STRIPING MUST BE YELLOW; ALL PARKING STALL STRIPING MUST BE WHITE I r 4.022 (31) - (31) Cooperative (Housing)~ A multiple family dwelling owned and . maintained by the residents. The entire structure and real property is under common ownership as contrasted to a condominium dwelling where individual units are under separate individual occupant ownership. (Code 072684, Ord. 86-13) (32) Court. An unoccupied open space other than a yard which is bounded on three or more sides by the walls of the buildings. (Code 072684, Ord. 86-13) property line on a curb face to curb face basis. (Ord. 88-10) I 4-8 072684 I 4,036 (4) (h) (~ - (ix) (vi t M No curb cut access shall exceed the mensions at the property line, Residential ............. 24 feet Commercial/Industrial ... 26 feet All curb cuts shall be installed to comply with the City's curb cut design standards. Curb cut widths not exceeding 32 feet may be permitted subject to review and recommendation of the City Engineer and approval of the City Council. Before the City Engineer recommends a curb cut exceeding the maximum widths set out herein, he shall consider the type of land use the curb cut will serve, the extent and nature of the vehicular traffic anticipated and the type and width of the street serving the property where the curb cut will be located. The City Engineer shall also. consider any regulations promulgated by the Minnesota Commissioner of Transportation relative to driveway and.curb cut dimensions before making a recommendation to exceed the 26 foot maximum width. (Code 072684, Ord. (vii) Curb Cut Minimum. Curb cut openings shall be located at minimum five feet from the side yard lot line in afl districts. (viii) Curb Cut Separation. Driveway access curb openings on a pUblic street except for single, two family and townhouse dwellings shall not be located less than forty feet from one another. (ix)Parkin~ Area Grades. The grade elevation of any parking area shall not exceed five percent. 4-33 A 072684 CITY OF NEW HOPE SPECIAL ZONING PROCEDURES APPLICATION LOG A B C D E F G H I J Appli- Applicant Date Date Applicant Date 60- Date 120- Date Deadline Date City Date City cation application was sent day time day time Applicant for City approved or sent response received notice limit limit was notified action denied the to Applicant number Name , Address by City that required expires expires of under application Phone information extension extension was missing or waiver 99-14 Pipe Fabricators, Inc. 6/10/98 8/9/98 10/8/98 2720 Nevada Avenue N. New Hope, MN 55427 Rodger Finke Nevada Avenue LLP 1623 South 5th Street Hopkins, MN 55343 939-0321 fax 939-0331 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 10 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 120-day limit, include all calendar days. G. Despite the automatic extension, the City will notify the Applicant a second time by mail that a 120-day approval 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. I. 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. CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning Case: 97-25 Request: Ordinance No. 98-03, An Ordinance Amending the New Hope Sign Code Location: City-Wide PID No.: Zoning: Petitioner: City of New Hope Report Date: July 2, 1998 Meeting Date: July 7, 1998 BACKGROUND 1. The City of New Hope is requesting consideration/approval of Ordinance No. 98-03, An Ordinance Amending the New Hope Sign Code, Section 3.40 of the New Hope Code of Ordinances. 2. For the past six months, the Codes & Standards Committee, Planning Consultant, Building Official, City Attorney and Community Development Director have worked to update the current New Hope Sign Code. 3. The City wanted to update the Sign Code to achieve the following objectives: A. Simplify the ordinance to make it user friendly, easy to understand and simpler to enforce. B. Make the Sign Ordinance business friendly. The ordinance update will attempt to provide New Hope businesses with signage opportunities that would be equal to competitive locations in neighboring cities. C. The ordinance update is also intended to correct some functional flaws that exist in the current ordinance. 4. The proposed ordinance is enclosed for preliminary review by the full Commission. The Planning Consultant prepared the draft ordinanCe and the final ordinance was prepared by the City Attorney. A side-by-side comparison of the existing and new code was also prepared by the Planner. 5. The City Attorney indicates in his correspondence that several changes have been made to the ordinance as a result of the June 17 Codes & Standards meeting. The City Attorney is also recommending that several definitional changes be added to the ordinance. 6. The Planning Consultant and City Attorney will be present at the meeting to review the ordinance in detail with the Commission. If time does not allow, the new ordinance can be tabled until the August Planning Commission meeting, however, there will be a number of applications for that meeting also and there is one business (Park National Bank) waiting for the new code to be effective so they can erect a time/temperature bank sign on Bass Lake Road (prohibited under the current code, but allowed under the revised code). 7. Previous memos prepared by the Planning Consultant are also enclosed so that the Commission is aware of the variety of issues reviewed/discussed by the Committee and staff. Attachments: 7/1 City Attorney Correspondence Ordinance No. 98-03 7/1 Planning Consultant Memo & Draft Ordinance Comparison of Existing & New Sign Code Previous Sign Code Reports from Planning Consultant JUL-01-@8 ~D 14:23 F~ NO, 425588? P. 02/22 Mr. Kirk MoDonald City of New H~ C~W ~elop~ D~r ~1 Xll~ Av~u= N~ New H~, Mi~ 5~ ~ ~ No. ~.4~ : Plea,se find enclosed prolmsed Ordinauce No. 98-03, Aa Ordi~sace Am~3ding Thc New Holm Sign Cod~ for consideration by the ln.,,,,i~ Commission at its July 7, 1998 Basically, I haw ~ tim ca'di-nm'~ form used by the N~w Hope City Pls~ .m~.er as discussed at the June 17. 1998 ~ and $'~..r~..~rds commi~:tee meeting. However, I ~ Codes and b'lsndards meeting. Specifically, ~ tbllowing chiles were m~cle: 1. In ~ 3.421 (1) ,, minor ~ was made to ~he __tatung code reference in ~ .*!~r 4. 2. In secti~m $.421 (2) a significant chs~e wss made ~o the style but not to the sivm ~ orm,~_.,-y dictl~ m~mtug if mx ~ by r~ ~onttlon secilons of th~ ~ code, the amins code or the/e~r~! d~flnit~m s~ima of ~.,,t~r 1 Ia ~ ~.4Z~ 0~) a~d (14) Smmaui~ ciamV~ ~ msd~ to ~ ~io~. 4. In sum~ ~.4tl (16)lB) the word 'side' v,~ In secfkm 3.422 (17) a m.i~ srammafi~ clam~e vms made to the de~nition of 6. In section .~.~Zl 09) s~d (~) ,~i,,^r grsmmsfi~ ~ were also mdc. JUL-01-98 NED 14:24 F~ NO, 4255887 P, 03/22 7uly 1, 1998 Page 2 ?, In section 3.432 additional IA~gua$o was added to indicate th~ sign structurc~ must be able to wiRmxnd a snow load of 40 po~mds per s~are foot and wind pressure of 80 pounds per squsre foot. ,?~':tion 4.433 wns amended by deleting the word stands at the -,~!_ of the paragraph nnd replacing it with the words 'is located". 9. ~eetion 3.470 was amended by indicatin~ tim seven day grace period to maintain thc sign is termi~ after the fhml building inspection. However, trois should be reviewed by Rte tmildini official to ensure tl~t it will ~over stl ~o~on and remo~lin~ projects where signs ate erected to advcrti~ the contractor doing the project. 10, Section 3.473 was cbant~ed to indicate the combined area of wall signs nmst be thc lesser of 151~ Of the az-ea of the front face of the building or 2.50 square 11. ,Section 3.473 (3) t-~gulatin§ reader boards was amended to indicate thst continuouS scrolling' messages are not permitted in subsection D of this section. Also, s~tion 3.4~2 (7) regulating ~eotion 3.474 (1) was amaadad slightly to indicate comer lots may have two area idonli~ation signs if eacl~ sign Is faclnll a separate ~eet. 13. Section 3,492 (1) dealing with wall signs on businass or industflal properties was mzw. nded to al.so indicate the total area of wall si~s cannot exceed the lesser of 15~ of the front face of the building or B0 square fi~et. .&~c~ion 3.493 was amended to refer to the specific sections of 3.493 regardin~ the infomm~on r~tuirnd by a comp~ sip pan 15. geotion 3.~dY3 was atn~nded to specifically Indicate tl~ amortizalion deadline date of December 31~ 2003. Se~ion 3.516 was addnd a3 tim sig~n variance t~lUL, mnm~ o£ 3.51 to dliYerixttta~ of lil~ht and ail: from t .m!~trment of police and fire fimctiom on city streets. Please review t~ e~clo~d or~insnee ~ advise of any other clmnges or modifications you lttink should be made before_ e,i, ordinance is emaddetmt either by the Plannin~ Co___w,,nis~ion or City Council. Three dentitions w~' should consid~ for in~;lusion in tl~ d~-~int!ton s~ttons of this ordinance would be definitions for flee sta~ing sign. nmnuxn~nt s~n and satellim sim. I will di.,znss Imss~le definitions for consiClemcl and adopted by the Planning Connnimlon wtth or witlmut the addition of these new de~l~itions. JUL-01-98 ~D 14:24 F~ NO, 4255887 P, 04/22 July 1, 1998 Please c~ntact me if you have any other questions or comments resardiu/this ordinance. Very Lruly yours, JEN~EN SWANSON & SONDRAI..L, P.A. Enclosure JUL-01-98 CD 14:24 F~( NO, 4255867 P, 05/22 ORDINANCE NO. 98-03 AN OP. DINANC~ AM~INDING N~W HOPE SI~N CODE The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains: Se~%ion 1. Sections 3.40 through 3.485 known as the "Sign Code" of the New Hope City Code ia hereby repealed in it cntirety.- ~DCtion 2. New sections 3.40 through 3.524 to be known as the "Sign Code" of the New Hope City Co~e are hereby ad~e~ to read ae follow~= (see attached Exhibit A - New Hope Sign Code) ~ction 3. ~£facttve Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and Dublication. Da=ed the day of , 199 w. Peter anck, Mayo= Artier: Va~erie Leone, Cit~ Clerk (Published in the N~w Hope-~olden Valley Sun-PosL the day of JUL-01-98 14ED 14:24 F~ NO, 4255867 P, 06/22 3.41 '!._~.l_e, Puroose and Intent. 3.411 Title. Sections 3.40 through 3.485 shdl be known, cited and referred to as the "New IIope Sign Cc<lc' cxccpt as rcfcrmd to hem[a, whcrc it s 'hall be known as t~e "Si~ Code". 3.412 ]~l:Ili~. This Sign C.x~le is established to protect ,aa promote health, safety, gCtl~al welfare and older w~thin thc City Of N~W Hop~ throllgh thc of a comprehensive and content-neutral series of standards, regulations and procedures governing the type, waml3er, size, su'uct~e, location, height, ill,,mi~=tjOR, erection, ~ alld/or display of devices, signs or symbols serving as a visual commtmica~lon meOta to tgrsoas simatal within or upon public rights-of-way or properties within the City of New Hope. The provisiom of this Sign Code are intemled to encourage creatlvl~, a reasonshle degzee of of choice, sad opportunities for effective communication. These provisions are also iatemied to reduc.~ confusion ami Razards m~ result from unnecessary ami/or: indiscrlmh~f~ use of signag¢ devices. 3.42 Rules aad Deflaitiom. 3.4:11 R~cs. Tho ~sa~,sgc sct forth in the text of t~is Sign Code shall tx= inmrpreted in accordance with the rules of comtmction prescribed in Chapter 1 except for thc following provisioas: (I) .Zgn_iae Districts. The Sign Code reft'crags the vadous zoaiag districts in Cbap~ 4 of the New Nope Zoning Code. (2) Co~struction_of Words. Whenever a word or term appears in the text of this Sign Code, Rs meaning ~ be defined in section 3.422 of this Code. A word or term no~ specifically defiz~ by section 3.4~ herein, shall be del'reed by the del'tuition scctions of Chapm' 4 or Ch .sp~ 1 of this Code, if applicable, otherwi~ it ~hal~ have ils ovii_,,~ dictionary meaning.' :(1) Siga. Any writ~ (including leller,, words, or Immerals), piotorial t~-la~mmltcm (iacludiag illustrations or decomtimm), emblem (including devices, s,/~abois, or trademarks), l~, bmm~r, straamer, peammt, striag reprasm~ on a building or otlg'r sUac'aim Or On tim grouad. -i- JUL-01-@8 ~D 14:25 F~ NO. 4255887 P. 07/22 (2) Si~n_. Advertising, A billboard, poster panel board, painted bulletin board, or other commnnlcativ~: device which iS ~ fO advertise products, goods, and/or services which are not exclusively related to the premise o- which thc sign is locatcd. O) $i_~n. A.ddress. A sign commuuicafing Street address only, whether wri~teu or iu uumerical form. (4) Si_tn. Area. That n~e~ within the marginal lines c~catcd by the sign surface wAicA bears the advertisement or, in the case of messages, figures or symbols attaahed directly to the part of a building, which is included in the .~'nn,est geometric figure which can be m~e to circumscribe the mes,mage, figure or symbol di~playcd thereon, (5) Sign, Banncrm and Pennants. Attention gctting devices which t~scmblc flags and are of a pat~, cloth, or plastic or plastic-like consistency. Si~n_. Bill .~.. rd. Any advertising si~ havin$ an area of more than three' hu,~h-~d (300) ~quar~ f~C (7) ~i n__~.~l~. Any sign which ~emlfles a business or group of businesses, either retail or wholesale, or any sign which idemifies a prof~sioml or is used in the identification or promotion of any principal commodity or service, indudin8 entemdnment, offered or sold upon the prcmise where such sign is located. (8) $i~u. Can _oo_y__and Marauee. Any message or ideutificarion which is ~ to a c. ll~opy or mn,'qu~e. ,~{~11,_{~. Any il]uminmd sign on which thc artificial light is not mn_!,,~{ ..,,~"d stntionary and/or con~nt in ~-mity ~ color at all tim~ when such sign is in use. il2depCJ~ly Of the main buildi-g or struclxtm on the property. Sign.q on accenory sm]mtr~ shall b~ considemi gro-~ sigm. :(11) ~. IIeil~t refe~ to the distanc~ from the ~ to the u~ point, on the gignnge. (12) Si_nh_ Idmmtifienttnn.. The principal sign idm~fy~ug the business conducted on the premiseS. In rcakkntial districts, thc sign identi~ng a resident, school, church, or othe~ nnn-b,,si,,e~ use. -2- JUL-Or-98 lIED 14:26 F~ NO. 4255867 P. 08/22 (13) ~i/IL_IiiIIII~IlI~. Any sign which has characters, letters, figures, designs or outlines ill-m~,ted by cl~tric lights or luminous robes. (14) ~. Any leV. er, character, symbol, or abbreviation ~ to represent an e~tire word or group of words denoting the name or purpose of any business. For purposes of this $i~n Cod~, a tradmnark may qualify as a symbol, but only if brand names or other words used therein are singe lc'~rs, characters or an abbr,~iafion. (1S) ~dglL..~,~,i~. Any sign which revolves, mules, llas any moving parts, or gives the illusiou of motion. (~6) Si_an. N0n-Co~o~{~. (a) L~dlL. A sign which hwfiflly existed at the time of the original passage of rigs Sign Code or amemlmem thereto bu~ which does not conform with the regulations of this ~ign Code, is legal. (b) _!lle_~l. A sign Which was conSmcted afl~ the original passage of this Sign Code or amenclmenu ~hereto and does not conform with regnlmiom of tht, Sign Codc is illegal. (17) Si~n. Portable. A sign so designed as to bo movable from one location to another ami which is not permanently roached to the grouml or a structure. (18) S'~,n. _Pro_i~. Any sign which is alruled to a building and which projects from the buildi-$ wall 1 ~ ~eater than twelve (12) laches. C19) ~i~,21lh~. ii? of s public, non-comum~d nature, inchding bu~ not indk~n~ scenic or historlcsl poh~._ of htlm'm~, memorisl phqu~ and sigus ~ by or on order or a public officer or employee in the pen'onus e or (~0) ~. A sign locaud above the ~ve or coping line. -3- JUL-01-98 ~D 14:25 F~ NO, 425588? P, 09/22 ~. A sign which is affir~ to thc catmior wail ota buikling ~ which does not project more than twelve (12) inches from the surface to which it ~s attached. (24) Si_gu. Wall Lettem. A sign composed of individual leilem whicil are attached (not painted) separately on a wall surface. (2&') ~l{,_.~[{~. A sign affixal to a window or located lipide a window surface legible to the general public. General S ,~,,.,dards. All signs hereal2er painted, constructed, erected, remodeled. relocated, or expanded shall comply v~ the following standards: 3.,t31 Si~n Permit. A sign may not bo co~, erected, remodeled, relocated, expanded or I~ir",xl, except in cases of routi~'~ main~, without a sign permit. A permit shall not bo issued unle~ tho sign ,,,t ali other sign., on the pr~,ni.~es of the applicant are in compliance with the regulation.s of the New Hol~. Sign COde, Scodon 3.40, ~t al. 3.432 Bufl~,~a .ElccU. ical Codes Applilabl~. Ail signs shall be wired to coaforul tO secliou 3.221 (2) of this Code. Sign smm'ur~ shall be designed to withstand a forty (40) 1~ snow load ami eig~,y (80) psf of wind pressure. 3.~3 M~ of Si_s.~. All signs, including gl~ri¢ wiring, suppora,~ suucu~es, guy wires or chains, shall be properly m,i~.._~_i_n_md lind lmpt in a ~fe condition. A sign or sign m~ which is ~, ,m~fo, defacetl, or otherwise altered .~h_mH_ be repaired, repatm~, or repl~x~[ by the p~:h~it holder or property owner on which th~ ~ign is located. ;~.4~ $i~n Location. (1) Excepting governmental signs, no sign siufll be erected or temporarily plso~ within a gm~ right-of-way or upon publio lands, eamomonts or risl~or-way. {~ Ail signs, 6xcepting governm~tal si~s. shall be locat~ on private propmy, t~m~uuxtiag ~ shaU be s,t b~ok a minimum of t~n (I0) foet from ~ umareg lot liu~. 'IIM: setback shall be measutud from the lot to that portion of th~ sign m~r~st to tl~ ~ lin~. (:{) On all oom~ lo~s, signs shall not bo p,~ within twe~y (20) f~t of any corner fom~ l~y tl~ ~on of two (2) strec, m or the rights-of-way of a railway ita~moofiug a stro~. Th~ ~ (20) f~t shall be in the form of a triangle with two sides formed by the property lines -4- JUL-01-98 ~D 14:28 F~ NO. 4255887 P, 10/22 and the third side formed by a straight line connecting the two twenty (20) foot points on each sidc of thc corner. A $1gll may be extcnded into the The cle~'~nce above the street ~rade ~s more than eight (8) feet. (b) No parc of the si~ structure encroaches in the triungular ar~ at an elevation l~s ~ eight (8) feet above street ~'ade. 3.435 Signs may be illmnhmted ~y or by rcflecl~l lifft~ providcd: (1) Illuminated signs shall be shielded to prevent lights from being directed ex oncovin§ m~'fic in such brilliancc d~ it impeirs the vision of the driver. Such sigm sbaI1 not interfere with or obscure an off'u:~aI ttaf~ sign or signal. This incl,_,a__~ imloor signs which are visible from public (2) Illumination of any sizn .~huil not cxceed one (1) foot candle me.uteri at' thc lot linc of thc site co~alnln_g thc si~n. 3.44 Prohibited Sisms. 3.441 Hashing signs, rotating or muvin~ signs, animated sl~ns, signs with moving lights or which cte~e the ~mion of movement, except for electronic or electrically controlled reader boards subject to the cond~on_~ Set forth in sectiOn 3.473 (3) and section 3.4~2 (T) of t'hi_~ CMde. 3.d42 Projectin8 si?, as defined in section 3.422 (lg} of this Code. 3.443 Si?-~ which physically obstruct any required a~..eaa way or window in such manner as to create a safc~y hazard. 5.444 Si_ohs located on property unimproved with a building except a sign advertising the prmnises for sale or lease which meets the stmw!~_,ds of s~ction 3.469 of this Code. St? located in the izamtor of a Imildin~ but vis,lc through a window where by -'rmmon of its position, size, shape or color it may obstruct, impair, obscure, interfere with the view of. or be confused with any traffic control sign, signal or device, or ~ with. mislead or confuse ~. 3,446 $i? which are releXcd to a business or scrvice which is not being ~tly conduct~ on tile premises on which the sign is located. -5- JUL-01-98 CD 14:28 F~ NO. 425588? P. 11/22 3.447 Business or advertising signs which are painted directly upon a wall ~urface. 3,448 Portable si/m, bauner~, pennants, ribbons, str~m~_,-s, strings of light bulbs, spinners, or sim|l~r d~Jc.~ al~ not pennitr~l except as provided In Section 3.492 of this Code. 3.~i9 Signs that are tacked or posted on trees, fences, utility poles, or other such suPtxyrts are not penniued, except when allached to an outfield fence of a ballfield and oriented to the playing field ,,~a spectator seating. 3.450 Roof si~n, as definod in ~on 3.422 (20) of this Code. 3.4~1 Billboard signs as defined in section 3.422 (6) of this Cod~. 3.4~2 AIl other signs not expr~ly pc~nittcd by thiz Sign Co~, 3,46 Permitted _Signs_. Thc si~.* identified in section 3,46 are exempt from permit: requirements in all zonin~ districts. 3.461 Identifi~le A&tress. (1) R~idential Buildinn_. Every principal building ~h~ be identified with it~ legal street address in mnneu-ical form, The numerals shall be at least three (3) Ine..hes in height, and either eonuasli~ in color from the principal tmlldlng, m~ of reflective material or ill~. The numerals ,hal! be readable from the nearest adjacent roadway ~Sng the Iffy'roi.ms. Should the building numerals not be visible from the roadway, an address post displaying the identification numerals of the same minimum height shall be placed adjacent to the driveway tn such a manner as to be readable from the roadway. (2) C_amm~_~/~l. lna,_o~._i~l ~1 M-l~;ole F~milv ]~,~I.4;,0~. Nu.mc~$ i~-miryifl_~ ~tr~t _,_~_~_ms,e~ for ~ and iadum~ buiidi,~. iacludi~ mm'title f--,,y dwcili,~ dettmd ia ~ctioo 4.022 (9~ of thi, Co~. ~ t~ a minimum of six (6) inch, in hei~.~t ,ad ~! comply with th~ other tequir~ of ~ (1) ~x~o. All ~h build~ 3.462 ~ ~d Memori~.$i_l~m. ~ or cmblcms of · ~_,~.~!. fc~lcral or st~!~ ~[ovmm~e~. or momodal ~ thcr~f, di~layed on priv-~- l~Opetty. -6- JUL-01-98 ~D 14:26 F~ NO. 4255867 P, 12/22 Si~n~ Reouired b_v 1.~w. Legal notie.~, nddress nnm~nls and other signs re~luircd by law or governmental order, role or regulations, provided that tile content and size of the sign do .not exceed the requirements of such la.w, order, role or regulation. 3.464 Public Convenience .and Directional Si~n.s. Small si?-% not exce~tng two (2) .~luare feet in area, displayed on private property for the convenionc~ of the public, including but not llmi~_~ to, directiollal or i~on signa for reatrooma, freight en_t~u-~, sarase and mmmase sales and pa~king lot signage. Garage and rummage sale sigm shall show, clearly imprinted, ll~ nam~ and sddre~ of the p~'son erecting the siva, or respons~le for the same. Garage and rummage sale siam shall not be erected more than five (5) days before or m~intained mor~ than one (1) day afar the sale to which thc si~n relates. Open hOUSe sl~ms ~ not be erected more tt~an one (I) day before or m~tain~d more ~n one (1) day after the open hous~ Meat. 3,46~ Political $i~.~,. Signs, not exgeedin~ thirty-two (32) aqua~ fe~t ia area,. displayed on private property, containing ma~er which is iateaded or m~Ls to' infkmaco directly or indirectly any votia$ at any primal, gene. cai, municipal, special or school election, iucluding picalres for announeement~ relative to candidates or campaign advertising. One sign per candidate and iasue per lot is permitted in addition to other signs on private property in am/zoning district. In St_~t.r g~neral elections, no per~m shall permit or allow any a~ch sign to be ptlblicly displayed or pm~ before August 1 or t~n (10) days after the ~,ate ~ election to which the sign re!___m~_. In special ele~tion~, the durattonal limit sllall be ninet7 (90) days before and t~n (I0) days af~ the special election to which th~ sign relams. Any sign penniUed by tltls section tony be used as a non-commemial opinion sign. 3.466 Government 5i_~1~. Signs of a duly e. onstimted goverrrmental body including waffle or similar res,,l~_qr~ sics, legal notices and WArnings at rnflroad camtnss. 3.a6'/ N _nn~C,,mm~-i~. O?'-iO_-_ Si'"o. Signs, not ~S m~-~o (32) ~ ~ M ~ ~~ on p~ ~~, ~~ ~~0n w~ e~ ~ ~ or ~ of ~, ~t ~ ~t ~v~ ~, ~, ~~ or ~. ~~~lot~~~~~, ~wev~, ~ .-~ ~ ~on si~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w~ ~ ~ a 3.46~ Itgl]l~Y_~. Signs or displays which contain or depict a message per~ining to a religious, national, state or local holiday. -7- JUL-01-98 NED 14:27 F~ NO. 4255887 P, 13/22 3.~ "Nor Sale~ and ..~l:or Reng~ $i_~ns. ~Nor ~e' ~ S~or ~' si~s ~ ~~ s~j~ m ~e fo~ow~g ~a~om: (1) ~ p~i~y ~m~, ~ ~o~ ~ w~om~ ~y ~ve one (I) s~ ~ W ~e ~e, ~nt or 1~ of ~e dwell~ ~ on ~e p~. S~d s~ ~ ~ ex~ ei~ (8) ~ f~ ~ ~. (~) M~le ~ily, ~~ or ~~ b~ ~ ~ve one (1) rel~ ~ ~e ~e, rent or 1~ of ~ b~ld~g ~t ~ys or dwcl~gs on ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~n~e. Exit ~ c~ ~ 3.~ (3) ~low, ~d s~ ~ ~t ex~ ~vea~-fivc (?~ ~ ~ ~ ~. (3) M~fiple ~ily, comm~c~ ~d ~~ bu~gs ~ ~o~e Sm~ ~way 169 ~y ~ve ~t more ~h,n ~o (2) ~~~g or w~ si~ ~ W ~c ~way. ~e ~m~ve ~ si~ ~ of ~d si~s s~l not ex~ o~ hu~ ~ (1~) ~ f~t & ~. 3,4~0 Co~~n snd R~el~ Si~. ~ (1) si~, ~t ex~ ~-~o (32) ~ ~ h ~~. ~o (2) si~ ~ ~~ on ~ 1o~, o~ (I) ~ng ~h ~. ~Jd si~shsll ~~~m~i~ofa ~g ~ ~ m~ ~ ~v~ no ~r ~ ~ ~ ~ys ~ ~ ~ ~ilding ~n. H~'s r~~ ~nin! ~m. ~ ~o~n5 ~ ~e ~~ ~ ~e R-1. R-2, R-3, R~ ~ R-5 ~niug ~~: 3.4~1 ~ si~ i~~ ~ ~on 3.46 of ~i~ C~. 3.4~ N~~ 5i~. N~m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ of ~ ~e ~ ~ of ~ pr~ ~ on ~e p~ w~ ~ s~ h I~. A ~~ ~ ~e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o (2) ~ f~ 3,4~ Si~, ~~ m ~, ~ls, ~-pmfit ~o~s ~ ~ve~n~ ~~ ~ow~ ~n ~i~ ~i~ ~m ~ ~~ ~ ~ows: ~. N~ ~ ~ ~o (2) ~ ~ ~ ~~ on ~ ~ ~ of ~ ~. ~1, ~~ ~m~ ~ ~m~ b~. of fi~ (15) ~t of ~ ~ of &e ~ ~ (~ ~ ~~) of ~e~, ~1, ~n-~ ~on ~ b~, or ~o ~M~ fi~ (~) ~ ~. -8- JUL-O1-98 ~D 14:27 FaX NO, 4255867 P, 14/22 Monument. Simms. For each principal building on a lot. there shall be not more th~n one (1) free~i,g monument si~ except on a corner lot where two (2) si~s. one facini each street, shall be petmilIed.- No such si~.. shah exceed sevcntT-fivc (75) square feet in arca. Montuncal silp]s ma7 not exc, e~ twelve (12) feet in height. The monument si~n may include a reader board as part of the allowable si~n area. (a) The reader board may I~ a wall, freestanding, or monument The reader board si~t area shall count as part of the total si~n area allowcd within a respcctivc district. (b) Thc reader board ar~a shall not exceed more than fifty (50) percent of the wnll or mon-m~nt sign erected. (e) One (1) reader board pet premise. (d) The render board al, n, dispby a ~iven copy or lp-aphic hna~e for a mt-tmum of three (3) seconds within the reader board frame. Cont~nuoEe scrolling message~ are not permitted. (4) Off-Premi~ Directional Siens. Off-premise directional sisns stroll be ,mit~ tO situations where access is conft~ing and traffic ~let7 may be jeopardized or traffic could be inappropriately muted throu~ rosidcntial streets. The size of the sign ~ not exceed seventy-five (75) square feet in area or twelve (12) ftmt in height. The off-pt~--mls¢ ~ shall not Interfere with usm of the lot on wlg~ its ~ is located. (5) ~itllt~]aL~.~. Snbject to the provisions of section 3.492 (6) of t~in Cod~. 3.474 Mt~tip__le Family Res~_Si~e. Si~ts accessory to multiple family residential buildin~ and complexes are permi~ n.q follows: (1} Arm ]d~ntiflcntion. Ea~ multiple fsrntly development shrdI be permitted OhO (I) area idemifi~ sign, corner lots arc lx~rmitt~d two (2) signs ir each sign is faci~_~ a separam rout. The Area ~ signs shall not oxoccd on~ hundred (100) squa~ feet in azea. Frceatamting movement silFm shall not exceed twelve (12) feet in hei~flt sad _,_~su be located st the -9- JUL-01-98 WED 14:27 FAX NO. 4255887 P. 15/22 Direction,sl/lnformafion Sim~s. Multiple family development direcfionaYinformatioa signs are permilled m direct traffic within ~ site and provide information pertainin~ to the building'$ ownership, managcxncnc and opera~ion. Individual dtrecflon~I signage may x/ot excccd nine (9) square feet in area. No illumination of the sign is permitted other thnn Ute general house illurninalion. Special Event $.iguai!e. Subject to the provisions of section 3.492 (6) of this Code. Home Occuoations. A residential unit with an approvcd home occupation requiring customer or client visits to the home is allowed one identifi~*ion sign for the home occupation. Said sign shall not exceed two (2) square fcct or six (6) feet in heit~ht. 3.48 ~id~.nti~al ~ INstrlet. Sigl~ are accessory to permitl~l a~d condifi_~mol uses in the ~-O Zoning DisIzi~. The following signs are po'mitred within the R-O Zoning Dis~c~: 3.481 All si?.s idcntifiod in section 3.46 of this Code. 3.,~Z P.~illcntial Si_~ns. All sism id~tified in section 3.4"/Of ~ Code. 3.483 ~. Busincss sisns as reg 'ulaaxl in sccflon 3.49 of mis Code. Comm~! s_~_~ l~d_~_~_ si Zonin? D~ _stol_ ~ $1~s are accessory to perllfitted a~d ¢ond~ uses in the IL1, B-l, B-3, B-i, 1-1 and 1-2 Zoning Districts. Only the followin~ signs are permitted in these zo~tnt distriCtS, unless otl~-fwi~ specifically provided for in this section. 3.491 All sit, ns identified in section-3.46 of this Code. 3.492 t,.,4~v~a,,,,t ~,,,i _,,ess__ l~__h~,s-',~__t Si~s. Signs accessory to a single occupancy business or ~ shall ~m.nly with the fonowin~ re~ns: (s) Not more than two (2) wall ai~s per lmilding. th) The total area of all wall ~ shall not exceed the lesser of fifteen (15) percc~ of tl~ front face of ~e princip,l co~ or industrial buildins or two hundred fifty (~f0) .square ~ect. (2) FreesUmdin~ Si_ecs. Not more ~ eec (I) ~ ~ ~ be pcrmi~ed on any lot. - 10- JUL-Ol-98 NED 14:28 F~ NO. 4255867 P. 16/22 (a) Freestanding siEn.~ shall mat exceed one hundr~ (100) square f~-'t (b) FrccC, audin~ sig~ shall not exc~d t~!rty (30) f~t (3) A~F or ~op? Si~. ~ may ~ p~ or o~~ ~ to ~y ~~lc awning ~ ~0~ ~ foBows: (a) ~fiO~. $i~ 8~I ~ limi~ to O~ (1) ~ ~n~g omo a ~. ~) Ha~t. T~ ~y si~ s~ not proj~ ~ve or ~Iow physi~ ~io~ of ~e a~ ~ ~ f~ia. ~U~ ~ ~or a ~u~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ mid or ~ ~~ ~M. (d) M~m $i~. A~$ ~ ~ ai~ ~(16) ~f~t~St~. A~n$ ~ ~izsible wall si~. (4) (s) ~m~W~w ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~e m of ~ ~or ~ow sl~ ~ ~-~ 0~) ~ of ~ ~ow ~ of ~ ~ s~ of ~ b~ ~ w~ ~d (c) ~ Adv~~. ~v~ ~ m.~ ~ i~ mis ~oa. ~ ~o~le s~ ~ ~ a ~w ~ ~on a.4~ (1) of ~Is ~. ~~ ~ ~r ~hs~ for of ~m a.4~ (1) of ~ ~. -11- JUL-01-@8 ~D 14:28 F~ NO. 4255887 P. 17/22 ($) Si_~ll$._A~i~.ry to Gas Salca in Con_iunetion with A~_omobile Stations or Convenience Stq~.._s. The following signs acces$o~ to auWmobilc service stations and convenience stores with g~s sales are permilXed in addition to thc $i~ pcfmiucd under scclion 3.492 of riffs Code. (a) Gasoline and Price gig. One (I) sign (single or double faced) per frontage on a public street, suitable for apprising persons of tlae total ss. lc price per gallon. The area of such pric~ sign .~h.~n not exceed sixt~n (16) square feet on either side. Each such sign · h~]l be affix~ to the r, andard of a ground sign or light fixturc, and shall state thc total price. NO sign posting an incomplete price or less titan the total sales price is permitted. Informational Si_~nage_. $i~o~,~ denotin~ operatin$ i~tmctiona associated with self service ~ facilities including gas pump. air supply and car wn.~hes are cxcm~.t from thc maximum sign area. stazaiar~ Of section 3.49 of this Code. (6) Banns. P.c_nnants. Streamers. Strin_es of Lights..Searchlights. Portable signs, bamiers, pe-,,~,v~, strcamcrs, ~ of lights, scarch lights or any other temporary sign are permitted only for cnmmercial or industrial special or promotional t,-,,m of a i~,,iu:d duration by pcrmit acquired from ~e City pursuant to the following conditions: (a) Special or Pmm~lion:l Eva-t,. Special or pramotional events shall m~an ~ ~ as grand opcnln~, management or ownership clamg~, or periodic sales ar ~ ~vents. (b) Permit Am,)licafit~,. Permits far any temporary sign ~t to ~ s~doa ahall be inued ollly to own_era or te~mts of commercial or ~ properW. Appli~fiom must be submitted to thc City ~ Official on a form approved by the City a minimum of fourteen (14) days prior to the special or promotional event when thc signs will be used. (c) Permit Duration. All permits mued hereunder shall be for a maximum period of fourteen (14) days and shall ~pirc automatically aftcr said period. Upon the permit expiration, the applicant ahall ~ to di~ any ~ all si~ns ~ by th~ permit RRle$s ~ appHeallt has obtained a flew permit for said sisna~e. - 12- JUL-01-98 MD 14:28 F~ NO. 4255867 P. 18/22 (d) Limitation on Permits_. No mor~ than three (3) p~rmits yearly shall be issued m any on~ (1) property or location. If two (2) permits are obtained in succession by any applicant per (b) above, both perm~ st~ be counte~ for the purpose of determinin$ the yearly llm~tatio~Is of this subsection. (e) ,Sil~n Location. Ail special or promofiotufl si~s must be located on the premises wllere the event is occurring. $ignage shall not exceed an amount equivalent to the permitted signag¢ area allowext th~ applicant's business in Ge respective zo~i,g district. (t) Grand Ooenin~$. Notwi~ the duration provisions of r~.~ion Cb) above, grand openi,,$ sii~a~¢ ma7 be for a maximum period of thirty (3O) days. ~. Temporary slim permitted by section 3.a6 Code ahall be exempt from the reqllite~en~a of this sect/on. (h) Non-comp_ lta~.cC. Violation of any comfitioa.s of this aection will result in a forfeiture of additional si~n permits for the property uad~ this section for a period of twelv~ (12) mom~/h~m ~ date of the violation. The permit forfeiture shall be in addition to any other penaltie~ for code violatioas allowed by this Code. (a) The r~ader board shall ~e a wall, ftee~mdl~, or monument sign. The reader board si~ area shall eotmi ss part of the total sign area allowed within a respective dLsuict. th) Tbo ~ bo~ area slutll not exceed mote ~sn ~ (~) ~ of the wall, freemading, or monument si~ ereoted. (e) Oae (1) rader board per pmsi~ a emnitted. (a) The reader board sludl disptoy a sive copy or Szaph for a minimum of three (3) ~ within the reader board fr*me. S]a)pptn~_ Cemers. When a single pri~ipal buiJai,,_- is devol~d to two (2) or mor~ businesses or industr~ uses, a oomt~zd~v¢ ~tSn plan tbr th~ entire - 13- JUL-01-98 CD 14:28 F~ NO. 425588? P, 19/22 or not the plan is consistent wita sections (2) through (4) of section 3.,~93. No permit shall be issued for an i~dividual u,~ except upon a demuniuaiion ~ it is consistent wit~ a previously or .concurrently approved comprehensive sign The effect of said comprehensive sign plan ia to allow aud require ~ owner of multiple occupancy ~ to determine the specific individual sign requirem~ for the teoants of his buila{nl. As sign locations, size and ogler sign details may be of some significant imponauce in lesse arrangements between owner and ~,~n~, it is the City's in~lltion ID e~;~b!ish g~leral requirements for the overall buildin~ only, thus providiu8 a buildin~ owner with both the flexibility and rcaponsibili~ to deal with his individual tuuants on their specific sililu needs. (1) Com_,m~h~usivc Si_~n Pl..an Information. Th~ appHcauI shall pl~are a wri~en and graphic comprehensive si~alle pl~.. for submission W ~he City. Said plan shall include, buI not be ~ to ~e following information: (a) Sign location (both wall (b) SiSn S gn ~ fl~r p~ ~ (0~fl~on of si~ Si~ ~~~ ~~ ~pli~on or ~y ~n CiV, or ~y ~ ~on ~ ~ ~~ (Z) (a) ~im,~m ~. ~ ~mb~ w~ s~ ~ ~u~ ~ d~. ~y ~ o~ ~ ~) ~{~di.~ !d~~n. d~y ~ ~ ~o (2) (C) T~ I~n ~i~. - 14. JUL-01-98 ~D 14:29 F~ NO. 4265887 P, 20/22 enffances to their use or they are ten,nts in ~ shoppin~ center, in which case. not more than one ,i~ may b~ disphyed. A t~n~,nr occup~g a corner location fronth~ two (2) streets may display identification si~s to both street frontages. (d) ~!i![~-~, A delivery si~n or si~l~s not cxcccdin~ nine (9) square feet in area may be located on the side or rear wall of the structure. (3) Er~standing Si~n. (a) Sho0?.in_~ Ccnters. Shopping centers corn, thing more than four (4) separate ~ ~ occupallcies may erect O~le (l) free~.~ndlng si~n per stmc~ frontage, not to exceed two (2) frog shoppirsg center signs per site, (sln~le or double faced). F.~tch ground sign may not exceed two hundred (200) square feet in area. nor thirty (30) feet in height. In lieu of multiple f~ng signs, thc shopping center may have a single freestanding si~ nor. m exceed three hundred (300) square feet in arca nor d,hv (30) (i) Reader boards in acco~ with section 3.492 (7) o£ this Code ,h_,_!! also be allowed on tho fr~.mnding ~ign provided tile inclusion of said boards in combination with the tenant direotory and center id~tt6cation does not (b) Other Multi~_ le Occu~es. Multiple occupancy structures other separ~ and distinct occupancies, may erect ~round signs in aooordan~ with the provisions of section 3.49'l of this Code and may identify each separate and distinct occupancy on said ~found (c) S_i.~le O,:_o_,p~n,~'7 Fr,~-~o~v, ain~ ._q~l!ite Stt~s, Not more than one (I) freestandin$ silo shall he permitted per satellite site. (~1 0) r. reemndins sips ~ not ~ one hundred (m0) (Z) ~~ s*.-,,s stroll not exceed ~ f~0) feet in - 15- JUL-01-98 (,lED 14:29 F~ NO, 4255887 P, 21/22 (4) ~e.~. Con~_ re.sire Si~n Plan Review. When a comprehensive sign plan review is r~ by th~ s~ion, the ~plicant =hSl~ pay a review fee in addRion ~o a permR fees set forth ia Chapter 14 of tl~ Code. 3.50 ~.orrrlin_~ 5iL~nS and ~ Smmtares. Sig~ and sign ~acmre~ found to be non-conforming with thc provisions of this Codc'as of Dccember 31, 1998 shall be subject to the following provisior~s: 3.~01 Proh~ifions. A non-conforming sign may not be: (I) Changed to another non-conforming sign. Structurally altered except to bring into compliance with the provisions of this Sign Code. Expanded. (4) Re-established afU~ its rcmoval for thirty (30) da~. (5) Re-cs~li~ed afU:r damage of more th~,~ fifty (50) percent of sign replacement cost except to bring into compliam~. 3.~02 ]gaialtt!!!~. Normal maintenance, such aa painting, ~pairiug withotu removal, cleaning, m~t,~aining, electrical wiring sad appurtensaces on site sad changing or repairing fastcacrs or guy w/rcs or cbaim shall be permiv~ on any lawful non-confo sign. 3,503 ,/~mo_rfi=ltiOn ,gchechfle. Any legal ~on-c, onformin~ sign ~h!!! be brought in to compliam;c with this Codc or rmnoved by December 31, 2003. ~,$1 vl/igl!_Xl~g~. Whcrc tlgre am pma/cal di~culties or umzcess~ hardsh~ in the way of carrying out the mict letter of the provisions of this sect/on, the City Couacil has th~ powcr to vary the requi~mmm of this section in harmony with the general purpose and intent hereof, so that the public health, safety and gemxai welfare may bc secured and mb,staatial justice done. When camtdcfla_g a variance, ere City Council shall make a fiading of isa and gram spprovsl based upon the following coaditioa-,: parcel of laud or use involved. 3.513 YarlaacC. ~. TI~ r~e pUrlmSe of the variance is not based exclusively upon a dedre to incresse the value or income POtential of th~ busiacas involved. .16- JUL-01-98 ~D 14:29 F~ NO, 4256887 P, 22/22 3.~13 .Causc of I.lardsl~. That thC alleged dlfftc~ or tmrcls_h~ is caused bl/this Sign Code and has not been cr~u~l by any persons presently having an intcr~ in ~h¢ parcel. 3,514 F_Xfect o£ Variau~. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfm-e or injurious tx) other land or improvements to the neighborhood. 3.$15 Impairment of Light and .Air. '13mt the variance will not impair au adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property. 3.~1~ Imp '.ai,nnent of Police and Fire Functiovs. Thai the variance will not impair or subsr~ltally increase tile coagesgon of the public streets, or interfere with thc ftm~on of the policc and fire dcpartmcnts of rd3e City. 3.~2 R~i~w ~ures and lnforn~.tional 3.S21 Si_mn Application. The Applicant must complete and submit a Sign Permit: Application for approval hy the City Council. ..Eermit Issued if Application is in. Order. The City Building Office, upon the f~llng of an application for a permit, shah e~nmine such plans, specifications and other data nmi the premises upon which it is proposed to erect thc sl~n. If it appears thnt thc pt'~t~Sg~l sttuotu~ iS ill ¢011~ with ali l'~//ent.s Of thi_~ C~apter and hi! other laws and ordinances of the City, t~ permit shall be issued. If the work ~thorizcd under a permit ha~ not been completed within sixty (60) days afar the date of issuance, the permit shall be null and void. 3.523 City Council A__m~roval. Wheu thh Chapter requires City Council approval for a sign, th~ application shall be processed in accordance with the procedural and subsamfive requiren~ms of the New Hop~ Zonini Ordinance for a condltiofa~ use p~mit. 3.5'24 !~es. Fees fo~ the review and processing of sign permit applications shall be i .,nlmsed in accordance with the fee s~hedulc ~abllsh~ by Chapter 14 of the 17- JUL-01-98 lIED t4:23 F~ NO, 4255865' P, 01/22 JENSEN SWANSON & SONDRALL, P.A. Attorntys At l.,aw 8525 EDLNBItOOK CROSS1NC, STL 201 T~LReHON~ (612) 424-8811 · TEL~AX (///2) 493-$193 FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET Please Deliver To: FAX NO,: This transmittal contains.,~_ ~ page, in¢ludLa§ this page;. PLEASE NOTIFY US Ii~h-M~DIATELY AT (~12) 424-8811 IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE THL~ TRANSMITTAL PROPERLY. ~I'IE8E DQCUMENTS AR. J~: RE~PONS£ IN~I'RUCI3ON$: CUonfider¢ial CIFax Your Response rg~at I~Telophone Your Re~po~ase E]Roufine 120ire Written Response EIAI~o Being Sent Hard Copy by Mail EINo N~--d to Respond NOT~S: NCIATED CONSULTANTS COMMUNITY PLANNING DESIGN MARKET RESEARCH MEMORANDUM TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Jeffrey Schaumann / Alan Brixius DATE: 1 July 1998 RE: New Hope - Sign Code FILE NO: 131.00 - 97.19 BACKGROUND This letter forwards the revised copy of the new Sign Code Ordinance. The new Sign Code was developed over the last four months to be more understandable, business friendly and competitive with other communities. Several changes were made within the code, which can be seen in Exhibit B. Attached for your reference: Exhibit A - Draft Sign Ordinance Code Exhibit B - Side-by-side comparison chart ELEMENTS UNIQUE TO THE NEW CODE Several portions of the existing Sign Code have been altered/deleted to allow for clearer understanding. Additionally, some new sections have been added to the Sign Code to remain competitive and create a more business friendly atmosphere. The items which have been altered are listed and briefly described below. The Section numbers of the new code are listed on the left to correlate with both attachments. Refer to the Side-by-Side Comparison Chart to compare language of new and existing codes. Additionally, very minimal changes in wording have not been listed below. 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA 55416 PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 612-595-9837 E-MAIL NaC@ WINTERNET.COM 3.41 Title. Purpose and Intent 3.412 Pumose -"Purpose" is shortened to make it easier to understand. Deleted section - Section 3.421(1) of the existing Sign C~de, "Measured Distance," has been deleted. 3;42 Rules and Definitions 3.421 (1) New section - Within the new section entitled "Zoning Districts," the Sign Code is related to Zoning Ordinance. 3.422 (1) New section -"Satellite Sites" are defined. 3.422 (12) New section - New definition for "Sign Height". 3.43 General Standards 3.431 New section - This section, "Sign Permit," requires a permit for any construction, erection, remodeling, relocation, expansion, or painting other than general maintenance. 3.432 Building and Electrical Codes Applicable - The psf wind pressure requirement is increased from 40 to 80 psf. 3.433 Maintenance of Signs - Made the section easier to read. 3.434 New section - "Sign Location" defines allowable locations for signs. Additionally, this section sets city wide standard setback for all signs of 10 feet, and defines what the traffic visibility triangle for corner lots. 3.435 Illuminated sign restrictions were redrafted. Removal of the hours of operation reference. 3.44 Prohibited Signs 3.441 to 3.447 and 3.450 to 3.451 are rewritten and made clearer. New Section - Sections 3.448 to 3.449 and 3.452 have been added as prohibited signs, which restrict portable signs and signs on trees. 2 3.46 Permitted Signs - Reduced wording to make more readable. 3.461 (1) Residential Building o The minimum numeral size for residential buildings has been reduced from 4 inches to 3 inches. 3.464 Public Convenience and Directional Signs - Open house signs have been limited under Section 3.464 to be erected and maintained no more than one day before and after the open house to which the sign relates. 3.469 (1) Simplified to make more understandable. 3.469 (2) - 3.469 (3) Combined existing sections 3.461 (2) and (3) and reclassified permitted signs by location rather than land use. Under the new code, multiple family, commercial and industrial sites are treated the same. The new condition is that if said buildings have frontage on Highway 169 are allowed more signs/sign area. 3.470 Construction and Remodeling Signs - Simplified language to improve readability and set duration for construction and remodeling signs. 3.47 Residential Districts - Changed existing wording to make the section clearer. 3.473 (2) Monument Signs - Setback removed and a height restriction of 12 feet was added. Reader boards allowed on monument signs. 3.473 (3) New section - Reader boards are defined and allowed as specified within this section. 3.473 (4) Off-Premise Directional Signs - Setback requirement removed and a height restriction of 12 feet added. 3.473 (5) Special Event Signage -"Special Event Signage" to replace 3.463 (2) "Temporary Signs of the existing code. 3.47.4 Multiple Family Residential Signage - Section was rewritten, multiple family signage was expanded from 25 square feet to 100 square feet, and special event signage within the district was permitted. 3 3.475 Home Occupations - Changed section to make it more understandable. 3.48 New section - Permitted signs within the R-O district are specified. 3.49 Commercial and Industrial Zoning District 3.492 (1) Wall Signs - "Wall Signs" were rewritten to make them much simpler and easier to read. 3.492 (2) New Section -"Freestanding Signs" have been added specifying allowable signage for any lot. Deleted section - Existing code section 3.465 (3), "Ground Signs," was removed. 3.492 (4, b) Illuminated Signs - Language for"Illuminated Signs" has been simplified. 3.492 (5) Sign Accessory_ to Gas Sales in Conjunction with Automobile Service Stations or Convenience Stores - Deleted section Section 3.466 (1 - 3) of the existing code has been removed to simplify the new code and make the code more competitive. 3.492 (7) New section -"Reader Boards" are allowed as specified within said section. Across the entire city, the following are set: 30 foot height and 100 square foot area 3.493 (3) New section - "Freestanding Signs" allowed for shopping centers, other multiple occupancies and single occupancy freestanding satellite sites. Refer to section for detail. 3.50 Non-Conforming Signs and Sign Structures 3.503 Compliance or Removal - Simplified section. Deleted section - Section 3.472 (3, a - c), "Amortization," of the existing code has been removed 3.52 New section - "Review Procedures and Informational Requirements" are outlines within said section. Said section specifies requirements for a sign application. pc: Steve Sondrall Doug Sandstad 4 3.40 SIGN CODE 6/30/98 3.41 Title, Purpose and Intent. 3.411 Title. Sections 3.40 through 3.524 shall be known, cited and referred to as the "New Hope Sign Code" except as referred to herein, where it shall be known as the "Sign Code". 3.412 Purpose. This Sign Code is established to protect and promote health, safety, general welfare and order within the City of New Hope through the establishment of a comprehensive and content-neutral series of standards, regulations and procedures governing the type, number, size, structure, location, height, illumination, erection, use and/or display of devices, signs or symbols serving as a visual communication media to persons situated within or upon public rights-of-way or properties within the City of New Hope. The provisions of this Sign Code are intended to encourage creativity, a reasonable degree of freedom of choice, and opportunities for effective communication. These provisions are also intended to reduce confusion and hazards that result from unnecessary and/or indiscriminate use of signage devices. 3.42 Rules and Definitions. 3.421 Rules. The language set forth in the text of this Sign Code shall be interpreted in accordance with the rules of construction prescribed in Chapter 1 except for the following provisions: (1) Zoning Districts. The Sign Code references the various zoning districts of the New Hope Zoning Code, Chapter 4.0. (2) Construction of Words. Whenever a word or term appears in the text of this Sign Code, its meaning shall be as set forth in the definitions in Subsection 3.422. Whenever a word or term appears in the text of this Sign Code which is not specifically defined within the definition section herein, the definition for said word or term, where such exists in the New Hope Zoning Code set forth in Chapter 4 shall apply, otherwise the definitions set forth in Chapter 1 shall apply. 3.422 Definitions. (1) Satellite Site. A freestanding development site within a shopping center lot having the following conditions: (a) The site is not a separate lot. EXHIBIT A - DRAFT SIGN ORDINANCE CODE (b) The site is under common ownership with the shopping center. (c) The site has shared parking and access with the shopping center. (2) Sign. Any writing (including letters, words, or numerals), pictorial representation (including illustrations or decorations), emblem (including devices, symbols, or trademarks), flag, banner, streamer, pennant, string of lights, or display designed to attract the attention of the public, whether it be attached to a structure, painted on, or in any other manner represented on a building or other structure or on the ground. (3) Sign, Advertising. A billboard, poster panel board, painted bulletin board, or other communicative device which is used to advertise products, goods, and/or services which are not exclusively related to the premise on which the sign is located. (4) Sign. Address. A sign communicating street address only, whether written or in numerical form. (5) Sign, Area. That area within the marginal lines created by the sign surface which bears the advertisement or, in the case of messages, figures or symbols attached directly to the part of a building, which is included in the smallest geometric figure which can be made to circumscribe the message, figure or symbol displayed thereon. (6) Sign. Banners and Pennants. Attention getting devices which resemble flags and are of a paper, cloth, or plastic or plastic-like consistency. (7) Sign. Billboard. Any advertising sign having an area of more than three hundred (300) square feet. (8) Sign. Business. Any sign which identifies a business or group of businesses, either retail or wholesale, or any sign which identifies a professional or is used in the identification or promotion of any principal commodity or service, including entertainment, offered or sold upon the premise where such sign is located. (9) Sign. Canopy and Marquee. Any message or identification which is affixed to a canopy or marquee. 2 (10) Sign. Flashing. Any illuminated sign on which the artificial light is not maintained stationary and/or constant in intensity and color at all time when such sign is in use. (11) Sign. Ground. Any sign placed upon, or supported by the ground independently of the main building or structure on the property. Signs on accessory structures shall be considered ground signs. (12) Sign. Height. Height refers to the distance from the ground to the uppermost point on the sign. (13) Sign, Identification. The principal sign identifying the business conducted on the premises. In residential districts, the sign identifying a resident, school, church, or other non-business use. (14) Sign, Illuminated. Any sign which has characters, letters, figures, design or outline illuminated by electric lights or luminous tubes as part of the sign project. : (15) Sign, Logo. Any letter, character, symbol, or abbreviation used to represent an entire word or group of words denoting the name or purpose of any business. For purposes of this Sign Code, a trademark may qualify as a symbol, but only if brand names or other words used therein is a single letter, character or an abbreviation. (16) Sign, Motion. Any sign which revolves, rotates, has any moving parts, or gives the illusion of motion. (17) Sign, Non-Conforming. (a) I, egal. A sign which lawfully existed at the time of the original passage of this Sign Code or amendment thereto but which does not conform with the regulations of this Sign Code, is legal. (b) Illegal. A sign which was constructed after the original passage of this Sign Code or amendments thereto and does not conform with regulations of this Side Code is illegal. (18) Sign. Portable. A sign so designed as to be movable from one location to another and which is not permanently attached to the ground, or structure. (19) Sign, Projecting. Any sign which is affixed to a building and which projects from the building wall a distance greater than twelve (12) inches. 3 (20) i~.ig.B_,~ublic. Signs of a public, non-commercial nature, to include safety signs, danger signs, trespassing signs, traffic signs, signs indicating scenic or historical points of interest, memorial plaques, and the like, when signs are erected by or on order of a public officer or employee in the performance of official duty. (21) Sign, Roof. A roof sign is defined asa sign which is located above the eave or coping line. (22) Sign, Structure. The supports, foundations, uprights, bracing and framework for a sign, including the sign. area. (23) Sign, Temporary. A sign other than a portable sign, that is not intended to be permanently displayed or affixed to the ground or to a building. (24) Sign, Wall. A sign which is affixed to the exterior wall of a building and which does not project more than twelve (12) inches from the surface to which it is attached. (25) Sign. Wall Letters. A sign composed of individual letters which are attached (not painted) separately on a wall surface. (26) Sign, Window. A sign affixed to a window or located inside a window surface legible to the general public. 3.43 General Standards. All signs hereafter painted, constructed, erected, remodeled, relocated, or expanded shall comply with the following standards: 3.431 Sign Permit. A sign may not be constructed, erected, remodeled, relocated, expanded or painted except in cases of routine maintenance without a sign permit. A permit shall not be issued unless the sign and all other signs on the premises of the applicant are in compliance with the regulations of the New Hope Sign Code, Section 3.40, et al. 3.432 Building and Electrical Codes Applicable. All signs shall be wired to conform to Subsection 3.221 (2). Sign structures shall be designed to provide a forty (40) pounds per square foot snow load and a eighty (80) psf wind pressure. 3.433 Maintenance of ~;igns. All signs, including electric wiring, supporting structures, guy wires or chains, shall be properly maintained and kept in a safe condition. A sign or sign structure which is deteriorated, unsafe, defaced, or otherwise altered shall be repaired, repainted, or replaced by the permit holder or property owner on which the sign stands. 4 3.434 Sign Location. (1) Excepting governmental signs, no sign shall be erected or temporarily placed within a street right-of-way or upon public lands, easements or rights-of-way. (2) All signs excepting governmental signs, shall be located on private property. Freestanding signs shall be set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from the nearest lot line. The setback shall be measured from the lot line to that portion of the sign nearest to the property line. (3) On all corner lots, signs shall not be permitted within twenty (20) feet of any corner formed by the intersection of two (2) streets or the rights-of-way of a railway intersecting a street. The twenty (20) feet shall be in the form of a triangle with two sides formed by the property lines and the third side formed by a straight line connecting the two twenty (20) foot points on each side of the corner. A sign may be extended into the triangular area provided that: (a) The clearance above the street grade is more than eight (8) feet. (b) No part of the sign structure encroaches in the triangular area at an elevation less than eight (8) feet above street grade. 3.435 Signs may be illuminated internally or by reflected light provided: (1) Illuminated signs shall be shielded to prevent lights from being directed at oncoming traffic in such brilliance that it impairs the vision of the drive. Such signs shall not interfere with or obscure an official traffic sign or signal. This includes indoor signs which are visible from public streets. (2) Illumination of any sign shall not exceed one (1) foot candle measured at the lot line of the site containing the sign. 3.44 Prohibited Signs. 3.441 Flashing signs, rotating or moving signs, animated signs, signs with moving lights or which create the illusion of movement, except for electronic or electrically controlled reader boards subject to the conditions set forth in Section 3.473 (3) and Section 3.:492 (7). 3.442 Projecting signs as defined under Section 3.422. 3.443 Signs which physically obstruct any required access way or window in such a manner as to create a safety hazard. 5 3.444 Signs located on vacant property except a sign advertising the premises for sale or lease which meets the standards of Section 3.469. 3.445 Signs located in the interior of a building but visible through a window where by reason of its position, size, shape or color it may obstruct, impair, obscure, interfere with the view of, or be confused with any traffic control sign, signal or device, or interfere with, mislead or confuse traffic. 3.446 Signs which are related to a business or service which is not being presently conducted on premises on which the sign is located. 3.447 Business or advertising sign which is painted directly upon a wall surface. 3.448 Portable signs, banners, pennants, ribbons, streamers, strings of light bulbs, spinners, or similar devices are not permitted except as provided in Section 3.492 of this Sign Code. 3.449 Signs that are tacked or posted on trees, fences, utility poles, or other such supports are not permitted, except when attached to an outfield fence of a ballfield and oriented to the playing field and spectator seating. 3.450 Roof signs as defined in Section 3.422. 3.451 Billboard signs as defined in Section 3.422. 3.452 All other signs not expressly permitted by this Sign Code. 3.46 Permitted Signs. The signs identified in Section 3.46 are exempt from permit requirements in all zoning districts. 3.461 Identifiable Address. (1) Residential Building. Every principal building shall be identified with its legal street address in numerical form. The numerals shall be at least inches (3) inches in height, and either contrasting in color from the principal building, made of reflective material or illuminated. The numerals shall be readable from the nearest adjacent roadway serving the premises. Should the building numerals not be visible from the roadway, an address post displaying the identification numerals of the same minimum height shall be placed adjacent to the driveway in such a manner as to be readable from the roadway. 6 (2) Commercial, Industrial and Multiple Family Buildings. Numerals identifying street addresses for commercial and industrial buildings, including multiple family dwellings defined in Section 4.022 (95) of this Code, shall be a minimum of six (6) inches high and shall comply with the other requirements of Sub-section (1) above. All such buildings having multiple street addresses shall be required to identify rear door entrances in the same manner as main entrances. 3.462 Flags and Memorial Signs. Flags or emblems of a national, federal or state government, or memorial signs thereof, displayed on private property. 3.463 Signs Required by Law. Legal notices, address numerals and other signs required to be maintained by law or governmental order, rule or regulations, provided that the content and size of the sign do not exceed the requirements of such law, order, rule or regulation. 3.464 Public Convenience and Directional Signs. Small signs, not exceeding two (2) square feet in area, displayed on private property for the convenience of the public, including directional or identification signs for restrooms, freight entrances, garage and rummage sales, open houses, parking lot signage and the like. Garage and rummage sale signs shall show, clearly imprinted, the name and address of the person erecting the sign, or responsible for the same. Garage and rummage sale signs shall not be erected more than five (5) days before or maintained more than one (1) day after the sale to which the sign relates. Open house signs shall not be erected more than one (1) day before or maintained more than one (1) day after the open house to which the sign relates. 3.465 Political Signs. Signs, not exceeding thirty-two (32) square feet in area, displayed on private property, containing matter which is intended or tends to influence directly or indirectly any voting at any primary, general, municipal, special or school election, including pictures for announcements relative to candidates or campaign advertising. One sign per candidate and issue per lot permitted in addition to other signs on private property in any zoning district. In State general elections, no person shall permit or allow any such sign to be publicly displayed or posted before August 1 or ten (10) days after the State general election to which the sign relates. In special elections, the durational limit shall be ninety (90) days before and ten (10) days after the special election to which the sign relates. Any sign permitted by this section may be used as a non. commercial opinion sign. 3.466 Government Signs. Signs of a duly constituted governmental body including traffic or similar regulatory signs, legal notices and warnings at railroad crossings. 7 3.467 Non-Commercial Opinion Signs. Signs, not exceeding thirty-two (32) square feet in area, displayed on private property, containing information which expresses an opinion or point of view, but does not advertise products, goods, businesses or services. One sign per lot is permitted in any zoning district, however, an illuminated or motion sign may not be used in residential zoning districts as a rron-commercial opinion sign. 3.468 Holiday Signs. Signs or displays which contain or depict a message pertaining to a religious, national, state or local holiday. 3.469 "For Sale" and "For Rent" Signs. "For Sale" and "For Rent" signs shall be permitted subject to the following regulations: (1) Single family homes, twin homes and townhomes may have one (1) sign related to the sale, rent or lease of the dwelling units on the premises. Said sign shall not exceed eight (8) square feet in area. (2) Multiple family, commercial or industrial buildings may have one (1.) sign related to the sale, rent or lease of the building tenant bays or dwellidgs on the premises per street frontage. Except as cited in 3.469 (3) below, said sign shall not exceed seventy-five (75) square feet in area. (3) Multiple family, commercial and industrial buildings having frontage on Highway 169 may have not more than two (2) freestanding or wall sign oriented to the highway. The accumulative total sign area of said sign shall not exceed one hundred fifty (150) square feet in area. 3.470 Construction and Remodelinc~ Signs. One (1) sign, not exceeding thirty-two (32) square feet in area is permitted. Two (2) signs are permitted on corner lots, one (1) facing each street. Said signs shall not be erected prior to the issuance of a building permit and must be removed no more than seven (7) days after final inspection. 3.47 Residential Districts. Signs are accessory to permitted and conditional uses within New Hope's residential zoning districts. The following signs are permitted within the R-l, R-2, R-3, R-4 and R-5 Zoning Districts; 3.471 Al! signs outlined in Section 3.46 of this Ordinance. 3.472 Nameplate Signs. Nameplate signs are intended for the display of the name and/or address of the primary use on the property where the sign is located. A nameplate sign shall be permitted on each property containing a primary use, provided that the surface area does not exceed two (2) square feet. 8 3.473 Signs accessory to churches, schools, non-profit institutions and governmental'~'''' buildings allowed within residential zoning districts. (1) Wall Signs. Not more than two (2) signs shall be permitted on the front wall of any church, school, non-profit institution or government building. The total area of such sign or signs shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the area of the front face (including doors and windows) of the church, school, non-profit institution or government building, provided that the combined total area of both signs shall not exceed two hundred fifty (250) square feet. (2) Monument Signs. For each principal building on a lot, there shall be not more than one (1) freestanding monument sign except on a corner lot where tow (2) signs, one facing each street, shall be permitted. No such signs shall exceed seventy-five (75) square feet in area. Monument signs may not exceed twelve (12) feet in height. The monument sign may include a reader board as part of the allowable sign area. (3) Reader Boards. (a) The reader board may be a wall, freestanding, or monument sign. The reader board sign area shall count as part of the total sign area allowed within a respective district. (b) The reader board area shall not exceed more than fifty (50) percent of the wall, or monument sign area erected. (c) One (1) reader board per premise. (d) The reader board shall display a given copy or graphic image for a minimum of three (3) seconds within the reader board frame. (4) Off-Premise Directional Signs. Off-premise directional signs shall be limited to situations where access is confusing and traffic safety may be jeopardized or traffic could be inappropriately routed through residential streets.. The size of the sign shall not exceed seventy-five (75) square feet in area or twelve (12) feet in height. The off-premise sign shall not interfere with uses of the lot on which its sign is located. (5) Special Event Signage. Subject to the provisions of Section 3.492(6). 3.474 Multiple Family Residential Signage. The signs accessory to multiple family residential buildings and complexes will be permitted as follows: 9 (1) Area Identification. For each multiple family development there shall be permitted one (1) area identification sign or two (2) signs on corner lots, each sign facing a separate street. The area identification signs shall not exceed one hundred (100) square feet in area. freestanding movement signs shall not exceed twelve (12) feet in height and shall be located at the entrance of the lot. (2) Directional/Information Signs. Within a multiple family development directional/information signs will be permitted to direct traffic within the site and provide information pertaining to the building's ownership, management and operation. Individual directional signage may not exceed nine (9) feet in area. No illumination of the sign is permitted other than the general house illumination. (3) Special event signage. Subject to the provisions of Section 3.492 (6). 3.475 Home Occupations A residential unit with an approved home occupation requiring customer or client visits to the home is allowed one identification sign for the. home occupation. Said sign shall not exceed two square feet in size and be no higher than six (6) feet above grade. 3.48 Residential Office District. Signs are accessory to permitted and conditional uses in the R- O Zoning District. The following signs are permitted within the R-O Zoning District: 3.481 All signs outlined in Section 3.46 of this Ordinance. 3.482 Residential Signs. All signs outlined in Section 3.47 of this Ordinance. 3.483 Business Signs. Business signs as regulated in Section 3.49. 3.49 Commercial and Industrial Zoning District. Signs are accessory to permitted and conditional uses in the B-l, B-2, B-3, B-4, I-1 and I-2 Zoning Districts. Only the following signs are permitted in these zoning districts, unless otherwise specifically provided for in this section. 3.491 All signs outlined in Section 3.46 of this Code. 3.492 Ir~dividual Business Establishment Signs. Signs accessory to a single occupancy business or industry shall comply with the following regulations: (1) Wall Signs. 10 (a) Not more than two (2) wall signs per building. ~-'~' (b) The total area of all wall signs shall comply with the following standards: Fifteen (15) percent of the front face of the principal building in a commercial zoning district or an industrial zoning district or two hundred fifty (250) square feet, whichever is less. (2) Freestanding Signs. Not more than one (1) freestanding sign shall be permitted on any lot. (a) Freestanding signs shall not exceed one hundred (100) square feet in area. (b) Freestanding signs shall not exceed thirty (30) feet in height. (3) Awning or Canopy Signs. Letters may be painted or otherwise affixed to any permissible awning or canopy as follows: (a) Location. Signs shall be limited to one (1) sign per canopy ~:ascia fronting onto a street. (b) Height. the canopy sign shall not project above or below the physical dimensions of the awnings or canopy fascia. (c) Use. Signs shall only denote the name and address of the business conducted therein and/or a product or products produced or sold or service rendered therein. (d) Maximum $ignage. Awning and canopy signage shall not exceed sixteen (16) square feet per sign. Awning and canopy sign shall be included in calculating the maximum sign area of the permissible wall sign. (4) Window Signs. (a) Maximum Window Area. In no event shall the size of the interior window signage exceed thirty-three (33) percent of the window area of : the one side of the building upon which said signs shall be displayed. (b) Illuminated Signs. An interior window sign may be illuminated. 11 (c) Temporary Advertising Signs. Advertising signs that are intended for temporary display only, may be affixed to a window provided that the sign area conforms with the formula allowance outlined in this subsection. The allowable sign area for a window advertising sign is in addition to the total permitted wall sign area as regulated in Section 3.492 (1). Window signs other than for advertising, such as business identification, or any sign which is permanently affixed to a window, shall constitute a dual purpose sign and thus be regulated under both the above and the provisions of Section 3.492 (1). (5) Signs Accessory to Gas Sales in Conjunction with Automobile Service~ Stations or Convenience Stores. The following signs accessory to automobile service stations and convenience stores with gas sales are permitted in addition to the signs permitted under Subsection 3.492. (a) Gasoline and Price Sign. One (1) sign (single or double faced) per frontage on a public street, suitable for apprising persons of th.e total sale price per gallon. The area of such price sign shall not exceed sixteen (16) square feet on either side. Each such sign shall be affixed to the standard of a ground sign or light fixture, and shall state the total price. No sign posting an incomplete price or less than the total sales price is permitted. (b) Informational Signage. Signs denoting operation instructions associated with self service gas facilities including gas pump, air supply and car washes are exempt from the maximum sign area standards of Section 3.49 of this Code. (6) Banners, Pennants, Streamers, Strings of Lights. Searchlights. Portable signs, banners, pennants, streamers, strings of lights, search lights or any other temporary sign shall be permissible only for commercial or industrial special or promotional events of a limited duration by permit acquired from the City pursuant to the following conditions: (a) Special or Promotional Events. Special or promotional events shall mean events such as grand openings, management or ownership changes, or periodic sales or similar events. (b) Permit A.~_~lication. Permits for any temporary sign pursuant to this section shall be issued only to owners or tenants of commercial or industrial property. Applications must be submitted to the City Building Official on a form approved by the City a minimum of fourteen (14) 12 days prior to the special or promotional event when the signs will be used. (c) Permit Duration. All permits issued hereunder shall be for a maximum period of fourteen (14) days and shall expire automatically after said period. Upon the permit expiration, the applicant shall cease to display any and all signs permitted 'by the permit unless the applicant has ' obtained a new permit for said signage. (d) Limitation on Permits. No more than three (3) permits yearly shall be issued to any one (1) property or location. If two (2) permits are obtained in succession by any applicant per subsection (b) above, both permits shall be counted for the purpose of determining the yearly limitations of this subsection. (e) Sign Locations. All special or promotional signs must be located on the premises where the event is occurring. Signage shall not exceed an amount equivalent to the permitted signage area allowed the applicant's business in the respective zoning district. (f) Grand Openings. Notwithstanding the duration provisions of Subsection (b) above, grand opening signage may be for a maximum period of thirty (30) days. (g) Exception. Temporary signs permitted by Section 3.46 of this Code shall be exempt from the requirements of this section. (h) Non-compliance. Any violation of the conditions of this section will result in a forfeiture for additional sign permits for the property under this section for a period of twelve (12) months from the date of the violation, the permit forfeiture shall be in addition to any other penalties for code violations allowed by this Code. (7) Reader Boards. (a) The reader board may be a wall, freestanding, or monument sign. The reader board sign area shall count as part of the total sign area allowed within a respective district. (b) The reader board area shall not exceed more than fifty (50) percent of the wall, freestanding, or monument sign area erected. (c) One (1) reader board per premise. 13 (d) The reader board shall display a given copy or graphic image for a minimum of three (3) seconds within the reader board frame. 3.493 Signs Accessory to Multiple Occupancy Business and Industrial Uses, Including Shopping Centers. When a single principal building is devoted to two (2) or more businesses or industrial uses, a comprehensive sign plan for the entire building or shopping center shall be submitted and shall include the information required by paragraph (1) to permit a determination as to whether or not the plan is consistent with paragraphs (2) through (4) of this sub-section. No permit shall be issued for an individual use except upon a determination that it is consistent with a previously or concurrently approved comprehensive sign plan. The effect of said comprehensive sign plan is to allow and require the owner of multiple occupancy structures to determine the specific individual sign requirements for the tenants of his building. As sign locations and size, etc. may be of some significant importance in lease arrangements between owner and tenant, it is the City's intention to establish general requirements for the overall building only, thus providing a building owner with both the flexibility and responsibility to deal with his individual tenants on their specific sign needs. (1) Comprehensive Sign Plan Information. The applicant shall prepare a written and graphic comprehensive signage plan for submission to the City. Said plan shall include, but not be limited to the following information: (a) Sign location (both wall signs and freestanding signs) (b) Sign area (c) Sign height (d) Scaled building elevations (e) Scaled floor plan that outlines tenant bays (f) Identification of sign design (h) Sign construction drawings (sections) (i) The Council, Planning Commission and City Staff may request additional information from the applicant concerning the application or may retain expert opinions at the expense of the City, or may require as a condition of proceeding with its consideration that the. applicant furnish expert opinion and data at the expense of the applicant. (2) Wall Signs. (a) Maximum Area. The total allowable sign area for a multiple occupancy structure shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the combined wall surfaces on walls which abut streets in business or industrial zoning districts. No individual tenant identification sign may exceed one hundred (100) square feet in area. 14 (b) Building Identification. No multiple occupancy structure may display more than two (2) overall building identification signs. (c) Tenant Identification Signs. Individual tenants located within multiple occupancy structures shall be permitted to display individual identification signs, if they have separate exterior entrances to their use or they are tenants in a shopping center, in which case, not more than one sign may be displayed. A tenant occupying a corner location fronting two (2) streets may display identification signs to both street frontages. (d) Delivery Signs. A delivery sign or signs not exceeding nine (9) square feet in area may be located on the side or rear wall of the structure. (3) Freestanding Sign. (a) Shopoing Centers. Shopping centers containing more than four (4) separate and distinct occupancies may erect one (1) freestanding sign per street frontage, not to exceed two (2) freestanding shopping center signs per site, (single or double faced). Said ground signs may not exceed two hundred (200) square feet in area, nor thirty (30) feet in height. In lieu of multiple freestanding signs, the shopping center may have a single freestanding sign not to exceed three hundred (300) square feet in area nor thirty (30) feet in height. (b) Reader boards in accordance with Section 3.492 (7) of this Code shall also be allowed on the freestanding sign. (c) Other Multiple Occupancies. Multiple occupancy structures other than shopping centers, or shopping centers having four or less separate and distinct occupancies, may erect ground signs in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.492 and may identify each separate and distinct occupancy on said ground sign. : (d) Single Occupancy Freestanding Satellite Sites. Not more than one (1) freestanding sign shall be permitted per satellite site. (1) Freestanding signs shall not exceed one hundred (100) square feet in area. 15 (2) Freestanding signs shall not exceed thirty (30) feet in height. (4) Fee, ¢omprehensiv. e Sign Plan Review. When a comprehensive sign plan review is required by this section, the applicant shall pay a review fee in addition to a permit fees set forth in Chapter 14 of this Code. 3.50 Non-Conforming Signs and Sign Structures. Signs and sign structures found to be non- conforming with the provisions of this Code as of December 31, 1998 shall be subject to the following provisions: 3.501 Prohibitions. A non-conforming sign may not be: (1) Changed to another non-conforming sign. (2) Structurally altered except to bring into compliance with the provisions of this Sign Code. (3) Expanded. (4) Re-established after its removal for thirty (30) days. (5) Re-established after damage of more than fifty (50) percent of sign replacement cost except to bring into compliance. 3.502 Maintenance. Normal maintenance, such as painting, repairing without removal, cleaning, maintaining, electrical wiring and appurtenances on site and changing or repairing fasteners or guy wires or chains shall be permitted on any lawful non- conforming sign. 3.503 Compliance or Removal. Any legal non-conforming sign under this Code shall be brought into compliance or removed within five (5) years of December 31, 1998. 3.51 Sign Variance.. Where there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this section, the City Council has the power to vary the requirements of this section in harmony with the general purpose and intent hereof, so that the public health, safety and general welfare may be secured and substantial justice done. When considering a variance, the City Council shall make a finding of fact and grant approval based upon the following conditions: 16 3.511 Uniaue Conditions. That the conditions involved are unique to the particular parcel of land or use involved. 3.512 Variation Purpose. That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the business ir~volved. 3.513 Cause of Hardship. That the alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Sign Code and has not been created by any persons presently having an interest in the parcel. 3.514 Effect of Variance. That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements to the neighborhood. 3.515 Impairment of Light and Air. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or interfere with the function of the police and fire departments of the City. 3.52 Review Procedures and Informational Requirements. 3.521 Sign A.polication. The Applicant must complete and submit a Sign Permit Application for approval by the City Council. 3.522 Permit Issued if Application is in Order. The City Building Official, upon the filing of an application for a permit, shall examine such plans, specifications and other data and the premises upon which it is proposed to erect the sign. If it appears that the proposed structure is in compliance with all requirements of this Chapter and all other laws and ordinances of the City, the permit shall be issued. If the work authorized under a permit has not been completed within sixty (60) days after the date of issuance, the permit shall be null and void. 3.523 City Council Approval. VVhen this Chapter requires City Council approval for a sign, the application shall be processed in accordance with the procedural and substantive requirements of the New Hope Zoning Ordinance for a conditional use permit. 3.524 Fees, Fees for the review and processing of sign permit applications shall be imPosed in accordance with the fee schedule established by Chapter 14 of the City Code. 17 J · COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN NIARKET RESEARCH MEMORANDUM TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Bob Kirmis / Alan Brixius DATE: 6 January 1998 RE: New Hope - Sign Ordinance FILE NO: 131.00 - 97.19 .- At your request, we have conducted a review of the City's Sign Ordinance and identified areas where some modifications may be desired. Additionally, we have attached sign ordinances utilized by the Cities of Brooklyn Center, Crystal and Plymouth for reference. SIGN ORDINANCE REVIEW Purpose Statement (Section 3.412). This section should be expanded to stipulate an additional ordinance objective of preserving and promoting civic beauty. Definitions (Section 3.422). This section should be expanded to include definitions for the following terms: Alteration Menu Board Area Identification Sign Non-Profit Organization Awning Parapet Bench Sign Reader Board Building Facade Real Estate Sign Campaign Sign Roof Line Construction Sign Sign Height Directional Sign Sign Structure Directory Sign Street Frontage Freestanding Sign Wall Graphics Informational Sign Institutional Sign Integral Sign 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 I ~ PHONE ~5 I g-SCJS-963~5 FAX ~ I ~-595-9837 Permit Exceptions (Section 3.43). Consideration should be given to adding the following sign types as being allowed without a permit (subject to maximum height area requirements): On-Premise Directional Signs Informational Signs Identification Signs Integral Signs Construction Signs Individual Property Sale, Lease or Rental Signs Rummage Sale Signs OSHA signs Window Signs Prohibited Signs. For convenience purposes, consideration should be given to specifically listing those signs which are expressly prohibited within the City. These typically include motion/flashing signs, projecting signs, roof signs, and expired business signs. Additionally, consideration should be given whether billboards should continue t~. be allowed in the City. Ordinance Format. The New Hope Ordinance is organized by sign type. To improve user convenience, consideration should be given to organizing the ordinance such that various sign types are referred by zoning district. Within such a framework, the reader of the ordinance would be provided a comprehensive list of signs which are allowed in a particular zoning district. Off-Premise Real Estate Signs. Unlike the City of New Hope, some cities allow the erection of temporary off-premise real estate signs. The desirability of such sign allowance in New Hope and associated precedent issues should be subject to comment and recommendation by the Planning Commission and a determination by the City Council. Gas Sales Signs (Section 3.466). This section of the New Hope Sign Ordinance includes several provisions applicable to automobile service stations. Included in such provisions are regulations pertaining to the placement of oil and tire racks. These provisions may be more appropriately listed as conditional use permit conditions in the district sections of the ordinance. Deliver Signs (Section 3.467.3.d). The New Hope Sign Ordinance specifically regulates "delivery signs". Such sign type is not, however, provided a definition. This sign type should likely be classified as an informational sign and regulated as such. 2 Advertising Signs. The New Hope ordinance allows the erection of advertising signs (billboards) within General Business Districts. As part of the Sign Ordinance update, discussion should take place as to the desirability of the continued allowance of such sign type. Murals. The City of New Hope prohibits murals (or painted wall signs). Likewise, pained wall signs are prohibited in the Cities of Brooklyn Center, Crystal and Plymouth. Business Identification Signs. The following is a comparative summary of business identification sign requirements utilized by the City of New Hope and the neighboring cities of Brooklyn Center, Crystal and Plymouth. City Sign Area Sign Height Brooklyn Center Proportionate to building floor area ranges Proportionate to building from 90 square feet to 250 square feet floor area ranges from 24 feet to 32 feet Crystal Along principal artedai - 200 feet 25 feet Along minor arterial/major collector-150 feet 25 feet Along collector - 100 feet 25 feet Along local street - 50 feet 25 feet Plymouth 96 feet 36 feet New Hope Along collector - 40 square feet 15 feet Along minor artedal - 75 square feet 20 feet Along principal artedal - 200 square feet 30 feet It is anticipated that this material will be discussed in a preliminary fashion on 6 January, please call if you have any questions, 3 OMMUNITY' I""/ANNIHO - DE:SION - MARK~'T Iql-~,a'AiqCH MEMORANDUM TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Alan Bdxius DATE: 14 January 1998 RE: New Hope - Sign Ordinance Update FILE NO: 131.00 - 97.19 BACKGROUND t The City wishes to ul~ate its Sign Ordinance in an effort to ecttieve the following objectives: 1. Simplify the ordinance to make it user friendly, easy to understand and simpler to enforce. 2. Make the Sign Ordinance business friendly. The ordinance update will attempt to provide New Hope buai .ne~s with Ngnage opportunities that would be equal to competitive loc~orm in neighboring eries. 3. 'rhe ordinance update i~, also intended to con'ect some functional flaws that exists in the current ordirlar~ ~. As a slading point in the sign ordinance update, staff has cxxtdu~ a preliminary review of the New ~Hppe Sign Ordinance to Identify some of ~ areas where modifications may be desired. Addlflormlly, we have attached sign ordlrmnce~ utilized by the Cities of Brooklyn Center, Crystal and Plymouth for reference. The fitml imction of the report outlines a proces~ for ll-m sign ordirmrt~ review. This ~ is open for discussion and adjustment. WAYZATA immIouLE. VARD, Sl;ITF' 555 ST. P~ONE ~ I ~.'5-~.5'~; FAX 1~SUE8 Ordinance Format: The New Hope Sign Ordinance is organized by sign type. This format is confu~ing and diffi~ul~ ~o u~e. To improve user convenience, consideration should be given to organizing the ordinance such that various sign types are referred by zoning district. Within such a framework, the reader of the ordinance would be provided a comprehensive list of signs which are allowed in a particular zoning district. The following format outline may be considered in uprising the sign ordinance: 1. Purpose and intent 2. Definition of Sign Ordinance terms 3. General sign regulations and restrictions 4. Prohibited signs 5. Signs permitted in all zoning districts 6. Residential district signs 7. Business district signs 8. Industrial district signs 9. Nonconforming signs 10. Administration and enforcement Contm~ Neutral. To simplify the sign ordinance, staff is strongly recommending the sign ordinance regulate sign size, location and height and limit restriction relating to sign content. Pmpaee ~tatement. The New Hope sign ordinance purpose statement should emphasize the desire to be business friendly, to encourage cm~dvity, and provide effective business communication. Deflnition~. The definitions a~touid be expanded to provide a clear understanding of ordinance terrrm Sign Permit Exgeptione, Considm~on should be given to adding the following sign type~ as being allowed wittmut a permit (subject to maximum Mze standards: On-Pmmi~e Di~ Signs OSHA Signs InformaUon 81gm Window 8iOns Identifi~ $ign~ Imi $igrm Cormtruction 8iGrm Individual ~ 8~ie, ~ or Rental Signs Rurrm'm~ Sele 2 Prohibited Sigrm. For convenience purposes, consideration should be given to specifically listing those sigrm which are expressly prohibited within the City. These may typically include projecting signs, roof signs, and expired business signs. Additionally, consideration should be given whether billboards should continue to be allowed in the City. Busine~ lden;~Hcation ~lgrm. The following is a comparative summary of business identification sign requir~ utilized by the City of New Hope and the neighboring cities of Brooklyn Center, Crystal and Plymouth. It is anticipated that New Hope sign standards will be adjusted to be competitive with standards. City Freestanding Sign Ama Free~anding ~ign Height Brooklyn CenterProportionate to building flo~' ama ranges Proportionate to building from 90 square feet to 250 square feet floor area ranges from 24 flst to 32 feet Crystal Along principal arterial - 200 feet 25 feet Along minor mia'iai/major collector-150 feet 25 feet Along collector - 100 feet 25 feet Along Ioc~J Mrest - 50 feet 25 rim Plymouth 96 feet 36 feet New Hope Along collectm'- 40 square feet 18 feet Along minor arte, lal - 75 square feet 20 feet Along prlndp.l arterl," - 200 aquare feet 30 feet Other topics to be reviewed in conjunction with the Mgn ordinance update will include: 1. Real estate signs 2. Advertising sign (billboer¢t) 3. Wall gmphlc/mumle 4. Off. premise sigrm 5. Compml'mns*we sign plans requiwnanm 6. $ignage for multiple tenant building~ If the goals and Issues for updaflr~ the sign om'inance are CXXlfl~ by Code~ and Standards Committee, Maff would proceed with sign ordJnart~e update in the following steps: 3 1. Prepare a matrix comparing the New Hope Sign Ordinance with surrounding communities. 2. Establish a working ordinance format. 3. Begin section by section review of the existing ordinance by staff to outline issues and suggested changes. 4. Present summary of the work to Codes and Standards Committee for review and comments. 5. Prepare draft ordinance including Codes and Standards Committee comments. 6. Present the draft ordinance the Codes and Standan$~ Committee, Planning Commission and City Council. 7. Finalize ordinance pc: Steve Sondrall Doug Sandstad 4 NO - DE:-~ION - MAiqKieT RE:$E:AIRCH ~ MEMORANDUM TO: Kirk MoDonald FROM: Alan Brixiua DATE: 6 February 1998 RE: New Hope sign Ordinance FILE NO: 131.00 - 97.19 BACKGROUND We have examined the New Hope Sign On:linan¢~ in comparison with ~ign regulations from Plymouth, Crystal and Brooklyn Center and offer lhe following ~uggestions for updating the New Hope Sign Code. 18SUE8 AND ANALYSI8 1. Purpoae. This .e~ion of the New Hope Sign Ordinance should be revised to include mferenc~ to the following objective, busine.~ friendliness, creativity and provide effective busine.~ chang~ in the balance of the text. 3. ~ ~ 81andar~. The general .ign pro~.' ior~ within eae~ of the v~ou. ordinence~ are very ~imilar, addrea~ng the following topic:a: a. Sign illumination b. Sign con~n.~ction (building/electrical oode) c. Signs may not obatnx:t required building openings 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUle PARK. MINNESOTA 554.1 6 PHONE 6 I 2-595-9636 FAX 6 I 2-59B-ge:~? ~:-MAIL. NACOWINTERNET.COM ~-lc~:3~ ~0:24 NRC d. Signs may not interfere with traffic with regard to color, language, or illumination. e. Prohibition of signs in public rig~-way. f. Removal of ol~solete or deteriorated signs. g. No signs on trees, fences, or utility polas. h. Sign maintenance. 4. Prohibited Signs. The various sign codes generally identified the following prohibited signs: a. Signs shaped aa traffic signs. b. Flashing signs. Generally electronic reader board when allowed were distinguished from flashing signs. c. Roof sign. d. Temporary or special event sign unless special event sign permit was approved. ®. Sign painted on building walls. f. Sign painted on commercial vehicles (Brooklyn Center). g. Signs which rotate or revolve (Plymouth). : h. Off-premise advertising sign~ (billboards). 5. Signs allowed without pem~ a. Public signs and govemnmntai sign~. b. Residential identification signs (address signs). c. Integral signs. d. Political campaign signs. e. Building renovation signs. f. Holiday signs. g. Flags. h. Public corrvenlen~ signs on prNate property, Including directional signs, restroom ~igns, garage sales, freight entrance~ and alike. Noncommercial opinion signs (New Hope and Plymouth). Cotmsy benches Ik~nsed by me C~y (~x,~ Center). k. TenLoora~ real estate signs. I. For.ale or lease signs. 2 COMPARISON SIZE8 OF PEi~I~I'n'ED GIGN8 (SQUARE FEET) ~esid~ I~n~n 2 4' 4 2 Public ~veni~ Signs 2 ~2 ~6 B P~I Sig~ 32 32 8 16 N~mme~ Opines Sig~ ~ 32 - 6 ~ns~o~e~on P~n 25 ~ 32 3~20 Through our review, we should determine if our sign areas should be more tS. Residential District. The residential zoning dia~ict may incJude the following:' a. Home add~~late signs. We may ~ to place these signs in the previously mentioned signs without permits section. b. Residential area identifigaflon signs. The~ signs may Identify either a rseidentiai subdivision or a multiple family apartment complex. c. Home oocupetion signs. d. Church/~:hool identification sigrm. 7. Commemlai and Iil¢lgetrlal Za~l~ District. T?tese zoning districts may be Single ~ ~iidingn (1) Wail ~gnage. r,znber, size. ~ (2) Free ~alnding signage number, size, Ioc~tion (3) A~ming sigr~ (4) Window signage _(S)Smc~,t event ~en, (e) Reeder board, 3 b. Multiple tenant building (1) Building identification (a) Wall signs, number, size, location (b) Free ~tanding signs, number, size, location (2) Tenant signage (a) Wall signs, number, size, location (b) Free standing signs, number size, location (c) Awnings (3) Other $ignage (a) Window $ignage (b) Special event signage Reader boards (4) Comprehensive sign plan c. Gas sales facilities (1) Wall signage (2) Canopy signage (3) Free standing signage (4) Gas pdce and pump operation signage (5) Other miscellaneous advertising The attached matrix of sign requYemen~ should allow the City to choose ~ign dimensions that will be competitive with adjoining communities. pc: Doug 8andstad Steve $ondrali 4 ~ REGULATIOId COMPAI~8ON WALL 81GN8 FREESTANDING I PYLON 81GN8 Mull Family Red- CommemJ,; Industflal [Nstrict, Multi Family ReM- Commercial Industrial DJstdcb Mi I:X~iGIJ Disld(~ dent~ Districts Dlslrict, Umdlm~ Height ....... < 36 units - IdA 24 fee( to 32 feet 24 feet to 32 feet · 36 units - 10 feet depending on depend~ on building floor area buRding tloor area : Maximum Nee One pet bulkllng- One on #ch wall, One on each wal, < 38 units - go to 250 square 90 to 250 square t0 mluare feet 15% of area of 15% of area of proNblted feet depending on feet depending on M aupporlJng Ihe waft sul~pmlk~ IM > 36 units - 38 build'rog Itoor areabuldino floor.arM sion Illin ,quire ~1~ t ml: Mmdrnum Halghl ~ - .... Not referenced 25 feet 25 feel Mmdmum Am~ O~e per building - Mmdmum 2 sign-, Mmdmum 2 ~ One per building, Prindpal mlerisls - ~ mledals - 12 sq~mm reM* per vMl' 10%o1' per.MI, 10% M 12 ~lU.m feet* 200sf 200 al' lie M wi,il area ofwal Minor artmJM/ Minor arlerlal/ soppMIk~ ~e ,ulq)orlkNI Ihe major oole~or - mnjor coleGtor - signs slgnl 150 ,f 150 ,f Colledor-lO0 .f Cokctor-100 af Local - 50 M I.L°cal - 50 .f New Holm: Maximum Height ::= ~ ~ Not referenced Collector- 15 ft Collector - 15 It Minor arterial-20 ftMinor aftmi.l-20 fl Principal mterial - PrincJpal mledal - 3Oft 30 tt , , Maxknm~ Ama One per ~,eet Two dgns per Two sign~ per One per street Two signs per lot Two signs per lot frontage, 25 front wall, t5% af front wall, 10% M fronlage, 25 Collector- 40 sf Collector - 40 sf squamfeM* meaoftirontwall, m'ea of front wall ~luarefeM* Minorarterlal-75sf MinorartMial.75sf nM to exceed 250 not to exceed 250' ... Principal arterial. Principal arterial - ,. ?am feet square feet 200 sf 200 ,f rtl SIGN REGULATION COMPAI~8ON Maximum Height ~ ~ ~ Not referenced 36 feet 36 fee~ Idmdmum Are~ Two ~ 20% of ~ of 5% of area of wall Two sigfts, 96 square feet 96,square feet squme feet rolM* ~ ~ .~tadmd, not to squm'e feet total* exceed ~ sqLmre ~ · N /.~.NNtN(3 - DII'$1(3N M~,iqKi~,T MEMORANDUM TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Alan Brixius DATE: 19 March 1998 RE: New Hope Sign Ordinance FILE NO: 131,00 - 97.19 BACKGROUND We have examined the New Hope Sign Ordinance in comparison with sign regulations from Plymouth, Crystal and Brooklyn Center. The attached draft ordinance is being presented in a rough form as a starting point for review and comment. We have tried to simplify the Ordinance format and response to outstanding issues. The following items should be discussed pertinent to this first draft: 1. Uniform sign setback 2. Reader boards - electronic 3. Billboards 4. Standard height for commercial freestanding signs 5. Real estate signs 6. Sign area requirements 7. Shopping center signage 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SUITE 555 ST. lOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA 554 I 6 PHONE 6 1 2-595-9636 FAX 6 I 2-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC~ WINTERNET.COM I ~ ¢OHHUNITY laI,.ANNINO Og..,$1ON M,kl~KtrT ~trSEA~CH MEMORANDUM' TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Alan Brixius DATE: 17 April 1998 RE: New Hope - Sign Code FILE NO: 131.00 - 97.19 In preparation for the Apdl 22nd Code and Standards meeting, the following items have been provided pertaining to the Sign Code update: 1. April 16, 1998 draft Sign Code that includes staff suggested revisions. 2. A side-by-side ordinance comparison of the existing code with the new draft code. It should be noted that we are reformatting the new Sign Code. As such, the section numbers in the code comparison do not always align. The draft ordinance is still in a preliminary form pending further discussion on the following items: 1. Off-premise signage, billboard, directional s. ignage. Does the City wish to accommodate this type of signage? 2. Murals, sign painted on walls. We are revisiting this issue and looking at other community codes. .3. Commercial vehicle signage. 4. Reader board language has been added to the new code. 5. The new code did not address remodeling signs or construction .signs - this should be added. 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SUITE 55.~ ST LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA 554 PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 612-595-9637 E.MAiL NAC~ WINTERNET COM 6. Special event signage for school and churches should define a time period for this '~-~ type of signage. 7. We should discuss portable and temporary signage associated with gas stations. 8. The general standards should be expanded to define how sign area and sign height will be measured. 9. Shopping center freestanding signs have not been modified pending the outcome of the Winnetka Center Shopping Center sign request. 10. The new Sign Code should include a sign permit section that outlines the information requirements and review procedures for sign permits. CONCLUSION The new~gn Code is attempting to simplify the Sign Code through improved formats and more community-wide general standards related to sign setbacks, sign area, and sign height. Through further discussions, the draft code can be further refined to meet the City's needs. pc: Steve Sondrall Doug Sandstad 2 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS COMMUNITY ~LANNING - DESIGN MARKET RESEARCH MEMORANDUM TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Alan Brixius DATE: 14 May 1998 RE: New Hope - Sign Ordinance Update : FILE NO.: 131.00 - 97.19 At the last Codes and Standards meeting, the Committee undertook a preliminary review of the proposed Sign Ordinance update. The following is a summary of issues that required further attention. 1. Off-Premise Signage In discussion of off-premise signage, the Code and Standards Committee did not want to provide for billboard advertising signage. The Committee did want to make some provision for off-premise directional signage. The following language is offered to accommodate this type of signage on a limited basis. Section 3.473. Signs accessory to churches, schools, non-profit institutions and governmental buildings allowed within residential zoning districts. (5) Off-Premise Directional Signs shall be limited to situations where access is confusing and traffic safety may be jeopardized or traffic could be inappropriately routed through residential streets. The size of the sign shall not exceed seventy-five (75) feet in area or twelve feet in height. The off- premise sign shall not interfere with uses of the lot on which its sign is located. 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 55~5 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 5541 6 PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 612-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC~WINTERNET.COM 2. Murals The Committee members expressed differing views on the acceptability of wall murals. Currently, as the Sign Ordir~ance is written, wall murals are not permitted. The Codes and Standards Committee asked us to survey various communities to determine how they deal with murals. We offer the following summaries of our survey. Excelsior - City Manager The city does not consider murals to be signs per their definition. There is no permit requirement for the creation of a mural in the city. If a mural contains a feature that brings it under the authority of the city sign ordinance, a remedy is determined by council, usually that the pertinent feature be removed from the mural. There are no regulations governing the placement of murals in residential areas. Signs are regulated by permit on a situation by situation basis. Plymouth - City Planner -. No pictorial representations of any kind are allowed within the city. The city does not differentiate between signs and murals. This regulation has never been a problem. Columbia Heights -Zoning Officer City zoning ordinance does not address murals specifically. Signs are not permitted to be painted on walls. There are no murals within the city as far as source knows. No one to his knowledge has ever requested permission or information on murals in the city. Brooklyn Center -Zoning Officer Signs, defined as attention attracting devices, are not allowed to be painted directly on walls. Murals are generally considered art. There is no permit process for murals, specifically, or to paint a building, generally. The city's view is that if art becomes such as attention attracting device that problems arise, such as traffic halting, then the city would use sign ordinance definitions to regulate. Present system is very subjective. If someone were to object to a particular mural the city would investigate, using the sign ordinance as a guide. Graffiti is not allowed but the zoning officer is aware that "urban art' might be a consideration in that instance. The city basically tries to stay out of this type of regulation. Cr~stal - City Planner Definition of a sign excludes murals non-commercial in nature. Complaints are addressed by refen'ing to the sign ordinance. If the mural does not conflict with the ordinance, a complainant may take civil action. But it is difficult to prove that harm has been done, which is the requirement to prevail in a judgement of this type. The city hopes to review its sign ordinance in the future. St. Paul - License Division Murals are ignored unless they are definitely advertising, based on sign ordinance. Murals are considered art. Graffiti is not considered art. Robbinsdale, Community Development One mural exists in the downtown area; an historic pictorial representation of the city. "Some didn't like it, one council member was hesitant, but democracy rules" Creator went before city finance committee to secure funding but has since gaine~ the necessary funding from the community. Murals are regulated by oveHay district architectural guidelines and are sanctioned by the city council on a case by case basis, approved by conditional use permits.. But only for downtown, not residential district. Murals are considered signs, and are likely to be approved if they further a civic cause. After talking with us, the City representative said that in his opinion the sign ordinance should be revamped based on the fact that some ambiguity exists in defining signs and murals. Minneapolis, Sign Inspector Murals are regulated in zoning ordinance per land use districts. Allowed by conditional use permit in downtown areas. In the absence of product logo and service advertising murals are art. Mr. Poor has no knowledge of complaints. Usually support for new murals is gathered beforehand at the community level. Mr. Poor is the chairman of the Mural Review Board and is usually the last stop in gaining permission to do a mural unless a special project, building or area is included, then request goes before city council. Basic procedure is to call him with address, theme and size. He checks zoning ordinance and if there are no inherent problems or special considerations, he approves. 3 As illustrated in our survey, cities address murals in a variety of ways. The cities that allow murals have differing review procedures. Based on research, the review proce'dures are somewhat vague and may be arbitrary in their applications. We question whether they provide good examples of what makes a good sign/mural ordinance. In conclusion, we believe that there are two options to consider: 1. Do not change the current ordinance, which prohibits murals. 2. Change the definition of sign to exclude murals. Define murals separately as pictorial representation that are non-commercial in nature and that do not include any identification of commercial products, services, or businesses. In allowing' murals, it must be recognized that the intent of Sign Ordinances is to be content neutral. In this respect, if we chose to regulate murals, the City could regulate size and location, but not be involved in the content beyond limiting commercial communications. : New Construction/Remodeling Signs The new sign update should include the following existing language: 3.476 New Construction or Remodeling. In connection with the construction or remodeling of a building, there shall be permitted one sign not exceeding twenty- five square feet in area indicating the names of any or all of the architects, engineers and contractors engaged in the construction; on comer lots two such signs, one facing each street, shall be permitted. All signs permitted under this paragraph shall be removed by the person or persons erecting the same not longer than two weeks after final inspection by the Director of Fire and Safety of the structure indicated, or two years, whichever is less. Shopping Center Signage Based on the recent review of the shopping center sign plans for both the Winnetka Center and the Poste Haste Shopping Center, the following ordinance changes are suggested. Section 3.493 (2) Wall Signs (b). This provision limits shopping centers to two building identification wall signs. The Poste Haste Center is proposing using a Sun Set logo for shopping center identification. Their sign plan proposes a series of four logo signs on the building face. Code and Standards may wish to discuss this ordinance provision. 4 Section 3.493 (3) addresses freestanding shopping center signs. In light of the sign variance app,'oval for the Winnetka Shopping Center, the following ordinance language is offered: 3.493(3) (a) Shopping Centers. Shopping centers containing more than our (4) separate and distinct occupancies may erect only one (1) freestanding sign per street frontage (single or double faced) to be used as an identification sign for the shopping center. Said ground signs may not exceed two hundred (200) square feet in area, nor thirty (30) feet in height. In lieu of multiple freestanding signs, the shopping center may have a single freestanding sign not to exceed three hundred (300) square feet in area nor thirty feet in height. Freestanding shopping center signs must be setback ten(10) feet from all property lines. Individual businesses within the shopping center may be allowed tenant identification in a directory contained within the identification sign pursuant to the following conditions: (i) The shopping center freestanding sign must include the center's nam~ identification. (ii) Reader boards in accordance with Section 3.441 of this Code shall also be allowed on the identification ground sign provided the inclusion of said boards in combination with the tenant directory and center identification does not exceed the maximum sign area. CONCLUSION We look forward to the next Codes and Standards meeting for the further review of the Sign Ordinance update. pc: Doug Sandstad Steve Sondrall NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS MEMORANDUM TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Jeffrey Schaumann / Alan Brixius DATE: 11 June 1998 RE: New Hope - Sign Code FILE NO: 131.00 - 97.19 : Since the most recent comments from the Codes and Standards Committee, several alterations have been made. The following items have been changes: 1. Off-premise signage, billboards, directional signage. No billboards will be allowed (Section 3.464). Directional signage is allowed as specified under Section 3.473 (5). 2. Murals, signs painted on walls. Murals are defined the same as a sign, and therefore are subject to the same restrictions (Section 3.447). 3. Commercial vehicle signage. No restrictions/concern is given to commercial vehicles. 4. Reader Board language. Per Section 3.473 (3) and Section 3.492 (7) of the new Sign Code: -. A. -The reader board may be a wall, freestanding, or monument sign. The reader board sign area shall count as part of the total sign area allowed within a respective district. B. The reader board area shall not exceed more than fifty (50) percent of the allowable wall, freestanding, or monument sign area. C. One (1) reader board per premise. 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST, LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA 55416 PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 6 I 2-595-9B37 E-MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET COl~l D. T~e reader board shall display a given copy or graphic image for a minimum of three (3) seconds within the reader board frame. 5. Remodeling and/or construction signs. One sign, not exceeding thirty-two (32) square feet in area will be permitted. Two signs will be permitted on corner tots, one facing each street (Section 3.470). 6. Special event signage for schools and churches are subject to the provisions of Section 3.492 (6). Also, special event signage has been expanded to include multiple family sites (Section 3.474 (3)). 7. Freestanding signs - shopping centers. No more than one (1) overall building identification sign per street frontage will be allowed, not to exceed two (2) per site (Section 3.493 (3) Shopping Centers (a)). Each sign may not exceed 200 square feet in area. In lieu of multiple freestanding signs, the shopping center may have One sign of 300 square feet. Single occupancy freestanding satellite sites are pursuant of Section 3.493 (3) Single Occupancy Freestanding Satellite Sites (c). 8. Definitions are the same as the existing Code, with the exception of sign height which was never previously defined (Section 3.422). 9. Review procedures and informational requirements per Section 3.52 of the new Sign Code. 10. Sign variances are allowed as defined under the conditions set forth in Section 3.51. 11. The Insurance Bond requirement for non-conforming signs has been removed. CONCLUSION In an attempt to simplify the Sign Code, the above char~ges have been proposed. For your convenience we have attached a side-by-side comparison of the existing Code and the proposed Code. Please notate any comments which you might have. Should you have questions about the meaning or intent of any section, contact us at you convenience. Attached for your reference: Exhibit A - Draft Sign Ordinance Code Exhibit B - Side-by-side comparison chart 2 Memorandum To: Planning Commission Members From: Kirk McDonald, Director of Community Development Date: July 2, 1998 Subject: Miscellaneous Issues NOTE: The purpose of this miscellaneous issues memo is to provide commissioners with additional detail on CouncillEDA actions. It is not required reading and is optional information provided for your review, at your discretion. 1. June 8 Council/EDA Meeting - At the June 8 Council/EDA meeting, the Council/EDA took action on the following planning/development/housing issues: A. Project #634, Resolution Awarding Contract for Playground Equipment for Hidden Valley Park: Approved, see attached Council request. B. Project #612, Motion Approving Quote Submitted by Pete's Water and Sewer in the Amount of $790 for Cutting the Sewer and Water at 5629 Wisconsin Avenue North: Approved, see attached Council request. C. Planning Case 98-08, Request for Comprehensive Sign Plan Approval and Variances to Sign Code, 9408-9446 36"~ Avenue North, Caribou Comer LLClJay Mutachler, Petitioner. Approved, as recommended by the Planning Commission, except that the Council left it to the discretion of the applicant as to whether or not to include the center identification on the Highway 169 pylon sign. D. Resolution Authorizing Commencement of Eminent Domain Proceeding to Acquire Property at 7300 Bass Lake Road: Approved, see attached ED^ request, subject to School Distdct 281 authorizing the sale of property necessary for project. E. Resolution Finding Need to Acquire Title and Possession of Property at 7300 Bass Lake Road Prior to Commissioners' Award, Approving the Appraisal of Damages Resulting From Taking and Ratifying and Authorizing Ali Steps Taken by Staff to Acquire the Property: Approved, see attached EDA request, subject to School Distdct 281 authorizing the sale of property necessary for project. 2. June 22 Council/EDA Meeting - At the June 22 Council/EDA meeting, the Council/EDA took action on the following planning/development/housing issues: A. Approval to Waive Fees for Eight Special Event Signs for 1998 Duk Duk Daze Festival: Approved, see attached Council request. B. Re~olufion Relating to Redevelopment Plans, Redevelopment Projects and Tax Increment Financing Plans; Calling for a Public Hearing on Amendments Thereto: Approved, see attached Council request and preliminary concept plans for Cooper gyms. C. Project #601A, Resolution Awarding Contract for Swimming Pool Improvements to Global Specialty in the Amount of $73,610: Approved, see attached Council request. D. Project #~96, Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Authorizing Bidding for the North Water Tower Wellhouse Building Improvements: Approved, see attached Council request and site plan. E. Project #615, .Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Authorizing R.i_dding for the Replacement of Watermains at Railroad Crossings: Approved, see attached Council request. F. Project #614, Resolution Approving Cooperation Agreement Between the Minneapoli-~ Public Housing Authority and the New Hope Economic Development Authority and the City of New Hope Regardin;I PPL/Bass Lake Road Townhomss Project at 7300-7332 Bass Lak,~ Road: Approved, see attached Council request and agreement. G. Resolution Approving Joint Powers A;Ireement Between the Metropolitan Council and the City of New Hope for Installation, Replacement, and Maintenance of Bus Stop Signs: Approved, see attached Council request. H. Proiect #589, Motion Approving Quote Submitted by Wroblsski's Lawn Service in the amount of $7,384.40 for Landscaping and Grading at the City-Owned Home at 9116 31st Avenue: Approved, see attached Council request and plan. I. Project #612, Motion Awarding Contract for Asbestos to Angstrom Analytical, Inc. in the Amount of $295 for the City-Owned Property Located at 5629 Wisconsin Avenue; Approved, see attached Council request. J. Project ~612, Motion Approving the Quote Submitted by E.H. Renner & Sons in the Amount of $458 to Seal the Well for the City-Owned Property at 5629 Wisconsin Avenue: Approved, see attached Council request. K. Resolution Reciting a Proposal for an Industrial Development Project, Taking Official Action with Respect Thereto Indicating Preliminary Intent to Assist the Financing of the Project Pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act and Calling for Public Hearing on the Project: Approved, see attached Council request and IDRB application. L. Proiect ~601 B, Approval of Plans and Specifications and Call for Bids for Swimming Pool Renovation: Approved, see attached Council request and plans. Do to the fact that this is only a renovation and not new construction, City staff did not feel it was necessary to present this to the Planning Commission for formal approval. However, plan details are enclosed for your information and full scale plans are available at City hall. M. Project #629, Approval of Plans and Specifications and Call for Bids for Civic Center Park Project - Phase 1: Approved, see attached Council request. I have also enclosed the plans on this project for your information. N. Proiect #~47 and #575, Presentation Regarding Proposed New Hope City Center Master Plan: Approved, see attached Council request. I have attached copies of the Executive Summary and Introduction of this report and a complete copy is available at City Hall if you are interested in reviewing it. Steve Svendsen and Paul Anderson both served on the Task Force. O. Project #~78, Discussion Regarding Property at 2751 Lamphere Drive: Council directed staff to obtain new appraisal of property; see attached Council request. 5. Codes & Standards Committee - The Committee met in June to continue/finalize discussion on th® Sign Code. The Committee will meet in July to begin discussion on several new code amendments regarding R-2 lot standards and the curb cut definition, and to continue discussion on home occupations and bus benches. 6. Design & Review Committee - Design & Review met in June to review four applications, including variances for the YMCA and Pipe Fabricators, site/building plan review for CCI, and a CUP for Crystal Free Church Extended Campus at the Homeward BOund site. The following applications are anticipated for the August meeting: PPL development stage PUD plans, Avtec building expansion, CareBreak, Cooper CUP, and Taco Bell at Midland Center. It is also anticipated that the Comprehensive Plan Update may be ready for consideration. 7. Comprehensive Plan Update Committee - The Committee met in June to discuss the land use section of the Comprehensive Plan. Two additional meetings are scheduled for July to finalize the plan. 8. Project Bulletins - Enclosed are meeting notices sent to neighbors of Dorothy Mary Park and Sunnyside Park, along with a weed abatement notice for residents in the southwest corner of 42nd and Jordan AvenUes. A project bulletin was mailed to residents adjacent to Meadow Lake School Park. 9. Miscellaneous Articles - Also enclosed is the Zoning News newsletter. Attachments: Hidden Valley Park Playground 5629 Wisconsin Avenue Sewer/Water 7300 Bass Lake Road Duk Duk Daze Signs TIF Distdct AmendmentJPPL & Cooper Gyms Swimming Pool Improvements - Gutter System 47~ Avenue Water Tower Wellhouse Building Improvements Watermains at Railroad Crossings Cooperation Agreement with MPHA re: PPL/Bass Lake Road Project Bus Stop Signs 9116 31'* Avenue Landscaping 5629 Wisconsin Avenue Asbestos Analysis 5629 Wisconsin Avenue Seal Well Paddock IDRB Swimming Pool Plans & Specifications Civic Center Park Project - Phase 1 Civic Center Master Plan 2751 Lamphere Ddve Meeting Notices/Project Bulletins Miscellaneous Articles REQUEST FOR ACTION Originating Depm~u,ent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section Parks and Recreation 6/8/98 Consent Shad French ~- -'~ Item No. RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT FOR HIDDEN VALLEY PARK (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 634) TO ARRIGONI BROTHERS Bids were open on Wednesday, June 3rd and have been evaluated by the engineers for playground equipment for Hidden Valley Park (Improvement Project 634). The Engineer's letter regarding bid evaluations is attached. Plans and specifications were approved at the May 26~' Council Meeting. The 1998 CIP contains $125,000 for this purchase. The engineer's estimate was $107,200 including the alternate. Contractors Tot~ll Base Bid Alternate Bid Total Bid Arrigoni Brothers $106,383.00 $650.00 $107,033.00 Lakeland Nurseries $139,550.00 $710.00 $140,260.00 As has been the practice, staff met with Hidden Valley Park neighbors in March to plan the new equipment. Those attending that meeting were invited to review the plan before Council approved in on May 26~. Children attending Sonnesyn Elementary School also were invited to review the plan and give input All liked this plan and are looking forward to new equipment at their park. The existing equipment dates back to the 80's. The alternate is for an accessible picnic table. Staff recommends award to the Iow bidder, Amgoni Brothers including the alternate. There is $125,000 in the Park CiP for 1998 for this project. The engineering exl3ertse for this project is expected to be approximately 15% of the total, or about $16,000. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO:' Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 ~ Communi~ Development Conseqt ~t~ No. ~c$us~n Hen~ 6-08-98 ommuni~ Develop~nt S~ialist ~,, ~ MOTION APPROVING QUOTE ~UBMI~ED BY PETE'~ WATER AND SE~R IN THE AMOUNT OF $790,00 FOR CU~ING THE GEaR AND WATER AT 5629 WISCONSIN AVENUE NORTH (IMPROVEMENT PRO~ECT NO. 6~ 2). At the De.tuber 22,~ 997, Council meeting, the Ci~ Council approv~ the purchase of the prope~ Io~t~ at 5629 ~sconsin Avenue NoAh. ~e pm~ h~d ~ long histo~ of zoning and housing code violations. Sin~ the pro~ was ~uir~, the plan now i~ to demolish the deteriorating stm~ure and constm~ a new home, either a single family or ~in home. ~fom demolRion ~n ~in, there are many steps to take. One of those steps is c~ing the water and sewer at the pm~ line. Re~ntly, ~e Ci~ went out for bid for this and the follo~ng ~o bids ~me in: Comuanv Pete's Water and ~ewer ~7~.00 Gene's Water and ~ewer ~850.~ Pete's Water and Sewer submi~ the Iow quote and their quote for c~ing the water and sewer and is lower than Gene's Water and ~ewer quote. ~taff recommends approval of · motion ap~oving the quote subm~ by Pete's Water and 8ewer in the amount of ~7~.00 for ~i~ s~r ~nd w~ter ~t the pro~ line for the Ci~wned prope~y lacat~ ~ 5629 ~nsin Avenue No~h. )a,) REQUEST FOR ACTION Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section EDA Community Development .~ 6 Item No. By: Kirk McDonald By:, 4 / RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING COMMENCLE/MENT OF EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY AT 7300 BASS LAKE ROAD The attached resolution prepared by the City Attorney authorizes the commencement of eminent domain proceedings to acquire the property at 7300 Bass Lake Road. The property is necessary to complete the PPL Bass Lake Road Townhome Project on Bass Lake Road. PPL has come to an impasse with the owners of the Spur Station located at the site. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION l/~ .. SF.,COND BY . RFA-001 ~ EDA RESOLUTION NO. 98- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CO~LMENCEMENT OF EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY AT 7300 BASS LAKE ROAD BE IT RESOLVED by the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of New Hope, Minnesota as follows: WHEREAS,. the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of New Hope (hereafter the HR/k) was established and organized within the City of New Hope under authorization of New Hope Code §2.30 et. seq. and Minn. Stat. §462.415 et. seq., and WHEREAS, the HRA, acting pursuant to the authority of Minn. Stat. Chap. 415 established the following Redevelopment Plans: 80-2,. 81-I, 81-2, 85-1, 85-2 and 86-1 and corresponding Redevelopment Projects to be undertaken pursuant to said Plans, and WI-IEREAS, in order to finance the public redevelopment costs to be incurred by the City and the HRA in connection with the Redevelopment Plans and Projects, the HRA and the City have approved Tax Increment Financing Plans, which establish tax increment financing districts, which are designated by Hennepin County as Tax Increment Financing District Nos. 1601, 1602, 1603, 1604, 16025, 1606,1607 and 1608, and WI-IEREAS, Minnesota Law 1987, C. 291 § 48, which repealed Minn. Stat. §462.415 et. seq. provided that all orders, resolutions, motions, plans and agreements and actions taken by any municipal housing and redevelopment authority organized or purported to be organized under Minn. StSt. §462.4125 to 462.705 and Minnesota Law 19259 C. 345 § 1 to 19, and taken or purported to be taken by any governing body, city planning commission or political subdivision of the state or public state body with respect to plans and projects are hereby declared valid aad effective, and WtIEREAS, the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of New Hope (hereafter the EDA) was organized and established within the City of New Hope by Ordinance No. 89-7 adopted by the City Council on March 27, 1989 under authorization of Minn. Stat. §469.090 et. seq., and WHEREAS, the EDA was transferred control, operation and authority over the Redevelopment Plans, Redevelopment Projects and Tax Increment Financing Plans pursuant to HRA Resolution No. 89-4, City Resolution No. 89-73 and EDA Resolution No. 89-3, and WHEREAS, the EDA has approved by EDA Resolution No. 94-108 adopted at its July 25, 1994 meeting an amendment to the Redevelopment Plans and Financing Plans which is entitled "Master Modification to Redevelopment Plans And Tax Increment Financing Plans" (the Modification). The Modification combines and expands the area subject to the Redevelopment Plans and authorizes the expenditure of tax increment revenues derived from the districts to pay public redevelopment costs in the additional area made subject to the Redevelopment Plans by the Modification. WHEREAS, the redevelopment plans and redevelopment projects, combined per the Modification, were established under the authority of Minn. Stat. Chap. 462 pursuant to various studies undertaken by the City of New Hope which have shown that certain redevelopment activities in the plan area are warranted and would not have occurred through private development alone. WHEREAS, the acquisition of the property located at 7300 Bass Lake Road hereafter legally described is necessary to the successful completion of the Redevelopment Plans, Redevelopment Projects and Tax Increment Financing Plans as combined by the Modification: The South 80 feet of the West 166.76 feet of the East 196.76 feet of the West 1/2 of Lot 32, Auditor's Subdivision No. 226, Hennepin County, Minnesota except road. (PID No. 05-118-21-31 0008), and WHEREAS, the goals and objectives of combining the areas subject to the Redevelopment Plans is to aid in the redevelopment of property in a manner beneficial to the residents of the City and consistent with the objectives of the EDA as stated in the Redevelopment Plans. This will also aid in the construction of public facilities which will serve all residents of the City, all of which will meet the needs specified in the Redevelopment Plans. WHEREAS, Project for Pride In Living, Inc. (PPL) is a nonprofit community development corporation which has been building and man'aging housing in the Twin cities area for the past 26 years. Further, that PPL has submitted a development proposal to the City Of New Hope to construct and manage 34 family rental units consisting of 14 four bedroom units and 20 three bedroom units on a site on Bass Lake Road between Nevada and Pennsylvania Avenues North which will include the property at 7300 Bass Lake Road described above, and WHEREAS, 11 units would have market rate rent, 11 units would have rent 15-20% below market rate and 12 units would be pan of the Metropolitan Housing Opportunities Program (MHOP) as described on the MHOP Fact Sheet attached hereto as exhibit 1, and WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of New Hope does hereby determine that the acquisition of this property is reasonably necessary and convenient to the furtherance of providing affordable housing opportunities within the City to lower income residents and citizens of the City, and WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of New Hope does hereby also determine that the acquisition of this property is reasonably necessary and convenient to the furtherance of the referenced goals and objectives of the Modification and the Redevelopment Plans, and that in its judgment the acquisition of this property will be for the benefit of the public health, welfare and safety of the citizens of New Hope, and WHEREAS, an appraisal of this property has been previously ordered by PPL and that said appraisal has been completed as of March 17, 1998 by Herman Appraisal Services, Inc. establishing a fair market value for the subject property of $140,400.00, and WHEREAS, the EDA does hereby ratify and adopt the March 17, 1998 appraisal for purposes of this condemnation proceeding to acquire the property at 7300 Bass Lake Road, and WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. §117.232 authorizes the EDA to acquire the subject property by direct purchase in lieu of eminent domain proceedings, and WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. §4.69.101, Subd. 4 gives the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of New Hope the authority to acquire property by power of eminent domain under Minn. Stat. Chapter 117, including the power of acquiring possession of the property per the "quick-take" provisions of §117.042, if necessary to carry out the redevelopment plan and redevelopment project, and WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of New Hope has determined it is necessary to acquire this property by direct purchase or eminent domain proceedings, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Economic Developmen~ Authority in and for the City of New Hope as follows: 1. That the Executive Director is hereby directed and authorized to acquire by direct purchase at the appraisal value of $140,400.00 the property at 7300 Bass Lake Road in the City of New Hope, legally described as follows: The South 80 feet of the West 166.76 feet of the East 196.76 feet of the West 1/2 of Lot 32, Auditor's Subdivision No. 226, Hennepin County, Minnesota except road. (PID No. 05-118-21-31 0008) 3 In addition to this amount, the Executive Director is authorized to pay all reasonable closing costs associated with the purchase of property. Further, the Executive Director is authorized to retain a relocation expert to determine the amount of relocation expenses the EDA must pay by law as a result of this acquisition and pay to the appropriate parties all required relocation expenses as determined. If direct purchase i.~ unsuccessful, the Executive Director is authorized and directed to commence eminent domain proceedings under Minn. Stat. Chapter 117 to acquire the subject property. 2. That the Executive Director is further directed to utilize the "quick-take" procedure per Minn. Stat. §117.042 if in the judgment of the Executive Director it is necessary to acquire possession of the property prior to the conclusion of the eminent domain proceedings. 3. That the Executive Director is hereby directed and authorized to obtain additional appraisals necessary to establish fair market value and just compensation for said property in preparation for said eminent domain proceedings. Adopted by the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of New Hope this 9th day of June, 1998. W. Peter Enck, President Attest: Daniel ~. Donahue, Executive Director CONDEMNI .EDA (283\CNH-RESO) 4 June, 1997 Metropolitan Housing OppOrtunities Program MHOP FACT SHEET What is MHOP? N~OP ~ a rental ho~ing pro~rn d'~at wm created m ~ result ora legal se~lement, ~e ~ollman Co~ent De~ee. ~ one o~the de~en~.~s ~ ~e ~wsu~, tee ~b~c Ho~g Autho~w (~) a~eed to expmd aEor~ble ho~g oppo~des for Iowa: ~come residents ~ ~-e~ wh~re there ~ ~iom~y not ~en a supply o~pub~c ho~g, ~ ~th the CiD' ofN~eapo~ ~d ~ sub~b~n locatio~. ~e ~ ~ develop ~d operate the Ho~ r~placemeat ~ts ~ the CiW, but a new ~d of approach w~ needed for the 5~ to pro;~d~ H~ ~ for the development of pubic ho~mg ~ the sub~bs. N~OP ~ t~ tool. Who can live in MHOP housing? F~es (a ho~ehold com~d~e~ of~'o or more people) whose ~come when they move ~ ~oes not exceed ~0 percent of~e me.oporto ~ea medim ~come. ~owable ~ncome ~-~ts ~nge ~om S2 l,~0 for a ~'o person ~ to ~36,0~0 for e~t or more ~y memory. How are families selected for MHOP? For 30% of the ~ts, ~es c~ ~ selecte~ ~om a loc~ w~t~g ~t ~thout r~spect to Ho~ priorities. For ~ rem.~g 70%, ~e comem de~ee requ~es t~t prospective reside=~s ~e ~ted to apply ~ the foEo%~g order: Those d~phce~ by demotion o f public ho~g. 2. F~ on the N~ w~t~g ~ who Eve ~ ~ofiw or ~ve~ concen~te~ ~e~. 3. ~y other ~es on the ~ w~t~g ~t. A~ there standards for selecting families? ~y eHg~ole ~d suitable f~es ~ ~ selected for N~OP ho~g, reg~dless of whether they ~e on a Ho~ pfiofiW ~t. S~mgent a~sion ~d e~g~w ~ ~ app~ed to a~ appHc=ts. For ex~ple, ~es ~ ~ch my mem~r ~ ~ c~aI or ~g ~e ~to~ c~ ~ rejected for ad.sion. Selection ~t~ for 14 MHOP Fact, Sheet page 2 housing ~,iU be the sa,mc as those used by pdvate companies: credit histories, landlord ki~toU, criminal amd cirug back~oumd, amd a.ny other relevan~ data will b~ checked. The local housing agency ~,ill determine the screening criteria and rna'rage the selection process. How do suburban families get on the Minneapolis public housing waiting list? The L(P[--LA. ,*iii automatically place all families who apply ~om suburbs who are p.~icipatM, g in NE-lOP on !ts waiting Ii::, thu~ .n'm!-.ing MLnneapclis and ~ubu:ban, resid~ts equally eLig,.'ble for the third priority. ~ted above. As of this writing, the N~HA's waiting Ht Lncludes over 220 suburban families. How much rent will families pay? TaL,-ry percent of their income or $25.00, whichever is ~eater. Who pays the rest of the rent? The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HI.rD). HUD will provide operat~g subsidies for MHOP units for forty, year~, subject to Congessional appropriation. The subsidy is the difference between operating costs and rent. Do families have to move if t~eir income goes up? No, but they must continue to pay 30% or'their income. Where can MHOP development~ take p/ace? bE-tOP-funded new comtrvction homes can be built anywhere outside N~aneapolis and Saint Paul, but within the .MI.ISA (metropolitan services) line. Rehabilitation oferdstk~g homes with NE-lOP can be done anywhere in the seven-county area, outside of Minneapolis and Saint Paul Sites will be se!coted which meet public housing site and neighborhood standards, and the MPHA will strongly encourage the development of NE-IOP units in places that are accessible to jobs, wamportation, and other amenities irnpoaant to tamih'es with children. What kind of homes will be built? Nfl-tOP housing can be single family homes, duplexes, tovmhou, ses, smaller rental MHOP Fact Sheet page 3 buLld~gs, or buildings which are cortstrucl:ed as part ot'a tar~' mixed income development. 'Fhe hou.sin~ can be newly cortstructed or existing houses can be acquired a.nd rehabilitated. Ail developments must comply with local buildin!~ standarcts. When will they be built? Anytime betwee~ now and April l, 2002. Who will own the units? The units can be owned by ~ private developer, the suburb or its Housing and Redevelopment Authority., or the MPH. A and the suburb a~eeing to own the property jointly. Who will maintain the units? A mznagement company will be hired to manage and maintain the property,. corr~any can be a private prope,'~.' managemen~ firm; a non-prom housing management orga.r-dzatiorg or a local public housing authority., l~<e a Housing and Redevelopment Author{ry. Why did the Ho/Imam consent decree encourage creating public housing in the suburbs? To create more choice in a~'orctable housin.g across the metro area, particular .N where jobs a.re be;ag created. Lower income families who already Ewe in the suburb will have an oppommiry to apply for at least 30% of the IV[HOP treks bein~ developecL Studies twelve years after the Gautr~aux dc~'ision in Chicago Fred that families who moved to the suburbs have had much ~eater economic and edticatiooal success, both for parents and the ch. Lidre~ More questions about Mi-lOP? Plm.s~ contac:. Dav~ En!is'trom, Minnmpo[is Ptlbiic Ho~in~ Authority., aC 342-1478. Or1~LnaCtng Department Apprm~i for A~enda A~enda SecUon T ,.98/9~ EDA Community Development B~. 6- Item No. By: Kirk McDonald . RESOLUTION FINDING NEED TO ACQUIRE TFTLE AND POSSESSION OF PROPERTY AT 7300 BASS LAKE ROAD PRIOR TO COMMISSIONERS' AWARD, APPROVING THE APPRAISAL OF DAMAGES RESULTING FROM TAKING AND RATIFYING AND AUTHORIZING ALL STEPS TAKEN BY STAFF TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY The City Attorney has also prepared the enclosed resolution regarding the PPL Bass Lake Road Townhome Project in reference to the property at 7300 Bass Lake Road. The resolution establishes a need to acquire title and possession of the property, approves the appraisal of damages resulting from the taking, and ratifies and authorizes all steps taken by staff to acquire the property. The City is utilizing an appraisal by Herman Appraisal Services which establishes a value of $140,000. These steps are necessary to stay on schedule so that the project construction can begin this fall. The MHFA also recently approved PPL's funding request for the project. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY ~,COND BY TO: RFA-001 ~ COUNCE, I OR ACTION Originating Dep~tment Approved for A~er~ta ,~enda $ecUon Community Development C:nnsent .~ 6-22-98 Item No. By: Kirk McDonald By:. 6.4 / APPROVAL TO WAIVE FEES FOR EIGHT SPECIAL EVENT SIGNS FOR 1998 DUK DUK DAZE FESTIVAL Greg Henry, Duk Duk Daze Committee, has requested that the City waive fees for temporary sign permits required for Duk Duk Daze. The signs would measure 4' x 8' and be placed two weeks before the festival at the following locations: 1. Winnetka and Bass Lake Road (NW comer) Amoco Service Station 2. Winnetka and 42"~ (SE comer) lSD 281 Administration Building 3. Winnetka and 36~' (NW comer) Union 76 Service Station 4. Boone and 27~ (NW comer) lSD 281 Sunny Hollow Elem. School 5. Boone and 36~' (SW comer) St. Joseph's Church 6. Boone and 42"~ (SE comer) Gethsemane Cemetery 7. Boone and Bass Lake Road (SE comer) Chardon Court Apartments 8. Northwood Park east side of Boone - North side of parking entrance Festival sign and event sign are back to back Event sign faces south and Festival sign faces north (8 signs ~} $25.00 -- ~XI.00) Impacted property owner~ have signed the encloeed permission slips. The City has waived these fees in the past. Duk Duk Daze will be held July 10 - 12 at Northwood Park. Staff recommends approval of a motion waning the fees for the temporary sign permits. MOTION BY ~COND ~F RFA-O01 COUNC~ FOR ACTION OnCmaun~ Depa~Lu~ent Appn:w~-d tot' A~eada a4eada Secuon Consent Community Development ,, 6-~ Item No. BYkirk McDonald By:. 6.9 RESOLUTION RELATING TO REDEVELOPI~NT PLANS, REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS; CAL~NG FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENTS THERETO The enclosed resolution establishes a public headng date of July 27 for the City Council and the EDA to consider amendments to redevelopment plans, redevelopment projects and tax increment financing plans regarding several properties included in the PPL Bass Lake Townhomes Project on Bass Lake Road and as related to Cooper Senior High School. The proposed amendments will add the following properties to the areas where tax increment funds can be expended: 1. 7300 Bass Lake Road (Spur Gas Station) 2. 7332 Bass Lake Road (Office Building) 3. South 100 feet of District 281 Thorsen Family Resource Center Property (located in New Hope) 4. Cooper High School Property, 8230 47~ Avenue North The first three properties are included in the PPL Bass Lake Townhomas Project and were not included ~n previous amendments and they must now be included if the City intends to use TIF funds for acquisition purposes. The City has also received a concept prol:~:~al from District 281 for the additions of two gyms on the north side of Cooper High School, which could be utilized by the pubic. The School District is requesting City assistance in financing the project through the u~e of 'I'IF fundt Although this is only a preliminary concept and needs to be di~ssed in detail by the Council at a later date, the City Manager is recommending that Cooper High School also be included in thi~ amendment process so another amendment is not necessary in the future. Preliminary budget~ for both projec~ are attached. The amendments to the financing plans will authorize the use of tax increments derived from the tax increment financing districts of the EDA for the projects. The Council had pmvioualy authorized funding for the PPL Project. No commitment has been made or is being made on the Cooper gyms I:~Oject. Staff recommends al:~Xoval of the resolution ~,,heduling the public bearing. MOTION TO: ~.OVE TY NOAO ~ ST. RAPHEL '.4- J CATHOLIC CHURCH PARK AVE. 48 T~ F. HOUSE oIr AVE CHUII~,H NEW HOPE EL EME NTARY SCHOOl. Memorandum TO: Doug Sandstad, Building Official Kevin McGinty, New Hope Fire Chief Randy Kurtz, Fire Inspector Mark Hanson, City Engineer FROM: Kirk McDonald, Director of Community Development DATE: June 5, 1998 SUBJECT: Proposed Gyms at Cooper High School Enclosed for your review and comment please find 'very preliminary" concept plans for adding gym space at Cooper High School. We met with School District officials eadier this week and they presented these two plan options and budgets. The contacts to date have been pdmadly with the Park & Rec Department to determine community recreational needs. They are now approaching the City regarding the City contributing some TIF financing to the project. They completed a similar project in Plymouth eady last year and the City of Plymouth contnbuted some financing. Option 1 is a bare-bonee option consisting of approximately 18,700 sf including the divider corridor between the building and the gyms. The intent would be to have a community entrance on the west side so that the public could have access to the gyms in the evenings and on weekends and the gyms would be separated from the rest of the school building. Option 2 is approximately 24,000 sf and inciudee a walking path around the basketball courts. Option 2 could also include four practice volleyball courts. I think one of the primary reasons they are putting in the corridor separation has to do with the snow load building code requirements (Doug?). Another major issue discussed was that there would be no restroom facilities available for the gyms, which of course is not acceptable. They would either need to remodel and have acce~ to the reatrooms in the existing school building or add restrooms to the new portion of the building. Another issue discussed was the parking that would be eliminated with the addition of the gyms and whether or not the emergency vehicle access road on the north side and the emergency vehicle tum around would be necessary (Kevin & Randy?). They indicated that they would be Iceing 22 parking spaces that are currently used for faculty. 1 believe there ia an exi~ng storm ~wer that would have to be relocated (Mark?). They did indicate to us that sprinkling of the main ~ building is buclgetad for the summer of 1999 and the gyms also would be sprinlded. The coat in their budget includes spdnkiere in the new building. Their general timeline is for plan approval thia winter, biclding in the spring, and conatruction in the summer of 1999. I know these are very sketchy plans but would ask that you give them a cursory review. Dan and I would appreciate your comments as soon as possible, as the Council will be discussing their funding contribution in the near future. Any feedback you could give us up front would be helpful. Thanks for your cooperation. cc: Dan Do~nahue, City Manager Shari French, Director of Park & Recreation Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Attachments: Plans and Budget May 22, 199~ EL,,;'-, iL ~,; L.' 4148 W~ Av~nu~ North New Ho~, ~~ ~5427-1288 EARS ~mmildO~ ~O. 99~ O~ON 1: Sim ~~m S ~,~.~ .. F~ T~ S~, ~u S ~76,~.~ ~~ S 114.~.~ ~ T~ S 2~.~ O~ON 2: Sim ~~ ~~on S 1,~,~.~ F~ T~ ~, ~ S 1~,~.~ ~ T~ S 2~~ COUNCr~ RF~U'E~T FOR ACTION Or~r. tn~ DeP~.~tment ~p~:)~m~ for ~e~ ~ ~on Consent Pa~s and Recreation ~/2~98 It~ No. Shad Fren~ ~ 6.10 RESOLUTION AWARDING CON~T FOR SWIMMING POOL IMPROVEMENTS (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 601A) TO GLO~L SPECIAL~ - $73,610,00 On 4/13/98 the City Council accepted a concept report for the swimming pool for improvements including needed maintenance improvements. This improvement project 601A calls for the manufacture and installation only of a new stainless steel gutter system for the 34 year old facility. No work has been done on the gutter system since the pool was constructed in 1964. The local neighborhood, the swim club, and the Advisory Commission have all reviewed the total plans for the pool for these needed improvements including the gutter system. The new gutter system meets all state code requirements. The engineer's estimate for 601A is $100,000.00'. Bids were opened on Wednesday, June 17~ and have been evaluated by the engineers for a new gutter system for the pool (Improvement Project 601A). The Engineer's letter regarding bid evaluations is attached. Contractor Bid Global Specialty $73,610.00 Olympic Pools $75,000.00 US Mechanical $94,540.00 The recommended funding source it TIF. Staff recommends award to the Iow bidder. *It should be noted that the engineer's estimate of $100,000 included some grouting work that was subsequently pulled out of thil project and added to 601B where it made more sense to be included. MOTION TO: RFA-O01 COr. rNCrr. RF.~IJEST FOR ACTION Originating Department Appmv~ for Agenda Agenda Section Consent Public Works 6-22.98 ~ .~ Item No. By: Jeannine Clancy By:. 6.11 RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS A~D SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING BIDDING FOR THE NORTH WATER TOWER WELLHOUSE BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT 596) The City Engineer and Public Works staff have developed plans and specifications for improvements to the north water tower weilhouse located at 47~ and Aquila Avenues. The site is technically owned by the Joint Water Commission. Since the facility is located in New Hope, Public Works will take the lead in managing the construction of the project. The proposed project includes the following: Replacement of the chain like fence and gates on the west side of the property with new chain link fence. The new fence will be placed so that security of the site is improved and additional landscaping can be installed. · Placement of the overhead utilities underground. · Cleaning the extedor brick and tuckpointing the building. · Replacement of the roof with a hip roof that will blend in with the residential character of the neighborhood. The estimated cor~truction coat i~ aPlxoximately $41,000. Also included in thi~ bid package i~ the construction of a new tre~h duml:~ter enclosure for the Fire Station and Swimming Pool. The enclosure wa~ removed during the demolition of the old Fire Station becauee of ita location and condition. The intent of staff i~ to coordinate these two projects with the building related project~ proposed at the swimming pool in an effort to obtain a more competitive bid. MOTION BY ~i~OND BY TO: North Water Tower Improvements (Project 596) June 22, 1998 Page 2 Schedule The milestone schedule is as follows: Approve Plans and Specifications June 22, 1998 Open Bids July 21, 1998 Award Contract July 27, 1998 Begin Work August, 1998 Complete Work Fall, 1998 Funding is available from the Joint Water Commission and the Water Enterprise Fund for the wellhouse improvements, and from tax increment financing proceeds for the trash dumpster enclosure. Staff requests approval of the resolution. ~' ~ NEW HOPE ' ' ELEMENTARY . WATER ~ ,~', TOWER INSTALL NEW FENCl POSTS AN0 GATE. NEW FABRIC, BARe AN0 '/ * ,, OVERHF. AO ' ,.~,~ , , ANTENNA C,,ABI.~ TO /-..~ "' ~'~ '~-- ,,' RELOCATED UNOERGR0bND. , ', / EXISTING UGH? WITH ,'', \ I MO'110N DETECTOR ,' , 'r ........ BUILD NEW HIP ..... ON EXI~'I"ING t~IJILDING ' ,, TELEPNONE TO UNOFJ~GEOUNO , 1. SOO .4iL, N~E:AS OIb'TLJRS~D 8Y CONCH. ~' 2. EXISTING AN'I'ENNA'S ANO ANTENNA ~ ARE !t ~, TO RIrMAJN IN SERVICE: THROUGHOUT THE: PROJECT. ~ ,, 3. PATCH EXISTING BITUMINOUS DRIVE DISTURBED " DURING CONOUIT INSTALLATION. AQUILA AVE. AND 47TH AVE. WELL HOUSE ~gonestrOoAnderlikRosene NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA FIGURE 1 Aasociate~ AQUILA AVE. ANO 4TTH AVE. WELL HOUSE 54.201C01.DWG DEC 1997 COMM. 34201 Illm~ ! I--- ! J~ NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"= 1 '-0" NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: ~/8'= 1 '-0" 5:12 PITCHED ROOF WITH 2'-6" OVERHANG AQUILA AVE. AND a,7TH AVE. WELL HOUSE ELEVATIONS~I~B°nestr°° Rosene Anderlik 6 NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA FIGURE 2 Associates AQUILA AVE. AND 47TH AVE. WELL HOUSE 34201C01.DWG DEC 1997 COUld. 34,201 Orlgtnatmg Department Approved for A¢eada Al~enda Sectton Public Works 6-22-98 Consent /-~ !' Item No. By: Jeannine Clancy By:, / / ~ . 6.12 / RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AI'~tg~'$PEClFICATION$ AND AUTHORIZING BIDDING FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF WATERMAINS AT RAILROAD CROSSINGS (PROJECT The City Engineer and Public Works staff have developed plans and specifications for a project that will replace 8 inch watermains at three railroad crossings. The existing mains are cast iron pipe and are susceptible to breaking due to the heavy train loads going over the mains. In the Winter of 1996, the City experienced such a failure at the crossing located on Intemational Parkway (north of West Research Center Road) and had to repair the pipe on an emergency basis. Because of the difficult construction conditions and the emergency nature of the repair, the cost was approximately $50,000. The intent of this project is to replace the cast iron pipes dudng the summer construction season at a more favorable cost to the City. The locations proposed in this project include the following: 1. Railroad crossing located at 49~ and Nevada Avenues, 2. Railroad crossing located at Science Center Drive west of International Parkway, and 3. Railroad crossing located at International Parkway west of East Research Center Road. While the scope of work ia site specific, generally each location will include removal of the 8 inch cast iron pipe, replacement with an 8 inch ductile iron pipe, and installation of valves on each side of the track so that the main can be isolated if necessary. The estimated cost for the three locations is $50,000. MOTION BY ~OND ~i TO: Project616-ReplacementofWatermains at Railroad Crossings June 22,1998 Page 2 Schedule The milestone project schedule is as follows: Approve Plans and Specifications June 22, 1998 Open Bids July 21, 1998 Award Contract July 27, 1998 Begin Work August, 1998 Complete Work Fall, 1998 Funding Funding for this project is available in the Water Enterprise Fund. Staff requests approval of the resolution. Memo Tm Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Frm~ Paul Coone, Utilities Maintenance Supervisor Data= June 16, 1998 Re= Project 615 (8 inch Water Mains at Rail Road Crossings) The 8 inch water mains under the railroad crossings are cast iron pipe and susceplible to breaking due to train loads going over ~ wat~ mains. Replacing these secl~)ns with duclile iro~ ~ and installing the pipe in a casing will limit the possibly of pipe failure under the crossings. The crossing at 49~ Ave. N. and Nevada Ave. N. has water main ~ wes installed in 1962. The scope of work at this site will conaist of replacing 115 ~~of8' cast iron with ductile iron andthe addition of two vaives to isolate the crossing in the event them are Problems in the future. The odginat casing will be examined to ~ if it is reusable. The crossing at Science Center ~ (west of Intemalionai Pad<way) has water main the was installed in 1960. This scope of work at thi~ site wil conai~t of reptacing 60 lineai feetof8' cest iron with 8' duc~le iron installed in 30 fae~ of caaing. Two valves wil added to isolate this crowing in the event there are pro~ierns in the future. The crossing at International Park'way (west of Vict~/Park) has watar main that was installed in 1965. instailed within a 40 fo~ c~ing. Two valve~ wil be added t~) isolal~ lhe cros.ing in the event them am · Page 1 COt~CIL ~ REQUEST FOR ACTION ~~ Dep~t ~p~ for ~e~ ~ ~on ~Ki~ McDonald ~// 6. RESOLUTION APPROVING COOPE~TIO~AGREEMENT BE~EN ~E MINN~POLIS PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORI~ AND THE NEW HOPE ECONOMIC D~ELOPMENT AUTHORI~ AND THE CI~ OF NEW HOPE REGARDING PPL./BASS ~KE TO. HOMES PROJECT AT 7300-7332 BASS ~KE ROAD (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N~ ~141 ~e enclosed resolution, which ne~s to ~ appmv~ by ~th the C~ Coun~l and EDA, approves a Coo~ration Agr~ment w~h the Minnea~lis Public Housi~ A~o~ for the PPUBass Lake Townhomes Proje~ at 7300-7332 Bass Lake Road. ~e agr~ment is ~ssaq to ~it PPL to obtain $1,256,000.00 in funding Eom the MHOP pr~mm for the Ba~ Lake Ro~ pro~. Per the co~espondence Eom the Ci~ Affomey, this ag~me~ i~i~tes ~ C~, in its ~pac~ as the taxing author, will not assess real estate t~es ~ainst ~e 12 MHOP un~ w~in the development for the entire 40-year exemption ~d~. In lieu of mai es~e ~es, the ~r ~11 ~y the EDA the PILOT (payment in lieu of t~es). ~e PILOT ~11 ~ual m~hly $2,~.~ - ~,~.~ annually. ~is amount will ~ calculat~ as 5% of the *SheEer Ren~ as ~ t~ is defi~ in the ~ment. SheEer rent is approximately 30% of the in.me ~ ~e ~~ of ~ 12 MHOP un~. ~ a resuE, the rental payment will ~ quite Iow. ~e EDA ~11 ~ r~ui~ to ~y ~e PILOT to ~ Coun~ for distdb~ion to the vadous taxing ~ies as if A were ~e a~ual real ~te ~ paym~t. ~her provisions of the ~me~ ~11 ~uim ~ C~ to ~ ~ MHOP unAs wAh basic Ci~ se~i~s as pmvi~ to all ~ ~ in ~ ~ ~ to ~ in ~ s~ss~l development and o~mfion of ~e ~ u~. ~ ~ v~ ~, E ~~, granting reasonable deviations and vadan~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z~ ~, ~~ ~~ of interior within the development, E any, a~ ~~ s~l~, w~er mains a~ ~o~ and sanAa~ leading to the dev~e~ a~. M~ ~ ~ ~i~ ~ C~ h~ al~ ~ne, is in the ~s of doing or ~ is n~ ~~ to ~ ~~. K~p in mi~ ~ ~ment ~ntains ~iler plate language u~ ~ a~ ~ ~ by ~ MP~. It ~ ~ ~ d~ s~lly for ~e subje~ deveiopme~. Staff r~mm~ ~~ ~ ~ ~l~n a~ a~o~ f~ ~ Mayor a~ C~ Man.er to execute the ag~m~t ~ ~aE ~ ~ C~. Kirk McDonald City o¢ New HoDs 4401Xylon Avenue No~h New HODs, HN 55428 RE: PPL Bane Lake Road Housing OevelopmonC Qur Ptla: 99.11200 Dear Encloeecl ie m draft copy of ~he re~u~red Agreemon~ both ~he Ct~y &nd EDA mus~ sign ~o permi~ PPL obtain $1,358,0Q0.00 ~n funding from the HHOP ~rogre~ on ~he Bass Lake Road project. aas~ca]ly, this agrsemon~ ~ndtca~es ~he C~y, in cag&~t~Y 88 ~he ~lx~ng authority, wt11 no~ assess real estate t. uxee againeC C~ 12 ~ unite within doveloO~ fo~ t~ entire 40 year ex~tton oert~. lieu of ~1 ee~=e =axes ~e~ner ut11 gay tbs EOA the RZLOT (OayMn~ in lieu of ~ee). The PZLOT wi]~ ~ua~ roughly $$,000.00 ~o 04,000.00 ~nually, This ~un~ ~ galculat~ ~ SS of tho 'Shelter Rent' aa that term defied iff ~agre~n=. S~el~r ron~ io~oroxlMtely 30~ of the t~ of ~he ~Guoanto of ~ ~2 ~P units. A~ a result, ~ho eonS1Da~n~ will ~ a~i~ 1~. The EDA ~ ~eautr~gay ~he PXLOT~~C~n~y ~oe distribution ~o ~he vart~O ~axing ~iee aa tf tt were ~he actual real eo~a~e tax O~her orovietofla of the agr~n~ ut11 r~uire ~o City co ~rovtde ~he ~OP un,t8 wt~ be81c Ct~y ~erv~coo a80rovlae~ ~o ell a~her pro~r~i~ tfl ~he Ct~y a~ ~ c~oeraCe tn euGceea~ul devolog~n~ ~d o~ra~ of ~he houetng un~ta. reasoflable deviations and var~8 fr~ ~ho building and zoning codol, l~eo~tno dedicates of 4fl~rior June 18, lgg~ Page 2. w~hin the development, ~f any, and providing sidewalks, water ~rocess o~ doing or ~ is no~ applicable ~o ~hle development. in m~nd ~his agreement con~a~n~ ~otler plat~ language used on bo~h ~he Ci~¥ Coun:tl and EDA. A mo~ton &u~h=~=~ng ~he H&¥or ¢i~¥ Hlneger ~o sign on ~ehalf of Ch& City ~nd e mo~ton authorizing ~he Pre~en~ and Executive D~rlc~r ~ ~tgn on behal~ o~ ~he EDA questions or c~n~s regarding chis ma~t&r. very :ruly ~Ceven A. 8ondrsll zl:~ enclosure cc: Dan Oon~ue DR.~T: 05/05/91 CO0~£1L¥1'ION T~ls A~en~ m~e m~ en~ ~to ~is ~ day Of ,199~, ~ rand ~ ~c Minnen~[is ~blic Hous~ Au~od~ in &nd fo~ ~ Ci~ of M~ea~I~ (~e ~d ~ C~ oE New Ho~, S~ of Minne~ WI~ESSE~: In conslde~tion of ~ mu~l co~ ~rei~R~ follows: 1, W~e~ee u~d ;n ~s Cz) ~e ~ "~OP Uni~" me~ ~lve (12) ~i~ ~cio~d w[~ the 73~7332 ~ass ~ ~) ~ te~ "T~g ~' ~ ~in0 ~i~' ~ ~ ~le of Mifln~ ~ any ~d ali ~liticaJ Su~tvisi~s situated lnd ~i~ ~ ~ve ~es, or to ~ s~h u~ ~d ~nefit ~ msmc~ ~on. ~e ~ '~ ~" d~lli~ ~ ~ ~llinI Uni~) ie~ ~ ~ of~ll MII~ ~ ~ll~l ~. ~ ~ ~OF ~ m ~ r~ulm~ of ~n commas m ~i~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~P Un~ u a ~ ~ ~i~ pl~jecf,, o~ (Iv) lay obl[~Kion$ ismmd in c~t~on wi~ ~e ~OP U~U During t~ Ex~p~o~ Pcri~ ~ M~ici~li~, o~ ~ o( ~ T~in~ I~cs ~ ic wifl not )e~ or ~ Iny ~1 or ~1 pm~ ~ r~[ ~vc~p~nr s~l ~ muUipl~cd ~ ~ ~ ~ hUmOr o( ~ · e ~o~1 n~r o~ ~OP UniU ind ~ d~mi~ Q~ ~ieh ~u~d from ~ ~x c~iw. e~ m e~ O) ~ve ~ (5%) of ~ S~ ~c ~ily ~ll~ed ~ ~OP Uniu d~nS ~e ~~ u~ ~, ~ (ii) ~ ~t Io~r. d[~ibum ~ P~OT ~ ~ T~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~iOa which ~OP U~im ~ ~ ~ ~ ~n. ~1: T=inI ~ ~y ~ in ~ ~ ~; ~ in ~ ~ m it ii e do ~o wRl~out co~t ot expense to the AuU~rity, ~ ~ ~e ~at of ~ ~OP U.its or to t~ Munlci~i~ ~ o~r T~ni B~, ca~ ~ ~ m~v~ ~m vacated ~e~. ~ ~ f~ ~ it may ~ ~s~, ~11 ~bi~ or private utile' li~a cqui~ment; (c) In ~ far ~ the Municiplii~ ~ o~ T~i~8 Bo~ may I&~uily do ~. ([) l~nt deviations ~m ~e buildi~8 ~e of ~e M~i~i~ ~t ~ T~ing ~ marble ~d ~m~ m ~m~ eco~my a~ e~nc~ ~ ~e ~cl~cnt MHOP Ufliu. ~ re~flable ~ fl~s~ ~r ~ ~l~cnt ~d ~c~ ~ ~Oe Units ~d ~ ,u~inl (e) Coo~ta~ w;~ ~e A~ ~ ~A ~ ~ ~ la~ul m~ or ways M~ici~ity ~ o~ T~nl ~ i~ ~ A~ ~y find ~~ in In the initial deveto~ea[ of ~ ~OP URIC. ~ M~ici~li~ f~ ~ on ~lf all T~e8 B~ies, ~[ wigan a ~~le ~ IM mMt~ of · ~cn ~ues[ ~M (t) ~at it will ~c~ ~ d~i~ of dl ~ ~ ~ Ille~, ~ ~jKeflt 5id~il~ wi~i~ ~e ~ o~ ~ Develo~ m~ ~ all ~ and ~t it will ~ ~~ ~~ of ~ f~, ~ ~il ~ im~ ~. and ~ovide si~ f~, ~l ~ ~~ ~ ~ve~~ u ~ ~~ ~vide ~m ~m ~ Cm ~s~~ ~(~ ~ shall ~y ~~). ~ ~e Au~. ~ ~A ~ ~ ~ of ~ ~ U~U ~ My ~ m ~n ~h eM ~ ~ilifig then ~ Au~ ~ EOA ~Y ~M m ~ ~~ ~ OF ~h ~u ~ ~y P~OT d~ ~ m ~ dd M ~ M~[~ ~ ~r T~S ~y ia ~ to ~ ~OP U~. ~ 14:31 ~S & ~, ?. NO C~ti~ A~m~ A~ or EDA ~! A~eemem. I. NO mem~r or' ~e I~ernin t~ ~OP Uni~ m ~y mcm~ or s~h ~ ~lic such i~ m ~ A~r~. without t~ con~t o~ ~ time ~e ~ficisl title i~ludine ~e I I COU-~C~ Ill .~ ~)io) REQUEST FOR ACTION Originating Depa~l~uent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section Pubic Works 6-22-98 Consent RS Item No. By: Jeannine Clancy By:. 6.14 RESOLUTION APPROVING JOINT P AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND THE CITY OF NEW HOPE FOR INSTALLATION, REPLACEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE OF BUS STOP SIGNS The Metropolitan Council operates a public transit system which serves New Hope citizens. This system is referred to as the MCTO. The MCTO has undertaken a project to replace its bus stop signs and has asked the City for assistance in completing this project, and to maintain the signs after they are installed. The City has made provisions to install the new signs through its contract with Ear/F. Anderson for the 1998 street sign replacement project. The MCTO will reimburse the City for its cost to have Ear/F. Anderson install the new signs, plus the costs for project management and inspection. The joint powers agreement also proposes that the City formally accept the responsibility of maintaining and replacing signs as needed after the initial project has been completed. The City has worked with MCTO in the past yearn on an informal basis. This joint powers agreement formalizes that relationship and provides the City with a mechanism to recover its labor and materials expense~ for repair and replacement of signs in the future. Staff believes that this working relationship with the MCTO is in the best interest of New Hope citizens and transit users. The City Attorney ha~ reviewed the agreement and has expressed no concerns relative to the legal content of the document. Staff recommends aPl~'oval of the resolution. MOTION BY ~:COND ~Y , COONC~ ' REQUEST FOR ACTION Onginaung Depara~ent ~p~ for ~e~ ~ ~on CommuniW Development Cnn~nt [t~ NO. ue Hen~ 6-22-98 ommuni~ Development S~ialist ~ 6. [ 7 MOTION APPROVING QUOTE SUBMI~ED BY ~OBLESKI'S ~ SERVICE, IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,3~.40, FOR ~NDSCAPING AND G~DING AT THE CI~-O~ED HOME AT 9116 31sT AVENUE NORTH (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 589). At the May 26, 1998, Council m~ting, ~e C~ Coundl ap~v~ plans and s~ifi~tions for landscaping and grading for the C~~ home at 9116 31= Avenue NoAh and autho~ ~ff to obtain qumes. ~e Ci~ Forester develo~ ~e lands~ping plans and s~tions. ~e C~ E~in~r drafted the grading plan. ~e total estimat~ amou~ for gradi~ a~ lands~ping was ~,710.~. ~e lands~ping plan inco~rates ~th new and existing ~anfings. ~e foll~ ~s were re~iv~: Core.ny ~ L & R Subu~an Lands~pi~ $7,4~.10 Flag Buildem $11,655.~ Wmbleski's Lawn Se~i~ $7,~.~ Wmbleski's Lawn ~i~, su~ ~ I~ q~e in ~ amou~ ~ $7,~.~. Due to the fa~ that it took longer to I~te a land~ ~m~ny ~r ~ ~ ~ ~pat~, the ~ntm~ ~mpletion date for the proj~ has ~n e~ u~l Ju~ 13, 1~. At ~ ~ ~ C~ ~11 hoM an o~n house and a~ively ~in to manet ~ ~ to a fl~ ~y~ ~ ~e in.me ~eda. Staff r~mmends ap~oval ~ a ~ ~~ ~ q~ ~~ by ~~'s L~n ~i~, in the amoum of $7,~.~ ~ ~~ a~ g~ f~ ~ C~~ h~e ~ 9116 31" Avenue No~h. P/ANT ~ FO~ gll~ $1' AVENUE NORTH Q~. Key Common M~me 8otmnkml Nmme PLANT SCHEDULE FOR 9116 31= AVENUE NORTH Qnt. Key Common Name Botanical Name Size 2 BHS Black Hills Spruce Picea glauca 6' B&B 1 RSC Red Splendor Crab Malus 'Red Splendor' 1.75 B&B 6 TGA Techny Gobe Arborvitae Thuja occidentalis #5 cont. 'Techny Globe' 4 SJ Scandia Juniper Juniperus sabina 'Scandia' #5 cont. 3 ID Isanti Dogwood Comus sedcea 'lsanti' #2 cont. 14 GFS Gold Flame Spirea Spirea x bumalda 'Goldflame' #2 cont. 150 cu. Yd. (est.) top soil 1550 sq. yd. (est.) Sod Hardscape items: 150 lineal ft. (est.) Plastic edging 8 cu. yards wood chip mulch l OR ACTION Or~maLtn& Department ~p~ for ~e~ ~ ~on Community Development ~nn~nt [t~ No. usan Hen~ 6-22-98 ommuni~ Development S~ialist ~ 6, ~8 MOTION AWARDING CONTACT FOR ASBESTOS A~LYSlS TO ANGSTROM ANAL~ICAL, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $295.00 FOR THE CI~ O~ED PROPER~ LOCATED AT 5629 WISCONSIN AVENUE NORTH (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 612). The Ci~ of New Ho~ mquest~ bids for from throe companies for an as~stos suwey for the Ci~ owned pro~ Io~t~ at 5629 ~s~nsin Avenue No~h. Only one ~mpany, Angstrom Anal~i~l, Inc., responded to the Ci~'s r~uest. ~is ~mpany has ~mplet~ wo~ satisfa~odly for the Ci~ on ~veral occasions. CONT~CTOR QUOTE Angstrom Anal~i~l, Inc. $295.~ The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and ~e National Em~sion Standard for H~ardous Air Pollutants require that all as~stos~ntaining materials ~ remov~ from a building pdor to demolition. Due to the age of the stratums (home and garage) at ~29 ~s~nsin Avenue No~h, staff feels that an as~stos su~ey is ne~ssa~ ~fom ~her demolRion pr~ums ~n ~in. The suwey will dete~ine if them is as~stos in the stratums and ~ or how it n~s to ~ remove. Staff recommends awarding the bid to ~gstmm ~al~l, Inc. in the amount of $295.00 for an as~stos su~ey of the stratums I~t~ on ~e C~ ~ pro~ at ~29 ~s~nsin Avenue No~h. M~ON ~ ~~ ~ ,, COUNCIl, · R m sr X*OR ACTION onflnatm/Depa, ~t ~p~ for ~e~ ~ ~on CommuniW Development ~nn~nt ~t~ NO. usan Hen~ G-22-98 ommuni~ Develop~nt S~ialist MOTION APPROVING THE QUOTE SUBMI~ED BY E.H. RENNER & SONS IN THE AMOUNT OF ~58.00 TO S~L THE ~LL FOR THE CI~ O~ED PROPER~ AT ~29 WISCONSIN AVENUE NORTH (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ~12). At the De~m~r 22, 1997, Council meeting, the C~ Council approv~ the purchase of the pro~y Iocat~ at 5~29 ~sconsin Avenue No~h due a long histo~ of zoning and housing ~de violations. Located on the pro~ is a on~sto~ home wRh a detach~ garage. It has ~n dete~ined that the home is not wo~h rehabilRating due to tom down and a new house ~ ~nstm~ on the s~e. In order for the home and garage to ~ tom down, the well n~s to ~ seal~. Staff obtained quotes from the following fi~s to seal the well at 5829 ~s~nsin Avenue No~h: FIR~ QUOTE E.H. Renner & Sons ~58.~ Don Stodola Well Ddlling Torge~on Well Co. $950.~ Staff recommends approval of a motion a~pting the I~ quote ~om E.H. Rennet & Sons in the amount of ~58.00. On~ the well is ~1~ and all ~il~ie= am removed, the C~ will demolish the home and detach~ garage. ffA~l II CO(.~CZZ, I OR I Development Community Development I ~ & Planning ] 6-22-9~/ It~ No. l, 8. 1 / RESOLUTION RECITING A PROPOSAL FO~AN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, TAKING OFFICIAL ACTION WITH RESPECT THERETO INDICATING PRELIMI~Y INTENT TO ASSIST THE FINANCING OF THE PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT AN~ CALLING FOR A pUBLIC H~RIN~ Paddock Laboratories, Inc. has requested that the City approve its proposal to finance a 35,000 square foot building expansion project through the issuance of tax-exempt industrial development revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $3,000,000. The enclosed resolution states that the City desires to facilitate said development because it will result in the employment of approximately 50 additional persons to work within the facilities. The resolution establishes a public headng date on said financing proposal of July 27, 1998. Paddock Laboratories has completed the City's application for IDRB financing and has submitted the appropriate application and deposit fees. Representatives from Paddock Labs will be in attendance at the meeting. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY ~I~ON[} ~Y TO: RESOLUTION RECITING A PROPOSAL FOR AN · INDUS~ DEVELOPMENT PROIECT, TAKING OFFICIAL ACTION WITH RESPECT THERETO INDICATING PRELIMINARY INTENT .TO ASSIST THE FINANCING OF THE PROfECT PURSUANT TO TKE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PRO/ECT WHEREAS, (a) The purpo~ of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165 known as the M/nnesota Municipal Industrial D~velopm~nt Act (the "A~") as found and determined by the legislature is to promote the welfare of the st~ by th~ active atlraction and encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerc~ to l:e~vent so far as possible the emergence of blighted and marginal lands and ar~as of chronic unemployment; (b) Factors neczssitating th~ active promotion and development of economically sound industry and commerc~ ar~ th~ ~ing concentration of population in the metropolitan areas and the rapidly rising increase in th~ amount and cost of governmental services r~luired to meet the needs of th~ increased population and th~ nz~d for ckv~lo~t of land use which will provide an adequate tax base to finance these ino~eased eom and access to employment opportunities for such population; (c) The City Council of the City of New Hope (the "City") has received a proposal from Bruce Pnddock and Paddock Laboratories, ln~., a Minnesota corporation (the "Company"), that the City assist in fmancin~ a Project hereinafter described, through the issuance of Revenue Bonds in the maximum aggregate prin~i~ amount of $3,000,000 Cnereina~r referred to in this resolution as "Revenue Bonds") pursuant to th~ Act; (d) Th~ City d~sires to fa~,ilimw the selective development of the commtmity, retain and improve the tax base and help to provide the rang~ of s~rvic, es and employment objectives. The Project will l~lp to ~ tax ~l~'itie~ of~e City and surto~ area and help reputation of th~ eommuniW, (e) Th~ Proj~ to be finanu~ by th~ R~,venu~ ~ is the con.vau~on and equil~in~ of an alswoximmady 3 $,000 squaze foot addition to the Company's e~istin~ mnnufactuting facility located at 3940 Quebec Avenue North in the City of N~v Hope, Minnesota and will result in the employment of a0pto~imnt~ly 50 additiol~l ~ to work within t~ f~ilitie~; (0 The City has b~n advised by ~ves of tl~ Company that conventional, co~--,en:ial finan~in~ to pay the capital cost of tbs Project is available only on a ~.t A-2 limited basis and at such high costs of borrowing that the economic feasibility of operating the Project would be significantly reduced; (g) No public official ofth~ City has either a direct or indirect financial interest in the Project nor will any public official eithe'r directly or indirectly benefit financially from the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The Council hereby indica~s i~s preliminary intern to undertake the Project pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act and to issue the Revenue Bonds in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $3,000,000 pursuant to the Act to finance the Project. 2. On the basis of information available to the Council it appears, and the Council hereby finds, that the Project constitutes properties, real and personal, used or useful in connection with one or more revenue producing enterprises within the meaning of Subdivision 2(a) of Section 469.153 of the Act; that the Project furthers the purposes stated in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.152; that the availability of the financing under the Act and willingness of the City to furnish such financing will be a substantial inducement to Company to undertake the Project, and that the effect of the Project, if ~en, will be to encourage the development of economically sound industry and commerce, to assist in the prevention of the emergence of blighted and marginal land, to help prevent chronic unemployment, to help the City retain and improve the tax base and to provide the range of service and employment opportunities required by the population, to help prevent the movement of talented and educated lin'sore out of the State and to arem within the State where their services may not be as effectively used, to promote mom intensive development and use of land within the City and eventually to in,ease the tax base of tbe community. 3. Tbe issuan~ oftbe R~enu~ Bonds by th~ City is subject to, among other things, (a) the holding of a public henring on the proposal (b) the approval of th~ Pmj~'t by tbe Mi,,,,esota Trade and Economic Devel~ Authority, (¢) review and apl~val of the proposed Project by the City's Bond Counsel, and (d) final al~val by this Com~, tbe Comlmzy, and the pu~ of the Revenue Bonds as to tt~ ultimate details of tbe fmaming of tbe Proj~-t. 4. ~ has am~! and it is be~by ~ tt~ any and ~ corn incun~ by the City in c~n~'tion with th~ rimming of the Project ~ or not tl~ Project is carried to completion and whether or not allOyed by tbe City will be paid by Company. 5. Nothing in this msoimion or in the documents prepared pursuant ~ shall authorize the expenditu~ of any municipal funds on tbe Proj~:t ~ than the revenuas derived from the Project or otherwise granted to the City for this ~. TI~ ~ ~ ~ not constitute a charge, lien or emumbrame, legal or equitable, upon any prolm~ or funds oftbe City except the revenue and proceeds pledged to th~ payment themo~ nor shall th~ City b~ subject to any liability 94~.1 A-3 thereon. The holder of the R~enue Bonds shall never have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the Cit~ to pay the outs',anding principal on the Revenue Bonds or the interest thereon, or w enforce payment thereof a/ains~ any property of the City. The Revenue Bonds shall recite in substanc~ that the Rev~nu~ Bonds, including inm'es~ thereon, is payable solely from the revenue and proceeds pledged to the payment thereof. The Revenue Bonds shall not constit'u~e a debt of the City wiflfin the m~aning of any cons~it~ional or statww~ lhn/~ation. 6. It is the purpos~ of this r~soluiion to evidence th~ commilment of the parties and their intentions with respect w the pwposed Project in order thai the Company may proceed withotn delay with the commencement of the acquisition, installation and consmiction of the Project with the assurance that there has ~ sufficient 'official a~ion' w/thin th~ meaning of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, ~o allow for th~ issuan~ of industrial r~,enue bonds (including, if deemed appropria~, any into'ira no~e or no~s to provids ~nporar~ flm~cin~ thereof) w finance the entire cos~ of the Project upon a~reement beh~ r~ached as to th~ ultima~ de~ls of the Project and its financins. 7. In anticipation ofth~ final approv~ by th~ Cii~, ofth~ issuance of the Revenue Bonds w fmanc~ all or a portion of fl~ Proj~'t, and in ord~ unduly delayed ~ approved, fl~ Company is h~by anflxaiz~ to make such expenditures and advances toward paym~t of~ portion of~ of the Revenue Bonds as Company wmide~ n~sa~, im:ludin~ the u.~ of inmim, shon-tmn financins, subj~'t ~o rdmb~ent f~m ~ ~ oftl~ l~ven~ Bonds if taxi when deliver~ bu~ otherwis~ withota liabili~ on ~ pm~ of th~ Ci~/. 8. A public hearin~ on lhe pl'oposal ofit~ Company will b~ hddaI the time and place s~ forth in the Notic~ of lh~bli~ H~ring ~h~d h~'to. Th~ Clerk is hereby autho~ and directed to cau.~ notic~ of ~ h~srin~ to b~ ~iv~n o~ l~blic~/on in th~ official n~paper of the Cit~ and also in a ~ of $~sm-al ch-~mlml/on available in th~ Cit% not l~ss than 14 days nor mor~ ~ 30 days prior to lt~ ~ tx~d f~ th~ ~ ~tially in ~ form of th~ al~ach~i Notic~ of Public H~in~. PASSED AND ADOFrl~ BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA, THIS ~ DAY OF MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK (S~al of th~ Ci~ of New Hope, Minnesota) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This Memorandum of Understanding ("Memorandum") is made and entered into the ~ day of Sune, 1998, by and between the City of New Hope, Minnesota (the "City") and Paddock Laboratories, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (the "Corporation"). WHEREAS, the Corporation has requested that the City approve its proposal to finance the project identified in the Resolution (the "Preliminary Resolution") attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Project") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.152 though. 1651 known as the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act ("Act") by the issuance of tax-exempt industrial development revenue bonds (the "Bonds") in an amount not to exceed $3,000,000; and WHEREAS, the Corporation and the City desire to enter into this Memorandum containing their agreement as to certain matters relating to issuance of the Bonds; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, and the Corporation and the City agree as follows: A. FINANCING APPROVAL 1. The City will consider adoption of the Preliminary Resolution at its meeting on June 22, 1998. 2. The City hereby reserves to itseff the right to rescind any action heretofore taken or to be taken with respect to issuance of the Bonds for the Project. Nothing in this Memorandum shall be construed as vesting in the Corporation any cause of action against the City arising from any f~ilute or refiml oftbe City to q~'ove the Project or issuance of the Bonds. The Corporation acknowledges tim neither the adoption of the Resolution nor execution of this Memorandum consti~ a commitment by the City to issue Bonds to B. COSTS, EXPOSe, INDICATION 1. The C~on a~ees that it will pay any and all costs heretofore incurred or to be incurred by the City, Bri~s and Mot~n, P.A., Bond Counsel Dorsey ak Whitney, counsel for the City, or others retained by the Colllorafion in colmaction with the Project, including but not limited to all ~ chm'~e~ advertising and Ilotif~cations and all out of 949199.1 pocket expenses and legal fees, whether or not the Project is given final approval by the Cit'y; whether or not the Bonds are sold; and whether or not the Project is carried to completion. 2. The Corporation further understands and agr~s that the City shall have no obligation for any expenses of the Corporation heretofore or hereafter incurred with respect to the ProJect in the event Bonds are not authorized and issued for any reason. 3. The Corporation agrees to indemnify and hold the city, its officers, employees or agents, harmless against any and all losses, claims, damages, expenses or liabilities, including attorneys' fees incurred in their defense, to which the City, its officers, employees and agents may l~come subject in connection with the City's consideration of the Project, issuance or sale of the Bonds for the Project or the carrying out of any of the transactions contemplated by this Memorandum and any resolutions adopted, agreements or memoranda executed by the City in connection with the issuance of the Bonds for thc Project. 4. The Corporation hereby releases the City, its officers, employees and agents from any claims, causes of action, losses, dama~s or liabilities which the Corporation may have against the City, its officers agents or employees or which the Corporation may incur in connection with the City's consider~tioo of thc Project; thc failure of the City in its discretion to issue Bonds for Project for ,ny reason including l~ck of authority under State or Federal law, thc issuance and sale of the bonds, ~¢ fimmcins of the Project or any other matter or thing of the type or nature which may m'ise in co~mection with the foregoing. City of N~,w Hol~ Its l. bor torie$, Inc. .~une 16, ! 998 .~ Pharrnaceu~cals for M~icne, Pharmacy anc Sce~ce Kirk McDonald, Commumt7 Dev. Coordinator City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Ave No New Hope, MN 55428-4898 Dear Kirk: Please find enclosed our required information for the application for industrial development revenue bond financing for Paddock Labs., Inc. Series 1998. Also enclosed are the required checks in the amounts of $500 and $2,500. If you have questions, plea.~ call. Sincerely, David C. Slettum, CPA Director of Adnfini~on and Finan~ cc: Bruce O. Paddodt S. ttalia 3940 Quebec Avenue North, MitoSis, MN 56427 · 612.546.4676 * FAX: 612.54~.48,42 * 800.328.5113 PADDOCK LABS, INC. MEMO To: : City of New Hope, MN From: ' David C. Sletmrn, Chief Financial Officer r Date: Sune 16, 1998 Subject: City of New Hope 53,000,000 Industrial Revenue Bonds (Paddock Lal~s, Inc. Project), Series 1998 REQUIRED INFO~TION FOR APPLICATION FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BOND FINANCING a. List of participants 1. Applicant's representative. Bruce G. Paddock, 3940 Quebec Ave No, New Hope, MN 55427. 2. Applicant's corporate counsel-LeVander, Zotaley et al, 720 Northstar West, Mpls, MN 55402. 3. Bond Counsel-Trudy Halla, Bdggs & Morgan, 80 So 8th St, Suite 2400, Mpls, MN S5402. 4. Accounting firm-Copeland Bub. l & Company, 800 £ Wayzata Bird, Wayzata, MN 5:5391. 5. Original purchaser/placement agent-David Mullen, US Bancotp Investments, Inc., 100 So 5th St, 14th Floor, Minneapolis, MN 55402. 6. Also, see attached distribution list. b. Applicant 1. Bruce G. Paddock/Paddock Laboratories, Inc., 3940 Quebec Ave No, New Hope, MN 55427. 2. Paddock Laboratories, Inc. is a Minnesota S-Corporation that inooq~rated in 1977. The ownership of the company is: Bru~e G. Paddock (55.93%), Kris Paddock (14.69%), Daralyn Paddock (14.69%) and Ryan Paddock (14.69~). Th~ company is a privately owned business with no other parent, subsidiaries or affiliates. Bruce Paddock owns the present and proposed project site and the comlmny l~ses th~ propmy. 3. The finn is a manufnennw of pimmmo~'fi~i ptodu~ md disttihms nationwide to wholesalers and, ~ ~t and chain pharmacies. The company started in 1977 and has/town continuously ~ver sinoe, residin~ in thr~ ~ fnoih'~es over th~ years because of said growth. Th~ ~npeny's sales a~ pwjectM to rm~h about $30 nu21ion by 9/30/9g and employs about 130 pmom. 4. Chainnm, Chief~v~ Offiear and Founder-Bna~ Paddo~ Other Directors-Kris P~ldock, Daralyn Pnddoe, k and Ryan Paddock Chief Financi~ Officer-D~vid $1~mnn Dire~r of Operations-Ed Malon~ Director of isles and Madming-Allan 5~ 5. The applicant has not filed any kind of'blue sky law' do~nnnents nor is it required to do so. IRB3MM.$AM Pa~ 1 PADDOCK LABS, INC. MEMO 6. The company currently employs about 130 persor~. ?. The company ha~ previo~ly be~n awarded 'an indu.~a'ial revenue bond of $4,000,000 from the City of New Hope in .Iune, 1992. 8. The fair market value of the facility to be built will equal or exceed the amount of the bonds being requested. c. Guarantor- Not Applicable. d. Project User-Described Above. e. The Project 1. The project will be a 35,000 square foot addition to the manufacturing facility at 3940 Quebec Ave No, New Hope, MN 55427. The addition will increase the manufacntring capacity of the company and result in the creation of new jobs. 2. Brace Paddock owns the present and proposed project site and the company leases the property. 3. The present zoning of the project site is light industrial. No changes are anticipated. 4. The estimated cost of the project is $3,000,000. 5. There is projected to be no effect to the environment caused by the project. 6. New jobs created from the project during the next 3 years a~ projected to be 50, (Administrative-5, Operation~29, Sales&Marketing-7, Scienlific-9). The total estkna~d increase in payroll costs is projected to be Sl,478,800. the federal allocation of bonding authority is available. 8. The coMm]ction oftbe project will begin in August, 1998 and be complete in February, 1999. f. Bonds leaving $2,940,000 for construction costs. 2. The proposed delivery date of the bonds is projecmd to be 90 days after the availability of the federal allocation (i.e. August 1, 1998 or January 1, 1999). 3. The bonds will matm~ and will be amortized over 15 years. IRB3MM.SAM Pase 2 PADDOCK LABS, INC. MEMO 4. The type of agreement between the City of New Hope and the applicant is expected to be a loan agreement. The bonds will be backed by a letter of credit from US Bank, NA. 5. The bonds are expected to be tax exempt "qualified small issue manufacturing bonds" under the Internal Revenue Code Section 144(a). g. Fees 1. Non-refundable fee to the City of $500 (is enclosed with this application). 2. Refundable fee to the City of $2,500 (is enclosed with this application). h. Attaehments I. Applicant's annual financial statements for 9/30/97 and 9/30/96 are enclosed. 2. Not applicable. 3. There is no pending litisation. 4. See feasibility letter (delivered by US Bancorp Investments, Inc.). 5. Enclosed (delivered by Briggs and Morgan). 6. Enclosed (delivered by Briggs and Morgan). 7. Enclosed (deliver~ by Bdggs and Morgan). 8. Enclosed (delivered by Brig~,s and Morgan). 9. Enclosed (deliv~d by Bri~s and Morgan). !0. The archi~ d~ sad plans hav~ ~ ~ subafi~ to tl~ City and approved. I I. Eaclos~l (d~aiv=~ by Bri~s md Mona). 12. Eac~osod (~ by miap and Morgsn). L Publie Hem4ag I. Notice of public heari~ (detiv=~ by Brisss and Mmlsn). j. Approval of Commission,r of ~ (d~lvered by Bri~s aad Morgan). IRB3MM. SAM Pa~ 3 City of lq'aw Hope, Mimmou (Psddock Z. ebouM,'le, Pruj,cf), S,,'b, lm D,,,ie{ Doushue, City Mtnxfer Pti: 612-531.5{.12 Ir, jilt A, iciWmuald, Ommmufli~, Dev. Co,:m'diof~or i~: 6 City oflVew ~ope Fax: 612-S31-SI3S 4401 Xyion Avefluf ISSUER' S J'ero,n, P. O~lli{tn, bi. 1~ ~ & ~L,L,I' Fmz: 612,.2~,~-2640 220 S~dh Sb:th Stream MJnneapolb, ~D4 55402-1498 Serven Saedru{l, hq. Pb: 612-42S-~6'11 Edinburgh ~e ~ lqAZ~ SutlB 203 f,-' 6! S~2~ Rdinh'o~ ~ Bruco G. Psdd~2ck Ph: 612-S46.4676 ~ C, Slftmm, CFO F~: 612.S4~LJ42 Paddock ~~ 2940 (:~mobec Avmn~ Nm~fl, Suim 203 r-¥sadst, Za~aby, Vambr Lisd,m & ltydlmd, PA. Fnr,;612,.239-S~6S 720 Naflhsmr Wast 62S Manlu, m, Awnuo T~y l~hM f~: U.S. Bank Nasimmi Amuutsinn FeE Pt2~mlfb, Mlq SS447 U.S. ~ T~ N~tl ~ F~ S~ P~ ~ SSiOt STATE OF MINNESOTA MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BOND PROJECT PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 469.152 THROUGH 165 (please submit ~is form in duplicate - all supporting data in single copy only) Date: June ,1998 The governing body of the (;ity of New Ho~3e , County of Henneoin , Minnesota. hereby applies to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development (Department) for approval of a proposed lnclustnat Development Bond issue as required by Minn. StaL 469.152-. 1~5. Address of Issuer 44{il Xvl0n Avenue North. New Ho~3e. Minnesota. 55428-4898 Attn: Daniel Donahue Telepttone: 612-531-~11~ We have entered into preliminary discussions wit~: Firm: Bruce PeddOcJ~/Peddock Labomtod~. inc. Att~3m~: Trudv J. Hllla. Brk~s and Momen. P.A. Address: 3940 Quebec Avenue N. Addre~: 2400 IDS Cenl~. 80 S. Eighth ~13'e~ City: N~# Hq~3e State: MN 55427 City: Minneam~l ~late: MN 55402 Name of Project: Paddock Laboratories. In{=. This firm is engaged pdmerily in (nature of bu~ine~): menufacaz~ of ~aml~cafl~=al ¢~,;1~ The proceeds from the sale of It~ Iml~tfel ~t ~ ~ be ~ t~ (de~ribe the project): construct an aooroximately $5,00~ ~1~, ff. edditi¢~ 1~ an extalin¢l ~ Address of Proje¢l: 3940 Quaint Avenue Nadir. Neat Initial Bom:l Re~ve: $ ~ S AEDP II10-1 It is presently estimated that construction will begin on or about Auaust ,1998 and will be complete on 4, about February, 1999. When completed, there will be approximately 50 new jo-be created l~y the project at an annual payroll of approximately $ 1,478,800 based upon currently prevailing wages. (If applica01e) There are 130 existing jobs provided by business. (If applical~te) There will be. jobs created I:~ c~nstruction of the project. Number of hours' Average wage level $ "' Repayment of the proposed issue will be amortized over a period of years. The following exhibits are furnished with this application and are incorporetecl herein by reference: 1. An opinion of bond counsel that the proposal constitutes a project under Minn StaL 469.153, sul:<l. 2. 2. A copy of the resolution by the governing body of the issuer giving preliminary approval for the issuance of its revenue bonds and stating that the project, except for a project under Minn. Stat. 469.153, subcl. 2(g) or (j) would not be undertaken but for the availability of Industrial Development Bond financing. 3. A comprehensNe statement by the municipality indicating how the project satisfies the public or purpose and policies of Minn. Stat. 469.152-. 165. 4. A letter of intent to purchase the bond issue or a letter confirming the foesibility of the project fi'om a financial standpoinL 5. A statement signed by the principal represe~tative of the Mluing ~ to the eflflct that upon ente~ into the revenue agreement, the informabon required by Minn. Stat. 469.154, sul:x:l. $ will be submitted to the Department (not applical:)le to project under Minn. Slit. 469.153, sulxl. 2(g) or(j). 6. A statement signed by the principal reprlssntalNt of the iesuing aut~ that the project does not include any property to be sold or affixed to or conlumed in the production of property for ~.~le, and does not include any housing facility to be rented or used es · permanent residence. 7. A statement signed by a represantatNe of lhe iesuing authority lttlt · pul)Nc hearing ~ conducted pursuant to Minn. Stat. 469.154, sul=d. 4. The statement M inctucll lite dill, time and place of the rTmeting and certify that a draft copy of thi~ application ~ MI Illlchmenta wll available for pulMic in~)ection and that all interested parties were afforded an opp(xttJnity to expresl ~ vilwl. 8. Copies of nolice(I) al puiMiltted which indicll N die(i) of ~ and Ihl newlpapar(s) in which the notice(s) were pulMilhed. 9. Provide a I~n /m' ~ of e~wmam IX.M.nm of emn(XTa~ly dleadvanteged or unempk~yed individuall. (~ll Mini1. ~ 4ee.1~4, Mjb([ 7.) A~DP 1/10-1 We, ~e unde~igned, are duly elected representatives of the Citv of New Ho~e Minnesota and solicit.Y0ur approval of this project at your earliest convenience so that we may carry it to a final conclusion. Signed by: (PrinciPal Officers or Representatives of Issuing Authority; type or print official's name on the line to the left of the signature line. Thank you.) : W. Peter Enck Mayorlcl~alr Signature Daniel Donahue Title City Manager Signature This approval shall not be deemed to be an approval by the Department or the State of the feasibility of the project or the terms of the revenue agreement to be executed or the bonds to be issued therefor. Authorized Signature, Minnesota Department of Date of Approval Trade and Economic Development Please return to: Minnesota Department of Trade and Ec~xx~ Development Division of Community Dev~t Att~: Paul Moe 121 7th P~tce East SL Paul, Minneeota 55101 AEDPIII~I CO(2VCIL ' RF.~b'E~T FOR ACTION Originating Vepar~nent Approved for Agenda Ager~da Section Parks & Recreation 6/22/98 Development & Pl annin( Shad French // ,~ Item No. By: B~.~IO~NS 8.2 APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICA AND CALL FOR BID FOR SWIMMING POOL RENOVATION (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 601B) On 4/13/98 the City Council accepted a concept report for the swimming pool for improvements including needed maintenance improvements. The local neighborhood, the swim club, and the Advisory Commission have all met and reviewed plans for the pool (601A and 601B). On May 26% Council approved plans and specifications for Improvement project 601A which calls for the manufacture and installation only of a new stainless steel gutter system for the 34 year old facility. Those bids will be considered separately tonight. Tonight staff is requesting approval of plans and specifications for 601B which includes: a new concession stand with additional site improvements, new sand filter system, improvements to the entry of the bathhouse, new concrete walk'ways, a reconstructed diving well with 2 new diving boards and one drop slide, sandblasting and painting the bottom and sides of both of the pools, ADA ramp into the shallowest end of the big pool, ventilation for both equipment buildings, and the demolition and concrete work involved with the gutter system. The total engineer's estimate at thi~ lime for 601B is $755,000.00. The total for the entire proposed project (601A & 601B) i~ $880,000.00. Funding sources will be identified. Staff recommend~ al31::~val oftheee plan~ and spedlication~. Bid~ will be opened on July 21= for consideration at the July 27a Council meeting. MOTION BY ~ BY TO: J~A-O01 ~ ADVERTISEMF=NT FOR BIDS Sealed bids will be received by the City of New Hope, Minnesota at the City Hall, at 4401 Xylon Avenue, until 1 l:00 A.M., C.D.S.T., on Tuesday, July 21, 1998, at which time they will be publicly opened and read aloud for the furnishing of all labor and materials and all else necessary for the following: Swimming Pool Renovation/Concession Building Improvements -Ci~ Proiect No. 601R Demolish and remove the existing pool gutter system, diving well, concrete decking, pool piping, pool f'flters, concessitm building, bath house entry desk and floor, pavement, sidewalk, and fencing. Construct concrete improvements including decking, gutt~ wall, pool shell, sidewalk, driveway pavement, and curb and gutter. Construct piping improvements including undergrmmd pool piping, interior mechanical room piping, water main, sanitary service, and storm sewer. Furnish and install sand filters and associated piping. Construct ventilation and electrical improvements in existing Mechanical Rooms. Construct concession building. Building is & one stot'y, 900 sq.ft, masonry building with a wood roof structure and a membrane and metal roof. Building includes cabinetry and both mechanical and electrical work. Furnish and install floor drains, cabinetry, and queuing standards in bath house entry. Miscellaneous site imlxo~m~ including ~r~in$, landscapin$, irrigation, and fencing. Plans and spec~ Ixogosal ~ a~ contra~t doo. ttmms nmy be seen at the o~ of the City Clerk, New Hope,, Minneao~ and at the office of ~, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc., Consulting Engineem 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36, St. Paul, ~ 55113, (612) 636=¢fi00. Each bid shah be a~ by · bidd~s bond namin$ th~ City of New Hol~ as obligee, certified check payable to the Clerk of the City of New Hoge or · cash depmit equal to at least five pen:ent (5 %) of the mount of the bid, which shall be forfeited to tl~ City in the event that the bidder fails to enter into a contra~ The City Council reserves tla~ right to retain th~ depmits of th~ tlaxze lowest bidders for a Ped°d n°t to exceed 45 days nfl~r tl~ dat~ and time set for th~ opmin~ of bids. No bids may be withdrawn for a period of forty-five (45) days after the dnte and time set fix the ~g of bids. .4ndsfl~ & ~ b~ ~DV~FTISBd~qT P~:~ B~S Payment for the work will be by cash or check. Contractors desiring a copy of the plans and speciflc~ons and proposal forms may obtait!, them from the office of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc., upon payment of a non-t;t,i'undable fee of $50.00. See "Information to Bidders" for plan/specification fee policy. The City Council reserves ~ right to reject any and all bids, to waive irregularities and informalities therein and further reserves the right to award the contract to the best interests of the City. Daniel Donahue, City Manager City of New Hope, Minnesota ,~ddm~ & Amocimm, b~.. ~'<'~'~' ~' ~"~"' X CITY Of NEW HOPE ~ ~ --~ ' ~' C~E~ ~DI~ .................. ' " I~~ME~S -- '-~ SWIMMING P~L ~ o · ...... ~. .1_ ~ .... ~ RENOVATION -' ................... ~;~' ~'~ ........... . ~ ~IA P' ~ ~ ~ '" ~·~ ' '" '" ' t 'l~j i: ..: .! ::: ' ".'"'l'" · ,.,, ,~ -- i.:-. "'--I ii ) ' I ..., ~ I ".~ " I~'~ ---t- I~- __ I ~'.,. ........... ,} ) .................. .~:..+ !~' ............................................... : ! · Z V~.O~NNIfl '3dOH ,. J .,.. YJ,OS3NNII~I '3dOH NL~N JO ,,l~JO I ! . I ! -Ii LJ '- ''L I ~ ~ SN~J.V,"CK311 '4~Od ~ V. LO~]NNIFI ']dOH ~N Iii V.I.OS~NNIIq '3dOH ! COUNCIl, [,~~/,,/ RF~UE~T FOR ACTION Or~ma~ Department Approved for A~ex~la A~da Sect/on Parks & Recreation Development & P1 anni ng 0/22/98 Shah French Item No. e~. ~. 8.3 APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPEClFI S AND CALL FOR BIDS FOR CIVIC CENTER PARK PROJECT- PHASE 1 (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ~629) At the February 23, 1998 City Council meeting, staff was directed to negotiate a contract with a park planner to develop a master plan for Civic Center Park. Brauer and Associates, Ltd. was the planner who worked with the City on the Northwood Park project in 1997 and so Mr. George Watson was contacted. At the 3/9/98 Council meeting, Council author/zed the hiring of Mr. Watson and to develop a Master Plan for the Civic Center Park with input from the public and the Citizen Advisory Commission. On April 8m input was received from Council, on April 30~ a meeting with held with park neighbors, a swim club reprasentative, and other interested persons from the community. On May 18m the Advisory Commission discuased a draft of the master plan. The neighbors and interested community members who attended the April 30~ meeting were invited to that meeting as well. On May 26e the Council accepted the Master Plan for Civic Center as recommended by the Citizen Advisory Commi~ion and directed staff to develop plans and specifications for phase one of the master plan. Tonight Council is being asked to aplxove plarm and specifications and call for bids for phase one of the master plan for Civic Cenl~ perk. Thi~ includes the rebuilding of the four existing tennis courts, the building of a lighted beN<elba# court, a lighted volleyball court, and realignment of the drive leading from Zealand Avenue to the Fire Station. Plans also include some landscaping materials to enhance the petit a~ well as provide some screening of the new courts from the Zealand Avenue neighbom. In order for the courts to be u~able next spring the project needs to take place this fall. It is staffs intent to open bids on July 21" and return to Council for bid co~ideration on July 27~. If TO: Review: Ad~lnistr~,~: Flmmce: RFA-O01 ADVERTISF..MENT FOR BIDS Sealed bids will be received by the City of New Hope, Minnesota at the City Hall, a~ 440l Xylon Avenue, until 11:30 A.M., C.D.S.T., on Tuesday, July 21, 1998, at which time they will be publicly opened and read aloud for the furnishing or' mil labor and materials and all else necessary for the following: Civic Center Park - Court Imt~mvernen~s, City Proi_ect No. 629 Demolish and remove existing paving and fencing for four tennis courts. Demolish and remove existing driveway from Zealand Avenue to Fire Station Furnish and install paving and fencing for four tennis courts (salvage existing lighting). Furnish and install new paving and lighting for one basketball court. Furnish and install new sand voHeyt~! court. Furnish and install new driveway to fire station. Miscellaneous site improvements include ~radinL landscape, site fumiunv,, bimmiuous trails, and restoration for a 3-acre site. Plans and specifications, proposal forms and contract docmnents may be seen at the office of the City Clerk, New Hope, Minnesota, and at the office of Bonestroo, Roeene, Anderiik & As.sodates, Inc., Consulting Engineers, 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36, St. Panl, MN 55113, (612) 636-4600. Each bid shall be accompanied by a bidder's bond naming the City of New Hope as obligee, certified check payable to the Clerk of the City of New Hope or a cash depesit equal to at least five percent (5%) of the amount of the bid, which shall be forfeited to the City in the event that the bidder fails to enter into a contract. The City Council reserves th~ right to mmin the deposits of tl~ three lowest biddm~ for a period not to exceed 45 days afar ~ ~ and tin~ s~t for'tbe opining of bids. No bids maybe withdrawn for a period of forty-five (45) days afbn' th~ dam and ~ s~t for the opening of bids. Payment for the work will lm by cash Contracton cl~iring a copy of the plans and specifi~ and proposal forms may obtain them fi'om the office of Bonestroo, Rosene, Andmtik & Associates, Inc., upon payment of a non-refUndable Fee of $30.00. See "Information to Bidders' for plan/specification fee policy. The City Council reserves tbe right m t~ject any and all bids, m walw ~ ami inform~ties therein and further reeervee the right to award the conlract to th~ best intemsu of the City. b ~ ~- VJ.O$2NNI~ '3dO~ M~N I COUNCIL FOR Originating Depa~i~,ent Approved for Agenda Agenda SecUon Public Works 6-22-98 Develooment & Plnnnin~ Item No. Jeannine Clancy B~. 8. ¢ PRESENTATION REGARDING PRO~P~/SED NEW HOPE CITY CENTER MASTER PLAN (PROJECT 547 AND 575) In December, 1997, the City Council authorized staff to contract with Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc. (DSU) to develop a streetscape master plan for the following areas: · 42"4 Avenue between Gettysburg and Louisiana Avenues, · Xylon/45"' Avenue between 42"~ and Winnetka Avenues, and · Winnetka Avenue between Quebec and 45"' Avenues. As further directed by Council, staff assembled a task force to assist the City Engineer and DSU to develop the streetscape master plan. The task force, which consisted of local business representatives, property owners, and county and city staff, ha~ completed its work. Mr. Geoff Martin, landscape architect and project manager from DSU, will present the work of the task force to Council. The attached report, which includes an executive summary, outlines the process in which the master plan was developS, the recommended improvements, the costs associated with the project, and the finding sources available. Staff requests that Council schedule a work se~ion in July to discuss the master plan. Once agreement hes been reached with Council on the scope of the project and the budget, the design phase will be initiated. MORION BY /~OND ~ TO: , Pr~ect547 and 575-New Hope City Center Master Plan June 22,1998 Page 2 The following is a milestone schedule for the project: Present Master Plan to Council June 22, 1998 Council Work Session July, 1998 Council Authorizes Preparation of Plans and Specifications July 27, 1998 Present Feasibility Report October, 1998 Public Hearing November, 1998 Approval of Plans/Specifications and Authorize Bidding January, 1999 Conduct Assessment Hearing/Award Contract March, 1999 Begin Construction May, 1999 Complete Construction October, 1999 Staff requests that a work session be scheduled in July to discuss the project. June 1998 Prorated By: Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc. CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Acknowledgments ' 3 List of Figures ............................................. 4 Executive Summary ........................................ 5 I. Introduction ......................................... 12 Purpose of Study ............................................... 12 What is a Streetscape? .......................................... 12. Project Approach ............................................... 14 Process ...................................................... 16 17 II. Existing Conditions ................................... District Identity ................................................. 17 Pedestrian Facilities and Circulation ................................ 19 Local History .................................................. 21 Character Elements ............................................. 23 Preliminary Issues .............................................. 23 Community Issues Workshop Summary ............................. 23 III Principles Goals and Objectives 27 Design Principles ............................................... 27 Goals and Objectives ............................................ 27 Design Framework Plan .......................................... 28 Master Plan · 30 IV. Streetscape ............................... Phase One Recommendations .................................... 30 A. 42nd Avenue: Zealand to Winnetka Ave ................. . ..... 30 B. Xylon Avenue: Civic Center ............................... 37 C. 45th Avenue: Residential and Open Space Corridor ............ 41 Phase Two Recommendations .................................... 44 A. Winnetka Avenue: North of 42nd Avenue ..................... 44 B. Winnetka Avenue: South of 42nd Avenue .................... 50 C. 42nd Avenue: East of Winnetka Avenue ..................... 52 Redevelopment Concepts ........................................ 59 V. Streetscape Elements ................................. 64 Principles ..................................................... 64 Design Concept ................................................ 64 Elements ..................................................... 65 PAGE 1 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT Vi Implementation 74 Public Improvements ....................................... ~ .....74 Phase One Summary of Costs .................................... 74 Potential Funding Sources ........................................ 75 Private Improvements ........................................... 75 Estimated Maintenance Costs ..................................... 75 Requested Actions .............................................. 77 ConcLusion .................................................... 77 VII. Appendix .................................... · ....... 78 Issues Summary ............................................... 78 Issues Workshop Summary ....................................... 80 Detailed Cost Estimates .......................................... $3 PAGE 2 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 1 Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc. wishes to thank the following individuals for participating in the design process and for providing their time, effort, and candid input into this collaborative effort. C_ity_CeQteLStr_e_ets_cape Mast~sk Force Steve Svendsen ................................. New Hope Planning Commission Sharon Cassen .......................................... New Hope City Council Steve Reed ........................................ Citizens Advisory Committee Paul Anderson ............................................. Universal Color Lab Mike Diederichs ............................................. Universal Color Lab Harvey Becker ................................................ Marquette Bank Joel Bonenstingl Marquette Bank Bob Sendelbach ................................................ Norwest Bank Thomas Walerius .......................................... School District #281 Robert Rappaport ............................................. Winnetka Center Mary Jean Kroll ............................................... Winnetka Center Kirk Malkowski ....................................... Gill Brothers Funeral Home Al Stabenow 'Gethsemane Cemetery John Louris ............................................... Catholic Cemeteries John Cherek .............................................. Catholic Cemeteries Brent Lindgren .............................................. Hennepin County Todd Grugel ................................................ Hennepin County David Lasky ............................................. Lasky Co. Real Estate Marisa Lasky Lasky Co. Real Estate Dale Jeske ........................................................ Resident Jeannine Clancy .......................... City of New Hope Director of Public Works Tom Schuster ...................... City of New Hope Contract Manager and Forester Kirk McDonald .................... City of New Hope Community Development Director Shad French ........................ City of New Hope Parks and Recreation Di,-ector Doug Sanstad ................................... City of New Hope Building Official Mark Hanson ...................... Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates, Inc. Glen Gustafson ..................... Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates, Inc. Vincent Vander Top ................. Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates, Inc. Landscape Architectural and Urban Design Consultants: Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban: Geoff Martin John Slack Carissa Schively PAGE3 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT LIST OF FIGURES 1 1. Project Phasing .................................................... 13 2. Work Program ..................................................... 15 3. Districts ......................... ' ................................. 18 4. Development Pattern/Bus Routes ...................................... 20 5. Historical Photos ................................................... 22 6. Preliminary Summary of Issues ........................................ 26 7. Framework Plan ................................................... 29 8. Streetscape Master Plan ............................................. 31 9. Hennepin County Guidelines .......................................... 32 10. 42nd Avenue Sections ............................................... 33 11. 42nd Avenue: Boone to Louisiana Avenue - Plan ............. ' ............. 34 12. View East at 42nd Avenue and Xylon Avenue ............................. 35 13. Xylon Avenue - Plan and Sections ...................................... 38 14. Xylon Avenue - Proposed View North from 45th Avenue ..................... 39 15. 45th Avenue - Xylon Avenue to Winnetka Avenue - Plan .................... 42 16. 45th Avenue - View from Winnetka Avenue ............................... 43 17. Winnetka Avenue: Quebec to 45th Avenue - Plan .......................... 45 18. Winnetka Avenue - View of Bus Plaza and Seatwalls ....................... 46 19. New Hope Roadside Farmers Market ................................... 47 20. City Center Commons - View from East ................................. 48 21. Winnetka Avenue - View of South Entry ................................. 51 22. 42nd Avenue East of Winnetka - Alternative A ............................ 53 23. 42nd Avenue East of Winnetka - Alternative B ............................ 54 24. 42nd Avenue East of Winnetka - Alternative C ............................ 55 25. Alternative C - View Looking East ...................................... 56 26. East Entry at Louisiana Avenue ........................................ 57 27. Redevelopment Concept A: City Center Commons ......................... 61 28. Redevelopment Concept B: Main Street ................................. 62 29. Redevelopment Concept C: Town Square ................................ 63 30. Sign Concepts ...................................................... 66 31. Parking Lot Buffer Railings ........................................... 67 32. Typical Parking Lot Buffer ............................................ 68 33. Bus Shelters ....................................................... 70 34. Lighting Alternatives ................................................ 71 PAGE 4 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ~'- 1 This report summarizes the analysis and master planning phases of the City of New Hope's City Center Streetscape Master Plan. The catalyst for this project was the proposed improvement of 42nd Avenue, also referred to ~s Rockford Road and County Road 9, between Boone and Winnetka Avenues scheduled for construction in the spring of 1999. At that time the City recognized that the upgrading of 42nd Avenue presented an opportunity to improve the image and to set the stage for future improvements to the overall City Center Area. Purpose of Study This document represents the completion of a six month process to formulate a framework plan for streetscape improvements within New Hope's City Center Area. The project area includes: · 42nd Avenue from Gettysburg Avenue to Louisiana Avenue · 45th Avenue from Xylon Avenue to Winnetka Avenue · Winnetka Avenue from Quebec Avenue to 45th Avenue · Xylon Avenue from 42nd Avenue to 46th Avenue The ultimate challenge of this project is to balance the functional needs of vehicles with those of pedestrians to create a sense of persona'l safety and comfort while also celebrating the community's culture, fostering a sense of community pride, and unifying the appearance of the City Center as an "Urban Village." Project Approach To be successful in the long term, the streetscape must create an environment that reflects the vision and character desired by the community. The approach was tailored to solicit the communities input and create a responsive plan that will assist the city in reaching informed decisions regarding the extent, character, costs, benefits, and maintenance concerns associated with the proposed improvements. Task Force The design process was overseen by the City Center Streetscape Master Plan Task Force which consists of representatives from area businesses, residents, the New Hope City Council and Planning Commission, and city staff. Process At this point, the City of New Hope has completed the first two phases of the four phase Streetscape Design Project outlined below: · Phase One- Analysis. This phase focused on defining the communities issues and objectives, character districts, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, opportunities and other design parameters. · Phase Two- Master Plan and Preliminary Streetscape Design. This phase focused on preparing the preliminary design and master plan for the project area. Alternative concepts were explored and ultimately a preferred composite plan was recommended based upon input from the task force. PAGE 5 I Il Illl ----- [ ......... ii Il Igll " ' I'l Iii .......... - ~ ' ~.~ -- CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER pLAN - SUMMARY REPORT · Phase Three- Design Development and Construction Documents, and Bidding.' Upon authorization to proceed by the City, the consultant will prepare design ~ development and construction documents for the first phase of improvements. · Phase Four- Construction and Site Inspections. Upon approval, the consultant team will assist with construction inspections. CommunitY Issues Workshop Summary A Community Issues Workshop was held on February 24, 1998, to provide the residents of New Hope with an opportunity to voice their opinions on the issues, problems, and opportunities facing the City Center Area. Following is a summary of the results: A. Strengths/Opportunities · Small town atmosphere. Participants noted that they appreciated the small town feel of the city and should maximize this by promoting a village character in the City Center Area. · Infrastructure and traffic. Properly managing the high traffic levels and maximizing the use of the quality infrastructure in the area are seen as opportunities. · Development opportunities. Participants identified the need to incorporate destination businesses into the City Center area. This could be accomplished on vacant and underdeveloped property within the area. B. Weaknesses/Threats · Unattractive features. A number of aesthetically displeasing elements were identified Within the City Center area including large expanses of asphalt, overhead electrical lines, fragmented buildings, and unattractive signage. · Need for identity. Participants noted a number of problems concerning the lack of an identity for the City Center Area including the lack of gateway features, lack of a central gathering space, and insufficient signage. · Lack of amenities. It was noted by participants that there is a lack of convenient access to recreational facilities and also insufficient commercial development to serve local needs within the area. C. Issues/Objectives · Development opportunities. The City Center Design process will afford the City an opportunity to consider development and redevelopment opportunities at several key sites within the City Center Area. · Central focus. One of the primary goals of this process is the creation of an area which can serve as a central focus for the community. Through the incorporation of design elements and additional facilities possibly including an outdoor market, pocket parks, a fountain, the community may be able to effectively create an identifiable "city center." Incorporating signage and improving linkages from neighborhoods are important ways to accomplish these objectives. · Aesthetics. Improving the aesthetic qualities of the City Center area is another area of focus. Options to accomplish this include burying utilities, developing a theme for building and landscape design, and promoting consistent signage. PAGE 6 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT Design Principles The design principles listed below are intended to serve as a foundation on which to base the design of the streetscape and guide future redevelopment efforts. · Reinforce a positive, genuine character. · Design a hierarchy of streetscape treatments. · Design a flexible palette of elements. · Integrate the need to move traffic with safety and aesthetic meeds of the streetscape. Goals · Utilize the streetscape design as a means of implementing an "Urban Village" theme. · Encourage a positive, vital, and unique image for the City Center Area. · Encourage appropriate redevelopment in the City Center Area. · Take advantage of opportunities for new development in order to effectively address the needs of the community. S/r_eetsca pe_Maste r Pla~ The area defined as Phase One is proposed to be constructed in the Spring of 1999 and therefore received the greatest scrutiny from the Task Force. Following is a summary of the streetscape elements recommended by the Task Force for each segment in Phase One. PHASE ONE: RECOMMENDED STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS A. 42nd AVENUE: ZEALAND TO WINNETKA AVENUE. This segment is the primary east to west entry into the City Center. · Landscaped Medians. This concept incorporates three landscaped medians within 42nd Avenue to define the gateway to the City Center and to reduce the perceived scale of the four to six lane road. · New Access to Applebees and K. Mart. This concept proposes that the access point just east of the bank would be closed and a new access point would be incorporated just west of Applebees. This new access point would prevent traffic entering from 42nd Avenue from racing in front of Applebees. A second access point would be located just east of Applebees. Service access will still be maintained for K-Mart. · Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail and Boulevard. The Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan includes a bikeway along the entire length of 42nd Avenue through New Hope. In addition, a bike lane along the south side of 42nd Avenue between Zealand and Boone Avenues is represented in the New Hope Transportation Plan. At this time it is uncertain if either of these plans will be implemented. However, it will be the intention of the master plan to explore means that will allow us to comply with either of these transportation plans if they are enacted. It is not the objective of the master plan to redesign these transportation plans. Rather, it is our goal to deal with regional bike trail issues. A ten foot bicycle trail and a ten foot boulevard are proposed on the south side of 42nd Avenue along the Gethsemane Cemetery property. This design configuration PAGE 7 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT meets the minimum standards established by Hennepin County for mixed-use trails. A pedestrian/bicycle crossing would occur at the Xylon/42nd Avenue intersection. The bicycle trail and boulevard on the south side of 42nd Avenue will require right- of-way beyond that already negotiated. The amount of right-of-way needed will range from five feet to eight feet. · City Center Sign. The body of the existing city center sign could be updated and redesigned to conform to a potential city center sign system. The existing brick base would be unchanged. Additional flowers and other landscaping is proposed to be added to punctuate this area as an entry to the City Center. The proposed entrance and landscaping for the Cemetery is included in the master plan. The new entrance is proposed to line up with Xylon Avenue and is 100 to 150 feet east of the existing City Center Sign. The proposed entry landscaping extends to the back of the sign and will form a very nice back drop. · Other Elements. A sidewalk and six foot boulevard will be provided on the north side of 42nd Avenue to provide access to City Center for residents to the west. New signs, boulevard trees, roadway lighting and additional landscaping will also be included. B. XYLON AVENUE: This street defines the west edge of the City Center and is the front door to civic uses such as the City Hall, Civic Center Park, the New Hope swimming pool, and the Fire and Police Stations. · Reduce width of Traffic Lanes, include Landscaped Medians, Widened Walks and Boulevards. The recommended plan for Xylon Avenue calls for reducing the roadway width to include landscaped medians, sidewalks and tree lined boulevards. This treatment will create a distinctive character to the corridor, reduce the perceived width of the street, calm traffic, and provide an element of continuity between 42nd Avenue, 45th Avenue, and potentially Winnetka Avenue. Although the City staff respects the task force decision regarding median.s, the staff has expressed concerns regarding the initial cost of construction and ongoing maintenance. · City Bikeway. The City Trail and Bikeway Plan designates a bike path thorough the project area from 46th Avenue south through Civic Center Park to 42nd Avenue. Options were discussed that include incorporating the bikeway or a spur into the Xylon Avenue corridor. · Bicycle Trail. This concept includes a ten foot bicycle trail and ten foot boulevard on the west side of Xylon Avenue. The bicycle trail should connect to the proposed City trail at 46th Avenue and go south through the park. Within the park, the trail should branch off at the swimming pool with one leg winding south through the park to Zealand Avenue and the other leg branching east to Xylon Avenue directly north of the swimming pool. The bicycle trail proposed on Xylon Avenue will travel south to the intersection of 42nd Avenue, where it will intersect with the proposed Hennepin County trail on the south side of 42nd Avenue. PAGE 8 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT · Pedestrian Crosswalk Between the Pool and K-Mart. A pedestrian crossing is proposed between the K-Mart parking lot and the pool. Safe sight lines ai~d traffic calming measures need to be incorporated into the design to insure this crossing is as safe as possible. A table top design for the crosswalk should be considered to provide a visual and textural cue to motorists to slow down for pedestrians. The city trail proposed on Xylon Avenue must take into consideration the vehicular and pedestrian traffic in and out of the swimming pool/City Hall parking lot. This is a highly populated area during the summer months which could lead to potential pedestrian/bicycle conflicts. · Retaining/Seatwalls. Low serpentine concrete or brick retaining walls are proposed at key areas along the east side of Xylon Avenue where earth may need to be retained due to the expansion of the walks and boulevards and also to emphasize entry points into the businesses. These walls will be designed to compliment the other streetscape elements and provide a distinctive image for the City Center area. · Pedestrian Level Lighting, Directional Signs, and Street Furniture. These Streetscape elements will be included to create a cohesive pedestrian friendly environment. C. 45th AVENUE: Residential and Open Space Corridor. · Reduce width of Traffic Lanes, include Landscaped Medians, Walks and Boulevards. The recommended concept for 45th Avenue includes narrowing the traffic lanes and putting the residual space into boulevards, walkways and landscaped medians. · Park and Ride. The park and ride parking lot at the northeast corner of the Winnetka Center is not authorized by the property owners. The proposed bus shelter at this location may not be as critical if the park and ride is not included in future plans. ° Wetland Interpretive Park. A small pocket park is proposed on the south side of the wetland. This space could incorporate a deck overlooking the wetland, an arbor with seating areas and interpretive exhibits. Other enhancements that should be considered at the wetland include: removal of fences, dredging to create islands, and wetland plantings to improve the habitat. A crosswalk is also proposed across 45th Avenue from the shopping center to the wetland. · Parking Lot Screening. Additional landscaping and possibly a decorative retaining wall are proposed to buffer the north edge of the Winnetka Center parking lot. Phase One Summary of Costs The costs for the landscape components summarized in this Master Plan are separated between streetscape (outside curb) and medianscape (between median curbs including median curbs.) Cost estimates for street/signal, utility, storm sewer, ponding (Boone Avenue and 41st Avenue, 45th Avenue east of Winnetka Avenue) and bury overhead electric also are identified. PAGE 9 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT The estimated costs not including landscape are from previous reports and very preliminary* estimates prepared.to date. Contingencies are estimated at 10 percent, while indirec~ costs include administrative, engineering, legal, interest, etc. are estimated at 25 percent. Right-of- way costs for Gethsemane Cemetery were pre~iously estimated, however, if additional right-of- way is requested, the previous estimates must be updated. The costs for phase one are summarized in the table below. 42nd Avenue Xylon Avenue 45th Avenue (Boone to Winnetka) (42nd to 46th) (Xylon to Winnetka) Total Street/Signal $710,00(; $250,000 $120,000 Utility (Sanitary Sewer) $40,00(; Storm Sewer $80,000 . $110,000 Pond $110,000! $50,00(; Landscape- Streetscape $450,00(; $325,00(; $375,00(; Landscape- $50,000 $50,000i $2~,00C Medianscape Subtotal $1,440,000 $625,000 $680,0001 +10%Cont, in~ency ,, + $1441000 + $62r500 ~ $681000 Subtotal $1,58.4,000 $687,500 $748,000 +25% lndirect Cost + $3961000 + $1711900 + $187r000 Subtotal $1,980,000 $859,400 $935,000 $3,774,401~ Buy Overhead Electric + $1501000 Total $2,130,000 $859,400 $935,000 $3,924,401; Projected Maintenance Costs Annual Maintenance Costs: $35,000 10% Overhead & Administration Costs _$3,500 $38,$00 Funding Sources The potential funding sources for the streetscape project include: Hennepin County, Municipal State Aid, Tax Increment Financing, Sewer and Water Funds, Stormwater Utility Funds, Assessment, Metropolitan Livable Communities grants, and Community Fund Raising;. Proposed Project Schedule Authorize Preparation of Feasibility report, and plans and specifications for bidding ................................ June 22,1998 Present Feasibility Report ..................................... October 12,1998 Public Hearing .................................................. Nov. 9,1998 Approval of Plans and Specifications for Bidding ....................... Jan. 11,1999 Bid Date ...................................................... Feb. 2, 1999 Council Considers Bids and Schedules Assessment Hearing ............. Feb. 8, 1999 Assessment Hearing ............................................ March 8,1999 Award Contract .............................................. March 22, 1999 Construction Starts .............................................. May 1, 1999 PAGE CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT I. INTRODUCTION t This report summarizes the analysis and master planning phases of the City of New Hope's City Center Streetscape Master Plan. The catalyst for this project was the proposed improvement of 42nd Avenue between Boone and Winnetka Avenues in the Fall of 1997. The objectives of that project were to improve traffic flow, bury the power lines, and enhance landscaping. At that time, the City recognized that the proposed upgrading of 42nd Avenue, also referred to as Rockford Road and County Road 9, presented an opportunity to improve the image of this gateway into the City of New Hope and to set the stage for future improvements to the overall City Center Area.. The 42nd Avenue project was postponed until the Spring of 1999 to provide enough time to prepare this Master Plan and to ensure that the 42nd Avenue improvements will be integrated into an overall plan for the City Center Area. Purpose of Study This document represents the completion of a six month process to formulate a framework plan and implementation strategy for streetScape improvements within New Hope's City Center Area. Included is an outline of the process, community issues, gOals and objectives, the framework plan, selected streetscape elements, cost estimates, a phasing plan, projected funding sources, and an implementation strategy. This plan should be used as a guide for future decisions regarding both public and private improvements within the project area. See Figure 1. The project area includes: · 42nd Avenue from Gettysburg Avenue to Louisiana Avenue · 45th Avenue from Xylon Avenue to Winnetka Avenue · Winnetka Avenue from Quebec Avenue to 45th Avenue · Xylon Avenue from 42nd Avenue to 46th Avenue The primary objectives of study are as follows: · The Master Plan for the area will provide the framework for future streetscape improvement projects. ·The Master Plan will ultimately guide redevelopment of this area to create an ."Urban Village" experience. · The Master Plan will integrate the existing 42nd Avenue improvements into the overall streetscape plan. This study is not intended to be a comprehensive redevelopment plan or strategy. However, a streetscape plan would not be complete without recognizing the important role that redevelopment concerns such as architecture, site planning, land uses, economics, community organization, and promotion play in shaping a vital city center and street environment. For this reason, redevelopment principles and concepts are presented in this report. These are intended to stimulate conversation and to respond to the vision for a city center defined by the participants in the study. What is a Streetscape? The term "streetscape" refers to the physical setting, shaped by the relationships and design of buildings, parking lots, sidewalks, signs, landscaping, street furniture, as well as, the mixture of land uses. The relationships of these elements are key determinants in shaping a positive environment that is both functional and appealing for motorists and pedestrians. PAGE t z F~GURE PAGE CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT Urban environments are characterized by densely spaced buildings that shape street corridors ~-~ and consequently an environment that is more compact, human scaled and comfortable for pedestrians. As with most suburban commercial areas, New Hope is a young city shaped by the dominant form of transportation - the automobile. Suburban environments, are characterized by buildings that are spread out and separated from the street by parking lots. This relationship usually results in an environment that is unorganized, and at a scale that is uncomfortable for pedestrians. Project Approach To be successful in the long term, the streetscape must create an environment that reflects the vision and character desired by the community. The approach was tailored to respond to the community's input and to result in a plan that will assist the City in reaching informed decisions regarding the extent, character, costs, benefits,' and maintenance concerns associated with the proposed improvements. A. T_ask_F_o_r_ce The design process was overseen by the City Center Streetscape Master Plan Task Force which consists of representatives from area businesses, residents, the New Hope City Council and Planning Commission, and city staff. The consulting team actively participated in meetings with this group throughout the design process and benefitted from their candid input and constructive criticism. B. _Community. Involvement New Hope's residents and business owners have had a lot to say about what the City Center Area should look and feel like and how future plans may affect their property. The success of the design depends on how well it responds to the goals and objectives of the community. The process was formulated to provide opportunities for the stakeholders to reView the plans, provide insights about how the project will affect their property, and to voice their concerns. This was accomplished through the task force, as well as a combination of an issues workshop and open houses. C. Master Plan and Implementation Strategy A framework which outlines the objectives for the City Center Area has been created to ensure that improvements completed over time will be integrated into a cohesive whole. D. Palette of Streetscane Amenities A flexible palette of streetscape elements has been produced that is intended to be used within the public rights-of-way within the City Center Area. The streetscape elements will contribute to the creation of a distinct and memorable district within the City of New Hope and the Metro Area. E. Cbar.~cter The approach recognizes the many functions that these transportation corridors serve, as well as the variety of districts that contribute to the personality of the City Center Area as a whole. The intent is to create a spirited, progressive streetscape that will reinforce the positive --.spects of the City Center area's history, landmarks, and its current role within the community. PAGE 14 CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY CENTER STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - SUMMARY REPORT F. Balance Between Pedestrian add Vehicular_U_s.es The ultimate challenge of this project is to balance the functional needs of vehicles with those of pedesirians to create a sense of personal safety and comfort while also celebrating the community's culture, fostering a sense Of community pride, and unifying the appearance of the City Center as an "Urban Village." The plan incorporates streetscape elements such as lighting, street trees, landscaped mediahs, bicycle and transit facilities, and coordinated signage to reduce the perceived scale of the street, provide adequate traffic capacity, create a traffic calming effect, provide a safer, more appealing pedestrian environment, and foster a sense of civic pride. Process At this point, the City of New Hope has completed the first two phases of the four phase Streetscape Design Project illustrated in Figure 2 and outlined below: A. Pha_se_O_~e, Analysis This phase focused on defining the communities issues and objectives, character districts, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, opportunities and other design parameters. B. Phase Two- Master Plan al3_d PreliminaL'y_Str_e_etscap.e_D~ The second phase of the study focused on preparing the preliminary design and master plan for the project area. Alternative concepts were explored and ultimately a preferred composite plan was recommended based upon input from the task force and the project team. The composite plan is described in this document. C. Phas~~~~~~ Construction Documents~and_Bl_'d_ding Upon authorization to proceed by the City, the consultant will prepare design development and construction documents, and bidding for the first phase of improvements. D. Eh[se Four- Constr_u_cti_o_n_an_d_SJte_lnspe_ctions Upon approval the consultant team will assist with construction inspections. PAGE RF. UE T ['OR ACTION ~-t~t. mg ~epart~ent Approved for Agenda A~enda SecUon Development Community Development ~ & Planninq 8 Item No. By:. Kirk McDonald · 8.5 DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPERTY/AT 2751 LAMPHERE DRIVE (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 578) In October 1996, the General Inspector informed the City that the owner of the property at 2751 Lamphere Ddve was interested in selling the property to the City. A code compliance inspection had been completed and there were a number of code violations. The house was built around 1900 and is one of the oldest homes in the City. The parcel contains approximately 32,500 square feet (.75 acres) and is located in an R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District. In 1996 them were two dwelling unite located in the single family home: a first floor, two-bedroom unit with 1,400 square feet of living space and a second floor, two-bedroom apartment with 800 square feet of living space. The City Council authorized staff to have an appraisal completed on the property as the City was interested in the potential redevelopment of the property. BCL Appraisals completed an appraisal of the property and estimated the fair market value at $119,000. The 1998 assessed value of the property is $99,000 ($29,500 land/S69,500 building). Subsequent to the completion of the appraisal, the property owner offered to sell the property to the City for $85,000. At the October 28, 1996, Council meeting, the Council approved a motion not to purchase the property due to the purchase pdce, the location of the sanitary sewer, and because the City would be required to provide relocation benefite to the~,,: tenante of the property. Per the affached letter, the property has been purchased by new owners and has been returned to a single family home use. No tenants reside on the property and no relocation benefits would need to be paid if the ownem agreed to waive the benefits and voluntarily sell the property to the City. The new owners are in the process of making substantial repairs to the property, but have more problems than anticipated and are questioning how much they should invest in the older home. They know that the City was previously interested in this site and are Inquiring if the City would again be interested in the property due to the fact that no tenants rseide on the site. (cont'd.) MOTION BY ~(~ON~ ~ TO: Request for Action Page 2 6-22-98 The City does have funds available from several sources (CDEIG and HOME) for several housing redevelopment projects and needs to find some sites to utilize the funding. Staff has developed several concept sketches for the potential redevelopment of the area, including the property -:,'djacent to and south of this site, which may also become available. Staff is requesting direction from the Council on how to respond to the property owner. If the Council is interested in the property, staff recommends that the Council authorize the appraisal to be updated and authorize staff to negotiate with the property owner. 2751 Lamphem Drive New Hope, Minnea<~ 56427 June 15, 1998 City Of New Hope Mr. Kirk McDonald Management A~i~nt/Community Development Coordinator 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, Minnem:da 55428 Re: 2751 Lampham Drive; PIN: 20-118-21 330085 Dear Mr. McDonald: We own the property lilMd above. The houle had · rental alcmrtment Ul:~tairt, ·piDaren~ for many yearn, but we have now returned it to · tingle-family home. The property, which induclee approxJrnetely three-fourth~ of ·n acre in land, i· in an ideal location. Would the City of New Hope be interelted in purchaling our property for rede~ We would Dike to purtue thi~ option. You mey contact u~ at any time f~ furlher in~Trmlion or if you have queetiorm. Our telel)hone hUnt)er i~ 645-9377. We look forward to haaring from you iooft. 4401 Xylon Avenue North City Hall: 612-531-5100 City Hall Fax: 612.531.5136 'New Hope, Minnesota 55428-4898 Police: 612-531-5170 Police Fax: 612-531.5174 Public Works: 612-533-4823 Public Works Fax: 612-533-7650 TDD: 612-531-5109 Fire Dep't. Fax: 612-531-5175 June 16,1998 Subject: Dorothy MaW Park Neighborhood Meeting Dear Dorothy Mary Park Neighbor. Last week the City of New Hope mailed invitations to the next Dorothy Mary Park meeting. This meeting will be held on Wednesday, June 24, in the Council Chambers at the New Hope City Hall, 4401 Xylon Avenue North, at 6:30 p.m. The invitation was to have included a summary of the discussions that have taken place at previous neighborhood meetings, and the current status of the planning process. Unfortunately, an oversight caused these items to be omitted from the invitations. A copy of the notes from the last meeting are included for your review. At the June 24 meeting, Sherd Buss will review the proposed plans and possible design options for the park. The meeting is expected to last 1% -2 hours and will include a discussion of project costs. A grant application has been submitted to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources requesting funding for the improvements to the plant communities in the park. Everyone is encouraged to review the plans and share comments and suggestions at this meeting. The plans for the park will be presented to the City Council in July. If approved, the project will go out for bids during August. We expect construction will begin in September. Buckthom removal is expected to occur this Fall and the plantings would be completed next Spdng. If you have questions or comments but are unable to attend the meeting, please call me at 533-4823, Ext. 13. This letter is being mailed to residents whose homes are in close proximity to the park. If you know of anyone who did not receive this letter but may wish to attend, please invite them to come along. Sincerely, Tom Schuster Contract Manager cc: City Council Members Citizen Advisory Commission Members Dan Donahue, City Manager Shari French, Director of Parks and Recreation Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Family Styled City For Family Living Dorothy Mary Park~Second Community Meeting ~'~ New Hope City Hall April 22, 1998 Concept Plans Bonestroo staff presented two concept plans for the park. The plans include replacement or construction of several structures--storm sewer manholes, the stairway, dock, and boardwalks over low areas on the trails. Restoration and plantings in the woodlands and wetlands and improvements at the east and west entry were also suggested. Neighbors Comments Fixing the stairway is a high priority. The stairs are slick and dangerous in winter. Kids use them for sledding. The landings should include tums. Prefer cement stairways rather than aggregate--less maintenance. Plantings along fences should be improved--trees trimmed and more use of ferns And wildflowers. Wood stairs and railings are preferred because the natural look blends with the Park. Paths The number of paths should be decreased. Locations should not be changed. Keep the main loop paths and try to eliminated some of the smaller paths. First priority is to close the path on the south side of the pond. The handicapped access trail through the park as indicated on the concept plans is a good idea. Through path preferred over the loop path. Most thought the boardwalks are a good idea. Some concerns were expressed about whether treated wood is a problem for water quality, and about maintenance issues. Try to discourage the sliding hill on the south side. Pond Mixed opinions on whether adding additional water to the pond would be helpful for improving water quality. It may also add more sand from street runoff. Adding a pipe from the west to bring additional water to the pond will require cutting a 10-12 foot opening through the woods. Neighbors are concerned about damage to trees and other vegetation Path on the south side of the pond should be eliminated and woodland restored. Signs should be placed where paths are closed to alert park users and explain the changes. Fences should be placed here as well to deter potential users. Get cost estimates of alternatives to help make comparisions. Neighbors could clean debris from pond if they wish. Dock The dock should look more natural and intrude less on the pond. Should be built up above pond and screened by vegetation. Materials suggested included concrete with rough cut wood forms and a recycled plastic deck material. Entries Wide entry on the west side needs to be maintained to allow access for park maintenance. Removable posts or bollards could be used to slow traffic, but allow occasional maintenance access. Next Steps Presentation to Parks and Recreation Citizen Advisory Committee in June. Bring recommended plan back to neighborhood in June. Plan to City Council in July. Plans and specifications in August. Construction in fall and plantings in Spring, 1999. 4401Xylon Avenue North City Hall: 612-531-5100 CiO/HaliFax: 612-53!.~ , New Hope, Minnesota 55428-4898 Police: 612-531-5170 Police Fax: 612-531.517,~ Public Works: 612-533-4823 Public Works Fax: 612-533-76-50 TDD: 612-531-5109 Fire Dep't. Fax: 612-531.5175 June 22,1998 Subject: Sunnyside Park Disc Golf Dear Sunnyside Park Neighbor: The City of New Hope is considering the relocation of its disc golf course from Northwood Park to Sunnyside Park. Disc golf has been a popular feature of the New Hope Park System for many years. However, the recent improvements to Northwood Park necessitate relocating the disc golf course to another site, Sunnyside Park is being considered for the new home of the disc golf course because of its size and its location. The park offers open space as well as wooded areas that would be well suited for disc golf play. The layout of the proposed disc golf course would make use of that portion of the park south of the ball field and continuing all the way to the south end of the park. City staff believes this to be a good use for this seldom used area of the park. The City would like to locate the disc golf course in Sunnyside Park for a two year trial pedod. After this time, the decision will be made as to whether or not Sunnyside becomes the permanent site of the disc golf course. City staff would like to include your input as we consider the relocation of the course to Sunnyside Park. You are invited to an informal meeting on Tuesday, June 30 at 5:00 p.m. to walk the park and discuss disc course lay out options. We will meet in the parking lot on Rhode Island Avenue. In attendance will be a representative from the Citizen Advisory Commission, representatives from the New Hope Park and Police Departments, a representative from the local disc golf league, and Sunnyside Park neighbors. The meeting is expected to last about an hour. This letter is being sent to residents whose homes are adjacent to Sunnyside Park. Anyone with concerns about the use of the park as the site for the disc golf course is encouraged to attend. If you have questions, or cannot attend the meeting but wish to offer comments, please call me at 533-4823, Ext. 13. Sincerely, Tom Schuster Contract Manager cc: City Council Members Citizen Advisory Commission Members Dan Donahue, City Manager Shad French, Director of Parks and Recreation Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Tom'stuf~3miec~'~42di~¢ ~ ~ meming ~.~ ~_ r%~ ~C'1,,~ Family Styled City~j~'~* For Family Living application in New Hope is enclosed. Homeowners that are considering hiring a lawn service to spray are encouraged to speak with their neighbors to see if there may be some savings to each if several properties are sprayed at the same time. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions, please contact me at 533-4823 ext. 13. Sincerely, Tom Schuster Weed Inspector cc: Dan Donahue, City Manager Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Shad French, Director of Parks and Recreation G:Tom'saJfl'~.ett~t~42~l&169 Lawn Servicee Licanaed in New Hope TrueGreen Chemlawn 6010 Culligan Way Minnetonka, MN 55345 Kenneth Lambert 6323 N. Fembrook Lane Maple Grove, MN 55311-4157 Jeff Chapman 12041 Robin Road North Maple Grove, MN 55369 Showcase 8633 Jefferson Highway Oseeo, MN 55369 Bryan D. Foster 1021 - 80"' Street West Bloomington MN 55420 Ed Hawes 165 James Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55405 The Davey Tree Expert Company 1500 North Mantua Street Kent, OH 44240 Guaranteed Turf Care 9919 Valley View Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 John Rose 20616 Zea Street, N.W. Anoka, MN 55303 G:Tom'tl~Jl~Leltem~42nel&16~ NOI~'rHWOOD I)Al~ K ' i i '~ NOi~THWOOO ~ PAI~K ... - PROJECT NO. 640 BULLETIN #1 PROJECT BULLETIN 1998 TENNIS COURT IMPROVEMENTS MEADOW I KE SCHOOL PARK Overview The City of New Hope is reconstructing the tennis courts at Meadow Lake School Park beginning on June 16. The project will include the removal of the existing paving for three tennis courts and adjacent paving, and the installation of new paving of the courts and adjacent areas. New posts, nets, and chain link fence will be installed. The area around the courts will be re-graded to meet the existing turf, and sod will be placed on disturbed areas. The existing light poles will be protected and reused. Project Schedule The New Hope City Council awarded the contract for Meadow Lake School Tennis Court Improvements to K.A. Witt Construction, Inc. at the May 11 Council meeting. The contractor plans to start construction on the project the week of June 15, 1998, and is estimated to complete the improvement project by the end of August. There will be a two to three week pedod of time dudng the project that the new bituminous surface will be allowed to cure before the color coating is applied. The courts will remain closed during this time. The contractor is responsible for the replacement of sod that is disturbed by the project. Construction Hours Construction may occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on Saturday. All work, including mobilization of equipment, will take place dudng these time pedods. Contact Persons If you have questions or concems dudng the tennis court improvement project, please direct your calls to the Project Engineer, Vince VanderTop, at 604-4790 or 533-4823 ext. 15, or Tom Schuster, Contract Manager, at 533-4823 ext. 13. City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 6/16/98 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION Plannlna_ _.__ . &Zoning co,ducts 2½-hour sessions on weekday evenings. ~We always have more information than we can fit into our allotted time," Offic,als Go To Class itchellsays. There is a general consensus on a few aspects of training. For By ,.V[arrin Roupe example, adults often respond better to participation-based exercises than lectures. Therefore, many trainers have shortened Ordinary citizens make decisions affecting their lectures in favor of hands-on exercises. Role-playing activities, communities by serving on planning commissions, zoning such as mock public hearings, make programs engaging. Also, boards of appeal, and other planning-related authorities. The participants like to experience the h~ng process before facing. reasons for serving are many, but all ultimately share a desire to a real situation. improve the community. Allowing these volunteers to enter the Program administrators also agree on the need to define their world of community planning without prior training is risky audience. ~When an organization is conducting both basic and because an imprudent decision could cost a community millions advanced courses, the distinction between the two must be of dollars or compromise its quality of life. This issue of Zoning dear,", says Mitchell, who finds that new commissioners may News explores current trends in training programs and offers unknowingly sign up for advanced workshops. The problem is resources to initiate citizens into the world of planning, preventable by simply modifying the tide of the program to make the distinction dear. Know Your SubJoct Motter Finally, commissioners and trainers place value on social New officials should be encouraged to read and ask questions time during training programs. Conversation with peers can about the community's comprehensive plan and zoning solidify ideas discussed in the classroom. For some students, ordinance. They should also become familiar with leadership this is when the most learning takes place. and management skills, and legal issues, such as ex parte communications. Unfortunately, staff are not always available to address the concerns of new initiates, and outside help may be needed. Established training programs confront these issues by covering the basic tenets of planning and zoning, the legal responsibilities of the positions held by the trainees, and the specifics regarding comprehensive pla~qs and zoning ordinances. Many training institutions offer advanced-level workshops that address the needs of veteran officials. These workshops cover more complex issues, such as capital improvement programming and growth management, as well as specific regulatory techniques, like planned unit developments and transferable development rights. Still, veteran officials may not have a good understanding of the basics. Training has revealed that some boards and commissions have done procedures incorrecdy for years. ~ '; ~ ' According to Bill Ross, president of Georgia's &PA chapter, Commissioners reviewing a mock siteplan at Michigan's ~We sometimes have a hard time reaching the veteran Grand Valky State University during an MSPO siteplan commissioners. Some of them feel very secure with the way review workshop. they have been doing things, and they are reluctant to change." Tho Logistics of IraimiBg The most common training format is the workshop. State A.PA No consensus exists on the right format for training. Weekday chapters, university extension services, and nonprofit planning workshops typically run from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., but some begin and education organizations are frequent hosts of the in midafternoon to prevent participants from missing an entire workshops, and some have collaborated successfully to create day of work. Many programs are even held on weekends to training programs. accommodate busy weekday schedules. Collab~ratlon & th# K~/. Collaboration is an effective way The length of training sessions also varies greatly. Some to implement training programs stateWide. Less time is required programs do not exceed three hours per session for fear of of each organization, and pooled resources allow for better overwhelming participants with too much information, while program development. Such a strategy also prevents repetition others opt to expose students to as much as possible. Robert of topics in a region. Mitchell, planning director in Amherst, Massachusetts, and An example of successful cooperation is the Citizen trainer with the Citizen Planner Training Collaborative Planner Training Collaborative (CPTC) of Massachusetts. (CPTC), admits frustration with this dilemma. CPTC CPTC consists of four planning-related associations--the APA Lends a Hand ArPA's Planners BOOk Service carries man?, ,'aluable conducts an annual Friday-Saturday workshop at a central esources for the citizen planner, including lTJeJob location in the state. Attendance at the workshop~ is o/'rhe PI, tn;ting Commissioner and Planning M, tde limited to 150 people, and the room is always at ~apactty, ~5~s~. Many ~tates have used Pl, mni;~g 3lade Easy as a savs Ross. The workshops last from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. and template for designing a state-specific training had a 1997 cost of S 1 I0 per person. Participants receive a document. Fhe accompanying manual, Training Made notebook of information recapping the topics discussed. Easy_, provides practical information for novice trainers. Ross says CPI may develop advanced workshops in the APA's Planning Commissioners Service introduced future but will concentrate on the needs of new officials an audio conference training series in 1996. The for the time being. programs, which cover topics like neighborhood The Oregon chapter of APA has filled its state's need planning and properD.' rights, are designed specifically for training since budget cuts forced the University of for appointed and elected officials, but planning staff Oregon to eliminate' its Bureau of Govermnental Research frequently attend as well. The basic participation fee and Services, taking with it its Planning Commission I ST0 as of May 1998) includes a course book, and an Training Programs. To fill the void, the Oregon chapter additional fee (530 as of May 1998) will get participants selected a three-person Planners Training Team (PTTL an audio tape of the program. Carol Swayne, In 1991, PTT conducted two workshops. Subsequent chairperson of APA's Planning Officials Advisory. demand was so great that 14 sessions were condncted in Committee, says the audio conference series has been a 1997. PTT's format usually involves a seven-hour wonderful success. She credits the format, which often Saturday workshop. "Basics" and "Beyond Basics" allows commissioners to receive training without courses are offered at a cost .of $95 a person (in leaving their local planning office, for this success, which includes training materials. Customized programs State APA chapters, such as Georgia's. are reaching on special topics are also offered at a community's request. out to commission members. When chapter president Team member and chapter president John 'Andersen feels Bill Ross realized the chapter was not meeting that a training program .mtmt accommodate students' commission member needs, he facilitated the creation needs, so evaluations are handed out at each session and of the Community Planning Institute (CPI). CPI the responses are used to improve the classes. Massachusetts Chapter of the APA, the Massachusetts the state. At a 1998 per-person cost of $55, PMPEI offers three Association of Regional Planning Agencies, the separate courses covering the fundamentals of planning, zoning, Massachusetts Association of Planning Directors, and the and subdivision regulations. Most courses last for three weeks, Massachusetts Federation of Planning and Appeals Boards-- with classes meeting once each week for three hours. Special and two state agencies--the Department of Housing and topics are taught by PMPEI at a commission's request. Community Development (formerly the State Executive Stan Lembeck, chairperson of the Board of Directors, Office of Communities and Development) and the attributes PMPEI's success to a few key decisions. First, two University of Massachusetts Extension Services. These six trainers conduct each workshop. Cotraining was initiated at the groups entered a formal memorandum of association in program's inception to ease the burden placed on trainers while 1996. Robert Mitchell, a founder of CPTC, looka at the they became acquainted with new positions. The institute union of such varied organizations and says, ~the planets changed its original intention to phase out the cotraining aspect must have been aligned correctly." He says the balkanized of the program because the teamwork proved conducive to political environment in Massachusetts usually serves to work learning and the instructors could substitute for each other if against this type of cooperation, one was unable to make it to a class. CPTC's first-year class roster exceeded 600 people. Class PMPEI also had to determine how to pay the instructors. A enrollment currently ranges from 10 to 40 people. Semiannual set amount was decided for each workshop and additional workshops are held at 11 sites across the state and cost expenses are provided for meals and travel. Lembeck says participants $20 last year. CPTC conducts basic courses on PMPEI's unique policy on paying the trainers has resulted in planning and zoning fundamentals and advanced courses on consistent and high-quality training: "Obviously it costs more topics like special permits and the regulation of adult uses. for us to conduct a workshop than it does in many other places, In another successful collaboration, the Pennsylvania state but the consistent results justify the price." Trainers must go APA chapter and the Pennsylvania State University Cooperative through 20 hours of training over two weekends to obtain the Extension Service partnered to create the Pennsylvania certification necessary to teach. Municipal Planning Education Institution (PMPEI). PMPEI's The Virginia Certified Planning Commissioners Program workshops are limited to 30 people in order to keep participant (VCPCP), another collaborative effort between a universi .ty interaction high. A group of about 20 trainers conducts extension service and a state APA chapter, focuses on certig.'ing workshops three times each year at nine locations throughout its participants. "It is a great partnership," says Michael Chandler about the alliance berween Virginia Tech University. and Virginia APA. Chandler is associate professor and Martin Roupe is a research associate with the American Planning extension community planning specialist at the university and Association. Virginia APA president. VCPCP participants obtain certification upon completion of of training planning officials and has since trained more than the course. While the state does not officially recognize 16,000 commissioners. MSPO conducts a basic workshop certification, many Virginia municipalities now require series and a second-level series that focuses on more commissioners to pass the course. Eighty-eight percent of the specialized topics. To keep the programs timely and topical, more than 1.200 participants have obtained certification since MSPO updates at least one program each year. Dave the program began in 1985. Downey, executive director at MSPO, says, "Often when we At 10 weeks, VCPCP's course is longer than most. It is update the programs, we choose to shorten the length of the divided into three parts, beginning with 15 hours of classroom ' lectures in favor of more hands-on exercises. Adults seem to instrtJction covering fundamentals, roles, and responsibilities. A respond better to these exercises. Also, our handouts are sel~'-study component follows, in which participants must apply more concise now. This makes it easier for participants to their knowledge. Participants also critique a planning retain the information instead of feeling overwhelmed by it. commission meeting outside their jurisdiction before attending We make sure they know where to get more information if the two-day workshop that concludes the course, they want it." VCPCP offers the course three times annually. In 1997, the Another active Michigan organization, the Planning & cost was 5300 a person. "People were very suspect that we were Zoning Center (PZC) in Lansing, trains throughout the state. trying to cover too much information when we began this PZC represents Michigan's only private-sector entity involved program," says Chandler, "but it has turned out to be a in training. Since 1982, PZC has averaged one workshop per phenomenal success." He also runs the Virginia Certified week, all of which are well attended, notes PZC President Mark Boards of Zoning Appeals Program, which he suspects is the Wyckoff. Most of PZC's workshops concentrate on the only program in the nation certifying zoning board of appeal fundamentals, but they also offer customized workshops upon members, request. The latter are based on a flat fee for unlimited A collaborative venture also formed the Planning attendance. Before customized workshops, Wyckoff requests a Commission Training Program (PCTP) in Texas. The program copy of the community's current zoning ordinance and minutes began in 1996 when the Texas Department of Community from the community's last six planning commission meetings. Affairs, the local branch of the National Association of Regional He then tailors the workshop to meet specific needs. Councils, and the Texas fi.PA together expedited 22 training Many communities ask that he come back for a second workshops around the state. Costs remain minimal at $25 per round of training, a request that Wyckoff says gives him person this year because 22 of the Councils of Government satisfaction. "I really enjoy doing a second round of training offices supply space free of charge. In 1997, the because it gives me a chance to see how we have Texas Municipal League provided attorneys to ..~, direcdy affected the quality of planning taking place assist at the workshops, a move that proved there.~ He says, once the officials have had a beneficial to participants with legal chance to put their training into practice, they questions, says Dick Lillie, executive often come into the second session with new administrator of the program, insight and educated questions about previously The format used by PCTP is quite covered topics. Wyckoffnotes that most different from other programs in that only Michigan developers would like long-term one hour is spent lecturing before opeaaing , !' the floor to planning-relared questions. While most programs include a question- Effective training alleviates and-answer period, PCTP's lasts for frustration associated with an three hours. According to Lillie, absence or bombardment of participants like' this aspect of in)~rmation. the program. "Veteran com- missioners and new commis- sioners both learn a lot during this period,' he says. ~ training to be implemented and cites the "The new commissioners get constandy evolving complexity of land- answers to specific questions use regulation as the primary reason about their positions, and for this desire. they are exposed to the tech- With five different agencies nical expertise of the veterans, ea~ ~, training in the state (the Michigan Also, many veterans feel a sense of Municipal League, the Michigan Townships Association, and gratification when they know the answer to a the Michigan Association of Regions are the others), Michigan question posed by someone else," says Lillie, adding that this officials have an abundance of workshops from which to choose. extended Q-and-A period is a great way to keep everyone involved Dave Downey, executive director at MSPO, thinks the agencies and interested, should attempt to coordinate their programs. "Similar training The Michigan Way. Although collaboration between programs sometimes take place within weeks of each other in agencies has proven successful in many states, a decidedly the same region. We could definitely improve upon this aspect different approach is underway in Michigan. At any given time, of training," says Downey. Still, Michigan is not doing a bad five different agencies are doing training in the state job. In fact, the state is regarded as one of the best in the nadon independendy of each other, for training planning and zoning officials. The Michigan Society of Planning Officials (MSPO), Cybertraining. New technologies, such as compressed video based in Rochester, was formed in 1945 for the sole purpose and the Internet, are broadening the available training options. Both technologies eliminate ffavel time and expenses and allow Three neighboring counties in Maryland axe experiencing such for widespread delivery of information. Compressed video growth and have thus passed or revisited legislation to control technology, for example, provides live action sight and sound devdopment and still provide adequate public facilities. reproduction at different physical locations via a satellite feed. Montgomery, Prince George's, and Charles Counties have recently This allows the training of several groups at different sites adopted legislative changes to maintain infrastructure such as parks, simultaneously, a technique that is particularly useful in western roads, and sewers. Similar changes have also been made to regulate states with widespread populations. California, Michigan, and the grow& in the counties' crowded public schools. Wyoming have experimented with this format, and it is gaining Despite the need for growth manageme.t, choosing between popularity, limited development or tax increases to pay for infrastructure The [nternet has become a powerful forum for sharing improvements is both difficult and unpopular with county current information. Wayne Senville, editor of the Planning officials and residents. How do jurisdictions maintain CommissionersJournaland host of the "PlannersWeb" site at progressive economies and keep taxes at a reasonable level and www. plannersweb.com, is using the lnternet to disseminate improve infrastructure? information that is useful to citizen officials, elected officials, Overcrowded schools were the catalyst that summoned and planners alike. Still, Senville feels this medium has not Montgomery and Charles counties to action. Their objectives reached its full potential, but believes it will eventually be a were to allow residential development but still provide great training tool. overcrowding relief for infrastructure and the school system. CPTC in Massachusetts is also going online by designing a Growth policies adopted by the counties in the 1970s website. The group is developing a resource center that will regulated development and assessed builders for road offer a variety of resources, including many of the training improvements required by the adequate public facilities modules used in its workshops. Robert Mitchell says when ordinance (APFO). CPTC discussed the best way to host a clearinghouse for its In October 1997, policy governing grow& management took a training information, the Internet became the obvious choice mm in both counties. Montgomery County adopted a bill to allow because it allows universal access and reaches an unlimited new development in parts of the county that the APFO had audience, previously closed to developers. The new bill does not require developers to meet the standards of the county's previous APFO. COlIClUSJOll However, they will have to pay a fee for the right to develop a Debate continues on the most effective way to educate citizen project. The fees are based on both the type of development and officials. Methodology aside, everyone agrees that training is whether the project is in a moratorium area. County officials hope key to successful planning. Although face-to-face workshops are this system, informally deemed "Pay and Go," will promote the likely to continue, technology may reduce this need in the residential, office, and retail development that provides fiscal future. Whatever the trend, civic-minded officials will support for schools and infrastructure. undoubtedly have available to them a virtual world of teaching In November 1997, commissioners in Charles County decided to abandon the grow& cap that was designed to protect schools resources, from overcrowding and implement a flexible system that would annually assess the need and location of new development. Revenues generated by subsequent development fee increases Managing would be allocated toward additional classroom space. Maryland's Growth Whne Montgomery and Charles counties enacted legislation to change stringent grow& policies of the past, Prince George's Growth management is frequendy an issue for counties that are County passed its first such policy: a four-year moratorium on new hosts to major business hubs or large cities. Because rapid development. Again, overcrowded schools were the driving force growth may increase the probability for long-term economic for the enactment. The moratorium will affect communities where survival, devising a method to slow the pace of development school overcrowding exceeds capacity by 30 percent. while maintaining a healthy tax base is the paradox facing Public schools are at or over capacity in all three counties, administrative officials in these areas, but the problem is most severe in Prince George's County,. A 1997 county report, Regulation to Analyze the Development Impact on Public School Facilities, showed that communities move in cyclical patterns. For example, empty-nester towns that Zon,ng New, is a monthly newstm't~r pub[idled by thc Amerie3~ Planning A.ssociasion. were once home to young families cannot supply the volume of Subscriptions are available for S50 (U.S.) and $65 (fonfign). Fr'ax~k S. So, Executive Director: William R. Klein. Di ....... f ~.~. students required to fill the public schools when these families Zomng News is produced at APA. Jim Schwab md Mike David~n, F..dito~; Chris Burke, Fay leave the community. As a result, classrooms sit vacant and Dolnick. Gina Jackson, 5anjav Jeer. Me~m .Lin, ds, Marya Morris, ~ Retalaff, Martin Roupe, j'ason Wittenberg, Reporters: ~Cy~thia Chela, Assista. nt F. ditor; Li~a Barton. D~ign and infrastructure is underutilized. The study prompted Prince Proauction. George's county officials to consider a way to regulate school Copyright ©1998 bv American Planning A.tv~iation. 122 S. Michigan Ave.. Suite 1600, Chicago. [L 60603. 'The American Planning A~ociation has beadquarter~ offices at 1776 overcrowding without building facilities that could be forced to Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20036. close in the future. MI righ ....... ed. No pan of this publicati ..... be ~pro,iu~i .... iii~i in any fo .... hy The Maryland cases illusu'ate the risks of high-growth areas. any means, electronic or mechanical, including pgotocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the American Planning Nevertheless, each county found a way to manage the issue. "Pay .Msociation. and Go" legislation, periodic needs assessments, and development Printed on recycled paper, including 50-70% recycled fiber · .d t00~ p ................ {~ moratoria may be the solutions to grow& management problems that have plagued the area for a long time. Chriswpher B. rke