Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
090298 Planning
AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA 7:00 p.m. Meeting t_o be held at School District #281' Administration Building Third Floor Conference Room 4148 Winnetka Avenue North (southeast corner of 42"d/Winnetka Avenues) New Hope, Minnesota 2. 3. 4. 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 5. 5.1 5.2 5.3 6. 6.1 7. 7.1 7.2 7.3 8. 9. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CONSENT ITEMS PUBLIC HEARINGS CaSe 97-32 Case 98-18 Case 98-20 Case 96-27 Request for Conditional Use Permit/Development Stage Planned Unit Development with Waivers to Allow Townhouse Development for Bass Lake Court and Plat Approval of PPL Addition, 7300-7332 Bass Lake Road, Project for Pride in Living, Inc., Petitioner Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of Brandell Fourth Addition and Side Yard Setback Vadance to Allow Parking Lot Five Feet From Property Line, 9401-9443 and 9449 Science Center Ddve, Liberty Property Limited Partnership and Marbell Realty LILC, Petitioners Request for Vadance to the Side Yard Setback Requirement to Allow Construction of a Garage, 8489 North Meadow Lake Road, Richard & Liane Shive, Petitioners Review of the Comprehensive Plan Update, City of New Hope, Petitioner COMMITTEE REPORTS Report of Design & Review Committee - Next Meeting: September 17 at 8 a.m. Report of Codes & Standards Committee - Next Meeting: September 24 at 7 a.m. Report of Comprehensive Plan Update Committee - Tentative September Meeting OLD BUSINESS Miscellaneous Issues NEW BUSINESS Review/Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of July 7, 1998 Review of City Council Minutes of July 27 and August 10, 1998. Review of EDA Minutes of July 27 and August 10, 1998.. ANNOUNCEMENTS ADJOURNMENT *Petitioners are required to be in attendance Planning Commission Guidelines for Public Input The Planning Commission is an advisory body, created to advise the City Council on land use. The'----~ Planning Commission will recommend Council approval or denial of a land use proposal based upon th6 Planning Commission's determination of whether the proposed use is permitted under the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan, and whether the propos.ed use will, or will not, adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood._ The Planning Commission holds informal public hearings on land use proposals to enable you to learn, first-hand, what such proposals are, and to permit you to ask questions and offer comments. Your questions and comments become part of the record and will be used by the Council, along with the Planning Commission's recommendation, in reaching its decision. To aid in your understanding and to facilitate your comments and questions, the Planning Commission will utilize the following procedure: 1. The Planning Commission Chair will introduce the proposal. 2. City staff will outline the proposal and staff's recommendations and answer any questions from the Planning Commission. 3. The petitioner is in, vited to describe the proposal, make comments on the staff report, and answer questions from the Planning Commission. 4. The Chair will open the public hearing, asking first for those who wish to speak to so indicate by raising their hands. The Chair may set a time limit for individual questions/comments if a large number of persons have indicated a desire to speak. Spokespersons for groups will have a longer period of time for questions/comments. 5. When recognized by the Chair, the person wishing to speak is asked to come forward and to give their full name and address clearly. Remember, your questions/comments are for the record. 6. Direct your questions/comments to the Chair. The Chair will determine who will answer your questions. 7. No one will be given the opportunity to speak a second time until everyone has had the opportunity to speak initially. Please limit your second presentation to new information, not rebuttal. 8. At the close of the public hearing, the Planning Commission will discuss the proposal and take appropriate action. A. If the Planning' Commission recommends that the City Council approve or deny a request, the planning case will be placed on the City Council agenda for the next regular meeting. Usually this meeting is within one to two weeks of the Planning Commission meeting. B. If the Planning Commission tables the request, the petitioner will 'be asked to return for the next Commission meeting. SEPTEMBER PLANNING CASES 8489 N 14eadow Lake Rd )7-32 7300-7332 Bass L~e M PC98-18 9401 & 9449 Science Center Dr ZONING DISTRI~ MAP 1 INCH- 2100 FEET 0 2100 4200 8300 F;lanning Case: Request: Location: PID Nos.: Zoning: Petitioner: Report Date: Meeting Date: CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT 97-32 Request for Conditional Use Permit/DeVelopment Stage Planned Unit Development with Waivers to Allow Townhouse Development for Bass Lake Court and Plat Approval of PPL Addition 7300 - 7332 Bass Lake Road #05-118-21-31-0007, ~:)5-118-21-31-0101, #05-118-21-31-0102, #05-118-21-31-0103, #05-118-21-31-0104, #05-118-21-31-0105, #05-118-21-31-0106, #05-118-21-30-0107, #05-118-21-31-0108, #05-118-21-31-0008 R-3, Medium Density Residential, B-3, Auto Oriented, and R-O, Residential-Office, Zoning Districts Project for Pride in Living, Inc. August 28, 1998 September 2, 1998 BACKGROUND The petitioner is requesting conditional use permitJdevelopment stage planned unit development to allow a townhouse development and plat approval of PPL Addition, pursuant to Sections 4.19 and 13.Q1 of the New Hope Code of Ordinances. In April, Project for Pride in Living, Inc. (PPL) submitted development applications for the redevelopment of a block between Pennsylvania and Nevada Avenues. This block currently consists of eight four-plex residential buildings, a non-conforming gas station, and a non-conforming office building. The current land uses have created a number of problems for both the City of New Hope and the adjoining Crystal neighborhoods. Due to the condition and character of the land use in this block, the City of New Hope has identified these sites as priority for redevelopment in the Tactics portion of the Comprehensive Plan Update. In consideration of the PPL applications, in May 1998 the City Council gave the following approvals: A. Rezoning. The City of New Hope approved rezoning the entire PPL project site consisting' of 11 existing parcels and three zoning districts (R-3, R-O) and B-3) to R-3, Multiple Family Residential. This approval was made contingent on subsequent city approval of the PUD development and final stages. B. PUD Concept Plan. The City of New Hope approved concept stage PUD for the PPL project finding that the proposed redevelopment project was in keeping with the City's land use and housing goals. VVith this concept approval, the City indicated the need for more complete information, and drawings must be submitted for PUD development stage consideration. C. Approval of the concept plan recognized the need and acceptability of the following vadance requests: (1) Section 4.193(3)(c) requires buildings to be set back 15 feet from the curb line from private roadways and parking areas. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a four-foot setback between buildings and parking stalls at the north end of the site. The need for parking and site drainage requires this reduced setback. PC97-32 (2) Section 4.193(3)(d) requires buildings to maintain a separation setback equal to one-half the sum of the height of the two adjoining buildings. This variance deals with the setback betwee~-''', existing buildings in the center of the project site (a 22-foot setback is required, a 20-foot setback exists). (3) Section 4.193(5)(d) prohibits a townhome structure from having a length greater than 80 feet without an offset of 10 feet or more. By connecting the three existing buildings on both the east and west sides of the site with garages, the structure length becomes 205 feet long without a 1 O-foot offset. (4) Section 4.172(11) requires private roadways to have a 25-foot minimum width. The applicant is requesting a 22-foot private roadway width to allow additional landscaping and green space. (5) Section 4.036(4)(h)(v) requires 90 degree parking to provide a 24-foot ddve aisle width. The applicant is requesting a reduction to a 22-foot width. Parking stalls are nine feet wide, which allows adequate turning radius for cars accessing and egressing the parking stalls. 4. Since PPL received conceptual approval in May 1998, 'the development plans have undergone a number of changes mandated by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA). The PUD development stage submission illustrates the following changes from the previous concept plans: A. The private road has been redesigned at the north end of the site providing direct street access to all the buildings. B. The new townhomes are designed as on-grade, garage forward units rather than townhomes with basements and tuck-under garages. C. Entry to the rehabilitated units has been modified to eliminate the common entry hall. D. The on-site office has been relocated along Bass Lake Road. E. The site fence along the east and west property lines has been changed to wood. F. The Breckenridge Group Home is requesting flexibility from the standard garage requirements. G. The Breckenridge property owner is requesting that his property be established as a second lot within the plat. 5. The size of the,parcel is 3.8 acres and includes the following 11 properties: · Eight R-3 properties (existing four-plex units under individual ownership, including Breckenridge grouP care facility, which will remain) at 7302-7316 Bass Lake Road · 100 feet of School District 281 property north of the sit~ · One R-O office building located at 7332 Bass Lake Road · One B-3 auto-oriented gas station located at 7300 Bass Lake Road 6. Surrounding land uses and zoning include single family properties in Crystal on the east and west, St. Raphael Church and School (Crystal) to the south across Bass Lake Road, and District 281/Thorsen Resource Center (Crystal) to the north of the site. 7. The topography of the property is generally fiat with a poorly defined drainage pattern, with some negative impacts to the Crystal residential properties to the east and west. The proposed redevelopment will include substantial improvements to the storm drainage system. 8. The petitioner states in their original cover letter that "PPL began working with city staff in the spring of 1997 to identify problem buildings and explore the possibility of redevelopment. One of the City's highest priodty redevelopment areas, the eight four-plexes on the north side of Bass Lake Road between Pennsylvania and Nevada Avenues, offered a unique opportunity. On this site, the proposed Page 2 9/28/98 project can accomPlish four goals simultaneously: provide much needed rehabilitation to the four- plexes, eliminate the non-residential gas station and office building, create three and four-bedroom townhouses which are in high demand, and provide responsible and responsive property management. While the current properties have created some major problems for other neighbors and the City, there are some significant assets: the courtyard with mature trees and the adjacent Thorsen Family Resource Center. The proposed project has 34 units, 14 four-bedroom units created by renovating the current four-plexes into side-by-side duplexes and 20 new three-bedroom townhouses. Land for the townhouses is made available through demolition of the gas station and office building and through the purchase of 100 feet of the School District property at Thorsen." PPL provided a narrative including a project description, history of the project, rents and property management, timeline and information about PPL with their original application, which is attached and summarized as follows: A. Proiect Description The project consists of 34 rental townhomes designed for larger families with 14 four-bedroom and 20 three-bedroom units. The 14 four-bedroom units are created by renovating seven of the existing four-plexes into side-by-side duplexes; the units are 1,700 square feet with two full baths plus a full height basement and a garage. (In 10 units the garages are attached.) The four-plexes have brick exteriors and surround a courtyard with mature trees. The site was noted as a high priority for redevelopment in the Comprehensive Plan Update. Land for the new construction includes the purchase of an unused portion of the School Distdct land north of the existing four-plexes and adjacent to Bass Lake Road on the south the purchase and demolition of a gas station and small commercial building. The seven four-plexes to be renovated have seven different owners. There are 28 two-bedroom units in the current four-plexes. The eighth four-plex in this complex was remodeled for use as a group home for mentally ill adults, run by the nonprofit Community Care Corporation. This four-plex will remain and PPL plans to purchase rights to renovate the exterior as well as a right of first refusal if the building is to be sold. B. History of the Project As part of a strategy to look for opportunities to develop suburban rental housing, PPL visited eight cities to solicit lists of problem properties, where opportunities might exist to develop affordable housing in ~vays that would also solve community problems. This site was the first choice among the three dozen properties evaluated. The site offers the chance to renovate the four-plexes into duplexes in a cost effective way. The addition of the garages provides a needed amenity and creates an interior garden and play area. Demolition of the gas station and office building provide the chance to create a residential presence on Bass Lake Road as well as a rare opportunity for new construction. The additional land from the School District allows enough townhouses to be built to make the project economically feasible. In the fall of 1998, PPL presented a concept proposal to the New Hope EDA followed by a meeting for the neighbors to the site (Crystal residents) in early November. Adjacent homeowners expressed support for the redevelopment because PPL committed to improve drainage problems from the site as well as solve the property management problems experienced from the various owners over the years. To meet requirements for project funding, the EDA voted approval of a Redevelopment Agreement with PPL on February 9, 1998, which makes $900,000 available plus the City's agreement to condemn properties which cannot be obtained by private negotiation. C. Rents and Property Management Rents for the 22 market rate units are set at $709 for the three-bedroom townhomes and $780 for the four-bedroom units. Heat and electricity are paid by the tenant, estimated at $81 to $101 per PC97-32 Page 3 9/28/98 month. Financing from the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency requires that these units occupied by families with maximum incomes of $31,600 to $35,240 (at the time they move in Twelve units have rents which allow families to pay 30 percent of their income. The cost to develop these units, plus a 40-year rent subsidy, are provided by the Metropolitan Housing Opportunities Program (MHOP). Eight of these units need to be offered first to residents on a Minneapolis Public Housing waiting list; the other four (and any not accepted by people on the first list) are for New Hope residents. Six of the MHOP units wilt be three-bedroom units and six will be four-bedroom units. One three and one four-bedroom unit will be made 'handicapped accessible. All residents (market rate and MHOP) will be carefully screened: each must have a good rental history, adequate income to afford the rent and no criminal background. PPL will provide an on-site management office (currently planned to be built out in the basement of one of the four-plexes) as well as an on-site caretaker. PPL also operates a Self-Sufficiency Program, which provides services for PPL residents such as counseling and social service programs, assistance with finding child care, budgeting, better employment situations and child and adult education. Amenities: · Large units (1,200 or 1,700 square feet + usable basement space) · 1.5 or 2 baths per unit · Garage and one off-street parking space pe~' unit · Private outdoor space and common landscaped courtyard with playground equipment · Licensed child care adjacent to site Large public playground and playing fields adjacent to site · Community education and other programs adjacent to site · On a bus line, convenient shopping D. Timeline/Budget A project budget, including redevelopment and development costs and financing, is enclosed. The project did receive approval from Hennepin County for HOME loan and funding has also been approved by the Met Council. Other funding decisions are pending, but the project is drawing favorable comments from the entire Twin Cities area. The closing is scheduled for on or before September 30, 1998, with construction to begin one week after. Construction time is seven months. Full occupancy is planned for May 1999. E..PPL Background Information PPL is a nonprofit community development corporation which has 26 years experience rehabilitating and building new housing. PPL has built over 860 housing units and owns and manages 350 units in the Twin Cities. PPL's property management company maintains PPL's long-term commitment to the community, providing professional services and access to support for residents who need it. PPL developed and now manages 50,000 square feet of commercial space and operates four businesses which provide job training for hard-to-employ adults. 12. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified, including the City of Crystal. A neighborhood meeting was held on August 20 with-most persons attending the meeting being favorable about the project. ANALYSIS GENERAL PUD REQUIREMENTS 1. The purpose of a PUD is to provide for the grouping of land parcels for development as an integrated, coordinated unit as opposed to traditional parcel by parcel, piecemeal, sporadic and unplanned approach to development. It is intended to introduce flexibility of site design and architecture for the conservation of PC97-32 Page 4 9/28/98 land and open space through clustering of buildings and activities. It is further intended that PUDs are to ) be characterized by central management, integrated planning and architecture, joint or common use of parking, maintenance of open space and other similar facilities, and harmonious selection and efficient distribution of uses. 2. The processing steps for a PUD are intended to provide for an orderly development and progressions of the plan, with the greatest expenditure of developmental funds being made only after the City has had ample opportunity for informed decisions as to the acceptability of the various segments of the whole as the plan affects the public interest. The various steps are: (a) Application Conference. Preliminary discussions. (b) General Concept Plan. Consideration of overall concept and plan. (c) Development Sta~e Plan, One or more detailed plans as part of the whole final plan. (d) Final Plan, The summary of the entire concept and each Development Stage Plan in an integrated complete and final plan, 3. The purpose of the development stage plan is to provide one or more specific and particular plans upon which the Planning Commission will base its recommendation to the Council and with which substantial compliance is necessary for the preparation of the final plan. 4. The evaluation of the proposed development stage plan shall include but not be limited to the following criteria: A. Individual Ri.clhts. Adequate property control is provided to protect the individual owners' dghts and property values and the public responsibility for maintenanCe and upkeep. . ~ B. Traffic Plan. The interior circulation plan plus access from and onto public rights-of-way does not create congestion or dangers and is adequate for the safety of the project residents and the general public. C. Open Space. A sufficient amount of useable open spac~ is provided. D. Privacy and Property Values. The arrangement of buildings, structures and accessory uses does not unreasonably disturb the privacy or property values of the surrounding residential uses. E. Compatibili~. The architectural design of the project is compatible with the surrounding area. F. DrainaRe. The drainage and utility system plans are submitted to the City Engineer and the final drainage and utility plans shall be subject to his approval. G. Sound Development. The development schedule insures a logical development of the site which will protect the public interest and conserve land. H. PlattinR Code. The development is in compliance with the requirements of the New Hope Subdivision Code, I. Distdct Requirements. Dwelling unit and accessory use requirements are in compliance with the district provisions in which the development is planned. 5. Development stage submissions should depict and outline the proposed implementation of the general concept stage for the PUD, Information from the general concept stage may be included for background and to provide a basis for the submitted plan. The development stage submissions shall include but not be limited to: A. Zoning Required. Zoning classification required for de. velopment stage submission and any other public decisions necessary for implementation of the proposed plan. PC97-32 Page 5 9/28/98 B. Buildings. The location, size, use and arrangement including height in stories and feet and total square feet of ground area coverage and floor area, or proposed buildings, and existing buildi.n9''-'~ which will remain, if any. C. Traffic Circulation. Location, dimensions and number of all driveways, entrances, curb cuts, parking stalls, loading spaces and access aisles, and all other circulation elements including bike and pedestrian; and the tOtal site coverage of all circulation elements. D. Common Areas. Location, designation and total area of all common open space. E. Public Open Space. Location, designation and total area proposed to be conveyed or dedicated for public open space, including parks, playgrounds, school sites and recreational facilities. F. Locate Existing Structures. The location, use and size of structures and other land uses on adjacent properties. G. Other Data. Any other information that may have been required by the Planning Commission in conjunction with the approval of the general concept plan. H. Legal Description. An accurate legal description of the entire area within the PUD for which final development plan approval is sought, correlated to the legal description defining use districts in this Code. I. Plans. Preliminary architectural plans indicating use, floor plan, elevations, and exterior wall finishes of proposed buildings, including mobile homes. J. Landscaping Plan. A detailed landscaping plan. K. Grading Plan. Preliminary grading and site alteration plan illustrating changes to existing topography and natural site vegetation. The plan should clearly reflect the site treatment and its conformance with the approved concept plan. L. Final Plat. A final plat in recordable form in accordance with Chapter 13, the Platting Chapter of the City Code. M. Erosion Control. A soil erosion control plan acceptable to watershed districts, Department of Natural Resources and any other agency with review authority clearly illustrating erosion control measures to be used during construction and as permanent measures. N. Document "Changes. A statement summarizing all changes which have been made in any document, plan data or information previously submitted, together with revised copies of any such document, plan or data. O. Additional Data. Such other and further information as the Planning Commission, City Manager or Council shall find necessary to fulfill consideration of the entire proposed PUD or any stage thereof. Subdivision/Final Plat .. 1. Per the Planner's report, currently the project site consists of 11 parcels of land which PPL is proposing to consolidate into lot and block descriptions. The plat will clean up the legal description, simplify property taxes and result in clear delineation of ownership of the site. Each of the objectives is endorsed by city staff. 2. Lot Area. The subdivision would result in two lots. The PPL site would consist of Lot I and have a total area of 3.75 acres. Lot 2 will consist of 3,780 square feet or .08 acres. Through the PUD approval, the City may grant flexibility in the subdivision design to accommodate the requested final plat. It should be noted that the requested flexibility only accommodates an already existing condition as described below: PC97-32 Page 6 9/28/98 PC97-32 The applicant is requesting flexibility for the Lot 2 lot size. The R-3 Zoning District requires a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet per building. The existing Breckenridge building is sited on a 3,388 square foot lot. Through the new plat and PUD, the Breckenridge lot will actually be enlarged to 3,780 square feet. Additionally, through the overall PUD, the density of the entire plat will be reduced from 13 units per acre to 9.1 units per acre." B. The applicant is requesting flexibility for Lot 2 from the requirement of having full frontage on a public street. In the current condition, the Breckenridge lot does not have frontage on a public street. Lot access is proposed to continue to be provided via access easement. C. The applicant is requesting flexibility from the property line setbacks for building. Through the PUD, the Breckenridge group home is intended to be integrated into the site and building design of the entire site. In this respect, the lesser setbacks are acceptable. Setbacks. With the revisions to the site plan, PPL is requesting a variance from the required perimeter setbacks as follows: Setback Required Proposed Front (South) 35 feet 28 feet .. Rear 30 feet 14 and 20 feet The revised site plan illustrates that variances from the perimeter setback are required along the north property line (14 and 20 foot setbacks) and the south property line (28 foot setback). The setback from Bass Lake Road was reduced from 35 to 28 feet with the required street right-of-way dedication of seven feet. The rear setback was reduced from 30 feet to 14 and 20 feet when MHFA required changes to the style of townhome units and modifications of the private street within the site. These setback variance requests go beyond the control of the applicant and are a result of the existing constraints unique to the site in regard to the following items: A. Redevelopment of the existing buildings. The location, size and configuration of the existing buildings establish a physical constraint that must be integrated into the site design. B. The site configuration is limited due to existing property ownership patterns preventing the site from being enlarged. C. The building design is being dedicated by a separate public agency. In total, this redevelopment project is unique and the constraints of the site present physical hardships that warrant consideration of these requested variances. The site plan maintains required setbacks along the east and west property lines where the project adjoins single family residential lots. A number of internal setback variances have also been requested. These internal setbacks were deemed acceptable when the concept plan was considered by the City in May 1998. As per routine policy, the final plat was submitted to the City Department Heads, the City Attorney, City Engineer, utility companies, and Hennepin County for review and comment. The City Attorney reviewed the final plat and made the following comments: A. The legal descriptions for the plat do not include the 56 feet by 60.5 feet parcel of land surrounding the proposed Lot 2 located to the left of the center of the plat. This parcel must be included in the plat, and the legal description of this particular parcel. The owners of that parcel, if different from the owners of the remainder of the land to be platted, must also join in the plat and be listed as owners. B. The legal description information available to us as a result of the condemnation of the service ~tation indicates that the south line of Lot 32, Auditor's Subdivision is the same line as the south line of the NE % of the SW % of Section 5, which is the middle of Bass Lake Road. The surveyor should review this issue. Page 7 9/28/98 C. The proposed LOt 2 will require variances from the design standards set forth in Section 13.05 of the__., Code, in particular Sections 13.051(1) Minimum [lot size], (4) Abut Street, and (5) Setbacks. Thes~ are needed in addition to any variances required by the Zoning Code. The procedure for a variance from the design standards of the platting requirements is found at Section 13.10. In general, the property owner must apply to the Planning Commission for the variance. Because the proposed Lot 2 will be owned separately from the balance of the platted land, the owners of the proposed Lot 2 should be required to join in the variance request. D. The notarization language for each of the owners must be expanded to include the standard references to the actual officers who will be signing on behalf of the entities; and their official position with the entity (i.e., president). E. Title evidence showing ownership of the real estate included in the plat will be necessary before the final plat can be approved. 6. The City Engineer reviewed the final plat and made the following comments: A. A 15-foot wide drainage/utility easement shall be centered over the east-west storm sewer between CB 2 and 4. B. Easements/right-of-entries for construction required outside the plat must be reviewed and approved by the respective property owners. The developers shall provide the required legal descriptions such that the City Attorney can prepare legal documents to be recorded at Hennepin County. 7. Hennepin County reviewed the plat and the plat illustrates a seven-foot street right-of-way dedication along Bass Lake Road in accordance with County standards. Hennepin County has verbally approved the two Bass Lake Road curb cut locations. Formal access permit approval is still pending. A. All proposed construction within county right-of-way requires an approved Hennepin County permit prior to beginning construction. This includes but is not limited to access, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. B. The developer must restore all areas, within the county right-of-way, disturbed during Construction. 8. Minnegasco was the only utility company that responded and wants an existing easement that they have referred to on the final plat (see attached correspondence). This easement needs to be added to the plat and wi#°be a condition of approval. 9. Easements. The final plat illustrates the utility easements around the perimeter of the lot. These easements have been enlarged at the northeast and southeast comers of Lot 1, Block I to accommodate the proposed public utility locations. 10. Property Ownership. Prior to recording the final plat with Hennepin County, PPL must demonstrate ownership of all the parcels comprising Lot 1, Block 1. PPL will be the single owner and manager of all the housing units within Lot 1, Block 1, PPL Addition. The single ownership of all the housing units in Lot 1, Block 1 is seen as positive to insure responsible site'maintenance and management. Lot 1, Block 1 of PPL Addition will continue to be owned by Harold Garvin and leased by the Community Care Corporation, which operates the Breckenddge group home. This ownership arrangement is acceptable providing there is a uniform standard for property maintenance applied to buildings and grounds for both Lots 1 and 2 of PPL Addition. Please see the attached correspondence from Mr. Garvin confirming his approval and support for the subdivision and replatting. 11. Variances. The petitioner's correspondence states that the "proposed plat includes two lots. Lot 1 includes all of the proposed new construction and seven of the eight existing four-plexes. Lot 2 consists of the four-plex at 7314 Bass Lake Road. This building is owned by Mr. Garvin and is leased to the PC97-32 Page 8 9/28/98 Community Care Corporation, which operates the Breckenridge Group Home for mentally disabled adults. ' '~ PPL does not wish to close the group home, as both the City and Hennepin County have indicated their support for the cdntinuation of the program and the neighbors have testified to the high quality of the operation. Mr. Garvin has invested a substantial sum in renovating the four-plex for group home use, including a commercial kitchen, plan changes to eliminate separate kitchens and living rooms, basement office space, air conditioning and a sprinkler system. Purchase of the building by PPL and continuation of the lease to the group home was not financially feasible and is outside the area of PPL's mission. Therefore, an agreement was reached with Mr. Garvin to' allow him to own and lease the building as long as he desires to do so. PPL will have a right of first refusal to purchase the property at the time he desires to sell the property. PPL will purchase his 1/8 share of the Association (common) land. PPL will provide exterior improvements to this four-plex to make it architecturally compatible with the rest of the development. The lot would include the area of building and approximately 13 feet to each side and PPL would grant an easement for road access. No easement for access to the courtyard play area is provided since the Breckenridge staff felt that private outdoor space would be most desirable for their clients, many of whom are heavy smokers. PPL has worked with Mr. Garvin and the Breckenridge staff to design outdoor space, including extra parking, which meets their needs. In order to accomplish these objectives, three variances are required: (1) Variance of minimum lot size in R-3 zoning from 10,000 square feet to allow for a lot of 3,780 square feet. The current lot is already below the minimum at 3,388 square feet and actually represents a slight increase in lot size. (2) Variance of requirement to have full frontage abutting a city-approved street. The current lot has no frontage abutting a city-approved street and road access is unchanged in the proposed plan. (3) Variance of setback requirements: front yard from 30 feet to 6 feet; side yard from 20 feet to 12 feet, 7 inches (north) and 11 feet, 5 inches (south); rear yard from 35 feet to 6 feet, 5 inches. Current setbacks are also substantially below the minimums. PPL is requesting that these three variances be approved. PPL believes that the special circumstances include the initial configuration of the site, the substantial renovations made to the 7314 prope, rty to operate, as a group home, and PPL's desire not to displace a necessary and well-managed facility. PPL believes that these variances will not be detrimental to the public welfare or to the adjoining homeowners because these variances simply allow the current property ownership and usage to remain. PPL believes that these variances can correct the inequities resulting from the initial decision to allow the four-plexes to be built without street frontage and the subsequent sale of these properties to separate owners. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 1. Per the Planner's report, within an R-3 Zoning Distdct townhomes are allowed by conditional use permit provided they satisfy the requirements of Planned Unit Development (PUD) regulation of the New Hope Zoning Code. A. Comprehensive. Plan. New Hope's 1976 Comprehensive Plan designates the project site for commercial and mid density residential land uses. Since then, the existing land uses have exhibited .. signs of site and building deterioration. The 1998 Comprehensive Plan Tactics Summary !dentifies the project site as a pdority site for redevelopment. The PPL project will accomplish the City's PC97-32 Page 9 9/28/98 · redevelopment 'Objectives for the area. Additionally, the proposed housing types are consistent with ~ the housing objectives identified in the City's 1996 Housing Action Plan and its 1997 Affordable Housing Study. B. Density. Within a PUD, the density shall be determined by standards agreed upon between the applicant and the City. Currently, the existing housing site has 32 housing units on 2.45 acres, producing a gross density of 13 units per acre. The PPL project will enlarge the total project site through acquisition of the adjoining gas station site, office building site, and a portion of the Thorsen School site to the north. The total size of the project site will be 3.84 acres; PPL proposes to convert seven of the four-plex buildings to two-unit townhomes, the eighth four-plex building will remain as the Breckenridge Group Home. PPL will also construct 20 new townhome units, resulting in a total of 34 units on the site plus Breckenddge. These efforts will result in a reduction of site density from 13 units per acre to 9.1 units per acre. The resulting density is consistent with medium density residential ranges of six to ten units per acre, and is consistent with density allowed by New Hope's PUD zoning standards. In reviewing this density in the context of the overall site plan, staff would recommend that the requested density be approved as part of the PUD consideration. SITE PLAN EVALUATION 1. Appropriate city staff and consultants and the Design & Review Committee met to review the plans. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meetings. 2. The revised plans include the following details; per the 15etitioner's correspondence, three significant changes have been made in the site plan since concept stage approval, as mandated by the MHFA: A. Road Alignment. The private road alignment on north end of the site is different. The east/west road will now be located between the existing four-plexes and the new townhouses. This improves garage and emergency vehicle access to those four units. A 20-foot wide speed bump has been created to slow traffic and create a handicapped accessible route from the northern townhouse row into the courtyard. B. Garages. Garages for new townhouses are attached, on grade, rather than "tuck under" in basement. MHFA would not support building basements. Therefore, the new townhouses are two- story buildings rather than three story and there is little grade change in the courtyard because the berms are eliminated. C. Townhous~s Reconfigured. The north townhouses have been reconfigured into a row, rather than two clusters. These changes required changes in the new townhouse floor plans. The furnace and laundry are now located on the first floor and an open/island kitchen plan has been designed. Storage trusses and pull-down stairs have been added to the garages. D. Roadways-Private. The PPL project will be accessed via a private street that encircles the housing units at the perimeter of the site. The Planner states that the revised circulation pattern is viewed favorably for the following reasons: (1) The revised circulation pattern provides vehicular access to all buildings. (2) Automobile traffic is segregated from the common open space and pedestrian paths. (3) The private street design provides excellent sight lines for motorists using the street. (4) The private streets and parking areas will have bituminous surface. Concrete curbing is proposed along the entire private street. (5) A speed bump/pedestrian crossing has been provided to reduce traffic speeds in the northern end of the project site. PC97-32 Page 10 9/28/98 The applicant is requesting a variance from the PUD private street width of 25 feet. The site pla~L~. illustrates a proposed street width of 22 feet. The reduced street width is dictated by the site's sizi the location of the existing buildings, and the required setbacks. The setback between the existing buildings and the side lot lines provides a physical hardship in attempting to meet bOth the required setbacks and providing a 25-foot street width. At 22 feet, the private drive is the equivalent to a drive aisle in a parking lot'-offering two 11-foot traffic lanes. With the reduced private street width, the following conditions will be imposed: (1) The private street shall be posted "no parking-tire lane" at 50-foot iritervals along the private street. The curb will also be painted yellow designating it a fire lane. (2) The 90 degree parking stalls adjoining the private, drive shall be oversized at nine feet by 20 feet, eight inches. The larger parking stalls offer greater maneuvering space for care accessing and egressing the parking stalls. (3) The turning radius on the private street should be increased to accommodate a large truck. (i.e., moving van, tire truck) 50 feet in length without running over the curb. E. City Engineer Comments on Roadways (1) Access is provided by two driveways onto Bass Lake Road. Hennepin County conceptually approved the access, however, final plans/permitting must be reviewed/approved by Hennepin County (including sidewalk and driveway removal/reconstruction in right-of-way). The existing pedestrian crossing and traffic signal for Bass Lake Road shall be shown on the plans. (2) The proposed driveway width is 23 feet back of curb (24-foot face of curb is preferred). The two internal 90 degree curves must include an acceptable radius (preferably 50 feet) accommodate emergency/service vehicles). F. Parking. The petitioner states that "this revised plan is very successful in addressing concerns about visitor parking. In addition to 34 garage spaces and 34 off-street spaces, we have been able to create 24 visitor spaces. Assuming six are designated for Breckenddge, the remaining 18 spaces create a parking ratio of greater than 2.5:1. This substantially exceeds the PUD requirements and exceeds the amount of parking typically provided at other MHFA-financed developments. Additional visitor parking could be obtained only by one. or more of the following undesirable options: (1) eliminat~ landscaped area along Bass Lake Road, (2) eliminate snow storage space at northeast and northwest corners of the property; (3) reduce side yard setbacks to 0 and create parallel parking on the unbuilt side of the pdvate road. PPl"will establish clear lease requirements to limit resident vehicles to a maximum of two and will also make arrangement for off-street parking to be used by the development, if needed." Per the Planner's report, the New Hope Zoning Code requires townhomes to provide at least one enclosed and open parking stall per unit. The site plan illustrates that each townhome will have a single car garage and a parking space in front of the garage to meet the City's Code. Additionally, 18 guest parking spaces are provided on the site plan. The guest parking stalls are a favorable addition to the revised site plan. Concern has been expressed as to whether there is sufficient parking near the proposed office to accommodate both customer and employee parking. The site plan shows both a standard and a disability parking stall near the office. The disability parking stall further limits the parking availability near the office. PPL has indicated that they would reduce the parking demand near the office by either hiring an on-site resident manager or requiring an off-site resident manager to park their vehicle in the north visitor parking lot. · The Planning Commission may wish to comment on the acceptability of the office parking. Alternative measures to increase the office parking may include: PC97-32 Page 11 9/28/98 (1) Relocate the disability parking stall to the western private street and provide three standard nine- foot wide parking stalls near the office. (2) Eliminate the 11.5-foot curb island between the office parking and the first townhome driveway to provide a third parking stall. Entry to Rehabilitated Units. An additional stair to the basement has been added to create access to private basement space and eliminate common entry hall. New Office. The on-site office has been relocated to a new townhouse, in a more visible location next to Bass Lake Road. The petitioner has provided a memo addressing the use of the adjacent parking space by the site manager. Drainage and Grading. (1) The petitioner states that a drainage and grading plan has been developed with the assistance of the New Hope, Crystal and School Distdct engineers. A large, shallow storm water retention area (dry pond) will be created in the southeast corner of the Thorsen land. The ballfield will be regraded to improve drainage of the field. The existing storm sewer will be extended to connect with a new storm sewer to be built by PPL; the east and west runs will be designed to pick up storm water from backyards along Nevada and Pennsylvania Avenues. The City of Crystal will accept a flowage easement from the School District and New Hope and Crystal will share maintenance responsibility for this storm sewer. (2) The City Engineer has made the following comments: (a) The grading and development of the perimeter access road must be carefully coordinated with Crystal residents (the distance between curb and property line is only 4.55 feet). Retaining walls aren't shown on the plans, however; if agreement with adjacent residents in Crystal isn't obtained to perform grading on their properties; retaining walls will be required where significant grade differences exist. The final location of CB 4, 6 and 7 must be resolved with Crystal residents if they are to be constructed. (b) The grading and restoration of the Thorsen School property must be carefully coordinated with representatives of the School District. Special attention is directed to the common lot line where a benched area is proposed to be graded. (c) The'depressed area will provide storm water retention dudng large storm events until the existing storm sewer in 58t~ Avenue has available capacity. A drainage/utility easement or agreement shall be provided between the City of Crystal and Robbinsdale School District over the storm water retention area. (d) The storm sewer line between CB 8 and 9 shall be moved north such that it is not located beneath a building. (e) The grading between the existing buildings where the" garages are proposed to be constructed shall be carefully done to direct drainage to the courtyard area (additional storm sewers may be required). (1) The Planner's report states that PPL has met with New Hope, Crystal and lSD 281 staff in an attempt to design a storm water drainage plan that adequately responds to the project needs and corrects existing storm drainage problems along the rear yards of the adjoining single family homes and the school. The system laid out in the plan includes the following elements: (a) The southeast quarter of the site will drain to catch basins and storm sewer that flows to Bass Lake Road. PC97-32 Page 12 9/28/98 (b) The balance of the site will drain north via storm sewer along the perimeter of internal private.,. streets. Storm sewer inlets from the adjoining single family lots will connect to on-site cak basins in an effort to relieve some of the area's existing drainage problems. The site's storm water is intended to outlet into a pond located on the School District property. In severe storm events, the pond would outlet north through storm sewers to 58th Avenue. (c) Per city staff recommendation, the applicant's grading plan has provided an eight-foot wide trail bench as part of the storm water pond grading. This bench is intended to provide a level walking path or future trail to Thorsen Community Center. (d) lSD 281 has reviewed the plan and is willing to convey a drainage easement over their property to PPL to facilitate the construction of the drainage pond. (e) The City of Crystal must meet with adjoining single family homeowners to solicit consent from adjoining homeowners in providing storm 'drainage easements and constructing storm sewer improvements beyond the PPL site. Utilities. The applicant has submitted a revised preliminary utility plan, The Planner's report states that the revised plan responds to the recommendations of staff in the following manner: (1) The utility plan indicates that all utilities including but not limited to telephone, electricity, gas, and cable television shall be located underground. (2) Where the sanitary sewer exceeds 300 feet in length, provisions must be made for manholes to allow adequate cleaning and maintenance of the lateral. The utility plan provides manholes along the sanitary sewer lateral. The greatest separation between manholes is 268 feet. (3) Where more than one building is served by the same water service, shut off valves should be located in such a way that each unit's water service may be shut off individually. The utility plan shows individual water services to the new townhome units. The existing buildings have one water service line for each building. PPL is investigating the use of flow meters to divide the water usage between tenants. (4) The fire hydrants shown on the utility plan are located on the building side of the private ddve. This location will provide easy access and use of the hydrants. The hydrant locations must be reviewed and approved by the City Fire Inspector. (5) All watdl' flow tests on the PPL water system will be, conducted in the presence of the New Hope Fire Inspector. All hydrants shall be required to flow 1,500 GPM with 20 PSI. (6) City staff questions the need for the new fire service/back flow preventor located on the east side of the site in front of the existing center building. The applicant should provide a description ' of this service function. The City Engineer provided the following comments on the utility plan: (1) As-built record plans shall be provided for the existing sanitary sewer services that serve the existing buildings. Additional clean outs may be required in accordance with acceptable standards. (2) Water service is proposed to be provided from the existing water service in Bass Lake Road (near east property line). An additional water connection is preferred either in Bass Lake Road (along west property line) or in Pennsylvania Avenue (to west). However, if only one water service connection is to serve this development, flow test at each hydrant must be done to insure fire flow requirements can be met in accordance with acceptable standards. In the event the required flow requirements can't be met, an additional water connection shall be provided. PC97-32 Page 13 9/28/98 Trails and Sidewalks. Per the Planner's report, the site plan and landscape plan illustrate a comprehensive network of trails and sidewalks through the site providing a pedestrian linkage between the housing units and the central court. With the revised site plan, the residents of the northern townhomes must walk across the private street to access the center court. To reduce traffic speed and improve pedestrian safety at this location, a speed bump/pedestrian crossing has been provided. The site plan does raise the following trail issues..The patios associated with the northern townhomes outlet into the School District property. Without School District approval, this design would promote random trespass onto property outside the control of PPL Related to this issue, the New Hope CPTED has continued to express the need for an improved pedestrian connection between the PPL site and the Thorsen Community Center. In an attempt to respond to both issues, PPL, following the suggestion of city staff, has revised the grading plan for the School District pond, providing an eight foot wide bench for trails along the full length of the northern townhomes. In consideration of this trail design, the following issues require resolution: (1) The School District must approve a trail at this location and a connection to the Thorsen parking lot. (2) The construction of a trail upon the completion of the site trading. The City, in cooperation with the City of Crystal, may consider sharing the cost of trail construction. The petitioner states that they have proposed to grade an eight-foot wide level area at the northern boundary of the site, on School Distdct property, to provide a path for residents to walk to Thorsen. This path could be paved and provide all-weather access to the daycare and other Thorsen amenities. The School District has indicated in conversation that they are not opposed to a path at this location. L. Landscape Plan. Per the Planner's report, the new PPL landscape plan illustrates extensive landscape plantings are proposed. Generally, the landscape plan appears to be very positive and responsive to some of staff's past recommendations. In review of the landscape plan, we offer the following comments: (1) The landscape plan shows that the landscaping along Bass Lake Road is located within the street right-of-way. All landscaping must be located on the private property. All trees must be set back five feet from the nearest property line. '(2) The City Forester has noted that the formal linear landscape design requires extensive maintenance and attention to insure its ongoing attractive appearance. Poor maintenance or the loss of a tree or shrub is highly noticeable in this formal linear design. To maintain the various -landscape areas and insure ongoing maintenance, an irrigation system is recommended as a condition of plan approval. (3) The location of Spirea along the outer drives will result in plant damage due to snow storage. The City Forester suggests replacing the Spirea with day lilies or hostas to accommodate some snow storage along the streets. A detailed landscape schedule is provided which indicates a total of 77 deciduous trees, seven evergreen trees, 683 shrubs, 120 vines and 539 perennials will be planted. Enlarged plans of the landscaping around the inner patios and entries are also provided. M. Site Fence, Site fencing along the east and west property lines (adjoining the single family homes) has been changed to wood. The northern boundary, now the backyards of the townhouse row, has a hedge bordering the School District property. A detail of the wood fence is enclosed showing it will be six feet in height with 4" x 4" posts eight feet on center and will be a dog-eared picket fence (slats alternating every other side). The wood will be rough-sawn, pressure-treated and stained. PC97-32 Page 14 9/28/98 N. Signage. Two identification signs are proposed to be located on the site: one at the east and one ~ the west entrance. Each sign will be 2' x 6'6" or approximately 13 square feet in size. The signs w state "Bass Lake Court" with the addresses of the units. Signs will be constructed of pressure- treated wood and all lettering will be engraved and painted white. Per the Planner's report, the proposed signage complies with city ordinances relating to sign area, height and location, except the manager's office sign'must be relocated to meet required setbacks. O. Courtyard Access and Surveillance. Per the petitioner,, to create drive through access for a police or emergency vehicle, the sidewalk along the south side of the courtyard was widened to eight feet. The pedestrian access to Bass Lake Road was redesigned to create greater privacy for the development. P. Lighting Plan. ^ revised detailed lighting plan has been submitted. Said plan shall be subject to review and comment by the City Building Inspector and CPTED officer. The lighting plan includes the following details: (1) New NSP "Nightwatch" lighting will be mounted o~ eight existing poles on the east and west property lines. (2) All front and back entry ways to be lighted by incandescent or compact fluorescent wall-mounted fixtures. (3) Nine pedestrian light poles will be installed on the intedor of the site on 14-foot concrete poles. Q. Breckenridge Group Home. Per the petitioner, instead of two garage spaces, the owner and the program staff have requested separate pdvate outdoor space for their residents. This allowed the creation of six staff/visitor parking spaces designated for Breckenddge. The Planner's report states that the site plan and construction details for the trash enclosure, related to the Breckenridge Group Home, illustrate a structure design that is out of character with the balance of buildings and garages within the project. Staff recommends that the group home locate their trash receptacles within a garage or smaller accessory building having the same architectural appearance as a garage. Please note that the petitioner submitted a revised landscaping plan showing the removal of the garage at the Breckenridge property, per the request of Breckenridge. This last minute revision has been submitted to the Planning Consultant for review and he will comment on this at the Planning Commission meeting. R. Playground. A large playground area and playground equipment will be located in the center of the site, with play areas designated for specific age groups. S. Soil/Groundwater Contamination. The petitioner has submitted the enclosed correspondence regarding environmental issues. T. Exterior Building Materials. Existing four-plexes are brick with asphalt shingles. New garages will have new fiber cement extedor panels. Extedor of new townhomes will be of cement fiber panels, wood trim and asphalt shingles. Petitioner is to provide samples of materials and present information on graffiti removal. U. Lot Coverage Ratios. With the redevelopment of the site, the lot coverage ratios would be as follows: Buildings 21.2% Concrete and aSphalt 41.3% Green Area 37.5% 100% PC97-32 Page 15 9/28/98 3. Staff commends the petitioner for responding to a number of issues raised by the Design & Review ~ Committee, staff and consultants and find that the revised plans address a majority of the issues discussed. RECOMMENDATION The PPL redevelopment project is an aggressive attempt to ih~prove an area of New Hope that is in poor condition. The effort is consistent with the City's comprehensive planning goals and housing goals. In this respect, based on review of the PPL PUD development stage application, staff recommend the following actions: Rezoning. Recommend that the City take final action in rezoning the entire project site to an R-3, Residential Zoning District. Subdivision. Recommend that the City approve the final plat and related variances for PPL Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. Revise plat, per City Attorney recommendations, regarding legal descriptions and notarization language, and provide evidence of ownership. 2. Revise plat, per City Engineer recommendations, including easement over eastJwest storm sewer between catch basins 2 and 4 and easement right-of-entries for construction. 3. Obtain appropriate permits from Hennepin County for work in right-of-way and restore all areas. 4. Revise plat to include Minnegasco easement. 5. The applicant outline the terms under which Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 of PPL Addition will establish uniform standards for property and building maintenance. Development Stage PUD. Recommend approval of the PUD .development stage for PPL with the following conditions: 1. Approval of the following requested variances from PUD standards in accordance with the submitted site plan: A. Building setback from private roadways and parking areas. B. Setbacks between buildings. C. Length of tl~e townhome structure. D. Private roadway width and parking lot dimensions. E. Perimeter setbacks. 2. Parking and Circulation: A. Increase turning radius on private streets at the north end of the site, per City Engineer's recommendation. B. All pdvate streets must be posted "no parking-tire lane." C. Consider options for increasing parking near the office. 3. Drainage plan to comply with recommendations of City Engineer. 4. Utility plans to comply with recommendations of the City En. gineer. 5. ResPond to the issues related to a trail connection to Thorsen Community Center. 6. Landscape Plan: PC97-32 Page 16 9/28/98 Attachments: A. All plantings must be located on private property. All trees must be set back five feet from property line. B. The site landscaped areas must be ifrigated. C. Replace the Spirea along the private streets with da~, lilies or hostas. Eliminate trash enclosure in faVor of a small accessory building that is architecturally compatible with the balance of the project. Building materials are conducive to anti-graffiti protections. Developer to enter into Site Improvement/PUD Agreement with the City and submit performance bond (amount to be determined by City Engineer and Building Official). Add'ress/Zoning/Topo Maps 8/24 & 8/21 Petitioner Correspondence: Development Application Lot Coverage Ratios Platting Variances Breckenddge Letter Soil/Groundwater Contamination On-Site Resident Manager/Visitor Parking Development Review Items Memo Revised Plans Site Plan Site Survey Site Removals Plan Landscaping Plan Revised Landscaping Plan re: Breckenddge Plant Schedule Patio/Entry Landscaping Landscaping Details Patio Wood Screens/Trash Enclosure Wood Fence Detail oO Interior, Walkway Light Section Signage Lighting Contours Grading/Drainage Plan Storm Water Management Notes Utility Plan Utility Notes Geometric Site Layout Utility Details Extedor Building Stair Sections Speed Bump Detail Exterior Building Elevations & Floor Plans Final Plat Planner's Report City Attorney Plat Comments City Engineer Plat & Site Plan Comments Minnegasco Plat Comments Application Log PC97-32 Page 17 9/28/98 AvE, AVE ST. RAPHEL CATHOLIC CHURCH .¸4 AVE N .E_Y AVE N O-OVERDAL£ AVE BROOKLYN PARK R22 ZONING DISTRICT MAP t e71.7 x ROAD PROJECT FOR PRIDE IN LIVING, INC. 2516 Chicago Avenue South Minneal3oiis, MN 55404 Telel~one (612) 874-8511 ~ FAX (612) 874-6444 August 21, 1998 Bill Sonsin, Chair, New HoPe Planning Commission, Members of the Planning Commission, Mayor Enck and City Council Members 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 RE: ~ Bass Lake Court - Development Application Dear Planning Commissioners, Mayor Enck and City Council Members: Enclosed please find a revised Development Application for this project. You will note a number of changes from the plan which received concept approval in May. These design changes respond to requests made by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, the first mortgage lender. Upon the advice of your staff some additional revisions have been made. Three significant changes have been made in the site plan.. 1) The vrivate road alimunent on north erld of thc site is different The east/west road will now be located between the existing fourplexes and the new townhouses. This improves garage and emergency vehicle access to those four units. A 20 foot wide speed bump has been created to slow traffic and create a handicapped accessible route from the northern townhouse row into the courtyard. 2) 3) Gara,,es for new townhous~ are attached, on m~ade, rath~c than "tuck under" in basement MHFA w~uld not support building basements. Therefore, the new townhouses are two story buildings rather than three story and there is little grade change in the courtyard because the berms are eliminated. .. The north townhouses ~ave been reconfieured into a row. rather than two clusters. These changes require changes in the ne~ townhouse floor plans. The furnace and laundry are now located on the first floor and an open/island kitchen plan has been designed. Storage misses and pull-down stairs have been added to the garages. Below is a summary of other items which have been changed. 4) Entry to rehabilitated unim An additional stair to the basement has been added to create access to private basement space and eliminate common entry hall. 5) New office The on-site office has been relocated to anew townhouse, in a more visible location next to Bass Give me a 8sh and ~ eat for a clay; teach me to fi~ and I eat for a lifetime. Mr. Bill Sonsin, Planning Commissioners, Mr. Mayor, City Council Members August 21, 1998 Page 2 Lake Road. A memo is attached addressing the use of the adjacent parking space by the site manager 7) Site fence Site fencing along the east and west property lines (adjoining the single family homes) has been changed to wood. The northern boundary, now the backyarcls of the townhouse row, has a hedge bordering the school district property. Trail to Thorsen Community Center '. A~t the request of City staff, we have proposed to grade an eight foot wide level area at the northern bouridary of the site, on school district property, to provide a path for residents to walk to Thorsen. This path could be paved and provide all-weather access to the claycare and other Thorsen amenities. The School District has indicated in conversation that they are not opposed to a l~ath at this location. 8) Breckenridge Group Home Instead of two garage spaces, the owner and the program staffhave requested separate private outdoor space for their residents. This allowed the creation of six staff/visitor parking spaces designated for Breckenridge. 9) Plat changes The building at 7314 Bass Lake Road, currently Breckenridge Group Home, appears as its own lot, since PPL is not purchasing the property at this time. This owner will be granted an access easement for use of the private road. Variances to the platting requirements are being requested to accommodate this lot. Parking This revised plan is very successful in addressing concerns about visitor pariring. In addition to 34 garage spaces and 34 off-street spaces, we have been able to create 24 visitor spaces. Assuming 6 are designated for Breckemidge, tl~ r~maining 18 spaces create a parking ratio of greater than 2.5:1. This substantially exceeds the PUD requir~.-ments and exceeds the amount of parking typically provided at other MHFA-finan~ developments. Additional visitor parking could be obtained only by one or mor~ of the following undesirable options: (1) eliminate landscaped area along Bass Lake Road, (2) eliminate snow storage space at northeast and northwest comers of the property; (3) reduce sideyard setbacks to 0 and create parallel parking on the ' unbuilt side of the private road. PPL will establish clear lease requirements to limit resident vehicles to a maximum of two and will also make arrangements for Off-street parking to be used by the development if n~ied. Mr. Bill Sonsin, Planning Commissioners, Mr. Mayor, City Council Members August 21, 1998 Page 3 Drainage and Grading A drainage and grading plan--has been developed with the expert assistance of the New Hope, Crystal and School District engineers. A large, shallow storm water retention area (dry pond) will be created in the southeast comer of the Thorsen land. The ballfield will be regraded to improve drainage of the field. The existing storm sewer will be extended to conner with a new storm sewer to be built by PPL; the east and west runs will be designed~to pick up storm water fi.om backyards along Nevada and Pennsylvania The City of Crystal gill accept a flowage easement from the School District and New Hope and Crystal will share maintenance responsibility for this storm sewer. Court_ ard' Access and Surveillance To create drive through access for a police or emergency vehicle, the sidewalk along the south side of the courtyard was widened to 8 feet. The pedestrian access to Bass Lake Road was redesigned to create greater privacy for the development. The revised Development Application requests: Rezoning of 7300 Bass Lake Road from B-3 to R-3 and re-zoning 7332 Bass Lake Road fi.om R-O to R-3; Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development to allow townhouse development; Six Zoning Variances; Site/Building Plan Review/Approval; Final Plat ~/~laroval for PPL Addition including approval of three variances to the City's platting regulations. We appreciate the attention end assistsnco we have received from your Commission, staff and consultants. PPL, New Hope and future residents will benefit from their time and attention. We look ~)rward to disc~ the~ plans with you. Thank you for your consideration. e Director CC: Dan Donahue Kirk McDonald Chris Wilson Lisa Kugler ATTACHMENT TO PPL BASS LAKE COURT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION Lot Coverage: Buildings Concrete and asphalt 21.2% 41.3% Green Area 37.5 % 100% August 21, 1998. New Hope Planning Commission 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428. /~737 Oarfietd Ave: $o. Minneapotis. MN 55409 Development Application for PPL Bass Lake Court Need for Variances fi.om Platting Requirements Dear Commissioners~ Project for Pride in Living has submitted a proposed plat which includes two lots. Lot I includes all of the proposed new construction and seven of the eight existing fourplexes Lot 2 consists of the fourplex at 7314 Bass Lake Road. This building is owned by Mr. Harold Garvin and is leased to the Community Care Corporation, which operates the Breckertridge Group Home for mentally disabled adults. PPL does not wish to close the Group Home, as both the City and Hennepin County have indicated their support for the continuation of the program and the neighbors have testified to the high quality of the operation. Mr. Garvin has invested a substantial sum in renovating the fourplex for Group Home use, including a commercial kitchen, plan changes to eliminate separate kitchens and living rooms, basement office space, air conditioning and a sprinkler system. Purchase of the building by PPL and continuation of the lease to the Group Home was not financially feasible and is outside the area of PPL's mission. Therefore, an agreement was reached with Mr. Garvin to allow him to own and lease the building as long as he desires to do so. PPL will have a right of first refusal to purchase the property at the time he desires to sell the property. PPL will purchase his 1/8 share of the Association (common) land. PPL will provide exterior improvements to this fourplex to make it architecturally compatible wilh the rest of the development. The lot would include the area of building and approximately 13 feet to each side and PPL would grant an easement for road access. No easement for access to the courtyard play areas is provided since the Breckenridge staff felt that private outdoor space would be most deisrable for their diems, many of whom are heavy smokers. PPL has worked ~ Mr. Crarvin and the Breckemidge staff to design outdoor space, including extra parking, which meets their needs. In order to accomplish these objectives, three variances are required: Variance of minimum lot size in R-3 zoning fi.om 10,000 square feet to allow for a lot of 3,780 square feet. The current lot is already below the minimung at 3,388 square feet and actually represents a slight increase in lot size. (612) 827-2189 fax 82&-8672 Planning CommissiOn August 21, 1998 Page Two 2. Variance of requirement to have full frontage abutting a city-approved street. The current lot has no frontage abutting a city-approved street and road access is unchanged in the proposed plan. Variance of setback requirements! front yard from 30 feet to 6 feet; side yard from 20 feet to 12 feet,, 7 inches (north) and 11 feet, $ inches (south); rear yard from 35 feet to 6 feet, 5 inches. Currea. t setbacks are also substantially below the minimums On behalf of PPL I am requesting that these three Variances be approved. PPL believes that the special circumstances include the initial configuration of the site, the substantial renovations made to the 7314 property to operate as a Group Home, and PPL's desire not to displace a necessary and well-managed facility. PPL believes that these variances will not be detrimental to the public welfare or to the adjoining homeowners because these variances simply allow the current property ownership and usage to remain. PPL believes that these variances can correct the inequities resulting from the initial decision to allow the fourplexes to be built without street frontage and the subsequent sale of these properties to separate owners. I would be pleased to provide any additional information you require. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Since.rely, , / -lisa Kusler t.,,' .. ConSultant to PPL CC: Steve Cramer August 21, 1998 Kirk McDonald City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, Mtq 55428 Dear .Mr. McDonald, I am .the owner of?314 Bass Lake Road,'.which is leased to Community Care Corporation, which opera{es the Brec,kemidge Group Home. This letter confirrm my approval and support of the request of Project for Pride in Living, lnc for approyal of the proposed new subdivision and replatting of the property, includin$ the request for variances. Please contact me at 476=2333 ifyou have questions. 1160 Xene Lane N Plymouth, MN 55447 CC: Lisa Kugler Steve Cramer MEMORANDUM TO: FR: RE: Kirk McDonald ~a Kugler, consultant to PPL PPL Bass Lake Court - Environmental Issues DATE: August 21, 1998 Soil/Groundwater Contamination ~737 OarfJetd Ave. 50. Minneapolis. MN 55/.~09 A Phase I has been conducted and supplied to you. BOrings for the Phase II investigation were conducted on August 17, 1998.. The Phase I indicated that the site received a No Action letter from the MPCA in response to soil and groundwater contamination caused by old gas tanks which were removed in 1991. It is PPL's intention to receive a No Action letter from the M~PCA from the Voluntary Investigation Cleanup Program, the fee-for-service arm of MPCA, which is designed to work within developer timelines The Phase II report is anticipated to be completed by end of August. This report checks whether the new tanks have leaked and verifies soil conditions in areas to be built upon. Two outcomes are possible. 1) No action Based on current information and prior Oil company and MPCA action, no soil remediation or other action is needed and conventional construction techniques can be utilized. Based on the on-site soil boring information, without laboratory tests and review by the envirionmental firm, this appears to be the case. 2) Soil Remediation , Areas of contaminated soil must be removed and replaced. Contaminated soil is taken to a licensed facility for disposal, ffthis is required, the Phase II will provide specifications and a cost estimate. The MPCA letter states no ground water receptors appear to-be at risk from this site and that natural bioattemmfion is decreasing the contamination over time. The MPCA letter stated that "there do not appear to be any ground water receptors at risk from the release at this site. Therefore, this release does not appear to pose a threat to public health or the environment." Old Wells The Phase I report found no evidence of drinking water wells, septic systems, pits, ponds, or lagoons. Monitoring wells on the gas station property were installed as part of the petroleum release investigation. (612) 827-2189 fax 826-8~72 Kirk McDonald' Memo August 21, 1998 Asbestos An asbestos survey has been conducted in the ogee building and will be provided to the demolition contractor,* as required. A survey will be conducted in the service station building. Asb~tos, if found, will be removed by a licensed and bonded asbestos removal contractor. Please feel free to give me a call if you have questions or need additional information on these matters. CC: Steve Cramer Chris Wilson MEMORANDUM /~737 0arfie{d Ave. $o. Minneapoti$. MN 55~9 TO: Kirk McDonald FR: Kugler, consultant to RE: PPL Bass Lake Court = Visitor Parking to office DATE: August 21, 1998 It is PPL's intention to hire and retain an on-site resident manager, who would park at her/his own umr If it is impossible at some point to fill this position with an on-site person, the manager would park in the north visitor parking. The on-site office serves residents and typically expects two types of visitors: applicants, who come one household at a time, by appointment; or service vendors who make short stops for pick-up or delivery. I would be pleased to provide additional information on this matter. Or, call Ms. Shaft Pleiss, Manager for PPL's Property Management Division, at 874-3302. CC: Steve Cram~ Shari Plei~ Chris Wilson (612) 827-2189 fax 826-8672 MEMORANDUM TO: FR: RE: Kirk McDonald, City of New Hope a7~7 Garfield Ave, 5o, Minneapotis. MN 554139 sa Kugler, consultant to PPL PPL Bass Lake Court Project - Response to Development Review Items and 8/12/98 Memo from Alan Brixius to Design and Review Committee DATE: Augusf21, 1998 Deveiopment Review Items 1. Plat has been corrected to include the additional fight of way. 2. Plat easements have been revised on plat submitted. 3. Recalculations are noted on sheet S-3. 4. Proposed building setbacks are on sheet S-3. 5. A letter indicating need for Lot 2 is included with the application. 6. These changes have been made on sheet C-2. 7. Meeting with the Crystal neighbors occurred on August 20, 1998 at 7 p.m. at Thorsen Community Center. 8. Lawn irrigation is specified as a design/build package and is not laid out on the plans at this time. 9. Revision on sheet C-3. 10. No action required. 11. A memo on PPL resident site managed is attached.. 12. A speed bump detail is included. Please note that design of speed bump and curb avoid backup interference to the extent possible. 13. A memo on environmental issues is attached. 14. Compreh~sive fighting plan (sheet S-8) includes point values. "Nightwatch" fixtures and mounting height was not changed as advice continues to be that lights are directional and can : be' position to avoid glare on adjacent homes. 15. A list of variances is included in the Development Application. 16. Signs are on sheet S-6. 17. No action required. 18. Landscapin~ su88estions have been followed with the exception of the Spirea, We are advised that Spirea is cut down to the ground every sprin8 so is not sens/tive to salt. We can provide a memo on this item if required. 19. Section shown on sheet A-l.7. 20. Title evidence to be submitted before final plat approval. Signatures of owners not required, per discussion with Steve Sondrahl and Martin Malecha. 21. Missin8 items: Land ownership is specified in attachment to Development Application, title evidence to be supplied before final plat signed; Declaration of covenants, Owner's Association, Liability for costs, staging of public and Common space De&cation - not applicable to rental housing 22. Preliminary discussion with the School District indicated willingness to allow 8 foot bench and openings in hedge. (612) 827.2189 fax 82&-8672 23. A larger sample of the siding material has been requested and a graffiti experiment will be conducted and results discussed. 24. Revision made on sheet C-3. 25. Breckenridge trash enclosure has been redesigned with a shed roof. Their trash removal will consist of four 95 gallon carts plus 3-4 recycling barrels. ' 26. Utility plan provides separate service pipes to the new townhouses; the existing fourplexes have one service to each building, which needs to be shared by both units. 27. Revision have been made in omitted locations. Please note sloped walks without curbs. 28. Specifications will require that redlined as-built drawings be submitted by contractor to owner as condition for figal payment. BKBM will provide as-built drawings to City. 29. Revised narrative listing all plan cha~..ges is included as cover letter to the Development Application. Res_nonse tO 8/12/98 Memo from Alan Brixius to Desi_nn and Review Committe~ SUBDIVISION The proposed plat has been revised. SETBACKS The school district has approved landscaping rather than a fence along their boundary and appears open to the idea of a trail. Formal school district approval is being solicited. Alternatively, the hedge can be continuous or a fence can be substituted. SITE CIRCULATION 1. Turning radius was increased, see sheet S-3. 2. See memo on staff parking. Overflow parking willl be directed to the visitor spaces at the north of the site. Generally, the site office serves residents, potential residents and service vendors on a one-to-one basis and is unlikely to parking in excess of that available. PATHWAYS~ 1. The pathway from the townhouses on the south has been revised; see sheet S-3. 2. Detail for 8 foot wide level pathway has been added to facih'tate pedestrian and wheelchair access. The ramp is sloped at 1:12, the ADA standard. 3. We agree and wo~id request that the City meet with the District to disoa~ a pathway. LANDSCAPING 1. An application for an encroachment permit will be made to Hennepin County to retain landscapin$ within the additional fight-of-way. This landscaping does not include trees and does not present any sort of hazard or interference with street use or maintenance. 2. Species diversity has been increased as suggested. 3. An irrigation system is included. ~A is not veo] supportive of this cost but we will continue to discuss this with them. 4. It is the opinion of our landscape architect that Spirea, which is cutback each spring, is not adversely affected by snow storage and provides a fuller planting. 5. The Crabapple trees have been replaced with Birch, as suggested. 6. The Scotch Pines have been relocated as suggested. TRASH ENCLOSURE 1. Breckenridge does not want a garage. A roof has been added to the trash enclosure to simulate a utility building. 2. The Breckem'idse trash enclosure is not readily accessible to residents and consists of four 95 gallon carts plus 3-4 recycling barrels. The enClosure can be locked ifuse by project residents should become a problem. LIGHTING 1. Additional information is provided on the lighting plan and ail elements are consolidated on the one pla~. We are advised that the lights are directional; height can be modified although the specified height is r_ecommended in order to light the road. Additional * information will be obtained on this item. 2. Additional lighting has been added. SIGNAGE 1. No comment. 2. Sign has been relocated. UTFLITY AND SITE DRAINAGE 1. City Engineer has provided commentSin the Development Review meeting. ill Ill fills ~ !ii111, I~1,1I~ Z r~ il' _] --'1 iJJliJ '"I I ! ! ilillll}! ! i J ,..,,,,! . i1111,tii i J ~i~J · JJJJJJJJJ l \ I CommYn Name Botanical Nam Size cont.. Remark! 10 Ash, Aul~Jmn,. Blaze' Fraxinus american(: 'Autumn B/aze' Plant at 30' o.c. 7 Crab, a~;l~le, Spring Snow' Malus, 'Spring Sno~ 8 Ash, r;~llgold' Fraxinus nigra 'Fallg )Id' 5 Lilac, Japanese Tree dump 14 Oak, Red 9 Honey Locust, Thornless I 1 Linden, 'Redmond" 13 Birch, 'Whitespire' clump Syringa mticulata Quercus rubrum Gleditsla triacanth< ~lia americana 'Re )s inermis fmond' Betula platyphylla japonica 'Whitespire" 2.5" BB 2.5" BB 2.$" BB 8' BB 2.5" BB 2.5"'BB' 2.5"'BB #10 cont. clump form clump form Evergreen Trees 7 Scotch Pine Pinus sytVestris 6' BB plant in groups 72 74 120 119 175 8 29 61 25 ShrUbs Spirea 'Anthony Waterer' Juniper, 'Grey Owl' Juniper, 'Mint Julep' Chokeberry 'Aulumn Magic' Hydrangea, 'Annabelle' Ulac, 'Miss Klm' Honeysuckle 'Em erald Mound' Potentilla, 'Abbolswood' Viburnum, Dwarf European Spirea x bumalda 'Anthony Waterer" J uniperus virginiana 'Grey Owl' J uniperus sabina "Scandia" Aronia melanocarpa "A untumn Magic" Hydrangea arborescens "Annabelle" Lonicera x x34ostemum 'Emerald Mound' Potent#la fruticosa "Abbotswood' Viburnum opulus 'Nahum' #5 conl. Planl at 4" o.c. #5 cont. Plant at 4* o.c. #5 cont. Plant at 4* o.c. #5 cont. Plant at 4* o.c. #5 cont. Planl at 4* o.c. 24.' BB Planl at 5" o.c. #5 cont. Plant at 4* o.c. #5 cont. Plant at 4*.o.c. #5 cont. Plant at 4* o.c. 120 Ivy. Engelmann Parthenocissus quinquefolio gal. Clsnt. Planl at 6' o.c. along fences 5,39 Da~ilies, mixed rebloomers Hemerocallis spp. gal. cont Plant at 18"o.c. ','i AND PLA'r' E(~T. (N.Y.C.) GAZEBO N.I.~. CONTAINER AND PLA'r' EOT. LL: AND ~ bJ 5~REEN FENCE ~t L IG/-/TING , (5) 'REDr'IOND' LINDEN ALONG ~ESTE~N D~IVJ TRA~ ENCL~URE ~ GRiP ~O~E. I~' ~EEN ~ALL ~ AT GROUP ~E ~' ~ ~AL~ T~P. (2) RED (25) (~08) 51B. ~15_.....- -- I1 - I I ! iii :-t ~!j.il!l:,,':, i: :Il::! iii ,:ii ilij i,ll ill '11 'j" ' · '" I~.I Jill llil I z ~Om ~ o 8 m~ ~'-~INGLE 17BIN NP~ I~EGA LUMINAII~E ~-~/RADIU~ A Rr"1 AMERON ROUND CONCRETE POLE INITW VANDAL JJ /-RESISTANT FINISH, I/ DIRECT-BURT. V COLOR TO BE 5ELECTED BT LAND.APE ARCHITECT, BACKFILL PER SPEC. INTEI~IOI~, ,P~LK, P~'T' LI~_~.IT SECTION I/4"=1'-0' PLAN /'"POST S'----~ //'-~"~ROUND- HEAD BOLTS COUNTERSIN~< NUT ALL I,.,IOOD 5z~St PRESSURE-TREATED AND STAINED, COLOR TO BE SELECTED BT LA ELEVATION ENGRAVED LETTERING 1.!. ENGRAVED LETTERING ALL LETTERING PAINTED I,,qN ITE qNUALS BT OI,,4NER COLLAR PROJECT 51®N AT EAST DRIVEP~¥ ! \ // iii"' !. ii!! ,/ / ti/i I HHIi II ]: ,,j,-,I. [ii . ~m, , , I I l! ,I ~.pip I !~ R~IM EL 878.0 INV. EL 874 CB5 4/c6. 41 ~E S87021 '21 "W 15.96' 12" CL 5 RCP O 5.2% RIM EL 879.0 INV. EL 875.5 SO0°O 1' 17"W 198.97' OF 15" CL 5 RCP O 0.4% STORM WATER MANAGEMENT TOTAL PROJECT AREA = ,].84 ACRES TOTAL WATERSHED AREA DRAINING TO POND = 6,32 ACRES TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA = 2.70 ACRES TOTAL PERVIOUS AREA = 3.62 ACRES ALL STORM WATER, WHICH FLOWS TO THE POND, OUTLETS TO A STORM SEWER IN 58TH AVE. INCREASE,. IN HARDSCAPE AREA - 0.59 ACRES 100 YEAR STORM PRE-DEVELOPMENT PEAK RUNOFF - 25 CFS '100 YEAR STORM POST-DEVELOPMENT PEAK RUNOFF - 29 CFS CON LIMITS ('PCP.) I · " PIP 100 YEAR STORM PRE-DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF VOLUME - 1.59' AC-Fr 100 YEAR STORM POST-DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF VOLUME - 1.79 AC-Fr DRAINAGE AREA DRAINING TO BASS LAKE ROAD = 1.8 ACRES 100 YEAR STORM PRE-DEVELOPMENT PEAK RUNOFF - 7 CFS 100 YEAR STORM POST-DEVELOPMENT PEAK RUNOFF - 7 CFS I-, ~.OENCH, MARK; ELEV. = 882.89 - TOP NUT OF HYDRANT, NE CORNER OF COURTYARD. 30 0 Scale x ~ ~ EXE ~ SER -BR~K iNTO EXISTING MH INV. ~ BR~K INT( ~ ~XlSTING M '~ 1NV. N89°59'59'' 100.84' of ~C ~ 0,5 ' AS~N ~ EXIt. W~ SE~CE 6. 7. 8. 9. AND 12. ANDON 13, WATER RVICE 868.1 UTILI~-. N©~ES: 1. COORDINATE SERVICE CONNECTION LOCATIONS AT THE BUILDING WITH THE MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR. PROVIDE THRUST BLOCKING ON WATER MAIN PER DETAIL 10/C5. PROVIDE MECHANICAL JOINT RESTRAINTS ON ALL BENDS, VALVES, TEES, PLUGS, AND HYDRANT LEADS. ALL WATER MAIN PIPING SHALL BE 6" DUCTILE IRON CL 52 PIPE. SANITARY SEWER PIPE SHALL BE ASTM D3034 SDR 35 STUB UTILITIES TO WITHIN 5 FEET OF THE PROPOSED BLDG. SEE DETAIL 6/C5 FOR SANITARY SEWER MH DETAIL. SEE DETAIL 9/C5 FOR HYDRANT LEAD INSTALLATION. SEE DETAIL 12/C5 FOR SEWER AND WATER SERVICE STUBS. WORK OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY LINES MUST BE APPROVED BY OWNER OR THE PROPER JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY. PROTECT ALL EXISTING STRUCTURES AND UTILITIES WHICH ARE NOT SCHEDULED FOR REMOVAL. NOTIFY CITY BUILDING INSPECTOR BEFORE TRENCHING AND EXCAVATION WORK COMMENCES. THE CONTRACTOR SHAI.L OBTAIN ALL APPLICABLE PERMITS PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION ALL WATER MAIN SHALL HAVE 7.5' OF COVER OVER TOP OF PIPE. THE SANITARY SEWER SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF 6' OF COVER OVER THE TOP OF THE PIPE. INSULATE WITH 21/2' RIGID STYROFOAM INSULATION IF MINIMUM COVER CAN NOT BE MAINTAINED. PROVIDE A MINIMUM SEPARATION OF 10 FEET BETWEEN ALL WATER MAIN AND SEWERS. PROVIDE A MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION OF 18 INCHES BETW[EN WATER MAIN AND SEWERS AT ALL CROSSINGS. COMPACT ALL BACKFILL IN UTIUTY TRENCHES WITHIN 3 FEET OF FINISHED SUBGRADE TO 95~ OF MAXIMUM STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY, ASTM D698. COMPACT BACKFILL TO l OOf[ OF MAXIMUM STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY WITHIN THE FINAL ;3 FEET OF FINISHED SUBGRADE. PROVIDE DENSITY TESTS IN ALL BACKFILL FOR EACH TWO FOOT LIFT OF FILL AT 150 FOOT INTERVALS IN FILL BELOW FOOTINGS AND PAVEMENT AREAS. COORDINATE GAS METER AND GAS LINE INSTALLATION, ELECTRICAL CABLE, AND TELEPHONE SERVICE WITH EACH LOCAL PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANY. ALL PRIVATE UTIMT1ES: GAS, 'ELECTRIC, TELEPHONE, AND CABLE TV SHALL BE UNDERGROUND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF NEW HOPE. NOTE: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FLOW TEST THE 3 NEW FIRE HYDRANTS IN THE PRESENCE OF THE NEW HOPE CITY FIRE INSPECTOR, KURTZ. THE HYDRANTS SHALL FLOW 1500 GPM WITH 20 PSI RESIDUAl. IF THE HYDRANTS CANNOT MEET THIS REQUIREMENT, AN ADDITIONAL WATER SERVICE CONNECTION WILL BE REQUIRED. THE EXACT LOCATION OF THE NEW WATER SERVICE WILL BE DETERMEINED AT THAT TIME. THE OWNER HAS SET ASIDE CONTINGENCY MONEY FOR THE ADOITiONAL WATER SERVICE, IF REQUIRED. ~flf i o -] '!t ~li~ il, li l ,! l i J,th. I i · 'ii L_ ,L__ iL ~ o {i ,, / '! ~W~S k ~ka~k~kkMk~kEkYkkik m TIm fret otb 1i'm{ }kf d'L,i }2. · mk~Mk~kNmm m km.d'~m~m {L~ km.d~mWWm~ ~mmm ~ mmmmm~md mm ~ pm ~mm Wmm ~amir~t.~ ~ bimmi ~.'~ #~k JO0 Im dTdt 3~,4tdmm, s b Nilm :lj, b Clue, ilmmmmL COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN CONSULTANTS MARKET RESEARCH PLANNING REPORT TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO: Alan Brixius 27 August 1998 New Hope - Project for Pride in Living: 131.01 - 97.05 Bass Lake Townhomes BACKGROUND In April, Project for Pride in Living Inc. (PPL) submitted development applications for the redevelopment of a block between Pennsylvania and Nevada Avenues. This block currently consists of eight four-plex residential buildings, a non-conforming gas station, and a non-conforming office building. The current land uses have created a number of problems for both the City of New Hope and the adjoining Crystal neighborhoods. Due to the condition and character of the land use in this block, the City of New Hope has identified these sites as priority for redevelopr~ent in the Tactics portion of the Comprehensive Plan Update. In consideration of the PPL applications in May 1998, the City Council gave the followir~ approvals: Rezoning. The City of New Hope approved rezoning the entire PPL project site consisting of 11 existing parcels and three zoning districts (R-3, R-O, and B-3) to R-3, Multiple Family Residential. This approval was made contingent on subsequent City approval of the PUD development and final stages. PUD Concept Plan. The City of New Hope approved concept stage PUD for the PPL project finding that the proposed redevelopment project was in keeping with the City's land use and housing goals. With this concept approval, the City indicated the need for more complete information and drawings must be submitted for PUD development stage consideration.. 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 5541 6 PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 612-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC~WINTERNET.COM Approval of the concept plan recognized the need and acceptability of the following variance requests: Section 4.193 (3)(c) requires buildir~gs to be set back 15 feet from the curb line from priVate roadways and parking areas. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a four foot setback between buildings and parking stalls at the north end of the site. The need for parking and site drainage requires this reduced setback. Section 4.193 (3)(d) requires buildings to maintain a separation setback equal to one-half the sum of the height of the two adjoining buildings. This variance deals with the setback between existing buildings in the center of the project site (a 22 foot setback is required, a 20 foot setback exists). Co Section 4.193 (5)(d) prohibits a townhome structure from having a length greater than 80 feet without an offset of 10 feet or more. By connecting the three existing buildings on both the east and west side of the site with garages, the structure length becomes 205 feet long without a 10 foot offset. Section 4.172 (11) requires private roadways to have a 25 foot minimum width. The applicant is requesting a 22 foot private roadway width to allow additional landscaping and green space. Section 4.036 (4)(h)(v) requires 90 degree parking to provide a 24 foot drive aisle width. The applicant is requesting a reduction to a 22 foot width. Parking stalls are nine feet wide, which allows adequate turning radius for cars accessing and egressing the parking stalls. Since PPL received conceptual approval in May 1998, the development plans have undergon~a number of changes mandated by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA). The PUD development stage submission illustrates the following changes from the previous concept plans: The private road has been redesigned at the north end of the site providing direct street access to all the buildings. The new townhomes are designed as on-grade, garage forward units rather than townhomes with basements and tuck-under garages. Entry to the rehabilitated units has been modified to eliminate the common entry hall. 2 The on-site office has been relocated along Bass Lake Road. The site fence along the east and west property lines has been changed to wood. The Breckenridge group Home is requesting flexibility from the standard garage requirements. The Breckenridge property owner is requesting that his property be established as a second lot within the plat. RECOMMENDATION Based on our review of the PPL PUD development stage application, we offer the following recommendation: Rezoning. We recommend that the City take' final action in rezoning the entire project site to an R-3, Residential Zoning District. Subdivision. Based on the information presented, we recommend that the City approve the final plat for PPL Addition with the following conditions: 1. Proper drainage and utility easements are dedicated. The size and location of needed easements shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer. 2. The applicant outline the terms under which Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 of PPL will establish uniform standards for property and building maintenance. Development Stage PUD. Staff recommends approval of the PUD development stage for PPL wit, r3 the following conditions: 1. Approval of the following requested variances from PUD standards in accordance with the submitted site plan: a. Building setback from private roadways and parking areas (Section 4.193 (3)(c)). b. Setbacks between buildings (Section 4.193 (5)(d)). c. Length of the townhome structure (Section 4.193 (5)(d)). 3 o d. Private roadway width and parking lot dimensions (Section 4.192 (9)(a) and Section 4.036 (4)(h)(v)). e. Perimeter setbacks (Section 4,193 (3)(a)). Utility plans are subject to review and comment of the City Engineer. Drainage Plan: a. A public drainage and utility easement is established between catch basins 2 and 3. b. Drainage plan is subject to review and comment of the City Engineer, Landscape Plan: a. All plantings must be located on private property. All trees must be set back five feet from the property line. b. The site landscal~ed areas must be irrigated. c. Replace the Spirea along the private streets with day lilies or hostas. Parking and Circulation: a. Increase turning radius on private streets at the north end of the site. b. All private streets must be posted "no parking-fire lane". c. Consider options for increasing parking near the office. Trails and Sidewalk: ~ a. Respond to the issues related to a trail connection to Thorson Community Center. Building Issues: .* a. Eliminate trash enclosure in favor of a small accessory building that is architecturally compatible with the balance of the project. b. Building materials are conducive to anti-graffiti protections. 4 c. BUilding plans subject to comments of other City staff. Lighting plans are subject to the review and comment by the City Building Inspector and CTEP Officer. Signage plan be revised to locate the office sign outside of the street right-of-way. Subject to the review comments of other City staff. ISSUES ANALYSIS Subdivision. Currently, the project site consists of 11 parcels of land which PPL is proposing to consolidate into lot and block legal descriptions. The plat will clean up the legal description, simplify property taxes and result in clear delineation of ownership of the site. Each of the objectives is endorsed by the City staff. Lot Area. The subdivision would result in two lots. The PPL site would consist of Lot 1 and have a total area of 3.75 acres. Lot 2 will consist of 3,780 square feet or .08 acres. Through the PUD approval, the City may grant flexibility in the subdivision design to accommodate the requested final plat. It should be noted that the requested flexibility only accommodates an already existing condition as described below: The applicant is requesting' flexibility for the Lot 2 lot size. The R-3 Zoning District requires a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet per building. The existing Breckenridge building is sited on a 3,388 square foot lot. Through the new plat and PUD, the Breckenridge lot will actually be enlarged to 3,780 square feet. Additionally, through the overall PUD, the density of the entire plat will be reduced from 13 units per acre to 9.1 units per acre. The/applicant is requesting flexibility for Lot 2 from the requirements of having full frontage on a public street. In the current condition, the Breckenridge lot does net have frontage on a public street. Lot access is proposed to continue to be provided via access easement. The applicant is requesting flexibility from the property line setbacks for building. Through the PUD, the Breckenridge group home is intended to be integrated into the site and building design of the entire site. In this respect, the lesser setbacks are acceptable. 5 Setbacks. The revised site plan illustrates that variances from the perimeter setback are required along the north property line (14 and 20 foot setbacks) and the south property line (28 foot setback). These variances are necessary due to the site plan modifications required by MHFA. These variances will be evaluated in greater detail in later portions of this report. The site plan maintains required setbacks along the east and west Property lines where the project adjoins single family residential lots. A number of internal setback variances have also been requested. These internal setbacks were deemed acceptable when the concept plan was considered by the City in May 1998. County Approvals. The plat illustrates a seven foot street right-of-way dedication along Bass Lake Road in accordance with County standards. Hennepin County has verbally approved the two Bass Lake Road curb cut locations. Formal access permit approval is still pending. Easements. The final plat illustrates the utility easements around the perimeter of the lot. These easements have been enlarged at the northeast and southeast corners of Lot 1, Block 1 to accommodate the proposed public utility locations. A utility easement must be established at the northern end of Lot 1, Block 1. The location of the utility easement must be aligned with the proposed east/west storm sewer that follows the private roadway. Property Ownership. Prior to recording the final plat with Hennepin County, PPL must demonstrate ownership of all the parcels comprising Lot 1, Block 1. Conditiori'al Use Permit. Within an R-3 Zoning District, townhomes are allowed by conditional use permit provided they satisfy the requirements of Section 4.19, Planned Unit Development (PUD) of the New Hope Zoning Code. The following paragraphs evaluate the proposed site plan against the PUD performance standards. Ownership. The ownership pattern has changed since the original concept plan. PPL is anticipated to be the single owner and manager of ali the housing units within Lot 1, Block 1, PPL Addition. The single ownership of all the housing units in Lot 1, Block 1 is seen as positive to insure responsible site maintenance and management. Lot 2, Block 1 of PPL Addition will continue to be owned by Harold Gan/in and leased by the Community Care Corporation which operates the Breckenridge group home. This ownership arrangement is acceptable providing there is a uniform standard for property 6 maintenance applied to buildings and grounds for both Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 of PPL Addition. Comprehensive Plan. New Hope's 1976 Comprehensive Plan designates the project site for commercial and mid density residential land uses. Since then, the existing land uses have exhibited signs of site and building deterioration. The 1998 Comprehensive Plan Tactics Summary identifies the project site as a priority site for redevelopment. The PPL project will accomplish the City's redevelopment objectives for the area. Additionally, the proposed housing types are consistent with the housing objectives identified in the City's 1996 Housing Action Plan and its 1997 Affordable Housing Study. Density. Within a PUD, the density shall be determined by standards agreed upon between the applicant and the City. Currently, the existing housing site has 32 housing units on 2.45 acres, producing a gross density of 13 units per acre. The PPL project will enlarge the total project site through acquisition of the adjoining gas station site, office building site, and a portion of the Thorson School site to the north. The total size of the project site will be 3.84 acres. PPL proposes to convert seven of the four-plex buildings to two-unit townhomes, the eighth four-plex building will remain as the Breckenridge Group Home. PPL will also construct 20 new townhome units, resulting in a total of 36 units on the site. These efforts will result in a reduCtion of site density from 13 units per acre to 9.1 units per acre. The resulting density is consistent with medium density residential ranges of six to ten units per acre, and is consistent with density allowed by New Hope's PUD zoning standards. Reviewing this density in the context of the overall site plan, staff would recommend that the requested density be approved as part of the PUD consideration. Utilities. The applicant has submitted a revised preliminary utility plan. This plan shall be subject to the review and comments of the City Engineer. The revised plan responds to recommendation of staff in the following manner: The utility plan indicates that all utilities including but not limited to telephone, electricity, gas, and cable television shall be located underground. VVhere the sanitary sewer exceeds 300 feet in length, provisions must be made for manholes to allow adequate cleaning and maintenance of the lateral. The utility plan provides manholes along the sanitary sewer lateral. The greatest separation between manholes is 268 feet. Where more than one building is served by the same water service, shut off valves should be located in such a way that each unit's water service may be shut off individually. The utility plan shows individual water services to the new townhome 7 units. The existing buildings have one water service line for each building. PPL is investigating the use of flow meters to divide the water usage between tenants. The fire hydrants shown on the utility plan are located on the building side of the private drive. This location will provide easy access and use of the hydrants. The hydrant locations must be reviewed and approved by the City Fire Inspector. All water flow tests on the PPL water system will be conducted in the presence of the New Hope Fire Inspector. All hydrants shall be required to flow 1,500 GPM with 20 PSI. City staff questions the need for the new fire service/back flow preventor located on the east side of the site in front of the existing center building. The applicant should provide a description of this service function. Drainage. PPL has met with New Hope, Crystal, and lSD 281 staff in an attempt to design a storm water drainage plan that adequately responds to the project needs and corrects existing storm drainage problems along the rear yards of the adjoining single family homes and the school. The system laid out in the plan includes the following elements: The southeast quarter of the site will drain to catch basins and storm sewer that flows to Bass Lake Road. The balance of the site will drain north via storm sewer along the perimeter of internal private streets. Storm sewer inlets from the adjoining single family lots will connect to on-site catch basins in an effort to relieve some of the area's existing drainage problems. The site's storm water is intended to outlet into a pond located on tl'j,e School District property. In severe storm events, the pond would outlet north through storm sewers to 58th Street. Per City staff recommendation, the applicant's grading plan has provided an eight foot wide trail bench as part of the storm water pond grading. This bench is intended to provide a level walking path or future trail to Thorson Community Center. lSD 281 has reviewed the plan and is willing to convey a drainage easement over their property to PPL to facilitate the construction of the drainage pond. 8 Remaining drainage issues include: The City of Crystal must meet with adjoining single family homeowners to solicit consent from adjoining homeowners in providing storm drainage easements and constructing storm sewer improvements beyond the PPL site. A storm drainage and utility easement must be established on the final plat that will cover the storm sewer connecting catch basins 2 and 3. The grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be subject to review and comment of the City Engineer. Landscape Plan. The new PPL landscape plan illustrates extensive landscape plantings are proposed. Generally, the landscape plan appears to be very positive and responsive to some of the staffs past recommendations. However, the plan will be subject to further review and comment of the City Forester. In review of the landscape 'Plan, we offer the following comments: The landscape plan shows that the landscaping along Bass Lake Road is located within the street right-of-way. All landscaping must be located on the private property. All trees must be set back five feet from the nearest property line. The City Forester has noted that the formal linear landscape design requires extensive maintenance and attention to insure its ongoing attractive appearance. Poor maintenance or the loss of a tree or shrub is highly noticeable in this formal linear design. To maintain the various landscape areas and insure ongoing maintenance, an irrigation system is recommended as a condition of plan approval. The location of Spirea along the outer drives will result in plant damag® due to sno~ storage. The City Forester suggests replacing the Spirea with day lilies or hosfas to accommodate some snow storage along the streets. Roadways - Private. The PPL project will be accessed via a private street that encircles the housing units at the perimeter of the site. The revised circulation pattern is viewed favorably for the following reasons: 1. The revised circulation pattern provides vehicular access to all buildings. Automobile traffic is segregated from the common open space and pedestrian paths. The private street design provides excellent sight lines for motorists using the street. 9 The priVate streets and parking areas will have bituminous surface. Concrete curbing is proposed along the entire private street. A speed bump pedestrian crossing has been provided to reduce traffic speeds in the northern end of the project site. The applicant is requesting a variance from the PUD private street width of 25 feet. The site plan illustrates a proposed street width of 22 feet. The reduced street width is dictated by the site's size, the location of the existing buildings, and the required setbacks. The setback between the existing buildings and the side lot lines provides a physical hardship in attempting to meet both the required setbacks and providing a 25 foot street width. At 22 feet, the private drive is the equivalent to a drive aisle in a parking lot offering two 11 foot traffic lanes. With the reduced private street width, the following conditions will be imposed: The private street shall be posted "no parking-fire lane" at 50 foot intervals along the private street. The curb will also be painted yellow designating it a fire lane. The 90 degree parking stalls adjoining the private drive shall be oversized at nine feet by 20 feet, eight inches. The larger parking stalls offer greater maneuvering space for cars accessing and egressing the parking stalls. The turning radius on the private street should be increased to accommodate a large truck (i.e., moving van, fire truck) 50 feet in length without running over the curb. Parking. The New Hope Zoning Code requires townhomes to provide at least one enclosed and open parking stall per unit. The site plan illustrates that each townhome will have a single car garage and a parking space in front of the garage to meet the City's Code. Adc~itionally, 18 guest parking spaces are provided on the site plan. The guest parking stalls are a favorable addition to the revised site plan. Concern has been expressed as to whether there is sufficient parking near the proposed office to accommodate both customer and employee parking. The site plan shows both a standard and a disability parking stall near the office. The disability parking stall further limits the parking availability near the office. PPL has indicated that they would reduce the parking demand near the office by either hiring an on-site resident manager or requiring an off-site resident manager to park their vehicle in the north visitor parking lot. 10 The Planning-Commission must decide on the acceptability of the office parking. Alternative measures to increase the office parking may include: Relocate the disability parking stall to the western private street and provide three standard nine foot wide parking stalls near the office. Eliminate the 11.5 foot curb island between the office parking and the first townhome driveway to provide a third parking stall. Trails and Sidewalks. The site plan and landscape plan illustrate a comprehensive network of trails and sidewalks through the site providing a pedestrian linkage between the housing units and the central court. With the revised site plan, the residents of the northern townhomes must walk across the private street to access the center court. To reduce traffic speed and improve pedestrian safety .at this location, a speed bump/ pedestrian crossing has been provided. The site plan does raise the following trail issues. The patios associated with the northern townhomes outlet into the School District property. Without School District approval, this design would promote random trespass onto property outside the control of PPL. Related to this issue, the New Hope CPTED has continued to express the need for a improved pedestrian connection between the PPL site and the Thorson Community Center. In an attempt to respond to both issues, PPL, following the suggestion of City staff, has revised the grading plan for the School District pond, providing an eight foot wide bench for trails along the full length of the northern townhomes. In consideration of this trail design, the following issues require resolution: The School District must approve a trail at this location and a connection to the Tho~'~on parking lot. The construction of a trail upon the completion of the site grading. The City, in cooperation with the City of Crystal, may consider sharing the cost of trail construction. Who bears the responsibility for the ongoing maintenance of the trail after construction? 11 Setbacks. With the revisions to the site plan, PPL is requesting a variance from the required perimeter setbacks as follows: Setback Required Proposed Front (South) 35 feet 28 feet Rear 30 feet 14 and 20 feet The setback from Bass Lake Road was reduced from 35 to 28 feet with the required street right-of-way dedication of seven feet. The rear setback was reduced from 30 feet to 14 and 20 feet when MFHA required changes to the style of townhome units and modifications of the private street within the site. These setback variance requests go beyond the control of the applicant and are a result of the existing constraints unique to the site in regards to the following items: Redevelopment of the existing buildings. The location, size and configuration of the existing buildings establish a physical constraint that must be integrated into the site design. The site configuration is limited due to existing property ownership patterns preventing the site from being enlarged. 3. The building design is being dictated by a separate public agency. In total, this redevelopment project is unique and the constraints of the site present physical hardships that warrant consideration of these requested variances. Building Issues. In review of the building design, the following issues were identified: The' site plan and construction details for the trash enclosure, related to the Breckenridge Group Home, illustrate a structure design that is out of character with the balance of buildings and garages within the project. Staff recommends that the group home locate their trash receptacles within a garage or smaller accessory building having the same architectural appearance as a garage. The applicant should address concerns relating to building material and anti-graffiti protections. Lighting Plan. A detailed lighting plan has been submitted. Said plan shall be subject to review and comment by the City Building Inspector and CTEP Officer. 12 Signage. The proposed signage complies with City ordinances relating to sign area, height and location, except the manager's office sign must be relocated to meet required setbacks. CONCLUSION The PPL redevelopment project is an aggressive attempt to improve an area of New Hope that is in poor condition. The effort is consistent with the City's comprehensive planning goals and housing goals. In this respect, staff recommends approval of the PPL development application with the conditions outlined earlier in this report. pc: Doug Sandstad 13 GORDON L. JENSEN's WILLiAlvl G. SWANSON STEVEN A. $ONDRALL ~ilCHAEL R. LAFLEUR ~kRTIN P. B~TT A. P~'UmY' C. ALDEN OF COUNSEL, LORENS Q. BRYN~STAD JENSEN SWANSON & SONDRALL, P.A. Law BROO{iLYN PAR~, ~A 55443-1999 TELEPItONE (612) 424-8811 · TELEFAX (612) 493-5193 August 19, 1998 Kirk McDonald City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue NOrth New Hope, MN 55428 RE: PPL Addition Our File No.: 99.15047 Dear Kirk: I have examined"the proposed final plat for PPL Addition and have the following comments: The legal descriptions for the plat do not include the 56 feet by 60.5 feet parcel of land surrounding the proposed Lot "2" located to the left of the center of the plat. This parcel must be included in the plat, and the legal descriptions of the land to be platted must include the legal description of this particular parcel. The owners of that parcel, if different from the owners of the remainder of the land to be platted, must also join in the plat and be listed as owners. The legal description information available to us as a result of the condemnation of the service station indicates that the south li'r~e of Lot 32, Auditor's Subdivision isthe same line as the south line of the NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 5, which is the middle of Bass Lake Road. The surveyor should review this issue. e The proposed Lot 2 will require variances from the design standards set forth in Section 13.05 of the Code, in particular Sections 13.052 (1) Minimum [lot size], (4) Abut Street, and (5) Setbacks. These are needed in addition to any variances required by the Zoning Code. The procedure for a variance from the Design Standards of the Platting requirements is found at Section 13.10. In general, the property owner must apply to the Planning Commission for the variance. Because the proposed Kirk McDonald August 19, 1998 Page 2 Lot 2 will be OWned separately from the balance of the platted land, the owners of the proposed Lot 2 should be required to join in the variance request. The notarization language for each of the owners must be expanded to include'the standard references to the actual officers who will be signing on behalf of the entities; and their official position with the entity (i.e. president). 5. Title evidence showing ownership of the real estate included in the plat will be necessary before the final plat can be approved. Be sure to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Martin P. Malecha Assistant City Attorney CC: Daniel J. Donahue, City Manager Susan Henry, Community Development Specialist Steven A. Sondrall, City Attorney Lisa Kugler, PPL B, : estroo Rcsene.. Anderhk & Associates Engineers & Architects TO: Kirk McDonald Jearminc Clancy FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: CC: PPL Addition File 34-Gea (E97.30) Augtat 26, Vinceat Vander Top We have reviewed thc above plm/Moject and reconmm~ the ~oHowin~:. ~eliminnry. pint. eetween CB 2 & 4. teqmred legal descnpUoaa such ,k.**~. r,:... ...__opera . provide the be recorded at Henncpin Comiy~ "~ *~,v ~ a~ney cna prepare lepi documents to Aecesd is provided by two drivewava onto Base ~ -~-- "---. -- - conceptually ~ppmved the . _ _ rl~ Couuty _..: ....... ,em~es, bowav~, f~d ,kas/ae,,,~.: .-...- t~moval/r~o--+-,,..~-- :- -'-~---"-? ~"'"'"~ amewa~ and ddve~y ,tgnal for Bass Lake Ro~ shall ~I~-~; '"" '"'~,-I~ l~n~n= ermsing and mtffic ~Tlle proposed driveway width ia 23.0' hek .~.a. ~ ~, ,,_=_ - The two iam'aal 90" ,'~-.,--- --.-- :~,---- ~ ""-" 77'v n~e of crab i~ preferred) ' vehidm. Oradina, D~nn~e. Erosion Z33S ~eest Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN S5113 · 612'636-4600 · Fax: 612-636-1311 9g~:ON ~0/~0: [~ 0£:01, ~6/9E/gO I,L£1,9£91,c~9 ,~, )IIqBg(INV gNgSO~I OOBISgNOg coommatea wlla represefltative8 of*'--- ~t.__. _.:~, .... the common lot line where a benched srea is proposed to be 8reded. on m directed to _ . . ~ storm sewer tn ~[- AV~ltle t~ &v~llb[e c,4q~cl~, A .a_; ........... Robbin.tdal~ School Disu'ict ~ fl~ storm water ~ anm. The storm sewer line ~ ~B 8 and 9 shall located beneath a buildins, b~ moved north such that it is not ,_.,.,:.~___, __ .,--,,u.,z ~ m.a?t, amnqe ta me court yard area ~muomu storm sewers may ne ruquired). Azbuilt record plans shah be provided for the ex~ sanitary sewer mn'vices that serve the existing butldinss. Additional clean outs may be required in accordance with acceptable standards. · _Water. service is proposed to be provided fl~m the existh8 water service in Bass Lake ~,~, ,-,~c..Ao~. qmons west propm~ tm) or in Pennsylvania Avmme ~'to w..**~ cordance..a~... ptable standards. In the event the required flow requirunem can't met an additional water connemton shall be provided. 99~:0N ~0/£0:[~0£:0~ 96/93/90 ~L£L9£9L~9~.~ H~qBBGNV gNBSOH OOB~SgNOta M nnegasco* A IMOga,Jt~ ENERGY COMPANY August 12, 1998 Kirk McDonald Director of Community Development 4401 XyIon Avenue ~North New Hope, MN, 55428 RE: Preliminary Plat of PPL Addition Minnegasco easement number 64-58 Dear Mr. McDonaltJ: Wit~ reference to the preliminary plat of PPL Addition, Minnegasco currently has an easement within the plat. I have enclosed a copy of Minnegasco's easement number 64-58, recorded with the Hennepin County Recorder on October 9, 1964, in book 2462 of Deeds on page 532 as document number 3503229. Please arrange for this easement to be referenced on the final plat. Forward a copy of the final plat to the address below when the plat is approved. Call me at 321-5381 with any questions. Respectfully, MINNEGASCO Steven Von Bargen Right-of-Way Administrator · 700 West Linden Avenue P.O. Box 1165 Minnea[x~,lis, MN 55440-1165 EASEMENT ~./ 19 ~,bT' und betweea Donald S Bebirtski end El izabeht L Babinski, husband and wife , of the County of Anoka , State of ~tinnesota , part les of the first part, hereafter called "GRANTORS ", and Minneapolis Gas Company, a co~oration o~gnnized under the laws of lbe State of Delaware and duly authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota, patty of the second part, hat'after called "GRANTEE". 1. TEe GRANTOR Sin consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration, to th~m in hand paid by the GRANTEE, the receipt whereof ia hereby acknowledgnd, do ~ hereby grant to the GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, forever, the right at all times to construc, t, operate, inspect, main- tala, repair, altar or remove gas miens, service pipes and npptn'tunances thereto, under and upon the following described promises in the Vi I I o~e. of New Hope , County of Heflflepifl and State of Minnesota: I) The East twenty (20) feet, end 2) The North twenty (20) feet of ell that pert lying East of the Vest one hundred end six (106) feet, end also The East twenty (20) feet of the Vast one hUndred end twenty- six (126) feet of the North mm hundred (I00) feet. of the following described trKt of land; That Inert of Lot ]2 Auditors Subdivision HO 226, Nennepin County, #innasota, described es fo{l~; Beginning at the Southeast corrmr of the Vas~ ofl~ half of said Lot 32; thence North t~ · point one hundred (100) feet South from the Southeast corner of the North six (6) acres of said Lot ]2; thence Vest to a point on the Vest line of said Lot 32 distant as aho~li~nl~d~l;(~OO~tfelg:~4~t~raron~,~Wle-.Tm~rtW~est c~"ner of'~he, Horth six (6) Kris of said Lot ]2; thence South along said Malt line ~m~of to a point one hundred ~nd severity-eight end two tenths (178.2) feet North fram the South line of said Lot 32; thence East one hundred (400)'-f'4~:~iehem:e-geu~k.t~ e-potvt~ in the Soutfl II~-~crf said Lot ]2 distant mm hundred (100) feet East from the SOothMnst - ---eai~er-thereof; thence tas~ta'~ht:tsOInt.ilrf beglnnfmj except the.South one hundred end thirteen (11]) feet of the East one hundred and sixty- two hundred and ninety-six end seventy-six one hundredths Indi~iduel to Corporation 3. The GRANTOR ~S herein agree __ that the easement hereby granted shell not be altered or encroached upon either by filling, excavation, erection of buildings or permanent enclosures which would interfere with access to gas facilities located therein or which would otherwise obstruct access thereto in any manner;, provided, however, that other utilities may occupy the hereinbefore described area but must be located at a distance from the gas main equivalent to twice the depth of the excavations made to install said utilities, except where crossing the gan mnln at angles greater than 4S° and in no case shall excavations for other utilities be made closer than ten (10) feet from the gas main ex- cept at crossings as hereinbefore set forth. 4. In the event that ~na service is discontinued, the GRANTEE shall have the right, but shall not be required, to enter upon the above described premises and remove'all pipes, mains and connections which have been placed on said premises by it. $. T~is instrument and the covenants and a~ements herein contained shell inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto, their personal repre- sentatives, successors and assi~'ns. In the Presence of Donald $ 8abinski STATE OF MINI~F~TA ) ) SS. a Not~ P~lic ~n ~d f~a~d ~, ~ly ~d ~eld S 8~tnski and ~1 iz~th L ~Jnski, hus~ and wife. to me ~ ~ ~ the ~n ~~ h tb f~i~ h~t nd ~owle~ that t~ he~ ....... ....~ ' .~%~ ~.~?-.-. ~ .... '.~ Nota~ P~ie ~ ~' :, '~ '" ~..,; ;.~'~ He.spin Co~ty, ~e~ta ~ ~ .. ....~.-. =~ ~ My ~m~on e~i~ ~_~ ...... s ~. >'., .' --.-4 ..~ .... 20' Filed for record on the 9 day of Oct AD 1964 at 1=40 o'clock p.M. 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 97-32 Project for Pride in Living Inc. concept 2516 Chicago Avenue plan concept concept Minneapolis, MN 55404 4/7198 plan plan 874-8511 6/6/98 8/5/98 Attn: Steve Cramer develop- 10/6198 12/5/98 Exec. Director ment plan develop- develop- 8/7/98 ment plan ment plan Lisa Kugler 4737 Garfield Avenue S. Minneapolis, MN 55409 827-2189 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. Ao B. C. D. Ho Assign each application a number. List the Applicant (name, address and phone). List the date the City received the application. 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. To calculate the 60-day limit, include all calendar days. To calculate the 120-day limit, include all calendar days. 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.) List the deadline under any extension or waiver. 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.) 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. Planning Case: Request: Location: PID No.: Zoning: Petitioner: Report Date: Meeting Date: CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT 98-18 Proposed Preliminary Plat Approval of Brandell Fourth Addition and Side Yard Sbtback Variance to Allow Parking Lot Five Feet from Property Line 9401-9443 and 9449 Science Center Drive #07-118-21-22-0011 and #07-118-21-22-0012 I-1 Limited Industrial Zoning District Liberty Property Limited Partnership and Marbell Realty LLC August 28, 1998 September 2, 1998 BACKGROUND 1. The petitioner is requesting preliminary plat approval of Brandell Fourth Addition and a side yard setback variance to allow the parking lot to be located five feet from the property line, pursuant to Chapter 13 and Section 4.22 of the New Hope Code of Ordinances. 2. The petitioner is requesting preliminary plat approval in order to purchase 23 feet of property from the adjacent owner and shift the property line for the purpose of creating additional parking for employees. The new property line would be located five feet from an existing parking lot along a portion of the common lot line and City Code requires a 10-foot parking lot setback, therefore, a five-foot variance is being requested for the portion of the parking lot that does not meet the setback. 3. The two properties involved in the property line shift and land purchase are located at 9401 and 9449 Science Center Drive. Both are office/warehouse uses. 4. Both properties are located at the southeast intersection of Science Center Drive and the Highway 169 frontage road and are located in an I-1 Limited Industrial Zoning District. Surrounding zoning and land uses include: CP Railroad and I-1 Limited Industrial to the south, I-1 Limited Industrial to the north and east, and High,way 169 to the west. 5. The petitioner states in their correspondence that "this letter serves as our request for preliminary plat approval and the associated requested variance on a small strip of land, currently under contract with and to be purchased from Marbell Realty LLC, owners of 9449. Science Center Drive and Liberty Property Limited Partnership, owners of 9401 Science Center Drive. The land in question is approximately 23 feet wide and 415 feet long. Approximately 18 months ago, Liberty Property Limited Partnership acquired 9401 Science Center Drive in New Hope. It came to our attention shortly thereafter that there is and has been an issue regarding parking for this building. The tenant, GE Capital IT Solutions has indicated that they are frustrated by the lack of available parking and may revisit the issue of relocating. GE Capital IT Solutions currently provides over 200 jobs and is a viable and valuable business to the community." 6. The petitioner continues "Liberty's philosophy has always been to not only service our customer, the tenant, but to also support the respective community. To that end, in an effort to keep GE Capital in New Hope, we reached an agreement with Marbell Realty to acquire the land in question and believe it is mutually beneficial to Liberty as well as the City to try to accommodate GE's request. The proposed parking expansion would add an estimated 29 parking spaces and would be at the northwest · end of the building. As the attached preliminary plat indicates, the piece of land lies to the southwest of the property at 944~. Science Center Drive. It has been brought to our attention that we would not be within City Code ('. setback from the parking lot to the property line) on the property located at 9449 Science Center Drive. The asphalt is within five feet of the property line. This shortage runs from the southwest corner to approximately 175 to 200 feet west. The variance would be for this area only. Liberty considered asking Marbell Realty to 'shorten' their parking lot, at our expense, but found that in order to accommodate and adequatelY service their dock area, all available parking/asphalt was required. Again, this brought us to the conclusion that a variance would be the only workable solution." 7. The petitioner states that "as the plat indicates, along with the enlarged section of th® proposed green area, Liberty is very concerned with landscaping the improved area, as well as continuing our program to upgrade the existing landscaping as is evidenced by the changes that have already taken place. Liberty will also install fencing at the northeast end and the southwest end of the building to screen the dumpsters from viewing along the major roads. Liberty appreciates the time and support the City of New Hope has extended on their behalf. In turn, Liberty, as a member of the community, would like to support the concept of a 'business friendly' environment and maintain a base of employers who bring to the community numerous benefits. We would ask that the City consider and grant the requested variance for the proposed parking expansion." 8. Both sites are generally fiat, although elevated about 12 feet above Highway 169 and the frontage road. There are two storm water runoff ponds on the site that were created in 1989 when the property was developed. 9. The lot/building coverage calculations for the proposed new lots are as follows: Proposed Lot 1 Building Paving Green Area Total Proposed Lot 2 Building Paving Green,Area Total 24,754 square feet 16.17 % 61,326 square feet 40.05% 67,035 square feet 43.78% 153,115 square feet 100% 74,334 square feet 26.36% 118,551 square feet 42.05% 89,087 square feet 31.59% 281,972 square feet 100% The proposal meets the I-1 20% green area requirement. 10. These properties are located in Planning District #5 of the Comprehensive Plan which identifies this area as a highly visible industrial park with excellent exposure to Highway 169. 11. As per routine policy, the preliminary plat was submitted to City Department Heads, City Attorney, City Engineer, utility companies and Hennepin County for review and comment. 12. The City Code states that copies of the final plat shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation, unless this requirement is waived by the Planning Commission during its review of the preliminary plat. Due to the minor nature of this plat, it is anticipated that the petitioner will request waiver of the review of the final plat by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will need to make a determination as to whether it wants to review the final plat or not. 13. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff have received no comments regarding this request other than the comments received on the plat. Planning Case 98-18 Page 2 8/28/98 Preliminary Plat 1. The existing legal description of the plat is Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 1, Block 2, Brandell Third Addition. The site area information for the existing plat is as follows: Existing Lot 1 ' -Total Area = 162,661 square feet, 3.73 acres Existing Lot 2 Total Area = 272.427 square feet,. 6.25 acres 2. The proposed legal description of the revised plat is Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 1, Block 2, Brandell Fourth Addition. The site area information for the revised plat is as follows: Proposed Lot 1 Total Area = 153,115 square feet, 3.52 acres Proposed Lot 2 Total Area = 281,972 square feet, 6.47 acres 3. Per the petitioner, the Vicom, Inc. land area lost and the Liberty Trust land area gained, per the proposed re-platting, is 9,545 square feet or .22 acres. 4. The lot area and width requirements for the I-1 Zoning District are compared to the plat below: I-1 Requirement Preliminary Plat Minimum Lot Area: 1 acre 9.99 acres Minimum Lot Width: 100 feet 578 feet 5. The City Attorney reviewed the preliminary plat and made the following comments/recommendations: A. The legal description of the real estate to be included in the plat is listed as Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 1, Block 2, Brandell Third Addition. It should be Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 2, Block 1, Brandell Third Addition. B. Title evidence showing ownership of the real estate included in the plat will be necessary before the final plat can be approved. 6. The City Engineer reviewed the preliminary plat and made the following comments/recommendations related to the plat: A. A 10' wide drainage/utility easement shall be provided along all lot lines while a 20' wide drainage/utility easement shall be provided along the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2. 7. Hennepin County reviewed the plat and has no comments,.as the plat does not abut a county road. 8. NSP reviewed the plat and commented that the existing power pole in the area where the new parking lot expansion will take place will need to be relocated to the north and has requested that the landscaping in this area not exceed 25 feet in height at maturity. Variance 1. 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. 2. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a vadance 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 - Planning Case 98-18 Page 3 8/28/98 o Planning Case 98-18 shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. 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. Consisteht 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. The shift of the common lot line 23 feet north creates a minor variance because the north lot will have an existing parking lot within five feet of the new lot line wh~re the code requires 10 feet. City staff and consultants and the Design & Review Committee met with the petitioner, on August 1 and 13 and neither group had a concern about the five-foot parking lot setback variance. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the Design & Review meeting. Revised plans/details include the following: A. New lot coverage calculations were submitted. B. A suggested landscape design representing a segment of what the completed area would reflect has been submitted. Landscaping will be enhanced along the north side of the new parking lot. Species to be planted include: Burning Bush; Lillie, Stella de Crc; Flowering Crab; Gold Flame Spirea; Spa Green Junipers; and Shrub Roses. C. Total Parking: There are a total of 338 parking spaces on the subject property of which there are 13 handicapped spaces to equal a 1:25 ratio (numbers include existing and proposed parking spaces combined). D. New Parking - The existing parking exceeds City Code. Thirty-six new spaces will be added to the south lot; no change on the north lot. ADA parking is identified on the plan. E. Proposed screen fence is identified at north and west sides of 9401 office/warehouse. F. Parking lot addition materials will be bituminous with concrete curb. G. There is an existing storm sewer on the site that drains from the east pond to the west pond and the west pond towards Highway 169. The parking lot expansion will be built over the existing storm sewer. The storm sewer changes with the parking lot expansion are minimal and the City Engineer is comfortable with the minor drainage changes, as long as grading and catch basin work is done after erosion control measures are in place. Storm sewer work should be inspected by Public Works and City Engineer. H. Specific comments/recommendations made by the City Engineer relative to the parking lot expansion include the following: a. The grading for the parking lot expansion shall be carefully done not to impact drainage from the property to the north to the two existing ponding areas (a drainage swale through the proposed landscape area along the common lot line may be required). b. Erosion and cleaning of the two existing ponding areas shall be considered as part of the parking lot expansion. c. The slopes to construct the two most easterly parking stalls will impact the existing storm sewer pipe from the easterly pond. One of the following shall be considered: Page 4 8/28/98 1. Extend storm sewer pipe. 2. Construct retaining wall to protect slope. 3. Not construct two easterly parking stalls east of the existing storm sewer manhole. 4. Staff support the gra_nt[ng_of_the variance for the following reasons: A. The location of the variance is on the lot line of the two parties exchanging property and any impact will be on these two property owners. B. The area of the lot line shift is behind both buildings and elevated above the west roadway. C. The north property owner has one loading dock that is served off the south side of the building. Five feet of the existing asphalt could be eliminated, which would eliminate the need for the variance. However, neither owner would benefit and the trucking area for the north building would be reduced. D. The variance is only for a short distance. E. The granting of the variance will not diminish property values. F. The granting of the variance will promote components of the Comprehensive Plan Update regarding business retention/expansion. G. The hardship could be identified as the unique shape of the properties. 8. Please refer to the attached Planning Consultant's report for additional details. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Brandell Fourth Addition preliminary plat and parking lot setback variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. Final plat to incorporate corrections recommended by City Attorney, City Engineer and NSP. 2. Landscape schedule to be submitted indicating exact number/type of plantings. 3. Parking lot expansion to comply with recommendations from City Engineer. 4. Site Improvement Agreement to be entered into with City and performance bond posted for parking lot and landscaping improvements (amount to be determined by City Engineer and Building Official). · Attachments: Address/ZoningFFopo maps Preliminary Plat Detail of Proposed Parking & Green Area August 21 Petitioner Correspondence Landscape Design Details/Photos August 20 Lot Coverage Calculations Preliminary Plat General Notes Existing/Proposed Legal Descriptions Site Area Information Parking Note Area Calculations for Impervious Coverage August 6 Petitioner Correspondence August 19 City Attorney Plat Comments August 28 City Engineer Plat Comments Planner's Report Application Log Planning Case 98-18 Page 5 8/28/98 = ~m WORKS i APART '?V ...................................... ~ ~ -. '-.. BROOKLYN PARK / 52g0 51 ST ,111,1 x A~:NL~ ii1,~, x -o} A~N~JE x mc Il Il II Il Il Il Il Il Il ii ' iii ill ! il ,Ii ~1 3 J.' N 3.3 A ~1 .L S R ~ N I 3 3 N 3 I ~ S I I I I I I I i ; O0'OgL --gf'8LS 3 .,0£,9Lo0 S ........ oo~oz () () LIBERTY' PROPERTY TRUST August21,1998 City of New H{~pe - Planning Commission 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 Re: Request for Re-plat and Variance Approval For Existing Legal Descripttons Lot 1, Block 1, Brandell Third Addition and Lot 1, Block 2, Brandell Third Addition 9449 Science Center Drive and 9401 Science Center Drive, Respectively Dear Planning Commission Members: Following Liberty's design and review meeting with the City of New Hope's Planning and Development Committee and based upon the Committee's suggestions, Liberty is submitting for your approval the preliminary plat, along with new coverage calculations and a suggested landscape design (please note the landscape design represents a segment of what the completed area would reflecO. As was stated in our letter dated August 6, 1998, Liberty is responding to a request from not only a valuable customer, but to a business in the City of New Hope. We would ask that the City consider and grant approval of the requested variance and plat for the proposed parking expansion. Liberty looks forward to working with the City of New Hope and appreciates the City's support and cooperation with this endeavor. If upon your review, you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 612.375.1776. Again, thank you for your consideration of Liberty Property Trust. Very truly yours, Thomas G. Shaver Vice President TGS/kr Attachments 330 SECOND Avmqua Sotrm · StJrm 390 ,, MnqN~.nl'OIJS, MN 55401 (612) 375-1776 · FAX (612) 375-8958 HARRY S. JOHNSON LAND SURVEYORS August 20, 1998 Site: Brandell Fourth Addition PROPOSED COVERAGE CALCULATIONS Proposed Lot 1 Building = 24,754 sq. ft. = 16.17% Paving = 61,326 sq. ft. = 40.05% Green Area = 67,035 sq. ft. = 43.78% Total = 153,115 sq. ft. = 100% Proposed Lot 2 Building = 7'4,334 sq. ft. = 26.36% Paving = 117,528 sq. ft. = 41.68% Gree. n Area = 90,110 sq. ft. = 31.96% Total = 281,972 sq. ft. = 100% Haffy $. Johnson Co. Inc. 170 West 79th St. I~n~ton, MN Tole (612) 884-.5341 Fax (612) 884-5344 PREUMINARY PLAT GENERAL NOTES Frmt 50 feet Re.r - 35 fe~ (l. et 1_) 20 ~ - 2o fe~t Bet From Relroed - & Pr~ Site Area= L~ 1 I.et 2 7. All r~luklnent" of ALTA/ACSM ~E]~..4~h~12.~ N. Mdc of ~ C~nter Dr. W. af Bc~me Ay. EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 1, BIo~ 1, Brenddl 11~ird Additl~, c~m~liflg to the recorded pl~t tlN~M. Heen~lfl Gaunt)~ ~t~ Lot 1, PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 1, Block 1, Br~dell Four~ Addition, ~ccordtng to t~e recerded INQt thfeef,-H~ Cau~ty, Mlmmlmt~ Lot 1, ~ 2. Br=ndel Fourth Addition, ~,-~,g to I~e r~cord~l pl~ U~re~f, 14~mNdn C~unt)& MInN~t~ O~nere - Lot 1, Marbell Realty LLC. 4455 Welt Brach-Rd. kk,~d, Mn. 55364 Lot 2, LIl~rty Prol~rty LTD P~nerahip Gr~3t Voley C..~. ~t~ ~ ~ey ~ ~. ~, P~ l g~ Surw)~r - H~n'y ~ ~ Co, Inc. 9h~m~b~gto~, kin. 55420 (e12) 884-~341 Utility Co~pm~i~ - E:iectrk: ~ Stotel Power Co. - ~ Mk~n~=ll:~ -~ P~rogm · UE-- --STS ,X- PRELIM EXISTINO LOT 1 - TOTAL AREA EXIS'IINO LOT 2 - TOTAL AREA 1~2,,~1 ,~3.' FT. - 3,73 ACRE~ 27~427 ,~3. FT. - 6.26 ACRE:~. LOT 1 - TOTAL AREA - 1~k3,115 SQ. FT. - ,3.52 AORE~ LOT 2 - TOTAL AREA - 281,972 ~3, IrT. - &47 AORE"'~ VICOM, INC. I, ANO AREA LOST AND I. JII~TY PROPERTY TRUST LAND AREA GAIHED PER PRO~ PLATTING: 9,545 SQ. FT. ,- 0.2.2 ACRES. PLAT: BRAND LL FO{ PARKING NOTE: THERE: ARE: A TOTAL OF' ~ PARKING SP~ ON SUI~ECT PROPERLY OF WHICH THERE: ARE 13 HAND~,APPL~ SPACES TO -' A 1:3~5 RATIO (NUMBERS INCLUDE EXISTINO AND ~ PARKING SPACES ~) )U RT'H ADD.ITION I' '. ~..A c~cu __~s ~'o..~ s ~: · ~~ LOT 1 ~T~ ~ - 1~115 ~. ~. ~ ~A - ~,~ ~ ~. - ~.~ '~~ LOT 2 - ~T[ ~ - ~1,t72 ~ ~. I~~S ~A-- 191,~2 ~ ~. - ~~ ~ II I III I IIIIIII I I I I I I I III I I IIII I I ~ PROPERTY TRUST August 6, 1998 City of New H6pe - Planning Commission 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 Re; Request for Re-plat and Variance/lpproval Igor Existing Legal Descriptions Lot 1, Block 1, Brandell Third Addition and 1.at 1, Block 2, Brandell Third Addition 9449 Science Center Drive and 9401 Science Center Drive, Respectively Dear Planning Commission Members: This letter serves aa our request for preliminary plat approval and the associated requested variance on a small strip of land, currently under contract with and to be purchased fi'om Marbell Realty L.L.C., owners of 9449 Science Center Drive and Liberty Property Limited Partnership, owners of 9401 Science Center Drive. The land in question is approximately 23 feet wide and 415 feet long. Approximately 18 months ago, Liberty Property Limited Partnership acquired 9401 Science Center Drive in New Hope. It came to our attention shortly thereafter that there is and has been an issue regarding parking for this building. The Tenant, GE Capital IT Solutions has indicated that they are fxustrated by the lack of available parking and may revisit the issue of relocating. GE Capital IT Solutions currently provides over 200 jobs and is a viable and valuable business to the community. Liberty's philosophy has always been to not only service our customer, the Tenant, but to also support the respective community. To that end, in an effort to keep GE Capital in New Hope, we reached an agreement with Marbell Realty to acquire the land in question and believe it mutually beneficial to Liberty aa well aa the City to try to accommodate GE's request. The propoaed parking expansion would add an estimated 29'parking spaces and would be at the northwest end of the building. As the attached preliminary plat indicates, the piece of land lies to the southwest of the property at 9449 Science Center Drive. It has been brought to our attention that we would not be within city code (10' setback fi'om the parking lot to the property line) on the property located at 9449 Science Center Drive. The asphalt is within 5 feet of the 330 SXCONO Avm,~'ol Sotrm * St;rra 390 · Mlt~m~)t~, MI~ 55401 (612)'375-1776 * FAX (612) 375-8958 property line: This shortage runs from the southwest comer to approximately 175 to 200 feet west. The variance would be for this area only. Liberty considered asking Marbell Realty to "shorten" their parking lot, at our expense, but found that in order to accommodate and adequately service their dock area, all available parking/asphalt was required. Again this brought us to the conclusion that a variance would be the only workable solution. As the plat indicates, along with the enlarged section of the proposed green area, Liberty is very concerned with landscaping the improved area, as well as continuing our program to upgrade the existing landscaping as is evidenced by the changes that have already taken place. Liberty will also install fencing at the northeast end and the southwest end of the building to screen the dumpsters from viewing along the major roads. Liberty appreciates the time and support the City of New Hope has extended on their behalf. In turn, Liberty as a member of the community would like to support the concept ora "business friendly" environment and maintain a base of employers who bring to the community numerous benefits.' We would ask that the City consider and grant the requested variance for the proposed parking expansion. If upon your review you shOuld have any questions, or have further comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at 612.375.1776. Again, thank you for your consideration of Liberty Property Trust. Very truly yours, Thomas G. Shaver Vice President .TGS/kr Attachments GORDON L. JENSEN* WILLIAM G. SWANSON STEVEN A. SONDRALL MICHAEL R. LAFLEUR MARTIN P. MALECHA BRETT A. PERRY* C. ALD£~ PEA~ON? OF COUNSEL LORENS Q. BRYNF~TAD JENSEN SWANSON & SONDRAI L, P.A. Attorneys At 8S2S EDINBROOK CROSSING, STE. ~ B~OOKLYN PARK, Mm~SOTA 55443. Ii, TELEPHONE (612) 424-8811 · TELEFAX (612) 493-5193 August 19, 1998 Kirk McDonald City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 RE: Brandell Fourth Addition Our File No.: 99.15048 Dear Kirk:. I have examined the proposed preliminary plat for Brandell Fourth Addition and have the following comments: 1. The legal description of the real estate to be included in the plat is listed as Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 1, Block 2, Brandell Third Addition. It should be Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 2, Block 1, Brandell Third Addition. 2. Title evidence showing ownership of the real estate included in the plat will be necessary before the final plat can be approved. · Be sure to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Martin P. Malecha Assistant City Attorney cc: Daniel J. Donahue, City Manager Susan Henry, Community Development Specialist Steven A. Sondrall, City Attorney Bonestroo Rosene Ander. lik & 1~ A .ssooates Engineers & Architects TO: Kirk McDonald Jeannim Clancy FROM: ~ Hereon SUBJECT: Brandeil 4e Addition File 34-Oen (9~-29) DATE: 26, 1998 CC: Vim~ Vmder T~ We have reviewed the above Melimint~ plat/pinking lot eXlmmion and recommend the following: ,, A 10' wide draina~o/u~ity em,,nem shall be Movided nlon8 nil lot line~ while a 20' wide drainqe/utility easement shall I~ Ixovidod alon~ th~ c~iiimon lot line between Lots 1 and 2. · The grading fo~ tho ~ lot ~ shall b~ ~y don~ not to impa~ drainage 6xnn the property to tl~ rank ~o ~be mo exie~ po~line are. (~ drainage swale through tl~ proposed lnndsea~ ama alon~ tho common lot lin. maybo mqui~). · Erosion and clesni~ of~ ~ ~ ~ m ~1 b ~~ ~ ~ of the pstkin~ lot exlw~m. . TI~ slol~ to ~ to two most e~asdy ~ stalls wifl iml~ the existi~ storm sewer pipe rzom the eastniy pond. Oho of ~ followin~ shall be considemt: 1, Extend .onn ~ pipe. 2. Co~~ w~topm~ ~ 3. Not oonsm~ two easterly lmtdn~ slnltt elint of the existi~ storm s~wer manhole. .ii'h ................ ' ............... st way 36 · St. Paul, MN 55il3-' 612-6:16-4600 · Fax: 612-636-1311 zg~:ON ~0/30: ~ ££:01, g6/9~/go 1,1,~;L,9£91,c_:9 ,~, :~I'~:qONV gN~SOB O0~J.S~NOg PLANNING REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO: Kirk McDonald Cynthia Putz-Yang / Alan Brixius August 26, 1998 New Hope - Brandell 4"` Addition Preliminary Plat / Variance 131.01 - 98.13 BACKGROUND The applicant met with the City's Design and Review Board on August 11"' and, based upon the Committee's suggestions, has submitted a preliminary plat, along with revised lot coverage calculations and a design for a segment of the landscape plantings. Liberty Property Trust is requesting preliminary plat and variance approval. The applicant is proposing to shift a common lot line 23 feet to the north to allow the expansion of the parking lot located on the southern lot. The lot line shift affects a piece of land approximately 23 feet wide and 415 feet long. This strip of land would be purchased from Marbell Realty, owner of the property to the north at 9449 Science Center Drive, by Liberty Property Trust, owner of the property at 9401 Science Center Drive. A variance is required to allow a five foot setback between the proposed lot line and the existing parking lot to the north. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 10 foot setback in the I-1, Limited Industrial District from property lines adjacent to non-residential uses. Approval of the preliminary plat and variance allows the applicant to add an estimated 29 parking spaces at the northwest end of the applicant's building.. The shift in the lot line 23 feet to the north accommodates these additional parking spaces by allowing parking stalls on both sides of the drive aisle, resulting in a more efficient design. The applicant is interested in providing these additional parking stalls because the tenant of the building, GE Capital IT Solutions, has found available parking lacking. 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST, LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 5541 6 PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 612-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM EXHIBITS Exhibit A - Site Location Exhibit B - Preliminary Plat Exhibit C - Proposed Lot Coverage Calculations Exhibit D- Landscape Segment Design RECOMMENDATION Our office has found the variance request to be the result of a unique lot configuration in which the'Liberty property forms an,"L" around the Marbell Realty property. Granting the variance is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Based upon these findings, we recommend approval of the preliminary plat and variance from setback requirements subject to the following conditions. 1. A landscape plan is submitted indicating plant quantities, locations and names. 2. The drainage plan shall be subject to the Review and approval of the City Engineer. ISSUES and ANALYSIS PLAT Lot Coverage. The extent to which buildings cover the site is not affected and is compliant. Lot Size. Both lots continue to conform to minimum lot size requirements with the adjusted lot line. ' Green Area. The proposed coverage calculations (Exhibit C) indicate that green area requirements are exceeded in both lots. At least 20 percent of each lot is required to be green area. The Marbell Property lot contains 43,8 percent green area and the Liberty property contains 32.0 percent green area. Parking Lots. A variance from the 10 foot setback requirement is requested. The proposed lot line is five feet from the existing parking lot on the Marbell Property. Further discussion of this variance request is found later in this report. Parking Lot Screening. Screening of the proposed parking lot expansion is not required because the parking lot is not adjacent to a street or residential use. 2 Landscaping. The applicant has provided a plan showing a design for e segment of landscaping. The design indicates e plenting strip epproximately 10 feet wide plented with e veriety of colorful shrubs end perenniels. While the concept of the plan is good, the plan does not indicate the totel quentity or size of Plants proposed or their location on the site. For three of the PrOPosed types of plents the plen indicates common names only without providing the variety to be used. A plenting plan indicating plant quentity, size~ location end name should be provided. Drainage. The drainage plan is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. VARIANCE For all Zoning Districts except I-1, Limited Industrial, the Zoning Ordinance states that off- street parking is not allowed within three feet of any property line (Section 4.036 (6) (c)). In the I-1, Limited Industrial District, the setback requirement is 20 feet adjacent to a residential district or 10 feet adjacent to a non-residential district (Section 4.145 (4)). The Planning Commission maywent to revisit this parking requirement considering consistency among districts. Purpose of a Variance. The purpose of a variance is to permit relief from the strict application of the terms of the Zoning Code to prevent undue hardships or mitigate undue non-economic hardship in the reasonable use of a specific parcel of property and where circumstances are unique to the individual property under consideration, and the granting of a variance is demonstrated to be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Code. Lot Shape. Narrowness, shallowness or shape of a specific parcel of property can be a reason for hardship in the reasonable use of the property. The subject lot contains unique physical constraints. The Liberty lot forms an "L" shape around the northern lot and ponding areas are located to the west of both legs of the UL". Because of the narrowness of the lot and the constraints imposed by ponded water, the applicant has a limited opportunitY, to provide adequate parking for the use. The narrowness and shape of the lot has resulted in parking being located on only one side of the drive aisle on the north side of the building. This is an inefficient parking design. Allowing the variance would allow the applicant to provide parking on either side of the drive aisle, increasing parking by 29 stalls and creating a more efficient design. Comprehensive Plan. Expanding the parking lot to better meet the needs of the existing business is consistent with the goal stated in the Comprehensive Plan of inplace expansion of existing businesses. Additional Criteria. Granting the variance will not impair the supply of light or air, increase congestion in a public street, increase the danger of fire or public safety, or diminish property values. 3 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 98-18 Liberty Property Ltd Prshp 8/7/98 10/6/98 12/5/98 330 2nd Ave S #390 Mpls 55401 John Gattuso, Sr VP 375-1776 375-8958 fax Marbell R~alty LLC 4455 VV Branch Road Mound 55364 Steven Bell 504-3051 504-3030 fax B. C. d. 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. Assign each appli~,ation a number. List the Applicant (name, address and phone). List the date the City received the application. List the date the City sent the Applicant notice that required information was missing. If the City give~ 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. To calculate the 60-day limit, include all calendar days. To calculate the 120-day limit, include all calendar days. 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.) List the deadline under any extension or waiver. The C~'-' 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.) List ti~ ~ate 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: Request: Location: 98-20 Variance to the Side Yard Setback Requirement to Allow Construction of a Garage oht0 the Existing Home 8489 North Meadow Lake Road PID No.: 06-118-21-12-0064 Zoning: Petitioner: R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District Richard & Liane Shive Report Date: Meeting Date: August 28, 1998 September 2, 1998 BACKGROUND 1. The petitioner is requesting a variance to the side yard setback requirement to allow construction of a garage onto the existing home, pursuant to Section 4.22 of the New Hope Code of Ordinances. 2. This is one of the few single family .homes in New Hope without a garage. The petitioners purchased the property ten years ago and have made significant improvements to the property. When the house was purchased it was a rental property with a significant number of neighborhood complaints and code violations. 3. The home was built in 1962 and each of the owners has inquired about options and available space for a garage. Some confusion existed about the exact property line and room for a garage until the current owner had a survey completed. The new survey shows that there is a distance of 24.6 feet from the house to the property line at the closest point and 27.6 feet from the house to the property line at the farthest point. In general, the survey shows that the property contains enough land for a 20-foot wide garage, maintaining a five-foot setback. 4. The petitioners are requesting to construct a 22-foot wide x 26-foot deep garage on the north side of the house. They are requesting a two-foot variance from the five-foot side yard setback requirement so that the front side ~Nall of the garage would be located three feet from the side yard property line. The petitioners indicate in their correspondence that they cannot get both cars in the garage and fully, open the doors with only a 20-foot width, therefore, they are requesting the 22-foot width. Most new standard double garages are 22-24 feet in width according to the Building Official. 5. The property is located southwest of the intersection of 60 % Avenue North and Meadow Lake Road North. The 16,000 square foot irregular shaped lot has a 72-foot frontage on Meadow Lake Road and has a 48-foot frontage on Meadow Lake. 6. The property is located in an R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District and is surrounded by single family homes, with Meadow Lake Elementary School and Park to the north of the intersection. 7. The property is located in Planning District #2 of the Cor~prehensive Plan, which noted the need for preventative maintenance on some homes in the district. 8. The L-shaped lot is fiat from the street to the home, where it falls away abruptly to a walkout basement and slopes down to Meadow Lake (200 feet away). 9. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified, and one neighboring property owner 'stopped to review the plan and supported the garage addition. Variance ANALYSIS 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 vadance 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 df 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. 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. 4. Appropriate city staff met to review the plans on August 12 and had no problems with the proposed garage addition. It was noted that there was an error on the original survey because two platted easements were not shown and a revised survey was requested. 5. The Design & Review Committee met with the petitioner on August 13. The Committee was supportive of granting the variance to allow a 22-foot wide garage, as they felt that 20 feet was too narrow and most primary garages built today are 22-24 feet in width. It was discussed that in the past some precedents exist for granting minor side yard setback variances for garage additions/expansion. It was confirmed that no easement would be encroached upon and that no business was being conducted on the premises. The Committee confirmed that the architectural style of the addition would match the existing home. The Committee agreed that a garage was a necessity. Revised plans and a corrected survey were submitted as a result of the meeting. 6. The revised survey shows two easements on the property: a 10-foot wide easement across the rear yard southwest of the house and a five-foot wide easement on a portion of the west rear property line. Neither of these easements involve the north side lot line where the setback variance is being requested. 7. The revised plans include the following details: · 22' x 26' (572 square feet) garage to be constructed on north side of single family home. Garage would be flamed into existing hip line roof of house. · Interior wall against house would have Fire Code gypsum board from the floor to the rafters, a metal fire door would replace the existing north side door, garage floor would be concrete with concrete steps to entry and a 16' x 7' steel panel insulated garage door would be installed. Planning Case 98-20 Page 2 8/28/98 · Two 44" x 22" windows would be located in the new garage; one on the north side of the building and one on the west side of the building. · Building materials will consist of asphalt shingles and fi. ve-inch lap vinyl siding to match the existing house. Note that the property-north of this site is a corner lot and fronts onto 60 ~ Avenue North, but has a detached garage with a driveway entrance on North Meadow Lake Road, just north of the petitioner's home. There is a timber wall located on the property line between the two properties. The garage on the property adjacent to the petitioners appears to be set back approximately five feet from the property line. Staff supports the granting of the variance for the following reasons: A. The property has a unique shape which could justify a hardship. B. The construction of a garage would enhance, not diminish property values. C. This home needs a garage and the construction of a garage would bring the property into compliance with the current City Code (garages now required). D. The construction of the garage would provide additional off-street parking. E. The garage would not be located in a drainage'easement. F. The garage would not have a negative impact on the property to the north, as the setback reduction is located near a detached garage, not a single family home. G. Similar variances have been granted in the past for garage expansions and additions. RECOMMENDATION Pending the comments received from neighbors, staff recommends approval of a two-foot variance to the five-foot side yard setback requirement to allow the garage addition to be located three feet from the property line, subject to the following condition: 1. Building materials, roof line and architectural style of garage to match existing single family home. Attachments: Address/Zoning/Topo Maps Petitioner Correspondence Property Survey Survey with Garage Addition Revised Plans Footing & Foundation Plan Cross Section Front Elevation North Elevation West Elevation Floor Plan Application Log Planning Case 98-20 Page 3 8/28/98 ' : 62ND AVE N - ~ ~ t-· rrt*iTt t · l'r lB1 t r~.H 1' · H I · 111 ~t-rl I-I-t lB t-I-i · It I-~1 r i.I I it ~.t Fiji FI H-I ": '"' '!il! J: ili i ii ii,J i -" ............. . ":' ....... :- ......... : ............................... MEADOW ............. · ................ i _.~ ............. ._611/.2 AVE N --.iE!~ ~'3" :a'~i=!--~-:=!-;-~---',=:ilE 'i i ' ELEMENTARY ........ ",__ ' ;'"T- ';"-t "-T " +" -~' '- :-' -:--' ' :~o t ~ *"0 .' ; ,,F,': !';;;.~_~ ~ s '~ o ~ ~ iii :_.o ,.J ,.[ l JJ i : SCHOOL ~:- 0100 .. : : '-,wla, .~ :~ i~ i !J bi · J '.~ ............ ,' " ~ ~m ~ ......... L-.. ~'...[~. ~,.', .L_'.. i..'.. ;.'.......-.-. :'" , ...... I ~, N/ .....!--.~..; ....... _.6..!..~_..,A...~_. N ............. %':,,' iS ' J & PARK ,,,, ,~,,~~ ...... -~§~ ~i:i'J:li,ll ~l~?.:o:= I '-:' "~,~-: ~,i-: . : "-' "" ~ .... ~ ..... ~"'-: .... : o ',Il ,.J ~ ."__: I ·'-~,/.~,,~,,'-;~;'~--'~'-,:; ....... _.,---~: .. . : ". ...... ~ .... ~ ..... F-';i. ii C~: BROOKLYN PARK x ! x AUGUST 10th 1998 RE: 8489 NORTH MEADOW LAKE ROAD NEW HOPE, WE HAVE LIVED AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS FOR TEN YEARS AND HAVE CONSTANTLY MADE IMPROVEMENTS TO THIS HOME IN THE INSIDE MAIN LEVEL. THE HOUSE WHEN WE PURCHASED IT WAS A RENTAL PROPERTY AND WAS IN POOR CONDITION. WE HAVE ALSO LANDSCAPED ETC TO IMPROVE THIS PROPERTY. WE ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO BE ABLE TO Pb~ON A TWO CAR ATTACHED GARAGE 22' IN WIDTH. THIS WOULD BRING THE STRUCTURE TO WITHIN 3' OF THE LOT LINE ON THE NORTH SIDE . WE FEEL THIS WOULD DRASTICALLY IMPROVE THE PROPERTY! OUR DESIRE IS NOT TO PUT UP A DETACHED (AS THIS WOULD DEVALUE THE RESALE VALUE). ALSO IT OBSTRUCT THE POND VIEW. A SINGLE ATTACHED IS UNHEARD OF IN THIS CENTURY AND ALMOST COSTS THE SAME AS A DOUBLE. IF WE SIMPLY PUT ON A 20'WIDTH WE CANNOT GET BOTH CARS IN AND FULLY OPEN THE DOORS! WE FEEL IF WE ARE GRANTED THIS 22' VARIANCE IT WOULD BE THE NICEST HOME ON THE BLOCK, ESPECIALLY AFTER ROOFING AND THE SIDING GOES ON. WE ARE CONFIDANT THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER THIS REQUEST A POSITIVE ADDITION TO OUR NEW HOPE NEIGHBORHOOD. LIANE HESSELGRAVE-SHIVE 5UiLMtY ~** TAm She, ye ' · DESCRIPTION: LoC t2, Block 5, MEADOW L~KE PARK, ¢~y of Ney Hope, Hennep£n County, Sb~VE2 FOR: The Shive' s ot 12, Block 5, MEADOW LAKE PA~K~ £ty of New Hope, Hennepin County, innesota. JI IT,, HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES 11470 M^K"rlN ,STREet' COON I~^FID,.~, MINNESOTA 55433 (612) '757-2~90 fax (612) '757-9755 / t NG WALLS ; TO BE REMOVED_ ;ON~I'I~JCTIO# CITY OF NEVV 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 98-20 Richard & Liane Shive 8/7/98 10/6/98 12/5/98 8489 N. Meadow Lake Road New Hope 55428 535-4141 557-1176 - w 557-1405 - fax B. C. D. 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. Assign each application a number. List the Applicant (name, address and phone). List the date the City received the application. List the date the C, ity 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. To calculatL~ the 60-day limit, include all calendar days. , To calculate the 120-day limit, include all calendar days. 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.) List the deadline under any extension or waiver. 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.) 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: Request: Location: - 96-27 Review of Comprehensive Plan Update C-ity~Wide PID No.: Zoning: Petitioner: Report Date: Meeting Date: All Zoning Districts City of New Hope August 28, 1998 September 2, 1998 OVERVIEW 1. Staff is requesting review/approval of the Comprehensive Plan Update from the Planning Commission. This is a public hearing on the plan (see attached legal notice). The Planning Consultant will be making the presentation of the Comprehensive Plan Update to the Commission. After the Commission makes comments on the plan, the hearing should be opened to the public so that anyone in attendance can also ask questions and make comments on the plan. 2. In July 1997, in response to local needs and State Statutes, the City of New Hope began the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan. The City first established a Comprehensive Plan in 1960, and revised it sixteen years later in 1976. Now, after twenty-two years, the City is nearing the completion' of another, updated Comprehensive Plan. As a general guideline for city planning and development, the revision of the Comprehensive Plan is a good governing process, providing goals and plans for the future, not to mention that the Plan is mandated by the State of Minnesota. The updated plan is intended to provide a detailed vision for the City of New Hope that will assist planning, development, housing, transportation and land use through the year 2020. 3. The process began with a Tactical Study. Through a series of interviews with elected and appointed officials, local business people, and city staff, local concerns and needs were identified by the Planning Consultant. · 4. Following the Tactical Study, the next step required a city-wide technical inventory of all social, environmental, and physical facts and trends of the community. With the interviews and a city tour, this part of the process was related to the research acquired from the Tactical Study. 5. With the research compiled from the prior steps, the Policy Plan and the formulation of the Development and Framework were then created. These phases account for the bulk of the written Comprehensive Plan. The Policy Plan outlines the desired community planning goals that the City wishes to accomplish by 2020. The Development and Framework outlines specific plans for improving housing, land use, transportation, infrastructure, and the natural environment. 6. With these steps complete, the Committee initiated the final step, which was analyzing the City's implementation tools. The City's methods of governing, its developmental regulations, capital improvement plans, housing programs, to mention a few, were evaluated to see if they were compatible with carrying out the goals and visions of the Comprehensive Plan. 7. With each phase of the Update, the Comprehensive Plan Committee has met to review the developments and make comments as to the directi6n of the Plan. The Comprehensive Plan Committee is comprised of Planning Commission members, Citizen Advisory Committee members, city staff, and the Planning Consultant. The Committee has met eight times since the beginning of the process, and has been hard at work developing an acceptable Comprehensive Plan Update for the City. The Committee conducted a work session with the City Council midway through the update to seek Council feedback.- ~-- 8. At this point, the Comprehensive Plan Update is almost complete. Following review/approval by the Planning Commission at this meeting with the public h. earing, the Comprehensive Plan Update will be forwarded on to the_City_Council for consideration on September 14. The Comprehensive Plan will be submitted to the Metropolitan Council in late September. 9. Pending approval, this Comprehensive Plan will serve as an advising entity in all decisions made by the City. It is a guide for programs and actions that will be taken to assure the accomplishment of the outlined goals and visions. It serves as a model for the elected officials, appointed officials, and City Staff in their continuing process of the City of New Hope a better place to work and live. 10.Three-ring binders of the Comprehensive Plan Update were distributed last month for your review. 11.Roger Landy, Vice-Chair of the Planning Commission, chaired the Comprehensive Plan Update Committee and staff extends its thanks to all the Planning Commission, Citizen Advisory Commission members and city staff/consultants that served on the Committee. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the 1998 New Hope Comprehensive Plan Update, pending review and comments by the Planning Commission and City Council. Planning Case 96-27 Page 2 August 28, 1998 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER · ,AMENDNENT TO NEW HOPE CONPREHENSIVE PLAN · _ City of New Hope., Minnesota Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the City of New Hope, Minnesota, will meet on the 2nd day of September, 1998, at 7:00 o'clock p.m. at the City Hall, 4401 Xylon Avenue North, in said City for the purpose of holding a public hearing to consider the adoption of a resolution amending the New Hope Comprehensive Plan. Said amendment will have the affect of making New Hope's Zoning Code consistent with its Comprehensive Plan. The Amendment will also set forth and restate the City's residential, commercial and industrial goals along with various policies to implement said goals. It will also define the City's general, community facilities and government administration goals and policies. Finally, it will describe the City's planning tactics and real property inventory. All persons interested are invited to appear at said hearing for the purpose of being heard with respect to the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Accommodations such as sign language interpreter or large printed materials are available upon request at least 5 working days in advance. Please contact the City Clerk to make arrangements (telephone 531-5117, TDD number 531- 5109). Dated the lOth day of August, 1998. s/ Valerie J. Leone Valerie J. Leone City Clerk (Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun-Post on the 19th day of August, 1998.) -C: \WP51 \ CNH\COMPPLAN, A15 . ' Memorahdum To-' Planning Commission Members From: Kirk McDonald, Director of Community Development Date: AugUst 28, 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. August 10 CouncillEDA Meetinqs - At the August 10 Council/EDA meetings, the Council/EDA took action on the following planning/development/housing issues: A. Proiect #646, Motion Authorizing Staff to Obtain Appraisal for 5546 Sumter Avenue North: Authorization granted, see attached Council request. B. Project #601B, Resolution Awarding Contract for Swimming Pool Improvements to LS Black Constructors, Inc. for parts A, B, D, and E - $518,491.15: Approved, see attached Council request. C. Discussion Regarding Potential Multi-Family Rehabilitation Project at New Hope Garden Apartments, 5600-5650 Zealand Avenue North and 8511 Bass Lake Road: EDA declined participation in Apartment Loan Program with owner, see attached EDA request. D. Project ~493, Resolution Declaring Preliminary Intent to Convey Property to Senior Outreach Services,~lnc. for Adult Day Care Facility: Approved, see attached EDA request. August 24 Council/EDA Meetinc~s - At the August 24 Council/EDA meetings, the Council/EDA took action on the following planning/development/housing issues: A. Project #612, Motion Accepting Bid for the Demolition of 5629 Wisconsin Avenue North: Approved, see attached Council request. B. Project #589, Motion Approving Final Pay Request to Flag Builders in the Amount of $7,580 for the Scattered Site Rehabilitation Project at 91t6 31't Avenue North: Approved, see attached Council request. C. Project #,578, Motion Authorizing Staff to Negotiate with Property Owner of 2751 Lamphere Drive: Approved, see attached Council request. D. Project #618, Resolution Approving Contracts Between the City of New Hope and Dave Perkins Contracting, Inc. for Storm Sewer Work and Monette Construction for Su~3~31vin_¢l and Installing Structural Features in Dorothy Mary Park: Approved, see attached Council request. E. Discussion Regarding Redevelopment Options at 5629 Wisconsin Avenue North: Approved, see attached Council request. Attachments: F. Project t~,5, Motion Authorizing Staff to Obtain Appraisals of Regent Aparl~nents at 713c 604 Avenue, 6017 Louisiana Avenue and 7124 Lombardy Lane: Approved, see attached EDA request. G. Project #61,1r, Resolution Approving Amendment .No. 1 to the Initial Agreement Betweer~, Economic Development Authority in and for the City of New Hope and the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority: Appr~)ved, see attached EDA request. Codes & Standards Committee - The Committee met in August to discuss bus benches, R-2 zoning standards, curb cuts definition, and A.C. Carlson vacant property. Desi.qn & Review Committee - Design & Review met in August to review plans for PPL, Brandell Fourth Addition plat, and a garage variance. Comprehensive Plan Update Committee - The Committee did not meet in August. The Committee will remain in tact until, the end of the year to review plan updates for neighboring cities. Project Bulletin - Enclosed for your information is a project bulletin regarding the swimming pool renovation project. Miscellaneous Articles - Articles from Zoning News and Zoning Bulletin are attached for your information. 5546 Sumter Avenue Swimming Pool Improvements New Hope Garden Apartments Senior Outreach Services/Adult Day Care 5629 Wisconsin Avenue Demolition 9116 31'* Avenue 2751 Lamphere Ddve Dorothy Mary Park 5629 Wisconsin Avenue Redevelopment Options Regent Apartments Initial Agreement Amendment #1 with MPHA Project Bulletin Miscellaneous Articles couvc. I OR ACTION oncmaur~ D~t Community Development BY'Kirk McDonald Approved for .Agenda .~8-10-98 Agenda Section Corotint Item No. 6.8 MOTION AUTHORIZING STAFF TO OBTAIN APPRAISAL OF 5546 SUMTER AVENUE NORTH (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 546) The City Manager has received the attached correspondence from the owner of the single family dwelling at 5546 Sumter Avenue North stating that ~we would like to have you start the procedure we talked about in buying our home.' The property is located at the southeast intersection of Bass Lake Road and Sumter Avenue and the City Council has indicated an interest in acquiring scattered site properties in that area for future redevelopment purposes. The City already owns several properties in that neighborhood, has demolished the structures and is land banking the property for future redevelopment. Staff is requesting Council authorization to seek quotes for an appraisal of the property, accept the Iow quote and get the property appraised. The estimated cost of an appraisal for a single family home is $325.00. Staff would then bdng the completed appraisal back to the Council to determine if the City desires to negotiate with the property owner for acquisition of the property. The 1998 valuation of the property is $7~000 ($19,500 land, $58,500 building). Staff has indicated to the property owner that because this would be a voluntary sale, no relocation benefits would be paid. Staff recommends approval of a motion authorizing staff to obtain an appraisal of the property. The appraisal would be paid for with CDBG, EDA or 'I'IF funds. MORON BY H AVE 'OUNTY ST. RAPHEL CATHOLIC -- ELIt CHURCH ST COUNCE. ~U~gT I~OR ACTION Or~tnattn~ De,pa,~e~t Parks and Recreation Shad French Approved for Agenda 8/10/98 A~enda Secuon Ordinances & Res. Itei~ No. 10.1 RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR SWIMMING POOL IMPROVEMENTS (IMPROVEMEN' PROJECT NO. 601B) TO L$ BLACK CONSTRUCTORS, INC. FOR PARTS A, B, D, AND E $518,491.15 On 4/13/98 the City Council accepted a concept report for swimming pool improvements. The local neighborhood, the swim club, and the Advisory Commission have all reviewed the plans for the pool for these needed improvements. Improvement project 601A which calls for the manufacture and installation only of a new stainless steel gutter system for the 34 year old facility was awarded on June 22"' to Global Specialty at a price of $63,610.00. Improvement project 601B in its entirety includes: · Part A: pool renovation work including ADA improvements, diving boards and drop slide, painting the main pool; completion of the gutter replacement work not included in 601A; new sand filters for the large pool; and ventilation of the two equipment' buildings. · Part B: batlYaouse entry improvements. · . Part C: Concession area improvements including a new building, site work to bring the area up to the level of the decking around the pool, storm and sanitary sewer impmvernents, sidewalk/concrete improvements, landscape work including irrigation, pathway work, fencing, removing volleyball court and relocating lights. Two other projects were bid ss ~ of this in order to take advantage of what was hoped would be lower bids if they were pert of a larger project. See attached memo from the Public Works Director. These include: · Part D: fire station concrete driveway panel replacement and add trash dumpsterlrecycling enclosure to be shared by the pool and fire station. · Part E: 47~ and Aquila we#house improvements. MO'I30N BY' TO: Bids were opened on Tuesday, August 4" and have been evaluated by the City's engineers. The Engineer's letter .regarding bid evaluations is attached. Only two bids were received but it is specula~'-~ that this is due to few contractors being willing or able to coordinate such a large project with many sub,,, plus the fact that'there is so much construction going on now that many contractors are too busy to take on more projects. The timing cannot be changed for this project as it was for Civic Center Park because the work must be done_-dud _ng the off season unless the pool is closed down for an entire season, which staff does not recommend doing. Contractor Global Specialty LS Black Constructors, Inc. $1,363,594.80 $ 909,405.94 The engineer's estimate was $800,000.00. The breakdown of the bids by parts A-E (as described above) is as follows: Contractor Part A Part B Part C Part D ~ ~ Global $661,975. $41,486. $596,928. $18,275.80 $44,930.. $1,363,594.80 LSBlack $450725.70 $14,818.29 $390914.79 $22,481.56 $30,465.60 $ 909,405.94 Alternates were requested as follows: Contractor Alt. 1: Delete Office Area Alt.2: Excavatio~ Global Deduct $60,000 Total: $15,000 LS Black Deduct $ 8,900 Total: $15,750 Alt. 3: Court I.~htir~ Deduct $3,000 Deduct $4,100 Staff recommends that council award parts A, B, D, and E of the project to the Iow bidder, LS Black Constructors, Inc. Staff further recommends that the concession area portion of this project (Part C) be r~moved and rebid immediately to attempt to rebuild that area in conjunction with other pool improvements. If the new bids are still considered too high to accept, the project could be bid as a separate improvement project in the future. The concesaiol~ area is very dated and the building itself is in need of many upgrades including electrical. After a viait fi'om the county health inapector this summer, staff also .knows that the facility is not up to their standard. Staff further re~ommen~ that the alternates not be accepted as they all relate to Part C, the concessions ar~. The recommended funding m~'ce for parts A, B, and D is TIF for all but the portion of Part D that relates to the fire station concrete I:mnel r~ work. Funding for Part E is available from the Joint Water Commission and Itm VValm' Enteq:Mle Fund for the wailhouse impmvement~. L EDA · -' I/E UE T FOR ACTION Or~mat. tr~ Depa2"lzneflt Approv~! for ~a ~da ~on EDA Communi~ Development 8-10-~ ~ It= ~o. ~i~ McDonald ~ / ~ 4 DISCUSSION REGARDING POTENTIAL MULTI~MILY RE~BILITATION PROJECT AT NEW HOPE GARDEN APAR~ENTS, 5600-5650 Z~N~AVENUE NORTH AND 8511 BASS ~KE ROAD Another multi-family dwelling owner has approached the Ci~ and is interested in the EDA Apa~ment Loan Program. ChaHes Miller, Miller Management Co., Inc., is pa~ of a pa~nership that owns the New Hope Garden Apa~ments. This is a group of seven buildings (11 un~s each), along with 77 single garages, Io~t~ on Zealand Avenue near Bass Lake Road. ~e s~cific addresses are: 5600 Zealand Avenue No~h 5~9 Zealand Avenue No~h 5601 Zealand Avenue No~h 5650 Zealand Avenue No~h 5624 Zealand Avenue No~h 8511 Bass Lake Road 5625 Zealand Avenue No~h The prope~ was buiE be~n 1~2 - 68 and Miller Management has owned the pro~ sin~ 1974. ~e owners want to make ~o major improvements to the buildings: 1. Installation of new windo~ thmugho~ the ~mplex (~0 window). ~e existing windows are the ~ginal ~dows, am single pane glass with no energy effidency, and let in wind and water. Estimated cost to mpla~ the ~ndows is $222,5~ (the ownem have already obtain~ quotes and sign~ a contm~). 2. Installation of new maintenan~ ~ siding on the eaves, ove~angs and garage walls. ~e ownem state that the siding and ove~ang am a ~nstant ~ling paint problem. Estimated cost for the Cladding is ~8,220. The total estimat~ ~st of the proje~ would ~ $270,720, w~h the ownem pro.sing to finan~ one-half of the proje~ and r~uesfing a no interest loan for the o~er on.haft of the pro~ ($135,360). (cont'd.) Request for Action Page 2 8-10-98 The request is slightly different than the request considered at the July EDA meeting, as follows: · Only two major improvements are being requested; not a full-scale rehabilitation of the property~ involving a vadety of items. · The applicant'understands this to be a 50/50 loan program; no grant is being requested. . The property is paid for, so there would .be no detailed financial analysis that would be necessary. One of the buildi_ngs or_ an assignment of rents could be used as the financial guarantee. Per the City Attorney's letter, the policy adopted in the resolution states that public funds will not be substituted for private funds that could reasonably be raised in the pdvate market. Staff feels that this would be a good project, but it is doubtful that public funds are essential for the project to move forward. Miller Management has done a good job of maintaining their properties in the City. Staff requests that the EDA give direction to staff as to whether this is a project you wish to pursue or not. , NUE z rNIA 0 CAVELL 0 Ill EDA REQUEST FOR ACTION Ongmaung Depa, Cu~ent Community Development By:. Kirk McDonald Approv~ for Agem:la A~enc~ Sect.ton 8-1C~98 / Item No. RESOLUTION DECLARING PRELIIV OUTREACH SERVICES, INC. FOR ADULT _./ IINAR/¥ INTENT TO CONVEY PROPERTY TO SENIOR DAY CARE FACILITY (It4PROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 493) The enclosed resolution prepared by the City Attorney sets forth the EDA's willingness to convey the property at 5501 Boone Avenue North to CareBreak for an adult daycare facility on a deferred loan/grant redevelopment contract. The entire purchase pdce would be in a deferred loan subject to 100 percent forgiveness in the event all of the conditions of a Redevelopment Contract were satisfied. The conditions would include: 1. A thirty (30) year contract term. 2. A reversionary clause which would automatically convey the property back to the EDA in the event the property was not developed and operated as an adult daycare facility on or before November 2000. 3. A second lien or mortgage in the amount of the EDA's $376,764 purchase pdce for the property. This - lien or mortgage would be forgiven in the event all conditions of the Redevelopment Contract were met. 4. CareBreak would make an annual payment to the EDA in 'an amount equal to the portion of real estate taxes the City would receive if the property was fully taxable for real estate purposes. 5. CareBreak would be required to immediately prepare and submit development plans for site and building plato review acceptable to the City. 6. That CareBreak entem into a Redevelopment Contract which incorporates the foregoing conditions and restrictions and any other conditions or restrictions required by the City. With this resolution, CareBreak should be able to commence negotiation proceedings with its financing institution, allowing it to prepare a financial plan for the successful completion of the project. This is simply the initial step in the process to a final cooperation agreement with CareBreak to construct this facility. A Redevelopment Contract will be brought back to the EDA for consideration in the future. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY TO: RFA.O01 FOR ACTION Community Development B3r~Susan Henry Community Development Specialist By:. ~'ff 8-24-98 .Agenda Sectton Consent Ite~n No. 6.9 MOTION ACCEPTING BID FOR THE DEMOLITION OF 5629 WISCONSIN AVENUE NORTH (IHPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 612) Per the City Council's action on July 27, 1998, specifications for the demolition of 5629 Wisconsin Avenue North were sent to demolition contractors. In response, the City received quotes from the following firms: Firm Kevitt Excavating R.P. Excavating Veit and Company $3,782.00 $4,350.00 $8,888.00 The Iow bid was submitted by Kevitt Excavating, in the amount of $3,782.00. Kevitt has completed satisfactory work for the City in the past. Staff recommends awarding the bid to the lowest bidder, Kevitt Excavating, in the amount of $3,782.00. Site preparation, including demolition costs, will be paid from CDBG funds. MOTION BY' TO: RF'A-O01 RF. U' T I OR ACTION ' N~prwed for ~etzla .4~em~ Secuon · Consent 8-24-98 It~ No. ~ 6.11 ~u,-~ D~t' · Community Development Susan Henry B~. Community Development Specialist MOTION APPROVING FINAL PAY REQ TO FLAG BUILDERS IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,580.00 FOR THE SCA'I-rERED SITE REHABILITATION HOUSING PROJECT AT 9116 31s~' AVENUE NORTH (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT #589) This is the final pay request for Flag Builders for the rehabilitation of the City-owned single family home located at 9116 31= Avenue North. The final pay request is in the amount of $7,580.00. The Building Official and Community Development Specialist conducted a final inspection of the property with the contractor on August 14 and reported that all items are completed and a Residential Certificate of Occupancy can be issued. Upon staff's receipt of the IC-134 paperwork, final payment will be issued to the contractor. This will signify the end of the rehabilitation on the home. The next steps will involve marketing and selling the property to an eligible first-time home buyer. Staff is coordinating with Marquette Bank on this. Staff recommends approval of the final pay request in the amount of $7,580.00, pending receipt of the IC-134 paperwork. MOTION BY TO: RFA-O01 PAYMENT TRACKING FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 589 Address: 9116 31'* Avenue North : SUMMARY 1 2 $ 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Total Bid Awarded Change Order- Deduction .' Revised Bid Amount First Payment Reqi Less Relainage C~y's Fi~t I:~/out (see ~ ,eh wavers) Second p~yment Request Third Pay~ Requmt Le~ Reminage (i-I~ par 8ui,:ling ~ - un~i.hecl work) c~ Th~ F'.you~ Tomt ~ Wlelh~ To D.I. City's Total Payout to Dam amance Due to Date (~ln~ rmyment to go to CC) $ 770.00 $59,970.00 $18,000.00 $ 900.00 $17,100.00 (3~/98) $18,200.00 $ 910.00 $17,290.00 (4/1/98) $23,000.00 $ 5.000.00 $18,000.00 (6/24/98) $ 6,810.00 $52,390.00 $ 7,580.00 M~IIIC:~:S? x ~&J COONCE., RF b'E T FOR ACTION Community Development B3r. Kirk McDonald A~eada Sectton Development & Planning Rem No. 8.1 MOTION AUTHORIZING STAFF TO NEGOTIATE WITH PROPERTY.OWNER OF 2751 LAMPHERE DRIVE (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 578) be intere~eed tn i~r~ha~ lhe illell~l~¢~, as they are interested ~n pursuing this option. Due to fl~ Ib0t~ 1'~-111~'~' ~ en ~ ~, no relocation benefits would needtobe tt eew.. _. · · - v x, M the pmm to the City. The parcel contaim-_ .~~~~ 32,5~__ ~ feet (.75 ..acr~. ) .and is located in an R.1 Single Family Reaidentiai"'Z0~'tg-I~[ri~.~'n'"{~ ~he Council ~ autl~3nzea an appraisal on the property, as the owner was selling the property and a code compliance inspection had indicated a number of code violations. The house ~ ~ around 1~00 ~ is one of I~e oldest home~ in the City. At that time there were two dwelling units located in the single family home. In 1996 the City also indicated a preliminary int, erest in the property for redevelopment purposes. The 1996 al3Praisal gave an estimated fair market value of the I~ of $11g,000. The 1~ ~ value of the property is ~,000 ($29,500 lend/~l~,500 building). Sut:~equent to the completion of the 1996 appraisal, the property owner offered to sell the property to the City for $85,000. At the October 2~, 1~, Council meeting, the Council approved a motion not to pun=ha~e the propert~ due to the purctla~e price, the location of the sanitary sewer Mind ~ the CRy would have bee~. required to provide relocation benefits to the tenants of the property. (cont'd.) MOTION BY TO: RFA-O01 Request for Action Page 2 WTth both the 1996 and 1998 Council requests,~~,~_~.~_? have faed~ from ~wemt eegtale (~DBG and HOME) fer i,jglii~Jr'l~l~"~lt~~ iMilgjii(~'"ll~i~[~l~. find some site/o utilize the funding. ~ I~/1~""*~ I~ ~ ~ ~ the As you are aware,~tl~ ~ heys become aware of ~.~~/~JIl~[~~....1~,~ property and are concerned about what could be built on the site. ~~~ ~ I~at the ~te .D~ ~ onlE f~r single rarely heme~~~"'lt: is anticipated' that a petition will be presented to the Council at the meeting with a similar request and that several neighbors will be in attendance. Staff has also been'in contact with the property owners who wrote the enclosed letter to the editor. The owners of the property desire to continue the discussions with the City ~regarding the Potential purchase of the property. If the Council is interested in acquiring the property, staff recommends approval of a motion authorizing staff to negotiate with the property owners. COUNCE., REQUEST FOR ACTION Approw.-d for Agenda Agenda Section Development 8-24-98 .'& Planninq Item No. Ortgtnatiz~ Depa~l~ent Public Works Jeannine Clancy RESOLUTION APPROVING CONRACTS BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEW HOPE AND DAVE PERKINS CONTRACTING, INC., FOR STORM SEt/VER' WORK AND MONETrE CONSTRUCTION FOR SUPPLYING AND INSTALLING STRUCTURAL FEATURES IN DOROTHY MARY PARK (PROJECT 618) At the direction of the City Council, Parks/Recreation and Public Works staff, along with City Engineers have conducted a sedes of neighborhood meetings to discuss issues related to DorothY Mary Park. These meetings were well attended and the neighborhood has been very involved in the park planning process. The result of these meetings was a plan for improvements to the storm water system, stairway, dock, boardwalks, trails, woodland and wetland plant communities in the park. This plan was reviewed and approved by the Citizen Advisory Commission at its June meeting. On July 27, the City Council approved the plans and specifications. The project has been broken into two contracts to allow staff maximum supervision and control of the project as well as to ensure the most competitive bids on each part of the project. One contract includes repair of the storm sewer inlet on the south end of the park and extending the storm sewer entedng from Xylon Avenue to discharge into the pond. The second contract includes fumishing all materials and labor for the construction of the timber stairs, dock, and two boardwalks. . Staff received the following bids for the contract to repair the storm sewer outlet off of 60½ Avenue on the south end of the park and to extend the Xylon Avenue st°rm sewer to the pond: Dave Perkins Contracting Inc. $20,483.50' Jay Bro~. Inc. $23,523.33 ' The extension of the storm sewer from Xylon Avenue to the pond wilt require clearing and removal of tree~ and shrubs from the area. The disturbance is expected to be no more than ten MOTION BY SECOND BY RFA-O01 Dorothy Mary Park Improvements Project 618 August 24, lg98 Page to twelve feet wide for the length of the pipe, approximately 200 feet. The restoration of the site will occur naturally and will be supplemented by woodland type plantings to be planted by volunteers in the Spdng. Staff received the following bids' for the contract to furnish all materials and labor for the construction of the stairway, dock, and'ooardwalk: Monette Construction · $58,875.00 Nacleau Utility $60,737.00 Lakeland Nurseries $65,574.00 Additional work to the trail at the west park entrance and landscaping at all park entrances is expected to occur in the Spdng and will be bid as a separate contract. This part of the project will be bid during the Winter. SCHEDULE The suggested project schedule is as follows: Award contracts for storm sewer repair and installation of structural features Begin storm sewer and structural work Completion of storm sewer repairs and installation of structural features Accept bids for landscaping at park entrances Award contract for landscaping at park entrances Begin landscaping at park entrances Completion of piantint~ August 24,1998 Late September, 1998 Late October, 1998 Winter 1998-1999 Late Winter 1999 Spdng 1999 Spring 1999 The City's'Capital Improvement Program identifies $40,000 for park dock, steps, and other related improvements, and $100,00. improvements. It i~ anticipated that the Storm Water Utility Fund through mventm~ received from the sale of the Brandell property. the project could be e~oflorted by internal financing. improvements such as the for storm water related could support the project Until that property is sold, Staff requests approval of the resolution which awards a contract to Dave Perkins Contracting in the amount of $20,483.50, and awards a contract ' in the amount of $58,875.00 to Monette Construction. Bonestroo Roser .. Ander. hk & AsS_oc,ates Engineers & Architects August 18, 1998 Seannine Clancy City of New Hope 4401 Xyion Avenue New Hope, MN 55428 Prlnct~d/$. Otto G. gonestroo. RE. · JOSeD~I C. AnG~erl,k. CE, · Mdrv,n L Sorvala. RoOertRic~ar~E' Turner. PE. · Glenn R. Cook. RE. · Rooert G. Sc~tc~t. ~E. · Jerry ~a Sus~ M. E~r,n. CPA. Sen~or Consulters Ric~ar~A~°clate~ Pt/nc~al~..Foster.,RE.Howara A. S~fora. RE. · Kelt~ A. Gor~n. PE · ~oOeet Dav,~ O LosRota. PE · ~oOerc C. ~usseK. Al A · Mar~ M~c~aef T aautmann ~E · Tea K.Fiel~. PE · Ken.erin p A~Oerson. PE. · Mark S~ney P ~lhamson. PE.. ~.S. · RoOert P Kotsml[~ · A~es M. R~n9 · M~c~ael P AII~ RiCR Sc~m~t. ~eDg~te www 0onestroo cam Dorothy Mary Park Improvements -' City Project. No. 618 BRA File No. 34219 Dear Jeannine: The Dorothy Mar~ Park Improvements were grouped into three projects: ' Dorothy Mary Proieeta 1. Storm Sewer Improvements 2. Structure Improvements Including the dock, stairs, and boardwalk 3. Restoration and landscape Improvements The storm sewer and structure improvements will be conmmcted this fall and the restoration and landscaping will be completed in the spring. City staffand neighborhood residents may complete a portion of the landscaping, Dividin~ the overall project into three smaller projects allowed contractors to bid competitively in their specific areas of expertise. Because the estimated cost for the storm sewer improvements wu :1;25,000 quotes were received. The sttm:mte improvements were advertised for bid. Storm sewer improvement quotes were ~,eived on ~M;n~.da, y., .A .u~. 17., ~ ~ impeovement bids ~ ..t..K.e. ived on Tuesday, August 18. Copies of ma tanumnons tar mxn projects am attached. Copies mil also be distributed to each, bidder. The following summarizes the te~ults of the four quotes received for the storm seweT improvements and the four bids for the stmctm~ impeovements. Store Sewer Improvemenm Low l~ve Perkins Contrucdn& Inc. #2 Say Bros., Inc. #3 F.F. Jedlicki, Inc. G.L. Contracting, Inc. $20,483.$0 $23,$23.33 $24,669.00 $25,482.60 $25,000 233S West Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN S5113 · 612-636-4600 · Fax: 612-636-1311 Structure Improvements #2 #3 #5 Monette Construction Co., Inc. Nadeau Utile, Inc. Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. Jay Br~s., Inc. L.S. Black Construction, Inc. $58,875.00 $60,737.00 $65,574.00 $76,425.00 $124,140.00 Both low bids compare favorably to the Engineer's Estimate. Dave Perkins Contracting is a reputable contractor and has constructed numerousprojects of'this nature for the City in the past. Monette Construction Co., Inc., however, i~s not worked in New Hope in the past. Three references including the City of Minneapolis, City of St. Paul, and Sanders, Wacker, Bergley (a landscape architecture firm) were contacted. All three rated Monette Construction as'excellent. Monette Construction started in 1958 with five brothers. Two brothen still maintain the business which specializes in concrete and carpentry work. All three references felt that Monette would be a perfect fit for the Dorothy Mary structures. Therefore, because both low bids compare favorably to the Engineer's estimate, both contractors are reputable, and 811 bids were found to be in order. We recommend that the Storm Sewer Improvements project be awarded to Dave Perkins Con~, Ine., for the Total Base BM of S20,483~d) and that the Structures Improvements be awarded to Monette Construction Co., he. for the Total Base Bid or Sss,s'/s.00. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call. My direct number is (651) 604-4790. Respectfully, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIX & ASSOCIATES, INC' Vincent T. V, ander Top, P.E. t -- REQUEST FOR ACTION Or~tnat. m.~ Department Approved for A~-nda A~enda Secuon Development Community Development & Plannin,q 8-24-98 Item No. BY'Kirk McDonald By:. DISCUSSION REGARDING REDEVELOPMENT OPTIONS AT 5629 .VVlSCONSIN AVENUE NORTH (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 612) Staff request to discuss with the City Council potential redevelopment options at 5629 Wisconsin Avenue North. Specifically, staff want to know if the Council would be generally supportive of a rezoning in that neighborhood and if you would support a minor reduction in the twinhome lot area requirement. As you are aware, the City acquired the property with a dilapidated single family home on it and is planning to demolish the structure at the end of the summer. Staff would like to start construction of a new home this fall. The issue that needs to be decided is whether the structure will be a single family home or a zero lot line twinhome. Staff originally acquired the property with the intent of constructing a twinhome on the property because the economics of the project are much more favorable to the City if a twinhome vs. a single family home is built. Staff desire to get input from the Council pdor to discussing this issue with the Codes & Standard Committee and before conducting a neighborhood meeting or sending out another project bulletin. Per the attached Planner's report, the site is currently zoned R-l, Residential District, which does not allow twinhomes. A rezoning to an R-2 Zoning Distdct is neck. ssary to accommodate the twinhome use. New Hope's lot area standards require 14,000 square feet of lot area for a twinhome (7,000 square feet per unit). The subject site is 13,500 square feet in area, adequate for a single family home, but 500 square feet short of the city standard for twinhomes. A reduction in the twinhome lot area requirement is also necessary to accommodate the twinhome use. The twinhome lot area requirement presents an obstacle for scMtered site redevelopment of blighted single family home sites where twinho~nes may be a preferred housing option. The single family homes along Wisconsin Avenue existed pdor to the 1975 New, .Hope Comprehensive Plan. The 1975 Comprehensive Plan proposed a change of land use along Wisconsin Avenue from Iow density residential to high density residential. Consistent with the land use plan, an apartment complex east of Wisconsin Avenue has been constructed and a twinhome has be, eh added at the comer of Wisconsin Avenue and Bass Lake Road. W'rth this infill development, 'the remaining area zoned R-1 is surrounded on three sides by higher density residential zoning and land uses. Per the Planner's report, these conditions suggest that the rezoning to an R-2 Distdct may be appropriate for the entire length of Wisconsin Avenue. A current trend within New Hope, as well as other communities, is to redevelop single family lots with twinhomes. In this respect, conditions have changed which could warrant a chanoe in zonin(3. MOTION BY ~.,(~ND ~ TO: Request for Action Page 2 8-24-98 The Planner indicates that the City should also review the proposed rezoning within the followin9 parameters: 1. The propoeed:acfio__n has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan, The Comprehensive Plan suggests Iow density residential use of the subject properties. According to the plan, ~low density" development is assumed to hold five or fewer dwelling units per acre. In this regard, the proposed twinhome on the 13,500 square foot lot produces a residential density consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The allowance of twinhomes further diversifies the City's housing stock by providing a greater range of life cycle housing options. The proposed Land Use Plan also encourages pdvate reinvestment into residential areas. 2. The proposed use is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area. In consideration of the rezoning requests, it is typically beneficial to examine the proposed use's compatibility with surrounding uses. The following is a listing of land uses and zoning designations which surround the subject area: North - R-4, High Density Residential and R-O, Residential Office; South - Hosterman Jr. High School; West - R-4, High Density Residential; and East - R-3, Medium Density Residential. Generally speaking, the proposed land use of the subject area is considered compatible with surrounding uses. 3. The proposed use conforms with all Performance standards. Currently, 7,000 square feet per unit is required for twinhomes (14,000 square foot per parcel). The subject site in question is only 13,500 square feet. This size lot is not large enough to accommodate twinhome development under the current twinhome standards. Staff is proposing consideration of a proposal for the reduction of twinhome lot area requirements, which could, if enacted, change twinhome requirements to allow twinhome development on 13,500 square foot lots. 4. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. While no detailed study has been conducted, it is expected that the proposed use of the .subject area and site will not depreciate the area in which it is proposed. 5. The propesed use can be accommodated with exi~.ting public sewicas and will not over- burden the City's service capacity. Existing public sanitary sewer capabilities are adequate to serve the develop,ment of twinhomes. 6. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of straeta serving the.property. The subject area is accessed by Wisconsin Avenue. The traffic impacts of the site, if developed as R-2, are less than the surrounding R-3 and R-4 Districts and stree( capacities are adequate to handle the increased traffic created by twinhome development. The Planner has also prepared the attached report on twinhome performance standards which compares New Hope's standards to those in neighboring cities. Staff requests that the Council give positive preliminary consideration to rezoning the length of Wisconsin Avenue north of 56"~ Avenue a. nd south of Bass Lake Road, which is currently zoned R-1 Distdct to R-2 District. Additionally, staff request that the council give favorable preliminary consideration to changing the twinhome performance standards to allow twinhome development at 5629 Wisconsin Ayenue, as well as other single family redevelopment sites throughout the City. Request for Action Page 3 8-24-98 If the Council supports the concept of a twinhome on the site, staff will proceed through the normal process-for the necessary code changes and return to the Council for formal approval. If the Council prefers that a single family home be built on the site, staff will pursue that alternative. -- -- EDA i -- Or~matm~ D~h~'tment Approved for ~DA Community Development .~ It~ No. ~i~ McDonald ~ 8-24 MOTION AUTHORIZING STAFF TO OBTAIN A~P~ISALS OF REGENT APAR~ENTS AT 7136 60TM AVENUE, 6017 LOUISIANA AVENUE AND 7124 LOMBARDY ~NE (~MPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ~5) At ~ J~ ~7 E~ ~, ~ E~ ~ a ~ ~~..~0~ R~ ~a~ments for anna ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ ...... ~ .__' , -~ ' mu~amily housing ~x~ ~ ~~~ A ~; ~, ~ 71~4 Lom~ L~. ~e improvements ~e ownem discuss~ with staff and the Ci~ AEomey included mpla~ment or mpaim of windows, repair of pa~ing lot, roof mpla~ment, installation of ~meter drain tile systems, ~tential repair or repla~ment of inoperable outdoor swimming ~ol, some new applian~s, inte~or wo~ including hal~ay ~t and ~t mpla~ment in some un,s, mpla~ment of some k~chen ~binets and floors, repair of leaking air cond~ioning units, and adding lands~ping to the pm~. I~ ha~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~. ~~ d~ ~ ~e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ to ~ ~ (them am cu~n~ seven garages for 36 units) and discussed improv~ pm~ management. ~e total ~st of the improvements w~hout garages is estimated at $180,000 - $200,000. ~e cost of the garages is estimat~ at $~5,000. ~e EDA ~n~ ~ ~y ~ ~~ a ~n, ~ a gm~ ~ EDA al~ i~i~ a ~ential i~e~t ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ which staff did. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8~ Av~ ~ W~ ~~y a~ ~ an ama for Subsequent to the EDA m~ting, staff ~her discuss~ the ~tential rahab proj~ with the ownem and the EDA comments r~arding r~evelopment. ~ ~ ~ve ~~ ~ ~~ ~er stating th~ ~ R~ P~~' ~m ~ ~ i~t~ in e~ng ~. ~si~l~ of' ~lling ~e have ~e pm~ a~~ a~ to e~m a pu~a~ of ~ ~iMings ~m R~nt Pm~s. (co~ ~a. ~ON ~ Request for Action Page 2 8-24-98 7136 6b~ Avenue $48,000 land / $216,000 building = 6017_-Louisiana Avenue $48,000 land / $227,000 building 7124 Lombardy Lane $48,000 land / $216,000 building ~ ~~tllill~ ll~.lle ~. taOle~O~ ~l~at, ~ ~"~' ~ staff Staff recommends approval of a motion authorizing staff to obtain appraisals on the three Regent Apartment build!rigs. AVl id ST \ AVE, G,.OV. EROAt. !: \ EDA for ~ Community Development ByKirk McDonald 8-24-98 ~j~ LUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE INFrlAL AGREEMENT EcoNOMIC ~Y~?~HSlNG AuTHORI~ (IMPROVEMENT MINN~POLIS PU~U~ A~e~da Sectton EDA Item No. 5 BETWEEN AND THE Metro~aan Coui~~.~,, _ ,~ O~aor met .......... t to the EDA . ..,,,~ ~......,.,,.a and HUD on Aug j' __~_..,., nr_acedures for delegate its ~=~l-because they are alrea(3y !~, ,'~ ....... 8 Program. The amendment to the agreement states that:.. -----, ~. me rer~cement MH~ u~! a~_ .... ia~' ~t for the · ' the Walang .-~ ,'" ' ' RA will a(:tminister me wa shall adminiater · Counal H , presented to tt~ p..t;~m~ v,,.,,,.---~- aPl~roves the amend?ent to the agreement anc Staff recommends approval of the resolution which authorizes the President and Executive Director to execute the agreement. PROJECT NO. 601 Bulletin No. 1 SWIMMING POOL RENOVATION Overview The City of New Hope is proceeding with renovation of the Milton C. Honsey Swimming Pool located at 4301 Xylon Avenue North. The pool was built in 1964 and opened in 1965: Many of the improvements scheduled for the pool are necessary to replace aging equipment and to comply with current safety and health code regulations. This multi-dimensional project will include the following: · Replacement of the existing gutter system with a new stainless steel gutter. · Replacement of the existing diatomaceous earth filter with a new sand filter. · Reconfiguration of the diving well. · Installation of a new three meter diving board and a drop slide as well as the reinstallation of the existing one meter diving board. · Construction of a new ramp into the shallow end of the pool to provide access to persons with disabilities. · Construction of a new stairway into the shallow end of the pool. · Repainting of the pool shell. · Improvements to the ventilation of both mechanical buildings. · Reconfiguration of the entry to the bathhouse. Aisc included with the project is the construction of a dumpster enclosure at the west end of the New Hope Fire Station parking lot, and repairs to the concrete ddveway in front of the Fire Station. Proiect Schedule The New Hope City Council awarded the contract for the swimming pool improvements to L.S. Black Construction, Inc. at the August 10 Council meeting: The contracter plans to start construction on the project the week of August 24, 1998. It is anticipated that the gutter replacement will be completed by the end of October and the bulk of the concrete work will be completed by the middle of December. The remaining building/pool deck repairs are expected to be completed by the end of Apdl of next year, with the turf and landscape restoration by' the middle of May. All work is expected to be completed well before the scheduled pool opening on June 12, 1999. Construction Hours Construction may occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Saturday. All work, including mobilization of equipment, will take place during these time pedods. Related Proiects The City has also recently bid other improvements in Civic Center Park including a new concession building, new tennis courts, a relocated volleyball court, and a new basketball court. T. he bids for these projects came in higher than estimated due to a busy construction season. The New Hope City Council rejected all bids received and requested staff to re-bid these projects. 8/25/98 SWIMMING POOL RENOVATION Page 2 Construction of the-concession building will be re-bid as a separate contract in an effort to obtain a more competitive bid. If the City Council accepts the new bid for the replacement of the concession building, the existing building will be demolished and a new building built at the site. The new building would be located just slightly south and west of the existing building and would be accessible to persons with disabilities from the pool area as well as from the park/parking lot side of the building. The new master plan for Civic Center Park provides for new lighted volleyball and basketball courts to be constructed south of the tennis courts in the park. Earlier this summer, bids had been received for a project in Civic Center Park that would have rebuilt the tennis courts, constructed the basketball and volleyball courts, relocated the Fire Station driveway to the south end of the park, and provided for additional trails and landscaping in the park. This park project is on hold at this time, but will be re-bid this winter and is anticipated to be constructed next spring. Contact Persons If you have questions or concerns during the swimming pool 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 JUlY 1998 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION The ABCs of TIF By Lolita Sereleas Tax Increment Financing (TIF) became a household term for economic developers when it emerged as a popular tool to facilitate development and combat urban blight in targeted areas. Local governments use TIF programs for land procurement and to pay for public improvements that support development, including water, sewer lines, streets, lighting, and purpose of TIF is to eliminate blight by supporting revitalization activities that the private sector is unwilling or unable to undertake. parking lots. Areas already slated for redevelopment are the primary beneficiaries of TIF funds. A TIF district essentially captures the tax capacity of the properties located within the specified area. For the duration of the district, property taxes that result from increases in the tax level above the level of a designated year are placed in a special fund that can be used only to finance public project costs. Bonds are often sold at the outset of the redevelopment project by a designated development agency so that funds are available for up-front expenses, including land assembly and infrastructure costs. Simply stated, TIF utilizes the revenue increase that will result from redevelopment to fund extraordinary construction and development costs. TIF has gained in popularity with public officials because it generates money for redevelopment without expending general revenue. The principal purpose of TIF is to eliminate blight by supporting revitalization activities that the private sector is unwilling (or perhaps unable) to undertake. The TIF objective is not to aid private enterprise. TIF ~ provides for the recycling of infrastructure, enhances the tax base, creates and helps to retain jobs, aids in revitalizing brownfields, provides affordable housing, and facilitates neighborhood stability. In addition to providing economic benefits to individual communities, 'HF districts can have regional land-use implications as well. Because TIFs are often located in urban areas, they help to combat urban sprawl and the consumption of open land in a metro region by providing incentives for urban infill development. "TIFs are a great tool for revirali?.ing blighted urban land," says Peter Skosey, urban development director at the Metropolitan Planning Council in Chicago. "They give municipalities tools which level the playing field against greenfield development." As an incentive for private investment, funds jCkom TIF districts in Rock Island, Illinois, are used to pay fbr interest costs incurred by the developer in a redevelopment project. TIP bots TIF dates back to the "urban renewal" movement that resulted from the Federal Housing Act of 1949. The purpose of this act was the elimination of the nation's blighted and substandard areas. One outcome of the federal urban renewal program in the 1950s was the passage of relatively uniform urban renewal laws in every state. The laws gave development powers to local governments and permitted the establishment of urban renewal authorities and programs. The states' most basic urban renewal laws have since been vasdy amended, however. Even the language has been changed. For example, references to urban renewal have been changed to "community development." In the 1970s, the gradual withdrawal of federal funds from urban renewal projects produced a need for new sources of revenue to fund the programs. California and Minnesota were the first states to make extensive use of TIF. The success of TIF in these two states gained the attention of cities nationwide. Today, nearly every state has some form ofTIF legislation~ TIF districts around the country have several important criteria in common: · A needs assessment to establish the necessity of a TIF district, and the designation of a boundary for the district. · Creation of a redevelopment agency by resolution or ordinance. The agency may be a governing body of the municipality, or it may be a new agency appointed by this body. ,-_a I Eleventh Street Tax Increment Financing Dldyict · Preparation of a development plan approved by the agency and the city. · Declaration of a base year from which to measure tax revenue increases. -- · Solicitation of developers to build within the district. Needs Assessment. The municipality must first conduct a needs assessment to establi'ih that-an-area is blighted and that redevelopment is both necessary and in the public interest. Careful documentation of the assessment is critical because it is subject to judicial scrutiny. Such scrutiny requires that the state statute be followed explicitly and that the redevelopment agency be prepared to defend its findings. As a protective measure, the agency should carefully document data and methodology, including expert testimony. The study should cite as many permissible bases as possible from the statute to support the findings of the needs assessment study. Establishing need with a well-supported study is crucial to the TIF process as a means of combating any legal challenges that arise and gaining public approval for the redevelopment project. Municipalities usually make the decision to establish a redevelopment authority to exercise redevelopment powers. The powers of such an agency Lypically include property acquisition to eliminate blight, demolition, construction of infrastructure and utilities, disposition of property at its fair value, programs to repair and rehabilitate buildings, acquisition rehabilitation and resale of structures for affordable housing use, and acquisition of air rights. Redevelopment Planning. A project plan is essential to the TIF process because it provides a framework for implementing the TIF district. Most state statutes require some form of redevelopment plan in order to ensure that TIF provides a benefit to the community as a whole. Although the details vary among states, legislation will usually oudine the content of the plan. Pennsylvania's Tax Increment Financing Act of 1990 is an example of such legislation: "The authority shall prepare a project plan for each tax increment district and submit the plan to the governing body of the municipality which will create the district and to the governing body of a~y other municipality or school district that levies property taxes within the boundarie~ of the proposed district. The plan shall include the following: · A statement listing the kind, number, and allocation of all proposed pubic works or improvements and/or all residential, commercial, or industrial development and revitalization improvementt · An economic feasibility study of the project and the fiscal effects on the municipal tax base. · A detailed list of estimated project cnsts. · A description of the method~ of financing all estimated project costs and the dine when related costs or monetary obligation are to be incurred. · A map showing existing uses and conditions of real property in the district. · Proposed changes of any zoning ordinance, master plan, map, building code or ordinance. · A.list of estimated non-project costs. Lolita Sereleas is a banking and economic da~elopment specialist at the Metropolitan Chicago Inflbrmation Center. · A statement of proposed methods for the relocation of families, persons, and businesses to be temporarily or permanently displaced from housing or commercial facilities~.. in the project area by implementation of the plan." Planners can play a central role in these first two stages of the TI.F process by providing technical expertise; including knowledge of state statues, local zoning laws, and land-use issues. Additionally, planners can help ensure that TIF districts remain committed to the goal of eliminating blight and enhancing the long-range plans of the area. In many TIF districts, zoning remains consistent with the city's master plan. In other districts, however, zoning changes are needed to lay the groundwork for desired redevelopment and to attract developers. A TIF district in Chicago recently underwent just such a zoning change. Part of the district was established on the site of the RR Donnelly Establishing multiple TIF districts is not just a tool for larger cities. This downtown TIF district in Rock lslana~ Illinois (population 41,000) is one of two such districts in the city. I building. The large facility was the former location of the company's printing operations, but is now slated for mixed-use development. The zoning change came as no surprise to residents who have watched many area properties make the transition from industrial to urban residential. Establishing a Base Year. The base year refers to the tax base of the year in which a TIF district is established. This tax base serves a point of reference for determining future tax increments. The general formula used to calculate tax increment revenues is: I = r(n-I), where I = increment revenues, r = the tax rate in the current year, n = the assessed valuation in the current year, I = the assessed valuation in the base year. This formula determine, that any positive difference between the base year and the subsequent years' tax revenue will flow into the redevelopment fund. A base year should be established early in the TIF process with as low an assessment base as possible. Again, it is beneficial to pay close attention to the statue, which oudines deadlines and provisions for triggering the base year. Solicitation ~f~l~en. Pending completion of the steps to establish a TIF district, the redevelopment agency must work to attract the private investment that will raise the tax assessment base. Activities of the agency include planning, making investments in public improvements, and acquiring and clearing land for redevelopment. Such activities may require an investment in advance of private development. The redevelopment agency may designate specific projects for implementation and solicit investors and developers to respond to a request for proposals. If the developer's proposal is congruous with the redevelol?ment plan, the developer may request assistance from the agency on important aspects of the plan. The agency will therLmake an agreement with the developer to build in accordance with the plan and within a designated time line, at which point &e agency should agree to provide specified services in support of the development. In Rock Island, Illinois, 'l-IF funds can be used to pay for interest MISSISS IPPI RIVER I~x Increment Finance District · a central role i~ the TIF process by providing technical expertise, including knowledge of state statues, local zoning laws, and land-use issues. costs incurred by the developer in a redevelopment project. The funds may also be used to pay for the costs of job training. Washington, D.C., developer Herbert S. Miller feels that TIF districts make mixed-used development affordable for developers. "WithOut it, you can't afford to compete against an office building." Miller is the developer of Gateway Square, a planned retail/entertainment complex in Washington, D.C., where TIF is being employed m revirali?e the city's downtown area. The D.C. council's TIF bill targets a downtown area of approximately 100 blocks. The Saint Louis Galleria retail complex in Richmond Heights, Missouri, is a TIF success story. The project was funded in part by TIF to help create city services such as no-fee ambulance service, high-rech firefighting equipment, van shuttles for the elderly, and routine sidewalk and road repairs, all of which occurred without an increase in real estate taxes over the past 10 years. Tho Downside d TIP Thc TIF approach is not without opposition. Much controversy has been generated over the varying definitions and broad interpretations of %light" in some TIF statutes. One unfortunate consequence of the ambiguity is that municipal officials have been allowed to unilaterally make critical financial decisions that affect the tax base of school districts and other overlying districts. Pennsylvania's statute defines blighted areas as, "unsafe, unsanitary, inadequate, or overcrowded conditions of an area's dwellings; lacking in proper lighting and open space; defective in the design or arrangement of the buildings; faulty in street or lot lay-out, and economically or socially undesirable land uses.' While this definition provides several specific criteria for blight, %ndesirable land uses" may be considered too vague and therefore provide a loophole for TIF misuse. Critics are quick to note the misuse of TIF, and daim that many officials do not recognize TIF as a redevelopment toot for blighted areas, but rather an economic development tool to attract developers and investors to the community. Another concern is that TIF moves development from one dry to the next, resulting in no net gain for the larger region. Misuse of TIF can be largely attributed to poor understanding on the part of municipalities, lack of dedication· to the diminadon of urban blight, few resources for local planners, or even the absence ora planning depamnent altogether. Insufficient planning of a TIF district can result in a legal disaster for a municipality. In October 1994, a group of nonprofit organizations and concerned citizens filed a lawsuit against the town of Addison, Illinois. The lawsuit charged the village with attempting to demolish Addison's only two predominandy Hispanic neighborhoods by misusing powers acquired through the enactment ora TIF district. The village had no specific redevelopment plans for these areas other than the seizure and demolition of all or most of the 827 apartments in the two neighborhoods, which were home to almost half of the village's nearly 5,000 Hispanic residents. Despite a promise by municipal officials that no buildings would be razed without public input, the Hispanic residents were faced with leaving their homes because the village was forcing landlords to iell within two weeks after the creation of the TIF district. Owners were given the opdon of selling at a price set by the village. Addison immediately demolished eight four-unit apartment buildings, with four others anticipating a similar fate. The village also filed a lawsuit to condemn at least eight more. Demolition was halted the week that the lawsuit was filed. · The plaintiffs in thc. case--Hispanic and open housing groups--were criticized by the village and its supporters who claimed that their intent was to stop all redevdopment and improvement effom. The plaintifl~ responded by saying, "all the plaintiff~ in this case are advocates of urban renewal.., as long as that renewal does not cause inexcusable homdessness, displacement and economic harm, which was the case in Addison." The $4.3 million setdement was reached in August 1997 and is the largest settlement of any private fair housing suit in the nation. The consent decree provides for the demolition of a limited number of additional buildings to make way for neighborhood parks and new affordable housing. Homeowners will receive reimbursement at 110 percent of fair market value and local tenants will receive substantial relocation assistance. In addition to preserving the vast majority of the existing housing, the settlement provides for the construction of up to 81 new units of housing with ownership and occupancy priority, given to displaced owners and tenants. None of this was included in the original TIF plan. Conclusion TIF is a valuable redevelopmen~ tool when used properly. TIF districts can help to attract development to blighted areas, encourage the cleanup ofenvironmentally contaminated areas, and provide incentive for infill development rather than the development of greensFace. Still, TIF districts have to be accompanied by sound planning practices, including needs assessment, land-use planning, and plans for the effective management of the district~. If suffic{endy planned, TIF will provide economic benefits to a municipality and environmental benefits to a region as a whole. Sinking Shopping Center to Become a Wetland Occasionally, APA's Planning Advisory Service is asked to provide examples of shopping center revitalization techniques. Options usually include varying the tenant mix, renovating the facade, improving the landscaping and parking, and/or redesigning the signage. For the Phalen Shopping Center in St. Paul, Minnesota, the selected alternative has been more dramatic--demolish the majority of the site and convert it to a lake and wedands. By spring 1999, St. Paul hopes to transform the site back into Ames Lake, surrounded by Wedands and community open space. Opened in 1960, the 200,000-square-foot shopping center was expected to provide an economic boom to the Phalen Village neighborhood. Builders speculated that a highway proposed for the neighborhood would link it to the regional retail market. But residents opposed the highway, which ultimately stopped short of the neighborhood. Another highway intended to traverse the area was built a mile and a half away, creating a more suitable site for a regional retail center elsewhere. While the Phalen Shopping Center operated well for a time, it never quite captured the community's retail market and suffered from high vacancy rates. And then there was the problem with the site. The center was built on what w_~ then the outsldm of St. Paul on the only available vacant land'Ames Lake. To create a buildable site, the developers drained and filled the lake, in some places m a depth of 80 feet. The shopping center site was never truly stable and began'sinking right from the start. Catraih began m grow through broken-up parts of the extended parking lot that was paved for an expansion that never occurred. The structural situation, coupled with the vacancies and a lack of major maintenance work over the years, made it Sub~ipfio~ ~ a~l¢ ~r S50 (U.S.} ~ ~5 (~). F~ S. ~, ~d~ Di~n Will~ ~ ~em, Dir~r of~ P~ucdon. Chi~, IL M~ A~., N.~., ~o~ MI r~u.~. No ~ of~ ~bii~fion ~y ~ ~ or u~ in ~y b~ or by ~y m~, sto~ ~d rem~ ~cem, wi~out ~tion. Printed on ~d 10% ~mumer ~. apparent that the community needed to act. Finding a solution for the shopping center became one of the catalysts for developing a neighborhood plan. In 1991, a neighborhood task force was established to /"~ identify strategies to revitalize the neighborhood, including the center, and develop them into a plan. The Phalen Village Small Area Plan Task Force includes representatives of residents, property owners, businesses, and two members of the St. Paul Planning Commission. When it acknowledged that the shopping center needed some help, the task force originally decided to add some aesthetic amenities to the site to create some neighborhood open spacei says Alan Torstenson of the St. Paul Department of Planning and Economic Development. It was not initially conceived as a wetlands restoration site. The idea for converting the site back to wetlands came from Sherri Buss, who was studying landscape architecture at the University of Minnesota when the city approached her adviser, offering the shopping center as a student project. As she studied the site, examining factors such as its history as a lake, the concave topography, and hydric soils, "all the information pointed to it being a wetland," says Buss. She developed a wetlands restoration plan, which also became her thesis project. When Buss presented her proposal to the neighborhood task force in 1992, ~I thought the neighborhood group would laugh at us," she says. But many of the residents remembered fishing in Ames Lake and became excited. The task force included the idea in the neighborhood plan. Not all of the site will be returned to wedands. Jerry's NewMarket, a successful grocery store tenant, has purchased. 50,000 square feet of the shopping center, which includes his store and six other srorefronts. Renovation of these stores is expected to occur ne~t year. In addition, Prosperity Avenue, the hopeful-sounding road that originally led m Phalen Center, will be rerouted around the wedand, creating a new commercial corridor m the north. The $2 million restoration is being underwritten by several contributors, including the city, the Metropolitan Council (through its Livable Communities fund), the Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources (using lottery funds dedicated to environment), and the watershed district. Site excavation is scheduled for this summer. Initial wedands vegetation plantin~ will occur this fall, with the final pla~fings completed next spring. The hope is that it will be a fully functional wetland that serves primarily as an environmental amenity and wildlife habitat. When completed, Ames Lake will contain from ~,en to nine acres of lake and wedands. It will link to nearly five acres ofwerJands restored in 1997 at Lake Phalen, located approximately one-quarter mile from Ames Lake, and become part of the Phalen Chain of Lakea bird flyway. According to the small area plan, it will also serve as a environmental education resource for school and youth programs. The Phalen Center project is part of an overall community revitalization effort, says Torstenson. "The community has always had stable areas, but has had pockets that were troubled," he says. The city hopes that the desire to live near green space will help attract higher-quality housing and mixed commercial uses, stabilizing the Phalen Village economy. Bus~ sees the lake and wetland aa ~namral resources acting as an aid to economic development." Already there are new townhomes being devdoped in the area. Megan Lewis, AICP Page 2- August 10, 1998 Z.B. Zoning Change-- Can board rely on neighborhood opposition in denying rezoning request? Citation: Day v. City of Decherd, Court of Appeals of Tennessee, at Nashville, No. OI-A-OI-9708-CH-O0442 (1998) The Days bought residential property in the city of Dechcrd, Tenn. They presented a plat to the city planning commission, seeking to rezone the prop- erty so they could use it for mini-warehouses. The property was a large lot on a highway with an old home at'the rear. The property on three sides was zoned residential. The state community planner, who consulted with thc city on land use problems, told thc commission he had rese~ations about using thc property for mini-warehouses based on other de- velopment plans for the downtown area. Thc planning commission recommended thc change, but told the Days the city board would have to approve the ordinance creating the change. The board refused to approve the change. The Days sued the city. They asked the court to vacate the board's decision and sought an order preventing the city from enforcing its zoning ordinance against them. The Days said the board refused to rezone thc property based solely on neighborhood opposition, which they said violated state law. They relied on a case in which the court held a zoning board couldn't deny a condi- tional use permit based solely on neighborhood oPposition. The court dismissed the Days' complaint, and they appealed. DF~,CI$1ON: Alarmed. Whether to rezone the Days' property was at the board's sole discretion. The Days correctly argued the board couldn't deny a conditional use permit based solely on neighborhood opposition, bttta rezoning request wasn't the same as a special use request. An applicant for a special use permit was entitled to the permit when all the zoning ordinance's requirements were met; all the board had to determine was whether the applicant satisfied the ordinance. The Days, however, sought a zoning change. When a municipal board considered whether to grant a zoning change, its members acted as legislators. They could listen to their constituents and try to please as many people as possible. Regardless, there was enough evidence for the board to deny the Days' request to rezone their property to build mini-warehouses. The property was surrounded on three sides by residential property, and thc state planner said the proposed warehouses would be inconsistent with other development plans for thc city's downtown area. see also: Hoover Inc. v. Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, 924 S.W. 2d see also: Failin v. Knox County Board of Commissioners, 656 S.W. 2d 338 Page 6 -- August 10, 1998 Z.B. Z.B. August I0, 1998 -- Pa~e 5 The Williamses were enlitled lc, an order shulting down the kennel pending a trial. Because the lawn had denied Ibc tlertzwigs a variance to conlinue Io use Iheir properly as a commercial dog kennel, it was likely the Williamsgs would win Iheir lawsuil. They also showed Ihey would be irreparably injured wilhout a courl ord~:~, because Ihe nonslop barking prevented Ihem from using and enjoying Iheir see also: Little Joseph Realty ~: Town of Babylon, 363 N.E. 2d 1163. see also: Matter of Parisella v. Town of Fishkill, 619 N.Y.S. 2d 160. Home Business ~ Owners want to run auto shop as 'customary home occupation' Citation: Ober v. City o/Deer Park, Court o/Appeals of Ohio, 1st Appellate Dist., Hamilton County, No. C~070742 (1908) The abets owned a house in Ihe city of Deer Park, Ohio. Their property was zoned residcnlial, bul for years Ihey ran an automobile repair business from their garage. The abets gal a permit Io tear down their existing garage lo build a larger garage with heat. They used the garage lo repair cars, and kept expensive louis and equipment in Ibc ga/age for Ihe business. Customers broughl their cars to the abets' property for repairs, and the customers relurned Itl the property to retrieve Iheir cars and to pay their bills. The repair business was Mr. Ober's sole source of income. The city apparently tried to shut dr}wu the abets' business after it denied them a variance allowing them Ia conlinuc operaling the aulo shop. The abets asked the city zoning board to determine Ihal their repair shop was a "cuslom- · ary home occupation." The city zoning code allowed home businesses in residential zones pro- vided all work was done inside the building and ual marc than 50 percent of the area of any one story was dew}ted lo the use. Also, Ihe building could not have been altered in any Way that would indicate il was anything olher than a residence, and the business tcould ual have allracted customers to the property. The code al~ prohibiled using an accessory building, such as a garage, for gain. The board found the ()hers' business didn't qualify as a home occupation. It relied on ev'~depc~e Ihey ran their business in an accessory building, which violaled the zoning code. I! also found Ihey used more than 50 percent of the garage for Ihe business and thc business attracted ~;uslomers ltl the properly. The abets appealed Itl courl. They claimed they didn't do anything Ia Ihe garage to make it look like a business aud "nothing had been done" Io altracl cuslomers Ia Ihe properly. They ~dso claimed Ibc oily had always inlcrpreled the pr0hibilion againsl atlracling customers lo the premises Io mean that no ~ business signs were allowed and Said the city unfairly singled them out be- cause il allowed other businesses that allracled cuslomers Io homes. The courl affirmed thc barrel's decision, and Ihe Obers appealed. DECISION: Affirmed. The board properly found the Obers' usc of their property for an automo- bile repair business wasn't a customary home occupation. The Obers' use of their property didn't fit the definition of a "customary home occupation." That the Obers didn't do anything to change the appear- ance of the garage didn't mean their business was a proper home occupation. The regulations simply prohibited the alteration of a building to alter its ap- pearance as a residence; they didn't mean the business was allowed as long as the building's appearance wasn't changed. Although the Obers didn't have any signs advertising their business, they couldn't deny that the business itself attracted customers to the property. Cus- tomers actually entered the property to leave their cars for repair, to pick up their cars, and to pay their bills. Even if the city had interpreted thc prohibition against attracting customers to mean that no business signs were allowed, this didn't prevent the city from enforcing the regulations against any business that drew customers to the property. see also: Ober v. Deer Parle, Court of Appeals of Ohio, 1st Appellate Dist., Hamilton County, Nos. C-950230 and C-950244 (1995). see also: Approval ufa Residence at 10 Guido St. v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Cincinnati, 690 N.E.2d 593 (1996). Historic District -- City claims historic zoning ordinance applies only to exterior alterations Citation: Old West End Association v. City of Toledo, Court of Appeals of Ohio, 6th Appellate Dist., Lucas County, L-97-1386 (1998) Old West End Association was an organization concerned with the preser- vation of historic districts in Toledo, Ohio. In 1982, Old West End sued the city, asking the court to require the city to enforce a zoning ordinance. The ordinance stated that no "environmental changes" could be made to properties in historic districts unless the historic district commission issued a certificate of appropriateness. It also prohibited the city from issuing a build- ing permit for any alterations unless the commission had issued a certificate. Thc court issued a decree stating no environmental changes could be made to properties in historic districts unless the historic commission had issued a cer- tificate of appropriateness. In 1985, the court amended thc decree to state Ihe city couldn't issue a demolition permit within a historical district without the commission's approval. Thc court amended the decree two years later to state that if an owner violated the terms of his or her certificate of,appropriateness, the city couldn't retroac- tively app[ovc changes to the certificate or grant a new certificate if the effcct was to retroactively appnwe changes not specified in thc original certificate. In 1996, Old West End notificd thc city building department that owners planncd to sell windows from their historic property the ncxt day. Thc building