Loading...
010296 Planning AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 2, 1996 CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA 7:00 p.m. i. CALL TO ORDER 2. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 3. CONSENT ITEMS 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS *4.1 Case 95-31 Request for Sign Variances/Approval of Comprehensive Sign Plan to Allow Wall and Ground Signs that Exceed Sign Code Requirements in Number and Size, 7709 42nd Avenue North, Autohaus of Minneapolis/Thomas Boettcher, Petitioner. 4.2 Case 95-20 Consideration of An Ordinance Amending the New Hope Zoning Code by Defining Understory and Overstory Trees and Modifying Landscaping Regulations for Semi-Public and Income Producing Property, City of New Hope, Petitioner. 4.3 Case 95-21 Consideration of An Ordinance Reclassifying VariouS Conditional Uses as Permitted Uses Within the B-l, B-2, B-3 and B-4 Zoning Districts, City of New Hope, Petitioner. 5. COMMITTEE REPORTS 5.1 Report of Design and Review Committee - Next Meeting: January 18th at 3:30 p.m. 5.2 Report of Codes and Standards Committee - Next Meeting: January 17th at 7:00 a.m. 6. OLD BUSINESS 6.1 Miscellaneous Issues 7. NEW BUSINESS 7.1 Review of Planning Commission Minutes of December 5, 1995. 7.2 Review of City Council Minutes of November 27, 1995. 7.3 Review of EDA Minutes of November 27, 1995. $. ANNOUNCEMENTS 9. ADJOURNMENT * Petitioners are requested to be in attendance. CITY OF JANUARY PLANNING COlqMI SSION MEETING ?C95-31 Autohaus 7709 42nd Avenue North t CITY OF NEW HOPE MEMORANDUM DATE: December 29, 1995 TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Community Development Coordinator SUBJECT: ELECTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICERS FOR 1996 Section 2.134 of the New Hope City Code, Plarming Commission - Organization, states that "the Planning Commission shall elect one of its members as Chairman, one as Vice-Chairman, and another as Secretary, each of whom shall hold office until December 31st following their election". It appears to be the intent of the City Code that Planning Commission officers are to be elected on an annual basis. Staff reconunends that the election of officers be conducted at the January Planning Commission meeting. In the past elections have been held at the conclusion of the January Planning Commission meeting. However, the question has arisen as to whether the elections shouldn't be held at the beginning of the January meeting, due to the fact that the current officer's terms essentially end on December 31st, and the new officers should really be in place to conduct the business on the January Planning Commission agenda. In reviewing this matter with the City Attorney, he is in agreement that it would probably be more appropriate to conduct elections at the beginning of the meeting. Therefore, election of officers is the first item on the January agenda. As some of you are aware, five years ago we discovered that an election of officers had not been conducted since 1984. An election was conducted and it was determined that thereafter the election of officers would be conducted at the first meeting of the year on an annual basis so that the elections could be officially recorded in the minutes and be in conformance with City Code. Excerpts from the City Code pertaining to this matter, previous minutes regarding 1994 and 1995 officer elections, and a list of current Planning Commission members is enclosed for your information. Current officers include: Robert Gundershaug, Chairman William Sonsin, Vice-Chairman Sharon Cassen, Third Officer Bill Sonsin currently serves as the Chair for the Codes & Standards Committee and Sharon Cassen currently serves as the Chair for the Design & Review Committee. As you are aware, Robert Gundershaug, who has served as Chairman of the Planning Commission for the past year, resigned effective December 31, 1995. Therefore, it will be necessary to elect a new Chairman and other officers. In the recent past, the Chairman has not served as a Chair for one of the sub-committees, so if ~a current sub-committee Chair is elected as Chairman of the Planning Commission, a determination w need to be made if that person will also Chair a sub-committee or if a new sub-committee Chair should be selected. Finally, the Planning Commission has operated for the past few years with eight members (although the City Code says the Commission shall consist of ten members). With the resignation of Bob Gundershaug, the Commission declined to seven members. Applications will again be solicited through the January City newsletter so at least one additional member can be appointed so the Commission will have a minimum of eight members. Staff anticipates that an appointment will be made in February or March. Staff is also currently coordinating with the City Attorney on an amendment to the current wording of the code and are proposing that it be changed from "shall consist of ten members" to "may consist of ten members," as it is the general consensus that ten members are too many and the Commission has not operated with ten members for many years. Such an amendment would give the Council the option of appointing up to ten members, but would not make ten members mandatory. In the meantime, with a Commission of seven and a quorum of four members required to conduct business, please remember that your attendance at meetings is very important. Please contact me (Kirk McDonald 531-5119) or my secretary (Pam Sylvester 531-5110) in advance if you are not able to attend a meeting. Thanks for your cooperation. CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING COMMISSIOi~ - CHAIR: MEMBERS: Codes and Standards Sonsin, William 3308 Gettysburg Avenue N. 55427 545-4401 Chair 525-0258 (w) Underdahl, Vi 7706 53rd Avenue North, 55428 533-5913 Landy, Roger 4417 Flag Avenue North, 55428 535-7602 920-3512 (w) Design and Review Cassen, Sharon 8040 60-1/2 Avenue North, 55428 537-5193 Chair 553-1810 (w) Oelkers, William 5909 Ensign Avenue North, 55428 535-6144 (h) 569-5641 (w) Smlberg, Richard 8824 47-1/2 Avenue North, 55428 533-9059 831-5828 (w) Damiani, James 4665 Flag Avenue NOrth, 55428 537-2294 (h) 545-1111 (w) Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator Kirk McDonald 4401 Xylon Avenue North 531-5119 (w) Pam Sylvester Community Development Secretary 531-5110 (w) Planning Consultant Alan Brixius) Northwest Associated Consultants 595-9636 David Licht ) 5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555 Minneapolis, MN 55416 595-9837 (Fax No.) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETS THE FIRST TUESDAY OF EACH MONTH AT THE CITY HALL AT 7:00 P.M. 2.132 Coloos~on. o~c~, n~ne of ~ne m~rs 8nal~ serve a ~egm of ~gee years, shoal M a ~eoLdefl~ o~ ~ne C~y o~ ~ Hope. (Ord. 2.~33 PGrooee, Au~hor%~y and O~ee. ?~e PXannAng aa advisory nody ~o ~ne Council. Z~ Lo ~ereDy &u~orLzed and dAreo~ed ~o carry on CA~y P~aafl~flg ac~vL~ee and ~o adop~ a p~afl regulation of ~me ~u~ure pnye&ca~ ~eveLopaen~ prepare and ado9~ aa official sap o! m%~ proposed a%~era~ons exLe~ng ~ando sad p~Lc spaces, and ~ne ~np~a~od propercLee and ena%~ recoamnd approve% oF d~eapproval su~d~vLe~on8 of ~and. ?~e CamLsaLofl o~a~ ~eveXoma~a of ~ne ¢~y, ~nc~ud~ng proposed p~L~c OuAld~nge, s~:ee~ arrangements emi ~apreveaence, pub~e ~%~A~y playgrounds, and sleet e~m&~ar deve%omnce. ~ne ~ne cam%melon aBel% ~e oumA~ed ~o ~ne co~ne~X. ~e of p~%%e mpro~enealm and o~ner mamurea affec~Lag ~ne ~ut~re or preoea~ devo~eqmma~ of ~ne ¢~y. 2.~34 OiiA&LIAL~. ~e Planning ¢~mmAee~ofl ABalX elee~ one of ~oae ia vLee ena&~uaa, end aM~ner as secretary, dam eaelX ~eld offA~e un~&L Oe~eaner 31R, ~ellovLng ~neLr eLec~Loa. (Code 071S04) CounciL. Spee~a~ request flo~ ere cmn ~vo day. a~er race&pc ~y tee cna~an or Secretary of a vr~en ~equee~ tee procedure of (Code 072e84, Ord. CITY OF NEW HOPE ~ :~ PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning Case: 95-31 Request: Request for Sign Variances/Approval of Comprehensive Sign Plan to Allow Wall and Ground Signs that Exceed Sign Code Requirements in Number and Size Location: 7709 42nd Avenue North PID No: 17-118-1-3-0017 Zoning: B-3, Auto'Oriented Business District Petitioner: Autohaus of Minneapolis/Thomas Boettcher Report Date: December 29, 1995 Meeting Date: January 2, 1996 BACKGROUND 1. The petitioner is requesting sign variances/approval of a Comprehensive Sign Plan to allow wall and ground signs that exceed Sign Code requirements in number and size. 2. In 1989, the City approved the Autohaus development at 7709 42nd Avenue North. At the time of the approval, Universal Color Lab, Inc. was leasing space in front of the .building, with the understanding that at some point in the future they would be moving off of the site and that Autohaus would occupy the entire site. As you are aware, Universal Color Lab purchased the Kuppenheimer building across the street this past fall and have moved into their new building and vacated the Autohaus site. Autohaus and related auto-oriented businesses are now in the process of occupying the entire building and would like to proceed with the installation of signage on the entire building now that Color Lab is no longer located on the site. 3. Some of the proposed signs exceed the size and number of signs currently allowed under the Sign Code standards, thus this application has been made for variances from certain requirements. 4. In 1991, the City executed a Development Contract and made a low interest loan to Autohaus to assist with the acquisition of the former Animal Hospital site and School District property. The Animal Hospital was demolished and all properties were combined into one plat. The loan was paid back in full this past summer. All of the site improvements have not yet been completed on the property and the City Council has granted several extensions for the improvements to be completed. This planning case application is intended to address only the signage issues. 5. The property is located in a B-3, Auto-Oriented Business, Zoning District and motor vehicle sales, service, leasing/rental and repair is allowed bY conditional use permit. Surrounding land uses/zoning include B-4 Commercial Business (YMCA) to the east, B-4 Commercial Business (Country Kitchen) to the west, I-1 Limited Industrial (District//281 Bus Garage) to the south, and B-4 Commercial Business (Universal Color Lab and Car Wash) across 42nd Avenue to the north. Planning Case Report 95-31 2 ~" ' January 25~ 1996 6. The Autohaus property contains 2.7 acres and the building contains 17,300 square feet. 7. The property is located in Planning District #17 of the Comprehensive Plan and is part of the "City Center" area. 8. The topography of the site is nearly flat, with the exception of the southeast comer, which slopes to the wetland in the rear of the property. 9. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff have received no comments regarding this request. ANALYSIS 1. Section 3.467 of the Sign Code establishes criteria for Signs Accessory to Multiple Occupancy Businesses. Staff is considering this a multiple tenant building because there are three (3) separate, but inter-related, businesses on the site: AutoBody Plus Autohaus (Sales) Autohaus (Repair) The ordinance states that "when a single principal building is devoted to two or more businesses, a comprehensive sign plan for the entire building shall be submitted. The effect of said comprehensive sign plan is to allow and require the owner of the multiple occupancy structure to determine the specific individual sign requirements for the tenants of the building. As sign locations and size, etc. may be of some significant importance in lease arrangements between owner and tenant, it is the City's intention to establish general requirements for the overall building only, thus providing a building owner with both the flexibility and responsibility to deal with his individual tenants on their specific sign needs." 2. Ground Signs. Multiple occupancy structures (other than shopping centers) may erect ground signs in accordance with the following provisions and may identify each separate and distinct occupancy on the ground sign: A. Not more than two (2) ground signs shall be permitted on any lot or one ground sign if the building should contain more than one (1) wall sign over ten (10) square feet, subject to the following requirements: 1. Maximum area not to exceed 75 square feet (per sign) 2. Maximum structure height not to exceed 20 feet 3. No ground sign shall be located closer than ten (10) feet to any property line 3. Wall Signs Maximum Area. The total allowable sign area for a multiple occupancy structure shall not exceed 15%. of the combined wall surfaces on walls which abut streets in Business Districts and no individual tenant identification sign may exceed one hundred (100) square feet in area. Planning Case Report 95-31 3 January 2., 1996 A. Building Identification. No multiple occupancy structure may display more than two overall building identification signs. B. Tenant Identification Siens. Individual tenants located within multiple occupancy structures shall be permitted to display individual identification signs, if they have separate exterior entrances to their use, in which case, not more than one sign may be displayed. C. Delivery Signs. A delivery sign or signs not exceeding nine square feet in area may be located on the side or rear wall of the structure. GROUND SIGNS 4. Autohaus is proposing to install two (2) seventy-two (72) square foot ground signs, which would be installed on the same support structure. They are proposing to revise the, existing support structure and add radius end shrouds. The total height of the sign would be 20 feet. The two signs are as follows: A. Bottom Sign: (12' x 6' = 72 square feet) "AutoBody Plus" with red lettering, a black background and blue accent lines. B. Top Si~n: (12' x 6' = 72 square feet) "Autohaus Sales/Leasing" with white letters with red accents and "ASE Certified Auto Service" with blue letters. Entire sign to have black background. 5. The Sign Code states that only one 7S-foot ground sign is allowed if the building contains more than one wall sign over 10 square feet. The wall signs proposed exceed 10 square feet, therefore a variance is needed for the second ground sign. 6. Also, the petitioner has indicated that the second ground sign (formerly used by the Animal Hospital) is to be removed. Any consideration of a variance should include the condition that the second free-standing ground sign be removed. 7. The two proposed ground signs would not require a variance if the building only contained one 10 square foot wall sign, as they meet the size and height criteria. 8. Any consideration of a variance should also include the condition that the 10-foot setback requirement be complied with. WALL SIGNS 9. Autohaus is proposing the installation of six (6) wall signs, as follows: North (front) Elevation: (1) 2' x 8' (16 square fee0 AutoBody Plus (2) 30" x 12' (30 square fee0 Autohaus Sales & Leasing (3) 30" x 12' (30 square fee0 Autohaus Certified Auto Service Planning Case Report 95-31 4 ':'~" January 2,'. 1996 East (side) Elevation: (4) 2' x 8' (16 square feet) AutoBody Plus West (side) Elevation: (5) 30" x 12' (30 square fee0 Autohaus Certified Auto Service (6) 2' x 8' (16 square fee0 AutoBody Plus In addition, one 2' x 2' x 5' awning stating "Autohaus Service & Parts" would be located over a service door and a 2' x 5' awning with the "AutoBody Plus" logo would be located over another service door. Most of the signs would be located on Back-Lighted Awnings with red fabric. 10. In discussing these sign requests with the Planning Consultant, the code is interpreted to allow one 100 square foot wall sign per tenant. Therefore, the three (3) signs proposed for the north (front) elevation meet code requirements. 11. No allowance is made for side wall signs, except that a nine (9) square foot delivery sign may be located on the side or rear wall of the structure. It has been interpreted that the proposed signs are not delivery signs, therefore variances are required for the side wall signs under the current sign code. 12. In addition, the Sign Code contains the following criteria for awning and canopy signage: Awnin~ or Canopy Signs. Letters may be painted or otherwise affixed to any permissible awning or canopy as follows: (a) Location. Lettering or letterS shall not project above, below or beyond the physical dimensions of the awning or canopy. (b) Height. Lettering or letters shall not be larger from top to bottom than twelve inches. (c) Use. Lettering or letters shall not denote other than the name and address of the business conducted therein and/or a product or products produced or sold or service rendered therein. (d) Maximum Signage. Lettering or letters shall be included in calculating the maximum sign area of the permissible wall sign. 13. The New Hope Sign Code states that where there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this section, the Planning Commission/City Council has the power to vary the requirements of this section in harmony with the general purpose and intent hereof, so that the public health, safety and general welfare may be secured and substantial justice done. When considering a variance, the Planning Commission/ City Council shall make a trmding of fact and grant approval based upon the following conditions: A. Unique Conditions. That the conditions involved are unique to the particular parcel of land or use involved. B. Variation Purpose. That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the business involved. Planning Case Report 95-31 5 ~'~ ~'' January 2,. 1996 C~ C. Cause of Hardship. That the alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Sign Code and has not been created by any persons presently having an interest in the parcel. D. Effect of Variance. That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements to the neighborhood. E. Impairment of Light and Air. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or interfere with the function of the police and fire departments of the City. 14. In preparing this report staff have discovered several inconsistencies in the Sign Code between the application to single and multi-occupancy buildings. These include: the criteria for single occupancy buildings includes sections referring to side and rear wall signs and the criteria for multiple occupancy buildings does not include these standards. the criteria for single occupancy buildings makes allowances for signage if the entrance to a particular use in the principal building opens onto a side wall - the multiple occupancy sign standards do not. - the wall sign areas allowed per tenant (100 square feet) are not utilized to the full extent on the from of the building. Should the excess square footage be allowed on the side walls? RECOMMENDATION Staff is supportive of the Autohaus proposal to upgrade the signage, but requests direction from the Commission and Council as to whether these variance requests are reasonable, whether the Sign Code needs modification, or whether the petitioner should be requested to submit revised plans which more closely adhere to the Sign Code requirements. Attachments: Zoning/Address/Topo Maps Site Plans Pylon/Ground Sign Elevations Pylon/Ground Sign to be Removed (photo) North Building Elevation with Proposed Signs East Building Elevations with Proposed Signs West Building Elevations with Proposed Signs East/West Building Elevations with Proposed Signs Building Rendering with Canopies COOPER HleH SCHOOL SUNNY ~lOl' EI(~JND ND/ R.4 OOOL I-1 - ~, 72-112 AVE-.. ~ ~ ' ' 42 ND AVE. N. ROCKF OFFICE ~ . G, . qtlo I . -~ 4to~ 4~ ST SCHOOL t ~ ~ .' BUS ~oo I '~ ~a ~ ~17~ I I BETHEL CEMETERY 39TJ~ AVE N 914. 918.5 919.6 922.7 X 922.7 0 0 0 a 91~.0 91 912.8 ) x 19.1 916.0 '~ X ~ ~~ 903.2 930 ~ COUNTY ROAD o° NO. 9 ;1= ~ '~'" ".~ REUSE ~EXlSTING STRUCTURE ADD RADIUS END SHROUDS S m El CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning Case: 95-20 Request: Consideration of An Ordinance Amending the New Hope Zoning Code by Defining Understory and Overstory Trees and Modifying Landscaping Regulations for Semi-Public and Income Producing Property Location: PID No: Zoning: All Zoning Districts Petitioner: City of New Hope Report Date: December 29, 1995 Meeting Date: January 2, 1996 BACKGROUND 1. City staff and the Codes & Standards Committee are requesting informal consideration and discussion by the Planning Commission of the enclosed draft Ordinance Defining Understory and Overstory Trees and Modifying Landscaping Regulations for Semi-Public and Income Producing Property. If the Commission gives favorable cOnsideration to the ordinance, staff will proceed to publish a public hearing notice for formal consideration of the ordinance at the February 6th Planning Commission meeting. 2. The idea for this ordinance originated this past spring/summer with the Citizen Advisory Commission. At the May 15, 1996 Citizen Advisory Commission, a motion was unanimously passed to recommend to Council changes in City ordinances pertaining to trees. The following were their recommendations: A. Eliminate the list of suitable plant material from the ordinance 4.033(4)(b)(iv); B. Update the current list of trees prohibited on the public right of way and include reasons why these trees are on the list of ordinance 4.033(4)(b)(iii)(bb); C. Establish a list of trees prohibited on private property, including why the trees are on the list; D. Establish an ordinance to set up a hazardous tree program; and E. Establish a boulevard street tree maintenance program. The above recommendation came about after discussions with the City Forester over a two-month period. The topic originated from a resident's concern over a cottonwood tree planted in her neighbor's yard from which roots were beginning to grow into her yard. As it turned out, the neighbor cut down his tree so that situation has resolved itself. The discussion then turned to trying to prevent such a situation in the future while encouraging the planting of long-lived, hardy species. The City Council accepted these recommendations at the June 12th Council meeting and directed that the recommendations be reviewed/acted upon by the Planning Commission. Planning Case Report 95-20 2 ~'~:' ~' January 2, 1996 3. The Planning Consultant has worked in conjunction with the City Forester to prepare the enclosed reports on this issue. 4. The Codes & Standards Committee has discussed this topic at several Committee meetings and the City Attorney has prepared the enclosed draft ordinance in response to the Forester's, Planning Consultant's and Committee's recommendations. 5. The Codes & Standards Committee is particularly interested in input from the Design & Review Committee on this proposed ordinance, as the Design & Review Committee is routinely the level where landscaping plans are reviewed in detail. The D & R Committee has not yet reviewed the proposed ordinance, as they did not meet in December. 6. Please refer to the enclosed reports, ordinance and memos for more information. The Planning Consultant, City Attorney and City Forester will be present at the meeting to explain the proposed ordinance and answer your questions. Attachments: City Attorney 12/27 Correspondence & Proposed Ordinance Planning Consultant 11/14 Report Building Official 10/25 Memo Planning Consultant 10/19 Report 6/12 Council Request City Code Excerpts: Landscaping Ap~/May Citizen Advisory Commission Minutes Co~am~ & SO~rOW~LL, A~YS ~T LAW ~buf~ Exeaufive Office Plea 8525 ~b~ok Sui~ $203 Brookl~ P~k, ~nesom 5~3 December 28, 1995 Mr. Kirk McDonald Management Assi stent City of New Nope 4401 Xyton Avenue North New HOpe, MN 55428 RE: Amendment to Tree Ordinance Our File No; 99.49602 Dear Kirk: In follow up to my December 27, 1995 letter pleaee find enclosed an amended Ordinance No. 96-2. This orOtnance replaces the one ! faxed to you in my December 27, t995 correspondence. BaSically, Section 2 of tlqe ordirlance has been modified to eliminate the provlsion~ dealing with the City Forester's ability to cietermtne when certain prohibited trees and shrubs may be planted on the public right-oT-way0 The pro¥islon was defective in that it did not contain any guidelines for the City Forester to ?ollow tn making his determination when to approve or not to approve certain trees and shrubs for planting on the public right- of-way. As you know, this kind of absolute cltscretlon on the part of a City official could result in a zoning challenge on the legal theory that the City Forester's de~ieion making process wa~ arbitrary and capricious, The City Planner agreed with thi~ int e rpret at i on. To remedy this situation, we aectded to eliminate the provision giving the City Forester the right to allow certain prohibited plantings on the public right-of-ways and simply include those plantings in the overall list of prohibited trees for planting on the right-of-way set out in the ordinance. r Mr. Kirk McDonald Degember 28, 1995 Page 2 If you have any questions or comments regarding this change, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Steyen A. $ondrall slt2 Eno 1 oeu re cc: A1 Brixius, C~ty Planner DE0-28-95 THU 13:41 P, 04/06 ORDINANCE NO, 96-2 AN ORDINANCE AMEND[NG THE NEW HOPE ZONING CODE BY DEF[N[NG UNDERSTORY AND OVERSTORY TREES AND MODIFY/NG LANDSCAPING REGULATIONS FOR SEM/-PUBL[C AND [NOOME PRODUCING PROPERTY The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains: Seiki_on 1, Se=rich 4.022 (129A) "Trees~ Und,erstoc¥/Overstory" of the New Hope Code is hereOy adQed to read as follows: ~.29A) Trees, Understory/Overetory, (~)' Overstory -.A tree w~h a normal maSu~e h~t~ht o~ 25 feet or more. _(_h.[ Un~erstorv -.A ,.plant with a normal ma~u~e height of ~5 feet or le~. Section 2. Section 4.033 (4)(b)(iii) "T_y_o.e,s of suitable boulevara/str, eet. trees" of the New Hope Oity Code is hereby amen. ded ~-0 read as follows: (iii) T~"---~ ~,-~ ~,t----'..*~ lc Prohibited, boul ever,, street t ree.~ ..... , ._-____.. ~,A ~ ~ I DE0-28-95 THU 13:42 P, 05/06 T.he . fol lowine trees ~ speci fical ly prohibited within the public right'_. Of ;;c.~-' i~,~l;dc- Acer neoundo Box Elder Acer Saochari num Gin~o bi]~Da (?ema3e e~_.nk~o pn3y) Picea sp. Smruqe soeci,~s Pious sp.,_ P~ne species Po~ulus var(etie~) ~ODU3 us...~e3to~ ~es ,Pop,q] ua PODU~US P~eudotsuna so. Oou~]asfir soec~.e:& ~obi ne, oseudoRpaG~ a Black_ Looust Sa]ix ~ ....... ~-- soecfe_s Wtllow T~u~a so. Hemlock .spec~ e~ ~lmus speoies ..(_,9on- Elm d i sease U~derstqry deciduous a, nd_.con.f, ferous,,,trees and. shrubs Al l ;,;t Seq..tjon 3. Sections 4,033 (4)(b)(iv) "S~U_itable _.?last Hateri.a.l" through 4,033 (4)(b)(iv)(gg) "G.round-Cpver" of the New Hope City Coae is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 4. Section 4,033 (4)(b)(¥) "Des__~" of the New Nope City Code is hereby renumbered Section 4,033 (4)(b)(iv). Sec[ion 5. Eftective Date, This Ordinanoe shall be effective upon its passage and publication. Dated the day of , 1990, Edw. J, Erickson, Mayor At t est; Valerle Leone, City Clerk U~O-ZU-~O TMU 13:4Z P, 06/06 (Publislled in The New Hope-Golden V~tlley Sun-Post the day of , 1996, ) 3 Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. COMMUNITY PLANNING · D E SIGN.' · MARKET R E S E A R C H MEMORANDUM TO: Kirk McDonald -' FROM: Dan Sjordal/Alan Brixius DATE: 14November 1995 RE: New Hope -Changes to Tree Ordinance FILE NO: 131.00 - 95.26 Northwest Associated Consultants has received Doug Sandstad's comments/suggested refinements in relation to trees in the City's right-of-way (Exhibit A). The. purpose of the proposed revisions of the Zoning Ordinance was to update the requirements/restrictions of the ordinances and to give the citizens of New Hope greater flexibility in the options of choosing plant material. The proposed format and requirements were determined in meetings between the New Hope City Forester and Northwest Associated Consultants. Per Doug Sandstad's comments: "Common men and women' may have some difficulty understanding all the specific scientific names or terminology of the individual plantings. However, it has been our experience that when landscaping, zoning or building code terms are not fully understood, the "common person' seeks advice, or definition rather than assuming the issue is fully understood. When drafting any regulation, we attempt to use the most specific terminology available to reduce the variable interpretations or vagueness. The scientific names and terminology for landscape materials were utilized for the following reasons: 1. There can be different "common names", but only one scientific name. The most specific terminology is utilized to avoid discretionary decision making. 2. The use of the scientific name gives a specific point of reference that may be researched with a botanical dictionary, a professional nurseryman, landscape architect or City forester. 5775 Wayzata Blvd.-Suite 555. St. Louis Park, MN 55416-(612) 595-9636-Fax. 595-9837 · "Named Male Cultivars of the Ginkqo" There are several named male cultivars of the Ginkgo. They include: "Autumn Gold" Ginkgo "Fairmont" Ginkgo "Fastigiata" Ginkgo "Lakeview" Ginkgo .- "Mayfield" Ginkgo "Pendula" Ginkgo "Santa Cruz" Ginkgo All of these are male species. When a Ginkgo is purchased as just a "Ginkgo" there is a chance that the tree could be a female. As stated in NAC's OCtober 19, 1995 memorandum, the Female Ginkgo is undesirable because of its odorous seed. From "Manual of Woody Landscape Plants", Michael Dirt writes: The problem in determining the sex of Ginkgo is that they do not "fruit" until they are quite old (20 to 50 years). Always be lean/when buying unnamed clones for this reason alone. E.H. Wilson, the great plant explorer, observed numerous trees in China, Japan and Korea and stated that there is no difference in habit between male and female plants... Although this may be confusing to "common men and women", the ordinance has been prepared for the welfare of the citizens of New Hope, in as simple and susinct manner as possible. The Ginkgo is a stately boulevard tree that can withstand City conditions. If, however, it is decided that the information is too difficult to understand, the Ginkgo can be completely removed from the list. "AIIowin. Certain Poolars on the Boulevard", It is unclear by the memorandum whether Mr. Sandstad dOes not want to allow any poplars on the right-of-way, or whether Latin genus and species description may be to difficult for the general public to understand.. In practical terms; the ordinance allows for the planting of seedless Eastern Cottonwood and Aspens (Quaking and Bigtooth). Although these trees are not generally viewed as specimen trees, there are situations where the use of these trees would be appropriate and should not be removed from a list (see Exhibit B). When a planting plan is being reviewed by the Building Official or Forester, the appropriateness of this location of the tree should be considered. This 'pertains to Oaks and Maples as well as Aspens. 2 Removal of Conifers itl the Boulevard The proposed Section 4.033 (4) (bb) has.been worded to include conifers and understory deciduous and evergreens only if approved by the City Forester. The right-of-way can be more than the boulevard and in certain instances evergreens could be used effectively as a screen that does not effect site lines. Dudng meetings between the City Forester and NAC, safety obstructions were of primary concern. It was determined that where there are relatively few instances when conifers and understory deciduous plant material will be allowed within the right-of-way areas, but there are enough circumstances where it would be appropriate to allow for the possibility of such planting (see Exhibit B). pc: Doug Sandstad Tom Schuster Dan Donahue 3 Date: October 25, 1995 To: Kirk McDonald From: Douglas Sandstad, Building Official & Zoning Administrator Subject: NAC REPORT ON ZONING ORDINANCE (TREE) CHANGES +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I have .read the summary of various thoughts on tree regulations and suggest two refinements: * General Comment; City codes should· be understandable by "common men & women". What are "named male cultivers of the Ginkgo" ? (p.3) The idea of allowing certain poplars on the boulevard may mislead the public and presurnns that they acquire new trees with a latin genus & species name, rather than "common" name. * "Overstory/Understory" (p.4) I would recommend that no conifers be added to the list of approved boulevard plantings for safety-visibility reasons, alone ! Many instances exist where views are already obstructed on PRIVATE driveways for emerging vehicles and pedestrians. Allowing safety obstructions on PUBLIC land is not acceptable. [Curiously, I would recommend more plan[ing of conifers on private lands, away from driveways and sidewalks, in our new "New Hope Preferred Tree List".] cc: 'NAC~ Schuster file EXHIBIT A APPROPRIATE USE OF POPLAR AND CONIFER WITHIN CITY R.O.W. EXHIBIT B Northwest. Associated Consultants, Inc. C O M M U NIT Y L A N NI N G · D E S ~'*GN· MARKET R E S E A R C H MEMORANDUM TO: New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission FROM: Dan Sjordal/Tom Schuster '~" DATE: 19 October 1995 RE: New Hope - Zoning Ordinance - Trees PLANNING CASE NO: 95-20 NAC FILE NO: 131.00- 95-26 SUMMARY At the 15 May 1995 Citizen Advisory Commission, a motion was unanimously passed to recommend to Council changes in City ordinances pertaining to trees. The following are their recommendations: A. Eliminate the list of suitable plant material from the ordinance, Section 4.033(4)(b)(iv). B. Update the current list of trees prohibited on the public right-of-way and include reasons why these trees are on the list of Section 4.033(4)(b)(iii)(bb). C. Establish a list of trees prohibited on private property, including why the trees are on the list. D. Establish an ordinance to set up a hazardous tree program. E. Establish a boulevard street tree maintenance program. The above items came about after discussions with the City Forester over a two month period. The topic originated from a resident's concern over a cottonwood tree planted in her neighbor's yard from which roots were beginning to grow into her yard. As it turned out, the neighbor cut down his tree so that the situation has resolved itself. The discussion 5775 Wayzata Blvd.- Suite 555 · St. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636.Fax. 595-9837 then turned to trying to prevent such a situation in the future while encouraging the planting of long-lived, hardy species. Attached for reference: Exhibit A - Draft Ordinance Exhibit B - Preferred Tree List Draft RECOMMENDATION During the September 14th staff meeting and subsequent meetings on September 20 and 27 with Northwest Associated Consultants and Tom Schuster, City Forester of the City of New Hope, a review of the Citizens Advisory Commissions recommendations per Code were made: A. Eliminate the list of suitable plant material from the Ordinance, Section 4.033 (4) (b) iv. The current "suitable" plant material list found in the ordinance is limited and outdated. The listing of suitable plant material puts unnecessary limits upon landscape designers. There are many species of plants that are not listed within the list that are valuable trees and shrubs in the landscape. A planting design for semi-public and all income producing property currently requires City approval (4.033 (4) (b)) and a one year guarantee (4.033 (4) (b) (v) (fl)) which is an adequate existing control measure for planting design within the City. Another control measure within the Zoning Ordinance is the listing of prohibited trees on the public right-of-way. A preferred tree list has been prepared for the residents of New Hope. This list is to be used for informational purposes and is a substitute for the list of suitable plant material removed from the ordinance (see Exhibit B). B. Update the current list of trees prohibited on the public right-of, way and include reasons why these trees are on the list of Section 4.033 (4) (b) (iii) (bb). The existing list of prohibited right-of-way trees should include trees that can be problematic because of poor resistance to disease, excessive maintenance requirements, invasive rooting habit, cleanliness or litter problems, and trees that can have negative effect on surrounding properties. The following trees should be added to the list of those p~°hibited from the right-of-way. Gink~ao: Ginka_o Biloba {Female only.}. Although the female species of this plant is unlikely available, the odor that the female seed emits is very unpleasant and could effect the surrounding area. The male species is a wonderful street tree and should be utilized more often, but only named male cultivers of the plant should be allowed. Black I,,ocust: Robinia Pseudoacacia. This species is inappropriate as a right-of- way tree because of its tendencies to develop into thickets as it freely seeds and develops shoots from roots. The following trees should be deleted from the list of prohibited trees in the right-of-way. Red Maple: Acer Rubrum. Although this tree can be effected by City conditions, it is othenvise a very suitable tree for right-of-way use. It should not be considered prohibited. Tree of Heaven: Ailanthus Altissima. Although this tree has little to no value as a street tree, it is not available from nurseries and should not be considered threatening to the City. Northern Catalpa: Catalpa SDeciosa. This species is also generally unavailable. The City of New Hope has few known examples of this tree within the City limits and the unlikely addition of this plant material would not be negative to the City. Poplar; po_oulus/_Varieties). Although there are several varieties of poplar that should not be allowed to be planted within the right-of-way, there are varieties that are not detrimental to use. The listing should include the species that are prohibited instead of grouping all of the varieties of Popular together. The listing of trees that should not be allowed within the right, of-way include: Non-hybrid Cottonwood Species: Populus Deltoides White Poplar. Populus Alba (and varieties) t.0mbardy Poplar. Populus Nigra "Italics" The non-hybrid Cottonwood species and the White Poplar are trees that are very messy because of their "cotton" and weak wood. The Lombardy Poplar is a species that is easily diseased and has a very short life expectancy, 3 Elm: Ulmus Varieties. There are several cultiver~of Elm that have shown a great resistance to Dutch Elm Disease. The disease is the reason that the species is found on the list. All of the varieties should not be prohibited if there are some with disease resistance. C. Establish a list of trees prohibited on private property, including why the trees are on the list. D. Establish an Ordinance to set up a hazardous tree program. The City staff determined that, although there are certain trees that should not be allowed within the City, the City should not prohibit the installation of these trees on private land or establish an ordinance for hazardous trees. The listing of trees in the Zoning Ordinance may force the City to become involved in liability and enforcement problems that should not be a City issue. Rather than a list of prohibited trees, the City staff has prepared a list of trees that are preferred in the City of New Hope (see Exhibit B). The list would be available to residents and could be updated and reviewed periodically. Also shown on the list are those trees that are prohibited in the right-of-way. E. Establish a boulevard street tree maintenance program. These items are not a planning issue and should be addressed within the Public Works budget. OverstorylUndersto~. Plantina_s Site lines and pedestrian safety concerns make it advisable to allow only deciduous overstory trees in the public right-of-way. There are some right-of-way instances where overstory coniferous and understory deciduous and coniferous trees and shrubs may be appropriate. The Zoning Ordinance should allow for this possibility in Section 4.033 (4) (b) (iii) (bb-cc). The following should be added to the Ordinance: 4 bb.Trees specifically prohibited within the public right'of-way un/ess approval is given by the City Forester include: Abies sp. Fir Species Picea sp. Spruce Species Pinus sp. Pine Species Pseudotsuga sp. Douglas§r Species Tsuga sp. Hemlock Species Understory Deciduous and Coniferous trees cc. Coniferous and deciduous shrubs are specifically prohibited within the public right- of-way un/ess approval is given by the City Forester. OverstorylUndersto~ Definition If the revisions listed above are made to the Zoning Ordinance, new definitions would be required under Section 4.02 for Overstory and Understory Trees. The following definitions should be added under the title: Trees, Overstory/Understory:: Oversto~_ . A tree with a normal mature height of 25 feet or more. ~ A plant with a normal mature height of 25 feet or less. CONCLUSION The recommended changes to the Zoning Ordinance are consistent with the recommendations of the New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission. We would recommend that the City forward the Draft Ordinance to the City Attorney to make the final changes required. DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 4.022 (129) AND 4.033 (4) (b) (iii-iv) OF THE NEW HOPE CITY CODE REGULATING REQUIRED LANDSCAPING FOR SEMI-PUBLIC AND ALL INCOME PRODUCING PROPERTY USES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW HOPE ORDAINS: ~ Section 4.022 (129a) Trees, of the New Hope Zoning Ordinance is hereby added to read as follows: (129a) Trees, Understory/Overstory 1. Overstory - A tree with a normal mature height of 25 feet or more. 2. Understory - A plant with a normal mature height of 25 feet or less. ~_¢/J.GJ~_~ Section 4.033 (4) (iii-iv) of the New' Hope Zoning Ordinance shall be amended to read as follows: ~ .......... ~__ ,._~___ ~_~, (iii) (aa) Trees specifi~lly prohibited within the public right.f-way include: Acer negundo Box Elder Acer saccharinum Silver Maple Ginkgo biloba (female only) Ginkgo Populus atba (and varieties) White Poplar Populus deltoides (non-hybrid) Populus deltoides Populus nigra 'ltalica' Lombardy Poplar "-' Robina pseudoacacia Black Locust Salix species Willow Ulmus species (non-disease Ulmus resistant) (bb) Trees specifically prohibited within the public right-of-way unless approval is given by the City Forester include: Abies sp. Fir species Picea sp. Spruce species Pinus sp. Pine species Pseudotsuga sp. Douglasfir species Tsuga sp. Hemlock species Understory deciduous and coniferous trees. (cc) Coniferous and deciduous shrubs are specifically prohibited within the public right-of-way unless approval is given by the City Forester. (aa) ..... :- dunlp~ru~ ..J~.dl IIJ,./ql %dq.,~ VI III I~q,~lq, J~ q~t~%,,4%l I~i I~ %,,/%J%.d%l Iql Id,V .Jill IIJ,,/~;~l i[ "~.t."l--,.J--l--g, ,A IT I----;--&:~--~ iJl----I I III(:~T~QII,.)I Ii.IQ ~ V Cai I~l.l~O/ iVl~.,/~.~f~.]l Gal I~ -r-..,: .... ., ..... Cr~n~p:,r~" L:-~-- -~-:,: .... ., ..... ._.,___.~,,, :_.,._ ,.-, ........ __,.._,._:_ .,-,:_, ~...,. ilIQB~dI~ [%./ !,~1 ~V~I I% ~1%,~Ol~dll ,-~,n" ---:-- :-v ,.~ ..."~r:----'- , .......n.- ,- ....- -,.- $~dum Acr~ ' :"- "' ......... My;t: ~ection 3. Effectiv® Data. This Ordinanc~ shall be eff~-"tive upon its passage and publication. Dated the day of 1995. Edw. J. Erickson, Mauor Attest: Valerie Leone, City Clerk (Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun-Post the day of 1995) 4 PREFERRED TREE LIST DRAFT The following tree list has been compiled by the New Hope City Forester to aid residents in the selection of trees that are acceptable in the City of New Hope. There are a number of important considerations when selecting trees that include: · Hardiness Cleanliness/Litter Problems · Mature Size Rooting Habit · Salt Tolerance Maintenance Requirements ',.... · Pest Disease Resistance Soil Compatibility Based upon these considerations, the 'following plant materials are deemed suitable for planting in New Hope. Those trees recommended for planting within the public right-of- way are indicated with an "R" (R). Those trees prohibited from the right-of-way have the post script "P". (P). The planting of understory deciduous trees and coniferous trees (overstory and understory) are prohibited within the public right-of-way unless approval is given by the City Forester. The plant materials that have been noted with an asterisk (*) are identified as undesirable species. The lists are broken down into both overstory and understory deciduous and coniferous trees and their cultivars. OVERSTORY DECIDUOUS TREES Acer x freemanii - Freeman Maple R Acer platanoides - Norway Maple Acer rubrum - Red Maple P* Acer saccharinum - Silver Maple Acer saccharum - Sugar Maple R Aesculus glabra - Ohio Buckeye R Betula nigra - River Birch Betula papyrifera - Paper Birch P* Catalpa speciosa -Northem Catalpa R Celtis occidentalis - Common Hackberry Fraxinus americana - White Ash Fraxinus nigra - Black Ash R Fraxinus pennsylvania - Green Ash R Ginkgo biloba - Ginkgo (Male Only) R Gleditsia triacanthos var. inermis - Thomless Honeylocust Gymnocladus diocia - Kentucky Coffeetree Larix species - Larch R Ostrya virginiana - Ironwood (Hophombeam) Phellodendron species - Corktree * Sorbus aucuparia - European Mountain Ash Syringa reticulata - Japanese Tree Lilac Viburnum lantana - Wayfaring Tree Viburnum Viburnum lentago - Nannyberry Vibumu OVERSTORY CONIFEROUS TREES Abies balsamea - Balsam Fir Abies concolor - White Fir Picea abies - Norway Spruce -,.. Picea glauca - White Spruce Picea pungens - Colorado Spruce Pinus cembra - Swiss Stone Pine Pinus koraiensis - Korean Pine Pinus nigra - Austrian Pine Pinus ponderosa - Ponderosa Pine Pinus resinosa - Norway Pine Pinus strobus - Eastern White Pine Pinus sylvestris - Scotch Pine Pseudotsuga menziesii - Douglasflr Tsuga canadensis - Canadian Hemlock UNDERSTORY CONIFEROUS TREES Juniperus dhinesis - Chinese Upright Juniper Juniperus scopulorum - Rocky Mountain Juniper Juniperus virginiana -Eastem Red Cedar Pinus mugo - Mugo Pine Thuja occidentalis - American Arborvitae ./ COUNCIL REQI/EST FOR ACTION Originating Department Approved for Agenda - . . Age,nda Section unrin~sned a Parks and Recreation /~une 12, 1995 0rg. Business Item No. ay: Shari French By:. 11.1 DISCUSSION OF ORDINANCE CHANGES PERTAINING TO TREES RECOMMENDED BY CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMISSION At the May 15, 1995 Citizen Advisory Commission, a motion was u~animously passed to recommend to Council changes in city ordinances pertaining to trees. The following is their recommendation: Eliminate the list of suitable plant mater'ial from the ordinance 4.033 (4) (b) (iv); Update the current list of trees prohibited on the public right of way and include reasons Why these trees are on the list of ordinance 4.033 (4) (b) (iii) (bb); Establish a list of trees prohibited on private property, including why the trees are on the list; Establish an ordinance to set up a hazardous tree program; and Establish a boulevard street tree maintenance program. The above recommendation came about after discussions with the City Forester over a two month period. The topic orginated from a resident's concern over a cottonwood tree planted in her neighbor's yard from which roots were beginning to grow into her yard. As it turned out, the neighbor cut down his tree so that situation has resolved itself. The discussion then turned to trying to prevent such a situation in the future while encouraging the planting of long-lived, hardy species. Mo'noNs' s co.o Review:. Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 4.033 (4)(a) Raoutred Landacaotna - General ~aetdenti&l. The lot area ramalntng after Drovtdtng for off-atree~ parktng, off-atrea~ loading acceptable vegetation or treatment generally uaed ~n landecaaing. ~encea or treea Dlaced uDOn utility eaaamente are mubjmc~ to removal tf required ~or the maintenance or imDrovemen: of the u:tltty. (The ~lanttng of large :reea ie no~ recommended un,er overhead wtral}. 4-22~ 07268A I 4.033(4)~)(i)- (ii)~dd) i (=~ R~qu£:ed Landsce~£n~ - Sem~-Publ£c and a~l income p~o~e:=y-use=. Prior to approval sE a:~u~ld~ng perm£t,Pr°du=~n'I f o: =Re aUove us=s s~all be subject to a mandatory Landscape Plan requirement. Said Landscape Plan should ~ developed wit~ an ~mpha$£s upon the ~ollowing areas= The boundary o= perimeter of the proposed s~te at points adjoinin9 another ex£st£ng or proposed site or · ites: the £mmed~ate perimeter of the structure or bu£ldAng a~ points of £te placement on the e£te! and the public boulevard areas at poAnts o£ inter,ace with s=reets or sidewalk areas of the city. Ali landscapgng incorporated in a Landscape Plan shall conform to the ~ollowing standards and i (Code 0726841 ({) Minimum Plant S£zes. Ali plants must equal not less than the following m£n£mum sizes= i Potted/ Balled/ Bare Root Hurle~Ded Shade Tries* i 3/4" dia. 2" i Russian Ol£ve, ~awthorn etc.) Evergreen Trees '' 3-4 ft. Tall Shrubs and Hedge 3-~ ~t. 3-4 i material (evergreen or deciduous)- Low S~rubs - deciduous 3 gallon 3 gallon evergreen 18-24 in. 24-30 inches ~._ , .pr.ad£ng pott.d 18-24 ,nch.. evergreen Type and mode are dependent upon time of planting i season, avai~a~il£ty, and s£=e coed{=ions (soils,. cl£me:e, ground va=er, man-mede irrigation, grading, etc. · ~ll bo=~evard trees mus= be not less than 2 1/2 inches i in caliper. ~. ¢~i) Soacinq. (aa) Trees shall not be placed closer than ~lVe eeet ~rcm the ~ance line or property line and shall not i be planted to con~l£ct with public planting. :=~ (bb) #here plant materials ara planted in two or more :Z.. rows, plant~ngs shell be staggered in rob1 unless I .. otherwise approved by the City. (cc) .~eciduous boulevard trees shall be planted not i more then forty ~eet apart. Cdd) ?ree-l~ke shrubs sha~l be plen~ed not more than ten (10) ~eet on center. I ' 072664 4.033 (4) (b) (ii) (ee) lee) La'~ge deciduous shrubs shall be Planted not more "' ~.hafl five ($) feet off center. (ff) Narrow evergreens shall be plan=ed not more than three (3) feet on center. Maes£ng of plants where screening is intended, large deciduous shrubs shall not be planted more than four feet. on center, and/or, evergreen shrubs shall not be planted more than three feet on center. 4-23A 0?2584 Types of su£:able bou[evard/scre~c"treeq. The only ~c:ees p~:m~ss£nle fo:. planting on the public waV sha!l be as follows: Fraxinus pennsylvanica Fraxiflus penflsylva~ica ~iflden= Tilia Corda~a 'Greeflspire' T£~ia Cordaca 'Redmond' Maple: Acer platanoldea 'Norway' · Acer pla~afloides 'Royal Red' Acer Saccharum 'Sugar* Oak: Quer¢~e plluecris 'Pin' Quercue Rubra 'Northern Red* righ~ o~ ray inc%ude= 'Acer negundo B~ Elder · cer rubrum R~ Maple ~cer SaccharL~ S~lver Maple Ulmus (varieties) Elm Popu~us (varieties) Poplar (lflcl~lng Co::oflwo~) Salix (varie~ies Willow ~lan:hus al:issiu Tree c~ Heaven ~u~able Plan: ~a~er~al. The ~ollov~flg plafl~er~al /~s permi~ ~or plafl~ng ~cep~ on ~he ~bLic righ~- o~-way where only the ~rees identi~l~ in S 4.033 (aa) Evergreen Trees. Four (4) o~ five (S) ~eet AMes Concolor Concolor ~ Wh~e Pin~8 ~gra A~CEA~ Pine Ptn~ aes~nosa n~ P~ne Plnus S~=obus Wh~e Pine P/n~ Sylves~ris Sco~ch Pine Plcea Glauca UhL~e Spruce Thu3a ~cidencalis - Plc~ Pungeno ~luca Color.s BLue Spruce . Picea Glauca Oensa~ Black HiLls Spruce (bbl Narr~ ~er~reens J~lpe~us Scopulo~m "Welchi" Welchi Juniperus Virqiniana PyramidaLis Hilli Dundee 3~per 0~2~84 4.033 "Pyraaidal£s' Jun£per ( '/ Thux& Occiden~aLis Columnar G~ant ~rborvi~ae Taxus Cuspida~a Japanese Yew Thuja Orientali$ O~ien~al (Siberian) Arbor Thuja Occiden~alis 'Techny' Techny Junperus Chines£s "Southerly" Southerly Juniper _-' (cc) SDreading Evergreens Juniperus Sabine Sevin Juniper Juniperus Chin.sis "Maneyi" Maneyi Juniper Juniperus Chin.sis Pfi~zer or Blue "pfi%zeriana" (Blue) Pfi~zer Juniper Juniper.us Sabine Sevin Juniper Juniper.us He=z( Hetzi Juniper Juniper.us Virgin(ann Silver Spreader 3uniper Taxus Cusp£da=a Japanese Spreader Juniper Juniperus Horizon=elis · Plum. sa" And.rte Juniper (dd) small Trees Malus (varieties Flowering Crabapple Lilac [Syringe Amurensis Japonica) Japanese Tree Lilac Maple (Acer Ginnala) Ginnala maples Canada Red Cherry Prunua Virginiana Am'ar Chokecherry Prunus Maacki (ee) Large Oec£duous Shrubs Pbysocarpua OpulLfolius "~ureus" Goldlea~ Niflebark Viburnum (Varie=ies) Viburnum' Syringe (varieties) Lilac Co=oeaster (Varieties) Co~oneaster Liqustrum (Varieties) privet - Hmafunelie (Varieties) Wltchhazel L~niceral (Varieties) Honeysuckle .philadelphus (varieties) Mock. range PrUnus Cis~efla Purple Leal Cherry (f~) Large Deciauous Tree~ · . Fraxinum pennsylvan£ca "Perm.reS ASh Fraxinum pennsylvanica "Sufistli~" Ash Tllia Cordage "~reenspire" Linden Tilia Cordaca "Redmond" Linden Acer pla~anoides "Norway" Maple Acer platen.ides "Royal Red" maple Acer Saccharum "Sugar" Maple Ouercua paluscris "pin" Oak Quercus Rubra "NorC~er~ Red" Oa~ 4o24A CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 Citizen Advisory Commission April 17, 1995 Regular Meeting City Hall, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair Rubin at 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Rt~bin introduced Anthony Brown, the newly appointed member of the Citizen Advisory Commission to the Commissioners. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Brown, Collier, Devine, Farmer, Fluke, Rubin, and Shapiro. Absent: None. Staff Present: Ms. Shari French, Staff Liaison Tom Schuster, City Forester APPROVAL OF Motion was made by Commissioner Devine, seconded by Commissioner MINUTES Farmer, to approve the Regular Meeting minutes of March 20, 1995 with minor revisions to page four. Ellen Carlson, a New Hope resident for 17 years, addressed the COTTONWOOD TREES~ Commission. She expressed her concerns over her neighbor's cottonwood tree, which is planted on a five or six foot strip of land adjacent to her --~ ~_~./. property. She is afraid the root system will take over her yard. She also does not consider it a safe tree, and is concerned because of its proximity to her house. Mrs. Carlson added that she spoke to someone at the Robbinsdale Parks Department who informed her that Robbinsdale residents are not permitted to plant cottonwood trees because they are considered unsafe. Commissioner Shapiro questioned whether there are any ordinances in the City of New Hope against planting certain trees or whether a permit is required prior to planting. Ms. French responded no. Tom Schuster, City Forester, stated New Hope City Code includes language that prohibits planting cottonwood trees on the boulevards or other public right-of-ways, but does not pertain to private property. He mentioned that he discussed this issue with his peers from' the Cities of Eagan, Apple · Valley, Crystal, and Plymouth. He stated that two of these communities have ordinances which prohibit the planting of non-hybrid (bearing cotton) cottonwood trees within city limits. He added that there is no ordinance against planting hybrid (bearing no cotton) cottonwood trees, but noted that they are considered weak trees. ~ New Citizen Commission April 17, 1995 Hope Advisory Page 1 Mrs. Carlson added that if cottonwood trees cannot be banned in the City of New Hope there ShoUld be a rule against having them s° close to someone's house. Commissioner Shapiro asked about controlling the growth of the tree. Mr. Schuster responded that a tree is most healthy when it's allowed to. maintain its normal growth. He added that pruning a cottonwood tree would rid the tree of branches that might be affected by the wind, yet allow the remaining branches to reach their normal adult size. Mrs. CaHson questioned whether there was an ordinance regarding branches extending over the roof of her house. Mr. Schuster replied that that is a legal question that he is not prepared to answer, but noted that in other cities a City Forester can identify a tree as hazardous and mandate its removal. He added that a branch extending over a residence is not considered hazardous, and until the tree becomes a problem, there's very little a City Forsstsr can do. Commissioner Shapiro asked Mrs. Carlson if there were any power lines near her neighbor's tree. Mrs. Carlson responded that there were not, but noted it is close to her gasline. She added that she knew' of an incident in Plymouth where the roots of a tree had invaded the foundation of a house. Commissioner Farmer suggested cutting the roots of the tree to contain the spread of the root system into Mrs. Carlson's yard. Mr. Schuster added that branches can be removed from the root system of a tree without harming the tree. He noted that there is a very minor loss of stability of the tree. Commissioner Devine asked Mrs. Carlson whether her neighbor understands her concerns. Mrs. Carlson responded yes. She added that she would like to see an article in the City Newsletter about being considerate when you plant. Commissioner Collier inquired as to whether the gas company would trim the roots of a tree if they're close to a gasline, just as the power company trims branches that are close to power lines. Mr. Schuster responded that he was not aware of any root pruning that had been done to prevent a tree from becoming a problem in a utility. Regarding overhanging branches, Mr. Schuster mentioned that Mrs. Carlson · may be able to remove the portion of the tree that's over her yard, provided it does not harm the health of the tree. New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission April 17, 1995 Page 2 .. Commissioner Rubin questioned whether any of the cities Mr. Schuster had communicated with had ordinances regarding planting distances from ~ property line. Mr. Schuster responded that he was not aware of any ordinances to that effect. He added that in Eagan cottonwood trees cannot be introduced to properties where they do not already exist. Commissioner Rubin inquired whether the City of New Hope has any ordinances restricting the planting of certain types of trees. Mr. Schuster stated that there is a list of seven prohibited trees from public right-of-way. All poplar trees, including cottonwoods, are on that list. Commissioner Rubin suggested thatthe Citizen Advisory Commission assist Mr. Schuster in reviewing current ordinances and providing the City Council with suggestions for revising those ordinances. Mr. Schuster responded favorably to that suggestion. Mr. Shapiro suggested that Mrs. Carlson contact Minnegasco regarding inspecting the roots in her yard. Commissioner Fluke asked Mrs. Carlson what her neighbor's reaction has been to this situation. Mrs. Carlson stated that last summer she expressed her concerns to her neighbor, but he did not respond. She added that her neighbor's wife denies the tree produces cotton, even though Mrs. Carlson saw it hanging from the tree. Mrs. carlson showed pictures of her neighbor's tree and its proximity to her property. Commissioner Collier asked if it would be possible to have someone from the City check with Minnegasco to see what their policy is. Mr. Schuster agreed to check with Minnegasco. Commissioner Rubin again offered the suggestion that the Citizen Advisor,/ Commission review current ordinances with Mr. Schuster and wondered if the City Attorney should be involved. Ms. French said that she would find out at what point the City Attorney would need to get involved. Commissioner Collier asked if there was an ordinance in New Hope that states that a tree must be planted a minimum of so many feet from a neighbor's property line. New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission ' April 17, 1995 Page 3 .' Mr. Schuster ~sp0~ded that in reviewing the ordinance several times, he did not recall to that effect. seeing language Commissioner Collier thought it was an excellent suggestion to include an article in the City Newsletter. Commissi'oner Shapiro asked about submitting an article to the New Hope/Golden Valley Post Newspaper. Mr. Schuster agree.d that it was a good idea. He added that he and Crystal City Forester, Marcia Holmberg would like to work with Cable TV to put together a monthly program on tree care tips. Commissioner Brown asked whether there would be the same problem if the cottonwood tree is removed and replaced with another tree. Mr. Schuster responded that a characteristic of the bottomland species is a root system which grows close to the surface. He added that to avoid this problem would require avoiding eastern cottonwoods, the willow species, and silver maples. DISCUSSION OF PARK Fred Tunks, a New Hope resident, addressed the Commission. He MAINTENANCE expressed his concern over the lack of maintenance given to the plants along 42nd Avenue. He also stated that he would like to see some type of shrubbery, such as lilacs or honeysuckle, placed around the satellites at Northwood Park to make them less visible. He also mentioned that he had heard a rumor that the path at Northwood Park was going to be lighted. In closing, Mr. Tunks added that he would like to see a stairway built leading up to Winnetka Avenue from Northwood Park. Ms. French informed the Commission that the shrubbery along 42nd Avenue was planted approximately 1987, and was supposed to have been maintained by the property owners, but that did not always happen. Mr. Schuster stated that Ardel Industries, which is located on the north side of 42nd Avenue just west of the railroad tracks, had previously requested that no shrubbery be planted in front of their building. He noted that the property on the south side of 42nd Avenue between Nevada Avenue and the railroad tracks was not originally included in the project, but was later added. The landscape contractor agreed to maintain it as well. He stated that the plants there are surrounded by a bed of mulch that's full of weeds and debris. Mr. Schuster stated that the City's plan is to clean up the planting bed on the south side of 42nd Avenue. A contractor will be responsible for the maintenance on all the plantings. He added that the City hopes to do the same thing in front of Ardel Industries, but it will depend on the new occupants. Mr. Schuster stated that there are ten · planters beside the bus benches along 42nd Avenue. This spring the City plans to plant annual flowers and assign the seasonal park personnel the responsibility of maintaining those flowers. He added thatthe maintenance of all new plants installed last year is still the responsibility of the contractor who installed them. New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission April 17, 1995 Page 4 CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 Citizen Advisory' commission May 15, 1995 Regular Meeting City Hall, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair Rubin at 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Brown, Collier, Devine, Rubin, and Shapiro. Absent: Commissioners Farmer and Fluke (both excused). Staff Present: Ms. Shari French, Staff Liaison Tom Schuster, City Forester CommisSioner Rubin informed the Commissioners that Commissioner Fluke is moving to Plymouth and is resigning from the Citizen Advisory Commission. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion was made by Commissioner Collier, seconded by Commissioner Shapiro, to approve the revised Regular Meeting minutes of March 20, 1995. Voting in favor: Commissioners Brown, Collier, Devine, Rubin, and Shapiro. Opposed: None. Motion carried. Motion was made by Commissioner Collier, seconded by Commissioner Shapiro, to approve the Regular Meeting minutes of April 17, 1995 as * --~ritten. All present voted in favor. Motion carried. DISCUSSION OF TREES AND .Tom Schuster, City Forester, stated that he would like to see all information SHRUBS .on tre~jIs combined into one section of the City code. He stated that he is ~k~ ~.sted in re-categorizing the different species of trees, but would find ~.~ _.---~- it difficult to prohibit certain trees. · Commissioner Collier stated that he is concerned that there are no restrictions on planting proximity to a property line, and suggested planting shrubs, rather than trees, when planting close to a property line. Commissioner Rubin added that he would like to see some guidelines which would apply to future planting.. Mr. Schuster stated that it may be a good idea to set up special parameters near property lines for trees with a wide-spreading root system. These would include silver maple, box elder, cottonwood and willow. He added that he advocates a regular tree maintenance program for trees along the boulevards. He feels that pruning should be handled contractually or with city crews to ensure uniformity. Commissioner Rubin questioned whether this issue has been addressed with city staff or the council in the past. New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission May 15, 1995 Page 1 Mr. Schuster responded that he has discussed the matter with the Public W~rks Superintendent, but has not formally addressed the City Council or staff. Commissioner Devine asked if many cities used this type of tree maintenance program. Mr. Schuster answered that he thought so. Commissioner Rubin asked about the costs of such a project. Mr. Schuster responded that he has seen the contract the City of Cr~stal sent to potential bidders, He believes they are budgeting $15,000-20,000 per year for this project. Commissioner Rubin inquired as to whether the contract included areas around sidewalks. Mr. Schuster answered that he believes it does. He reminded the Commissioners that this contract pertains to boulevard and trail trees, and does not address backyard trees (as in Mrs. Carlson's situation}. Commissioner Collier added that it would be good to have these ordinances for situations in which problems cannot be resolved on a neighborly basis. Commissioner Shapiro informed the Commissioners of his situation with his neighbor's Russian olive tree, which hangs mostly over his yard. He added that sometimes a mutual agreement cannot be reached, and additional steps must be taken, including pruning or removing the tree at your own expense. Commissioner Rubin asked Mr. Schuster how the Russian olive is categorized. Mr. Schuster responded that some people consider the Russian olive a nuisance tree, while others think it's beautiful. He noted the City code does not include language that describes a hazardous tree situation, or requires removal. If there were an ordinance, trees that are defective could be condemned. He added that the Department of Natural Resources has a booklet describing the different types of tree defects. Commissioner Collier questioned' whether other cities have guidelines outlining the characteristics of a hazardous tree. Mr. Schuster informed the Commission that a well-documented procedure would be followed. He explained that in New Hope, because there is not an ordinance pertaining to hazardous trees, he would write a letter to the 'New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission May 15, 1995 Page 2 property owner advising them of a hazardous tree situation and recommend a plan of action to make the tree safe again {pruning/removal). He added.~.~ that the letter serves to notify the property owner that he/she is responsibl~ for any damage caused by not correcting the defect. Commissioner Rubin stated that he would like to see an ordinance which includes a deadline for removal of a hazardous tree once it has been condemned by the City. Mr. Schuster replied that he thought it Was a good idea. He suggested a 20-day time limit, which is what is allowed for a diseased elm. He added that if a tree is identified as being a hazardous tree, the entire cost of removing that tree would be the responsibility of the property owner. Trimming roots would be done at the expense of the person who wants them trimmed, since shallow roots are not considered a hazard. Mr. Schuster stated that he did check with Minnegesco, and was informed that they never do root pruning on trees. He informed the Commissioners that in Eagan, Williams Bros. Pipeline cut down trees within their easement as a preventative measure to ensure the root systems would not rupture the nearby pipeline, should the trees topple. Commissioner Rubin asked Mr. Schuster whether any agencies list or define nuisance trees. Mr. Schuster explained that literature is available from different sources, including the University of Minnesota and Northern States Power. He added that trees that are usually found on prohibited tree lists include female ginkgos, box elders, eastern cottonwoods, and non-disease resistant elm trees. Ma. French questioned whether those lists pertained to private property as well aa public. Mr. Schuster responded that in the City of New Hope it's only on public property, but some cities have the same list for private property. Commissioner Rubin asked if it would be appropriate for the Citizen Advisory Commission to address prohibiting certain trees from the public right-of-way. Mr. Schuster stated that if a prohibited tree list were produced, it should be consistent with the lists of the surrounding cities. Commissioner Collier wondered whether Mr. Schuster knew if the cities of Robbinsdale, Golden Valley, Crystal, or Plymouth had a prohibited tree list for public and private property. Mr. Schuster responded that the City of Crystal has a list of trees prohibited from both public and private property. He added that he did not know how long their list had been enacted. New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission May 15, 1995 Page 3 Mr. Schuster mentioned that some public property sites may be best suited for a cottonwood tree or a maple tree. He cited a wetland area as an example. Commissioner Collier added that all existing trees should remain in place, should an ordinance be placed into effect; Commissioner Brown stated that he beiieves people sometimes plant a poorly suited tree because they do not fUlly understand the characteristics of that tree when they plant. He cited Mrs. Carlson's neighbor as an -. example. '~'~ Commissioner Rubin asked Mr. Schuster if area nurseries would work with the City to make sure they wouldn't sell prohibited trees. Mr. Schuster felt the nurseries would cooperate. He added that they must also comply with Department of Agriculture restrictions. Commissioner Shapiro asked if the City newsletter offered residents a phone number they could call regarding planting trees on private property. Mr. Schuster mentioned that it is a good idea, but added that it's difficult to get people to read the articles. He stated that some cities require the homeowner to obtain a permit to plant along the boulevard. The tree would then become the responsibility of the homeowner. He noted that this gives the City some control in what's planted along the boulevard. Ms. French stated that Plymouth does not allow trees along the boulevard. She asked what action would be taken if a tree were planted on the boulevard, regardless of the ordinance. Mr. Schuster responded that unless someone complained, it may not even be noticed. He added that if a tree is noticed in a prohibited area, the homeowner would be encouraged to transplant it. He informed the Commissioners that on many streets in New HOpe the boulevard is defined as property 15 feet in front of a home. Commissioner Devine referred to the City Ordinance and asked if the list of trees on page 4-24 (Box Elder, Red Maple, Silver Maple, Elm, Poplar, Willow, Tree of Heaven, Northern Catalpa} ara specifically prohibited. Mr. Schuster confirmed that they were, and added that they are only prohibited on public right of way, which would not include parks, outlets or easements. MOTION Commissioner Devinb made a motion to revise the ordinance to include prohibiting the above-mentioned trees on private property. Commissioner Rubin suggeat, ed that the Commissioners come to an agreement on which points they would like to address, then present an itemized list of recommendations to the City Council. New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission May 15, 1995 Page 4 Commissioner Devine withdrew his:motion. Commissioner Collier stated that he would like to see some type o~ hazardous tree ordinance to protect a homeowner from a neighbor's tree that appears so unstable it may fall on their house. He is concerned that action does not have to be taken until the tree actually causes damage. Ms. French mentioned that perhaps the Building Official may be able to get involved in a hazardous tree situation. Commissioner Rubin stated that he has three items that he would like to see addressed to the City Council. They include hazardous trees, prohibited trees (expanding to include the private sector), and either city or contractual maintenance of the boulevard area. He asked the Commissioners if they had anything to add. Commissioner Brown expressed concern that a resident may use a hazardous tree ordinance to get even with their neighbor for an incident not specifically related to the tree. Mr. Schuster stated that the parameters for hazardous tree designation are clearly defined, so if a tree is inspected and is not unstable, no action is warranted. Commissioner Shapiro stated that the prohibited tree list has to be clearly defined, possibly including an explanation as to why these trees aren't allowed. Commissioner Rubin questioned whether the City of Crystal's list .of prohibited trees for both public and private property is the same as New Hope's list. Mr. Schuster responded that in the City of Crystal, not more than 50% of the required number of trees must be composed of one species. He added that the following trees are prohibited: Non-resistant elm trees, box eider, ali popisr tree., and the female ginkgo. He noted that it does not mention maple trees. Commissioner Collier wondered if New Hope's list had to be exactly the same es Crystal's. Commissioner Devine inquired about maple trees. Mr. Schuster explained that silver maples are shallow-rooted and considerably weak. He stated that hard maples like 'sugar maples have deep roots and strong branches. He added that the box elder is a member of the maple family. ' Commissioner Devine questioned why the red maple is prohibited on public right of way in New Hope. New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission May 15, 1995 Page 5 Mr. Schuster responded that he co, id. not understand why red maple is on the. .list. Commissioner Shapiro suggested asking Mr. Schuster to make a recommendation to us of which trees he considers appropriate or not appropriate. Commissioner Rubin suggested the Commissioners recommend modifications to the prohibited tree list: He added that he sees no reason why the red maple should be prohibited from public property. Mr. Schuster noted that trees and shrubs are listed by species .with "~' common and scientific names. He suggested that the only plants that would be listed by species would be the ones you cannot plant. Commissioner Rubin agreed and suggested the section on "suitable plant materials' be eliminated from the ordinance in its recommendation to Council. Commissioner Collier suggested the ordinance include separate lists of prohibited trees, one list for public property and the other for private property. Ms. French asked if certain species of allowable trees become dated in an ordinance. Mr. Schuster responded yes. He stated that nurseries are now suggesting native species, such as oak. He suggested creating a list of "performance specifications' for boulevard trees. He cited tree height or smaller fruit as some desirable qualifications. He mentioned the importance of explaining to the publio why certain trees are more desirable than others. Commissioner Rubin asked Mr. Schuster if there were any other issues he would like to see the Commission address for Council. Mr. Schuster responded that of the three issues that were discussed, he would most like to see the issue of boulevard tree maintenance addressed. He added that a regular maintenance program would allow the City to take a proactive approach to maintenance. Commissioner Rubin questioned whether it would be appropriate for the Citizen Advisory Commission to make specific recommendations on types of trees in its recommendation to the City Council. Ms. French responded that the City Council would probably address that issue with the experts on staff, as in the pest. Mr. Schuster added that he likes the idea of eliminating the section on suitable plant materiel and concentrating on the prohibited tree list instead. Commissioner Rubin asked if there was any further discussion regarding this matter. New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission May 15, 1995 Page 6 ¢ I I I MOTION A /notion was made by Commissioner Collier to recommend to the Council the following changes in the city ordinances pertaining to trees. Eliminate the list of suitable plant material from the ordinance (4.033) (4) (iv); update the current list of trees prohibited on the public right of way and include reasons why these trees are on the list (4.033) (4) (b) (iii) (bb); establish a list of trees prohibited on private property, including why the trees are on the list; establish an ordinance to set up a hazardous tree program; and establish a boulevard street tree maintenance program. Commissioner Shapiro seconded the motion. Voting in favor: All. Opposed: None. Motion carried. PARK REPORTS Commissioner Rubin asked Ms. French why a portion of concrete near the play area was being removed at Jaycee Park. Ms. French responded that the inspector found something that needed correcting by the contractor. Ms. French informed the Commissioners that Begin Park's tennis and basketball courts will be remodeled this year, with completion by September first. Commissioner Collier inquired if the cement under the shelter was scheduled for improvement. Mr. Schuster responded that the shelter will be removed, along with the bituminous underneath it. Commissioner Collier asked if the horseshoe pits at Begin Park will be removed. Me. French replied that they will stay. OTHER BUSINESS Commissioner Rubin stated that he noticed a sinkhole on 49th Avenue between Rag Avenue and Erickson Drive. He mentioned that it is adjacent to the sidewalk and the sewer, and wes concerned that someone could easily fail. Mr. Schuster stated that he would have someone from streets maintenance check lt. Commissioner Rubin informed the Commissioners that he received one copy of the final draft of the Transportation Plan. He noted that there will not be any officially designated bike trails within the City of New Hope. Ms. French stated that the cost estimate is approximately $600,000 to develop bike trails. Commissioner Rubin mentioned that he would like to see bike lanes adapted aea lower cost alternative to bike trails. He added that he would like to see the City Council address this issue. New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission May 15, 1995 Page 7 CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning Case: 95-21 Request: Consideration of An Ordinance Reclassifying Various Conditional USes as Permitted Uses Within the B-I, B-2, B-3 and B-4 Zoning Districts Location: PID No: Zoning: B-l, B-2, B-3 & B-4 Business Districts Petitioner: City of New Hope Report Date: December 29, 1995 Meeting Date: January 2, 1996 BACKGROUND 1. City staff and the Codes & Standards Committee are requesting informal consideration and discussion by the Planning Commission of the enclosed draft Ordinance Reclassifying Various Conditional Uses as Permitted Uses Within the B-I, B-2, B-3 and B-4 Zoning Districts. If the Commission gives favorable consideration to the ordinance, staff will proceed to publish a public hearing notice for formal consideration of the ordinance at the February 6th Planning Commission meeting. 2. The idea for this ordinance originated this past summer when the City Manager gave administrative approval for a dance studio to operate in the Post Haste Shopping Center. "Dance studios" are not specifically identified in the Definition section of the Zoning Code and routinely "commercial recreational uses" require a conditional use permit. Staff recommended that the City review our standards for some of these uses, as a dance studio seems to be a reasonable use for a shopping center. Why is it that some reasonable uses, such as a karate school or cafe, require a CUP while other more complicated uses, such as tattoo parlors, are a permitted use? It was staff's opinion that some uses that currently require a CUP should be allowed as permitted uses and not be required to go through the CUP process. 3. The Planning Consultant has prepared the enclosed reports 'on this issue and he also prepared a chart illustrating the current permitted and conditional uses in the Business (B-1 through B-4) Zoning Districts and the changes that this proposed ordinance would have on those uses. 4. The Codes & Standards Committee has discussed the topic at several Committee meetings and the City Attorney has prepared the enclosed draft ordinance in response to the Planning Consultant's and Committee's recommendations. 5. While it is not staff's intent to bypass the Commission or City Council with planning/zoning applications, staff would like to streamline the process so that uses that do not have a negative impact on surrounding properties and are clearly a reasonable use in the Business Zoning Districts are not required to go through the conditional use permit application process. Planning Case Report 95-21 2 January 2, 1996 6. Please refer to the enclosed reports, ordinance and memo for more information. The Planning Consultant and City Attorney will be present at the meeting to explain the proposed ordinance and answer your questions. Attachments: City Attorney 12/22 Correspondence & Proposed Ordinance Planning Consultant 12/21 Report with Matrix City Attorney 11/20 Correspondence Planning Consultant 10/24 Report Planning Consultant 9/27 Report Building Official Comments CORRICK & SONDRALL. P.A.. STEVE. A. SONDRALL ATTORNEYS AT LAW ~'~.'~',',~ M,CNA~.. ~U. Edinburgh Execu~ve Office Plaza s.~. o. MARTIN P. MALECHA WILLIAM C. ST"AlT 8525 Edinbrook Crossing Suite ~203 Brookl~ P~k, Minneso~ 55443 TE~P~NE (S~2) 4~ Qecembe~ 22, 1995 M~. K~rk McDoma]d Mamasemem~ Ass~ s~amt C~y of New ~o~e 4401 Xy]on Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 RE: An Ordinance Reclassifying Various Conditional Uses as Permitted Uses Within the B-1 through B-4 Zoning D~str~cts Our File No. 99.40074 Dear Kirk: Please find enclosed an amended Ordinance Reclassifying Various Conditional Uses as Permitted Uses Within the business zoning d~stricts for consideration at the January 17, 1996 Codes .and Standards meeting. As a result of said meeting we decided to make convenience food take-out/delivery establishments permitted uses in the B-1 Zoning Oistr~ct. As a result, Section 1 of the enclosed Ordinance has been amended to make this change and Section 2 has also been amended to remove this use as a conditional use in the B-1 Zoning D~strict. Also, Section 7 of the Ordinance has been amended to make bus,ness drive-through windows a conditional use permit and not simply restaurant and convenience drive-through windows. If you have any other questions or comments regarding this enclosed Ordinance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Steven A. Sondral] slf EnclosuFe cc: Al 8r~x~us, City Planner ORDINANCE NO. 95- AN ORDINANCE RECLASSIFYING VARIOUS CONDITIONAL USES AS PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE B-l, B-2, B-3 AND B-4 ZONING DISTRICTS The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains: ..' Section 1. Section 4.102 "Permitted Uses, B-I" of the New Hope Code is hereby amended by adding subsections (3A) "Convenience Food Take-Out/Delivery Establishment", (14A) "Government and Utility Buildings" and (17A) "Professional and Commercial Offices" to read as follows: (3A) Convenience Food Take-Out/Delivery Establishment. (14A) Government and Utility Buildings. (17A) Professional and Commercial Offices. Section 2. Section 4.104 "Conditional Use~, B-I" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended by repealing in their entirety subsections (1) "Government and Utility Buildings", (2) "Medical, Professional and Commercial Offices" and (4)"ConVenience and ~ake- Out/Delivery Establishment" and renumbering subsections (3) "PUD Commercial" and (5) "Restaurant" subsections (1) and (2) respectively. Section 3. Section 4.112 "Permitted Uses~ B-2" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended by renumbering subsections (2) "Cleaning" to subsection (3) and subsection (3)"Food", subsection (4) "Limited 8-4 Uses" and subsection (5)"Mortuary" to subsections (5) through (7) respectively, and by adding new subsections (2) "Banks (Without a Drive Throuqh)" , (4) "Electrical Aooliance Stores" and (8) "Restaurants (Without a. Drive Through)" to read as follows: (2) Banks (Without a Drive Through). Electrical Appliance Stores. (8) Restaurants (Without a Drive Through). Section 4. Section 4.114 "Conditional Uses. B~2" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended by repealing in their entirety subsections (2) "Multiple Family", (4)(a) "Banks", (4)(b) "Electrical Appliance Stores", (4)(c) "Fabric Stores", (4)(f) "Restaurants", (4)(g) "Camera and Photographic Supplies", (4)(h) "Book Stores" and renumbering subsections (4)(d)"Off-Sale Liquor" and (4)(j)"Garden Novelty Stores" to (4)(a) and (b) respectively. Section 5. Section 4.114 (4)(k) "Criteria for (a) Through (~)" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended to read as.. follows: -<.- (NG) Criteria for (a) Thrcu~h (~) and (b): Uses (a) ~ (j) and (b) preceding must meet the following criteria: Section 6. Section 4.122 "Permitted Uses, B-3" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended by amending subsection (5) "Restaurants" to read as follows: (5) Restaurants, Convenience Food, Drive-In. Including restaurants with liquor, wine or beer licenses obtained under Chap. 10 of this Code. Establishments with Drive- Through services windows do require a conditional use permit as provided by Section 4.124 (3) of this Code. Section 7. Section 4.124 (3) "Drive-In and Convenience Food" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended by repealing in their entirety subsections (a) through (i) and amending subsection (j) to read as follows: (+~) Drive-Through Service Windows. A drive-through service window used in any permitted business or use shall be allowed only if the following additional criteria are satisfied: (a) Stacking. Not less than 180 feet of segregated automobile stacking lane must be provided for the service window. (8__b) Traffic Control. The stacking land and its access. must be designed to control traffic in a manner to protect the buildings and green area on the site. (8~) Use of Street. No part of the public street or boulevard may be used for stacking of automobiles. 2 (~) Noise. The stakcing lane, order board intercom window placement shall be designed and located such a manner as to minimize automobile and communication noises, emissions and headlight glare as to adjacent premises, particularly residential premises, and to maximize maneuverability of vehicles on the site. (~) Hours. Hours of operation shall be limited as necessary to minimize the effect of nuisance "~ factors such as traffic, noise and glare. Section 8. Section 4.132 "Permitted Uses, B-4" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended by adding subsection (48) "Commercial Recreational Uses Not Exceeding 4=000 Square Feet in Area" to read as follows: (48) Commercial Recreational Uses Not Exceeding 4,000 Square Feet in Area. Section 9. Section 4,134 (6) "Commercial Recreational Facilities" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (6) Cdmmercial Recreation Facilities. Commercial recreation faci. lities exceedin~ 4,000 square feet in area, provided that: Section 10. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and publication. Dated the day of , 1996. E'dw. J. Erickson, Mayor Attest: Valerie Leone, City Clerk Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun-Post the day of ., 1995. ) · D~C-21-199S 1~: 11 M~C 612 $95 98~? M.01/09 · .orthwes Associated . nsultants' Inc. PLANNING REPORT TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Cary Teague/Alan Brixius DATE: 21 December 199,5 RE: New Hope - Zoning Ordinance Amendments (Business Districts) FILE NO: 131.00 - 95.21 BACKGROUND Per the request of the Codes and Standards Committee our office has dev opecl a matrix showing a comparative analysis of all uses within the City's business districts. Specifically the matrix shows existing uses compared to the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment. This memo serves as an explanation of the matrix. ANALYSIS The attached matrix highlights all uses within the City's business zoning districts and compares them to the existing zoning ordinance and the proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance. The uses in bold print refFessnt areas where changes to the ordinance are proposed. An explanation of the purpose of each zoning district maY be beneficial when considering amendments to the zoning ordinance, therefore, the purpose of each district is as follows: B-1 Limited Neighborhood Business Disttfct. The purpose of the "B-I" Limited Neighborhood Business District is to provide for the establishment of local centers for convenient, limited office, retail or service outlets which deal directly with the customer from whom the goods or services are furnished. These centers are to provide services and goods only for the surrounding neighborhoods and are not intended to draw customers fi.om the entire community. B-2 Retail Business Distrfct. The purpose of the 'B-2" Retail Business District is to provide for Iow intensity, retail or service outlets which deal directly with the customer for 5775 Wayzata Blvd.-Suite 555. St. Louis ParktMN $;54161. (612) 595-9636-Fax. 595-9837 whom the gOods or services are furnished. The uses allowed in this district are t° provide goods and services on a limited community market scale and located in areas which are well served by collector or arterial street facilities at the edge of residentia~ districts. 8,3 Auto,Oriented Business Distrfct. The purpose of the "B-3" Auto-Oriented Business District is to provide for and limit the establishment of motor vehicle oriented or dependent commercial and service activities. 8-4 Community Business District. The purpose of the "B-4" Community Business '~- District is to provide for the establishment of commercial and service activities which draw from and serve customers from the entire community or subregion. The following is a detailed explanation of the proposed ordinance amendments shown within the matrix. Each issue corresponds to t_hp nUmber on the left side of the matrix. 1-2a. The existing ordinance regulates barber shops and beauty shops as different uses. However, after a detailed study, it was recommended to amend the zoning ordinance to establish persona/serv/ces. Under the definition of personal services, several similar uses are regulated under one definition. Personal services are defined as follows: Barber shop, beauty salon, electrolYsis, manicurist, tanning parlor, physical therapy, therapeutic massage, and tattooing. 37. Please note that there are several uses in the current ordinance that are listed as both permi.tted and conditionally permitted uses within the current Zoning Ordinance. ' 37a. The current zoning ordinance does not make a distinction between banks with and without drive, through windows. Based on the impacts drive,through banks have on traffic and site design, the proposed ordinance makes the distinction between the two. Under the current ordinance, bank~ are considered a permitted and conditionally permitted use in the B-2 district and permitted in the B-4 district. Under the proposed ordinance, banks without drive.through facilities are permitted., Uses within !the B-2 and B-4 districts, and drive-through facilitips will remain conditionally permitted uses within the B-2 and B-4 districts. facilities, the City is abl to By conditionally permitting ddve-l~lrough examine the impacts of such uses through a pul~ic hearing and CUP processing, and may place specific conditions on these uses. Banks ~ drive-through facilities do not hold any land use impacts different from uses that ar~ permitted within the B-2 or B-4 district. 4'1. Because a Fabric Store does not h°ld any land use impacts different from uses that are permitted within the B-2 or B-4 district, the proposed amendment calls for Fabric Stores to be permitted uses. 42. Because a Camera/Photographic Supply Store does not hold any land use impacts different from uses that are permitted within the B-2 or B-4 district, the proposed amendment cells for Camera/Photographic Stores to be permitted uses. 43. Restaurants are currently considered permitted and conditionally permitted uses within the B-2 zoning district. Further, regulation of restaurants with drive-through facilities are regulated as Drive-in and Convenience Food. The proposed ordinance eliminates D#ve-in and Convenience Food Establishment and replaces it with Restaurant with Drive-through Fac#ih'es, therefore, all types of eating establishments will be regulated as Restaurants. As such, Restaurants with drive- through facilities are proposed to be conditionally permitted in the B-2 and B-4 districts and a permitted use in the B-3. Restaurants without drive-through facilities are proposed to be conditionally permitted in the B-3 district, and permitted uses in the B-2, B-3 and B-4 districts. The purpose of the additional regulations on Restaurants with drive-through facilities is the same as for banks with drive-through facilities. The land use impacts are greater on uses with drive-through facilities. 44& Off-sale liquor and medical facilities are currently considered permitted and 4S. conditionally permitted uses in the B-2 district. However, these uses more appropriately designated as permitted uses, therefore, are proposed as such. 66& Government and Utility Buildings and Professional and Commercial Offices hold 67. characteristics which may make them more appropriately designated as permitted uses within commercial zoning districts rather than conditionally permitted uses, therefore, the change has been proposed. 70. Multiple Family development has been found not to be an appropriate use within the B-2 district, as the purpose of the district is to provide for Iow intensity retail or service outlets, therefore, mUltiple family development is proposed to be prohibited in the B-2 district. 71. Electrical Appliance Stores hold characteristics which may make th~m mo~e appropriatelY designated as permitted uses within the B-2 zoning district, rather than a conditionally permitted use, therefore, the change has been proposed. 87. Currently Commerci~al Recreation Facilities are considered permiffed uses in the B-3 district and COnditionally permitted uses in the B-4 (prohibited in the B-1 and B- 2). Commercial Recreational Facilities are defined by the Ordinance as "bowling alley, golf, pool hall, dance hall, skating, trampoline and similar uses." 3 DEC-21-i995 i5:13 NA¢ 612 595 9837 P.04/89 . While commercial recreational uses the scale of bowling alley, billiard hall roller rink, etc. were recently studied and found to be appropriately designated as conditional uses in the B-4 District, it is believed small scale commercial recreational uses may be more suitable as permitted uses. Of particular issue are small scale uses such as dance studios, karate instruction, otc. which exist in multiple occupancy commercial buildings. While these smaller recreational facilities would provide for assembly of people for classes or competitions, the size and scale of these operations can be regulated to make them consistent with other B-4 permitted uses. "-:- In this regard, it is believed that commercial recreational uses with less than 4,000 square feet of floor area could compatibly exist in the B-4 District without need for a public hearing and CUP processing. In review of the tenant breakdowns of the New Hope City Center alrtd Winnetka Center, a standard leasable ~bay' measUres 3,400 and t,600' square feet respectively. Based on this and existing business square footage allotments, it is believed a commercial recreational facility less than 4,000 square feet in area would have minimal impact. CONCLUSION The attached matrix highlights the proposed changes to the City's Business zoning districts. These changes are proposed after much study and consideration by the City. It has b.,~.n concluded that a number of conditional uses in the City's various commercial zoning district may be more appropriately classified as permitted uses. Based on an examination of district purpose and use characteristics our office recommends approval of all of the proposed modifications. 595 983? P.05×89 ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN NEW HOPE'S BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICTS P - Permitted Uses A - Accessory Uses C - Conditional Uses CA - Conditional Accessory Uses N - Not Permitted DISTRICT USES B-_I B-_;Z ~ B-4 B~I B.-2 B-3 B-4 Use 1. P P N P 8aa 2a 1. Barber Sholzs. 2. P. P N P ' See 2,3 2. Beauty Sltol~. 2a. - - - P P., N P 2a, Personal Services, 3. P P N P P P N P 3. Essential Services. 4. P P N P P P N P 4. Convenience, Limited ~ ~ Merchandise, Grocery Stores (not supermarket type). 5. P P N P P P N P 5. Laundromat. .J 6. P P N P P P N P 8. Mortuary. 7. P P N P P P N P 7. Cleaning. Lau~/& dry Cleaning provided the proce~ usecl meets the requireme~s of the Fire Prevention Code for use in buildings with other 6. N P N !P N P N P 8. Food. Grocery stores I and SUl;4rmarkets prowling the use does not exceed 21,500 s.f. of floor s;~ace. 9. P P N P P P N P $. Antique Shops. 10. I= P N P P P N P 10. Art/School Supplies, BooK, Office Supplies, 11. P P N P P P N P 11. Bicycle Sales'Repair. 1:2. P ~P -N P P P N P 12. Candy, Ice Cream, Ice ' I~lk, POl:,:om, Nuts, Frozen Desserts, Packaged Snacks, Soft Drink. 13. N P N P N P N P 15. Carl~'t, Rugs and 'hie and Other Floor Covetings. 14. P P N P P P N P 14. Coin and Philatelic Stores. 612 595 98J? P.06/09 s-3 s.z use 15. N P N P N P N P 15. Commercial and 1~. P P N P ~ P N P 16. Co~ an~ P~ng 17. N P N P N P N P 17. C~me 18. N P N P N P N P 18. 19. N P N P N P N P 19. Drag ~r~. "~ 20. N P N P N P N P 20. EmH~e~ ~en~. 21. P P N P P P N P 21. FIo~ ~op. ~. N P N P N P N P ~. Fum~m 23. N P N P N P N P 23. Fu~~ Oo~u~ only ~r R~ T~, on 24. P P N P P P N P 24. ~ GM or N~ ~r.. 25. P P N P P P N P ~, ~~, ~. N P N P N P N P ~. I~m~ ~. P P N P P P N P 27. ~~. ~. N P N P N P N P 20. ~ ~ b~ N~ 2g. N P N P N P N P ~. P~ a~ ~ll~r 8al~, ~. N P N P N P N P ~. ~um~, Tel~n, 31. P P N P P ~ P N P 31. ~. P P N P P P N P 32. TMm ~. 33. N P N P N P N P ~, N P N P N P N P ~. Tr~vel Bure,us, TmOn, ~. N P N P N P N P ~. V~~, ~1o Gem 37.. - - - - N P N P 37& ~n~ ~gh, 39. P P N P P P N P ~. Reel ~ ~- ~. N P N P N P N P ~. B~ ~dal ~1~ of 4~, P P~ N P N P N P 4t. Faro ~m. 4Z, P P&O N P N P N P 4~ C~Pho~graphio .... ~upp~, DEC-~i-I~D5 15:14 B=.I. B-~ B.a,. 8.4 B.~ B-~ S.a B-4 Use 43. C P&C P P N C P C 43. Restaurant (with dr'we- through). 43a .... C P P P 433. Restaurant (without drive-through). 44, N P&C N P N P N P 44, Off-&tM Liquor Stores, 45. N P&C N P N P N P 4~. Medical F;~cility, 46. N P N P N P N P 48. Sporting Goods Stores. 47. N P N P N P N P 47. Pet Shops. 48. N P N P N P N P 48. Hard,are Stores. 45. N N P P N N P P 49. Auto Acoessory ~mre. 50. N N P N N N P N 50. Motor Vehicle and Reore~on Equipment Sal~ and Garages Acce~eory Thereto. 51. N N P N N N P N 51. Commerdal Reareedion~ 52. N N P N N N P N 52. $3. N N P N N N P N 53. Amusement RkJes. 54, N N N P N N N P 54. Encloe~l Boat and Madne 8ales. 55. N N N P N N N P 56. Dry Cleaning Including Plant Accessory heretofore, Pree~ng and 56. N C N P N C N P 56. Garden Novelty ,St:oreo. 57. N N N P N N N P 57. TheM~em - Not Outdo~T D~'Jve.4n Type. 58. N N N P N N N P 58. cumom ,Manufa~dng 6g. N N N P N N N P ~9. Public Garage/Parldng , Ramp. 60, A A A A A A A A 60. Floor Space LlmJtm:l. Commerdel or busineee '' buildings and .b'uctures for a uae ~ry to ~he ~nepal uae, but · uch u~ sh~il not e~esd thkty percent of th~ princil~l u~e, 61. A A A A A A A A 61. Parking. Off-street parldng as regulate¢l by Sec6on 4.056. 62. A A A' A A A A A 62. Off-~='~ Loading. 63. A A A A A A A A 63. ,Signs. 64. A A A A A A A A 64. FqnbaJl Machine~. 65. N A A A A A A A 65. Drive-up, Financial. 66. C C N N P P N P ~4, Governmerrt and Utility Buildings. 3 i- Current Proposed 67. C C N N P P N P 67. Professional and Comntercial omces. 6a, C c N C C C N ~ ~. PUD, Commercial.. 69. C C N N C C N N 68. Convenience Food Take- Out/Delivery Est, blbhment. 70. N C N N N N N N 70. Multiple Family. 71. N C N N N P N P 7'1. Eleclllcal Appliance Store. 72. N N C C N N C 73. N N C C N N C 0 73. Convenience $tore with G~moline. ]'a,, N N C C N N N Convenience Food. 7~. N N C C N N C C 75. Car Washe~. 76. N N C C N N ¢ ¢ 78. IVlotor Vehicle Sales, Serdoe, I.e~ng/Rental ,nd Ral~lr. 77. N N CA N N N CA CA 77. Automobile Service Stmion, Add~m~l U~e~. 78. N N CA N N N CA CA 78. Autmnobile Service ~ Subordinate Um. 79. N N CA N N N CA CA 79. Open Storage, 80. N N CA N N N CA CA 60. Outdoor Sales a~cl 81. N N CA N N N CA CA $1. E~oio,~l Sele~ and 82. N N CA N N N CA CA 82. Take-Out Service 83. N N CA N N N CA CA Aulrm'mbile 8ewk~e ~don. 64. N N CA N N N CA GA 64. Outdoor Dining, 65. N N N ! O N N N C ~q. Training Sohools 8~. N N N C N N N C ~. Vet~inarian Cilnk~. aT. N N P C N N P C aY. Conmterc~l Reemm~n Facilitklm (exceeding N N P C N N P P ~jr~. COnlmerc~ Recreation -- Facilities (not 88. A A A A A A A A 88. Adult L/se~ - Accessory. 69. N N C C N N C C 89. Adult Use~ - Princil~l. gO. N N P P N N P P go. Outdoor sales of seasonable farm produe, e. 5 TOTClL P. 09 CORRICK & SONDRALL, P.A~:' STEVENA. SONORALL ATTORNEYS AT LAW MICHAEL R. I.L=LEUR MARTIN P. MALECHA Edinburgh Executive Office Plea w~u~c, s~.~r 8525 Edinbrook Crossing Suite ~203 Brookl~ P~k, Minneso~ 55443 TE~P~NE (612) 4~1 FAX (6~ 2) 42~S~ November 20, 1995 Kirk McDonald Management Asst. City of New Hope 4401Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 RE: Proposed Ordinance Reclassifying Conditional Uses as Permitted Uses in the Various Commercial Zoning Districts Our File No: 99.40075 Dear Kirk: Per your request please find enclosed a proposed Ordinance Reclassifying Various Conditional Uses as Permitted Uses Within the Commercial Zoning Districts for consideration at the November 28, 1995 Codes and Standards meeting. Basically, this Ordinance implements the recommendations of the City Planner set out in his September 27, 1995 memo with a few minor changes, Specifically, and referring to the page 9 summary in the memo, his recommendation for the B-1 District is implemented by Section 1 of the Ordinance. Section 2 of the Ordinance then readjusts the numbering system for the B-1 permitted use classifications to accommodate the two added permitted uses in that section.. Section 3 of the Ordinance then adjusts the B-1 Conditional Uses to reflect the reclassification of government and utility buildings and professional and commercial offices from conditional to permitted use in the B-1 District. Section 4 of the Ordinance implements the City Planner's recommendation for changes to the permitted uses in the B-2 District. However, government and utility buildings, professional and commercial offices, camera and photographic supplies and book stores are not specifically listed. They are all B-1 permitted uses and therefore roll over as permitted uses in the B-2 District. Mr. Kirk McDonald November 20, 1995 Page 2 As a result, listing them again as permitted uses in the B-2 District is not necessary. Again, Section 5 and 6 of the Ordinance readjusts the conditional use classifications for the B-2 District to reflect the reclassification of conditional uses to permitted -- uses in the B-2 District. Also note that the reference to "multiple family" as a conditional use in the B-2 District has been entirely eliminated at the suggestion of the City Planner on page 5 of his memo. Sections 7 and 8 of the Ordinance implement the City Planner's recommendation to make convenience food establishments and drive- ins a permitted use in the B-3 District. This recommendation is made in his October 24, 1995 memo. For the sake of consistency, I think we should treat the drive-through window component of the Ordinance as a conditional use for both restaurants and convenience food establishments. Therefore, I have eliminated the reference to service window as a permitted use for restaurants in Section 7 of the Ordinance and recluire in Section 8 of the Ordinance that all drive-through windows be subject to th® conditional use permit process. I think it is hard to distinguish the difference between a drive-through for restaurants rs. convenience food and think consistency is important, however this requirement certainly can be changed if the committee and staff feel otherwise. Relative to the Building Official's memo of October 25, 1995, I would like to maintain our current definitions and distinctions between restaurant and convenience food establishments. I do not think the definitions do any harm and there may be a reason to distinguish between the two despite the fact said reasons are not clear at the present time. Sections 9 and 10 of the Ordinance implement the City Planner's recommendation for establishing commercial recreational facilities not exceeding 4,000 SCl. ft. in area as permitted uses in the Zoning District. Please contact me if you would like any changes to the enclosed Ordinance prior to the Codes and Standards Committee meeting, Very truly yours, Steven A. Sondrall slm2 Enclosure cc: A1 Brixius, City Planner Doug Sandstad, City Bldg. Official Northwest. Associ. ated Consultants, Inc.. COMMUNITY L A N N I N G D E S I G~N' * M A R K E T R E S E A R C H MEMORANDUM TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Bob Kirmis/Alan Brixius DATE: 24 October 1995 RE: New Hope - Zoning Ordinance: Business District Conditional Use Review FILE NO: 131.00 - 95.21 BACKGROUND This memorandum is intended to convey our thoughts as to the appropriateness of listing drive-in and convenience food establishments as conditional Uses in the City's B-3, Auto- Oriented Business District. Of specific issue is the need for the processing of a conditional use permit for such uses which occupy space within shopping centers. ISSUES Existing Regulation Historical Puroose. Drive-in and convenience food establishments are currently listed as conditional uses in the City's B-3 zoning districts. The establishment of drive-in and convenience food establishments as conditional uses relates to an original intent to address primary architectural compatibility and traffic related concerns associated with such uses. Since the early 1970°s, the character of a "drive-in" has evolved such that these facilities almost exclusively have indoor dining components and are themselves restaurants. Such facilities also have evolved to such a point where architectural appearance is not as prevalent an issue as in the 1970's. Also to be noted is that new drive in or convenience food establishments in the City must either locate upon "redeveloped sites" or occupy shopping center space where exterior design has already been established. 5775 Wayzata Blvd.-Suite 555. St. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636-Fax. 595-9837 Conditions. Drive-in and convenience food establishments in B-3 zoning districts are currently required to satisfy the following conditions: (a) Com.oatibili _ty. The architectural appearance and functional plan of the building and site shall not be so dissimilar to the existing buildings or area as to cause impairment in property values or constitute a blighting influence within a reasonable distance of the lot. (b) Green Stri.o. At the boundaries of a residential district, a strip of not less than five (5) feet shall be landscaped and screened in compliance with Section 4.033 (3). (c) i. LLgb.tj~ Each light standard island and all islands in the parking lot landscaped or covered. (d) Curbing. Parking areas and driveways shall be cured with continuous curbs not less than six (6) inches high above the parking lot or driveway grade. (e) Vehicle A(;x;ess. Vehicular access points shall be limited, shall create a minimum of conflict with through traffic movements, shall comply with Section 4.036. (f) ~ The entire area shall have a drainage system which is subject to the approval of the City. (g) ~ The entire area other than Occupied by buildings or structures or plantings shall be surfaced with a matedal which will control dust and drainage and which is subject to the approval of the City. (h) ~ Adequate space shall be provided on the site for a loading berth to accommodate the parking and maneuvering of semi-tractor trailers and shall comply with the requirements of Section 4.037 of this Code. (i) Refuse Storage. All refuse shall be stored in containers as specified by City Code. Said containers are to be screened and enclosed by a fence or similar structure. (j) Drive-Through Window~, Service windows shall be allowed if the following additional criteria are satisfied: (1) Stacking. Not less than one hundred eighty (180) feet of segregated automobile stacking land must be provided for the service window. (2) Traffic ContrOl. The stacking land and its access must be designed to control traffic in a manner to protect the buildings and green area on the site. (3) Use of Street. No part of the public street or boulevard may be used for stacking of automobiles. (4) Noise. The stacking lane, order board intercom and window placement shall be designed and located in such a manner as to minimize automobile and communication noises, emissions and headlight glare as to adjacent premises, particularly residential premises, and to maximize maneuverability of vehicles on the site. (5) Hours. Hours of operation shall be limited as necessary to minimize the effect of nuisance factors such as traffic, noise and glare. In review of the aforementioned conditions, items (a) through (g) would be imposed through the City's general performance standards. Item (j), however, relating to drive- through windows, is considered highly specialized and is, our office's opinion, appropriately included in the B-3 District's conditional use provisions. Alternative R~gulation. To ensure that ample City protections remain in place and to avoid an unnecessary CUP review process, it may be beneficial to simply list "accessory drive-through windows" as conditional uses in the B-3 District, rather than blanket all ddve.-in and convenience good establishments. It should be realized that a convenience food facility without a "drive-through" component is essentially a "restaurant" which is currently listed as a permitted use in the B-3 District. CONCLUSION In our opinion, it is the drive-through element of a drive-in/convenience food establishment which holds a potential adverse impact and separates such uses from "restaUrants" which are currently permitted uses in the B-3 District. Should Codes and Standards agree with our evaluation of this matter, we would suggest that the following Ordinance changes be considered: 1. Establish convenience food establishments without drive-through components as permitted uses in the B-3 District. 2. Establish accessory drive-through windows as a conditional use within the B-3 '" District. If you have any questions or comments regarding this material, please advise. pc: Doug Sanstad Steve Sondrall 4 Northwest Associ. ated Consultants, Inc. COMMUNITY PLANNING DESIGN * MARKET RESEARCH PLANNING REPORT TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Bob Kirmis/Alan Brixius DATE: 27 September 1995 RE: New Hope - Zoning Ordinance Business District Conditional Use Review FILE NO: 131.00 - 95.21 BACKGROUND At the direction of the City, our office has conducted a review of the various conditional uses . within the City's commercial zoning districts to determine whether certain uses would be more appwpriately classified as permitted uses within their respective districts. Based on past experience, question has arisen as to the need to process certain uses via a conditional use permit, particularly in cases where such uses occupy existing structures (i.e., within shopping centers). Additionally, we have given specific attention to the reguhfion of ~commercial recreational" uses within the City's B-4, Community Business District. Attached for reference: Exhibit A - Zoning Map ISSUF~S ANALYSIS Purpose of Conditional Use Permit Process. According to Section 4.211 of the Zoning Ordinance, the purpose of a conditional use permit is to: Provide the City with a reasonable and legally permissible degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certain designated uses upon the general weffare, public health and safety. In making this determination, whether or not the 5775 Wayzata Blvd.-Suite 555. St. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636.Fax. 595-9837 conditional use is to be allowed, the City may consider the nature of the adjoining land or buildings, whether or not a similar use is already in existence and located on the same premises or on other lands close by, the effect upon traffic into and from the premises, or on any adjoining roads, and all such other or further factors as the City shall deem a requisite for consideration in determining the effect of such use on the general weffare, public health and safety. It should be recognized that the CUP process and its need is directly related to the purpose of the City's various zoning districts and a use's appropriateness within such framework. Basically, conditional uses are uses which are appropriate within the base zoning district provided certain additional conditions are imposed to insure compatibility. DISTRICT REVIEW B-l, Limited Neighborhood Business District Purpose. The purpose of the B-l, Limited Neighborhood Business District is to provide for the establishment of local centers for convenient, limited office, retail or service outlets which deal directly with the customer from whom the goods or services are furnished. These centers are to provide services and goods only for the surrounding neighborhoods and are not intended to draw customers from the entire community. " As shown on Exhibit A, very few B-I Zoning Districts currently exist within the City. Where they do exist, such districts typically overlay single sites of limited size. It is within the framework of the B-1 District's purpose that the potential for adverse impacts and need for conditional use permit processing should be evaluated. Permitted/Conditional Us~s. The following is a listing of permitted and conditional uses in the City's B-1 Zoning District. Permitted Uses: Barber Shops Beauty Shops Essential Services Convenience, Limited Merchandise, Grocery Stores (not supermarket type) Laundromat Mortuary Conditional Uses: Government and Utility Buildings Professional and Commercial Offices 2 Commercial PUD Convenience Food Take-Out/Delivery Establishment Findings. Of the aforementioned B-1 District conditional uses, a number hold characteristics which may make them more appropriately designated as permitted uses within the district. Specifically, the following uses should be considered as permitted uses in the B-1 District: Government and Utility Buildings Professional and Commercial Offices To be noted is that the aforementioned uses hold characteristics similar to several permitted uses in the district and the additional conditions imposed upon such uses are applied regardless through general provision requirements (i.e., conformance with setbacks, prohibition of outside storage, etc.). It is further recommended that the references to barber and beauty shops (under permitted uses) be changed to "personal service". In conjunction with such change, the term "personal service" will be specifically defined to include a variety of service businesses including barbers, beauty salons, and similar uses within the Def'mition section of the Zoning Ordinance. B-2, Retail Business District Purpose. The purpose of the B-2, Retail Business District is to provide for low intensity retail or service outlets which deal directly with the customer for whom goods or services are furnished. The uses allowed in the district are to provide goods and services on a limited community market scale and located in areas which are well served by collector or arterial street facilities at the edge of residential districts. As shown on Exhibit A, the B-2 Zoning District has limited application in the City. Such district is most prevalent along the eastern portion of the Bass Lake Road corridor. Permitted/Conditional Us~s. The following is a listing of permitted and conditional uses in the City's B-2 Zoning District. Permitted Uses: Permitted Uses in the B-1 District Laundry and Dry Cleaning Grocery Stores/Supermarkets Antique Shops Art/School Supplies, Book, Office Supplies, Stationery Stores Bicycle Sales/Repair Candy, Ice Cream, Ice Milk, Popcorn, Nuts, Frozen Desserts, Packaged Snacks, Soft Drinks 3 Carpet, Rugs and Tile and Other Floor Coverings Coin and Philatelic Stores Commercial and Professional Offices Copy and Printing Service Costume and Clothes Rental Office Equipment Stores Drug Store Employment Agencies Florist Shop Furniture Stores Furriers when Conducted Only for Retail Trade, on Premises Girl or Novelty Stores Hobby Store Insurance Sales Locksmith Meat Market But Not Including Locker Storage Paint and Wallpaper Sales Plumbing, Television, Radio, Electrical Sales and Such Repair Toy Stores Tailor Shops Jewelry Shops and Other Similar Uses Travel Bureaus, Transportation, Ticket Offices Variety Stores, 5/10 Cent Stores, Stores of Similar Nature Wearing Apparel Banks, Savings/Loans, Credit Unions, Other Financial Institutions Record Shop Real Estate Sales Building Material Sales of Retail Nature in Totally Enclosed Building Fabric Stores Camera/Photographic Supplies Restaurant Off-Sale Liquor Stores Medical Spox~dng Goods Stores Pet Shops Hardware Stores Conditional Uses: Conditional Uses in the B-1 District Multiple Family Buildings Commercial PUD Banks Electrical Appliance Stores Fabric Stores 4 Off-Sale Liquor Offset Printing and Copy Service Restaurants Camera and Photographic Supplies Book Stores Medical Garden Novelty Stores Findings. Numerous permitted uses in the B-2 District are replicated as listed conditional uses. This raises obvious concerns in regard to Ordinance interpretation. Specifically, the following uses are listed as both permitted and conditional uses in the B-2 District: Banks Electrical Appliance Stores Fabric Stores Off-Sale Liquor Camera and Photographic Supplies Within the context of the B-2 Zoning District, the following conditional uses have characteristics which make them more appropriately designated as permitted uses: Government and Utility Buildings Professional and Commercial Offices Banks (Without a Drive Through) Fabric Stores Electrical Appliance Stores Restaurants (Without a Drive Through) Camera and Photographic Supplies Book Stores Medical Garden Novelty Stores (Without Outdoor Sales) Generally speaking, the aforementioned uses are considered similar in nature to permitted uses within the district. For instance, it is believed a fabric store holds no greater land use impact than a supermarket or dry cleaning facility. It is further recommended that multiple family buildings be prohibited in the B-2 District as their existence lies contrary to the district purpose of establishment. B-3, Auto Oriented Business District Purpose. The purpose of the B-3, Auto Oriented Business District is to provide for and limit the establishment of motor vehicle oriented or dependent commercial and service activities. As shown on Exhibit A, the City's B-3 Zoning Districts flank Bass Lake Road and 42nd Avenue. Permitted/Conditional Uses. The following is a listing of permitted and conditional uses in the City's B-3 Zoning District. -. Permitted Uses: Auto Accessory Store Motor Vehicle and Recreation Equipment Sales and Accessory Garages Motels Restaurants Amusement Rides Conditional Uses: Motor Fuel Station, Auto Repair-Minor, Th-e and Battery Stores and Service Convenience Store with Gasoline Drive In and Convenience Food Car Washes Motor Vehicle Sales, Service, Leasing/Rental and Repair Conditional Accessory Uses: Automobile Service Operations Retail Sales Accessory to Auto Service Stations Open Storage Outdoor Sales and Service Enclosed Sales and Service Take Out Service Windows (Drive Through) Propane LP Gas Sales Outdoor Dining Findings. In review of the B-3 District conditional uses, it is believed all hold characteristics which warrant the imposition of additional, use specific performance standards to ensure land use compatibility and maintain the public health, safety and weffare. B-4, Community Business District Purpose. The purpose of the B-4, Community Business District is to provide for the establishment of commercial and service activities which draw from and serve customers from the entire community or sub-region. Permitted/Conditional Uses. The following is a listing of permitted and conditional uses in the City's B- 1 Zoning District. .. Permitted Uses: Permitted Uses in the B-1 and B-2 Districts Antique Shops Art/School Supplies, Book, Office Supplies, Stationery Stores Bicycle Sales/Repair Candy, Ice Cream, Ice Milk, Popcorn, Nuts, Frozen Desserts, Packaged Snacks, Soft Drinks Carpet, Rugs and Tile and Other Floor Coverings Coin and Philatelic Stores Commercial and Professional Offices Copy and Printing Service Costume and Clothes Rental Office Equipment Stores Enclosed Boat and Marine Sales Dry Cleaning Including Plant ~ry Heretofore, ~g and Repairing' ' Drug Store Employment Agencies Florist Shop Furniture Stores Furriers When Conducted Only for Retail Trade, on Premises Garden Novelty Stores Gift or Novelty Stores Hobby Store Insurance Sales Locksmith Meat Market But Not Including Locker Storage Paint and Wallpaper Sales Plumbing, Television, Radio, Electrical Sales and Such Repair Theaters, Not Outdoor Drive-In Type Toy Stores Custom Manufacturing and Repair Tailor Shops JeweLry Shops and Other Similar Uses Travel Bureaus, Transportation, Ticket Offices Variety Stores, 5/10 Cent Stores, Stores of Similar Nature 7 Wearing Apparel Banks, Savings/Loans, Credit Unions, Other Financial Institutions Public Garage/Parking Ramp Record Shop Real Estate Sales Building Material Sales or Retail Nature in Totally Enclosed Building Fabric Stores Camera/Photographic Supplies Restaurant Off-Sale Liquor Stores Medical Sporting Goods Stores Pet Shops Hardware Stores Conditional Uses: Conditional Uses in the B-3 District, excluding any B-3 uses permitted in the B4 District Commercial PUD Training Schools (Secondary Use) Veterinarian Clinics Commercial Recreation Facilities Findings. Of the li~ted conditional uses in the B4 District, veterinarian clinics are allowed subject to conditions which would apply to the use regardless of whether it is "permitted" or "conditional". For instance, a veterinarian clinic is allowed under the sole condition that such use comply with the City's noise regulations. From a regulatory standpoint, such use is not considered dissimilar than the majority of permitted uses in the B4 District. This, however, does not mean that such use does not hold a potential for adverse impacts. In this regard, it is believed that some additional conditions relating to animal confinement, carcass disposal, kennel requirements should be imposed. This may, however, be considered beyond the scope of this review and may be more appropriately addressed at some future point. Of particular issue in the B-4 District is the regulation of commercial recreational facilities. Commercial recreational fac'flities are defined by the Ordinance as "bowling alley, goff, pool hall, dance hall, skating, trampoline and similar uses". While commercial recreational uses the scale of a bowling alley, b~ hall miler rink, etc. were recently studied and found to be appropriately designated as conditional uses in the B-4 District, it is believed small scale commercial recreational uses may be more suitable as permitted uses. Of particular issue are small scale uses such as dance studios, karate instruction, etc. which exist in multiple occupancy commercial buildings (i.e., strip centers). While these smaller recreational 8 facilities would provide for assembly of people for classes or d6rripetitions, the size and scale of these operations can be regulated to make them consistent with other B-4 permitted uses. In this regard, we believe commercial recreational uses with less than 4,000 square feet of floor area could compatibly exist in the B-4 District without need for a public hearing and CUP processing. In review of the tenant breakdowns of the New Hope City Center and Winnetlm Center, a standard leasable "bay" measures 3,400 and 1,600 square feet respectively. Based on this and existing -' business square footage allounents, it is believed a commercial recreational facility less than 4,000 square feet in area would have minimal impact. SUlVlMARY It is concluded that a number of conditional uses in the City's various commercial zoning districts may be more appropriately classified as permitted uses. Based on an examination of district purpose and use characteristics, the following modifications are recommended: B-l, Limited Neighborhood Business District Government and Utility Buildings Professional and Commercial Uses B-2, Retail Business District Government and Utility Buildings Professional and Commercial Offices Bank~ (Without a Drive Through) Restaurants (Without a Drive Through) Camera and Photographic Supplies Book Swres B-3, Auto Oriented Business District No Changes Proposed B-4, Community Business District Commercial Recreational Uses Less than 4,000 Square Feet in Area 9 If you have any questions regarding this material, please do not hesitate to call. pc: Doug Sandstad Steve Sondrall 10 City of New. HoPe SINGLE FAMM. Y RESIDENTIAL. Sl~ AND TlWQ FJAIt. Y R~:SIOENTIAI. ME~ DENSITY ~ESI~NTIAL HI~ DENS~Y R~O~K~L R-4 RESI~NTIAL OFFICE R-O LIMITED NEIGH~ BUSINESS RETAIL. BUSiNE~ . AUTO ORIENTED BUSINESS B-3 COMMUNITY ~SINESS 8-4 LIMIT[O iNOUSTR ML Z'l GENIAL IN~STRI~ ~ ~AiN FP WET k~O W ~r~--~orthwest ;on~ultant~, inc. EXHIBIT A - ZONING MAP Date: October 25, 1995 To: Kirk McDonald ~,/ '"-. From: Douglas Sandstad, Building Official Subject: NAC REPORT (10-24-95); B-ZONE CUP REVIEW 4-+++"1-++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I am pleased to see the input from Al Brixius on our CUP headache in B-Zone& Staff support the simplification o.f the process by initiating this phase of review, after hearing much "flak" from our business community. When, however, we make all restaurants ("last" and "slow") Permitted Uses in all of our B Zones, we must revise our parking standards and definitions to parallel this change. Code sections 4.022 (29) and 4.022 (120) must be combined into a single eatery definition. Section 4.036 (10) I has required parking on a different basis than 4.036 (10) r, in the past. This requires some careful consideration and further study. I agree with the concept of requiring the CUP process .for "Drive-through" eating establishments, but not ali drive-up windows, such as banks, photo-processing & pharmacies, as long as staff have the site plan review process .for any proposed changes. cc: Brixius l te FILE MEMORANDUM ***POSTE HASTE SHOPPING CENTER*** 9400-9446 36th Ave. No. ~2-25-95 OK TO ISSUE BUILDING PERMIT FOR "DANCE STUDIO" (3,200 sD completed scale plan~ & section view. fees. ~c) Property Owner, Jerry Showalter, mu$t schedule meeting to talk with city staff about the recent cutting down of front yards trees after request wa~ denied and general ~Pd) cirOperty issues. ty Staff will commence by SepL 15, 1995, a Text Amezutm~ for small B-4 tenant u~es that are now CUP's despite routine nature. cc: Donahue McDonald TO: KIRK McDONALD fx, x FROM: DOUG SANDSTAD DATE: AUGUST 29, 1995 C/ SUBJECT: PROPOSED ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT-"TATTOO PARLORS" I have reviewed the latest draft of definitions, rules and.fees regarding "Personal Services" such as tattooing and therapeutic massage. There are only two comments that I will provide at 1. I have referred the draft code to Del Matasovsky, our Sanitarian, for his tattoo code review. I have asked him to comment to me by this friday. 2. I have an equity concern about the Special Zoning Procedure complexity and cost required for a number of more routine uses in the B Zones, compared to this new "Permitted Use" status simplicity for a tattoo business in the same zone. For example, each of these uses must go through the CUP {Conditional Use PermiO process .in certain B zones, taking 30-60 days and costing $450 + plans: * Government buildings * Medical & Dental Offices * Convenience Food * Restaurants * Apartments * Banks * Book Stores * Camera & Photo supplies * Fabric Stores * Appliance Sales * Gas Stations * Convenience Stores * Car wash * Adult Uses * Outdoor Sales & Service * Take-Out Windows * Outdoor Dining * Veterinarian Clinics * Training Schools * Commercial Recreation * Dance Studio The "Balance" seems to be missing from this equation when a fabric store in a B-2 Zone must jump through more hoops than a tattoo parlor. Restaurants, Banks and Book Stores, also, defy logic on this zoning scale. '~... The problem, understood, lies primarily with existing language that may be outmoded or out-of-synch with 1995 community standards and expectations. The fact that we seem to be getting many complaints about "red tape" and requests to waive standards for businesses is not consistent with our new "Business Link" efforts to improve the relations between city hall and local merchants. We have recently boosted commerce by improving part of our sign code. Perhaps it is time to take a serious look at basic Zoning code distinctions in B- Zones. There appears to be a need to streamline and simpli, fy, evidence by the chart, above, and public comments. Let's discuss the options. ~,.13, 4.131, 4.1:32, 4.13:] 4.1:] "B-4" COMM~qlTY BUSINESS DISTRICT Purpose. Tee purpose Community Business Dis~ricC of provide for =he es~ablishmen= of commercial and service which draw from and serve customers ~rom =he en2ife communi=y or sub- region. 4.132 Permi=tad Uses~ B-4. The following are permi~ed uses in (2) (3) ArC/School Supplies~ Book~ Office Supplies~ S~a=lone~Z S~orss ($) CandzrlCeC~eeusr ~ce Milk~ Popcornr Nu~er Frozen Desser~s~ Pac~a~ Snacksr So~C Drinks (6) Carps=r au~s end ~le and Other Floor Coverin~e (7) Co~n and Philatelic SCores (8) ¢ommerci&L and Pro~ess~onal Offices (9) Copy and Pr~n=in~ Service (10) Costume and Clothes Rental (Il) Office R~ulpmen= stores *1121 Enclosed Boat and Marine Sa~es *(131 Dry C2een~n9 Znclud~n~ Plant Accessory heretoforer Pressin~ 1141 11S) 1161 ~ 1171 *1191 Garden Novel=¥ Stores (20) Gi£~ or Novelty S~oree 1211 Hobb~ S~c)re (23 Locksmi=h (24) Meat Marke~ bu~ No= l~cludin~ Locker S~oraqe (25) and S~ior'' Electrical Sales and Such Repair (26) Plumbingr '*(27) Thee=erer no~ Outdoor fLve-Zn (28) S~c)res *(29) (30) (:]11 and Other Similar Uses ( 32 ) O££icee (33) Cen~ S~ores S~ores-o£ shnilar (34) (35) Credl~ Unions Other Financial *136) (37) (381-. ~sLa~e Sales (39) Bu~ldin~ Ma~erial Sales of Re=ail Nature in To~all¥ Enclosed Buildin~ (40) Fabric SI:ores C4l) Camera/Pho~oqraphic Supplies (42) Res~aur&nt 1431 O~f-S&~e '~lquor S~ores 1441 Medical 1451 Spor=in~ Goods S~ores (46) Per Shops (471 Hardware S~ores 4.133 Permit~ed AccesserZ Uses, B-4. The following are permitted accessory uses in a #B-4" (l) Less Intens£ve Use Oistr£c~. All permitted accessory uses in a "B-3" District. 6-70 072686 4.134 (1) - (5) 4.134 Condit£onal Usesf B-4o The ~ollow£ng are conditional uses in a '8-4" District= (RequL~es a conditional use permi~ ~sed upon procedures se~ ~o~h ~n and regula~ by Section 4.20~ and con~o~nc~ ~he~e appl~c~ble~ ~h Chapter 3~ Sign~flg). Less Intensive Use District. &ll conditional uses, sub~ect to the sae~ conditions as allowed in the B-30lstricts excludinq any develop~n~ as requla~ by Section 4. (3) Trainlno Schools. Training schools, provided thats As Prin I el Use. The school is operated as an ed3unct o~ the principal use to provide training ~or the consumer, distributor or installer o~ the product, process or service which is soldt distributed or nunu£actured under the principal use. C0d~ Comi)~lence. Prose sE co~pliance with City and State 1A~o and le£ety codes is shorn. (c) P&rkinq. Adequate on-site parking is provided so that no customerst visitors or employees a~e required to perk outside the existing o£~-street perkinq areas of the business as a result o~ the operation o~ the school. Veterinarian Clinics. ~hen all ~acill'ties are to~ully enclosed~ and procedures and construction vhich will couoly with the noise nequLution portion o~ this Code are approved by the City. (S) Deleted. (Code 072684; 85-22) :-:~. 4-?1 072~84 4.134 ($)(~. 4.134 Commercial Recreation Faciilties. Commercial rec=eation~ prov£ded ~hat: (a) Access. ~e site of the proposed use has direct access to an arterial street as defined in the City Code, without public streets of a lower traffic handling classification to reach the arterial street, and (b) Proximity to Residential. The outside perimeter o~ the site, ss legally described is, 150 feat or more ~rom the boundary of a residential zoning classification, or (c) Compatibility. The primary recreational "~ ~acilitiou are enclosed such that the architectural appearance and functional plan of the building and site shall not be as diseinAlar to the ex,sting buildings or areas. as to cause impairment to property values or constitute a blighting £n~luence. Cd) Sereenin~ from Residential. Parking areas sha~l be screened ~rou view o~ residential districts and sha~l be curbed with continuous " concrete curbs not Less than nix inches high above the parking lot or d~iveway grade, at the 'curb lane. (e) Access. Vehicular access points shall be ~-'~'n=~-ed and designed and constructed.to create a minimum of con~Lict with through (f) LA,brAns Shielded.' All Lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the light source d la not visible from the right-of-way or from a residential zone or use. (g) The entire area other than that occupied by buildings, structures or plantings shall be su~aced with bitusttnous or concrete nmterial ~aich viii control duet and drainage. The nuterial and grading shall be subJe~t-~o the approval of the City. th) Landscaoin~. rdndecapinv shall be provided and the type of planting nmtecial and the numboF~nd ease of plants shall bm subJe~.t to the approval of the City. COrd. 85-32) 4-72 072f84 CITY OF NEW HOPE MEMORANDUM DATE: December 29, 1995 TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator SUBJECT: Miscellaneous Issues 1. December llth and 13th Council/EDA Meetings - At the December l lth and 13th Council/EDA'~. meetings, the Council/EDA took action on the following planning/development/housing issues: A. Planning Case 95-30, Request for Site/Building Plan Review Approval for a Building Addition, 7201 Bass Lake Road, The Wedding Chapel, Petitioner: Approved, subject to the condition that either Alternate A or B be instituted for track maneuvering/access or (at the suggestion of the City Attorney) that a restrictive covenant be drafted and filed with the property, which would give the City the authority to implement the requirement at a later date or at the time the property is sold for another business use. The petitioner has indicated that they prefer the restrictive covenant option and it is in the process of being prepared by the City Attorney. B. Planning Case 95-23/Ordinance 95-16, An Ordinance Rezoning Property Located at 6073-6081 Louisiana Avenue North to R-2 from R-l, City of New Hope, Petitioner: Approved. C. Resolution Re-Appointing William Sonsin to the Planning Commission for a Three-Year Term Expiring December 31, 1998: Approved. D. Resolution Accepting Resignation of Robert Gundershaug from the New Hope Plannino Commission and Extending Appreciation for His Service: Approved. Please see the letter an~ resolution that were sent to Bob (enclosed). He will be officially honored at an upcoming Council meeting, after his recovery, and I will notify you in advance if you would like to attend the meeting. E. Prolect #514, Resolution Approving Agreement with Events of Distinction to Assist with Coordination of 1996 Northwest Suburban Remodeling Fair: Approved; please refer to the enclosed flyer for details on time and location. F. Project #519, Resolution Approvine Change Order No. 1 with H & M Asphalt Company for Utility Extensions at 6073 Louisiana Avenue Twin Home Project Site in the Amount of $1,420: Approved; see attached Council Request for Action for more details. G. Pro|ect #544, Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1 with Veit & Company, Inc. for 4400 Quebec Avenue NOrth and Golf Course Storm Sewer and Pond Improvements in the Amount of $10,359.88: Approved; see attached Council Request for Action for more details. H. Pro|ect #544, Resolution Approving Amendment of CCI Petitioner for Public Improvement and Authorization of Construction of Sanitary Sewer Improvement: Approved; see attached Council Request for Action for more details. I. Pro|ect #529, Resolution Approvine Plans and Specifications for a 500,000 Gallon Elevated I. Project//529, Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications for a 500,000 Gallon Elevated Storage Tank Rehabilitation Project and Ordering Advertisement for Bid.~: Approved; see attached Council Request for Action for more details. J. Project #542, Resolution Accepting Facility Assessment and Buildin~ Pro,am for the P ~ Works Facility and Authorizing Architectural Services Contract and Ordering Preparatio~ of Plans and Specifications: Approved; please refer to attached Council Request for Action for more details. Revised concept plans will be brought back to thc Council and the building addition will also be presented to the Planning Commission at a later date for site/building plan review/approval. K. Project #551, Resolution Authorizing Feasibility Report and Pavement Evainatlon for Louisiana Avenue and 31st Circle: Approved; please refer to enclosed COuncil Request for Action for more details. L. Pro|ect #536, Resolution Authorizing the Ci~ Manager to Negotiate and Enter Into a Contract with E & V Consultants and ConstructiOn Managers for Construction Mano.oement Services for Ice Arena Expansion: Approved; please see enclosed Request for Action for more information. M. Project #467, Update on Autohaus Site Improvements: Tabled; due to the fact that the petitioner was not in attendance at the meeting. This matter will be discussed at the second CounCil meeting in January. Please see enclosed staff report. N. Resolution Approving Right of First Refusal for Acquisition of Homeward Bound Property at 4741 Zealand Avenue North: Approved; please refer to enclosed EDA Request for Action for more information. O. Lease with Phoenix Manufacturing, 7528 42nd Avenue - The EDA directed staff to proceed to negotiate a lease at market rate terms. See attached EDA Request for Action for more information. 2. Codes & Standards Committee - Will be meeting in January to continue discussions on flashing/moving signs and the recently enacted 60-day zoning legislation. Also, during 1996, staff would recommend undertaking a study on pawn shops, as New Hope currently has no regulations on this use. 3. Design & Review Committee - Will be meeting in January to review a routine industrial building expansion by Tabor-Bushnell. 4. Lasky/Car-X Plans - No new plans have been submitted to date. Staff recently responded in writing to a number of planning/zoning questions Lasky had.., see attached letter. Attachments: Gundershaug Resolution Remodeling Fair Flyer Louisiana Avenue Utilities Change Order CCI Change Order Amended CCI Assessment Agreement 47th Avenue Water Tower Public Works Addition/Remodeling Louisiana Avenue Street Project Ice Arena Construction Management Firm Autohaus Site Improvements Phoenix Manufacturing Lease Homeward Bound Agreement Lasky Letter 4401 Xylon Avenue North City Ha~;'? .' 612-531-5100 City Hall Fax: 612-531-5156 New Hope, Minnesota 55428-4898 Police: 612-531-5170 Police Fax: 612-537-5174 Public Works: 612-533-4823 Public Works Fax: 612-533-7650 TDO: $12-531.5109 Fire Oep't. Fax: 612-531.5175 December 13, 1995 Mr. Robert Gundershaug 6141 Utah Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 Subject: Resignation from New Hope Planning Commission Dear Bob: I am writing to inform you that at the City Council meeting on December 1 lth, the City Council formally accepted your resignation from the New Hope Planning Commission effective December 31, 1995 as requested in your letter of November 15th. The Council passed a resolution formally accepting your resignation, with regrets, and extending appreciation for your years of service to the community, and I have enclosed a framed, original resolution with the City seal. The City Council, City Manager, Planning Commissioners and staff are very grateful for your 20 years of service on thc Planning Commission, your many years as chairman of the Design & Review Committee, and thc one year you served as chairman. You have guided the Design & Review Committee and the Commission in the review of numerous commercial and industrial building projects that have impacted thc 'the physical development of thc City. Your diligent review of a project's landscaping plans, in particular, have added to thc beautification of thc City. The City Council desires to formally honor your service to the City in a presentation at an upcoming City Council meeting and we will be contacting you regarding your schedule/availability in the near future. You will also be honored with a plaque of appreciation at this summer's appreciation picnic, which will be held in July. You will be receiving an invitation prior to thi~ event. Thank you again for your outstanding contributions to the City of New Hope. I have enjoyed working with you and wish you well in the future. We also wish you well in your continuing recovery from your recent automobile accident. Sincerely, Kirk McDonald Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator Enclosure: Resolution cc: Dan Donahue, City Manager Doug Sandstad, Building Official City Council Valerie Leone, City Clerk Planning Commission Family Styled City ~^~/~ ~*% For Family Living CITY OF NEW HOPE RESOLUTION NO. 95- ~ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING RESIGNATION OF ROBERT GUNDERSHAUG FROM THE NEW HOPE PLANNING COMMISSION .., AND EXTENDING APPRECIATION FOR HIS SERVICE WHEREAS, Robert Oundershaug was appointed and Served on tbe New Hope Planning Commission from 1975 to 1995, and for many of those years he served as Vice- Chairman of the Commission and as Chairman of the Design & Review Committ~; and .. WHEREAS, Oundershaug served as Chairman of the Commission during 1995; and WHEREAS, Oundershaug has submitted his resignation due to upcoming plans for retirement; WHEREAS, Gundershaug has guided the Design & Review Committee and the Commission in the review of numerous commercial and industrial building projects that have impacted the physical development of the City; and WHEREAS, Gundershau$ was known for his diligent review of a project's landscaping plan and. is responsible for additional landscaping being added on many sites throughout the City; and WHEREAS, the City of New Hope accepts C_.nmde~ug's resignation effective December 31, 199~5 with regrets alld desires to thallk him for his .many years of dedicated service and contributions to the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLED, that the City Council of the City of New Hope hereby accc~ts tim resignation of Robert C_mndershaug and extends their appreciation for his 20 years of dedicated service to and interest in the City of New Hope. Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this 11 th day of December, 1995. Mayor Attest: City Clerk 1996 Northwest Suburban Remodeling Fair Saturday, March 16, 1996 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Park Center High School 7300 Brooklyn Boulevard Brooklyn Park MN The Cities of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn o Artful Flower and Vegetable Gardens Park, Crystal, New Hope, Robbinsdale and o New Bath and Bedroom Suites Northwest Hennepin Human Services o Interior Design with You in Mind Council invite you to join us at our 1996 o Financing Your Remodeling Dream Remodeling Fair. This will be the fourth annual Remodeling Fair and the past events Prizes will be awarded throughout the have been very day and refreshments successful, will be sold. The Fair will be free and open to The purpose of the · $10.00 Off Early Registration · Hospitality Room for Vendors the public. F a i r i s t o e n c o u r a g e· Discounted Price for More than home owners to make On·Booth If you choose to improvements to their · Star and Tribune Advertisements participate in this homes. The event · Cable Television marketing event, return Commercials/Announcements the enclosed registration proved last year to be an · Over 2,500 Attendees excellent opportunity for form that provides the members of the home necessary details improvement industry to regarding booth demonstrate the benefits of their products 'registration. Booth space is limited so we and services, encourage you to return the registration form today. Receive $10.00 off the regular The Remodeling Fair will include over booth price if you register by January 19, 100 exhibits from local contracting 1996. Final registration deadline has been businesses, lending institutions, local extended to February 16, 1996. If you have manufacturers and municipal inspections, any questions, please contact ... The following workshops/seminars have been scheduled for the 1996 Fair. Stacie Kvilvang, City of Brooklyn Park 493-8089 o Best Buys for Your Remodeling Dollars o Designs for Kitchens of the 90's or o Designing Entertaining Yards © Fully Functional Decks and Porches Kirk McDonald, City of New Hope o Basic Home Maintenance 531-5119 o Color Your World with Painting Techniques ~ ~~ COUNCIL REQUF T FOR ACTION Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager Consent Kirk McDonald ~, /}12-1 1-95 Item No. By:. Management AssistantBy:. ~// 6.20 RESOLUTION APPROVING NO. 1 WITH H & M ASPHALT COMPANY FOR UTILITY EXTENSIONS AT 6073 LOUISIANA AVENUE TWIN HOME PROJECT SITE (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 519) IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,420.00 At the October 9th City Council meeting, the Council awarded a contract to H & M Asphalt Company in the amount of $26,632.15 for sewer and water utility extensions/installation at the 6073 Louisiana Avenue twin home site (Improvement Project No. 519). Based on previous work in this area it was anticipated that good material would exist below the sanitary sewer pipe, therefore the plans and specifications did' not provide for removal of bad material and importing better material fOr pipe bedding. However, af~er the contractor initiated the work it was discovered that poor material existed in certain areas. The attached Change Order in the amount of $1,420.00 provides for pipe bedding beneath the sanitary sewer pipe and removal of poor material beneath the pipe and the road surface. The City Engineer has reviewed the Change Order and recommends approval. The utility extensions are being paid for with CDBG funds. The enclosed resolution approves the Change Order and staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA.O01 Robert ~. Rosene. P.E.' Keit~ A. Gor~on.. P.E. James R. Malaria. P E. F roa~ Foster. JoseD~ C. An~etliK. P.E. RoOe~ R. Pfefferfe, PE. Jerry D, Pertzsc~, PE. ~e~ R. Y~DD. ~arvifl ~ Sorvala. PE. Richard ~. Foster, P.E. Scott J. ArganeR. P E. O~u~las j Benomt Associates Thomas ~. Noyes, PE. Jerry A. a~T~o~, P.E. Mar~ A. Seep, PE. Kent J. RoBert O. Schunic~t, P E. Mark A. Hanson, P.E. Gary ~. Mormen. PE. Paul G. Neuer Susan M. Eberlin. C.P.A.* Michael r. Raucmann, P.E. Paul J. Oannon, A.I.A. Jonn P Ooraer -u,Cn-~neers & Architects · Senior Consultant Ted K. Field, PE. Danie J. Edgerton. P.E. Dan D 8oyum. Thomas R. Anderson, A.I.A. A. ~ic~ Sc~midt, P.E. Jeffrey J. Ehlermger. James R. Rosenmerkel, P.~ Dale A. Grove, P.E. Joseph R. Rhem. Donald C. Burgarat, P.E, PhJlJ~ J. Caswell. P.E. Lee M. Thoma~ A. Syfko, PE. Mark O. ~allJ$, P.E. Char~es A. December 4, i 995 ~,~,r,c J. Steneorg, P.~ Miles 8. Jensen, P.E. L~ M Pawelsky Ismael Mart/ne~ P.E. L. PhJllJp Gravel, P,E. Harlan M Olson Michel P, Rau, P E. Kar~ L Wieme~, P.E Agnes M. Ring Thomas W. Peterson, P.E. Gary D. Kristofitz. P.E James F. Engetharat Mr. Kirk McDonald City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Ave. N. New Hope, MN 55428-4898 Re: Cameron's Addition - Utility Extensions City Project No. 519 Our File No. 34187 Deal Kirk: Attached is Change Older No. 1 for the above referenced project. This Change Order provides for pipe bedding'beneath the sanitary sewer pipe and removal of pool materi~l beneath the pipe and road surface. Based on previous work in this area, it was anticipated good material would exist below the sanitaz~/ sewer pipe. Therefore, the plans and specifications did not provide for removal of bad material and importing better material for pipe bedding. The amount of the Change Order is $1,420.00, which we recommend for approval.. Listed below is the bid amount including Change Older No. 1: Bid Amount $26,632.15' Change Order No. I 1.420.00 Revised Contract Amount $28,0~2.15 If you have any questions, please contact me at this office. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. MAH:pr Encl. 2335 ~X/est Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113 · 612-6'36-4600  REQUF~T FOR ACTION originating Depa~taient Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager Consent Kirk McDonald ,~4~-1 1-95 Item No. By:. Management ASsistant By:.~,l/ 6.21 RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 WITH VEIT & COMPANY, INC. FOR 4400 QUEBEC AVENUE NORTH AND GOLF COURSE STORM SEWER AND POND IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. IN THE AMOUNT OF $10 359.88 At the October 23rd City Council meeting, the City Council approved a contract with Veit & Company, Inc. for 4400 Quebec Avenue North and Golf Course Storm Sewer and Pond Improvements (Improvement Project No. 544) in the amount of $263,087.17. The plans/specifications for 4400 Quebec Avenue provided for reconsU~cting the existing sanitary sewer to accommodate a future building expansion at Conductive Containers, Inc. The cost to reconstruct the sanitary sewer are to be assessed to CCI based on an Assessment Agreement which was also approved by the Council. When it was determined that the sanitary sewer was to be reconstructed, the Public Works Department reviewed sanitary sewer television tapes from 1990, and determined that additional investigation/ reconstruction was required. Also, CCI requested that the existing fire hydrant adjacent to their driveway be relocated at their cost and requested that the cost be added to the current Assessment Agreement. The hydrant relocation is necessary to accommodate a wider driveway to reduce the risk of the existing hydrant being hit by service tracks entering/exiting the property. Based on the above circumstances Change Order No. 1 is separated into three pans, which are summarized as follows and described in more detail in the attached correspondence from the City Engineer: Excavation/investigation of existing sanitary sewer condition $1,123.50 Reconstruction of existing 10 feet of sanitary sewer and removal of existing 33" storm sewer to accommodate new sanitary sewer crossings $ 5,716.38 Relocate existing hydrant (at CCI's expense) $ 3,520.00 1 MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Request for Action 2 ' 1 ' I t The Change Order has been reviewed by the Director of Public Works arid the enclosed resolution approves the Change Order. A revised Assessment Agreement with CCI to cover the cost of relocating the hydrant is also included on this Council agenda. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. /~o~estroo Otto G. 8onestroo, P E. HowardA.$a~'ford. P.E. Mle~aelC, Lync~,PE. grlan K. Gage. ~ E. RoOert ~ Rosene. P E.' Keet~ A. Gor~on., P E. James R Manana. ~ E. ; Rosene JoseD~ C. Aflderlik. PE. RoD,ri R. Pfefferle. P.E. Jerry O. Pertz~c~, P E. R ~op, p c Marvi~ L. Sorvala. P E~ Richar~ ~. Foster, PE. Thomas E. Noyes, PE. Jerry A. ~out~n. PE. Mark A. Se~D, PE. ~ent J Engineers & Architects - Senior Consultant Ted K. Field, P E. Danml J. Edge~on, P.E. Oan O. Thomas R~ Anderson, A.I.A. A. Eic~ Scnm~at, P E. Jeffrey J. James R. RosenmerkeL P.E. Dale A. Grove, PE. Joseo~ e Rne+~ Donald C. Burgardt, P.E. Philip J. CaswelL P E. Lee M. Mann, P Thomas A. Syfko. P.E. Mark D. ~allls, P,E. Charles a. Er~ckson Deccmbe[ 5, [995 ~,~,nc J. Ste~org, P.E. Miles e. Jenson. P.E. Leo M. Paweis~y fsmael Ma~inez. P,E. L. Phillip Grave, P.E, ~arl~ M. O~son Michael P. R~ P.~ Karen L Wlemeri, PE. Agnes M. Ring Mr. ~rk McDon~d City of New Ho~ ~01 Xylon Ave. N. New Ho~, ~ 554284898 Re: Golf Coupe ~d ~ ~e~c Avenue No~ Sto~ Sewer ~d Pond ~provements Project No. 5~ ~r File No. 34184 Dear Kirk: Attached is Change Order No. 1 for the above referenced pwject. The plans/specifications for 4400 Quebec Avenue provided for reconstructing the existing sanitary sewer to accommodate a future building expansion at CCI (Brad Ahlm, President). Bids were received to reconstruct the sanitary sewer and were reviewed with Brad Ahlm at CCI. The cost to reconstruct the sanitaT sewer is. to be assessed to CCI 15ased on an agreement between CCI and the City of New Hope. Once it Was determined the sanitary sewer was to be reconstructed, New Hope Public Works reviewed sanitary sewer television tapes from 1990 and determined additional investigation and reconstruction was required. In addition, Brad Ahlm at CCI has requested the existing fire hydrant adjacent to his driveway to Quebec Avenue be relocated at his cost. The relocation is required to accommodate a wider driveway and reduce the risk of the existing hydrant being hit by service trucks leaving and entering the property. Brad's requesting the hydrant relocation cost be included with his sanitary sewer assessment. Change Order No. 1 is separated into three parts, described as follows: A) The TV tapes indicated a possible break 36 feet east of MH JT. The sewer crew dug a hole at the location and reviewed the pipe's existing condition with New Hope Public Works. After review, it was determined the pipe was in adequate condition (3 hour sewer crew @ $374.50/hour -- $1,123.50). B) The sanitary sewer reconstruction did not include reconstructing 16 feet of sanitary sewer between the new sanitary sewer reconstruction and the existing 24" trunk sanitary sewer. The TV tapes indicated the existing 16 feet of 9" VCP sewer was in poor condition and its vertical alignment indicated backfall. It was determined the existing 16 feet of sanitary sewer be reconstructed, including the drop section in the existing manhole over the 24" trunk sanitary sewer. Also included is removing a portion of the existing 33" storm sewer to be abandoned to accommodate the new sanitary sewer crossings ($5,716.38). 2335 ~test Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113 · 612-636-4600 Mr. Kirk McDonald ~' " December 5, 1995 ~ ', City of New Hope · - Re: Golf Course~4400 Quebec Ave. N. Storm Sewer/Pond Improvements Page -2- C) Brad Ahlm (CCI President) has requested the existing hydrant adjacent to his driveway be relocated at his cost ($3,520.00). .- Listed below is the bid amount including Change Order No. 1: Part I - 4400 Quebec Avenue $152,299.92 Part 2 - Golf Course Improvements 110,787.25 Total Bid $263,087.17 Change Order No. 1 10.359.88 Revised Contract Amount $273,447.05 If you have any questions, please contact this office. Sincerely, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark A. Hanson MAH:pr Encl. REQUEST FOR ACTION Originating Depa~lh,,ent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager Consent Kirk McDonald ! ~2- I 1-95 Item No. By: Management ASsistant B~./ / 6.22 RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMEN~ OF C.C.I. PETITION FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 544) At the October 23rd Council meeting, the City Council approved a petition from Conductive Containers, Inc. (C.C.I.) for the construction of an eight-inch sanitary sewer extension across the parking lot of C.C.I. to accommodate a future expansion of the building at 4500 Quebec Avenue North, in conjunction with storm water ponding improvements at 4400 Quebec Avenue North (Improvement Project No~ 544). C.C.I. was responsible for the cost to construct the improvement ($13,808.00) and agreed to pay an additional 15% of the construction cost ($2,071.00) for engineering, legal and ad~niniswative services, for a total cost of $15,879.00. The Council approved an Assessment Agreement that stated that CCI. would pay the costs b.y special assessment against the property over a period of five years at a rate of simple interest of 8% per annum. Since that approval, C.C.I. has requested several changes to the agreement. These changes involve relocating a fire hydrant on the property so the hydrant will not interfere with truck access to the site. The City Engineer has estimated the cost of the hydrant relocation at $3,520.00 and C.C.I. has requested that this additional amount be included on the Assessment Agreement. The City Attorney has prepared the enclosed Resolution and Amended Petition and Assessment Agreement to incorporate these changes and staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY , SECOND BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-001 December 7, 1995 Daniel J. Donahue City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue Nortl~ New HoDs, MN ~5542a - RE:CCI Amended Pe~ttlon and Assessment Agreement Our File No: 99.11152 Dear Dan: Since the Council approved the CCI Petition and Assessment Agreement tn October, CC! asked the Cl~y for several cl~anges to .the Agreement. TheSe involve extending the rsl3ayment of the assessment from three to five years, and relocating a fire hydrant on the property eo the hydrant will not interfere with truck access so the CCI building, The Clty Engineer estimated the cost of the hydrant relocation at $3,520, which increased the amount of the assessment, The ~nclosed Resolution and ~ Amended Petltton and Assessment incorporate these changes. If the C. nuncil approves this proposal, they can pasa the enclosed Resolution et the next Council meeting. Please contact ae if you have any cluestions or comments. ~tncerely~ Martin P. Malecna Asst. New HoDs City Attorney m3t Enclosure cc: Kir~< McOonaid, Managementl Assistant (w/one) V~l~e Leone, City C~erk SteYen A. Sondral], City Attorney AMENOED ~_~ PETITION FOR.~UBLI~..IMPHOVEMENT AND ASSESSMENT ~GREEMFNT 1, Parti~ - The parties to this agreement are the City of New Hope (hereafter City] itlinoi~ corporation (hereafter Fee Owner). 2. Purpose - The Fee Owner hereby requests and petitions the City t~ construct a Ou~c sanitary sewer on Gue~ec Avenue Nor~, ~nclud~n~ 167 feet of ~ ~nch PVC SDR 3~ pipe, four m~nholes, an~ al 1 other' appurtenant works and servi cas reesonably required to provide sanitary sewer service to acco~oaate a future expansion of it~ building localed in the City of New Hope end County of Henneptn legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, C.C,I. Addition As part af the above work, the Fee Owner also requests the City relocate the fire hydrant at the above property to a place 15 feet souLh of its current location. 3, Description of Work - The public improvements described above shall be constructed a~cordina to pl~n~ and specification~ prepared.by the New Hope City Engineers Bonestroo, Rosune, Anderlik and Associates dated August 28, 1995, as amended; It is contemplated by the parties that the work will be completed in the sprtng of 1990. 4. Co,tm - The Fee Owner acknowlsdges and agrees that the cost esLimate to complete the described work is e13,a0a.00 pursuant to a bid submitted by Vlet & Company, Inc. to t~e City, plus an additonal $3,520.00 es a chang~ order for relocating thai fire h~drant. The Fee Owner further ~oknowledge~ e~d agrees to pay the City adQitional sums for engineering, legal and administrative ~ervices provided the Fee Owner as part or t~is publio improv~ent and that their proportionate share for said worK, including smtd addibional The Fee Owner further agrees it will pay any anU all necessary change orders increasing the estimated $19,39g.0~ in costs to complete Lhe described work, A 15~ ~urchar~e will be added to any additional change or,ers for legal, engineering and administrative ~ervice~. 5. ~pec!.al Assessment_ - T~e Fee Owner aukr~owledges and agrees that the pr~posed construction s~ecially benefits their property deecribed in paragraph 2 of this agreement. In consideration for the Cily's action to cause the construction of the described work at t~e Fee Owner's request, ~e Fee Owner agrees that the fair market value ot' its property will increase in an amounL equal to or greater than the total co.~t of the iml~rovement including change orders but currently estimated at $1g,399.O0 and that tt witl DaY its COSts .bY a spe~ia~ assemsment against the described ~roperty ~ver ~ oeriod of five years at a rate of simple interest of 8~ per ~nn~m, It ts understood by the Fee Owner ~hat pr'oportionmte share wi~ be assessed to the pro~erty after construction ls complete~ In 1990 with interest s~cruin9 i~edtately thereafter and the first payment w~11 ~e ma~e wtth real estate taxes due and payable in 1997. The Fee Owner expressly waives all objections.to anv irregularity with regard to the special assessment for t~s Improvement arid any claim that the estimated amount of $1g,399.00 or the actual constFucttort ~oet~ whichever is ~remter, to be levie~ against the described property ts excessive, The Fee ~ner further waives any and mll right~ to appeal~ the special assessment the Courts. ~ndemntfi~ation - The Fee Owner egree~ to Indemnify, reimburse and hold the Cltv harmless for all costs tO make the improvement In t~e ever~l the spemlal &amassment against the described ~roDerty is he]Q inva~iQ anQ unenforceable for reason, This mha~ include reasonable attorney's fees and cost to colleG[ and enforce the s~ecial ameoamment and/or this eg re~ent. oared: . 1995, CONDUCTZVE CONTAINERS, ZNC. CITY OF NEW HOPE ay: By: Brad Ahlm Edw. d. E~tckson Daniel J, Donahue Its City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY The , 1995, by Brad Ahlm, President of Conductive Conta4ners, Inc., an Illinois corooration, on Behalf of satd corpor~'tion. '.~ Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing was aoknowlodged before me this . d&y of _, 1995~ by Edw. J. Er~ckson a~d Dan~e] J. Oonahue, the Mayor and City Manager~ ffespe¢~vely~ of the C~[y of New Ho~e~ a Minnesota municipa] corporation, .on behalf of sai~ ~unlclD&~ corDoffa~lon. Notary Pub1 'iG COUNCIL  RE~UF~T FOR ACTION Originating Depmh.,ent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section Development Public Works 12-11-95 & Planninl~ ff Item No. By:. Ieannine Clancy By:. 8.2 / RESOLUTION APPROVING PLAI~S AND SPECn~ICATIONS FOR A 500,000 GALLON ELEVATED STORAGE TANK REHABHATATION PROJECT AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 529) The Golden Valley-Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission has authorized the preparation of plans and specifications for the rehabilitation of the 4itth Avenue Water Tower. Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates has developed the plans and specifications for complete removal of the existin~ paint on the tower, application of new paint, structural improvements and other miscellaneous upi/facies. Improvements that may need to be made to the existing fence, building, driveway, and landscaping will be constructed under a separate contract. Funding for this project is available from the Joint Water Commission Capital Improvement Pro~m. Staff requests approval of the resolution. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Arlml~dstratlon: Finance: RFA-O01 LOCATION MAP ~AnderlikFl°eenel~°nestr°°& NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA FIGURE 1 Aeeociatee 0.5MG ELEVATED WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR 34180FO2.DWG DEC I99,5 COMM. 54.180  CATHODIC PROTECTION PANEL WATER TOWER ..... n OVERHEAD ~ ,. ANTANNA CABLES _. ,-'-- ' NEW HOPE . ELEMENTARY SCHOOL h ,, INSTALL NEW CATHODIC ,," PROTECTION PANEL ~" NOTE: . SOO N.J. AREAS DISTURBED I~' CONSTRUCTION. . EXIST1NG ANTENNA'$ AND ANTENNA 6ABI..ES ARtr " , TO REMAIN IN SERVICE THROUGHOUT THE: PROJECT. II  Bonestroo SITE PLAN Rosene ' Andertik & NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA FIGURE 2 Associates 0.5MG ELEVATED WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR ~¢18CF;5.gWG r3E¢ lg95 CCMM. 34180 ~ H~GH WArE~ ' ' ~;l EL. 10t LOW WATER 8 LEGS ~;;~ EL. 0 TOP OF' FOOTING TANK ELEVATION jj~ Etonestroo Roeene Anderlik & NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA FIGURE .3 Associates 0.5MG ELEVATED WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR 34.180FO1.DWG DEC 1995 COMM. 54.180 CITY L.OGO w/ ~" Wl0E 24,'x24,' ORI0 (TYP.) 8RUSH STROKE: 8' 8RUSH STROKE ANO 8' SPACING BETWEEN LETTERS LOGO PLAN - CITY LOGO ~ Boneetroo Roeene NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA FIGURE 4 A.sociates O.SMG ELEVATED WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR 54.180F04..DWG DEC 1995 COMM. ,34180 ¢gth AVE NO 48th AVE HOUSE OF LUTH£RI~I CHURCH HIG~I~ .- SCHOOL ~.7~h AVE: ,NO CITY Jv CITY -- LOGO = ~ ~ LOGO NEW ~Om~: ~.~r~Y 0EL DR z LO'GO ORiE:NTATi~O~ -~ Boneatroo  Roeene Anderli~ & HOPE, MINNESOTA ~GURE 5 Associates O.5MG E~ATED WATER STOOGE RESERVOIR 3~18OFOS.~WG OEC 1995 CO~. ~4180 Paint Color to Match Tower Located at Medicine Lake Road HOPE _ _ \ / COUNCIL ACr O Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section Development Public Works f-~ 12-11-95 & Plannin~ ,/ IreTM No. Jearmine Clancy By:. ~ 8.3 RESOLU'rlON ACCEPTING FACILi'~fY ASSESSMEI~FF AND BU]LDI'NG PROGRAM FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 542, AUTHORIZING ARCHITECTI. YRAL SERVICES CONTRACT AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIHCATIONS Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates has completed the Facility Assessment and Building Program for the Public Works Facility. This document serves as a basis for completing several projects at Public Works that will make the building more functional, correct code deficiencies, and comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. At this time, staff is requesting approval to proceed with the preparation of the plans and specifications for.the following components: Of/ice addition and remodeling · Lunchroom remodeling · Relocation of employee locker facilities · Exterior paint Funding for the project is available from the Capital Improvement Pro,ram and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. CDBG funds will be only utilized for building corrections related to the Americans with Disabilities Act. Staff recommends approval of the resolution and requests authority to enter into a contract with Bonestroo, Rosene, Andeflik & Associates for the development of project plans and specifications. Pending approval from City Council, construction drawings could be complete in three months. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Adminkstration: Finance: RFA-O01 ~~ ~ Matin ~ SorvaM. ~ E. Richard ~ ~a0ert G. Sc~un~r~t. P E. Mar~ A. H~n. Engineers & Architects · Senmr Consultant rea K. Field. ~E. Oan,e J. Edgerton. ~E. gan O. aoyu~: r~mas a. ~naerson. A.I.A. A. Rick Schm~at. ~ ~ Jeffrey ~. ~ James R. Ro~enmerte. 0ona*d ~ ~urgarat. r~oma~ A. Syfko. P E. Ma~ O. ~MIIs. p E. C~arte~ A. ~,c~son F~ea~lc J. Sten0oe~ P.~ Miles B. Jensefl. P.E. Leo M. Pawefsey ~smae~ M~t~ez. P E. L P~lll~ Grave. PE. Harl~ M. Olsofl MIc~a~ P Rau. P~ Thomas W. ~ovcmbcr ~, leannine Clancy Director of Public Works 5500 International Parkway New HoPe, MN 55428 Re: Facility Assessment and Building Program Our File No. 34183 Dear Ms. C]ancy: Transn~tted herewith Js out report on the fac~ty ~sessment ~nd b~d~g progr~ for the Pubic Wor~ B~d~g. ~ mpon ev~uat~ ~e e~g [~ty, su~~ ~e p~g ~b~ation ob~ ~m ~u ~ ~ s~ p~en~ a sp~e prog~ ne~ to sa~ p~g ~sues. addi~o~ it p~ o~ co.pt pl~ ~d a co~pond~g cost estate, w~ch would ~ refined a ~tu~ sche~c d~i~ ph~. We w~ ~ happy to m~ew ~e conten~ of t~ ~pon at your con~e~e. Respect~y ~b~t~, BONESet, ROSE~, ~~ · ~S~~S, ~C.. Paul Joseph Gannon, A.I.A. PJG:gs I cc: Robert C. Russek 2535 ~,/est Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113 · 612r636-4600 TABLE OF CONTENTS-, I. PROBLEM STATEMENT i II. EXISTING CONDITIONS DOCUMENTATION I ~ A. PLAN ' B. PHOTO SURVEY C. CODE ANALYSIS [ D. SITE ANALYSIS III. PROGRAM A. PROGRAM: SUMMARY OF SPACE NEEDS , B. PROGRAM INVENTORY IV. SOLUTION A. CONCEPT DIAGRAMS B. PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE V. APPENDIX SPRINKLER SYSTEM REVIEW ARCHITECT FIELD REPORT: ROOFING EXISTING PROBLEMS CITY OF NEW HOPE ~'~P ~' · Public Works management team and support staff are not in a centralized location. '('The management team consists of the Director, Street Maintenance Coordinator, Utility Maintenance Coordinator, Central Garage Coordinator, Park Superintendem, and Parks Leadworker. The support staff consists of two secretaries.) Three separate office areas exist. This is not efficient. · Superintendent/Coordinators are in a large open area. There is no privacy to conduct a one-on-one conversation with an employee: Phone conversations and work that requires concentration can be difficult due to background noise. · Conference room size and space is inadequate. · Storage space for office supplies ia inadequate. · File storage is inadequate. · Existing decor' is deteriorated and soiled. · Phone system ia outdated and does not interact effectively with the City Hall phone system. The City Hall receptionist cannot act as a backup for incoming Public Works phone calls. · There is no del'reed entry area wher~ a citizen question or complaint can be resolved. Lunch Roonl · Many of the old appliances do not work and should be removed and replaced. · Cabinets are old and deteriorated. Counter space is limited. · Current size of lunch room cannot ag¢ommodate staff during summer months. · No separate ventilation system exists. Odors from shop and lunch room migrate into office area. · Decor is old and soiled. Locker Room .::~' ~' ·The toilet and shower facility is not attached to the locker room. · Lockers for uniforms are not in this room. · The locker room is located in the shop, which takes away needed parking and storage area. · There is no ability to accommodate female employees. Gara2e / Shon Area · Ventilation needs to be assessed for adequacy and health/safety issues. · The storage area is used for an office area. · Fire sprinkler system located throughout the building is not adequate. Most of the concerns are within the garage/shop area. · Walls need to be cleaned and painted. Buiidin~ Exterior · Building need~ to 1 I , 4', '. ~ MEZZANINE: PL~.N _ ,EXISTiN, G. CONDiTiONS ~ l~one, troo FLOOR PLAN ~o~ene ' ' Anderlik PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING · -':G1.DWG DATE: 10-12-9,5 COMM. 34.183 .i PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING PROGRAM Department Summary: Size '.' I. ADMINISTRATION Reception / Clerical 80 sq. ft. Clerical (part-time) 80 sq. ft. Director of Public Works 190 sq. ft. Conference Room 210 sq. ft. File / Storage / Work area 160 so. fi. Subtotal 720 sq. ft. Circulation 30% 216 Total 936 sq. ft. II. SUPERVISORS Work area/contract engineer 400 sq. ft. Street maintenance office 100 sq. ft. Utilities maintenance office t00 sq. ft. Parks Superintendent office 100 sq. ft. Parks leadworker 100 sq. Subtotal 700 sq. ft. Circulation 40% 280 Total 980 sq. ff. VEHICLE MAINTENANCE Coordinator's office 100 sq. ft. Assistant ar~a (2) 100 sq. ft. Storage I suppli~ Subtotal 62O sq. ft. Circulation 10% {i0 ,,. Total 680 sq. ft. 3a 183\publicwk.pro 22 IV. EMPLOYEE / COMMON Reception/Lobby I56 sq. ff. Mail / time clock 80 sq. lt. Lunch room 900 sq. tt Kitchen 150 sq. f. Locker room (male) w/toilet & shower 450 sq. ff. " Locker room (female) w/toilet & shower 100 sq. ff. Storage / general 200 sq. ff. Recreation area N/A -- Mechanical 200 sq. ff. '"" Rest rooms 400 sq. ff. Janitor 80 sq. fi, Subtotal 2,720 sq. ff. Circuation 45% L224 sa. f. Total 3,94~ sq. f. V. GARAGE Streets No modifications Parks --- Utilities' --- Maintenance --- Welding --- Storage: maintenance --- Cold storage --- Warm storage --- Wood shop --- Small eng~e repair -- Paint storage --- Paint booth -- 34183\pubticwk.pro 23 / ~\. /' / '\ / PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING REMODELING ,:i. .- PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE CITY OF NEW HOPE FILE NO. 34183 1.0 General 7780 sf 7.53 $58,580.00 ';" Conditions 2.0 Site Work Excavation 1760 sf 1.60 $2,820.00 3.0 Concrete Footings 1760 sf 3.48 $6,130.00 Precast 8' plank 2'T 240 st 5.77 (m430) $1,390.00 Floor 4' scab 1760 sf 3.77 $6,640.00 4.0 Masonry Ext walls 12' C block 3220 sf 13.36 (m230) $43,020.00 Partitions 8' C block 2690 sf 6.60 (m220) $17,750.00 5.0 Steel Roof Bar joists/deck 1760 sf 8.23 $14,490.00 Stairs Steel /conc 1.53909.75 (m230) $10,370.00 6.0 Wood / Cabinets P laminate 130 If 231.99 (m170) *$30,160.00 Plastic ' 7.0 Envelope Roofing Ballasted Eporr 1760 sf 2.01 $3,540.00 Insulation R 38 1760 sf 1.28 $2,250.00 Gravel stop 24 G. metal 1760 sf 0.14 $250.00 8.0 Doors / Entdes Aluminum 4 2797.2 *$11190.00 Windows Single leaf HM x HM 34 581.64 $19,780.00 Windows Aluminum 200 sf 32.19 $6,440.00 9.0 Finishes Partitions $ stud/GBD 3910 sf 6.60 (m220) $25,810.00 Furing Insul/GBD 2460 sf 3.13 (m670) $7,700.00 Wall Paint 15660 sf 0.53 $8,300.00 Floor S vinyl/carpet 7780 sf 4.16 *$32,370.00 Ceiling Susp AC tile 7780 sf 2.11 $16,420.00 10.0 Specials Broom part metal 300 sf 3.26 $980.00 Lockers 44 191.48 (m310) $8,430.00 Kitchen equip. Range 11251.53 (m220) *$1,250.00 Refrigerator 1 704.85 (m220) *$710.00 Microwave 11137.20 (m220) *$1,340.00 $338,410.00 Sub totat this page 14.0 Conveyors Elevator !.8941.00(m230) $58,940.00 15.0 Mechanical Plumbing Floor mtd. 16 3313.35 $53,010.00 HVAC Warm air 1650 SF 4.04 $6,610.00 Sprinkler Lt. hazard 1650 SF 1.9 $3,140.00 16.0 Electric Power 200 A 1650 SF 0.31 $510.00 Lights Flour 30FC 7780 SF 4.41 $34,310.00 F_Alarm 7780 SF 0.21 $1,630.00 Total Estimated Construction Cost $496,620.00 Floor Area 7780 SF Unit Price (SF) $63.80 Alternates 1. Paint External Walls - exist 14430 sf 0.53 $7,650.00 2. Paint interior part - exist43980 sf 0.53 $23,310.00 3. Update sprinkler- exist 789Osf 2.85 (m230) $22,490.00 4.-Update HVAC - exist building insufficientinformation 5. Rebuild shops Masons/walls 2490 sf 6.6 $16,430.00 Pre cast 1040 sf 5.77 $6,000.00 Wall finish 4980 sf 0.53 $2,640.00 Stairs I 6909.75 $6,910.00 G cond. 1040 sf 7.53 $7,830.00 Total $39,810.00 Notes * Indicates that cost may be reduced after desisn is determined An estimated $167,873.10 address buildin$ deficiencies that would be corrected to co~plywith the American with Disabilities Act COUNCIL , REQUEST FOR ACTION Originating Depa~t~ent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section Development Public Works ~--.~2-11-95 & Plannin$ Item No. / By:. Jeannine Clancy By:. 8.4 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND PAVEMENT EVALUATION FOR LOUISIANA AVENUE AND 31ST CIRCLE (IMPROVEMENT PRO/ECT 551) The City of Crystal is proposing to mill and overlay Louisiana Avenue between Med/cine Lake Road and 32nd Avenue and is requesting that New Hope part/c/pate in the project. The boundary line between Crystal and New Hope lies at approximately the centefline of Louisiana Avenue. The proposed construction is scheduled for Summer, 1996. Given the age and the condition of the street, the City Engineer and Public Works staff are supportive of the project. Staff requests that Council authorize a pavement evaluation and feasib'flity repor~ for Louisiana Avenue and 31st Circle. Because of the proximity of 31st Circle to the proposed Crystal project, staff believe that it would be bendic/al to coordinate the two projects through one contract manased by the City of Crystal. It is proposed that the project be funded through New Hope's M'um~m State Aid allocation and special assessments that would be consistent with the City's assessment policy. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 eonestroo o.o ----o. s.,..,. ,,,.,. RQD~ ~. Rose~. P.['Kel~ A. ~ p.[ J~ R. ~, p E F Toa~ Foster.  M~tfl ~ So~ala. P.~ ~Jc~d ~. Fost~, p.~ SCO~ J. Arg~e~, P~ ~oug~as j. ~ena*L ~omas E. ~yes, P.E. Jerry A~ 8ouraon, P.E. MO~ A. Seip, PE. Kent J. ~agner. RoDe~ G. Sc~ic~L P.[ Mar~ A. Hanson, P E. ~ ~. ~rlen, P.E.. Paul G~ Heuer. Susan ~ Ebertln, C~.A.* MIC~W T. R~tm~, P.[ P~ J. G~, A.I.A. Jonn p G~.,p Engineers & Architects · Senior Consulter Tea K. Field. P.E. O~,et J. Edgmon, PE. O~ O. Thomas R. An~rs~, A.I~. A. Rick S~mi~, P.[ Jeffrey J. J~es R. Ros~m~, P.~ O~e A. ~ove, P.[ Josegn e. R~em, Oon~ C. ~g~, P.[ P~tll~ J. Ca~I, P.[ Lee M. M~n, Thom~ A. Syfko, P.E Mi~ O. ~lls, P.E. Che~es A. E,cKson Frederic J. S~r& P.[ Miles I. J~, P.E .~o M. ~awelsXy Mt~ P. E~ P.[ Kar~ ~ ~le~, P.[ A~es M. Ring Seannme Clancy City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Ave. New Hope, MN 55428 Re: Louisiana Avenue (Medicin~ Lake Road to 32nd Avenue) 31st avenue Street Improvement oint Project w/City of Crystal Our File No. 34-Oen Dear Seanniue: The City of Crystal is requesting thz City of New Hope participate in the street improvements proposed for Louisiana Avenue between Medicine Lake Road and 32nd Avenue. The easterly half of Louionnn Avenue is in Crystal wh~ tbe westerly half is in New Hope. Phase 2 of Crystal's Street Reconstruction Program include~ this portion of Louisiana Avenue. The City of Crystal had it's public leasing for the proposed street improvements in Lo~ Avenue on November 8, 1995, at which time they closed the public _l~in~ and approved the project. The proposed improvements for Lo-t~-~ Avemm iaclade a milYo~y project Ne~ Hope's respo~,i_hgity is estimated at $40,1 $0. ~ section of Louisiana Avenue is de_,i?,~_,yt a State Aid street in New Hope and Crystal Therefore, project costs are eligible for Stare Aid fttads. Crystal's schedule for the proposed improvements in Louisiana Avenue is as fo~ow$: Approve pinns/Specificatioll$ for Bidding March 1996 Award Contract April 1996 Begin Construction May 1996 Construction Completion September 1996 2335 West Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113 · 612-636.4600 Jeannine Clancy ...:' December 6, 1995 City of New Hope Page - 2 - To comply with the City of Crystal's schedul~ and satisfy policy for strut improvements, in New Hope, the following is recommnnd~l: · City Comacil authoriz~ preparation of fea~ihtlity report at D~cember 11, 1995 Council Meeting. · 31 st Avenue cai-de-sac west of Louisiana Avenue be included in project. · Braun Intertec be retained to determine the pavement condition index (PCI-surface evaluation) in Louisiana Avenue and 31st Avenue. (Estimated cost $500) · Present feasibility report to council January 22, 1996. · Publk: Hearing February 26, 1996. Attached is Figure 1 fxom Crystal's report showing the 1996 Phase 2 Somlwa~ Street Rehabilitation in Crystal. The number of properties and usea in New Hope for this project are as follows: Residential Properties 1 ff you have any question, please coutact this otfmce. Sincerely, BONESTROO, ROSEN~, ANDI~.m~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark A. Hanson MAH:gs cou vcr REQUEST FOR ACTION Originating Depa~h~,ent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section Development: Parks and Recreation December 11, 1995 & Planning Shari French l, /~ Itero No. ~c.~/nn 8.5 1 HE (.; ANAC~EH [0 NE~C)TIA E AND ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH E & V CONSULTANTS AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR ICE ARENA EXPANSION (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT #536) The City of New Hope solicited proposals from seventeen construction management firms for services to support the construction of an addition to the existing New Hope Ice Arena to accommodate a second sheet of ice, interior renovations to the existing building and exterior site and building improvements. Eight firms responded. A Committee of staff, consisting of the Parks and Recreation Director, Recreation Facilities Manager, Public Works Director, and Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator, reviewed and evaluated all proposals based on the following criteria: *Demonstrated experience in managing construction of ice arena projects, *Demonstrated experience in managing complex projects and delivery to the client on-time, within budget, and in accordance with the' design intent, eDemonstrated experience in construction scheduling, cost control, and value engineering, *Demonstrated experience in participating in the design process, *Response to the Request for Proposal and oral interview, *Competitive fee. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 Four firms selected to participate in the oral intervi'ew process were: · E & V Consultants and Construction Managers · Kraus-Anderson Construction Company · Knutson Construction Company .Mortenson Staff is recommending that the City enter into a contract with E & V for the following reasons: · E & V proposed an assembled project team that has just completed an ice arena in Woodbury in which they worked with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates. · Their approach to the project is very much team oriented. They have a proactive approach to project management. · They are proposing full time people on site during the course of construction. Again, these would be the same people who worked on the Woodbury project. · They have demonstrated a clear understanding of the project. · Their fee is competitive. Staff recommends that the City Manager clarify the scope of work and negotiate a lump sum fee with a breakdown into three portions, that being pre-construction services, construction services and post construction services. · They have experience with projects that include additions and remodeling to existing buildings and so understand the importance of maintaining the existing ice arena operation during construction. If hired, E & V will begin immediately and will perform a cost confirmation. Staff is recommending that the City enter into contracts with multiple contractors, without a general contractor. The Construction Management firm will manage aspects of construction and coordinate responsibilities, including that of the architects/engineers from BRAA. The enclosed resolution authorizes the City Manager to negotiate and enter into a contract with E & V for construction management services. Staff recommends approval. November 21, 1995 Proposal for CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES for " THE PROPOSED NEW HOPE ICE ARENA EXPANSION CITY OF NEW HOPE E&V Consultants and Construction Managers I E&V Consultants and Construction Managers 5801 Duluth Street Suite 345 I Minneapolis, MN 55422 Phone (612) 545-1355 I t Co~str~ctor City of New Hope New Hope Ice Arena Expansion '-~. Construction Management Services Proposal TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Introduction 1.0' Finn Organization 2 2.0 Professional Organization 2 3.0 F.~rience 3 4.0 Workload 4 5.0 Refe~.nce~ 6 6.0 Scope of Services 7 7.0 Constm~on IVlnna~m~ Apla~oach 9 $.0 Basis of Compensation 10 9.0 Additional P~tin~nt Information I 1 November 21, 1995 Construction Ma~age~ Ms. Sh~ F~ch D~tor of P~ ~d R~on Ci~ of New Ho~ ~01 Xylon Argue No~ New Ho~ ~ 55428 ~: New Ho~ I~ ~ D~ ~. F~ ~d CM Sel~ Comm~ ~1~ ~ A~ ~) ~ av~le ~ ~ ~ ~ ~j~ ~. ~ Ci~ of W~b~ h~ Servin8 as your project mmmser will be Mr. Ihvid W'dlims. David is a andum constnmion mana~n' and ha~ ree~ axnpletM the City of Woodbu~s ice sram md domed fieldhouse. He is current~ mmqing tho MdMom md renovstimm to tho Phelps end Logm Park Community Centers for tbe bfinneopolb Park ami ~ Board. David ~ ~ ~pl~ a $14 million exptmion h' the Pillsbury Compmy where be mmtpd s ~neral conn'a~ and was required m iceep tbe exJstkg phnt ~ during C~StngtimL ¥ourfz~//ot/Af field constrmtim mmager will be Mr. Scott SmJdmmn. Scott served on the project mare with D~vid for tim City or W~,~ Ho las over 20 years of experiage md en extensive background in mechmi~ md electrical s~mns. Togetl~ David and Scott have developed a strong working rela/omlLip with BRA~ This will provicb your project team with a solid foutuintlon. Most CM gxperienee F.~¥ has offered construction tmmagement in its 'pure' foFm on over 3S0 public projects.sinc~ 1969. We were the first construction managers coutractM with tho CMos of Mlplo Grove, Woodbury, Coon laatpicls, ChgsIm, Eagan, and the Minfl~kaolis Psrk md Recreation Board. F_~V can U~ly be your advocate beceaso we do not Ixu~orm construction work with our own forces. No other firm has this wealth of experience with 'pure' construction management. 5801 Duluth Street · Suite 345 · Minneal~lis, MN 55427 Phone 61~545-1355 · Fax 612/545-134~ EquaJ Opportunity Employer Ms. Shad French ~ City of New Hope ~ November 21, 1995 Page 2 Contractors and Suppfier Relationships If you select F.~V, the general contractor competitors will be available to bid the actual '-." consUuction. E&V maintains good workin$ relationships with numerous contractors and suppliers in the metropolitan area. Because these contractors mid suppliees know that F.~V does not benefit from bid the of New should receive bids financiaily shoppin8, City Hope competitive and quality workmanship. We at F.&V feel uniquely qualified and are available to serve you on your si~anificant and interesting project. We look forward to having the opportunity to personally dismms H,f~V's proposal with you. We aiso encourage you to contact tho pubUc cUents, architects and conuugtou listed as references for their opinion of F.~V's consulting and consm~ion management servieet Very truly yours, E&V CONS~ AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS AJS/jd Enclosures ~e ~fo~ pmvi~ h~h b m ~ ~ of my ~1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ by ~e ~ipient ~ ~ ~ve n a ~ ~~ o~ ~V Co~l~ ~ ~~~ M~ Comply: Ad~s: 5801 DuI~ S~ Sui~ 345 M~i~ ~ ~4~ Title: R6~ J. S~ P.~. ) Da~: Nov~ 21, I~$ Constn~c~on Manage~ 1.0 ~ ORGANIZATION " a. How many years has your firm provided professional coastruction management services? 26 ye~ b. What other services does your firm currently provide h addition to construction management? l. ¢onsultin$ 4. Project Manalpmem Services 2. Master Plannin~ S. Ownees Repruenta~e Scrvices 3. Cost Estimatinf at Scheduling c. Ir your fire provides general contraetinfd trade contracting and/or architectural/ engineering services, do you provide any or both or these servim on projecu where you serve as construction manater? Not applicable. E&¥ provides only "pure' a~,ncy construction manasemem services. d. b your firm currently involved in any litigation from past or current pro]ecU? If so~ please provide a summary or r~levant information. No. 2.0 PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATION How many people are empbyed ia your eonstrmJon mourn_ mmmt or~Jntiou? 89 b. How my of thru m asdgaed to fall*time eonstruetion marls_ann.hq activity? 89 c. Of those listed in b., how many are in-house perm)nd? 89 d. If this project is awarded to your firm, list Cbe uames of staff who would be assigued to the project, ia what capacity they wouM serve, and the years of experiene~ each staff member has. professiona! Stuff ~ Yeer~ o~ £x~erienc~ Robert Suave Principal. in-Charge 27 years f David Williams Pro}act Manager 15 years Michael Fenner Project Ccordinstor 2 years I Scott Sendmmm Field Construction Menqer/ Meclumical F:stinmmr 20 yeah j F. arf 'Doc~ Smith Civif/S~ArchimcunM F_.stimamr 15 years ~ Robot Gordon Electrical F~iammr 49 y~rs i Berry Bedinser Scheduler 8 ~mrs 3.0 EXPEBIX~C~ Cit~ of W~ , Ic~ Ar~a, DomM Fi, M ~ mi ~O-A~'~ l~:m~o~i Compkx Woodbury~ ~ b. List your mud vohmo of eoustmc,~bl mmut?uMu, for publk projeets ia the hst I five year& 19~. $141,000,000 1992 $178,000,000 1991 Sl 12,000,000 · 1990 $~ 83,000,000 1989 $ 62,OOO,OOO c. [,bt the projecU your firm hss compkUd over the origfnl budget nd/or over the originally schedu_LM compkeba daU and ~phh rusons for such ruulU. Not applicable. Co~umscff~ ~ C~ ~ - Pag~ J 4.O WORKLOAD a. What is your present construction mana_~ement workload? E&V's present construction management workload in Minnesota consists of: $132,000,000 in planning phase $48,000,000 in design pluts~ $127,000,000 in construction phaa~ - b.Based on your present professional organization, can your firm effeetively manage this projeet? E&V Consultants and Consuu~on Managm is the larg~ "pure' agnn~y conslruction management firm in Minnesota. The personnel we've proposed are Clualifi~ committed and very capable of ~in$ your needs within the required time frame. The timing of your projec~ is ideal for personnel scheduling. Your propo~d project teem just recently completed the ice arena, domed fieldhouse, end recre~oml complex for the City of Woodbury. They are immediately available to serve u your edvocat~. c. List your firm's current construction umugemant proj,m starry. ~o following: ~ Loe~tion. Sb nd Con_nlntion Dsm Renovations/Additions to City Hall Eaga~ Minnesota Remodeling arid New Constm~on $3.0 million November 1995 New Community Recreation Complex Woodbury, Minnesota including Ice Arena & Domed Fieldhous~ $8.6 million New Co~ November 1995 New Firu Station Chasim, [~in.esom New Construction $3.0 million County Courthous~ Addition and Long Prairie, Minnesota Renovation $2.2 million New Cons~uetion and Remodeling Febma~ 1996 Addition/Remodelin$ of Chmka, Minnesota Community Centor $3.2 million New Consuuction and Remodeling Match 1996 New City Center Coon Rnpids, Minnesota New Constm~on $8.2 million Match 1996 Con~ma'aon ~ List your tim's current construction management projects stating the following: (cont.) ~ Location. Size and Corn?etlon Dete Additions/R~novation~ and B~l~y, Minnesota New 7-12 Facility $12.5 million New ConsUu~tion and R~mod~ling May 1996 F~ Station 1%. I Coon R~id~, Minn~a ¢o~m~ion ~1 R~od~li~ $1.2 million N~w High School $16.5 million N~w Constm~on and August 1996 Middl~ Sdmol Of~m Ro-Um Li~hfieid, Minnm~ ~iw R~m~i~ S3.0 million Summa' 1996 Hmpi~l Additions sad R~u~tatio~ Mor~ ~ N~w C~ aM R~xwatio~ S4.5 million Mare, h 199~ Se~io~ High md Elemem~ 5~oole S9.8 'million New C~ md Remodeline Augmt 1997 Additiom md Rmovafom m Ho~i~ Fossm~ md Nursing Home $5.5 million N~ ~ mi Pamod~liug 1997 Phelps Park $1.5 million N~, Cousmsut~ md ltamod~li~ 1996 R~ovatious at LoSm P~ Mimm~lis, Remodeling $0.3 million 1996 N~w Community C~m' Maple Csrov~ Minmom New Constru~ion Sll million 1997 lq~ Con.~'n~ion $9 million c. List your tim's current construction mnagement pFojec~s stating the following: (cont.) ~ l_~ention. Size nnd Com_nleffon Dnto New Elementary School Northfield, Minnesota " and Additions/Renovations to High School $17.5 million New Construction and Retnodelin~ 19~8 Renovations to Four Facilities and Faribault, Minnesota · Construction of New Elementary School $35.7 New Construction and Remodeling 1997 a. List your five (S) m~t rueent constrmton maaasemont prom for public pro]ecU. Provide the name and telephone number for the owner and the architect. Complex and Ice City of Woodlmp/ Bon~troo Rosen~ Anderlik ,~,-' Ar~a (612) 731-$799 Associatm Woodb, n% MN (612) 636.46oo New Community Mr. Tegry Just Mr. Brian Cluts Center with an I~ City of Maple Grovo Clum O'Brim Strotlm' Arena and Pools (612) 494-6201 Archim~ Maple Grove, MN (612) 941-4822 c~n aapids. ~C~ of Coon ~ ~ ~ Tidman i (612) 7s0-0479 Arc, ams (612) 2~2-3740 New City Cenmr Mr. William Otnnnnann Mr. Panl Mickelbers Coon Rapids, MN City of Coon Rapids Ik~rman Kroos Pfister Rudin (612) 78O-6479 Associalm (612) 339-3?52 Additions and Westonka Publi~ Schools Mr. ~ Hqlund Renovations to Six Mr. Michael Looby EOS Architacture BuiMinp (612) 472-0341 (612) 474-3291 Mound, MN DF. Sames Smith (612) 753-7040 6.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES Develop your scope of services by phase (construction manager's approach to fulfilling the abbreviated scope of work). a. Design and constructiou documouts phm 1) Prepare a Program Schedulo dot,lin8 descriptions, durations, sequences, and dependencies of tho required activities for design, bidding, contract awards and 2) Consult with Owner of~cials and A/E m provide advk:e and value management input regarding maWrials, methed~ systems, schedules, labor, and other conditions as they af~:t constru~o~ and conm~cting, (Conga, ucmbility and Conlragdbiliry reviews.) 3) Review design studies and do~umea~ preparing · mreme~ of probable construction 4) Prepare · construction schedule including recommended bidding caZegories and phases. 5) Prep, re · projemd cash flow for ~ proje~ 6) Recommend biddi~ procedur~ im:ludi~ work scopes, bid divi~'o~ to facilita~ the mul~lo biddias pmee~ ,ad Io~ lead ow,er prs-p, uel,ase requlmaem. specie' t~ fi~ciUla~ tl~ ~me of the Coa.~m:tioa ]V~eat project dzlive~ GOAl., - To mire a~ tim earl o~ t~e ~ with · ~et o~ plato aM R~eci£w, ations that de,aec a coerce pmjee~ ~ caa be bid ia ~ cra'mat local mm'ket place b. Pre-bM, bM, ami awm'd plm. e. 4) Cond~ l~-bid conf~'~c~ ~ all ~ fo, ~.h bid dillon. 5) Receive and evaluate bids. 6) Conduct post-bid interview~ with apparent Iow bidde~. Pre-bid, bid, and award phases (cont.) 7) Make award recommendations to Owner and A/E. 8) Evaluate contractor value engineering proposals. 9) Preparation and review of contracts and associated documents. GOAL - To receive the best possible prices from local, competitive and qualified - conu'actors through defined work scopes, clear, coordinated, complete and concise '~-~" plans and specifications, concise and fair contract documents, and professional, knowledgeable negotiations between the construction manager and contractors. c. Construction phas~ 1) Provida on-sirra staff to plan, manage, and coordi,~*_- on-sirra con--rs' activities. 2) "Design and implementation of the pmjeefs quality managmn~ program. 3) Monitor trad~ con~ safety programs. 4) Administm~Pmm~ general conditions and construction suppest items as the Owner's agent. 5) Provide progress reports and conduct progress meetings. 6) Conduct monthly project meetings for planning, coordination, and payments. 7) Monitor contractor performance and contract compliance. t[~ 8) Coordinate constmctiou interfaces, methods, techniques, and sequences. 9) Monitor, evaluate, and administer changm ordm' requests and Owner and ME c. Construction phase (cont.) _. 14) Prepare and administer payment and cost control procedures, including the following: a) Contractors' Schedule of Values b) Contractors' Payment Application and Certifications ' c) Contractors' Sworn Statements and Waivers of Lien d) Purchase Order Listings e) Budget Cost Summary Reports .- f) Administration of Owner's cost tracking and ae. count~ff programs " 15) Exp~it~ direct-~ and Owner-~ material and equipment delivery. professional plannin~ and execution of project activities. This is accomplished by the consUuction manages leadership of the project team comMised of the School Owner, Arc~ffineer, contractors, and construction ~ in an effort oriented toward d. Po~-eonstrue~ion phas~ 1) Provide Post Consttu~on ~'oilow-up t'or the longest warranty period covered by a 2) Assist~ as necessary, in tbe perfotman~ of poeg-~mstnsction project audits utilizing 3) Initia~ and conduct a pegfonnan~ review of the project team's efforts and accomplishments for tf~ pmpo~ of assessing each team membeg's performance as compared to expectations. Tbe pu~po~ of thll review is m conclude with a consmscti~ forum to euhanoe the Owneg's satisfaction and undentsnding of the GOAL - A salis~ed client, willin~ to tuoommend EdkV for subsequent projects. 7.0 CONSTRUCrXON MANAG~glVr AIsPROA~H De~erfl~ your firm's Constrnetlon l~anagemont Approach. (How do you propose to implen~nt your senpo of work~ The F..&V Constnsction ~ent systems was designed and developed in 1969 and put into · operation in 1970. It has over $0 years of construction and design expegiance, contracting know-how, and management ability behind it. While the term Construction Managml (CM) is singular in expression, it is in fact an o .r~ni~sttlon consisting of professionals and technicians that have current proficiency in value en~merin~ estimating, scheduling, construction, contracting, and related management teclmiqu~. Tbe CMo .rgsmi~tlon maintains professional status alongside architectural and engineering ~ums. 7.0 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEbtXNT APPROACH (cont.) The use of the E&V/CM system precludes the need for a general contractor on the project. The secondary responsibility of project management assumed by a general conwactor b~com~s th, primary responsibility of the construction manager during d~si~n, bidding, and on-sit~ durin$. construction. The typically inefficient biddins procedures used to establish the general contractor's proposal convert to a highly efficient and competitive multiple bidding concept under CM leadership. Control of qual/ty, cost, and time becomm a prime consideration in the II CM pme.,~ ~ the v~'io~ ~ of th~ pmj~ E&V/CM is a t~m concept that Senerms and utilizes input on project issues from th~ Owner. centers on tho philosophy that in2r-disciplinm~ input has gr~t valu~ m & motivator and problem solvm' durin$ programmin~ plannin~ d~si~n, biddin~ and comtmatimz. Non~ of tl~ other provid, tho r~ultin~ ~.onomi~ ~zl ~fl~ci~uci~ attrilmmd to conmnctiou Throu~mut tho projm:t, tho E&VlCM systmn appli~ it~ff to ~vmy faa~t of oomtruatiou and contracti~ involv~n~ut on bdmif of tl~ Owner. TM CM ia und~ coutm~ with tl~ Owner as a contmlkr of cost. quality, and tim, hay, bom w, il d~mmmm~ md 8.0BAS/S 01~ COMPKNSATION Project Informatiou For this project, wo lave assumed · S3,037,000 total project budpt f~ tbo c~m~tbn of sa ice areas MdMoa of ~mady 31,403 square feet. W~ hvo also rammed · schedub with the besinain~ of design immedim~, bids tsken in February, 1996 fad construction besinnins in Marck 1996; with owner occupanay in ~, 1996. a. Lump sum, d bidudvo bo for Comtruetbn Maaapmmt Serviom durhj tho deaip, bid cons~uctioe and post comtruetbu pkaa~ as well aa · budgeUry emimma for reimburaemnt. 1. Comlr~a Mamgammt b Fee E&V's fixed fee for principal omce support includ~ a) PersOnnol Cm-Houso Consultm) rr~ip~-h-Charp gobert Su~ r~ Project ~ David Williams Earl ~ Smith. P.E. Sch~lul~r Barry Badin~r Contract / Cost Administr~or(O As r~luimd Clerical As mquimi com,~~ CU~p,~ - ~a~ ~0 1. Construction Management Fixed Fee (cont.) I b) Principal Offi~ E&V liability imuranc~ Paler, forms, offie~ supplies Potage, delivzo, .~rvic.~, milzag, Telephon~, f~x Construction management fixed fee total: $54~318 j 2. Construction Management Reimbursables I E&V'S fee for reimburnbles is as followE Field Construction Mmqer I Scott hndmmn astimmd 30 week duration $42.311 Project Coordimm~ i Michael Fsrmer F. stimsmd 48 week duration S15,426 Ltbar Burden st I Consinctiou management rdmburmbles Mini S72,S82 I employee ofik~, equipment, supplies to supplied FioM by the City under C.~nmul Conditiou / C~ Suppe~L I All fees and of services 8re nogcdbble. F.~V is willing m convert to a lump sum fee for ~on managemeQt fixed foo mid cousiru~io~ mstmgSille~ ~le8. ~¥ does not ~ service, if necemry, is imhded in F.&V's hnnp sum fe~ b. Your firm*s poliey reprding ram for mldf~oni Mm requesUd by tim City. Fee S~L'auL~ faf .&ad~B Principal-in Clmp S9S.00 Proj~.t ¢oordin~ 3~.00 I Clerical 2~.00 El~'ic~l ~ ~.00 Amhif~m~l/Civil/S~ ~ ~.00 Scheduler 55.00 I Field Construction Manage~ 40,00 to (Range in Ra2s Bas~! on Qualiflc~ons) 65.00 I Other Authorized ~ Actual cost + ~ ~':-" Deceml~r 6, 1995 E&V Cons~uc~on M~nag~ Shari French .. City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 RE: Proposal Clarifications-New Hope Ice Arena Expansion Dear Share The following is the information you requested yesterday to further clarify our proposal. Your first concern was that the project scope had increased since the Request for Proposal was issued end you felt that we should review the current drawings with Boneslroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates. Mike Farmer and myself sat down with Gary Kristofitz yesterday afternoon and reviewed the drawings. Although the project has increased in size end cost, we feel our scope of services end fee are sufficient to cover the current scope in the time frame stated in our proposal. We rescue the right that if additional services are requested from you that exlaats our managment services beyond the October time frame that we would be compensaled pm' our hourly fee schedule. Our proposal separated the basis of compensation on page 11 into two items: Consmvaion Management Fixed Fee and Construction ~mnent Reimbu~sbles. E & V's total proposal cost- for the project is the'combined fee of our Fixed Fee ($54,318) and our Reimbursables ($72,582) which totals $126,900. Your final request was to see our overall cost of services split in~o Pre-C~on services up to award of bids and Construction/Post-Construction services. The followin8 is that breakdow~ Pre- Construction Services: $35,041; Constmction/Post-Conseuction Services: $91,$59. We hope that this informal, 'on cleso up any outsinndin~ issues you may have with our proposal. If Thank you. Sincerely, B&V, INCORPORATED David Ii. Williams Project Manager cc: Bob Strove, E & V 5801 Duluth Street · Suite 345 · Minneapolis, MN 55427 Phone 812/545-1355 · Fax812/545'-1346 Equal Opportunity Employer 1. Coastructioa Mmmgem~at Fixed Fee (coat.) b) Principal Offico ~ F~V liability insuranc~ Pap~, forms, offic~ supplies Postafe, delivery service, mileas~ Telephone, fax Compurm% copy machines, office equipment Ren~, hear, 1iSh~s, e~. .- Cons~uc,ion nunqement fixed fee totnl: SS4,318 2. ConsU'uctton Mmm~ement Reimbursables F-~V's fee for reimbursables is ss follows: Field Construction Mmmser Sco~ hndmann ~ :30 week duration S42~11 Project Coordin~or Michml F&-mer ~ 48 week duration $1S,426 Labor Burden st 35% ConsWuction mtnqement reimbursables ~otsl S72,S82 employee benefits. FieM office, equipment, supplies md co~municstions to be supplied by the City under Cranerd CondMom / Construction Support. All fees and scope of' services sre nes~., le. F.~V is willinf to convert to a lump sum fee for consu~'tion manqemant fixed fee and construction mmmsaneu~ reimbursables. F.&¥ does not chrse additional fees for rebiddinf and clmnse ordm within tho established ~ budsets. This setvice, if necesnry, is inoluded in F.&V's lump mm fee. b. Your firm's pone7 reprdiq fees rot sdditioni services requested by the City. Fee ~qph~rlula For AddM~_nsl b[q4~t l~mumiwl by_ tim ~ of I ~c~pal-~a Chnp SgJ.O0 ~j~ Mm~ Clerical Electrical F. qtilllaMr Mechanical F~hnnMr .' I A~hlt~tliraYCivil/StlNlct~ir~ ~ Si.00 Scheduler SS.00 Field Construc4/on Mana$~s 40.00 to (Ran$o in RAtu Based on Qualificttions) Other Authoriz~ Ex[mnsms Actual cost + F.&F Comulm~ and ~.. City of [ c_..._.. EDA REQUEST FOR ACTION Originating Depaxhaent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager EDA 12-11-95 Kirk McDonald ~'N Item No. Bin. Management Assistant By:./ ~ 4 Thomas Boettcher from Autohaus will be present at the December 1 lth EDA meeting to present an update on the Autohaus site improvements. The EDA has previously requested an update on the progress of the improvements, particularly since Universal Color, Inc. has vacated the front portion of the Autohaus building. Boettcher will be presenting a revised site plan to the EDA and a large copy of the revised plan is enclosed in your Council packet if you want to review it prior to the meeting. On April 4, 199I, Autohaus, Inc. and the City of New Hope executed a Development Contract regarding specific improvements to be made to the Autohaus property, such as the installation of concrete curb, landscaping improvements, storm drainage improvements, paving and lighting improvements and the demolition of the Animal Hospital building. The contract called for the improvements to be made to the property by April 14, 1992. Autohaus subsequently requested several time extensions to complete the improvements. The most current agreement states that all improvements will be completed by October 31, 1994. While some of the work has recently been completed (such as striping of the lot), several items have not yet been completed (landscaping on east and west sides of property, trash enclosure, etc.). Also, in Suly, 1994, Autohaus submiUed a request to the EDA to allow the retaining wall they constructed five feet from the property line to remain in place. The EDA declined to consider the request until an update on all outstanding issues on the plan was presented. In 1991, the EDA also made a low interest loan to Autohaus in the amount of $187,500 to assist with the acquisition of the former Animal Hospital site and for development improvements to the site. The loan was paid back in full this past summer, several years in advance of when it was due. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 12-11-95 Staff hope to meet with Autohaus prior to the EDA meeting to di~uss the following staff comments on the plan and the EDA will also want to discuss these issues with Boettcher. Comments include: 1. The original plan showed that the space occupied by Universal Color Lab was to be used in the future for display area and the revised plan shows that the front portion of the space will be used for showroom and rear portion of the space will be used for a Service Department: A new overhead door into the Service Department will be installed on the west side of the building. 2. The original landscaping plan included: .. 29 Austrian Pines to be planted on the west property line between Autohaus and Country Kitchen 16 Isanti Dogwood to be planted on the south side of the building 156 Andorra Junipers to be planted along 42nd Avenue 33 Pfitzer Junipers to be planted along east property line between Autohaus and YMCA property 18 Techny Arborvitae to be planted on rear/west property line between Autohaus and Country Kitchen While some landscaping has been completed at the frOnt of the site, the majority of the plantings included on the original plan have not been completed. The revised plan does not include a landscape schedule with plant name or quantity. The revised plan shows coniferous trees (6) along the west property line, deciduous trees (4) along the east property line and shrub plantings along 42nd Avenue. The landscaping portion of the revised plan needs to be more specific and staff is concerned that the landscaping has been reduced from the original plan. 3. The original plan showed a 10-foot setback between the sidewalk and the front display area for plantings. A retainln~ wall was installed 5 feet from the sidewalk and this is shown on the revised plan. AuWhaus desires to keep the retaining wall in place. 4. The original plan showed an outdoor trash enclosure to be installed on south side of the building, as does the revised plan; but the enclosure has not been completed. 5. Autohaus has made application for a si~gn variance for new canopy wall signs which will be considered in January. They will also be making improvements to the existing center ground sign and have indicated that the second ground sign on the northeast side of the property will be removed. 6. The revised plan shows A. one 48M elevated auto display at the northeast corner of the property, B. one 48" (to be changed to a 24M) elevated auto turntable di~lav in front of the property, and C. one 24" elevated auto display at the northwest comer of the property. The elevated auto displays were not included on the original plan. Request for Action 3 12-11-95 The parking lot was recently striped and AutohaUs has indicated-that the lot will be sealcoated and re- striped in i996. They also have plans to repaint the building. The major issues that need to be discussed/resolved are the landscaping, retaining wall/setback and the auto display turntables. After these items have been resolved, staff recommends that the agreed upon changes be incorporated into the site plan and that a revised Addendum be prepared/executed to define the timetable for completion. ,/ AOOENOUM TO CZTY OF NEW HOPE OEVELOPMENT CONTRACT 1. P r_~. The parties to this Addendum are the C~ty of New Hope (hereafter City), Autohaus of. Mtnneapoli s, Inc. (hereafter Autohaus) and Thomas W. 8oettcher, individually (hereafter Boettcher). 2. P_.~gJ~.I~-~-Y. The real property (hereafter Property) to which the this Addendum applies ts owned .in fee by Boettcher and is . !ocated ~n Henneptn County, Mtnneaota, legally described as: (See attached Exhibit A) 3. ~. Thts Addendum shill ~dt'fy the that certain Development Contract dated A~r~l ~, 1991 (hereafter Contract entered ~nto by the ~art~e~. Autohaul and Boettcher a~knowledge and agree that they are ~n breach, of the performance condttton~ of the Contract and ~n consideration for the Ctty'~ igrl~ent not to ~ld~ltlly pursue its remedtea under the termt o~ the Contract 8oettcher end Autohlul have agreed to enter into tht~ Addendum. 4. Uneerformed Cond~ti~na. S~le~f~cllly, Autohaue and aoettcher acknowledge and agree that they have fatle4 to ~erform ail the requtrementa of ~aragra~he 2.A) through I) and 3 of the Contract. With readier to. the ~rk required 'by . those grovt~ton~ the ~Art~e~ hereto agreff" that Autohau, and Boettcher will ~erfOm the ~rk ee fo110-~: a.) ~e tnttallat~~ of conerete ourb rrm the ~at southerly wall of the bu~ldtne northward to County Rea4 No. 9 be e~eleted by ~to~er 31, 1993. The r~atnder of the COMPLETED. curbin8 ~ ah~ on the ~te ~1~ aha11 be inetalled by · October 31, 19~4, except that curbtn~ around t peri.tlr of the unDlved ~dy ~ ~d re~ area ehl11'be ~natalled tf ~d whe~ ~A~d ~dy ~he~ r~tr atora,l ar~ t~ ~ave4 ae eat forth belo~. =~n, aha11 be of · ,ur~untable ty~e ~ a~rove4 by t~tty. Autohaua and ~ettcher aha11 =u~tt a of 1l~4' =urbtn~ for ag~roval to the C~ty ~rior to b.) 'All ~lanttnge ~ho~' on the a~te ~l~n north of t ~uil~tng'a ~at southerly ~all aha11 be ~natalled NOT October 31, 1993. All other ~lanttflge aho~ on the COMPLETED ~lan ~ha11 be'installed by October 31, 1994. c.) The six-foot opaque security fence around the of the body shop end collisiorr repair storage area shall · COMPLETED be installed by October 31, 1994. The existing fencing .shall remain tn PlaCe until ~he new security fence instal led. d.) The ~nstallat~on of l~ght~ng shown on the s~te plan shall be completed by Octobe~ 31, 1993. However, the Parties COMPLETED agree ~hat the existing lighting for the collision repair area as of the date of this Addendum 1~ adequate aha no required by the site plan. e.) All planted area, completed tn 1993 will be sprinkled by PARTIALLY October 31, 1~93. All planted areaa coapleted tn 1994 CONPLETE will be sprinkled by O~tober 31, 19~4. f.) The installation of the outdoor traah enclosures will be NOT DONE completed by October 31, 19~4. . ._~.) The front display area w~11 be c~lete~ by October 31, PAVING CO~PLETEB 1993. He,ever, the parties a~ree that the front STRiPiNG NEEDS TO BE area can be pave~ ,tth concrete an~ DONE--NO HANDICAPPED SPACES h.) The ialanda tn the trana~rt lane area will be Installed NOT DONE b~ October 31, 1~94. ~. And m~ner ~r=ve4 by the C~ty Engineer sh~11 c~leted by October 31, 1993. The eroaton control me~ure~ ~ha]l ~ly t= ~11 un~ve4 j.) The C~ty ~gree~ t= ~ve ~ndef~n~tely the r'equ~rement the C=ntr~=t that Aut=h~u~ ~n4 ~ettcher .~Ave'~he body .~ ~ett.~her el~t t= ~ve the ~dy ~ ~d 're~r .gert=her ~111 ~e r~utre4 to tn~t111, ~rtor to ~vtnl~ the ~blla Itom ~lter 4rltnlle t~rov~ent~ r~lr~ b~ ~lriiri~h 3 of the ~,trl=t. ~4, ~rtor t~t~11t,1 11t4 ~tom ~lter drltn~,e t~rov~ent~, ~~ ~d.the Ctty ~t ~ree on the ~:~l~t' =f the c=~t ~f ~d ~t=m w~ter dr~nage ~v~te. ~T~S THAT NEED TO BE CONP.LETED: LANDSCAPING ~ -- STRiPiNG TRANSPORT LANES 5. ~. The parties agree that :t'l~e terme of the Contract and this Addendum shall survive the satisfaction, release ~--. termination of the April 4, 1991 Mortgage, Security Agreemer.. and Fixture Financing Statement given by Boettcher, and Autohaus and Boettcher shall be required to perform all work set forth above even if said Mortgage, Security Agreement and Fixture Financing Statement is satisfied, re)eased, or terminated. 6. ~.~4~..~i..t~Y. The subdivision bond or other security required of Autohaus and Boettcher to ensure their performance under the Contract shall be reduced to $1,000.00. T, Effect ot" Addendum, The parties agree that this Addendum shall not change the'other provisions of the Contract, which shall remain in full force and effect. This Addendum shall be construed es supplemental to end not tnconst'stent with the Contract. The parties further agree that &.breech of this Addendum shall also constitute a breach of the. Aprtl 4, 1991 Mortgage, Security AgreMaent and Fixture Financing. Statement given by 8oettcher.to secure the Aprtl 4,-1991 Mortgage Note executed by Boettchsr. Autohaua further agrees that the assignment of the Certificate of 0epostt given aa financial security to insure: performance of the-Contract shall subject to reduction aa set forth ,-above, also extend to secure performance under this Addendum. Dated: Dated: ~ vtdually · .~O! Xylem Avenue Norm rete~o~e.' ~ .... %'ew Hc~e. M~cesota 55428-4898 TDD ~,ne: 6~2-53~.5~09 Ro~,ce ~ax' July 27, 1994 Mr. Thomas Boet~her Autohaus of Minneapolis, In~. 7709 42nd Avenue Nort/t New Hope, MN 55427 Subject: REQUEST TO ALLOW FRONT RETAINING W.a,t .~_ TO REMAXN IN PLACE FIVE FEET FROM PROPERTY ~ At the luly 2~tli New Hope F.t:otmm~ Development Authority meeting, the City Manager presented your lett~ to the EDA requesti~ m allow the existin~ t'etaini~ wall to remain in place five feet from the pmpea~ lin~, dna to the fact that Univet~t Colout Lab, Ina. will be extending their lease and tl~ plan for the front display ama will be dehyed. T"n6 EDA declined The EDA indicatmt that they do not want to ammd th~ existi~ Development Agreement for ' only the remini~ wail isnm if oiler ~ ~ nmM tO 1~ made. Aa you at~ aware, all complel~d by this fall. TI~ EDA warns aa ulMam oa all omnandi~ issu~ before it will consider you~ requa~ m allow tbs t~ainin[ wall tn mnain in plate, and tbs City cam~ proce~ 'with any curb ~ on your ~ in conjungtion witll the 42nd Avenue I have enr, los~ · ~ of tbs nmst t~m~dy revised ~ between the City ~tnd Autohaus. Please ~ I~ all. mint and msimnd in ~ regatnti~ tl~ outslamli~ improvements to Council/EDA mmsin[ to answ~ tbs EDA's 'quastions so that we can move forward on thi_~ Family StytM C~'~~ Fo~ Fami~ LMn~ Mr. Thomas Boettcher luIy 2'/, 1994 ~-" Page 2 Sincerely, Daniel .[. Donahue City Manager Ki~ McDonald ¢onmauni~ l~v~l~m~m Coordin~r Steve $ondrall, City Mark Hanson, City Dous Sandmd, Buildin~ Official ,- COUNTY ROA .13 ~ NO. 9  EDA REQUF~T FOR ACTION Originating Depa~t~ent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager EDA Kirk McDonald Item No. By: Management Assistant By:. . 5 RESOLUTION APPROVING RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL FOR ACQUISITION OF HOMEWARD BOUND PROPERTY AT 4741 ZEALAND AVENUE NORTH (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 533) The enclosed resolution, which authorizes the Mayor and City Manager to execute a Right of First Refusal Agreement for the acquisition of the Homeward Bound property at 4741 Zealand Avenue North, has been prepared by the City Attorney for consideration by the EDA. The EDA has indicated an interest in the use of the property in the event that it is sold by Homeward Bound and the EDA has been working with representatives from North Ridge/CareBreak for the possible location of an adult day care facility at the site. The enclosed Right of First Refusal permits Homeward Bound to freely market the property, but provides the EDA with the opportunity to match any purchase offer for its acquisition. In other words, the EDA would have to buy the property pursuant to the same terms and conditions being offered by a third party. If the EDA would not meet the offer, then Homeward Bound would be free to sell the property to the third party without any claim of right by the EDA. The terms of the attached agreement are that the EDA would pay $500 in consideration for its fight to match any third party offer. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 December 6, t995 Mr, Daniel 4. Donahue City Manager City of New Hope 4401Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN RE: New Hope EPA/RIght of FirSt Refusal for Homeward Bound Property Our File No: 99.11101 Dear Dan': Please find enclosed a Resolution Authorizing Execution of the ~tght of First Refusal for the Homeward Bound property by the Mayor and City Manager for coneideretion at the December 11, 1995 Counctl meeting, ! took the ltberty of making a $500 offer to Homeward Bound for the execution of this document. [t is my opinion $500 ts reasonable consideration for the iDA's right to match any third party offers for ;he Homeward Bound property. If we exercise our right to acquire the property pursuant to thle document, the $500 paymen= will be applied to the purchase price of the property. Please contact me if you have any quest/one about the contents of this document, Very tru3y yours, Stev~n A. Sondrall slw Enclosure co: Valerie Leone (w/eno) December ~, 1095 Ms, Donna Hoverman £xeout {ye O~rec~or Homeward ~ound, 47¢1 Zealand Avenue NOrth New Hope, MN 5542S ~E: New ~ope £DA/Rtg~t of FirSt Refusal to Acquire Proper~y Our..F~le No: 99,31101 Dear Donna: 1 Please f{nd enclosed a proposed R~9ht of F~rst Refusal you have d~acussed with both the New Hope'Mayor ~n~ City Manager. This aocument ~s submitted ~n connection w{th your o~gan~za~an's ~n New t4ope. As you are aware, t~e New Hope E¢onom{c DeveloPment Authority very ~ntereated in the use of your proper~y ~n :ne event your' organizatton dottles to sell tr. AS you are aware, we are work~n~ Wlt~ the people at North R~ge for the poaa{ble toca:Son of adult day care f~¢~l~ty {n the C~ty, ~nd your proper'ty wouid be very su{table for such a use, The enclosed R~ght of F{rst Refuse1 permits you to freety your property but s~mp~y p~ov~des :~e NeW HOpe EDA w~th ~pportunt~y ~o matc~ any purchase offer for {ts acqu~s{:~on. other words, we woutd have to buy the propert~ pursuant to the terms and conditions being offered by a :hir~ party. ~f the New Hope EPA does not meet the offer, then you are f~ee ~o sel~ ';t :he third party without any claim of r~ght by the New Hope EPA. The New HOpe EPA would p~¥ ~5OO ~n consideration for ~:s rlg~: match any third party offer pursuant to th~s Right of Refusal. MS. Ocnn~ Hoverman D~cember 6, 1995 Page 2 ~asical.',y, this document provides Homeward t)oun~ w{t~, essentially two buyers for any purchase o~fer s~bm~tted to ~cqui re the have ~bo~: the enc~oseO document, Very truly yours, ~Y ~EN A. SONDR~L New HODe City Attorney co: Dan(el d. Oon~hue~ City RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL WHEREAS, Homeward Bound, [nc., a Minnesota non-profit corporation (the Owner) is the fee owner of certain real estate located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described The South 332.43 feet of the West 1/2 of the Northwest Quarter the Southeast Quarter of section 7, TownshiD 118, Range 21, except the East 360 feet of the South 180 feet thereof, according to the Government Survey thereof; (the Property), and WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority in and for the City o'f New HOpe (the EDA) wishes to obtain a right of first re?usa1 for purchase of the Property. NOW, THEREFORE, In consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein, the Owner and the $DA agree ae follows: 1. NOtice of Prooose~ Sale, The Owner aha11 give the EDA written notice by certified mail or personal service of any signed purchase agreement for all or a part of the Owner's interest in the Property, including the terms end conattions of said proposed ssle. The Owner shall include a contingency clauee referring to this right of first refuge1 in any purchase agreement involving the Property. 2. Sxerciee of..Ootlo~. The EDA $hall have 30 days from of reoeiDt of eaid notice wlthtn w~ic~ to exercise the option to purGhase ~he interest of the O~ner in t/he Pro~erty upon the same terms and conditions as contained in e&i~ PurChase Agreement. The EDA shall exeroiee the option by delivering to the owner, or by recording wtth t~e ~egistrer of Tttlae, notice that the EDA wil~ purchase the Owner's interest in the Property, A closing of the sa~e/purchase shall then t~ke p]&oe within s reasonable time after the exer~tse of this Option. 3. Non-Exercise 9f Option, [f the EDA fatls tO exercise said right to ~pur~hass the Property ~y coltlD~ytng with the above, the EDA'S right of f~rst refusal shall become n~11 and voi~, and the EDA shs]l. ~rovide to the Owner reaeonable documentation ~ecordable form, such as, but not ]tmltea to, a Waiver of Right of First Refus&l~ whtch evidences t~e waiver of the EDA's rights under ~hlS agreement. 1 4. P~yment for OO~ion. In consideration for this r~ght of first refusal, the EDA will pay the Owner the sum of $500.00 within 20 days of final exeoution of this agreement. In the event the EDA exercises its Right of First Refusal, the Owner agrees the $500,00 payment made hereunder will be applied to the EDA's purcflase of the property and wi1] be Gons~dered an earnest money paid by the EDA to the Owner for the acquisition of sa~d ~roperty. 5. Tec~inetion Date. modified, th~s agreemsn~ shat1 terminats end become null and void on a a~s five years from the date of execution of this agreement, 6. Notice. Any No, tee rebutted by this Agreement~ if mai3ed, sba11 be mailed to the following FOR THE OWNERS= Attn= Donna Hoverman Homeward Bound~ Znc. ~741 Zealand Avenue North New Hope, MN 554~8 Attn: Donna Hoveraa~ FOR TH~ EDA: Attn: OanieI J, Oonahue New Hope EDA 4401Xylon Avenue North New HOpe~ MN 55428 Attn: ~teven A. $ondrall Corrt~ & So,ar&II, P.A. 8525 EdJnbrook Crossing, Ste. 203 Brooklyn Park~ MN 55443 . ?. ~t~.~~. Thee agreement eh~11 be btn~lng upon and inure to the beneftt of t~e ~elrs~ adminlstrators, executors an~ successors of the respective part~ee. Dated. thee .. . day of . ., 199~o HOMEWARD BOUND, ;NO~, a Minnesota non-profit corporation [ts By . t ..... ECONOMZC DEVELOPMENT AUTHOF~ZTY [N AND FOR THE CZTY OF NEW HOPE, a Minnesota munict Da1 corDorat ton By ~te Preeident By . It S 'Execu't ive 'Dt r'ector '--[ ~ ._~ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing waa acknowledged before me thts _. day of ......... ~ 1 es__, by , and . __ ::. , the an~' , , ,,, reapeettvelY, of Homeward BOUnd: [nc., s '"MinneeOt~ non-profit corporatton~ on .Beh&lf of said corporation. Notary Publta STATE OF MINNESOTA ) coUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing waa acknowledged before me thta ...... day of , 199 , by Edw, J. ErlcKson and D&niel J. ~ahue, the chat~an &nd exeou~lve director, reapecttvely, of the Econonttc Oeve10pment Authority ~n and MJnnesota municipal corporation, on beh&lf of setd Notary Public DRAFTED BY: 3 CORRZCK & SONDRALL, P.A. 8525 Edlnb~ook C~osa~n~, #~03 Brooklyn Perk, MN 55443 (~lZ) 425-5671 REQUEST FOR ACTION Originating Depmlanent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager EDA  1-95 Kirk McDonald Item No. By: Management Assistant By:. 6 DISCUSSION REGARDING LEASt BETWF.~N PHOENIX MANUFACTURING CORPORATION AND THE EDA FOR CITY-OWNED BUILDING AT 7528 42ND AVENUE (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 474) The existing lease between the EDA and Phoenix Manufacturing Corporation for the City-owned building at 7528 42nd Avenue expires on 12/31/95 and staff requests to discuss with the EDA if you are interested in extending the lease into 1996. The City has no immediate plans for demolition of the building/redevelopment of the property and Phoenix Manufacturing has made timely lease payments during the past year. As you will recall, the EDA entered into the lease with Phoenix for the same terms as the EDA had with Foremost, Inc. The current lease rental rate (from 4/24/95 through 12/31/95) is $20,020, which is the amount of the 1995 real estate taxes. Under the existing lease, Phoenix Manufacturing is required to pay all building operating expenses (insurance, maintenance, utilities) and to correct any substandard building conditions. A copy of the current lease is attached for your information. If the EDA is agreeable to extending the lease, staff would request direction from the EDA on the terms and conditions of the extension. Staff recommends that the EDA consider increasing the rental rate to market rate conditions, per the enclosed information. Staff recommends that the EDA authorize the City Manager to negotiate with Phoenix Manufacturing on a lease extension if you are favorable to letting them remain in the building. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 MEMORANDUM '~ DATE: March 22, 1995 TO: Dan Donahue, City Manager Steve Sondrall, City Attorney FROM: Kirk McDonald, Managemem Assistant/Community Development Coordinator SUBJECT: Iudusu'ial Buildiug Reu~al Rates In an effort to determine what market rental rates currently are for industrial buildings in the New Hope area, I contacted Thorpe Bros., Inc. (our agent for the vacant property at 42nd/Nevada Avenaes). We specifically discussed tl~ Foremost, Inc. building at 7528 42nd Avenue North. Per the attached excerpt from the appraisal, the building contains an area of 20,795 square feet and contaim 1,600 square feet of office space, or 8% office area. Thorpe indicated that a low rental rate for wal~hOUse space would be $2.$0 per squar~ foot on a triple net lease (they pay aH utilities and taxes). They said a mom reasonable rate would probably be $3.00 - $3.25 per square foot. Thorpe indicated that the office space should rent for $5.00 $6.00 per square foot. Using these market estimates on the Foremost buiidi~, the monthly and annual payments that might be derived from a lease are calculated as follows: Office Space -- 1,600 sq, ft. x 5.00 psf -- $ 8,000.00 Warehouse Space -- 19,195 sq. ft. x 3.25 psf --- TOTAL PER YEAR i $70,383.75 · + 12 months TOTAL PER'MONTH $ 5,865.31 4401Xylon Avenue North City Hal[: 612-531-5100 City Hall Fax: 612-531-5136 New Hope, Minnesota 55428-4898 Police: 612-531-5170 Police Fax: 612-531.5174 Public Works: 612-533.4823 Public Works Fax: 512.533-7650 TDD: 612-531.5109 Fire Dep't. Fax: 612-531-5175 December 27, 1995 Mr. David Lasky Lasky Co. Real Estate 2506 Monterey Avenue South St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Subject: Car-X PUD Development Dear Mr. Lasky: This letter is in response to the questions outlined in your December 4th correspondence to the City Manager and Building Official regarding your proposed Car-X PUD development, at 7180 42nd Avenue. In your letters and our phone conversations, you have indicated that there are three (3) basic issues that you want addressed: 1. Estimated cost of storm sewer improvements; 2. Restriction on further future development on the site if the Car-X project is approved; and 3. Information regarding the approval process for the Car-X project if the PUD zoning process is not utilized and the property is subdivided instead. I have discussed the above issues with the City Manager, City Engineer, Planning Consultant and Building Official and our responses are outlined below. 1. Storm Sewer Improvements. One of the recommendations that has been included in all of the staff reports to the Planning Commission, per recommendation of the City Engineer, is that a "Storm sewer system must be provided, including easement acquisition, per the City Engineer" or that "a grading and drainage plan, subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer, be submitted." You have inquired about the costs of the storm sewer and the City Engineer has prepared the attached letter and sketch in response to your questions. The total estimated cost to install 350 lineal feet of 12" storm sewer and two (2) standard manholes and catch basins with castings is $26,000. This cost includes a l0 percent contingency and 25 percent for indirect costs, which includes engineering/administration, etc. The cost does not include costs associated with easement acquisition. The proposed storm sewer would serve the Car-X site and a portion of the Champion Auto site to the east. The benefitted drainage area would encompass 1.8 acres, Family Styled City ~ For Family Living Mr. David Lasky Page 2 ~-~ December 27, 1995 including 1.4 acres from your site. The cost per acre and the estimated assessment to each property is outlined in the City Engineer's letter and the estimated cost to the Car-X project is $20,221.00. The costs for any easement acquisition (if necessary) and repairs to the existing storm sewer (if any) would be the responsibility of the City, however the City would probably request a perimeter easement.,. dedication for the improvement from you at no cost at the time your project was approved. If you have further questions about the storm sewer portion of the project, please contact Mark Hanson at 636-2168, extension 338. 2. Restriction on future development on the site if the Car-X pro_iect is approved. You have asked, if the PUD for the Car-X project was approved, if you could come back to the City in the future to accomplish further development on the site. You indicated that the future development could involve a new tenant, a new building behind the Car-X building, or a new building in or around the existing G.I. Joe Surplus store. You indicated that you did not wish to be locked into two (2) small projects (G.I. $oe and Car-X) if a larger project came along in the future. The City has also suggested that in the future you may want to consider total demolition to accommodate total new construction on the site. In answer to the above question, it is the opinion of the Planning Consultant that the approval of a Car-X project on the site today in no way prohibits or precludes you from amending your PUD or submitting a new PUD to allow for additional redevelopment/eXpanded development in the future. The only condition for an amended or new PUD plan in the future would be that any development on that parcel would have to be accomplished within the capacity of the site and meet and comply with all of the performance standards, as delrmed by the City's Zoning Ordinance and PUD regulations. In other words, you certainly could submit another plan in the future for consideration, but it would need to comply with parking, density, loading requirements (for buildings exceeding 5,000 square feet), etc. 3. Information re~ardin? thc approval process for the Car-X ~roiect if the PUD zoning process is not utilized and the property is subdivided instead. In your letter to the Building Official you asked a number of questions about the subdivision approval process. If you did not proceed with the PUD process, and wanted to subdivide the property and construct a new Car-X on the new lot, you would need to make application for the following zoning procedures: A. Preliminary and Final Plat to subdivide the property: The Planning Commission and City Council need to approve the Preliminary Plat. Once the Preliminary Plat was approved a Final Plat would need to be submitted. The Final Plat needs to be approved by the Planning Commission and City Council or the Planning Commission can waive their review of the Final Plat at the time they consider the Preliminary Plat; therefore, the Final Plat could go directly to the City Council. I have enclosed the excerpts from the subdivision ordinance regarding this process for your reference. If two buildings are to occupy the site, from the City's perspective, it would probably be better to Mr. David Lasky '~':~ "' Page 3 December 27, 1995 develop the site as a PUD rather than to subdivide, however that choice is yours. The City feels that the overall site works better as a PUD due to the shared parking, traffic circulation issues, etc; B. The Car-X facility on the new subdivided lot would need site and building plan review/approva!i... from the Planning Commission and City Council; and ~-' C. Due to the fact that the property is located in a B-4 Zonin~ District and auto-oriented uses are allowed by conditional use, a conditional use permit would need to be approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. The CUP would need to meet the conditions outlined under Section 4.124(1) of the Zoning Code, which I have enclosed for your information. Under the usual circumstances the applications for site and building plan review/approval and the conditional use permit would be made at the same time. I have enclosed a 1996 Planning Commi.~sion schedule, which includes application fees and deposits for the above listed zoning procedure. Finally, I want to respond to your inquiry about the impact that a subdivision would have on the setback requirements and whether or not you could add on to the existing building. The Zoning Code defines "lot frontage" as "that boundary abutting a public right-of-way having the least width." Therefore, under the existing conditions with the entire parcel being one unsubdivided lot, the west property line abutting Nevada Avenue is considered the front yard and the setback requirement is 3:5 feet. The east property line abutting Crown Auto is considered the rear yard and the setback requirement is 3:5 feet. The south property line abutting 42nd Avenue is considered a side yard abutting a thorou,~hfare and the setback requirement is 3:5 feet. The north property line abutting residential property is also considered a side yard and the setback requirement is 25 feet because a commercial use is abutting residential property. These setbacks are summarized as follows: One Lot Yard Desicrnation Setback Remiirement Front Yard (Nevada Avenue) 35 feet Rear Yard (Crown Auto) 35 feet Side Yard Abuttin~ Thoroughfare (42nd Avenue) 35 feet Side Yard Abutting Residential (north) 25 feet If the property is subdivided into two lots, per the enclosed examples developed by Doug Sandstad, the above stated setbacks would remain the same for the Nevada Avenue corner lot, as Nevada Avenue would still be defined as the front yard. However, the setback requirements on th~ interior lot would change. The 42nd Avenue thoroughfare would become the front yard of the interior lot and the setback requirement would be 50 feet. The north property line abutting the residential area would be considered the rear yard with a 35-foot setback requirement. The east and west boundaries of the interior lot would be considered the side yards and the setback requirement would be 10 feet. These setbacks are summarized as follows: Mr. David Laslcy ';"'" Page 4 December 27, 1995 Two Lots Corner Lot Yard Designation Setback Requirement Front Yard (Nevada Avenue) 35 feet Rear Yard (east) 35 feet Side Yard Abutting Thoroughfare (42nd Avenue) 35 feet Side Yard Abutting Residential (north) 25 feet Two Lots Interior Lot Yard Desicrnation Front Yard (42nd Avenue) $0 feet Rear Yard (north) 35 feet Side Yard (east and west) 10 feet I hope this information clarifies your questions about the setback requirements regarding the existing parcel and a possible subdivision of the property. In regards to your question about adding on to the existing building, nothing would prohibit an addition on to the existing G.I. $oe building, provided that the setback and parking requirements were complied with. In the event they were not met, you would have the opportunity to make an application for a variance from the requirements. If you have any furthe(questions, please Contact me at $31-5119. We are looking forward to working with you on the development of the property. Sincerely, Kirk McDonald Management Assistant/ Community Development Coordinator Enclosures: City Engineer Correspondence Subdivision Requirements CUP Requirements Building Official Concepts 1996 Planning Schedule & Fees 12/4 Lasky Correspondence cc: Dan Donahue, City Manager Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant Steve Sondrall, City Attorney Planning Case No. 95-15 Doug Sandstad, Building Official