020696 Planning AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6, 1996
CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA
7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. CONSENT ITEMS
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
'3.1 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.
*3.2 Case 96-02 Request for Site & Building Plan Review/Approval for Building
Addition, 7709 WinPark Drive, Taber Bushnell, Inc., Petitioner.
3.3 Case 95-20 Ordinance 96-2, 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.
3.4 Case 95-21 Ordinance 96-04, 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.
4. COMMITTEE REPORTS
4.1 Report of Design and Review.Committee - Next Meeting: February 15th at 3:30 p.m.
4.2 Report of Codes and Standards Committee - Next Meeting: To be scheduled after 2/12
Council meeting.
5. OLD BUSINESS
5.1 Miscellaneous Issues
6. NEW BUSINESS
6.1 Review of Planning Commission Minutes of danuary 2, 1996.
6.2 Review of City Council Minutes of December 11, 1995 and January 8, 1996.
6.3 Review of EDA Minutes of December 11, 1995 and January 8, 1996.
7. ANNOUNCEMENTS
8. ADJOURNMENT
* Petitioners are required to be in attendance.
NEW HOP~
FEBRUARY PLANING
CO~ISSION MEETING
PC95-31
Autohaus
7709 42nd Avenue
North
PC96-02
Taber Bushnell
7709 Winpark Drive
GOLDEN VALLEY
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: February 2, 1996
Meeting Date: February 6, 1996
UPDATE
1. This request was tabled at the January 2nd Planning Commission meeting, as the Commission
indicated it could not support the original request and asked the petitioner to submit revised plans
with the correct size/scale shown. The Commission requested a reduction in the number of signs
and the square footage of the signs to more closely comply with the Sign Code.
2. The petitioner has submitted revised plans, which are described below.
3. Ground Sign - The revised plans show one (1) 12' x 6' (72 square feet) ground sign which would
be installed on the existing support structure, with radius and shrouds to be added. The total
height of the sign would be 18 feet.
The original proposal was for two (2) seventy-two (72) square foot ground signs being installed
on the same support structure, therefore the petitioner has reduced the ground sign request by
50 percent and staff finds that the revised request is a big improvement over the original request.
The colors of the smaller sign would be the same as the one originally proposed.
The Sign Code states that only one 75-square foot ground sign is allowed if the building contains
more than one wall sign over 10 square feet and the proposed wall signs exceed 10 square feet.
This ground sign meets the Sign Code requirements if the second ground sign on the old Animal
Hospital property is removed, as two ground signs are not allowed. Staff will be recommending
approval of the revised ground sign on the condition that the second ground sign be removed.
4. Front Wall Signs - Autohaus is proposing the installation of three (3) walls signs on the north
elevation, as follows:
North (front) Elevation:
(1) 2' x 8' (16 square feet) AutoBody Plus
(2) 30" x 12' (30 square feet) Autohaus Sales & Leasing
(3) 30" x 12' (30 square feet) Autohaus Certified Auto Service
Planning Case Report 95-31 2 February 2, 1996
The number and sizes of the signs are the same as proposed in January.
The Sign Code states that the total allowable sign area for a multiple occupancy structure shall
not exceed 15 percent 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. 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.
In discussing these sign requests with the Planning Consultant, if the Commission considers this
as a multiple tenant building, 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. Staff would recommend that a condition of any approval be that the petitioner
submit floor plans to the Building Official indicating what areas each tenant occupies.
5. Side Wall Signs - The petitioner is proposing the following side wall signs:
East Elevation:
One (1) 20" x 6' (9 square fee0 AutoBody Plus
West Elevation: One (1) 20' x 6' (9 square feet) Autohaus Certified Auto Service
One (1) 2' x 5' (10 square feet) Autohaus entrance
One (1) 2' x 5' (10 square feet) AutoBody Plus entrance
One (1) 20" x 6' (9 square feet) AutoBody Plus
In the Sign Code 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. If it is interpreted that the
proposed signs are not delivery signs, variances are required for the side wall signs under the
current Sign Code.
6. Staff finds that the petitioner has significantly reduced the size of the ground sign and the side
wall signs have been reduced to meet or almost meet the nine square foot requirement. The only
remaining issue is the number of the side wall signs.
RECOMMENDATION
If the Commission proceeds with the approval of the sign plan, staff recommends the following
conditions:
1. Second ground sign on former Animal Hospital property to be removed.
2. Floor plans identifying tenant spaces to be submitted justifying multiple tenants and front wall
signs.
Planning Case Report 95-31 3 February 2, 1996
3.Side wall signs shown at ten square feet to be reduced in size to nine square feet maximum.
Attachmems: Revised Ground Sign Plans
Revised North Elevation Ground Signs
Revised Awning Plan
Revised East Elevation
Revised West Elevation
1/8 Correspondence
1/2 Planning Case Report
JAN I 2 1996
16' 61'
I
i 2' i 8 6'* I ~6' I I 16' I
J8" I 12' I I 12' I
NORTH ELEVATION
i/4" - I'
20"-0"
15" RED
4" RED
18" COPY AREA = 9 SQ.FT. 25" WHITE
4"' RED
TEAL SIRIPES 230 246
20"-0" 15" RED
4~RED
~ 18" COPY AREA = 9 SQ.FT. 25" WHITE
BAND ERADICATE
.Certified Auto Bervioe* -
4" RED
6'-0" j COPY; Cardinal red 230-53
A
TYPICAL
AWNING
142 -- BACK UG44I£D AWN~IG
RED COC~EY BI~I1E FA~I~IC
NO COPY
~Ol.~ 16 .~O. FI'.- 64'
20'
EASl E~EVA~K)N
I/4": I' 0'
f
WEST [IEVATION
I/4" = I'-0" ~
4401 Xylon Avenue North CiO/Hall: 612-531-5100 C, ty ~,a/l :ax:
Ne w Hope, Minnesota 55428-~898 .~otice: 612-531.5170 Po/ice Fax: 5' 2-52
Put~iic Works: 612-533-4823 Pubiic WorKs Fax:
TDD: 612.531-5109 Fire Dep't. Fax:
January 8, 1996
Mr. Thomas Boettcher
Autohaus of Minneapolis
7709 42nd Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55427
Subject: PLANNING 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
Dear Mr. Boettcher:
As you are aware at the January 2nd Planning Commission meeting, the Commission tabled ~our
request for sign variances/approval of Comprehensive Sign Plan to allow wall and ground signs
that exceed Sign Code requirements in number and size until the February 6th meeting.
The Commission has requested a reduction in the number of signs and the square footage of the
signs in order to more closely comply with the Sign Code. Please submit revised plans with the
correct size/scale shown by January 22nd if you want the plans to be considered at the February
6th Planning Commission meeting.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 531-5119.
Sincerely,
Kirk McDonald
Management Assistant/
Community Development Coordinator
cc: Dan Donahue, City Manager
Steve Sondrall, City Attorney
Mark Hanson, City Engineer
Doug Sandstad, Building Official
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
Property File (7709 42nd Avenue North)
Planning Case File 95-31
Family Styled uny ,~!,,;i^,,, l, li,~,' For Family Living
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 2, 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 Simas. 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 Si__t, ns 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 Simas. 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 Sign: (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 75-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 feet) AutoBody Plus
(2) 30" x 12' (30 square feet) Autohaus Sales & Leasing
(3) 30" x 12' (30 square feet) 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 feet) Autohaus Certified Auto Service
(6) 2' x 8' (16 square feet) 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:
Awning 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 finding 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 Janua~ 2. 1996
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 Lit~ht 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 malces 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 front 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
,1
~.[td~rLqY
~ Nz-,/~ ~VE4-~ !'-'-:----~ ~
~J ' -- 42 NO AVE. N.
OFFICE
4~ ST av E~ ~03
~ SC.OOL .
~'
AVE. N.
I ~ ~ ~
· , ~ ~;~, ~l ~, ~ I
TH AVE N. 3~Z~ ~/ ~1
~ - BETHEL
I
CEMETERY ,
~6~ AVE N
913.3
X
922. ?
X 922.7
DODO 9 1.0
9~2.8
96.0
k
903.2
COUNTY ROAD - NO. g
REUSE EXISTING STRUCTURE
ADD RADIUS END SHROUDS
20'-0"
ll.OII
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 96-02
Request: Request for Site & Building Plan Review/Approval for Building Addition
Location: 7709 Winpark Drive
PID No: 20-118-21-22-0002
Zoning: I- 1, Limited Industrial
Petitioner: Taber Bushnell, Inc.
Report Date: February 2, 1996
Meeting Date: February 6, 1996
BACKGROUND
1. The petitioner is requesting site and building plan review/approval for a building addition,
pursuant to Section 4.039A of the New Hope Code of Ordinances.
2. Taber Bushnell, Inc. is proposing to construct a 27,616 square foot warehouse addition to the
south side of their existing 54,500 square foot building. The addition would bring the total
building size to 82,116 square feet.
3. Taber Bushnell is the leasee of the property and produces metal stampings for the automotive,
computer and electronics industries.
4. With the addition, Taber Bushnell will provide jobs for 180-190 employees working on a three-
shift operation.
5. The petitioner has stated that this addition will have an impact on their ability to grow in their
business as well as provide an updated structure in the New Hope community.
6. Staff considers this a routine site and building plan review, as no variances or conditional use
permits are required. The existing building and the addition meet the following setback
requirements:
Front yard (north) 50 feet
Side yard (east/west) 20 feet
Rear yard (south) 35 feet
7. The property is located in an I-1, Limited Industrial, Zoning District at the southwest comer of
Winpark Drive. Surrounding land uses and zoning include I-1, Limited Industrial, to the
north/south/west and 1-2, General Industrial, to the east.
8. The topography of the undeveloped south portion of the lot slopes steeply downhill 27 feet
towards the street on the east side of the property.
9. No public hearing notice is required for a routine site and building plan review.
Planning Case Report 96-02 2 February 2, 1996
ANALYSIS
1. Special requirements for all developments in the I-l, Limited Industrial, Zoning District include
the following:
A. Lot Coverage. Not more than forty percent of the lot, parcel or tract of land shall be
covered in a Limited Industry District.
B. Lot Area. In determining the minimum lot area requirement of one acre, the contiguous
dedicated streets shall be excluded.
C. Green Area. At least twenty percent of the lot, parcel or tract of land shall remain as a grass
plot, including shrubbery, plantings or fencing, and shall be landscaped. Required minimum
green area shouM be emphasized in the front and side yards abutting streets or residential
property. The work "landscaped" means a controlled surface and grade and plantings to
allow a smooth surface flow and being under continual maintenance for the preservation of
scenic harmony.
D. Parking Lots. The minimum setback for parking lots shall be twenty feet adjacent to a
residential district and ten feet adjacent to a non-residential district.
E. Parking Lot Screening. The parking lot in front of the building shall be screened from the
street and from adjoining property in the residential district.
F. Landscaping Plans. Detailed landscaping plans shall be submitted to City Council and
approved before a building permit may be obtained.
G. Design Standards - Curb Cuts. All off-street parking facilities shall be designed with
appropriate means of vehicular access to a street or alley as well as maneuvering area.
2. The project data for this site/building is listed below:
Lot Area: 203,000/4.66 acres Existing Building Area: 54,500 sf
Office: 3,200 sf
Manufacturing: 38,640 sf
Warehouse: 12,660 sf
Proposed Building Addition: 27,616 sf Total Building Area: 82,116 sf
Manufacturing: 15,360 sf Office: 3,200 sf
Warehouse: 12,256 sf Manufacturing: 54,000 sf
Construction Type: II-N Warehouse: 24,916 sf
Planning Case Report 96-02 3 February 2, 1996
Building to Lot Ratio: 40% Total Parking Required: 178 spaces
Parking to Lot Ratio: 38% Office: 17 spaces
Green Space to Lot Ratio: 22% Manufacturing: 139 spaces
Warehouse: 22 spaces
Total Parking Provided: 184 spaces
3. The lot coverage and green area ratios are met, as well as the parking requirements.
4. The City Department Heads reviewed the plans and the Design & Review Committee met with
the petitioner on January 22nd and the following issues were discussed: parking spaces and
number of employees/shifts, truck docks/traffic circulation/maneuverability, landscaping, snow
storage, grading/drainage plans and retaining wall, building addition and exterior finish, lighting,
roof-top equipment and refuse containers. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the
meeting.
5. The revised plans include the following details.
A. A snow storage area has been added to the site plan on the south side of the property and the
owner indicated at Design & Review that snow would be hauled off of the site, if necessary.
B. The trash/recycling area has been identified on the northwest side of the building and the area
is screened by the front building wall.
C. The existing bituminous on the west side of the building will remain and the new parking lot
on the south will be new bituminous with B6/12 curb.
D. Two new light standards are shown on the plan in the south parking lot for exterior lighting
purposes.
E. Traffic circulation signage and directional arrows have been added to the revised plans, as
follows:
1. A "One Way Only - Do Not Enter" sign to be placed along north end of westerly drive
aisle.
2. Painted direction arrows directing traffic to the north to be painted on westerly drive
aisle for one-way traffic flow.
3. A "One Way Only" sign to be placed along south end of westerly drive aisle.
4. Two "Truck Entrance - One Way Only" signs to be installed on east curb cut near
loading dock.
5. "Truck Exit Only" sign to be installed on most southerly east curb cut.
Planning Case Report 96-02 4 February 2, 1996
F. Existing east curb cut to be closed and two new curb cuts on east to be installed.
G. Fifty-foot turning radius for trucks is shown on plan. The width of the addition was reduced
to address truck maneuverability concerns and the revised plans have been approved by the
Building Official.
H. The landscaping plan has been revised to show existing and new landscaping and species have
been identified. Plantings include the following:
Quantity_ Size Description
7 21fi" Green Ash
8 21/2" Norway Maple
17 6' Colorado Spruce
1 8' Austrian Pine
10 36" Red Twig Dogwood
12 //3 Jaclcman Potentilla
2 10-12 River Birch Clump
5 Existing Ash
Existing Ash are shown in front of and on the east side of the existing building.
New Green Ash will be planted on the north and east sides of the property near the
boulevard.
New Norway Maple will also be added on the north and east boulevards.
New Colorado Spruce will be added to the northeast comer of the site along with an
Austrian Pine and on the east side of the site to shield the truck loading area.
Red Twig Dogwoods and Potentilla will be planted along the east side of the property,
also near the new dock area.
New Birch will be added in front of the building.
Existing shrubs are shown in front of the building.
Green areas around the new south parlcing lot will be sod.
I. The elevations show that the exterior of the addition will be Break-Off Block painted to
match the existing building.
J. A new loading dock area will be located at the southeast comer of the building and will
contain four (4) overhead doors with dock bumpers.
K. Wall pack lighting is included on the new addition and is shown on the new elevations.
Planning Case Report 96-02 5 February 2, 1996
L. A four-foot retaining wall. will be installed on the southwest portion of the property at the
west end of the parking area.
6. The petitioner inadvertently omitted a plan note indicating that roof-top units would be color-clad
to match the building color, but has indicated that they will match the building.
7. The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and his comments are as follows:
We have reviewed the above referenced site improvements and recommend the following:
The grade of the westerly parking lot is 8%, which exceeds the recommended 5 %. The
steeper grade is proposed to minimize the retaining wall height from 6', as previously
proposed, to 4' and reduce the amount of excavation. It is suggested if the cost advantage
is substantial for an 8 % grade versus 5 %, the 8 % be allowed.
· The construction of the retaining wall adjacent to the proposed addition (west side) will
encroach on the adjacent property. In addition, the driveway width is narrow to allow
parallel parking against the building and one-way traffic. It is suggested the adjacent
property owner be contacted to determine if private easement can be acquired to improve the
amount of space in this area if the proposed addition can't be narrowed. Another option
would be not to allow parallel parking and move the retaining wall away from the property
line.
· The storm sewer connection must be reviewed with Public Works. Due to the soil types and
ground water in this area, drain tile and fabric construction may be warranted in the new
parking lot and adjacent to the retaining wall.
· Bassett Creek Watershed recently adopted new water quality requirements. The project shall
be reviewed by Bassett Creek Watershed and comply with their requirements.
· A substantial amount of excess material is being moved off the site. The owner shall be
responsible for keeping adjacent public streets clean of material from this site.
· Erosion control shall comply with City standards and the Hennepin Soil Conservation
District.
8. The petitioner has addressed the majority of issues raised by the Design & Review Committee.
Planning Case Report 96-02 6 February 2, 1996
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the site and building plan review/approval requested by Taber Bushnell
for their building addition, subject to the following conditions:
1. All roof-top mechanical units be screened or painted to match building.
2. Compliance with the recommendations of the City Engineer, including:
A. Storm sewer connection reviewed with Public Works.
B. Geo-grid fabric construction adjacent to retaining wall.
C. Bassett Creek Watershed Commission approval.
D. Owner responsible for keeping adjacent public streets clean of material being moved off the
site.
E. Erosion control shall comply with City standards and the Hennepin Soil Conservation
District.
Attachments: Zoning/Address/Topo Maps
Site Plan
Project Data
Floor Plan
Building Elevations
Structural Plan
Landscape Plan
Plant Key
Grading/Drainage Plan
Survey
Building Official "Attachment A"
Engineer's Comments
Petitioner's Correspondence
I-1
x 90C). 4
_ 90~
9~5.8 PARK DRIVE x 900.7
z
907 5
X
907.9
919.4
W~
FILE:
x,C.,D$1TE
~GNS (2 THUS~
LOT AREA: 20,3,000/4.66 ACRES
EXIST. BLDG AREA: 54,500 S.F. ~'
OFFICE: 3,200 S.F. c_.)
MANUFACTURING' 38,640 S.F.
WAREHOUSE: 12,660 S.F.
PROPOSED BLDG. ADDITION: 27,616 S.F.
MANUFACTURING' 15,360 S.F.
WAREHOUSE: 12,256 S.F.
CONSTRUCTION TYPE' II-N
TOTAL BLDG. AREA: 82,116 S.F.
OFFICE: 5,200 S.F.
MANUFACTURING: ,.54,000 S.F.
WAREHOUSE: 24,916 S.F.
BLDG. TO LOT RATIO' 40%
PARKING TO LOT RATIO: 58%
GREEN SPACE TO LOT RATIO' 22%
TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED' 178 SPACES
OFFICE: 17 SPACES
MANUFACTURING: 159 SPACES
WAREHOUSE: 22 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 184 SPACES
TABER/BUSHNELL, INC.
7709 WINPARK DRIVE NE~ HOPE,
, t ~,, ~.
/
[
TABER/BUSHNELL I,VC.
7709 W[NPARK DRIVE NEW HOPE,
o.~
P~EL~MONARY ' ~ '
TABER/BUSHNELL, INC. ~- ~~,--'~~~~
~ ~ 770~ ~INPARK DRIVE NE~ HOPE, ~N, ~ '~
WINPARK DRIVE
PRELIMINARY
MARTIN WOODY ARCHITEL~TS Associates, luo. ~-~,r ,,
WINNETKAAVENUE (COUNTY ROAD NO. 156)
·, ~
{ ~ ~l [1 { MARTIN WOODY ARCHITECTS ~ I I I Associates, Inc.,
{ /~/ I ~ot,.~,.~t~"~ ~~~ '
~-, TE': 'ALL-" TRUCKS
..
80NES]-RO0 ASSOCIATES ~6126361311 02/01/96 14:54 [~ '03/04 N0:0891
Otto G. a~nroo. P,~. ~wa~a A. S~tora, P~. MIc~J C. Ly~, P~, gn~ K. G~e,
M~ln L Sorv~, P.~ Rlch~ta ~. FQSL~. P.~ ~att J. Ar~, P.~. Uo~ j, genof~. ~,E,
~as E. ~yes, P.E. Jerry A. ~ur~n. PE. Mar~ A. Se~. P.E. K~t j.
Eo~ G. S~K~I, P.E. MMk A. H~lon, P.E. O~y ~. Mo~fl, P.E Paul G.
5~ M. ~rlfn, C.P~.' MIAMI T. R~m~n, P.E. Pa~ J. Ga~, ~I.A. J~n P. ~tder,
Engineers & Architects · ~n~or c~;,~e~t T~ K, Fle~ e,e. Oamel J, e~er~, ~.E. Oa, O.
T~amas ~, A~n, A,LA, A, R*C~ SC~. P,E. Jeffrey J. ~erl~r. P.E.
~n~ C. ~g~, ~. ~lllg J, CaMeIL P~, Lee M, M~. P,E.
Thom~ A. Syfka, ~.E Ma~ O. ~l~ ~.E. C~e; A, Erlc~s~
Fcb~ l,1996 ~'~'~ J' S~m~ P.E. ~S B. Jean, P.[ Leo M Paweisky
~1 MenlMI, F,E, L. ~lllp Gravel P~. Harl~ M.
~J P, ff~ P~, K~en L, ~lemerL PE, A~es M.
Thom~ ~. Pet~s~, P.E. G~ O. ~afltl. P.E. J~e( F
~. ~rk McDonald
cat? of New
~I Xyion Ave. N.
New Ho~, ~ 55428
Re: T~r~ush~ell, ~c.
Our Fi~e No. 34 Gan (96-01)
~ ~rk:
We have reviewed thc above referenced site improvements and recommend the following:
· The grade of the westerly parking lot is 8%, which exceeds the recommended 5%. The
steeper grade is proposed to minimize the retaining wall height from 6', as previously
proposed, to 4' and reduce the amount of excavation, h's suggested if the cost
advantage is substantial for an 8% grade versus 5%, the 8% be allowed.
· The construction of the retaining wail adjacent to the propo,',~d addition (west side) will
encroach on the adjacent property. In addition, the driveway width is nm'row to allow
pazallel parking against the building and one-way traffic. It's suggested the adjacent
property owner be contacted to determine if private easement can be acquired to
improve the amount of space in this area if the proposed addition can't be narrowed.
Another option would be not to allow parallel parking and move the retaining wall
away from the property lane.
· The storm sewer connection muat be reviewed with public works. Due to the soil types
and ground water in this area, drain tile and fabric construction may be warranted in
the new paddng lot and adjacent to the retaining wall.
· Bas~tt Creek Watershed recently adopted new water quality requirements. The project
shall be reviewed by Bassett Creek Wate~hed and comply with their requiren~ents,
· A substantial amount of excess material is being moved off the site, The owner shall
bc rcsponsiblc for keeping adjacent public streets clean of material from this site.
· Eroaion control shall comply with City standards and the Henncpin Soil Conservation
District.
2335 '~Vest Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113, ~"6~2-636:4600
~ BONESTRO0 ASSOCIATES ~6126361311 02/01/96 14:54 ~'04/04 N0:089
Mr. Kirk McDonaM February I, 1996
Ci~. of New Hope
Re: Taber/Bushnell, Inc.
Page -2-
ff you have any questions, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
BONESTRO0, ROSENE, ANDERI .IK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Mark A. Hanson
MAH:pr
.lanuary 4, 1995
Mr. Doug Sandstad
City Of New Hope
4401 Xylon Av. N.
New Hope, MN. 55428
Dear Mr. Sandstad:
It was a pleasure meeting with you last week and we are very excited about the addition to
· Taber Bushnell, Inc.
Our total number of employees will be at a maximum of 180 to 190. We will require
parking spots to accommodate these employees as we have multi-shifts and will be a three
shift operation. Our truck traffic will be at about 8 to. 12 trucks per day.
This addition will have an impact on our ability to grow in our business as well as provide
an updated structure in the New Hope community.
Thank you again for the time you spent with us.
Sincerely,
TABER BUSHNELL, INC.
Jerry Hetland '
President & CEO
~-Vdb
CC: Rick Will
Benson Ch'th
Precision Starnpings. Tools & Dies · Spotwelding · A~embly. Contract Man~f;icturing
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 95-20
Request: Ordinance No. 96-2, 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: February 2, 1996
Meeting Date: February 6, 1996
BACKGROUND
1. City staff and the Codes & Standards Committee are requesting formal consideration by the
Planning Commission of the enclosed Ordinance Del'ming Understory and Overstory Trees and
Modifying Landscaping Regulations for Semi-Public and Income Producing Property. The
Commission discussed the ordinance informally at the January Planning Commission meeting and
directed staff to proceed to publish a public hearing notice for formal consideration of the
ordinance at this meeting.
2. At the January meeting, the Planning Commission recommended one minor revision to the
ordinance regarding the definition of understory and overstory trees. This clarification was made
by the City Attorney and the definitions now read as follows:
Overstory_ - A tree with a normal mature height of 25 feet or more.
Understor¥ - A plant with a normal mature height of less than 25 feet.
3. The idea for this ordinance originated this past spring/summer with the Citizen Advisory
Commission. At the May 15, 1995 Citizen Advisory Commission meeting, 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 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 February 2, 1996
4. In response to the above listed issues (5), the City Forester, City Attorney, City staff and
Planning Consultant made the following recommendations:
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 required City approval (4.033(4)(b)) and a one-year
guarantee (4.033(4)(b)(v)(ff))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.
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)(ill)(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.
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 oro_gram.
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. 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 pro_gram.
These items are not a planning issue and should be addressed within the Public Works
budget.
Planning Case Report 95-20 3 February 2, 1996
5. Therefore, this ordinance amendment addresses items A and B of the Forester's
recommendations. Further investigation of the other remaining issues may be discussed in more
detail by the City Council and staff in 1996.
6. The Codes & Standards Committee discussed this ordinance amendment at several Committee
meetings and the City Attorney has prepared the enclosed ordinance in response to the Forester's,
Planning Consultant's and Committee's recommendations.
7. The attached legal notice was published in the official newspaper and the ordinance, which would
be applicable to all zoning districts, would be effective upon publication after consideration and
approval by the Commission and Council.
ANALYSIS
1. The ordinance amendment would add new definitions for Overstory and Understory Trees to
Section 4.02 of the ZOning Code, as follows:
Section 1. Section 4.022(129A) "Trees, Understory/Overstory" of the New Hope City Code is
hereby added to read as follows:
(129A) Trees, Understory/Overstory. (a) Overstow - A tree with a normal mature height of 25 feet or more.
(b) Understory - A plant with a normal mature height of less than 25 feet.
2. The ordinance amendment would eliminate the list of suitable plant materials on public right-of-
ways, as follows:
Section 2. Section 4.033(4)(b)(iii) "Types of suitable boulevard/street trees" of the New Hope
City Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
(iii) n-~ ...... _~ v ........... ~: ~..:.n~.~ Prohibited boulevard/street trees .........
Planning Case Report 95-20 4 February 2, 1996
3. The ordinance amendment would add and delete specific trees on the public right-of-way, as
follows:
(bb) The following trees are specifically prohibited within the public right: e,f way
Abies sp. Fir species
Acer negundo Box elder
Acer saccharinum Silver maple
Ginkgo biloba (female only) Ginkgo
Picea sp. Spruce species
Pinus sp. Pine species
Populus alba (and varieties) White poplar :~"'~:~ c,~,.~ .......
Populus deltoides Eastern cottonwood
Populus nigra 'Italica' Lombardy poplar
Pseudotsuga sp. Douglasfir species
Robina pseudoacacia Black locust
Salix ~ species Willow
Tsuga sp. Hemlock species
Ulmus species (non-disease Elm
resistant ~
Understory deciduous and coniferous trees and shrubs
The reasons for the above recommendations are listed below.
The following trees should be added to the list of those prohibited from the right-of-way.
Ginkeo: Ginkgo 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 Locust: Robinia Pseudoeacia. 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 affected by City conditions, it is
otherwise 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.
Planning Case Report 95-20 5 February 2, 1996
Northern Catalpa: Catalpa Speciosa. 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: Populus (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 Poplar 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)
Lombardy 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.
Elm: Ulmus Varieties. There are several cultivers 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.
The Planning Consultant and City Forester have recommended that trees specifically
prohibited within the public right-of-way should include:
Abies sp. Fir species
Picea sp. Spruce species
Pinus sp. Pine species
Pseudotsuga sp. Douglasfn' species
Tsuga sp. Hemlock species
Understory Deciduous and Coniferous trees and shrubs
4. The ordinance amendment would also repeal and renumber the following sections:
Section 3. Sections 4.033(4)(b)(iv) "Suitable Plant Material" through 4.033(4)(b)(iv)(gg)
"Ground-Cover" of the New Hope City Code is hereby repealed in its entirety.
Section 4. Section 4.033(4)(b)(v) "Design" of the New Hope City Code is hereby renumbered
Section 4.033(4)(b)(iv).
5. In addition to the above stated ordinance amendment, staff is recommending that the Preferred
Tree List, outlined below, be adopted and made available as a handout to New Hope residents
and developers (including a mailing in the spring issue of the City Report):
Planning Case Report 95-20 6 February 2, '1996
PREFERRED TREE LIST
The following u'ee list has been compiled by the New Hope City Forester to aid residents in the
selection of trees that are acceptable in the Civy 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 Phellodendron species - Corktree
R Acer platanoides - Norway Maple Populus deltoides "Siouxland" - Siouxland
Poplar
Acer rubrum - Red Maple Populus deltoides "Robusta" - Robusta Poplar
P* Acer saccharinum - Silver Maple P* Populus species - Columnar Poplars
Acer saccharum - Sugar Maple Populus tremuloides - Quaking Aspen
R Aesculus glabra - Ohio Buckeye Prunus serotina - Black Cherry
R Betula nigra - River Birch R Quercus alba - White Oak
Betula papyrifera - Paper Birch R Quercus bicolor - Swamp White Oak
P* Catalpa speciosa - Northern Catalpa R Quercus ellipsoidalis - Northern Pin Oak
R Celtis occidentalis - Common Hackberry R Quercus macrocarpa - Bur Oak
Fraxinus americana - White Ash Quercus palustris - Pin Oak
Fraxinus nlgra - Black Ash R Quercus rubra - Red Oak
R Fraxinus pennsylvania - Green Ash P* Robinia pseudoacacia - Black Locust
R Ginkgo biloba - Ginkgo (Male only) P* Salix pentandra - Laurel Willow
R Gelditsia triacanthos var. inermis - P* Salix species - Weeping Willow
Thornless Honeylocust R Tilia americana - American Linden
Gymnocladus diocia - Kentucky Coffeetree R Tilia cordata - Littleleaf Linden
Larix species - Larch Ulmus hybrids - Hydrid Elms
R Ostrya virginiana - Ironwood
(Hophornbeam)
Planning Case Report 95-20 7 February 2, 1996
UNDERSTORY DECIDUOUS TREES
Acer ginnala o Amur Maple * Prunus armeniaca var. mandshurica -
Amelanchier species - Serviceberry Apricot
Carpinus caroliniana - Blue Beach * Pmnus maackii - Amur Chokecherry
(American Hornbeam) Pmnus nigra "Princess Kay" - Princess
· Cercis canadensis - Eastern Redbud Kay Plum
Comus alternofolia - Pagoda Dogwood Pmnus "North Star" & "Meteor" - Sour Cherry
Comus racemosa - Gray Dogwood Pmnus sargentii - Sargeant Cherry
Crataegus cms-galli - Cockspur Hawthorn * Pmnus virginana "Canada Red" -
· Elaeagnus angustifolia - Russian Olive Canada Red Chokecherry
Euonymus alata - Burning Bush * Salix matsudana "Tortuosa" - Corkscrew
Willow
Maackia amurensis - Amur Maackia * Salix discolor, S. caprea - Pussy Willow
Magnolia acuminata - Cucumbertree * Sorbus alnifolia - Korean Mountain Ash
Magnolia * Sorbus aucuparia - European Mountain Ash
Malus species - Crabapple Syringa reticulata - Japanese Tree Lilac
Pmnus americana - American Wild Plum Viburnum lantana - Wayfaring Tree Viburnum
Viburnum lentago - Nannyberry Viburnu
OVERSTORY CONIFEROUS TREES
Abies balsamea - Balsam Fir Pinus nigra - Austrian Pine
Abies concolor - White Fir Pinus ponderosa - Ponderosa Pine
Picea abies - Norway Spruce Pinus resinosa - Norway Pine
Picea glauca - White Spruce Pinus strobus - Eastern White Pine
Picea pungens - Colorado Spruce Pinus sylvestris - Scotch Pine
Pinus cembra - Swiss Stone Pine Pseudotsuga menziesii - Douglasfir
Pinus koraiensis - Korean Pine Tsuga canadensis - Canadian Hemlock
UNDERSTORY CONIFEROUS TREES
Juniperus chinesis - Chinese Upright Juniper
Juniperus scopulorum - Rocky Mountain Juniper
Junipems virginiana - Eastern Red Cedar
Pinus mugo - Mugo Pine
Thuja occidentalis - American Arborvitae
Planning Case Report 95-20 8 February 2, 1996
RECOMMENDATION
Staff and the Codes & Standards Committee recommend approval of the ordinance amendment and
the Preferred Tree List.
Attachmems: City Attorney 1/23 Correspondence
Legal Notice and Proposed Ordinance
City Attorney 12/27 Correspondence
Planning Consultant 11/14 Report
Building Official 10/25 Memo
Planning Consultant 10/19 Report
6/12 Council Request
City Code Excerpts: Landscaping
April/May Citizen Advisory Commission Minutes
CORRICK & SONDRALL, P.A.
ST;VEN A. SONDR&LL ATTORNEYS AT LAW
MICHAEL R. I.~FLEUR
MARTIN P. MALECHA Edinburgh Executive Office Plaza
W,LLIAMC. STRAIT 8525 Edinbrook Crossing
Suite #203
Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443
r~LEP,ONE
FAX (S~2)
January 23, 1996
Mr. Kirk McDonald
Management Assistant
City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE: Amendment to Tree Ordinance
Our File No: 99.49602
Dear Kirk:
In follow up to our January 18, 1996 telephone conversation please
find enclosed a revised Ordinance No. 96-2 regulating trees in the
City.
Section 1 of the Ordinance was changed to define a tree less than
25 feet in height an understory tree. This makes the understory
definition consistent with the overstory definition as pointed out
by Chairman Sonsin at one of our recent Codes and Standards
meet i ng.
Contact me if you have any further questions or comments.
Very truly yours,
Steven A. Sondral]
slt
Enclosure
cc: Va]erie Leone, City Clerk (w/enc)
ORDINANCE NO. 96-2
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
The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains:
Section 1. Section 4.022 (129A)"Trees, Understory/Overstory"
of the New Hope Code is hereby added to read as follows:
(129A) Trees, Understory/Overstory.
(a) Overstory - A tree with a normal mature height of
25 feet or more.
(b) Understory - A plant with a normal mature height of
less than 25 feet.
Section 2. Section 4.033 (4)(b)(iii) "Types of suitable
boulevard/street trees" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
(iii) TTP;; ~f :'~it---b]¢ Prohibited boulevard/street tree~. ~
o FEB-01-86 THU 16:69 P, 03/03
The followina trees are specifically
prohibited within the public right:_ _,
~.~S SP. Fir species
Acer negundo Bo× Elder
Acer Saccharinum Silver Maple
Ginkgo biloba (female Ginkgo
only)
Pice~ s~. ~ '
~ Pine ~pecies
pl .....
Populus elba (and White Po ar
varieties} ~-''
Populus deltoldes Esstern Cottonwood
Populus nigre 'Italics' Lomberd¥ Poplar
PS~U.~Su.~a...SP., Douglas.~j r species
Robina pseudoac~cia Black Locust
Salix Yc~ species Willow
Ts~.g.~.~D~ Hemlock
U~mus sDec~es (non? E~m
disease
Understory deciduous and coniferous trees end__shrubs
· ~ ~--~..- alt .--~-- ~ ..... ,
Section 3. Sections 4.033 (4)(b)(iv) "Suitable Plant
M~terial" through 4.033 (4)(b)(i¥)(gg) "Ground-Cov. e..r" of the New
Hope City CoUe is hereby repealed in its entirety,
Section 4. Sectton 4.033 (4)(b)(v) "~esi~n" of the New Hope
C~ty Code ~s hereby renumbered Section 4.033 (4)(b)(iv].
Section 5. Effective Date, This Ordinance shall be effective
upon its p~ssage and publicst{on.
D~ted the day of ._, 1996.
Edw. J. Eriokson, Mayor
Attest:
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
(Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun-Post the day of
, 1996. )
3
rUE 1~:44
NOTIC5 OF PUBLIC HEARIN~ TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE
AMENDING NEW HOPE ZONING CODE BY
AMENDING REQUIRED LANDSCAPING REGULATIONS
.~tY ~!.New. Hope, Min~esot~
Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the
City of New Hope, Minnesota, will meet on the 6th day of February,
199B, at 7:00 o'clock p.m. at the City Hall, 4401 Xylon Avenue
North, in said City for the purpose of hoiaing a public ~earJng to
consider the adoption of an ordinance ~mending the New Hope Zoning
Code.
Sai~ ordinance wi]3 have the affect of amending the New Hope
code Dy aQding §4.02Z (129A) defining understory and over,tory
trees ~nd amending §4.033(4) regulating types of permissible
boulevard trees and other permi~slb~e plant materi~ for use in the
City on private property.
All persons interested are invited to appear at said has'ring
for the purpose of being heard with respect to the zoning code
amendment.
Auxiliary aide for persons with di~abilitles are available
upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the
City Clerk to make arrangements (telephone 531-5117, TDD
number S31-5109).
Dated the 22nd day of January, 1996.
s/ Valer~e J .... L.eone
Va]erie J. Leone
City Clerk
(Published in the New Hope..-Go~den Valley Sun-P~st on the 24th day
of January, 199~,)
December 28, 1995
Mr. Kirk McDonald
Management ASSistant
City of New Hope
4401Xylon Avenue North
New Hove, MN 55428
RE= Amendment to Tree Ordinance
Our File No; 99.49602
Dear Kirk:
In follow up to my December Z7~ 1995 letter please find enclosed an
amended Ordinance NO. 98-2. This ordinance replaces the one [
faxed to you in my December 27, 1995 corresDondence.
Basically, Section 2 of the ordinance has been modified to
eliminate the provls~ons dea3ing with the City Forester's ability
to ~etermtne when certain ~rohibited trees and shrubs may be
D3anted on the Dubllc right-o?-way, The provision was defective in
that it did not contain any guide]~nes for the City Forester to
follow in making his determination when to a~prove oF not to
a~Drove certain trees and shrubs for planting on the public right-
of-way. As you know, th~s k~nd of absolute atscretion on the Dart
of a C~¥ official could ~eeult ~n a zoning challenge on the lega)
theory th&t tile city Forester's decision making process was
arbitrary and caDr~c~ous. The City Planner agreed with th~s
interpretation.
To remedy th~s e~tuatfon~ we declded to eliminate the ~rov~sion
giving the C~ty Forester the right to al)ow certatn ~rohib~ted
plantfngs on the public right-of-ways &nd simply include those
plantings ~n the overall 11st of prohlb~ted trees for planting on
the right-of-way set out {~ the o d nance,
Mr. Kirk McDonald
December 28, 1995
Page 2
[f you have Shy questions or comments regarding this change, please
do not hesitate to oont&¢t me.
Very truly your-~,
Steven A. $ondrall
slt2
Enclosure
cc: A1 Brixius, City Planner
Northwest Associ. ated Consultants, Inc
COMMUNITY PLANNING OESIGN · MARKET RESEARCH
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. VVhen 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 Cuitivars 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 leary 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.
"AItowitl~_ Certain Poolam 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 Eastem 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 irl 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.
During 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 presumes 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 plant'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
COMMUNITY LANNING ' DESIG MAR RESEARCH
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) (ff')) 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 prohibited from the right-of-way.
Ginkgo: Ginkgo 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 Locust: 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 Maole: Acer Rubrum. Although this tree can be effected by City conditions,
it is otherwise 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 Catal_Da: Catal_~a 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; PoDulus (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 PQplar: Populus Alba (and varieties)
Lombardy 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.
Elm: Ulmus Varieties. There are several cultivers 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.
OverstorylUnderstory. Plantinqs
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:
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.
Overstory/Understory 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.
Understo~_ . 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.
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 (Hophornbeam)
Phellodendron species - Corktree
EEB-~l-I996 15:57 NAC 612 5~5 98J? P.OJ/Oa
Populus deltoides "Siouxland" - $iouxland Poplar
Populus deltoides "Robusta" - Robusta Poplar
P* Populus species - Columnar Poplars
Populus tremuloides - Quaking Aspen
Prunus serotina * Black Cherry
R Quercus aiba -White Oak
R Quercus bicolor - Swamp White Oak
R Quercus ellipsoidalis - Northern Pin Oak
R Quercus macrocarpa - Bur Oak
Quercus palustris - Pin Oak
R Quercus rubra - Red Oak
P* Robinia pseudoacacia - Black Locust
P* Salix pentandra - Laurel Willow
P* Salix species - Weeping Willow
R Tilia americana - American Linden
R Tilia cordata - Littleleaf Linden
Ulmus hybrids - Hydrid Elms
UNDERSTORY DECIDUOUS TREES
Acer ginnala - Amur Maple
Amelanchier species - Serviceberry
Carpinus carolinians - Blue Beach (American Hornbeam)
* Cercis canadensis - Eastern Redbud
Comus altemofolia - Pagoda Dogwood
Comus racemosa - Gray Dogwood
Crataegus crus-galli - Cockspur Hawthom
* Eiaeagnus angustifolia - Russian Olive
Euonymus alata- Burning Bush
Maackia amurensis - Amur Masckia
Magnolia acuminata - Cucumbertree Magnolia
Malus species - Crabapple
Prunus americana - American Wild Plum
* Prunus armeniaca var. mandshurica - Apricot
* Prunus maackii - Amur Choke(sherry
Prunus nigra "Princess Kay' - Princess Kay Plum
Prunus ~North Star' and "Meteor' - Sour Cherry
Prunus sargenti[ - Sargeant Cherry
* Prunus virginana "Canada Red" - Canada Red Chokecherry
* Salix matsudana "Tortuosa' - Corkscrew Willow
* Salix disco]or, S. caprea - Pussy Willow
* Sorbus alnifolia - Korean Mountain Ash
* Sorbus aucuparia - European Mountain Ash
Syringa reticulata - Japanese Tree Lilac ~r~
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 -Eastem White Pine
Pinus sylvestris - Scotch Pine
Pseudotsuga menziesii - Douglasfir
Tsuga canadensis - Canadian Hemlock
UNDERSTORY CONIFEROUS TREES
Juniperus Chinesis - Chinese Upright Juniper
Juniperus scopulorum - Rocky Mountain Juniper
Juniperus virginiana -Eastem Red Cedar
Pinus mugo - Mugo Pine
Thuja occidentalis - American Arborvitae
CORRICK & SONDRALL. P.A.
s~v~ A. SONORA~L ATTORNEYS AT LAW
~c~,E~,. ~u. Edinburgh Execu~ve Office Plaza
MARTIN P. MALECHA
w~cux~ c. s~.~; 8525 ~d[~bgook Crossing
Su~t~ ~203
Brookl~ P~k, ~[~eso~ 55443
TE~PHONE (612) 4~S~1
FAX (612) 4~5~7
January 23, 1996
Mr. Kirk McDonald
Management Assistant
City of New Hope
4401Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE: Amendment to Tree Ordinance
Our File No: 99.49602
Dear Kirk:
In follow up to our January 18, 1996-telephone conversation please
find enclosed a revised Ordinance No. 96-2 regulating trees in the
City.
Section 1 of the Ordinance was changed to define a tree less than
25 feet in height an understory tree. This makes the understory
definition consistent with the overstory definition as Dointed out
by Chairman Sonsin at one of our recent Codes and Standards
meeting.
Contact me if you have any further questions or comments.
Very truly yours,
Steven A. Sondrall
slt
Enclosure
cc: Valerie Leone, City Clerk (w/eric)
/ " ~ COUNCIL
REQUF~T FOR ACTION
Originating Department Approved for Agenda , ~ Agenda Section
unfinished ~
Parks and Recreation /~une 12, 1995 0rg. Business
Item No.
By: 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 unanimously passed
to recommend to Council changes in city ordinances pertaining to trees. The following
is their recommendation:
Eliminate the list of suitable plant material 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'rIoN BY_ SECOND BY
Review: Administration: Finance:
RFA-O01
4.033
<~)
(~) ReauJred L~ndac&~n~ - Gener~l ~{d~n~l. The lo~ ar~ ~m&~ntng
07268~
4'033 (4)~)(i)- (ii)'(dd~
o: :~ a=ove us~s shall be subJe¢~
The ~oun~ary or
poin:s ad~oinin
building ac poin=s of its placemenc on the site~ and
the public boulevard areas ac points of interface w~=~
s:reets or sidewalk areas of the city.
Ail lands:aping incorporated in a Landscape Plan shall
conform =o =he following standards and criteria=
(Code 0728841
(i) Minimum Plant Sizes. All plants must equal not less
CAen =~e following minimum sizes:
Po=Ced/ Balled/
8are Root Burla~ped
Shade Trees' 1 3/4' dia. 2"
Russian Olive, Hawthorn
etc.)
Evergreen Trees -- 3-4 f~.
Tall Shrubs and Hedge 3-~ f~. 3-4 f~.
ma=ariel (evergreen or
deciduous)
Low Shrubs - deciduous 3 gallon 3 gallom
evergreen 18-24 in. 24-30 inches
spreading ported 18-24 inches
Type and mode are dependent upon time of plsnting
season, availability, and sits conditions (soils,
clime:e, ground wa=er, man-made irrigation, grading,
*~11 boulevard trees must he not less ~han 2 1/2 inches
in caliper.
(ii) Spacinq.
(aa) T~eee shall hOC be placed closer Chart five feeC
fF~ln the fence line or property line an~ shall hoc
be plan~ed co coflflicc wich public planting.
~ (bb) #here plant ma=erials are plan=ed £n Cwo or more
::... rows, plantings shall be staggered in rows unless
o=hervise approved by the City.
(cc) Oec£duous boulevard trees shall be planted
more
(dd)Tree-like shrubs shall be planted
ten (10) feec off cen=er.
072884
4.033 (4)(~)(ii)(ee) -
(ee) Large deciduous shrubs shall be planted not mote
chart five (5) ~eet on center.
(fl) Narrow evergreens shall be planted not more than
three (3) feet on center.
Mass£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 no= be plan=ed more than three feet on
center.
4-23A
TY~e$_o~_su£:~le_boulevard/s~ree~ ~ree~. The only
way s~all be as ~olIows:
Fraxinus pennsylvan£ca
'Pa:more.
Fraxinus pennsylvan£¢a
Linden: Tilia Cordata 'Greeflspire'
Talin Co:data 'Redmond.
Maple: Acer platanoides 'Norway'
' Acer platanoides 'Royal
Acer Sacchsrum 'Sugar'
Ouercus Nlustris 'Pin'
Quercus Rubra 'Northern
Red'
~.~e~ Trees specifically prohibited within the public
right o~ way include:
Box Elder
Acer
neg~ndo
Acer
Acer Saccharifl~ Silver Maple
Ulmus (varieties) Elm
Popul~s (varieties) Poplar (iflcl~ing
Cottonwo~)
Sills (varieties willow
~ilaflthus altissiu Tree o~ Heaven
C,,,lpa,p,,io., North,rnC,,,l,,
~ai:able Plant Material. The ~ollo~ing plant ~terial
ffi's perai~c~ ~or plan:trig ~cept on the public right-
ed-yam vhere only the trees identified in S 4.033
i4)(~)liii) ~ ~ planCedz
Evergreen ~our (4) o~
Trees.
heigh: as tollo~
Abica Concolor Coneolor ~ White Fir
Pin~igr~ A~crl~ Pine
pinus Resinosi R~ Pine
Pinus S~:o~us ~hi~e Pine
Pinus Sylvescris Scotch Pine
Pieea Glauca white Spruce
Thu~a ~cideflcalis
"Pyramidalis' Pyramidal ~:~rvitie
~ieea Pungens galu~a :olot~o Blue Spruce
Piece ~liuca ~flsaca Black Hills Spruce
(bb} Narrov ~er~reens
~tpe:us scopulo~m
~niperus virginiana
pyramiialis Hilli Dundee J~niper
4-24
072684
4.0~3 (4)(l-)(iv)(%b) - (f~
Juniperu$ Chine$i$ Blue Colu~z chinese
"~yram~dali~" Juniper (
Thuxa Oc:iden=alis Columnar G~an%
~rborv~:ae
Taxus Cuspidata Japanese Yew
Thuja Orion%ails Orion%al (SlOerian)
Arbor
Thuja Occidencali$
"Techny" Techny ~rborvicae
Junperu$ Chine$i$
"Sou:hotly" Southerly Juniper
(¢c) Spreading Everqree.s_
Juniperus Safina Savin Juniper
Juniperu$ Chine$i$
"Maneyi" Maneyi Juniper
Junipe~u~ Chines[s Pfi~ze= or Blue
junipe=ous Safina Savin Juniper
Juniperous ~e:zi He%z~ Juniper
Juniperous Virginiana Silver Spreader
Juniper
Juniper
Juniperus Morizon=alis
"plu~sa" An4o~a Juni~e~
(44) Small Trees
Malus (varieties Flowering Cra~apple
~urensis Japonica) Japanese Tree ~ilac
Maple (Ace= Ginnala) Ginnala Maples
~hysoca~s
Opu~i~oli~s "~ureus" Go~d~ead Nine~ar~
Vi~urn~ (Varie%ie~) Vibu~n~
Sy~inga (Varieties) ~ila~
Cocoeam~ec (Var levies ) CoConeas%e~
~iqus~tum [Varieties ) privet
~hus (Varieties) SuMC
HwM%is (Varieties) Wi~ch~aze~
philadelphus (Varieties) M~orange
P~n~ tis%efta Purple ~a~ Che~7
Fraxinum peflnsyivaflica "Pa~ort" Ash
Tilia Cordaca "Oreenspice" Linden
Tilil Cocdaca "R~ofld" LinSen
Acer pla:afloides "No~ay" Nap~e
~ce~ p~a~anoides "Roya~ ~e6" Maple
Acer Saccha~um "Sugar" Maple
O~ercus paluscris "Pin" Oak
Quo=cum ~u~ra "No~chern Red" Oa~
4-24A
072684
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 R~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.
USSION OF' 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 Hope Citizen Advisory Commission . April 17, 1995
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 so 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. Carlson 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 Forester 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 c~uestioned whether any of the cities Mr. Schuster hacl
communicated with had ordinances regarding planting distances from a
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 Advisory
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 responded that in reviewing the ordinance several ~mes, he
did not recall seeing language to that effect.
Commissioner Collier thought it was an excellent suggestion to include an
article in the City Newsletter.
Commissioner Shapiro asked about submitting an article to the New
Hope/Golden Valley Post Newspaper.
Mr. Schuster agreed 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. Ha 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 sea a stairway built
i 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 track~ 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 that the 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
CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chai~ 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 P~ymouth 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
//"~DISC ...... "--~..~ritl:en. All present voted in favor. Motion carried.
USSlON OF TREES AND Tom Schuster, City Forester, stated that ha would like to see all information
%.....SHRUBS on tre/es combined into one section of the City code. He stated that he Js
i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i.i.i.i.~te~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 PutDhc
Works Superintendent, but has not formally addressed the City Ccuncd 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 CrYstal
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
doea 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 adde~
that the letter serves to notify the property owner that he/she is responsible
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 ia 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 Minnegasco, 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 I~rohibited tree lists include
female ginkgos, box elders, eastern cottonwoods, and non-disease resistant
elm trees.
Ms. French questioned whether those lists pertained to private property as
well as 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 s 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 Citizen Advisory Commission May 15, 1995
Hope
Page 3
M~. 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 ia 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.
Me. 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
aa property 15 feet in front of a home.
Commissioner Devine referred to the City Ordinance and asked if the list of
tress on page 4-24 (Box Elder, Red Maple, Silver Maple, Elm, Poplar,
Willow, Tree of Heaven, Northern Catalpa) are 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, outlots
or easements.
MOTION Commissioner DevinJ made a motion to revise the ordinance to include
prohibiting the above-mentioned trees on private property.
Commissioner Rubin suggsst, 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 d,
Commissioner Devine withdrew his motion.
Commissioner Collier stated that he would like to see some type of
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 elder,
all poplar trees, end the female ginkgo. He noted that it does not mention
maple tress.
Commissioner Collier wondered if New Hope's list had to be exactly the
same aa 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 Mav 15, 1995
Page 5
Mr. Schuster responded that he could not understand why red maple ~s 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 public 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 e 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 troee 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 past.
Mr. Schuster added that he likes the idea of eliminating the section on
suitable plant material and concentrating on the prohibited tree list instead.
Commissioner Rubin asked if thero was any further discussion regarding
this matter.
New Hope Citizen Advisory Commission May 15, 1995
Page 6
MOTION A motion was made by Commissioner Collier to recommend to the City
Council the following changes in the city ordinances pertaining to trees:
Eliminate the list of suitable plant material from the ordinance {4.033)
(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)
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 Flag Avenue and Erickson Drive. He mentioned that it is adjacent
to the sidewalk and the sewer, and was concerned that someone could
easily fall.
Mr. Schuster stated that he would have someone from streets maintenance
check it.
Commissioner Rubin informed the Commissioners that he received one copy
of the final draf/of the Transportation Plan. He noted that there will not be
any officially designated bike trails within the City of New Hope.
Ma. 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
aa a 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: Ordinance No. 96-04,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-i, B-2, B-3 & B-4 Business Districts
Petitioner: City of New Hope
Report Date: February 2, 1996
Meeting Date: February 6, 1996
BACKGROUND
1. City staff and the Codes & Standards Committee are requesting formal consideration by the
Planning Commission of the enclosed Ordinance Reclassifying Various Conditional Uses as
Permitted Uses Within the B-i, B-2, B-3 and B-4 Zoning Districts. The Commission discussed
this ordinance informally at the January Planning Commission meeting and directed staff to
proceed to publish a public hearing notice for formal consideration of the ordinance at this
meeting.
2. Since the January meeting, the Planner has submitted a revised matrix and also pointed out some
other inconsistencies in the attached January 26th memo. Staff, the City Attorney and Planner
have discussed these issues and the City Attorney has prepared the enclosed correspondence and
a revised ordinance to address the inconsistencies. The changes are outlined under the
ANALYSIS section of the report.
3. 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.
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
4.The Planning Consultant conducted a review of the various conditional uses within the City's
commercial zoning districts to determine whether certain uses would be more appropriately
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 center). Additionally, the
report gives specific attention to the regulation of "commercial recreational" uses within the
City's B-4, Community Business District.
5. The Planning Consultant reiterated the purpose of the conditional use permit, as follows:
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 welfare, public health and safety. In
making this determination, whether or not the conditional use is to be allowed, the City may
consider the nature of 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
welfare, 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.
6. The consultant further outlined the purpose of each of the commercial zoning districts, the
permitted and conditional uses allowed in each district, and inconsistencies between various
uses/districts. The conclusion of the analysis was that a number of conditional uses in the City's
various commercial zoning districts could be appropriately classified as permitted uses and the
intention of the amendment is to clean up the uses allowed in each district, eliminate duplication
and overlapping of certain uses, and generally make the ordinance easier to understand.
ANALYSIS
1. Subsequent to the January meeting, the Planner raised the following issues and these issues have
been addressed in the revised ordinance as follows:
A. Memo Item #7 Number 55 from the previous matrix was eliminated (Dry Cleaning
including plant accessory heretofore, pressing and repairing), as it is listed under number
7 (Cleaning. Laundry and dry cleaning provided the process used meets the requirements
of the Fire Prevention Code for use in buildings with other occupancies).
Planning Case Report 95-21 3 January 2, 1996
Response to Memo Item 7 Staff decided to eliminate "cleaning" from the permitted
uses in a B-2 Zoning District under Code §4.112. Staff determined that "cleaning" is
already a permitted use in the B-1 District and therefore rolls over as a permitted use in the
B-2 District. As a result, its reference in the B-2 District is not necessary. In Section 4 of
the enclosed Ordinance, the Commission will see the repeal of this reference in the B-2
District.
B. Memo Item #8 The City allows for grocery stores that are less than 21,500 square feet
in size. However, under current City regulations, grocery stores larger than 21,500
square feet in size are not identified in any zoning district. The City may wish to
consider adding a provision to allow larger grocery stores in the B-4 Zoning District.
Response to Memo Item #8 Staff decided it did not make sense to limit the floor space
of grocery stores and supermarkets in either the B-2 or B-4 District. Staff decided to amend
the reference to "food" in the B-2 District by eliminating the floor space restriction.
Therefore, based on the roll-over provision of the Code, the floor space restriction will not
apply in the B-4 District as well. Staff decided the lot sizes of the various properties in the
referenced districts would actually control the floor space of such facilities and, therefore,
a specific reference limiting floor space is not required. In Section 4 of the Ordinance,
enclosed the Commission will find the amendment dealing with this issue.
C. Memo Item #15 The proposed ordinance does not eliminate Copy and Printing Service
from being both a permitted and conditionally permitted use in the B-2 District.
Response to Memo Item #15 The enclosed Ordinance now eliminates "copy and printing
service" as a conditional use in the B-2 Zoning District. Refer to Section 6 of the enclosed
Ordinance. It repeals the "offset printing and copy service" reference. Staff concluded this
is the same use as referenced in §4.132 of the Code under subsection (9). Since §4.132(9)
is not marked with an asterisk, it also becomes a permitted use in the B-2 District pursuant
to Code §4.112(5).
D. Memo Item #25 Insurance Sales offices would also fall under the category Professional
and Commercial Offices, therefore, the reference has been added to the matrix.
Response to Memo Item #25 Staff decided to eliminate the reference to "insurance
sales" since it would fall under the same category as "professional and commercial offices".
Section 9 of the enclosed Ordinance repeals the reference to "insurance sales", and staff will
now rely on the reference to "professional and commercial offices" in the B-2 District to
permit insurance sales in both the B-2 District and the B4 District.
E. Memo Item #37a Drive-Through Service Windows have been added to the matrix per
the proposed ordinance. All uses with drive-through facilities are proposed to be a
conditionally permitted use within the B-3 and B-4 Zoning Districts.
Planning Case. Report 95-21 4 January 2, 1996
Response to Memo Item #37a Staffdecided that "drive-throughservice windows" should
be listed as a conditional use in all commercial zoning districts. As a result, the reference
to this use as a conditional use in the B-1 Zoning District has been added. This reference
can be found in Section 2 of the enclosed Ordinance. With the inclusion of this reference
in the B-1 Zoning District, all permitted uses or conditional uses in all commercial zoning
districts that include a drive-through service window will be required to obtain a conditional
use permit for the drive-through service window. In other words, this is the broadest
application possible for drive-through service windows thereby providing the Commission
with the desired effect relative to this use.
F. Memo Item #58 The consultant raised the issue of the purpose of number 58 (Floor
Space Limited). Specifically, how does the City administer a regulation of an "accessory
use not to exceed 30% of the gross floor area of the principal use".
Response to Memo Item #58 Staff determined that the reference to "floor space limited"
actually dealt with accessory buildings. As a result, Section 3 of the enclosed Ordinance
amends §4.103(1) dealing with "floor space limited" by changing the reference to accessory
building.
G. Memo Item #64 Number 15 (Commercial and Professional Offices) from the previous
matrix was eliminated, as it was listed twice within the matrix (previous #67
Professional and Commercial Offices). Again, note that the proposed ordinance
establishes this use as a "permitted use" in the B-1 District rather than "conditionally
permitted use".
Memo Item #84 Please note that the City Code allows Commercial Recreational
Facilities as a permitted use within the B-3 Zoning District. If the City does not wish
to allow these types of uses within the B-3 District, it should repeal Section 4.122(3) of
the City Code, that allows Commercial Recreational Uses.
Response to Memo Items #64 & #84 The issues raised by these items did not result in
any changes to the enclosed Ordinance. #64 is an informational reference, and #84 was
dealt with by the pool hall amendment adopted last year as Ordinance No. 95-03. The City
did repeal commercial recreational uses as permitted uses in the B-3 Zoning District.
2. Two other changes were made to the enclosed Ordinance not mentioned in the City Planner's
memo. First, Section 5 of the enclosed Ordinance repeals the reference to "drive-up financial"
as a permitted accessory use in the B-2 Zoning District. Staff determined that this reference was
not necessary based on the decision to make drive-through service windows conditional uses for
all permitted and conditionally permitted businesses in all commercial zoning districts.
Therefore, a bank or other financial institution with a drive-up service window will be required
to apply for a conditional use permit for the service window.
Planning Case Report 95-21 5 January 2, 1996
3. The second change not considered by the Planner's memo was the decision to repeal the
"commercial enterprises" conditional uses in the B-2 Zoning District with the exception of garden
novelty stores.' Section 6 of the enclosed Ordinance deals with this issue. §4.114(4) of the Code
will refer to a garden novelty store as a conditional use permit in the B-2 Zoning District after
the adoption of the enclosed Ordinance. Subsections (4)(a) through (i) and (k) will be eliminated.
4. Staff hopes that these changes are not to confusing to you, but we want the ordinance amendment
to correct as many errors as possible. On Tuesday night there will be an updated matrix
presented and a listing of each Zoning District showing you what is being added and what is
being deleted.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance, unless the Codes & Standards Committee wants to
review these changes at a Committee meeting and bring this back to the full Commission in March.
Attachments: City Attorney 2/2 Correspondence and Proposed Ordinance
Planning Consultant's 1/26 Report and Revised Matrix
Legal Notice
City Attorney 12/22 Correspondence
Planning Consultant 12/21 Report
City Attorney 11/20 Correspondence
Planning Consultant 10/24 Report
Planning Consultant 9/27 Report
Building Official Comments
CORRxcr~ & ,SO~rDRALI~, P./k. ~,,
,, ,
E~nb~h Executive O~ee PI~ ~ ~, ~
8525 E~br~k C~
Sui~ 8203
BroozI~ P~k, Minn~O~ 55443
February 2, 1990
Kirk McDonald
Management Aast.
City of NeW HOpe
4401Xylon Avenue North
New Hope) MN 55428
RE: Ordinance Redefining Conditional Uses as Permitted
Uses in the Commercial Zoning Districts
Our File No: 99.49004
Dear Kirk:
In follow Up to our phone conference with Alan Brixius please find
enclosed a revised Ordinance redefining conditional uses as
permitted uses in the ~ommer¢ial zoning districts for consideration
at the February 5, 1996 Planning Commission meeting.
Basically, the reviaions respond to the concerns set out in Alan's
January ZO, 1555 memo. Specifically, the City Planner's memo set
out eight concerns. They are addressed as follows;
[tam 7 - we decided to eliminate "cleaning" from the
permitted uses in & B-2 Zoning District under Code §4.112. We
determined that "cleaning" is already a permitted use in the
District and therefore rolls over as a permitted use in the B-2
District. AS a result, its reference in the B-2 District is not
necessary. In Section 4 of the enclosed Ordinance you wtll see the
repeal of this reference in the B-2 DiStrict.
Item 8 - we decided it did not make sense to limit the floor
space of grocery stores and supermarkets in either the B-2 or
District. We decided to amend the reference to "food" in the B-2
District by eliminating the floor ~pace restriction. Therefore,
based on the rollover provision of our Code, the floor space
restriction will not apply in the B-4 District as well. We decided
Mr. KJrl< McDonald
February 2, 1996
Page 2
the lot sizes of the various properties in the referenced districts
would actually control the floor sp~ce of such facilities and
therefore a specific reference limiting floor space is not
reouired. In Section 4 of the Ordinance enclosed you will find
amendment dealing with this issue.
Item 15 - the enclosed Ordinance now eliminates "~op¥
printing ser¥ice'° as a conditlonal use In t~e B-Z Zoning Distr~ct,
Refer to 5ectton 6 of the enclosed Ordinance. It re~eals the
"offset orint~ng and copy service" reference. We concluded th~s
the same use as referenced in ~4.132 of the Code under subsection
(~). SlnGe §~,132 (9) is no[ marked with an asterisk, it also
Decomes a ~erm~tted use in the B-2 Distr~ct pursuant to Code §4.112
[~em 25 - we de~ided to eliminate the reference to "insurance
sales" since it would fa33 under the sa~e category as "professional
and commercial offices". Sect-ion S of the enc~osea Ordinance
repeals the re?stance to "insurance s~les", and we will now rely on
~he reference to "professional and commercial offices" in the
D~strict to permit ~neurance sales in both the B-2 Dts[rict and the
B-4 District.
[tern 37& - we decided that "dr~ve-through servtce w~naows"
should be listed as a condl~tona~ use ~n ail commercial zoning
~str~¢ts. As a result, [ have added the reference to this use as
a conditional use in the B-1 Zoning District. You can f~nd th~s
~eference ~n Section Z of the enclosed Ordinance. W~th the
~ncluslon o? th~s reference ~n the B-1 ZonSng District, all
permitted uses or cond~t~ona~ uses ~n all commercial zon~n~
distr~cts that include · dr~ve-through servt~e window will be
required to oOtaln a cond~t~ona~ use permit for ~he drive-through
service w~ndow. In other words, this ia the broadest appl~oatSon
possible for dr~ve-through service windows thereby prov~lng us
with ~he desired e~fect relative to th~s use.
Item 58 - we determined that the reference to "floor space
l~mited" actually dealt with ~c~essory buildings, As a result,
Section 3 Of tbs enclosed Ordinance amends §4.103 (1) dealing with
"f~oor space llm~ted" by changing the reference to
building.
~tems 64 and 84 - the issues rd{sad by these ~tems d~d not
result in any ch~n~es to the enclosed Ordinance. 64 ~s an
~r. Kirk McDonald ~'~
PeDruary g, ~99e
Page 3
informational reference, and 84 was dealt with by the pool h~11
~mendment adopted last year as Ordinance No, $5-0~. We ~id rapes1
commercial recreational uses as permitted uses in the B-3 Zoning
District,
Two other changes were made to the enclosed Ordinance not mentioned
in the City Planner's memo. First, Section 5 of the enclosed
Ordinance repeals the reference to "drive-up financial" as a
permitted accessory use in the 8-2 Zoning District. We determined
that this reference was not necessary based on our decision to make
drive-through service windows conditional uses for ell permitted
and conditionally permitted businesses in all coff~nercia] zoning
districts. Therefore, a bank or o~er financial institution with
a drive-up service window will be required to apply for
conditional use permit for the servioe window.
The second change not considered by the Planner's memo was our
decision to repeal the "commercial enterprises" ~ondltional uses in
the a-2 Zoning District with the exception of garden novelty
stores. Sectlon 6 of the enclosed Ordinance deals with this issue.
§4.114 (4) of our Code will refer to a gmrden novelty store es a
conditional use permit in the B-Z Zoning Dtstrict after the
adoption of the enclosed Ordinance. Subsections (4){a) through (6)
and (k) will be eliminated.
This deals with &ll the 'issues we discussed. Please contact me if
you h&ve any ot~er questions, comments or recommendations.
Very truly yours,
s[~e~. ,ond rall
~1 f3
Enclosure
CC: Ar Brixtu$, City Planner
ORDINANCE NO. 96-04
AN ORDINANCE R~CLASS[FYING VARIOUS CONDITIONAL
USES AS PERMITTED USES WZTH[N THE
AND B-4 ZONING DISTRICTS
The City Council O? the City of New HODe ordains:
Sectio~ 1. Section 4,102 "Permitt.~d use~, B~I" of the New
Hope City Code ls hereOy amended by adding subsections
"convenience. Food ~ake-Out./Deliv~ry E~teblishment", (14A)
"Government and Uti3ity. Bu~l~i~gs" and (I~A) "Professional and
Commergial Q[fices" to read as follows:
~ Convenience Fo~ Take-Out/Deli.very Establishment.
(~4A) ,~overnmen~.. &nd Utility Buildings.
(16A) Professional and ~ommerctQ.l Offices,
Sectioo 2. Section 4.104 "qo~ditional Uses~. B-I" of the NeW
Hope Oit¥ Code is hereby amended Dy repealing in their entirety
subsections (1) "Government and Utility guildin~.s", (2) "Medi~a~,
Prq. fes$ional and Cqmmerci.~l Offic~" and (4) "Convenien¢~..and TaKe-
Out/~elivery. Esteb~ishment", Dy renumDering subsections (3) "P_~
commerci&~" and (5) "J[e~~" subsections (2) and (3)
respectively, and by adding a new subsection (1) "~.riYe-Through
~er¥ice Windows" to read as follows:
~I) Drive-ThrouR.h Servic. e Windows, A..drive-th~ou~h se[vice
window .used in. any permitted or.~ondlt, ionall¥ permitted.
busipess or use s~all be all~we~ on3y if_ the followin~
addition&l cr!.teri& ~re s~tis.fied:
Stacking, Not ~ess,..t~an 180 feet of seeregated
au~_~_g.b_~..~ckino lane must....be pro..vided for the
service window~
(D) T~.ffi¢ Contro~ ..... The stac.~ing l~d and its acces~
mv~ be designed to ~ontrol..trafflc i.n a manner to
9rotect the buildings and. green ~re& o~...t.~e site.
~ Use of Street.. No pa.rt of the ~ub~i~. etreet, or
bou).eYard may be used for St..ackinR. of. automom~]es.
~d} ~ The stackin~ ~ne, orde~ board i..ntercom and
window ~lacement ,shall bff desi~nQ.d and lO.cared 1~
s~ch a mapner as to m~n~mize automobi~e.~.d
~ommunication noiseS., emissions and headliRht ~.1. sr~
a_s ~o ~diacent or,mists, oartiq.ularly rent,anti.al
Drem~.ses,. and, t~ maximize ~neu~eraDil. i~y o~
vehicles .on th~ sitff.
~ H~ours... Hours of oppratign shall ,De limite~..&~
necessaF~ tp mipimize the ..e~fect .of nuisance
faCtq~s such as.traffic. ~olse and ~are~
Section 3. Section 4.103 (1) "Floom~,.Smace Limi,$ed" of the New
Hope City Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
''-~-~ ..ACcessory Building. Accessory
(1) 7~pcr ~pccc ........ ~..
buildinm for commercial s_~
~ shall not excee~ thirty Dercent of the gros;
floor space of the principml
.Section. 4. Section 4,112 "Permitted Uses. B-2" of the New
Hope City Code is hereby amended by repealing subsection (2)
"~Cleani.ng" in its entiFety, by renurllbering sut~section (3) "Food",
...... 4 Use_s" a y to
subsection (~,) i_~i_qEi_teO.._ts-~_~5__g_,S~ and subsection
subsections (A) through (6) respectively and by adding new
"---,, subsections (2) "Banks.. (Without a Drive Th,rou.qh)" , (3) "E_I_~~
~ppliaDce Stores" and (8) "Reslu~urants {Without a Oriv,~ Through)"
"Fo0 "
and amending renumbered subsection (4) ~ to read as follows:
(2) Banks (Wit~ou~ .a ~rive Throu~hJ..
Electrical. Appliance
~-~ GroceF~~es and ~umermarkets
ReetaHrants. (W~th~ut ~ D,rtve
.~ection 5.. Section 4,113 "pfirmitted AGcessory Uses, B-2_" of
l:t~e New Hope City Code is hereby amended by repealing subsection
(2) "prive-Um. Financial" in its sntirety.
~l~,.~~. Section 4.11~ "~Conditjonal_Uses, B-_2" of t~e New
Hope City Code ~s hereby amended Dy repealing in their entirety
subsections (2) "Mu__9_]J_jJ2_l_e_ Fa.m]_]_~", (&) "Commercial Enterprises",
(4)(a) "~", (a,)(b),,O Electri_~al ADpllan.q.e Sto£es", (¢)(c)
"Fabriq ~,t.loreG.'', (4)(d) flY-_Sale Li~uo_r", (¢)(e) "OffS_e..t ?rintinq
and CoDy Service", (4)(f) "Restaurants", (4)(g) "Camera
~hoto~raDh~c Supplies", (4)(h)"Book Stores", (4)(i)"Medi. C~_[l", and
(4)(k) "Criteria for (a~ thro.ugh (i)" and by renumbering subsection
(4)(j) "~arde~. Noyelty Stores" to subsection
$ec~io0 7. Section 4.122 "Permitted Uses, .a-3" of the New
Hope City Code is hereby amended by amending subsection (5)
"~estau.rant~" to re~d as ~ollows:
(~) .~estaursnts, C~nveni.ence. FOOd., o.r~ve-In. Including
res__~.ts wi..~h [~quor.~ wi~e or beer l~.oenses obtaine~
Mnder ChaD. 10 of this C~.e. E~t~blishments w!,tb Dr~ve-
Through seryl~e$.win~ow$ dO reauir~.a cqnditi.on&l us~
[ermit as provided by Section 4.12~ (3) of th~s Cq. de.
Section ~. Section ~.124 (3) "O~ve-[n an~ Conve~.~enc~ Food"
of the New Hope City Code ~e hereby amended by repealing ~n ~heir
entirety subsections (a) through (~) and amending subsection (~) to
read as follows:
(+~) Dr~ve-~brou~h Service Windows. A ~rive-thro~gh service
window USed in Shy permitted or conditionally permitted
business or use shall be allowed only if the roi'towing
additional criteria are satisfied:
(a) ~t__~. Not less than 180 feet of sesre9ated
automobile stackin~ lane must be provided for the
service wln~ow.
(~_b) Traffic Contr~l. The staoklng land and ~ts access
must be designed %0 control traffic in a manner to
protect the buildings and green area on %he site.
(~c_) Uae of Street. No part Of t~e public street or
boulevard may be used for stacking of automobiles.
(~) o?~. The stamking lane, order boars intercom and
window placement shall be designed and located 5n
such a manner as to m~n~mize automobile and
communication no~sem, emissions and ~eaalight glare
as to adjacer~t premises, particularly residential
premises, and to maximize maneuverability of
vehicles on the e~te.
(~A) ~.o~rS, Hours of operation shall be limited ms
necessary to minimize the e?fect of nuisance
factors such as tralfic, noise and glare,
~_e i.~, section 4,13z "_Permitted~" of the New
Hol3e City Code is t~erelly amended by repe&ling in its entirety
subsection (22) "Insurance Sale_~" and by adding Subsection (48)
"C_ommercJe3 Recre_ati._onaJ U.semj. Not ExCeeding 4,(~.00 $ou.~r.e F...eet, in_
Are___.~a" to read ms follows:
.(48~ ~ommercia~ Reoreat .ion...~l. Uses Net .Exceeding_ ~,,OOQ ScLuar~e
~Feet i.n Area.
_Sec.t.(o_n 10, Section ~.134 (6) "C~ornm#rcial. Recr. eel;ion~al
Facili,t~es." of the New HODe City Code {s hereby amended tO react ms
fo1 lows:
(6) ~Com[n~ rci al Rec~e. at lone] Flc_'i 1 ~.t ~ ea. Commercial
retreat ~onal .fa¢_i 1 j.t ~ ~ls exceedS,n. ~ ~,000 _s~uare ..feet .~ n
r~.~_e.~, provided that:
$~;_tjLq_o.__~.. Effect{ye Date, This Ordinance shall be
Dated the day o? __ , 1996,
~dw. J. Erickmon, Mayor
~ttest:
va]erie Leone, City Clerk
Published ~n the New Hope-Golden Valley Su~-Post the day of
~ I~SS.)
Northwest Associated .C?nsultants, Inc.
COMMUNITY PLANNING · DESlG MARKET RESEARCH
PLANNING REPORT- ADDENDUM
TO: Kirk McDonald
FROM: Cary Teague/Alan Brixius
DATE: 26 January 1996
RE: New Hope - Zoning Ordinance Amendments (Business Districts)
FILE NO: 131.00 - 95.21
Upon further review of the matrix highlighting the current ordinance vs. the proposed
ordinance amendment, a couple of issues of note were discovered. ~
The following highlights the issues discovered, again, each issue corresponds to the
number on the left side of the matrix.
7. Number 55 from the previous matrix was eliminated (Dry Cleaning including plant
accessory heretofore, pressing and repairing), as it is listed under number 7
(Cleaning. Laundry and dry cleaning provided the process used meets the
requirements of the Fire Prevention Code for use in buildings with other
occupancies).
8. Please note that the City allows for grocery stores that are less than 21,500 square
feet in size. However, under current City regulations, grocery stores larger than
21,500 square feet in size are not identified in any zoning district. The City may
wish to consider adding a provision to allow larger grocery stores in the B-4 zoning
district.
15. The proposed ordinance does not eliminate Copy and Printing Service from being
both a permitted and conditionally permitted use in the B-2 district.
25. Insurance Sales offices would also fall under the category Professional and
Commercial Offices, therefore, the reference has been added to the matrix.
37a. Drive-Through Service Windows have been added to the matrix per the proposed
ordinance. All uses with drive-through facilities are proposed to be a conditionally
permitted use within the B-3 and B-4 zoning district.
5775 Wayzata Blvd,. Suite 555. St. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636.Fax. 595-9837
$8. Our office raises the issue of the purpose of number 58 (Floor Space l~'mited).
Specifically, how does the City administer a regulation of an "accessory use not to ,--,,
exceed 30% of the gross floor area of the principal use".
64. Number 15 (Cornrnercia/and Professional Offices) from the previous matrix was
eliminated, as it was listed twice within the matrix (previous ~7 Professional and
Commercial Offices). Again, note that the proposed ordinance establishes this use
as a "permitted use" in the B-1 district rather than "conditionally permitted use".
84. Please note that the City Code allows Commercial Recreational Facilities as a
permitted use within the B-3 zoning district. If the City does not wish to allow these
types of uses within the B-3 district it should repeal Section 4.122 (3) of the City
Code, that allows Commercial Recreational Uses.
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
Current Proposed
6-1 B-2 B-3 B.4 B-1 B-2 B-~ B-4 Use
1. P P N P See ?.a 1. Barber Shops.
2. P P N P See 2a 2. Beauty Shops.
2a. - - P P N P 2a. Personal Services.
3. P P N P P P N P 3. Essential Se~ces.
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.
6. N P N P N P N P 6. Mortuary.
7. P P N P P P N P 7. Cleaning. Laundry & dry
Cleaning provided the
process used meets the
requirements of the Fire
Prevention Code for use
in buildings with other
occupancies.
8. N P N P N P N P 8. Food. Grocery stores
and supermarkets
providing the use does
not exceed 21,500 s.f. of
floor space.
9. P P N P P P N P 9. Antique Shops.
10. P P&C N P P P N P 10. Art/School Supplies,
Book, Office Supplies,
Sta'donary Stores.
11. P P N P P P N P 11. Bicycle Sales/Repair.
12. P P N P P P N P 12. Candy, Ice Cream, Ice
Milk, Popcorn, Nuts,
Frozen Desserts,
Packaged Snacks, Soft
Drinks.
13. N P N P N P N P 13. Carpet, Rugs and Tile
and Other Floor
Covedngs.
14. P P N P P P N P 14. Coin and Philatelic
Stores.
Current Proposed
~--~,
B-1 B-2 l~-3 B-4 B-1 B-2 6-3 B-4 Use
15. P P&C N P P P&C N P 15. Copy and Printing
Service.
16. N P N P N P N P 16. Costume and Clothes
Rental.
17. N P N P N P N P 17. Office Equipment Stores.
18. N P N P N P N P 18. Drug Stores.
19. N P N P N P N P 19. Employment Agency.
20. P P N P P P N P 20. Florist Shop.
21. N P N P N P N P 21. Furniture Stores.
22. N P N P N P N P 22. Furriers when Conducted
only for Retail Trade, on
Premises.
23. P P N P P P N P 23, Gift or Novelty Stores.
24. P P N P P P N P 24. Hobby Store.
25. P P N P P P N P 25. Insurance Sales (See
~4)
26. P P N P P P N P 26. Locksmith.
27. N P N P N P N P 27. Meat Market but Not
Including Locker Storage.
28. N P N P N P N P 28. Paint and Wallpaper
Sales.
29. N P N P N P N P 29. Plumbing, Television;
Radio, Electrical Sales
and Such Repair.
30. P P N P P P N P 30. Toy Stores.
31. P P N P P P N P 31. Tailor Shops.
32. N P N P N P N P 32. Jewelry Shops and other
Similar Uses.
33. N P N P N P N P 33. Travel Bureaus,
Transportation, Ticket
Offices.
34. N P N P N P N P 34. Variety Stores, 5/10 Cent
Stores, Stores of Similar
Nature.
35. N P N P N P N P 35. Wearing Apparel.
36. N A A A N A A A 36. Drive-up, Financial (1
Lane Maximum).
37. N P&C N P N P N P 37. Banks (Without drive-
through.
37a. - - - N N C C 37a. Drive-Through Service
Windows.
38. P P N P P P N P 38. Record Shop.
39. P P N P P P N P 39. Real Estate Sales.
40. N P N P N P N P 40. Building Matedal Sales of
Retail Nature in Totally
Enclosed Building.
41. P P&C N P P P N P 41. Fabric Store.
42. P P&C N P P P N P 42. Camera/Photographic
,, Supplies.
2
Current Proposed
B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-1 B-2 B-3 E~-4 Use
43. C P&C P P C P P P 43. Restaurant (without
drive-through).
44. N P&C N P N P N P 44. Off-Sale Liquor Stores.
45. C P&C N P N P N P 45. Medical Facility.
46. N P N P N P N P 46. 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. Hardware Stores.
49. N N P N N N P N 49. Auto Accessory Store.
50. N N P N N N P N 50. Motor Vehicle and
Recreation Equipment
Sales and Garages
Accessory Thereto.
51. N N P N N N P N 51. Motels.
52. N N P N N N P N 52. Amusement Rides.
53. N N N P N N N P 53. Enclosed Boat and
Marine Sales.
54. N C N P N C N P 54. Garden Novelty Stores.
55. N N N P N N N P 55. Theaters - Not Outdoor
Drive-In Type.
56. N N N P N N N P 56. Custom Manufacturing
and Repair.
N P N N N P 57. Public Garage/Parking
57.
N
N
Ramp.
58. A A A A A A A A 58. Floor Space Limited.
Commercial or business
buildings and structures
for a use accessory to
the principal use, but
such use shall not
exceed thirty percent of
the gross floor space of
the principal use.
59. A A A A A A A A 59. ParkJng. Off-street
parking as regulated by
Section 4.036.
60. A A A A A A A A 60. Off-street Loading.
61. A A A A A A A A 61. Signs.
62. A A A A A A A A 62. Pinball Machines.
63. C C N N P P N P 63. Government and Utility
Buildings.
64. C P N P P P N P 64. Professional and
Commercial Offices.
65. C C N C C C N C 65. PUD, Commercial.
66. C C N N P P N P 66. Convenience Food
Take-Out/Delivery
EstablishmenL
67. N C N N N N N N 67. Multiple Family.
68. N C N P N P N P 68. Electrical Appliance
Store.
3
Current Proposed
B-1 B-2 6-3 B-4 B-1 B-2 6-3 1~-4 Use
69. N N C C N N C C 69. Automobile Service
Station.
70. N N C C N N C C 70. Convenience Store with
Gasoline.
71. N N C C N N P P 71. Drive-In and
Convenience Food.
72. N N C C N N C C 72. Car Washes.
73. N N C C N N C C 73. Motor Vehicle Sales,
Service, Leasing/Rental
and Repair.
74. N N CA N N N CA N 74. Automobile Service
Station, Additional Uses.
75. N N CA N N N CA N 75. Automobile Service
Stations, Subordinate
Uses.
76. N N CA N N N CA N 76. Open Storage,
Accessory.
77. N N CA N N N CA N 77. Outdoor Sales and
Sewices, Accessory.
78. N N CA N N N CA N 78. Enclosed Sales and
Service, Accessory.
79. N N CA N N N CA N 79. Take-Out Service
Window.
80. N N CA N N N CA N 00. Sale of Propane or LP
Gas Accessory to
Automobile Sewice
Station.
81. N N CA N N N CA N 81. Outdoor Dining,
Accessory.
82. N N N C N N N C 82. Training Schools
83. N N N C N N N C 83. Veterinarian Clinics.
84. N N P N See 84a & 84b 84. Commercial Recre~onal
Uses.
84a. N N P C N N P C 84a. Commen:ial Recreation
Facilities (exceeding
4,000 square feet).
84b. N N P C N N P P 84b. Commercial Recreation
Facilities (not
exceeding 4,000 square
feet).
85. A A A A A A A A 85. Adult Uses - Accessory.
86. N N C C N N C C 86. Adult Uses - Principal.
87. N N P P N N P P 87. Outdoor sales of
seasonable farm
produce.
4
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE
AMENDING NEW HOPE ZONING CODE BY
RECLASSIFYING VARIOUS CONDITIONAL US~S
AS PERMITTED USES IN THE BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICTS
C~t¥ of New Hope, M~.~nesota
Notice fs hereby given that the Planning Commission of the
ci[y of New Hope~ Minnesota, wi13 meet on the 6th day of February,
t996, at 7:00 o'clock O.m. at the City Na11~ 4401 Xylon Avenue
North, in said City for the purpose of ho3d~ng a Dub3~c hearing to
consider the adoption of an ordinanoe &mending the New Nope Zoning
Code.
Satd ordinance w~] have the affe~t of reclassifying various
conditional uses as permitted uses in t~s B-l~ B-2, B-3 and B-4
zoning d~etr~cts.
A~I Derso~s interested a~e. invlted to appear at sa~d hear~'ng
for the purpose of being heard with respect to the zoning COde
amendment.
Aux~3tary aids for persons with disabilities are available
upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the
City C3erk to make arrangements (te3ephone 531-5117, TDD
number 631-5109).
Dated the 22nd day of January, 1996.
s/ Valerie J, Leone
ValeT,s J. Leone
City Clerk
(Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun-Post on the
o~ January, 1556.)
CORRICK & SONDRALL. P.A.
STEVE. A. SO~O.ALL ATTORNEYS AT LAW
MICHAEL R.
.A.T,... UAU~C.A Edinburgh Executive Office Plaza
WILLIAMC. ST"AIT 8525 Edinbrook Crossing
Suite #203
Brooklyn Park, Minneso~ 55443
December 22, 1995
Mr. Kirk McDonald
Management Assistant
City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE' An Ordinance Reclassifying Various Conditional Uses
as Permitted Uses Within the 8-1 through B-4 Zoning
Districts
Our File No. 99.40074
Dear Kirk: ,
Please find enclosed an amended Ordinance Reclassifying Various
Conditional Uses as Permitted Uses Within the business zoning
districts 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
District. 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 8-1 Zoning
District.
A]so, Section 7 of the Ordinance has been amended to make all
business 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. Sondrall
slf
Enclosure
cc: A1 Brixius, City Planner
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Kirk McDonald
FROM: Cary TeagueiAJan Brixius
DATE: 21 December 1995
RE: New Hope - Zoning Ordinance Amendments (Business Districts)
FILE NO: 131.00 - 95.21
BACKGROUND t ~
Per the request of the Codes and Standards Committee our office has developed a matrix
showing a compi-ative analysis of all use~ wilhin the City's busines~ districts. Specifically
the rnatTiX shows existing ~ compa~ to the pro~ Zoning Ordinance Amendment.
This memo serves as an explanation of .the matrix.
ANALYSIS
The attached matrix highlights all uses within the City's busines, zoning districts and
compares them to the existing zoning ordinance and the pn:)posed amendment to the
zoning ordinance. The ~ in bold print ~ 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, lharefore, the purpose of each district is as follows:
B-1 Umited Neighborhood Bu. inea. s DistricL The purpose of the 'B-I" Limited
Neighborhood Business District is to provide for the e.ttablishment of local centers for
convenient, limited office, retail or service outlets which deal directly with the customer
from whom the goods or services are fumished. These centers are to provide services
and goods only for the surrounding neighborhoods and are not intended to draw
customers from the entire community.
B-2 Retail Business DistricL The purpose of the *B-2" Retail Business District is to
provide for low intermity, retail or service outlets which deal directly with the customer for
5775 Wayzata Blvd.. Suite 555 · St. Louis Park,~MN $5416r (612) 595-9636-Fax. 595-9837
whom the goods or services am furnished. The uses allowed in this 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.
B.3 Auto. Oriented Business District. 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.
B-4 Community Business Dilrtrfct. The purpose of the "B-4" Community Business
Dist~ct 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 iuue corresponds to the number on the left side of the matrix.
1-2a. The existing ordinance regulates barber shops and beauty shops aa different uses.
However, after a detailed study, it was recommended to amend the zoning
ordinance to establish persona/servfces. 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 maeaage, and tattooing. ~
3'/. Please note that there are several uses in the current ordinance that are listed as
both permitted 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. Baaed 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, benk~ are considered a permitted and
conditionally permitted use in the B-2 distri~ and permitted in the I]-4 district.
Under the proposed ordinarx=e, banks without drive-through facilities are permitted
uses within'the B-2 and B-4 districts, and drive-through facilitiles will remain
conditionally permitted uses within the B-2 and B-4 districts.
'
By conditionally permitting ddve~lrough facilities, the City is abl~, to examine the
impacts of such uses through a pulpit, heer~g and CUP processing, and may place
specific conditions on ti'rose uses. ~ ~lthout ddve-~ facilities do not hold
any land use impacts different from uses that areJ permitted within the B-2 or B-4
district.
41. Because a Fabric Store does not hold any land use impacts different from uses that
are permitted within the B-2 or B~ diStri~ 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 calls 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 Ddve-in and Convenience Food. The proposed
ordinance eliminates D~fveqn and Convenience Food Establishment and replaces
it with Restaurant with Drive-through FaciliSes, therefore, all types of eating
establ~ 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 ~:iitionaily 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 uae impacts ara greater on uses with drive-through facilRies.
44& Off-sale liquor and medical facilities are currently oonsidered permitted and
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 appropnately designated as permitted
uses within commercial zoning districts rather than conditionally permitted uses,
therefore, the change has been proposed.
70. Multiple Family development has bc, cn found not to be an appropriate use within
ti'ts 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~ai Recreation Facilities are considered permitted 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."
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, etc. 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 El-4 Distrtct without need for
a public hearing and CUP processing.
In review of the tenant breakdowns of the New Hope City Center .~.d Winnetka
Center, a standard leasable 'bay' measures 3,400 and 1,600 square feet
respectively. Based on this and existing busines~ square footage allotments, it is
believed a commercial recreational facility less than 4,000 square feet in area
would have minimal impact.
CONCLUSION
The attad'~ecl 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 been concluded that a number of conditional uses in the City's vadous commercial
zoning district may be mom appropriately classified as permitted uses. Based on an
examination of district purpose and uae characteristics our office recommends approval
of all of the proposed modifications.
CORRICK & SONDRALL, P.A.
STEVEN A. SONORALL ATTORNEYS AT LAW ~'~-~'~.~
MICHAEL R. ~EUR
MARTIN .. UA~CHA Edinburgh Execu~ve Office Plaza
.,~u~u c. s~ 8525 Edinbrook Crossing
Suite ~203
Brookl~ P~k, Minnesota 55443
TE~PHONE (612) 4~S~1
~x (s~2)
November 20, 1995
Kirk McDonald
Management Asst.
City of New Hope
4401 Xy]on Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE: Proposed Ordinance Rec]assifying 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 Conditiona~ 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
c]assifications 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
uti]ity buildings and professional and commercial offices from
conditional to permitted use in the B-1 District.
Section 4 of the Ordinance implements the City P]anner's
recommendation for changes to the permitted uses in the B-2
District. However, government and utility buildings, professional
and commercia] offices, camera and photographic supplies and book
stores are not specifically listed. They are ail B-1 permitted
uses and therefore roil 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 require in Section 8 of the Ordinance that a11~
drive-through windows be subject to the conditional use permit
process. I think it is hard to distinguish the difference between
a drive-through for restaurants vs. 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 sq. ft. in area as permitted uses in the B-4
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. Sondra11
slm2
Enclosure
cc: A1Brixius, City Planner
Doug Sandstad, City Bldg. Official
Northwest. Associ. ated Consultants, Inc
COMMUNITY LANNING OESIGN · MARKET RESEARCH
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 Puro_ ose. 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) LJgb.tJD~ 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 Access. 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) Surfacing. 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-Throuoh Windows. Service windows shall be allowed if the following
additional criteda are satisfied:
(1) ~ 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 Regulation.
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 drive-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 Sondrail
4
COMMUNITY L ANNING · DESIG MAR 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
appropriately 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 regulation of ~commercial recreational" uses
within the City's B-4, Community Business District.
Attached for reference: Exhibit A - Zoning Map
ISSUES 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 welfare,
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 welfare, 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-I, 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-1 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 IYl 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
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 def'med to include a variety of service businesses including barbers, beauty
salons, and similar uses within the Def'mifion 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 ~y 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 Covetings
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
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
Toy Stores
Tailor Shops
Sewelry 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
Sporting 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
Off-Sale Liquor
Offset Printing and Copy Service
Restaurants
Camera and Photographic Supplies
Book Stores
Medical
Garden Novelty Stores
l*indings. 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 a~ 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 l/mit 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 Us~s. 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 F. quipment Sales and Accessory Garages
Motels
Restaurants
Amusement Rides
Conditional Uses: Motor Fuel Station, Auto Repair-Minor, Tire 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 ali hold characteristics
which warrant the imposition of additional, use specific performance standards to ensure land use
compatibility and maintain the public health, safety and welfare.
6
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 Accessory Heretofore, Pres~g and Repairing '
Drug Store
Employment Agencies
Florist Shop
Fumiture 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 ligted conditional uses in the It4 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 vetefinaxian 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 facilities a~ defined by the Ordinance as Ubowling alley, goff, pool hall,
dance hall, skating, trampoline and similar uses".
While commercial recreational uses the scale of a bowling alley, billiard hail 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, 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 competitions, 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 Winnetka Center, a standard
leasable "bay" measures 3,400 and 1,600 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.
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:
Proposed Permitted Us~s: :
B-1, 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
Banks (Without a Drive Through)
Electrical Appliance Stores
Restaurants (Without a Drive Through)
Camera and Photographic Supplies
Book Stores
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
~ Ir&idly AESIOENTIAI.
SirC~Lf. ANO TWQ FAIdlLy R~'SIO[NTIAI. FI-Z
MEOII, M DENSITY RESIO~NTIAL,
HIGH DENSITY RESID[NTL'I,. It-4
SIrNIOlII ClTtZE. N RESIDENTIAl.
~,r SIO~NTI&i. OFFICE. ~q-o
[.IUIT[O NIrlGHBQ~H~QO BUSINESS
R~'TAII. BUS INES,I 8,2'
AUTO ORIENTED BUSINESS
COMMUNITY ~USINi~ SS
LIMIT[O INDUSTRIAL. £- I
0£NEAAI. INOUSTNIAt. ~ - 2
Lrl.O00 II'1.&lN
WET /ANO W
est
' '.A;~sodated
Consultants, 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
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I am pleased to see the input from Al Brixius on our CUP headache in B-Zones. Staff
support the simplification of the process by initiating this phase of review, after hearing
much "flak" from our business community. When, however, we make all restaurants ("fast" 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) l 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 all 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
file
FILE MEMORANDUM
***POSTE HASTE SHOPPING CENTER***
9400-9446 36th Ave. No.
~-25-95 OK TO ISSUE BUILDING PERMIT FOR "DANCE STUDIO" (3,200 sD
~) SsU~ c_f~sP, leted scale plans & secti°n view'
~c) Property Owner, Jerry Showalter, must schedule meeting to talk with city staff about
the recent cutting down of front yards trees after request was denied and general
PcrOperty issues.
ity Staff will commence by Sept. 15, 1995, a Text Amendment ]'or small B-4
tenant uses that are now CUP's despit~ routine nature~
cc: Donahue ~
McDonald
TO: KIRK McDONALD
FROM: DOUG SANDSTAD
DATE: AUGUST 29, 1995
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. [ 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
simplify, evidence by the chart, above, and public comments.
Let's discuss the options.
4.13, &.~21, 4.122,
!
4.13 'B-4' COMRUNITY BUSINHSS DISTRICT
4.131 Pur¢ose. The purpose of e~e "B-I' Canmunity Business District is to
provide for the es~abl£shment of commercial and serv£ce
i region.
4.132 Permitted Uses~ B-4. The following are permitted uses £n a "B-4"
I (1} Less Zntens~vt Use DiStricts. All pe=m£t=ed use· ~n 'B-i' and
2"°
i (2) ~
C3) Art/School Suppl~e·, Book, 0·face' Supplie·~ S~a~ioflery S~ore-
(S) ~andy. Ice erie Silk, Popcornr Nut·r Frose~ Desserts, Packa~e~
Snack·r So~
I ~8) Carpe~r Rug· and Ttle and O~her Floor Coverings
7) Cote and P~tleteltc Stores
w
(8) Co. neutral and ProFessional Offices
(0) Cogy and Prtnttn~ Service
(1~ Of~ce Rqulpmen~ Stores
*(12) Reels·ed BoeC and Ha, ina Sale·
*(13) Dry C~ean~n~ ~flc~ud£fl~ Plant AccessorZ heretofore, Pressin~ and
I (14)
(16)
(17) Furniture
(20) G~£t or Novelt~ Store·
(22) Znsu~·nce Se2e·
I 123) L°cksm~tA
24) ~eat K&rke~ but Not Includ£n~ Locker
25) Paint and Ual~paper S,~es
26) P2umbin~r ~e~evi·~onr 'o--~£o. , Electr£cal Bi2·· and Such ReFair
I '*(27) Theater·r no~ Outdoor ,Lye-Se Type
.(28)( To~ S~oF·· '
20 ) Cu·to~ aanu~ac~ur~n and Re
I~o) ~
(32) Tceve~ Bureau·
33) variety S~ore·r 5/10 Cent Stores, Storeso~ Sheller Nature
34) We&r~n A Eel
I (35) Bin · Say n · Loans Cred£~ Unions Other Financial Institutions
*(36) Public ~ara · Park~n Ram
(39) Bu~ldLn~ aa~artal Sa~es of Reta£1 ~ature in Totally Bnclosed
But~dtnq
Fab, to S~orem
411 Camera/Photographic Suppl
( 42 )
! (44(431 ~ed~calOf~'Sale L~quo= Stores
(45 S~°rtiflg Goods Stores
(461 Pet Sho~·
C47) Hardware Stores
I
4.133 Perm£tted Accesso=~ Uses, B-4. The following are permitted accessory
uses An a "B-4'
I ·
Ill Less Intensive Use O£sCr£ct. All permitted accessory uses £n a
~8-3' District.
I 4-70
· 07~684
i
D£s~r£c=~ (Requ~=es 'a condition&l use permit based upon procedures
set forth in and regulated by Section 4.20, and conformance where
applicable, with Chapter 3, Sign£ng).
(1) Less ~ntensive Use District. All conditional uses, subject to
the same conditions as allowed in the B-3 Districts excluding any
'B-S" conditional use listed as 'permitted" in "B-4".
(2) Planned Unit Development - Commercial. Commercial pl&nnad unit
development as regulated by Sect£on 4.19.
(3) Trainin~ Schools. Training schools, provided
(a) As Principal Use. The school is operated es an adjunct of
the principal use to provide training for the consumer,
distributor or installer of the product, process or service
which is sold, distr£buted or manufactured under the
principal use.
(b) Code Compliance. Proof of compliance with City and State
(c) Perklflq. Adequate on-site parking is provided so that no
customers, visitors or employees are required to par~
business as & result of the operation of the school.
Veterinarian Clinics. When all facilities are totally
enclosed, and procedures end construction which will couply with
the noise aequlation portion of this Code ere approved by the
City.
($) Deleted.
(Code 072684, 85-22)
4-71
072~84
t 4.1~4 (~)(~, 4.1~4 (~) (,)-~)
l {~) ¢o-"rcial_~re~lon_~aclll~lee.
(&) Access. ~he site o£ the p=opose4 use has /,~
~ &ccess to an a=~e=ial at=ee~ am
de~ln~ in ~he Ci~ C~e, ~i~hou~ u~ilizing
public a~ree~a o~ a lower ~ra~lc handlimq
classification ~o reach ~he arterial a~ree~,
(b) P~ozimi~y ~o Reliden~ial. ~e
periM~e~ o~ ~e aide, as legally desc~ib~
residential zoning c~asst~tca~ton, or
~aclll~ie. are enclosed such ~ha~
B a=chl~ural ap~=anee and func~io~l p~an
se ~he building and sA~e shall no~ ~
dissimilar ~o ~he ~isCing ~ildings or
as ~o ~use A~Lcunc ~o p~oper~y uluea or
~naC~uCe a blighting influence.
B (d) Screening ~rom Residen~ial. hrking ar~s
shall ~ K~n~ ~rou view o~ ~esiden~AaL
dia~ric~, and IhiL~ ~ ~rb~ vi~h ~n~inuouo
concrete ~rba ao~ less ~hafl six inches high
a~e ~he ~rkiflg lo~ or ~ivevay grade, a~
~he '~Eb line.
Ce) Access. Vehi~lar access ~A.ts shall
~ amd design~ and ~ns~ruc~.~o
cr~te a ~n/m~ se ~fl~lict vi~ ~hr~gh
n ,,, Li~h,inq Shield,.' All lAsh, Lng .ha,, ~ _
ho~ and M dLrec~ that ~he light source
As no~ v/sAble ~r~ the rLgh~-o~y or ~r~
a resAden~Aal Mae or use.
; CS) ~e entire a~u o~her ~han
Surfacing.
~cupL~ ~ buildings, s~ruc~ures o~
plantLnga shall ~ su~aced vi~h bA~u~n~o
o= ~ncre~e m~erial ~ich wall eon~ro~
and draA~ge. ~he m~erAal and grading
~ sub3~-~o ~he approval o~ ~e C~y.
__ (h) ~ndseaoAn~. ~ndocap~ng shall ~ pr~id~
-- ~d ~e ~y~ o~ pXan~Ang M~erAaX and
nu~r and sase o~ p~an~s shaXl ~ sub3~
the appr~aX of ~e Ct~y.
(Ord. 85-32)
I
CITY OF NEW HOPE
DATE: February 2, 1996
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator
SUBJECT: Miscellaneous Issues
1. January 8th Council/EDA Meetings - At the January 8th Council/EDA meetings, the Council/EDA
took action on the following planning/development/housing issues:
A. Project #545, Motion Approving Ouote by Hy-Land Surveying in the Amount of $300 to
Survey City-Owned Property at 6067 West Broadway - Approved and survey has been
completed.
B. Projects #545, #548, & #549, Motion Awarding Contract for Asbestos Building Surveys of
Three City-Owned Properties Including 6067 West Broadway, 5559 Sumter and 7621 Bass
Lake Road - Approved and surveys in process.
C. Resolution Relating to Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A, Five Thousand Winnetka 2nd Addition -
Approved; all improvements at Navarre Corporation completed.
D. Project #514, Resolution Approving A~eement with CEI Convention Services, Inc. to Provide
Booths for the 1996 Northwest Suburban Remodeling Fair - Approved; see attached Remodeling
Fair advertisement. Commissioners are invited to attend.
E. Pro|ect #536, Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Call for Bids for Ice
Arena Expansion - Approved; bids will be opened on February 7th and considered by the Council
on February 12th.
F. Pro|ect #550, Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Call for Bids for
Ballfield Reconstruction - New Hope Elementary School - Approved; see attached Council
Request for more information.
G. Ordinance 96-1, An Ordinance Amending Planning Commission Membership and
Appointment of City Councilmember as a Planning Commissioner - Approved; see attached
Council Request for more information.
H. Project #537, Discussion Regarding 1996 Shop Neighborly New Hope Promotion - The City will
be conducting another Shop New Hope campaign this summer; see attached EDA Request for
further information.
I. Resolution Approving Contract with TwinWest Chamber of Commerce for Minnesota Real
Estate Journal Property Tracking Data Base Program - Approved; see attached EDA Request
for further information.
2. January 22nd Council/EDA Meetings - At the January 22nd Council/EDA meetings, the Council/EDA
took action on the following planning/development/housing issues:
A. Project #529, Resolution Awarding Contract for 500,000 Gallon Elevated Storage Tank
Rehabilitation Project to Odland Protective Coating in the Amount of $272,850 - Approved;
see attached Council Request for more information.
B. Resolution Authorizing City Manager to Negotiate and Enter into a Contract with Scott
Shore/Creative Representative for the Production of the New Hope City Report - Approved;
see attached Council Request for more information.
C. Project #537, Resolution Approvine Agreements with Kev Group Advertising for Billboard
A~eements with Naegele Outdoor Advertisinll for 1996 Shop Neighborly New Hope Campaign
- Approved; see attached EDA Request for more information.
D. Resolution Approving Submission of the ~Minnesota City Participation Program (MCPP).
Application to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MI-IFA) - Approved; see attached
Request for more information.
E. Resolution Approving First Amendment to Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments Prol~ram
Contract No. C-94-56 for Administrative Services Between the Metropolitan Council and the
City of New Hope and Authorizing President and Executive Director to Execute A~eement -
Approved; see attached EDA Request for more information.
3. Codes & Standards Committee - Met in January to continue discussions on flashing/moving signs and
the recently enacted 60-day zoning legislation. These issues will be further discussed in February. Per
staff's recommendation, the Committee will also undertake a study on pawn shops, as New Hope
currently has no regulations on this use.
4. Design & Review Committee - Met in January to review a routine industrial building expansion by
Taber-Bushnell. Will be meeting in February to review revised plans for the Car-X development on
the Lasky property. The revised concept plans have been reviewed by the City Manager and staff and
include attaching the buildings instead of constructing a separate building, thus the request would be
modified from a PUD request to a CUP request. The revised plans address the traffic circulation
problems inherent in previous plans.
5. Quarterly Reports - The fourth quarter reports for planning/development, housing and engineering are
enclosed for your information.
6. Planning Commission Applications - The City has received several inquiries regarding interest in
serving on the Planning Commission and the City Council will probably be conducting interviews in
February.
7. Land Use Planning Workshops - Government Training Service will again be conducting Land Use
Planning Workshops for Planning Commissioners in February, March and April. Please review the
enclosed information, and if you are interested in attending, please make arrangements with Pam
(531-5110). We will be glad to coordinate your registration and there are funds available in the
Planning Budget to pay for the training.
8. Miscellaneous Articles - Enclosed are articles from APA Zoning News, Planning Minnesota and the
Zoning Bulletin which may be of interest to you.
Attachments: Remodeling Fair Advertisement
Plans & Specifications for New Hope Elementary School Ballfields
Planning Commission Membership Ordinance
Shop New Hope Promotion
TwinWest Property Tracking Data Base
Water Tower Rehabilitation
City Newsletter Production
Billboard Agreements
First-Time Homebuyers Program
Metro HRA Agreement
4th Quarter Reports
GTS Workshops
Miscellaneous Articles
996 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
· $10.00 Off Early Registration
The purpose of the · Ho~pitalltTRoom for Vendors the public.
F a i r i s t o e n c o u r a se · Dbenuntad l~'i~ for More than
home owners to make One Booth If you choose to
improvements to their · Star and Tribune Adverfisements participate in this
homes. The event · CableTelevlsion marketing event, return
CommercialdAnnouncements the enclosed registration
proved last year to be an · Over 2,S00 Attendees
excellent opportunity for form that provides the
members of the home necessary details
improvement industry to r e g a r d i n g b o o t h
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 Kvilvan& 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
o Fully Functional Decks and Porches Kirk McDonald, City of New Hope
o Basic Home Maintenance 531-$119
o Color Your World with Painting
Techniques
COUNCIL
RE IJ'F, ST FOR ACTION
Originating Department Approved for Agenda A&enda Section
Plannin8 &
Parks and Recreation ~ 1/8/96 Development
Item No.
B~. Shari French B~. 8.2
APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR
BIDS FOR BALLFIELD RECONSTRUCTION - NEW HOPE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
( IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 550 )
Approval of plans and specificationsand call for bids is sought by
staff for ballfield reconstruction including some storm sewer
improvements for New Hope Elementary School.
The City's parks and recreation department uses the ballfields at
New Hope Elementary spring and summer for you=hand teen programs.
At the presen~ time the fields are less than adequate. They flood
with very ii=tie rain and become unusable. The backstops and
players benches need work as the footings have risen due to frost
heaving. The fields need to be raised to provide for adequate
drainage. The facility is becoming unusable because of the safety
issues involved.
The School District uses this facility for the elementary school's
physical education programs as well as their recess site. Cooper
High School uses the facility for its~girls' competitive softball
program as well as its competitive fall soccer program.
If construction were to happen in conjunction with the Ice Arena
project, the ex=fa fill from the Arena can be used at New Hope
Elementary. The engineer speculates that this will save =he City
MOTION BY SECOND BY
money as the fill from the arena~will then not have to be haui~
off and disposed of. If the project were to happen later in ck~
future without fill provided by the City, it would become expensive
to bring fill to the site. This way the needed fill is hauled away
from the arena and used on the ballfields.
City staff met with school district staff on December 22nd to
discuss this idea of improvements at New Hope Elementary. District
staff is enthusiastic and offered that if the facilities are not
improved that Cooper athletics will no longer be able to be played
there because of the safety issues involved. Construction
scheduling is critical to the district staff as they need the
outdoor facilities in the spring through the first part of June and
again in the fall as soon as school starts.
As outlined in a letter from Mark Hanson to Mr. Jim Dahle, staff
suggested that the School District be responsible for the storm
sewer cost of the project, approximately $45,000. The school board
would consider this in February.
If the facility is upgraded, the City could use the new ballfields
for an evening youth softball program as well as a new fast pitch
softball program for teens. Both programs are needed but cannot be
accommodated at this time because of a lack of adequate facilities.
Staff recommends approval of the Plans and specifications and a
call for bids for the ballfield reconstruction and storm sewer
project for New Hope Elementary School. Staff further recommends
that bids be considered on March 11 as by then the School Board
will have had a chance to discuss the project.
Funding is recommended to come from surplus CIP.
~ COUNCIL
REQUEST FOR: ACTION
Orlgtrlatlrlg Department Appr~v~-d for Agenda ~ .e~.~-t~on
Ci~ Manager & l~esolufions
Kirk McDonald ~'] 1-08-96 Item No.
Management Assistant I~.~/ 10.1
ORDINANCE NO. 96-1: AN ORD~IANC£ AMENDING PLANNING COMMISSION
MEMBERSHIP AND APPOINTMENT OF CITY COUNCILMEMB£R AS A PLANNING
COMMISSIONER
Section 2.132(1) of the City Code, which discusses th~ composilio~/number of members on
the Plannin~ Commission, currently smms tim "The Plsamh~ Coa, a~loa ~ consist of
ten members sppoiat~d by the ComaeiL" The Commission bas no~ co~ist~ of ten members
for many years and staff recommend thai the ordimm~ b~ amended ~o r~flect wbaI is the
present situation and to allow the Council/reaCt fl~-xibili~ in ~ membership number. The
Cornmi-~qion currently cons/st· of s~ven members and has roulindy c. on.sist~ of eil~hl members.
Sm/f and the Commis~'on fed that ten members is mo lar~ of a/roup, however thai is
currently mandamd by ordinan~. Th~ City AtWrn~ bas ~ tb~ al~hed ordinance
which would emend th~ ordimm~ to read tim "The Pls~ag~ Coauais~n ~sv consist of
uo to ten members sppoiat~l by the Coaaeii."
Section 2.132(3) of the Cod~ which discusses a Coun~i!memb~r bein~ a tenth member of the
Commlssioll, currently ~ tb~ "The CoRgi[ ~ ·pp~llt · ~a~b~. of the Council to
be the tenth memb~' of the P[smlimf Commis~l~, ...". If fll~ Coundl is al/l~eabl¢ to the
amendment allowin~ mm flt~xibility in th~ number of Commi-~ionors, and not requ/rinI a
maximum of ten members, then this se~don of th~ Cod~ would also n~d to b~ mended. The
at~ached ordinanc~ revis~ th~ cun~ ood~ to ~ tha~ "The Commeii ms~, ·ppoiat · member
of the Council to s~rve o, the Plsnaiaf Commission ...".
Staff recomm~/s appro~ of th~ proposed ordinan~ amendmeni~.
!
ORDINANCE NO. 96-1 '-~'
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PLANNING COk~[SS~ON
MEMBERSHZP AND APPOZNTMENT OF
C~TY COUNCZLMEMBER AS A PLANNZNG COMMZ$SZONER
The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains:
Se~ion 1. Section 2,132 (1)"Number" of the New Hope Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
(1) Number, The Planning Commission e~=1-1- may consist of up_
to ten members appointed by the Council. Every
member shall, before entering upon the discharge of
duties, take an oath that he will faithfully discharje
the duties of his off~cs.
Section 2. Section 2.132 (3)'"Councilman May ~ Tenth Member"
of the New Hope City Code ia hereby to read as
(3) Councilman May be ~-ee~l~Member. The Council may appoint
a member of the Council to =; ~;.. ............ .-..... ...-...--. ..' serve
on the Planning Commission who aha11 serve a term
expi. ring on the f~rst business day of January in the year
following the year appointed,
Section 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective
upon its passage and publication.
Dated the day of , 1996.
Edw. J. Erickaon, Mayor
At t est:
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
(Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun-Post the day of
, 1996. )
EDA
REQUF~T FOR ACTION
Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section
City Manager EDA
1-08-96
Kirk McDonald Item No.
By: Management Assistant By:.
DISCUSSION REGARDING 1996 "SHOP NEIGHBORLY NEW HOPE" PROMOTION
(IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 537)
City staff recently met with Key Group Advertising, Inc. and requested that they submit to the
City a proposal for a 1996 "Shop Neighborly New Hope" promotion. Their preliminary
proposal is attached for review and comment by the EDA. If the EDA is favorable towards
proceeding with a 1996 campaign, staff would recommend that a Steering Committee meeting
be held at the end of January so that the Committee can also review the preliminary proposal
and make recommendations for changes/revisions. The total preliminary estimated cost from
Key Group for the 1996 campaign is $46,015, and in 1995, approximately $17,000 was collected
in revenues from participating sponsors and businesses. The Finance Director has indicated that
adequate EDA funds are available for the promotion in 1996 ff the EDA is so inclined.
Staff requests direction from the EDA on this matter.
MOTION BY SECOND BY
TO:
Review: Administration: Finance:
RFA-O01
KEY GROUP
ADVERTISING INC
January 3, 1996
Terri Welding
City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Ave. N.
New Hope, MN 55428-5898
Dear Council Member Wehling:
We are pleased to provide the enclosed proposal for the second annual SHOP
NEIGHBORLY NEW HOPE city-wide campaign. The project was a highlight of 1995
for us and we know that this year with your commitment and that of the city it will
have even more impact.
The attached proposal is a starting point only, subject to Steering Committee
revision. While we do not yet have a contract from Naegele due to Tracy's vacation
schedule, the amount budgeted should accommodate the billboards we discussed.
Also please note that, based on last year's agency time investment of over 300 hours,
we feel that a $7,000 fee would be equitable again for this year.
Should you have questions or if we can be of any other assistance, please call me at
375-1080 ext. 726. We look forward to working with you on this exciting project.
Best Regards,
Vice P~/Geno ~ager
Advertising · Public~
:;23 _<ourh E~ghrh Street · M,nneaooi,s %lmnesota 55404-1078
Phone oil ]-~.It~s~.FAN 012 ]42-2239
.A ~raus-Ande~on Company
Proposal for
The City of New Hope
"Shop Neighborly New Hope"
Prepared by
Key Group Advertising, Inc.
January 1996
Situation Analysis
The City of New Hope is a community of 21,853 people and approximately 260 businesses.
There are 8.525 households of which 4,900 are single family homes and 3,625 apartments. Last
year, concern over business closings and increased competition from outside the community
prompted city and business leaders to spearhead "Shop Neighborly New Hope," an innovative
five-week multi-media campaign designed to encourage shoppers to support local business.
Response to the campaign was very favorable. Over 125 businesses paid from $25 to $1500 to
participate in the campaign as sponsors. The kick-off event generated television, radio and print
coverage, and thousands of atmndants. Surveys show that the overwhelming majority of
participants responding felt the campaign met its goals and would support the campaign again.
Marketin~ Ohiectives
To amplify the positive effects of 1995's Shop Neighborly New Hope Campaign by · Increasing public awareness of New Hope's variety of goods and services
· Encouraging patronage of New Hope stores and businesses
· Tying store/business visits to measurable sales results
Marketing Strategv
A five-week multi-media campaign "Shop Neighborly New Hope" with new and refined elemen~
designed to implement the above objective~
Markoting Plan
· Kick-Off event June 12- "Duk Drop and Shop" at Civic Center Park held in conjunclion with the
City's summer concert series: with helicopter Duk Drop of 2.000 plastic ducks redeemable for
business-donated prizes: live music, food and family activities.
· Tabloid: Four-page, full-color tabloid inserted in Sun Post and Star Tribune and distributed to all
New Hope businesses; featuring illustrated map of New Hope businesses and officiai "Play Shop
Neighborly New Hope" game.
· Play Neighborly New Hope game flyers: Featuring a directory of participating New Hope
businesses and spaces for six stamps. Players complete game by visiting six New Hope
businesses and receiving stamps. Completed games can be deposited as registration blanks for
prize drawings of Duk-Bucks. Game boards will also be featured in print advertising and the
tabloid.
· In-Store specials: Newspaper and tabloid advertising will refer shoppers to look for Shop
Neighborly New Hope specials in participating stores through Duk Duk Daze
· Prizes: In addition to business-donated prizes redeemable at Duk Drop, $2500 in Duk-Bucks girl
certificates will be given away to winners of the Neighborly New Hope game m drawings during
Duk Duk Daze week of July 10
· Billboards: Featuring Shop Neighborly New Hope logo and new headline
· Banners: Additional stmetlight banners with Shop Neighborly New Hope logo and high-visibility
banner on water tower on Hwy. 169
· Newspaper: weekly ads in Star Tribune and Sun Post newspapers
· Internal Communications: The elements and oppommities for business participation in Shop
Neighborly New Hope will be presented in campaign kits distribmed at a Shop Neighborly New
Hope breakfast meeting scheduled approximately 2 months prior to the campaign.
Estimate
City of New Hope
"Shop Neighborly New Hope" Four-Week Campaign
with 1995 cost comparison
January, 3, 1996
1996 1995
Kick-Off Event Wednesday, June 12 $2,500 $2,500
Includes 2,000 plastic ducks: event coordination
assistance and on-sim staff'mg assistance at event
Logo NC $880
Design. layout, production
Tabloid $14,000 $16,200
4-color, two-sided. 21" x 15" folded twice: to include
new cover art: revised map: back cover "gameboard" an;
concept, design: layout, production, film, printing,
insertion and distribution; qty. 57,000
Billboards $7,400 $5,850 (5 boards)
Six boards located in New Hope, four weeks
New headline
Newspaper $9,200 (8 b/w ads)
Four ads. 112 page, black + one color $4,900
includes production and media
Four ads, 8" teasers, black & white $1,050 NA
includes production and media
Flyers $1,300 NA
8 1/2 x 1 I", 2-sided, 1/2 color "gameboard'-
qty. 10,000, inserted in City newsletter and
distributed to busineses; concept, layout, production
and printing
Banners $515 NA
3 a-color. 28" x 84" Kids
3 a-color, 28" x 84" Father/Son
One ,~-color, 30' x 50' banner on New Hope water tower '$3,500 NA
painmd on vinyl and reusable; to he installed by city
(optional 50' x 50' for $4500)
Registration Boxes $1.200 $3,815 (15" boxes)
170. 5" x 6" x 9" with 11" x 6 1/2"
header card and four-color logo
Decals NC $1.500 (500 decals)
· (qty) 2-sided. 5-color. 5" x 5"
~, l use overprint from 1995
Duk Bucks $2,500 $2,500
Redemption value
Production/printing of 500 3" x 7", one-color,
2-sided Duk-Buck gift certificates $150 $150 (500 bucks)
Account Management/Publicity $7,000 $7.000
Client meetings/communication, campaign concept,
estimating, production and distribution of campaign kits.
press kits/PSAs, monitoring program implementation,
deliveries, follow-up and research, March-July
Total $46,015
*This esUmate d(Ms not include tax. Estimat~l costs are accurat~ to within 10 pea'cent of the total cost indicated i
nthe estimate. Estimated costs a~ based on normal preparation time and do not allow for oveflime charges. Overtime
charges will be billed to the client in addition to estimated costs. Client alteFations will be valid in addition to estimated
cOSL~. Estimates are valid for a period of 60 days from the above.
Shop Neighborly New Hope!
.See back for instructL .~s.
III
$ 3
Register to Win Duk-Buks!
Name: · ~,
Phone Number: T~ ~ n~ ,~e A~ ~n a D~-&ov
TM s~i~ ~e ~ ~e I c~n't ~,~t so I ~an.
P~e dr~ off at any Star ~. ~ ~; Sh~ Ne~ Ho~ ~ ~ w~'t fi~ ~
INSTRUCTIONS:
NO PURCHASE NECCESSARY'. Just stop tn at any six Star Retailers listed below and have themstamp
your card. When all six spots on your game card have been stamped, fill out the registration form and leave
the gameboard at any Star Retader. You will then be entered in a drawing for Duk-Buks, good for merchan-
( -~' dise and services all over New Hope. Drawing will be on July 15, 1996. Good Luck!
Shop Neighborly New Hope Star Retailers 1996
ACCOUNTING $6 ~Abl~y C~l~t, 4371 Winnetka Ave., 533-1945
18 ~rDe~le¥, Jerry Accounting Office, 7600 Bass Lake Road, 533-8649 166 ~The C,~petShoppe, 2763 Winnetka Ave., ~46~080
20 Dom & Associates, 7600 Bass Lake Road. $33-7689
108 ~rGepnef & Gepnef, 4124 Quebec Avenue, 536-0396 CHIROI~ACTORS
204 Lee Ganz Accounting Service, 2738 Winnetka Ave., 542-9633 199 Falk, Randall, 2738 Winnelka Ave., 546-8622
11 Marce~ Rehaume Tax Service, 7801 Bass Lake Road, 5354780 112 Heartland Chiropractic, 4124 Quebec Ave., 536-5400
19 TetzIoff & Hoilowa~, 7600 Bass Lake Road, 537-3011 69 tEoddonl ~ Cbi~ Center, 4221 Winnetka Avenue, 533~3654
205 Todd Dotzenrod, CPA, 2738 Winnetka Ave., 541-4914 58 WW~nnet~a Chiropractic, 4351 Winnelka Ave., 53(~1112
APPAREL CHURCHES
155 ~Ba~ain Britches & Toys, 9402 36th Ave., 546-6227 Beautiful Savioe Lutlteran Church, 3351 Independence Ave.
165 ~lrCla~sic Re-View, 2769 Winnetka Ave., 54~0637 Crystal EvanBelicai Free Church, 4225 Gett~/sbu~ Ave.
89 ~Down On 42nd Ave., 7180 42nd Ave., 537-3374 Hob/Nativity Lutheran Church, 3900 ~mnetka Ave.
176 *Extra Special, 2721 Winnetka Ave., 545-1633 HolT Trinity Lutheran Church, 4240 Ge~/sbur~ Ave.
86 Gl Joe Surplm Stoee, 7180 42nd Ave., 533-9851 Home of Hope Lutherm Church, 4800 Boone Ave.
84 ~rKu~penheimer Men's Clothie~ 7700 42nd Ave.,$33-3077 81 ~New Hope Church, 4217 Boone Ave., 533-5273; 533-2994
35 Wedding Chapel/Formal Affair, 7201 Bass Lake Road, 533-4228 208 tPa~h Commueily ofSL Jmeph, 8701 36~h Ave., 544-3352
ARTS & CRAFT~
77 ttOid Ame~ca Store, 4350 Xylon Ave., 537-0585 134 *Hot Comic~ & Collectibie~, 3550 Winnetka Ave., 593-1223
A1TORNEYS CONVENIENCE
193 Bailey, Kyte A~oci~t~, 2738 W~nnetka Ave., $41-0320 ~1, Bmoi~ Foo~, 6113 W. Broadway, 533-4249
11 ? Be~e~, Stq~he~ 4124 Quebec Ave., 533-4999 4~ tF~t Lane Madmt, 6026 W. Broadway, ~33-5387
203 G~, Pamela 2738 Winnetka Ave., ~42.9888 ~S ~rF~tzel~ ~ 6028 W. Broadway, 537-9111
~1 ? Jokmofl, PhitliR 4124 Quebec Ave., ~37-2720 94 Tom Thumb, 7141 42nd Ave., ~33-S799
150 Miller, Robe~t/Geoit~y 9405 36th Ave., $42-3030 185 Tom Thumb, 2720 Winnetka Ave., 546.2344
11 ? Ol~ofl, Richa~141:24 Quebec Ave.,
D~NTAL/OIITHOI~TI~S
AUTO CARI~ 66 Alpha Oefltal, 4227 W~nne~ka Ave.,
183 ~tALFA Muffler & Brake, 7900 Medicine Lake Road, 541-1984 3~ ~Bam Lalm Oental, 7123 8ass lake Road, $33-~3~9
102 ~Autoham of New Hope, 7709 42nd Ave., 535-~?07 159 WBo~, Stt~he~ DDS, 9413 361h Ave., 546-~707
184 I~'~ie & Jim's M~dland Amoco, 7800 27th Ave., ~46-1334 10 Ca~te~ Den~, 7801 Bass Lake Road, $33-8554
138 Bi~ Wheel Ro~i, 3532 36th Ave., $42-84~2 79 tl4e~ita~e Oefl~ll Center, 8500 42nd Ave., 337-6070
88 Champion Auto, 7140 42nd Ave., $35-3661 200 Ki~ Micha~ ODS, 2738 VV~nne0ca Ave., 544.$919
89 ~Cook Automotive I:nteq~i~e~, 7100 42nd Ave.,$35-3661 80 ~'M~, Jaln~, OO~, 8500 42nd Ave., 537-0100
1 ~3 tFina Mart, 3535 W~nnetka Ave., ~46-8350 1&3 ~tR~ O~hodontic~, 9401 36~ Ave., 544-8745
122 First Line E~ine, 4~ 25 Ore,on Ave., 533-0237 91 Tec~nlc~ Oental Af~, 4215 Louisiana Ave., $33-I
106 ~'42nd & Winne0~a Unoc~ll ?&, 4200 Winnelka Ave., $35-~99 3& WinfletEa Oefltal, $001 W~nne0ca Ave.,
5 Ken'~ Auto Repai~, 7901 Bass Lake Ro~d, 536.7847 190 ~Wmbet, Paul T., DOS, 27?5 W~nne~a Ave., 545-3010
15 Mida~ Muffler, 5604 Winne~a A~., $33-2509
164 tMobil Mart, 9400 36th Ave., 391-5960 DISCOUNT ~l'o~r~
83 ~,New Hope Ca~ Wash, ?820 42nd Ave., 537-I 682 ?$ WK. Ma~t Discount Sto~e, 4300 X¥1on Ave., ~35-4830
14 tNew Hope P~eci~ion Tu~e, ~600 Winnetka Ave., 533-3903 ~8 ~'Value Village Tl~ift Slope, ~223 W~nnetka Ave.,
142 ~New Ho~e 76, 3601 Winnelka Ave., ~46-8481
37 ~'New Hope Texaco. Div. TAPOA I~nt., Inc., DRIVING ~Ci~
98 Rapid Oil Chan~e, 730~ 42nd Ave., $33-4223 15~ tSu~ D~vir~ Scko~i, 9412 36th Ave., 457-~?~3
187 Sinclair Service Stat~o~, 9456 27th Ave., 546-3936
A ~Supe~Ame~ca, 61 ~J, W. Broadway, ~36-8880 OItUG SToItrdPHAItMAC~
1 ~1 ~Tit~s Ptm, 3520 Winne0ca Ave., $25-1583 179 ~r~n~def 0~1~ Store, 2705 W~nne~ka Ave.,
30 ~'Tom's New Hope Spur, 7300 ~3ass Lake Road, $3~-1 ?92 128 ~Wal~, 3566 Winne~a Ave., ~45-3616
97 Total Mart, 7231 42nd Ave., $33-4540
31 Total Petroleum, 7117 Bass Lake Road, ~37-2088 DRYCLFANING/I. AUNDRY/ALTL~RATION~
4 ~rWinnetka Amoco, 7900 Bass Lake Road, 535-0~80 67 Clea~ '~ I~,~, 4225 Winnetka Ave., ~37-3250
BUSINESS SER¥1CI~S 172 ~HallmarE Cleaner~, 2741 V~nnetka Ave., 545.0010
167 '~Falcon Prlntinp,, 2761 VV~nnetka Ave., $93-510~ 188 Midlam~l No~e Or/Cleane~, 8016 27th Ave..
11 3 I~Site System~J, 1nc., 4124 Quebec Ave., 537-0999 14? ~rPil~rim Clea~e~, 9418 36th Ave..
73 ~rMail Box~ Ftc., 421 ~ Winnetka Ave., 336-8989 150 ePo~t Haste Tailor, 9436 36th Ave., $46-0011
38 ~rNorthland Printi~n~, 4954 Highway 169, $35-2398
171 WPostal Sea, ice Plu~, 2?45 V~nnetl~ Ave., ~9~-9484 18& Sew What!, 2722 V~nnetka Ave., ~44-4285
144. ~rPrintmakef~, Inc., ?980 36th Ave.,
B Sable Adve~ti~i~$_~tem~, Inc., 2730 Nevada Ave.. ~44-9~88 ELFCTRONICS
40 ~rS~ Speed% 3749 Imemational Parkway, ~3~-0703 202 WinS Wholesale Electronics, 2~38 W~nnetka Ave..
198 Soft, are Qualit~ En~ine~ n~, 2,"38 V~nnetka Ave 341 -~ 431
120 Sound Cli~, 4~ .4 C~uebec ~'~e.. 333~2813 "
90 -~Totai Re~ster Swtem$, 421 ~ Lomsi~na Ave., ~37-1906 EMP%OYMFNT S~R¥1CE$
195 ~tWord Ove~loa~l, 2~38 W~nnetka Ave.. 546-33,"3 12 AsF~n Employment ~ervice, ~801 Bass Lake Road. ~3%13~
Li' 118 Constant $~f~n~ 5ervice~, .1.! 24 Quebec Ave.,
LDA ~
REQUEST FOR ACTION
Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section
City Manager EDA
1-08-96
Kirk McDonald Item No.
By: Management Assismt By:. 5
RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT WITH TWINWEST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR
MINNESOTA REAL ESTATE $OURNAL PROPERTY TRACKING DATA BASE PROGRAM
City staff have been coordinating with the TwinWest Chamber of Commerce and other member
TwinWest cities regarding a property tracking data base to track vacant and available property in our
cities for business attraction/retention purposes. The cities felt that it would be more cost effective for
the Chamber to administer the service and make it available to member cities. TwinWest solicited
proposals from several tn'ms in 1995, and has selected the data base offered by the Minnesota Real
Estate Journal as the best system based on both services and lower cost.
TwinWest is proposing to administer the use of the Minnesota Real Estate Journal Property Tracking
Data Base in the Chamber office and allow each city to receive their own copy of the data base. Each
city would receive software to run the program, a disc with current information about commercial/
industrial space availability and periodic updated discs of that information. This would be a one-year
agreement, renewable on an annual basis. The cost would be $750.00 per city for the first year and
the annual cost is estimated to decrease to $600.00 per year thereafter. There are funds budgeted in
the 1996 EDA budget for this activity.
Staff receives a number of inquiries each year about industrial/commercial space availability in the City
and feels that this program would greatly improve staff's ability to respond to requests for information.
Other program benefits and the tentative timeline for program implementation are outlined in the
attached correspondence from TwinWest.
The enclosed resolution approves participating in the program for a one-year period. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution.
· - J
Review: Administration: Finance:
RFA-O01 ~
TWI ST
CHAM B E R OF COM M E ROE
Contract for services
City of New Hope
and
TwinWest Chamber of Commerce
Proposal - December 1, 1995
INTRODUCTION
A City staff person in the TwinWest area was approached by a company who offers a property
tracking data base. This City could not justify the full cost of this data base for the amount they
expected to use the system. It was suggested by this City staff person that the TwinWest
Chamber look into contracting for the property tracking data base which could be accessed by
the Chamber as well as all member cities for the purpose of business retention and recruitment
in the area.
BACKGROUND
TwinWest staff met with and solicited proposals from two companies who offer property
tracking data bases. After a full year of negotiations and comparisons TwinWest has selected
the data base offered by the Minnesota Real Estate Journal as the system best suited based on
both services provided and lower cost. A representative from each member city attended a
March 1st meeting with MN Real Estate Journal to see first hand what the system can provide.
This meeting was concluded with the consensus that this system can be of benefit and Chamber
staff was asked to submit a formal proposal to each city for approval.
PROPOSAL
TwinWest proposes to set up and administrate use of the Minnesota Real Estate Journal Property
TraCking Data Base ~ the Chamber office, allov~.ng each City to receive their own copy of the
data base as an additional facility. By participating in this program each City will receive the
appropriate software to run the program, a disk with current information about commercial/
industrial space availability in the metro area and subsequent updated disks to that information.
This will be a one year agreement, renewable on an annual basis. As a part of this agreement
TwinWest will appoint one staff person to serve as the liaison with the MN Real Estate Journal
and to facilitate the insiillation, update and use of the program. We ask that participaiing cities
should be prepared to appoint one staff person to serve as the primary contact for this program
as well.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
City Investment: (based on 7 city participation)
1st year investment $750 per city
2nd year and beyond estimated $600 per city
'f0550 WAYZATA BOULEVARD · MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55305 · t612) 540-0234
Crystal, Go/den Valley, Hopkins, Medicine Lake, Minnetonka. New Hope. Plymouth. St. Louis Park
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Benefit to Participatin~ Cities:
* Access to property tracking system for $1,2.50 less than setting up independently first year.
* Constantly growing data base
* New ability to respond to inquiries regarding space available
* New ability to generate comprehensive reports on available space in city
* Access to comparison market data on space available
Benefits to TwinWest Chamber * Excellent business retention and recruitment tool for Chamber
* Ensures access to necessary information by member cities
* Provides quality service at discounted price for member cities
* New ability to respond to inquiries to Chamber office about space
* Access to market comparison data on space available
CONCLUSION
The TwinWest Chamber of Commerce views this proposed partnership as an asset to everyone involved.
This partnership provides '"ouying power" to get a quality tool for business retention and recruitment at
an affordable price.
Our meeting~ with the representatives from MI~ P-.EJ have been impressive and our decision to work with
them is based on a more competitive price and the customer service they have provided already. They
are eager to make this program work and are wiilir~g to be very flexible in order to put together this
unique partnership and to serve our needs as we progress with the system.
TwinWest does not intend in any way, nor does it encourage the cities, to compete with our area real
estate brokers. We are merely trying to provide a service to keep information about opportunities flowing
to those who inquire: TwinWest will conl~nue to provide a list of member brokers, along with the new
space available information, when responding to inquiries.
TENTATIVE TIMELINE
December ! Proposed contracts submitted to cities for approval
December 31 Commitments received from participating cities
January 1996 Program distributed to TwinWest and participating cities
June 1996 Meeting to review effectiveness, make suggestions for improvements
December 1996 Option to renew contract for second year
Larry S. DoweIl, President Authorized Signature
TwinWest Chamber of ~ommerce City of New Hope
Date ?:2-/-- Date.
O~~g Dep~ent ~p~d fo~ ~enda ~da Section
~blic Works 1-22-96 & Piing
Je~n~ Cl~cy Item No.
~ 8,1
~SOL~ON AWinG CO'CT ~O~ 5~,~ G~LON ~L~A~D STO~G~
T~ ~~ITATION P~O~CT TO ODL~ P~O~C~ COA~G ~ ~
~O~ O~ $~7~,~0.~ ~O~~ P~O~CT NO. 5~9)
On D~mbe~ 11, 199~, ~e New Hope Ci~ Coumc~ appto~ pl~ ~d sp~i~cafio~ ~d
~ffo~ ~ ~clude compile ~emov~ of ~e ~imB ~ om ~e ~ow~t, app~cafiom of mew
~ume ~d ~ compline 6y AuXin, 1 ~6.
Bids we~ o~ for ~ pm~ om ~ lT, 1~6. ~ fo~o~B 6id~ w~te
Odl~d Pm~e:i~e CoafimB $~,8~0.00
D~lou~ P~B 2~7,~.00
~ Coa~mB~ 314,0~0.~
Pm~.
acfi~fi~. ~ addifio~ ~ll ~i~ ~e comprador im ~o~d~a~B ~ Dis~dc~ 2~ 1 ~o
Coafin~ ~ ~e ~oum~ of $2~,~0.00
~t~o~: F~ee:
~A-OO I ~
REQUEST FOR ACTION ~
originating Department Approved for Agenda De~~ection
City Manager & Planning
Kirk McDonald ~ 1-22-96 Item No.
By:. Management Assistant By:.// 8.2
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT WITH SCOTT SHORE/CREATIVE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE PRODUCTION OF
THE NEW HOPE CITY REPORT
For a number of years the City has utilized the services of Walker Enterpfi~ for the production of the
City newsletter, City Report. Last fall Walker Enterprises notified the City that they were closing their
business effective the end of 1995 and would no longer be available for the production of the City
Report.
The City Report is published and distributed to residents and businesses five times a year. Four editions
are four pages with a four to six page Parks & Recreation ~ and one edition is six pages with a
separate Parks & Recreation Summer Activities Brochure. An amount of $20,000 is budge~'d for 1996
in the Unalloca~*d Fund for the production, printing and mailing of the City Report. The major
responsibilities of. the production firm are to take articles prepared by City s~ff and layout the
newsletter, inser~ phoWs, edit the ~ex~, deliver the newslet~r m the prin~er, oversee the print quality, and
oversee delivery of the prin~ed newsle~3~er ~ the mailing service. With a change in production firms,
~aff is also interested in upA~v~o and improving the look of the City Report.
City ~ developed an KFP (Reques~ for Proposals) and solicited proposals from inV,-res~ed newsleuer
production firms. Five firms responded. A gommit'~ of City ~ COnSisting of the Administrative
Analy~ Management Assistan~Community Development Coordinator, Director of Parks & Recreation
and Director of Public Works reviewed and evaluated the proposals based on the following criteria:
· Demons~ated experience in producing newsletters;
· Demons~a~ed experience in delivering to the client on time, within budget, and with a high level
of quality;
· Demo~ experience in managing the production process, including design, editing, printing,
and diswibufion;
· Response to Reques~ for Proposals; and
* Competitive fee.
MOTION BY' ' ~ ':~' '
!
Revt~: Admlnl~-atlon: Finance:
RFA-O01 ~
Request for Action 2
Four of the five firms that responded to the RFP were selected to participate in the oral interview
process, including:
Ikola Designs
Dotted i Communications
Everett Marketing Communications
Scott Shore/Creative Representative
Based on the ratings of the oral interviews, a review of production material and reference checks, staff
is recommending that the City Manager be authorized to negotiate and enter into a contract with Scott
Shore/Creative Representative for production of the New Hope City Report for the following reasons:
· Demonstrated experience in producing newsletters and specific experience with other
municipality's newsletters (City of Minnetonka);
· Response to Request for Proposals and quality of work presented to committee;
· Demonstrated experience in managing production process, editing experience, and proposal to
shorten production schedule;
· Competitive fee that meets current budget guidelines;
· Experience in producing materials dealing with cultural diversity;
· Agreeable to utilizing existing printing company;
· Good suggestions to update/revise format of existing newsletter;
· Ability to not be sensitive to criticism and desire for City to be direct about its wants/needs;
· Recommendation that Parks & Recreation Brochure be visually linked with newsletter;
· Ability to serve as the primary contact, but also to have a temporary replacement, if necessary;
and
® Creative ability demonstrated in work and artistic background/education.
Staff is recommending that the City Manager be authorized to negotiate/enter into a contract with Scott
Shore/Creative Representative for production of the City Report. If approved, Shore would begin
immediately and be responsible for the next City newsletter which will be distributed in March. The
contract would be brought back to the Council for formal approval at the next Council meeting.
The enclosed resolution authorizes the City Manager to negotiate and enter into a contract with Scott
Shore/Creative Representative for City newsletter production services and staff recommends approval
of the resolution.
EDA
REQUY. ST FOR ACTION
o
Originating Depa~u~ent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section
City Manager EDA
1-22-96
Kirk McDonald ,' ~'~ Item No.
B~. Management Assistant By:.//
RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEI~NTS WITH KEY GROUP ADVERTISING FOR
BILLBOARD AGREEMENTS WITH NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADVERTISING FOR 1996 SHOP
NEIGHBORLY NEW HOPE CAMPAIGN (IMPROVF2vlENT PROJECT NO. $37)
Pursuant to the direction from the January 8th EDA meeting, staff is proceeding with preliminary plans
for the 1996 "Shop Neighborly New Hope" promotion. One of the th'st items that needs to be taken
care of is reserving the billboards for the campaign advertisements. Key Group, Inc., the ftrm the
City is working with on this campaign, has submitted the enclosed two agreements from Naegele
Outdoor Advertising for consideration by the EDA.
One agreement reserves both sides of two (2) billboards, for a one-month period starting June 10th,
as follows: 3530 Douglas Drive (northwest face and southeast face)
3620 Winnetka Avenue (north face and south face)
The cost for the agreement is $2,941.00. (Staff is pleased that we are able to get the board at 36th
and Winnetka, as that location has high visibility in New Hope and was not available last year.)
The second agreement reserves both sides of a porta panel billboard for a two-week period starting
June 10th. This would be the same porta panel that was used last year for Winnetka and City Center
and would be located on Winnetka Avenue. The cost for the agreement is $340.00.
Both of these billboard, costs are included in the estimated budget prepared by Key Group and the
combined cost of $3,281.00 is considerably less than the amount budgeted ($?,400.00). It is
anticipated that the cost of the billboards will be covered by the major sponsors of the campaign.
The enclosed resolution approves the agreements and staff recommends approval of the resolution.
/
Review: Administration: Finance:
I I RFA-O01
EDA
Originating Department ~p~d for ~da ~enda Sec~on
Ci~ M~ger EDA
Sar~ ~lle~ Item ~o.
~: A~s~ative ~lyst ~ 5
~OLU~ON ~PRO~NG S~SSIO~ OF ~E ~NN~OTA CI~ P~C~A~ON
PR~~ (MCPP) ~P~CA~ON TO ~E ~NN~OTA HOUS~G FIN~CE AGENCY
(~FA)
~e MCPP is a pro~ ~ough ~e ~A ~ w~ch ~e ~A is able to ~ moagage ~venue ~nds
on ~f of p~icipa~g cities to m~t l~y ident~ ho~g ~. ~e pr~s ~om ~e ~s
provide ~low-~ket ~rest m~ moagage 1o~ for low ~d m~em~ ~ome f~st-tme homebuye~.
~s msome is available to cities ~oughout ~e sm~.
~s ye~ ~e 1~ hous~g ~1 for mo~gage revenue ~n~ is estima~ to ~ ~n $38 - 58
mllion. ~e f~ de~tion of ~e to~l mo~t of pro~ ~ ava~able to each p~cipat~g
ci~ w~l ~ made by ~e ~A ~ de~mi~ by a ~r capita d~fion me~. In 1995, ~e Ci~
received ~9,896 MCPP ~l~ation to ~ ~ ~ f~t-t~e homebuyer lo~.
In 1996, ~e MCPP progr~ ~m is eight mon~. ~g ~e f~t s~ mon~, p~icipa~g cities ~ve
exclusive use of ~ek ~divid~ ~o~ent. D~g ~e f~ ~o mon~, ~e ~dividml ~lomen~ will
go ~to a s~tewi~ ~ol ~t w~l ~ ava~ble to ~ MCPP pmicipa~ cities. ~s allows cities wi~
~gher dem~ds to a~ess ~ ~t we~ not us~ d~g ~e p~g s~-mon~ ~. ~e progr~
tern wi~ ~g~ shoffiy a~r ~e ~ ~le w~ch shoed ~ d~ ~e met of 1~6.
In order for ~o~ to apply for mo~y ~ough mis pro~ ~ey m~t:
a) ~ a f~st-t~e homebuyer;
b) ~cupy ~e horn, within ~ ~ys of mo~gage clos~g;
c) m~t cem~ hou~hold ~ome ~qu~menB (~,8~ or less - for a f~ly of four);
d) ~d p~ ~ e~s~g home or bu~d new for $95,~ or less.
M~ON BY ~ SECO~ BY
~: ~tmUon: F~e:
~A-~ I ~
Request for Action 2 1-22-96
The fee for participating in the program is $20 for each $100,000 in allotmem provided. Also, an
application deposit of 1% of the allocation amount specified in the agreement is needed. The 1~
deposit is refunded within a month of the closing of the bond sale.),
In order to participate in the MCPP, cities must arrange with local lenders to originate mortgage loans
under the program. These lenders will be required to enter into a contract with the MHFA as to
program and loan origination requirements. Each city applying for the MCPP must have at least one
lender.
The application is due between February 1 and February 15, 1996.
The application packet from the MI-IFA is enclosed.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
EDA
, REQUF~T FOR ACTION
Originating Depmhuent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section
City Manager EDA
2-96 Kirk McDonald Item 1~o.
By: Management Assistant By:. 6
RESOLUTION APPROVING FIRST AME/NDMENT TO SECTION 8 HOUSING ASSISTANCE
PAYMENTS PROGRAM CONTRACT NO. C-94-$6 FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
BETWEEN THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND THE CITY OF NEW HOPE AND
AUTHORIZING PRESIDENT AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT
On August 8, 1994 the New Hope EDA approved a revised contract between the Metropolitan Council
and the City of New Hope regarding the Section 8 Housing Assistance Program. The two basic
changes in the contract at that time were:
1. The administrative fee available to the City increased from $16.56 per unit/month to $21.00 per
unit/month for basic administrative services (the fee increases are regulated by the Dept. of Housing
and Urban Development); and
2. In a move intended to reduce paperwork, the Metropolitan Council required the City to only submit
quarterly invoices/reports instead of monthly reports.
The City of New Hope employs a full-time Section 8 Housing Representative to administer this
program and reimbursements from the Metropolitan Council/HUD cover all costs of the
program/position. In past years the City has administered up to 300 Section 8 contracts in New Hope,
however over the past several years that number has decreed to approximately 240 contracts, due in
part to the newly adopted portability requirements. Obviously, the City receives less revenue to cover
the costs of the program/position with a reduced number of contracts.
In 1994 when contract discussions were taking place, City staff indicated to Metropolitan Council
representatives that the City would have an interest in taking on additional contracts from neighboring
cities to increase program revenue. The additional contracts would involve only administrative services,
with Section 8 clients coming to the New Hope City Hail for income verification, etc. No inspection
services for clients residing outside of New Hope would be offered by the City, as that would be Metro
/
--
Review: Admlnls~tlon: Finance:
Request for Action 2 1-22-96
HRA's responsibility. The Metro Council indicated at that time that they would take the Cit~"s interest
in assuming the administrative work for additional contracts under consideration.
In December of 1995, due to several staff position vacancies at the Metro HRA in St. Paul, the Metro
HRA contacted the City to see of the City was still interested in assuming administrative responsibility.
for additional contracts.- City staff responded in the affu'mative.
The attached contract amendment is being presented to the EDA for consideration and is a result of
discussions between the City and Metro HRA. The contract amendment states that the City of New
Hope will administer a specific number of Section 8 contracts from the following cities:
Edina 20 contracts
Golden Valley 16 contracts
Maple Grove 15 contracts
TOTAL 51
Metro I-IRA would be responsible for all inspections and the existing New Hope Section 8
Representative would handle the administrative component of the contracts (no additional staff would
be hired). The City would bill Metro HRA the regular fee (now increased) of $21.65 per contract and
once a year Metro I-IRA would deduct $24/contract for inspection services. The additional revenues
to the City for assuming the additional contracts would be approximately $12,000.00 per year, as
outlined in the attached correspondence. The Metro HRA has also agreed to work with the City during
1996 to work towards computerizing this entire process to make the program more efficient.
City staff is supportive of the contract amendment, as it provides additional revenues for the program
and will help to insure that this important program for low/moderate income residents is maintained and
is self-supporting with revenues exceeding expenses.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Fourth Quarter 1995 Report
The Planning Commission reviewed the following cases during the fourth quarter:
No. of Cases Notices Sent
October 2 7 & 21
November 8 3, 9, 9
December _.1 0
TOTAL 4TH QTR. 11
Month Type of Request Number Approved Denied Withdrawn Tabled
Oct. Comp. Sign Plan ! 1
SBPR 1 1
Variance
PUD 1
Nov. Comp. Sign Plan 2 1 1
Shop Ctr Sign Study 1 1
SBPR 1 1
Rezone 1 1
Prel. Plat 1 1
PUD I 1
Detach/Annex i 1
Dec. SBPR _.1 _.1 _
TOTALS 13 8 5
YEAR TO DATE TOTALS APPROVED DENIED WITHDRAWN TABLED
Preliminary Plat 3
CUP 5
Variance 2 1
SBPR 4
Comp. Sign Plan 3 !
PUD 3
Ordinance Amendment 4 !
Rezoning 1
Detach/Annex 1
Shopping Center Sign Study _.1
TOTALS 24 6
PLANNING/DEVELOPMENT ISSUES
~pi~ved~[~ie:.:.:3~;([~i~.~i~i~i~.~[~.i~e~;~&..~..~. construction of a funeral home
and a setback variance for the entrance canopy, subject to specific conditions, at their October
3rd meeting. The City Council approved the request at their October 9th meeting. Also on
October 9th, the EDA approved the redevelopment contract which provides Gill Brothers with
$150,000 in "pay-as-you-go" tax increment f'mancing for this project. The HRA approved the
sale of the City-owned property to Gill Brothers in the amount of $254,826, the appraised
value, at their October 23rd meeting. The closing will be completed during the first quarter
of 1996.
2. _ The Planning Commission reviewed
concept plans for a proposed Car-X Muffler & Brake shop at 7180 42nd Avenue at their
October 3rd and November 8th meetings. Due to the fact that there were many items stil'''-~
unresolved, the Commission tabled this matter in order that the petitioner could submit revisect
plans. Also, at the October 9th EDA meeting, the EDA declined a request from the property
owner for Tax Increment Financing assistance for the Car-X development.
3. e~~vei~ii~i!:i~iii~ii~iiii~ - The Planning Commission considered
the request for Comprehensive Sign Plan Approval for Twin City Garage Door at their October
3rd meeting, however the request was tabled until revised plans showing a visual linkage were
submitted. The Commission approved the revised plans at their November 8th meeting. The
City Council considered the request at their November 13th meeting, but took no action and
tabled the request due to the fact that the petitioner was not in attendance. On November 27th,
the City Council approved the request as presented, however encouraged the petitioner to
consider canopy signage for Elliott Auto Supply.
4. ~~~iii!ii~ - At the October 9th City Council meeting, the Council approved a
proposal from Decision Resources, Inc. to conduct a community-wide random telephone
survey, asking detailed questions on the quality of life and delivery of services in the City.
The survey was conducted during the fourth quarter and the results will be presented to the
Council in January.
5. ~!i~iii~ii i~ii~i~ - At the October 9th City Council/EDA
meetings a resolution was approved to amend the Redevelopment and TIF plans to include two
additional properties: the Ice Arena property at 49th and Louisiana and the Winnetka
Elementary School site and adjacent recreational fields. By modifying the plan, if the City
proceeds with future developments on either property and the developments meet requirements
under state law, the City could spend excess tax increment funds on the projects.
6. '.~i!i~~~iiii~iii!~ili!~ - At the October 9th City Council meeting, the
Council authorized staff to have 100 copies of the videotape of the "Shop Neighborly New
Hope" activities/newscasts be made and Councilmembers delivered the tapes to all participating
retailers. During the fourth quarter, staff also met with representatives of Key Group
Advertising, Inc. regarding a 1996 "Shop Neighborly New Hope" promotion, per the direction
from the Council.
7. ~!iiii i!?i~iiil i?~ig - At the October 23rd Council meeting, the
Council approved an agreement between the City and Navarre Corporation whereby the Fire
Department will raze the Jacobwith property after utilizing it for training purposes. Navarre
will be expanding their facility onto this newly acquired property in 1996.
Standards Committee reviewed the New Hope Shopping Center Sign Code and made
recommendations to the Planning Commission on November 8th which included revisions
regarding the square area for shopping center name identification, square area for tenant
directory, eliminating the number of individual tenants on the sign, letter style, font and
business logo use, and allowing reader boards. The changes essentially allow more flexibility
for content and presentation, while maintaining the previous sign area limitations. The City
Council approved the ordinance amendment on November 13th.
9. _ Due to the fact that Ordinance
95-17 was approved prior to this planning case, no variances were required and the Planning
Commission approved an amendment to the Comprehensive Sign Plan for Winnetka Shopping
Center at their November 8th meeting. The City Council approved the sign plan at their
November 13th meeting, which allows the Shopping Center to reconstruct and make changes
to the existing pylon ground sign.
10. N~i H~!i~ii~ii~!i~i~~Sii~!~ii~~ - At the November 8th Planning
Commission meeting, the Planning Commission approved the site and building plan review and
the conditional use permit for the New Hope Ice Arena subject to specific conditions. The City
Council tabled this issue pending final architectural plans and the bids on the project.
11. ~~iiii~~i!ii~iiiii~~ - On November 8th, the Planning Commission
recommended approval on rezoning 6073/6081 Louisiana Avenue from single-family residential
to single and two-family residential for the purpose of constructing a handicap accessible twin
home on the site. The project is being sponsored/funded by the City, the CO-OP Northwest,
CHODO and the Metropolitan Council. The City Council approved an ordinance rezoning the
property to R-2 from R-1 at their December llth meeting.
12. ~~ili~~!ili~i!i~ - On November 8th, the Planning Commission approved
the preliminary plat of Cameron 3rd Addition. The purpose of the platting was to subdivide
the parcel into two lots to accommodate the construction of a zero-lot-line handicap accessible
twin home. The City Council approved the preliminary plat at their November 13th meeting.
The City Council on November 27th approved the final plat of Cameron 3rd Addition.
November 8th, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal of detaching Beth E1
Synagogue/Cemetery from New Hope and annexing the property to the City of Crystal in order
that Beth E1 and Adath Shel Emes Cemetery could join in a joint PUD project. It was felt that
this project would be less complicated if the petitioners were dealing with one city or the other.
The Planning Commission recommended against the detachment and suggested that New Hope
annex the Crystal cemetery. The City Council did not agree with the recommendation from
the Planning Commission. On November 13th, the City Council passed a resolution requesting
concurrent detachment from New Hope and annexation to Crystal.
14. ~iii~iiii~?~i~ !!ii~iii~ii!~~i~ - At the December 5th Planning
Commission meeting, the Commission approved the site and building plan review for the
proposed addition at 7201 Bass Lake Road, subject to specific conditions. The City Council
approved the request at their December 1 lth meeting.
15. ~~ii~~iii~~ - At the December l lth City Council meeting, the Council
accepted the resignation of Robert Gundershaug, with regrets. Gundershaug had served on the
Commission for 20 years, was long-time chair of the Design & Review Sub-Committee, and
served as chair of the Planning Commission in 1995.
16. ~h~i~~ii?~i~ - Also in December, the City Council re-appointed
William Sonsin to another three-year term on the Commission.
17. At the December 1 l th
EDA meeting, the EDA approved a Right of First Refusal Agreemem for the acquisition of the
Homeward Bound property in the event that Homeward Bound vacates the building.
18. ~i R=~~i!ii~~ -In June, the New Hope Community Development staff and
Building Official published/distributed the first New Hope Business Retention newsletter. The
newsletter is an attempt to increase communication between businesses and City officials and
includes information on ordinance revisions, available financing, development success stories,
etc. During the third quarter staff prepared the fall issue of the newsletter and it was mailed
to businesses in October. During the fourth quarter, staff also began working on the first issue
of the 1996 Business Link newsletter.
19. ===================== In July, the EDA authorized Northwest Consultants to
complete a market study for Winnetlo Shopping Center to determine how to attract viable
businesses to this site. The owner of the center agreed to share the cost for the market study
on a 50/50 basis with the City. The study proceeded during the third quarter and included
interviews with BuiMing Management, Inc. and a number of other center owners. A completed
study was presented to the City in October and distributed to a variety of persons, including
Building Management, Inc., SuperValu, Councilmembers, Planning Commissioners and City
staff.
20. ~i~~ii~ ' At the December llth EDA meeting, the EDA directed staff
to negotiate a 1996 lease for the rental of the City-owned building at 7528 42nd Avenue
(Foremost, Inc. building) with Phoenix Manufacturing.
21. i~iiii~ii~i~ - The City of New Hope agreed to host this
years "Local Government Day" presentation for the TwinWest Leadership class and staff
assisted in coordinating speakers and presentations for the January event.
22. ~!~...~~i::~..==================================================:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ' ....................................... - The EDA approved the City's participation in Phase II of the
Community Parmers Business Retention Program sponsored by the North Metro Mayors
Association at their June 12th meeting. The fn'st phase of the program surveyed all industrial/
commercial/retail businesses in the City regarding their needs and expectations. The six-month
Phase II program began July 1st and involved prioritizing recommendations, developing
specific action plans and updating the existing data base. The "working group" has been
meeting bi-monthly to review the data from the survey and to develop defined goals and
objectives for Phase IH of the program and this activity continued during the fourth quarter.
23. ~iii:ii~i.i~- At the beginning of 1995, the Community Development staff and
Building Official initiated regular semi-monthly meetings to review/discuss planning/
development/housing issues. The purpose of the "BLT" meetings is to improve coordination
between the City Manager's Department and the Inspections Department and to provide better
information to persons/businesses inquiring about available buildings/land for development in
the City. A log has been established to track all responses to inquiries. This activity continued
during the fourth quarter.
' 24. C~ & standar~;Iss~ - During the fourth quarter, the Codes & Standards Committee met
to discusS/review the following issues:
A. Rezoning at 62nd & Louisiana Avenues
B. Shopping Center Sign Ordinance Changes
C. Boulevard Tree Ordinance
D. Changes in Permitted and Conditional Uses in the B-I, B-2 and B4 Zoning Districts
The first two items moved on to the Planning Commission and City Council during the fourth
quarter and the last two items will be presented for consideration during the first quarter of
1996.
25. ~i!ili~iiiiii~ii!i~~ - The Design & Review Committee met during the fourth
quarter on the following projects:
A. Lasky/Car-X PUD
B. Ice Arena expansion
C. Wedding Chapel expansion
The Ice Arena and Wedding Chapel projects moved ahead for approval during the fourth
quarter. The Lasky/Car-X PUD application is on hold until more complete revised plans are
submitted.
Kirk McDonald
Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Fourth Quarter 1995 Report ....
City Council Synopsis
During the fourth quarter, staff continued coordination on the Gill Brothers Funeral Chapel project
proposed for the City-owned property at 42nd and Nevada Avenues. In June Gill submitted a
purchase offer to the City with a request for financial assistance and in July the EDA entered into a
90-day Exclusive Negotiations Agreement with Gill, which allowed them the exclusive right to
negotiate a development contract with the City. During July and September Gill determined total
project costs and staff consulted with Bond Counsel to determine which costs were eligible for TIF
assistance. /n September, the EDA approved, in concept, a pay-as-you-go TIF reimbursement of
$150,000 for eligible development costs. In October the Planning Commission and City Council
approved the building plans and a minor setback variance. The EDA also approved the
Redevelopment Contract in October and the HRA conducted a public hearing and formally approved
the sale of the land. The closing on the property has been delayed due to some minor title problems,
but is anticipated to take place in the first quarter of 1996.
Two major City projects proceeded during the fourth quarter with coordination/assistance from the
Community Development staff. The second handicap accessible twin home development was
initiated near 62nd and Louisiana Avenues with both the preliminary and final plats and the
rezoning to allow the construction ora zero-lot-line duplex being approved. Construction was started
in October. Staff also assisted in the presentation of the Ice Arena expansion plans to the Planning
Commission and the conditional use permit and site/building approvals were received in November.
The City continued its cooperation with the business community during the fourth quarter with the
completion of the Winnetka Center Market Study and the distribution of the 1995 "Shop New
Hope" tapes to afl participants in the campaign. Plans are already underway for a 1996 promotion.
Also, the Planning Commission and City Council approved a significant amendment to the
Shopping Center Sign Ordinance upon recommendation from the Codes & Standards Committee.
After a detailed study of Sign Code requirements in neighboring cities, it was the consensus that the
existing requirements were overly restrictive and should be amended to allow shopping center owners
more flexibility in promoting their tenants.
The City also had to consider the first detachment/annexation request that it has received in many
years during the fourth quarter. The request was due to the desire of Beth El Synagogue/Cemetery
in New Hope to participate in a joint development project with the Adath Shel Emes Cemetery in
Crystal. Due to the fact that no taxable market value was derived from the property due to its tax
exempt status, the New Hope Council did not object to the detachment.
Lastly, during the fourth quarter Robert Gundershaug resigned from the Planning Commission,
due to his upcoming retirement. Gundershaug had served on the Commission for 20 years, was the
chair of the Design & Review Committee and was chair of the Planning Commission in 1995. His
guidance and leadership on the Commission will be missed. The City Council passed a resolution
in December accepting his resignation, with regrets, and he will be honored at a future City Council
meeting.
Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant/
Community Development Coordinator
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Fourth Quarter 1995 Report
The New Hope HRA continues to be busy with the management of housing programs and redevelopment
activities in the City.
Section 8 Rental Assistance Pro_gram
Currently, the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program is providing assistance to 245 New Hope low income
families. This is higher than the number families that were being served in September. During this same
time period in 1994, New Hope was providing assistance to 258 families, so overall the program is
serving fewer families in 1995 as in 1994.
The breakdown is as follows:
Certificates Vouchers Total
October 164 74 238
November 163 74 237
December 167 78 245
The number of housing inspections has decreased compared to the same time period in 1994. During the
fourth quarter of 1995 a total of 86 inspections were completed, as compared to 99 for the same time
period in 1994.
A breakdown of housing unit inspections for the fourth quarter is contained in the following table:
Initial Reinspect Total Year to Date
Section 8 58 28 86 285
During the fourth quarter, staff continued to discuss with the Metro HRA the possibility of the City
assuming administrative responsibilities for Section 8 clients in neighboring cities in an effort to increase
revenues for the program. In the past the City has administered up to 300 certificates/vouchers. The
Metropolitan Council has made a proposal to the City and it will be formally considered by the EDA in
January 1996.
Community Development Block Grant Program
Housing Rehabilitation Program -- Hennepin County manages the Housing Rehabilitation Program for
the City and maintains a waiting list. The funds assist low income persons in making basic repairs to
homes that they own. Currently there are two residential households in the process of being assisted,
zero being rehabilitated and zero on the waiting list. At this time all Year XVIII (1992/93) funds have
been expended. Approximately $24,684 from Year XIX (1993/94) has been expended or committed and
$23,400 out of $33,345 has been committed from Year XX (1994/95) funds.
Year XXI CDBG Funds -- The City of New Hope was allocated $182,816 for Year XXI (1995/96).
In addition, the City received $123,326 in additional program income. The additional income was
generated by the Petro Fund reimbursement for contaminated soils clean-up at 42nd and Nevada Avenues.
These funds were reprogrammed for the removal of architectural barriers at City Hall and scattered site
housing activities.
Scattered Site Housing Projects
During the fourth quarter, the City continued to pursue several projects that will be funded by CDB¢~'
MHFA, HOME, EDA and City funds. Projects that use these funds include the following:
7901-7909 51st Avenue North -- During the third quarter, construction was completed on the City's
first handicapped accessible twin home. Once construction was completed, a driveway and sidewalks
were installed and the property was landscaped. The landscaping was designed by Tom Schuster,
New Hope City Forester, and installed by Wrobleski's Lawn Service. The 7909 51st Avenue unit
was sold on August 15th. On August 17th, an open house was held to allow neighbors, City staff
and the general public an opportunity to view the property. Roughly 100 people visited the property
during the open house.
During the third quarter, the City signed a purchase agreement for the 7901 51st Avenue unit with
Carey Luckeroth. The EDA formally approved the sale on August 14, 1995. During the fourth
quarter, Carey Luckeroth and the City closed on the property. The closing was conducted on October
12, 1995. The City Council approved the final pay request on this project to Equal Access Homes
at the October 23rd Council meeting.
6073-6081 Louisiana Avenue North -- The site is a City owned property that was developed through
the purchase and replatting of surrounding properties. In 1993/1994, the City purchased, rehabilitated
and sold the property at 7109 62nd Avenue North. As part of that project, the City split off the rear
100 feet of the property due to the depth of the lot. At the same time, the owners of the comer lot
located at 7105 62nd Avenue North decided to subdivide their property and sold the rear 100 feet to
the city. The City combined both properties to create a new parcel as part of the City's Scattered
Site Housing Program. This new lot is roughly 16,600 square feet and faces east toward Crystal
Lions Park.
During the second quarter, staff developed a budget for the construction of a three-bedroom handicap
accessible twin home at 6073-6081 Louisiana Avenue. Funds to be used for the project include
MHFA, CDBG, and EDA funds and a Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Housing Assistance Loan in the amount of $125,000. The Housing Assistance Loan will be applied
toward the construction of the twin home and will be paid back at the time of sale.
During the third and fourth quarters, staff worked with Charlie Braun, Equal Access Homes, on
expanding the two-bedroom design at 7901-7909 51st Avenue into a three-bedroom twin home. The
EDA approved plans and specifications and ordered an advertisement for bids on October 9, 1995.
The three-bedroom design has similar accessibility features to those present in the two-bedroom unit
and is slab on grade construction. At the same meeting, the Council also awarded the contract for
sewer and water service installation to H & M Asphalt in the amount of $26,632.15. At the
November 23rd Council meeting, the Council awarded the contract for tree removal to Crystal Tree
Service in the amount of $950.00.
On November 13th, the City Council awarded the construction contract to the low bidder, Michlitsch
Builders for $199,900. A pre-construction meeting was held on November 16th and construction of
the twin home began immediately after the contract was awarded. Once the contract was awarded,
staff began marketing the property for $95,000 per unit. The City received several inquires about
the property and has one eligible buyer at this time. The City plans on signing a purchase agreement
with that family in late January. The City will continue marketing the property and hopes to have
both units sold before construction is compieted~
The City Council also approved the preliminary plat of the property on November 13th. The final
plat was approved on November 27th, and an ordinance rezoning the property from R-1 to R-2 was
approved on December 11, 1995.
5559 Surnter Avenue North -- The City Council authorized the purchase of 5559 Sumter on October
9, 1995 for $62,000. Once the purchase was complete the City had the sewer and water turned off,
and the telephone, cable, gas, and electricity was disconnected from the house. All of these items
were disconnected so that the property would be ready to demolish next spring.
The property contains a one-story home with an attached garage and is suffering from obsolescence
and other blighting factors. The City acquired the property for street right-of-way purposes to resolve
a hazardous traffic condition caused by the misalignment of Sumter Avenue. It is the City's intention
to demolish the existing home in order to realign the intersection at some future time.
City staff have also been discussing with the New Hope Police Department the possibility of using
the house to practice SWAT maneuvers. If approved, this activity would happen in the spring before
demolition takes place.
During the fourth quarter, staff also solicited quotes from fin'ms to perform environmental surveys of
the scattered site homes for asbestos, etc. These quotes will be considered by the Council in January.
The environmental assessments are necessary prior to completing the demolition specs.
7621 Bass Lake Road -- The City Council approved the purchase of 7621 Bass Lake Road on October
23, 1995. In January 1995, Jerry McBrady, owner of the property, contacted the City to inquire if
the City had an interest in acquiring his property for potential future redevelopment purposes. The
property is a large 32,000 square foot parcel located at the end of the Bass Lake Road Extension and
is the key parcel related to any future redevelopment in the area. This was a voluntary sale purchased
on a scattered site basis with no relocation costs involved. The City closed on the property December
22, 1995. The City intends to demolish the home due to its location and "land bank" the property
for future redevelopment.
6067 West Broadway -- 6067 West Broadway is a residential property purchased by New Hope from
HUD, due to a mortgage foreclosure, on October 17, 1995 for $41,400. There is a one-story, 576
square foot house with a basement currently located on the property. The main floor consists of a
living room, dining room, kitchen, bathroom and one bedroom. The basement includes a laundry
room and secondary room, which was used as a bedroom. An illegal breezeway has been built
between the house and single-car garage. There is a gravel driveway off of West Broadway and
landscaping is minimal. The house is located in a neighborhood that has previously been designated
by the City Council as blighted. Most of the homes adjacent to this property are well kept and in
good condition and this particular property is a detriment to the neighborhood.
The house has been evaluated by the City and Project for Pride in Living (PPL) staff and it has been
determined that it is not worth rehabilitating due to its deteriorated condition and a number of building
code violations. Therefore, City staff is recommending the house, breezeway and single-car garage
be torn down and a two-story house with an attached two-car garage would be built on the site. The
City is suggesting building a new home on the current foundation due to the size and configuration
of the lot and the setback requirements. If the City removes the basement and rebuilds, variances
will have to be approved by both the Planning Commission and City Council.
The total lot area is 8,913 square feet. The lot faces east on West Broadway and is zoned R-1. T1-
site is bordered on the north and south by single family homes, on the east (across West Broadwayj
by Broadway Village Apartments, and on the west by the back yard of a single family home. Due
to the size of the lot, the City has determined that the best use for the site is as a single family
home. The house to be built on the original foundation will have three bedrooms, 11/2 bathrooms,
a living room, kitchen, dining room, basement, and two-car garage. The building design will be
similar to the surrounding architecture; either a cape cod or 11/2 story walk-up. Upon completion,
the home will be sold to a low/moderate income family.
The City of New Hope is responsible for marketing the home, finding a developer/builder and
overseeing construction. It is estimated that demolition of the house will occur in March 1996 and
construction will begin in May 1996. Marketing will begin before construction occurs. This will
allow a qualified buyer the opportunity to choose the interior colors of the home.
The City of New Hope will work with Marquette Bank New Hope to handle financing for qualified
buyers. Home Line has been hired through CHDO to facilitate the application process and
determine which applicants qualify to purchase the property. The City will also work with CO-OP
Northwest and PPL to determine an achievable sale price and market strategy. City staff will market
the property through the City newsletter, local newspaper, and brochures to area realtors and service
organizations.
Qualifying homeowners must meet the income guidelines required for HOME-funded projects. City
staff estimates that the asking price for the house will be $80,000. The cost includes a $75,000 first
mortgage and a $5,000 second mortgage. An income of $26,000 - $29,000 is sufficient to purchase
the home if the interest rate is 6.85% or below.
Purchase and Rehabilitation of Two Single Family Homes -- During the past few months staff have
been surveying New Hope neighborhoods looking for two homes that are in severe need of
rehabilitation. Staff has developed a list of potential sites for redevelopment and will contact the
owners to determine if they are interested in selling their home to the City.
The purchase and rehabilitation of the properties will be funded through HOME, CDBG, and EDA
funds. In addition, the City has received a Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment
Authority Housing Assistance Loan in the amount of $120,000. The City will receive the loan in
March 1996. The Housing Assistance Loan will be applied toward the purchase and rehabilitation
of the homes and paid back at the time of sale.
Conversion of a Four-plex or Six-plex to Group Home Facilities - During the first quarter, staff
toured group homes as part of a study to determine the feasibility of developing a small group home
for the special needs population.
During the second quarter, staff was awarded HOME funds in the amount of $90,000 to be used
toward this project. The City has also committed $90,000 as a zero interest first mortgage for the
project.
The project will require the purchase and conversion of a four-plex or six-plex apartment building.
The City has been working with Project for Pride in Living (PPL) and the CHDO to coordinate the
project and find a service provider. A Request for Proposals was developed by PPL. approved by
the EDA on September 25th, and distributed to service providers. Ihe CHDO received five
proposals as of December 15th. City and CHDO staff will review the proposals in January 1996
to determine if any match the project requirements. The project will require that the service
provider own and manage the property, the CHDO will provide funding, and the City will provide
funding and staff support for the project.
Care Break Facility -- The New Hope EDA acquired 5501 Boone Avenue North and the northern
75 feet on 5425 Boone Avenue North through the eminent domain/condemnation process, to
facilitate the construction of the Care Break Adult Day Care Center to be operated by Senior
Outreach Services. Due to the cost of constructing a new facility at the 5501 Boone Avenue, Care
Break is now interested in purchasing the Homeward Bound site at 4741 Zealand Avenue North and
using that building instead.
The City has designated $100,000 (approximately $33,000 per year for three years) in CDBG funds
for a future Care Break facility. Originally this money was to go toward land acquisition and
construction at 5501 Boone. Because of the change in location, the funds will now be used for
remodeling the Homeward Bound facility. Due to the location change, staff is preparing an
Environmental Assessment on the Homeward Bound site.
During the fourth quarter, and due to the time it is taking for the Care Break facility to be
completed, the City reprogrammed the 1993 and 1994 CDBG funds dedicated to the project to be
used for reimbursement of the removal of architectural barriers. This will close out the program
needs for the removal of architectural barriers. The program amount dedicated in 1995 for the Care
Break facility was then increased from $34,000 to $100,000. The 1995 CDBG funds will not have
to be used until 1997.
At the December 1 lth EDA meeting, the EDA approved a Right of First Refusal Agreement with
Homeward Bound so that in the event an offer was made on the property, the City could match the
offer.
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Grants
Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority Housing Assistance Loan -- On
February 9, thc City submitted two Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Housing Assistance Loan applications. One application was for $125,000 for the construction of a
three-bedroom handicap accessible twin home to be constructed at 6073 Louisiana Avenue North. The
second application was for $120,000 for the purchase and rehabilitation of two homes that would bc
resold to low income families after rehabilitation had bccn completed. The Housing Assistance Loans
arc zero interest and must be repaid when thc sale of thc units are complete.
The City presented the applications to the Metro Council Advisory Committee on April 26th and the
Metro Council Community Development Committee on May 8th. Both of these committees approved
the applications. The Metropolitan Council awarded both of the loan applications requested by the City
in May. The City received the funds for the construction of the twin home in November 1995, and will
receive the funds for the two rehabilitation projects in 1996.
Community Activity Set-Aside (CASA) Program -- The CHDO has been made the designee of $1
million in mortgage revenue bonds through the MHFA Community Activity Set-Aside (CASA)
Program. CASA funds can be used to provide first-time home buyer mortgages to low and moderat~'-,
income people that are purchasing homes through the CHDO. Marquette Bank New Hope is th,.
designated lender for the mortgage revenue funds. The interest rate for the funds are 6.85% and are
the exclusive use of the CHDO until March 1996.
MHFA Minnesota CRV Participation Program
The MCPP is a program through the MHFA in which the MHFA sells mortgage revenue bonds on
behalf of participating cities to meet locally identified housing needs. The proceeds from the bonds
provide below-market interest rate mortgage loans for low and moderate income first-time home buyers.
The MCPP is a six month program that begins in July and runs for six months. During the first four
months, participating cities have exclusive use of their individual allotment. During the final two
months, the individual allotments go into a statewide pool that is available to all MCPP participating
cities.
In June, the City applied for the 1995 MCPP program. On July 7, the City received $449,000 in MCPP
first-time home buyer funds for 1995. The funds were available to first time home buyers until
November 27th.
During the fourth quarter, staff initiated an application for the 1996 program, which will be presented
to the EDA for approval in January.
Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Act
The Metropolitan Livable Communities Act was enacted in June by the State Legislature in an attempt
to address housing issues in the metropolitan area. The Act also establishes a Metropolitan Livable
Communities Fund which consists of three accounts designated to help improve communities and
neighborhoods. The funds in these accounts can only be accessed if a City elects to participate in the
Livable Communities Act.
On September 25th, the City took the first step in participating in the program by passing a resolution
electing to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program under the Livable Communities
Act. During the fourth quarter, staff met with representatives from the Metro Council to discuss and
establish housing goals for the City. The outcome of the discussion was that the City already meets or
exceeds the housing goals outlined by the Metro Council. Therefore, the Council approved the housing
goals established under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act on November 27, 1995. As a final
step in the process, by June 1996, the City must submit a formal plan outlining how the City will
achieve its goals.
Also during the fourth quarter, New Hope, in partnership with the cities of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn
Park, Crystal, and Robbinsdale have submitted a proposal to the Met Council for funding through the
Livable Communities Act Demonstration Account Program. The cities are requesting $2.5 million to
be used toward improving owner-occupied, deteriorating properties in the 5-City area. If the funds are
approved, they will be used as loans in partnership with private financing for improvements to single
family low and middle income properties. It is felt that a loan program such as this is necessary if the
5-City area hopes to retain the character and quality of its neighborhoods. Approval of this project will
occur in the first quarter of 1996.
CO-OP Northwest
1993 HOME Grant -o During the fall of 1993, staff was notified that Hennepin County had approved
a $274,100 5-City grant application for Federal HOME funds. New Hope, used $44,000 worth of
HOME funds, in conjunction with other grant monies, to acquire and build a handicap accessible twin
home at 7901/7909 51st Avenue North.
During the first quarter of 1995, the City presented the CHDO Board of Directors with a request for
$45,000 for the construction of a three-bedroom handicap accessible twin home to be built at 6073
Louisiana Avenue North and to purchase/rehabilitate one blighted single family home to sell to low
income buyers. Due to a lack of funds during the third quarter, the CHDO asked the City to forgo the
purchase and rehabilitation of a single family home. The money that would have been used for this
project was needed by the cities of Crystal, Robbinsdale, and Brooklyn Park for their CHDO projects.
1995 HOME Grant -- In 1995 the CHDO hired Project for Pride in Living (PPL) to act as coordinator
for the 1995 HOME grant applications. In April, PPL completed and submitted the 1995 HOME
application to Hennepin County. In the grant New Hope requested $90,000 to convert a four or six-plex
into housing for the disabled and to purchase, rehabilitate, and sell two single family homes to
low/moderate income first-time home buyers.
5-City Multi-Jurisdictional Housing/Human Services Group -- Staff continues to participate in
groups that seek out programs to integrate human services with multi-family housing complexes. Seven
action groups have been formed and staff serves on the Planners' Sub-Group and the Housing and
Human Services Group. Besides serving on these groups, staff reports to/attends Executive Committee
meetings. These groups meet on an informal basis to coordinate housing programs, the annual
Remodeling Fair, the Renters' Rights Forum, and other new initiatives.
Sub-Regional Housing Plan -- On November 27th the New Hope City Council approved the CO-OP
Northwest Sub-Regional Housing Plan. The purpose of the Sub-Regional Housing Plan is to establish
coordinated goals, polices and strategies to address housing issues in the 5-City area. Although it is not
a binding document, it is intended to be a proactive document recognizing that the five cities share
commonalties in both housing stock and demographics and states that a cooperative approach to
planning to address housing needs is beneficial to each of the cities.
Landlords' Forum
During the third and fourth quarters, staff cooperated with CO-OP Northwest and neighboring cities to
plan and sponsor a Landlords' Forum. The purpose of the Forum was to educate apartment
owners/managers about their rights and responsibilities. The Forum was held on November 6th at the
Crystal Community Center and the event was well attended. Speakers included an attorney and a
Hennepin County Housing Court Judge and topics covered included tenant screening/discrimination
laws, leases, unlawful detainers, and how to prepare for housing court.
4th Annual North Suburban Remodeling Fair
The Cities of New Hope, Crystal, Robbinsdale, Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park have joined
together to sponsor the 4th Annual North Suburban Remodeling Fair, to be held on Saturday, March
16th, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at Park Center High School, 7300 Brooklyn Boulevard in Brooklyn Park.
The purpose of the Fair is to encourage homeowners to make improvements to their homes. The
Remodeling Fair will include more than 50 exhibits from local contracting businesses, lending
institutions, local manufacturers, Police, Fire, and Inspections Departments. There will be workshoF~'''
and demonstrations by exhibitors, along with refreshments and drawings for door prizes.
The event is free and open to the public, and interested New Hope residents are encouraged to attend.
Additional details will be provided in the SunPost, on Cable TV, and on City reader boards.
New Hope is again coordinating the registrations/revenue receipts and the disbursements for expenses.
On December 12th the Council approved a contract with Events of Distinction to assist with the
coordination of seminars and door prizes.
New Hope Apartments - Multi-Family Housing Rehabilitation
In September 1993, the EDA approved a Multi-Family Housing Financial Assistance Policy to address
requests for funding assistance for building rehabilitation/renovation work from owners of multi-family
dwellings in the City. In February 1994, a loan proposal was approved for New Hope Apartments (four
12-unit buildings) in rehab work. The closing on the loan was completed in June and the renovation
work was started in July. A substantial amount of work was completed during the third and fourth
quarters of 1994 and several payment requests were approved, subject to recommendations from the
Inspections Department. At the November 14, 1994 EDA meeting, the EDA approved an additional
$20,000 loan to cover additional unanticipated expenses including a new fire alarm system. This project
continued during 1995 and the project should be finalized in the spring of 1996. Staff has been pleased
with the cooperation of the owners and the overall execution of the rehabilitation project. Staff is
interested in undertaking a similar project at another multi-family housing complex in 1996.
Respectfully submitted,
Kirk McDonald Sarah Bellefuil
Management Assistant/ Administrative Analyst
Community Development Coordinator
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Fourth Quarter Report .. City Council Synopsis
During the fourth quarter, the City continued work on a number of housing and redevelopment
activities. Both units located at 7901/7909 51st Avenue North were sold to /ow/moderate
income first-time home buyers. One unit was sold in August and the other was sold in October
1995.
Construction at the property located at 6073/6081 Louisiana Avenue North began in
November 1995. In October the Council/EDA approved plans and specifications for the home
and ordered bids and they also awarded contracts for the installation of sewer/water services
and for tree removal. The contract for the twin home construction was awarded to Michlitsch
Builders. The three-bedroom twin home being built on the property will be similar to the twin
home built at 51st and Winnetka. Staff also began marketing the properties in November and
has one eligible buyer that the staff plans on signing a purchase agreement with. The City has
received a Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority Housing
Assistance Loan in the amount of $125,000 to help finance construction of the twin home.
The City purchased a HUD home located at 6067 West Broadway in October, 1995. Staff is
recommending that the house be torn down to the foundation and a new three-bedroom home
be built on the site. The new house would be sold to a Iow/moderate income first-time home
buyer. Staff is also looking at other blighted properties throughout New Hope that could be
purchased, rehabilitated, and sold to Iow/moderate income families. The City will be using a
variety of financing sources to purchase and rehabilitate two properties including a $120,000
Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority Housing Assistance Loan and
$23,000 in HOME funds.
During the fourth quarter, the City also acquired and closed on two other scattered site
properties with voluntary sales. The home at 5559 Sumter was acquired in October and will
be demolished for future road realignment. The property at 7621 Bass Lake Road was
acquired in December and will be demolished with the land being "banked" for future
redevelopment. Bids will be sought for demolition after environmental assessments are
completed.
The City Council adopted the CO-OP Northwest Sub-Regional Housing Plan during the
fourth quarter and also approved a housing goals statement for the Metropolitan Livable
Communities Act. Both of these actions lay the groundwork for future housing projects and
establish goals to work towards. Staff have also been working with other CO-OP Northwest
cities on a proposal for the Livable Communities Act Demonstration Account Program and
have made presentations during the fourth quarter to a committee of State Legislators and
Metropolitan Council representatives.
Lastly, staff assisted in sponsoring the November 6th Landlords Forum which was held to
educate multi-family building owners/managers about leases, tenant screening, unlawful
detainers and housing court. During the fourth quarter staff also started preparation, in
conjunction with neighboring cities, for the 4th Annual North Suburban Remodeling Fair,
which will be held on March 16th.
It has been a busy, but successful, fourth quarter for housing programs and projects with a
number of goals being achieved.
Respectfully submitted,
Kirk McDonald Sarah Bellefu//
Management Assistant/ Administrative Analyst
Community Development Coordinator
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Fourth Quarter 1995
D~scription October November December
Scattered Site tiousing
Projects:
7901/7909 51 st Avenue I O/12 Closing on 7909 51 st Avenue
completed
10/23 Council approves final pay request to
Equal Access Homes
6073/6081 Louisiana 10/9 EDA Approves plans and specifications l 1/13 Contract awarded to Michlitsch Construction and marketing in process
Avenue & orders bids Builders
10/9 Council awards contract for sewer/ 11/16 Pre-contruction meeting held
water service installation
10/9 Council awards contract for tree Construction started
removal
5559 Sumter Avenue 10/9 Council authorizes purchase of Utilities disconnected Quotes for environmental assessments
property for future intersection alignment sought
7621 Bass Lake Road 10/23 Council authorizes purchase of 12/22 Closing on sale completed
property for future redevelopment
6067 West Broadway 10/17 Closing on sale completed Utilities disconnected Quotes for environmental assessments
sought
Other Housing Programs/
Projects:
Group Home Facility (Council approved RFP on 9/25) 12/15 Five responses to RFP received
CareBreak & Homeward CDBG Funds Reprogrammed and 12/11 EDA Approves Right of First
Bound Environmental Assessment in process Refusal Agreement
Metro liRA Housing Funds received for construction of
Assistance Loan twin home
MHFA MCPP Applicaton for 1996 program started
Description October I November December
Mclropolitan Council 11/27 Council approves housing goals
Livable Communities Act
Staff works with other CO-OP Northwest Cities to make application for
Livable Communities Act Demonstration Account Program
CO-OP NW:
IIOME Grant On-going throughout fourth quarter
5-City Groups On-going participation throughout fourth quarter
Sub-Regional Housing Plan 11/27 Council approves plan
Landlords Forum Held on 11/6
1996 Remodeling Planning underway for 4th Annual North Suburban Remodeling Fair ...
Fair to be held March 16, 1996
12/I 1 Council approves agreement
with Events of Distinction
Multi-Family Housing Project was on-going during fourth quarter ...
Financial Assistance to be completed in spring of 1996
ENGINEERING PROJECTS
Fourth Quarter 1995 Report
Progress took place on the following major engineering projects during October, November and December:
1. Project-//437, 36tit Avenue: ~oad Bridgn~ and Proj~ #486~ 36t!~ Avenue:. Street- Improvements
(Winae~k.a: to. LouiSiana} - The contract for the bridge reconstruction and for Phase I of the street and
storm sewer improvements was awarded at the December 12, 1994 Council meeting to Johnson
Brothers Corporation, low bidder on the project, in the amount of $1,299,936.25. Project bulletins
were sent to residents in the area throughout the duration of the project informing them of construction
programs and road closures. At the September l lth Council meeting, two change orders were
approved that included modifications to the metal safety railing on the wing walls to create a safer
condition at the top of the wing walls and the installation of anti-graffiti coating. On October 9th, the
Council approved Change Order No. 3 in the amount of $37,322 for storm sewer, sanitary sewer and
subgrade treatment modifications. A final Phase I project bulletin was mailed to residents/businesses
in mid-October regarding the road opening. The road re-opened on October 28th. Staff have been
meeting with the cities of Crystal and Plymouth during the fourth quarter to finalize plans/agreements
for Phase II of the project, which will be initiated in the spring of 1996.
2. ~J~!~Z~ii:~ :,ii~!ii~ ~:i~!i:~?~g~- During the second quarter.
the City received an "all-clear" letter from the MPCA stating that the investigation and cleanup had
adequately addressed the petroleum tank release and that additional investigation/cleanup was not
required. The Council approved a quote from Agassiz Environmental Systems to abandon and seal
the wells on this property and the wells were sealed in July. Authorization was obtained at the
October 9th Council meeting to submit the Supplemental Petrofund Application. On December 1 lth
the City Council approved a Right-of-Entry Agreement with Braun Intertec, who is conducting
investigation work for Ware Manufacturing.
3. ~oj~.~#~iii:i ii:;~iii~ - At the August 28th City Council meeting, the Council
approved a resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering preparation of proposed assessment
in connection with the 1994 Retaining Wall Improvement Project. The public hearing for the
assessments was held on September 25th. There were no objections to the assessments and the
assessment roll was approved as presented. At the October 23rd Council meeting, the Council
approved the final pay request to Classic Asphalt Company in the amount of $1,500.00.
4. ~Oj~ ~i:~b~i~i!i!~i:iii!~iiii~- At the November 27th City Council meeting,
the Council authorized final payment to C.S. McCrossan Construction in the amount of $19,680.23,
as all improvements had been completed.
5. ~oj~ ~iiii:~!i~ili :~)r,_ The Stormwater Management Plan Task Force
completed the preliminary draft of the Surface Water Management Plan and it was distributed to the
two Watershed Management Organizations in February 1994. The City was informed that the reviews
by the Shingle Creek and Bassett Creek Water Management Organizations require some minor
modifications to the plan. The modifications are estimated to cost an additional $4,680 in engineering
services and the City Council approved a change order in that amount at the December 1 lth Council
meeting. The Task Force will be meeting the tn'st quarter of 1996 to discuss possible changes to the
plan.
6. Project #502, City i:!~11 Renovatiou -At the November 27th City Council meeting, the Council
authorized final payment to Mikkelson-Wulff Construction in the amount of $21..836.25, for the Phase
II City Hall Remodeling Project. The final amount of the contract was $438,378. ~.~.
7. Proje~ #.~4}7, 4~,n8 Ave~e N~ La~dscaOe/Mlti~~e Impmv~e~t~ an~ Railroad Bridge
Repainting - Discussions continued on a staff level regarding the clock tower agreement with the
School District and the 45th/Winnetka sign agreement with Winnetka Center. At the May 22nd City
Council meeting, the Council discussed the request from the contractor for additional monies to
complete the landscaping on this project, which was to be completed this past spring. The
recommendation from staff was to re-bid the remaining work, which was done. Also discussed at the
May 22nd meeting was the proposed clock tower. Council will cominue to discuss this project at a
future work session. During the third and fourth quarters, the City continued to work with the
landscape architect on a revised plan for the School District comer. The plan was submitted to the
School District for review and the City is waiting for a formal response.
· :'::: '':: ':::: ":::::::::::' ::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: '"~' '1;':::::: :-" ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ': ::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::: :" ii:-.. ' · · ~..
8. Pr~tl~! ~tg~ii~i:.~ ~alit~ ~ i [~ i~ii iat ~3 ~uis~ana Avenue-
In 1993/1994 the City of New Hope purchased, rehabilitated and sold the property at 7109 62nd
Avenue North. As part of that project, the City split off the rear I00 feet of the property due to the
depth of the lot. At the same time, the owners of the comer lot located at 7105 62nd Avenue North
decided to subdivide their property and sold the rear 100 feet to the City. The City combined both
properties to create a new parcel located at 6073/6081 Louisiana Avenue North on which will be
developed a three-bedroom, handicap accessible twin home. Because this is a newly platted lot, sewer,
water and storm sewer needed to be extended to the site. The City sought bids for the work and at
the October 9th Council meeting, the Council awarded the contract to H & M Asphalt, low bidder,
in the amount of $26,632.15. The utilities were installed in October and construction proceeded on
the home (refer to Housing Report). At the December llth meeting, the Council approved Change
Order No. 1 to the contract in the amount of $1,420.00 for the removal of poor soil and importing
better material for pipe bedding.
9. Proj~:~i~;~.l~!~.~il ii~- There was a considerable amount of Council and
staff time devoted to this project during the first three quarters. The bid was awarded to the low
bidder, Hardrives, Inc., in the amount of $887,828 with Option B, which calls for the reclamation of
the existing bituminous surface to be used in the project. The project construction started on May 15th
and proceeded on schedule. The City Council approved Change Order No. I in the amount of
$32,617 at the June 26th Council meeting for additional storm sewer work. The majority of work was
completed in the late fall, with punch list items to be completed in the spring of 1996.
10. proj~ #~iiiii~ii?~!~i}!if~:!!~!i:~- This project was completed during the fourth
quarter and the final pay request was approved at the December 1 l th Council meeting in the amount
of $2,838.34.
11. ~j~: ~!iii~i!i~iiiii~i?:i~i! - During the first quarter, the Council
accepted the Feasibility Report, approved plans and specifications, conducted a public hearing,
advertised for and opened bids, awarded the contract for the street improvements and approved the
revised Conditions of Approval. Pre-construction meetings were held in April. A project bulletin was
sent to area residents on May 26th. Construction on the City's portion of the work (street, parking
lot and utility improvements) started on June 3rd and the majority of the construction was completed
by the end of September. At the June 26th City Council meeting, the Council approved Change Order
No. 1 in the amount of $19,660.50 for street section improvements near New Hope Elementary, due
to poor soil and drainage conditions. On September 25th the City Council approved a resolution
accepting an easement from Homeward Bound to allow the construction of a sidewalk on the north sxde
of 47th Avenue. Final construction items were completed during the fourth quarter.
12. Project g528, 1995' Back-yard Drainag~ Project - During the second quarter, the City Council
approved plans and specifications for seven properties to be included in the 1995 Backyard Drainage
Project. Property owners were advised about the project and Easemem Agreements were obtained
from 34 project properties. During the third quarter bids were sought and the City Council awarded
the bid to Sunram Construction, low bidder, in the amount of $75,518. The pre-construction meeting
was held and a project bulletin was mailed to all properties impacted by the project. At the November
27th City Council meeting, the Council approved Change Order No. 1 which reduced the contract total
by $1,315, which included construction of a driveway at 8119 47th Avenue. The homeowner desired
to reconstruct his emire driveway and, therefore, the City Council authorized payment of $1,315
directly to the homeowner. The majority of the improvements were completed during the fourth
quarter, with punch list items to be finished in the spring of 1996.
13. PrOj~i~9!i~i~ A~!iW~i.T~- During the third quarter, City staff and the Joint Water
Commission continued to evaluate whether the tower needed to be removed/repaired/replaced. The
major issue was whether it was more cost effective to rehabilitate the existing tower vs. construct a
new tower. A consultant specializing in water tanks analysis continued to evaluate these alternatives
during the third quarter. At the October 23rd City Council meeting, the Council discussed the Joint
Water Commission's recommendation that the water tower be upgraded, rather than replaced, by
removing all existing lead-based paint, repainting the tank, and making modifications to meet OSHA
standards. On December l lth the Council approved plans and specifications and ordered
advertisement for bids for the project. Bids will be opened and considered by the Council in January
1996.
14. ~iiii~!;i!i~ii~i!i - During the second quarter, the City Council approved
plans and specifications and called for bids for replacement lighting, irrigation and grading. The
contracts were awarded to: Hamelwood for grading and irrigation in the amount of $91,815.80 and
Killmer Electric for lighting in the amount of $57,980 (low bidders). Also during the second quarter.
the Council accepted an easement at 4921 Boone Avenue in order expand the distance from the
backstop to home plate and thanked Boone Partnership for their donation of the easement to the City.
The improvements at Lighted Ballfield proceeded on an unacceptable schedule during the third quarter,
including partial installation of a new irrigation system, new lighting, the rebuilding/grading of field,
and installation of storm sewer and new fencing. The City Council approved Change Order No. 1 in
the amount of $7,387.40 for lowering and insulating existing 6" sanitary sewer service, removing
buried concrete footings for dugouts, and removing block and debris for backstop posts at the
November 13th Council meeting. During the fourth quarter, the contractor did not complete the
project or fulfill his obligations under the contract. Staff is currently reviewing liquidated damages
procedures and dealing with the bonding company.
15. Proj~#$3$~ii~ii~i!~ii::i~a~ - At the July 24th City Council meeting, the Council
authorized staff to proceed with the preparation/submittal of two grants under the new "Mighty Ducks"
legislation: one for the addition of a second sheet of ice at the existing New Hope Ice Arena and one
for renovations to the existing facility. Staff proceeded to assemble the applications in August and
September and obtained letters of support from the NHPAA, School District No. 281 and Hennepin
County. Financial data, economic impact information and other planning/site plan documents were
also prepared. At the September 25th Council meeting, the Council passed a resolution that authorized
the preparation of plans and specifications for the addition of a second sheet of ice and also resolutions
that authorized the submittal of the two grant applications. Staff submitted the grams to the Minnesota
Amateur Sports Commission by the October 2nd deadline. In November the City Council reviewed
two concept plans for the Ice Arena expansion. After an RFP and interview process, on December
1 lth the City Council authorized the City Manager to negotiate a contract for construction management
services for the project.
16. Project ~40~ 1995 Stree~ ~l~rovemenls-. ~ea:l - At the April 24th City Council meeting, the
Council deleted Area 1 from Project #521 and initiated a separate project for this area. On May 8th,
the Council provided for a public hearing to be held at the May 22nd Council meeting. At the May
22nd Council meeting, the Council conducted the public hearing and approved a resolution ordering
construction and ratifying preparation of and approval of final plans and specifications. The bid
opening for the 1995 Street Improvements - Area 1 was on June 23rd and the contract was awarded
to the low bidder, Hardrives, Inc., in the amount of $349,904.40 at the June 26th Council meeting.
A pre-construction meeting was held on July 12th before construction got underway. A project
bulletin was mailed to all residents in the project area on July 27th, as the project got underway.
Construction proceeded on schedule through August and September with the majority of work being
completed in October. Final punch list items will be finished in the spring of 1996.
17. Proj~ :.g~2~:!i~i!~ii~$- At the August 14th City Council meeting, the Council
authorized staff to proceed with development of a programming report for the proposed remodeling
of the Public Works facility. The cost of architectural and engineering services provided by Bonestroo
is estimated at $7,500. At the December l lth the Council meeting, the City Council accepted the
Facility Assessment and Building Program, authorized a contract for architectural services and
authorized preparation of plans and specifications.
City Council approved a resolution ordering preparation of plans and specifications at their luly 24th
meeting. At the August 28th meeting, the Council approved the plans and specifications and
authorized advertisement for bids. At the September l lth Council meeting, an increase in the
quarterly Storm Water Utility charge was approved to assist with the f'mancing of City-wide
storm/surface water improvement projects. Besides the construction of a storm water pond at 4400
Quebec Avenue, the project also includes improvements to the Municipal Golf Course. The
improvements at the Golf Course will include dredging the pond along hole No. 9, bank stabilization,
storm sewer repair, modification of the Meadow Lake outlet structure and the regrading of Fairway
No. 9. Bids for the project were opened on October 4th. At the October 9th Council meeting, the
bid was awarded to Veit & Company, low bidder, in the amount of $263,087.17, which included
Alternate No. 5. Alternate No. 5 provides for disposing of all excess material from the pond
excavation at 4400 Quebec Avenue and the Golf Course at Sunnyside Park. A pre-construction
meeting was held on October 20th and an informational meeting was held with residents on October
21st. At the October 23rd City Council meeting, Council authorized construction of sanitary sewer
improvements and approved a petition from C.C.I. to pay for their portion of the project through an
assessment. Construction started in November. On December l lth, the Council approved an
amendment to the C.C.I. petition for public improvement and sewer improvement to allow for extra
costs involved with relocating a fire hydrant to be added to the assessment. The Council also approved
Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $10,359.88 for the hydrant relocation.
19. P~'x~j~!i~;i~!~:~H~;!R~- At the August 28th City Council meeting, the Council approved
plans and specifications and authorized bids for City Hall Re-Roof Project. There were no signs of
problems or leaks in the roof until late in the Phase II City Hall Remodeling Project, therefore it was
not included in the original specifications. At the September 25th Council meeting, bids were
presented and the Council awarded the bid to All Systems Roofing, low bidder, in the amount of
$18,660. The work was completed during the fourth quarter, however testing remains to be
completed.
~ .. 20. Project #547, 42nd/Xylon Avenue Intersection Upgrade -At the April 10th City Council meeting.
~, the Council approved an agreement with NSP to remove old and install new underground electrical
service on the south side of 42nd Avenue between Boone and Winnetka Avenues. In June, staff met
with NSP and Gethsemane Cemetery officials to further discuss this project. In August, staff and the
City Engineer met with Hennepin County Public Works officials to explain the plans, discuss financing
and review the County's policy regarding project participation. Following the meeting, the City
Council approved a resolution at the August 28th meeting supporting the 42nd/Xylon
Avenue/Gethsemane Cemetery entrance/intersection upgrade and encouraging Hennepin County to
participate in the project. The resolution was sent to the County. During the fourth quarter Hennepin
County responded, the City Engineer initiated preparation of a report, and there was on-going
discussion between the City and the County about the project.
21. -During the fourth quarter, the
City Engineer prepared preliminary plans on this project, which involves regrading, drainage and other
improvements to the three ballfields on this site. Part of the needed fill may come from the Ice Arena
project. The City Engineer and Parks & Recreation Department staff met with School District officials
to review the plans.
22. ~j~i::#~ti!i! ~i?:~iii!~~?:ii~ii~iii~!~ - At the December l lth City
Council meeting, the Council authorized a feasibility report and pavement evaluation.
Kirk McDonald
Management Assistant/
Community Development Coordinator
ENGINEERING
Fourth Quarter 1995 Report
City Council Synopsis
Work continued on three major engineenng/construction projects dunng the fourth quarter, with all proj ~
on schedule and neanng completion.
1. The majodty of work was completed on the 36th Avenue Railroad Bridge and Phase I of the Street
Reconstruction Project, with 36th Avenue being re-opened on October 28th. The bridge was
constructed in 1925 and was in need of major repair, with the major deficiency being the safety
hazard posed by the inadequate roadway width between the existing concrete piers. Phase I of the
project included construction of a new railroad bridge and street/utility work approximately 250 feet
either side of the bridge. The span between the new bridge abutments is now 70 feet and will
accommodate a 48-foot wide roadway, a 5-foot wide sidewalk on each side and a 6-foot wide
boulevard. Construction was started in March and the City worked to keep residents/businesses in
the area informed of the project via project bulletins. With the completion of Phase I of the
improvements, staff now has begun to focus on Phase II improvements and is working to finalize
plans/agreements with neighboring cities for 1996 construction of Phase I1.
2. The majority of work was also completed on the Cooper High School Street and Parking Lot
Improvements during the fourth quarter. The City's contract included all street, parking lot and utility
improvements, with 47th Avenue being extended between Winnetka and Boone Avenues and
Zealand Avenue being reconstructed into a cul-de-sac. Staff responded to many phone calls
regarding the building of the berm. The City's portion of the project fell several weeks behind
schedule due to some heavy rains and the heat wave during the summer, but all work was essentially
completed by the end of September. The Cooper homecoming game was held on the field on
October 6th.
3. The 1995 Street and Storm Sewer Improvement Project (Areas 1 & 2) proceeded during the first
part of the fourth quarter with the majority of work in both areas being completed in October. Staff
responded to a number of calls throughout the construction project. Final punch list items will be
completed in the spring of 1996.
Besides these major projects, work was also essentially completed on the Backyard Drainage
Improvements Project, final payment was made on the Public Works Site Improvements Project and
soil test data was distributed to all residents in the Meadow Lake drainage area. Work proceeded on the
storm water ponding improvements on Quebec Avenue and at the Golf Course and a neighborhood
meeting was held with residents residing adjacent to Sunnyside Park. Discussion also continued with
Hennepin County on a new future entrance/intersection at Xylon Avenue and Rockford Road.
Significant progress on newer projects included the approval of plans and specifications for the renovation
of the 47th and Aquila Avenue Water Tower and the authorization to prepare plans and specifications
for the Public Works Building Remodeling.
The major park improvement project during this quarter was Grading and Lighting Improvements for
Lighted Field on 49th Avenue. The improvements included the installation of a new irrigation system,
new lighting, the rebuilding/grading of the field, and installation of a storm sewer and new fencing.
Although the contractor fell behind schedule, this project should be completed in the spring of 1996. The
major Park & Rec engineering project accomplished during the fourth quarter was continuing work on the
Ice Arena expansion/improvements under the new "Mighty Ducks" legislation. The Council approved
concept plans for the expansion during the fourth quarter and also approved the concept of utilizing a
construction management firm to manage the construction of the project. Although staff were very
disappointed to leam in December that the grant applications had not been approved, it appears likely that
the Council will proceed with the project using additional TIF financing. Preliminary plans were also
prepared and discussions initiated with the School District regarding 1996 proposed improvements to the
New Hope Elementary School Ballfields.
Respectfully submitted,
Kirk McDonald
Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator
ENGINEERING PROJECTS
Fourth Quarler 1995
I'roj.# Proje~l Name ,lan- Apr- Jul- October November December
Mar. June Aug
437 RR Bridge - 361h Avenue 10/9 Council approves Change I I/2 Bridge/Street walk- On-going discussions with
Order//3 through Crystal & Plymouth re: Phase
Project bulletin mailed !1 plans
!0/28 Street re-opened
462 42nd/Nevada Ave (Ground- 10/9 Council approves submittal 12/11 Council approves Right
waler & Soil Cleanup) of supplemental Petrofund of Entry
application Agreement with Braun Interlec
469 Retaining Walls 10/23 Council approves final pay
request
487 Public Works Salt Storage 11/27 Council approves final
pay request
499 Surface Waler Management Plan 12/Il Council approves
Change Order #1
502 City ttall Remodeling 11/27 Council approves final :
pay request
507 42nd Ave. Landscape/Maint. Continued to work with landscape architect on revised plan for
School District property and discussions held with School District
519 Utilily Installation at 6073 10/9 Council awards contract to 12/1 ! Council approves
Louisiana H&M Asphalt Change Order #1
Utilities installed
House under construction
521 1995 Street hnprovements Majority of construction completed wilh punch list
(Area 2) items to be finished in spring of 1996
522 Jaycee Park Play Equipment 12/11 Council approves final
pay request
I'ro.j.# I'rojec! Name .lan- Apr- Jul- October November December
Mar. June Aug
527 Cooper Slreet Improvemenls Majority of construction completed
528 1995 Backyard Drainage Construction in progress I !/27 Council approves
Change Order #1
I !/27 Council approves
agreement for restoration of
driveway at 8110 47th Avenue
529 47th Ave. Water Tower IO/23 Council discussion of 12/I 1 Council approves plans
project and alternatives & specs & orders
advertisement for bids
530 I.ighted Field Improvements Construction in process but not !1/13 Council approves
on schedule Change Order #1
536 Ice Arena Expansion !0/2 Staff submits Mighty Ducks ! 1/27 Council reviews concept 12/I I Council authorizes City
Grant Applications plans Manager to negotiate contract
for construction management
services
12/18 City notified that New
l-lope was not selected to
receive Mighty Ducks Grant
540 1995 Street Improvement - Area I Majority of construction completed with punch list items
to be finished in spring of 1996
542 Public Works Remodeling 12/I I Council accepts Facility
Assessment & Building
Program
Authorize architectural services
contract & preparation of plans
& specifications
I'ro.j.# IN'o. ject Name .lan- Apr- Jul- October November l)ecember
Mar. June Aug
544 ,%,tm Water Ponding al Golf 10/4 Bid opening Construction starts 12/11 Council approves
('ourse & 4400 Quebec 10/9 Award contract Change Order ffl
10/20 Pre-construclion meeting 12/Il Council authorizes
10/21 Informational mtg. held amendment to project
with residents residing adjacent
to Sunnyside Park
10/23 Council authorizes
construction of sanitary sewer
546 Cily Hall Re-Roof Work completed, testing remains
547 42nd/Xylon Ave. lnlerseclion Staff continued to coordinate with the County on this project
Upgrade (Cemetery Entrance)
550 .BallfieM Reconslruclion Preliminary plans prepared and City staff met with
New tlope Elementary School District to review plans
5.51 Reconstruction of Louisiana 12/Il Council authorizes
Ave & 3Is! Circle feasibility report & pavement
evaluation
iA~QO£ Id~.SlO~lld 'no~ ~oi e~ sdoqs)uot~ eseLt£
~6~-~SS N~ ~d¢,H ~eN
N a^~ uoi~X ~0~
'P~OOO"^eO'~o3/.~ss~.~§W
P~eUO~OW ~
LAND USE PLANNIN~ WORKSHOPS
FOR PLANNING COMMISSIONERS D ELECTED OFFICIALS
INCLUDES:
FEBRUARY--- · ANNUAL PLANNING
APRIL 1996 INSTITUTES
! · BEYOND THE BASICS
Sponsored by: ~;~ GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE
GENERAL INFORMATION
We are pleased to once again offer workshops using the forms in this brochure. Fill out one forrT
designed especially for citizen planners, for each workshop; duplicate forms if needed. Fees
Participants will enhance their knowledge of vari- will be refunded less a $15 service fee if the
ous areas of planning and, as a result, become bet- registration is cancelled 3 working days before
ter equipped to make recommendations and deci- the program. Substitutions for registered partici-
sions about the communities in which they live. pants may be made at any time. Should inclement
weather (or other circumstances beyond our con-
Program Features Include: trol) necessitate program cancellation or postpone-
' An accomplished faculty with extensive ment, registrants will be notified via announce-
backgrounds in both planning and ments on WCCO radio and other local radio sta-
instruction tions.
· Presentations focusing on current issues
and timely information FEES
· Handy reference materials designed to Registration fees for all workshops include a meal,
make your job easier refreshment breaks and handout materials. See
inside for details about group discounts for three or
If you would like to make your contribution to solv-
more participants attending "Annual Planning
lng land use problems as informed and effective as Institute.'
possible . . . REGISTER TODAY! THESE PRO-
GRAMS ARE FOR YOU. IMPORTANT: To qualify for the group discount, reg-
WHO SHOULD ATTEND? istrations must be mailed in the same envelope!
Members of planning commissions, boards of CO-SPONSORS
adjustment/appeals and governing bodies in ° Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
Minnesota cities, counties and townships. Also ° Association of Minnesota Counties
valuable for members of other advisory commis- ° Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs
sions, housing and redevelopment authorities, staff ° League of Minnesota Cities
(especially thOse without degrees in planning), real ° Minnesota Association of Townships
estate professionals, and others working in areas ° Minnesota Chapter, American Planning
related to specialized workshop topics. Association
ATTENDANCE AT THESE WORKSHOPS PRO- ° Minnesota Planning Association
rIDES ADDITIONAL BENEFITS FOR CITY ° Minnesota Planning
ELECTED OFFICIALS! FURTHER INFORMATION
If you are enrolled in the new League of Minnesota Contact Barb Wright (Registration) or Vivian Hart
Cities Leadership Institute for Elected Officials (or (Program) at Government Training Service, (612)
want to be!), these courses count toward the 40 222-7409 or Minnesota Toll Free (800) 652-9719.
credits required for Certification. Each Land Use
Planning Workshop is worth 7 credits. The r AboutGovemmentTraining~(GTS)
Certification Program was inaugurated in January, !'
1996. Application forms are available by calling I.r-.~.-~ot'Organ/z~_ .o~ .i Support for
Cathy Davidio at the League offices at (612)281- | . ~ []~:~ Excellence in Training · Award
1250. Call Sharon Klump at (612) 281-1203 with [ ~i~'L~ (American Society for Training and
questions about the Leadership Institute program. ! ~"~Devel°pment)
REAL ESTATE CREDITS G'I'S_is a public oil~ni,zalion' whose mission is to provide
innovative, comprehensive, practical training and con-
Participants of "Annual Planning Institutes' and suffing to address the changing management and lead-
''Beyond the Basics' can earn Continuing Real ership needs 0f por~'ynmkere, staff and appointed offi-
Estate Education Credits. ciale in publicly funded organizations in Minnesota
through educational ssrvi~m designed to enhance indi-
REGISTRATION/CANCELLATION vidual competency and-through organizational services
designed to strengthen group effectiveness.
Register at least 7 days prior to the workshop date
ll~l~ Printed on recycled paper.
ANNUAL PLANNING INSTITUTE: BEYOND THE BASICS
THE BASICS Thuraday, March 7, Thuraday, March 28 or
Thursday, February 22, Saturday, March 2 Saturday, April 27, 1996
or Saturday, March 23, 1996 9:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.
9:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Learn about preparing and using planning too/s to
For those new to land use planning and zoning or interested deal with a wide variety of development problems,
in a review of fundamentals plus an in-depth review of the planning process ~
INTRODUCTION TO PLANNING from proper legal notice to development of sophisti.
· Why plan? cared findings of fact.
· Players in the planning process
· Understanding the planning process PLANNING FOR DEVELOPMENT
· Elements of a comprehensive plan (Of Any Size)
BASIC PLANNING TOOLS -- PART I.' · Some definitions and background
ZONING, VARIANCES, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS · How tools relate to each other
Definitions, Rationale, Uses, Myths/Misconceptions, How · Subdivision exactions and dedications
to's, Non-conforming Uses. · Role of comprehensive plan; standards
· Public and pdvate sector perspectives
ZONING CASE STUDIES: · Implementation strategies
HYPOTHETICAL PROBLEM SOLVING · Legal issues
Participants are placed into small groups in which they · Pitfalls/words to the wise
work on rural or urban zoning issues. · Adoption requirements
YOUR LEGAL LIMITS: BASIC LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
YOUR ROLE AS A DECISION MAKER · Open Meeting Law
· The changing environment in land use · Conflict of interest
· Legal limits · Making findings of fact that support your land-use
· Procedures to keep from being sued decisions
· When something goes wrong, who's liable?
· Conflict of interest RECENT CASE LAW UPDATE
· How your attorney can help
· Video presentation: 'Rudehaven' "WHAT'S HOT, WHAT'S NOT"
· Summary of recent land use cases
HOT ISSUES t PART I: · Any proposed new legislation
ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS (Faculty Panel)
BASIC PLANNING TOOLS t PART I!: SURVIVAL SKILLS:
COPING WITH THE REALITIES OF THE PLANNING
SUBDIVISION REGULATION PROCESS
Definition, Rationale, Uses, Content, Procedures, Design
Standards, Financial Guaranties, Special Provisions. · How to (and how not to) conduct public hearings
· Legal guidelines
EVALUATION OF A SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL: · Practical tips from a local elected official
A SIMULATION
Participants work in small groups to evaluate a develop- ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREA-WIDE REVIEW
er's subdivision plan using standard planning tools ~ the
comprehensive plan, ordinances, and maps. QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION OF SPECIFIC
SITUATIONS (Faculty Panel)
HOT ISSUES -- PART I1:
ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS (Faculty Panel) FACULTY
~ BRUCE MALKERSON, Attorney, Popham, Haik,
Schobrich and Kaufman
lAN TRAQUAIR BALL, Planner and Attorney,
Rasmussen & Ball JOHN SHARDLOW, President, Dahlgren,
WILLIAM GRIFFITH, Attorney, Larkin, Hoffman, Shardlow and Uban, Inc.; planning consultant
Daly & Lindgren
ROBERT LOCKYEAR, Director of Planning and TERRY SCHNEIDER, Councilmember, Minnetonka
Public Affairs, Washington County
L, OCATIONS LOCATIONS
Thursday, February 22, 1996 - No Henn. Comm. College - Room 132 Thur~lay, March 7,1996 - Kelly Inn
7411 85th Ave. No. o Brooklyn Park, MN 55445 · (612) 424-0880 Highway 23 & 4th Ave. S. · St Cloud, MN 56302, (612) 253-0606
Saturday., March 2,1996 - Sawmill Inn - Hwy. 169 So. Thurlday, Mamh 28,199~ - Earle Brown Center - U of M St. Paul Campus
2301 Pokegama Ave. So. · Grand Rapids, MN 55744 · (218) 326-8501 1890 Buford Ave. · St. Paul, MN 55108 · (612) 624.3275
Saturday, March 23,1996- Earle Brown Center- U of M $l. Paul Campus saturday, AlXt127,199~ - No Henn. Comm. College- Room 132
1890 Buford Ave., St. Paul, MN 55108, (612) 624.3275 7411 851h Ave. No., Brooklyn Pan~, MN 55445 · (612) 424-0880
FEE[ FEE
$80 per person or $70 per person for 3 or more people $90 per person. This course has been approved for 6.5
from same jurisdiction. This course has been approved hours of continuing Real Estate Education Credit.
for six hours of Continuing Real Estate Education Credit.
HAVE WORKSHOP -- WILL CONSIDERING A GOAL-SETTING
TRAVEL! OR TEAM BUILDING SESSION
Government Training Service can customize the FOR YOUR GOVERNING BODY
workshops in this brochure and other planning topics,
especially for your community! OR AN ADVISORY COMMISSION?
YOU choose the topics, date, location, and supply the GTS can Provide trained facilitators
participants, We'll provide the faculty and materials.
who have extensive experience~
Some possible in-house planning workshop topics
include, but are not limited to: working with local governments like
· Updating Your Comprehensive Plan yours! We can also facilitate a
· Planned Unit Development
· Environmentallssues process designed to gather citizen
· Housing & Economic Development Tools
· The Art of the Deal input, to guide-problem solving, to
· Visionary Leadership help re-allocate scarce resources
· Hanging Tough in Tough Times
and-make budget decisions, or to
More and more cities and counties are taking
advange of this convenient, cost-effective way to help strengthen existing teams.
make such educational opportunities available to
those involved in local planning.
OTHER BENEFITS: Using professional, objective assis-
· The content can focuaon your current issues, tance can be even .more beneficial
· The program can be presented for a diverse gr°Up when you-are faced with these
-- advisory commission members, electa~ officials,
staff, interested citizer,~, times of reduCed resources and
· Costs can be shared by two or more jurisdictiof~..-
- tough decisions ....
Call V'n4an Hart (612) 222-7409to explore the possi-
bilities.
I
I
4'.;
_- .... * .o_ ._.
JANUARY 1996
AMERICAN
PLANNING
ASSOCIATION
Home Occupations
as Accessory Uses
With the rise of telecommuring,
telecommunicating, and the need for day
care in families with two working parents,
full-time home occupations, as well as
occupations that require some work at
home, are on the rise. This issue of Zoning
News presents a primer on the legal
framework of home occupation regulations
for communities wrestling with the changes
wrought by technology and an evolving
work~brce.
Accessory uses are ordinarily permitted
in residential zoning districts, provided Home occu?arions, such as this arr gallery in rural Maine, are subject to an
they are incidental, secondary, or array of local ordinances governing accessory uses of residential properry.
subordinate to the primaryy permitted use
of the property.. It is well recognized that a professional office occupations while others refer to home occupations broadly as a
or other home occupational use can constitute an accessory single category of accessory use. Both types of ordinances
use in a residential dwelling. In fact, most zoning ordinances enumerate various standards that home occupational uses must
specifically permit such accessory uses in residential districts meet before they will be permitted as accesso .ry uses.
provided that the profession or customary home occupation
is conducted in the house occupied by the worker and other Interpretation of Zoning Ordinance
applicable criteria are met. Judicial interpretation of whether a home occupation is
Home occupation provisions of residential zoning ordinances permitted as an accessory, use will ~bcus largely on the language of
generally seek to accommodate professional business uses that the local zoning ordinance. Issues concerning ordinance
are reasonably compatible with the residential districts in which construction will often settle the question of whether a particular
they are located. Thus, home occupations are generally limited home occupation is valid under the terms of the local ordinance.
to those uses that may be conducted within a residential When the language is susceptible to more than one
dwelling without substantially changing the appearance or interpretation, courts will give weight to the interpretation that is
condition of the residence or accessory structures. If the business least restrictive of the rights of the property, owner, while staying
use of residential property dominates, it will not be permitted as within the confines of the ordinance. Still, if the local zoning
a valid accessory use. body has substantial evidence to back its interpretation, courts
will almost always accord deference to that interpretation.
Ordinance Definitions of When an ambiguity exists, the principles of ordinance
Home Occupation Accessory Uses construction employed by the court will depend on the type of
Along with the list of permitted uses for residential zones, most provisions formulated to address home occupations. When a
zoning ordinances contain provisions for accessory, uses that broadly worded provision permits such occupations if they fit
explicitly, or at least implicitly, address incidental use of the the general definition of accessory use, the court will generally
property for professional or occupational use. Some ordinances hold that the provision allows the occupation if it is customarily
simply provide broad language that implies permission to incidental and secondary, to the primary, use of the proper ,t7 as a
conduct certain home occupations. If a home occupation fits the dwelling unit.
broad definition of accessory use, it may be permitted depending When the ordinance specifically lists permitted and
on the scope and intensity of the occupational use. These broadly prohibited home occupations, parties will usually ask the court
worded provisions demand that home occupations conform to to determine the validity of a home occupation that is not
the general standards applicable to all types of accessory uses: listed. For example, in one case, the local ordinance specifically
principally, that they are customarily incidental to the dominant prohibited barber/beauty shops and automobile repair shops,
use of the property, as a residential dwelling, but real estate offices were not listed. The court concluded that
On the other hand, many ordinances specifically address the ordinance could not be construed as prohibiting the
home occupations as a subcarego .fy of accessory, uses, including operation of a real estate business from an individual's home
more specific additional criteria for home occupations. Some of when such an office was not otherwise listed in the prohibition.
these ordinances permit or exclude specific .types of home [ Visliset v. Board of Adjusrmenr of Cedar Rapids, 3v2 N.W.2d
316 ilowa App, 1985).j Further, another provision permitted consultant or real estate professional who knows the history of
certain home occupations, including facilities used bY a permitted uses in the area. Landowners may tN' to present
physician, surgeon, dentist, lawyer, clerD'man, or ortner evidence that local officials have issued building, occupancy, o
professional person, for emergency consultation or treatment, home occupation permits to other landowners with the same or
but not for the general practice of their profession. Finding that similar type of home occupational use. Their goal is to establish
a realtor was a "professional person," and that the realtor's use that it has been a customary practice to allow certain types of
of her home for calls and contacts with clients was the type of home occupations as accessory, uses.
consultation use contemplated by the ordinance, the court The intensity of the use and nature of the activities
concluded that the home occupation was valid, conducted in connection with the home occupation will often
Another important issue may arise in home occupation cases determine whether a particular type of home occupation is
when the local ordinance contains separate definitions for subordinate to the primary, use of residential property. The
accessory uses and home occupations. Under these intensity of business use of residential property will often
circumstances, the court will need to examine the ordinance's indicate whether the home occupation is the secondary or
purpose and intent and consider whether the accessory use predominant use.
definition and home occupation sections are to be construed
together in light of the stated purpose set forth in the ordinance. Impact on Rosldonfiu! Character
[See Plaits v. Zoning Hearing Board and Borough of Bradford A primary purpose behind single-family zoning is the
Woods, 654 A.2d 149 (Pa. Commw. 1995).] preservation of neighborhood character. Accordingly, another
factor considered when determining the validity of a home
Validity of Home Occupation occupation is whether that use will adversely impact the
A number of relevant factors contribute to the determination of neighborhood's residential character. A home occupation that is
whether a home occupation is a valid accessory use. The detrimental to residential character may properly be excluded.
prerequisites for a landowner to establish the right to conduct a To minimize the adverse effects of home occupations on
home occupation on residential property, should be contained in residential character, some ordinances require that they be
the applicable zoning ordinance. The degree to which the conducted entirely within the residence, eliminating outdoor
necessary criteria are spelled out depends on how detailed the business activities. Similar restrictions may be based on
language is. Broadly worded provisions may permit all types of neighborhood aesthetics, such as prohibitions against the display
home occupations as long as they fit the general definition of of business signs on the property's exterior or outdoor storage of
accessory, use. This type of ordinance requires that the business equipment.
landowner show that the home occupation is customarily
incidental and secondary to the primary use of the property as a Floor Area/Size Restrictions
single-family dwelling. Other ordinances may require that the Some ordinances restrict the maximum floor area that the home
landowner make this showing in addition to satisfying other occupation may use. Typically, these provisions limit home
criteria specific to home occupation accessory uses. This latter occupation use in terms of a certain percentage of the floor area
t?pe, which is more prevalent, can be further broken down into of the dwelling unit. They also may be phrased in terms of
two general subcategories: ordinances that specifically list maximum allowable square footage. Such a requirement is
permitted and prohibited home occupations, and those that do designed to ensure that the home occupation remains
not identify different home occupations by name. In either of subordinate to the primary, use as a dwelling. [See Reynolds
these common types, most enumerate criteria that all permitted Zoning Hearing Board of Abington Township, 134 Pa. Commw.
home occupations must meet in order to be valid as accessory 382, 578 A.2d 629 (1990).]
uses in residential zones. Of course, proper calculation of the floor area used for the
home occupation is necessary.. Determining which areas should be
Incidental and Secondary to Primary Use included in the floor-area calculation is not always cut and dried.
The requirement that the home occupation use be incidental Should hallways and staircases be considered part of the floor area
and secondar?, to the primary use of the residential property is for the home occupation? The exact percentage or square footage
the least clearly defined of the factors used to establish the allocated to the home occupation may be subject to debate.
occupation's validity since its proof depends on the fact-specific For example, in Town of Sullivans Island v. Byrum, 306 S.C.
nature and scope of the occupation in relation to the dominant 539, 413 S.E.2d 325 (1992), there were conflicting views over
use. To satisfy this requirement, the landowner must put forth whether an upstairs hallway should be included when calculating
facts that show that the intensity of the accessory, use is clearly the percentage. The trial court excluded the hallway from the
secondarv or subordinate to the use of the property as a calculation, so that the use did not exceed the 25 percent
residence. Further, the landowner may need to offer proof that limitation required by the ordinance. However, on appeal, the
the particular home occupation is one that is "customarily" South Carolina Supreme Court concluded that the trial court
associated with single-family dwellings, had erred. The court found that all of the upstairs rooms in the
Courts may simply take notice of general experience as to dwelling were part of the bed and breakfast operation, thus the
what business occupations are customary in relation to only use of the upstairs hallway was for the same operation.
dwellings. Evidence of customary home occupations may be When the court added the square footage of the hallway into the
established through expert witness testimony from a planning floor-area calculation, the use exceeded the limitation.
Onsite Residency Requirements
31drk De~m~son is an attorn~ m prtt,ate practice in Westwood, Another common criterion for establishing a home occupation
.Vow Jerso'. lie ts the aut/~or of numerous books and articles on accessory use is the requirement that the landowner reside on
zo~zmg, la,d use. a,d e~wtronmenral law issues, the premises where the use is being conducted. This residency
2
requirement helps to ensure that the property's primarV use is ordinance, the landowner and municipalitT may be forced to
residential. Onsite residency prevents the landowner from resolve their conflicting opinions through litigation. To avotd this
converting the propert5' into a business use. If a landowner does costly alternative, municipalities must do their best to spell out
not reside on the premises, it may be found that the home clearly the standards they wilt use to evaluate home occupations.
occupation is not secondary' to the primaU' use of the property.
for residential purposes.
Nonresident Employee Prohibitions Calling on
Some home occupation provisions contain specific limitations the Militia
on the status and number of employees that may be employed
by a home-based occupation. Obviously, such a limitation James Dacev is fighting for his home. A New York appeals
depends on the language of the applicable ordinance. Some court has ordered him to remove his mobile home from his land
ordinances may prohibit employment altogether or state such a because it violates the town zoning laws of Perry,, New York.
restriction as a prohibition against %mploymenr of anyone in But he refuses to do so, and the state is charging him 550 a day
the home other than the dwelling occupant." [Ci{y of Pekin v. until he complies.
Kaminski, 155 Ill.App.3d 826, 508 N.E.2d 776 (1987).] Most In 1992, Dacey applied for a permit ar a zoning board of
ordinances, however, allow for limited employment of workers appeals hearing, requesting permission ro replace his existing
in connection with the home occupation. Most of these impose mobile home with a larger unit. His application was denied.
a residency requirement on all workers, and some additionally Dacey's home on Van Valkenburg Road is on land zoned
require that the employees be family members who reside on the agricultural/residential, which allows one- and two-family units.
premises. Some ordinances will permit employment of Dacev claims that there are other mobile homes in this area that
nonresident workers, but they usually limit their number, do not comply with town zoning laws but are allowed to remain.
No matter which .type of employment provision is contained in He then applied for a use variance, asking to become an
the ordinance, this condition may determine whether the home exception to the law, and that application was also denied. The
occupation is valid. For example, in a Missouri case, St. Louis court ruled that Dacey was unable to demonstrate that he would
County v. Kienzle, 844 S.W.2d 118 (Mo. App. 1992), the court suffer an "economic hardship" if he were denied the variance.
found that the landowners' operation of an insurance and bonding Dacey appealed and was granted a rehearing. At the
business was, for the most part, not at odds with the definition of rehearing, no further information was brought forth, and he
home occupation. There was no sign or any other display indicat- was again denied the application. In supporting the zoning
lng that a business was being conducted inside the home, no board of appeals decision, the trial court ruled that Dacey had
clients went to the residence to conduct business, and no products to remove his home within 60 days. He sought appeal in the
or goods in trade were sold from the premises. Nevertheless, the appellate division, where he was ordered to remove the home
court was compelled to conclude that the landowners' employ- within 30 days or face a $50 daily fine.
ment of two nieces who did not live on the premises violated the In an effort to rally support behind his cause, Dacev has
ordinance's home occupation employment limitation, which contacted local and national militia groups including the
allowed employment of only resident family members. Michigan Militia and the Chemung Coun~ Militia. Other
When it is unclear whether a particular home occupation militia groups throughout the country, have also rallied to help
accessory use is permitted under the terms of the local zoning Dacey keep his home.
Finding Home Occupotkmoi Use Yard
· Winnie v. O'Brien, 17l A.D.2d 997, 567 tV.. ES.2d 943 (S. Ct. · Baker v. Pol~inelli, 177A. D.2d 844, 576 N. ES. 2d 460 (S. Ct.
1991) (ordinance definition of home occu~a.ti~n was broa~ general 1991) (it was reasonable/bt the zoning board to find that the
dance studio was more extensive than what was intended to be
one that included installation of ak, ntal chair), permitted under the ordinance as a hon.e occupation).
· City of White Plains v. Deruvo, 159A. D.2d534, 552 N. ES.2d
399 (S. Ct. 1990) (ute ofresidonce in connection with limousine · Cassidy v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of City of Pit, burgh, 559
A.2d 610 (Pa. Con.n.w. 1989) (beauty shop was not home
service constituted per~ni~sible customary home occupation), occupation within meaning of general zoning ordinance permitting
· Osborn v. PlanningBoardoftht Town of Colonic, 146~D.2d home occupations in residentially zoneddistricts).
838, 536 N. Y.S.2d 244 (S. Cg 1989) (social worker}proposed
home office use/hr the practice of her profeuion was not the · Franchi v. Zoning Hearing Board of the Borough of New Brighton,
543 A.2d 239 (Pa. Con.n.w. 1988) (landowner} accounting office
don.inant use of the premises), did not qualij~ as a valid accessory use because it was not secondary
Finding Home Occupational Use Invalid to the primary use as a residence).
· Holsheimer v. Colun.bia County, 890 P.2d 447 (Ore. App. 1995) · Rendin v. Zoning Hearing Board ofthe Borough of Media, 488
(landowner} storage of equipment and paving materiala fbr a A.2d3 91 (Pa. Con*n*w. 1985) (zoning ordinance permitted
paving business did not qualify as home occupation), professional offices in a residential district only if the practitioner
· Criscione v. City of Albany Board of Zoning Appeals, 185 ago resided in the building).
A.D.2d 420, 585 N. Y.S. 2d 821 (S. Ct. 1992) (law office not · Page v. Zoning Hearing Board of Walker Township, 471A.2d
clearly incidental and secondary since lawyer did not reside in 1348 (Pa. Con*n*w. 1984) (vehick inspection and repair business
the dwelling unit), was not activity customarily associated with dwellings).
BOOK REVIEW~ proposed solutions were incorporated There are several valuable aspects of
~ . ~~...~ ~into the project. The Massachusetts the book which make it a worthwhile
oesignin the Ci · A Ouide ~r ,~avo. · ·
,g,., ~: . , ]', , , j Hous~n~ F~nance A~enc~, for examt)le read. The checklists and tips are prac-
cares aha t'uotic cmzciats, Dy ,%flele/ . = % -' , ~ '
.*, - -:: - Jcreateo a program wnere "ouafitv oe- tical and useful. Several examples are
,r~e,et Ba,cow. Is, land Press, 1995,~/sign. was defined and then~man~lated provided to stimulate creative brain-
l~a pp tpaper) / for affordable housing projects bv. in- storming. Quotes from public officials
BY BARBARA DACY, AICP corporating design elements into the may come in handv for a presentation
Whv does a Wal-Mart have a brick competitive scoring system, on design issues, ff a planner is gear-
facade in one community and the t.vpi- The interest and pace of the book lng up for a proiect, the book's focus
cai blue rock face block i'n another? Isslows in the middle chapters about on process will be helpful in shaping
one more appealing than the other? grant programs, creating opportunities the project's review schedule.
Brick or blue rock face block reallv for local artists, and integrating design Readers mav become frustrated with
isn't the issue according to Adele 'Fleet into the development process. The the middle of the book and overlook
Bacow. "Design is a process of problem tone shifts from a guidebook approach the last two chapters. More emphasis
solving and creating solutions". Good to a retelling of what programs exist on financial issues is also warranted.
design, she writes, is a result of a pro- where. Substantive material on fund- While the book may not have to be on
cess which contains a clearly stated lng mechanisms and cost implications every, planner's sheif, it is a good, read-
objective, consideration of various de- is also missing. The reader ends up able studv on design and the process.
sign alternatives, and a solution which asking the question %o how did it get The reader can then decide what a
best meets the stated objective. Bacow paid for?" Bacow does, however, pro- Wal-Mart should look like in his/her
also emphasizes that design needs to vide a useful list of tips for selectingcommunity!
relate to the surrounding neighbor- designers and also argues effectivelv for Barbara Dacy is Cornrnuni~ Development
hood, considering adjacent uses, build- public agency, leaders to embrace and Director for the Cify of Fridlev.
lng scale, color, t.vpe and texture of ma- support the design process. -
terials, height, density, form, .symmetry. The book closes with two nice chapters ' ~ ~~A
and environmental conditions. It may on education and practical tips for a
be that the blue Wal-Mart looks fine in design process. Bacow proposes two ~~ jeim.~t bY the Minnesota
one context but the brick Wal-Mart audiences for education: "public lead- [ .~m~ta~.(MPA) and the
may be better suited in another, ers who currentlv make the decisions [' i ~ ~/amrican
Bacow, currentlv senior vice president affecting our built environment and ~?-t~/~=~O~t. pA)'
of a major consulting firm is Boston, children who will soon become the · .. :;:
leaders or active citizens who can
Massachusetts, relies on twenty years change the world around us." '~{b i~ m~d~the ~ter
of urban design experience to present a ~ ~ ~AI~ mmatm, s, send to:
guidebook to achieving "good design". An education program should start
The book begins with three well-paced with the mayor in order to help inspire ~ i~:!, ~ ~
other members of a community's lead- · :~ ~ ~
chapters about influencing design, ad-
vocating for design, and incorporating ership. The author cites the Niavors' I~,~ ~~
Institute on City. Design as a go6d ~ IL
design elements into public works method to begin the education process ~' ~ MPA ~, send to:
projects. Especially useful is the sec- (the institute is sponsored bv the Na-
ond chapter which provides quotes -
from public officials from around the tional Endowments for the Arts). ~ ~ ~
country who provide convincing an- Hearing and seeing about other suo ~ ~ ~1t~ ~
swers tb "whv it can't be done", and in ceases is inspiring, and can sometimes ~ ~ ~
general, speak to the benefits of the turn into specific action when the ~ M/amm~ ndeoa~ articles,
design process. Mavor returns home. ammmammm,/~t~rs, picna~
"All mayors should be concerned with Working with schools to develop de- :. ~ (e~t/fw ~/f~0. ~)br t/~
the aesthetic effect of their city on sign curricula is also recommended. ~ ~ is lmmmy 2.2. P/ease
both visitors and residents. Design is Suggested teaching tools include using ~ ~ ~ an/BM~~ dis-
the first thing you see and the last existing projects for "hands-on" learn- lz, tte, ~ m ~ r~um
thing you remember."- Mavor David lng, finding local architects or other ~ $, I1~, E~
practitioners to help teach and inspire, ~ ~t ~ ~
Armstrong, Natchez, Mississippi. providing walking tours of neighbor- · Ilimm~, ~
Bacow then presents examples of suo hoods or other projects, and asking the ~ ~,lmr (rail
cessfu] projects where design issues students to draw or "vision" a particu-
were identified early in the process andlar place or building. ~-~:.
Page 2 -- i)ecembcr 15, 1995 Z.B. Z.B. December 15, 1995 --- Page 3
Adult Entertainment -- City Revokes License on Sexually Oriented occur. Although members of the public might strongly oppose the sexual bchav-
Business' Opening Day ior expected at Hooters, it was more important to prevent any infringement of
ltooter.; Inc. v. City of Texarkana, 897 F. Supp. 940 (Texas) 1995 constitutional rights.
(_;oleman was the sole officer, director, and shareholder of Hooters inc. (a Hooters had a substantial chance of winning at trial. The evidence pre-
Texas corporation unrelated to the national restaurant chain). She wanted to sented al the hearing suggested that the correctional center did not contain a
operate a restaurant with nude dancing in the city of Texarkana, Texas. "church," as that term was defined by the ordinance. A church had to be a
On Jan. 25, 1995, Goleman applied for a "License for a Sexually Oriented building. To call the worship space a church would mean either that Ihe church
Business" as required by a city ordinance. She also paid a nonrefundable "building" moved every time the worship space moved, or that the entire
$4{}{} application fee. The application stated the business would be an "[a]duit correctional center was a "church." The stated purpose for the ordinance's
lc}abater, or food service, private or public parties and meeling area" called distance requirement also suggested the worship space was not a church --
iiooters Inc., d/b/a Executive Room. Apparently, the nude dancing would be the ordinance sought to prevent sexually oriented businesses from having a
the main feature lhat drew customers into the restaurant, dehumanizing effect on people attending the family-often.ted activilies offered
Under the city ordinance, an adult cabaret was a nightclub or restaurant by churches. The correctional center's services were not family oriented; in
that featured nudity (real or simulated), live performances in which "speci- fact, family members were not allowed to participate. No city officials involved
fled anatomical areas" were exposed, or films or videos showing sexual activ- with Hooters' license even knew the services were offered, and the police
ily or "specified anatomical areas." Sexually oriented businesses were not chief did not find out about them until three days before revoking the license.
allowed within 1,000 feet'of a church or school. The ordinance defined a The inmates who participated in worship services were incarcerated, so they
church as "a building in which persons regularly assemble for religious wot- were not subjected to Hooters' "dehumanizing influence."
ship and activities." Even if Hooters failed to prove there was no church in the correctional
Two days after Goleman filed the application, the city's planning admini- center, it might successfully claim at trial that the city's conduct prevented it
slrator sent her a letter that stated the location was not within 1,000 feet of a from revoking the license. Hooters' president paid a nonrefundable applica-
chnrch or school. On Feb. 2, the city's police chief issued Goleman a license, tion fee, and the city issued her a license. Hooters then spent almost $1(){},0{)0
Goleman spent nearly $100,000 remodeling. On May 8, 1995, the night remodeling the space. When the business was about to open, the police chief
Goleman planned to open the business, the police chief revoked the license, decided to revoke the license.
The chief said the business was within 1,000 feet of a church. The alleged Coe ~. City of Dallas, 266 S.W. 2d 181 (1953).
church was inside the Bowie County Correctional Center. Rosenthal v. City of Dallas, 211 S.W. 2d 279 (1948).
liooters sued Ihe city. }looters claimed the city -- by revoking the license
-- violated its free speech aod due process rights under the state and federal Nonconforming Use~Neighbors Challenge Conversion From Two-Family
conslitutions. Home to Battered Women's Shelter
Hooters also asked the court to order the city to let the business open and Neighbors Together Homeowners & Tenants Association v. Neufeld,
operate under the license pending a trial. It said that although the county 631 N.Y.S.2d 428 (New York) 1995
could legally provide religious services for its inmates, it could not fund a A two-family house in the village of Mamaroneck, N.Y., was a noncon-
church. During the hearing on Hooters' requested order, there was testimony forming use. My Sisters' Place inc. wanted to convert the house into a shelter
that the correctional center used 2,4{}{} of its 32,000 square feet for worship, for battered women and their children, and applied to the village building
preaching, and singing, ttowever, the actual space it used for these religious inspector for permission to do so. The inspector denied the application.
services got shifted around and was used for other things as well. My Sisters' Place appealed to the village's Zoning Board of Appeals. Under
DECISION: Motion granted, the village zoning code, the board could grant the application if there was
ttooters was entitled to an order letting it operate pending trial, evidence the new use would be less nonconforming than the old. After hold-
The nude dancing at the business was protected expression under the First ing a public hearing and considering many documents supporting and oppos-
Amendment to the federal Constitution. To deny tlooters the right to have lng the plan, the board found the shelter would be less of a nonconforming
nude dancing, even for a short time, would deprive it of its "primary drawing } use and more in harmony with the area.
card." This harm outweighed the minimal threat to the city if the business The Neighbors ~lbgether Homeowners & Tenants Association asked a court
wc~c allowed to be open until trial. In that short period, there would not be to review the board's decision. The court dismissed the association's case.
enough time for Ihe secondary effecls about which the cily was concerned to The association appealed.
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 '~
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 2, 1996
City Hall, 7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER The New Hope Planning Commission met in regular session pursuant to
due call and notice thereof; Vice-Chairman Sonsin called the meeting to
order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL Present: Landy, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cassen, Stulberg, Damiani
Absent: Oelkers
Also Present: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Steve Sondrall,
City Attorney, Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant
ELECTION OF Vice-Chairman Sonsin stated the first order of business for the January
OFFICERS meeting is to elect officers for the coming year. Vice-Chairman Sonsin
then opened the floor for nominations for officers. Commissioner
Underdahl nominated Bill Sonsin as chairman, seconded by Commissioner
Landy, and was unanimously approved by acclamation. Commissioner
Landy nominated Sharon Cassen for Vice-Chair, seconded by
Commissioner Stulberg, and was unanimously approved by acclamation.
Commissioner Landy nominated Commissioner Underdahl for Third Officer,
seconded by Commissioner Cassen, and was unanimously approved by
acclamation.
CONSENT ITEMS No Consent Items.
PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Sonsin introduced for discussion Item 3.1, Request for Sign
PC 95-31 Variances/Approval of Comprehensive Sign Plan to Allow Wall and Ground
Item 3.1 Signs that Exceed Sign Code Requirements in Number and Size, 7709
42nd Avenue North, Autohaus of Minneapolis/Thomas 8oettcher,
Petitioner.
Mr. McDonald stated that the petitioner's representative was in the
audience, however the petitioner was not in attendance yet. Chairman
Sonsin asked for a motion to table Planning Case 95-31 until the petitioner
arrived.
MOTION Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Underdahl, to
Item 3.1 table until later in the meeting Planning 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.
Voting in favor: Landy, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cassen, Stulberg,
Damiani
Voting against: None
Absent: Oelkers
Motion carried.
PC 95-20 Chairman Sonsin introduced for informal discussion Item 3.2,
Item 3.2 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
New Hope Planning Commission - I - January 2, 1996
Hope, Petitioner.
Chairman Sonsin pointed out that this was not a formal public hearing, but
an informal discussion with the Commissioners, staff and City Forester.
If an agreement can be reached, a formal public hearing will be held at the
February Planning Commission meeting.
Mr. Brixius informed the Commission that this ordinance was a
recommendation that originated with the Citizen Advisory Commission last
May. The CAC requested that staff review the current regulations
pertaining to the landscaping requirements in the zoning ordinance. Five
recommendations came from that Committee including: (1) Eliminate the
list of suitable plant material from the ordinance §4.033(4)(b)(iv); (2)
Update the current list of trees prohibited on the public right of way and
include reasons why these trees should be excluded; (3) Establish a list of
trees prohibited on private prop. erty, including why those trees should be
on the list; (4) Establish an ordinance to set up a hazardous tree program;
and (5) Establish a boulevard tree maintenance program.
Mr. Brixius stated that staff responded to these recommendations. First,
the list of suitable plant materials was reviewed and staff was in
agreement that this list should be eliminated. The current list is limited and
outdated and puts unreasonable restrictions upon landscape designers as
far as what might be planted/placed within a property. There are species
and plants not currently listed that would be valuable additions within the
City of New Hope. Staff's recommendation would be to eliminate this
section of the ordinance by repealing it and establishing a preferred tree list
that would be used as a guideline rather than adopting this list by
ordinance. It would be available at City Hall and administered by the City
Forester. The second recommendation was to update of the current list
of prohibited trees on public right-of-way including the reason why the
trees are not allowed. There are a number of reasons why trees are not
permitted including: roots, poor tree strength, potential overhangs,
breaking of limbs falling on cars, etc. These reasons were outlined in the
planning report. After reviewing the list, it was determined a number of
trees should be added to this list including the female "Ginkgo" and Black
Locust. Some of the trees on the list should be deleted such as the Red
Maple, Tree of Heaven, Northern Catalpa and Elm varieties. The list of
trees for right-of-ways should be more specific as to what is or isn't
allowed. Mr. Brixius stated that it is important to understand that the only
areas this section of code deals with are the trees in the public right-of-
ways, under City control, and does not pertain to any areas of the yard
(private property).
Mr. Brixius continued saying the third recommendation was trees
prohibited on private property and reasons why the trees are on the list.
After much debate among City staff, the recommendation was not to try
to establish a list of prohibited trees on private property as enforcement of
this would be very difficult. When dealing with public right-of-way, the
City has control of the right-of-way and it can be effectively monitored and
enforced. However, when dealing with private properties and disputes
between neighbors, the situation becomes difficult and more problems
would be created for the City. Staff feels that establishing a hazardous
tree program, reCommendation four, would be difficult to maintain,
especially on private property. It would be difficult for City staff to
determine what is a hazardous tree, when it becomes hazardous, what the
potential impacts are on the property, the location of the tree and impact
New Hope Planning Commission - 2 - January 2, 1996
on surrounding land. These areas leave the City open to much exposure
and staff feels it would be inappropriate to get into that position. The final
recommendation was to establish a boulevard tree maintenance program.
Staff is in agreement with this recommendation, however this is a Public
Works budget item rather than a zoning ordinance element. Therefore, this
recommendation is not being dealt with at this time.
Mr. Brixius summarized the changes saying there needs to be some
definition on overstory and understory trees: deletion of provisions for
acceptable boulevard trees; amend the prohibited trees within the public
right-of-way by deleting some and expanding other varieties. The
provision of §4.033(4)(iii)(bb-cc) allows for some trees to be located within
the public right-of-way or prohibited within the public right-of- ay and
should be approved by the City Forester. These include Coniferous variety
of trees and some lower or understory shrubs. Upon further discussion
with the City Attorney and staff, the conclusion was reached that this
provision be deleted from the ordinance, rather than leaving the decision
totally to the discretion of the City Forester, as there are already problems
dealing with trees of this type in the "site trinagle" on corner lots. Mr.
Brixius explained further that the City would also offer to its residents a list
of preferred trees as a guideline at City Hall which will not be a part of the
ordinance.
Commissioner Underdahl questioned whether the City could provide
guidelines for trees on private property. Mr. Brixius answered that the list
of preferred trees is what is suggested as far as guidelines. Staff felt it
best not to prohibit specific species because then the City is also
responsible for enforcement. The guidelines are the preferred tree list and
outlines all the trees that staff feels are preferable in the City and it will
exclude those that are not popular due to hardiness of the tree or not
appropriate for the Minnesota climate. These guidelines will include
private and public properties.
Chairman Sonsin questioned whether the Design & Review Committee had
a chance to review the changes. Commissioner Cassen felt that the
changes being recommended are favorable. Commissioner Stulberg agreed
that it makes sense to not try to regulate what goes on private property.
The Design & Review Committee can review the landscaping schedule on
a case by case basis and determine if the plantings are appropriate and in
line with City ordinances. Commissioner Damiani questioned how the
public would obtain this list of preferred trees. Mr. Brixius explained that
through publications, i.e., the City Report, SunPost and word of mouth,
the public can be made aware that there is a handout listing the preferred
trees. Mr. McDonald interjected that this will definitely be reported in the
City newsletter. Commissioner Cassen agreed that an article in the City
Report would be a good idea and also to include this information in the
New Resident Packet, or send to developers in the area. Chairman Sonsin
stressed that this information should be included in the next City Report
as residents will soon be thinking of spring and gardening.
Mr. Schuster, City Forester, added that the goal of this ordinance change
is to simplify things. Residents may not be aware of the scientific names
of trees as listed in the ordinance. If there are any questions, they can
contact the City Forester for clarification. Nurseries usually sell trees by
their common name, however they buy trees by their scientific name so
this information is available at the nursery. Some of the trees on the
preferred list are not as common as others and it may not be known if the
New Hope Planning Commission - 3 - January 2, 1996
tree is hardy enough to withstand the Minnesota winters unless someone
takes a chance and tries to grow a lesser known variety. Rather than
including the tree list in the ordinance, it makes sense to just-ha~e this
information available at City Hall for the public. The list will be a useful
tool in the long run. Chairman Sonsin questioned if the City is actively
trying new species to see what grows in Minnesota and if there was
written information that can be shared with the homeowner or does the
homeowner need to talk to the City Forester. Mr. Schuster informed the
Commission that the City does not do a lot of planting, but that he does
look for new species that will do well here. The Green Ash and Silver
Maple do well in New Hope.
Commissioner Underdahl wondered if the hazardous trees will be listed,
like the Ginkgo. Mr. Schuster replied that the preferred list instructs
residents to take into consideration the hardiness of the tree, mature size,
tolerance to salt, pest disease resistance, cleanliness, litter problems,
rooting habits, maintenance requirements and soil compatibility. Any tree
will fail eventually, however any one or combination of these items will
reduce the life of the tree. A homeowner should know the type of soil in
their yard an~l take into consideration some of the other requirements of
the tree they are planting and a lot of hazardous trees will be eliminated.
This information will be included with the tree list.
Commissioner Cassen suggested that if the list of preferred trees is listed
in the City Report, staff should also include information on site lines, not
only when the tree is planted but when the tree is mature. Chairman
Sonsin added that nurseries give information on how close trees can be
planted, but there are times the tree gets bigger than anticipated and this
should be considered at the time of planting. Mr. McDonald pointed out
that this is the reason' coniferous trees were deleted from the boulevard
because the City is constantly dealing with the site triangle problem and
asking residents to trim back the large pines.
Chairman Sonsin commented that there will be formal public hearing on
this issue at the February Planning Commission meeting and if any of the
Commissioners have additional suggestions before that time, contact staff
or the Planning Consultant. Chairman Sonsin inquired about the height of
overstory trees being 25 feet or more and understory trees being 25 feet
or less. He suggested that this point be clarified so there can be no
questions raised in the future.
PC 95-31 Chairman Sonsin requested a motion to remove from table Planning Case
Item 3.1 95-31.
MOTION Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Cassen, to
Item 3.1 remove from table Planning 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, Autohaus
of Minneapolis/Thomas Boettcher, Petitioner,
Voting in favor: Landy, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cassen, Stulberg,
Damiani
Voting against: None
Absent: Oelkers
Motion carried.
Mr. McDonald stated that the petitioner is requesting sign variances/
New Hope Planning Commission - 4 - January 2, 1996
approval of a Comprehensive Sign Plan to allow wall and ground signs that
exceed Sign Code requirements in number and size. 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 building. Also a CUP was issued for a drive-through window this
past summer for Universal Color Lab to move into the Kuppenheimer
building across the street from the Autohaus site. Universal Color has
since moved out of the Autohaus site and into their own building.
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. Some of the proposed signs exceed the
requirements of the Sign Code, therefore this application has been made
for variances. This particular site is zoned B-3, Auto Oriented, and
surrounding businesses are basically commercial in nature with the
exception of industrial zoning to the south.
Mr. McDonald reported that the Sign Code requirements are outlined in the
report. The Sign Code establishes criteria for signs that are accessory to
single occupancy and multiple occupancy businesses. Those requirements
are basically the same and staff have applied the multiple occupancy
standards to this request because there are going to be three auto-related
businesses in this building -- AutoBody Plus, Autohaus Sales, and
Autohaus Repair. Each will have a different entrance and different
signage. The ordinance states that "when a single building is devoted to
two or more businesses, a comprehensive sign plan for the entire building
shall be submitted." It is the City's intention to establish general
requirements for the overall building only, thus providing the building
owner with both the flexibility and responsibility to deal with his individual
tenants on their specific ground signs.
Mr. McDonald continued saying that multiple occupancy structures may
erect ground signs that identify each separate and distinct occupancy. No
more than two ground signs are permitted on any lot and only one ground
sign if the building contains more than one wall sign over 10 square feet.
The maximum sign area shall not exceed 75 square feet, a height
requirement of 20 feet and a setback of 10 feet off the property line.
Autohaus is proposing to install two signs on one pylon. Each sign would
be 72 square feet and would be installed on the current support structure.
The support structure would be revised and radius end shrouds would be
added. The total height of the sign would be 20 feet. The bottom sign
would be 72 square feet (12' x 6') and would read "AutoBody Plus" with
red lettering, a black background and blue accent stripes. The top sign
would also be 72 square feet (12' x 6') and state "Autohaus Sales and
Leasing" with white letters with red accents and "ASE Certified Auto
Service" with blue letters. The entire sign would have a black background.
The Sign Code states that only one 75 square foot ground sign is allowed
if the building contains more than one wall sign over 10 square feet. The
wall sign package is more than 10 square feet, and if the petitioner wants
two ground signs, a variance is needed from the Sign Code. If the
petitioner proposed the two ground signs and wall signs of only eight
square feet, a variance would not be required. In a discussion with the
Planning Consultant, he indicated that the intent of the code is to either
allow a business a lot of signage on a ground sign or a lot of signage on
the wall, one or the other. The ground sign needs a variance because
New Hope Planning Commission - 5 - January 2, 1996
there are two signs. Mr. McDonald added that there is an existing third
ground sign on the site from the Animal Hospital, which is against Code,
and any granting of a variance needs to include removal of this' sign.
Mr. McDonald next discussed the wall sign package. The City Code states
that the total allowable wall sign area for a multiple occupancy structure
shall not exceed 15% of the combined wall surfaces and no individual
tenant identification sign may exceed 100 square feet in area, Autohaus
is proposing six wall signs. The three on the front of the building would
include one sign of 16 square feet (2' x 8') for AutoBody Plus; one 30
square foot (30" x 12') Autohaus Sales & Leasing sign and one similar 30
square foot sign for Autohaus Certified Auto Service. In discussing with
the Planning Consultant, the opinion is that these signs are alright because
they are under the 100 square foot requirement. The sign plan for the
east elevation shows 9 square feet, however the measurements on the
sign calculates to 16 square feet. In discussing this with the consultant
for Autohaus before the meeting, he indicated that this sign is eight square
feet. Revised plans should be submitted to show correct sizes of the
signs. Mr. McDonald pointed out that the Sign Code states that delivery
signs not exceeding nine square feet may be located on side or rear walls
of the structure. The Commission will need to determine whether or not
these are considered delivery signs. The Sign Code also does not identify
how many delivery signs are allowed. Therefore, if the sign on the east
wall is indeed eight square feet and the Commission considers it to be a
delivery sign, it would not require a variance. There are two signs on the
west side of the building. One sign has the same discrepancy in the plan
and may be eight square feet for AutoBody Plus. The sign for Autohaus
Certified Auto Service is a 30 square foot sign and would require a
variance. In addition there would be two additional awning signs with the
company name on each awning.
Mr. William Cragg, Signcrafters, representing the sign company came
forward to answer questions. The smaller signs in question over the doors
are for customers to identify which tenant is in each space. The actual
signage for Autohaus will be a little larger than the other two businesses.
The lettering for the sign for Autohaus Service could be changed to allow
a smaller sign for that entrance. It was confirmed that the front signs
meet the Sign Code as they were proposed. The variances requested,
therefore, are for the signs on the east and west sides of the building,
which will be used for customer identification for each business as each
of the three businesses are separate, and for the ground signs,
Commissioner Landy questioned why there is such a large variance being
requested for the pylon sign. Mr. Cragg .replied this is being requested so
that each tenant can identify their separate business. The pylon signage
for Autohaus and Universal Color is the same square footage as what is
being proposed. Commissioner Landy pointed out that the Sign Code
states one 75 square foot ground sign and the request is for two 72
square foot ground signs. Mr. Cragg responded that there are two
separate companies and each is being identified. Commissioner Landy
disagreed with this point.
Commissioner Stulberg explained that the purpose of a variance is not
based exclusively on the desire to increase the value or income potential
of the business involved. While the Commission and Council desires to be
as agreeable as possible with businesses in New Hope, he would have a
hard time granting a variance when the purpose of a variance is so clear
New Hope Planning Commission - 6 - January 2, 1996
cut. Mr. Cragg stated that he would have to propose an alternate plan to
the customer. Co~missioner Landy added that the purpose of a variance
is also to show hardship and in his opinion there is no hardship shown.
Autohaus has been in this location for several years and is well known.
Mr. Cragg replied that AutoBody Plus has not been in this location and is
a separate entity with a separate owner. Commissioner Landy also stated
that he would have a hard time granting a variance.
Mr. Tom Oestreich of Autohaus came forward. Chairman Sonsin
emphasized that the thrust of the planning report is that this is three
separate businesses, and he has always felt that Autohaus is one business
at that location no matter if it is sales or repair work. Chairman Sonsin
asked for clarification if there are three businesses with one owner or if
there are separate owners. Mr. Oestreich explained that originally there
was sales, service and auto body. The last few years the decision was
made to not be involved with the body shop business. Mr. Oestreich
stated that the body shop entity was sold along with all of the equipment.
Mr. Boettcher is the owner of the property. Autohaus Service and
Autohaus Sales remain from the original business. Mr. Oestreich has
proposed that he would buy out the service portion of Autohaus and lease
the space that was vacated by Universal Color. Chairman Sonsin
requested clarification on the businesses and owners and if there are two
or three businesses. Mr. Oestreich explained that he had thought about
changing the name of the service department, however so many
customers are referrals that this would be difficult to do. If the name
would be changed, it would be Autohaus of New Hope and the font style
would be different on the signage. If the plans proceed to buy out the
service department, Mr. Oestreich would be the owner of service, Mr. Jeff
Benzinger is the owner of AutoBody Plus, and Mr. Boettcher is the owner
of Autohaus Sales. Chairman Sonsin confirmed that there are three
separate businesses and three separate owners, assuming that the service
department sale proceeds.
Chairman Sonsin maintained that he shares some of the same concerns as
the other Commissioners with the size of the variance and the enormous
amount of signage. The business has been an asset in New Hope and the
site has vastly improved over the last several years. Chairman Sonsin
stated that the petitioner and staff should work together to cut down the
volume or number of signs to get the proposed sign plan in closer
conformance with the Sign Code while maintaining the petitioner's needs.
There are also several inconsistencies in the existing sign plan.
Commissioner Sonsin advised the petitioner that this request would
probably be tabled and that they should submit a revised sign plan. Mr.
Oestreich called attention to the sign for the auto body shop and that it is
set further back from the street and needs to be larger to be visible from
the street. The petitioner felt that the wall sign is more important for his
service department. Commissioner Underdahl questioned if the sign needs
to be as large as proposed. Mr. Oestreich explained that he has not had
opportunity to study the size of the signs extensively and was asked to
attend the meeting at the last minute.
Commissioner Cassen expressed that the front signage was alright since
this is advertising. The signs on the east and west sides of the building
are more directional signs to let people know where to go and the
proposed signs are much too large and should be greatly reduced in size
as these.are not intended for advertisement. Commissioner Cassen agreed
that the canopy signs are good. Mr. Oestreich stated that the service door
New Hope Planning Commission - 7 - January 2, 1996
signage, which is where the customer would enter, is more important than
the signage over the garage door and also feels that there should be no
problem meeting code. Commissioner Cassen suggested that revised plans
be submitted that meet Sign Code requirements. ~-~
Commissioner Stulberg cautioned that the Commission should be careful
to approve such a large variance to the Sign Code in a major area of the
City's business community and have other businesses along the same
street request signage the same size. Mr. Cragg reminded the
Commissioners that the reasoning behind the 72 square feet for each sign
was that there are two tenants in the building and the understanding was
that each business was allowed that much signage. Other businesses in
the area have only one business per building. The lighting on the sign at
night will only have the letters illuminated and not the entire sign.
Commissioner Stulberg agreed that the problem is not the lettering, etc. of
the sign, but the quantity and size. Mr. Cragg asked for clarification of the
code to in order to revise the plans for the ground sign and was told that
one ground sign would be allowed with up to 75 square feet, if there are
wall signs over 10 square feet. The ground sign can have two names on
it. Chairman Sonsin reiterated that the Commission does not regulate the
content or what is written on the sign, but instead size. All three
businesses could be listed on the one ground sign. Mr. Cragg stated that
the sign plan would be revised.
Commissioner Landy reminded the petitioner that the second ground sign
from the Animal Hospital needs to be removed. Commissioner Underdahl
also reminded the petitioner that there is a lO-foot setback that needs to
be complied with.
Chairman Sonsin invited the petitioner to return with revised plans at the
February Planning Commission meeting and to work with City staff if more
direction is needed regarding sizes of signs to reduce the variance request.
MOTION Motion by Commissioner Underdahl, seconded by Commissioner Landy, to
Item 3.1 table Planning 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.
Voting in favor: Landy, Underdahl, Sonsin, Cassen, Stulberg,
Damiani
Voting against: None
Absent: Oelkers
Motion carried.
PC 95-21 Chairman Sonsin introduced for informal discussion Item 3.2,
Item 3.3 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.
Mr. Brixius stated that he met With the staff and the Building Official and
it has been determined that there are a number of areas of the ordinance,
regarding what is a permitted use and what is a conditional use, that are
much more restrictive than need be. A conditional use permit is an
application process that takes 45-60 days and includes a $450 fee. In
reviewing this ordinance as far as age, established character and
established zoning and shopping center arrangements, staff feels that in
New Hope Planning Commission - $ - January 2, 1996
a lot of cases the conditional uSe permits are not necessary and, in fact,
cumbersome for businesses to enter the community. In giving attention
to this issue, each ZOning district was studied and specific
recommendations have been made as to what conditional uses should
continue to be conditional uses and what should be changed to permitted
uses. 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 for
whom the goods or services are furnished. This District is very limited in
the community in that there is only one B-1 Zoning District. The uses are
very restrictive within that District including government and utility
buildings, professional and commercial offices. When considering the
District and what it is intended to do, both of these uses could be
permitted uses within this District. This then gives this property an
opportunity to culminate additional uses without having to go through the
conditional use application process.
Mr. Brixius continued with the B-2, Retail Business, District which is to
provide for Iow intensity, retail or service outlets which deal directly with
the customer for whom the good or services are furnished, and is more
restrictive than the B-4 District. There are a number of uses listed as
conditional uses, however, some are listed as both conditional and
permitted uses. These become quite confusing as to how the uses should
be treated. In an effort to clarify this, several recommendations have been
made. In the B-2 District most of the uses that were previously listed as
conditional have been changed to permitted and include government and
utility buildings, professional and commercial offices, banks without drive-
through facilities, electronic appliance stores, fabric stores, restaurants
without drive-through facilities, camera and photographic supply and book
stores. Staff feels that each one of these uses can compatibly co-exist
within the character of the B-2 District and would still require a site plan
review and as a result feel that the conditional use requirements are overly
restrictive. Commissioners should note that in the case of banks and
restaurants with drive-through facilities staff is still asking that these be
listed as conditional uses as it is felt that traffic and drive-through
arrangements have extraneous impacts on the site that can affect adjacent
properties and should require closer inspection.
Mr. Brixius reported that the B-3, Auto-Oriented Business District, uses are
listed correctly and should remain as is.
Mr. Brixius continued with the B-4, Community Business District, by saying
that this is the most generalized District. The uses that would be changed
from conditional uses to permitted uses in the B-1 and B-2 Districts would
roll over as permitted uses within this District. One area of discussion was
a veterinary clinic and whether that use should be changed from a
conditional use to a permitted use. Staff felt that there are a number of
extraneous factors very unique to a veterinary clinic, such as the boarding
and keeping of animals, noise consideration, odors, disposal of deceased
pets, etc. which would require some attention by City staff and it is being
recommended that this remain a conditional use. Recently discussed to a
great extent was commercial recreational uses and for the most part these
uses should remain a conditional use. However, there are opportunities in
the shopping centers for smaller commercial recreational uses, such as a
karate school or dance studio with less than 4,000 square feet of floor
area, be a permitted use within the B-4 District. The focus is to make it
easier to start a business in New Hope, to eliminate the areas of
New Hope Planning Commission - 9 - January 2, 1996
conditional use where it is not appropriate or required, and maintain the
integrity of the conditional use permit by requiring those uses which have
unique features and require special attention as conditional uses. The
changes that have been suggested are not unique within the character of
the Zoning Districts described. One of the exhibits included with the
planning report is a matrix showing how the changes were made, the
current use and the proposed change.
Commissioner Underdahl questioned the meaning, in the Planner's report,
of the item regarding restaurants without drive-through facilities proposed
to be conditionally permitted in the B-3 District and permitted in the B-2,
B-3 and B-4 Districts. Mr. Brixius replied that the sentence should read a
conditional use in the B-1 District not a conditional use in the B-3 District.
This use, restaurant without drive-through, would be allowed in a B-l,
Neighborhood, District by conditional use and the use would have to be
directly related to the neighborhood it is serving. The matrix shows
restaurants with drive-through facilities to be a permitted use in the B-3
District because this is an Auto-Oriented District. It was the consensus of
the Commission to change restaurants with drive-through to a conditional
use in the B-3 District. To clarify these uses it is noted that restaurants
with drive-through facilities are not permitted in Bo1, and would be a
conditional use in the B-2, B-3 and B-4 Districts; restaurants without drive-
through facilities would be a conditional use in the B-1 District and
permitted uses in the B-2, B-3 and B-4 Districts.
Commissioner Underdahl also questioned //74 on the matrix regarding the
drive-in and convenience food which are not permitted in any District. Mr.
Brixius explained that the reason for this is that drive-in and convenience
foods have been combined with restaurants. The City Attorney listed
drive-in and convenience foods in one land-use arrangement in the draft
ordinance. The only distinction being whether the dishes/containers were
disposable or not. The land use categories are being combined to include
restaurants, convenience drive-in, etc.
Commissioner Underdahl wondered whether or not a drive-through needs
to be listed with the category of camera/photographic supplies since there
is now one use like this in the City and should this be considered. Mr.
Brixius agreed that this could be changed on the matrix to include a
conditional use for a drive-through camera/photographic supply.
Chairman Sonsin advised that if the Commissioners had any questions or
thought of any revisions that should be included in this ordinance to
contact Mr. McDonald.
Commissioner Underdahl questioned whether the issue of tattoo parlors
being a permitted use and some other businesses being conditional uses
has been corrected with this ordinance and it was confirmed these items
have been changed. Mr. Brixius stated that there is agreement that some
of the smaller type businesses would not need a conditional use permit
providing all the requirements are met. The City Attorney added that by
eliminating some of the conditional uses, the businesses will be regulated
through licensing procedures. Through licensing there is a set of
procedures that need to be followed prior to obtaining a license for tattoo
parlors, for example. The philosophical discussion centers around whether
tattoo establishments or the art of tattooing is a legitimate service
business the same barber shops, etc. It would be difficult for the City to
try and rezone a legitimate business out of the City. The way to insure
New Hope Planning Commission - 10 - January 2, 1996
against health and safety issues is through regulation by licensing
requirements. Commissioner Cassen also added that licensing Would
provide for annual insPeCtiOns. -'.
Commissioner Stulberg questioned the Building Official's memo regarding
the CUP process for drive-through eating establishments but not for any
other business as long as a site plan is on file. After some discussion by
the Commission and staff, the consensus was that the ordinance requires
the CUP process for all drive-through establishments because this does
affect the site and traffic patterns. Mr. Brixius cautioned that all drive-
through establishments should be handled in the same manner whether the
use is for an eating establishment or a bank or some other type business.
Chairman Sonsin recapped that all drive-through establishments would
require the conditional use process.
Commissioner Cassen questioned the zoning for the multi-family housing
just to the north of Kmart. Mr. McDonald replied that this is zoned R-5,
Senior/Disabled Housing.
Chairman Sonsin confirmed that there would be a formal public hearing on
this ordinance at the February Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Brixius
added that a corrected matrix will be sent to the Commissioners before the
meeting.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Design & Review The Design & Review Committee did not meet in December, but will be
Item 4.1 meeting in January. Mr. McDonald stated he believes that plans will be
submitted for an expansion by Taber Bushnell.
Codes & Standards' Chairman Sonsin stated that Codes & Standards did not meet in
Item 4.2 December, but will be meeting on January 17th and will continue
discussion on flashing/moving electronic signs and 60-day zoning
legislation. Mr. McDonald added that an issue the Codes & Standards
Committee should review during 1996 is pawn shops. Staff has received
calls regarding this issue and the City does not have any regulations on
pawn shops at this time. The City Attorney mentioned that pawn shops
do have some inherent problems with them and it is possible to argue that
they could be prohibited. There are different schools of thought on the
idea of pawn shops. The Code does not list pawn shops specifically, and
under the current ruling if the Code does not list a business, it is prohibited
in the City. The Code should probably list some reasons why pawn shops
are prohibited.
Chairman Sonsin added that the Codes & Standards Committee should
also review other areas of the Sign Code. Mr. Sondrall raised the issue of
therapeutic massage and that this issue should also be reviewed by the
Codes & Standards Committee.
OLD BUSINESS
Miscellaneous Issues There was no discussion regarding the miscellaneous issues.
NEW BUSINESS The Planning Commission minutes were approved as written.
Chairman Sonsin next discussed Committee assignments and the number
of Commissioners on the Planning Commission. Chairman Sonsin
New Hope Planning Commission - 11 - January 2, 1996
suggested that the Commission contain an odd number of Commissioners,
for purposes of maintinaing a quorum, and would like to see two new
members added. Mr. McDonald interjected that City Code currently'states
that "the Commission shall consist of ten members" and an ordinance is
being presented to the City Council to change this ordinance to read that
"the Commission may consist of ten members."
Chairman Sonsin asked if any Commissioners would like to change to a
different Committee and Commissioner Stulberg stated he was considering
moving to the Codes & Standards Committee. Chairman Sonsin remarked
that current Commissioners should change now if any wanted to and the
new Commissioners would be assigned to a Committee. Chairman Sonsin
stated that he would like to remain as Chairman of the Codes & Standards
Committee, in addition to being Chairman of the Commission.
ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. McDonald stated he would let Commissioners know the date that Bob
Gundershaug will be recognized by the Council for his service to the City.
Commissioner Damiani commented that the public works remodeling
seemed to be very expensive. Commissioner Stulberg also mentioned that
the last report on the ice arena expansion seemed to be more expensive
than originally reported.
ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:38
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Pamela Sylvester
Recording Secretary
New Hope Planning Commission - 12 - January 2, 1996
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 ~'-
Approved City Council Minutes December 11, 1995
Regular Meeting #22 City Hall, 7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER The New Hope City Council met in regular session pursuant to due call and
notice thereof; Mayor Erickson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF The City Council and all present stood for the Pledge of Allegiance to the
ALLEGIANCE Flag.
ROLL CALL Present: Erickson, Enck, LaVine Norby, Otten, Wehling
Staff Present: Sondrall, Hanson, Donahue, Leone, McDonald, Bellefuil
APPROVAL OF Motion was made by Councilmember Enck, seconded by Councilmember
MINUTES Wehling, to approve Regular Meeting minutes of November 27, 1995.
Voting in favor: Erickson, Enck, Wehling; Abstained: Norby, Otten;
Absent: None. Motion carried.
OPEN FORUM There was no one present to address the Council for the Open Forum.
Item 5
CONSENT BUSINESS Mayor Erickson introduced the consent items as listed for consideration and
Item 6 stated that all items will be enacted by one motion unless requested that
an item be removed for discussion.
Item 6.7 was removed for discussion.
MOTION Motion was made by Councilmember Otten, seconded by Councilmember
Consent Items Wehling, to approve all remaining items on the Consent agenda. All
present voted in favor. Motion carried.
BUSINESS LICENSES Approval of Business Licenses.
Item 6.1
FINANCIAL CLAIMS Approval of Financial Claims Through December 11, 1995.
Item 6.2
CLAIM 95-21 Acknowledgement of Liability Claim No. 95-21 (Stanley Karp).
Item 6.3
RESOLUTION 95-203 Resolution Authorizing City Staff to Draw Upon Flag Addition Letter of
Item 6.4 Credit.
RESOLUTION 95-204 Resolution Re-Appointing Citizen Advisory Commission Members for One-
Item 6.5 Year Terms Expiring December 31, 1996.
RESOLUTION 95-205 Resolution Re-Appointing Dan Nordberg to the Citizen Advisory Arts Sub-
Item 6.6 Commission for a One-Year Term Expiring December 31, 1996.
RESOLUTION 95-206 Resolution Accepting Resignation of Robert Gundershaug from the New
Item 6.8 Hope Planning Commission and Extending Appreciation for His Service.
New Hope City Council December 11, 1995
Page 1
RESOLUTION 95-207 Resolution Re-Appointing Richard Henry to the Personnel Board for a Three-
Item 6.9 Year Term Expiring December 31, 1998.
RESOLUTION 95-208 Resolution Re-Appointing Richard Quarnstrom to the Fire Personnel
Item 6.10 Committee for a Term Expiring December 31, 1997.
RESOLUTION 95-209 Resolution Re-Appointing Councilmember Enckto the Civil Defense Board.
Item 6.11
RESOLUTION 95-210 Resolution Re-Appointing City Manager as Director to the HRG Board for
Item 6.12 a Term Expiring December 31, 1996.
RESOLUTION 95-211 Resolution Adjusting 1995 CIP Budget for Central Garage Expenditures.
Item 6.13
RESOLUTION 95-212 Resolution Authorizing the 1995-95 CIP Authorizing Transfer of $12,000
Item 6.14 from Pool Drop Slide to Swimming Pool Study.
RESOLUTION 95-213 Resolution Approving Agreement with Events of Distinction to Assist with
Item 6.15 Coordination of 1996 Northwest Suburban Remodeling Fair (Improvement
Project No. 514).
RESOLUTION 95-214 Resolution Establishing City's Monthly Contribution for Health Benefits
Item 6.16 Programs.
RESOLUTION 95-215 Resolution Approving a Three-Year Maintenance Contract for the New
Item 6.17 Hope Indoor Shooting Range Lead Decontamination Services with Range
Management Services, Inc.
IMP. PROJECT 522 Acceptance of Play Equipment for Jaycee Park (Project 522) and Authorize
Item 6.18 Final Payment.
IMP. PROJECT 535 Acceptance of 1995 Court Improvements - Begin Park (Project 535) and
Item 6.19 Authorize Final Payment.
RESOLUTION 95-216 Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1 with H & M Asphalt Company
Item 6.20 for Utility Extensions at 6073 Louisiana Avenue Twin Home Project Site
(Improvement Project No. 519) in the Amount of $1,420.
RESOLUTION 95-217 Resolution Approving Change Order No. I with Veit & Company, Inc. for
Item 6.21 4400 Quebec Avenue North and .Golf Course Storm Sewer and Pond
Improvements (Improvement Project No. 544) for $10,359.88).
RESOLUTION 95-218 Resolution Approving Amendment of C.C.I. Petition for Public Improvement
Item 6.22 and Sewer Improvement (Improvement Project No. 544).
RESOLUTION 95-219 Resolution Approving Right of Entry Agreement with Braun Intertec (#462).
Item 6.23
BOARD OF REVIEW Approval of April 4, 1996 (7:00 p.m.) as Date for Local Board of Review.
Item 6.24
RESOLUTION 95-220 Resolution Approving Amendment to Key Person Life Insurance Agreement
Item 6.25 for City Manager by Adjusting Annual Premium.
New Hope City Council December 11, 1995
Page 2
SAW & TOOL SLING Authorization to Purchase a Cutter's Edge Ventilation Saw and Tool Sling
Item 6.26 from Danko Emergency for $1,425.
PUBLIC HEARING Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 7.1, Public Hearing on the
LICENSE RENEWALS 1996 Liquor License Renewals.
Item 7.1
City Clerk Valerie Leone indicated that all of the applicants have submitted
the necessary documents for renewal of the liquor licenses and the owners
have been requested to attend tonight's hearing to answer any questions
the City Council may have pertaining to the liquor establishments.
Mayor Erickson indicated the Council is familiar with the establishments
employee training practices and therefore recommended a change in format
from previous years. Councilmember Norby requested the opportunity to
meet the owners of each establishment.
The following persons individually addressed the City Council: Ken
Streeter, Star Liquor; Greg Bender, New Hope Bowl; Tony Brace
representing David Schwappach of Adair Liquor; Gary & Darlene Shelley,
Winnetka Liquors; Randy Rosengren, Sunshine Factory; Brian Minette,
Winnetka Cinema Cafe; and Brian Johnson, Applebee's Grill & Bar.
All applicants reported favorably on police emergency response time and
cooperation from city staff.
CLOSE HEARING Motion was made by Councilmember Wehling, seconded by
Item 7.1 Councilmember Enck, to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: All.
Motion carried.
MOTION Motion was made by Councilmember Wehling, seconded by
Item 7.1 Councilmember Otten, to approve all liquor renewals for 1996. Voting in
favor: All. Motion carried.
PLANNING CASE Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 8.1, Planning Case 95-30,
95-30 Site/Building Plan Review/Approval for a Building Addition, 7201 Bass Lake
Item 8.1 Road, The Wedding Chapel, Petitioner.
Mr. Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant/Community Development
Coordinator, explained that the petitioner is requesting site/building plan
review approval for a building addition. The Wedding Chapel is proposing '
to construct a 2,416 square foot addition along the south and east sides
of the existing 4,638 square foot building to allow for additional dressing
rooms, garment preparation room and receiving area. The addition would
bring the total building size to 7,054 square feet. The property is located
in a B-2, Retail Business, Zoning District on the south side of Bass Lake
Road. The building was constructed in 1976 as a restaurant and the
current use as costume/clothes rental/wearing apparel is a permitted use
in the B-2 Zoning District. Because the Zoning Ordinance defines "lot
frontage" as "that boundary abutting a public right-of-way having the least
width", the front yard on this property is considered to be Nevada Avenue,
with the side yard on the south side. The proposed building addition meets
the required setbacks, as it is located 10 feet from the south side yard
property line.
He continued by stating the building elevations show that the addition will
New Hope City Council December 11, 1995
Page 3
have building materials consisting of horizontal lap siding, cedar trim and
stucco overhang; all to match the existing building. Notes on the plan
state that all rooftop units will be screened, Six new soffit downlighting
fixtures will be installed on the addition to match those on the existing
building and a monitored interior security system will be expanded to
address Police Department concerns about losing visibility of the south wall
with windows/doors. The existing parking available on the site is at 75
spaces which far exceeds code requirements. The plan shows existing and
new landscaping, with three Red Pine being added along the south property
line, just east of the building, and eight Spreading Yew being added on the
east side of the building near the entrance doors. The site also contains
several perennial flower beds with over 2,000 bulbs. Landscape rock will
be added to the south side of the property between the addition and the
south property line. The existing trash enclosure, as shown on the site
plan, is located on the west side of the building. He noted there is an
existing fence on the south property line. Snow storage is on the east side
of the parking lot and the petitioner has indicated that there will be no
signage changes with the addition.
Mr. McDonald stated the primary issue is the truck delivery access and
loading area issue since. The Zoning Code requires some type of unloading
area for commercial buildings that exceed 5,000 square feet in area. For
traffic circulation purposes, it is important to note that the Nevada Avenue
right-of-way located on the west side of the property is located in the City
of New Hope and that the Maryland Avenue right-of-way, located on the
east side of the property, is located in the City of Crystal. The petitioner
has submitted two alternatives to address the'truck access issue, pending
a response from Crystal on installing a new curb cut on Maryland Avenue.
Alternate A: shows the curb cut islands to be revised to accommodate
truck maneuvering/access to the site. This alternate meets City standards '
and would be utilized if the request to Crystal is not approved. Trucks
would enter the property from the north (Bass Lake Road) and exit on the
west (Nevada Avenue),' with deliveries being made to the west "receiving"
door. Mr. McDonald noted Alternate A would require some modifications
to the existing parking lot peninsulas.
Alternate B: represents the request made to the City of Crystal for a new
25-foot curb cut to be installed on Maryland Avenue to accommodate semi-
truck maneuvering. Trucks would enter the property from the north (Bass
Lake Road) and exit on the east (Maryland Avenue), with deliveries being
made to the east front entrance.
Mr. McDonald stated the petitioner and his architect are present to address
the Council.
Staff and the Planning Commission finds that either alternative is
acceptable. The site plan also contains notes that "all deliveries are made
by vans and straight body trucks." At the Planning Commission meeting,
the petitioner requested that this requirement be waived, however the
Commission did not feel it had the authority to waive the requirement.
Councilmember Enck noted that although the current property owner does
not need the truck loading capacity, he questioned whether the City could
require modifications to the property if the building is sold in the future.
New Hope City Council December 11, 1995
Page 4
The City Attorney indicated a restrictive covenant would give the City such
authority.
The City Council complimented the property owner on the appearance of
the property. Mr. Scott Ellingson, noted his father-in-law takes great pride
in the landscaping maintenance.
The City Council informed Mr. Ellingson that either Alternate A or B may
be implemented for truck access/maneuvering capability, or a restrictive
covenant may be filed with the property requiring a subsequent owner of
the building to implement Alternate A or B at a later date at the City's
request.
Councilmember Enck encouraged the properW owner to proceed with
obtaining the curbcut on Maryland Avenue since the City of Crystal has
approved their request.
RESOLUTION 95-221 Councilmember Enck introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 8.1 adoption: "RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANNING CASE 95-30,
REQUESTING SITE/BUILDING PLAN REVIEW/APPROVAL TO ALLOW A
BUILDING ADDITION AT 7201 BASS LAKE ROAD (PID//05-118-21-34-
0073) SUBMITTED BY THE WEDDING CHAPEL". The motion for the
adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Councilmember
Wehling, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Erickson, Enck, Norby, Otten, Wehling; and the following voted
against the same: None; Abstained: None; Absent: None; whereupon the
resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the mayor
which was attested to by the city clerk.
IMP. PROJECT 529 Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 8.2, Resolution Approving
Item 8.2 Plans and Specifications for a 500,000 Gallon Elevated Storage Tank
Rehabilitation Project and Ordering Advertisement for Bids (Improvement
Project No. 529).
Councilmember Norby inquired whether surrounding property owners have
been made aware of the project. Mr. McDonald confirmed that impacted
residents have been mailed several project bulletins.
RESOLUTION 95-222 Councilmember Enck introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 8.2 adoption: "RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
500,000 GALLON ELEVATED STORAGETANK REHABILITATION PROJECT
AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS {IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NO. 529". The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was
seconded by Councilmember Wehling, and upon vote being taken thereon,
the following voted in favor thereof: Erickson, Enck, Norby, Otten,
Wehling; and the following voted against the same: None; Abstained:
None; Absent: None; whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed
and adopted, signed by the mayor which was attested to by the city clerk.
IMP. PROJECT 542 Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 8.3, Resolution Accepting
Item 8.3 Facility Assessment and Building Program for the Public Works Facility,
Improvement Project No. 542, Authorizing Architectural Services Contract
and Ordering Preparation of Plans and Specifications.
Ms. Jeannine Clancy, Public Works Director, explained that Bonestroo,
New Hope City Council December 11, 1995
Page 5
Rosene, Anderlik & Associates has completed the facility assessment and
building program for the public works facility. She noted that public works
personnel have been involved in the planning process.
Ms. Clancy reviewed existing problems/inefficiencies in the office area,
lunchroom, locker room, garage/shop area, and building exterior.
Mr. Paul Gannon, Project Architect for Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik &
Associates, was recognized. He stated the primary focus was to identify
ways which the public works facility can better serve the community. He
stated their report included code issues, life safety concerns, handicapped
accessibility issues as well as input from staff which identified space
requirements and work relationships. Mr. Gannon illustrated the concept
design including the following areas: administration, supervisors, vehicle
maintenance, and employee/common area (lunch room, locker rooms, rest
rooms).
It was noted that the proposed plan includes remodeling of the existing
space and 1500-1700 square feet of new construction.
Discussion was held regarding the $50,000 expense of the elevator if the
lunchroom is relocated to the upper level, It was noted that an elevator
would not be necessary if the upper level space remained used for storage
purposes.
Ms. Clancy explained that the reasons for considering utilizing the upper
level are due to the limited space available on the site and the need for the
City to be in compliance with the green area requirements as well as to
minimize the loss of parking space.
Councilmember Norby emphasized the need to involve employees in the
planning process since the users have valuable input. She expressed
concern regarding the expense of the elevator, the amount of carpeting,
and the large lobby space.
Councilmember Enck commented that the public works facility has been
inadequate for many years. He questioned whether the plans could be
revised to avoid putting the lunchroom upstairs and inquired regarding the
difference in cost if the footprint was enlarged to maintain the lunchroom
on the main level. The City Council requested the opportunity to view
alternate concept plans.
Ms. Clancy stated if the City Council approves the architectural services
contract, staff will present various concept drawings in the future.
Councilmember Otten commented that the facility may be more functional
if placed all on one level.
RESOLUTION 95-223 Councilmember Enck introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 8.3 adoption: "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING FACILITY ASSESSMENT AND
BUILDING PROGRAM FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY, IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT 542, AUTHORIZING ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES CONTRACT
AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS". The
motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by
Councilmember Norby, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
New Hope City Council December 11, 1995
Page 6
voted in favor thereof: Erickson, Enck, Norby, Otten, Wehling; and the
following voted against the same: None; Abstained: None; Absent: None;
whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, 'signed
by the mayor which was attested to by the city clerk.
IMP. PROJECT 551 Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 8.4, Resolution Authorizing
Item 8.4 Feasibility Report and Pavement Evaluation for Louisiana Avenue and 31 st
Circle (Improvement Project No. 551).
RESOLUTION 95-224 Councilmember Enck introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 8.4 adoption: "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND
PAVEMENT EVALUATION FOR LOUISIANA AVENUE AND 31ST CIRCLE
(IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 551)." The motion for the adoption of the
foregoing resolution was seconded by Councilmember Wehling, and upon
vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Erickson,
Enck, Norby, Otten, Wehling; and the following voted against the same:
None; Abstained: None; Absent: None; whereupon the resolution was
declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the mayor Which was
attested to by the city clerk.
IMP. PROJECT 536 Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 8.5, Resolution Authorizing
Item 8.5 the City Manager to Negotiate and Enter Into a Contract with E & V
Consultants and Construction Managers for Construction Management
Services for Ice Arena Expansion (Improvement Project No. 536).
Mr. Jim Corbett, Recreational Facilities Manager, was recognized. He
commented that city staff solicited proposals from several construction
management firms.
Mr. Dan Donahue, City Manager, explained the concept of employing a
construction management firm. He reviewed the advantages and
disadvantages of retaining a construction manager as well as advantages
and disadvantages of selecting a general contractor to perform the project.
He emphasized that with a construction management firm the City will be
considering several separate contracts [for electrical, steel, mechanical, etc)
rather than only one contract with the general contractor. The
construction manager would evaluate the bids and advise the City.
He stated a construction management firm will provide independent
observers in the process who can consult and advise the City. He stressed
that the City has not experienced problems by using the traditional general
contractor process in the past.
Mr. Donahue stated if the second ice sheet is built, the project must be
completed by October 1, 1996. Therefore, bids would need to be
considered by the Council in February.
Cost comparisons between utilizing an architectural/engineering services
firm and a construction management firm were reviewed by the Council.
Mr. Donahue stated long range costs of using a construction management
firm are estimated to be 5 to 10% less than a general contractor, although
it is $100,000 higher at the commencement of the project. A slightly
higher risk is taken by hiring a construction management firm since they
would be managing separate contractors. However, city staff feels the
risks are negligible compared to the overall return.
New Hope City Council December 11, 1995
Page 7
Mr. Donahue stated staff recommends hiring E & V Consultants which is
a firm just completing the Woodbury Ice Arena and has worked with
Bonestroo. E & V Consultants has submitted a proposal and adoption of
the resolution would allow the City Manager to negotiate a contract. He
noted the firm could be employed immediately on an hourly basis until
actual award of the contract. He emphasized the necessity of employing
the construction management firm at this time so that they will be able to
work with the architect (Bonestroo) for the design phase.
Mr. DOnahue stated the proposal submitted by E & V Consultants is
approximately $127,000.
Councilmember Otten inquired as to the overall advantages of hiring a
construction management firm. Mr. Donahue reported that it will result in
obtaining a better product, an overall lower cost, and less city staff
involvement. He invited members of the City Council to tour the Woodbury
facility.
The Council expressed support for proceeding with hiring a construction
management firm.
RESOLUTION 95-225 Councilmember Norby introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item8.5 adoption: "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
NEGOTIATE AND ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH E & V CONSULTANTS
AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
SERVICES FOR ICE ARENA EXPANSION (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO.
536)". The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was
seconded by Councilmember Enck, and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof: Erickson, Enck, Norby, Otten, Wehlin.g;
and the following voted against the same: None; Abstained: None; Absent:
None; whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted,
signed by the mayor which was attested to by the city clerk.
IMP. PROJECT 499 Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 8.6, Resolution Approving
Item 8.6 Change Order No. I for Surface Water Management Plan (Improvement
Project No. 499) in the Amount of $4,680.
Councilmember Enck inquired whether the task force will meet once again
to review the final recommendations.
Mr. Hanson, City Engineer, indicated that he will arrange such a meeting
and noted receipt of the Watershed's comments which will allow the plan
to be prepared in accordance with the approval process.
RESOLUTION 95-226 Councilmember Enck introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 8.6 adoption: "RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. I FOR
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO.
499) IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,680.00". The motion for the adoption of the
foregoing resolution was seconded by Councilmember Otten, and upon
vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Erickson,
Enck, Norby, Otten, Wehling; and the following voted against the same:
None; Abstained: None; Absent: None; whereupon the resolution was
declared duly passed and adOpted, signed by the mayor which was
attested to by the city clerk.
New Hope City Council December 11, 1995
Page 8
PLANNING CASE Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 10.1, Ordinance No. 95-16,
96-23 An Ordinance Rezoning Property Located at 6073-6081 Louisiana Avenue
Item 10.1 North to R-2 from R-1 (Planning Case 95-23).
ORDINANCE 95-16 Councilmember Enck introduced the following ordinance and moved its
Item 10.1 adoption: "ORDINANCE 95-16, AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 6073-6083 LOUISIANA AVENUE NORTH TO R-2 FROM R-
1". The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was seconded
by Councilmember Wehling, and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof: Erickson, Enck, Norby, Otten, Wehling;
and the following voted against the same: None; Abstained: None; Absent:
None; whereupon the ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted,
signed by the mayor which was attested to by the city clerk.
CONSENT ITEM Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 6.7, Resolution Re-
REMOVED Appointing William Sonsin to the Planning Commission for a Three-Year
Item 6.7 Term Expiring December 31, 1998.
Councilmember Wehling suggested continuing the item to allow her the
opportunity to converse with Mr. Sonsin regarding his commission re-
appointment.
MOTION Motion was made by Councilmember Wehling, seconded by
Item 6.7 Councilmember Enck, to continue this item until the December 14, 199.5,
Council Meeting, All present voted in favor. Motion carried.
ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Donahue reminded the Council of the Budget Hearing scheduled for
December 13, 1995; and the possibility of adopting the budget on
December 14, 1995, at 7:30 a.m.
He also pointed out that commission candidate interviews will be held on
December 13th starting at 5:30 p.m. Mayor Erickson requested that Kay
Kramer be invited to attend the interviews.
A joint city council meeting with the City of Crystal was scheduled for
Monday, January 29, 1996, to discuss organized garbage collection study
and fire consolidation study.
ADJOURNMENT Motion was made by Councilmember Enck, seconded by Councilmember
Wehling, to adjourn the meeting as there was no further business to come
before the Council. All voted in favor. The New Hope City Council
adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Valerie Leone
City Clerk
New Hope City Council December 11, 1995
Page 9
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428
Approved City Council Minutes January 8, 1996
Regular Meeting #1 City Hall, 7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER The New HoPe City Council met in regular session pursuant to due call and
notice thereof; Mayor Erickson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF The City Council and all present stood for the Pledge of Allegiance to the
ALLEGIANCE Flag.
ROLL CALL Present: Erickson, Enck, LaVine Norby, Otten, Wehling
Staff Present: Sondrall, Hanson, Donahue, Leone, McDonald, French,
Corbett
APPROVAL OF Motion was made by Councilmember Enck, seconded by Councilmember
MINUTES Wehling, to approve Regular Meeting minutes of December 11, 1995,
December 13, 1995, December 14, 1995 and January 3, 1996. All
present voted in favor. Motion carried.
OPEN FORUM There was no one present to address the Council at the Open Forum.
Item 5
CONSENT BUSINESS Mayor Erickson introduced the consent items as listed for consideration and
Item 6 stated that all items will be enacted by one motion unless requested that
an item be removed for discussion. Item 6.20 was added to the agenda.
MOTION Motion was made by Councilmember Wehling, seconded by
Consent Items Councilmember Enck, to approve all items on the Consent agenda. All
present voted in favor. Motion carried.
BUSINESS LICENSES Approval of Business Licenses.
Item 6.1
FINANCIAL CLAIMS Approval of Financial Claims Through January 8, 1996.
Item 6.2
RESOLUTION 96-01 Resolution Appointing Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates as City
Item 6.4 Engineer for Sewer, Water, Street, Storm Sewer Projects and General
Work.
RESOLUTION 96-02 Resolution Appointing City Attorney.
Item 6.5
RESOLUTION 96-03 Resolution Appointing New Hope - Golden Valley Sun Post as Official
Item 6.6 Newspaper for City of New Hope.
RESOLUTION 96-04 Resolution Designating Depositories for Funds of the City of New Hope
Item 6.7 Relative to Investments.
RESOLUTION 96-05 Resolution Designating Marquette Bank N.A. As Depository for Payroll
Item 6.8 Account and General Funds of the City of New Hope.
New Hope City Council January 8, 1996
Page I
RESOLUTION 96-06 Resolution Establishing 1996 Fees and Charges for Park and Recreation
Item 6.9 Programs.
RESOLUTION 96-07 Resolution Re-Appointing City Manager as City of New Hope
Item 6.10 Representative on the "Golden Valley/Crystal/New Hope Joint Water
Commission" for a Three-Year Term Ending December 31, 1998.
RESOLUTION 96-08 Resolution Approving Joint Powers Agreement Between Cities of Golden
Item 6.11 - Valley and New Hope for the Position of MIS Coordinator; and Authorizing
Mayor and Manager to Sign.
IMP. PROJECT 545 Motion Approving Quote by Hy-Land Surveying in the Amount of ~300 to
Item 6.12 Survey City-Owned Property at 6067 West Broadway (Improvement Project
NO. 545).
IMP. PROJECTS 545, Motion Awarding Contract for Asbestos Building Surveys of Three City-
548, AND 549 Owned Properties Including 6067 West Broadway (Project 545), 5559
Item 6.13 Sumter (Project 548), and 7621 Bass Lake Road (Project 549).
IMP. PROJECT 531 Acceptance of Northwood Park Playground Equipment (Project 531) and
Item 6.14 Authorize Final Payment.
RESOLUTION 96-09 Resolution Approving Police Cadet Tuition Grant/Loan Agreements; and
Item 6.15 Authorizing Mayor and Manager to Sign.
RESOLUTION 96-10 Resolution Relating to Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A, Five Thousand
Item 6.16 Winnetka 2nd Addition.
RESOLUTION 96-11 Resolution Authorizing Application to the Minnesota Department of
Item 6.17 Transportation for Active Warning Device and Grade Crossing Surface
Improvements at 49th Avenue North and CP Rail Systems Tracks.
RESOLUTION 96-12 Resolution Adopting a Drug and Alcohol Policy Implementing the Federal
Item 6.18 Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act and Authorizing Mayor and
Manager to Enter into Service Agreement with Metro-Test.
BID/METER READING Approval of Bid and Authorization to Purchase Sensus Water Meter
EQUIPMENT Reading Equipment- $8,786.25.
Item 6.19
RESOLUTION 96-13 Resolution Approving Agreement with CEI Convention Services, Inc. to
Item 6.20 Provide Booths for the 1996 Northwest Suburban Remodeling Fair
(Improvement Project No. 514).
COMMISSIONERS Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 10.3, Resolution Appointing
Item 10.3 New Commissioners to the Citizens Advisory Commission, Planning
Commission, and Human Rights Commission.
Mayor Erickson reported that the City Council interviewed several qualified
applicants for various city commission. He indicated that the City Council
recommended appointment of the following persons to the Human Rights
Commission: Timothy Thomas, Iris Moore, Henry Bates, Eugene Jackson,
Jr., Preston McMillan, and Kay Kramer. He noted the only person declining
the appointment was Preston McMillan. Mayor Erickson recognized the
New Hope City Council January 8, 1996
Page 2
members present at the meeting and thanked them for their interest in
serving on the Human Rights ~Commission.
The City Council unanimously recommended the appointment of Brenda
Gassman and Vernon Halvorson to the Citizens Advisory Commission.
It was determined to postpone any appointments to the Planning
Commission until the notice is published in the City Report newsletter.
The City Council requested the Human Rights Commissioners to attend an
introductory 'meeting on Tuesday, January 16.
RESOLUTION 96-14 Councilmember Wehling introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 10.3 adoption: "RESOLUTION APPOINTING NEW COMMISSIONERS TO THE
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMISSION AND HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION".
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by
Councilmember Otten, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof: Erickson, Enck, Norb¥, Otten, Wehling; and the
following voted against the same: None; Abstained: None; Absent: None;
whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed
by the mayor which was attested to by the city clerk.
IMP. PROJECT 536 Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 8.1, Approval of Plans and
Item 8.1 Specifications and Authorization to Call for Bids for Ice Arena Expansion
(Improvement Project No. 536).
Mr. Dan Donahue, City Manager, explained that the plans and
specifications for the ice arena expansion have been prepared and will be
presented by the City Engineer. He noted the construction management
firm of E&V Consultants and Construction Managers will assemble the bid
package based on the specifications.
Mr. Mark Hanson, City Engineer, reviewed the plans for remodeling and
expansion of the ice arena. He stated the expansion provides for extending
to the south side of the existing building. He first reviewed the site plan
stating the parking and drive lanes as well as access will remain the same
(opposite Maryland Avenue and opposite Nevada Avenue). The existing
parking allows for 230-240 stalls and the new plan provides for 306
spaces. He noted the site will require much excavation, approximately
13,000 yards, due to the elevation. He also stated soil correction work is
necessary at the southwest corner of the site. He advised that two types
of quotes will be sought: one quote would be to take the excess material
from the site to be stockpiled at the New Hope Elementary field site and
the second quote would be for the material to be hauled off site to a
locatiOn designated by the contractor. The comparison would determine
whether it's to the City's advantage to place the material at New Hope
Elementary. Mr. Hanson continued by stating new exterior lighting is
proposed for the facility and it would be zoned so that the lot could be
partially or fully lit depending on the event. Employee parking will be
provided in the rear during major events. The plan also illustrated green
areas and proposed irrigation system.
Next presented were the building elevations. The existing entryway will be
expanded and there will be separate entrances to each ice sheet. The
existing facia is proposed to be re-painted and the wooden roof beam
New Hope City Council January 8, 1996
Page 3
would be covered by plaster material similar to the south side. Mr. Hanson
illustrated the proposed garage doorway for large service vehicles. He also
reviewed the roofline.
The interior of the arena was shown including the skylights behind the
seating area, office area, concession, existing elevator, lobby, 500 seating
capacity, new restrooms, facilities along the east walls, meeting rooms,
and a rubber-floored training room. An alternate bid will be requested for
continuation of the walkway around the building.. The lower floor will
consist of team rooms, restrooms, coaches' rooms, addition of hallway by
elevator, storage area, and players' benches.
Project costs were reviewed. Mr. Hanson compared the previous estimate
to the current estimate and noted the revised estimate includes
construction manager fees of approximately $125,000:
Previous (11/95) Current (1/96)
Site Improvements $ 386,000 $ 464,000
Building Expansion 3,662,000 3,560,000
TOTAL $4,082,000 $4,149,000
Mr. Jim Corbett, Recreation Facilities Manager, noted that space has been
designated for the training room and the concession area; however,
specific plans have not yet been finalized for these two spaces.
Questions were asked by members of the City Council. Issues raised were
designation of rinks, handicapped accessibility (restrooms and seating),
security plans (camera monitoring system), use of police reserves,
expandable walls in meeting rooms, replacement plan (carpeting--10 years,
plexiglass--15 years, and rubber mats--7 years), fire wall, and heat system.
Councilmember Norby expressed concern regarding the Mighty Ducks
Grant and that the Grant Committee may not have adhered to the
established criteria. Mayor Erickson pointed outthat congressional districts
played a major role in determining grant awards. The City Manager was
directed to correspond to the Grant Committee and inquire whether the
grant recipients have met the criteria. Mr. Donahue reported that each
grant recipient must demonstrate their commitment to the project by
February 26.
Councilmember Enck noted the cost of moving the fill should be borne by
the ice arena project.
Mr. Corbett indicated separate locker rooms will eliminate gender problems.
He also spoke regarding the refrigeration system which is oversized to
accommodate both ice sheets when the current system becomes
inoperable due to its age.
He noted the committee is confident that two ice sheets will create a
surplus of operating funds. He confirmed that the new arena has a
potential for dry floor activities during non ice use months.
Mr. Donahue indicated a final report illustrating replacement cost
projections and operating budget will be presented at the time bids are to
New Hope City Council January 8, 1996
Page 4
be considered by the Council.
Mr. Corbett stated Coca-C°ia is willing to provide $20,000 of funds for a
scoreboard if the City enters into a full-service contract for the pop
machine. He explained that this would be the same type of arrangement
as previously agreed upon for the existing scoreboard.
The City Council asked legal counsel to report back on the legality of this
issue relative to uniform bidding requirements.
MOTION Motion was made by Councilmember Norby, seconded by Councilmember
Item 8.1 Enck, approving the plans and specifications and authorizing the call for
bids for the ice arena expansion (improvement project no. 536). All
present voted in favor. Motion carried.
IMP. PROJECT 550 Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 8.2, Approval of Plans and
Item 8.2 Specifications and Authorization to Call for Bids for Ballfield Reconstruction
- New Hope Elementary School (Improvement Project No. 550).
MOTION Motion was made by Councilmember Wehling, seconded by
Item 8.2 Councilmember Enck, to approve the plans and specifications and authorize
the call for bids for the ballfield reconstruction project. The motion
included the condition that if feasible, the extra fill from the ice arena
project should be moved to the ballfield site with the associated costs paid
for by the ice arena project. All present voted in favor. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE 96-01 Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 10.1, An Ordinance
Item 10.1 Amending Planning Commission Membership and Appointment of City
Councilmember as a Planning Commissioner.
Mayor Erickson pointed out that the amendment allows flexibility in the
number of Commissioners. It also states that the Council may appoint a
member of the Council to serve on the Planning Commission; however, the
MayOr recommended that the Council remain independent of the Planning
Commission.
ORDINANCE 96-01 Councilmember Wehling introduced the following ordinance and moved its
Item 10,1 adoption: "ORDINANCE 96-01, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PLANNING
COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP AND APPOINTMENT OF CITY
COUNClLMEMBER AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER". The motion for the
adoption of the foregoing ordinance was seconded by Councilmember
Enck, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Erickson, Enck, Otten, Norby, Wehling; and the following voted
against the same: None; Abstained: None; Absent: None; whereupon the
ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the mayor
which was attested to by the city clerk.
ACTING MAYOR Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 10.2, Resolution Appointing
Item 10.2 Acting Mayor.
Councilmember Otten nominated Councilmember Enck to serve as Acting
Mayor and Councilmember Wehling seconded the nomination.
RESOLUTION 96-15 Councilmember Otten introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 10.2 adoption: "RESOLUTION APPOINTING ACTING MAYOR." The motion for
New Hope City Council January 8, 1996
Page 5
the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Councilmember
Wehling, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Erickson, Norby, Otten, Wehling; and the following voted against
the same: None; Abstained: Enck; Absent: None; whereupon the
resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the mayor
which was attested to by the city clerk.
COMMISSION Action on Item 10.3 followed the consent agenda.
APPOINTMENTS
Item 10.3
IMP. PROJECT 542 Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 10.4, Resolution Approving
Item 10.4 Contract with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates for Design of the
Public Works Remodeling Project, Improvement Project 542, Authorizing
the Mayor and City Manager to Sign.
Mr. Donahue reported that the request before the Council at this time is for
concept/design plans only and not approval of the project. He stated there
were some language modifications made to the "Standard Form of
Agreement Between Owner and Architect" which is produced by the
American Institute of Architects. An approximate maximum figure of
$500,000 was utilized at this time for the project cost. The basic architect
fee was established at 8.7%.
Mr. Steve Sondrall, City Attorney, was asked to elaborate on the contract
modifications. He noted the modifications generally were to eliminate
perceived favoritism toward entities within the contract back toward the
owner's perspective in terms of control of the project. Amendments were
also made to the indemnification provisions. He explained that no
significant changes were made to the contracts.
RESOLUTION 96-16 Councilmember Enck introduced the following resolution and moved its
Item 10.4 adoption: "RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT WITH BONESTROO,
ROSENE, ANDERMK & ASSOCIATES FOR DESIGN OF THE PUBLIC WORKS
REMODELING PROJECT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 542, AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO SIGN". The motion for the
adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Councilmember
Otten, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Erickson, Enck, Norby, Otten, Wehling; and the following voted
against the same: None; Abstained: None; Absent: None; whereupon the
resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the mayor
which was attested to by the city clerk.
IMP. PROJECT 536 Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 10.5, Resolution Approving
Item 10.5 Contract with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates for Design
Services for the Ice Arena Expansion, Improvement Project 536, and
Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Sign.
Mr. Donahue reported that this item is similar to action taken in the
previous item (10.4) and the request before the Council at this time is for
design services only and not approval of the project. He stated there were
some language modifications made to the "Standard Form of Agreement
Between Owner and Architect" which is produced by the American
Institute of Architects.
New Hope City Council January 8, 1996
Page 6
RESOLUTION 96-17 Councilmember Norby introduced the following ordinance and moved its
Item 10.5 adoption: "RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT WITH BONESTROO,
ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE ICE
ARENA EXPANSION, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 536, AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO SIGN". The motion for the
adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Councilmember
Enck, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Erickson, Enck, Norby, Otten, Wehling; and the following voted
against the same: None; Abstained: None; Absent: None; whereupon the
resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the mayor
which was attested to by the city clerk.
IMP. PROJECT 536 Mayor Erickson introduced for discussion Item 10.6, Resolution Approving
Item 10.6 Contract with E&V Consultants and construction Managers for
Construction. Management Services Related to the Ice Arena Expansion,
Improvement Project 536, and Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to
Sign.
Mr. Donahue indicated compensation details are being negotiated for the
contract and he will provide a final report at a later date. He confirmed
that at this time the City is only obligated to pay an hourly rate for services
rendered to date.
MOTION Motion was made by Councilmember Norb¥, seconded by Councilmember
Item 10.6 Otten, to continue Item 10.6 until the January 22, 1996, Council Meeting.
All present voted in favor. Motion carried.
OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Donahue reminded the City Council of the Fire Consolidation Meeting
Announcements January 9th at the City of Crystal.
A joint City Council Meeting with the City of Crystal is scheduled for
January 29 regarding organized garbage collection.
A work session was scheduled for January 18 to discuss community
survey results.
An introductory meeting with Human Rights Commissioners was scheduled
for January 16 at 6:00 p.m.
Councilmember Enck referred a recent request made by the Association of
Nonsmokers for review of the city's tobacco ordinance to the Citizens
Advisory Commission.
ADJOURNMENT Motion was made by Councilmember Norby, seconded by Councilmember
Wehling, to adjourn the meeting as there was no further business to come
before the Council. All voted in favor. The New Hope City Council
adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Valerie Leone
City Clerk
New Hope City Council January 8, 1996
Page 7
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428
Approved EDA Minutes December 11, 1995
Meeting #19
CALL TO ORDER President Erickson called the meeting of the Economic Development
Authority to order at 8:51 p.m.
ROLL CALL Present: Erickson, Enck, LaVine Norby, Otten, Wehling
Staff Present: Sondrall, Hanson, Donahue, Leone, McDonald, Bellefuil
APPROVE MINUTES Motion was made by Commissioner Enck, seconded by Commissioner
Wehling, to approve the EDA minutes of November 27, 1995. Voting in
favor: Erickson, Enck, Wehling; Abstained: Norby, Otten; Absent: None;
Motion carried.
IMP. PROJECT 467 President Erickson introduced for discussion Item 4, Update on Autohaus
Item 4 Site Improvements, 7709 42nd Avenue North (Improvement Project No.
467).
President Erickson suggested that the item be continued to a later date as
Tom Boettcher is out of town tonight.
MOTION Motion was made by Commissioner Enck, seconded by Commissioner
Item 4 Wehling, to continue this item until the January 22, 1996 meeting. All
present voted in favor. Motion carried.
IMP. PROJECT 533 President Erickson introduced for discussion Item 5, Resolution Approving
Item 5 Right of First Refusal for Acquisition of Homeward Bound Property at 4741
Zealand Avenue North (Improvement Project No. 533).
The EDA has indicated an interest in the use of the property at 4741
Zealand Avenue North 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.
President Erickson provided an update on the property. He stated the
property has been listed for sale. Representatives of CareBreak and House
of Hope Lutheran Church may be interested in leasing the property if the
City purchased it.
EDA RESOLUTION Commissioner Enck introduced the following resolution and moved its
95-23 adoption: "RESOLUTION APPROVING RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL FOR
Item 5 ACQUISITION OF HOMEWARD BOUND PROPERTY AT 4741 ZEALAND
AVENUE NORTH." The motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution
was seconded by Commissioner Otten, and upon vote being taken thereon
the following voted in favor thereof: Erickson, Otten, Enck, Wehling,
Williamson; and the following voted against the same: None; Absent:
None; whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted,
signed by the president which was attested to by the executive director.
IMP. PROJECT 474 President Erickson introduced for discussion Item 6, Discussion Regarding
Item 6 Lease Between Phoenix Manufacturing Corporation and the EDA for City-
New Hope EDA December 11, 1995
Page I
Owned Building at 7528 42nd Avenue (Improvement Project No. 474).
President Erickson stated currently the lease rental rate with Phoenix
Manufacturing is $20,020 which covers the real estate taxes. Staff is
recommending increasing the rental rate to market rate conditions and is
seeking EDA's direction.
Mr. Donahue indicated that staff has researched industrial building rental
rates. He pointed out that prior to any new agreement, it is necessary to
determine whether the building meets city code.
President Erickson pointed out that this may be one way to recover the
cost of demolishing the building which is estimated at $30-40,000.
The EDA directed the City Manager to proceed with a developing a
proposal.
ADJOURNMENT Motion was made by Commissioner Norby, seconded by Commissioner
Enck, to adjourn the meeting. All present voted in favor. The New Hope
EDA adjourned at 9:02 p.m,
Respectfully submitted,
Valerie Leone
City Clerk
New Hope EDA December 11, 1995
Page 2
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428
Approved EDA Minutes January 8, 1996
Meeting #1
CALL TO ORDER President Erickson called the meeting of the Economic Development
Authority to order at 8:46 p,m,
ROLL CALL Present; Erickson, Enck, LaVine Norby, Otten, Wehling
Staff Present: Sondrall, Hanson, Donahue, Leone, McDonald, French
APPROVE MINUTES Motion was made by Commissioner Norby, seconded by Commissioner
Enck, to approve the EDA minutes of December 11, 1995. All present
voted in favor. Motion carried.
IMP. PROJECT 537 President Erickson introduced for discussion Item 4, Discussion Regarding
Item 4 1996 "Shop Neighborly New Hope" Promotion (Improvement Project No.
537).
Commissioner Wehling reported that she and city staff met with Key Group
Advertising, Inc. regarding a campaign for 1998. She recommended
appointing a steering committee and welcomed input from the other EDA
members. Invitations will be distributed t° the star retailers. President
Erickson directed Commissioner Wehling to schedule a 3:00 p.m. meeting
in the near future.
DATA BASE President Erickson introduced for discussion Item 5, Resolution Approving
PROGRAM Contract with TwinWest Chamber of Commerce for Minnesota Real Estate
Item 5 Journal Property Tracking Data Base Program.
EDA RESOLUTION Commissioner Enck introduced the following resolution and moved its
96-01 adoption: "RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT WITH TWlNWEST
Item 5 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR MINNESOTA REAL ESTATE JOURNAL
PROPERTY TRACKING DATA BASE PROGRAM." The motion for adoption
of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Commissioner Wehling, and
upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof:
Erickson, Enck, LaVine Norby, Otten, Wehling; and the following voted
against the same: None; Absent: None; whereupon the resolution was
declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the president which was
attested to by the executive director.
ADJOURNMENT Motion was made by Commissioner Wehling, seconded by Commissioner
Norby, to adjourn the meeting. All present voted in favor. The New Hope
EDA adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Valerie Leone
City Clerk
New Hope EDA January 8, 1996
Page I