030496 Planning AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 4, 1996
CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA
7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER.
2. CONSENT ITEMS
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
'3.1 Case 95-15 Request for Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development
Approval to Allow Construction of a Car-X Muffler, Brake and
Alignment Facility in a Mini-Mall Concept with Future Retail Space
Construction, David Lasky, Petitioner
3.2 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 - Request to Table
4. COMMITTEE REPORTS
4.1 Report of Design and Review Committee - Next Meeting: March 14th at 3:30 p.m.
4.2 Report of Codes and Standards Committee - Next Meeting: To be scheduled
5. OLD BUSINESS
5.1 Miscellaneous Issues
A. Discussion regarding pawn shop moratorium
B. Discussion regarding A Resolution Establishing Minimum Requirements for
Accepting Written Requests Relating to Zoning
6. NEW BUSINESS
6.1 Review of Planning Commission Minutes of February 6, 1996.
6.2 Review of City Council Minutes of January 22 & February 12, 1996.
6.3 Review of EDA Minutes of January 22, 1996.
7. ANNOUNCEMENTS
8. ADJOURNMENT
* Petitioners are required to be in attendance.
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 95-15
Request: Request for Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development Approval to
Allow Construction of a Car-X Muffler, Brake and Alignment Facility in a
Mini-Mall Concept with Future Retail Space Construction
Location: 7180 42nd Avenue North
PID No: 17-118-21-21-0031
Zoning: B-4, Community Business District
Petitioner: David Lasky
Report Date: March 1, 1996
Meeting Date: March 4, 1994
BACKGROUND
1. The petitioner is requesting Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development approval to allow
construction of a Car-X Muffler, Brake and Alignment facility in a mini-mall concept with future
retail space construction, pursuant to Sections 4.19, 4.194 and 4.196(e) of the New Hope Code
of Ordinances.
2. The initial PUD request was considered by the Planning Commission in September and included
a detached Car-X facility to be located on the site. There is currently a 4,400 square foot
building containing "G.I. Joe Surplus" and "Down On 42nd Avenue Consignment" stores on the
property. The Commission tabled the request, the petitioner revised the plans, and came back
to the Commission in November. The application was tabled again due to lack of details
provided and due to a number of concerns expressed by staff and the Commission regarding
traffic patterns, noise barriers, and the lack of linkage between the existing and new buildings
proposed for the site.
3. In December and January, the petitioner met with staff and completely revised the plans to
address a number of previous staff/Commission concerns. New plans were submitted in
February for consideration by the Design & Review Committee. The petitioner also appeared
before the Ci.ty Council on February 12th to get input on the revised concept. At the Council
meeting, the petitioner indicated that the previous application for a detached Car-X facility was
being withdrawn and that the new mini-mall concept should be considered as a new application,
and the City Council concurred.
4. A revised site plan has been submitted by Laslcy Company Real Estate for a planned unit
development (PUD) conditional use permit to construct a second principal building (Car-X) on
a 1.47 acre lot located at the northwest corner of Nevada Avenue and 42nd Avenue. The
western portion of the subject site is currently occupied by a single story retail structure with two
individual tenants. The eastern portion of the site, currently undeveloped, is proposed to be
developed with a 4,800 square foot Car-X automotive service facility and a 2,268 square foot
future retail structure. The site is located within the B-4, Community Business, Zoning District
which conditionally permits automobile service and repair establishments and commercial planned
unit developments.
r
Planning Case Report 95-15 2 March 4, 19'96
5. Surrounding land uses include Crown Auto to the east (B-4), vacant B-4 City-owned property to
the west across Nevada Avenue, B-4 retail to the south across 42nd Avenue, and R-1 (Single
Family Residential) arid R-4 (Multi-Family Residential) to the north.
6. The property is located in Planning District #16 of the Comprehensive Plan, which focused
recommendations on traffic safety issues and effective transitions or screening of higher intensity
uses.
7. Consistent with the 42nd Avenue Plan, the City initiated a rezoning of several properties along
the 42nd Avenue corridor in 1990 from B-3 to B-4, in an attempt to unify existing and future
land uses in the area. As a result, the subject property was rezoned from B-3, Auto Oriented
Business, to its current B-4, Community Business, designation. The B-4, Community Business,
which lists minor auto repair as a conditionally permitted use, in addition to the introduction of
a second principal use is only allowed by a planned unit development (PUD).
8. The Planning Consultant has stated that "the Car-X facility is to be physically interconnected to
the site's existing retail structure. The site plan also makes provision for _+2,300 square feet of
future retail space directly east of the Car-X facility. By City zoning definition, the proposed
development constitutes a "shopping center" and must be processed as a planned unit
development conditional use permit. Due to the relative simplicity of the development,
simultaneous PUD concept plan, development plan and final plan processing is considered
appropriate."
9. The Planning Consultant has also indicated that "generally speaking, the proposed site
modifications are considered highly positive, both in terms of site functioning (circulation) and
appearance (aesthetics). There are, however, several minor issues which should be addressed
as the development process moves forward."
10. The topography of the property slopes downward 12 feet from 42nd Avenue to the northeast
comer (rear) of the property.
11. The petitioner states in the application that the proposed building would be similar to other
buildings of the chain, but would be designed and treated in a more sophisticated manner. The
petitioner further states that it is their intention to make the building and surrounding land
attractive and functional. The petitioner states that the new business will provide employment
for the people in the area as well as needed service to the community.
ANALYSIS
1. The purpose of the Planned Unit Development is to provide for the grouping of land parcels
for development as an integrated, coordinated unit as opposed to traditional parcel by
parcel, piecemeal, sporadic and unplanned approach to development. The PUD is intended
to introduce flexibility of site design and architecture for the conservation of land and open
space through clustering of buildings and activities. It is further intended that PUDs are
to be characterized by central management, integrated planning and architecture, joint or
common use of parking, maintenance of open space and other similar facilities, and
harmonious selection and efficient distribution of uses.
P, lannin~g Case Report 95-15 3 March 4, 1996
2. The General Requirements and Standards for a PUD that are applicable to this application include
the following:
(1) Ownership. An hpplication for PUD approval must be filed by the landowner or jointly by
all landowners of the property included in a project. The application and all submissions
must be directed to the development of the property as a unified whole. In the case of
multiple ownership, the approved PUD shall be binding on all owners.
(2) Comprehensive Plan Consistency. The proposed PUD shall be consistent with the City
Comprehensive Plan.
(3) Common Open Space. Common open space at least sufficient to meet the minimum
requirements established in this Code and such complementary structures and improvements
as are necessary and appropriate for the benefit and enjoyment of the residents of the PUD
shall be provided within the area of the PUD.
(4) Operating and Maintenance Requirements for PUD Common Open Space/Facilities.
Whenever common open space or service facilities are provided within the PUD, the PUD
plan shall contain provisions to assure the continued operation and a maintenance of such
open space and service facilities to a predetermined reasonable standard. Common open
space and service facilities within a PUD may be placed under the ownership of one or more
of the following:
(a) Landlord-Tenant. Landlord control, where only use by tenants is anticipated.
(b) Owners. Property Owners Association, provided that certain conditions are met.
(5) Sta~ng of Public and Common Open Space Dedication. When a PUD provides for
common or public open space, the total area of common or public open space or land escrow
security in any stage of development, shall, at a minimum, bear the same relationship to the
total open space to be provided in the entire PUD as the stages or units completed or under
development bear to the entire PUD.
(6) Under_ground Utilities. In any PUD, all utilities, including, but not limited to telephone,
electricity, gas and Cable television shall be installed underground.
(7) Utility Connections.
(a) Water Connections. Where more than one property is served from the same service
line, a shut off valve must be located in such a way that each unit's service may be shut
off and secured by the City, in addition to the normally supplied shut off at the street.
(b) Sewer Connections. Where more than one unit is served by a sanitary sewer lateral
which exceeds three hundred feet in length, provision must be made for a manhole to
allow adequate cleaning and maintenance of the lateral. All maintenance and cleaning
shall be the responsibility of the property owners association or owner.
Planning Case Report 95-15 4 March 4, 1966
(8) Roadways. Private.
(a) Design. Private roadways within the project shall have an improved surface to twenty-
five feet or more in width and shall be so designed as to permit the City fire trucks to
provide protection to each building.
(b) Parking. No portion of the required private road system may be used in calculating
required off-street parking space or be used for parking.
(9) Landscaping. In any PUD, landscaping shall be provided according to a plan approved by
the City Council, which shall include a detailed planting list with sizes and species indicated
as part of the Final Plan. In assessing the landscaping plan, the City Council shall consider
the natural features of the particular site, the architectural characteristics of the proposed
structures and the overall scheme of the PUD plan.
(10) Public Services. The proposed project shall be served by the City water and sewer system
and fire hydrants shall be installed at such locations as necessary to provide fire protection.
(11) Building Height. Height limitations shall be the same as imposed in the respective districts.
(12) Refuse. Provision for trash pick-up shall be provided according to a plan approved by the
City Council.
(13) Site Improvement Agreement. Prior to the issuance of a building permit as part of Planned
Unit Development, the permit, applicant, builder, or developer shall execute and deliver to
the Council a development agreement. The agreement shall detail all use restrictions and
required on and off-site improvements conditional to the PUD rezoning or CUP approval.
The agreement shall provide for the installation within one year of the off-site and on-site
improvements as approved by the Council, secured by a cash escrow or surety bond in an
amount and with surety and conditions satisfactory to the City, to insure the City that such
improvements will be actually constructed and installed according to specifications and plans
approved by the City as expressed in such agreement. The amount of the bond shall be one
and one-half times the estimated cost of the improvements as determined by the City
Engineer or City Building Official.
3. The City Code establishes special requirements for the granting of a conditional use permit
to allow Commercial or Industrial PUD projects which are in compliance with the permitted
and conditional uses allowed in a specific district in one or more buildings in relation to an
overall design, an integrated physical plan and in accordance with the provisions and
procedures prescribed in the Code.
(1) Frontage. The tract of land for which a project is proposed and a permit requested shall
not have less than 200 feet of frontage on a public right-of-way.
(2) Yard. No building shall be nearer than 50 feet to the side or rear property line when such
line abuts an R-l, R-2, R-3 or R-4 use district.
I-'lanning Case Report 95-15 5 March 4, 1996
(3) Landscaping, Screenine and Surfacing.
(a) Surfacing. The entire site other than that taken up by structures or landscaping shall be
surfaced with'a material to control dust and drainage.
(b) Drainage. A drainage system subject to the approval of the City Engineer shall be
installed.
(c) Screening and Landscaping. Developments abutting an R-l, R-2, R-3 and R-4 district
shall be screened and landscaped.
4. The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to provide the City with a reasonable and legally
permissible degree of discretion in determining suitability of certain designated uses upon the
general welfare, pUblic health, and safety. In making this determination, whether or not the
conditional use is to be allowed, the City may consider the nature of adjoining land or
buildings, whether or not a similar use is already in existence and located on the same
premises or on other lands close by, the effect upon traffic into and from the premises, or
on any adjoining roads, and all such other or further factors as the City shall deem a
requisite for consideration in determining the effect of such use on the general welfare,
public health, and safety.
5. Other general criteria to be considered when determining whether to approve or deny a
conditional use permit include:
A. Comprehensive Plan. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific
policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official
Comprehensive Municipal Plan of the City.
B. Compatibility. The proposed use is compatible with its adjacent land uses.
C. Performance Standards. The proposed use conforms with all applicable performance
standards contained in the Code.
D. No Depreciation in Value. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area
in which it is proposed.
E. Zoning District Criteria. In addition to the above general criteria, the proposed CUP meets
the criteria specified for the various zoning districts:
1. In Business Districts (B-l, B-2, B-3, B-4):
a. Traffic. The proposed use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion.
b. Nearby Residences. Adjacent residentially zoned land will not be adversely
affected because of traffic generation, noise, glare, or other nuisance
characteristics.
c. Effect on Other Businesses. Existing businesses nearby will not be adversely
affected because of curtailment of customer trade brought about by intrusion of
unduly heavy non-shopping traffic or general unsightliness.
Planning Case Report 95-15 6 Marcli 4, 1906
6. Minor auto repair and tire and battery stores and service are allowed by conditional use in the
B-4 Zoning District, provided that the following conditions applicable to this application are met:
A. Compatibility. Tlie architectural appearance and functional plan of the building and site shall
not be so dissimilar to the existing buildings or areas to cause impairment in property values
or constitute a blighting influence within a reasonable distance of the lot.
B. Surfacing. The entire site other than that taken up by a building, structure or plantings shall
be surfaced with a material to control dust and drainage which is subject to the approval of
the City.
C. Area. A minimum lot area of 22,500 square feet and minimum lot dimensions of 150 feet
by 130 feet.
D. Drainage. A drainage system subject to the approval of the City shall be installed.
E. Curbing. A curb not less than six inches above grade shall separate the public sidewalk from
motor vehicle service areas.
F. Green Strip. At the boundaries of a residential district, a strip of not less than five feet shall
be landscaped and screened in compliance with Section 4.033(3).
G. Lighting Landscaped. Each light standard shall be landscaped.
H. Vehicle Circulation. Vehicular access points shall create a minimum of conflict with through
traffic movement.
I. Noise. Provisions are made to control and reduce noise in accordance with the Noise Control
Section of the City Code.
J. Outside Storage. No outside storage except as allowed in compliance with City Code.
7. The Department Heads of the City met on February 15th to review the revised plans and the
Design & Review Committee met on February 16th with the petitioner to review the plans.
Issues discussed at these meetings included: landscaping and green area along 42nd Avenue,
grade at rear of building, exterior aesthetics of the building, site lighting plan, parking areas,
loading zone, trash enclosure on west side of property, sod vs. seed in future retail area, sanitary
sewer and water service connections, bituminous vs. concrete curb, signage, and Fire Department
issues. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meetings.
8. The revised plans include the following details:
A. Site data listed on the site plan is as follows:
Existing site area = 63,458 sq. ft.
New paved areas = 40,200 sq. ft.
New building construction = 4,900 sq. ft.
I~lannin'g Case Report 95-15 7 March 4, 1996
Existing building floor areas = 2,400 sq. ft.
Future building area = 2,560 sq. ft.
Green Space = 15,958 sq. ft.
11.5 % total area = Building area
28% total area = Green space area
60.5 % total area = Paved area
B. Setbacks: The Planning Consultant has confirmed that the proposed structure addition
(including future retail space) has been found to meet applicable B-4 District setbacks as
listed below:
Required Proposed
Front Yard* 35 feet 70 feet
East Side Yard 10 feet 36 feet
North Side Yard** 50 feet 73 feet
* Applies to 42nd Avenue and Nevada Avenue
** Abuts residential district
C. Parking Requirements: The Planning Consultant has stated that in consideration of the
proposed shared parking arrangement, it must be demonstrated that the site in question may
accommodate maximum use of both site structures. As calculated below, the subject site
must provide a total of 55 off-street parking spaces. With a parking supply of 65 spaces,
applicable off-street parking requirements have been satisfied for the proposed site plan.
Required
Ratio Spaces
Western Building 1 per 150 square feet of floor area* 28
(4,640 sq. ft.)
Car-X 8 spaces plus 1 for each 800 sq. ft. 13
(4,800 sq. ft.) of floor area over 1,000 sq. ft.
Future Retail 1 per 150 square feet of floor area* 14
(2,268 sq. ft.)
TOTAL 55
* Structures containing two or more types of uses, the gross floor area of each use shall be
calculated and a 10% reduction shall be made for non-productive space.
The site plan has been revised as per staff's recommendation to illustrate specific stalls
devoted to use by the handicapped (three handicapped stalls). Two are located in the front
parking area near 42nd Avenue and one is located north of the existing building/west of the
proposed building. The parking stalls each meet the City's minimum size requirements.
The site plan illustrates that all parking areas will have bituminous surfacing and striped
stalls.
Planning Case Report 95-15 8 March~ 4. 1996
The Planning Consultant has stated that the future implied conversion of the Car-× facility
to retail use would escalate total off-street parking demand from 55 to 70 spaces (1 space
per 150 square feet used for retail uses). Thus, the proposed off-street parking supply of
65 spaces would not be sufficient. In the event that Car-X would be converted to other retail
uses, a parking lot south of the proposed Car-X can provide an additional ten parking spaces.
The southern parking area provides a 69-foot dimension between the south curb and the
Car-X building. This dimension can adequately provide for a double load 90 degree parking
lot and a seven-foot sidewalk along the building.
D. Curbing. The site plan indicates that the curb along the south parking area curbing around
the front plaza area and the curbing at the rear of the proposed building is made of concrete
whereas the new curbing to be installed on the north and east sides of the site curbing shows
bituminous construction. It is the City Engineer's recommendation that all curb be made of
concrete as the City has held this standard for most other commercial developments.
Bituminous is more prone to deterioration and highly susceptible to snow plow damage.
Upon examination by the Design & Review Committee, a compromise position was
suggested which would include a combination of concrete and bituminous curb. The
Committee suggested that a concrete curb be provided along Nevada Avenue, along 42nd
Avenue, and along the eastern property line from 42nd Avenue extending to the front of the
building, with the balance remaining as bituminous curb. The Planning Commission should
consider whether they want a mixture of bituminous/concrete curbing on the site or not. The
City ordinances do not specifically require concrete curbing on the interior of commercial
sites, however, the Commission has the prerogative to establish conditions of approval with
a conditional use permit.
E. Traffic Circulation. The site's circulation pattern is considered positive and a vast
improvement over the previous submission. Adequate area for vehicular stacking has been
provided both along the 42nd and Nevada Avenue access points. The property is accessed
via a 22-foot wide curb cut from Nevada Avenue and a 28-foot wide curb cut from 42nd
Avenue North.
F. Loading. The site plan notes that a loading area is to be provided on the north side of the
Car-X facility and a future loading platform to be constructed in the future, if required. The
Building Official has indicated that the loading berth area meets code requirements. It is the
City Engineer's recommendation that the loading berth area north of the building be raised
by ___two to three feet to be functional with regard to building access, however, the petitioner
has indicated that raising the grade will cause drainage problems for the business located in
the lower level of the existing building.
G. Landscaping. The landscaping plan shows existing and new landscaping and a planting
schedule shows that 223 new trees and shrubs will be planted on the site, as listed below:
P~lanning Case Report 95-15 9 March 4, 1996
PLANT SCHEDULE
Common Name Size Quantity
Black Hills Spruce 5' hr. 10
Techny arborvitae 5' ht. 10
Hughes juniper 18" spr. 30
'Autumn Flame' red maple 21/2" c. 0
'Tina' crabapple 1.5" c. 1
'Minuet' lilac 36" ht. 9
'Burgundy Carousel' barberry 24" ht. 2
Black chokeberry 24" ht. 17
(transplant) 35
'Gumball' spirea 24" spr. 47
'Autumn Joy' sedum 47
'Fairy Charm' daylily 15
TOTAL 223
(includes transplants)
- Black Hills Spruce will be located on the north/rear of the property (9) and one will be
located near Nevada Avenue.
- Techny Arborvitae will be planted around the trash enclosure on the west side of the
property and on the east side of the new building.
- Hughes Juniper will be planted on the peninsula at the 42nd Avenue curb cut, in the plaza
area at the front of the building, and near the west trash enclosure.
- Crabapple to be planted in front plaza area.
- Lilacs to be planted on east side of new building.
- Carousels to be planted on peninsula at 42nd Avenue entrance.
- New Chokeberry to be planted west of parking area near Nevada Avenue. Existing
Chokeberry at comer of 42nd and Nevada to be transplanted along 42nd Avenue.
- Spirea to be planted along 42nd Avenue.
- Autumn Joy to be planted near westerly curb cut and around west trash enclosure.
- Daylillies to be planted in front plaza area.
- All plantings on the north/south/west sides of the property will be sprinkled and an
irrigation plan has been provided.
- The green area is proposed to be seeded and disturbed areas on 42nd Avenue will be
sodded. The petitioner has revised the plan to show sodding in the future retail area on the
east.
Planning Case Report 95-15 10 March 4, 19~)6
-Rock mulch will be installed adjacent to the rear of the new building.
- The Planning Consultant has made several spacing/planting recommendations in his report
and staff will be recommending as a condition of approval that all landscaping be
coordinated with the City Forester.
H. Snow Storage - is shown at the north side of the property and at the southwest comer.
I. Trash Enclosure. The Planning Consultant has recommended that the trash enclosure
located along Nevada Avenue to the south of the entry/exit drive be relocated. After
discussion with the owner, the Design & Review Committee felt that it may be possible to
screen the trash enclosure at the proposed location with plant material as shown. Although
the trash enclosure is sufficiently screened to screen views from the north and west, three
issues remain regarding its proposed location:
1. By its nature a trash enclosure is an accessory use that is necessary and incidental to the
conduct of retail operations. No accessory storage type buildings should be located in
any yard other than a rear yard.
2. The location of the trash enclosure is approximately 8 feet from the sidewalk that runs
along Nevada Avenue. This attractive nuisance effects the visual appearance of Nevada
Avenue.
3. The coniferous plant material screen sight may interfere with traffic or pedestrian
visibility from Nevada Avenue. Staff and the petitioner have been unable to determine
another suitable location for the trash enclosure that would be easily accessible by
tenants of the existing building. The Commission will need to determine if the proposed
location is acceptable or not.
A new trash enclosure is also shown at the rear of the new building near the loading
berth. As requested, the petitioner has shown that this enclosure would be relocated to
the north parking area if a loading platform is installed in the future.
J. Lighting. The lighting plan shows spillage onto adjoining properties and public rights-of-
way. The lighting plan should be revised to show that lighting at the property line should
not exceed one foot candle. Any lighting used to illuminate off-street parking areas must
be arranged and designed to reflect light away from adjoining property and public rights-of-
way.
K. ~. As shown on the site plan, two ground signs are proposed to be located upon the
subject site. The existing sign at 42nd/Nevada which states the address of the property and
identifies the two existing tenants would remain in place. A new pylon sign would be
installed at the 42nd Avenue entrance identifying the Car-X Muffler Shop.
L. Buildin~ Height. Within B-4 Zoning Districts, no structure may exceed three stories. As
shown on the submitted building elevations, the proposed Car-X building is to measure 19
feet in height and, therefore, meets the Zoning Ordinance requirement for height.
I31anning Case Report 95-15 11 March 4, 1996
M. Building Design. The elevations show that the two buildings will be connected with a clock
tower which would have a standing seam metal roof, a clock facing 42nd Avenue, and
vertical wood siding and trim. The area beneath the clock tower would be open and the
stairway to the north would provide access to the businesses in the existing building. An
ornamental steel railing would surround the staircase.
The south elevation of the Car-X building would have vertical metal panels on the upper
portion and face brick on the lower portion. The building would contain eight (8) overhead
doors facing 42nd Avenue and the doors would have glass view panels. The south elevation
would also have a Car-X Brakes/Muffler wall sign, which complies with Sign Code
standards.
The rear (north) elevation of the new building would be painted concrete block. A new roof
connection to the existing building would be installed.
The west elevation of the new building would have upper vertical metal panels and lower
concrete painted block. Windows have been installed on the west elevation, per staff and
Design & Review Committee recommendations.
The east elevation would have similar upper vertical metal panels and lower concrete painted
block.
The Design & Review Committee suggested that the west side of the Car-X facility needs
additional treatment along Nevada Avenue. The revised plan has attempted to provide this
by continuing the vertical metal fascia along the west elevation of the proposed building to
tie into the existing elevation design; and provide windows similar in design to the existing
structure.
The western facade of the site's existing structure is finished in face brick, whereas, the
facade of the Car-X facility is to be f'mished in painted concrete block. However, since the
west side is the front elevation as viewed from Nevada Avenue, the Planning Consultant has
suggested that the western facade of the Car-X facility be finished in a manner similar to the
existing building. The Building Official believes that it will be difficult to match the old and
new brick sizes and instead suggests using glaze, trim and glass to provide more unification
between the two buildings. The north and east facades of the Car-X structure are proposed
to be finished in painted concrete block to match the face brick upon the site's existing
structure.
N. Future Retail Use. The Planning Consultant has also recommended that to avoid
unnecessary future processing, the conditions of PUD/CUP approval should specify that an
amendment procedure will not be necessary unless a "substantial" change as determined by
the City is proposed.
9. The City Engineer reviewed the plans and his comments are attached. Recommendations that
have not been discussed previously include:
Planning Case Report 95-15 12 Marcl4 4, 1996
A.Sanitary sewer service is shown on 42nd Avenue. It is suggested sewer service be
considered from Nevada Avenue, which has less traffic. Also, insulation may not be
required from Nevada as it is from 42nd.
B. Water service is shown as wet tap in Nevada Avenue. Public Works does not allow wet
taps. Cut-in is required.
10. Staff commend the petitioner on his cooperation with staff and significant revisions/improvements
that have been made to the plans.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the CUP/PUD request to construct a Car-X facility and future retail
space at 42nd/Nevada Avenues subject to the following conditions:
1. Submittal of revised lighting plan to show a maximum of one (1) foot candle at property lines.
2. Landscaping/plantings to be coordinated with City Forester.
3. Implementation of City Engineer's recommendations on sanitary sewer and water connections.
4. Consideration be given to the location of the west trash enclosure and the adequacy of the
screening provided for it.
5. Consideration as to which curbing options be imposed (a continuous concrete curb throughout
the site or a combination of concrete and bituminous).
6. The west building facade material to be reconsidered to match the existing building finish.
7. Execution of a CUP/Site Improvement/PUD Agreement and performance bond to be submitted
(amount to be determined by Building Official and City Engineer).
Attachments: Address/Topo Maps Petitioner 2/6 Correspondence/Proposal Description
Site Plan Previously Submitted Project Information:
Site Data Market Evaluation
Floor Plan Hours of Operation
Signage Details Delivery Trucks
Building Elevations Maintenance
Landscape Plan 2/28 Planners' Report
Plant Schedule 2/27 City Engineer Comments
Irrigation Plan 2/29 Building Official Comments
Lighting Plan 2/12 Council Request
Lot Survey
X
906.2
o
907.0
JE 903. I NORTH
~ x
t04.8 x90§. 4
~ ....... ~ ~ 1 - , I . -
h! ~ I ;L .; i i
I
Jamk BERNARD HERMANJ LASKY NEW HOPE kllNi MALL
SITE PLAN l~mlm~.~ARCHITECTS'~ ~ ~..INC',-~ J
S TE DATA:
EXISTING SITE AREa =6~,.458 SQ. FT.
NEW' PAVED AREAS =40,200 SQ. FT. ,
NEW BUILDINO CONSTRUCTION = 4,900 SQ. FT.
EXISTING BUILDING FLOOR AREAS -- 2,400 SO FT
FUTURE BUILDING AREA '"' 2,560 SC FT
GREEN SPACE ,, =1.5,958 SC) FT
11.5% TOTAL AREA = BUILDING AREA
28% TOTAL AREA = GREEN SPACE
60.5 % TOTAL AREA -' PAVED AREA
, PARKING:
REQUIRED --- 56 SPACES
PROVIDED -- 62 REGdL~R SPACES
'- - +$ ~DCP
65 TOTAL SPACES
........... ~ EX!STtNO BUILDING
.' I NEW CONSTRUCTION
PARKING LOT DIAGONAL STRIPING
NEW CONTOUt,' 'i EVATIC;NS
.......................... EXIST CONTOtI~
~ LEVATIONS
............................... FUTURE
"1,, CONSTRUCTION
"' .' PROPERTY Lli'h
.................. SANITARY SEw,
.................. --XIST STORM
.......... ;'RUCK TUR!'I~,,
BERNARD ~ LASKY NEW HOPE MINI MALL
~ .~ ~,,, f~.~ /~ /--, ,/
.: 1~Ii It '- ~
JjJ~
! ~ itit
~~~~ :Lasky-N ew Hope Mini-Mall
I~ 7~80 42NO. AVE. N. NEW HOPE
..... PLANT SCHEDULE
':'i"f COt!~-?,O'~ NAME BOTANICAL NAME SL"".~ TYPE QNTY
~ ~,~,~ HPI~ sI)~ce Pic~ gl~uca denska 5' t,~. ~, & B. 10
ZONE B-~ ~ T~? ~rb,rvffae Thu{; occideNalis 'Tech~y' 5' P'. ~, & B.
C H,q~'-~ ju~;per Junipers hodzontalis 1~" ,r~. fi3 cont. 30
'Hughes'
~ 'Au*utah Flame' Acer ~b~m 2-I ~:~' c, ~. & ~. 0
red m.~ple 'A~Umn Fl~e'
; 'Tk?' cr~apple MaI~ sarge~i 'Tine' 1.? f-. ~. & B.
'Minuet'
~ ~ CPC G 'Pur~[mdy Carousel' Ber~ri~ thunbergl 2t' I,L a? c~.
H b~k chokebe~ Aroma melanoc~a Z4" hL ~ cont.
tr, npl~. 35
I 'Gu~,~beq' spirea Spirea x burnside ~Y' ~'-' ~ ¢o~. 47
~G~mball'
J '.~u'umn Jo~ sedum Sedum spectabile ~1 cont. 47
K 'F~;;v Cl~rm' d~i~ Hemerocallis x 'Fai~ Ch~m~' ~ cont. 1
STAKE ~ RAIL I;~'~ ~ r ~c~'. I' ? %V. PU'E O~
-il L,c~-~-n,~c. J,~~ ARCHITECTS,,.,~ o~,, ,,,~,~ .,.., ,-~INC' CAR-X IwuIrlrL£R SHOP
REAL ESTATE
FAX (612) 922-8540
2506 MONTEREY AVENUE SOUTH · ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 55416 · PHONE (612) 922-3334 or 377-~167
February 6, 1996
Mr. Doug Sanstad
Building Specialist
City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE: 7180 42nd Avenue North revised building project
Dear Mr. Sanstad:
As we have discussed with some of the staff of the City of New Hope, we have
revised the plans for the site to become a mini-mall.
With the changes outlined on the following pages, we will be adding to the
existing structure at 7180 42nd Avenue, and will be requesting a Conditional use
Permit for the additions.
The first addition will be for a Car-X facility which is a permitted use under the
present B-4 zoning, the current zoning of the property.
We hope that the New Hope City Council and the other review committees will find
this project as appealing as others have.
Sincerely,
David Lasky
DL/mw
enc.
APPLICATION TO THE CITY OF NEW HOPE
FOR CONDITIONAL USE
7180 42ND AVENUE NORTH
FOR
CAR-X MUFFLER & BRAKE FACILTY
Property Owners
The Lasky Family
Designers
Bernard Herman Architects
HISTORY
The site, the northeast quadrant of 42nd Avenue North and Nevada, was the
original location of the New Hope City Hall. Later it became the New Hope
Municipal Bar, then Paros Pub and now is G.I Joe Army Surplus and Down on
42nd, a consignment shop. The site is approximately an acre and a half with
extremely complex topography. The property slopes from east to west along 42nd
and from west to east along the northern edge. In addition there is an elevation
drop of more than ten feet from the south to the north property lines.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
After many months of designing, planning and meeting with various staff and
committees of the City of New Hope, the owners of the property have completely
revised the planning. We are now proposing to add to the existing building to
accomplish all of the objectives suggested to us by the City.
The proposed project is now a mall with the existing building on the west end, an
attached tower, the Car-X facility and a future retail building, not yet marketed.
The new Car-X facility will be brick to match the existing building, as closely as
possible. The end result will be an integrated development with attractive
landscaping and good traffic flow.
ACOUSTICAL INFORMATION, MARKET EVALUATIONS, ETC.
All of these items have been dealt with earlier and approved by the committees at
the time the project was a PUD application. This material is a matter of your
record and file.
THE ITEMS OF CONCERN TO THE CITY STAFF
Although all aspects of the development of the site are of concern to the owners,
the future tenants and the City, there have been a few that had not been resolved
earlier.
First, the drainage, and we have agreed to participate in a catch basin or two on
the north edge of the property.
Secondly, we have relocated and redesigned the building to provide for a semi-
trailer berth, although none has been needed or expected to be needed by Car-X.
Thirdly, to tie the new structures to the existing building to make the site more
homogenous. The new plans do this.
Fourth, we have eliminated noise questions by having the building to face 42nd
Avenue as well as set-back over 70 feet.
OBJECTIVES
For more than fi~e years, the owners and previous tenants have searched for
desirable businesses for the property. Although there have been a variety of
interests, they have proved to be either undesirable, unfeasible or uninterested.
The proposed Car-X facility and future structure produce what we believe to be as
good a use of the property as history and the future indicate.
BENEFITS OF THE CAR-X PROJECT
Since the 42nd Street redevelopment project started, there have been a number of
improvements on the properties along the street. As we view the plans for this
property, I think you will agree that it is a vast improvement over the existing
conditions, In addition there are many other benefits to the community, such as:
Increased tax revenue.
Employment at a higher wage rate.
A benefitting service to the area.
A source of additional customers to the area.
An attractive development for the street.
MARKET EVALUATION
OFFICEANAREHOUSE 4457 ~ ~, N.E. 1001 W. L~e S~t
~ Minnea~lis, MN 5~14 (612) 789-3~1 (612) 8~-3118
(612) 378~4
F~ - (612) 378~31 1011 2~ ~t, South 1201 Wh~e ~ar Aven~e
11~ Harmon Pa~ HOp~ns, MN 55343 ~ Paul, MN 551~
Min~apo~, MN 55403 (612) 9~-8320 (612) 774-8686
Mutll;r & Bra (612)37 1e16
August 23, [995
H~. David LasE¥
2506 Honcece¥ Avenue S.
SC. Lou~s ?a~E, HN. 55416
EE: Ha;Eec Study -- ~e~ Eope
Dea~ Dav£d;
~hen we sea,ch fo~ a community co expand ou; Ca~-X Hu£~[e~ & B~aEe
ope~a;~on [n;o we consider a w~de a;~a~ o[ demo~;~ph[c
Some of chose ~h~n~s a~e: Adult population, ~ncome levels,
vehicle popu[aC£on, a~e o~ ve~£c[e pop, inchon, C;a~[c patterns,
end the numbe; a~d ±denc~;~es o£ compe;£C~on.
~ew Eope n~ce[¥ fits the demos~aph~cs ~hac we sea,ch
Once ~e have £denc~f[ed mazEecs ot c=mmun[C£es ~Ch ~pp;op;~a;e
demos;aph~cs, we be§~n Co seazch ~ot a suitable s£~e w[Ch~n ;hac
a;ea. Some of the conditions ~e use co evaluate a potential
s~ce £nc[ude: Amount o~ pass[n~ c~a£~c, speed
pcesence o~ c~a~c cone;o[ [£~hCs, ease o~ [n~;ess and es~ess,
s~nase p[acemenc and allowance, probable o~en;ac£on of the
bu[[d[n~ co the sc;eeC, and p¢esence o~ oche~ commercial develop-
The s~ce on 42nd Avenue ~. meets the c;£;e~£a fo~ development
o~ a Ca~-X Hu~[e~ & B~aEe Shop.
We [oo~ ~o~a~d ~o aaa7 7ea~s o~ successful[7 setv[n~ the suco-
moo±ye cepa~c needs of the ~e~ Eope commun£c¥.
S~nce;e[y,
General ~anager, ~nne
HOURS OF OPERATION
OFFICEANAREHOUSE
, ' 2400 No. 2nd St 4457 Central Avenue, N.E. ~001 W. La~e Street
(~ Minneaf:x3lis, MN 55411 (612) 789-3561 (6~ 2) 822-3! ~ 8
(612) 521-13.3 7
FAX - (612) 521-0567 1011 2nd Street Soutll 1201 Wh~e Bear Avenue
1100 Harmon Place Hopkins, MN 55343 St Paul, MN 55106
Minnea,oolis, MN 55403 (612) 935-8320 (612) 774-8686
Mufllar i6 2) 375-1918
August 22, 1995
Mr. David Lasky
2506 Monterey Ave So.
St. Louis Park MN 55416
RE: New Hope Car-X Development---Hours of Operation
Dear David,
The Car-X Muffler & Brake Shop which you are developing for us on
42nd Ave North in New Hope will be the fifth owned and operated by
Minne Mufflers Inc. in the Twin Cities area.
We anticipate that this new shop will begin operating with the same
hours-of-opera:ion as the other four. Those hours are:
Monday & Friday 8:00AM-7:'00PM
Tues. Wed & F~N~ 8:00AM-5:30PM
Saturday 8:00AM-3:DOPM
Sunday CLOSED
Having said that, it is imperative that a service business such as
ours retains the flexibility ofbeing open when our customers need
us. This consideration might require us to tailor our operating
hours at a given location to mee~ :hat shop's particular needs.
However, even with that consideration, and with respect for our
residential neighbors and our employees' private lives, we cannot
imagine that we would require more operating hours than shown ~elow.
Monday- Friday 7:30AM-7:00PM
Saturday 7:30AM-6:00PM
Sunday CLOSED
I hope you find this information useful. If I can be of any other
assistance, please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
General Manager, Minne Mufflers
DELIVERY TRUCK SIZES
" OFFICEANAREHOUSE 4457 Centrei Avenue, N.E. 1001 W. Lai~ S~'eet
974 East Henne~n Ave. Caluml3ia Hts., MN 55421 Minne~o~3im, MN 5.54~8
(612) 378-0734 (612) 789-3561 (612) 822-3118
FAX - (612) 378-0931 1011 2nd Street, Soultl 1201 White Bear Avenue
1100 Harmon Ptace Hopi~as, MN 55343 SL Paul, MN 55106
. Minneapolis, MN 55403 (612) 935.-&320 (612) 774-86~6
Muffler & Bra <6,2 37 -191,
August 24, 1995
Mr. David Lasky
2506 Monterey Avenue S.
St. Louis Park, MN. 55416
RE: New Hope Car-X Development -- Semi-Trailer Access
Dear David;
The purpose of this letter is to respond to you about the issue
of semi-trailer or large delivery truck access to the Car-X
Muffler & Brake Shop which you are developing for us on 42nd Avenue
in New Hope.
Minne Mufflers, Inc. currently operates four Car-X shops in the
Twin Cities area. As part of that operation we maintain warehouse
and administrative facilities centrally located at 97~ E. Hennipin
Avenue in Minneapolis.
This warehouse receives all major deliveries of inventory from
our vendors. The inventory received here includes weekly receipts
of exhaust parts, brake parts, shock absorbers, and miscellaneous
parts and supplies. This weekly receipt of merchandise is then
delivered to each shop in daily deliveries via our own fleet of
light-duty pick-up trucks.
These pick-up trucks are also use4 by our shops to pick up parts
from local au:o parts jobbers, to transfer parts among our shops,
and to provide our customers with courtesy rides as needed while
their vehicles are being repaired.
In addition to the pick-up trucks utilized by our'shops for the
aforementioned tasks, our warehouse also keeps two small pick-up
trucks to assist in the transfer of small amounts of inventory
from location to location.
Because of the success we have had in managing our inventories
in our shops and warehouse, we have no need for semi-trailer
access to our shops. The shop in New Hope will be no exception.
The only "large" trucks which will periodically visit our shops
are small cube vans used by our uniform supply company, small
-2-
flat-bed or cube vans used by our welding supplies vendor, and
garbage trucks. All of these vehicles are medium-du~y, single
axle vehicles.
I hope that this addresses any concerns that you or the City of
New Hope may have regarding the access by, or regular presence
of, semi-trailers at the proposed Car-X Muffler & Brake Shop in
New Hope.
If I can be of any further assistance in this or any other
matter regarding this development, please feel free to contact
me at (612) 378-0734.
Sincerely,
General Manager, Minne Mufflers
RE. 7180 42nd Avenue North
MAINTENANCE
Because the 7180 42nd Avenue North site involves a number of tenants, all
of whom are using various parts of the site, the plan is to have the property
serviced by various companies under our direction. The tenants will be charged
for the services on the basis of a formula not yet established.
These service companies will take care of snow plowing, lawn care and other
landscaping needs. Servicing of the parking and driveway areas will also be
handled by an outside company and charged to the tenants on the same formula.
COMMUNITY LANNING ,, DESIG MARKET RESEARCH
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Kirk McDonald
FROM: Madhulika Singh/Alan Brixius
DATE: 28 February 1996
RE: New Hope - Lasky PUD (Car-X)
FILE NO: 131.01 - 95.01
BACKGROUND
A revised site plan has been submitted by Lasky Company Real Estate for a planned unit
development (PUD) conditional use permit to construct a second principal building (Car-X)
on a 1.47 acre lot located at the northwest corner of Nevada Avenue and 42nd Avenue.
The western portion of the subject site is currently occupied by a single story retail
structure with two individual tenants. The eastern portion of the site, currently
undeveloped, is proposed to be developed with a 4,800 square foot Car-X automotive
service facility and a 2,268 square foot future retail structure. The site is located within the
B-4, Community Business Zoning District, which conditionally permits automobile service
and repair establishments and commercial planned unit developments.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A - Site Location
Exhibit B - Existing Conditions
Exhibit C - Revised Site Plan
Exhibit D - Revised Landscape Plan
Exhibit E - Building Elevations
Exhibit F - Lighting Plan
Exhibit G - City Engineer's Recommendation
5775 Wayzata Blvd.. Suite 555 · St. Louis Park, MN 55416 · (612) 595o9636.Fax. 595-9837
RECOMMENDATION
Our office further recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit for a
planned unit development subject to the following conditions:
1. Planning Commission opinion as to which curbing options be imposed. A
continuous concrete curb throughout the site or a combination of concrete and
bituminous as recommended by the Design and Review Committee.
2. Planning Commission recommendation as to the appropriateness of the location of
the west trash enclosure and the adequacy of the screening provide for it. ,
3. It is recommended to provide sodding where the subject site abuts residential
property. Alternative planting, as discussed in this report, should be considered to
address site appearance and maintenance concerns.
4. Submission of a final grading and drainage plan based on the recommendation of
the City Engineer.
5. The west building facade material to be reconsidered to match the existing building
finish.
6. Any lighting used to illuminate off-street parking areas must be arranged to reflect
light away from adjoining property and public rights-of-way. Said lighting plan shall
be reviewed by the City Engineer.
7. Subject to comments of other City staff, Commission members and City Council.
ISSUES ANALYSIS
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for a commercial planned unit
development as allowed under Section 4.144(3) of the New Hope Zoning Ordinance to
accommodate two principal buildings on a single lot.
Zoning. Consistent with the 42nd Avenue Plan, the City initiated a rezoning of several
properties along the 42nd Avenue corridor in 1990 from B-3 to B-4, in an attempt to unify
existing and future land uses in the area. As a result, the subject property was rezoned
from B-3, Auto Oriented Business to its current B-4, Community Business designation.
The B-4, Community Business, which lists minor auto repair as a conditionally permitted
use, in addition to the introduction of a second principal use is only allowed by a planned
unit development (PUD).
Setbacks. The proposed structure addition (including future retail space) has been found
to meet applicable B-4 District setbacks as listed below:
Required Proposed
Front Yard* 35 feet 70 feet
East Side Yard 10 feet 36 feet
North Side Yard** 50 feet 73 feet
* Applies to 42nd Avenue and Nevada Avenue
** Abuts residential district.
Off-Street Parking Requirements. In consideration of the proposed shared parking
arrangement, it must be demonstrated that the site in question may accommodate
maximum use of both site structures. As calculated below, the subject site must provide
a total of 55 off-street parking spaces. With a parking supply of 62 spaces, applicable off-
street parking requirements have been satisfied for the proposed site plan.
Required
Ratio Spaces
Western Building 1 per 150 square feet of floor area* 28
(4,640 square feet)
Car-X (4,800 square 8 spaces plus 1 for each 800 square 13
feet) feet of floor area over 1,000 square feet
Future Retail 1 per 150 square feet of floor area* 14
(2,268 square feet) ....
TOTAL 55
* Structures containing two or more types of uses, the gross floor area of
each use shall be calculated and a 10 percent reduction shall be made for
non-productive space.
However, the future implied conversion of the Car-X facility to retail use would escalate
total off-street parking demand from 55 to 70 spaces (1 space per 150 square feet used
for retail uses). Thus, the proposed off-street parking supply of 62 spaces would not be
sufficient.
3
In the event that Car-X would be converted to other retail uses, a parking lot south of the
proposed Car-X can provide an additional ten parking spaces. The southern parking area
provides a 69 foot dimension between the south curb and the Car-X building. This
dimension can adeqQately provide for a double load 90 degree parking lot and a seven
foot sidewalk along the building.
It should be noted that the City of New Hope has a specific off-street parking space
requirement for shopping centers. The off-street parking requirement for shopping centers
smaller than 20,000 square feet is ten spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area.
Application of this standard to the Lasky proposal would require 117 spaces. The Lasky
site could not accommodate this type of off-street parking requirement.
Upon examination of this parking requirements with national parking standards for
shopping centers, staff believes that the City's requirement is excessive and recommends
that the City should re-examine its Zoning Ordinance requirements for off-street parking
for shopping centers. We further believe that the retail parking standard of one space per
150 square feet would adequately serve the shopping center's need.
The parking stalls each meet the City's minimum size requirements. The applicant's site
plan illustrates that all parking areas will have bituminous surfacing and striped stalls.
The site plan has been revised as per staff's recommendation to illustrate specific stalls
devoted to use by the handicapped (three handicapped stalls).
Curbing. The site plan indicates that the curb along the south parking area is made of
concrete whereas the rest of the site curbing shows bituminous construction. It is staff's
recommendation that all curb be made of concrete. The City has held this standard for
other commercial development. Bituminous is more prone to deterioration and highly
susceptible to snow plow damage and as such, staff recommends redesign of the curb to
concrete construction instead of bituminous.
Upon examination by the Design and Review Committee, a compromise position was
suggested which would include a combination of concrete and bituminous curb. They
suggested that a concrete curb be provided along Nevada Avenue, along 42nd Avenue,
and along the eastern property line from 42nd Avenue extending to the front of the
building, with the balance remaining as bituminous curb.
The Planning Commission should consider the appropriateness of the staff's or Design
and Review Committee's recommendations.
Circulation. The site's circulation pattern is considered positive and a vast improvement
over the previous submission. Adequate area for vehicular stacking has been provided
both along the 42nd and Nevada Avenue access points.
4
The subject property is accessed via a 22 foot wide curb cut from Nevada Avenue and a
28 foot wide curb cut from 42nd Avenue North. The proposed curb cut is acceptable by
the City Engineer.
Loading. Some question exists in regard to the functioning of the site's loading area.
The site plan notes that a loading area is to be provided on the north side of the Car-X
facility. It is the City Engineer's recommendation that the loading berth area north of the
building be raised by + two to three feet to be functional with regard to building access.
Landscaping. Based on the following review, the landscape plan is generally acceptable.
City staff recommends approval provided the following conditions are met:
1. Areas to the north shown as seeded areas are to be sodded. Sodding is required
where the subject site abuts residential property. In addition, if seeded, there is
greater likelihood of soil erosion along the swale to the north of the parking lot.
2. The shrub massing located to the south of the parking area north of 42nd Avenue
north are to be planted a minimum of three feet on center away from the face of
parking lot curb. This will help prevent damage of vehicle overhang.
3. Black Chokeberry is generally not used as a hedge or screening plant material
because of its tendency to be leggy at the base, and because of screening
characteristics. In addition, where the plants have been located along 42nd Avenue
North, there may be problems with staining of the sidewalk from the plant's berries.
It is suggested that another type of shrub be considered at this location.
4. "Autumn Joy" Sedum has been specified for the planting beds at the entry on
Nevada. These perennials are generally spaced around 18 inches on center. The
area where these perennials are shown to be installed is approximately 250 square
feet, requiring around 160 plants, rather than the specified 47. Either the plant
material type should be changed, or additional plants are to be required.
Trash Enclosure. The New Hope City staff has recommended that the trash enclosure
located along Nevada Avenue to the south of the entry/exit drive is to be relocated. After
discussion with the owner, the Design Review Board felt that it may be possible to screen
the trash enclosure at the proposed location with plant material as shown. Although the
trash enclosure is sufficiently screened to screen views from the north and west, three
issues remain regarding its proposed location.
1. By its nature a trash enclosure is an accessory use that is necessary and incidental
to the conduct of retail operations. No accessory storage type buildings should be
located in any yard other than a rear yard.
2. The location of the trash enclosure is approximately 8 feet from the sidewalk that
runs along Nevada Avenue. This attractive nuisance effects the visual appearance
of the entry o¢ the existing retail building as well as the visual appearance of
Nevada Aven~e.
3. The coniferous plant material screen sight may interfere with traffic or pedestrian
visibility from Nevada Avenue. Although shown at 3 feet diameter in size, Techney
Arborvitae can reach widths of 6-8 feet.
Future Retail Use. To avoid unnecessary future processing, the conditions of PUD/CUP
approval should specify that an amendment procedure will not be necessary unless a
"substantial" change as determined by the City is proposed.
Grading and Drainage. The final site plan must revise its grading and drainage plan
based on the City Engineer's recommendation in Exhibit G:
Building Design. The Design and Review Committee suggested that the west side of the
Car-X facility needs additional treatment along Nevada Avenue. The revised plan has
attempted to provide this by continuing the vertical metal fascia along the west elevation
of the proposed building to tie into the existing elevation design; and provide windows
similar in design to the existing structure.
The western facade of the site's existing structure is finished in face brick, whereas, the
facade of the Car-X facility is to be finished in painted concrete block. However, since the
west side is the front elevation as viewed from Nevada Avenue, it is suggested that the
western facade of the Car-X facility be finished in a manner similar to the existing building.
The north and east facades of the Car-X structure are proposed to be finished in painted
concrete block to match the face brick upon the site's existing structure.
Building Height. Within B-4 Zoning Districts, no structure may exceed three stories. As
shown on the submitted building elevations, the proposed Car-X building is to measure 19
feet in height and hence, meets the Zoning Ordinance requirement for height.
Lighting. The lighting plan shows spillage onto adjoining properties and public rights-of-
way. The lighting plan should be revised to show that lighting at the property line should ·
not exceed one foot candle. Any lighting used to illuminate off-street parking areas must
be arranged and designed to reflect light away from adjoining property and public rights-of-
way.
6
Signage. As shown on the site plan, two ground signs are proposed to be located upon
the subject site. According to the City's sign regulations (Section 3.407(4).b), shopping
centers having four or less occupancies are allowed two ground signs measuring not more
than 20 feet in height or 75 feet in area. Both the existing and proposed ground signs
appear to comply with applicable sign code provisions.
CONCLUSION
Based on the information contained within this report, our office recommends approval of
the PUD/CUP subject to the conditions outlined herein. '
pc: Dan Donahue
Doug Sandstad
Steve Sondrall
David Lasky
Mark Hanson
7
~-~ ~s. ~. i ~ '.:::' :'.
O[t. '-: ' '" '
I FR~O [
B'4
1-/ ~. . ..........
::':':...:~: . ·
· ::~.: .:~.~:
~ __ - ' '. :.2...'
SCHOOL
I-1
LUTHERAN
CHURCH
CEMETERY ; - PARK
Exhibit A- Site Locatio~
" ! : ..... t ::Z~,%_.
I
,{,...._.
W- , ...... -'i "'
o
I ..~,. .: i ..l.,
· ,-..', · I ~ ::: . . l,~ :t~ii.
' ~ ..... , ...... i" ~ =' '
' - '_ , i '" ' J' ' ' · yT:--H
.... ~-_~.. """ Exhibit C - Revised Site Pla~
IlelAI-!U!IAI edoH MaN-X>ISe"I ..............
_.'... ~1 ~ - %-~ ......
./.......... ~
~.'.' . ...~... J ~"';
!"
I
~-'-------.__Exhibit D - Revised Landscape Plan
TO: Kirk McDonald
FROM: Mark Hanson
DATE: Februsxy 14, 1996
~ RE: Preliminary Review
~ Lasky New Hopo.Mini Mall
,, Our ~ile No. 34 Gert
.,.
· Sanitary sewer servtc~ is shown in 42nd Avenue. It's suggosted sewer service b~ considered from
Nevada Avenue, which has less traffic. Also, insulation may not be reqalxed from Novada as t: is from
42n&
· Water service is shown as w,t tap in Nevada Avenue, Public Works does not allow wet taps. Cut. in
is required.
· The grad,s in the front drive aisle south of Car X appear flat. Positive drainage from garage doors to
center drive lane is required. Storm sewer catch basin may be warranteA in this area. Tho T.C.
· elevaton at DBL CB appears to be a foot high (895.1', not 896).
· The site plan implies bituminous curb versus coucreto curb as required.
· The driveway grade east of future retail could be softer if low potnt in rear parking lot is locat~l directly
north of proposed building.
· Thc curb set back along 42nd Avenue (8') and the east lin~ (3') is minimal.
· It was implied if Car X was replaced with retail, parking and sidewalk tn front of garage doors would
work. However, 22'-4" will not provido parlcixlg and sidewalk.
- Existing building brick ali sides, while Car X is brick front; block (painted) on east, north and west
sides.
· It appears loadtng berth axea north of building may be lower than it needs to be (raise :e 2'-3').
Exhibit G -City Engineers Recommendations
Otto G. ~m¢~roo, P.E, Howard A. ~a~foro, P,E. MlO~&e! C_ Ly~, P~. 8H~ ~ ~e.
Rosene Ro~ ~. ~os~. p,~. Keit~ A ~r~. ,~. J~s · ~, P,~ F, T~ Foster,
~in L ~rv~a, P~, RJc~d ~. ~, P~. Scott J. ~g~k, P~. ~a~ J. Be~. P.~
~m~ 5. Noyes. P~. Jer~ A, BO~d~. P.E ~ A. ~lp, P~ K~ j. W~. P~.
Engineers & Architects , scmor c~s~e~r Tee K. ~tel~ e~. O~e J, ;~on, P~ O~ D. ~,
~om~ R. An~r3o~ ~l~ ~ Rick ~I~G P~, Jeffrey d, ~l~er,
J~s ~. Rosenme~eL P~. Date A ~ove, F.E, Jole~ ~ ~,
~flal~ C. ~gar~ RE, P~flp J. CaswetL P~. Lee ~ M~.
Fre~c J. Ste~r~ e~, Miles B. J~sen, P~ g~ ~ p~y
Michel P. R~, P~ ~aren ~ ~le~t, P~. A~s ~
Th~s ~. Pete~, P.~ ~ D, Krlstofit~ P~. J~s F, E~e~at
TO: Kirk McDonald
FROM: Mark Hanson
DATE: February 27, 1996
RE: Preliminary Review
Lasky New Hope Mini Mall
Our File No. 34 C-en
· Saniutry sewer service is shown in 42nd Avenue. It's suggested sewer service be considered from
Nevada Avenue, which has less traffic. Also, insulation may not be required from Nevada as it is from
42nd.
· Water service is shown as wet tap in Nevada Avenue. Public Works does not allow wet taps. Cut-in
is required.
· The site plan shows bituminous curb along east and north property line versus concrete curb as
required.
· The driveway grade east of future retail (7.00%) could be softer if low point in tear parking lot was
moved west and located directly north of proposed building.
· The curb set back along 42nd Avenue (5'-6") and the east property line (3') is minimal.
· It was implied if Car X was replaced with retail, parking and sidewalk in front of garage doors would
work. However, 22'-4" will not provide parking and sidewalk.
· Exi~ng building is brick all sides, while Car X building is brick front; block (painted) on east, north
and west sides.
· The g~ade near the loading berth area located in northeast cornet of building cotdd be rnised (_~
to provide easier access to btdlding sad soften grade of easterly d~ve.
2335 West Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113 · 612-636-4600
TO: KIRK McDONALD
FROM: DOUG SANDSTAD
DATE: FEBRUARY 29, 1996
SUBJECT: REVISED LASKY CUP-PUD AT 7180 42nd AVENUE NORTH
Our Consulting Planner, NAC, has summarized the few remaining details that should be
discussed and clarified, if not changed. I would emphasize just a few:
* Lighting contour drawings must be revised (before a building permiO to show a
maximum of one (1) footcandle at the property lines.
* Architectural finish to west elevation; A west wall brick match is less desirable
than attractive, consistent trim-detailing, along with significant glazing. A blank west
wall facing Nevada is not progress.
* Concrete curbing, throughoug is desirable, but not required by code. An argument can
be made that commercial-industrial traffic and plowing destroys asphalt curbs;
Perhaps, Council is at the point where they feel that the increased cost of concrete
curbing should be an ordinance requirment for all zones, other than residential. If they
agree with this approach, it is reasonable to state that decision and authorize staff to
assist the City Attorney in revising the code language, promptly.
This project has "blossomed" into a multiple use strip-retail mini-center, that hardly
resembles the earliest concepts. As a property owner design and investment, it will qualify as
a PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT, even if a few TIF dollars are used for neighborhood drainage
corrections. As such, it represents a significant capitol injection along our "Avenue". The timing
is perfecg since other signs are visible that hint at an eroding commercial market. Council and
the BLT team may be able to help Mr. Lasky locate an early tenant for the east retail space.
Staff recommend approval.
cc: file
Staff support the
FOR ACTION
Originating Department Approved for Agenda
City Manager & Planning
Kirk McDonald D 2-12-96 Item No.
By: Management Assistant By:it/ 8.
/
PLANNING CASE 95-15, DISCUSSION REGARDING CONCEPT PROPOSAL FOR
DEVELOPMENT EXPANSION ON PROPERTY OWNED BY DAVID LASKY AT 7180
42ND AVENUE NORTH
Mr. Lasky has requested to appear before the Council to get your input on his concept proposal
for development expansion on the property he owns at 7180 42nd Avenue North. There is
currently a 4,400 square foot building containing the "G.I. Joe Surplus" and "Down On 42nd
Consignment" stores on the property. Lasky appeared before the Planning Commission on
several occasions this past fail with a proposai to add a second building to the site which
would be a Car-X facility. Two buildings on one lot require a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) approval. The request was tabled at the Commission level due to a number of problems
with the plans, including traffic circulation on a site containing two buildings.
Lasky has developed a new proposal to develop a mini-convenience center on the site, which
would include a Car-X facility and furore retail space. The building additions would be added
on to the existing building on the site and would require site/building plan review/approval and
a conditional use permit. Staff is more receptive to the new plan and Lasky has included some
nice amenities on the site, including a proposed clock tower. He has submitted revised plans
to the City and will be meeting with the Design & Review Committee on February 15th in
preparation for the March 4th Planning Commission meeting. While it is unusual for a
petitioner to appear before the Council prior to seeking approvai from the Planning
Commission, he wants Council input on the concept before proceeding further.
Mr. Lasky and a representative from Bernard Herman Architects, Inc. will be present at the
meeting to make a brief presentation to the Council.
MOTION BY SECOND BY
Review: Administration: Finance:
RFA-O01
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: March 1, 1996
Meeting Date: March 4, 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 submitted revised plans for consideration at the February Planning Commission
meeting, however requested that the matter be tabled because the petitioner wanted to make
further revisions to the plans before they were considered by the Commission.
3. The petitioner has again requested tabling this request until the April 2nd Planning Commission
meeting. Staff does not anticipate any problems in complying with the "Agency Deadline"
legislation, as the petitioner has requested the tabling in writing.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends tabling this request until the April 2nd Planning Commission meeting.
.. CITY OF NEW HOPE II
II
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 29, 1996
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator
SUBJECT: Miscellaneous Issues
1. February 12th Council/EDA Meetings - At the February 12th Council/EDA meetings, the
Council/EDA took action on the following planning/development/housing issues:
A. Resolution Authorizing Release of Performance Bond for J.R. Jones Fixture Company,
Planning Case 94-02: Approved, as all improvements have been completed. See attached Council
request for more information.
B. Resolution Requesting Conveyance of Certain Tax Forfeited Land to the City of New Hope
for Specified Public Purposes - Approved, see attached Council request for more information.
C. Discussion Regarding Concept Proposal for Development Expansion on Property Owned by
David Lask¥ at 7180 42nd Avenue North - continued for discussion at 2/27 Council work session.
Please refer to Council minutes for more information.
D. Planning Case 96-02, Request for Site/Building Plan Review/Approval for Building Addition,
7709 Winpark Drive, Taber Bushnell, Inc., Petitioner: Approved as recommended by the
Planning Commission. A Site Improvement Agreement and performance bond requirements have
been forwarded to the developer.
E. Planning Case 95-27, Request for Site/Building Plan Review/Approval and a Conditional Use
Permit Amendment for the Construction of a Second Sheet of Ice at the Existing New Hope
Ice Arena, 4949 Louisiana Avenue North, City of New Hope, Petitioner: Approved as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
F. Project #536, Resolution Awarding Contracts for Ice Arena Expansion - Approved, construction
will start soon.., see attached project bulletin.
G. Project #542, Report Regarding Public Works Remodeling Project - The Council gave direction
to proceed with plans for a one-story addition and the plans will be presented to the Planning
Commission in April.
H. Discussion Regarding Moving/Flashing Si_mas - The Codes & Standards Committee had requested
direction from the Council on this issue before conducting further research (see attached Council
request). The majority of the Council indicated that they did not favor a change in the ordinance,
therefore, the Committee will not pursue this matter further.
Page 2
I. Ordinance No. 96-2/Planning Case 95-20, An Ordinance Amending the New Hope Zonin?
Code by Defining Understory and Overstor¥ Trees and Modif_¥ing Landscaping Regulation~
for Semi-Public and Income Producing Property: Approved as recommended by the Planning
Commission. A short article will appear in the April City newsletter describing the "Preferred Tree
List" and will advise residents of its availability at City Hall. We will be revising the list into a
brochure format. The list will also be included as a hand-out in all Planning Commission
applications and in all "New Resident Packets" handed out when new residents come in to City Hall
to homestead.
J. Ordinance No. 96-04/Planning Case 95-21, An Ordinance Reclassifying Various Conditional.
Uses as Permitted Uses Within the B-l, B-2, B-3 and B-4 Zoning Districts: Approved as
recommended bY the Planning Commission. An article on these code changes will be included in
the spring issue of Business Link.
K. Project #474, Discussion Regarding Property at 7500 42nd Avenue - Due to the fact that the
Ardel Engineering building at 7500 42nd Avenue is up for lease and the City is interested in
acquiring the property for redevelopment, the EDA authorized staff to update the appraisal and
negotiate with the property owner on the possible purchase of the property (see attached EDA
request).
2. February 26th Council/EDA Meetings - At the February 26th Council/EDA meetings, the
Council/EDA took action on the following planning/development/housing issues:
A. Project #551, Approval of Report for Louisiana Avenue (Medicine Lake Road to 32nd Avenue)
and 31st Avenue Street Improvements - Approved, see excerpts from report that are enclosed.
B. Ordinance No. 96-06, An Ordinance Amending New Hope City Code Regulating Net Income
for Special Assessment Deferral - Approved, see attached Council request.
C. Discussion Regarding Appointments to an Executive Committee Relative to the Organized
Collection Study - Committee appointed, see attached Council request.
3. Codes & Standards Committee - The Committee met on February 22nd and discussed two issues:
Pawn Shops and the 60-day zoning "action on applications" law. Work on these two issues will
continue as follows:
A. Pawn Shops - Per the recommendation of the City Attorney, staff will be recommending that the
City Council implement a 6-month moratorium on pawn shops at the 3/1! Council meeting while
the Planning Commission studies the issue and makes recommendations about a new ordinance and
licensing requirements. Enclosed is a short report prepared by the Planning Consultant on this issue
for your information. The Committee will be reviewing materials pertaining to this subject over
the next several months provided by both the Planner and Attorney. Also, the New Hope Police
Department will be conducting research on pawn shop operations in neighboring cities and will be
providing this information to the Committee.
B. Deadline for Agency Action on Zoning Applications - Per the recommendation of the City
Attorney, the Committee and staff will be recommending that the Council adopt the enclosed
resolution at the 3/1 ! Council meeting "Establishing Minimum Requirements for Accepting Written
Requests Relating to Zoning." The Committee will be meeting again in March to review a
Page 3
proposed ordinance on this issue after a meeting has been conducted at the staff level to discuss/
review forms/letters that need to be revised and implemented (see attached reports/correspondence
from Attorney and Planner). This ordinance will probably be considered by the full Commission
at the April Planning Commission meeting.
4. Design & Review Committee - The Committee met on February 16th on the Lasky Car-X CUP/PUD
plans.
5. Future Planning Cases - It is anticipated that the following applications will be considered in April
and/or May:
A. Autohaus Comprehensive Sign Plan/Variances
B. Public Works Building Expansion
C. Ordinance Regarding Decisional Process for Special Zoning Requests
D. Expansion of Car Wash at Mobile Mart on 36th Avenue
6. Planning Commission Applications - The City Council interviewed eight Planning Commission
applicants on February 26th and I believe they will be appointing two new members at the next Council
meeting. The new members would then take the oath of office and attend the April 2nd Planning
Commission meeting.
7. TwinWest State of the City Address - The annual TwinWest "State of the City" address will be held
on Wednesday, March 13th, at 7:30 a.m. in the City Council chambers. At this event displays are set-
up showing recent public and private developments and projects taking place in the City and a
presentation is made by the City Manager. Planning Commissioners are invited to attend.
8. Remodeling Fair - The 1996 Northwest Suburban Remodeling Fair, sponsored in part by the City of
New Hope, will be held on Saturday, March 16th, at Park Center High School in Brooklyn Park from
10 a.m. to 3 p.m. A brochure for the Fair is enclosed in your packet. Commissioners are invited to
attend.
9. Land Use Planning Workshops - In your last packet, information was enclosed regarding the
Government Training Service Land Use Planning Workshops for Planning Commissioners which will
be held in March and April. No Commissioners responded and I have not enclosed that information
again. However, it is not too late to register, 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. ! will probably encourage newly appointed
Commissioners to attend the sessions.
Attachments: J.R. Jones
Old Dutch Pond
Ice Arena Bulletin
Moving Signs
Ardel Property
Louisiana Street Report
Deferred Assessments
Solid Waste Committee
Pawn Shops
60-Day Zoning Action
Remodeling Fair Brochure
I ~u~'~ ~
REQUF. T FOR ACTION
Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section
City Manager Consent
Kirk McDonald ~ 2-12-96 Item No.
By: Management Assistant By:f/ 6. l0
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF PERFORMANCE BOND FOR J.R. JONES
FIXTURE COMPANY, PLANNING CASE 94-02
The City. has held a Performance Bond in the amount of $30,600 on the J.R. Jones Fixture
Company building expansion (Planning Case 94-02) for the installation of public improvements
and on-site exterior amenities. This amount was held to insure that specific improvements
were made, including sidewalk, curb, bituminous parking lot and landscaping improvements.
J.R. Jones has requested that the bond be released.
The City Engineer and Building Official have inspected the property for completion of the
improvements and are recommending that the bond be released, as all improvements have been
completed.
The enclosed resolution authorizes release of the Performance Bond and staff recommends
approval of the resolution.
MOTION BY SECOND BY
TO:
Review: Administration: Finance:
RFA-O01 ~
Otto G. lanes~ruu. P,l. ~w~ O A, Sa~fo~. f~. MI<~ C. LV~ ~. 8n~ K G~e ~ E
Rosene '
~ln L Sorvala. PE. RIc~ar~ W. FOST~. P~. ~OW a At~, ee ~a~ ~ ~o~t ~
P E
R~ G. ~l¢~t. P E. M~r~ ~ ~n~, P [. Gar), W. ~le~, P.& P~I ~ H~er.
Engineers & Architects . s,~ co,,.,~ ~,a,. ~,.~,.,.~ ~,., ~. ~... ~ o.o. ~. ,~.
~l A. Syfke. ~. ~k O. ~lilis, ~[. C~rlEI A,
IImN4 M~I, ~ E. L. ~dl~ ~¢~eL ~. F4~I~ M.
Thom~ W Pete~so~, P[. ~y O KFIsTOfRZ. P~. J~s F
Mr. Kirk McDonald
City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Ave. N.
New Hope, MN 55428
Re: J.R. Jones Bond
Our File No. M-Bond (93-27)
D~ Kirk:
The bond amount for the above referenced project was $30,600, which included sidewalk, parking
lot, arid landscape improvements. Doug and I have reviewed the work and find it all to be properly
completed. Therefore, it's recommended the bond be relea.~ed in the amount of $30,600.
If you have any questions, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
BON..ESTROO,.ROSENE, A~ DERI.I"K & ASSOCIATES, INC.
M~'k A. H~on
MAH:pr
cc: Marry MaJecha
Doug Sandstad
2335 West Highway 36 · st'. ~'~u'i, M'N 55113 · 612-636'4600
· ~ PLANNING
PLAT BOND REVIEW
DATE: ~'eb. 1, 1996
TO: City Manager J~ ~ ,
FROM: Doug Sandstad
sUBJECT: J.~,. Jones Plat
BOND AMOUNT: $ 30,600
TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS:
FACILITIES/LANDSCAPING REQUIRED:
Curbing
Sod
Trees oz
Driveway
Sidewalks o~
Grading o~
Structures n/a
Mylar & blueline copies in City Clerk's file
Other n/a Describe:
I have, on this day ,T,,~ 1;]ClQ~ , inspected the plat for
completion of ali work covered by the bond we retain. It is appropriate to:
HOLD RELEASE ~ this amount: $ AT,T, S30.~e0
I have consulted with the City Engineer on this.
cc: City Engineer
City Clerk
File
OO5 9/94
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED as follows:
1. ~NCORPORAT[ON OF RECITALS. The recitals above are
incorporated herein by reference, specifically including the
conditions of' {he CUP.
2. THE WORK. The Work shall consist of the site
improvements described in the Plans, including the Secure Work as
described below, and including any amendments to the Plans which
are approved by the City Council. The Work shall be performed by
the Developer to the City's satisfaction and in compliance with all
applicable codes, ordinances, standards, and policies of the City.
3. THE SECURED WORK. The Secured Work includes all on-site
exterior amenities shown on the Pians that are l~sted beiow.
Quantity Item
2,650 SF Sidewalk · $2.00/sq.ft. $ 5,300.00
460 L.F. Concrete curb · $5.00/lin. ft. 2,300.00
1,000 SY Bituminous pavement ·
$8.00/sq. yd. 8,000.00
32 EA Boulevard trees · $150/ea 4.800.00
$20,400.00
+ 50~ Increase 10t200.00
TOTAL AMOUNT OF FINANCIAL GUARANTEE: $30,600.00
The Developer unconditionally guarantees to the City all of the
Secured Work for a period of one year subsequent to the Completion
Date of the Secured Work. This guarantee shall include failure of
the Secured WOrk due to poor material, faulty workmanship, or any
other cause. This guarantee shall continue whether or not all of
the financial guarantee shall have been released by the City.
3. COMPLETZON. The Developer agrees that the Work shall be
comDleted in its entirety on or before the 30th day of September,
1994 (the Completion Date), except as this period of time is
2
REQUEST FOR ACTION
Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section
City Manager Consent
Kirk McDonald /, ) 2-12-96 Item No.
By: Management Assistant By:.// 6. !. 1
RESOLUTION REQUESTING CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN TAX FORFEITED LAND
TO THE CITY OF NEW HOPE FOR SPECIFIED PUBLIC PURPOSES
The parcel known as Outlot A, DeJarlais Addition, also known as Old Dutch Pond, was
forfeited to the State several years ago for non-payment of real estate taxes. The City applied
for ownership of the property in 1993, but irregularities required the County to go through the
forfeiture procedure a second time. The City Attorney has advised that now would be the
appropriate time for the City to again apply for conveyance of the DeJarlais Addition Outlot
to the City.
The property is currently used for a holding .pond and is subject to a City drainage easement.
Because it is officially designated as a wetland, the official conveyance must come from the
legislature. It is assumed that Hermepin County and the Commissioner of Natural Resources
will recommend the conveyance, as conveyance to a local unit of government is specifically
authorized.
The enclosed resolution requests the conveyance to the City and staff recommends approval
of the resolution.
MOTION BY SECOND BY
TO:
Review: Administration: Finance:
RFA-O01 ~
February 7, 1995
Daniel J. Oonahue
City of New Hooe
a401Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 5B428
RE: Outlot A, OeJarlais Addition
Our File No: 99.11108
Dear Dan:
It would now be appropriate for the City Council to take action on
the OeJarl~iS AO~ition Outlot. Thi~ parcel was forfeited to the
State several years ago for non-payment of real estale taxes. T~e
City of New HOpe applied for' ownership of the property in 1993, but
irregularities in their notice required the County to 9o through
the forfeiture DrocAdure a ~econd time. At this time the City of
New Hope can again a~ply for Conveyance of Ou[lot A to the City.
YOu may recall that this property is currently used for a holdir]9
pond, and is subject to a City drainage easement.
Because Outlot A aoDears to he a wetland, based on appearance and
upon a 1991 U.~. Department of Inter~or WetlanOs map, the
conveyance must come from the legislature. NenneDin County wil~
recommend such a conveyance, and presumably so will the
Commissi'oner of Natural Resourcem. The committees of the
legislature with ~urimdictiou over n&tur&l resources will review
the matter eno ~aKe their decision. Conveyance to a unit of
government such as the City is ~pecifica~ly authorized. The
procedure is set out in Minn. Stat. Section 282.018.
Outlot A wi~ be ~art of a group of parcels the legislature wi]~ be
dealing with, though probably not unlil the next legislative
session. At the uonclu$1on of [he process, the City will receive
a "use" deeQ from the State. ~f the City's use of the property
changes at some ~oint in the future, the City must f~le for
approval of the new use or ~he parcel will revert back to the
St~le.
Daniel J. Donahue
December 5, 1995
Page 2
If the Council wislaes tO proceeci, t~e enclosed Resolution can be
passed at the next Council me..ting. This resolution or a similar
on must be p&ssed and sent to the County by the arid o1' tt~e mont~ 41'
the City wishes Lo obtain [itle to Outlot A.
Be ~ure to contact me if you have any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Martin P. Malecha
Asst, New Hope City Attorney
m3t
Eric3 o~ur'es
cc: Valerie Leone, City Clerk (w/eric)
Kirk McDonald, Management ASSistant (w/enc)
Steven A. $ondr~ll, City Attorney
cna
£rom
'said
~. ~. e) ~.~ measure
¢ a line
4<)' t s~.~. or ~
LOT f ~" "'
· ~epres~a~[
~ ~ p~aced ~ ~h
~ , Co~=y of He
.--, N~ HOPE, ~
~. -Ti"' This pla~ of
'""..' ~ and ~he Co~
TLO T ";" A C~ ~d reco~(
''
g 0 ';
9~ - .~I ·:
· ~(. I hereby ce~
~ z , day of
'. '
Vernon ~.
PROJECT NO. 536
· ~~ BULLETIN NO,1
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PROJECT BULLETIN
ICE ARENA EXPANSION
Overview
On February 12th, the City Council gave final approval for a $4.2 million expansion project
at the New Hope Ice Arena, 4949 Louisiana Avenue North. The project includes construction
of a 44,915 square foot two-story addition on the south side of the existing arena to
accommodate a second sheet of ice, team rooms, meeting room, upper level walkway and a
new concession area. Other improvements will include painting the existing building, a new
entrance, parking lot improvements and new lighting and landscaping on the site.
The addition of the second sheet of ice will provide for increased opportunities/participation
in ice sports by females. It is also anticipated that dry floor activities will be available for 5-6
months per year, including in-line skating, trade shows, fairs and demonstrations.
Construction Schedule and Details
Site excavation and utility work will commence March 4, 1996 and will continue throughout
the month of March. The initial site work consists of stripping the parking lot south of the
existing ice rink, relocation of utilities which currently run through the new building footprint,
and grading in preparation for foundation work. Excess soil will be hauled offsite to the New
Hope Elementary School for ballfield grading improvements. Foundation work should begin
by early April with precast wall panels and structural steel erection in May. The new ice rink
should be enclosed by July with interior work starting in earnest at this time. The parking lot
work will be complete in August and landscaping and irrigation work will be complete in late
September/early October. Work on the new rink is scheduled to be complete in October
1996.
Work within the existing ice arena will continue throughout the construction period working
on a room to room basis. This work consists of adding fire protection above the existing rink,
rework of existing rooms including new flooring and paint, tie-in to the new rink area, and
expanding the lobby and concession area. The front entry and vestibule will be removed and
replaced with a new entry into the common lobby for both ice arenas.
Construction Hours
Standard construction hours will be from 7:00 a.m. until 3:30 p.m., however, depending on
weather and schedule, these hours may be expanded accordingly. Sitework contractors
typically work from sunrise until sunset.
Site Access
A temporary fence will be installed around the construction area. Construction access to the
site will be from the south utilizing the current entryway on 49th Avenue and temporary
public access to the ice rink will be from the east off Louisiana. A temporary access into the
existing ice rink will be provided at an existing emergency exit north of the main entrance.
2-29-96
Haul Route
The exces, s soil to be hauled off of the site to New Hope Elementary School will be
transported via the following route: south on Quebec Avenue from 49th Avenue to 42nd
Avenue (Rockford Road); west on 42nd Avenue to Boone Avenue; north on Boone Avenue
to 46th Avenue; east on 46th Avenue to Aquila Avenue; then north about one-half block.
The excess material will be stored on the west side of the New Hope Elementary School
property. A Disposal' Site Haul Route map is shown below for your information.
Contacts
If you have questions about the construction at the site, please contact the following persons:
Scott Sandmann at 531-9313 or Dave Williams at 545-1355
If you desire to speak with someone at City Hall, please contact Shari French, Director of
Parks & Recreation at 531-5152.
The City of New Hope appreciates your cooperation during this project.
City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Avenue N. ~[I II[TIltaLl;
New Hope, MN 55428 ~
~E~ I 4~h ~m~t~ N
DIS~ SITE ~UL ROUTE(R~SED 2/20/96)
A~er/Ik
ICE ARENA ADDITION
~ REQUEST FOR ACTION
Orlgtnattng Department Approved for Agenda DexP~ff~ectlon
City Manager & Planning
Kirk McDonald 2-12-96 Item No.
By: Management Assistant By:. 8.6
DISCUSSION REGARDING MOVING/FLASHING SIGNS
Last fall the City received a requ~ from Liberty Div~'~ified Industries, 5600 North Highway 169. to
install a lighted message center/electric moving sign on its exi~ng free-standing ground sign to
advertise jobs available at th~ indu,~.ry. LDI indicates that the sign would not be used to advertise their
products; that it would be ~ almost exclusively to attract potential employees. In addition, they may
want to post fime/teml~'mm'~, holiday gratings, and statements of public and commurdty service. LDI
states that they would be agr~ble to limiting the number or content of messages flashing throughout
the night to ¢~,min hour~.
Currently flashing or moving si~ are prohibited within the City. Section 3.446 of the New Hope Sign
Code states: Fiashinz or Movin~ Signs: No fl~hin$ ~igm, rotating or moving signs, animated signs,
signs with moving lights, or crating t.~ illmion of movement ~ be I~'mitt~.
lhe intention of t~ $i~ COd~ i~ ~o l~'ovida ~titable si~e for ail bu~es~ and allow business
identification without creating conf~on and hazards from unnece~ use of signs. One specific issue
is whether such sign types attract the attention of commuter passersby and if that attraction is hazardous
to motorists.
The Codes & Standards Committee of the Planning Commission has been discussing this issue and has
obtained/reviewed ordinances from other cities to review how they ~ldress "moving signs" and whether
they contain specific regulations regarding time interval, prsentafion of message, etc. Some cities
control the message co_ntent (Eden Prairie) and allow only signs that give time, date, temperature or
other similar public information. Hours of illumination are also controlled. Plymouth allows only time
and demperature display. Crystal allows time, temperature, public service information and on-site
advertising, with a limit on message display times. Minnetonka allows only time and temperature.
Brooklyn Center and Golden Valley prohibit moving/flashing signs.
Before the Planning Commission or Codes & Standards Committee study this issue further, they are
requesting direction from the City Council, as to whether you would be favorable toward considering
an ordinance amendment to allow such flashing/moving signs or not. Staff requests direction from the
City Council on this matter.
MOTION BY SECOND BY
TO:
Review: AdmWastraUon: Finance:
RFA-O01 ~
Liberty Diversified Industries
~00 N -!G~WA¥ '~9 · MINNEA~CLiS. MtNNF_.SC"'A
September ! !. 1995
SEP I 31 J5
Mr. Doug Sandstad
Building Offici~ City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Ave. N
New Hope, M]fl' 55428
Dear M~'. Sandstad:
A.s you are no doubt aware, bu.sine~ea everywhere ~'e lookia$ for new ami ex¢itin8 ways to
~ttract potential employee~. Nationwide, the pool ofpeople"aew to the job met" is at a 50
year Iow. Baby boeme~ ate agia~ and fewer childrea ate ~ bom, rea~iti~ ia a ~,ortage or'
quality carry-level people. Liberty Divenified Industrie~ (LDI) i.s ao e~ceptioe_ While there Ls a
variety ofjob~ open at any given time. there Ls · severe sbort~e of qualified c. aadidatea for those
positions. All iadication.~ poim towel ~ trend continuing for · number of yeats, la tetnu of
Human R.e~ource~ thia i~ a long-tetra roue of concern.
Because LDI is lo.ted along · very weft-traveled higl~way, we have aa exceptional opportunity
to reach ~ of ~ommutm - ~ ~ - alteaa'7 ~ in the nortl~est suburbs.
To that end, LDI would like to pumue additional ~/gaage along Hi.way 169. A photo of our
current ~iga is enclosed, alon~ ~ · ~et~ ora pmpo~d addition to tim ~ignage. Our propo~ ,
incorporates a message center into our existing ~ign.
A rne~age c, eater mr, a ~ ti~ will ~ u~ the flexibih'ty to alter our mmage based on job~
currently opea. It will ~ive u~ daily ~ to tlx~mad.s of ~ommuten.
demon.stratea our commitment to the ioafion, maintenaam and modernization of our facility. It
will be prof'emonally imalled and maintained. Tt~ ~ i~ tasteful unlike · tempom% 'Now
Hiring' or large neon ~ign. And, it Ls not visible from any reaidentiai are~.
Most imponamly, we do not lateral to uae thLs signage to adverse out prodtgts. It will be used
almost ~ to mragt potential employee~. 'Almo~ exclusively' means fiat we may
choose to ix~ the time and temperature, holiday gremin~. ~tatemeat~ of pubik se~vic, e, or even
community servim, ~t timm. Iftt~~tomem~e~~~~ofa~
flashing throughout the night, we ~ di.scu~ limiting the nmnber or content of merges, for
certain hours during the ni~t. An example might be that from Mklnight to 4 a.m. the memge
'Drive Safely' doea not change.
Liberty Diversified Industries
We understand that within the next few days you will be reviewing several ordinances, including
that of business signage. We ask that you take our request and the reasomng behind it into
consideration. We feet ttmt the type of signage we ~e requesting is necessary for our business
today, and can a~ the sagne time be appropriate withift the p~ametetl of the city without offending
the residents of New Hope. Please let me know it'you need ~ny further information fi.om LDI,
and what the outcome ia of your meeting regarding this issue. Thank you for your consideration.
Dan Petrella
Director of Hunch R~ourc~
Enclo~.~r~
REQUEST FOR ACTION
originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section
City Manager EDA
12-96 Kirk McDonald Item No.
By: Management Assistant By:
DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPERTY/~T 7500 42ND AVENUE
(IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT
NO. 474)
One of the City's long-term economic development goals is the redevelopment of the three properties
located north of 42nd Avenue located between Quebec Avenue and the railroad tracks. The goal is to
acquire the industrial sites, demolish the buildings, accelerate the ground water clean-up, rezone the
property from I-2, General Industrial, to B-4, Community Business, and market the site for commercial
redevelopment. The City has acquired and presently owns two of the three sites. The City purchased
the Electronic Industries property, 7516 42nd Avenue in 1993 and demolished the building. The City
also purchased the Foremost, Inc. property, 7528 42nd Avenue in 1993, and is currently leasing the
building.
The owner of the third parcel at 7500 42nd Avenue, where Ardel Engineering is a tenant, has recently
placed a "Building for Lease" sign on the building. The City had this property appraised in 1992 and
the market value estimate on the property was as follows:
Estimated value without pollution stigma $313,000
Less pollution stigma 29,700
Value estimate as allegedly polluted $283,300
In 1993, the City received a letter from the owner stating he would accept the sum of $325,000 for the
property. Due to the recent installation of the lease sign, the City Manager has authorized an update
of the 1992 appraisal.
Staff requests to discuss with the EDA if you are interested in pursuing the acquisition of the property
at this time, before the building is leased to another tenant. It is staff's understanding that Ardel
Engineering does not currently have a long-term lease with the property owner and staff have received
calls from businesses interested in leasing the property. If the EDA did acquire the property, perhaps
it could be leased to Ardel Engineering until such time that the demolition of the Foremost property took
place so both buildings could be demolished at once.
Staff requests direction from the EDA on this issue.
MOTION BY SECOND BY
TO:
Review: Administration: Finance:
RFA-O01
TH AVE. N. ~. -'. "-I', Ii~ ~'~
~ETKA '
5000
~ -- _
.....
"',,.., : Z~,, : ~. '" ROCKFORD RD (.C-
---,,. ~ ,: ' ~ "'~ '"' ..... .:
~ ~ t ~ WENOY ~,, '
' ~ ~ = ~ ;I~))? TERRAC
~ ...... X ~ - '~4i % - ~17~ ' 4;ST AVE
I
[ Plat Map )
Otto G. Bonestroo, P.E, Howard A. Sanford, P.E.Michael C. Lynch, PE, Brian K. Gage, P E.
Robert ~(/, Rosene, P.E.* Keith A. Gordon., PE. James R. Matand, P.E. ~ F Todc~ Foster, PE,
Rosene Joseph C. Anderlik, P.E. Robert R, Pfeifer,e, P.E. Jerry D. Pertzsch, P.E. Kelth R. Y~pp, P~:.
Marvin L. Sorvala, P.E. Richard ~'. Foster, P.E. Scott J. Arganek. PE. Douglas J, Benoit. ? E
Thomas E. Noyes, PE. 3erry A. Bourdon, P,E. Mark A. Seip, P.E. Kent J. ~agne~, ? ~
RoDert G. Schunic~/, PE. Mark A. Hanson, PE, Gary ~. Morien, P,E. Paul G. Heuer, PE
Susan M. Eberlin, C.P.A.' Michael T. Rautmann, P.E. Paul J. Gannon, A.I.A. John ~ Gorder, P E
Engineers & Architects · s~,~o~ co,,~ ~ x. ~,~. ~.~. ~., ~. ~,~o,, ~.~. ~ ~. ,o~,m. ~ ~.
Thomas R. Anderson, A.I.A. A. Rick Sch~dt, PE, Jeffrey J. Eh~ermger, PE
James R. Rosenmerkel, PE. Dale A. Grove, PE. Josep~ R. RheJn, PE
Donald C. gurgardt, P.E. Philip J. CaswelL P.E. Lee M. Mann, P E
Thomas A. Syfko. PE, Mark D. ~allis, P.E. Charles A. ErJckson
Frederic J. Stenborg, P.E. Miles B. Jensen. P.E. Leo M. Pawelsgy
tsmael MartJnez, P.E, L. Phillip Gravel, P.E. Harlan M. Olson
Feb~ary 20, 1996 Michael P. Rau, P.E. Karen L. ~iemeri, P,E. Agnes ~. ~in~
Thomas ~. Peterson, P.E. Gary D. Kristofitz, PE. James F. Engel~ardt
Honorable Ma~or and Council
City of New Hope
~01 Xylon Ave. N.
New Hope, MN 55428
Re: Louisiana Avenue & 31st Circle
Medicine Lake Road to 32nd Avenue
Project No. 551
Our File No. 34188
Dear Mayor and Council:
Attached is our report for the Louisiana Avenue & 31st Avenue Street Improvements, Project No.
551.
This report discusses the proposed street and storm sewer improvements and presents cost estimates
for these improvements. Also included are the estimated assessment rates per front foot.
We will be pleased to meet with the Council and other interested parties to discuss this report at a
mutually convenient time.
Respectfully submitted,
[~SENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
BO ,..b~STR~Ot
Mar'k-'A. Hanson, P.E.
MAH:rb
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or
under my direct supervision and that I am a duly
Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of
the State of Minnesota./'
Mark A. Hanson, P.E.
Date: February 20, 1996 Reg. No.: 14260
2335 West Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113 · 612-636-4600
Scope
This project provides for constructing a bituminous overlay on Louisiana Avenue (Medicine Lake
Road to 32nd Avenue) and 31st Avenue west of Louisiana Avenue as shown on Figure 1. The
project is being considered at this time in conjunction with the City of Crystals 1996-Phase 2
Southeast Street Reconstruction (Crystal Project No. 95-6) which includes the east half of Louisiana
Avenue. Louisiana Avenue serves as the border street between Crystal and New Hope in this area.
The properties abutting Louisiana Avenue and 31st Avenue in New Hope include nine (9) limited
industrial properties ( zoned I-1) and two (2) residential properties. The two residential properties
are located in Kranz Addition opposite 30th Avenue.
Since 1980, the City of New Hope has undertaken similar projects which have
resuffacedh'econstructed approximately 63 miles of street. These projects have been undertaken to
improve the strength and surface foundation of the existing streets to extend their design life.
1995 Street Improvement Program
3
z
, .. ...... .' ,x~ ~ ~ "~ ~.' ~I ~
: , i ~ '. t _~ ~ /
~ U :~ i ~ .4:.-', ~ :: Cr~ ~ ~ i
· ". '- ~' r i : /'/' '~'~ ' ~ I i I i~
> ,' ~-' .... ,,, ,~ - ,PROJECT
' '"' '"': '~ "" "~-~~':"~ LOCATIO .....~"~"~
~ / ? ~ ,
.... ..: .. ~] ~ :
.~ -~ ...' ~ ~ .
.~. ., .
~ ~i ,'. i~ "'.". ii ..
~ i:: ?.~-..,'/ J~ ~ ., ::
-'-" ,: :: ' · ; ;iZ ti ',j ~r .'? ~ ii il
,.i.' ~ ~,L ~ ;~ ~ ~1 ~ ........ ~s - .-
: :, 'x ",, < :l x', ~ , ~: ~[
,. t ..... , ~ ,,
~. i~ ~1~1~* ~ '~ ' ~
MEDICINE ~KE RD 2 AVE N (CO RD NO 70)
0 ~ 12~
~ in f~
LOCATION PLAN ¢l~
NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA FIGURE I ~ A~ociate~
LOUISIANA AVE. N end 31s; AVE. N
CI~ PROJECT No. 551
5~188FO1.DWO FEBRUARY 1996 COMM. 34188
Feasibility and Recommendation
This project is feasible ~:rom an engineering standpoint and is in accordance with the Master Street
Plans for the City of New Hope. The project can best be carried out in conjunction with the City of
Crystal's Phase 2 Southeast Street Reconstruction project.
Louisiana Avenue within this project is designated a Municipal State Aid (MSA) Street in New Hope
and Crystal. Therefore the project will be constructed in accordance with State Aid Standards and
those portions not assessed will be financed by MSA funds.
The estimated project cost is $88,490 of which $86,505 is proposed to be assessed to the abutting
property. The estimated assessment rate is listed below:
Property Use Estimated Rate
Industrial $27.29 / FF
Residential $15.35 / FF
Street Evaluation
An independent evaluation is conducted to justify street improvements in New Hope. Appendix A
located at the back of this report includes a pavement condition survey conducted by Braun Intertec
in Louisiana Avenue and 3 Ist Avenue. The results of the survey indicate the pavement Condition
Index (PCI) fall near the transition between seat coat and overlay. However due to the existing chip-
seal debonding condition in Louisiana Avenue a mill/bituminous overlay construction is
recommended. The milling process will remove the debonding chip seal requiring a bituminous
overly to be constructed.
The City of Crystal in conjunction with their consulting engineer (Short, Elliot, Hendrickson, Inc.,
SEH) have also conducted evaluations justifying the proposed street improvements. SEH' s report
dated September 28, 1995 for the City of Crystal include the results of their evaluations.
1995 Street Improvement Program
5
Discussion
The City of Crystal reconstructed this section of Louisiana Avenue in 1974 while the City of New
Hope constructed 31st Avenue in 1979. The existing street sections are shown on Figure 3. The
proposed street improvement include milling the existing bituminous surface and constructing a 1-
1/2" - 2" thick bituminous overlay. Concrete curbs which are settled or damaged will be removed
and reconstructed. Drain tile will be constructed in select areas while existing catch basins will be
reconstructed as required. Sanitary sewer and water main repairs are not anticipated at this time.
Area to be Included
The area to be included for assessment purposes is shown on Figure 2 located at the back of this
report and listed below.
Parcel Description
Johnson St. Croix Addition
Lot 14 Block 1
M & C Addition
Lot 1 Block 1
Kranz Addition
Lot 1.2 Block 1
P.I.D. 20-118-21 - 34-33
20-118-21 - 34-02
20-118-21 - 34-18
20-118-21 - 34-20
1995 Street Improvement Program
6
Cost Estimate
A detailed cost estimate is presented in Appendix C located at the back of this report for 31 st Avenue
west of Louisiana AvenCe. The estimated cost for New Hope's portion of Louisiana Avenue is taken
from SEH's report for Phase 2 Southeast Street Reconstruction dated September 28, 1995. A
summary of these costs is shown below:
Louisiana Avenue $40,150.00
31st Avenue 48.340.00
Total $88,490.00
The total estimated project cost is $88,490.00 which includes contingencies (10%) and indirect costs
(25%). Indirect costs include legal, engineering, administration, and bond interest.
Assessments
Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefitted property in accordance New Hope's
Assessment Policy for street resuffacing. In general, 100% of the street cost is assessed to industrial
properties based on a front foot basis.
Residential property on MSA Streets such as Louisiana Avenue are given a 25% credit because the
service life for bituminous overlays on MSA Streets is less than residential streets (ie 15 years verses
20 years). In addition a credit is also given for the street width because Louisiana Avenue is wider
than residential streets (ie 40' wide verses standard residential width - 30' wide). In the case of this
project a 25% credit for service life and street width was applied to determine the residential rate.
Listed below is the estimated assessment rate.
Property Use Estimated Rate
Industrial $27.29 / Front Foot
Residential $15.35 / Front Foot
Appendix C located at the back of this report includes a preliminary assessment roll.
1995 Street Improvement Program
7
Revenue
A summary of revenue sources is listed below:
Street Project Cost Revenue Balance
Louisiana / 31 st Avenue $88,490
Street Assessment $86.458
$88,490 $86,458 $-2,032
The anticipated project deficit is $2,032 which will be financed by MSA Fund.
Project Schedule
Present Feasibility Report February 26, 1996
Public Heating March 25, 1996
Award Contract (City of Crystal) April 25, 1996
Substantial Completion Fall 1996
Assessment Heating Winter 1997
The project will administered by the City of Crystal. The City of Crystal intends to receive bids and
conduct their assessment hearing before contract award. It's anticipated Crystal will conduct their
assessment heating/contract award at their April 25, 1996 Council Meeting. New Hope's approval
will be contingent on Crystals award of the contract.
1995 Street Improvement Program
REQUF T FOR ACTION
Originating Department Approved for Agenda P~~tlon
Cit.',' Manager & Resolutions
Kirk McDonald { /) 2-26-96 Item No.
By: Management Assistant By:// 10. t
/
ORDINANCE NO. 96-06, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING NEW HOPE CITY CODE
REGULATING NET INCOME FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERRAL
In April 1991, the City Council adopted an Ordinance Establishing a Program to Defer
Payment of Special Assessments for Senior Citizens and Retired Disabled Homeowners. A
resident filing for a deferment completed an application form to determine their total net
household income. The total net household income is based on the Section 8 two-person very.
low income guideline established by Hennepin County and the Department of Housing and
Urban Development, which fluctuate on an annual basis as listed below:
Year Net Household Income
1990 $18,000
1991 $19,200
1992 $20,400
1993 $19,850
1994 (current) $20,400
The City has received notification from Hennepin County and HUD that the Section 8 two-
person very. low income guideline for 1996 has been adjusted to $21,850. The City Attorney
has prepared the enclosed ordinance amendment which incorporates the increase into the New
Hope ordinance. However, rather than just change the dollar amount of the limit, the enclosed
proposed Resolution incorporates the relevant HUD Section 8 standards, so the City. deferral
income limits will automatically be adjusted when the Section 8 limits change.
Staff recommends approval of Ordinance No. 96-06.
MOTION BY SECOND BY
TO:
Review: Administration: Finance:
RFA-O01 ~
February 21, lg96
Daniel J. Donahuo
City Manaser
City of New Hope
&401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE: .qpecial Assessment Deferral Income Limit
Our File No. 99. 49606
Dear Dan:
The City Code au%horizes the deferral of special assessments
senior citizen.~ and retired disabled homeownerm in Code Section
1,60. The deferral also include~ income limi'~ in Section 1.613.
These income limits are in turn based upon HUD Section 8 income
limits, which are adjusted on a r,gu]ar basi~.
It is now time for aa udjustment of the Code income limits, which
were last changed in ~994. However, rather than. ~ust change the
dollar amount of the limit, %ho enclosed proposed Resolution
incorporates the relevant HUD Section 8 ssandards, so the Clty
deferral income limits will automatically be adju,~ted when th~
Sec%ion 8 l.~m~t~ change.
Please call if you Aave any ~uestlons or comments.
Sincerely,
Martin P. Malech~
Assistant City Attorney
m3w
Enclosure
cc: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant (w/eric)
Vale:ie Leone, City clerk (w/enc}
Steven A. Sondrall, City Attorn~.y
· Memo
DATE: January 30, 1996
TO: Urban Hennepin County Subrecipients and HOM~ Participants
FROM: ~Mark Hendrickson, Office of Plarming and Development
SUBJECT: 1996 Section 8 I~come Limits (Effective December 14, 1995)
Below are the current Section 8 income limits for low-income (80% of median) and very low income (50%
of median) households. In addition, income for households at 60% and 30% of median income are
provided. These income limits are based on HUD estimates of 1996 median household income. The U.S.
median family income ~ increased to $~1,600. The Minneapolis/St. Paul MSA median income has
increased from $51,000 to $54,600. The U.S. median family income is used as a "cap" in calculating
income for households at 80% of median income.
These income limits must be used in calculating household income eligibility for all HUD funded activities
which need to document low/moderat~ income benefit. These income limits are effective umil further
notice.
MSA: MPLS./ST. PAUL FY 1~9~ MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME: $54,600
Household (80%) (60%) (S0%) (30%)
Size Low Income Very Low
Income
1 Person 29,100 22,900 19, I00 11,500
2 Person 33,300 26,200 (21,850) 13,100
3 Person 37,450 29,500 24,550 14,750
4 Person 41,600 32,750 27,300 16,400
5 Person 44,950 35,350 29,500 17,700
6 Person 48,250 38,000 31,650 19,000
7 Person 51,600 40,600 33,850 20,350
8 Person 54,900 43,900 36,050 21,650
The FY96 Federal Poverty Guidelines will be published in late February. Please call me at 541-708a if you would like this
information sent to you.
Hennepin County O['~ice of Planning ~4 Development, Development Planning Unit, 10709 Wayzata BoulevarA,
Suite 260, b[inneton~a, bLN 55305
blail Cocle: 604 Phone: (612) 541.7080 Fax: (61-'~ 541-7090
I~ COUNCIL I
REQUEST FOR ACTION
Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section
Unfinished &
City Manager 02-26-96 Org. Business
/ Item No.
By: Dan Donahue By: 11.1
DISCUSSION REGARDING APPOINTMENTS TO AN EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
RELATIVE TO THE ORGANIZED COLLECTION STUDY
In continuation of the organized collection study, it was recommended that the joint councils
(Crystal/New Hope) form an "Executive Committee" to gather, review, and evaluate data and then
report that information to the joim councils.
It has been suggested that the "Executive Committee" be comprised of one Council Member and
one citizen representative from each of the two cities. The Committee of eight people would also
include Marilynn Corcoran. HRG Administrator; Kathi Doti, Consultant with Richardson Richter.
Dan Donahue. New Hope City Manager; and Jerry Dulgar, Crystal City Manager. Also. all nine
licensed haulers would be invited to attend and participate in the discussions.
If the City Council is in agreement with this direction, appoinnnents of the one Council Member
and one citizen representative must be made as soon as possible. The following tentative dates
have been set for the Executive Committee meetings: March 12 and March 26 at 4:00 p.m.
MOTION BY SECOND BY
TO:
Review: Administration: Finance:
RFA-O01 ~
DATE: February 15, 1996
TO: HRG Board - Jerry Dulgar/Crystal;
Dan Donahue/New Hope
FROM: Marilynn Corcoran - Program Adm.
SUBJECT: Organized Collection Study
In response to a request for more definitive data, made by the joint councils at
the January 29 meeting, staff has discussed options for gathering and reviewing
information relative to impacts of the garbage hauling system on roads,
cost/price, service levels etc.
It was recommended that we create a "Executive Committee" of the joint
councils to gather, review and evaluate data and then report that information to
the joint councils.
City Manager Dulgar suggested that each council appoint one council member
and appoint one citizen representative from each of the two cities. In addition,
there would be the HRG Admin. Marilynn Corcoran, the consultant Kathi Dory,
and the mangers from the two cities for a total of eight. In addition ALL of the
nine licensed haulers would be invited to attend and participate in the
discussions, as required by State Statute. The first stage would likely take two
or three meetings, after which, a report would come to the joint session of the
councils for their review.
We have set tenative dates for the Executive Committee meetings to be March
12 and March 26 at 4:00 p.m. It is important that appointments be soon in order
to plan and prepare.
If there are questions regarding this process, please contact either City Manager
or Marilynn Corcoran at 493-8006.
C COMMUNITY PLANNING · DESIGN · MARKET RESEARCH
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kirk McDonald
FROM: Madhulika Singh/Alan Brixius
DATE: 14 February 1996
RE: New Hope - Pawnshop Research
FILE NO: 131.00 - 96.01
BACKGROUND
The City of New Hope is investigating various means of regulating and controlling
unwanted proliferation of pawnshops in the city. Regulating pawnshops is one of the
oldest exercises of local police powers in the state. This issue can be looked at from two
perspectives. One, by regulating the land use, and second is the operational perspectives.
For the purpose of this research, various cities around Minneapolis were contacted to
investigate their regulations and requirements for pawnshop services. The APA, League
of Minnesota Cities and other planning organizations were also contacted in this regard.
The following are a list of articles enclosed:
1. Greg Brooker: 'A Survey of Pawnbroker Ordinances in Minnesota."
2. Greg Brooker: 'State and Local Regulation of Pawnbrokers."
3. 'Spaced-Out Zoning"
4. General articles:
a. Municipal Police and Power & Ordinance -"Money lending and pawnbrokers"
b. Businesses- =Pawnbrokers"
c. Municipal Licenses and Permits - 'Loan businesses; pawnbroker; banks"
5. Zoning Ordinances - Land Use Issues
a. City of Burnsville
b. City of Richfield
6. Licensing Ordinances
a. City of Roseville
5775 Wayzata Blvd.-Suite 555. St. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636-Fax. 595-9837
b. City of Minneapolis
c. City of Hopkins
d. City of Burnsville
e. Brooklyn Center
f. City of Coon Rapids
The following is a summary of the findings based upon: a) Land Use Requirements, and
b) Operational/Business Requirements.
ISSUE ANALYSIS
Existing Regulations. The City of New Hope currently does not have any special zoning
or license requirements for Pawn Shops:
Land Use Issues. Land use issues can be addresses in the following areas:
Allowed in Commercial Zoning Districts: Typically pawnshops have similar in
character to other retail and financial lending units with regard to building size, customer
attraction, parking, traffic circulation, and other site characteristics. Therefore, pawnshops
have traditionally been located in the Business/Commercial Districts of cities and required
to comply by the general provision and standards of that district. For centuries,
pawnshops have provided a service to law-abiding citizens. However, pawnshops can
also be places to "fence" stolen property and can attract a criminal element into the
neighborhood in which they are located. As a result, cities look for means to regulate
these more restrictively.
Prohibition of Use: According to Greg Brooker, in his research, "State and Local
Regulation of Pawnbrokers", he states based on case law examples that: "regulations so
onerous as to amount to a prohibition of pawnshop is not permissible. Some cities have
attempted to totally ban pawnshops by defining them as a "nuisance". However, unless
the city can document and prove that a pawnshop is injurious to the public health, safety,
or welfare of the neighborhood, the city would be subject to challenge to this total
prohibition. Our research has not found any examples or studies that have documented
that pawnshops qualify as a nuisance.
Provide Buffer Zones: Many cities have buffer zones requirements in their Zoning
Ordinance around pawnshops in order to prevent such uses from being close to certain
"sensitive uses" such as schools, parks, licensed child centers, and libraries. However,
unlike adult uses where research have documented their negative secondary impacts on
adjacent neighborhoods, no study is available that document similar negative impact for
pawnshops. As a result, it raises question whether buffer zones are justified.
2
According to Greg Brooker in his study, "State and Local Regulation of Pawnbrokers", a
city could, however, argue that because most pawnshop ordinances prohibit minors from
pawning or selling merchandise to a pawnbroker, a buffer zone from 'youth land uses' such
schools, child care _centers and churches is direct furtherance of one of the goals of the
ordinance. His survey on pawnbroker ordinances in Minnesota shows that most of the
cities pawnshops were not allowed within 300 to 1000 feet of a school or church. Richfield
Zoning Ordinance stated that such a business shall be located not less than 1000 feet
from any similar existing use and 250 feet from a residential district.
Based on our research, we find that the pawnshops should be confined to Commercial
Zoning Districts and the city may choose to implement a buffer zone from youth related
land uses if deemed appropriate by the city attorney.
Operational/Business issues. As stated earlier, the primary concern with a pawnshop
is that it can also be a place to "fence" stolen property and attract a criminal element into
neighborhoods in which they are located. Because pawnshops.can become linked to
commission of crime, jurisdictions are permitted to apply stricter operational regulations
to pawn shops than to other kinds of business. The Minnesota Statutes Section 471.925-
471.929. states:
"....The statutes provides that the governing body of any municipality may
continue to exercise the authority to regulate pawnbrokers and secondhand
or junk dealers as provided by law but may contract with the country board
of commissioners for administration and enforcement of countrywide
regulation or ordinance provisions within the borders of the municipality."
Regulating of pawnbrokers are controlled by the local municipality and the state is not
involved in licensing for pawnshops. In all the cities contacted, pawnshops were subject
to special business licensing requirements. The cities of St. Paul and Crystal currently
moratorium on pawnshops and are in the process of revising their ordinance in this regard.
Our research shows that many problems associated with pawnbrokers is related to the
manner in which the business was being conducted and cannot be resolved through
zoning. The following are a list of issues addressed by most cities in regard to pawnbroker
business licence requirement:
1. Application: A full application will be required. As part of the application
procedure a full investigation will be conducted. No license shall be issued to a
person who has a criminal record.
2. Fees: A fee is required to cover cost of both administration, pre application
investigation, and ongoing police investigation. Our research show that the fee
value ranges anywhere between $70 to $13,500 in Minnesota cities.
3
Operational requirements:
a. Identification Requirements: An identification by the person from whom the item
was received is required. A valid drivers licence or a picture identification issued
by a state W~uld be a valid form of identification.
b. Daily report to police. Every pawnbroker is required to keep record of every
article pledged with him or sold to him. This record must be reported to the police
on a daily basis.
c. Automatic holding period: Pawnbrokers can sell after 30 days after records have
been made available to the police.
d. Provision allowing for police hold: VVhenever the City Police Department notifies
the pawnbroker not to sell an item, it shall not be sold or removed from the licensed
premises until authorized to be released by the City Police Department.
e. Redemption period: Most cities required that an individual may redeem an item
pawned 72 hours to five months after the item was received on deposit by the
pawnbroker.
g. Storage of fire arms: A pawnbroker may be prohibited from storing, receiving or
sale of any fire arms.
h. Method of payment: Pawnbrokers can cash or check. However, some cities
require for the pawnbrokers to pay by check only.
i. Photo or video of customers required: In some cities a pawnbroker were required
to take a photograph or a still video of each person selling or pawning any item of
property.
j. Ineligibility for license: Minors; a person who has been convicted of any crime;
a person who is not a citizen of the United States or a resident alien, or a person
who hold an intoxicating liquor license with the city are ineligible for license.
k. Hours of operations: The hours were determined based other retail/business
around the district. However, pawnshops in some cities were required to be closed
for business on Christmas Day and Thanksgiving Day.
I. Receipt requirements: A receipt was always required which included the current
address, telephone number of business, date on which the item was received, a
description of the item, and the purchaser's signature.
4. Bond: A bond amount ranging from $1,200 to $8,000 was required by the cities at
4
the time of application. An average bond value was $5,000 in various cities in
Minnesota. This bond was required so that the pawnbroker would observe all laws
and conduct business in conformity with the ordinance.
Most cities contacted had a minimum of the above mentioned requirements. See
examples of various city licenses ordinances enclosed.
CONCLUSION
Our office recommends that pawnshops be permitted in the B-4 Zoning District.
Regulating and special requirements in terms buffer zones to adjacent sensitive areas of
land uses are not preferred as it is often subject to scrutiny and challenge. However, if the
city decides to impose buffer zones, an intensive analysis and study must be investigated
and the communities needs specifically justified. Regulation of pawnbrokers must be
reasonable and must not unreasonably interfere with property rights.
We also recommend that the city investigate a pawnshop business licensing ordinance
and this may be strictly regulated by imposing high fees, high bond/security deposit,
stricter requirements for operations, and other such issues that will discourage illegal
operations and prevent social disorganization and crime.
The above information is intended to assist the city of New Hope and City Attorney in
formulation their own documents. Please contact our office if you have any further
questions.
Enclosed: General research material
cc: Steve Sondrall
Dan Donahue
5
Co~cx & So~rO~,~.
AI'TOR~YEYS AT LAW
E~b~gh Execu~vc Office Pt~
8525 ~rooR Crossing
Sui~ ~203
Br~ P~k, Minneso~ 55aa3
February 15, 1996
Klrk McDonald
Management Asst.
City of New Hooe
4401Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE: O0 Day Response Deadline/Soacial Zoning Requests
Our File No: 99.40077
Dear Kirk:
Please find enclosed for consideration at the next Codes and
Standards meeting a proposed Resolution and Ordinance Amending New
Hope Code §4.202 Regulating the Decisional Process for Special
Zoning Requests. This Ordinance is necessitated by Minn, Stat.
§15.99 passed into law last duty ky the State Legislature.
Basically, the new state law imposes a 60-day response deadline on
a~l speoial zoning requests governed by Code §4.202. The deadline
requires City action on zoning requests within 60 days from the
date of application submittal. [f action is not taken within the
60-day period, the application is considered approved as submitted.
Ob¥iously, this could baYe serious ramifications if the deadline is
m~ssed. ~n that s~tuation an unfavorable zonin~ request could be
forced on the City.
AS we have d~scussed, the ~tatute provides fo~ a 60-day extension
if requested by the City. This would enlarge t~e response oeriod
to 120 days, The statute also provides for the City's &bility to
define a completed application. This is important because
submission of an incomplete application will not start the response
clock running. However, the City wilt De required to ~nform an
applicant within 10 days from the application submittal date it is
incomplete to toll the running of the response ~lock.
Mr. Kirk McDonald
February 1§, 199~
P&ge 2
Also, the City must inform the applicant of the necessary
information needed to complete the application in this
notification.
The enclosed Ordinance amends our Code to automatically incorporate
the 60-d~y extension to the response deadtine and better defines
the necessary information required to satisfy the complete
application definition.
Implementation of this statutory requirement is also dependent upon
application forms and written proceQure$ USed by t~e City to
consider and approve special zoning requests. I have enclosed in
this letter various forms being used by other citiem in an effort
to comply with this law, The attachments to the City Planner's
memo also includes sample ~orms we may wish to use. We probably
need to take some time at a staff level to review and modify the
forms we are uming to insure that we fully comply with this new
statute, Again, tht$ i$ necessary to insure that unwanted special
zoning requests are not forced upon us.
Very truly yours,
Steven A, $onoral 1
elt3
Enclosure
cc: A1 Brixius, City Planner
ORDINANCE NO. g6-
AN ORDZNANCE AMENDING NEW HOPE
CODE ~4.202 REGULATING THE DECISIONAL
PROCESS FOR ~PECI^L ZONING REQUESTS
The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains:
Section 1, Section 4.202 "Decisional Pnoqess" of the New Hope
Code is hereby amended to read a~ follows:
¢.202 Decisional Process. The City Council acting as the Board
of ~ Adjustments .end Appeal.s under ~.C~ Minn.
Stat. ~§. 4~2.354, 462,357 (G) ~ ~2,359 (4) ~nQ 15.~
s~all make t~e decisions within the legislative and
executive framework of the City on al~ Specis3 Zonins
~ request,applications.
Section 2. Section 4.202 (1) "Reques~ for Soe,~,ja3 Zon_inR -
Ho~,~ade" of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended to read as
?ollows:
(1) Remuest. for Soeci~l_.ZoninR - How Ma~e. All requests for
special zoning shall be processed ~ursuant toM~.~n. Stat.
615.99, in the follow~ng manner~ wlt~ ~hc .... ,t,~.--e-~
~tion 3. Section 4.202 (1)(~) "~lannin~ ~ommission" of the
New Hope City Co~e is hereby amended to read as follows:
(&) Plannin~ Comm~i.Asion, All Spe¢~&3 Zoning ~
reauee.t appllcat~ons shall ~irs[ De presented ~0
the Planning Commission, together with the
a~ropriate comment,----f-~ ~nd recommendations
from the City M&na~er or his desi~n&te~
representatives.
Section 4, Section 4.202 (1)(b) "AOOlication" Of the New Hope
Ci[y Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
~pecl&l Zoning ~ re_Quest ap~l ic~tion~
$halI be fil~.d with the Zoning Administrator or any
staff per~on~ designated by the ~ity Manager on an
o~f~cia3 application ~orm o~ the C~ty, accomm~nied
Dy a fee as out ~ ined ~n Chapter 1~. The
application ah~ll also be accompanied by detailed
written and graphic materials fully explaining the
proposed change, development, or use. The number
of copie~ tO be provided and any additional data
sh~ll be determined by the City Manager.
ADoliq,~tions for ~oeoial .Zonin~ r~quests must be
complete before the~ are_ a~cepted. .. A comp]et...e
appl icat i.~ must in~
i) A City ~pl~cation .form(s) relatin~ to the
r'J. quest si~n~U by all_persons with ~.~. interest
i~ the sub~ect orooert,y
request.,
m m~ OO~ .gf ~n Ownec's Duplicate
C~rtifioatQ or Title or ot~er , approve~
Qocumeotation of interest _ shall alsp be
~ubmitted~ith'the ~iqned a~mlic~.~ion form(s);
ii.) All ...... S~pportin~ infg~matjon required by this
~ode and~o~ outlined in the ..~ppl i c~t ion
pro~edure~ documents included with th,e City
application forms.;.
j_ii) Payment of all fees ~sscpiated with the
applicabte applicatlon.(s);
j~ A prey~plication meetin~ may be required by
City ~taff ~t _ ~hich the ..... ~ppropri~te
amDl iqat ion ~roc,eaures, req~j rem~nt s -and
.~aolicable ,..Cod~ oroviA, ion~ rel.~ti.0g to the
re~.ffst Nil 1 be reviewed a~d exmlaine~.
An ~o~liGaJ..~on wij.1 be deemed complete unla~ the
mDklicant recei, ye~ written.potiOe withiQ 10 d~ys of
its submission indicating it is not compt~.~e and
.~.nQicatlnR ~at informatiqn i.s. missinq. T~
D~tice 8hal 1 bA .considered ..given by .i~ts .deposit in
thQ U,8.. M~it, fi,rst ~lass posta~e Dcepaid,
addressed to any listed amolicant.._..at tD~ address
~iven on ~.aDDlication_.form. In the event the
am~li~)nt fails tq provide ~ address on the
~ppl icat ion ,.~orm, t~is notice regu. i rement for
incomDla, te a~D!~..G~tions shall_be deemed wa~.v~d by
t~.e. applicant.
2
Secti~_n_,,..$.. Section 4.202 (1)(e) "City Manager's Re~oort" of
New Ho'De City Coc~e is hereby amended to read as follows:
(e) City Manager's Report. The Special Zoning ~-~
application shall be processed under the direction of the
City Manager for a report and recommendation and
initially presente~ to the Planning Commission. A
preliminary draft of the report of the City Manager and
his comments and/or recommendations with such supporting
data as furnished by the applicant, and as the City
Manager deems necessary or desirable shall be given to
the Planning Commission prior to the meeting at which
said report and/or recommendations are to be Presented.
The final report and/or recommendations of the City
Manager are to be entered in and-made ~art of the
permanent written record of the Plannin~ Commission, and
forwarded to the Council.
Section 0. Section 4.Z02 (1)(g) "Notice of Mearin~" of the
New Hope City Coae is hereby amended to read as follows:
(~) Notice of Hearing. The P~,,,,~n~ C;,,~,,~si-'-~,, City M~na~er
s~all set a date for a public ~ear~ng. Notice of such
hearing shall be published in conformance with Chapter 1
and individual notices shall be mailed not less than ten
days nor more than thirty days prior to the ~earing to
all owners of property, according to the records
ay&liable to the City within three hundred fifty feet of
each parcel included in the request, as provide~ in
Chapter 1.
Section 7. section 4.202 (1)(j) "~ecommendations of Planning
CommissiOn*' of the New Hope City Code is hereby amended to read a~
follows:
(~) Re¢o_~endations of Planni~e_ C_ommission. The Planning
Commission shall ' ~ ~ --- cf ....
m:~: .~_~..o_ ~*^~ =~..d recommend such
actions or conditions relating to the request as deemed
necessary or desirable to carry out the intent and
purpose of this Code and the Comprehensive Plan. ~uch
recommendation shall be'Ffl-~'F~%'*+~, e~ther in the minutes
or by written resolution, and accompaniea by the report
and recommend&t~on of the City Manager, and forwarded to
the City Council.
Section 6. Section 4.202 (1)(k) "Council R.fyiew" of the New
HOPe City 'C6Qe is hereby amended to read as follows:
(k) Council Review. The City Council shall act upon a
Special ZonirlgP-~~-erequest application after it has
received the report and recommendation from the Planning
Commission and the City staff cr.-=xty. -.~- :ft;r t ....
Droyided within 120 ~,ys from the date · comple~efl
eDD~ca[~on is supm~t~ed, for consideration. ~his. time
~imit a~.tomatica~¥ incor~or&t~.s the 60 d~y extension to
.t~.e response deadline set out ~n Minn. ~.t~t, §1§.9~,
$__u~.d. 3(D). T~e extension is necessar~y to provi_c[A
a0_~e,~LUJZLe....~ime for D~hlic heari_oga and' aDoropriate d~.sign
and environmental reyi~w. All ~Reoi~ ZOning request
aooT~ations w~ll require ~.he amolican, t to &Dorov~}hiA
1__~0 days timei.j~e for...Citv Counc.~] _action. ~f, upon
receiving the report~ and recommendations of the Planning
Commission and City M~nager, the City Counct1 desires
further consideration, or finds that inconsistencies
exist in the review ~roce~$, data submitted, or
recommended action, the City Oounci~ may, before taking
final action, refer [~e matter beck to the Planning
Commission with a statement detailing the reasons for
referral. Thi~ prooedure ehal~ be followed only one time
on an application, except for a 9oo~ cause. The Council
may refer an application Deck to the Planning Commission
if it determines that changes in the aDplicAtion after
Planning Commission recommendation require such action,
or such referral may be waive~ by the Council.
Section 9. SecZion ¢.202 (1)(m) "Council ACtion" Of the New
Hope City Code is hereby emended to read as follows:
(m) Council Action, Upon receiving %he report and
recommendation of the Planning Commission and the City
Manager, the City Council may, at its option set And hold
a public hearing if deemed necessary and shall make
~lnding$ O? fact an~ impose any condition on approval
which it considers necessary to protect the ~ublic
health, safety and welfare, and shalt make its dec~sion
as to the application. Un]e.ss a 1On,er period of ti.ma, is
aporoved i.o. writi.~.g by the aDDl~.can~, City Cou~.~ action
will occur within 120 days. after su.b~ssion by the
applicant of a comDJ.~ted Spe~i.~l Zoning.. reques~
~OOl~cat~.on as provi~e~ Oy §~.202~.~)(b).of this Code.
Seotion 10. Section ¢.20Z (2)"Request for Minor V&rianc~" of
New HOpe City Code is hereby repealed in its entirety.
~ection 11. E~ective Date, This O~dinance sh&ll be
effective upon its passage and publication.
Dated the day of , 195§,
Edw. J, Erick$on, Mayor
Attest:
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
Published in the New HOpe-Golde~ Valley Sun-Post the day of
, , 1996.)
RESOLUTION NO. g6-
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING MINIMUM
REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCEPTZNG
WRITTEN R£QUEST~ RELATING TO ZONING
WHEREAS, ~inn. Stat. §15.99 became effective on July 1, 199~,
and
WHEREAS, said statute est&bi,shes certain de&dlines for agency
actions relating to zoning, septic systems, or export&ion of the
metropolitan urban ser¥ice area, and
~.~, subdivision (1) of the law defines "agency" to
include statutory cities, and ~he deadlines therefore apply
certain actions by the Ci%y of New Hope,
WHEREAS, "actions relating to zoning" are not defined by the
statute, end
WHEREAS, the established time limits begin u~on the agency's
receipt of a written request ¢ontainin~ all information required by
law or by & previously adopted rule, ordinance or policy of the
agency.
NOW~.~.HEREFORE, BE IT RESO~VE~ by the City Council of New Ho~e
that written requests relating to zonin9 shall not be accepted as
containina all required information until a~l of ~he following have
been complete~ pursuant to New Mope Code §4.202, et
1. A pre-application meetin~ with City staff during which
t~e appropr~a[e &ppl~cetion procedure(s), requirements
and applicable Code provision~ are reviewed and
exD3ained;
2. Submitta] of al] aDp]icab]e, como]&ted City ao~lication
form(s) relating to the request (current City aop]ication
forms are aYai~ab]e at City Ma~l and may be periodica31y
3. Submittal of a31 supporting information required by City
CbOe and/or out]ineQ in t~e application orocedures
Qocuments that are included with the City app]ication
forms (current app]ication procedures documents are
avail&Die at City Ha3] and may be periodically
.Submittal of all fees assocla~ea with The applicable
application(s) (current fees are included on the
application forms or procedures documente; such fees
be periodically updated by action of the City Council).
Dated the day of , 1990.
~dw. J. Erickson, Mayor
Attest:
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
Living Within the New 60-Day Limit
A Sample Application Log
Fhs sample I.~g ~s nter, ded to I-elp cl-'es keep Ir~::~ ofdead~nes u~',~er l~e ne~ IJrne i~.
A G C D E F G H I
Appl cai,ch Appi canl Da:e Oale ~ic~ Oa~ 60-~ay ~le A~Flicanl Deadlire :or Date C~ Da:e City
ncm~r appli~ti0n w~ w~ sent n~ice t~e Imit rdn~ ~s n~fied ~y a~on app~ed or se~ response
received by ~at ~qui~d of e~en~oa under e~nsi~ d~aied the Io A~lica~
~e ~ info.at or or ~i~er a~licafi0r,
......... was miss~ ............
: '.:- ~' s ,~ct :s :c'--p ex ~ t ;~a~s:. ~o~es A-C and E vi. Il always be ~lled o~. S~e~ l~e ~e- ~o~s am ~ed o~ depencs on ~e Ci~s pmcedcres aqd lh~ ltle of a s~ific ap~lical~on.
A. A~,gn ~ch applicon a numbe~;
B. L,~ Ihe~pliclnt
C. [ist the dale t~e C~ ,ece~xed ~e appli~tion
F) [ ~st lhe date tFe Csly ~nt U~e Applic~i notice ~al ~quired inb~i~ ~.~ mi~ng, g ~e Ci~ gi~s such n~i~. ~ mu~ do so w;~ I 0 b~iness ~ys after tt~e da:e in ~ C. I~ the t~nqe clock is
such a ~obce. ~ssgn ~e ~ppli~lion a ne'~ numar acd ~ all subsequent d~dlires on a n~ line.
: I1 the C,1)' o;,ls ~or ~n ~e~,sion. ,~ ~.~t nol,~' Ire Appqcant bebre the 6C-dty t,me ~eri~ ends. ~he d~le in B~x F ~nu~ come berne ~e date in ~x
· [~ L~t the d~adlir~e unde' aqy e~ension or w.t,¥,r.
t -~ he Cily n~usl ac~ ~fo~ ~he deadlir~e, i I he dale n Box H must come befo-e the ~te ,r ~x [oc if applicab~, Bo~
L :~t he d~te Ihat th: C~ sent no:~:e of ~ts a~llan lo lhe Apphcant. I: is be~ if the C~y not on~ l~kes ac~on w;thin the ~me li~a, bs~ also nolifies ~e A)p~ic~nt befo~ the l,me I,~il runs.
'~(~J'l I (~fll(% i.-i~ dI50 ~stl to jc.t down d~e ~r, lalve date~ oi aprlicabl~ planning ccmrnission and ci~ er. until meelin~ when 1he ~pplication is ~cei~d to ~SL~eIFe deadln~ will be ~L
BY:.
Ao~licant's name:
contact l~maen:
Address: Zip:
Teleplqone: (Work), (Home) ............
Fax: ...........
Inl~rest in property:
Property owner(a) of reomd:
Address: .............. Zip; ....
Telephone: (Work) ,,. (Home) .,
F~x; .......................
Applieefio~ is mede to alter · Cit¥-deelgrmted wetland and/or floodplain far the purpose of:
Property acreage: _ L _ Acreage ~ alteration: .....
~o~ addree~ or Io~on'
Prope~y Ideal.orion
Legal deseH~i~, ,,
FILING REQUIREMENTS
Unlea~ waived by the Planning DepartmenT, you must provide all o1' The following Items with this
apl~iCaTion. An incomplete al~Dlioation will not be accepted.
$100 epglioal~on fee (not refundable). Make check payable to 'City of Minnetonka.'
Names end addresses of Drooerty owners within 400 feet of I~roflerty i~oposed for wetland end/or
floodplain eltetatio~ (form attached)
Fifteen copies* of the following drawings:
site/¢oncelgt plan __ erosion control plan
grading/drainage plan with ~i~ng mveg~ation Dian
and ~o~d cwo-foot oontoure
~orage cagaci~ oalculatio~ for~reas regi~ered survey shewing e~sfi~ a~
~o be m~ified pro~o~d s~tuctures, lot lines, ~inent
di~nensions, lot acreages, and w~land
tree ~an. The tree plan is to ide~ify delineates ~er ~ We~Ind Conse~ati~
· exi~ ~gnifieant ~rea~ nnd fh~ ~het ACt and City S~d~rds. WeUe~
will remain e~r devel~ment. Significant bound~ee~ I~ li~ and proposed
~ees are .... The ~lan ehoula ~en~fy ~u~ms m~ ~e ~ked in ~e field.
indi~d~l sig~f~e~ ~e~ ~y size and
spe~ee. Grou~ of ~gnifiegnt ,~ non-
~nif~a~ ~ee ~id be ~awn ae
~n 8 ~ ' ~y 14' ~ ~ ~e ~t ~ ~
O~ r~d g ~" x 11" redu~ion of ~h of ~ ab~ d~wings
Copies of all ~mi~ a~licatio~ end/or .~ovals from all age~i~ ~ving ]udsdiefi~ over ~
re~, including wa~t~ di~fi~., Mi~es~ Depa~men~ of Na~I Resomcea, and/or the
U.S, Army ~mpe of Engineers
Comdeti~ of ~ed "L~.l-St~Fedm;I W~er R~rae" proje~ notificetionle~lice~on form
A wd~n ~atem~ deKribi~ T~ inte~ed use of the ~o~ and why ~e City sh~ld approve
your request
Wfi~en sta~em da~dbing mvegeTaaon plan intimating t~e of wetland ~e~Tion to be planted
1, Try to discuss your I~Om~ai with adjacent I~Ope~ty owners before su~ this appli~on.
~y ~nffio~ ~t y~ can re~ve a~ad ~ time will ma~ it e~ier and ~er fm the Ci~ to
2. ~ Pla~ O~Or may req~re a eansuRant, ~eh aa a wetland a~ciali~, to review your
a~i~on. If the ~reotm rea~r~ a con~n['~ review, y~ m~ ~i~ a ~ e~mw to pay
~e f~. ~ ~aff will nO~ you ~ ~ Oire~ re~kes a co~ul~nt.
~q
3. The City hereby notifies thc eppficam that develol~ant review may not 'be eomDleted within the
required 60 days, clue TO public hearing requirements and agency review. ?herefore, the Cit~, is
nodf~ng the applicant that the CH;v is taidng an automatic §O-day extension for devetoDmen[
review. Development review will be completed within 1 ~.0 rla¥.~ [tnl#ss additiona~ review
extensions are a0provad by the apl~li[;ant. The Planning DeDartment will netlfy you of all meetings.
PROOEDURE
1. Consult with the Manning Department to determine the ordinances and procedures Gat apply to
your application.
2. Return this apl~tt=ation to the Manning Department
The Planning Dire~m' will s~hedule a public hearing with the Pier,nine Commission after preparing
a report and reoommenclatlon. Allow az least 30-60 clays from ~e al~plioa~ion daze [o [he Planning
Commission hearing. The Director will mail a notice to Dro0ert~/owners within 400 feet of the
property you plan to alter. A ¢Ol3Y.ef the ~teff report will be mailed to the applicant on the Friday
13e/ore t~ Ptanning Commission meeting.
4. The Planning Cm'nmteeion will mlke a recommendation to [ha City Council.
The Director will schedule a meeting witl~ tl~e City Council. Tl~y will make The final 0ecisien,
Allow at least three weeks between the Plennlng Commission meeting and the City Council
me,ting.
APPLICANT'S STATEMF. NT
This apDiioation should be ~rocessecl in my name, and 1 am the oa~/whom the City ~l~ould contact
about this applicmtion.
To the best of my tmowledge, the documergs and infocmaTion I have submitted are true ancl correct.
J~oplb. ant~ $ Sig~re .... Date
OWNER'S STATEMENT
1 am ~l~e fee title o~mer of the above described property, and I agree to this application.
Jif a corporation m' ~l~[p 15 the Fee title ho/der, attach a resolution authorizing this al~l~iication on
Owner's Signature Date
G:~WP'tFOR~~O,FRM
R_m/.
IT I$ YOUR REgPONSlBtLrl'Y TO 9END THIS LETTER
WITH A SZ~ GHEt~K TO HENNEPIN GOUNTY.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE FOLLOWING PROCESS MAY TAKE
OVER A WEEK. YOUR APPUCATiON WILL NOT BE COMPLETE
AND WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT THE CERTIFIED LIST
OF NAMES AND ADDRESSES FROM HENNEPIN COUNTY.
Senior ~oper~y Oe~ripfion Tachnioian
HennepJn County Uovarnrne~ CenTer
Finance Oi~sion
603 Admiration T~
MIn~apolis, MN
~ele~e: 348-3271 )
Please pre.re a ce~fi~ ii~ ~ the names and eddms~s of the prope~y ownerl of ail profiles I~ated
withfn ~0 feet of ~ f~iow{ng:
~mI~ Address:
Legal
Rease include any ~rcels in adja;ent ;iUis wi;bin 400 feet, Include ~ of mailing la~ls.
I under~=~ ~=re will be ~ ~e per ~roel ~nd e minimum charge of $25.~. I have enclosed
chair tO Henne~n Co~ty. Y~ may ;;utify mu r~in9 t~ final fee for ;his ~¢e at
(0h~ ~m~r d~ing t~e ~ay).
~ea~ ~ the c~pleted list te (PL~E PRI~)~
Ao01icant's Name:
A~licant's Add.ss: ......
City, 5~e, ~p= ....
(Sign Name) -
REV. 2/96