Loading...
100395 Planning AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 3, 1995 CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA 7:00 p.m. 3. '3.1 *3.2 3.3 4.1 4.2 6.1 6.2 6.3 CALL TO ORDER CONSENT ITEMS PUBLIC HEARINGS Case 95-17 Request for Comprehensive Sign Plan Approval for a Single Principal Building Devoted to Two or More Businesses, 8700-8748 East Research Center Road, Twin City Garage Door Company, Petitioner. Case 95-18 Request for Site and Building Plan Review and Setback Variance to Allow Construction of an Entrance Canopy, 7300 42nd Avenue North, Gill Brothers Funeral Chapels, Inc., Petitioner. Case 95-15 Request for Concept Stage Planned Unit Development Approval to Allow Construction of a Car-X Muffler, Brake and Allignment Facility, 7180 42nd Avenue North, David Lasky, Petitioner. No discussion - request to be tabled until the November 7th meeting, COMMITTEE REPORTS Report of Design and Review Committee Report of Codes and Standards Committee OLD BUSINESS Miscellaneous Issues NEW BUSINESS Review of Planning Commission Minutes of September 5, 1995. Review of City Council Minutes of August 28 and September 11, 1995. Review of EDA Minutes of August 28 and September 11, 1995. ANNOUNCEMENTS ADJOURNMENT * Petitioners are requested to be in attendance. OCTOBER PLANNING CASES PC95-17 Twin City Garage Door 8700-8748 East Research Center Road CITY OF:: NFzw HOPE PC95-18 Gill Brothers 42nd Ave. N. QOLDEN VALLEY P Planning Case: Request: Location: PID No: Zoning: Petitioner: Report Date: Meeting Date: CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT 95-17 Request for Comprehensive Sign Plan 8700 - 8748 East Research Center Road 06-118-21-31-0003 I-l, Limited Industrial Zoning District Twin City Garage Door Company September 29, 1995 October 3, 1995 BACKGROUND The petitioner is requesting Comprehensive Sign Plan approval for a single principal building devoted to two or more businesses, pursuant to Section 3.467 of the New Hope Code of Ordinances. 2. There are two tenants occupying the building at the northwest intersection of Boone Avenue and East Research Center Road: 1. Twin City Garage Door Company 2. Elliot Auto Supply Company, Inc. 3. Twin City Garage Door Company is requesting approval to erect signs stating the occupants of the building and to erect a canopy sign over the business entrance. 4. There is currently one ground sign on the property. There are currently no permanent wall signs on the building; only temporary canvass signs identifying the two businesses. 5. The proposed comprehensive sign plan would consist of installing the following three (3) signs: 1. 40 square foot pendant mounted ground sign listing both tenants. 2. 1/2 barrel canopy sign over the Twin City Garage Door Company entrance. 3. 32 square foot wall sign adjacent to the entrance of Elliot Auto Supply. 6. The petitioner states on the application that the purpose of the request is to help customers find these places of business. The property is located in an I-l, Limited Industrial, Zoning District, with I-1 industrial uses to the south (across East Research Center Road), I-1 property and Victory Park to the west, R-4 property (Pheasant Park Apartments) to the north, and R-4/R-5 property to the east across Boone Avenue (North Ridge Care Center). Planning Case Report 95-17 2 September 29, 1995 8. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff have received no comments regarding this request. ANALYSIS Section 3.467 of the New Hope Sign Code, Signs Accesso~ to Multiple Occupancy Business and Industrial Uses Including Shopping Centers, states that "when a single principal building is devoted to two or more businesses, or industrial uses, a comprehensive sign plan for the entire building or shopping center shall be submitted and shall include the information required by paragraph (1) to permit a determination as to whether or not the plan is consistent with paragraphs (2) through (4) of this subsection. No permit shall be issued for an individual use except upon a determination that it is consistent with a previously or concurrently approved comprehensive sign plan. The effect of said comprehensive sign plan is to allow and require the owner of multiple occupancy structures to determine the specific individual sign requirements for the tenants of his building. As sign locations and size, etc. may be of some significant importance in lease arrangements between owner and tenant, it is the City's intention to establish general requirements for the overall building only, thus providing a building owner with both the flexibility and responsibility to deal with his individual tenants on their specific sign needs." (1) Comprehensive Sign Plan Information. The applicant shall prepare a written and graphic comprehensive signage plan for submission to the City. Said plan shall include but not be limited to the following information: Sign location (both wall signs and freestanding signs) Sign area Sign height Scaled building elevations Scaled floor plan that outlines tenant bays Identification of anchor tenants Description of window signage use Identification of sign design Sign Construction Drawings (sections) The Council, Planning Commission and City staff may request additional information from the applicant concerning the application or may retain expert opinions at the expense of the City, or may require as a condition of proceeding with its consideration that the applicant furnish expert opinion and data at the expense of the applicant. (2) Compliance. All signs shall comply with the provisions of Subsections 3.465(1)(c) and (4) and 3.442 except as otherwise provided. Subsection 3.465(1)(c), Metal Electrically Illuminated Signs, states that "Signs constructed of metal and illuminated by any means requiring internal wiring or electrically wired accessory fixtures attached to a metal sign shall maintain a free clearance to a grade of nine feet. Accessory lighting fixtures attached to a non-metal frame sign shall maintain a Planning (3) Case Report 95-17 September 29, 1995 clearance of nine feet to ground. In the event a metal sign structure or accessory fixture herein described .is grounded by the use of a grounding conductor mn with the circuit conductors and said structure or fixture is also grounded by being bonded on a grounding electrode at the sign site, no clearance to grade shall be mandatory." Subsection 3.465(4) refers to roof signs, which is not applicable in this case. Wall Signs. Maximum Area. The total allowable sign area for a multiple occupancy structure shall not exceed 15 percent of the combined wall surfaces on walls which abut streets in Limited or General Business Districts or 10 percent in Limited or General Industrial Districts. No individual tenant identification sign may exceed 100 square feet in area. Building Identification. No multiple occupancy structure may display more than two overall building identification signs. Tenant Identification Signs. Individual tenants located within multiple occupancy structures shall be permitted to display individual identification signs, if they have separate exterior entrances to their use or they are tenants in a shopping center, in which case, not more than one sign may be displayed. A tenant occupying a comer location fronting two streets may display identification signs to both street frontages. Delivery_ Signs. A delivery sign or signs not exceeding nine square feet in area may be located on the side or rear wall of the structure. (4) Ground Signs. Other Multiple Occupancies. Multiple occupancy structures other than shopping center, or shopping centers having four or less separate and distinct occupancies, may erect ground signs in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.465(3) and may identify each separate and distinct occupancy on said ground sign. The portions of Section 3.465(3) that are pertinent to this request include the following: (c) Maximum Sign Area and Height. All ground signs shall conform with the maximum sign area, and maximum sign height provisions in relation to the street classification, as contained in the following table: Street Maximum Area Maximum Structure Classification (Sq. Fee0 Height (Fee0 Collector 40 15 Minor Arterial 75 20 Principal Arterial 200 30 Planning Case Report 95-17 4 September 29, 1995 (g) Location to Property Lines. No ground sign shall be located closer than ten feet to any property line-. The petitioner is proposing to install one (1) 10' x 4' (40 square feet) pendant mounted ground sign listing both tenants. The sign would be non-lighted. Twin City Garage Door Company would be identified on the upper portion of the sign, which would have a white background with red and black lettering. Elliot Auto Supply would be identified on the lower portion of the sign, which would have a gray background with blue lettering. The cabinet and pole of the sign would be black. 3. The petitioner is proposing to install two (2) business identification wall signs on the south side of the building (one for each tenant). A. Elliot Auto Supply would have a 4' x 6' (24 square feet) flat wall sign installed adjacent to their entrance. Bo Twin City Garage Door would have a new red canopy over their entrance which would contain three small signs with white lettering (18" x 7' = 10.5 square feet each) for a total of 31.5 square feet. It should be noted that a technical problem exists with three signs proposed for one business on the Twin City Garage Door canopy. City Code allows one per tenant or two for a comer tenant (and Twin City Garage Door is a comer tenant). However, staff finds that the small size proposed for the three canopy signs is reasonable in proportion to the building. This is a large building and the Sign Code would permit 100 square feet wall signs for each tenant. The petitioners request for wall signs of 24 and 32 square feet seems reasonable. o The only other item staff would point out is the lack of some visual coordination or "link" between the signs, which the Comprehensive Sign Plan regulations suggest. Due to the marginal quality of the "Elliot" sign that was provided, staff would request a scale plan of the "Elliot" sign and some visual link to the Twin City Garage Door sign, such as color, type style, size, placement, shape, etc. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommend approval of the Comprehensive Sign Plan request, subject to the following condition: 1. Scaled plan of "Elliot" sign be submitted and consideration be given to visually linking the signs together. Attachments: Zoning/Address/Topo Maps Petitioner's Letter Ground Sign Detail Canopy Sign Detail Wall Sign Detail R-0 VICTORY PARK H0STERMA# JR HIRH SCHOOL CENTER R.4 CARE CENTER ATHLETE PARK PARK V 1,3T ORY CENTER ROAD PARK SCIENCE CENTER DRIVE NTER RD )UBLIC WORK S 5-5'o GARAGE 5700 $500 56 TH. NL)R i'H RIDGE CARE ~,~$o 3,ENTER 54 TH. -J ¢4~o ~/4H H JR I- 55 T't~' .6 X ! RESEARCH :' 892-3.X : (~800) TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO. Corporate Office · 5601 Boone Avenue North · Minneapolis, MN 55428 ° (612)533-3858 · (612)533-9704 FAX September 8, 1995 Mr Doug Sanstad City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Ave. North New Hope, Minn. 55428 Dear Mr. Sanstad, Enclosed are the sketches for our proposed signage and a check for $40.00 for the application fee. The proposed signage will consist of: A) 40 square foot pendant mounted sign listing both tennants. B) 1/2 Barrel Canopy sign shown in drawing. Entrance to TCGD. C) 32 square foot sign applied to bldg. Entrance to Elliott Auto Supply. Sincerely, Marc Little President St. Paul, MN 55117 ° 240 East Maryland (612) 641-0420 ° (612) 487-6107 FAX Burnsville, MN 55337 ° 12100 Riverwood Drive (612) 894-8500 · (612) 894-8502 FAX 7' 10' TWIN CITIES GARAGE DOOR CO. D/F i~'EDESTAL 51GN-NON LIGHTED TO? DACr,,GROUND-WHITE TC, GD-RED DOOR-OUTLINE BLACK, TWIN -CO.-BLACK LOW, F, D^CKGKOUND-GI~Y ELLIOT. ^UTO-INC.-DLUE C^DINET & I~OLE-DL^CK 10' 51DE ELEVATION ~/8/'=1' TOP ELEVATION' 178"=1' REVISIONS Sign Co. 18607 Hwy. 65 N.E. Cedar MN. 55011 (612) 4346134 ~.....~5' F-,ADIU5 I ~-1/2" 120'' FF.,ONT ELEVATION 5/8,"=1' CUSTOIV~R APPROVAL DATE OF APPROVAL ~ THIS IS AN ORIGINAL BY ARROW SIGN CO. IT IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED OR SCALE COPIED WlTHOLrr THE CONSENT OF ARROW SION CO. ! Planning Case: Request: Location: PID No: Zoning: Petitioner: Report Date: Meeting Date: CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT 95-18 Request for Site and Building Plan Review and Setback Variance to Allow Construction of an Entrance Canopy 7300 42nd Avenue North 17-118-21-21-0054 B-4, Community Business Zoning District Gill Brothers Funeral Chapels, Inc. September 29, 1995 October 3, 1995 BACKGROUND The petitioner is requesting site and building plan review approval for the construction of a funeral home and a variance from the setback requirement to allow the construction of an entrance canopy fronting 42nd Avenue, pursuant to Sections 4.039A, 4.034 and 4.22 of the New Hope Code of Ordinances. Gill Brothers Funeral Chapels, Inc. is proposing to construct a 7,800 square foot funeral home on property currently owned by the City at the northwest intersection of 42nd and Nevada Avenues. The City has been marketing the property for the past year and has received an "all-clear" letter from the MPCA subsequent to having gasoline impacted soils on the east side of the property removed in conjunction with an approved MPCA clean-up plan. The City acquired the property in the late 1980's for purposes of implementing the 42nd Avenue Street Reconstruction Project. The property previously included all or a portion of Lots 11-18, Auditor's Subdivision Number 324 and all of these parcels were combined into one plat in 1994, for marketing purposes. The property is now known as Lot 1, Block 1, City Center Addition. The property is located in a B-4, Community Business, Zoning District and surrounding land uses/zoning include R-4 apartments to the north, I-2, General Industrial, to the west (across railroad), B-4 to the east (Army/Navy Store), and B-4 to the south across 42nd Avenue (All Star Sports and Rapid Oil). 6. The proposed funeral home is a permitted use in the B-2 Zoning District and is a "roll-over" permitted use in the B-4 Zoning District. 7. The topography of the property is fairly flat with a rising ridge on the east side. 8. Besides site and building plan review/approval, the petitioner is requesting a variance from the 35-foot side yard setback requirement on 42nd Avenue to allow the construction of an Planning Case Report 95-18 2 September 29, 1995 entrance canopy. The proposed canopy would be located 11 feet from the side yard property line, therefore, a 24-foot variance from the side yard setback requirement is needed. In September of 1994, a Letter of Intent was submitted to the City on behalf of Minne Mufflers, Inc. for the development of a Car-X Muffler and Brake shop on the site, however, the EDA declined the offer and indicated that they would prefer a non-auto-oriented use for this site. 10. In June of 1995, the EDA considered two additional offers on the property: one from Champion Auto and one from Gill Brothers Funeral Chapels, Inc. The EDA declined the offer from Champion Auto and directed City staff to meet further with Gill Brothers to discuss their financial assistance request. 11. At the July 24, 1995, EDA meeting, the EDA entered into a 90-day Exclusive Negotiations Agreement with Gill Brothers, which allowed Gill the exclusive right to negotiate a development contract with the City for the 42nd & Nevada Avenues property. The City, in mm, agreed not to market the property to another party for the 90-day time period. 12. Between July and September, Gill Brothers determined total project costs and staff consulted with Bond Counsel to determine which costs were eligible for Tax Increment Financing assistance, as the property is located within the 42nd Avenue Tax Increment District. 13. At the September 25th EDA meeting, the New Hope EDA approved, in concept, a pay-as-you-go tax increment reimbursement of $150,000 for eligible development costs. It is anticipated that a final Purchase Agreement and Development Contract will be presented to and approved by the New Hope EDA at the October 9th EDA meeting. If everything proceeds on schedule, Gill Brothers have indicated that they would start construction this fall. 14. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff have received no comments regarding this request. ANALYSIS VARIANCE The purpose of a variance is to permit relief from strict application of the zoning code where undue hardships prevent reasonable use of property and where circumstances are unique to the property. A hardship may exist by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of property or because of exceptional topographic or water conditions. The hardship cannot be created by the property owner and if the variance is granted, it should not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or unreasonably diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable Planning Case Report 95-18 3 September 29, 1995 use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. 3. Additional criteria to be used in considering requests for a variance includes the following and the Planning Commission/City Council shall make findings that the proposed action will not: Ao B. C. D. E. Consistent With Purpose of Variance. Be contrary to the purposes of a variance. Light and Air. Impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property. Street Connections. Unreasonably increase the congestion in the public street. Public Safety. Increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. Property Values. Unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the neighborhood, or in any other way be contrary to intent of City Code. This property is unique in how the setback requirements are applied because the "front yard" is considered the portion of the property with the narrowest frontage abutting a public right-of-way. In this particular case, the "front yard" is considered the east side of the property which fronts onto Nevada Avenue. The setback requirements are applied as follows: Front Yard (East/Nevada Avenue) Side Yard (South/42nd Avenue) Side Yard (North/Apartments) Rear Yard (West/Railroad) 35 feet 35 feet 10 feet 35 feet The proposed building meets all of the setback requirements except for the front entrance canopy facing 42nd Avenue. o Staff f'mds that there is a qualifying non-economic hardship to justify some setback flexibility on this parcel. The property is long and narrow, has an unusual shape, and is located along a restricted access County Road. All of these conditions create many complications for site design. The lot size is approximately 135' wide x 435' long, with a "slenderness ratio" of greater than 3 to 1. Since eastbound access is only allowed from the Nevada Avenue cul-de-sac, the narrow lot shape forces the building to be unusually shaped or pushed to the west edge, where it would have poor commercial visibility. Staff also finds that the site design is reasonable, as canopies are standard for mortuary use of loading caskets before funeral processions in all weather. The canopy consists of a roof supported by two posts. It is not enclosed and will not visually intrude upon 42nd Avenue redevelopment. 7. For the above stated reasons, staff is recommending approval of the variance request. Planning Case Report 95-18 4 September 29, 1995 SITE AND BUILDING PLAN REVIEW 1. The petitioner has provided the following narrative description of the project: The proposed Gill Brothers Funeral Home will complement the adjacent properties. It will provide necessary handicap accessible features and meet all local, state, ADA and OSHA guidelines. The funeral home has been designed to include the following: Maintenance free parking area with 67 parking stalls. The building exterior will be brick veneer with aluminum soffits and facia and a shingled roof. The entrance canopy will accommodate entering and exiting the funeral home during Minnesota's inclement weather. The funeral home has been designed to include lobby, reception area, work office, visitation room, music room, arrangement office, lounge area, children's room, men's and women's restroom facilities, prep room, mechanical room, and garage. There will be one large visitation room with seating for 200 people. The room has been designed with coffered ceiling, soffit lighting and individual visitation storage areas. It also has a sound proof folding partition to divide this area into two visitation chapels, if desired. The large casket display room will easily exhibit 20 caskets and have an alternate selection room for cremation. The City Department Heads reviewed the plans on September 14th and items discussed included: whether or not it was necessary to relocate the existing storm sewer in the center of the property or if the building could be shifted east so the storm sewer could remain in place, snow storage, lighting, landscaping, the need for a sidewalk, easement, sprinkling requirements and signage. The Design & Review Committee also met on September 14th with the petitioner to review the plans and items discussed included: the need for architects signature, existing landscaping should be shown, shifting of building to avoid $30,000 storm sewer relocation cost, underground irrigation, additional lighting on north side of building, the need for more vertical plantings next to building, refuse storage, the need for sign plans, buffer needed on north adjacent to drive, additional green area near the intersection, clarification of continuous curbing, exterior building materials, and the variance request for the canopy. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meeting. 4. The revised plans, which incorporate all recommendations by the Design & Review Committee, include the following details: A. Parking - The Zoning Code requires 20 stalls per chapel (2 x 20 = 40) and the plan provides 67 stalls. All parking and drive areas will be bituminous. B. Five-foot (5') wide concrete sidewalk around perimeter of building. C. All parking lot islands are painted stripes. D. Handicapped parking stall, curb cut and signage provided on east side of building. Planning Case Report 95-18 5 September 29, 1995 E. Catch basin provided for storm sewer in center of west parking lot; to drain to existing storm sewer. F. New 24-foot 42nd Avenue "entry/exit" curb cut approved on 42nd Avenue. G. New 24-foot Nevada Avenue cul-de-sac curb cut has been revised to clarify traffic flow and reduce asphalt. H. All parking/drive areas to be surrounded by B6-12 curb and gutter. I. Refuse enclosure within building. J. Two 25-foot high shoebox type light standards provided in west parking lot. K. Seventy-five square foot maximum sign, 20 feet high maximum, 10 feet off property line near 42nd Avenue entry/exit. L. "One-way" traffic direction sign shown at southwest comer of building, directing traffic east under canopy. Traffic striping is shown on one-way (under canopy) drive. M. "Do Not Enter" sign shown near south/east curb line. N. Building has been shifted to the east to eliminate expensive storm sewer relocation. O. Snow storage areas are shown on the plan (west and east). P. Lot Coverage Details Building 12 % Bituminous 50 % Green Area 38 % Q. Soffit downlighting is shown on all sides of building. R. Landscaping - The plan has been revised to include the following: 1. A large green mass area has been created at the signalized intersection, as requested, without infringing into the site triangle. (Note that the apartment sign will remain on the comer, per an existing easement agreement.) 2. A Lilac hedge has been provided as a buffer along the 6-foot wide perimeter at the north. 3. Arborvitae have been added next to the building for a "vertical element." 4. Existing landscaping is shown, with the existing evergreens to be relocated on the site. 5. All landscaped areas will be sprinkled. 6. A planting schedule has been provided, as follows: COmmon Name Marshal Seedless Ash (Fraximus Pennsylvanica) Spirea Snowmound (Spiraea Nipponica) Silver Queen Maple (Acer Saccharipum) Black Hills Spruce (Picea Glauca 'Densata') Cherry Purple Leaf Sand (Pmnus Cistena) Lilac Arborvitae Size Quantity 2 1/2" Ca. 4 24" Ht. 34 2 1/2" Ca. 4 6' Ht. 14 16 10 36" Ht. 60 6' Ht. 4 Staff feels that the residential style, one-story professional building architecture of the building complements and is harmonious with the other residential buildings located nearby. It is similar to the professional office building located across the street from the Post Haste Shopping Center. No crematory services are included in the request. Planning Case Report 95-18 6 September 29, 1995 6. The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and recommends: A. That the City retain an easement to correct the sidewalk encroachment at the south property line. (Easement to be prepared by City.) B. The building slab elevation should be at least 9' above the west parking lot elevation in the event of 42nd railroad underpass flooding. C. The private storm sewers connecting to the public storm sewer shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. D. Erosion control features shall be in place to prevent erosion off-site and through the public storm sewer. 7. Staff finds that the petitioner has done an excellent job in revising the plans and in incorporating recommended changes. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of site/building plan review for the construction of the funeral home and the setback variance for the canopy encroachment, subject to the following conditions: 1. City retain an easement to correct the sidewalk encroachment at the south property line. (Easement to be prepared by City.) 2. The building slab elevation must be at least nine feet above the west parking lot elevation in the event of 42nd railroad underpass flooding. 3. The private storm sewers connecting to the public storm sewer shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. 4. Erosion control features shall be in place to prevent erosion off-site and through the public storm sewer. 5. Performance bond to be posted for on-site amenities and public improvements with amount to be determined by City Engineer and Building Official. Attachments: Address/Zoning/Topo Maps Site Plan Survey Floor Plan Elevations Landscape Plan Landscape Schedule Project Description Architect Experience FRED s~us 4c~z~ 4oz? ROAD SUNNY$1DE R.4 B'4 R~'4 I-1 -R-O : I71 LIOR~ ~CE 894 · 8 './ 42ND F~ ',' City of New Hope, Ninneoota - Owner end Developer 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, NN 55428 Prepared By: By-Land Surveying P.A. 7845 Brooklyn Boulevard Brooklyn P&rk, lin 55445 Legal DeeoriPtlon: The Beat 130.00 feet of Lot 18, Auditor'a Subdivllion N-mher 324. Lots ~11, 12, 13, 14, 1S, 16 end 17, Auditor's Subdivision Number  t that part taken for road. - 74,516 Square Peet AR~DF LOT OF LOT 1 - 61,376 Square Feet / - All ¢~.''nce..r..pprox*mat..ut,act to fin. 1 .urv.¥. ! hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that ! am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the Laws of the Stets of Nlnneeote. cunt I)000 NEVADA AVE. N N'LY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF' 4~ND A¥£N~J~ NOJ~Tf4 ~ I I "I'IORTU L'U~VATIOU .'TO. SL..~ 6 II EAST ELEVATIOIt J '° EAST ELEVATIOrl '.~'o. IrT& 12, 12. ASPHALT 5,HIHC~LF..5 ~ '~,,~ ~ & ' ..."',~ GILL BROTHERS FUNERAL HOME WEST ELEVATIOPI /,211D AV[~ II. t urn. m .n~H ~um6 -, yin. 'm nm~t~q. IL GILL BROTHER~ FUNERAL HOME NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA MB LE'FI'ER A B C D E' F PLA COIV SHAL A SN( ILVER KHIL ,Y PI ~ I'IOPF..~ MIi'qN~SOTA The proposed Crill Brothers Funeral Home, owned by Nell and Dan Iv[cC-caw, will be located on lQ acees of land in New Hope, lvf~esota and will Complement the adjacent pmpertie~. It will provide necessary handicap accessible features and meet all local, state, ADA and OSHA guidelines. The funeeal home has been designed to include the followins: · lV[amtenance free parking area with 66 parking stalls. · The building exterior will be beick veneer with aluminum soffits and facia and a shingled roof. · The entrance canopy will accommodate enmfing and exiting the funeral home during 1V[~n~esotag inclement weatha~. · The funeral home has been designed to include lobby, reception area, work office, visitation room, music mom, arrangement office, lounge area, children g mom, men ~ and women ~ restroom facihties, prep room, mechanical room, and garage. · The~e will be one large visitation room with seatm8 for 200 people. The mom has been desisned with coffered ceili~, soffit: l~hti~ and individual vimtation stornge areas. It also has a sound proof folding partition to divide this area into mvo visitatiom.chapels ff desire. · The large casket display room will easily exhibit 20 caskets and have an altemage selection room for cremation. MILLER ~ HOME DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION ST. CLOUD, MINNF~OTA A BRIE~F' SK~'I'CH High quality construction has been the cornerstone of Miller Funeral Home Design & Construction, a subsidiary of Jim W. Miller Consmaction, since 1955 when Jim W. Miller founded the f'u'm in St. Cloud, Minnesota. Initially a general contractor specializing in agricultural and residential projects, Miller Construction evolved through planned growth and pursuit of opportunity into the leading commercial developer in Central Minnesota. Chaixman of the Board, Jim Miller, himself the descendent of skilled tradesmen and the son of a successful contractor, has built the reputation of the f'u'm upon sound design and consm~ction techniques used by highly trained and experienced personnel. Miller Construction has become adept at finding useful applications for new building technology and resources while anticipating market and client needs. Miller Construction remains a people-oriented company with management policies that encourage individual creativity, initiative, and contribution throughout the organization. Hard work is encouraged and rewarded within an informal, urtstmctured climate which allows individuals to achieve both personal and clearly stated company goals. Miller Constructions' objectives and activities are linked to its design/build concept. The design/build concept is a combination of services and products which basically is a one-step construction service. The staff of highly trained Financial Consultants, Architects, and Project Managers work together for the successful completion of a client's project. The economies of scale and coordination can save a developer cost and time. (A Brief Sketch, cont'd Miller Construction has developed many large scale projects in the areas of commercial, industrial, and residential constructiOn. These projects include funeral homes, condominiums, apartments, motels, restaurants, office parks, manufacturing plants, and warehouses. Under the operational control of management, the Architect, Development Consultants, and Project Managers assist businesses of all sizes. A few of the funeral homes completed by Miller Construction include: Green Funeral Home, Skroch Funeral Chapel, Anderson Funeral Home, Boldt Funeral Home, West Kjos Funeral Home, Kapala-Glodek Funeral Home, Holcomb- Henry-Boom Funeral Home, Major-Erickson Funeral Home, Bonnerup Funeral Home, Wight & Fox Funeral Home, Westgor Funeral Home, Minnesota Valley Funeral Home, Rowe Funeral Home, Winberg-McLaughlin Funeral Home, Cambridge Funeral Home, Kaiser-Corson Funeral Home, and Sturm Funeral Home. GWVtlmh GV0809.1 MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Kirk McDonald Mark Hanson, City ]Engineer September 26. I995 Gill Brothers Funeral Home File No. 34-Gert Gill Brothers Funeral Home i~ proposing to develop Lot 1, BIock 1, City Center Addition. From an engineering standpoint the renewing is recommended: * Additional easement is required to maintain a minimum 2 foot separation between sidewalk and the right-of-way line for 42nd Avenue (County Road. No. 9). Access to County Road No. 9 shall be reviewed and approved by Hennepin County. Acce~ to Nevada Avenue cul-de-sac shall be done in accordance with public works artd its standards for driveway. · No portion of the building shall encroach into the 20 foot wkle utility e.~ement for storm sewer. The private driveway serving the apartments to the north shall be identified along thc north property line. The existing driveway i$ within 1-2 feet of the existing property line. For purposes of snow storage and landsca~ it is recomm,~.naed strongly the developer work with the apartment owners to provide an acceptable green space separating each driveway. Thc building elevation shall be determined to m,lntain overland drainage from thc low point in 42nd Avenue to the nog. hwest. The low point in 42nd Avenue below the railroad bridge will pond storm water during large storm events. · The private storm sewers connectin__g to the public storm sewer shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. · Erosion control features sban be in phce to prevent erosion off-site and through thc pub~ storln scwcr. CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning Case: Request: Location: 95-15 Request for Concept Stage Planned Unit Development Approval to Allow Construction of a Car-X Muffler, Brake and Alignment Facility 7180 42nd Avenue North PID No: 17-118-21-21-0031 Zoning: Petitioner: Report Date: Meeting Date: B-4, Community Business District David Lasky September 29 1995 October 3, 1995 UPDATE 1. You will recall that this request was tabled at the last Commission meeting due to the fact that a number of staff and Design & Review Committee recommendations had not been incorporated into the plans. The petitioner was directed to meet again with the Design & Review Committee and a lengthy Committee meeting was held on September 14th. At the conclusion of the meeting, the petitioner indicated that they would be revising the plans, however, they would not be completed for the October Planning Commission meeting. The petitioner has written the attached letter requesting that this matter be tabled until the November Planning Commission meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends tabling this request until the November 7th Planning Commission meeting. Enclosure: Letter from Petitioner 9228540 '95 09/26 07:15 FAX 9228540 LASKY-CENTRAL REAL ESTATE ~]OOl FAX (612) 922-8540 2506 MONTEREYAVENUE SOUTH · ST. LOUISPARK, MINNESOTA55~1'6 · PHONE (612) 922-3334 or 377-1167 Mr. Kirk McDonald, Assietant City Manager City o~ New Hope 4401 Xylon Ave. N. New Hope, MN. S5425 Sept. 26, 1995 re: PUD application for 7180 42nd Ave. N. Dear Mr. McDonald: Following our last meeting with the Planning Revi~wCommittee, we have been working with our architect, Car-X and a new group o~ landscape arCchitects. Unfortunately thingm a~e moving slower t~ we had hoped. For this reason, I am requesting that you postpone our revised Sincerely, David Laek~ Faxed and mailed II CITY OF NEW HOPE MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: September 29, 1995 Planning Commission Members Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Community Development Coordinator Miscellaneous Issues 1. September llth Council/EDA Meeting - At the September llth Council/EDA meeting, the Council/EDA took action on the following planning/development/housing issues: A. Resolution Commemorating 50th Anniversary of Tool Products/Quadion Corporation and Proclaiming September 25, 1995, as Tool Products/Quadion Corporation Day in the City of New Hope - The City Council passed a resolution commemorating the 50th Anniversary of this firm and the resolution is attached for your information. B. Planning Case 95-14, Request for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Home Occupation for a Home-Based Pet Grooming Business at 3656 Maryland Avenue - Approved, subject to the same conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission, with the exception that the annual inspection was changed to a semi-annual inspection for the first two years. C. Planning CaSe 95-07/Ordinance 95-13 - An Ordinance Amending New Hope gonin? Code by Establishing License Regulations for Tattoo Businesses and Allowing Tattoo Businesses as Permitted Uses in the Commercial Zoning Districts - Approved, however the City Council was uncomfortable with the low license and investigation fees and requested that staff study this issue further and come back with a recommendation at the September 25th Council meeting. D. Resolution Authorizing Letter of Agreement for Design Services for 6073 Louisiana (Improvement Project No. 519) - The EDA approved a Letter of Agreement with Equal Access Homes to provide professional design services to the City for the second handicap accessible twin home project to be located near the intersection of 62nd and Louisiana Avenues. Please see attached information. September 25th Council/EDA Meeting - At the September 25th Council/EDA meeting, the Council/EDA took action on the following planning/development/housing issues: A. Project #527, Resolution Accepting Easement from Homeward Bound, Inc. for Cooper High School Street Project - Homeward Bound has granted the City an easement for the construction of a sidewalk on the north side of 47th Avenue in conjunction with the Cooper High School Street Project and this action accepted the easement. Please see attached request. B. Project #519, Motion Approving Quote from Hy-Land Surve~ng in the Amount of $400 for the Subdivision of Property at 6073 Louisiana Avenue North - The City Council approved a quote from Hy-Land Surveying in the amount of $400 for the subdivision of the property at 6073 Louisiana Avenue North. The subdivision is necessary for the City to proceed with the handicap accessible twin home project and this preliminary plat will be presented to the Planning Commission in November. C. Resolution Authorizing Reduction of Letter of Credit on Don Harvey 2nd Addition/Versa Die Cast Project - The City Council approved a reduction in the Letter of Credit on the Don Harvey 2nd Addition/Versa Die Cast project to $5,000, as the majority of the improvements have been completed. Please refer to the enclosed attachments for further information. D. Project #469, Resolution Adopting Assessment for 1994 Retaining Wall Improvement - The City Council conducted the assessment hearing for the Retaining Wall Improvement Project and all assessments were approved; no property owners appeared at the public hearing due to the fact that the majority of the assessments were lower than the original estimated amount. E. Project/?536, Resolution Ordering Preparation of Plans and Specifications for New Hope Ice Arena Expansion at 7100 49th Avenue North - The City Council approved the Orepara~tion of plans and specifications for the addition of a second sheet of ice at the New Hope Ice Arena. This action was necessary to proceed with the filing of applications with the State for grant monies to complete either a second sheet of ice or rehab of the existing arena under the Mighty Ducks legislation. This project will be proceeding for the Planning Commission to review at their November meeting. F. Project #536, Resolution Authorizing Filine of Application for Addition of Second Ice Sheet and Execution of Agreement to Construct Sport Facilities Under the Provision of the State Capital Bonding Fund - Following the approval of the preparation of plans and specifications, the Council authorized the filing of an application for a $250,000 grant to add a second sheet of ice to the New Hope Ice Arena. G. Project #536, Resolution Authorizing Filing of Application for Ice Arena Renovation and Execution of Agreement to Construct Sport Facilities Under the Provision of the State Capital Bonding Fund - The Council also approved the filing of an application for a $50,000 grant for ice arena renovation to address gender equity requirements, modification to mechanical and electrical systems and refurbishing and modifying of team locker rooms. If the grant for the second sheet of ice is not approved by the State, the City's second priority would be to obtain a grant for renovation. H. Resolution Electing to Participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program Under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act, Calendar Year 1996 - The Council did pass a resolution to participate in this new Livable Communities Act, which is a new housing program developed by the Metropolitan Council. The City will be eligible to apply for certain grant funds if it participates in the program. Please refer to the attached Council request for further information. Note that New Hope is one of the few cities in the metropolitan area that currently meets the guidelines for the program. I. Resolution Approving Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority Housing Assistance Loan Program for City of New Hope Scattered Site Housing Rehabilitation Program and Authorizing Execution by Mayor and City Manager - Earlier this year the Metropolitan Council established a loan program for scattered site housing programs. New Hope was the only city in the entire metropolitan area to apply and receive grant monies for housing activities. The scattered site housing loan agreement grants the City $120,000 to be used for the purchase of two blighted, scattered site, single-family homes, which will be purchased, rehabbed and sold to low/moderate income first-time home buyers. The Council approved the agreement. J. Resolution Approving Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority Housing Assistance Loan Program Agreement for City of New Hope Handicapped Accessible Twin Home and Authorizing Execution by Mayor and City Manager - The City also received $125,000 in grant monies for the construction of the handicapped accessible twin home at 6073 Louisiana Avenue North. The funds are in the form of a zero interest loan and will allow the City to proceed with the construction without using EDA funds. K. Ordinance 95-15, An Ordinance Amending the New Hope Code by Amending the Tattoo Business License Fee - Pursuant to the request at the September 1 lth City Council meeting, City staff met with the City Attorney and Director of Police to further discuss the license and investigation fee for a tattoo business in the City. Upon further consideration, the staff recommended that the investigation fee be increased from $200 to $400 and staff further recommended that the annual license fee be increased from $100 to $300, based upon the number of times the business would need to be inspected per year. The City Council passed an ordinance amending the New Hope Code to amend the tattoo business license fee as recommended by staff. Please refer to the attachments for further information. L. Planning Case 94-35/Ordinance 95-03, An Ordinance Amending Re_mllations Governin~ Commercial Recreational Facilities and Pinball Machine, Video Game and Pool Table Licenses - The City Council finally approved the pool hall ordinance amendments at this past Council meeting, thus the prohibition will b6 :~ii~ifi~d as is°on as the ordinance is published. After discussing these proposed ordinance amendments a number of times, the Council adopted all of the amendments in the form as recommended by the Planning Commission. M. Consideration of a Community-Wide Survey by Decision Resources, Ltd. - The City Council is proceeding with a professional, community-wide, random telephone survey of residents in the City to determine their satisfaction with the current level of services. As soon as the final version of the survey has been finalized, I will distribute a copy to the Planning Commission for your information. N. Consideration of Huebner Purchase Agreement Offering to Sell Property at 7609 Bass Lake Road for $78,500 - In light of the fact that the EDA has canceled the Bass Lake Road Housing Redevelopment Project due to the high costs of relocation benefits, the EDA approved a motion rejecting the purchase offer submitted by the property owners at 7609 Bass Lake Road. The owners were proposing to sell the property to the City for $78,500 and the City's appraisal, which was recently completed, valued the property at $65,000. O. Discussion Reeardine Guidelines for Financial Assistance to Businesses - The EDA had a general discussion regarding priorities for financial assistance to businesses in the City, however, determined that they would continue with their current policy which is to consider each request on a case by case basis to allow staff and Council the needed flexibility to deal with different situations. P. Project //523, Discussion Regarding Development Agreement with Gill Brothers Funeral Chapels, Inc. - After analysis by the City's Finance Director and Bond Consultant, the City has determined that a total of $415,937 in tax increments would be generated by the Funeral Chapel project over the remaining life of the 42nd Avenue TIF District. Eligible costs that could be reimbursed by the City with TIF funds would be about $350,000. The EDA made a preliminary determination at this past meeting that they would be willing to provide the development with up to $150,000 in TIF fmancing assistance. Staff will be meeting with Gill Brothers to now determine if the development proposal and agreement can move forward. Please refer to the attached Request for Action for further information. Q. Motion Approving a Request for Proposals for Special Needs Rental Housim, - The EDA approved a motion that would allow staff to send out Requests for Proposal for special needs rental housing. The City received $90,000 in 1995 HOME funds and has also committed $90,000 in EDA funds for the rehabilitation of a four or six-plex in the City for special needs housing. Please refer to the attached Request for Action and the RFP for further information. Winnetka Center Market Study - Work is proceeding on the Winnetka Center Market Study and the preliminary draft will be presented to the City staff in mid-October. Staff will make the final draft available to the Planning Commission for review. Codes & Standards Issues - City staff and the City Attorney met in mid-September to discuss the following potential City code changes and planning/zoning issues: A. Changes in City Ordinance - Pertaining to Trees B. Platting/Subdivision of 6073 Louisiana Avenue North C. Rezoning of 6073 Louisiana Avenue North D. Commercial Recreational and Other Uses in the B-4 Zoning District E. Building Code Amendments F. Rezoning of Homeward Bound Site and Conditional Use Permit for an Adult Day Care Center G. Review of Parking Standards for Athletic Facilities H. Shopping Center Sign Study I. Other Sign Code Modifications o The Planning Consultant is proceeding to prepare reports on the majority of these issues and staff would like to schedule a Codes & Standards meeting for mid-October to discuss these items. ~ Miscellaneous Planning/Zoning Issues - Attached are several articles from the APA Zoning News magazine that you may be interested in as they apply to several ordinances that we have dealt with in the past or are currently dealing with. Keeping Up - Enclosed for your information is the September issue of Keeping Up. Please note the Spotlight On New Hope article on page 7. Attachments: Tool Products 50th Anniversary Design Services for Twinhome at 6073 Louisiana Avenue Homeward Bound Easement Subdivision of Property at 6073 Louisiana Avenue Letter of Credit Reduction for Don Harvey 2nd Addition/Versa Die Cast Retaining Wall Assessments New Hope Ice Arena Plans and Specifications New Hope Ice Arena Second Sheet of Ice Grant Application New Hope Ice Arena Renovation Grant Request Livable Communities Act Met Council HRA Housing Assistance Loan Program - Scattered Site Housing Rehab Met Council HRA Housing Assistance Loan Program - Handicap Accessible Twimhome Tattoo Ordinance Gill Brothers Funeral Chapels Special Needs Rental Housing Miscellaneous Planning/Zoning Articles Keeping Up Publication COUNCI£ REQUEST FOR ACTION Approved for Agenda Agenda Section Consent I~-~')/ 9-11-95 Item No. By:~/ 6.5 Originating Department City Manager Kirk McDonald Management Assistant RESOLUTION COMMEMORATING 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF TOOL PRODUCTS/ QUADION CORPORATION AND PROCLAIMING SEPTEMBER 25, 1995, AS TOOL PRODUCTS/QUADION CORPORATION DAY IN THE CITY OF NEW HOPE ' Tool Products, a Quadion company, is celebrating 50 years of business in New Hope and has requested that the City proclaim Monday, September 25, 1995, as Tool Products/Quadion Corporation Day in New Hope. The company, which is located at 5100 Boone Avenue North, was founded in 1945 and has grown from a small contract tool and die shop to a large tool manufacturer. The enclosed resolution commemorates the company's 50th Anniversary and proclaims September 25th as Tool Products/Quadion Corporation Day in the City of'New Hope. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY TO: SECOND BY Administration: Fmance: CITY OF NEW HOPE RESOLUTION 95- RESOLUTION COMMEMORATING 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF TOOL PRODUCTS/QUADION CORPORATION AND PROCLAIMING SEPTEMBER 25, 1995, AS TOOL PRODUCTS/QUADION CORPORATION DAY IN THE CITY OF NEW HOPE WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, 1995 is the 50th Anniversary of Tool Products, a Quadion company, and they are celebrating 50 years of business in New Hope; and Tool Products, located at 5100 Boone Avenue North, was founded by toolmaker Al Zeiss in 1945, and tile company has continued to grow from a small, contract tool and die shop to the large tool manufacturer it is today, with locations in both New Hope and Jackson, Tennessee; and . the company is known locally and nationally for quality tools and in 1975, Tool Products became a wholly owned subsidiary of Minnesota Rubber and those two companies now form the backbone of Quadion Corporation; and Tool Products and Quadion maintain a strong commitment to their customers, employees and the communities in which they operate and in this 50th year their employees are participating in a number of Community Action Projects, such as Habitat for Humanity, Meals on Wheels, commRnity beautificati°n and fund- raisers for various charities; and Tool Products has an equally strong commitment to its customers and employees and has established highly successful customer service and employee involvement programs; and Tool Products has worked hard to make New Hope a better place to live and work for the past 50 years and has provided jobs to a number of New Hope residents; and in conjunction with the 50th Anniversary of Tool Products, the New Hope City Council desires to proclaim September 25, 1995, as Tool Products/Quadion Corporation Day in the City of New Hope.. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that in commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of Tool Products/Quadion, the City Council of the City of New Hope hereby proclaim~ September 25, 1995, as TOOL PRODUCTS/QUADION CORPORATION DAY in the City of New Hope. Adopted by the City Council oftbe City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this llth day of September, 1995. Mayor Attest: City Clerk Nld(;rath Au~ust23,~995 Edward Erickson Mayor, New Hope 4401 Xylon Ave., N. New Hope, MN 55428 Dear Mayor Erickson: I am writing to you to request that Monday, Sept. 25, 1995 be proclaimed Tool Products/Quadion Day in New Hope. Tool Products, a Quadion company, is celebrating 50 years of business in New Hope, Minn. Founded by toolmaker Al Zeiss in 1945, Tool Products has continued to grow from a small, contract tool and die shop to the large tool manufacturer it is today, with locations in both New Hope and Jackson, Tenn. The company, known locally and nationally for quality tools, experienced such success over the past five decades that it stopped performing military and other contract work and began exclusive production of products for its own clients. In 1975, Tool Products became a wholly owned subsidiary of Minnesota Rubber. The two compames now form the backbone of Quadion Corporation. Tool Products, and its parent company Quadion, maintain an amazing commitment to their customers, employees and the communities in which they operate. In this, the company's 50th year, employees are participating in several Community Action Projects, where they are serving the community through projects such as Habitat for Humanity, Meals on Wheels, community beautification and fund-raisers for various charities. 8400 IqORMANDALE LAKE 80ULEVARD SUITE $00 UINNEAPOLIS /dlNNESOTA 55437'-1080 612.832.5000 FAX 612.831.8241 i'ool Products' commitment to its customers and employees is equally as strong. Tool Products has revolutionized the ideas of customer service and employee involvement by sending an unprecedented number of employees to visit their customers to see how their job impacts the customer's business. Upon their return, these employees are better able to see the value of their position and provide better quality and service to the customer. Please consider issuing a proclamation to honor a company ~ has worked to make New Hope a better place to live and work for the past 50 years and has provided jobs to many of your residents, ff you have any questions, please call me at 832-5000. I look forward to hearing from you. A SHANIWflCK COMPANY ~ E~u~ o~tv REQUF.~T FOR ACTION originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager EDA 9-11-95 Sarah Bellefuil ~) Item No. By: Administrative Analyst By:// 4 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LETTER OF AGREEMENT FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR 6073 LOUISIANA (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT//519) , At the August 28, 1995 City Council meeting, the City Council discussed the construction of a handicap accessible twin home at 6073 Louisiana Avenue North. The City Council indicated their support and staff is proceeding with project at this point. Staff desires to construct the same type of structure at the 6073 Louisiana site as was constructed at the 51st and Winnetka property. Therefore, staff is requesting approval of a Letter of Agreement with Equal Access Homes to prepare plans and specifications and related design work for the twin home. The plans and specs will be a modification of those completed by Equal Access Homes for the 51st and Winnetka property. The services that will be required of Equal Access Homes have been determined to be professional consulting services, therefore no bids were received for this project. The attached Letter of Agreement was prepared by the City Attorney and the total maximum estimated cost for the design services is $1,590 and will be funded out of EDA or CDBG scattered site housing funds. Staff requests authorization for the Executive Director to enter into and execute a Letter of Agreement with Equal Access Homes, to provide design services for this project. Staff will bring the twin home design back to the EDA for approval prior to the construction bidding process. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Admlntst~Uon: Finance: RFA-O01 ~ Wl~ ~ S'TlWAff CORRICK & SONDRALL, P.A. Al~3 R.~"eYS AT Edinburgh Exccu~vc Officc Plaza 8525 g~ln~roog Crossing Suite #203 Brookllra Paris. Minnesota .~54A3 FAX (~) Geptember 7, 1995 Daniel d. Donahue City Manager City of New Hope 4401Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 RE: 6073 Louisiana Avenue North Dear Dan: In connection with the proposedtwtnhome project at 6073 Louisiana Avenue North, enclosed you will find & Letter of Agreement between the EPA and Equal AcGeee Homes, Inc. for design aha related services. This Agreement contains the same terms as the prior Agreement with Equal Access Homes for the twinho~e at 7901-7905 51st AVenue, except for &ddtttonal language in the first Part of Paragraph 2 clarifying Cha; Equal ACCess Hoetes will not be 0aid for supervising and inspecting the construction if Equal Access Homes is awarded the bid to construct the 6073 twinhome. This change reduces to writing the understanOtng the EPA had with EQual Access Homes ?or the 7901-7909 Project. The dollar amounts for the deei9n and related services are slightly lower than the previous project due to the deletion of the separate charge ?or a marEetlng plan. ~f the Agreement meets with your approval, you will also find enclosed & Resolution Authorizing Letter of Agreement for Oestgn Ser¥ices for 6073 Pro,eot. This resolution can be considered by the EPA at ~ts next meeting. Be sure to oall i~ you have any questions. Sincerely, Mart in P. Malecha s3t Enclosure cc: Kirk McDonald, Management Asst. · arah Bellefu~l, Administrative Asst. Steven A. Sondrall, City Attorney EDA RESOLUTION NO. 95- RF$OLUTION AUTHORIZING LETTER OF AGREEMENT FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR 6073 ~ROJECT WHEREAS, the Economic OeveloDment Authority in and for the C~ty of New HoDs (EDA) owns certain reel est&ts known as 8073 Louisiana Avenue North, and WHEREAS, the EDA is considering constructing a handicap accessible twinhome on said real estate, and WHEREAS, ~he preparation of plans and specifications and related design work for the twinhome is a necessary Preliminary step in such a project, and WHEREAS, the services involved are professional consulting in nature, and WHEREAS, the EDA has received quality services of this type in the pa~t from Equal Access Homes~ end WHEREAS, the Lette~ of Agreement between the EDA and Equal Access Homes, [nc., attached he~eto as Exhibit A~ se~s forth the details of an appropriate contract between parties for the prepar'at~on of plans and sOec~ficetions and related ser¥~ces. NOW, THEREFOEE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Lette~ of Agreement attac~e~ ~ereto as Exhibit A between t~e EDA ana E~ua] Access Homes, [nC. fo~ sa~d ~esig~ a~d reSated work is approved, and the President and Executive D~reotor are authorize~ and directed to s~gn se~d Letter of Agreement. Adopted by the EconomiG Development AUthority in and for the C~ty of New Hope this day of _ _, 199E. Edw. J. Er~ckson, President ATTEST: O&n~e~ J. Donahue, Execut~¥e Director C:\~PSl\Cn~\~la COUNCIL REQUF_~T FOR ACTION Approved for Agenda Agenda Section Consent /~.~~ 9-25-95 Item No. 6.7 Originating Department City Manager Kirk McDonald Management Assistant RESOLUTION ACCEPTING EASEMENT FROM HOMEWARD BOUND, INC. FOR COOPER HIGH SCHOOL STREET PROJECT (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO.,527) The City needed to obtain an easement from Homeward Bound in order to construct a sidewalk on the north side of 47th Avenue in conjunction with the Cooper High School Street Project (Improvement Project No. 527). Homeward Bound has granted the City a permanent street, utility, and drainage easement across a portion of its real estate at 4741 Zealand Avenue for this purpose and the enclosed resolution accepts the easement. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY TO: SECOND BY CORR~¢K & SONDRALL, P.A. ATTOR,~EYS AT LAW Edinburgh ~xem~ve O~ce P~a 8525 Ed~b~ok Cro~ing ~ui~ ~203 B~O~I~ P~, M~n-e~o~ 55443 September 20, 1996 Denis1J. Donahue City Manager City of New NoDe 4401Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55¢28 RE: Reeo3ution Accepting Easement from Homeward Bound, Znc. For Cooper Hig~ $chool ProJect Our File No: 99.65273 Dear Dan: Homeward Bound has returned to our office signed copies ~f the easement affecting their property, which easement is needed for the Cooper High School Street/Parking Lot PrOjeCt. The easement should be acceoted by the City Counsel and then recorded by our office. The enclosed Resolution takes care of the acceptance, and can be passed at the next counset meeting. not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Martin P. Malecha m3w Enclosure cc: Kirk McDonald; Management Asst. Valerie Leone, City Clerk Steven A. $ondra11, Esq, RESOLUTION NO. 95- RESOLUTION ACCEPTZNG EASEMENT FROM HOMEWARD BOUND, [NC. FOR COOPER HIGH ~CHOOL PROJECT WHFRFA.~, H~mAwmrd R~und, Thc. owns c.~rt~in real estate known as 4741 Zealand Avenue North, which rea] estate is ~ffected by the Couper' High S~ho~l S[r'ee~/P~rking Lot Project, City of New Hope Project No. 527, and WHEREAS, Homewa~'d Buund, ~r~c. has 9ranted the Ctty of New Hope a permanent street, utility, and drainage easement over, under, and acro~$ a portion of its real estate mt 4741 Zealand Avenue,North, which easement is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incor'pur'ated here~n, an~ ~, said easement contains certain obligations and duties on the part o? the City of New Hope, and W~_.~~ sai d easement completion of Pro~ect 527. for the successfu~ NOW. THEMEFOME. BE IT RE~OLVED; 1. That the permanent street, utility, and drainage eaeement from Homeward Bound, Inc., attached hereto am Exhibit A, is accepted by t~e City of New Hope. Dated the 25t~ Gay of September, 1995, Edw. J. Eriokao'n, Mayor Attest: Valerie Leone, C~ty Clerk COUNCIL REQUEST FOR ACTION Approved for Agenda Agenda Section Consent 9-25-95 Item No. B~. 6.8 Originating Department City Manager Sarah Bellefuil Administrative Analyst MOTION APPROVING QUOTE FROM HY-LAND sURvEYING, P.A., IN THE AMOUNT OF $400.00 FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY AT 6073 LOUISIANA AVENUE NORTH (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT #519) . At the August 28, 1995 New Hope City Council meeting, the City Council discussed the construction of a handicap accessible twin home at 6073 Louisiana Avenue North. The City indicated their support and staff is proceeding with the project. One item that needs to be completed for the project is the subdivision of the lot to allow a twin home at the site. City staff sought quotes on the subdivision of the property and received the following quotes: FIRM Hy-Land Surveying, P.A. Lot Surveys Company, Inc. OUOTE $400.00 $900.00 Staff recommends accepting the low quote from Hy-Land Surveying, P.A., in the amount of $400.00. Staff recommends approval of a motion by the City Council approving the quote from Hy-Land Surveying, P.A., in the amount of $400.00 for the subdivision of property at 6073 Louisiana Avenue North (Improvement Project #519). MOTION BY TO: SECOND BY Review: Administration: Finance: HY-LAND SURVEYING, P.A. LAND SURVEYORS hp'l:elJ~ 28, 2994 7845 Brooklyn Blvd. · Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55445 · 560-1984 RAYMOND A. PRASCH MINN. REG. NO. 6743 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY LAND SURVEYORS REGISTERED UN'DER L.~WS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA 560-3093 FAX 560-3522 7601 - 73rcl Ave. No. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 Sa~-ah Bel lefuil Ci~¥ of ~ Hop~ ~40! Xylon t~ve. No. N.~ Hol:~ev NN. ~528-~89~ Rel Lot ~v Block 1, C4~ER(~ RDDITION fol loMing sev'vi~-es ! have v'eseav,,a-hed the ~-oat o~ p~oviding the 1. ) Boundary survey :~. ) Topographical survey 3.) P~epa~ p~limi~ry plat 4. ) P~Pm~ fiMl plat 5. ) P~-ovide mylav-~ The above5 itm will ZK)t exceed $900. The county plat ~he~king fee of $150 is Thank you for, c~nsidev-ing us for, this work. trt~luded in this bid. S~r~lyv~ ~6667 EA ST-.--.~ I "' I:;' 7t09 62nd Avenue ~ 7105 62nd Aveuue ' I ! Itl ~~I 30 lJ ~ ~ '--~-5 ;,... DRAINAGE 8~ UTILITY_ --~EASEMENT ~..--'~- ,,, ,n ~_.______.l - - - --166.~? N80~-o~'46'W-- --~ · COUN~ REQUF.~T FOR ACTION Originating Depmh~ent Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager Consent Kirk McDonald /) 9-25-95 Item No. By: Management Assistant By:..// 6.11 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REI~UCTION OF LETTER OF CREDIT ON DON HARVEY 2ND ADDITION/VERSA DIE CAST PROJECT The City has held a Letter of Credit in the amount of $215,200 on the Don Harvey 2nd Addition/Versa Die Cast project at 3943 Quebec Avenue North for the installation of public improvements and on-site exterior amenities since September of 1994. The amount was held to insure that specific improvements were made, including new/rehabilitated bituminous surface, concrete curb, storm sewer, pond. excavation, and installation of landscaping and retaining wall. The owner/developer has requested a release or partial release of the financial guarantee on the project due to the fact that the majority of work has been completed. The Building Official and City Engineer have inspected the property for completion of the improvements. They have indicated that all work is complete except for restoration near the pond and north of the northerly curb line and recommend that the Letter of Credit be reduced to $5,000 until all restoration is completed. The enclosed resolution approves said reduction and staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Atlmtnlstratlon: Finance: RFA-O01 CITY OF NEW HOPE RESOLUTION NO. 95- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REDUCTION OF LETTER OF CREDIT ON DON HARVEY SECOND ADDITION/ VERSA DIE CAST PROJECT 3943 QUEBEC AVENUE NORTH WHEREAS, certain work under the Development Contract for property known as Don Harvey Second Addition (Versa Die Cast Project) was secured by Letter of Credit No. 75470, in the amount of $215,200, issued by First Bank Minneapolis; and WHEREAS, all work under the Development Contract and secured by the Letter of Credit has been completed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City of New Hope as follows: The City Council hereby authorizes a reduction in the Letter of Credit issued by First Bank Minneapolis from $215,200 to $5,000. Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this 25th day of September, 1995. Mayor Attest: City Clerk Bonestroo Rosene Ander. lik& ~ Associates Engineers & Architects September 21, 1~5 Kirk Mc Do-~]a City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Ave N New Hope, Mlq 55428 Don Harvey 2nd Addition (Versa Die) Our File No: 34-Bond Dear Kirk: We have reviewed the bond Mnoum for the above project. All work is complem exc¢~ for rcstorahon near the pond and north of their nortlerly ~ ~ We mcomam~ the letter of c~l~t be tecluced to $$,000.00 to emute all mato~n Ja eompletecL If you h~ve any qu~s, please contact tim office. BONESTRO0, ROS~NP. AND~,RT-TTC. & A,SSOCIA'rE~, INC. Mark A. Hanson MAH:gs , Doug $~ ~'ty ss.~' 2335 ~Vest Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN .~612-636-4600 DATE: TO: FROM: PLAT BOND REVIEW September 21~ 1995 .sUBJECT: BOND AMOUNT: ?' TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS: PLANNING City Manager (2~ ~ Doug Sandstad ~. Don Ha~'ve¥ Znd Actdi~ion FACILITIES/LANDSCAPING REQUIRED: Curbing o~: Sod 9n Trees Driveway ng Sidewalks Grading Structures Mylar & blueline copies in City Clerk's file Other t<inor restoral:~.on near [3omi & al; nort:h I have, on this day Sept. 20, 1995 City Clerk , inspected the plat for CC: City Engineer City Clerk File 005 9/94 all completion o- wo~k'covered bY the bond we retain. It is appropriate to: HOLD~ RELEASE this amount: $~ I have consulted With tl~e City Engineer on this. ~ ~ CITY OF NEW HOPE MEMORANDUM September 11, 1995 Doug Sandstad, Building Official Mark Han~on, City Engin,~r Kirk McDonald, Managemenf Assistant/Community Development Coordinator DATE: TO: FROM: SUB/ECT: WINNETKA PROPERTIES LETTER OF CREDIT ON DON HARVEY 2ND ADDITION/VERSA DIE, CAST PROJ-ECT Per the enclosed letter, Greg Harvey is requesting a reduction in their Letter of Credit on 'the above reverence project. You will recall that the original bond amount was reduced from $232,000 to $215,200 due to the elimination of the sidewalk on Quebec Avenue. Would you please review the work that has been completed, discuss among yourselves, and make a recommendation as to the reduction or elimination of the present Letter of Credit. I have attached the Bond ARlount Letter for your referencz. If possible, it would be appreciated if you could give me your recommel~lation (l)lat Bond R~view frol DoIlg al~ letter from Mark) by Wednesday, September 20th. I will titan prepare a Council request for the September 25th Council meeting based on your rec~mnlendatiort~. · Thanks for your cooperation. CC; Dan Donahue, .City Manager leannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Valerie Leone, City Clerk Plnnning Case File 9420 WINNETKA PROPERTIES 7145 Sandburg Road Minneapolis, MN 55427 612-544-2767 September 6, 1995 Mr. Kirk McDonald Management Assistant Community Development Coordinator City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428-4898 Dear Kirk: I would like to request the release or partial release of our financial guarantee on the Versa Die Cast Project. I believe all of the work required by the P.U.D. agreement has been completed. The only concern is the landscaping that has not gone through one full winter season yet. I assure you that any landscaping that does not survive this winter will be replaced. If this is not satisfactory, would you consider a partial release. Please contact me at your earliest convenience to let me know what is necessary on my part. .. Sincerely., Gre~ 1;. Harvey GLH/ks Don Harvey 2nd Addition Removal of the existing drive on Winnetka Avunua and Quebe~ Avenua shall be dona in aoenndance with Honnaptu.C~ and city standards. Tha integrity of the existfnl sidewalk alonl Wlnnatka Av~naa shall ba constructod after removal of' the Th~ retiininI wall Ln the northwest corner of the new ptrldn[ Iren shell be properly desisned and comply with setba~ requiremen~ . · Tho boud mount shall include all tim improvements sununafisad below. 4~00 SY S~}O SY IS{X} LF ~OLF ~=~}0 CY Lump ~tm S600 Sit 400SF + $0~ Bond Incruase Total If you have any qnestions, pka~. c~nta~t this offtee. BONF, STRO0, R~ ANDm~T-IK & ASSOCIATES, ~C. Mark A. Hanson 29,000 15,000 29,400 15,000 / s16o,6oo / ~ .ft. COUNCIL REQUEST FOR ACTION Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager Public Hearing Kirk McDonald !,~-25-95 Item No. By:. Management Assistant By:.// 7. l / PUBLIC HEAR/NG - RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 469 (1994 RETAINING WALL IMPROVEMENTS) ' This is the public hearing on the assessments for the 1994 Retaining Wall Improvement Project (Improvement Project No. 469). At the August 28th Council meeting, the Council passed resolutions declaring costs to be assessed, ordering preparation of the proposed assessment roll and setting the date for this public hearing. The notice sent to property owners, along with the amount proposed to be assessed, is attached. If the assessment roll is adopted by the Council at this meeting, property owners could pay their assessment in full without interest prior to October 25th (a 30-day period). If property owners do not choose to prepay the assessment, it would be certified for collection with real estate taxes payable in 1996. The assessment would be spread in equal installments over five years at an eight percent interest rate. The final costs for the project are compared to the estimates presented in the preliminary report in the attached correspondence from the City Engineer. The final cost exceeds the amount estimated by 12.45 percent. The preliminary report proposed to assess the abutting property owners 25 percent of the cost to reconstruct each wall based on the actual square footage of wall constructed. The retaining wall cost included only the construction per square foot and does not include sidewalk, restoration or indirect costs. The estimated cost per square foot in the preliminary report was $15.00/square foot and the final cost is $9.28/square foot. In most eases the final assessment is less than the preliminary estimate. The revenue sources for the project are also outlined, including the participation by Hermepin County. The City Attorney has prepared the enclosed proposed Resolution Adopting Assessment for Improvement Project No. 469 (1994 Retaining Wall Improvements). Staff recommends adoption of the resolution after the public hearing is closed. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 ~ Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects August 2 I, 1995 M_r. Daniel Donahue City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Ave. N. New Hope, MN 55428 Re: 1994 Retaining Wall Improvement Project No. 469 Our File No. 34153 Dear Dan: Larry and I have determined final costs for the above referenced project which are listed below. The final costs are compared to the amount estimated in the preliminary report dated Sune 1994. Preliminary Final % Reoort Cost Deviation I994 Retaining Wall $201,510 $226,610.93 Change Orders: 1. 36th Avenue Storm Sewer NA 66,728.52 2. Bass Lake Road Sidewalk NA 3,006.32 Total $296,345~77 +12.45% As noted, the final cost exceeds the amount estimated in the preliminary report by 12.45%. The preliminary report proposed to assess the abutting property owners 25% of the cost to reconstruct each retaining wall based on the actual square footage of wall constructed. The retaining wall cost was to include only the construction cost per square foot, not including sidewalk, restoration, and indirect cost. Listed below is the estimated cost per square foot in the preliminary report and the average bid cost as bid by the contractor. Preliminary Final % Report Co~t Deviation Wall cost/sq, ft. $15.00/sq. ft. $9.28/sq. ft. -38.1% Attached is the final assessment roll which includes final assessments compared to the amounts estimated in the preliminary report for each parcel. Listed below is a breakdown of the revenue sources based on final costs and those estimated in the preliminary report. 2335 ~1~/est Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113 · 612-636-4600 Mr. Daniel Donahue City of New Hope Re: 1994 Retaining Wall Improvement Page -2- August 21, 1995 Revenue Source Preliminary Report Final Costs Project Not Including Change Order No. 1 Assessment $ 21,511 $15,205.00 MSA Funds 150,019. ' 182,991.64 Hennepin County 21,840 9,400.00 City Cost 8.1 40 ~ Total $201,$10 $226,610.93 Change Order No. 1 MSA Funds NA $65,933.50 City Cost NA 3,801.34 Total $69,734.84 As noted, no portion of the Change Order cost is to be assessed; however, nearly all is eligible for MSA Funds. The portion not eligible for MSA Funds is indirect costs not eligible in accordance with their policy. Attached is a letter fi.om Hennepin County documenting their participation ($9,400). Summarized below are final costs including Change Order No. 1: Final Costs Assessments $15,205.00 MSA Funds 248,925.14 Hennepin County 9,400.00 City Cost 22.815.69 Total $296,345.7"/ It's recommended the City Council accept the proposed assessment roll and schedule an assessment heating for September 25, 1995. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Sincerely, BO~%ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. M~A. Hah~on MAH:pr Eno. cc: Theodore J. Hoffman - Hennepin County Larry Watts / Kirk McDonald / Valerie Leone - City of New Hope Steve Sondrall - City Attorney APPENDIX B FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL 1994 RETAINING WALL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 469 Wall Est. Retaining Wall Cost Prelim. Assess. Final Assessment No. Address (2S% Cost I 6140 Utah Ave. Skorpak 645.8 $ 5,993 $1,818 $1,498 2 6132 Utah Ave. Nail 261.1 2,423 525 606 3 7900 - 61st Ave. Hubbard 419 3,888 1,575 972 4 7900 - 60~/ath Ave. White 268:3 2,489 1,313 622 5 7901 - 60~th Ave. Hudson 362.4 3,363 1,500 840 6 6001 Winnetka Ave. Mills 380.5 3,531 1,238 883 7 7900 - 59~th Ave. Myers 209.7 1,946 825 487 8 7900 - 59th Ave. Brandt 225.5 2,093 900 523 9 7615 Bass Lake Rd. (1) Alano Group 154.3 1,432 338 358 10 7605 Bass Lake Rd. (D Hilgers 122.8 1,140 2~n; 284 11 7609 Bass Lake Rd. (1) Huebner 151.7 1,408 338 352 12 7643 Bass Lake Rd. (l) Dolan 187.3 1,738 338 434 13 5546 Sumter Ave. (I) Peterson 328.4 3,047 712 .762 14 5212 Wirmetlm Ave. (1) Vorasane 59.3 550 263 138 15 4840 Decature Ave. Fort~st 112.8 1,046 300 262 16 4627 Winnetka Ave. (1) Pionk 0 0 562 0 17 4625 Winnetka Ave. (1) Klehr 249 2,311 2,175 (2) 577 18 7900 - 46th Ave. (I) Johansen 267.1 2,479 975 620 19 4322 Winnetlm Ave. (1) McClurg 272.6 2,530 1,013 632 20 4320 Winnetlm Ave. (1) Amos 99.7 925 263 231 21 4424 Nevada Ave. Miesen 209.6 i,945 675 486 22 4425 Nevada Ave. Gustafson 242.5 2,250 638 563 23 8810 - 42nd Ave. (1) Houser 299.1 2,775 975 694 24 9009 - 42nd Ave. (1) Nabedrick 218.8 2,030 600 508 25 9109 - 42nd Ave. (I) Newton 120 1,I 14 450 278 Outlot A - New Hope 26 Highlands St. Land Dept. 338.2 3,138 NA 786 27 3601 Gettysburg Ave. Kramer 275.3 2,555 788 639 28 3600 $ordon Ave. Bakgr 7~.~ ~i7~} 1~11~ 170 (1) Retaining walls on County roads. (2) Assessment assumes 25% for street (220 sq. ft.) and 100% along north side driveway (90 sq. ft.). COUNCIL REQUF~T FOR ACTION Originating Department City Manager Kirk McDonald Management Assistant Approved for Agenda Dev~/rt~ectlon & Planning ¢-25-95 Item No. ny:. 8ol RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATIO/N OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR NEW HOPE ICE ARENA EXPANSION AT 7100 49TH AVENUE NORTH (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 536) At file July 24th City Council meeting, the CiD' Council gave direction to City staff to proceed with the submittal of grant applications undcr the "~figh~' Ducks" legislation for expansion/addition of a second sheet of ice at the New Hope Ice Arena. Subsequent to that time, the City Engineer, in conjunction with City staff, has been developing preliminary plans for the Ice Arena expansion wh/ch will be attached to the grant applications, which are due October 2nd. As part of the grant application it is required that a project/construction schedule be submitted and the application guidelines state that those applicants receiving favorable consideration for the grants will have to demonstrate both a need and a schedule which indicates that the applicant is ready to begin construction immediately. City staff and the City Engineer have developed the following schedule, which is intended to be included in the grant application: Authorize preparation plans/specifications Planning Commission/City Council approval Approve plans/specification for bidding Receive bids Award Contract Contractor orders, fabricates materials Begin Construction Completion September 25, 1995 November, 1995 January 8, 1996 February 7, 1996 February 22, 1996 February - March, 1996 April, 1996 October 1, 1996 In order to have final plans and specifications available for approval and authorization for bidding in January, 1996, staff is recommending that plans and specifications be initiated at this time. A public hearing will be conducted at the October 9th Council meeting to amend the Redevelopment/TIF District Plan to include the Ice Arena site, which would make the project eligible for TIF funding. The attached resolution authorizes preparation of plans and specifications for this project and staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 Bonestroo osene m--1 Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects September 15, 1995 "horna$ A SyfXo. ~?ec)er,c ~J S~er, oorg. City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Ave. N. New Hope, MN 55428 Attn: Daniel Donahue Re: "Mighty Ducks" Ice Arena Grant Request City Project No. 537 %3 ~- Our File No: 34179 Dear Dan: Our office, m conjunction with your staff, have been developing plans for the New Hope Ice Arena Expansion. Bob Russek and Jim Maland from our office have developed preliminary plans in accordance with lira Corbett. The attached plans are included in the "Mighty Ducks" grant application. As part of the application it is required to submit a project / construction schedule. It has been stated that those applicants receiving the grant will be the ones who demonstrate not only a need but also a schedule which implies the applicant is ready to begin construction immediately. City staff and our finn have developed the following schedule, which is included in the grant application: Authorize preparations plans / specifications Planning Commtqsion / City Council approval Approve plans / specification for bidding Receive bids Award Contract Contractor orders, fabricates materials Begin Construction Completion September 25, 1995 November, 1995 lanuary 8, 1996 February 7, 1996 February 22, 1996 February- March 1996 996 October 1, 1996 It is recommended that at the September 25, 1995, council meeting preparation of detailed plans / specifications be authorized ~n accordance with the above schedules. We propose to do the work based on a negotiated fee similar tO past projects in accordance with our contract. Previous work developed for the plan would be credited to the fee amount based upon applicable portions. 2335 ~Vest Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113 · 612-636-4600 Daniel Don,~hue "Mighty Ducks" [ce Arena Grant Page 2 September i '~ 1995 Although the above schedule is ambitious, it's felt substantial cost savings of from ten to twenty percent will result through the bidding process ff your project is one of the first projects out in the market. It's expected other ice arenas will be bid in late winter and early spring due to the "Mighty Ducks" grant program. If you have any questions, please contact this office. BONESTROO, R~SENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark A. Hanson MAH:gs cc: Bob Russek Jim Malarld Tom Anderson CO(~WCIL REQUEST FOR ACTION Approved for Agenda Dev~@ll~ectlon & Planning ~c)-25-95 Item No. Originating Department City Manager Kirk McDonald By: Management Assistant KESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FILIN,C,~F APPLICATION FOR ADDITION OF SECOND ICE SHEET AND EXECUTION OF AGRERMENT TO CONSTRUCT SPORT FACILITIES UNDER THE PROVISION OF THE STATE CAPITAL BONDING FUND (IMPROVEMENT PROJI~CT NO. 536) At the July 24th City Council meeting, the City Council gave direction to City staff to proceed with the submittal of a grant application under the "Mighty Ducks" legislation for the addition of a second sheet of ice at the New Hope Ice Arena. City staff have been working with the City Engineer, Planning Consultant and other personnel to compile the application, which is due October 2nd. One of the documents required for the application is a Council resolution authorizing filing of the application. The enclosed resolution authorizes the filing of the application and the execution of an agreemem to construct the facility under the provisions of the State Capital Bonding Fund. The estimated .cost of the project is $2,500,000 and the grant application is for $250,000, which is the maximum mount that communities may apply for funding. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY SECOND BY Review: Administration: Finance: Required Documentation Mighty Ducks Funding Application Suggested division of responsibilities: · Items in bold can be done by Bonestroo · Items in bold italic ara optional tasks that can be done by Bonestroo · Items in regular text can be prepared by the sponscdng City, County or School District, some with Bonastroo's assistance as desired e Government resolution authorizing the applicatio~ Geographic location map (preferably no larger than 8 ½ x 11) Site plan (preferably no larger than 24 x 36). The plan Ihould Identify: · Land presently owned · Land to be acquired · Existing aports/auppcwt fm=ilitlM · Roads, city Iimitm, meotlon Iine~ · Water bodice · EnvironmentM intnmlona: utilitle~, buildings, man-mede (Comment:. to property prepare the site plan, Itm owner will need to provide topographic and Environmental Intru~lorm SMtm. ent and mitigation plan: 77tie mf~ra to man-made developmenta on, above or below the facility, including buildinge, utility polee end Ilne~, r~gd~, dHve~ plpelim, power fines, sewer linu, railroad traelm, (Comment: Bonestmo can complete this item for compenaalion on an hourly ba~). Agreements with other govemmentsl organization8 or organizations: An example would be a joint powem agreement for development of maintenence/operations with a school district,, sports association, foundation, st~. Operations and maintenance statement: This should indicate: · Agency responsible for. maintenance (the original public sponsor) · Source of maintenance funds · Length of time arena will be open (seasonally and/or daily basis) · Proof the arena will be maintained at National Governing Body or Olympic standards [ Ill ~:0~ FA~ 7355699 I I by an author[zed official of the community. 7. Grant Amount The MASC is authorized to appropriate a maximum of 2.9 million dollars..Respondents will find it necessary to augment the state grant matching contributions in order to develop an ice arena or arctics. rant amount/'or new ice arenas. Communities may apply for up to ~ for each/ce arena (Either standard size 85' x 200' or the recommended Olympic size 100' x 200~). Communities applying for a renovation grant for their existing ice arena may apply for up to $50.000. Renovation grants must be matched by non-state sources on a 1:1 ratio. 8. Project Completion For 1995 grant awas~ recipients, the project will be completed by January 1, 1997, or within (12) twelve months of when the contract officially be~. For 1996 grant award recipients the project will be completed by lan,,*ry 1, 1998 or within (12) twelve month~ of when the contract offic/ally be~. 9. Content Responders proposal should contain the following elements, as per MASC agency application insUuctions: (Complet~ Items A through G). A. Enter name of local governmental unit responsible for the project. B. The primary contact person is the individual who will have direct responsibility for the day-to- ctay activities of the project and to whom project inquiries can be d/rected (e.g., Director of the Recreation and Park Department, Mayor, City Manager, County Engineer, etc.) C. Name of project. If application is for the continuation of a previously approved, state-funded COUNCIL REQUEST FOR ACTION Approved for Agenda Dev~~ectlon & Planning /~-25-95 Item No. 0.3 Or~gtnating Department City Manager Kirk McDonald By: Management Assistant / RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FILING OF APPLICATION FOR ICE ARENA RENOVATION AND EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT TO CONSTRUCT SPORT FACILITIES UNDER THE PROVISION OF THE STATE CAPITAL BONDING FUND (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 536.) At the July 24th City Council meeting, the City Council gave direction to City staff to also proceed with the submittal of a grant application under the "Mighty Ducks" legislation for renovations at the existing New Hope Ice Arena. City staff have been working with the City Engineer to compile the application, which is due October 2nd. One of the documents required for the application is a Council resolution authorizing filing of the application. The enclosed resolution authorizes the filing of the application and the execution of an agreement to construct the facility under the provisions of the State Capital Bonding Fund. The estimated cost of the renovations is $100,000 and would-include refurbishing and modifying team locker rooms to accommodate gender equity requirements, modification to the mechanical and electrical systems to accommodate the revised floor plan, and improvements to the elevator access to comply with ADA requirements. The grant application is for $50,000, which is the maximum amount that communities may apply for funding. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY TO: SECOND BY Review: Administration: Finance: COUNCfL REQUF. T FOR ACTION Originating Department City Manager Sarah Bellefuil Administrative Analyst RESOLUTION ELECTING ACCOUNT PROGRAM CALENDAR YEAR 1996 Approved for Agenda De~~ectlon & Planning  '~-25-95 Item No. TO PARTICIPATE IN THE LOCAL HOUSING INCENTIVES UNDER THE METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT, The Metropolitan -Livable Communities Act was passed by the State Legislature in June, 1995. The Act establishes the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund which provides funding for local economic revitalization and affordable housing initiatives. Cities can apply for the funds only if they elect to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. The Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund consists of three accounts which will be available in 1996: · The Tax Base Revitalization Account -- which provides grants for polluted site cleanup. · The Livable Communities Demonstration Account -- which is designed to fund a variety of community development projects though loans or grants. · The Local Housing Incentives Account -- which provides grants to help cities work toward affordable and life cycle housing goals through a voluntary program. In order for New Hope to be eligible for the funds mentioned above, the City must provide the Metropolitan Council with the following items: · A Resolution passed by the City Council by November 15, 1995 -- This resolution is before you tonight. MOTION BY TO: SECOND BY Review: Administration: Finance: Request for Action 9-;5-95 New Hope adopts goals outlined by the Metropolitan Council by December 14, 1995 -- These goals include the following two items: 1) A Housing Goals Agreement must be signed by the City and submitted to the Metropolitan Council by December 14. The goals, outlined by the Metropolitan Council, compare our City to other fully developed suburbs in the metro area. Became of the variety of housing types and homing programs the City already offers, New Hope is one of only a few cities that already meet the goals outlined by the Metropolitan Council. 2) The Affordable and Life-Cycle Homing Opportunities Amount (ALHOA) is determined by the Metropolitan Council and is the amount a participating city must spend to create or maintain affordable homing in the community. Because New Hope already meets the housing goals outlined by the Metropolitan Council, New Hope will have no ALHOA requirement for 1996. · Action plan submitted to the Metropolitan Council by June 30, 1996 The attached resolution addresses the City's desire to participate'in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and be eligible for funds through the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. LIVABLE COMMUNITI~S QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS What is the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act? The Metropolitan Livable Conmmnities Act ("Act") wa~ enacted in June 1995 and is the Legislature's attempt to address various issues facing the seven-county metropolitan area. The Act establishes a Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund which consists of three account~: the lax Base Revitalization Account; the Livable Conmmnitie$ Demonstration Account; and the Local Housing Incentives AcC° unt. Metropolitan municipalities are not required to participate in the progran~ under the Act, but the Act provides incentives and funding to those municJpalitie$ that do participate. 2. What is the incentive to partidpate? The benefit~ are cleat:. Cities, town$ an~ in $omt case. t, counties have acct~.to resources that will improve their communities and neighborhoode. In adttidon, the legislation puts local units of govern- ment in the driver'~ seat. Communities can not only choose whether to participate; they also have flexibility in determining how th~'re going to use the resources available. 3. What is tl~ incentive to provide lower, cost hominf in oar ~emmunity? Affordable housing is an inve~ment in communities and their ~. It fulfill~ a commitment to young families, single people and older residents that they can find a hon~ they can afford in the com- munity of their choice. Housing is "affordable" if it cosu no more than 30 percent of a family'~ income. For ownership hous- ing this income amount is 80 percent of median, an amount that in 1994 could afford a home costing approximately $115.©00. For rental housing this income is 50percent of median. approximately $500 per month. 990 ~h~s "Life-cycle" housing refers to housing available for people at all stages of their lives, offering a choice and variety of housing types and cost to accommodate people's changing needs and preferences as their incomes and circurn~tances change. What are the affordable and life-cycle housin~ opportunities amount? The Affordable and Life-Cycle Housing Opportunities Amount ("ALHOA amount") is an amount, established by formula in the Act, that a participating municipality mt~ spend to create affordable and life-cycle housing or to maintain exis~g affordable and l~fe- · cycle housing. A participating municipality's ALHOA amount is e~tblished each year. 6. Does the ALHOA mnount lmve to be a propeFty tax levy? No. The ALHOA amount can be derived from a lev3 or it can be derivedfrom fundrfrom another source. Regardless of the source of fund~ for the munic~'~ ALttOA amount, a participating munici- pality that did not meet it~ negotiated affordable and l~ff- cycle housing goal,, and did not spend 85 pen:tnt of ~ ALItOA amoum to creat~ affordable and life- cycle housing opporfunitie$ in the previous year,, must distr~ute the entire AJ.I'IOA amount to a local housing and redevelopment authority to create affordable and lOt-cycle ho ~u~ng opportunities in the municipality, or to the Metr~. politan Council for ~ttribution through the Local Housing Incentives Program. 7. If my municipality elects by Novomher IS, lggS, to ~ in the I,ocli Housing Incen- fives Account Pmfrmn, mat the mukipiii~ spend in ALIIOA Imount h cllendm- yet 1~967 No. Because of various riming prov~iont in th~ Act, the ALHOA amount requirement does not apply until your municipality'~ election to par~ipa~ in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program made by November 15, 1995, for calendar year 1. 99Z 8. If my municipality elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Prog~,~ by November 1S, 1995, but is unable to agree on housing IGuls with the Metropolitan Council, must the municipality participate in the progrmn? .Vo. A munici£aiic: is ncr £arrici£ating in the Lccai Housin~ Incentives Account conditions have been met: a. The municipality has elected to participate in the program; and b. The Metropolitan Council and the municipality have negotiated and agreed on affordable and life-cycle housing goals for the municipality. If the municipality and the Metropolitan Council do not successfully negotiate housing goals, your municipality may not participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Progran~ 9. Muat my mmaieil~llty particiga~ in the Local lt~ hteenttves Account Pr~ram? No. Participation in the program is voluntary, but a municipality that does not participate may at some later time elect to participate in the progran~ However, a municipality which later elects to participate must establish that it has spent or agrees to spend on affordable and life-cycle housing an amount equivalent to what it would have spent on affordable and life.cycle housing had goals been established for the period in which the municipality was not pang. 10. If my mnnleigaiity ha~ m~t l~ ho~a~iag ~ in tl~ ~ eabadar y~ar, may my munici. parity partl~t~ in tl~ Local llomt~ Inemttives Acemmt ~? Yes. However, your municipality will not be eligible to receive grants from the local Housing Incentives Account Program if it met its affordable and lO~e.cycle housing goals. Your municipality still will be eligible for grants and loans under the Livable Communities Dernon.vtmtion Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account programt, 11. What if my municipality choosm not to pm'flcilmte in the Local Housing incentives Ac- count Program? Municipalities that elect nor to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program are nor eligible to participate in the ?'ax Base Revitalization Account and Livable Communities Demon~ration Account progranu under the Act. 2'he.Metropolitan Council is required by the Act to take into account your municipality's participation in the local Housing Incentives Account Program when making discretionary funding decisions. In addition, your municipality will not be eligible to apply for funds under the Department of Trade and Economic Development's polluted sites clean-up program if your municipali~.' is nor participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program. 12. If my municipality elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program, but does not have the capacity to create additional affordable and life- cycle housing opportunities, can my municipality give its ALgIOA mounts to other municipalities to meet negotiated housing goals? Yes. A municipality that has negotiated housing goals, but might not have adequate resources to create or maintain affordable and life-cycle housing opport~nlties still could be coz~sidered a participating mu- nicipality. However, the municipality would be required to distribute its ALHOA amount to the Metro- politan Council for distribution to other participating municipalities or distribute its ALHOA amount to a local housing and redevelopment authority for creating affordable and lif~cycl~ housing ~ponunities within the municipality. The Act permits municipalities to enter into asr~ts with adjacent municipali- ties to cooperatively provide affordable and life-cycle housing. The Metropolitan Council will work with municipalities to help municipalities create affordable and life-cycle housing opportunities and avail themselves of the incentives and fulldlng available under the Act and from other sources. 13. If my municipality 1~ ~ local r~mmrem to maim lmYmmata o~ a ama, tga~ for an afford- able or life-cycl~ housing opportunity ~mat~d prior to tl~ Att, em tht~ ~ count toward expenditure~ of the munieipality's ALHOA amount? Yes. As long as the use of the funds is directly related to your municipality's gOrort~ to meet its afford. able and life-cycle housing.goals, these local resources can be considered an expenditure Of ALHOA 14. Are the goals for affordabi~ and iife-eyel~ houain~ aa pmpamad by tl~ ~tan Coun- cil, achievable? The goals proposed by the Metropolitan Council are intended to b~ "long. term" goals. Your munici- pality will establish an action plan that identifies the steps your municipality intends to take to move toward its long-range goals. Beginning in 1998, your numtctpal~'s annual progress in meeting its negotiated affordable and lOee.cyclehousing goals will b~ meamm~ against tht annual goals your municipality sets forth its action plato Progress toward the goals will depend on private marketplace efforts, the availability of affordable and life-cycle housing resources and the use of local controls to create an environment to meet goals. 15. Do the Metropolitan Council and a municipality negotiate and set housing goals annually? ' No. The Act envisions negotiated housing goals as a one-rime process. That is why the goals are long term in nature. The Metropolitan Council will propose affordable and life-cycle housing goals that encourage your municipality to address key housing benchmarks. 16. After the Metropolitan Council and a municipality negotiate and set affordable and life- cycle homing goals for the municipality, what happens next.* The municipality must prepare an action plan that describes how it intends to meet its negotiated goals. The municipality has until June 30, 1996, to submit the action plan to the Metropolitan Council. 17. Does the Metropolitan Council have to approve the action plan? The Act does not require the Metropolitan Council to approve a municipality's action platt However, the Metropolitan Council will comment on the plan's content in relation to the negotiated goals that have been establishev~ and it will attempt to identify potent~ resources available to the municipality to help the municipality meet its negotiated affordable and life-cycle housing goal& 18. What should the ac~lon plan look like? The suggested format will be modeled after the one used for the housing element of your comprehensive plata COUN¢ REQUF~T FOR ACTION Originating Department Approved for Agenda ~endaSection City Manager Deve lopmenC  ? & Plannin~ Sarah Bellefuil 9-25-95 Item No. By: Administrative Analyst By:. 8.5 / RESOLUTION APPROVING METROPOLITAN COUNCIL HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HOUSING ASSISTANCE LOAN PROGRAM FOR CITY OF NEW HOPE SCATTERED SITE HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION BY MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER On January 23, 1995, the New Hope City Council approved the submittal of an application for the Metropolitan Council Homing and Redevelopment Authority Housing Assistance Loan Program funds. The purpose of these funds is to assist local units of government in providing affordable housing opportunities in the community. The funds are in the form of a zero interest loan, with terms not to exceed three years from the date of the loan funding agreement. The application requested $120,000 to be used for the purchase of two blighted, scattered site,single family homes which would be purchased, rehabilitated and sold to low/moderate income first-time homebuyers and on May 25, 1995, the Metropolitan Council approved the application for funding. The City Attorney reviewed the loan agreement on August 30th and had no recommendations for changes to the agreement. Staff' recoramends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 ~ COUNCIL REQUEST FOR ACTION Originating Department Approved for Agenda ~e.n~a ,%etlon City Manager Development & Planning Sarah Bellefuil ~// 9-25-95 Item No. By: Administrative Assistant By:V/ 8.6 RESOLUTION APPROVING METROPOLITAN COUNCIL HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HOUSING ASSISTANCE LOAN PROGRAM AGREEMENT FOR CITY OF NEW HOPE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE TWIN HOME AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION BY MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER On January 23, 1995, the New Hope City Council approved the submittal of an application for the Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority Housing Assistance Loan Program funds. The purpose of these funds is to assist local units of government in providing affordable housing opportunities in the community. The funds are in the form of a zero interest loan, with terms not to exceed three years from the date of the loan funding agreement. The application requested $125,000 for the construction of a handicapped accessible twin home at 6073 Louisiana Avenue North and on May 25, 1995, the Metropolitan Council approved the application for funding. The City Attorney reviewed the loan agreement on August 30th and had no recommendations for changes to the agreement. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. MOTION BY SECOND BY , TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 ~ COUNCfL REQUF~T FOR ACTION Approved for Agenda & Resolutions {,~ 9-25-95 Item No. ~o.~ Originating Department City Manager Kirk McDonald Management Assistant / ORDINANCE NO. 95-15 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE NEW HOPE CODE BY AMENDING THE TATTOO BUSINESS LICENSE FEE At the September 1 lth City Council meeting, the Council passed an Ordinance Amending New Hope Code by Establishing License Regulations for Tattoo Businesses and Allowing Tattoo Businesses as Permitted Uses in the Commercial Zoning Districts with the understanding that the business license fee schedule would be increased pursuant to a study completed of surrounding communities and review with the Director of Police. A survey of fees charged by other municipalities was completed (attached) and the fees were discussed with the Police Chief. The City Attorney prepared the enclosed ordinance which increases the non-refundable Investigation Fee from $200 to $400. The investigation fee for an adult entertainment business license is $500 and staff reasoned that the investigation for a tattoo business license would not be as extensive, therefore the fee of $400 is reasonable. The ordinance also increased the annual License Fee from $100 to $300. This proposed fee is based on the assumption that the City Sanitarian would probably inspect a tatWo business once a month and allocating one hour for the inspection at an hourly rate of $25. These proposed fee increases can be adjusted by the Council at the Council meeting if there is disagreement with the staff recommendations, however the fees need to reasonably correspond to the staff time associated with the tasks involved. Staff recommends approval of the ordinance. MOTION BY TO: SECOND BY Finance: STEVEN A. SONnRALL MICHAEL R. L~FLEUR WILLIAM C. STRAIT CORRICK & SONDRALL. P.A. AI~O~LNEYS Ar LAw Edinburgh Executive Office Plaza 8525 Edinbrook Crossing Suite #203 Brooklyn Pa~k, Minnesota 55443 F~X (~I~) 4~-~#7 SH&.qON O. DE~IY September 18, 1995 Mr. Kirk McDonald Management Assistant City of New Hope 4401Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 RE: Amendment to Tattoo Business License Fee Our File No. 99.49515 Dear Kirk: In follow to our recent meeting with Chief Kastanos, please find enclosed an Ordinance amending Chapter 14 of the New Hope City Code relating to tattoo business license fees. The investigation fee has been increased to $400.00 and the annual license fee has been increased to $300.00. The fees were previously set at $200.00 and $100.00 respectively. We are charging a $500.00 i'nvestigation fee for an adult entertainment business license. We reasoned that an investigation for a tattoo business license would not be as extensive as the adult entertainment license and therefore, a $400.00 fee would be reasonable. We further reasoned that the City Sanitarian would probably inspect a tattoo business once a month. Allocating one hour for the inspection .at an hourly rate for the Sanitarian of $25.00, the $300.00 license fee was believed reasonable. Regarding Colin's question about the application of health and sanitation regulations to employees, please refer to Section 8.300 on page 7 of the Ordinance passed at the last Council meeting. This section clearly makes applicable these regulations to all persons engaged in the practice of tattooing and would cover any employees of a licensee. As a result, no change needs to be made in the Ordinance previously adopted to cover this concern. September ;~3, !295 Page 2 Please contact me if you have any further questions or comments. Very truly yours, SteVen A. Sondrall slm2 Enclosure CC: Daniel J. Donahue (w/enc) Valerie Leone (w/enc) Colin Kastanos (w/eric) ORDINANCE NO. 95-15 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE NEW HOPE CODE BY AMENDING THE TATTOO BUSINESS LICENSE FEE 14.103 The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains- Section 1. Section 14.103 "Tattoo Establishment License Fe~" is hereby amended to read as follows: Tattoo Establishment License Fee. (1) Non-Refundable investigation Fee - $2CC.00 400.00 (2) Annual License Fee - $13C.0C 300.00. Section 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and publication. Dated the day of , 1995. Edw. J. Erickson, Mayor At t est: Valerie Leone, City Clerk (Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun-Post the , 1995.) day of TATTOO STUDY OF SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES Golden Valley Not licensed or regulated There is one tattoo parlor in the city & there have been problems with infections. Bloomington Minneapolis Licensed - $400 fee - See attached Code. $125 fee that runs 5/1 to 5/1 - which is for one location, each location needs a separate application/approval. Approval needed by City Council in Ward and health department approval. St. Paul Licensed - $164 fee - See attached Code and application. Minnetonim Licensed - SI(K) fee. St. Cloud Licensed - $100 fee. REQUEST FOR ACTION originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager EDA 9-25-95 Kirk McDonald f-") Item No. By: Management Assistant By:/// 6 DISCUSSION REGARDING DEVELOPMENT/AGREEMENT WITH GILL BROTHERS FUNERAL CHAPELS, INC. (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 523) Staff requests to discuss with the EDA the enclosed proposed Development Contract f~r the Gill Brothers Funeral Chapels project. The proposal, drafted by the City Attorney, is a "pay as you go" tax increment financing project as discussed in the City's Bond Consultants August 11th letter. The arrangement would be for the EDA to reimburse the developer for eligible costs from the tax increment received from the property after it is developed as a funeral chapel. The project is located in Redevelopment/Tax Increment Financing Project 85-2. The Finance Director has indicated that the frozen tax capacity or value of the property is $17,826. Assuming taxable market values on the completed project ranging from $1,000,000 to $1,195,000, the available tax increment generated by the funeral chapel project would be approximately $415,937 over the remaining life of the TIF District (2006). This increment could be used to reimburse the Developer for eligible costs. Per the enclosed Schedule D, costs eligible for reimbursement could be as much as $387,806. Staff requests that the EDA give staff direction regarding the extent to which tax increment financing assistance will be provided to this developer. The details of the development proposal could then be f'malized and a bond resolution could be prepared for consideration at the October 9th EDA meeting. The EDA should also consider how or if this property could be sold or developed without TIF assistance, taking into consideration the long/narrow shape of the property and previous soil contamination issues. The EDA also should discuss wage level and job creation goals, as outlined in the attached correspondence from the City Attorney. Staff have made this preliminary draft Development Agreement available to representatives of Gill Brothers and they may be in attendance at the EDA meeting. (Gill Brothers has submitted an application and plans for site/building plan review/approval and will be appearing before the Planning Commission on October 3rd.) MOTION BY SECOND BY Review: Administration: Finance: I RFA-O01 ~ STEVEN A. SONDRALL MICHAEL R. LAFLEUR MARTIN P. MALECHA WILLIAM C.$TRAIT CORRICK & SONDRALL, P.A. ATTOI~NEYS AT LAW Edinburgh Executive Office Plaza 8525 Edinbrook Crossing Suite #203 Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 TELEPHONE (612) 425-S671 FAX (612) 425-6867 SHARON D. DERBY September 20, 1995 Kirk McDonald Management Asst. City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 RE: Development Agreement with Gill Brothers Funeral Chapels, Inc. Our File No- 99.11141 Dear Kirk' Please find enclosed a proposed Development Contract attachments for the Gills Brothers Funeral Chapels project. and Basically, this proposal is a "pay as you go" tax increment financing project discussed in Jerry Gilligan's August 11, 1995 letter. The arrangement would be for the EDA to reimburse the developer for eligible costs from the tax increment received from the property after it is developed as a funeral chapel. The project is located in Redevelopment Project and Tax Increment Financing Project 85-2. The Finance Director indicates the frozen tax capacity or value of the property is $17,826.00. Assuming taxable market values ranging from $1,000,000 to $1,195,000 available tax increment generated by the funeral chapel project over the remaining life of the District would be approximately $415,937.00. This increment could be used to reimburse the Developer for eligible costs as set out in the enclosed documents. At this time we need direction from the Economic Development Authority regarding the extent to which tax increment financing assistance will be provided to this Developer. As pointed out in the proposed Schedule D, costs eligible for reimbursement could be as much as $387,806.00. It is my recommendation that this proposal should be placed on the September 25, 1995 EDA agenda for further discussion and a request Kirk McDonald September 20, 1995 Page 2 for direction on the amount of tax increment financing assistance we wish to provide this Developer, We can then finalize the details of the enclosed development proposal and prepare a bond resolution for consideration at the October 9, 1995 meeting if the Developer wishes to go ahead with the project based on the tax increment financing assistance proposed by the EDA. The EDA should consider how or if this property can be sold or developed without tax increment financing assistance. Also, under a new law codified as Minn. Stat. §116J.991 the develope[ must provide it will create a net increase in jobs to qualify for the assistance. We must establish wage level and job creation goals the developer must meet to qualify for the assistance. If these goals are not met, the developer will be required to repay the assistance per Minn. Stat. §116J.991. These job creation goals must be discussed both with the EDA and developer. Please contact me if you have any other questions or comments. Very truly yours, Steve'~en A. Sondrall slw2 Enclosures cc- Daniel J. Donahue, City Manager (w/enc) Larry Watts, Finance Director (w/enc) Valerie Leone, City Clerk '(w/eric) Jerry Gil]igan, Esq. (w/enc) GILL BROTHERS FUNERAL CASH PROJECTION TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ESTIMATED TAXABLE MARKET VALUE, ESTIMATED TAXABLE MARKET VALUE ESTIMATED FROZEN VALUE INCREMENT VALUE TOTAL TAX CAPACITY FROZEN TAX CAPACITY INCREMENT TAX CAPACITY INCREMENT TAXES BASED ON 1995 TAX RATE 1,000,000 YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 1,000,000 1,020,000 1,040,400 1,061,208 1,082,432 1,104,081 1,126,162 1,148,686 1,171,659 1,195,093 422,300 422,300 422,300 422,300 422,300 422,300 422,300 422,300 422,300 422,300 577,700 597,700 618,100 638,908 660,132 681,781 703,862 726,386 749,359 772,793 44,400 45,320 46,258 47,216 48,192 49,188 50,203 51,240 52,296 53,374 17,826 17,826 17,826 17,826 17.826 17,826 17,826 17,826 17.826 17.826 26,574 27,494 28,433 29,390 30,366 31,362 32,378 33,414 34,471 35,548 $35,721 $36,958 $38,219 $39.506 $40,818 $42,157 $43,522 $44,915 $46,336 $47,785 SCHEDULE D PORTION OF PROJECT THE COSTS OF WHICH ARE ELIGIBLE FOR REIMBURSEMENT FROM BOND LAND EXCAVATION & BACKFILL LANDSCAPING & SPRINKLING SANITARY SEWER & WATER PARKING LOT CURBING UTILITY TOTAL- $254,826 28,800 22,700 14,400 27,600 9,480 30,000 $387,806 D-1 I!)9.5 REGUL.-~.R SESSION Ch. 224, § o~ Federal Re.la,ions, ~i~le ~4, pm 909 ~s daem~d ~o me~ ~h~ board membe~h~p requiremen~ of this subdMsion. "-' (0 The corporation shall no~ dise~minate against any persons on the b~is of a s~tus protected under chapter 36~. ~g) The corporation shall demonstrate tha~ it has or can ebon the teehnie~ s~s to zna/yze projects, ~hat it is familiar ~th available public and p~va~ ~nding so.ecs and economic development, redevelopment, and housing- pro.ams, and ~ha~ it is capable of paeka~ng economic development, redevelopment, and housing project. (h) The corporation must have completed ~o or more economic development, redevelop_ men~, or housing projeem Mthin i~ desi~ated community d~ng ~he 1~ ~ee ye~s. Sec. 58. 11~1.991 PUBLIC ASfiIST~CE TO BUSINESS; WAGE ~D JOB RE- QUIREMENTS. . ~ busines~ ~v~ ~a~ or local government ', job ~o~~ec?no~c ~evelo merit or reca~ng me ~sistanc~n ~uu~ m ~v~mneso~ ~thi~ ~o~din~ ~sismnce ~ , go~s to be me~ ~~ess r ........ must establish wage level and ' · goals must ~Da~fi2~ the ~sis~n~ A ~,,~,.~2~ ....... ~ob creation .... ,~ ~smm~e ~ tM ~ o meet the e p~n ~~ ~nd job goals un~ ,,uoc UalS ~ the .... - ..... dep~me n ~~;~,~evelo r CJ June I ~~2s~_of~e repom for ~he pre~ous e~~ ~e ~po~ of th~e;~ s~mment and ~he eom~e~  ~C or loan in exce~ of ~tutes 1994, sectmn I16M. 16, sub~mn 2, is mended ~ o Subd. 2. GIFTS; GR~; ~PROPR~TION. ~e bo~d may apply for, ~eept, and d~bume ~f~, ~an~, lo~s, or other prope~y from the Uni~d S~s, ~e s~, p~va~ [o~dations, or ~y other so,ce. It may en~r in~ an ~eemen[ req~ed for ~e ~, or loans and may hold, use, ~d dispose of i~ ~se~ in aeeord~ee ~ the ~ of ~ ~, ~an~, loan, or a~eement. Money r e~ved by the bo~d under ~ summon ~ dens,ted m a sep~a~ account m Ch ee ~. The a~ount deposited ,-~.~ .tre~ and incased bF the s~ bo~U~ ~u m e~ ou~ ~a duties. ~ ..... ~umg mves[~ is appmpm~d ~c. 60. Minneso~ S~tutes 1994, section 116M. 18, su~hsion 4, ~ mended ~ re~: Subt ~. BUSINESS LO~N CRITER~:' (a) The c~a in this sub~ion apply ~ made under the ~ban eh~lenge ~ant pro~m. b) Loans must be made to businesses that ~e not ~ely ~ unde~e a project for which ~e sought mthout ~sistanee ~om the ~b~ eh~enge ~t pro~. · loan must be used ~or a project desired ~ benefit pemons the creation of job or oppo~u~ties for ~hem. 3~eng for loans to the lowest income ~e~. P~oh~ must ~e minimum loan is $5,0~ and the m~m ~ $1~0,~. loan must be matched by at least an equal amount of new private investment. A loan may not be used for a retail development project. ~e business must agree to work with job referral ne~rorks that focus on minority low-income areas. 1. 'Minnesota Statutes 1994, section 116M.I8, is amended by adding a subdivision to Additions are indicated by underlin~e; deletions by ~ 1123  I::L)A , REQUEST FOR ACTION originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager EDA By:./~-25-95 Sarah Bellefuil Item No. By: Administrative Analyst 7 MOTION APPROVING A REQUEST 1/OR PROPOSALS FOR SPECIAL NEEDS RENTAL HOUSING In 1993, the CO-OP Northwest Community Revitalization Corporation, a non-profit Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO), was established to provide affordable housing t$ low and moderate income residents of Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center, Crystal, New Hope, and Robbinsdale. Because of the establishment of CO-OP Northwest, the five cities have received Federal HOME Investment Partnerships Program funds which the cities can use toward their affordable housing goals. One example of a project in New Hope that used HOME funds was the construction of the handicap accessible twin home at 51st and Winnetka. HOME funds will also be used for the accessible twin home to be built at 6073 Louisiana Avenue North. New Hope has also recently received $90,000 in HOME funds for year 1996. These funds have been designated for special needs rental housing. Specifically, a blighted four or six unit apartment house would be purchased and rehabilitated for low-income developmentally disabled, physically disabled, or mentally ill persons or households and would include on-site support services to those individuals. The City's commitment to the project would be a $90,000 zero interest loan that would come from Economic Development Authority (EDA) funds. The loan would be considered a first mortgage on the facility and would have to be paid back to the City. Attached is a request for proposals drafted by CO-OP Northwest which would be sent out to an organization (or organizations that submit a proposal jointly) that could own and manage the facility. If a proposal is submitted and approved, staff would oversee the project preparation, development, renovation specifications and rehabilitation process. The City would not own the property but would only provide financing and staff services to an organization(s) that would purchase and manage the site. Staff does not have a specific site in mind at this time but has looked at several sites in the community to determine if they would be adequate for this type of project. Sites that will be targeted for the project are apartment units that are in need of substantial rehabilitation. Staff requests approval of a motion approving the request for proposals for special needs rental housing in the City of New Hope. MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 ~ REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS To Own and Manage Special Needs Rental Housing and Provide Supportive Services as Necessary The CO-OP Northwest Community Revitalization Corporation, a non-profit provider of affordable housing, and the City of New- Hope are soliciting proposals from organizations seeking to own and manage an affordable multi-unit rental housing facility for low-income developmentally disabled, physically disabled or mentally ill persons or households and provide appropriate supportive services. The CO-OP Northwest Community Revitalization Corporation is a non-profit 501 (c)(3) Community Housing Development Organization (CF[DO) with a mission of providing affordable housing to low- and moderate-income residents of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Crystal, New Hope and Robbinsdale. Additional goals of the organization are to stabilize neighborhoods and maintain the existing housing stock through working closely with participating cities. The Corporation was formed in 1993 and its activities are supported by the five cities and Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council. The Corporation has recently contracted with Project for Pride in Living (PPL) to provide housing development assistance. The City °fNew Hope has extensive experience in housing development and in providing affordable housing opportunities for iow- and moderate-income persons. Past and present projects include: a scattered site housing acquisition and rehab program to create affordable homeownership opportunities for low and moderate households; scattered site housing rehab loans for low and moderate income homeowners to maintain their homes; a Section 8 rental assistance program; construction of barrier free affordable rental housing for people with physical disabilities; and, construction of affordable barrier free owner-occupied housing for persons with disabilities. Pro~.ram Descri_otion The CO-OP Northwest Community Revitalization Corporation and the City of New Hope have entered into a partnership to renovate a multi-unit housing facility in New Hope for use as long- term affordable rental housing for low-income developmentally disabled, physically disabled or mentally ill persons. An organization (or organizations submitting a proposal jointly) will be selected through this RFP process to own and manage the housing and place staff on-site to provide appropriate support services, The City of New Hope has committed Economic Development Authority (EDA) funds and the CO-OP Northwest Community Reyitalization Corporation has committed Federal HOME funds towards acquisition and renovation costs The owner/provider selected through this RFP process ~,,ould acquire the propers? File (-'itx tnas ~dentified several properties as potential project sites containing betx,,'een 4 and 8 umits The owner/provider will identifi,' the needs of the population being served and work directly with the CO-OP Northwest Community Revitalization Corporation and the City of New Hope to identig' the site and rehab needs appropriate to the special needs population. The New Hope Community Development Department will contribute staff time to oversee the project preparation, development, renovation specifications and the rehab process. The capital financial assistance provided by the City and the CI--tDO would enable the owner/provider to maintain the property as permanent, safe housing for persons/households in one of the three designated special needs population groups, with incomes at or below 50% of the Metro area median income. The housing facility would be combined with a range of appropriate supportive services to enable the residents to live successfully in the community. There would be legal agreements with cross-guarantys between the CO-OP Northwest Community Revitalization Corporation. the City of New Hope, and the owner/service provider to guarantee a satisfactory quality of operation and supervision in the housing facility. Form of Financial Assistance The City of New Hope has committed $90,000 in Economic Development Authority (EDA) funds, and the CO-OP Northwest Community Revitalization Corporation has committed $90,000' in Federal HOME funds, to help cover acquisition and renovation costs. Both sources of financing will be allocated in the form of loans to the owner/provider selected through this RFP process. The City financing would be secured through a $90,000 first mortgage on the property at 0% interest. Full repayment of the $90,000 first mortgage is expected. The CHDO would have the second mortgage on the property also at 0% interest. Repayment 0fthe second mortgage is also required. Repayment schedules for the first and second mortgages would be negotiated upon selection of the owner/provider. Goals The goals of the project are as follows: 1) Rehabilitate a 4-8 unit multi-family housing facility to increase the supply of housing for persons/families with: a. Physical disabilities; b. Developmental disabilities; or c. Mental illness. Establish and maintain lon~-term f I0-20 years) affordable housing available to persons/families at or below 50°0 of the Metro area median income in one of the three special needs listed above 3) Maintain and improve the existing housing stock in the City of New Hope and surrounding cities in Northwest Hennepin County. Criteria for Selection: Stronger consideration will be given to those proposals that: Demonstrate an understanding of Sound budgetary practices in managing affordable multi-family housing as demonstrated through the pro forma budget submitted by the applicant. Include appropriate supportive services for the target population being served which help to integrate that population into the broader community. Demonstrate the financial ability to provide supportive services for the identified low- income special needs population for at least 10 years. Adequately meet the affordability needs of the target population, as demonstrated in the budget submitted by the applicant. Demonstrate a proven track record of providing decent, safe long-term affordable housing. Provide quality affordable housing opportunities for low income special needs residents of New Hope, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Crystal and Robbinsdale. Elinible A_nnlicant_a Non-profit or for profit housing and/or supportive service providers. Proposals submitted jointly by housing providers and supportive service providers will be accepted. Pro~ram Requirements Applicants must comply with all requirements of the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME). Any additional financing or subsidies proposed by applicants must also be in accordance with Federal HOME requirements. The federal regulations governing the HOME program can be obtained by contacting Dave Cn'eeman, at Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council, at 493-2802. Applicants must be committed to operating the multi-family housing facility as affordable housing for a designated special needs population for no less than 10 years. The selected o~ner pr~¥~der mt~t be ~llitvZ to market rental units in accordance ~'ith the ~lrmative Nlarketin~ Plan adopted by the CO-OP North~,es~ Community Revitalization Corporation which includes, but is no~ limited to, compliance with Federal Fair Housing laws. The selected owner/provider mus~ locate staff'on-site at the housing facility to provide necessary supportive sen/ices and any required supervision. Selection Process and Funding Commitment Projects will be selected based upon the established goals and priorities. A selection committee consisting of representatives of the CO-OP Northwest Community Revitalization Corporation and the City of New Hope will make a recommendation to the CO-OP Northwest Community Revitalization Corporation Board of Directors and the NeTM Hope Economic Development Authority. The initial funding commitment will serve as a preliminary commitment. A final commitment will be made at the point a contractual agreement has been executed. The Hermepin County Housing Consortium will review the contractual agreement prior to its execution to verify that the agreement is consistent with HOME requirements and those established by Hennepin County. The CO-OP Northwest Community Revitalization Corporation and the City of New Hope reserve the right to reject all funding requests and rescind this request for proposals. Deadlines for Proposals' All proposals must be submitted by 4:30 p.m., December 15, 199~. Mail or deliver proposals to: Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council, 7601 Kentucky Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, MN 55428. Direct any questions to David Greeman at Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council at 493-2802. PROPOSAL CONTENTS I. Narrative Items A through E should be addressed in the Narrative section. The Narrative section is limited to 5 pages. A. Housing Plan 1) Provide a brief description of the plan for owning and operating the housing facility as long-term affordable housing and providing appropriate support services for residents. In responding to this item, identify the special needs population for which the housing would be provided. 4 2) II. Budget 2) Describe anx unique tbatures or'the proposal. B. Experience and Capacity of the ,Applicant 1) Describe the extent and length of experience of the applicant(s) in owning and managing similar housing activities. 2) Provide a list of projects which the applicant has proposed, completed and/or managed. 3) Describe the length of experience the applicant has in working with and/or providing services to the targeted population. 4) Explain how the applicant will maintain the proposed level of support services. 5) Describe the applicant staff levels and expertise to implement the activity. 7) Describe the financial capacity of the applicant to undertake the activity. C. Affordability 1) Describe the extent to which the proposed activity provides long-term affordable housing and how it will be accomplished. 2) Describe how the project provides affordable housing and the anticipated income range of residents. D. Evidence of Need 1) Demonstrate the need for the proposed housing and support services for the targeted special needs population. E. Supportive Services 1) Describe supportive services which are.an integral part of the proposed activity and why the services are appropriate for the residents. Describe how the services will be provided for the residents and financed. Provide a detailed operating budget, using the pro forma budget attached. Include yearly expenses related to operating and maintaining the property as affordable 5 housing and p~F~ ~ding appropriate suppomxe se~'ices..&lso provide information on vearl~ re~ enue sources it~cluding rents and other sources including reir~buriement t'or the provision of resident services if applicable. Please also list debt service and cash flow to indicate the proposed schedule for repaying the mortgages held bv the City and the CHDO. The repayment schedule for the first and second mortgages will be negotiated upon the selection of an owner/provider. For the purpose of completing the pro forma budget, assume that the property will be a fourplex with a $l 10.000 purchase price and $70,000 in rehab and conversion costs. Also assume a 3% annual increase in expenses and revenues. (Note: Applicants should not assume that this will be the actual scenario for the project selected.) 2) Provide information on the proposed repayment schedule for the first and second mortgages, IlL Community and Constituency Support 1) Letters of support may be attached as appendices to the application. 6 Page 2 -- September 15~ 1995 Z.B. Adult Entertainment-- Town Tries to Shut Down Cabaret Based on New~ Ordinance _ ~ o-'"-T6-C~untington v. Pi~'rce A rr°w ~ 627 N. Y.S. 2d 787 (New York) 1995 From 1981, Pierce Arrow Realty Corp. owned and operated a cabaret in ~he town of Huntington, N.Y. In 1991, the town enacted a zoning ordinance that allowed premises with an "adult use" to operate only in specific areas. Apparently, the ordinance did not provide reasonable alternative locations for adult use establishments. Before enacting the ordinance, the town did not con- duct or review any studies about the effects of adult businesses on the quality of life in the business community. Pierce Arrow's cabaret was considered an "adult entertainment" establish- ment under the new ordinance. The town asked a court to permanently stop Pierce Arrow from operating the cabaret. At the beginning of the lawsuit, the town asked for a court order to tempo- rarily, but immediately, stop Pierce Arrow's operations. To get the temporary order, local law required the town to show only that it would likely get the permanent order and that fairness required the temporary order. The court granted the town's request for the temporary order. Pierce appealed, claiming the zoning ordinance was unconstitutional. DECISION: Reversed. The lower court improperly granted the temporary order, so the order was reversed. The town produced no evidence that the ordinance complied with federal and state constitutional requirements, so it failed to show it would likely suc- ceed in closing the cabaret permanently. The town did not show the ordinance was reasonably limited to establishments that had secondary detrimental effects on the community -- it did not even conduct or review any studies about that issue. Also, in its request, the town never discussed Pierce Arrow's right to some reasonable amortization period to compensate it for its 10 years of pre- existing cabaret use. Special Use -- Residents Don't Want Offices "Creeping" Into Residential Area City of Reno v. Harris, 895 P.2d 663 (Nevada) 1995 In 1978, the Reno (Nev.) City Council unanimously approved a special use permit to allow property (Hawkins House) in a residential zone to operate as a pt~blic art museum. The permit was granted in accordance with a zoning amend- ment that placed the property in a "historic or landmark overlay district." Hav~kins House was used as an art museum for almost 12 years and then lay vacant until 1992. The city's original master plan allowed single family and multifamily resi- dences in Hawkins House's area. Residents of that area were concerned that multifamily or professional office uses were "creeping" into traditionally single- famil~ residential areas. In 1988, the city council responded by adopting the Z.B. September 15~ 1995 -- Page 3 Newlands Neighborhood Master Plan (neighborhood plan) as an amendment to the master plan. The neighborhood plan created transition areas that would serve as buffers for single-family residential areas. Several uses were allowed in transition areas, including single-family, multifamily, community commer- cial, and office uses. Proposed uses for property in the transition area would be considered on a case-by-case basis. Gustin had an option to buy Hawkins House. In 1992, he applied for an amendment to. the property's special use permit so the property could be con- verted from museum to limited office use. Gustin planned to run an advertising agency there, his wife planned a franchise muffin business, and they expected to rent space to someone else. By that time, most properties in the transition area were used for professional offices. The next largest use category was mul- tifamily residential. The city's board of adjustment held a hearing on the application. At the hearing, Gustin said the existing structure would remain intact and he would replace only the kitchen. Contrary to claims by a local neighborhood associa- tion, he said office use would generate less than half the traffic the museum use had. Gustin also alleged the area to the property's east was dominated by offices and was no longer residential. The state Historical Preservation and Archeology Advisory Board's chairperson stated the building would be in jeopardy if it remained vacant, restoration to a single-family home was too expensive, and traffic would be less for the office than for the museum. Some objectors said the neighborhood plan was supposed to create a buffer to keep office use from encroaching on Single-family'use. The board denied Gustin's application. Gustin appealed to the city council. At the city council's hearing, 220 people opposed the application and 24 were in favor. An associate city planner recom- mended approval, saying the historic overlay zone allowed nonresidential uses to preserve historic buildings and the application was consistent with the neigh- borhood plan. The city council reversed the board's denial and approved the amendment to the special use permit. Harris, who owned property next to Hawkins House, asked a court to over- turn the city council's approval. He argued that the neighborhood plan did not allow office use at Hawkins House. The court voided the amendment to the special use permit. The city appealed. DECISION: Reversed. The lower court improperly overturned the city council's decision to amend the special use Permit. It should not have substituted its judgment for that of the city council. The transition area provided for multiple uses, so the city council had discre- tion about what use it would permit for Hawkins House. There was enough evidence to support the city council's decision. The limited office use was not dissimilar to museum use, and there was credible evidence the office would actually produce less traffic than the museum. There was also expert testimony that the office was permitted by zoning regulations and commtible with the area. Page 4 -- September 15~ 1995 Z.B. The building was designated a historical landmark, which Meant any use was allowed that would preserve the structure and not be detrimental to the neighbor- ho, od. Therefore, the city council had even greater authority to allow the use. (r..~Ordinance ~ Can Ordinance Expand State Law Definition of Group Home? In 1990, the commonwealth of Virginia enacted a law that required local zoning ordinances to define as single-family residential all licensed residential facilities with no more than eight mentally ill, mentally retarded, or develop- mentally disabled residents. The statute also stated, "No conditions more restric- tive than those imposed on residences occupied by persons related by blood, marriage, or adoption shall be imposed on such facility." The town of West Point's zoning ordinance defined a group home as a single-family detached dwelling in which "not more than eight [unrelated] physi- cally handicapped, mentally ill, mentally retarded or other developmentally disabled persons ... reside on a long-term basis." It also included family care homes or foster homes. Trible owned a single-family home in a residential district in West Point. In December 1992, the town's zoning administrator issued a certificate of use and occupancy for the single-family house next door to Trible's, allowing a "group home." The certificate's special conditions section stated, "Self-Care Only/No More Than 21 Residents." Trible claimed she first learned that the town granted the certificate in July 1993. At that time, she asked for a hearing before the board of zoning appeals. The board found she had requested the hearing too long after the certificate was issued (more than 30 days later), so it denied her request. In August 1993, Trible sued the town's mayor (Bland), the zoning adminis- trator, and several other town officials. She claimed the town violated state law and its own ordinance by letting 21 disabled people live on the property. She also asked the court to declare the toWn's ordinance invalid because it alleg- edly violated the state statute. Trible wanted the court to stop the town from enforcing t_he ordinance and allowing the group home to operate. The c0urt.granted' the town's request ~o dismiss the case. The court found the board of zoning appeals properly declined to hear Trible's case because she filed it too late. (Because of this, Trible's claim that the town violated its own ordinance by allowing 21 people was never addressed.) It also decided the town could define a group homemore expansively than state law did, but could not exclude group homes. Therefore, the zoning administrator properly issued the certificate. Trible appealed only the decision regarding the town's authority to define group homes more broadly than state law provided. DECISION: Affirmed. The lower court properly found that the state law prohibited municipalities only from excluding group homes. The law did not prohibit the town from allowing more types of group homes than state law defined. The state law had a family composition rule, not a maximum occupancy restriction. It defined Z.B. September 15~ 1995 -- Page 5 group home residents as a family when determining what uses were allowed in a single-family residential district. It did not restrict the number of people who could live in a group home. Ordinance -- Property Owners Protest Facility for Pre-Parole Prisoners Abbott v. Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, 895 P.2d 1165 (Colorado) 1995 In 1989, the Weld County (Colo.) Board of County Commissioners approved a request to rezone the Fort Junction Planned Unit Development (Fort Jun~ction) from agricultural to a combination of commercial and industrial zones. Under the zoning ordinance, an allowed use category in one of the commercial zones included "HOSPITALS, nursing homes, and mental or physical rehabilitation centers." The ordinance stated that words or phrases not specifically defined would be given their ordinary, contemporary meanings, and that listings of allowed uses were "representative and [were] not all inclusive." The Villa at Greeley Inc. filed an application for a planned unit develop- ment plan to operate a pre-parole facility in Fort Junction. The Villa would operate the facility under a contract with the state Department of Corrections. The enabling statute stated that pre-parole facilities provided in-residence pro- grams and services to provide treatment and teach prerelease inmates about employment, academic courses, vocational training, and community resources. In 1993, the board approved The Villa's application after a public hearing. The board found the proposed building was "representative of" uses like hospi- tals, nursing homes, and mental or physical iehabilitation centers. Therefore, it was consistent with the allowed uses. A group of property owners (including Abbott) asl~ed a court to review the board's decision. They wanted the court to declare the approval void and to stop the board from letting construction begin. According to the property own- ers, the facility was a prison, so it was not identical to any uses allowed in Fort Junction. The board said the facility would be like a mental or physical reha- bilitation center. The court dismissed the case, finding the board did not abuse its discretion when it interpreted the zoning law to allow a pre-parole center in Fort Junction. The property owners appealed. DECISION: Affirmed. The lower court properly dismissed the property owners' case. The board had enough evidence to support its conclusion that the facility was like a rehabilitation center. Since the phrase "rehabilitation center" was not defined and the listed uses were not all inclusive, the board had discretion about what type of use the facility was. The Villa's chief operating officer, the architect, the corrections director, and a practicing psychiatrist all testified that the facility was more like a rehabilitation center than a prison. Based on that testimony, the board reasonably could conclude the proposed facility would be similar to the ones listed in the zoning law, even though the list did not specifi- cally refer to a pre-parole center. AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION Die 'AWay By Aman with a fancy car--the kind worthy of the most precise attention to detail--flashes his membership card . and enters an exclusive car wash. Scantily clad young women armed with hoses and towels take over as he gets out, and for $20 he watches as they polish and shine his Lexus to perfection. Is this service or entertainment? In the case of Richard Korber's Bikini Car Wash on Chicago's North Side, the city's revenue department deemed it entertainment. Almost as soon as he opened the establishment last New Year's Day, he was informed that he needed an amusement license if he wanted to keep the establishment open with bikini-dad attendants. It was not Korber's only clue that such a business might encounter opposition. Last November, he was shouted down by protesters when he tried to explain his new enterprise during a community meeting at the Irving Park Lutheran Church. And in March, when he sought an emergency order to enjoin the city from continuing to block his efforts to open the new business, a federal judge simply ordered the two parties to "resolve this business dispute" themselves before returning to court on April 5. Eventually, however, Korber was able to open his facility. Korber's operation, however, is comparatively modest. In Staten Island, New York, and Fort Lauderdale, Florida, car washes have featured topless attendants. A Jacksonville, Florida, car wash features nude attendants. Angry residents succeeded in dosing the Staten Island facility two years ago, then focused their wrath on the advertising sign that it left behind. The ongoing tension between new manifestations of adult entertainment and neighbors who are less than amused indicates that the regulation of adult uses is an issue that just will not go away. Backlash in the Big Apple On September 17, the New York City planning commission is scheduled to vote on a proposed new ordinance for regulating adult uses. Its recommendation will then go m the city council, where substantial support makes it highly probable that some ordinance will be approved soon, although the council may make minor changes. The proposal is the end product of an initiative launched last year by Mayor Rudolph Giuliani in response to a public backlash against the proliferation of such businesses, not only in highly visible Times Square but near residential areas of Queens. Collaborating with the city planning department, Giuliani issued a 65-page proposal last September that recommended prohibiting sexually oriented businesses from locating within 500 feet of residences, schools, houses of worship, or each other. Giuliani also proposed a moratorium, which ends November 30, on the opening of any new adult businesses while the proposals were being considered. City council president Peter Vallone soon produced a separate proposal, and both met to work out a compromise that has become the basis of discussion by the city's 36 community boards throughout this year. While their recommendations have varied, they have leaned heavily toward tightening the proposed restrictions, in some cases to 1,000 feet. The final proposal, however, stands by the 500-foot spacing. Marilyn Mammano, the city's director of zoning and urban design, says this plan provides for 492 locations citywide for adult businesses. She notes that tightening the rules further might jeopardize the constitutionality of the proposed ordinance by making it too difficult for adult uses to find suitable locations. The proposal also would limit the size, placement, and illumination of business signs on adult establishments and limit them to 10,000 square feet. It also would require existing nonconforming businesses and signs to terminate within one year, with certain exemptions and extension procedures. Interestingly, of the 177 existing adult businesses, 26 would be permitted to continue in their present locations, 17 of them in Manhattan. Overall, about 11 percent of the city's land area would be available for adult uses, but the spacing requirements would limit that area in Manhattan to 3.9 percent, with higher percentages in the four other boroughs. Shifting Gears in Columbia While New York City has debated its proposed new ordinance, Columbia, South Carolina, has both appealed the rejection of its ordinance and adopted a new one to take its place. This dual stance has left the city in a precarious legal position as it seeks to respond to public concern about four adult businesses, two near residential areas. A previous ordinance requiring 1,000-foot separation of adult enterprises from churches, schools, 15arks, day care centers, and residential neighborhoods was overturned in state court. Circuit Judge Walter Bristow ruled early last year that the ordinance effectively prohibited such businesses from locating anywhere in the city. Two clubs--Chippendolts, which features nude dancing, and Chasers' Mags-N-MixersBhad been ordered to close. The city had modeled its ordinance on that of surrounding Richland County, but the county has far more land available under such restrictions. The city is now appealing its case to the South Carolina supreme court. In the meantime, however, it had an unenforceable ordinance. While the city planning department recommended loosening the restrictions to 750 feet, the planning commission last December went further, recommending 500 feet, slightly more than one city block (450 feet). The city council adopted the ordinance on January 18. Unlike in New York, however, the planning department will not reveal the number or location of available sites this new rule creates, citing the current litigation. Location, Location Mammano's concern about the constitutionality of the New York ordinance relates to a tricky issue of balance that has plagued many communities across the country in recent years: How much space is enough to accommodate adult businesses without letting them overrun the community--or be perceived as doing so? That concern arises from a series of U.S. Supreme Court cases that are worth reviewing briefly. Ultimately, the line of relevant cases goes back to Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc., 427 U.S. 50, 95 S.Ct. 2240 (1976). The city of Detroit became concerned in the early 1970s about the rapid growth of adult bookstores and theaters in depopulated and riot-devastated areas. From just two such businesses in 1967, Detroit by 1972 counted 35 topless bars, 25 adult theaters, and 21 adult bookstores, many clustered on major thoroughfarei. To cope with this influx, the city passed an ordinance that defined adult bookstore, adult theater and minitheater, and Group "D" cabaret, added these to' the list of regulated uses, and prohibited them from locating within 500 feet of residences. In addition, adult theaters could not locate within 1~000 feet of any two other adult establishments. Two adult theaters challenged the ordinance and, in one case, the federal district court struck down the spacing requirements. Detroit responded by amending the ordinance to prohibit location within 500 feet of a residentially zoned area. In the other case, however, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the entire ordinance. In a consolidated appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Detroit's zoning did not totally suppress the opportunity for free expression of the type found in adult theaters and, therefore, the zoning was valid. Moreover, it sanctioned the distinct classification of adult theaters within the zoning ordinance as a special type of regulated land use. Detroit succeeded because it convinced the Court that the concentration of the regulated land uses posed a specific threat of deterioration to surrounding properties. In subsequent years, a plethora of communities nationwide sought m copy Detroit's ordinance, assuming it was the magic bullet that would deter the concentration of adult uses while passing constitutional muster. The Achilles heel for many was a failure m consider a significant footnote in the Young decision: The situation would be quite different if the ordinance had the effect of suppressing, or gready restricting access to, lawful speech. Here, however, the District Court specifically found that the ordinances do not affect the operation of existing establish- ments, but only the location of new ones. There are a myriad of locations in the city of Detroit which must be over 1,000 feet from existing regulated establishments. This burden on First Amendment rights is slight. (427 U.S. at 71, footnote 35) The upshot of the footnote was a strong hint that no specific spacing requirement would pass muster as such, but that the real issue was whether the spacing requirement--or any other method of restricting the location of adult usesBallowed adequate locational opportunities for adult uses so as not to suppress protected free expression. Over the next decade, many cities that had adopted what were, in. effect, copycat ordinances encountered constitutional difficulties in court, often seeing entire ordinances struck down. Often, the simple reason was that their ordinances, unlike that in Detroit, had left no adequate, room--and in some cases no room at all--for adult uses to operate anywhere within the jurisdictional limits. The issue finally came m a head once again in City of Renton v. Playtime Theaters, Inc., 475 U.S. 1132, 106 S.Ct. 106 (1986). Renton, a Seattle suburb, had stated-its findings of potential blight on the basis of a Seattle study that led to an ordinance substantially different from the one adopted in Rerrton. The Renton law tended to concentrate adult facilities by forcing them to locate at least 1,000 feet from any residential zone, family dwelling, church, park, or school. Two issues faced Renton: whether its reliance on Seattle's findings was proper and whether its zoning allowed adequate available land for adult uses. The Supreme Court sided with the city on the first count, deeming its reliance on Seattle's study reasonable under the circumstances. Moreover, the Court ruled that because Renton's ordinance left some 520 acres, or five percent of the city's land area, available for adult uses, it did not have the effect of suppressing protected expression. Rejecting the logic of the appeals court that had overturned the ordinance, the Court found immaterial the fact that some of the 520 acres was already occupied or too expensive, because "we have never suggested that the First Amendment ~ompels the government to ensure that adult theaters and other kinds of speech-related businesses, for that matter, will be able to obtain sites at bargain prices." Spacing is not, of course, the only way to achieve---or avoid-- the effect of providing adequate land where adult uses are allowed. Its primary value in most cases is the dispersion of adult uses, but some cities prefer to isolate such uses in particular areas of the city. Madison, Wisconsin, recently chose that alternative with a new ordinance that simply allows any adult entertainment establishment to establish itself as a permitted use in the M 1 limited manufacturing district. Such establishments are defined as "an adult book store or video store or an adult motion picture theater," and all terms are defined fairly specifically. It should be noted, however, that courts have not been sympathetic to municipalities that offer industrial districts that pose serious access problems. In the pre-Renton case of Basiardanes v. City of Galveston, 682 F.2d 1203, 1209 (5th Cir. 1982), a federal appeals court struck down an ordinance where the district was "largely a patchwork of swamps, warehouses, and railroad tracks. ·. lack[ing] access roads and retail establishments." Even reasonably clear definitions will not avert all legal entanglements. Madison is in court with one establishment that maintains that it is not covered by the definition but refuses to divulge its sales or inventory figures, according to planner Brad Murphy. The issue is whether the store can document its claim that selling or renting adult videos is merely an accessory use and not its primary business. Basic Principles The fundamental legal issues in regulating adult uses are not nearly so difficult for most planners and zoning officials as the political ones--dealing with the community pressures to shut down existing or block potential sexually oriented businesses. Community groups often demand more regulation than is likely to pass constitutional muster when the owners of such businesses inevitably challenge overly restrictive ordinances. Allowing adequate available land for such uses is just one issue, but it happens to be one that still forces many communities to defend themselves in court. It is particularly important to distinguish between patently illegal sexual activities and those that fall under the protective cover of free speech. For example, many communities allow massage parlors only as accessory functions to other permitted uses, such as hotels, health clubs, and the like, in part because of historical links between such activities and prostitution. Moreover, massage is not free speech and enjoys no protected expression, unlike films, books, and other media of expression that may contain explicit sexual material. Furthermore, it is also clear that pornography or obscenity is not protected speech, although the dividing line there has not always been so clear. The~most essential point is that a community must make clear that its motive does not involve any suppression of free speech and does not aim to influence the content of any communication. Detroit and Renton both succeeded in part by documenting a harm to the community that was directly addressed by the specific types of regulations adopted. The constitutional value of such a justification is just as important in today's cases as it was 10 or 20 years ago. Finally, clear and concise definitions are at least as important in regulating adult uses as they are with any other type of zoning. Definitions thai can be too easily interpreted to include nude paintings in a legitimate art gallery, sexually explicit language in books and movies with significant literary content or social commentary, and other free-ranging "loose cannons" will invariably face stiff legal challenges for good reason. In short, once a community has decided to stay within the constitutional boundaries in establishing its zoning, draftsmanship is crucial to success in regulating adult uses. Supermajority Rules Get Mixed Support Recently, two governments in fast growing metropolitan areas considered requiring supermajoriry votes for changes to their zoning ordinances. One adopted its use by one vote. The other rejected the idea by the same narrow margin. Metro-Dade County, Florida, commissioners adopted a supermajority rule on April 4, 1995. The law would allow commissioners to call for a two-thirds vote instead of a simple majority to approve zoning changes in their districts. To do that, however, a commissioner must present "substantial competent evidence" that the change would place an ~unreasonable burden" on schools, roads, or parks in the district. The law is designed to make it easier to block construction in crowded neighborhoods. In the following weeks, a heated debate arose in the local media between the law's sponsor, Miguel Diaz de la Portilla, and groups that oppose it, such as the Latin Builders Association and the Builders Association of South Florida. The builders claim that the new law is effectively a moratorium on new construction, and they worry about the potential for abuse. Diaz de la Portilla defends the law by indicating that its goal is managed growth, not no growth. He also offered planning department figures that show a 16-year supply (at current rates of purchase) of approved, zoned, but as yet unbuilt housing units in Dade County. He defended his own motives by reviewing his record supporting numerous development projects in the county and his consistent support for responsible, people- sensitive development. In an April 20 Miami Heraldartide, Diaz de la Portilla wrote, "I have worked diligently to reform the zoning process so that parents, families, students, workers, and ordinary residents have the same access and input on zoning decisions as the powerful special interests." Despite his strong belief in the new law, Diaz de la Portilla tried to placate the opposition by introducing a bill to define more clearly an "unreasonable burden." On June 6, the Metro-Dade commission reconsidered the law at a highly charged meeting attended by many supporters and detractors of the controversial ordinance. Homeowners told