Loading...
050493 Planning AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 4, 1993 CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 Case 93-06 Consideration of Ordinance 93-04, An Ordinance Amending Section 4.145 of the New Hope Zoning Code By Reducing the Green Area Requirement in the I-1 Zoning District, City of New Hope, Petitioner 4. COMMITTEE REPORTS 4.1 Report of Design and Review Committee 4.2 Report of Codes and Standards Committee 5. OLD BUSINESS 5.1 Miscellaneous Issues 6. NEW BUSINESS 6.1 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of April ~, 1993 6.2 Review of City Council Minutes of April 12, 1993 6.3 EDA Minutes of April 12, 1993 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS 8. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning Case: 93-06 .luest: Consideration of Ordinance 93-04, An Ordinance Amending Section 4.145 of the New Hope Zoning Code By Reducing the Green Area Requirement In the I-1 Zoning District Location: City of New Hope PID No: Zoning: I-1 (Limited Industrial) Petitioner: City of New Hope Report Date: April 30, 1993 Meeting Date: May 4, 1993 BACKGROUND 1. The Codes & Standards Committee and City staff are requesting Planning Commission and City Council consideration of Ordinance 93-04, An Ordinance Amending Section 4.145 of the New Hope Zoning Code By Reducing the Green Area Requirement in the I-1 Zoning District. 2. Section 4.145 of the New Hope Zoning Code (Special Requirements for all Limited Industrial Uses), subsection 3 (Green Area), currently reads as follows: Green Area. "Not less than thirty-five percent of the lot, parcel or tract of land shall remain as a grass plot, including shrubbery, plantings or fencing, and shall be landscaped. The work "landscaped" means a controlled surface and grade and plantings to allow a smooth surface flow and being under continual maintenance for the preservation of scenic harmony." 3. The proposed amended ordinance would read as follows: Green Area. At least twenty percent of the lot, parcel or tract of land shall remain as a grass plot, including shrubbery, plantings or fencing, and shall be landscaped. Required minimum green area should be emphasized in the front and side yards abutting streets or residential property. The work "landscaped" means a controlled surface and grade and plantings to allow a smooth surface flow and being under continual maintenance for the preservation of scenic harmony. 4. The review of this zoning ordinance requirement is a result of action taken in connection with Plannine Case 92-35, Request for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit to Allow Expansion of Outdoor Storage Area and Increase in Trailer Limit, and Variance to Green Area Requirement, 3531 Nevada Avenue North - You may recall that the Planning Commission reviewed this request on December 1 st and recommended approval on a split vote (the petitioner was requesting a 2 % green area variance). At the January 1 lth meeting the City Council passed a resolution that extended the existing conditional use permit for outdoor storage for three months and increased the trailer limit to 5 and tabled the request for an amendment to the CUP to allow expansion of the outdoor storage area and the variance to the green area requirement for 3 months so that the I-1 35% green area requirement could be studied. Staff was directed to study the I-1 green area requirement with the Planner and Codes & Standards Committee and to bring a recommendation back from the full Commission regarding whether the existing 35 % requirement should be changed or not. Planning Case No. 92-35 will be brought back to the Council for consideration after a recommendation has been forwarded to the Council from the Commission in regards to the I-! green area requirement. 5. The I-1 Zoning District "green area" issue was referred to the Planning Consultant in January after meeting with City staff. The Planner, in conjunction with information provided by the Building Official, prepared the enclosed March 5th report on the New Hope Green Area Ratio. Planning Case Report 93-06 May 4, 1993 Page -2- 6. The Codes & Standards Committee first met to discuss the initial report on March 17th. There a general consensus at the meeting that if a reduction in the percentage of green area was to be recommended, then the reduction should be of a fairly significant nature so as to allow existing businesses in the I-1 Zoning District the opportunity to expand. Among the topics discussed at the first meeting were: 1) the fact that the continued granting of variances to the green area requirement was not the proper zoning tool to utilize, as no non-economic hardship could be proven; 2) the discrepancy in having a "green area" requirement in only one zoning district in the City; 3) the number of properties that would be brought into conformance if the green area standard were reduced; 4) the percentage of green area that should be recommended (why 20%); and most important 5) the fact that New Hope is nearly a fully developed community and maintaining existing businesses and encouraging growth to maintain a stable tax base is important so that businesses that want to expand wont necessarily move to a new location outside the City. There was also a consensus that maintaining aesthetically pleasing industrial areas was also very important. 7. The Codes & Standards Committee requested that the Planner explore other options/trade-offs that might be utilized in the regulation of green space, i.e., additional landscaping in exchange for reduced green area, etc., and they requested that the Building Official prepare a list of businesses that have inquired about expansion in the past but who have been restricted from expansion by the I-1 35% green area requirement. This information was presented to the Committee at their second meeting on April 20th. 8. The Consultant's Report was included in the April 8th Planning Commission packet and at that meeting the Committee sought input from other Commission members on a possible reduction on the I-1 green area percentage requirement. Although several Commission members were reluctant to change a long- standing requirement, most members agreed that the Consultant's Report contained some good points and that the City's zoning standards need to be updated periodically to address changing conditions in the City. At that meeting a minor green area variance was also approved for a proposed warehouse addition for Lakeside Ltd. 9. At the April 12th City Council meeting the Council also approved the minor green area variance for Lakeside Ltd. and the City Manager informed the Council that the staff and Planning Commission may be recommending a reduction in the green area requirement from 35% to 20% in the near future. 10. The final Codes & Standards Committee meeting was held on April 20th and the City Attorney was in attendance to draft final ordinance amendment language. The unanimous consensus of the Committee was to reduce the green requirement to 20% and to add language stating that the required green area should be emphasized in the front and side yards abutting street or residential property. The Committee also felt that a future study issue should be green area requirements in other zoning districts. 11. The Twin West Chamber of Commerce has also become aware of this issue, has notified New Hope businesses that will be impacted by the proposed change and sought their input, and is supportive of the proposed reduction. 12. Due to the fact that this is an amendment to the City Code, which would be effective in all I-1 Zoning Districts in the City, a general legal notice was published for a public hearing at the City Council meeting on May 10th (newspaper publication deadline constraints did not allow sufficient time since the last Codes & Standards meeting to publish notice for both the Planning Commission and City Council meetings). City Code allows public hearings to be held at either or both levels. If approved by the City Council, the ordinance amendment would become effective upon publication. Planning Case Report 93-06 May 4, 1993 Page -3- ANALYSIS '~. In considering a change to the Zoning Ordinance, the enclosed Planning Consultant's report attempts to outline the original purpose of the existing zoning standard and evaluate the standard against the following criteria: 1. Changing conditions within the community 2. Consistency with the City Comprehensive Plan 3. Existing development condition 4. Comparison with other City commercial and industrial districts 5. Survey of adjacent communities 6. Variance opportunities 7. Alternative City performance standards 2. The predominant Industrial Zoning District in New Hope is the "I-1", Limited Industrial Zoning District covering 94 of the City's 123 industrial zoned sites. The purpose of the "I-l", Limited Industrial District is to provide for the establishment of industrial development in a well-planned, residentially compatible setting. Section 4.145 of the New Hope Zoning Ordinance establishes special performance standards exclusively for the I-1 Zoning District, some of which include: 4.145 Special Requirements for all Limited Industrial Uses. 1. Lot Coverage. Not more than forty percent of the lot, parcel, or tract of land shall be covered in a Limited Industrial District. 2. Lot Area. In determining the minimum lot area requirement of one acre, the contiguous dedicated streets shall be excluded. 3. Green Area. Not less than thirty-five percent of the lot, parcel, or tract of land shall remain as a grass plot, including shrubbery, plantings or fencing, and shall be landscaped. The work "landscaped" means a controlled surface and grade and plantings to allow a smooth surface flow and being under continual maintenance for the preservation of scenic harmony. 4. Parking Lots. The minimum setback for parking lots shall be twenty feet adjacent to a residential district and ten feet adjacent to a non-residential district. 5. Employee Parking. No parking lot in front of the building shall be used by vehicles of employees. 6. Parking Lot Screening. The parking lot in front of the building shall be screened from the street and from adjoining property in the residential district in conformance with the provision of Section 4.033(3). 7. Landscaping Plans. Detailed landscaping plans shall be submitted to the City Council and approved before a building permit may be obtained. 3. The green area provision is intended to: 1. Provide or enhance the aesthetic quality of the I-1 Industrial areas. 2. Insure proper setback and screening between industrial development and less intense land uses. 3. Limit impervious surface to reduce the on-site storm water drainage. 4. While the intention of the I- 1 special performance standards provide some strong aesthetic benefits, they also serve to limit the usable and buildable areas of I-1 lots. Provision #1 lot coverage restricts building size to 40 percent of the lot area and Provision #3 green area limits the usable area of the lot to 65 percent of the total lot area. For lots at or exceeding these standards, future expansion or building alterations that increase the site's impervious surface are prohibited without a variance. Planning Case Report 93-06 May 4, 1993 Page -4- 5. The current regulation does not dictate the location of the required green area. While the ~. j emphasizes landscaping to screen incompatible land uses, the developer often creates green space area anywhere on site just to comply with code. Green space and screening between rear yards of industrial sites beyond required setbacks has limited aesthetic or screening effectiveness. 6. The Planner's Report also points out that since the 1975 Comprehensive Plan, New Hope has experienced significant inf'fll development to a point of near saturation. In 1987, the New Hope Vacant Land Study identified 14 industrially zoned sites comprising 72.1 total acres. Development since 1987 has consumed seven additional sites and resulted in a total vacant land supply of 45.9 acres. The diminishing land supply reduces the City's opportunities for economic development opportunities through new industrial construction. Maturing communities must rely on the expansion of in-place businesses for new industrial growth. Fixed development and property ownership patterns limit the potential for adding land to a site to permit growth in compliance with 35 percent green are standards. Under these circumstances, the I-1 35 percent green space standard establishes an artificial limit to industrial expansion which may discourage private reinvestment on established industrial sites. Without flexibility these businesses may need to relocate outside the City to satisfy their growth needs. 7. To promote private investment and reinvestment, the New Hope Vacant Land Study also recommends the following Zoning Ordinance goals and policies: Goals: Utilize City codes and ordinance to promote and direct privately initiated development activities on vacant parcels of land in New Hope. New development must meet the modern standards and needs of the community. Policies: Provisions of the City Development Ordinances (including zoning, subdivision, signage, etc.) shall be reviewed on a regular basis to ensure its up-to-date status in response to the changing needs of the community. Under the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the New Hope Vacant Land Study, an ordinance change to promote and encourage private economic development is consistent with the community land use goals. 8. As part of this ordinance review the City staff inventoried the existing developed industrial sites in New Hope to determine the degree of conformity with the I-1 green area standard. There are currently 112 developed properties divided among the two industrial zoning districts in New Hope. Of these, 19 (16.6 percent) are located in the I-2, General Industrial District, and 96 (83 percent) are located in the I-l, Limited Industrial District. The median ratio of green space for the I-1 site is 36.5 percent. Half of the sites fall below this point. Currently, 40 sites fall below 35 percent green space ratio and exist as non-conforming sites. These sites are not permitted to expand without variance if the degree of non-conformity increases. 23 additional I-1 sites fall into 35 percent to 39 percent green space range. Industrial expansion on these sites may also be limited by the 35 percent green area standard. 9. The 35 percent green area requirement is exclusive to the I-1 zoning. The City does not impose this standard in the other commercial or industrial zoning districts. I-1 and I-2 Zoning Districts require the same minimum lot areas, however, the I-1 Zoning District requires a greater lot width and side yard setback in addition to the green area and lot coverage standards. Planning Case Report 93-06 May 4, 1993 Page -5- ~ 3. Aside from the I-1 green area requirement, the New Hope Zoning Ordinance has other zoning '~ performance standards to provide green area, landscaping, and to prevent the over-utilization of the site, such as: A. Setbacks: Building Setback: Front yard: 50 feet Side yard: 20 feet Rear yard: 35 feet Greater setback from major streets are also required. Parking Setback: The I-1 zoning requires a minimum parking lot setback of 10 feet. B. Landscaping and Screening: The New Hope Zoning Ordinance requires screening of commercial and industrial sites from residential area and public rights-of-way. C. Building Coverage: The I-1 special requirements limit the building cover of the lot to 40 percent of the lot area. D. Drainage: The City requires drainage plans for all industrial construction. E. Parking: These sections define the amount, the design and location of accessory parking for industrial development and stress the proper screening and landscaping at the perimeter of the parking lot area. These design elements undergo critical review by staff, the Design and Review Committee, Planning Commission, and City Council. New Hope, through its strict review process, has been effective in requiring quality development and site design. 11. It should be noted that a small number of variances from the green area standard have been granted in the past. In considering a variance, the City must f'md a non-economic hardship unique to the specific site not created by the property owner. Generally, a variance from the green space standard would not meet these criteria for the following reasons: A. The alternative to the green space variance would be: a) not to expand the specific business, b) purchase additional land, or c) to relocate the business to a larger site to accommodate it in accordance with City standards. These are each a financial consideration when expanding the business. B. The hardship is not unique to a specific site. 40 I-1 sites are currently non-conforming under this zoning standard and 23 other sites are within 4 percent of the green area limit. With these conditions, the likelihood of additional similar variance requests is great. C. The choice of expending a business is a decision of the property owner. As such, the variance to reduce green space is generated by the property owner. The past variances establish a precedent for future variance considerations. These variances were given to accommodate local business growth and are supportive of the City's economic development philosophies to maintain local industrial tax base and employment opportunities. Since the afore- mentioned conditions suggest that the variance process is not the appropriate means for reducing I-1 green space, a zoning text amendment is recommended. 12. A survey of surrounding communities was conducted to determine if a green area ratio was common in other cities. Most communities do not rely on a green area ratio standard, rather they address green area through required setbacks, buffer yards, landscaping, screening, and building coverage. Brooklyn Center is a community that does use a green area ratio and established a green area ratio for each zoning district. The Brooklyn Center green area ratio for industrial zoning district is 15 percent. New Hope's application of a green area ratio in a single zoning district is a unique arrangement. Planning Case Report 93-06 May 4, 1993 Page -6- 13. Changing development conditions in New Hope has caused the City to re-evaluate the green sI,,.~e standards of the I-1 zoning. Diminishing land supply and fixed development patterns have limited new economic development growth resulting in greater reliance on the expansion of in-place businesses. The I-1 green area ratio establishes an artificial limit on expansion on I-1 businesses. The City must now weigh the benefits of the existing green area standard versus the community's ability to promote and aid further reinvestment and expansion of New Hope's in-place I-1 businesses. The Codes & Standards Committee, Planning Consultant, and City staff believe that the City can achieve the benefits of this I-1 standard through the application of other existing zoning performance standards and would suggest that the Planning Commission and City Council consider a reduction of the green area ratio from 35 percent to 20 percent. The City may want to consider a reduction of the green area ratio to a lesser degree as alternative amendment options. However, the change should be significant enough to provide some flexibility for future growth and should give attention to the existing non-conforming sites. The 20 percent ratio requires green area in excess of just the minimum setbacks, expands the usable area of the existing I-1 sites for business expansions, and reduces the number of non-conforming I-1 lots from 40 to 4. RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Codes & Standards Committee recommend approval of Ordinance 93-04, An Ordinance Amending Section 4.145 of the New Hope Zoning Code By Reducing the Green Area Requirement in the I-1 Zoning District. Attachments: Attorney's April 22nd Correspondence Ordinance No. 93-04 Notice of Public Hearing Planner's Report, March 5, 1993 Planner's Report March 19, 1993 Building Official Memo/Examples Resolution 93-11, January 11, 1'993 City Council Minutes, P.C. 93-25, January 11, 1993 Planning Commission Minutes, P.C. 92-35, December 1, 1992 Planning Case Report 92-35, December 1, 1992 CORRICK & SONDRALL A PAP~TNE~HIP OF P~FF~q~IONA~ CO~K ~W ~RC~, P~ w~J. ~ ~lnb~ ~ecu~e Office ~ ~ ~.o~ P.~ 8525 ~br~k C~sl~ / ~T~ ~D~ ~c~. ~u~ S~ ~203 ~,. ~. ~c~ B~ ~k, M~neso~ 5~3 ~LEP~NE (612) ~1 FAX (61~ 42~7 April 22, 1993 Kirk McDonald Management Asst. City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 RE: Proposed Ordinance Reducing Green Space Requirement in I-1 Zoning Districts Our File No: 99.49304 Dear Kirk: In follow up to the April 20th Codes and Standards meeting, please find enclosed a proposed Ordinance amending §4.t45 of the Zoning Code concerning the green area requirement in the I-1 Zoning District. As we discussed, the 35% lot requirement has been reduced to 20%. Further, the green area coverage will be required in the front and side yards and not the back yards of I-1 parcels. Contact me if you have any questions. Also, the public hearing for this matter will be held at the May lOth Council meeting rather than the May 4th Planning Commission meeting due to the ten day publication requirement. We were not able to publish the public hearing notice until April 28th. Very truly yours, Steven A. Sondrall slt Enclosure cc: Daniel J. Donahue (w/enc) Valerie Leone (w/enc) Alan Brixius (w/eric) ORDINANCE NO. 93-04 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 4.145 OF THE NEW HOPE ZONING CODE BY REDUCING THE GREEN AREA REQUIREMENT IN THE I-1 ZONING DISTRICT The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains: Section 1. Section 4.145 (3) "Green Area" of the New Hope Zoning Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) Green Area. At least twenty [~ct lcd= then thlrty--fiv~ percent of the lot, parcel or tract of land shall remain as a grass plot, including shrubbery, plantings or fencing, and shall be landscaped. Required minimum 9reen area should be emphasized in the front and side yards abutting streets or residential property. The word "landscaped" means a controlled surface and grade and plantings to allow a smooth surface flow and being under continual maintenance for the preservation of scenic harmony. Section 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and publication. Dated the day of , 1993. Edw. d. Erickson, Mayor At t est: Valerie Leone, City Clerk (Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun-Post the day of , 1993.) NOT[CE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONS[DER ORDINANCE AMENDING NEW HOPE ZONING CODE BY REDUCING THE GREEN AREA REQUIREMENTS IN [-t ZONING DISTRICTS City of New Hope, Minnesota Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of New Hope, Minnesota, will meet on the 10th day of May, 1993, at 7:00 o'clock p.m. at the City Hall, 4401 Xylon Avenue North, in said City for the purpose of holding a public hearing to consider the adoption of an ordinance amending the New Hope Zoning Code. Said ordinance will have the affect of amending §4.145 of the New Hope Zoning Code by reducing the green area requirement in t-1 Zoning Districts from thirty-five to twenty percent of lot area. All persons interested are invited to appear at said hearing for the purpose of being heard with respect to the zoning code amendment. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk to make arrangements (telephone 531-5117, TDD number 531-5109). Dated the 22nd day of April, 1993, s/ Valerie J. Leone Valerie J. Leone City Clerk (Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun-Post on the 28th day of April, 1993.) R B A P L N N G DES N , M A R K E R E S E A R C H PLANNING REPORT TO: Kirk McDonald FROM: Alan Brixius DATE: 5 March 1993 RE: New Hope Green Area Ratio FILE NO: 131.00 - 93.01 INTRODUCTION Recent development requests within the I-1 Zoning District raised a concern over the district's requirement of maintaining 35 percent of the site for green area. This standard presents Ordinance limitation on site development and/or building alterations that may result in increased impervious surface on the I-1 site. As a result of these inquiries, the City has directed us to evaluate the I-1 green area requirement to determine if an ordinance amendment would be appropriate. In considering a change to the Zoning. Ordinance, this report attempts to outline the original purpose of the existing zoning standard and then evaluate the standard against the following criteria: 1. Changing conditions within the community. 2. Consistency with the City Comprehensive Plan. 3. Existing development condition. 4. Comparison with other City commercial and industrial districts. 5.~ Survey of adjacent communities. 6. Variance opportunities. 7. Alternative City performance standards. 5775 Wayzata Blvd.-Suite 555. St. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636.Fax. 595-9837 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS I-1 ZONIN~ DISTRICT The predominant Industrial Zoning District in New Hope is the "I- Limited Industrial Zoning covering 94 of the City's 123 industrial zoned sites. The purpose of the "I-l", Limited Industrial District is to provide for the establishment of industrial development in a well planned, residentially compatible setting. To accomplish this expressed purpose, Section 4.145 of the New Hope Zoning Ordinance establishes the following special performance standards exclusively for the I-1 Zoning District: 4.145 Special Requirements for all Limited Industrial Uses. (1) Lot Coverage. Not more than forty percent of the lot, parcel or track of land shall be covered in a Limited Industry District. (2) LQ= Area. In determining the minimum lot area requirement of one acre, the contiguous dedicated streets shall be excluded. (3) Green Area. Not less than thirty-five percent of the lot, parcel or tract of land shall remain as a grass plot, including shrubbery, plantings or fencing, and shall be landscaped. The word "landscaped" means a controlled surface and grade and plantings to allow a smooth surface flow and being under continual maintenance for the preservation of scenic harmony. (4) Parking Lots. The minimum setback for parking lots shall be twenty feet adjacent to a residential district and ten feet adjacent to a non-residential district. (5) Employee Parking. No parking lot in front of the building shall be used by vehicles of employees. (6) P~rkin~ Lot ScreeninG. The parking lot in front of the building shall be screened from the street and from adjoining property in the residential district in conformance with the provision of Section 4.033 (3). (7) L~ndscaDinG Plans. Detailed landscaping plans shall be submitted to City Council and approved before a building permit may be obtained. (8) DesiGn Standards - Curb Cuts. All off-street parking facilities shall be designed with appropriate means of .. 2 vehicular access to a Street or alley as well as maneuvering area. Curb cuts shall be placed at intervals of not less than one hundred fifty feet and no curb cut shall be located within seventy-five feet of an intersection, as measured from the driveway centerline along the edge of the traveled surface to the intersecting edge of the traveled surface. The performance standards and most specifically, the green area provision, are intended to: 1. Provide or enhance the aesthetic quality of the I-1 industrial areas. 2. Insure proper setback and screening between industrial development and less intense land uses. 3. Limit impervious surface to reduce the on-site storm water drainage. While the intention of the I-1 special performance standards provide some strong aesthetic benefits, they also serve to limit the usable and buildable areas of the I-1 lots. Provision #1 lot coverage restricts building size to 40 percent of the lot area and provision #3 green area limits the usable area of the lot to 65 percent of the total lot area. For lots at or exceeding these standards, future expansion or building alterations that increase the site's impervious surface are prohibited without a variance. While the benefit of green space is significant, the impact of the I-1 green space standard raises the following comments: 1. The current regulation does not dictate the location of the required green area. While the City emphasizes landscaping to screen incompatible land uses, the developer often creates green space area any where on site just to comply with code. Green space and screening between rear yards of industrial sites beyond required setbacks has limited aesthetic or screening effectivenesS. 2. According to the City Engineer, the drainage significance of the 35 percent'green area ration is minimal. The City's tough~ parking and site plan review process, erosion control policies and sensitivity to drainage issues exceeds the value of raw green space. CHANGIN~ CONDITIONS Since the 1975 Comprehensive Plan, New Hope has experienced significant infill development to a point of near saturation. In 1987, the New Hope Vacant Land Study identified 14 industrially zoned sites comprising 72.1 total acres. Development since 1987 has consumed seven additional sites and resulted in a total vacant land supply of 45.9 acres. The diminishing land supply reduces the city's opportunities for economic development opportunities through new industrial construction. Maturing communities must rely on the expansion of in-place businesses for new industrial growth. Fixed development and property ownership patterns limit the potential for adding land to a site to permit growth in compliance with 35 percent green area standards. Under these circumstances, the I-1 35 percent green space standard establishes an artificial limit to industrial expansion which may discourage private re-investment on established industrial sites. Without flexibility these businesses may need to relocate outside the City to satisfy their growth needs. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN New Hope has had a strong economic development philosophy as recognized in the following policy statements of the 1975 Comprehensive Plan: Industrial Goals o Provide for a sound industrial base for the City that will be stable and on-going. o Concentrate industrial development in the existing industrial parks (Science and Industry Center, Olson, Winnetka). o Fully develop existing industrial parks. o Promote continued industrial development in order to create an expanded employment base and opportunity within New Hope. Industrial Policies 1. Continue to maintain and expand the City's industrial and co~,~ercial tax base to assist in paying for needed services and in reducing tax impact on housing costs. 2.' Within economic capabilities, provide those public services and facilities to New Hope industries to help ensure their satisfaction with locating in the community. 3. Promote continued industrial development in existing industrial parks which have direct access to major highways. 4. Encourage the development of compatible, non-industrial activities within industrial parks in order to increase the potential utilization of undeveloped industrial park land. 5. Identify industrial activities complementary to existing activities and promote and facilitate the development of such industries in New Hope. 6. Investigate alternative fiscal incentives to attract new desired types of industries to New Hope. 7. Promote the type of industrial development which maximizes the return on City investments in public facilities and services. 8. Give due consideration to all potential physical implications and services and facility demands (i.e., traffic generation, sewer and water demands, etc.) of any proposed industrial development. These economic development goals and policies were more recently supported by the 1987 New Hope Vacant Land Study Phase II. This study has outlined strategies for promoting the economic development of the vacant industrial sites and for remaining competition with other co~Lunities in the area of economic development. The City TIF policies promote business growth in the community through actual public financial assistance. To promote private investment and re-investment, the New Hope Vacant Land Study also recommends the following Zoning Ordinance goals and policies: Goals: Utilize City codes and ordinance to promote and direct privately initiated development activities on vacant parcel of land in New Hope. New development must meet the modern standards and needs of the co~unity. Policies: Provisions of' the City Development Ordinances (including zoning, subdivision, signage, etc.) shall be reviewed on a regular basis to ensure its up-to-date status in response to the changing needs of the co~Lunity. Under the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the New Hope Vacant Land Study, an ordinance change to promote and encourage private economic development is consistent with the co~=~unity land use goals. 5 EXISTIN~ CONDITIONS As part of this study, the City staff inventoried the existing developed industrial sites in New Hope to determine the degree of conformity with the I-1 green area standard (see Exhibit A). There are currently 113 developed properties divided among the two industrial zoning districts in New Hope. Of these, 19 (16.6 percent) are located in the I-2, General Industrial District and 96 (83 percent) are located in the I-1, Limited Industrial District. As illustrated in Table A, the I-1 site's green area range from 2 to 75 percent. The average green space ratio is 38.6 percent, however, this statistic is deceptive due to the number of sites with a high ratio of green space, which may be reduced with future development. A more pertinent statistic is median ratio of green space of 36.5 percent. Half of the sites fall below this point. Currently, 40 sites fall below 35 percent green space ratio and exist as non-conforming sites. Under Section 4.031 of the New Hope Zoning Ordinance, these sites are not permitted to expand without variance if the degree of nonconformity increases. Twenty-three additional I-1 sites fall into 35 percent to 39 percent green space range. Industrial expansion on these sites may also be limited by the 35 percent green area standard. TABLE A SURVEY OF ~REEN SPACE IN INDUSTRIAL SITES IN NEW HOPE Percent Percent Green I-1 I-2 Green I-1 I-2 Area Sites Sites Area Sites Sites 0-4 2 i 40-44 6 3 5-9 I 3 45-49 2 0 10-14 0 4 50-54 8 1 15-19 1 2 55-59 7 0 20-24 10 1 60-64 1 1 25-29 9 i 65-69 4 0 30-34 17 1 70+ 3 0 35-39 23 i TOTAL 94 19 Mean Green Area: I-1 - 38.6% I-2 - 24.1% Median Green Area: I-1 - 36.5% I-2 - 18.8% SOURCE: Aerial Photo Study by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates with correction by City Staff (2/2/93) The 35 percent green area requirement is exclusive to the I-1 zoning. The City does not impose this standard in the other commercial or industrial zoning districts. Table B provides a comparison of development standards in both the I-1 and I-2 Zoning Districts. The I-2 District offers a slightly broader range of uses, but may accommodate development with less restrictive zoning standards. The two zoning districts require the same minimum lot areas, however, the I-1 Zoning District requires a greater lot width and side yard setbacks in addition to the green area and lot coverage standards. TABLE B COMPARISON OF I-1 AND I-2 ZONIN~ PERFORMANCE STANDARDS I-1 I-2 Lot Area 1 acre 1 acre Lot Width 150 feet 100 feet Setback: 3 stories 3 stories Front 50 feet 50 feet Side 20 feet 10 feet Rear 35 feet 35 feet Building Height 3 stories 3 stories Green Space 35 percent N/A Building Coverage 40 percent N/A SOURCE: New Hope Zoning Ordinance A survey of the I-2 industrial (see Table A) area indicates that these lots average green area of 24 percent and a median green area ratio of 18.8 percent. There appears to be a significant discrepancy in the permitted usable area of lots between the existing industrial zoning districts. The New Hope commercial zoning districts do not impose a mandatory green area ratio. The New Hope Building Official estimates that the average green area ratio of the co~ercially zoned sites is approximately 10 percent. OTHER CITY PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Aside from the I-1 green area requirement, the New Hope Zoning Ordinance has other zoning performance standards to provide green area, landscaping, and to prevent the over-utilization of the site. This performance standard addresses: 1. Setbacks= Building Setback (Section 4.034) Front Yard: 50 feet Side Yard: 20 feet Rear Yard: 35 feet Greater setbacks from major streets are also required. Parking Setbacks (Section 4.145): The I-1 zoning requires a minimum parking lot setback of 10 feet. 2. Landscaping and Screening (Sections 4.033 and 4.145): The New Hope Zoning Ordinance requires screening of commercial and industrial sites from residential areas and public rights-of- way. Additionally, the Zoning Ordinance general provisions and I-1 special performance standards require the submission of detailed landscaping plans that emphasize landscaping or screening of the building perimeter, parking lot area, and required yards. 3. Building Coverage (Section 4.145): The I-1 special requirements limit the building cover of the lot to 40 percent of the lot area. 4. Drainage (Section 4.032.(4)): The City requires drainage plans for all industrial construction. 5. Parking (Sections 4.036 and 4.145): These sections define the amount, the design and location of accessory parking for industrial development. These zoning provisions stress the proper screening and landscaping at the perimeter of the parking lot area. These design elements undergo critical review by staff, the Design and Review Co~,~,Littee, Planning Commission, and City Council. New Hope, through its strict review process, has been effective in requiring quality development and site design. VARIANCE It should be noted that a small number of variances from the green area standard have been granted in the past. The City Building Official identified four past variances including 5010 Hillsboro, 5621 International Parkway, 8701 Bass Lake Road, and 3531 Nevada Avenue. Section 4.22 of the New Hope Zoning Ordinance states: Purpose of Variance. The purpose of a variance is to permit relief from the strict application of the terms of the Zoning Code to prevent undue hardships or mitigate undue non-economic hardship in the reasonable use of a specific parcel of property and where circumstances are unique to the individual property under consideration, and the granting of a variance is demonstrated to be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Code. A hardship may exist by reason of narrowness, shallowness or shape of a specific parcel of property or a lot existing and of record upon the effective date of this code or that by reason of exceptional topographic or water conditions of a specific parcel of land or lot, the strict application of the terms of this Code would result in exceptional difficulties when utilizing the parcel or lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the district in which said lot or parcel is located, or would create undue hardship upon such lot or parcel that another lot or parcel within the same district would not have if it were to be developed in a manner proposed by the appellant. In considering a variance, the City must find a non-economic hardship unique to the specific site not created by the property owner. Generally, a variance from the green space standard would not meet these criteria for the following reasons: 1. The alternative to the green space variance would be: a) not to expand the specific business, b) purchase additional land, or c) relocate the business to a larger site to accommodate it in accordance with City standards. These are each a financial consideration when expanding the business. 2. The hardship is not unique to a specific site. As illustrated on Table A, 40 I-1 sites are currently non-conforming under this zoning standard and 23 other sites are within 4 percent of the green area limit. With these conditions, the likelihood of additional similar variance requests is great. 3. The choice of expanding a business is a decision of the property owner. As such, the variance to reduce green space is generated by the property owner. The past variances establish a precedent for future variance considerations. These variances were given to accommodate local business growth and are supportive of the City's economic development philosophies to maintain local industrial tax base and employment opportunities. Since the aforementioned conditions suggest that the variance process is not the appropriate means for reducing I-1 green space, a zoning text amendment is recommended. SURVEY OF NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES In preparation of this study, a survey of surrounding communities was conducted to determine if a~ green area ratio was co~on in other cities. Exhibit B summarizes the findings of the community survey. Most communities do not rely on a green area ratio standard, rather they address green area through required setbacks, buffer yards, landscaping, screening, and building coverage. Brooklyn Center is a community that does use a green area ratio. They established a green area ratio for each zoning district. The Brooklyn Center green area ratio for industrial zoning district is 15 percent. New Hope's application of a green area ratio in a single zoning district is a unique arrangement. CONCLUSION Changing development conditions in New Hope has caused the City to re-evaluate the green space standards of the I-1 zoning. Diminishing land supply and fixed development patterns have limited new economic development growth resulting in greater reliance on the expansion of in-place businesses. The I-1 green area ratio establishes an artificial limit on expansion of I-1 businesses. The City must now weigh the benefits of the existing green area standard versus the community's ability to promote and aid further reinvestment and expansion of New Hope's in-place I-1 businesses. A review of the green area standards, we believe that the City can achieve the benefits of this I-1 standard through the application of other existing zoning performance standards. We would suggest a reduction of the green area ratio from 35 percent to 20 percent. Exhibit C provides examples of a variety of green area ratios applied to a minimum I-1 lot. The City may consider a reduction of the green area ratio to a lesser degree as alternative amendment options. However, the change should be significant enough to provide some flexibility for future growth and should give attention to the existing non- conforming sites. The 20 percent ratio requires green area in excess of just the minimum setbacks, expands the useable area of th~ existing I-1 sites for business expansions, and reduces the number of non-conforming I-1 lots from 40 to 4. pc: Steve Sondrall Dan Donahue Doug Sandstad o EXHIBIT A- City Industrial Site Inventory ZONING DISTRICT MAP CITY of NEW HOPE LEG~;ND ' ¥1~,l. lN I,.IMI ?1 ...... [](1 $?11~ STJqrwTs ~ ~TY N[S(O[NTI~L ~-3 ~ ~NSITY N[SOO[NTI&L GREEN AREA RATIO SURVEY .I ' , i , IOZ 20Z 3~Z 4(~Z 50Z 6 Z 70Z 80Z 90Z : ' ' t 75~ ' I 13 Industrial Sites (Aerial photo study by Bonestroo, Rosene & Co., with corrections by city staff- 2-2-93) ~ I~I~.LEOE Ct'IIT~N NOllO C~#T[I~ NO SCHOOl. ',~ I $ , 4~ S~ ~vE SCHOOL i ~, ~ ~ -. '~QI ~EMEtERY LIONS '' PERFORMANCE STANDARDS COMPARISON SURVEY CITY ZONING "GREEN SPACE" REQUIREMENT Brooklyn Center Ail Districts 15 FT green strip from property line to driving lane. Parking requirement varies by use with formulas for each using maximum square footage (SF). Commercial/ 35 FT "green strip" with goal Service/ of maintaining 5 FT off Office interior and rear yards/10 FT between lots. Industrial 15 FT strip No building to land ratio. Use parking requirements and "green strip." Maple Grove Commercial/ buffer yard: 20 FT wide planted ~ Industrial strip with fence and plantings required where Commercial abuts Residential. Industrial/ Residential buffer yard: 20 FT minimum + 110 FT for every 100 parking spaces, not to exceed 50 FT. Mixed Use percent open space requirement Golden Valley Ail Non-Res. 50% of side/rear setbacks must zones be landscaped. Industrial 75 FT front setback, 100 FT side/rear; 50% maximum building coverage. Open Dev. 25% maximum building coverage. Multi-family 35% " " - Commercial 50% " " Business/ 40% " " Professional Institutional 25% " " -"setbacks work more than coverage requirement to achieve open space EXHIBIT B - Perfomance Standards. Survey requirement." Plymouth Industrial 35% maximum building coverage, not counting parking. Business 25% maximum building coverage. adjacent screen parking, goal of 25-30% to Resid. maximum building coverage. no area requirement, use landscape policy and maximum building coverage. Crystal Commercial/ 22 FT front parking setback with Industrial landscaping. 5 FT setback on sides. Screening required on sides and rear. Residential not more than 30% of yard can be covered by accessory structures. City is built up, facing redevelopment. Brooklyn Park All Districts minimum 5% "green" landscaped area, parking areas: 15 FT front,side and rear setbacks. Med. Density 40% green Residential/ Churches High Dens. 35% green Residential Office/ 30% green Business Commercial 25% green General 20% green Business Industrial 15% green ~ Single-fam. 25% maximum building coverage. Residential Double frontage lots: 40 FT green strip on arterial street, 20 FT on all other. PUD 30% green minimum variable setback: 75 FT to parking lot, 35 FT if no .. parking. use landscape ordinance and percent green area requirement. St. Louis Park listed by tables of intensity class- intensity building height, mass, class impervious surface, hours of operation. buffer yards between conflicting uses. requires a percent of development cost budget be used for landscaping. parking lot- varies by abutting use, on local or commercial street, area. 6% of lot interior must be landscaped. new development is evaluated by point system; existing trees get points; tree preservation section of ordinance, replacement policy; residential areas are exempt. Robbinsdale N\A North Liberty, Business\ 30-50 FT wide planted or grass Iowa Industrial buffer yards required where residential property abutted. Screening also required where uses are separated by street except front of business. 15 FT buffer yard required along street. EXHIBIT C - Green Area Ratios U R B A P L A NG · DES N M AR K E T R ES E A'R ¢ N TO: Alan Brixius FROM: Elizabeth Stockman DATE: 19 March 1993 RE: New Mope Green Area Ratio FILE NO: 131.00 - 93.01 I have generated several ideas which may be utilized in the regulation of green space and/or landscape areas in the City of New Hope Industrial Districts. These are intended for reference and further examination with potential for incorporation into the City Zoning Ordinance. I. Reduction in the percentage of green area required, maintaining the open space standard as'a ratio of total site versus impervious surface area. 2. Allow a reduction in green space percentage subject to a return on investment in additional landscape and buffer areas being required such as: a. Specified location of landscaping/screening in front and side yard areas and/or adjacen[ to differing land uses. b. Require a certain quantity of plants, shrubs, turf based on total site and building size. One tree per 25-375 square fee: should be considered based on the type of land use, surroundings, etc. c. Promote plant diversity. Required Number Minimum Number of Trees of Species 1-10 1 11-20 2 21-30 3 31-40 4 41+ 5 5775 Wayzata Blvd.-Suite 555-St. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636-Fax. 595-9837 d. Promote specialized landscape design, for instance fountains, ponds, sculptures, water gardens, court yards, uniqt/e plantings/flower gardens, use of varying levels, theme designs, etc. e. Focus on pedestrian interaction, employee usage and linkage with overall community park and recreation elements. f. Preservation of natural areas. g. Usage of parking lot landscaping. Total Parking Percent of Total LOt Area Interior Parking Area* 7,000- 49,999 sf 5% 50,000-149,999 sf 8% 150,000+ sf 10% *The planting area for parking lots includes only space within the perimeter curb or lying between parking spaces, such as median or island areas. 3. In addition to or in place of green area requirements as a percentage of the total site, utilize different means by which to calculate landscape/open space requirements. For instance: a. Number of trees/shrubs per square foot of open space. b. Landscape cost as a percentage of total development cost. (see attached) c. Required buffer zone/yard areas: Land Minimum Minimum Use Building Landscaped TYPe* Setback Yard A 20 ft. 10 ft. B 30 ft. 20 ft. C 40 ft. 30 ft. D 50 ft. 40 ft. *To be designated by City depending upon what districts in which this type of requirement would be useful. d. Number of trees/shrubs per linear foot of street or property line frontage. Between 40 and 160 plant units per 100 linear feet of frontage of property line should be considered based on the land use category, neighboring 2 land uses, etc. A plant unit is a measurement tool that translates the amount of required fauna into a quantifiable unit. (Example: one shade tree ~ 10 plant units, one ornamental tree = 5 plant units, and each shrub = one plant unit.) e. Building design, materials and percent of opaque space as a determination of the amount of landscaping. Higher quality* architecture, materials and a lesser percentage of opaque exterior wall space (versus windows, open balconies, etc.) would require less landscaping. (*This may be hard to judge, however.) SOURCES: Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. Preparing a Landscape Ordinance APA Planning Advisory Service, 1990 14: ~$-4 LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERYARDS r NDSCA G All open ~e~ of a lot w~ch ~e not ~ed fo~ b~s, req~ed p~-~ or =c~fion =e~, patios, or s~r~e ~ be ~ped ~ a co~on of ~opy trees, ~dersto~ trees, ever~een trees, shahs, flowers, sod, ~d ~o~d cover ~e~. ~ sh~ not apply ~ site ~e~ re~ed s~te. A plan for landscapin~ is required for all new development except single and two family structures. This plan may include ~round cover, shrubbery, trees, sculpture, foundation plantints, decorative walks or other site desiln features.- This plan shall incorporate bufferyards, p~kin$.lot landscapini; street frontage landscapin~ or materiEs in'a qu~ti~ ha~n~ a minimum vEue in co~orm~ce the foEo~ T~le 6~ · Project Cost flnclu~i-g buil~i-5 construction, Landscape Cost site preparation, ~ud site improvements) Below $1,000,000 2% of project value. $1,000,000 - $2,000,000 $20,000 plus of project value in excess of $1,000,000. $2,000,000 - $3,000,000 $30,000 plus 0.75% of project value in excess of $2,000,000. - $3,000,000 - $4,000,000 $37,$00 plus 0.25% of project value in excess of $3,000,000. Over $4,000,000 1% of project value. [The costs for grading or site lighting cannot be included as a part of r~i~r~,,m landscape costs.] 280 14:6-4 LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERYARDS If hesJthy plant materials of acceptable species exist on a site prior to its development, the application of the standards in ~h~.~ Section may be adjusted by the City to allow cre~t for such m~teris/, provided that such adjustment is consistent with the intent of this Ordinance. The City may permit the seeding of areas reserved for future expansion within the development if see~,~g is consistent with the intent of th/s Or~,~,,~ce. C. D~SIGN CRITERIA When the proposed development results/.u landscape costs of $10,000 or · more, the landscape plan for the development must be prepared by or under the supervision of · re~tere~ ~pe ~~ ~r o~er ~pe deg~ profe~o~L D. E~~ON Development of ad~o~ of less ~ ~,000 sq~e feet to e~g s~es =e exempt ~om ~e req~emen~ of ~h~ Subse~on 14:6~.7. TO: KIRK McDONALD FROM: DOUG SANDSTAD DATE: APRIL 9, 1993 SUBJECT: BACKGROUND MATERIAL ON I-1 35% "GREEN AREA RATIO" A primary reason for my recommendation that we consider a change to our inequitable I-1 35% G.A.R. results from my knowledge of the frustration that property owners have endured when limited or prevented from expanding either the building or the intensity of use. I have attached a graphic that shows two existing I-i warehouse properties with expansion under a proposed 20% G.A.R.. The following list includes properties that have expressed interest in expansion "below" the 35% G.A.R. or developed to the maximum extent rather than seek a variance, which has been historically quite difficult to obtain. In many cases, they have contacted me by phone, had brief meetings and then decided to proceed no further. Some have moved out of the city, with a "component" of the decision our 35% G.A.R. 3101 Louisiana Ave. No. Paddock Labs 5701 International Parkway Rosewood 4920 Highway #169 Wayzata Bay Center 5010 Hillsboro Ave. No. Olson Concrete 2701 Nevada Ave. No. Benson-Orth 7010 31st Ave. No. R. Johnson 3225 Winpark Mini-Warehouse 2901 Louisiana warehouse 9100 49th Englund Graphics 5000 Winnetka Brad Hoyt 3216 Winnetka J.R.Jones 5420 Int. Parkway Custom Mold 3531 Nevada Karl David 9401 Science Center Steve Hoyt 5101 Boone Keelor Steel 5100 Boone Tool Products 3960 Quebec Don Harvey 9000 Science Center Jerry Finch Numerous requests for green area variances have been denied in the I-1 zone, over the years. Tool Produc~s 5100 ~ AVENUE NORTH ExisCin$: Proposed LOT~ 39S,000 al' (9.13 acres) (same) BLDG.= 107,000 151,000 ~ = 35Z 20Z Expmn'iou of tb~a build~ ~riCh' over an acre of ue~ buildin~ ~ould require m~Jor i~veacmmnt, and could be done ~riChouC violatin~ park~ {tadard{, setback l~s or the buffer co the residenci~ ar~ ac s~ch. [37 n~ par~ stalls for wareh~se ~C ~111uscraced] 4401Xylon Avenue Nortl~ New Hof~e. Minnesota 55428 Phone: 531-5t00 FAX Sanuary 12, 1993 Mr. Karl H.A. David VlDCO 3531 Nevada Avenue North New Hope, ~ 55427 Subject: REQUF~T FOR AM~.~DMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMTT AND VARIANCE TO G]{~N AREA, PLANNING CASE NO. 92-35 Dear Mr. David: Please be advised that on Sanuary 11, 1993, the New Hope City Council extended your existing conditional use permit for outdoor storage for three (3) months and approved an increase in the trailer limit from thr~ (3) to five (5). The City Council tabled your request for an amendment to your conditional use permit to allow expansion of the outdoor storage area and a variance to the green area requirement for three (3) months so that the I-1 35 % green area requirement can be studied. The City's Planning Consultant and staff will be res~arc~g the ~ ar~ requirement over the next several months and I would anticipate that a recommendation will be brought back to the City Council the first part of April. When a r~comm~tion is completed I will contact you, as I would anticipate that your request for an exlxmded storage area and green ar~ variance will be brought back to the Council for consideration at that time also. If you have questions, plea~ call. Sincerely, Daniel J. Donahue City Manager Kirk McDonald Management Asmimi~ntYCommunity D~velopment Coordinator cc: Dan Donahue, City Manager Steve Sondrall, City Attorney Doug Sandstad, Building Official Jean Coone, General Inspector Valerie Leone, City Clerk File ' Styl~l City F0~ Famil~ tivin[ CITY OF NEW HOPE RESOL~ON NO. 9 3- 3.1 RESOLUTION EXTENDING EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTDOOR STORAGE FOR TI-I~ MONTHS AND INCREASING TRArLER lIMIT TO FIVE TABLING REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF oITrD(X)R STORAGE SPACE AND VARIANCE TO GREEN AREA REQ~ FOR TI~ MONTHS SO THAT THE I-1 35~ GI~-~.~I AREA REQ~ CAN BE STUDI~n PLANNING CASE NO. 92-35 3531 NEVADA AVENUE NORTH (PR) g20-118-21-21-0010) SUBMI'I'rED BY KARL H.A.DAVID/VIDCO WHEREAS, the applicant, Karl H.A.David/Vidco, has submitted a request identified as Planning Case No. 92-35 for an amendment to conditional use permit to allow expansion of outdoor storage and increase in trailer limit, and a variance to green area, pursuant to Sections 4.144(1) and 4.145(3) of the New Hope Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on Plannin{ Case No. 92-35 on December I, 1992, found that all conditions required by the New Hope Zoning Code for the amendment to conditional use permit to allow expansion of outdoor storage and increase in trailer limit, and a variance to the ~ m requi.,~ment have been satisfied by the applicant, and r~commended approval of the planning case request subject to some of the conditions set forth in the City Staff Report dated November 25, 1992; and WHEREAS, the City Council on January 11, 1993, considered the report of the City staff, findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, and the comments of persons attending the City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds and concludes that the applicant has not necessarily satisfied all conditions required by the New Hope Zoning Code for issuance of the requested conditional use permit and variance. NOW, TI.IF~I::ORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of New Hope that: 1. The existing conditional use permit for outdoor storage is hereby extended for three (3) months and the trailer limit is increased f!ltm three (3) to five (IS), 2. The request for an amendment to the conditional use permit to allow expansion of outdoor storage space and a variance to the green area requirement is tabled for three(3) months so that the I-I 315 · green ar~a r~uirement can be studied. Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this llth day of lanuary, 1993. City Clerk Item 6.4 Board of Review. RE$OLUTXO# ~3-491 Resolution Appointing New HopeF '- Gol~ Valley Sun Post as %~ t.~ Official NewSpaper for City of New Hope. RESOLUTION 93-02 Resolution Appointing Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderltk and %rem 6.6 Associates as City Engineer for Sewer, Water, Street, Storm Sewer Projects and General Work. RESOL~ffION 93~3 Reso)~iOm~ ~potntt~ ~ty A~rney. Item 6.7 RESOLUTION 03-04 Resolution Designating Marquette Bank New Hope as ~tem $.8 Depository for Payroll Account and General Funds of the Cit) of New Hope. RE$OLUT%0# 93-05 Resolution Designating Depositories for Funds of the City %rem 6.g of ~ IMge Relative to Investments. RESOLUTIOI~ g3-o~ Resolution Appointing Acting Mayor. Item 6.10 RESOLUTIOIt 93-07 Resolution Authorizing Reduction of Special Assessment %rem 6.11 Levy 11885 (Project 4449. RESOLIJT%III 93-08 Reselution Estab)eshing 1993 Pay Plan for Regular Full- Item 6.1~1 time am/ R~lar Part-time Personnel. RESOLUTION 93-09 -s-, Reselutton Approving Henneptn County Housing %tern 6.11 ' Rehabilitation Deferred Loan Progrem Repayment Agreement and Authorizing Mayor and City Manager to Execute · ~iP" Agreement. RECYCL~ WINNERS Acknowledgement of O~ **-1~9~;~ :*~5(~'~ HRG Recycling Item 8.14 Wi nners. RESOLUTION 93-10 "; Ilml~i~n'Establishing and Amending Fees and Charges for Mayor Ertckson introduced for discussion Item 8.1, Planning Case 9~-35, Request for Amendment to Conditional It, 1:1/ Use Permit to A1 low Expansion of Outdoor Storage and Increase in Trailer Limit, and a Variance to Green Area Requirement, 3531 Nevada Avenue North (PID #~0-118-21-21- 00109, Karl H.A. Oavid/Vidco, Petitioner. Mr. Kirk McDonal d, Management Ass i st ant/Commun i ty Development Coordinator, stated the petitioner is requesting an amendment to a conditional use permit to allow expansion of outdoor storage area and increa~ in trailer limit, and a variance to the green area requ i rement. This property was first developed with a warehouse in 1986 New Hope City Council January 11, 199:3 Page 2 and in 1987 the owner of the property was required to apply for a conditional use permit for outdoor storage and that CUP was granted with specific limits on storage. The 60 x 70 foot enclosure with screening fence was approved, the concrete surface had to be installed, the number of semi-trailers stored ont he site was limited to 3, and an ~-~ annual inspection by staff was required. The petitioner is requesting an amendment to the existing conditional use permit for outdoor storage to expand the outdoor storage area by 2,100 square feet and increase the number of semi-trailers stored on the existing concrete surface from 3 to $. The expansion of the outdoor storage area would reduce the existing green area from 35% to 33%. The green area requirement for the I-1 District is 35%, thus a 2% variance is required. The situation is such that the use has expanded beyond the previously approved parameters. The General Inspector has issued a number of orders on the property asking that it either be brought into compliance or that the petitioner apply for an amendment to the CUP. The Planning Commission reviewed the case on December 1st and recommended approval of the CUP amendment and green area variance subject to three conditions. Mr. McDonald stated at staff's request, the petitioner has submitted revised plans to address concerns of truck maneuvering. The two additional trailers will be placed in the northwest rear parking/unloading area and should not negatively impact the required turning radius. The green area variance was also discussed at the Planning Commission Meeting and the Planning Commission did recommend approval of the variance. He noted that in the initial staff report, staff suggested that additional green area or landscaping be added to compensate for the 2% loss so that no variance is required; however, the Planning Commission did not wish to include that requirement in their approval. Mayor [rickson asked whether the Planning Commission discussed prior complaints regarding the property. Mr. McDonald stated the Commission received copies of orders issued by the Inspections Department but no discussion was held with the petitioner regarding the issue. Mr. Karl David, owner of building located at 3531 Nevada Avenue North, was recognized, and conveyed that he will insist that his tenant comply with the City's wishes. He expressed his displeasure of the possibility of losing the -':-New Hope City Council January 11, 1993 Page 3 ' tenant if he continues to violate the CUP. He explained~that ~occasionally there has been outdoor storage in cases where a shipment arrives and is to be delivered the same day. Councilmember Enck made reference to debris on the property (cement blocks piled in the rear yard, large concrete chunks, old split rail fence into the drainage swale along the railroad tracks). Mr. David interjected that much of the items which have been in the drainage swale have been dumped by persons other than owners or renters of the property. He stated there seems to be sufficient patrol of the area but occasionally over the weekend items mysteriously appear on the site. Councilmember Enck expressed concern regarding setting a precedent of reduction of the green .area. He was surprised by the Planning Commission's recommendation. He suggested that if the requirements for the use of the property are such that it exceeds green area requirements then the tenant has out used the reasonable capacity of the building and ought to cut back or find an additional storage place. He questioned the validity of the 35% requiremtn if variances are granted. He noted the 35% green area requirement makes New Hope an attractive City. He questioned whether Mr. David could comply to the other requirements and not request the green space variance. Mr. David replied that he could not. He pointed out that if this is of concern to Council, they should visit the site without snow coverage. He stated in the corner they have not changed the property level from its original condition. There is a problem on the northwest corner of the piece of property. He stated his neighbor, owner of the mini-warehouse, has a drainage problems but that he cannot alleviate that problem. He mentioned his plans to create ounding on the northeast corner. Mr. David also noted a need for a snow storage area. The petitioner requested the City to review the code and the feasibility of changing the green area requirement from 35% to a percentage more realistic for industrial zoned properties. Mr. David mentioned that he paid $4,000 on the property before development and the tax structure is now $48;~00, Counctlmember Enck agreed that if 35% is inappropriate for this day and age then perhaps an ordinance amendment should beconsidered; however, at this itmehe is not convinced. New Hope Ctt~ Council January 11, 1993 Page 4 Mr. David indicated that his tenant just invested in interior shelving to utilize the height of the building so that should relieve much of the outside storage problem. Councilmember Enck noted bead styrofoam floating on the~-~ property most likely caused by a punctured bag. Councilmember Enck stated the property is already used beyond its capacity (storage problems). Mr. David stated all he can do is make the request and let the decision be made by the Council. Mayor Erickson stated when the 35% requirement was made part of the code it was to maintain green area and promote attractive industrial properties especially where there were single family homes in the immediate area. He commented that reductions have been allowed in the past for instances where residences were not near industrial properties as in this case. He stated he would vote in favor of the variance provided Mr. David would assure the City that the premises will be better maintained. Mr. David stated he constructed the building to be appealing and he wants it to continue in that manner. He stated he is trying to resolve the situation and will make his tenant comply. He pointed out that if this does not resolve the problem, then the City can revoke the conditional use permit and he would be forced to evict the tenant. Councilmember Wehling asked the petitioner of his plans for storage in the rear area (truck and miscellaneous items) should the variance be granted. Mr. David explained that the proposed new section would match the existing slab and screened fence. He indicated that the truck noted by Councilmember Wehling would be removed. He explained that under fire regulations no more than three gas-filled vehicles are allowed in the building overnight so there are several pick-ups parked outside in the evening. He stated the only other storage he is aware of is a few culverts in the area. He noted that they would be contained inside the fenced area if his request is approved. Councilmember Otten asked if the variance for allowing additional trucks would solve the outdoor storage problem. Mr. David explained that in 1987 when he first applied for the conditional use permit he had three trailers, two of which were mobile and not classified as parked trailers. He explained that it is no longer feasible for the owners New Hope City Council January 11, 1993 Page 5 of the trailers to utilize them as mobile units a, therefore he is requesting that they be allowed permanently~? '~:i He stated there is one 35' trailer which could be stored inside the fenced-in area or may not even be retained. Councilmember Otten suggested that Mr. David go back to his tenant and fully explain the situation of storage and green space prior to requesting Council action. He questioned whether the green area variance is a necessity. Mr. David responded that the tenant has attended the Planning Commission Meetings and does understand the situation. He explained that he has no other options but to expand the outdoor storage which reduces the existing green area. Councilmember Williamson noted that she does not feel the 33% green area would be a problem given the location of the property. However, she noted concern about the materials that are not currently stored in a fenced area. She pointed out that if the variance is granted she would expect Mr. David to ensure that all materials are stored in the building, inside trailers, or in the fenced area. Mr. Oonahue stated in checking the records, staff found that the property to the north (the mini-warehouse) was denied a similar variance request a few years ago. He expressed concern with the precedent set if the Council approves Hr. David's variance request. He recommended referring the matter back to the City Planner to review the entire green area issue and make a recommendation to Council at a later date. Prior to considering an amendment to the conditional use permit and since construction could not commence until spring, the Council directed staff to review the matter and re-calculate the current green area of the site. Mr. Donahue stated the Council could extend the existing conditional use permit for outdoor storage for three months and increase the trailer limit from three to five. The petitioner and Council agreed to re-consider the case on April 12, 1993. RESOLUTIQll 93-1! Councilmember Enck introduced the following resolution and ltlB 1.1 moved its adoption: "IESOUJ~ION EXTENDING EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE J~ItZT ~1 .ItTOOOR STORAIE FOIl ~ NORTNS NID' 'INCREASING TRAILER LIMIT TO FIVE AND TABLING REQUES FIt,-.~ NIB~IIBa,4~ C~I)ZTIQ#AL USE PEENIT TO ALLe#ExFms3~! OF OU~ STORAGE SPACE AND VARIANCE TO GREEN AIIF. A IEI~JIIIEXENT FOR THREE MONTHS SO THAT THE I-1 New Hope City Council January 11, 1993 Page 6 ..,~ . ...... ; ._ _. _ -{laiD ~20-118-21-21- ~010),_~ IULR~ HA. DAVID/VIDCO'. The motion fo~ adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded ' Counctlmember and vote being taken by Wtlltamson, upon thereon; the following voted in favor thereof: Erickson,~'~ Enck, Otten, Williamson, Wehltng; and the following votea against the same: None; Absent: None; whereupon the resolution was de¢l~red duly oassed and adooted, signed by the mayor which was attested to by the city clerk. PLAIIIING CASE o Erickson introduced for discussion Item 8.2, g3-01~ Planning Case 93-01, Request for Conditional Use Pemit to Item S,~ Allow a Home Occupation at 4448 Independence Avenue North · (PID #18-118-21-22-00~1r), Dung Tien Van, Petitioner. ~_~ Mr. McDonald stated~he petitioner is re~luesting a '~ condt~onal use permti~, to allow a home occullltton. ii, The pe~ltttoner is p~mpostng to operate on a part-time x~...~ basis am&'omputerized~x preparation b~.tness out of his ~home an~$tates thai, no employees jgjlimld be hired, no ~isible sJ~n would b_e~ested, an est I~ed 2 customers per ~ would~'.,be serve(~ and he Mot anticipate that tr~lfic be a p~ _~!l_lem for' ghborhood becau~m he ,intment~l~om 9:00 to 3:00 p,m,..~ll~ only from Apr' year. hold anothe) The Planni t) uest at their meeting on )nded approval of the request s~ conditions: 1. Evidence property be submitted to the Ci oner is apparently a new occupant · 2. Any . .l!l~'*~?y~tl~l :~ tty Cede ~' ).' A limit ~stomers per day with cars to be parked ,. 4. No tr~'~ )tCl, lp deltveries at the site. 5. An~..~ ~l~spe~tic~. by st4m~ff. Counc~bi~ Willtam~itt questioned Condition #3 and wheedling., t~im~, custommrs p~ day is Im be interpreted as no mo~ thal two cust~mers'~r day allowed or no more than ~ car)' are to be parked at one timm in the driveway. .- Mr. IMImnald explained that the condition was established bas~ldupon the petttioner'~ estimation that he woulq not be~lble to serve mere than two customers per day. The cg~d_ttion restricts the number of customers to two per day ]~lglensures that customer vehicles are parked in t~e ~411'tveway rather than the street. ! New HOpe City Council January 11, 1993 Page 7 PC 92-3S (3.3) ChairB~fl CaMron called for Planning Case 92-35 and &eked u ~l~I~ mn~n~ ~o a conditional use ~m~ ~o e~d ~he ou~d~= 8~orage .~ SZ~ Of ~ =~rmn~ f~ 35~ ~o 33~. He no~ cha~ ~ p:~y vas ~l ~ d~e~ Ln ~g86 ~d ~n 1987 I cond~o~ use ~ vas ~ ~I~ ~ lfls~c~or ~8 Logu~ a n~r of or~8 ~o eL~he= r~uce was pr~Lous~y a~r~. He ~ ~hl~ ~n rem~nme ~o ~he ~ AV. ~. hearing no, Aces een~ ~o ourro~dAng prelim ~ora he had one c~n~ fr~ Dick ~, ~r of ~ pro~y on ~he no~h, who r~o8~ ~hi~ ~l~ni~ M ~nLtor~ 8o ~hi~ Lt d~l no~ ~1~ on ~o his pr~y since ~h~ ~ve e~=~enc~ ~y ~8~n8ge p=ob$~a ~ha~ 1~ 8L~o. Ho ~Ln~ ou~ ~ha~ ~ho Building O~fic~al has a conce~ as =o h~ =he =railorg are =o M laid ou~ ~cauae he ~liovoe l~ ~c~o ~Ao ~urnLng radius for =~cks and =he ~/oner L8 pro~r~ ~o ad~oo8 ~hio Loouo. He e~lain~ ~ha~ ~he grin ~ea v~ance on ~hts nL~e. ILr. ~l David, pe~.l~.ioner and owner of ~he p~o~y, :el~nd~ ~ho ~u~ng radius ~ssuo, I~l~Lng ~hl~ ~hl c~y ~ha~ ~ln~l ~r~ hM La ~he one who pr~Lly has 1~ ~ck8 c~flg ~n ~o ~he sL~e, ~ he pre~n~ a ~e~er fr~ ~ ~ck~fl~ c~y se~es ~he ren~er whAch s~a~ea ~hey ~ no~ ~rAenc~ ~y en~ or ~A~ problm w~h ~heAF S3' ~raAlerg. He ~An~ ou~ ~ha~ ~ho CFaLlo~I ~o ~ lo ~ ~ho ~ ~t co Cho no~h where ~he p~a~l~9 v~e em ~o ~ ~r~, a p~lm c~ld ~ crea~ when ~ o~~ ~adAng ~naula~Aon o~or~ ~flo~de ~he blue ~ of ~ ~raAlero ~d ~ound ~he ~. He e~la~n~ ~he a~h ezis~ng ~ence lane wLXl Fm~n ~n place ~d 3 n~ ~ence lanes w~ll M add~ wL~h a ~oller ga~e ~or access and ~reas ~ea. ~ r~all~ ~hi~ a~ ~he ~ of ~he or~gL~l condi~ona~ use a~lLcatLon ~ a~ =oa ~LfLca~Lon of ~he pl~ =o acc--- date ~ ~n ~oa al~h~gh ~ M ~ ~ld ~on~ually have pr~lm, ~ ~ a~i~ ~o viola~iong ~ha~ ha~ ~r~ ~ t~. ~ ~J~ ~o ~o=al of ~ ~rren~ condi=iona ~ha= ~ ~~, o~ of which Lo a de~lo~n~ agr~n~ ~d ~nd, and M ~~ t~t' he ~ld n~ do ~b~ ~r~n~al ~o his ~~ ~ ho o~ndo a ~ of ~ ~d ~noy mp~ L~ up. He M ~ ~ c~ld ~ addL~Lo~ ~n ~ea Mcaune he has ~o B ~~ ~ ~ ~ concrete Lo o~ ~o ~aLn on~o ~heL~ of che p~y ~d ~y n~ ~ea will ~aLn 1L~Lee. He r~eoCod ~sa~onor ~rnhiug conf~ ~ ~a~na~ and ~ha~ ~he ~ence ~ ga~ea ~ld M~ch ~he ~:ren~ s~ora~ ~ea fencing. ~. David ~~ ~ ~horo will M ~ e~aCe storage areas, vLCh e~aCo ~ller gates, one for hie reneer ~d one ~or has use. lope PlannAng CogmLssAou -4- December 1, 1992 ~ioo:L, oner Gundorlh&ug itreeeld CAe ~.Lol~,cr~'l hes£~'.&n¢¥ gr~ o~n a 2% g~n ~a v~co ~d ~ndor~ Lf CAere wa8 ~here on ~he st~e ~ha~ grin ~ea could M a~. ~nsLoner Oundershaug ~ee~on~ ~he n~ ~or ~ add~ona~ IM~ ~o ~he ~.c~ ~d s~orage ~a ~d no~h~ng else ~O~de on ~he ~. David ~la~ C~C orLg~ly h~e renter ~v~ h~e C.cks and ouC of CAe o~Co~ ~C e~ncually dece~n~ ~C vas eas~er up M~IF~i~I ra~her ~ hau~ ~ ~o ~i~ ~ conf~ ~ha~ ~hey are lAcens~. ~ 8f~ ~hl~ ~here w~ll ~ no o~orage outside ~he ~eaa An consLdera~Lon. ~ioo~oner Gunderghaug ~haoLz~ ~ha~ ~he cond~Aofl re~ir~flq a ~nd La ~o ~nauro ~ha~ ~e~hLng La c~le~ as sh~ ~n p~afls ~d he s~rong~y idvocl~e8 ouch ~nd ~. David vo~c~ h~o ob~e~on8 ~o ~h~8 r~r~n~. ~LsaLoner Zak c~n~ ~ha~ abe had v~aL~ ~he o~e during ~he day ~d found a ~o~ of ou~oLde o~orage vLs~le ~d ~nder~ ~f ~he r~eg~ ~un~ of s~orage ~ea w~ll ~ enough ~o k~p ~ LngLde. ~. DavLd ~a~r~ ~ha~ a lo~ of ~he M~er~llo hive ~o M ~v~ ~d ~ ~d ~ou~ as ~hey ~e n~ ~d he As ~ng ~o crol~o ~ea ~o h~dle all ~ go ~ he ~o n~ have ~o con~nuaX~M ~eaLo~r Z~ ~hor c~nC~ on C~ ~n trailer d~re and C~ ~sLgh~y ~eCy p~e C~C ~k C~ ~n ~d a~oo ~ndorod a gate c~d ~eo~ly ~eCa~l~ on ~ no~h olde o~ ~he ecotage ~ea ~d Lf ~re c~ld ~ ~ ~r~o on ~ ~s~ sade ~o help · cr~n ~ ~ora~ ~ea. She i~ ~el~ wha~ ~ghc~ng pr~ ~ou~ CAe ~oa. ~. David ~1~ ~ha~ a gate c~ld no~ M ~nsCalX~ ~here ~cauee s~. ~ ~eoC~o~ Af tr~e ~ld su~ at Cha~ ~oclC~ofl and ~e d~e ~h~ Co ~ro~ ChoLr p~y. ~ ~~ ouc ~haC a~l~ ~ ~ld 1L~ Co ~C I~ ~ o~ ovorh~g on ~ho ~oncod n ~o ~ m~h~ng under c~r, although he c~oC ~us~y ~ of ~ &t r~ght n~, but uyM v~ll do ~t as he has ~. DavLd ~ee~ CAe 1LghCL~ 8CaCLng ~haC there Lo no ~LghC~ng X~ghCo on a~l eL~8 of cae ~ee~oner Oun~cghaug conf~ ~haC ~he cra~ler d~rg ~d ~L~ ~ron call~ ~or a ~cLon, al~gh he ~nd~caC~ ~ha~ v~co La n~, ~rhapa CAe ~C~C~onor has ouCgr~ CAe Plm~ ~osLn -S- ~~r 1, ~o a~ve ~e ~e8~ ~o ~nd ~e condl~ion~l use ~ ~o allow ~~r ~ BuAld~g OffAcAal). 3. ~ul ~s~lou by o~iff. V~ ~ fa~rt ~f~n, ~e~, Ilk, ~ers~ug, Vo~ ageless Sak, ~n, Fr~rich PC 02-36 (3.~) Chii~ Cmron LnCroduc~ ~ho nex~ p~ann~flV case, No. 92-36. ~~IM ~. McDonald ou~lLn~ ~he r~oo~ for a v~i~ce ~o ex.nd a non- ~ ~ confo~ing 8C~cCuro ~o all~ conoC~cC~on of a ~rch on ~he rear. ~ ~m~- He e~laLn~ =he non-confom~=y Lo due =o =he house ~flg bu~= on T~ OF ~, a corner ~oC ~ac~ng the w~deeC p~ of the ~oC whereas the front ChaL~ ~ron confL~ w~Ch Oho ~CL~Loner her in~enC =o n~ ucer~a~e ud r~f pitch w~Ch existing .~cCure. ~X~ ~X~ by ~illLonor Sons,n, s~ by ~laLoner Ounderehau~, ~ a~ve ffl~ ~.e 92-36, .~ ~ ~ co~on.~ VK~ ~ fluff ~fm, Iff, ~l~, ~nu, ~ero~ug, ~ (&) ~m ~ ~m 6 SC~l c~cel~ Oho ech~ul~ ~v~r me,fig and It~m (4..2) pin Co ~ ~ Juu~ da~e Co dLm~mm a~nC conversions. ~ EXnll (S) CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNII~IG CASE REPORT , Planning Ca.~: 92-35 Request: Request for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit to Allow Expansion oC_~ Outdoor Storage Area and Incr~e in Trailer Limit, and a Va_,'iance to Greet Area Requirement Location: 3531 Nevada Avenue North PID No.: 20-118-21-21-0010 Zoning: I-1 (Limited Industrial) Petitioner: Karl H.A. IYavid/V]])CO Report Date: November 25, 1992 Meeting Date: December 1, 1992 BACKGROUND 1. The petitioner is requesting an amendment to a conditional use permit to allow expansion of outdoor storage area and increase in unJler limit, and a variance to green ar~a requi~ment, pursuant to Sections 4.144(1) and 4.145(3) of the New Hope Code. 2. The petitioner is requesting nmeu&ment to the extstin[ conditional use Imermit for outdoor ~to{m~ to ~gt'l}~nd th~ outdoor ~tolt"~{~ al'~ by 2,100 .~q~i~l'~ f~et nnd [~cl'~{~ the n-mb~r of semi-trailers stood on the ~ ¢ou~rete surface from 3 to 5. The expansion of the outdoor storage a~a would t~duce the existing {teen are~ from 35 % to 33 %. The g~en area requirement for the I-1 District is 35 %, thus a variance if required. 3. This pro~ was Fu~ developed with a wa~se in 1986. In 198'/, the owner of the pro~, Karl David, was required to apply for a conditional use permit for outdoor storage (see attached planning case and minuues) that had not been included in city plans or approvals. Planning Case 8'/-33 was approve~ ~th specific limits ou the storage: A. A 60' x 70' (4,200 square ~'~) enclosure with sc~$ fence was approved, C. The number of semi-tmlen stored on the site w~ limited to 3, and 4. These conditions ~ only initially met and the use has expanded beyond the previously approved ~. Th~ C, enerai Inspector has issued repeated orders (see attached) to the ixSitionet m reduce the outdoor ston~e or apply for an amended CUP, thus this Ftlin{. 5. The lX~ ia 1o~ on the west side of Nevnde Avenue near the int~m~ction of 35th and contains 2.2 road and New Hope T~-a~e Apm~uents to the west, and City of Crystal/Industrial to the e~t. 7. The topogm'aphy of the 1~ siopes gently towards the south and west. The adjacent property owner has complained of runoff to the north from this site. 8. Pro~ ownei~ within 350' of the request have been notified, includin{ neighboring Planning Cas~ Report 92-35 December 1, 1992 ~. ~ Acc~.~rv Storag~e is allowed by conditional use permit in the I-1 Zoning District, provided that the foHowin~ conditions are met: A. Screened From Residential Use~: The area is fenced and ~creened from view of neighboring residential uses or if abutting a residential district. B. ~. Storage ar~ is grassed or surfaced to control dust. 2. The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to pwvide the City with a reasonable and legally permissible degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health and safety. In making this determination, whether or not the conditional use is to be allowed, the City may consider the nature of the adjoini~ land o~' buildings, whether or nora s'unilar u.~ is air, dy in existence and located on the same prmnises or on other lands dim by, the effect upon traffic into and from the prmnises, or on any adjoinin~ roads, and all such other or further factors a.s the City shall deem a requisite for consideration in determining the effect of such use on the genezal welfare, public health and safety. Other general criteria to be considered when determining whether to approved or deny a conditional penuit include: A. Comm'ehensive Phn. The proposed action has been considered in rehtion to the sped-ftc polities and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official Comprehensive Municipal Plan of the City. B.~. The proposed use is compatible with its adjacent land uses. C. Pedormance Standards. The proposed use conforms with ail applicable performance standards contained in the Code. D. No _De~reciau'on in Value. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate th~ ama in which it is proposed. E. Zonin~ District Crim'ia. In addition to the above general criteria, the pwposed CUP mu~ m~t the criuma si~dfied for the ~cific zoning districts: a. Nuisms:e. Nuisance characteristics generated by th~ use will not have an b. F~emmmie P. eUL~. The u~ will provide an economic return to the community and aomm~ura~ with oth~ indum'ial uses that the pwpe~ could feasibly b~ umi for. In consi~g the economic return to the commur, ity, the _ Plannin~ Commission and City Council may give we/ght to the mciological imp~ of a pmpo,~ use, bo~ positive and ne~ive. 3. The p~itioner is requ~in~ to ~lmnd the previously approved/0' x 70' (4,20 square foot) storage m to 90' x 70' (6,300 square fi~e0 by adding a 30' x 70' (2,100 square foot) additiou to the south side of the existing ar~a and ~ the number of tmlers from 3 to 5, per ~e enclos~l plan. Planning Case Report 92-35 December 1, 1992 l~e °3- 4. Staff has two concerns with ~e proposal: ~ A. The proposed trailer storage area is unacceptable because it compromises the loading/unloading de~i~n for the west side of the building and negatively impacts the required turning radius. Staff requests that the owner submit a revised plan to change this...similat to the staff revision shown on Attachment A. B. The past par, em of storage beyond what was/is officially approved must be stopped. If this proposal is not something that the property owner, who leases to several tenants, can reliably enforce, then a realistic revised plan should be submitted. NO ADDITIONAL STORAGE OF MATERIALS BEYOND THE ILLUSTRATED TWO AREAS IS ALLOWED, IF THE AMElqDMENT IS APPROVED. 6. The original building/sim plan in 1986 contained 39% green area (38,518 square feet). The approval of the outdoor storage area in 1987 reduced the green area to 35%. With the addition of the requested outdoor storage area, the Building Official has calculated that the green area on the site will be reduced to 33 %. City Code sates that all parcels in the I-t Zoning District ate required to have no less than 35~ of the site green, thus a 2% green area variance is tequixed for the expansion of outdoor storage. 6. The purpose of the variance is to permit relief from the strict application of the zoning cede where undue hardships prevent the reasonable use of the property and where circumstances are unique to the ptopenT. A hardship may exist by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of propen7 ot because of exceptional topo~¢ ot water conditions. The hardship cannot be c-teated 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. 7. 'Undue hardship' as used in connection with the ~-anting of a variance means the property in question cannot be put to a rea.amiable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to cii,aimstances unique to his property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. F. cono~ considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the tnopeny exists under the terms of the ordinance. 8. Additional ~:aileria to be used in considering requests for a variance includes the following and the Planninl Comllgsaion/City Council shall mage findinss that the ptopo~ action will not: A. C_,~_,i,~,~t With ~ of Variance. Be contrary to the purposes of a variance. n. Li~. Impsir aa adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property. - C. Street Connections. Unreasonably increase the congestion in the public street. D. l~. Increase the danger of rite or endanset the public safety. E. 1~. Unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the nei~, or in any otbet way be contrary to intent of City Code. 9. Althouga the variance request is minimal and staff wants the outdoor storage problems resolved, it is difllcuR to support a reduction in Ireen area below the cede requirements. Perhaps the property owner would add Ireen area in another location to compensate for the 2% leas with the addition of the storage area or add additional landscaping. Planning Case Report 92-35 December 1, 1992 Page -4- . 10. The Commission will also want to consider any public input that is received, particularly from the multi-family residential area to the west with 2nd and 3rd floor apartments who view this site. 11. Staff did not submit this request to the Design & Review Committee due to the minimal changes requested with this amendment. If the Commission wants Design & Review to meet with the petitioner prior to consideration by the full Commission, the request should be tabled. 12. If the amendment to the CUP is approved, a new 30' x 70' concrete slab and additional screened fence should be added to match the existing storage area. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit amendment, subject to the following conditions: 1. Semi-trailers to be moved as shown on Exhibit "A". 2. A development contract and bond be submitted to enforce the new slab, matching screening fence, and Wailer moves, and be held in effect for 24 months (bond to be determined by City Engineer and Building Official). 3. Property owner to agree that future CUP violations resulting in citations will provide a basis for staff to begin action to remove the CUP approvals from the property. 4. Additional green area or landscaping be added to compensate for the 2% loss so that no variance is required. 5. Annual inspection by staff. 6. Any additional run-off drainage that results from expansion of outdoor storage area to be directed away from adjacent properties. Attachments: Section/Topo Maps Site Survey Attachment "A" - Staff Revision Inspection Dept. Orders Planning Case 87-33 and Minutes Original Site Plan - Green Area % -! Il. $?u? 395.8 x ... x Q 895. 892..3 ~' 903.9 : 910.2 ~,.~__897~ X 895.8 X t.~ 1~. X .4 X 897.4 902.0 X 899.5 900 ' 90 ~ · ~ × 90~. 3 CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning 'Case: 87-33 Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor storage in an I-1 "Limited Industrial" Zone Location: 3531 Nevada Avenue North Zoning: I-1 Petitioner: Karl H.A. David/VIDeO Date: October 6, 1987 The petitioner is requesting a conditional use permit to allow a 4200 square foot outdoor storage area in an I-1 "Limited Industrial Zone" pursuant to Section 4.144 of the New Hope Code of Ordinances. Property owners within 350 feet of this property have been notified. 1. Outdoor storage areas are allowed in an I-1 zone provided that: 1. It is accessory to the primary use of the proper~y; 2. The storage area is screened from neighboring residential area and in compliance with Section 4.033(3) of ~he New Hope Code. 3. That ~lle storage area is surfaced. 2. Section 4.033(3) requires that screening be constructed of masonry, brick, wood, or steel. The fence cannot exceed eigh~ fee~ in height or be less ~han six feet in height. 3. The pro--or storage area reduces the required green aria ~'~35 percan__~hich is ~he minimum required by the City 4. Staff believes that the area will be adequate to contain only a maximum of three trailers or vehicles. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the request for a conditional use permit to allow outdoor storage in an I-1 "Limited Industrial Zone" at 3531 Nevada Avenue North with the following conditions: 1. That an 8 foot fence of solid material is installed that will provide adequate screening. 2. That suitable surfacing (asphalt or concrete) be installed within one year of approval by the City Council. 3. That the site be reviewed on an annual basis by city staff. Attachments: Site Plan staff ruvim; prior =o any installatic~. MOTION Ccmn/ssicr~r ~ ma~8 , ~, D~i~ fo~ ~ ~ ~~, it ~ ~ ~ ~ ~d ~ ~e ci~ l~le f~ ~ ~ ~ ~ of ~ ~i~. / ~~~ ~= ~ ~1~ b~m ~ ~ ~ior ~~ at ~ si~ of a ~. ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ a ~ 1~ f~ wi~ ~~, ~ ~c ~ ~ ~, ~fol~, ~. ~ ~1 ~ ~ or ~ v~cl~ m ~ ~~, ~ ~ ~ ~~y f~ ~ Of ~ ~~icn a ~ ~~ ~1~. ~ ~ P~ 0 ..... {~i~ ~r 6, 1987 ~oin~ into the city,s massena. ~hm ~b~si~ w~uld ~=~ain ~e ~4 BY:Dan Donahue BY: ~ =T~:.~ NO. 8.3 P~ING ~E 87-33 - CONDITIONAL USE PE~IT TO AL~W OUT,OR , STOOGE IN ~ I-1 ZONING DIS~I~ 3531 N~ADA A~ NORTH ~L H.A. DAVID/VInO, PETITIONER The petitioner is requesting a conditional use permit to allc' outdoor storage in an I-1 zoning district pursuant to Section 4.14 of the New Hope Zoning Code of Ordinances. The Planning Commission reviewed this case at its October, 198 meeting and unanimously recommended approval subject to the followin conditions: 1. That an 8 foot fence of solid material is installed t provide adequate screening. 2. That suitable surfacing (asphalt or concrete) be installe within one year of approval by the City Council. 3. That the site be reviewed on an annual basis by city staff In addition to ~he Planning Commission conditions, staff recommend ~hat the n,~mher of semi-trailers stored not exceed three. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. 2. ~at an eight-foot sc~security fence bm installed ar=und the ~~~ ~i~ ~ ~i~ ~ ci~ ~ff prior ~~ ~, 2~9 V~e V~, ~ ~~ ~ ~t~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ of ~ ~; i= ~d ~ ~f-~r~. ~ ~~~9~~" ~~m f~ ~~ of ~e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~; ~ f~~ ~ ~ f~r ~f: ~, ~y, ~, ~, W~~; ~ ~ foll~ vo~ ~ ~ ~: ~; ~: ~; ~ ~ ~lution ~ ~) ~ ~ ~ f~ ~~~ Pl~ ~ 87-33 ~-33 - ~ ~ H.A. ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~t ~ ~1~ 3~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ I-1 z~ d~i~ a~ 3531 ~ Av~e A~. - ~ ~.3 ~y ~ ~ ~,~ a= 3531 ~ A~ ~. ~~ ~ ~t. ~ P~ ~i~ ~ ~i~atio~ New ~ City ~il October 12, 1987 1. ~a= an eight-foot fence of solid material 2. Tha~ suitable surfacin~ (as/aR~t or concrete) be witJ%in one y~w of a~oroval by t_he City Council; 3. T~a~ the site bm reviewed ce~ a~ arelual basis by city staff. Mayor Ericksc~ inquired what ~ould bm s'~ormd c~cside. Mr. Ifarl D~vid, pro~x~ owner a~: 3531 Nevada Averse North, was rmcoc311/zed and stated that the use of the outside s~orage wculd be primarily f~r s~ of forklifts, trailers, ar~ scaffolds use~ in (2x==~ Enck stated t. ba,: bSare was ~ ~ ir~.~,~rmd ~ a ctminl~ fence with a fabric Mr. ~ ~ ~c ~ azm qumm~crable ~m:ta-d ccrditions on ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~, 1987 Mr. D~vid s~a~ed t. ha= he vould ai~Freciate t. ha= ~i~=ion ~. ~-1~ ~~: ~~ ~ ~ ~. 87-33 ~ ~ ~~ 3~1~A~~." ~ ~ for ~ ~ion 3~1 ~ of ~ f~~ ~1~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~y, A~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ fo~~ ~ ~ fair ~f: ~~, ~y, ~, ~, W~~~ ~ ~ foll~ ~~ a~ ~~ci~cl~. ~~ ~ ~ a~ of ~ ~ for ~ ~ of 51~ ~ A~. I~8.4 ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~itio~ ~. ~-147 ~: ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~. 87-34 ~ ~ 51~ ~A~ ~, ~~, ~.' ~ ~on for CITY OF NEW HOPE MEMORANDUM DATE: April 27, 1993 TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator SUBJECT: Miscellaneous Issues 1. April 12th City Council Meeting At the April 12th Council meeting the City Council approved: Planning Case 93-07, Sunshine Factory Conditional Use Permit Request for Outdoor Dining, Planning Case 93-08, Rapid Oil Conditional Use Permit, Setback Variance and Site/Building Plan Approval to Construct an Oil Changing Facility, and Planning Case 93-09, Lakeside Ltd. Green Area Variance and Site/Building Plan Approval to Construct a Warehouse Addition All cases were approved subject to the same conditions as those adopted by the Planning Commission. Planning Case 93-10, Request for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Home Occupation, was tabled due to the fact that the petitioner was not in attendance at the meeting at the time the case was presented. The case was reconsidered at' the April 26th Council meeting, with the petitioner in attendance, and approved subject to the conditions recommended by the Commission. 2. First Quarter Planning/Development Report Enclosed is a copy of the first quarter planning/development report for your information. We are off to a slow start for planning cases and hopefully applications will pick up during the second quarter. 3. Paddock Laboratories Staff has been contacted by representatives of Paddock Laboratories, who have indicated that they will be proceeding with their new building plans on the newly constructed Quebec Avenue extension this summer. 4. Senior Outreach Services/Public Works Property Plat Staff has obtained quotes on the platting of the Senior Outreach Services site and the Public Works property, which were considered by the City Council at the April 26th Council meeting and approved. Staff will proceed to have a plat prepared for Planning Commission consideration this spring/summer. See attached information. 5. Planning Case 92-35, Vidco Request for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit to Increase Outdoor Storage Area and Green Area Variance This case was tabled by the City Council in January, pending a recommendation from the Planning Commission on the 35% green area requirement in the I-1 Zoning District. If the Commission forwards a recommendation to the Council on this issue at this meeting, the Vidco request will come back to the Council for consideration on May 10th. 6. Planning Case 91-13, Request for One-Year Extension on Site/Building Plan Review Approval and Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Temporary Sales Office at~.. Gethsemane Cemetery Per the attached information, Gethsemane Cemetery officials have requested a one-year extension on the conditional use permit for the temporary sales office at the cemetery. You will recall that the original request was made/approved in June, 1991, and one of the conditions was a two-year maximum time period. The City Council approved a one-year extension, subject to the condition that the performance bond be renewed for the extended period. 7. Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan Earlier this month staff met with Gethsemane Cemetery officials, at their request, so they could present their long-range master plan to the City. The plan has been developed in phases for implementation over an extended time period. The first phase, which the Cemetery plans on implementing this summer, will include the construction of a mausoleum and office building. Due to the staged process of development in the plan, staff will probably be recommending that the Cemetery application be handled as a Planned Unit Development. The Planning consultant for the City was present at the meeting and commended representatives of the Cemetery for the quality of the plan. Due to the small number of planning cases this month, staff has attached the plan for your early review, if you are interested and have time to review it. 8. Community Center Surveys Approximately 300 surveys out of 8,500 households were returned to the City regarding the construction of a new community center. This is a 3.5 % response rate. Of the surveys returned, 89% of the respondents were opposed to the construction of a community center. Staff continues to work with the Citizens Advisory Commission on this project and they will be making a formal recommendation to the City Council on this topic in June. 9. Egan Companies Lot Combination For your information, attached are maps and memo from the Building Official regarding a simple industrial lot combination by Egan Companies on Nevada Avenue/Medicine Lake Road. Attachments: 1st Quarter Planning/Development Report Public Works Plat Info Cemetery CUP Extension Cemetery Master Plan Egan Companies Lot Combination PLAN~'ING AND DEVELOPMENT First Quarter Report The Planning Commission reviewed the following cases during the first quarter: No. of Cases Notices Sent January 3 85 February l None March 3* 45 * 1 case carried over from February I case under study since early 1992 Month Type of Request Number Approved Denied Withdrawn January CUP Home Occup. 1 1 CUP Open Acc. Stor. 1 1 Rezone Property 1 1 1 February Comp. Sign Plan 1 (tabled) March Comp. Sign Plan 1 1 CUP Home Occup. 1 1 TA-Apart. Convers. 1 1 YEAR-TO-DATE TOTALS APPROVED DENIED WITHDRA~ CUP Home Oecup. 2 CUP Open Ace. Storage 1 Rezone Property 1 Comp. Sign Plan 1 Text Amend.-Apart. Convers. 1 PLANNING/DEVELOPMENT ISSUES 1. The property owner at 4448 Independence Avenue North requested a conditional use permit for a home occupation to conduct a part-time tax preparation business out of the home from January through April. The Planning Commission recommended approval at their January 5th meeting and the City Council concurred with that recommendation at the January 1 lth Council meeting. 2. C~~[?:i~?~!~!i~!~iiii~~::~:~~- The property owner at 8701 Bass Lake Road requested a conditional use permit to allow one of the tenants, Protective Surfacing, Inc., to park three work vehicles overnight on the property. The Planning Commission recommended approval at their January 5th meeting and the Council approved the CUP on January llth. 3. R~Zoai~:i ~::iiiiii~i!!iiM~iiiii~?i!~iiiii~~i - Medicine Lake Lutheran Church requested the rezoning of the Post property at 8801 Bass Lake Road from I-1 Limited Industrial to R-O Residential Office to allow a church to locate on the property. The City staff and Planning Consultant recommended that the Commission deny the request due to the fact that it would constitute spot rezoning and that a zoning error had not been made nor had the nature of the area changed. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the rezoning on a 5-2 vote and the church subsequently withdrew their request and did not proceed to the Council. 42 4. Planning CommiSsion Offle~rs - Officers are to be elected at the beginning of each year and in January the Planning Commission nomnated/elected the following officers: President - Robert Cameron Vice Chairman - Robert Gundershaug Third Officer - William Sonsin 5. lmemiment to COn~ai USe Permit: to Alt~w ExPamion of Outdoor Storage Area and Vance to:.Gr~:.~ Requirement. - The owner of Vidco, 3531 Nevada Avenue North. requested an amendment to a conditional use permit to allow expansion of the outdoor storage area and increase in trailer limit, and a minor variance to the green area requirement. The Planning Commission reviewed the request at their December 1. 1992. meeting and recommended approval on a split vote. At the January 1 Ith Council meeting the Council granted a 3-month extension on the CUP, approved the increase in trailer limit. tabled the request for the green area variance, and directed the Planning Commission to study the I-1 green area requirement and make a recommendation to Council in 3 months. 6. Winn~ka COmmons Letter of'C~edit - The outstanding invoices related to the Winnetka Commons Shopping Center development were resolved during the 1st quarter with the Council authorizing a draw on the developer's letter of credit to cover outstanding tees. 7. COnditi~n~ U~e Permi¢'for Itome Octulmflon - The property owner at 3833 Gettysburg requested a CUP to operate a plumbing business out of the home. The request was tabled at the December Council meeting and referred to the City, Attorney to prepare "findings of fact". I'he petitioner indicated that he was willing to cooperate with the City and meet specific conditions, thus the Council approved the request at their January. 25th meeting. 8. Apartment. C~~ns: - The Codes & Standards Committee has been studying this issue with staff, Planning Consultant, and City Attorney over the past year. The Council implemented a one-year moratorium on apartment conversions that increase the :number of bedrooms per unit that expires April 13, 1993. It was determined that the per~brmance standards in the existing code could be amended to address this issue and the Planning Commission held an informal discussion on this matter at the February 2nd meeting. The Commission conducted a formal public hearing on the issue at their March 2nd meeting and all apartment owners/managers in the City were notified. The Commission recommended approval of the amended performance standards, which essentially implemented four new standards: A. Prohibits conversion in non-conforming buildings, B. Increases the amount of open space per unit for four or more bedroom units, C. Requires a defined active recreation area to accommodate children, and D. Sets a limit of no more than 40% of the total number of apartments per building for three or more bedroom units. The City Council considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission at their March 22nd meeting and approved the amended performance standards and terminated the moratorium on conversions. 9. ~ri~~iiiii~~iii!ii~}?~!i~iii!i~ - At the February 22nd EDA meeting a r~s~lufion was: p~d '~3""ai'i~"~l~qi/isifion"of the property at 5501 and a portion of 5425 Boone Ay. N. by "quick take" and approving the appraisal of damages resulting from the taking. 10. !::i:~ii~iiiiii~ ' At the March 2nd Planning Commission meeting the (~0mmission recommended approval of a comprehensive sign plan for K.C. Development at 2720 Nevada Avenue North. The Council concurred with the recommendation and approved the request at their March 8th meeting. l 1. Coaditional U~, Permit for Itume O~:~Pati~a - The Commission considered a request · for a CUP to allow a home Occupation for the continuance of a jewelry business at 8132 46-1/2 Avenue North at their March 2nd meeting and recommended approval of the request subject to Specific conditions. The request was approved by the City Council on March 8th. 12. G.r~:: :~r~,a ~mrem~: m tlite I-l!, Z~ning: D~t The Codes & Standards Committee is in the process of reviewing the 35% green area requirement in the I-I Zoning District with staff, City Attorney, and Planning Consultant and will be forwarding a recommendation to the Planning Commission in May. The Council will consider this matter at their May 10th meeting. 13. Commune:. Crater - Staff continued to assist the Citizen Advisory Conunission during the first quarter with the Community Center project. A model of the community center was constructed and "town meetings" to inform residents about the project were conducted in February and March. A survey was drafted and inserted into the April City Report to solicit residents input on the construction of a community center and a formal recommendation will be made to the City, Council this spring. 14. 42ndTQUebec: R~Velopment - During the first quarter staff continued to coordinate the acquisition of the Foremost and Electric Industries properties. The long-range goal of the City is to acquire and demolish the three buildings north of 42nd Avenue between Quebec and the railroad tracks and redevelop the site. 15. Ge~sem~me+ Ct~mete~. The two-year CUP for the temporary sales office at Gethsemane Cemetery will expire this spring/summer. Cemetery officials have recently met with City staff and indicated that they have developed a master plan for the-cemetery property. They have decided to proceed with construction of the mausoleum and office this fall and will be requesting a short extension on their CUP from City Council to provide adequate time to develop final building plans to be presented to the Planning Commission. 16. cKr~x!- The Development Agreement for the Car-X Muffler and Brake Shop was executed during the first quarter and the building is currently under construction. 17. F:rBk~:~~i- The Development Agreement was executed and they have contacted the City about another expansion. 18. Staff is in the process of receiving quotes to prepare a plat of the property acquired for the Adult Day Care facility on Boone Avenue, along with the existing Public Works site and the additional property acquired from Custom Mold, which will be presented to the Commission/Council this spring. 19. E~iiii~iiiil !- Staff participated in the Twin West Chamber of Commerce Executive Call Program in March and called on Sheridan Sheet Metal and Nedmac, with the purpose of the program being to keep the lines of communication open between local govemment and businesses. 20. ~a~:: ~~ili~:~!ii~- Staff attended/completed the 4th class of the National Development Council training program during the end of March, which dealt with economic development financing. Kirk McDonald Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator 44 REQUEST FOR ACTION Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section City Manager Consent 4-26-93 Kirk McDonald/ ,. Item No. By: Management Assistant By: ~,// 6.9 APPROVAL OF QUOTE SUBMITTED BY LOT SURVEYS COMPANY FOR PLAT OF SENIOR OUTREACH SERVICES AND PUBLIC WORKS PROPERTY AT 5501 BOONE AVENUE AND 5500 INTERNATIONAL PARKWAY (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 48~ & 40% The City has sought quotes from two firms on the platting of the property to be included in the Senior Outreach Services Adult Day Care Project and the City's Public Works Garage site. Ihe property for Senior Outreach Services would include the vacant lot at 5501 Boone Avenue and the north 75 feet of the property, at 5425 Boone Avenue. The property for the City would include the existing Public Works garage site at 5500 International Parkway and the northerly portion of 5430 International Parkway, which was acquired from Custom Mold in 1992. during the expansion of their facility. The plat would include all four properties (see enclosed map). The two quotes received were as follows: Firm Quote Lot Surveys Company /;1,550.00 Merila & Associates, Inc. $3,950.00 The City Engineer has reviewed the quotes, discussed the variation in quotes with both rirms, and recommends approval of the low quote. Staff recommends approval of the low quote for the platting of the Senior Outreach Services/ Public Works site by Lot Surveys Company in the amount of $1,550.00 (Improvement Project Nos. 488 and 493). MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Admlnistrat~on: Finance: IIII RFA-O01 ~ VICTORY' PARK 44 5500 IRKS 5'gol iARAGE · NORTH RIOG~: ,3'4,~o CARE ,~3o CENTER ~ ~'~:~ ~. ~t ~ ~4r.. ~IENCE CENTER ~V~ LOT SURVEYS COMPANY ~' LAND SURVEYORS ~, _PRA~CH REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STAI'E OF IV~'~3TA MINN. REG. NO. 6743 r~:)-,30e3 FAX ~ 7~01 - 73r0 Ave. No. Minnea~is, Minneso~ 55428 ADpll~,-' 1995 Mw. ~tt'k McDonald City or New HoDe New Hooe, MN 554~8 ~e: ~ lot Dia~ at 5501 Boone anO 5500 International ~s ~eoues~ea Dy Ma~R Hanson, we ~ave looKeO xnto tt3e foiioming mopk on the adore piat. Boun~apy supvey 5. Set lpons a~ hem Olvision line PpeQape final plat fop filing 5. Plat checking fee to Hennepin County of $150.00 Photo pla~s ~e ¢os~ of the above 6 items mzll not exCeed $1,550.00. rhamK you fop comsideping us. Slncepeiy; Off~ce Hanager GRP/tp MERIL, A, March 31, 1993 ' Mr. Kirk McDonald City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Ave. No. New Hope, MN 55428 Re: PUBLIC WORKS/ADULT DAY CARE Merila Proposal No. 93-022 Dear Mr. McDonald: I am writing in response to a request from Mark A. Hanson of Bonestroo. Rosene, ~ncerlik and Associates, Inc. Hr. Hanson requested a proposal for platting the property I~cated at 5500 International Parkway and 5501 Boone Avenue. The platting will combine a number of parcels and create two new lots. We propose to do the work outlined in the Scope of Services for a fee of $3,950.00. in the event that the project is terminated prior to completion, our fee will be based on an hourly rate according to the attached fee schedule. It is anticipated that work on this project will proceed immediately. Please inform me of your anticipated schedule. Invoicing for services will be made on a monthly basis for the hours spent on the :espective tasks. As is our policy, any invoice not paid within 30 days after receipt will be subject to a 1.5 percent per month interest charge. If the items of this proposal meet with your approval, please sign both copies and return one copy to our office. Sincerely, MERIL~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~/~/~~ ACCEPTEDBY:DATE: Walter J. Gregory, .L.S. Vice President WJG:jh Enclosures: Scope of Services Standard Fee Schedule ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING SCOPE OF SERVICES PUBLIC WORKS/ADULT DAY CARE NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA I. PRELIMINARY PLAT A. Items included: 1. Prepare a preliminary plat of the property according to the requirements of the City of New Hope. 2. Prepare application form. 3. Prepare copies and reduced copies of preliminary plat as required by city. B. Items not included: 1. Preparation of a grading plan. 2. City application fees. 3. Attending public meetings. 4. Substantial revisions of lot layout. II. FINAL PLAT A. Items included: 1. Preparation of the final plat according to the requirements of the City of New Hope and Hennepin County. 2. County plat review fee. 3. Reprographic cost for recordable mylars of final plat. 4. Setting iron stakes at all lot corners. Scope of Services Page 2 B. Items not included: 1. Resolution'of boundary disputes of conflicts, if any. 2. Title research work required for County Surveyor. 3. Attending public meetings. 4. Preparation of an ALTA Certificate of Survey. 5. County plat filing fees. 6. Park dedication fees. III. 'ITEMS TO BE SUPPLIES BY CLIENT A. Property owner's list. B. Title information in the form of an up-to-date title commitment, abstract or certificate of title. C. Topographic survey map of the area to be platted. D. Proposed lot configuration. UOUNCIL Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section Development & City Manager Pl ann i 2-93 Item No. Kirk McDonald By: Management Assistant By: // 8.1 PLANNING CASE 91-13 - REQUEST F6R ONE YEAR EXTENSION ON SITE/BUILDING PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL AND AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR TEMPORARY SALES OFFICE AT GETHSEMANE CEMETERY, 4021 WINNETKA AVENUE NORTH, THE CATHOLIC CEMETERIES/ARCHDIOCESE OF ST. PAUL AND MINNEAPOLIS, PETITIONER The Catholic Cemeteries/Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis is requesting a one year extension on site/building plan review approval and amendment to conditional use permit for the temporary sales office at Gethsemane Cemetery. On June 10, 1991, the City Council approved the request for the placement of a temporary office facility on the grounds of Gethsemane Cemetery. The purpose of the facility is to provide an office from which counseling managers sell, on a pre-construction basis, crypts in a mausoleum which may be constructed when sufficient income is generated. The approval of the temporary sales facility was subject to several conditions, one of which was a two-year time period maximum. Said time period expires June 10, 1993. The Catholic Cemeteries are requesting a one-year extension for the following reasons: 1. Although approval for the facility was received in June, 1991, cemetery staff was unable to occupy the facility until November, 1991, therefore the sales effort did not begin as scheduled. 2. Since the mausoleum pre-construction program was slower than expected in meeting sales projections, a f'mancing plan for the construction of the mausoleum and office building was not approved until March, 1993. At the present time site and building plans are being developed for this construction project, which the cemetery anticipates beginning in August/September, 1993. (continued) MOTION BY SECOND BY TO: Review: Administration: Finance: RFA-O01 April 12, 1993 Council Meeting Planning Case 91-13 Page 2 3. It is assumed that the construction of both buildings will be completed by June, 1994, however until the permanent office building is completed the cemetery staff will need use of the temporary facility in order to conduct cemetery business. The City code states that "If the work or use authorized by a Special Zoning Procedure has not been implemented within a year after final Council approval, the procedure shall automatically terminate unless a petition for extension of time to implement the use or complete the work pursuant to the Special Zoning Procedure has been granted by the City Council. Petition for extensions shall be made in writing and filed with the City Manager at least thirty days before the expiration of the Special Zoning Procedure. There shall be no charge for the filing of a petition for extension. The petition shall include a statement of facts explaining the circumstances necessitating the extension". Staff recommends approval of the one-year extension subject to the condition that the original performance bond, which expires on June 10, 1993, be extended/renewed for the extended time CITY OF NEW HOPE RESOLUTION NO. 93- RESOLUTION APPROVING REQUEST FOR ONE-YEAR EXTENSION ON PLANNING CASE 91-13 REQUESTING AMENDMENT TO CUP AND SITE/BUILDING PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR TEMPORARY SALES OFFICE FOR GETHSEMANE CEMETERY AT 4021 WINNETKA AVENUE NORTH PID #18-118-21-13-0001 WHEREAS, the City of New Hope is a Municipal Corporation organized and existing under the taws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City of New Hope has adopted regulations governing construction standards and building signage; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on Planing Case No. 91-13 on June 4, 1991, and recommended approval of the amendment to CUP and site/building plan review; and WHEREAS, the City Council on June 10, 1991, considered the report of the city staff findings and the recommendations of the Planning Commission and comments of persons attending the Council meeting, and the Council approved the amendment to the CUP and site/building plan review for a temporary sales office at Gethsemane Cemetery, subject to specific conditions; and WHEREAS, one of the conditions was that the approval had a two-year time period maximum, thus the Special Zoning Procedure expires on June 10, 1993, unless an extension of time is requested/granted; and WHEREAS, the Catholic Cemeteries have submitted a petition requesting a one-year extension of the Special Zoning Procedure and have indicated the circumstances that necessitate the extension. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of New Hope hereby approves a one-year extension on the amendment to CUP and site/building plan review for a temporary sales office at Gethsemane Cemetery, as requested in Planning Case No. 91-13, subject to the following conditions: 1. The existing performance bond be renewed for the extended period of time. 2. Special Zoning Procedure shall expire on June 10, 1994. Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this 12th day of April, 1993. Mayor Attest: City Cleric ' THE CATHOLIC CE.XlETERIES ~ .\R(:HDI()CESE OF ~AINT PAUL AND MINNE,\P()LIS · 22,4 ~AY'r'©N AVENUE SAINT PAUL MN 55!'32 (6,12) 29'1-4533 March 25, 1993 Mr. Kirk McDonald Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, Minnesota 55428 Regarding: Planning Case 91 - 13 Dear Mr. McDonald: On behalf of The Catholic Cemeteries, Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, I am requesting a one year extension of the amendment to CUP and Site/Building Plan, Planning Case 91-13, regarding a temporary office at Gethsemane Cemetery located at Rockford Road and Winnetka Avenue in the City of New Hope. The reasons for this requested extension are the following: 1 ) Even though the original approval for the placement of the temporary office facility was effective on June 10, 1991, our staff was not able to occupy the facility until November 1991. As a result our sales effort did not begin as scheduled. Since that time, however, the facility has served the customers of families of Gethsemane Cemetery in a most effective manner. 2) Since our mausoleum pre-construction program was somewhat slower than expected in meeting sales projections, The Board of Directors of The Catholic Cemeteries delayed its action to a~rove a financing plan for the construction of the mausoleum and office building at Gethsemane Cemetery until its March 2, 1993 meeting. At the present t tree a site plan and respective building plan are being developed for this construction project which we antici~ate to begin in August-September, 1993. 3) In view of this timeframe, it can reasonably be assumed that construction of both buildings will be co--Dieted by June 1994. Until the permanent office building is built, the cemetery staff will nc~d the use of the temporary office facility in order to conduct cemetery business. CALVARY ST MARY'S ST. ANTHONY'S -'~'~ ': GETHSEMANE ASSUMPTION RESURREC7'C~, Saint Paul Minneapolis Minneapolis ~ New Hope New HoDe Mendota Page 2 March 25, 1993 Mr. Kirk McDonald It is our hope that the appropriate site and building documents can be presented for approval to The City of New Hope Planning Commission and City Council in July or August 1993. Following approval construction could then be initiated. As you can conclude, it is our intent to build the mausoleum and office; however, we will require an office facility during the construction phase. It is my hope your staff and city officials will approve this extension. If deemed necessary, The Catholic Cemeteries is willing to renew the performance bond for the extended period. If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Very truly yours, THE CATHOLICCEMETER/ES John M. Cherek JMC:sa · CITY OF NEW HOPE PLANNING CASE REPORT Planning Case: 91-13 Request: Request for Site/Building Plan Review Approval and Amendment to CUP Location: 4021 Winnetka Avenue North PID No.: 18-118-21 13 0001 Zoning: R-1 (Single Family Residential) Petitioner: The Catholic Cemeteries, Archdiocese of St. Paul & Mpls. Report Date: May 31, 1991 Meeting Date: lune 4, 1991 BACKGROUND 1. The petitioner is requesting an amendment to a Conditional Use Permit and Site/Building Plan Review Approval to allow construction of a temporary sales office for pre-sales of units in a proposed Mausoleum at Gethsemane Cemetery, pursuant to Sections 4.211,4.039, and 4.039A(1)oft he New Hope Code. 2. The Catholic Cemeteries/Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis is requesting that the City grant approval for the placement of a temporary office facility on the grounds of Gethsemane Cemetery. 3. The purpose of the facility is to provide an office for the cemetery manager, a secretary, and a pre-need counseling manager. The counselors will be conducting a sale program in homes and for the most part will use the temporary office as a check-in point. The objective is to sell, on a pre-construction basis, crypts in a mausoleum which would be constructed when sufficient income is generated. 4. The petitioner states that the maximum time needed for the pre-construction phase should not exceed two years. 5. The hours of operation for the temporary office facility will be 8 AM to 5 PM Monday- Friday, 8 AM to Noon on Saturday, and closed on Sunday. 6. The petitioner states that the request should be granted to allow the cemetery to proceed with improvements included on the Cemetery Master Plan. 7. Section 4.039(1) of the City Code states that certain uses that ar~ generally not suitable within · p~ticutar/.onin! district al~ potentially suitable on a temporary basis. Where not spedfically listed, all temporary uses shall be permitted in any zoning district provided they apply and receive approval of a conditional use permit. 8. Section 4.039(A) of the Code requires site and building plan review approval for the erection of a building and/or the moving of a building to a location within the City. 9. Gethsemane Cemetery contains 80 acres, with about one-half of the site developed and existing burials and plots sold in about 12 acres. 10. The temporary sales office would be set back a distance of 164 feet from the side yard setback line (Rockford Road) and 1,050 feet from the front yard setback line (Winnetka). Planning Case Report 91-13 Planning Case Report 91-13 lane 4, 1991 Page -2- The building would be a modular unit measuring 12' x 44' and would not be elevateo Landscaping would be installed around the site and parking spaces would be provided. Access to the sales office would be through the existing entrance and on existing cemetery roads. 11. Surrounding land uses include busineSs/industrial to the east, single family homes to the south, single and multiple family dwellings to the west, and a mix of single/multiple family dwellings and commercial to the north. 12. Property owners within 350' feet of the entire cemetery area have been notified. 1. City Code states that all conditionally permitted temporary uses must satisfy the following criteria in addition to the general CUP criteria: A. l~[llli.~dlLi,~[[~- Adjacent vacant land is not to be affected by the proposed use. B. Noise and Nuisance - Adjacent developed land not to be adversely affected by use because of traffic, noise, dust, smoke, or unsightliness. C. Term of Permit - The time period for CUP will terminate before any adverse effects are felt upon adjacent property. D. performance Bond - There is adequate assurance, guaranteed by a performance bond, that the property will be left in suitable condition after the temporary use is terminated. Staff feels this temporary use meets these criteria, as the site is isolated by a large distance from other properties, the use will not generate noise or dust, traffic will not increase significantly, and staff will be recommending a two-year termination date and a performance bond. 2. Other criteria to be considered for a CUP in residential districts includes: A. ~- Non-residential traffic to be channeled onto thoroughfares, not minor residential streets. B. ~- Proposed use must be sufficiently separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned land. C. (~om_nattbl~ A_n_uearanee - The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. Staff finds that them criteria are met due to the site location of the temporary structure and because landscaping will be planted around the temporary structure. 3. Design & Review met with the petitioner and the major issues discussed included time limit on structure, long-range plans, utilities, changing entrance location, parking, building footprint, hours of operation, signage, landscaping, setbacks, grading, and removal of debris. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the meeting. Planning Case Report 91-13 June 4, 1991 Page -B- t. 4. The landscape plan shows that a total of 51 trees and shrubs will be planted around the temporary sales office, including snow crabapple, green spruce, and junipers. 5. The sign setback has been revised to meet code requirements; the size also meets code requirements. 6. Parking for customers has been added to the plan. 7. The plans have been revised to show a possible future entrance road at the intersection of Xylon and 42nd Avenue. 8. The utilities plan shows "furore" water main and sewer which have been moved to coincide with a new future street. 9. The plans have been revised to include the correct building footprint. 10. Staff finds that the construction of a chapel/mausoleum in the future on this site would be an asset to the community and a compatible use for the property. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the request for an amendment to a Conditional Use Permit and Site/Building Plan Review approval for a temporary sales office facility at Gethsemane Cemetery, subject to the following conditions: 1. Two-year time period maximum. 2. Performance Bond to be submitted; amount to be determined by City Manager/City Council. 3. Installation of landscaping prior to occupancy of temporary structure. 4. Removal of debris, lumber, junk, broken down fence, etc. at south center of site near well house. LP tank enclosure must also be repaired to meet fire code standards and be seCUre. Attachments:'" Zoning/Section Map Petitioner Letter Cemetery Survey Site Plan Landscape Plan Grading/Drainage/Utilities Plan Temporary Building Details Photos of Temporary Building Mausoleum Elevation Mausoleum Floorplan Sign Plan *Large plans to be available at meeting ~OD May 22, 1991 City of New Hope li~'~ MAY 23 4401 Xylon Avenue N. ~...,. New Hope, HN 55428 i'U~i Dear Sir: [ The Catholic Cemeteries, a Minnesota religious corporation, on behalf of one of its cemeteries, Gethsemane Cemetery, located at 4021 Winnetka Avenue N., requests that the City grant approval for the placement of a temporary office facility on the grounds of the cemetery. The purpose of this facility is to provide an office setting for our cemetery superintendent, secretary and a pre-need counseling manager. The sales counselors, for the most part, will be conducting the program in homes and will use the office as a check-in point. The objective of the counseling program is to sell, on a pre- construction basis, crypts in a mausoleum which will be constructed when sufficient income has been generated. It is reasonably expected that the maximum time needed for the pre-construction phase is 2 years. The hours of operation for the temporary office facility will be 8 A.M.-5 P.M. (M-F), 8-Noon (Sat.) and closed on Sunday. Should you have any questions feel free to contact me at your convenience. Very truly yours, THE CATHOLIC CEMETERIES Director JMC:sa CALVARY ST MAt::tY'S ST ANTHONY'S -~.--"~ GETHSEMANE ASSUMPTION ~ESU~EC- Saint Paul MmneaoohS Minneaooli$ ~-. "--,-~ New Hooe New Hooe Me,~dota COUNTY, M INN ESOTA ~,~ o,~Js~ o, s~,~.,rai$,~s (.~,I~.~ ~ JN 1E511~O~Y W~ii~i.~ ]~E 010C~5[ Of ~l~i ~'l'f~o~s LB ,~,aa~l~t~,,-,,~-.r~-r,~ ~-- "'~ ,.-~-" ~/;'~,-' MAY 2 3 1991 -~:.. - m ~ ~.~ LANDSCAPE PLAN ~Y 2 3 ~gl '' I-I~,:~1 * '/?---~ '-.'-. '~. I I"'~ / .." ~. iN ""- It.I ._ ---- .: .- ~-:L~-.c.... · ....~ HAY 2 ~11 ..' . ' ~ i'~, · -r- i~.~ . I I L, ~ ~ LOCATIO~ I_1__ ~ ' 4 '~' t I":1 I ............ ~ -: ' ~-'--:-' ~ :_.,: 7 ~ ~ I. .,.,.,..~, .~ ...... ~,,~ GRADING/DRAINAGE/UTILITIES ~,r i- . - , . I ~ ': "L - '- ~ ....... ~__ . . --~ .~ , ~-~-. _ ....................... / \ .... 44'- ......... + 4'-. 4 Wood i~ Fold 12' 1, GSD- 12~8 GSD-1248 TIlE DESIGNER 12'X 44' · One ! 2' privale office · Display area · I lair-bath equipped for the handicapped * Ch}set o C~ffee bar with sink ,,,-.,~,,,., ~,,,,,. ,,,~,.,,,','.,' ,,"."~"'~"' * Recessed fronl door wil h * :{(),()(J() I{'1'11 air c~lltli , Proposal for: GETHSEMANE CEMETERY NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA :24 COUCH CRYPT SPACES ~S:2 SINGLE CRYPT SPACES 948 TOTAL CRYPT SPACES · · HIGH ' ::'" ~ I 688 TOTAL NICHE SPACES : ' FLOOR PLA~I : SCALE: !/8' · I' - 0° I ...... ~2 Proposa r: 'NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA Avenue and Medicine Lake Road. Mr. Lebahn stated he would be willing to make those adjustments. Council advised Mr. Lebahn to meet with city staff and resolve the details. RESOLUTION 91-103 Councilmember L'Herault introduced the following Item 8.2 resolution and moved its adoption: 'RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANNING CASE 91-12 REQUESTING VARIANCE TO EXCEED REQUIRED FENCE HEIGHT AT 2700BOONE AVENUE NORTH (PID ~19-118-21 43 0010) SUB#ITTED BY THERESA/TONY LEBAHN'. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Councilmember Williamson, and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof: L'Herault, Otten, Enck, Williamson; and the following voted against the same: None; Absent: Erickson; whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the mayor which was attested to by the city clerk. The Council discussed the new sidewalk next to Medicine Lake Road and asked Mr. Lebahn if he had any difficulty maneuvering his wheelchair. Mr. Tony Lebahn commented that the sidewalk width was about 2 inches short between the fence and the semaphore. Mr. Donahue stated he would inquire whether the Public Works Department could rectify the situation by extending the sidewalk with 2 inches of bituminous material. .~ ~~ :**~": K~yor P~*tem Enck introduced for discussion Item 8.3, 91-13 Planning Case 91-13, Request for Amendment to CUP and ~m~. * Site/Building Plan Review, 4021 Winnetka Avenue .Jrth (PID #18-118-21 13 0001), The Catholic Cemeteries, Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, Petitioner. Mr. Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant, Community Development Coordinator, stated the petitioner is requesting an amendment to a Conditional Use Permit and Site/Buildinq Plan Review approval to allow construction of a temporary sales office for pre-sales of units in a proposed mausoleum at Gethsemane Cemetery. The hours of operation for the temporary office facility will be 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, and B a.m. until noon on Saturday. The facility would be a 12 x 44 foot mobile trailer. The Planning Commission reviewed this request at their meeting of June 4, 1991, and recommended approval subject to the following seven conditions: 1. Two-year time period maximum. 2. Performance Bond to be submitted, amount to be determined by City Monager/Council. 3. Installation of landscaping prior to oc:upancy of temporary structure. ~ew Hope City Council Page 5 June 10, 1991 4. Removal of debris, junk, broken down fence, etc. at south center of site near well house. LP tank enclosure must also be repaired to meet fire code standards and be secure. 5. One-year review. 6. Addition of handicapped parking/signage 7. Addition of security lighting. Mayor Pro tem Enck questioned whether the City can regulate the placement of the mausoleum. Mr. Donahue stated the ordinance does not regulate cemetery property usage other than it be used as a cemetery. He commented that if a nuisance was caused, then the City could become involved. When the time is reached to draw plans and specs of the mausoleum, Mayor Pro tem Enck suggested that the petitioner meet with staff beforehand to discuss the proposed location. Mr. John Cherek, Director of The Catholic Cemeteries, was recognized and stated the facility will provide an office setting for the cemetery superintendent, secretary and a pre-need counseling manager. The sales counselors, for the most part, will be conducting the program in homes and will use the office as a check-in point. The objective of the counseling program is to sell, on a pre-construction basis, crypts in a mausoleum which will be constructed when sufficient income has been generated. Councilmember Williamson inquired of the timetable. Mr. Cherek reiterated that their objective is to sell enough crypts on a pre-construction basis to actually pay for the construction costs, and that they hope to start as soon as possible but it depends on the number of crypts sold. Councilmember L'Herault asked whether the amount has been determined for the performance bond. Mr. McDonald responded-that the City Engineer and City Attorney would be asked to make a recommendation. Mayor Pro tem Enck asked whether anyone in the audience cared to address the Council on Planning Case 91-13. Ms. Marilyn Merit, 8124 40th Avenue North, asked Mr. Cherek if the sale of crypts would cover the entire cost of the mausoleum or if extra monies would be necessary. Mr. Cherek stated the sale of approximately 50 percent of the crypts would cover the entire construction costs. New Hope City Council Page 6 June 10, 1991 Mayor Pro rem Enck informed the audience to keep in mind that tonight's approval is only for the temporary structure for a sales office and that the location of the mausoleum will be determined at a later date. Mr. Grant Merit conveyed that he is not opposed to placement of a mausoleum but that he would strongly oppose any type of development on the west side of Gethsemane Cemetery. He referred to a recent article which appeared in the New Hope--Golden Valley Post which mentioned a ,~ proposed housing development. Mayor Pro tem Enck pointed out that tonight's action only relates to the temporary sales office. He indicated that the City had taken the initiative and approached the / Catholic Cemeteries regarding the possibility of selling a small portion of their cemetery. Mr. Donahue, City Manager, commented that staff has held preliminary discussions with the Archdiocese but they have not made any type of commitment and only indicated that they would be willing to listen to development proposals. / Mayor Pro tem Enck stated at this time City staff only desires to determine if there is a need for housing or commercial development, and the Economic Development Authority (EDA) held discussions regarding this issue on May 28, 1991. Mr. Merit stated the initial steps have a cumulative effect and the end result would be development. The Council discussed the use of the cemetery property. Mr. Donahue stated if the cemetery desires to sell a / portion of its land for housing purposes, the property would have to be re-platted. Mr. Donahue indicated again that the Cemetery representatives have taken no initiative whatsoever regarding development of cemetery property. Mr. Merit inquired of the reaction to the City's proposal. Mr. Donahue stated they are very "non-committal" and are only willing to listen at this time. RESOLUTX~II~il)~ Councilmember Williamson introduced the following %~m ~.)~ * -~ resolution and moved its adoption: 'RESOLUT%0# APPROVIN6 PLANNIt, ~ 91-13 REqUESTIlI~[ AMENDMENT TO CUP AND SITE/BtJ)LDIII~ PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR 6ETHSAMENE CEMETERY AT 4021 WINNETKA AVENUE NORTH (PID J18-118-21 13 0001)'. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Councilmember L'Herault, and upon vote New Hope City Council Page 7 June 10, 1991  being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof: L'Herault, Otten, Enck, Williamson; and the following voted against the same: None; Absent: Erickson; whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the mayor which was attested to by the city clerk. PLANNING CASE Mayor Pro tom Enck introduced for discussion Item 8.4, 91-14 Planning Case 91-14, Request for Variance to Exceed Item 8.4 Required Fence Height, 3700 Jordan Avenue North (PID ~18- 118-21 33 0066), Larry Erickson, Petitioner. Mr. McDonald explained that the petitioner is requesting a two-foot variance to exceed the maximum front yard fence height requirement of four feet for the purpose of constructing a six-foot high fence. The fence will be a wooden privacy fence to avoid nuisance public shortcuts across his lawn corner. The fence would be in two sections: one section extending from the garage to Hillsboro Avenue; one section extending from the south corne~ of the house to Hillsboro and northeast to the driveway. The property is located at the northwest intersection of Jordan and Hillsboro Avenues. Although the front of the house faces southwest toward Jordan Avenue, the zoning code defines the front yard as the narrowest street frontage (which would be the Hillsboro Avenue side), thus a variance is required. The "sight triangle" rule would be applicable in this case because the intersection is not regulated with traffic controls, but the applicant's fence request does not interfere with the triangle. Mr. McDonald indicated- that the Planning Commission conSider~ this request at its June 4, 1991, meeting and recommended approval subject to the condition that the sight triangle .at the intersection of Jordan/Hillsboro Aven~s be kept clear of all fencing. DEFINITION OF Tbs-Council discussed the definition of the "front-yard" "FRONT-YARD" &t it relates to the zoning code. It was pointed out that some homes in the City face a street which would not be defined as their "front-yard" since it is not the narrowest street frontage. Councilmember Williamson raised the issue of re-defining the zoning code's definition of "front-yard". Mr. Donahue stated he would request the Planning Commission to review the definitions of front and side yards. RESOLUTION 91-105 Councilmember Williamson introduced the following New Hope City Council Page 8 June 10, 1991 Chairman C~meron suggested passing over the two ordinances ii · heX= on =he agenda and moving on =o Planning Cases 12, 13 and ~4. PC 91-12 (3.$) Chairman Cameron called for Planning Came 91-12 and Kirk McDonald REgUIIT FOI explained the request to Place a 6-foo~ we~t~ red cedar fence on V~X~ ~ ~he lu~hern boundary of ~he pro~r~ which ~u~ Medicine Lake EX~ ~l~ Road. ' Ho no~md ~ha~ ~he pro~r~y Il Ioca~ed a~ ~he northeast ~ ~XG~ in~mrlmc~ of Medicine Lake Road ~d Boone Avenue with the front ~gUX~, of ~he h~cin~ Boone Avenue, bu~ the zoning ordinance defines 2700 ~ ~hm na~rowel~ ~rmmt fron:a~ al the "front yard" (which wou~d A~ N. M~lcinm Lake Re. which il why the variance il needed. He called a~mn~ion ~o ~hm IonL~ ordinance clause re~ardin~ a triangle" which a~W in i~ fence variances, but noted it no: applic~m in ~hXm calm bmcaulm :he corner is traffic- con:ro~lmd. ~ cited ~hm ~:i~ioner'l concerns regarding privacy, incrmalmd ~fmffic on Medici~ Lake Road, and lafm~y concerns for children a~ rmalonl for gran~/mg ~he variance. Chai~ C~eron called on the ~2ionmrl for ~estions and they had ~l. ~ION ~2iOn by Co~issioner Sonsin, se=~nd by ~ission Zak, to approve Pla~ing Case 9~-~2. Voting in favor= Zlk, CaSlOn, Friodrich, SOnlin, Cameron, G~dershaug, Watschko Voting against= None ~sent, None ~9~ (3.l~ Planning Case 91-13 was in~roducod by ~he Chai~an and explained ~~ Kirk McDonald. He revi~ed ~he re.os= =o allow cone=rucCion si a ~ ~ C~rary gales office on Cho grounds of Oe=he~ane CemeCery ~o ~ ~ ~/ used for pro-sales of un~=e in a pro.ged mausolea. He noted Char B~ ~ =he ~Ci=ionor, CaCholic C~Cor~oo, ~chdioceae o~ Sr. Paul and ~ ~R~ MLnnea~lie, will uso =he =~rary faciliCy for a cemetery 420L~ manager, a socroCa~, pro-needs counseling manager, and counselors AJNOR~ who w~ll conducC a sales progr~ in homes buC use =he office as chock-in ~lnC. Ho added =haC Cho ~CiCioner feels =haC the m~ =~ ne~ed for =ho pro-consCrucCion phase is Cwo years, and w~ll o~raCe Che faciliCy beCmn Che hours o~ 8 ~ and 5  Monday =brough Friday, 8 m =o noon on SaCurday, and be closed on Sunday. Ho ci=~ Che cfi=erie for C~ra~ buildings ~o be considered by =ho C~iesion. Ho explained =ho issues discussed ~he Dogie& Rovi~eCing and 8~a~ha~ a revised plan has been su~l=2~ am a rogul2 of =ha~ meeting. He no=ed 2he landscaping lo, back ~d lizl ~l c~l, pa~king IpICII and a ~ll~ll future en~r~cm have been add~ ~o ~hm p~an, and :he correct building f~pri~Z has b~n include. He ca~L~a~en~ion ~o ~hm conditions ~ls~ In ~hm. s:af~ rm~r: for approval and added ~ha: · 1~o~=1 ~nd, :he ~un~ ~o bm de:m~ined by the City ~agmr/~uncil, is a~so rm~irmd ~or ~hm :mm~rary structure. ~lse&onmr ~undmrshaug re~es:~ ~he ~i~ioner give a ~rief ou~/no o~ ~ho ~aBZer P~an and ~he deve~o~n: of :he wen:em end of ~ho pro~y. ~. John Chorok in~r~ucod h~aolf as representing Catholic C~oriea and exp~ain~ ~ho conce~ plans for develo~en: and the ne~ for ~ho ~r~ office building. Ho continued with de, ails of ~h~ ~ko~ing plan of visiting ~plo mainly in their homes, wi~h ~ho counselors using ~ho office only as a check-in ~in:. He indica~ha~ ~ho~g~er~8~ devolo~n~ was a~il~ undecided ~hoy~ro o~n ~o ~ho~msibili~y of considering alternate uses for :be pro~y. ~. McDonald o~a~ :ha: ~he EDA has approv~ a Marko~ S~udy ~o done rllovanC ~o Cho~oCern section o~ ~ho p~o~y for a~ssib~e mix~-uao housing dovolo~n:. I~~ PIing ~88Lon -2- J~e 4, 1991 Commissioner Gundershaug wondered about the possibility of the two- year time limit being shortened to a year and a half by =he completion of the selling project and was advised the petitioner hoped it would be even sooner than that. Commissioner Gundershaug questioned the sewer and water utili+ hookups, typo of construction, material, and color of the temporaz~ structure and how it would be anchored on the site, the future need for a new entrance when the mausoleum is added, number of parking spaces and marked handicapped parking, addition of new signage, landscaping, lighting, and refuse, and requested that all noted items be shown on the plan. blueprint of the building and landscaping plans, outlining the specifics of tyl~o of material, color, etc. He further outlined how it would be recessed below ground level, not elevated. Hr. McDonald pointed out the change in the route of the utilities. Commissioner Gundershaug wondered if marketing would be handled by newspaper advertising or signs on site, and what will be done with the area when the building is removed. Mr. Cherek explained there would be no will be marketed by special presentations and personal contacts. He added that when the building is removed the site would be returned to sod and landscaping. Commissioner Cameron wondered how many employees would be in the facility during working hours and what type of sanitary facilities would bo available for their use. Hr. Cherek replied there would probably by 4 or $ at the most at any time, and the plan is for use of an indoor satellite facility. Commissioner Watschkewondered if they had considered leasing off- The answer was that they have leased off-site in another location, but feel they will have more visibility and it is more beneficial to bo located on tho site. Coaunissioner Cassen wondered if a walkway will be provided from the parking spaces to the office and it was confirmed thoro would be. Motion by Co~nissioner Gundershaug, second by Commissioner Cassan, X. TMo-year tame period 2. Perforuance Bond to be submitted, amount to be determined by CAty Uanager/Counc£X. 3. XnstalXation of landscaping prior to occupancy of tempora~r structure. 4. Removal of debris, ~unk, broken down fence, etc. at south center of site near well house. LP tank enclosure must also be repaired to meet fare code st&ud~rds and be S. Oneeyear review. &. AddAtAon of handAcappedparkimg/s£gnage. 7. AddAtAon of security light~ug. Votimg ~n fevor~ lek, Cassen, FrAedrAch, BOneXn, Cameron, Oundershaug, Watschke Votimg agaXnst~ Mono Absent: Mono Mew Hope Planning Commission -3- June ¢, 199t 4401 Xyton Avenue Norrl~ New Hof~e, Minn®so~ 55428 Phone: 533- ~ 521 June 11, 1991 Mr. John Cherek, Director The Catholic Cemeteries Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis 244 Dayton Avenue St Paul, MN 55102 Subject: REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO CUP AND SITE/BUILDING PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL, PLANNING CASE 91-13 Dear Mr. Cherek: Please be advised that on June 10, 1991, the New Hope City Council approved the request for amendment to Cup and Site/Building Plan Review Approval as submitted in Planning Case 91-13, subject to the following conditions: 1. Two-year time period maximum. 2. Performance Bond to be submitted, amount to be determined by City Manager/Council. 3. Installation of landscaping prior to occupancy of temporary structure. 4. Removal of debris, junk, broken down fence, etc. at south center of site near well house. LP tank enclosure must also be repaired to meet fire code standards and be secure. 5. One-year review. 6. Addition of handicapped parking/signage. 7. Addition of security lighting. The City Code requires that there be adequate assurance, guaranteed by performance bond, that the property will be left in suitable condition after the temporary use is terminated. The City Engineer has recommended that ~he amount of the bond be set at $7,500. The City Attorney will be drafting a short development agreement incorporating the performance bond requirements and will be forwarding the agreement to you shortly. Once the agreement has been executed and the security posted, you can initiate the landscaping and place the structure on the site. If you have questions, please call. Sincerely, Daniel J. Donahul City Manager A , Kirk McDonald Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator KM/lb cc= Dan Donahue, City Manager Steve Sondrall, City Attorney Mark Hanson, City Engineer Valerie Leone, City Clerk _nm ~ Plan. i.g Call FileF~iiI~H~ii C~"~.~.~ F~ Fa~ L~i~ Property File -- ~ ~ "~ ~" CORRICK & SONDRALL ~ll I WE'I'T IlliOAO~NAY Roe~s~uL ~A 55422 STEVEN A. SONDI~ALL. P A. SHARON 0 OEI~BY STE¥~N A. SONORALI. MICHAEL ~q, L.AIrLEUIq MANTIIq P MAL&'CHA August 15, 1991 Mr. Kirk McDonald Management Assistant City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 RE: Gethsemane Cemetery Development Agreement Our File No. 99.29113 Dear Kirk: Please find enclosed a License and/or Permit Bond in the amount of $7,500.00 and two Temporary Conditional Use Permits in connection with the referenced matter. The bond should be retained by the City in its safe:y deposit box. The Temporary Conditional Use Permits shouTd be signed by Dan and one signed copy should be returned to John Cherek at the Catholic Cemeteries. Also provide me with a photocopy of :he Temporary Conditional Use Permit after i~ is signed by Dan. If you have any further questions, please contac: me. Very truly yours, S~even A. $ondrall Enclosures cc: Daniel J. Donahue Doug Sandstad (w/enc) · TEMPORARY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHEREAS, the Catholic Cemeteries, a Minnesota Religious Diocesan Corporation, is the fee owner of the property olatteO as and legally described as Gethsemane Cemetery, and WHEREAS, the Catholic Cemeteries has requested from the C~ty of New Hope authority to construct a temporary sales office on Gethsemane Cemetery per New Hope Code §4.039 et. al. for the purposes of promoting sales of cemetery plots and crypts in a mausoleum to be constructed on the cemetery, and WHEREAS, the Catholic Cemeteries has submitted all necessary information to obtain the requested conditional use permit within New Hope Planning Case 91-13 and that the City Counci3 has approved the Catholic Cemeteries request for said CUP at its June 10, 1991 meeting subject to the execution of this agreement and, the conditions as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed and stipulated to as follows: 1. The Catholic Cemeteries is hereby granted a conditional use permit to construct a temporary sales office on its property legally described as Gethsemane Cemetery located in the City of New Hope. 2. The duration of said permit shall be for a period of 2 years and shall automatically expire and become null and void on June 10, 1993 without further notice or affirmative action by the City. 3. The purpose of the sales office shall be limited to sales of cemetery lots and mausoleum crypts on Gethsemane Cemetery. Any other use of the office shall be prohibited. 4. A performancI bond or other financial security in the amount of $7,500.00 approved and accepted by the City Attorney shall be deposited by the Catholic Cemeteries ~ with the City to insure that subsequent to the termination of this permit that the property will be returned to a suitable condition and to insure that the other terms and conditions of this conditional use permit are completed or performed by the Catholic Cemeteries. 5. That landscaping will be provided in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the Catholic Cemeteries in P3anning Case 91-13. 6. That the temporary office structure shall not exceeO 12 Feet by 44 feet, shall not be elevated and be of the type and nature represented by the Catholic Cemeteries in Planning Case 91-13 7. That the hours of operation for the sales office shall be 8:00 a.m. to .5:00 p.m. Honday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon on Saturday. 8. That all debris, lumber, junk and the broken down fence located at the south center of the cemetery near the well house shall be removed. Further, that the LP tank enclosure shall be repaired to meet the fire code standards and be secured. 9. That all other conditions or representations, if any, made by the Catholic Cemeteries as part of Planning Case 91-13 are performed regardless of whether they. are specifically set forth herein. 10. That the Catholic Cemeteries hereby grants the City a right of entry to enter onto the property to enforce the terms of this agreement in the event of a default by the Catholic Cemeteries. The City, however, agrees to provide 10 days written notice of said default before initiating action to cure same. Notice shall be provided by mailing written notice to John M. Cherek, Director, at 244 Dayton Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55102, by first class mail. The 10 day period shall begin 3 days after deposit of said notice in the mail. Notice may also be provided by personal delivery of same to John M. Cherek. Dated: ~ \~X , 1991. THE CATHOLIC CEMETERIES, A MINNESOTA RELIGIOUS DIOCESAN CORPOR~I~ ION )Yot3n M. Cherek Its Director CITY OF./NEWHOPE Its City Manager MASTER PLAN FOR GETHSEMANE CEMETERY Prepared for The Catholic Cemeteries Board of Directors of the Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis MASTER PLAN COMMITTEE Representing The Catholic Cemeteries of the John Cherek, Director of The Catholic Cemeteries Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis Representing Gethsemane Cemetery Al Stabenow, Superintendent Representing the Aesthetic and Liturgical Relevancy Interests Father James Notebaart, Director of Indian Ministries of the Archdiocese of St. Paul~Minneapolis Father Walter Sochacki, Church of the Immaculate Conception Representing Consumer Interests Byron Scheick, Long-standing lot owner in Gethsemane Lisa Lange-Louris, Mortician with Kapala-Glodek Funeral Service Representing John Bergly, Planner The Catholic Cemeteries Planning Consultants Mark Salzman, Landscape Architect Prepared October 1992 through January 1993 Prepared with the Assistance of Sanders Wacker Wehrman Bergly, Inc. The Catholic Cemeteries Planning Consultants Landscape Architects and Planners 365 East Kellogg Boulevard Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ........................... 1 SECTION 4 Development Concepts .................... 2 Implementation ..................... 35 Phase 1 ..................... 39 Purpose .............................. 2 Phase 2 ..................... 41 Phase 3 ..................... 41 Terminology ........................... 3 All Phases .................... 41 Cost Estimate ...................... 42 SECTION 1 Attitudes Toward Death ............... 7 SECTION 5 SECTION 2 Images .......................... 45 Issue Identification Goals/Objectives ....... 15 Issues ...................... 17 Goals & Objectives .............. 18 SECTION 3 The Illustrative Master Plan ............ 27 INTRODUCTION Three separate Master Planning Programs for Gethsemane Cemetery have occurred over the past 30 years: of the exclusively "lawn park" concept, this study presented several overall development concepts 1. The initial Development Plan was developed in the (within the framework of the existing road pattern) late 1950's - early 60's. This plan resulted in the and investigated various options for the cemetery first stage of site development including grading, road perimeter treatment, entrance area, and landscaping. construction, underground drainage, landscaping and Section features in the eastern developed sections of fencing - much as it exists today. The original the cemetery were constructed and landscaping was development was based on the ~Memorial Park" or used in Section 8 to create smaller, more intimate "Lawn Park" concept. Over the 40 or 50 years spaces. previous to this first Master Plan, this open park concept, without raised headstones, was gaining 3. The Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan presented in acceptance across the country. Enthusiastic reception this report continues the planning process by (a) of this new idea by the mid-1900's prompted The establishing long-range development and improvement Catholic Cemeteries to plan their newest cemetery in Goals and Objectives, (b) Presenting a long range this contemporary form. The exclusive use of "flush" Master Development Plan, based on the Goals and markers (flush with the ground) instead of the Objectives, and (c) outlining a Staged Implementation traditional headstones, characterizes the cemetery Strategy. development over its first 30 years. Two factors provided the impetus for initiating this 2. In 1983, another step was taken in the planning phase of planning: process. This study critically evaluated the physical and visual image of the cemetery after two decades of 1. Determining an appropriate location for the growth and looked particularly at the liturgical mausoleum and cemetery office. significance of the death/burial/mourning process as it relates to cemetery design. (SectiOn 1 of this report 2. Recognizing the need for a dramatic facelift of expands on this aspect and is taken directly from the the overall cemetery. 1983 Study). Besides setting the stage for phasing out DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PURPOSE The foundation of the Master Plan is the overall "Development The Master Plan provides a series of guidelines that together form Concept" as follows: an integrated framework for future development functions and activities. The cemetery witnesses to the Christian mystery of death, namely, in life and in death we belong · It provides a vision of opportunities. to the Lord. Thus the cemetery is at once a place · It establishes a deliberate course of action to of the living and of the dead where memories, guide decisions. prayers and sorrow mingle with an expectation of · It presents design guidelines and realistic a final reunion in Christ. scheduling for future improvements. · It shows responsible stewardship of available It is also a place where we announce Christ's resources. ~ictory over sin and death and express our hope · It presents budgeting needs for maMng the Plan a in the resurrea~on. Thus it is a family place, a reality. social space and a focal point which draws people together by the common experience of death. Gethsemane Cemetery utilizes fluid, winding drives, formal axes and a subtle grid pattern to encompass a variety of landscape experiences. Some spaces are formal and highly structured, others are pastoral landscapes, prairie lands, wetlands and woodlands. Buildings and architectural features are positioned to create a sequence of focal connections with a varied sense of scale. This design approach creates smaller scale more intimate areas, encouraging family visits and private meditation while providing a feeling of quiet orderliness. Integration of formal and informal areas lends a classical, timeless environment without being excessively thematic or constricted by a particular style. TERMINOLOGY Terms used throughout this Master Plan Report have the following definitions. : 1. At-Need. At-need burial facilities. Ground spaces, 8. Cremains. Cremated remains; ashes of the dead. mausoleum or lawn crypts, niches or urn spaces (cemetery jargon) bought at the time of need. 9. Crypt. A pre-placed fully enclosed chamber used as 2. Block. A defined area of land within a "section or a durable, outer enclosure for burial caskets. They garden" of the cemetery, identified by a number or are usually constructed of reinforced concrete, poured letter. Ordinarily, several adjoining "blocks" in place or pre-cast, and are installed in quantity. comprise a "section# and several "lots" comprise a "block". 10. Double-depth Lawn Crypts. Lawn crypts which are placed one on top of the other, rather than side-by- 3. Casket. A container in which the deceased is side as in single-depth crypts. interred. 11. Entombment. The act of placing casketed or 4. Cemetery Master Plan. A written and graphic guide cremated remains in a mausoleum crypt. This would to the development of the Cemetery. include the removing of the crypt front, placing the casket or urn containing the remains in the crypt, 5. Cenotaphs. Memorialization provided for those scaling thc crypt and replacing the crypt front. interred elsewhere. 12. Estate Lot. Large lots containing several graves and 6. Columbarium. A structure or room or space in a intended to bc used by several members of a family. building used for the entombment of cremated human remains. 13. Feature. Sculpture, shrines or iconography placed within sections/gardens creating focal points that 7. Concrete or Sectional Box. An outer enclosure reinforce the section/garden theme. A main feature constructed of concrete. The box is usually in each section/garden will be the focal point of the unpainted, very simple, and uses no type of sealing entire section/garden while smaller, subordinate compound or mechanism normally found in vaults, features will provide focal points and meditation areas (See liner, vault and lawn crypt definitions.) of smaller, more intimate spaces. 3 14. Garden. A defined space of land within the 21. Mausoleum (Garden). A building designed and Cemetery often bordered by streets and identified by constructed to provide crypt spaces with an outdoors a garden name or theme, setting. Crypts are generally placed three' to eight crypts high. Six high is an industry standard. 15. Grave. One ground interment space. Often, two or more "graves" are purchased as a single "lot". 22. Mausoleum (Indoor). A building designed and constructed to provide crypt spaces_within an enclosed 16. Interment. The act of burying casketed or cremated structure, usually heated and air conditioned. These remains in the ground, buildings may include offices, storage areas, and restrooms. If the mausoleum also contains a chapel it 17. Inurnment. The act of burying cremated remains in may be referred to as a chapel mausoleum. These the ground or replacing cremated remains in a buildings can be several stories high, each floor being mausoleum, columbarium niche or niche wall. five to eight crypts high, thereby making more efficient use of limited ground space. 18. Lawn Crypt. Each crypt is identified by number and is an integral part of a given garden or section, drawn 23. Mausoleum Crypt. A crypt in a mausoleum, on a map and so designated as each are built or constructed of concrete, with reinforced steel installed. Usually lawn crypts are planned and support, and is fronted by a marble or granite shutter. installed in groups rather than singularly as needed at time of interment. (See crypt, concrete/section box, Mausoleum crypts may include singles, double, or liner and vault definitions.) side-by-side companions, tandems or true companions, couches and Westminster Abbeys. 19. Liner. A rigid container into which a casket is These different types of mausoleum crypt spaces are placed, or which is placed over the casket. It is described as follows: designed to remain intact after the casket deteriorates, thereby preventing the surface of the grave from a. Singles: A crypt space with the casket space sinking. (See lawn crypt, concrete/sectional box and oriented end-wise. A shutter fits the end of vault definitions.) the sealed crypt and bears the entombment inscription. Commonly 36" wide x 7'-6" deep 20. Lot. An area of ground consisting of one or more x 28" high. graves or casket spaces. A casket is placed in a vault, a liner or a concrete/sectional box in a defined lot. b. Double or Side-by-Side Companion: 27. Memorials. Permanent bronze or stone identification Horizontally adjacent casket spaces which have pieces that memorialize or mark the grave(s) of a a one piece shutter covering the two crypt deceased person(s). They may be level with the ends. Commonly 72" wide x 7'-6" deep x 28" ground (flush markers) or upright stone monuments or high. headstones. c. Tandem or True Companion: A double length 28. Monument Garden. An area designated for use of crypt with two casket spaces placed end-to-end upright grave stones. Monument privileges are and having a single width shutter. Commonly usually granted every other row to facilitate 36" wide x 15' deep x 28" high. maintenance. d. Couch: A crypt space with the casket space(s) 29. Niche. A space within an above ground structure in oriented lengthwise. A single piece shutter which cremated remains are placed (e.g. matches the crypt length. Commonly 8' wide columbarium, niche wall or niche bank). x 3' deep x 28" high. 30. Niche Wall. A wall containing recesses or niches in e. Westminster Abbeys: A crypt space with one which cremated remains are placed. or more of the casket spaces below floor level. 31. Opening/Closing. Collective acts required to prepare 24. Mausoleum Niche. A small space in a mausoleum an interment or inurnment site, place the remains in for the inurnment of cremated remains. Glass or the grave or burial unit, close the grave and finally granite fronts are common, dress any disturbed area. 25. Mausoleum, Private. A free-standing mausoleum 32. Pre-Need. Pre-need purchases are generally designed and constructed to provide enclosed crypt purchases made in advance of need. spaces_for one family. 33. Section Plat Map. A drawing which shows the 26. Memorialization. This term refers to any permanent locations and number designations of individual system designed to mark the names and other data interment spaces within a section of a cemetery. Can pertaining to deceased persons, be for garden, mausoleum, niches, wall and/or lawn crypt areas. 34. Section (or Garden). A group of blocks and lots whether for conventional or crypt or laWn crypt spaces, often bounded by roads, paths or other barriers and assigned a name or theme. 35. Single Depth Crypts. Lawn crypts which are placed side-by-side rather than one on top of the other as in double depth crypts. 36. Urn Space~ An area of ground (e.g. urn garden) in a cemetery 'used for the placement of cremated remains in urns. 37. Vault. A fully enclosed chamber used as an outer enclosure for the burial casket. Vaults are normally constructed of concrete, steel, polymer, fiberglass, or like materials. Vaults are usually installed at the time of interment and not installed in groups or clusters. (See concrete/sectional box, lawn crypt and liner definitions.) 38. Wall Crypt. A crypt placed in a retaining wall structure. Similar to mausoleum crypts except they are not contained in, or as part of a building. · ~ ' ," ' , , '. :' ~.: ,?' ~ . . '.. ,~.,' ~,~-,'~. L' 't,~. ~:':,.; .~*'.-'.,.;,',.~. ~ ,, ,~ ~'~'~'*%.~ .''"~'. : · , ~','~', . .-..'-~ :,,. ~ .. ..... . '. '; .,,~,,' '~.,:..;,,,- ..,. .. '. t~;..- ,, ,, ... . .v. . ~,~ ..... -'. ~ ., ~ -,.-..:. · . ~ . - , .,~_ ....,~' '- .' , .- ,.. ~ t ,~-,.', .~,; .~ .;., ~ '" - S CTION Attitudes Toward ~ath SECTION I This corporate attitude toward death was strengthened by tile theology which predomiuated during lhe period. That ATTITUDES TOWARD DEATH theology was marked by a Paschal hope rooted in the conviction that all who are baptized belong to Christ. By James Notebaart Once an individual belongs to Christ, his or her future is Christ's. That means to die with Jesus is also to rise with him. This attitude gave an immense sense of hope and confidence to the dying as well as a conviction that The following is a summary of four major periods in history and the the community somehow shared in an individual's attitude toward death and burial which developed during these centuries, passage to death. The practice of giving Viaticum or placing the consecrated host on the tongue of the deceased or in the coffin, is symbolic of the relationship A. THE FIRST 1100 YEARS the dead and the living share. The first 1100 years of the Church were marked by a strong sense of the community. Individuals saw their own life The role of the individual in the dying process was to patterns in terms of a larger social and human order. This is preside, that is orchestrate ali the dying moments themselves. They did this by making the death bed a so true that individuals understood their own death to be a participation in all who die. It wasn't simply my death but public arena inviting friends and relatives into the my joining the community of the dead. This attitude helped bedroom, sharing in farewell and turning over to the the person face their own individual death within a broader family one's body. The family then assumed context because it was based in the community, the responsibility for washing, clothing, and waking the individual saw a relationship between the community of the individual. living and the community of the dead (the Church militant and the Church triumphant). The rites of burial had four focuses: the home, the procession to the Church, a service of the Word in the Church and a procession to the grave where Psalms of Augustine portrayed the relationship between the living and [he dead as both sailing on the same boat with the living confidence and praise were sung. There was no funeral responsible for rowing the boat and the dead at the rest from Eucharist at this time, but rather the focus of the funeral was Christian hope and confidence that a relationship still their labors. It was a single economy in which the living and the dead have a share, continued between the living and the dead. 10 Cemeteries were part of tile domestic environment. They As one might suspect, tile dying moments were still were places where the living gathered not only to bury their orchestrated by the individual but there was now a dead, but to join in festival memorial meals, etc. Because heightened moral sense in which individuals expected to the period was marked by a sense of corporate identity, this summarize their own lives and to ask pardon and prayers. period did not distinguish individual graves by name. Rather burial was anonymous yet at the same time associated with The cultural practice following death still paralleled the particular places, first one thousand years, namely, the family assumed responsibility for washing, clothing m~d preparing the B. TilE TWELFTH AND TIIIRTEENTH CENTURY body for a wake. The funeral rites still consisted of four moments: one at the home, a second in procession to the There was a great shift of attitude beginning during the church, a third at the church and a fourth station at the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. This is due in part to the grave. The major change was the addition of a Eucharist growing sense of the individual and a weakened sense of at the church. The funeral mass which was begun under corporate identity. At this same time society began to the Franciscans became a mass of petition for the recognize its key figures; artists began signing their works, forgiveness of the deceased. and the growth of individualism took hold. This loss of a sense of the corporate existence shattered the relationship The sense of solidarity which existed in the first eleven between the living and the dead. Unlike Augustine's image hundred years and the Paschal spirituality was now no where the living and dead shared existence on a core,non longer the key theological perspective. boat, now there was a growing chasm between the living and the dead. The relationship had not been completely severed, The graveyard began changing, too, because of the however, because with the growing sense of the individual widened chasm between the living and the dead, the there was also a growing sense of the need for supplication graveyards bec;,~,,, more isolated from the domestic and prayers to aid in the forgiveness of an individual's sin. areas. The heightened sense of the individual also established a practice of marking individual graves. The twelfth and thirteenth century period was marked by a growing sense that individuals were to be judged for their C. TIlE EIGtlTEENT!t AND NINETEENTlt CENTURY own particular deeds. This judgment was both an immediate experience and one which .has an absolute finality at the end The eighteenth and nineteenth century mark a shifting of time. The sense of final judgement allowed for the cultural attitude toward death. Unlike the earlier growth of prayers for the deceased. These prayers were centuries in which death was considered part of a normal meant to contribute to the good deeds of the individuals and life process, now death was seen as disruptive. Death add to their forgiveness of sin. was the robber, the destroyer of what should be. The cultural altitude was to deny death or to fight it with technology. This changing attitude deepened the chasm interruption of it. The development of hospice centers between the living aud the dead. it also disrupted the and especially home hospice care is an attempt to return individual role in presiding over his/her own death because death to the individual and place it in a family context. technology attempted to overcome it. This is in short a return to an attitude of death which The more death was thought of as an alien, the more the involves the family and one which is more in keeping family also turned over its responsibility to outsiders. The with the first eleven hundred years of Western culture. development of the professional undertaker took place during this period. These changes in attitudes are complemented by the shifting role of the undertaker. We see evidence of this As one might suspect with the individual losing control of in the critique of the funeral industry by people such as their own dying and, with the family relegating its traditional Jessica Mitford. The developing role is to undertake role to others, the Rite of Funerals was considered to be a certain specific tasks, yet to involve the family as much single focus at the Church. The traditional wake in a home, as possible. the procession to the Church, the Church Rite and the grave commitment no longer composed the entire process of burial. In addition to a changing practice in the funeral industry as well as a shifting role of the family, there is an Cemeteries, too, took on an atmosphere of nostalgia in which expansion of the religious rite. As in the ancient past, the dead were no longer visited and the places of burial the ritual pattern has been developed to mark certain became isolated, eg. burial on estates rather than community moments in the process of dying. We see this clearly in cemeteries, the renewed understanding of anointing as anointing in illness rather than death. At the same time we have a revalidation of the "last rite" which is Viaticum. The D. TIlE TWENTIETH CENTURY REVIVAL renewal of that sacrament reinforces the relationship between the co~nmunion of the faithful and the In the 1950's and 1960's there was a major revolution which community of the dead. Thus reinforcing the most began a change in the cultural perception of death. This ancient understanding of the Body of Christ. I~appened in part because of the clinical study of attitudes of the dying. People like Elizabeth Kubler-Ross established Likewise the Church's insistence of the renewal of psychological attitudes of the dying person. These attitudes baptismal commitment before death reestablishes the reinforced the importance of individuals who can take hold of fundamental link to baptismal entry at birth. This tells us their own dying. The importance of the dying person's role theologically that at death because of baptism the newness has also begun to shift medical practice to the extent of of life does not end. uuderstanding death as a final slage of life rather than an 11 12 A further expansion of the rites of death is the renewal of the the whole experience of death and burial, but this process wake in the home, church or funeral parlor. This too is part will take one or two generations to accomplish. of the ancient tradition and expands the liturgy beyond simply the funeral and introduces a sense of the Paschal Watch for the Lord. The funeral liturgy is arranged in a series of stations marked by the procession from the home to the grave. This procession is the most ancient element of the Christian funeral. The stational character consists of a greeting at the doors of the church, an affirmation of baptismal commitment, a Eucharist within the church, a final commendation and leading forth to burial. At the grave there is a blessing and a commitment to the earth. What is happening in the religious ritual, then, is an expansion of elements which parallel what is going on culturally. Theologically, the Rite of Funerals emphasizes a paschal spirituality rather than a theology of suffrage or petition. CONCLUSION The shifting attitude toward death, the role of the individual and the family, and the changing character of the funeral industry as well as the shifting attitude of the rites, is just now beginning to have an impact on our cultural practice. If these tendencies continue, we will be abandoning the eighteenth and nineteenth century attitude which narrowed E. TIlE PROBLEMATIC F. LITURGICAL CONCLUSIONS Although it is quite clear that attitudes have begun to change, I. The liturgical rites of death and burial clearly indicate there are growing pressures from the funeral industry to an expansion of the ritual rather than a contraction of maintain a commercial market. Examples of this are direct it. cremation or cemeteries which have mortuaries and burial chapels connected with them. 2. There is a pastoral concern for maintaining the multiple stations: home, church, procession and While these elements are economically more feasible, they graveyard. go against the practice which sees burial as a multi-stage, muiti-faceted reality. They also will tend to diminish the 3. The place of burial is important theologically both for responsibility of the family. Here we have a questions of the family and as a witness to the co~nmunity. theological values which are being overridden by commercial ones. 4. The cemetery should represent in its iconography tile present unders~iding of Christian death. There are other problems too. With a mobile society the graveyard is no longer visited nor is the sense of a family 5. The cemetery should not try to avoid the symbolism Plot as important as it had been in previous centuries. Yet of the grave. this does not relegate the cemetery to an anonymous place, but rather it makes it .more important in terms of the actual 6. Because burial at the grave is tile last stage of the burial rite. This is true because the funeral rite, like the funeral, care should be taken to personalize the place perception of death itself, is expanding, of burial not in an isolated or private way, but by locating the grave in an easily identifiable location. Whether the tensions between the funeral industry and the expanding perception of the process of death will be 7. The place of burial is a place for the continued reconciled is a difficult.question to answer. At best one can memory of the dead, both by the family and the say that the cemetery will grow in its responsibility to create parish community, yet the memories are not meant to a special place of burial which is in tune with the theology of be anonymous but personal so a personal, scale of christian death, burial is preferred to a larger field of the dead. 8. The understanding that the dead are part of the larger church, living and dead reinforces the value of cemeteries as places for the living as well as the dead. This too, indicates something about scale and place. 13 SECTION 2 Issue Identification, Goals/Objectives 15 SECTION 2 ISSUE IDENTIFICATION/GOALS AND OBJECTIVES In order to establish the challenges to be addressed in the Master Plan, a list of issues were identified early in the planning program. This list helps to define the direction and extent of the Goals and Objectives, which in turn, impacts the Master Plan. As we progressed through the various planning stages, the list was amended to include new or redefined issues. ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED IN MASTER PLANNING PROGRAM: I. Changing the basic development concept - extent of change. 15. Level of detail to achieve a "comprehensive" Master 2. Philosophical approach - aesthetics, function, liturgical. Plan. 3. Landscaping/plantings along perimeter fences - available 16. Level of involvement by parishes and families in Master land. Plan development, site improvements and maintenance. 4. Most appropriate major entrance location. 17. Space Utilization - maximizing use, staged intensity (fill- 5. Screening adjacent uses - K-Mart, Applebees to north, school in later stages), maintenance implications. bus parking to east, residences to the south and west. 18. IJse of excess land - how much is needed, appropriate 6. Problems affecting survival of trees - soils, auto emissions, interim uses, liability, reclaiming land for cemetery use. road chemicals, water, maintenance. 19. Responsibilities to lot owners/families - expectations. 7. Natural vs. tailored landscape - species selection, pruning, 20. Terminology/glossary - common understanding of terms. location. 21. Gathering spaces for large groups - special event services 8. Different grass textures for different environments. (Easter sunrise service, National holidays, etc.) parish 9. Character of buildings, features, architectural elements - use, service organizations. material, design, images, location, proximity. 22. Variety of scales for cemetery spaces - different needs, 10. Implications of a crematory on site. moods. 11. Signage - establishing image. 23. Maintenance considerations - Special equipment, 12. Curb appeal - image portrayed to passerby, visitors, family, accessibility, level of grooming, man-power. parishes, City of New Hope. 24. Proximity of major attractors to entrance - mausoleum, 13. Mix of burial types - conventional, crypts (single and offices, large group gathering spaces. double), estate types, mausoleum, private mausolea. 14. Exposure of major buildings to Rockford. 17 18 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: A. OVERALL DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OBJECTIVES: A 1. To provide a choice of interment types The cemetery witnesses to the Christian mystery of death, namely, in life and in death we belong to the Lord. Thus thc a. Conventional monument cemetery is at once a place of the living and of the dead b. Conventional non-monument where memories, prayers and sorrow mingle with an c. Lawn crypts - monument expectation of a final reunion in Christ. d. Lawn crypts - non-monument e. Wall crypts It is also a place where we announce Christ's victory over f. Above ground mausoleum crypts sin and death and express our hope in the resurrection. Thus g. Mausoleum (building) crypts it is a family place, a social space and a focal point which h. Estate lots draws people together by the common experience of death, i. Cremation niches - floor, lawn, wail, mausoleum j. Columbarium Gethsemane Cemetery utilizes fluid, winding drives, formal k. Ethnic forms axes and a subtle grid pattern to encompass a variety of landscape experiences. Some spaces are formal and highly A2. To provide a sense of "place" with variety in the scale of structured formal spaces, other are pastoral landscapes, outdoor spaces - from intimate, personal areas to larger prairie lands, wetlands and woodlands, congregating spaces. Buildings and architectural features are positioned to create a a. Architecture, architectural elements, landscape sequence of focal connections with a varied sense of scale, elements and circulation systems will be used to define spaces. The impact of this design approach creates smaller scale more intimate areas which encourage family visits and b. Architecture, features, shrines, iconography, private meditation while providing a feeling of quiet surfacing, benches and plantings will provide focal orderliness. The integration of formal and informal areas points for defined spaces. lends a classical, timeless environment without being excessively thematic or constricted by a particular style, c. Sections and subsections will be named to reinforce the overall development concept. Names should relate thematically and be timeless. A3. To address and enhance the hierarchy of spaces considering c. Snb-Sections: context, scale and appropriate materials. (l) Focal point(s): Subsection Feature. An a. The overall Cemetery: intimate garden or structure comprised of a sculptural element, landscaping, paving and (1) Focal point(s): Main entry, central axis, 1-2 benches for prayer, grieving or buildings and other architectural components, reflection. landscape features, major outdoor gathering spaces. (2) Perimeter treatment: Shrubs, ornamental trees, occasional shade trees to create an (2) Perimeter treatment: Encloses the Cemetery intimate, quiet space (outdoor room). with edge plantings, fences and walls. (3) Circulation system: Narrow grass paths (3) Circulation system: Primarily vehicular connecting to the road and to the section (except for occasional walkers through the feature. Cemetery) on the Cemetery roads. (4) The main orientation of graves will be b. Sections (defined by the Cemetery roads and east/west with other orientation used Cemetery perimeter): occasionally to add visual interest. (1) Focal point(s): Central dominate feature in A4. To develop the Cemetery in a staged manner in accord section that reinforces tile theme of the section with annual goals, that allows economical improvements and is of a scale to be seen from all areas of and maintenance but does not give a feeling of crowding the section and designed to provide a private or maximizing development intensity. meditation space as well as being capable of handling small groups such as a funeral, ethnic a. Open spaces within sections will be landscaped to worship services, etc. break large sections into smaller more personal spaces. In the future, when trees mature, some of (2) Perimeter treatment: Cemetery roads, these spaces could be used for burials. groupings or individual, ornamental or shade trees, b. Staged development will offer a variety of interment types in a variety of environments with (3) Circulation system: Wide paths to feature a variety of section themes. area, perhaps with special surface treatment in soine cases. 19 20 A5. To provide a plan that will allow flexibility and adjustments b. Turns in the roads, intersections and existing land in the number and type of interment types, forms will be enhanced with landscape and architectural elements. a. The plan will begin as a framework with specific development plans for the near term future and c. The existing developed roadway pattern will be general plans for later phases, utilized whenever possible when it does not compromise opportunities. b. As each new development phase occurs, plans will be kept open-ended to allow planning flexibility when A8. To provide paths within sections to facilitate movement of expansion is warranted, people walking from the roadway to section features, sub-section features and individual graves. A6.To provide section and sub-section features as new sections are opened. A9. To plan for reuse of some of these paths as future burial sites when other expansion space in the Cemetery is not a. Features will be used as focal points for orientation, available. to give identity to a "place", to communicate a sense of reverence and to assist in the Cemetery's Al0. To provide opportunities for local parishes to adopt a marketing efforts, portion of a section and enconrage parishes to undertake one or more of the following: b. Features will be professionally designed and project a lasting, majestic quality. Private features such as a. Utilizing the space as a "parish cemetery". mausolea subject to review. b. Determining the theme. c. Features will be visible from Cemetery roads and passers-by and will be especially meaningful from the c. Participating in the planning, funding and close-up, personal scale, development of improvements. A7. To provide a sense of progression for people driving or d. Committing to maintain the space. walking through the Cemetery - not just a path to reach a destination, or an endless array of monuments. Al 1. To investigate opportunities for using privately or corporately donated features, shrines, mausolea, a. Trees, shrubs, flower beds, features, buildings and landscaping (and maybe even buildings) as significant land forms and the pattern and size of grave markers cemetery components. will all be used to add interest, variety and continuity to-the circulation system. B. ENTRY C. AXIAL PLAN' GOAL: The Cemetery entrance tells the passer-by that this is the GOAL: The central axis extending south from the entrance, is gateway to a special place of enduring quality. It will be large the spine of the Cemetery Plan. All components inthe enough to provide a transition from the community-at-large to a Cemetery - roads, buildings, features, landscaping and entrance - quiet, reverent place where mourners can grieve, reflect and are all related to this dominant visual and functional feature. meditate. OBJECTIVES: OBJECTIVES Cl. To relate ali major Cemetery buildings and other BI. To determine the most appropriate access point on Rockford architectural components directly to the axis. Road as both the physical and symbolic entrance to the Cemetery. C2. To form a d~'amatic transition through the entrance and into the central axis (name). a. The configuration of the entrance area, including roads, fences, gates, landscaping and feature area will C3. To provide a principle architectural monument feature at be redesigned as necessary to'achieve the following: the south terminus of the axis. (a) To invite C4. To use landscaping, earthforms, architecture and (b) To establish a tone of reverence as one enters architectural elements and roadway widths to achieve a the Cemetery natural sequence of "entry". (c) To serve as the Cemetery portal and be scaled appropriately (d) To be constructed of permanent D. PERIMETER TREATMENT materials (e) To allow safe access and egress GOAL: The perimeter establishes a very positive image of the (f) To provide traffic control Cemetery to the external community and it sets the Cemetery (g) To sy~nbolically relate to other elements in the apart from the outside world for those meditating and mourning Cemetery in terms of materials, scale and within the Cemetery. symbolism - must not be too complex OBJECTIVES: DI. To establish an attractive definition of all Cemetery property lines. 21 22 D2. To reflect the character and quality of Cemetery developlnent E. ARClilTECTURE/ARCIIITECTURAL ELEMENTS by using high quality materials on the perimeter of the cemetery. GOAL: Architecture/architectural elements reinforce the overall development concept. D3. To be compatible with the monumental scale of the Ce~netery and the distance from which the perimeter is seen. El. A cohesive framework. D4. To create a broader "front yard" by moving the fence further E2. To incorporate high quality materials and timeless into the site and articulating the edge to create interest and design. variety. E3. To integrate design, materials, massing, detailing to be D5. To use landscaping with seasonal color and texture, part of a collective whole. o Spring - Flowering ornamental trees and ~E4. To establish permanent sites for buildings and perennial flowers, architectural features. o Summer - Variety of colors, textures and scales in trees, shrubs, perennial and annuals, a. Orient all major buildings to the main entrance o Fall - Colors of foliage, and central axis. o Winter - Evergreens, colored twigs and branches; interesting forms, textures b. Take full advantage of prominent terrain features. and structure. c. Provide significant "glimpses" of buildings from D6. To provide for occasional glimpses through the landscaped outside the Cemetery. edge to view site and architectural features, d. Appropriately screen maintenance buildings and service areas. D7. To provide relatively mature landscaping (1 i/z" caliper ornamental trees, 2iA" caliper overstory trees, 6' upright E5. To incorporate symbolism. evergreens, 3' shrubs) in the perimeter of the presently developed (east area) and to plan for the future by using E6. To plan for the following anticipated architectural smaller plant material (1" - 1%" ornamental and overstory elements: trees, 3' -4' upright evergreens, 2' shrubs) and allowing more years for maturing to occur in the undeveloped areas, a. Public Mausolea b. Private Mausolea D8. To provide controlled access, c. Office building d. Chapel e. Maintenance building (existing) F2. To use a mixture of tree and shrub sizes depending on f. Colmnbarium the need: g. Pergola h. Crematorium a. Larger planls for immediate i~npact in developing i. Outdoor chapel/gathering area sections. j. Entry gateway b. Smaller trees in more remote areas where k. Section features development is not eminent F. LANDSCAPING/PLANTING F3. To provide a dense landscape screening for the street frontages on Winnetka Avenue and Rockford Road and The abundant use of trees, shrubs and flowers creates a wide variety the maintenance area. of comfortable, attractive and interesting spaces. Some are oriented to the individual on foot,others to groups of people and others to a. The screening will present an attractive view of views from a vehicle. Some are broad, sweeping lawns defined and the Cemetery from passing traffic. accented by bordering trees and shrubs; others are intimate, b. The screening will block out objectional views enclosed spaces and still others are linear, long vistas that focus on from within the Cemetery to the bus garages east major features or buildings. Some are spaces that offer solitude and of Winnetka and to the K-Mart and business uses privacy while others are expansive, limited only by distant forested north of Rockford Road and the maintenance area. edges. Some are open to the sky while others are sheltered with a c. The screening will provide a degree of isolation canopy of branches. The landscape consoles, offers hope and for burial services and visitors in the sections directs one to God's infinite love and compassion, nearest either of the streets. OBJECTIVES: F4. To generally use low maintenance landscape materials. FI. To use landscaping to: F5. To maintain all landscape materials in a timely and appropriate manner in accordance with established a. Create an overall feeling of a sanctuary guidelines. A place for refuge and protection A place for worship, grieving and reflection a. Allow trees and shrubs to mature in their natural A consecrated place form except where pruning is occasionally needed b. Provide strong focal points to achieve formality. c. Define spaces d. Provide shade b. Recognize the need for cost effective maintenance e. Provide interest (color, texture, scale) of open lawn areas when developing planting plans. 23 24 G. PUBLIC ACTIVITIES IN CEMETERY 11. PROPERTY UTILIZATION GOAL: The Cemetery recognizes that maintaining a good GOAL: As responsible stewards of the 80 acre Gethsemane relationship with neighbors, the City, parishes and organizations is Cemetery property, the Catholic Cemeteries organization has important; that the Cemetery environment is conducive to limited determined that the Master Plan will show ultimate utilization of public use; and that certain activities should be encouraged to occur the entire property as a cemetery. However, at a continuation of when they do not interfere 'with Cemetery functions, the absorption rate that has occurred over the last 31 years, the total cemetery property will not be needed for burials for another OBJECTIVES: 150+ years. The decision to retain the property at this time recognizes that the rate of interments may increase with some Gl. To allow neighbors within walking distance of the Cemetery major improvements and a heightened presence in the NW to walk or jog on the Cemetery roadways. Metropolitan area. The decision to retain or sell will therefore be delayed - perhaps for the next generation. G2. To allow special groups, such as authorized parish congregations or groups, to use the Cemetery for worship, OBJECTIVES: memorial services, etc. HI. To allow only those interim uses, (or eventually sale for G3. To provide large and small scale gathering spaces for use by long term uses), that will be compatible with the individuals or groups. Cemetery operation. G4. To use beds of annual and perennial flowers to create accent H2. To assure that a suitable buffer will be provided between points throughout the Cemetery, especially at the entrance, the Cemetery property and the excess land to be used (or feature areas and key road intersections. Encourage sold). parishes, individuals and organizations to assist in planting and maintaining (or sponsoring) individual beds. H3. To encourage only those uses that will provide a reasonable return to the Cemetery for use in its G5. To establish guidelines for liability - related issues for public development program. use of Cemetery grounds. H4. To provide necessary safeguards that will assure G6. To' establish guidelines for appropriate long term use of conversion back to the Cemetery at some future date. unused Cemetery land and assuring protection of Cemetery (This may be difficult.) interests. 1. ABSORPTION/NEED (l) Traditional ground: 23 % (2) Side by Side Lawn Crypt: 25% OBJECTIVES: (3) Double Depth Lawn crypt 20% (4) Mausoleum (Crypt & Niche): 32% I1. To establish a base line of data which represents historical burial and sales information as well as providing projected e. Total Area - 80 Acres rates of growth in the future. (1) Undeveloped: 45 acres I2. Points of consideration: (2) Currently maintained: 35 acres (15 acres a. Average annual number of interments 1980 - 1992 is of which are surveyed) 241 with a high of 279 in 1988 and a low of 212 in (3) Utilized for burials: 15 acres 1990; for the period 1961-1980, the number of (4) Opened for burials in 1992:5 acres average annual interments is 233. b. Average number of cremation burials 1980 - 1991 is J. MARKETING STRATEGY 10 with a high of 26 in 1990 and a low of 0 in 1981; however, for the period of 1986 - 1991, the average OBJECTIVES: number of cremations is 16. This equates to an annual average of 7 %. J 1. To develop a comprehensive marketing program for The c. The regional annual cremation rate in 1991 is 10.6% Catholic Cemeteries by April, 1993. of all burials compared to 7% at Gethsemane. The projected regional annual rate in 2000 is 16.3% and J2. Points of Consideration: in 2010 is 23.4%. Primary reasons attributed to this 20 year increase are: a. Gethsemane Cemetery will be marketed on an archdiocesan wide basis as one of the five (1) aging population cemeteries owned and operated by the (2) higher educational and economic strata have a Archdiocese; the focus of the marketing initiative cremation preference will be parish oriented. (3) increase in Asian population view cremation as normative b. A market analysis should be conducted to (4) regional differences in burial traditions determine the number of parish households within decrease the immediate parish and parish age and death d. Assuming 1991 - 1992 as a base line for sales projections within the marketing area of the programs, sales of burial options breakdown in this cemetery i.e. the northwest quadrant of the manner: archdiocese. 25 26 c. Ongoing development of a parish-based pre-need sales b. Current financial assets lo be considered in the program must be maintained in order to develop mix of financing options. cemetery heritage. (1) Expansion and Development Fund d. Promotion of a variety of burial alternatives and ($450,000) product lines must continue in order to develop a new cemetery image and visibility to the community. (2) Permanent Care Fund ($7,000,000) restricted. e. Projected suburban growth rates from 1990 - 2030 in people and in jobs substantially favors the southern c. In the long-term, development of non-Catholic and western suburbs of the Twin Cities. Eden Cemeteries generated revenues (i.e. development Prairie, Plymouth, Maple Grove, Brooklyn Park, and of consulting and direct service provider) to parish Andover will experience consistent growth in this cemeteries of the archdiocese. timeframe. L. SPECIAL BURIALS f. Per cemetery development standards, sales volumes and product mix should be projected in 5 year LI, OBJECTIVE: increments based on community needs. To develop a cemetery image which promotes an K. FINANCING FOR IMPROVEMENTS integrated, non-exclusionary practice of burying the dead and ministering to bereaved families. K1. OBJECTIVES: L2. POINTS OF CONSIDERATION: To develop a comprehensive near-term and long-range financial plan. a. The cemetery will primarily be representative of the catholic faith tradition, yet will strive to K2. POINTS OF CONSIDERATION maintain an ecumenical posture which invites participation of all faiths. a. A variety of near-term funding options needs to be examined, to include, but not limited, to the b. The cemetery will attempt to relate to ethnic, following: cultural, and societal burial needs and traditions in a manner which is accommodating yet compatible (1) Potential utilization of a portion of to our Catholic tradition. undeveloped acreage of Gethsemane Cemetery. c. If developed, special burial sections for parishes, (2) Utilization of a financial institution loan single persons, various ethnic groups, veterans, package for near-term construction, the unborn and infants, and indigents will be (3) Determination of projected sales growth for integrated into the whole of the cemetery. long-range funding of improvements. SECTION 3 The Illustrative Master Plan 27 SECTION 3 TIlE ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN The plan evolved through a series of several overall development The level of detail on the Illustrative Plan is intended to provide options and several concepts for each of the major components -guidance for the subsequent design development stages without entrance, major axis, building groupings, large group gatheringlimiting the creativity involved in further study. spaces, columbarium, section layout, etc. Committee discussions lead to further options and refinements to be studied and reviewed Individual components in the plan will not be discussed in detail again, as they portray the ideas established in the Goals and Objectives. It may be helpful, however, to present some of the major concepts that contribute to the integrated plan. · ( EX~S~e~G RESI~:NCE8 (~ ~:ER) 177 ..... :' ~:---', - , : , Planning for future develop- i ~: ' ~' -'""""- - '"" '""~ merit recognizes that many , /i'/' ,'"----',, ,-.-.:; ...':...,". ,...'., ~ ~ .......~.: _7_.. .'; \ '- ; ,t'._..'. ': feaures of the existing ~ ', ~f ' C; t-emeery will remain as the ~ ' ~ " "~ ' "~' "~ .... starting point from which we ! Or~VELOPED ^~../',," ~'~-:~:~' '"/ enhance, deviate or expand. ~ ,, , ', ~.. , ,'.-~-~-~--:~.~ ......... ..,,~=x;s*"n- Conditions Plan '~ ~ ........ ~ ' The identifies some of these ~- '' " ', 1' .' ,'~ ,~E~^~ - o,.~ features and characteristics. ~ - ,, .. .... ?... ,, ,' ; '~ '~ / ' '"~ : - i , Gethsemane Cemetery NEW IIOPE, ~IlNNI~OIA --'~- 29 EXISI'iNG CONDITIONS. I. NIgW MINOR GATEWAY 5. ADD 8~ION F~TU~ 19. A~PHITHEATER ILLUSTRATI~ PLAN MASTER DEVELOPMENTPLAN 6. SZ~IONFEATURE~.) 20. ~T~ NEW HOPE, MI~ESOTA ~. SUB~E~IONF~TU~.) 21. F~UREC~PEL J S~ERS WACg~ WEH~ BEROLY. ~C. 9. OETHSE~ GARDEN- BENIGN FEATURE 23. FOU~AIN ~a~c~P~ 10.8U~T~LR~KFO~ROADL~CAPING 24. FUTU~USOLEUM o~sso ~oo lso :oo ~oo No~h I I. ~USOLEU~C~PEL 25. EXISTING WOODS - RETAIN 12. COLUMBA~U~GA~EN ~USOL~ 26. PERGOLA 14. NEW OFFICE 28. ~TATE LOT ~.) 15. E~NCE ~ONUHE~ 29. WET~D Entrances (#1 New Minor Gateway and//15 Entrance Monument). The Main Entrance from Rockford Road will remain at its present location for the short term with minor enhancement and moved to the Xylon intersection in the second stage development. With increasing traffic congestion on Rockford Road, the unsignalized present entry is becoming increasingly hazardous and difficult. The Xylon entrance will be at a presently signalized intersection and will afford excellent access to the expanded Cemetery. The new entrance (#15) will be spacious and ~nonumental in scale, reflecting the new image of the Cemetery. Upon entering, a stately, divided boulevard will direct attention across the entire site to a dramatic vertical terminus feature (#17). Two stone crypt walls (#18) will intersect the road as it rises up the hill on the south. The Existing Secondary Entrance from Winnetka will be enhanced and treated as an accent point on the site's periphery. The Boone ~ ' .'~'~ theAVenue Entrance is long-range pending the decision to retain all of Cemetery site. ~~~'~ i ~.-~~-. 31 32 Major Buildings (#11 Mausoleum, #14 Office, fl21 Chapel, fl24 these axes. The Cemetery office (#14) and the mausoleum, the Future Mausoleum [if needed]) first buildings constructed, will be equally accessible from both the existing interim entrance and the proposed permanent Xylon Ail the major buildings are clustered near the major Cemetery entrance. The "front yard" facing Rockford Road will be entrance on Rockford Road. Visibility from the snrrounding between the existing and proposed entrances, offering excellent arterials and accessibility from the entrance were key factors in exposure for immediate impact. locating the buildings. Orientation to all parts of the Cemetery - the presently developed eastern portion, the long range development planned in the western area, and ali the areas immediately surrot, nding the buildings, is accomplished by the intersection of axes through the mausoleum (gl 1) and linking the other buildings on Large groups will have a permanent gathering space identified as an "Amphitheater" at the edge of the building grouping. Easter sunrise services, special church holiday functions, Memorial Day services and a wide range of other large group functions will be encouraged to utilize this outdoor chapel. The Prayer/meditation Garden (//13) just south of the Mausoleum (#1 I) provides an outdoor gathering space, as well, especially for smaller groups and as a large group space until the Amphitheater is constructed. ~Major Architectural Site Features (,912 Columbarium/Garden . Mausolea, #17 Vertical Axis Termination Feature, ,918 Wall Crypts and #26 Pergola) Throughout the Cemetery, these architectural features provide important major points of interest. Some are functional (provide alternative burial types) while others are aesthetic landmarks providing significant focal points. 33 34 Sections Individual sections are further divided by landscape enclosures into subsections, thereby creating s~naller scale spaces that feel more private and personal. Each section has a principal section feature (#6 is typical) that serves as the central focus of the entire section. Landscaping, a few benches and a shrine, sculpture or feature symbol, are designed to communicate a section theme.. Subsection features are smaller in scale but designed around the main section theme. ~[a!~Lots (#28 is typical) Estate lots generally consist of a number of graves and are suitable for either a private family mausoleum or conventional burial spaces for a family, usually with a large monument for a family head stone. Spaces for estate lots are reserved along the roadways at the corners of sections. SECTION 4 Implementation SECTION 4 IMPLEMENTATION Obviously development of the Cemetery needs to respond to the demand for burial space. The total development will not occur until well into the 21st Century or beyond. Therefore, a phased development approach is a critical part of the Master Plan. The next pages will define the order of development with cost estimates for the near term phases. Only the first phase will be discussed in detail. See Master Plan for the key to improvements in Phases 2 - 4. 37 38 ...~ . ...' .; ..' ~'~_~ ~) ~ ~ ~ · , , - ~'~ ' ' '' ' "" '"' ' 't"'-'::"-~J :,.,~1 : ', · , . '-',' -.-"-~, ..~j-_, '-'7',' --~ ' '" 'L"' ~'z ' '~' \ ~ ~' .... ' . ~.,. . , ~ ~ ,~..'.:, ~.~L~ c,.), ~,~ - . ,. . .-...- ~ __ . _.,..,,.. .... ..:':.. ':."/. '' '~ '"~../-. I .~l ',," ---_ ~", ~. ,' ~ --"~/:~- , ', -' / '~ ~,~ ~ ~ _- . ,,.,. il '" ~'~ ........ .._.....-' .... . ~.-'"' -'~,. -:" "' - -- ' ~tF.." .,:'.. "3 x~ ~ ~ '" ~ """ .-~ ' -'~k~ ~ ~ .." '. , , , ~ I ,:' .:' ,' ~ , , ' z - ',' ' ' ~1 z ~ ~'1" · . , .t .. ~ ~ ..... i ~ )~'~x',t ,,' ,,~L.. ._. ~.,'~ I --"~~'~_. _ .:- - ~ -..-~ . ~~'~ ~c >~-,,.' MASTER ~. b~USOLEU~DSCAPING 9. CREATION SECTION FEATURE DEVELOPMENTPLAN :. ~sn~v DRIVE 10. SECTION 6 FEATURE NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA ~. OFFIC~DSCAPINO Il. SE~iON8 EN~CEME~ 4. TEMPO~RY E~RY ENH~CEME~ 12. REINFORCE WINNET~ L~DSCAPING PIIASE I PLAN a~oeaa w&cgea we~aN B~nOL~. INC. ~. P~YER GARDEN l~. SECTION ~ FEATURE J~nu~rr, 1993 LSD~AP~ ARCIIITg~ ~O PLSNBa$ 6. CO~ER MONUME~ 14. SU~ECTION FEATUR~ANDSCAPING 8.7' SE~IONSFEATURESSE~ION 2 FEATURE (COMPLETE) 15. PERIMETERPRECEDES SECTION SALES L~DSCAI'ING - SECTION S PHASE 1. 1 TO 5 YEARS Enhance the present main entrance to make it more attractive 4. Add Landscaping - g 12). Reinforce the present and functional. Construct segments of ornamental fencing in landscaping along Winnetka to screen objectional views entrance vicinity, and to provide a backdrop for Sections 1, 2, and 3. 2. Construct Mausoleum (gl - Top Priority). The success of s. Complete Feature (//8) in Section 3 and Add Feature (//7) this major building will be a determining factor in the in Section 2. This is necessary to meet the responsibility viability of all subsequent Cemetery development. It must to present lot owners and families concerned about these have a dramatic impact on the public's image of the sections. This was the first area to be utilized for burials Cemetery and must increase public awareness and acceptance in the Cemetery so these improvements are critical. of Gethsemane as a quality Cemetery. 4. Enhance Secondary Entrance and Construct Corner 3. Construct Office - (g3 - Top Priority). Currently the Monument and Sign (g6). The Cemetery's image to a Cemetery management and sales staff is operating out of a passerby can be strengthened substantially with these two temporary building with a permit that is scheduled to relatively minor enhancements. Minor ornamental terminate in 1993. A new permanent office building will be fencing could be constructed in conjunction with the located between the present entrance and the proposed Xylon proposed monuments. entrance. Although the structure will not be large, it is in a very prominent location and mustbe well designed with 7. Section 5 Features/Landscaping (g's 13 & 14). As this is materials and massing compatible with the mausoleum, the newest section opened-up for sales (both crypts and conventional graves) section features and landscaping The turn-a-round and parking area will be constructed in should be added to make the section appealing to conjunction with the mausoleum and office, prospective purchasers. 39 40 D E V E LOP E~O MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLaiN PIIASING PLAi ~ NEW HOPE, blINIqESOTA J ...... ,.. ~,~,~ LANDSCAPE ARCIIITECT5 AND PLANNERS 02S~0 I~0 1~0 200 300 ~o~h PIIASE 2: BEGINS IMMEDIATELY AFTER PIIASE I ALL PIIASES COMPLETION YEAR Development of new grave sites will occur as needed. Specific 1. Construct new entrance (//15 &//16) and convert present tasks will include: eutrance (//9) to a section feature. 1. Developing plans for grave layouts and construction 2. Construct central axis road from new entrance to south documents for crypt installation. terminus (//17). 2. Development irrigation plans. 3. Construction as needed. 3. Construct mst/west road north of Section 11. 4. Planning and developing features. 5. Planning and installing detailed landscaping. 4. Continue with perimeter treatment (fencing and landscaping) 6. Planning and developing estate lots as the demand and interior landscaping, warrants. 7. Preparing grading and road plans for sections in the next 5. Continue to provide new lawn crypt and conventional burial phase of development. Earth material excavated for areas as needed. As new sections are opened, section and burial sites will be used to create interesting earth forms. subsection features and landscaping will be added. After rough grading, areas can be planted with small trees to allow more time for maturing by the time tile sections are opened for burials. PIIASE 3 AND 4: INDEFINITE TERM Phases beyond the 2nd Phase, only show the general sequence of development. Due to the distant time when these phases will be undertaken, a detailed breakdown of improvements and related cost estimates would be of little value. 41 42 GETHSEMANE CEMETERY MASTER PLAN Cost Estimate/By Phase ASSUMPTIONS: 1. Costs used are based on Current, January, 1993, prices assuming a single construction contract for all work. 2. Cost estimate for planning purposes only. 3. New central drive off of Xylon requires City and County approval. COst of traffic light requires in depth study as well as negotiation with City and County. 4. Recommend test study for variety of solutions on planting adjoining Rockford Road and Winnetka. 5. Grading for Xylon not included. Grading for central spine, Sections 11, 14, 15 and 16 require detailed study. PHASE 1 Qty. Unit Price Total 1. MAUSOLEUM A. Structure 1 LS $1,500,000.00 $1,500,000.00 B. Landscaping 1 LS $43,000.00 $43,000.00 (walks, landscaping, lighting) $1,543,000.00 2. OFFICE/MAUSOLEUM TURN AROUND A. Bituminous Removal 900 sy $4.00 $3,600.00 B. Curb Removal 585 If $1.50 $877.50 C. Bituminous (3" on 6" base) 2500 sy $9.00 $22,500.00 D. Excavation Grading/Bituminous 2500 sy $2.00 $5,000.00 E. Curb (vertical - no gutter) 600 If $9.00 $5,400.00 F. Concrete Pavers 1700 sf $6.00 $10,200.00 G. Perennials, potted, 18" oc 140 sy $40.00 $5,600.00 H. Mulch - Plant Beds (3" depth) 140 sy $1.50 $210.00 I. Soil Preparation - plant beds 140 sy $1.25 $175.00 J. Poly Edger 130 If $1.25 $162.50 K. Sod (includes topsoil) 450 sy $3.00 $1,350.00 L. Sculptural Element (turn around) 1 ls $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $75,075.00 Unit Qty. Unit Price Total 3. OFFICE BUILDING A. Office Building 1800 sf $90.00 $162,000.00 B. Utilities/Storm Sanitary 1 ls $6,000.00 $6,000.00 C. Excavation/Rough & Fine Grading 1 ls $1,000.00 $1,000.00 D. Landscaping 1 Is $10,000.00 $10~000.00 (walks, sod, landscaping, lighting) $179,000.00 4. _EXISTING ENTRY ENHANCEMENT A. Shrub removal, new planting beds, mulch and edging 1 ls $5,000.00 $5,000.00 5. MAUSOLEUM PRAYER GARDEN 1 Is $45,000.00 $45,000.00 6. !2ORNE..R MONUMENT 1 ls $45,000.00 $45,000.00 7. SECTION 2 .FEATURE (Typical) A. Sculptural Feature 1 ls $27,500.00 $27,500.00 (20,000 - 35,00O) B. 2-4 Benches 1 ls $4,500.00 $4,500.00 (3,000 - 6,000) C. Landscaping 1 ls $5,000.00 $5,000.00 D. Paving (concrete pavers set on 600 sf $8.00 $4,800.00 sand w/Class 5 base) $41,800.00 8. SECTION 3 FEATURE (complete) A. Landscaping 1 ls $4,000.00 $4,000.00 B. Benches 2 ea $1,500.00 $3,000.00 C. Paving 600 sf $8.00 $4,800.00 $11,800.00 43 44 Unit Qty Unit Price Total 9. CREMATION SECTION FEATURE A. Sculptural Feature (10,000 ~ 15,000) I ls $12,500.00 $12,500.00 B. Benches (1 - 2) (1,500 - 3,000) 1 Is $2,750.00 $2,750.00 C. Landscaping 1 ls $4,000.00 $4,000.00 D. Paving - concrete pavers 300 sf $8.00 $2,400.00 $21,650.00 10. SECTION 6 FEATURE (Planting) A. Landscaping - St. Paul Feature 1 ls $4,800.00 $4,800.00 B. Paving - concrete pavers 600 sf $8.00 $4,800.00 C. Landscaping 1 ls $5,000.00 $5,000.00 (SE/SW corners) $14,600.00 11. SECTION 8 ENHANCEMENT A. 50% increase of planting 1 ls $7,000.00 $7,000.00 B. Shredded Hardwood 450 sy $2.00 $900.00 $7,900.00 12. REINFORCE WINNETKA LANDSCAPING A. I_andscaping - replacement 1 Is $8,600.00 $8,600.00 B. Concrete Barrier Walls (merit 1 ls $49,000.00 $49,000.00 further study) (29,500 - 72,000) $57,600.00 13. SECTION 5 FEATURE 1 Is $45,000.00 $45,000.00 14. SECTION 5 DEVELOPMENT A. Subsection features 5 ea $22,000.00 $110,000.00 B. Landscaping allotment - internal landscaping 1 ls $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $130,000.00 15. PERIMETER LANDSCAPING A. Section 5 1 Is $10,000.00 $10,000.00 PHASE 1 TOTAL $689,425.00 ) Unit Qty Unit Price Total PHASE H 1. Remove existing entry 1 Is $11,770.00 $11,770.00 2. New Central Drive @ Xylon 1 sy $126,100.00 $126,100.00 (bituminous/curb/glaring) - $0.00 NOTE: Refer to assumptions $0.00 3. Central Drive Landscaping I ls $50,000.00 $50,000.00 4. Drive north of Section 11 I ls $19,200.00 $19,200.00 5. Main Entry Gateway 1 Is $75,000.00 $75,000.00 6. Traffic Circle @ Sections 8, 9, 11 & 12 1 Is $60,000.00 $60,000.00 7. Maintenance Bldg. Landscaping 1 Is $200,000.00 $200,000.00 8. Develop Section 4 9. Develop Section 9 10. Garden Mausoleums related to Section 12 Mausoleum PHASE 2 TOTAL $542,070.00 PHASE m 1. Central Drive Terminus Feature (#17) 1 ls $60,000.00 $60,000.00 2. Section 11 - (wall crypts) 3. Section 1 4. Section 13 5. Section 15 (wall crypts) 6. Pond/Fountain 1 Is $155,000.00 $155,000.00 7. Build Streets/Roads 8. Chapel (/g21) 9. Section 16 10. Section 17 11. Section 18A PHASE 3 TOTAL $215,000.00 45 PHASE IV 46 1. Second Mausoleum 2. Roads (complete) 3. Secondary Entry 4. Secondary Entry - Gateway 5. Section 18B 6. Section Feature (19 and 2~}) 7. Section 19 (Pergola) 8. Section 19 Mausoleum/Estate Lots 9. Section 20 10. Section 20 Wetland Ponds 11. Section 21 12. Section 22 13. Section 23 14. Section 24 15. Section 25 47 Section Feature IMAGES 49 Subsection Feature Wall Crypts-Section 11 & 15 IMAGES Section Feature Section Feature IMAGES 53 Mausoleum Chapel Section Feature IMAGES IMAGES Prayer Garden Adjoining Mausoleum $7 TO: KIRK McDONALD DAN DONAHUE CHERYL JOENS FROM: DOUG SANDSTAD DATE: APRIL 21, 1993 SUBJECT: INDUSTRIAL LOT COMBINATION The property owner of 7100 27th Ave. No., Gerald Egan [The Egan Companies], has decided to combine his developed lot with the adjacent parcel he owns, addressed as 2700 Nevada Ave. No. This responds to an internal problem resulting from Building Code defects in the unsprinklered building remodeled extensively without city approvals and permits over the last 10-15 years. One solution was to move the west property line further away from the building, since he already owned both lots. Since the costs of platting are very high, Me. Egan has elected to merely combine the two lots, as allowed by city code and Hennepin County. I have illustrated lot lines and building on the attachments. They actually began paving and using part of the vacant west lot several years ago, unofficially. This is now legal parking, with room for building expansion. Please call me, if you have any questions. Perhaps you were not aware that the building construction was connected to its distance from the lot lines. cc:Smith Crelly Coone file 937.3 5 X 935.7 945.0 X 943.2 927.4 X 927.6 ~ 92, .8 71~ 929.8 924.7 X 917.4 0 920.9 ~ X 919.4 -~-TTORNEYS .kT TELECOPIER (012 :l;19 Direct Lin~: (612) 341-9710 April 19, 1993 City of New Hope Building Official/Zoning Administrator 4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope, Minnesota 55428 Attention Doug Sandstad RE: 7100 27th Avenue North/The Egan Companies Dear Mr. Sandstad: I represent The Egan Companies and spoke to you sometime ago about your letter to D. J. Kranz Co., Inc. dated February 11, 1993 and the need to combine the two lots (see II A). The two lots have been combined and will bear one property identification number on next year's tax statement. As evidence of said combination, I enclose a stamped copy of the Application for Combination of Parcels, the original of which was delivered to Mr. Dennis Mill of the Hennepin County Department of Property Tax and Public Records. I believe this combination should satisfy the requirements of II A. City of New Hope Page 2 April 19, 1993 If I can be of any further assistance, please call me. Yours very truly, RJC:dlm:7705N Enclosure cc: Mr. Edward a. Kocourek, The Egan Companies APPLICATION FOR COMBINATION OF PARCELS Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 272.46, Subd. 2, Gerald L. Egan, fee owner of two contiguous separately described parcels situated in the City of New Hope, County of Hennepin, hereby applies to the County of Hennepin to combine the below described parcels into one parcel with one property identification number. Said parcels are described as follows: Parcel One Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1362, Files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin. Property I.D. Number 20-118-21-34-0010 Parcel Two The East 282 Feet of the South 533 Feet of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 20, Township 118, Range 21. Property I.D. Number 20-118-21-34-0001 Dated: ~ /9 , 1993. Gerald L. Egan THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY: Best & Flanagan (RJC) 3500 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 339-7121 74a8N ~ ~ /. ?'X//.,~ / DEPUTY TwI ST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ~pril 30, 1993 Commissioner Robert Cameron City of New Hope 4401 Xylon Avenue South New Hope, MN 55428 Commissioner Cameron The TwinWest Chamber of Commerce represents more than 1,250 businesses in the western suburbs with many of these businesses located in New Hope. Because we are interested in the overall economic development climate for all of these businesses within the cities we serve, it is essential for TwinWest to take a position regarding the 35 percent green area requirement in the I-1 Limited Industrial Zoning District within the City. Diminishin~ land supply and fixed development patterns have limited new economic development growth resulting in greater reliance on the expansion of in-place businesses. The I-1 green area ratio establishes an artificial limit on expansion of I-1 businesses. We believe that if these businesses are not allowed to grow with the changing economic times, the businesses will either, ultimately fail, or relocate elsewhere. Therefore, TwinWest Chamber of Commerce fully supports the ordinance amending Section 4.145 of the New Hope Zoning Code by reducing the green area requirement in the I-1 Zoning District to 20 percent. Changing the requirement on the green area retains high quality standards as well as allows flexibility for future growth and should give attention to the existing non-conforming sites. It is our hope that the Commission consider our support when making their final decision regarding the green area requirement. Thank you. President cc: Daniel J. Donahue, City Manager Kirk McDonald, Community Development Director Ray Holloway, Tetzloff & Holloway, CPAs Brad Robinson, Robinson Rubber Products 10550 WAYZATA BOULEVARD · MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55305 · (612) 540-0234 Crystal, Golden Valley, Hopkins, Medicine Lake, Minnetonka, New Hope, Plymouth, St. Louis Park