100692 Planning AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 6, 1992
CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA
7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
3.1 Case 92-21 Request for a A Rear Yard Setback Variance to Allow an Addition, 2800
Boone Avenue North, Harry Wong, Petitioner
3.2 Case 92-19 Request for Text Amendment to Rezone 5501 and a portion of 5425 Boone
Avenue North from and I-1 (Limited Industrial) to an R-5 (Senior Citizen
and Physically Handicapped Residential Housiong) Zoning District, City of
New Hope/Senior Outreach Services/North Ridge Care Center, Petitioners
3.3 Case 92-23 Request for Site/Building Plan Review Approval and Conditional Use
Permit to Allow an Adult Day Care Facility in an R-5 Zoning District, 5501
& 5425 Boone Avenue North, Senior Outreach Services/North Ridge Care
Center, Petitioners
3.4 Case 92-25 Request for a Zoning Text Amendment, Conditional Use Permit, Variances
to Fence Height and/or Fence Setback, and Site/Building Plan Review
Approval to Allow a Garden ~Novelty Store in a B-2 Zoning District, 8001
Bass Lake Road, Lyndale Garden Center, Petitioner
3.5 Case 92-26 Request for Conditional Use Permit, Variance to Setback Requirement,
and Site/Building Plan Review Approval to Allow a Car X Muffler Shop,
7900 27th Avenue North, Naftali Alkalai-Mahzal, Inc. Petitioner
3.6 Case 92-27 Request for Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Home Occupation, 3833
Gettysburg Avenue North, Robert Goldman, Petitioner
3.7 Case 92-28 Request for Variance to Rear Yard Setback Requirement to Allow
Addition of a Three-Season Porch, 4164 Ensign Avenue North, Duane Hoff,
Petitioner
4. COMMIIWEE 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 September 1, 1992
6.2 Review of City Council Minutes of August 24 and September 14, 1992
6.3 Review of EDA Minutes of July 27, 1992
7. ANNOUNCEMENTS
7.1 November meeting date change
8. ADJOURNMENT
PLANNING CASES
OCTOBER 1992
PC 92-19 92-25
pC 92-23 ,,2~.. ' ':~:!:'~ ~-.i~ 0 1 Bas $ Lake Rd
5425/5501 ~one
L
PC
4164 Ensi,
I
38 Gettysb
PC 92-21
2800 ~BOO ne ~,.,
92-26
7900 27th Av.N.
ZONING DISTRICT MAP
CiTY of NEW HOPE
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 92-21
Request: Request for a Front Yard Setback Variance to Allow a Garage Addition
Location: 2800 Boone Avenue North
PID No.: 19-118-21-43-0012
Zoning: R-1 (Single Family Residential)
Petitioner: Harry Wong
Report Date: October 1, 1992
Meeting Date: October 6, 1992
UPDATE
1. The petitioner originally requested a front yard setback variance to allow a 21' x 22'
garage addition to existing structure, pursuant to SectiOn 4.034(3) of New Hope Code of
Ordinances to construct a 420 square foot attached double garage to the west side of the
existing house (in front of the existing garage) and convert the existing garage to living
2. The Planning Commission reviewed this request on August 4th and was not supportive
of granting the front yard setback variance. The Commission requested that the
petitioner consider an alternative plan and tabled the request.
3. Petitioner met with staff on 8/27 regarding alternative plans and staff developed several
concept sketches with estimated setback variances that would be required. Petitioner
requested and received input from the Commission on September 1st regarding a rear
yard addition which would require a rear yard variance instead of the front garage
addition. Petitioner indicated he would submit revised detailed plans for the October
Planning Commisison meeting.
4. Property owners within 350' of the request were renotified due to the change in the
variance request from the front to the rear yard.
5. Staff contacted the petitioner on 9/28 and he indicated his preference to withdraw the
request at this time, as he has not pursued revised plans due to his preference for the
original plan. Petitioner may resubmit another application next spring.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Commission pass a motion accepting the request to withdraw
Planning Case 92-21 from consideration.
Attachments: Request for Withdrawal
Alternative Concept Sketch
August Planning Report
*e~LO T. ~OV~ LOT SURVEYS .COMPANY
~o Nmm'WlCK ,~VE. ~ .- '
MINN. R~..K. 4741 "' ~U g~ ~ M ffi~ ff ~~j MINN. R~. NO. 6743
. · ~ BT O~~
S747 W. ~oedwey
C~M~CIAL -- TO~PHICAL
CI~ LOTS ~ P~ING ~ O ~ DENOT~ IRON
HE~K~ C~STRUCTI~ 'CO. ~
....... ~ ? '-~ SeC For Excava~lo~
No. 2800 Booue ire. No. ~ . ~',,'~ly
/
, .~
~ ~ ;: _, , ..
~1 evati~s
'~'.. ....... ~' - .
-
cot 5, Btoc~ t, gOON~: 'r~RAcg /
deKtlbed Lend end the ~tion of ,11 builldinq~ Ind ~islble encroachmenls, if any. iron or
.
so,~.,~ b,., ,h,,_ 2nd . d.y ~ April ~9 76 ~ "~ ~T S~VEYS COMPANY-~ '
SITE PLAN DECLARATION ~ ~ "1--'
I CERTIFY THAT lAM THE PROPERTY
OWNER, OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE &
~AY TO ~
CITY OF NEW HOPE
._ PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 92-19
Request: Request for Text Amendment to Rezone 5501 and a portion of 5425 Boone
Avenue North from an I-1 (Limited Industrial) to an R-5 (Senior Citizen
and Physically Handicapped Residential Housing) Zoning District
Location: 5501 and 5425 Boone Avenue North
PID No: 06-118-21-34-0007 & 06-118-21-34-0010
Zoning: I-1 (Limited Industrial)
Petitioner: City of New Hope/Senior Outreach Services/North Ridge Care Center
Report Date: October 2, 1992
Meeting Date: October 6, 1992
UPDATE
1. This is a request by the City of New Hope, Senior Outreach Services and North Ridge
Care Center to consider an ordinance amending the 'New Hope Zoning Code by rezoning
industrial property from an I-1 (Limited Industrial) to an R-5 (Senior Citizen and
Physically Handicapped Residential) Zoning District, pursuant to Sections 4.23 and 4.24
of the New Hope Zoning Code.
2. Senior Outreach Services/North Ridge Care Center is proposing to construct an adult day
care facility, which would accommodate up to 120 adults, on vacant property located at
5501 and a portion of 5425 Boone Avenue North. The property is currently zoned I-1 and
this request regards the rezonlng of the property to an R-5 District. The rezoning issue
precedes the request for a conditional use permit and site/building plan review/approval
for actual construction of the facility, which will be considered later on the agenda under
Pl~nnlng Case 92-23.
3. This request was tabled at the September 1st Planning Commission meeting at the request
of the petitioner and the City, as the actual amount of property to be acquired and
rezoned for the development had not been determined. Staff met with North Ridge
subsequent to the meeting and they are in the process of finalizing their acquisition plans
and are revising building plans. The project should be ready for consideration at the
November 4th Planning Commission meeting.
4. The petitioner is agreeable to tabling the request for one additional month.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Case 92-19 be tabled until November 4th.
Attachments: September Planning Report Excerpts
CITY OF NEW HOPE
.. PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 92-19
Request: Request for Text Amendment to Rezone 5501 and a portion of 5425 Boone
Avenue North from an I-1 (Limited Industrial) to an R-5 (Senior Citizen
and Physically Handicapped Residential Housing) Zoning District
Location: 5501 and 5425 Boone Avenue North
PID No: 06-118-21-34-0007 & 06-118-21-34-0010
Zoning: , I-1 (Limited Industrial)
Petitioner: City of New Hope/Senior Outreach Services/North Ridge Care Center
Report Date: August 28, 1992
Meeting Date: September 1, 1992'
BACKGROUND
1. This is a request by the City of New Hope, Senior Outreach Services and North Ridge
Care Center to consider an ordinance amending the New Hope Zoning Code by rezoning
industrial property from an I-1 (Limited Industrial) to an R-5 (Senior Citizen and
Physically Handicapped Residential) Zoning District, pursuant to Sections 4.23 and 4.24
of the New Hope Zoning Code.
2. Senior Outreach Services/North Ridge Care Center is proposing to construct an adult day
care facility, which would accommodate up to 120 adults, on vacant property located at
5501 and a portion of 5425 Boone Avenue North. The pf0perty is currently zoned 1-1 and
this request regards the rezoning of the property to an .R,75 District. The rezoning issue
precedes the request for a conditional use permit and site/building plan review/approval
for actual construction of the facility, which will be considered later on the agenda under
Planning Case 92-23.
3. The City has been working with North Ridge and Senior Outreach Services and the
owners of both properties over the past year in regards to the acquisition of the property
west of Boone Avenue for the construction of an adult day care facility.
A. At the June 22nd EDA meeting a resolution was passed authorizing the acquisition
of 5501 Boone Avenue North bY eminent domain proceedings, which authorizes
the City to acquire the Property by direct purchase or to utilize the "quick take"
procedure. The resolution states that the acquisition of the property is reasonably
necessary to the furtherance of the goals and objectives of the redevelopment plan
and will be for the benefit of the public health, welfare, and safety of the citizens
of New Hope.
B. The 5501 Boone Avenue property is already included in the North Ridge/City Hall
tax increment district. At the July 27th EDA meeting a resolution was passed
amending the tax increment district to include the north 100 feet of the 5425
Boone Avenue property.
Planning Case 92-19
September 1, 1992
Page -2-
4. The property has not yet been acquired, but North Ridge and the City are in negotiations
with both owners at this time. The owner of the 5501 Boone Avenue parcel is Mel Doyle
and the owners of the 5425 Boone Avenue parcel, where Lee Brothers Manufacturing Co.
is located, is Charles Lee, Jr. The rezonlng of the site would be subject to acquisition of
the property, combination of the two parcels and platting, and completion of the
development. The actual ordinance officially rezoning the site would not be published
or become effective until all of the above conditions are met. This process will prevent
th~ site from being officially rezoned until it is acquired by the City or North Ridge and
until the development is completed. The reason the rezoning is being requested prior to
final acquisition is because the conditional use permit for an adult day care center in an
R-5 District cannot be considered or acted upon while the property is zoned I-l, as an
adult day care facility is not a permitted or conditional use in an I-1 Zone.
5. This request is for the rezoning of the entire 5501 parcel and a portion of the 5425 parcel.
The exact amount of property to be split off, purchased, and rezoned from the 5425
parcel is not yet known. It will not exceed the northerly 100 feet (that is the amount of
land that was amended into the TIF Distric0 and will probably not be less than the
northerly 75 feet. The public hearing notice is for the maximum. Again, due to the fact
that the acquisition of the property is still under negotiation, the exact amount of the Lee
property to be rezoned is not known. The official rezoning of the parcel will not be
published until the development is completed. This request actually entails rezonlng
whatever amount of property is acquired by the City/NoAh Ridge for the Senior Outreach
Services project and requires some flexibility on the part of the Commission. Several
concept sketches have been prepared by the Building .Official (attached) showing the
impact on the Lee Brothers property and these are being reviewed by the owners prior
to any decision to sell off a piece of the property.
6. There is a possibility in the future that North Memorial Hospital, in conjunction with
North Ridge, may acquire the property located at 5555 Boone Avenue North for the
construction of a hospice facility. The New Hope site is one of the locations being
considered. If the hospice facility would become a reality, then that parcel would also
need to be rezoned from I-1 to R-5, but that parcel is not included in this rezoning
request.
7. The Planning Consultant prepared the attached report on this rezoning amendment and,
due to the benefit of clustering together health care related facilities which can support
one another, he is recommending approval of the rezoning subject to specific conditions.
8. The City Attorney has reviewed and is in agreement with the Planner's report and
recommendation and has prepared the attached ordinance amendment for consideration.
9. The Codes & Standards Committee considered this amendment at their August 19th
meeting and is supportive of the rezoning~
10. Notice of public hearing to consider the rezoning has been published ~d affected
property owners have been notified.
Planning Case 92-19
September 1, 1992 .4
Page -3-
ANALYSIS
1. The proposed development of an adult day care facility is to be located on a site along
the westerly side of Boone Avenue between Science Center Drive and East Research
Center Road, currently zoned I-1. The North Ridge Care Center and senior citizen apart-
ment complex are located across Boone Avenue to the east, currently zoned R-5.
2. Currently, New Hope has the R-5, Senior Citizen Residential Housing District. This
district is specifically intended to define locations and amenities for elderly housing and
related complementary uses. The R-5 District currently allows elderly housing as a per-
mitred use and nursing homes and adult day care by conditional use. Under this zoning,
the proposed adult day care is allowed.
3. The subject property is currently zoned I-l, Limited Industrial. A rezoning to R-5 is
Senior Citizen Residential Housing, is necessary in order to allow (by CUP) the proposed
adult day care facility.
Consideration of any rezoning in the City of New Hope involves the review of two criteria,
outlined as follows:
A. Does the existing zoning represent a mistake in the original layout?
B. Have the characteristics in the area changed, warranting reconsideration of the
existing zoning?
The existing zoning designation does not allow health care facilities, thus it is necessary
to rezone the subject site to R-5 to accommodate the adult day care, given the location
of the North Ridge Care Center and apartments across BOone Avenue. Although the R-5
District is very limited in the types of uses which are allowed in the zone, it is of benefit
to maintain a clustering of health care properties which can support one another.
4. The existing zoning designation does not necessarily represent a mistake in the original
layout, however, the characteristics of the area are changing with the expansion of North
Ridge and related facilities and this change warrants consideration of changing the existing
zoning.
5. As mentioned previously, the applicant will require CUP approval to construct the pro-
posed adult day care facility with an R-5, Senior Citizen Residential Housing Zoning
District. The Planning Commission and City Council will consider possible adverse effects
of the use through review of specific criteria outlined in Section 4.212 of the City Zoning
Ordinance under Planning Case 92-23.
RECQMMENDATIQN
Staff recommends approval of An Ordinance Amending New Hope Zoning Code by Rezoning
Industrial Property from 'I-l" Limited Industrial and "R-5" Senior Citizen and Physically
Handicapped Residential Housing, subject to the following conditions:
1. Acquisition of the property by the City and/or North Ridge/Senior Outreach' Services.
Planning Case 92-19
September 1, 1992 ~-
Page -4-
2. Platting of the property/subdivision with legal description.
3. Only the property acquired for the Adult Day Care Facility to be rezoned at this time.
4. ReZoning subject to approval of CUP for facility and completion of project.
5. Rezoning not to be officially published or changed on the zoning map until after
acquisition of property and completion of construction of facility.
6. If facility not constructed on the proposed site, rezoning is null and void.
Attachments: July 10th Attorney Correspondence & Public Hearing Notice
June 22nd Planner's Report
City Code/R-5
Maps/Site Plan
TIF Amendment
Eminent Domain Proceeding
Options: Lee Property
.L
Northwest Associate'd sultants, Inc.
C U R B A N P L A N N I N G · M A R K E T R ES E A R C H
DESIGN
TO: , Kirk McDonald
FROM~ Elizabeth Stockman/Alan Brixius
DATE: 22 June 1992
RE: New Hope - North Ridge Adult Day Care/
Hospice Facility
FILE NO: 131.00 - 92.08
We have compiled a list of the necessary application procedures and
site issues related to the potential adult day care and hospice
facility proposed in New Hope. The proposed development is to be
located on a site along Boone Avenue between Science Center Drive
and East Research Center Road, currently zoned I-1. The North
Ridge Care Center and senior citizen apartment complex are located
across Boone Avenue.
1. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment
Currently, New Hope has the R-5, Senior Citizen Residential
Housing District. This district is specifically intended to
define locations and amenities for elderly housing and related
complementary uses. The R-5 District currently allows elderly
housing as a permitted use and nursing homes and adult day
care by conditional use. Under this zoning, the proposed
adult day care is allowed.
In consideration of the proposed hospice facility, we
contacted the Department of Health and Human Services. They
indicated that hospice facilities offer a degree of care
similar to nursing home operations. In this regard, an
amendment to the R-5 Zoning District to allow a hospice
facility under the same conditional use permit as a nursing
_home is reco~m%ended.
5775 Wayzata Blvd.-Suite 555 .SI:. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636-Fax. 595-9837
2. Rezoning
The subject property is currently zoned I-l, Limited
Industrial. A .rezoning is necessary to R-5, Senior Citizen
Residential Housing, in order to allow (by CUP) the proposed
adult da/ care facility. Consideration of any rezoning in the
City of New Hope involves the review of two criteria, outlined
as follows:
a. Does the existing zoning represent a mistake in the
original layout?
b. Have the characteristics in the area changed which
warrant reconsideration of the existing zoning?
The existing zoning designation does not allow health care
facilities, thus it is necessary to rezone the subject site to
R-5 to accommodate the adult day care/hospice facility given
the location of the North Ridge Care Center and apartments
across Boone Avenue. Although the R-5 District is very
limited in the types of uses which are allowed in the zone, it
is of benefit to maintain a clustering of health care
properties which can support one another.
3. Conditional Use Perm~
As mentioned previously, the applicant will require CUP
approval to construct the proposed adult day care/hosPice
facility within an R-5, Senior Citizen Residential Housing
Zoning District. The Planning Con~nission and City Council
will consider possible adverse effects of the use through
review of specific criteria outlined in"Section 4.212 of the
City Zoning Ordinance..'
4. Information Sul~m~ttal
As part of the rezoning application, a certificate of title
and detailed written/graphic materials fully explaining the
proposed change and development will be required. Graphic
material submitted must include, but is not limited to, a site
plan, drainage plan, landscape and lighting plan. ,
pc: Doug Sandstad
Dan Donahue
2
AREA
SENIOR OUTREACH SERVICES
ADULT DAY CARE
NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA
SITE
CITY OF NEw HOPE
PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 92-23 -
Request: Request for Site/Building Plan Review Approval and Conditional Use
Permit to Allow an Adult Day Care Facility in an R-5 Zoning District
Location: 5501 & 5425 Boone Avenue North
PID No: 06-118-21-34-0007 & 06-118-21-34-0010
Zoning: I-1 (Limited Industrial)/R-5 Senior/Disabled Residential
Petitioner: Senior Outreach Services/North Ridge
Report Date: October 2, 1992
Meeting Date: October 6, 1992
UPDATE
1. Senior Outreach Services/North Ridge are requesting site/building plan review/approval
and a conditional use permit to allow an adult day care facility in an R-5 Senior/Disabled
Residential Zoning District, pursuant to Sections 4.039A and 4.08A3(2) of the New Hope
Code of Ordinances.
2. The request is being made subsequent to a request to rezone the site from an I-1 Limited
Industrial District to an R-5 Senior Citizen and Physically Handicapped Residential
Housing District, which is considered under Planning Case 92-19.
3. This request was also tabled at the September Planning commission meeting at the
request of the petitioner, as it is associated with Planning Case 92-19. The building
setback requirements are dependent upon the amount of property acquired/lot frontage
definition. Staff met with North Ridge subsequent to the meeting and they are in the
process of finalizing their acquisition plans and are revising building plans. The project
should be ready for consideration at the November 4th Planning Commission meeting.
4. The petitioner is agreeable to tabling the request for one additional month.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Planning Case 92-23 be tabled until November 4th.
Attachments: September Planning Report Excerpts
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 92-23
Request: Request for SitedBiailding Plan Review Approval and Conditional Use
Permit to Allow an Adult Day Care Facility in an R-5 Zoning District
Location: 5501 & 5425 Boone Avenue North
PID No: 06-118-21-34-0007 & 06-118-21-34-0010
Zoning: I-1 (Limited Industrial)/R-5 Senior/Disabled Residential
Petitioner: Senior Outreach Services/North Ridge
Report Date: August 28, 1992
Meeting Date: September 1, 1992
BACKGROUND
1. Senior Outreach Services/North Ridge are requesting .site/building plan review/approval
and a conditional use permit to allow an adult day care facility in an R-5 Senior/Disabled
Residential Zoning District, pursuant to Sections 4.039A and 4.08A3(2) of the New Hope
Code of Ordinances.
2. The request is being made subsequent to a request to rezone 'the site from an I-1 Limited
Industrial District to an R-5 Senior Citizen and Physically Handicapped Residential
Housing District, which is considered under Planning Case 92-19.
3. The Design & Review Committee met with the petitioner on August 13th and revised
plans were submitted that incorporated changes recommended by the Committee.
4. This request was also referred to the Planning Consultant for review (please see attached
report). '~
5. In careful review of the plan it has been discovered that the proposed building under the
current development scenario does not meet the required setback requirements. The
proposed building is set back 35 feet from Boone Avenue and 16.5 feet from the west
property line.
The setback requirements for the R-5 District are as follows:
Front Yard- 35 feet
Side Yard - 20 feet
, Rear Yard - 35 feet
With the exception that any front yard on Boone Avenue must have a minimum setback
of 50 feet.
When the original concept proposal was developed it included a second building (North
Memorial Hospice) on the 5555 Boone Avenue property at the southwest comer lot of
Boone Avenue North and East Research Center Road. Under this concept the three
parcels would be developed under a PUD, with all 3 properties being combined/platted
into one lot. The "front" of the lot, for zoning purposes, would have been the narrowest
frontage or the frontage abutting East Research Center Road. The setback requirements
would be:
Planning Case 92-23
September, 1992
Page -2-
Front Yard · 50 feet East Research Center Road
Side Yard 35 feet Boone Avenue
20 feet West property line
Rear Yard 35 feet South property line
However, the Hospice facility was dropped from the plan, thus no longer making it a
comer lot and shifting the front yard to Boone Avenue.
6. Due to the plan changes and the fact that the setbacks are not met, staff and petitioner
are requesting a tabling of the case for one month. This will give the staff appropriate
time to either advertise for the variances, the petitioner to change the setbacks, or acquire
the property at 5555 Boone Avenue and proceed with the corner lot PUD.
7. Property owners within 350' of the subject property were notified.
RECoMMENDATiON -
Staff recommends that the ease be tabled for one month,
Attachments: Area Map
Site Plan
Landscape Plan ....
Lighting Plan
Floor Plan .,-
Elevations
Building Section
Planner's Report
SITE
SITE PLAN
ELEVATIONS
LANDSCAPE
Se or
Adult Day Care
September 28, 1992
Mr. Dan Donahue, City Manager
City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55428
Dear Mr. Donahue:
This is to confirm that Senior Outreach Services would like to make
an appeara~ in front of the Planning Co--ittee o~U~_~esday,
Novembe.F~fand the City Council on Monday, Novemberw~Tr~garding
the Senior/Outreach Service construction plans for a building
across the'street from North Ridge Apartments.
Lennie Samuelson and Chuck Thompson will be in contact with
Doug Sandstad soon.
This also is to confirm a meeting on September 30 regarding
financing of this project in Chuck Tho~pson's office at 9:00 a.m.
Also in attendance will be Ann Yungner, our accountant, Sister
Bernice Ebner, and Ken Gallus from St. Therese of New Hope.
We are optimistic that all of this will fall into place so that we
can have groundbreaking ceremonies early spring.
Thank you.
Sincerely,.
Mary J~e Thompson
Adminigtrator
NJT:gb
5430 Boone Avenue North · Minneapolis, MN 55428 · 612-536-7000
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 92-25
Request: Request for Zoning Text Amendment, Conditional Use Permit, Variances
to Fence Height and/or Fence Setback, and Site/Building Plan Review
Approval to Allow a Garden Novelty Store in a B-2 Zoning District
Location: 8001 Bass Lake Road
P1D No: 06-118-21-41-0006
Zoning: B-2 (Retail Business)
Petitioner: Lyndale Garden Center
Report Date: October 1, 1992
Meeting Date: October 6, 1992
BACKGROUND
1. Lyndale Garden Center has made application for a zoning text amendment to allow a garden
novelty store by conditional use permit in a B-2 Zoning District, a conditional use permit to
allow the use, variances from the fence height and/or setback requirement, and site/building
plan review/approval to allow the redevelopment of the vacant Country Club Market
building/site into a garden novelty store facility, pursuant to Sections 4.20, 4.112, 4.114, 4.132,
4.21,4.033, and 4.039A of the New Hope Code.
2. Lyndale Garden Center is proposing to completely redevelop the vacant Country Club Market
building at 8001 Bass Lake Road into a garden novelty store. The plans include removing a
36' x 96' (3,456 square foot) portion of the existing building at the front northwest corner and
replacing it with a new slope-glass greenhouse, new decorative steel picket fence in front for
storage/sales of plant materials, new curbing and elimination of one curb cut, new perimeter
green buffers/landscaping, demolition of existing loading docks and construction of new
recessed dock at the southwest corner of the building, relocated fire siamese connection, new
refuse enclosure, new site signage, and new wood siding to replace corrugated metal facia, and
new entrance/overhang to be constructed on west side of building. If approved, construction
would start this fall with an anticipated opening in March, 1993. Staff is very supportive of the
redevelopment of this site.
3. This request was tabled at the September Planning Commission meeting. Since that time the
petitioners have met again with the Design & Review Committee, the Codes & Standards
Committee has met to review the proposed text changes, the Planner has submitted a revised
report, the Attorney has drafted the text amendment and the City Engineer has reviewed the
plans.
4. There are a number of issues that pertain to the proposed development. As you are aware, the
propo~ garden novelty store is currently not a permitted use within the B-2 District and
development within a building size in excess of the 3.500 square foot T maximum is also
prohibited. The City initiated a text change that would eliminate the need to comply with the
maximum building size requirement a stipulated for limited B-4 uses within the B-2 District.
The Planning Commi.~ion approved thi~ text amendment (Planning Case 92-20) in September,
however the amendment was tabled by the City Council so that it could be considered in
conjunction with the Lyndale request at the Council level.
Planning Case Report 92-25
October 6, 1992
Page -2-
The specific requests for this application include the following:
A. Site/Building Plan Review/Approval
B. Zoning Text Amendment to allow a garden novelty store by ¢0n~liti0nal use permit in
a B-2 Zoning District. Staff had originally proposed to eliminate the asterisk (*) in front
of the B-4 garden novelty use and allow the use as a permitted use. However, after
further consultation with the Planner and Codes & Standards, it was felt that the City
would have more control over site issues, such as outdoor storage, if the use was
permitted conditionally. The proposed text amendment is enclosed for your reference.
C. Conditional Use Permit to allow the use on this site. If the text amendment is approved
to allow garden novelty stores in the B-2 District by conditional use, then a specific
conditional use permit must be considered/granted for this site.
D. Fence Height and/or Setback Variance. The proposed code amendment allows fences
up to 7 feet in height. If the amendment is acceptable to the Commission, no fence
height variance is required. If the height proposed in the amendment is not acceptable,
then a fence height variance is necessary.
The proposed code amendment also calls for a 15-foot setback from the right-of-way.
The petitioner's plan shows a staggered fence with a setback (at the closest point) of 10
feet. Again, if the proposed amendment is acceptable to the Commission,. then a
variance will either be required or the petitioner will have to revise the plan. If the
Commission finds that a 10-foot setback is acceptable, then the amendment can be
modified and no variance would be necessary.
5. Surrounding land uses/zoning include B-3 Auto-Oriented gas station to the east, R-1 Winnetka
Elementary School to the south, R-3 apartment complex to the west, and B-2 retail/R-4 St.
Therese Nursing Home to the north across Bass Lake Road.
6. Over 90% of the existing site is impervious with the topography sloping to a low area in the
rear at the south side which floods during heavy rains.
7. Property owners within 350' have been sent a second public hearing notice because a request
for a possible variance to the fence height was added to the original request and the text
amendment was revised. Staff has received no comments in regards to this request.
ANALYSIS
1. The Planner has prepared a detailed report on this application so please refer to it for specific,
details as it is staffs' intention to only address issues in brief format. Mr. Brixius will be present
at the Planning commission meeting to explain the text amendment and site plan issues.
2. The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to provide the City with a reasonable and legally
permissible degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certaifl designated uses upon
the general welfare, public health and safety. In making this determination, 'whether or not the
conditional us is to be allowed, The City may consider the nature of the adjoining land or
buildings, whether or not a similar use is already in existence and located on the same
premises or on other lands close by, the effect upon traffic into and from the premieres, or on
any adjoining roads, and all such other or further factors as the City shall deem a requisite for
consideration in determining the effect of such use on the general welfare, public health and
safety.
Planning Case 92-25
October 6, 1992
Page-3-
Other general criteria to be considered when determining whether to approve of deny a
conditional permit include:
A. Comprehensive Plan. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the
specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official
Comprehensive Municipal Plan of the City.
B. Compatibility_. The proposed use is compatible with its adjacent land uses.
C. Performance Standards. The proposed use conforms with all applicable performance
standards contained in the Code.
D. No Depreciation in Value. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the
area in which it is proposed.
E. Zoning District Criteria. In addition to the above general criteria, the proposed CUP
meets the criteria specified for the various zoning districts.
1. In Business Districts (B-1. B-2. B-3. B-4):
a. Traffic. The proposed use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion.
b. Nearby Residences. Adjacent residentially-zoned land will not be
adversely affected because of traffic generation, noise, glare, or other
nuisance characteristics.
c. Effect on Other Businesses. Existing businesses will not be adversely
affected because of curtailment of customer trade bt'ought about by
intrusion of unduly heavy non-shopping traffic or general unsightliness.
3. In addition to the above listed general CUP criteria, the proposed text amendment allows
garden novelty stores with outdoor storage/sale areas subject to the following conditions:
A. Outdoor storage/sales area(s) shall not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) ~rcent
0f the gross floor area of the building.
B. Outdoor storage/sales ares(s) may be allowed in a front yard if a fifteen (15) foot
setback from public rights-of-way is provided and rea_uired fencing across front yard shall
be a least fifty (50) percent open for passage of air and light.
C. Outdoor storage/sales area(s) shall be fenced around its periphery and must be screened
form residential zoning districts. The design and materials used in constructing the
rea_uired fencing/screening shall be subject to City_ Council a_t)proval and constructed of
premium quality_ materials such as masonry_, brick, a_ualitY wood(s) and/or metal(s), not
incllj~ling wir~ weave/chain link. barb wire. or scrap metal materials.
D. Outdoor storage/sales area(s) must be surfaced with concrete, bituminous, or similar
ma,eri~l to control dust and to provide a clean, attractive and usable surface.
E. OutdOOr storage/sales area(s) do not take up parking space nece~ssary to meet the
rea_uirements of this code.
F. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the light source shall not be visible
from the public right-of-way or from neighboring residences and shall be in compliance
with Section 4.033(5) of this code.
Planning Case Report 92-25
October 6, 1992
Page -4-
Staff and the Planner find that the majority of these conditions are either met or exceeded by
the petitioners' plan.
4. The Design & Review Committee met with the petitioners on September 17th and the major
issues discussed included increased landscaping on the perimeter of the site, parking, curb cuts,
fence setback, fire connection, curbing/resurfacing, snow storage, roof top equipment, refuse
storage, building materials, and signage. Revised plans were submitted as a result of the
meeting.
5. Site plan issues that should be reviewed include the following:
A. Lot Coverages
Site Size = 100,524 sq. ft.
Building Size = 21,849 sq. ft. (21.7%)
Green Area = 26,000 sq. ft. (25.9%)
Parking = 41,060 sq. ft. (40,8%)
Other = 11,624 sq. ft. (11.6%)
B. Parking
City Code requires 8 spaces plus one per 800 square feet over 1,000 square feet of gross
floor area for a total of 34 parking spaces.
The submitted plan shows a total of 93 spaces; 91 standard and 2 handicapped.
C. Fence Detail
Front picket fence detail has been provided, per Design & Review.
D. Sign Detail
Front entrance sign, pylon sign, and building wall sign details have been provided,
reviewed by the Building Official, and are in compliance with sign regulations.
E. Landscaping
Revised landscaping plans have been submitted with the following changes, per Design
& Review:
*6 additional Junipers have been added to the front of the
building (for a total of 14)
'17 new Arborvitae have been added along the southwest
property line along the chain link fence to screen adjacent
R-3 zoning from plant storage area
*8 additional Daylily have been added to the front of the
building (for a total of 28)
An enlarged landscape schedule is attached to this report. A total of 225 shrubs and
trees will be added to the site.
F. C~rb Cuts
Two curb cuts currently exist on the site on Bass Lake Road and the proposed
development eliminates the curb cut closest to the Winnetka Avenue intersection, which
is viewed as highly positive. The remaining proposed 32-foot curb cut on Bass Lake
Road with new striping/directional arrows for one entry and two exits has been
approved by the City Engineer.
Planning Case Report 92-25
October 6, 1992
2age -5-
G. ~
An 8,000 square foot area has been designated for snow storage in the southwest corner
of the site.
H. Loading
The two existing loading docks in the rear will be demolished and a new recessed
loading dock will be provided on the southwest corner of the building.
I. Outdoor Sales/Storage
The outdoor sales/storage area is 26,000 square feet. The proposed CLIP amendment
states that outdoor sales/storage cannot exceed 125% of the gross building floor area.
The Lyndale storage area encompasses 119% for the gross floor area and meets the
standard.
$. F~ng¢ Setback
The Commission will need to determine if the proposed decorative fence located 10 feet
(at the closest point) from the front property lines (which juts back to about 13 feet from
the property line) is acceptable or not. The proposed code amendment calls for a 15-
foot setback. Staff prefers the "staggered" fence look for landscaping purposes and if
the petitioner is forced to move the fence back to 15 feet the aesthetically pleasing
"staggered" look may be eliminated for a "straight" fence. Traffic safety issues, however,
also need to be taken into consideration.
6. The Planning Consultant has made some suggestions for minor plan changes involving median
areas in the parking lot, revisions to parking stall arrangements, and customer loading zone
alterations and the Commission will need to determine if they want to incorporate these as
conditions of approval or not. Staff is satisfied with the revised plan as presented, but feels that
the planner has several good suggestions.
7. Per the attached letter form the City Engineer, it was his recommendation that with the
approval of this development the City seek an easement from Lyndale Garden Center at the
southerly property line for future ponding improvements and it was suggested that the petitioner
might share in the cost of these improvements. The petitioner is opposed to granting the
easement because it reduces outdoor storage area. It is the opinion of the City Attorney that
the City has no legal authority to require the easement because the petitioner is not creating
or increasing the drainage problem. Staff is recommending that the easement not be required
as a condition of approval.
8. Staff commends the petitioner for their cooperation in implementing a number of
recommendations from staff and Design & Review on the proposed plans.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the text amendment, conditional use permit and ,site/building plan
review/approval for the Lyndale Garden Center proposal subject to the following conditions:
1. Resolution of the fence setback issue
2. Annual CLIP review by staff
3. Other conditions or site plan changes suggested by the Planner that are approved by the
Commission.
Planning Case 92-25
October 6, 1992
Page -6-
Attachments: Section/Zoning/Topo Maps
Revised Site Plan
Floor Plan
Building Elevations
Grading/Drainage Plan
Revised Landscape Plan
Site Survey
Fence and Sign Details
Landscape Schedule
Planner's Report
Attorney Correspondence and Ordinance Amendment
Code Excerpts (B-2/B-4)
Engineer Letter-garment
Attorney Letter-Easement
PARK VILLAGE GREEN
GOLF
COURSE
ST. THERESA
NURSING
5700 ~ .~
N INTY
, NOSTERM&M WINNETKA
,IR NIGH SCHOOl. EI. EME~T&RY
$~OO . , SCHOOL
H H TH AVE. #.
NORTH RIDGE
..,~.3o CENTER ~[e,~o[~,,Ht e~ e~ ~07 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L'LtL
54 TH. AVE. N.
' 5, oo r, oi
PARK
VILLAGE GREEN
GOLF
COURSE
ST. THERESA
NURSING
R. 4
R.3
HOSTERMAN
JR *HIGH SCHOOL,
SCHOOl.
GROVE'
PARK
$STH AVE. N. 'TH
BEGIN
z z PARK
AVE.
o
POST
H~DR~NT
EXHIBIT F - GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN
TRAI'~SFORMER
GUARD POST
G~S MET[R
GAS
HYDRANT
LIGHT
o SCALE: ~' = 30'
EXHIBIT H- SITE SURVEY
?Fd O~- TO 6'1'cOON.t)
~OkL~: I" "" I '
"The Lawn and Garden Supers[ore" ~,_
,....
!
EVERGREEN & DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL
Plant Material
Qu~lltlt,/ Cmmtt~t N&me $1z~ R~t TYl~e L&t#l N&me
Notes
Northwest Associated Inc.
Consultants,
URBAN P L A N N I N G DES I G N · MARKET R ES E A RC H
PLANNING REPORT - Revised
TO: Doug Sandstad
FROM: Elizabeth Stockman/Alan Brixius
DATE: 24 September 1992
RE: New Hope - Lyndale Garden Center
FILE NO: 131.01 - 92.01
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
Preliminary site and building plans were submitted in August 1992
which proposed a Lyndale Garden Center in a vacant 21,840 square
foot building which Country Club Foods previously occupied. The
site is located at 8001 Bass Lake Road, just west of Winnetka
Avenue North. In response to the 28 August 1992 Planner's Report
and staff recommendations, revised site and landscape plans have
been submitted which include changes to proposed parking, loading,
landscaping, and fenced outdoor storage areas.
The site is zoned B-2, Retail Business. Current regulations
prohibit the proposed garden novelty store and development within
a building size in excess of 3,500 square feet. The applicant has
applied for a change in the text of the Zoning Code which will
require passage by a four-fifths vote of the full City Council
prior to consideration of the proposed development. A draft Zoning
Ordinance amendment has been prepared and is currently under review
by the City which would allow the proposed garden novelty store
(including outdoor sales/storage) as a conditional use within the
B-2 Zoning District. Approval of the zoning amendment is necessary
to allow this use within the B-2 Zoning District. As 'such, this
review also addresses the specific requirements of the proposed
Ordinance amendment. A number of conditions must be met prior to
site plan and/or CUP approval.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A - Site Location
Exhibit B - Revised Site Plan
5775 Wayzata Blvd.-Suite 555. St. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636.Fax. 595-9837
Exhibit C - Preliminary Floor Plan
Exhibit D - Preliminary ~levations
Exhibit E - Recommended Parking Lot Layout
Exhibit F - Grading and Drainage Plan
Exhibit G - Revised Landscape Plan
Exhibit H - Site Survey
RECOMMENDATION
Our office recommends approval of the proposed preliminary site and
building plans, provided the following conditions are met to the
satisfaction of the City:
1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance text change is approved which
would allow garden novelty stores with outdoor storage/sales
areas as conditional uses within the B-2 District.
2. Ail conditions be met, as outlined on pages 4 and 5 of this
report, prior to site plan and CUP approval.
3. Median areas are added in the parking area with curbing
utilized as discussed herein.
4. The 32 foot curb cut width is reviewed by the City Engineer
and approved by the City Council.
5. Revisions to parking stall arrangements be made as indicated
in Exhibit E.
6. A detailed lighting plan is submitted which shows the types,
sizes, and locations of lights to be used throughout parking
and exterior building areas of the site, including any new
fixtures which may be required.
7. The customer loading zone near the front outdoor sales/
storage area be revised to accommodate vehicles with trailers
and prevent interruption to the flow of traffic in the main
drive lane.
8. Decorative fencing proposed at the front of the building be
set back a minimum of 15 feet from the property line.
9. The scored block sides and rear of the building which are to
be maintained be painted and the rooftop equipment be screened
from view on all sides.
10. A detailed signage plan be submitted prior to final
development approval which indicates the type, size,
materials, and location(s) of the proposed sign(s).
2
ISSUF AND ANALYSIS
Zoning. The site is ~oned Bi2, Retail Business. The purpose of
the B-2, Retail Business District is to provide for low intensity,
retail or service outlets which deal directly with the customer for
whom the goods or services are furnished. The uses allowed in this
district are to provide goods and services on a limited community
market scale and located in areas which are well served by
collector or arterial street facilities at the edge of residential
districts.
The proposed garden novelty store is currently not a permitted use
within the B-2 District and development within a building size in
excess of the 3,500 square foot maximum is also prohibited.
However, the applicant has requested a Zoning Ordinance text change
which would allow garden novelty stores within the B-2 Zoning
District, and the City initiated a text change that would eliminate
the need to comply with the maximum building size requirement as
stipulated for limited B-4 uses within the B-2 District provisions.
The proposed zoning text amendments have been viewed positively for
several reasons, as outlined below.
1. The proposed garden store is in compliance with the purpose of
the B-2 Zoning District given its location along a major
street corridor and market focus toward adjacent residential
areas and communities proximate to New Hope.
2. Given the limited number of permitted uses which are allowed
in the B-2 District, and limitation on the building size, the
vacant grocery store facility and site has been difficult to
red~Melop. The proposed garden store is viewed as a positive
reuse of the site.
3. Considerin9 adjacent residential and school properties, the B-
2 District provides land use protection and allows the
proposed garden center to compatibly coexist with surrounding
area uses.
4. Frank's Nursery, which is located just east of the subject
site on Winnetka Avenue and also zoned B-2, was recently
allowed to expand from its legal non-conforming standing to a
buildin9 size in excess of the 3,500 square foot maximum.
Given the similarities in use and locational characteristics
between the Frank's Nursery and proposed Lyndale Garden Center
sites, a precedent has been set which should be upheld.
5. City planning staff have approved the elimination of the 3,500
square foot building size minimum requirement.
3
Zoning Ordinance Text Chanqe - Outdoor Sales. An additional text
change in the Zoning Code must also be considered in order for the
proposed redevelopment to occur. Outdoor sales and/or storage of
goods is not a permitted use within the B-2 District. The
applicant is proposing approximately 26,000 square feet of open,
outdoor sales, and storage space. As such, the area exceeds the
outdoor sales and services limitation of 30 percent of the gross
floor area of the principal use as required in other commercial (B-
3 and B-4) zoning districts. The Codes and Standards Committee did
not want to change the B-2 District to resemble the more intense B-
4 District. In order to be more site and use specific, as well as
provide specific site performance standards, the staff recommended
that garden novelty stores be allowed as a conditional use.
For this reason, the draft text amendment, if approved by the City
Council, would allow garden novelty stores with outdoor
storage/sales areas subject to the following Ordinance and
performance standards. These proposed conditions are as follows,
which must be addressed prior to site plan and CUP approval:
1. Outdoor storage/sales area(s) do not exceed one hundred
twenty-five (125) percent of the gross floor area of the
building.
2. Outdoor storage/sales area(s) may be allowed in a front yard,
provided:
a. A fifteen (15) foot setback from public rights-of-way is
provided.'
b. Fences extending across front yards be aesthetically
pleasing and at least fifty (50) percent open for passage
of air and light.
c. Required fencing be constructed of premium quality
materials such as masonry, brick, quality wood(s) and/or
metal(s), not including wire weave/chair link, barb wire,
or scrap metal materials.
d. Fences do not exceed seven (7) feet in height.
3. Outdoor sales/storage area(s) will require a fence around
their periphery and must be screened from residential zoning
districts. The design and materials used in constructing the
required fencing/screening are subject to the approval of the
City Council.
4. All lighting shall be hooded and so ~irected that the light
source shall not be visible from the public right-of-way or
from neighboring residences and shall be in compliance with
Section 4.033 (5) of this Code.
4
5. Outdoor storage/~ales a~ea(s) must be surfaced with concrete,
bituminous, or similar material to control dust and to provide
a clean, attractive and usable surface.
6. Outdoor storage/sales area(s) do not take up parking space
necessary to meet the requirements of this Code.
It should be noted that Frank's Nursery currently contains outdoor
sales/storage area and was recently allowed to expand as a non-
conforming use within the B-2 District. Given this precedent, it
may be difficult to deny the applicant's request for the same type
of use on the proposed Lyndale Garden Center site. The proposed
Zoning Ordinance amendment is being pursued to specifically
accommodate the garden novelty store use. At the same time,
approval of the request and associated Zoning Ordinance amendment
would eliminate Frank's as a non-conforming business.
Surrounding Area Uses. Land uses which surround the proposed
Lyndale Garden Center site include the following:
Direction Land Use Zoning
North Adair Liquors/Printmakers B-2, Retail Business
Northwest St. Theresa Nursing Home R-4, High Density
Residential
Northeast Amoco Station B-3, Auto Oriented
Business
South Hosterman Jr. High/Winnetka R-l, Single Family
Elementary Schools Residential
East Sinclair Station B-3, Auto Oriented
Business
West Apartment Complexes R-3, Medium Density
Residential
The co~Lercial nature of the proposed use is complimentary to the
existing B-2 and B-3 commercial facilities. With proper site
planning and landscape screening, this use can compatibly coexist
with adjacent residential uses.
5
Lot Area, Width and Setback Requirements. The following provisions
are applicable to the proposed development and must be met prior to
approval of any site Or building plans.
Required Proposed
Minimum Lot Area i acre 2.31 acres
Minimum Lot Width 100 feet 400 feet
Building Setbacks:
Front 35 feet 70 feet
Side 10 feet 10 feet
(from residential
district) 25 feet 105+ feet
Rear 35 feet 35 feet
Thoroughfare
(greater of two) 90' from centerline
50' from right-
of-way line 70 feet
The proposed garden center facility meets or exceeds all the lot
area, width and setback requirements of the B-2 Zoning District, as
shown above.
Parking. The submitted plan shows a total of 93 parking spaces on
site; 91 standard and two handicapped. Section 4.036 (10) (t) of
the Zoning Ordinance (various auto intensive uses) requires eight
spaces plus one per 800 square feet over 1,000 square feet of gross
floor area for a total of 34 parking spaces. The provision of more
parking space than is required is viewed positively, however,
several deficiencies exist in the proposed parking lot layout which
should be addressed prior to final site plan approval.
1) Curb Cut Width. The curb cut along Bass Lake Road is shown on
the plan as being 32 feet wide. The standard allowable width
for commercial facilities is 26 feet, thus revised site plans
are in excess of this standard. However, it is viewed as
beneficial to maintain the 32 foot wide curb cut as shown on
submitted plans given the type of land use the curb cut will
serve, the extent and nature of the vehicular traffic
anticipated and the type/width of street which serves the
property. The designation of entrance and turn lanes is also
viewed positively.
It should be noted that two curb cuts currently exist along
Bass Lake Road on the subject site. The proposed development
shows an elimination of one curb cut and subsequently, an
increase in the distance of the curb cut from the Winnetka
Avenue intersection and neighboring curb cuts. While this is
viewed as highly positive for the safe movement of vehicles in
the area, it does, however, necessitate that trucks utilize
6
the same access point as all other traffic. In this regard,
the 32 foot curb-cut would be advantages in order to provide
for the additional turning movement that trucks require. The
32 foot wide opening may be permitted after review by the City
Engineer and approval of the City Council.
2) Surfacing/Curbing. During a recent site inspection of the
subject site, it was noted that the existing paved areas
remain in a deteriorated state with many cracks, potholes, and
weeds throughout. The proposed development should include
complete resurfacing of the parking and drive lane areas. The
site plans show curbing around the perimeter of the entire
parking lot as required in Section 4.036 of the City Zoning
Ordinance.
3) Parking Stall Arrangement. While the design of the proposed
parking area is generally positive, a conflict exists between
the customer loading area and the two parking stalls directly
west of this point. It is probable that parked vehicles would
be unable to back out of these two spots when other customers
are picking up merchandise. It is recommended that the two
spaces be eliminated, as shown in Exhibit E, to avoid
potential aggravation or inconvenience of patrons.
Additionally, a conflict exists at the northwest corner of the
site with the proposed arrangement of parking stalls. Rows of
parking which meet at an angle less than 90 degrees do not
allow for proper backing of vehicles. The two-way drive lane
arrangement necessitates that vehicles be able to back up and
travel in either direction. Thus, it is recommended that the
site plan be revised as shown in Exhibit E in response to the
above mentioned issues and to maintain a uniform drive lane
width.
4) Handicapped Parking. Two handicapped parking stalls have been
provided on site, which is the required number given the total
number of parking spaces. One stall must be provided for
every 50 parking spaces thus two handicapped stalls are
adequate. Additionally, the location of the handicapped
stalls adjacent to the entrance, on either side of the door is
viewed as acceptable in meeting the safety and mobility needs
of impaired persons.
5) Screening. The City Zoning Ordinance requires that all open,
off-street parking areas of five or more spaces shall be
screened and landscaped from abutting residential districts.
In this regard, screening is required along the south and west
sides of the parking/loading areas. The submitted plans show
six Amur Maple and three Crabapple trees (nine total) along
the western periphery of the parking lot and four Ash trees
(relocated from along Bass Lake Road) along the south side of
the site. Given the deteriorated state of the site as it
7
currently exists, and the natural topographic buffering along
the south side of-the s~te, the proposed landscape screening
is considered acceptable. Additionally, the removal of
existing asphalt, planting of trees, and sod along the west
property line is also viewed positively.
6) Lighting. The submitted plans do not include a detailed
lighting plan for the parking or other site areas. Two light
pole standards are currently located on the subject site
within the proposed parking area which are to be reused. One
will be moved to the end of the northernmost double row of
parking spaces adjacent to the main drive land and one will be
moved to the loading area. Additional light standards are to
be maintained at the front and rear of the building. The
adequacy of all existing light standards should be evaluated
by the City Engineer. It is possible that additional lighting
will be required and reuse of the lights may require painting
or repair.
7) Snow Storage. An area of approximately 8,000 square feet has
been designated in the southwest portion of the site for snow
storage purposes which represents approximately 20 percent of
the proposed parking lot area. The section of fencing between
the outdoor storage and parking areas is to be removed during
the Winter months to allow snow plow access to the rear yard
area. The location and size of the snow storage area appears
to be adequate, however, the plan should be subject to review
and comment by the City Engineer.
7) Recommended Parking Lot Layout. Given the issues associated
with the design of the parking area as indicated above, a
redesign and recommended layout of the parking lot has been
proposed as shown in Exhibit E. The layout more adequately
responds to vehicle maneuvering needs.
a) While curbing has been provided around the periphery of
the parking area as is required by Ordinance, the
recommended plan also indicates additional curbed medians
for safety reasons which aid in identification of drive
lanes and provide space for landsdaping/plantings to
improve the aesthetic quality on site and help to buffer
the effects of the parking area.
b) More landscaping and screening space has been provided on
the recommended parking lot layout through the
elimination of unnecessary parking/paved areas in the
northwest and southwest portions of the site.
c) A revised customer loading area has been 'provided
adjacent to the front outdoor sales/storage area for
safety and vehicle maneuvering purposes. The recommended
arrangement provides a pull-in type arrangement of
8
slightly greater length which can better accommodate
vehicles with tra~lers without blocking the flow of
traffic within the main drive lane.
Loading. The applicant has proposed the elimination of the
existing loading docks at the rear of the building. A new loading
area has been proposed at the southwest corner of the building as
shown on submitted plans. The City Zoning Ordinance requires that
loading berths be located no closer than 100 feet from a
residential district unless within a structure. The site plan
shows a recessed loading dock at the southwest corner of the
building in response to this requirement. The location of the
loading area, as proposed by the applicant, is viewed as
acceptable, given the existing site circumstances, and elimination
of the existing nonconformity.
The front left outside path of an average (55 foot) length semi-
truck has been shown on the submitted site plan, as will be
necessary for trucks entering the site. Trucks leaving the site
will need to utilize the drive lane along the west side of the site
to pull ahead and back up in order to obtain the proper angle to
exit via the main driveway. While not an optimum situation, the
arrangement is acceptable given the pre-existing site
circumstances.
Screeninq/Landscaping. The City Zoning Ordinance requires that
screening be provided along the boundary of the subject property
where any business use abuts land zoned for residential use (south
and west sides). Specific standards typically require that
screening form a complete barrier to a minimum of six feet in
height. However, given the long term pre-existing non-conforming
and deteriorated state of the old Country Club Market property, the
proposed plantings represent a vast improvement. Additionally, the
neighboring apartment buildings and school ball fields are set back
a significant distance so as to compatibly coexist with the
proposed garden center use.
A landscape plan has been submitted which shows plantings
throughout the site. The plan shows a variety of well chosen
species along the front (north) and east sides of the site which
buffer hard surfaced building and parking areas, as well as enhance
the aesthetic quality of the front yard area. Likewise, trees and
shrubs with screening capabilities have been located strategically
along the west and south sides of the site to buffer parking,
loading, and outdoor storage areas. The landscape plan represents
a positive arrangement of elements, as shown, but may require
slight revision based on recommended changes, as shown in Exhibit
E, including additional medians and change of parking"orientation
in the northwest corner of the site.
9
Drainage/Utilities. A drainage and utility plan has been submitted
as required for the proposed development. The plan should be
subject to review by the City Engineer prior to final plan
approval. A drainage easement may be required along the south
property line as determined by the City Engineer which should be
included on the plan.
Building Appearance. Exhibit D indicates that in addition to the
proposed glass greenhouse structure, wood siding will replace the
existing corrugated metal facia and a new entrance/overhang will be
constructed. This is viewed as positive for an overall improvement
in building appearance. The existing scored block on the sides and
rear of the building is to be maintained as is. It is recommended
that the block be repainted, as years of wear and some graffiti are
evident. Additionally, the rooftop equipment should be screened.
Given the site location at a lower elevation than portions of Bass
Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue, the rooftop is highly visible from
surrounding areas and should be screened on all sides.
Fencing. The submitted plans propose a seven foot decorative steel
fence at the front of the building and a seven foot chain link
fence at the rear and sides of the building to enclose plant and
other materials for sale. As mentioned previously, several
conditions must be made as part of the CUP approval process, five
of which specifically address fencing requirements as outlined on
page 4 of this report.
Ail outdoor storage areas include fencing around their periphery
and fencing within the front yard which is in excess of 50 percent
open for passage of air and light as is required. The design and
materials proposed for the front yard fence are aesthetically
pleasing and of high quality. The proposed fencing does not exceed
the seven foot height limitation.
There is, however, one aspect of the proposed fencing which is not
acceptable as shown on submitted plans. A fifteen (15) foot
setback from public rights-of-way is required, but only a ten (10)
foot setback has been indicated. While the design and arrangement
of the fencing and associated plantings is viewed positively, a 15
foot setback is deemed necessary to provide proper visibility and
landscape/aesthetic quality along Bass Lake Road for the following
reasons:
1. Assuming that materials will be stored adjacent to the fence,
partial or full blockage of views from vehicles may occur.
This will provide a safety hazard for motorists attempting to
enter onto Bass Lake Road.
2. Minimal area for landscape/boulevard plantings is available.
It would be beneficial to provide more area between the fence
and property line for aesthetic purposes as well as ensuring
ample growth area for plantings.
10
Outdoor Sales/Storaqe-Areas.. The outdoor storage /sales areas as
shown on submitted plans total approximately 26,000 square feet.
The building square footage is approximately 21,840 square feet.
As a requirement of CUP approval, outdoor storage/sales areas
cannot exceed 125 percent of the gross floor area of the building.
The proposed outdoor storage/sales areas on the Lyndale Garden
Center property encompass 119 percent of the gross floor area of
the building and thus meet this standard.
The outdoor storage/sales areas are fenced around their periphery
as also required. A portion of the proposed storage/sales space is
to be located on existing paved areas. It is also a requirement of
CUP approval that sales/storage areas be surfaced with concrete,
bituminous or similar material to control dust and to provide a
clean, attractive and usable surface. The existing paved areas
will be subject to review by the City Building Inspector and may
require resurfacing and/or repair to meet this City standard.
Determination should be made as to the exact types of materials
which will be stored within the fenced outdoor storage/sales areas.
While it is not anticipated to be a problem, the aesthetic quality
of the storage areas and manner in which they will be kept must be
ensured. Placing conditions on the approval of the development may
be an option to control the types of materials which are stored
within the fenced outdoor areas. It is recommended that no refuse,
debris, dead/dying plant material, or junk be stored within the
front yard outdoor storage area.
Si~naqe. Two signs have been proposed on the subject site, one at
the entry to the parking area and one at the northeast corner of
the property. While the signs appear acceptable, detailed plans
which indicate the type, size, and materials of the signs will be
required prior to final development approval. The proposed signs
will be subject to rules outlined in Section 3.40 of the City Code.
Care should be exercised so as not to impede the vision of vehicles
or concentration of drivers in any way.
Lighting, A detailed lighting plan has not been submitted for the
proposed redevelopment. The submittal of a detailed plan will be
required for review and comment by City Staff. Additionally,
evaluation of the proposed reuse and movement of existing fixtures
will be necessary to ensure that they provide adequate lighting and
are in good working order. It is possible that additional lighting
may be necessary as may the painting and/or repair of existing
lights/poles.
Refuse. The refuse area has been located and screened properly at
the southwest corner of the building according to Zoning Ordinance
requirements.
11
CONCLUSION
Given the number of issues which pertain to the proposed Lyndale
Garden Center development as highlighted herein, it is recommended
that revised site plans be submitted which address these issues.
We recommend approval of the proposed development subject to the
conditions as listed in the Executive Summary of this report and
approval by the Planning Commission and City Council.
pc: Dan Donahue
Kirk McDonald
12
N
)N Q~oll N(~O~
;
~ ~ ~':
AQUILA
,,~,,,.,~., ..,~ EXHIBIT A -,SITE LOCATION
EXHIBIT E - RECOMMENDED SITE LAYOUT
OCT-- 2--92 FR I 1~ : 10 CORR I CK & SONBRALL P - 02
Co :uc : &
~lnburgh ~u~e O~ce P~
8525 ~br~k Cmss~
B~ Park. Mlnne~ 55443
WAX (0~)
October 2, 1992
Mr. Kirk McDonald
Management Assistant
City of New Hope
4401Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE: Amendment to Proposed Ordinance 92-15
Garden Store as CUP in B-2 Zone
Our File No: 99.49215
Dear Kirk:
Please find enclosed an amended Ordinance No. 92-15 incorporating
a condition permitting fences not exceeding seven feet in height
for outdoor storage and sa]es purposes that we discussed in our
October 2nd, 1992 te]ephone conversation.
Contact me if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
$teven A. $ondrall
slf
Enclosure
cc: Doug Sandstad (w/eno)
A1Brix~us (w/eric)
OCT-- 2--9~ FR I 1~ : I I CORR I CK & SONDRALL P . 84 ~
ORDINANCE NO, 98-15
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING NEW HOPE CODE
SECTI[ON 4.114 (4) BY PERMITTING
GARDEN NOVELTY STORES AS A CONDI[TIONAL
USE IN A B-2 ZONE
The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains:
Section .1,, Section 4.114 (4)(j) "C__r...iteria fo~ (a) t,,h_roug~
(.i_1" 'of the New Hope City Code is hereby renumbered to Section
4,114 (4)(k) and amended to read (a) through (j),
~ectton~, Section 4,114 (4)(j) "_G.arden,Novelty Stores" of
the New Hope City Code is hereby added to read as follows:
(j) Garden__Novelty ~.tores. ,W,,jth outdo,,,o.r stora__.qe/sale areas
_s_u_b_.i_e.~.,t._t_p__t..he fo 11 owi_n.q__co__nd i t i
(t) Outdoor storm. Q._eZsa]es area(,s) shal_.l,not exceed one
Jqundre.d...t_w_enty_-_flv, e. (125). oe~_ceot_ of the gros~
_f_l._o,.o_r_..~mrej of t,h,,,,,e, buildi_ng~.
Outdo_o.r s~o~.qe/sales area(_s_)_may, be allowed in ~
_f__ro_.n_t yard if a fi, fteen (_1_.5_.) foot setback from
publ_.~c riJt_h_t_s-of-way is ~_rovided._requi._red f.e. ncin,q
across front yards shal~ be at least flfty (5_0_]_
p__e_rcent .o_p_e~_~as~..a. ae of, air and 1 i~ht,__and said
,,.f..m.,,n,.,c_~ .n.g__d...o._es__p,,ot ex_c.e, ed seve_o__(_7._) feet in_. he_i_g, bt ._
( i i i ) Outdoor st ora~.e_/_~_a._! es , , a,~,,,a(s ) she11 b,e,, fenced
j~lJQ~L__it~, psr~pber¥ ~n~d. must,,, be screened from
resident.~.al zoning district,s., The de,igc and
mat e r,i,,a,.1,,,s used i n ~onst r u ,¢,t.~,,Dq the reou t__re_d_
f__e_n_c.j_ng/.,.screeni n,q__s_hal 1 be,,.s,u,,biact to C~tY Council_
a_p_p_r__ov a 1 and constructed of Premium qualt~¥
,m,...a.,t,.e..r.~,_a.],~,_ .s..,u...c.h_,_a.m. _.,.m._a~_o.n ry, b r i c k
an__~or metal(s).~_Oo_t. _tncludin.q wire weave/chain
l_.i.,.n_K..~_~.~..r.b._w__~ r__~e,,_~r__s.crap, metal mater_~ al s.,
(iv) o..,u,,,t,,d.o,,,O,~,,.,.SX.p..r~a.e.Z..sm.__!l,.e,s area[~)_...m.u_st be,,surfac_ ed wi..___~t.h_
,.C..0 p ~ _r, e t_ e, .~±t_u_m__i_n_o_.u....s. or simt lar material tq
c.o_.n.t__r~d_ujt and to provide a clean, at_tractive,,and.
usable surface.
(v) Outdoor storage/sales ,,ar, e_a(s)-, do _n,q,.,t, take up
p_.~_r__k!.ng_sp_a¢_e._necessary to meet the reouiremen,t,s,._o~'
this Code.
OCT-- 2--9~ ~ I 15 : i I CORR I CK & SOND~ALL ~ . 0~
(v~) All l~q..ht, i_n.~ shal.!_be hooded a0. d...so, d~rected that
the .l~ht source shall ...... ,n....ot be v4sible from fha
p_~bl.~¢ ri.ght-of-way or .f..r_o.m ne~.a.h, borina, residences.
..a_.n...d._....s.h.a.].] be _~D_~cQ.m_p.]j.~nce with ~ctlon
g_f_ this c_ode,
section 3. Effective Date, This Ordinance shall be effective
upon its passage and publication.
Dated the .... day of .... , 1992.
Edw. J, Er~ckson, Mayor
Attest;
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
(Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun-Post the day of
._, 1992.) .,
4.11, 4.111, 4.112, 4.115,
4.114 (1) - (2)(a)
4.11 "B-2# RETAIL BUSINESS DISTRICT
4.111 Purpose. The purpose of the "B-2" Retail Business District is to
provide for low intensity, retail or service outlets which deal
directly with the customer for whom the goods or services are
furnished. Th~ uses allowed in this district are to provide goods and
services on a limited community market scale and located in areas
which are well served by collector or arterial street facilities at
the edge of residential districts.
4.112 Permitted Uses~ B-2. The following are permitted uses in a "B-2"
District:
(1) Less Intensive Use District. Ail permitted uses as allowed in
the "B-l" Limited Neighborhood Business District.
(2) Cleaning. Laundry and dry cleaning provided the process used
meets the requirements of the Fire Prevention Code for use in
buildings with other occupancies.
(3) Food. Grocery stores and supermarkets providing the use does not
exceed 21,500 square feet of floor space.
) Limited B-4 Uses. Ali "B-4" uses that are not marked with an
asterisk(*) providing such use does not occupy more than 3,500
square feet of floor area per location.
4.113 Permitted Accessory Uses~ B-2. The following are permitted accessory
uses in a "B-2" District:
(1) Less Intensive Use District. Ail permitted accessory uses as
allowed in a "B-l" District.
(2) Drive-Up~ Financial~ One lane drive-up service windows for
federal and state regulated financial institutions, providing the
facility is approved as part of the original construction
approval of the building. If a service window is to be added to
an existing building, or if more than one lane is to be provided,
a conditional use permit procedure shall be used and the facility
must be found to meet the criteria of Section 4.201 and the
Council shall apply such conditions as it deems necessary to
reasonably control traffic, noise and other nuisance
characteristics.
4.114 Conditional Uses~ B-2. The following are conditional uses in a "B-2"
District: (Requires a conditional use permit based upon procedures
set forth in and regulated by Section 4.20, and compliance with 4.036,
Off-Street Parking and 4.037, Off-Street Loading; Chapter 3, Signing)
(1) Less Intensive Use District. Ail conditional uses, subject to
the same conditions as allowed in the "B-l" District2
(2) Multiple Family. Multiple family buildings provided that:
(a) Compatible. Development is compatible with existing and
planned use of the area and conflicts are not created
between commercial and residential use and activities.
4-01
072684
(b) Set-backs. The lot, set-back and building requirements
outlined in Sections 4.032, 4.033, 4.034, and 4.035 are
complied with.
(c) Open space. At least five hundred square feet of useable
open space as d~fined in Section 4.022 is provided~.for
each dwelling unit.
(d)Street Access. The development is adequately served by a
collector or arterial street.
(3) PUD Commercial. Commercial planned unit development as regulated
by Section 4.19.
(4) Commercial Enterprises. Various commercial enterprises as
follows:
(a)Banks. Savings and loans, credit unions, banks and other
financial institutions.
(b) ~lectrical Appliance Stores. Including incidental repair
and assembly but not fabricating or manufacturing.
(c) Fabric Stores.
(d) Off-Sale
Liquor.
(e) Offset .Printing and Copy Service.
( ~ ) Restaurants.
(g) Camera and Photographic Supplies.
(h) Book Stores.
¢£) ~edical.
preceding must meet the following criteria:
(i) Size of O~eration. The scale of operation is in
keeping wlth the stated intent of District (see Section
4.111).
(ii) Traffic Volume. Traffic volumes and circulation
creates a minimum of conflict and shall be approved by
the review of the City Engineer and the City Council.
4-62
' 0726~4
4.13, 4.131, 4.132, 4.133
4.13 "B-4" COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT
4.131 Purpose. The purpose of t~e "B-4" Community Business District is to
provide for the establishment of commercial and service activities
which draw from'and serve customers from the entire community or sub-
region.
4.132 Permitted Uses, B-4. The following are permitted uses in a "B-4#
District:
(1) Less Intensive Use Districts. Ail permitted uses in "B-l" and "B-
(2) Antique Shops
(3) Art/School Supplies, Book, Office Supplies, Stationery Stores
(4) Bicycle Sales/Repair
(5) Candy, Ice Cream, Ice Milk, Popcorn, Nuts, Frozen Desserts, Packaged
Snacks, Soft Drinks
(6) Carpet, Rugs and Tile and Other Floor Coverings
(7 Coin and Philatelic Stores
(8 Commercial and Professional Offices
(9 Copy and Printing Service
(10 Costume and Clothes Rental
(11 Office Equipment Stores
*(12 Enclosed Boat and Marine Sales
*(13 Dry Cleaning Including Plant Accessory heretofore, Pressing and
Repairing
(14) Drug Store
(15) Employment Agencies
(16) Florist Shop
(17) Furniture Stores
,(19 ) Furriers when uondn~a~nly for Retail Trade~ on Premises
) Garden Novelty Stores
(P~ Gift or Nove]~.~ ~+erc~-~
21) Hobby Store
22) Insurance Sales
23) Locksmith
24) Meat Market but Not Including Locker Storage
25) Paint and Wallpaper S~]es
26) Plumbing, Television-, adio, Electrical Sales and Such Repair
* 27) Theaters, not Outdoo*. , ire-In Type
28) Toy Stores
* 29) Custom Manufacturing and Repair
30) Tailor Shops
31) Jewelry Shops and Other Similar Uses
32) Travel Bureaus~ Transportation, Ticket Offices
33) Variety Stores~ 5/10 Cent Stores, Stores of Similar Nature
34) Wearing Apparel
35) Banks, Savings/Loans, Credit Unions, Other Financial Institutions
* 36) Public Garage/Parking Ramp
37) Record Shop
38) Real Estate Sales
(39) Building Material Sales of Retail Nature in Totally Enclosed
Building
(40) Fabric Stores
(41) Camera/Photographic Supplies
(42 Restaurant
(43 Off-Sale Liquor Stores
(44 Medical
(45 S~orting Goods Stores
(46 Pet Shops
(47 Hardware Stores
4.133 Permitted Accessory Uses~ B-4. The following are permitted accessory
uses in a "B-4# District:
(1) Less Intensive Use District. Ail permitted accessory uses in a
"B-3" District.
4-70
072684
Bonestroo o,o G. Bonestroo, RE. Howard A. Sanford, RE.Michael R Rau, RE. Miles B. Jensen, RE.
Robert ~/. Rosene, PEYK~ith A. Gordon, RE. Agnes M. Ring, ^.I.C.P. U Phillip Gravel IlL RE,
Joseph C. Anderlik. RE. Robert R. FYeffede. PE. Thomas ~ Peterson. RE. Karen L. ~Viemeri, PE.
Richard E. Turner, RE. David O, Loskota, RE. James R. Maland, RE. E Todd Foster,
Glenn ~, Cook, RE. Robert C. Russek, AkA, Jerry D Pertzsch. RE. Kei~ R. Yapp, RE.
Anderlik ,x Jer ^..our o ,PE en e hRA e on. RE. ,h wnD. Gus a,son,
~o~ert G. ~hunichL PE. Mark ~. Hanson. PE Mark R EoJ~, RE. Cecil~o O~v~e~
*~nior Consultant Ted K. Field, RE, Ga~ ~ Morien. RE. Leo M. Paweisky
Thomas R. Ande~on. A.I.A. Danie~ J. Edge~on, RE Harlan M. Olson
"-'cng,neers & Architects ~o~ c. Burgardt, RE. Day K. Kirschenman, RE. James F. Engelhardt
Thomas E. Angus, PE. Philip J. Cas~ll,
Ismael Ma~inez, RE. Mark D, Wallis,
September 25, 1992
City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Ave. N.
New Hope, MN 55428
Attn: Mr. Kirk McDonald
Re: Lyndale Garden Center
8001 Bass Lake Road
Our File No. 34 Gen.
Dear Kirk,
Our letter dated August 28 for the above project recommended the storm water retention area on the
school property be expanded onto the proposed Lyndale Garden Center site to improve the storm water
retention for this area. Also, attached is a letter from Boisclair Corporation responding to the recent
flooding they experienced at the Park Acres Apartments on September 15, 1992. Although their letter
references the blockage in the 6" pipe, from an engineering standpoint the lack of storage and direction
of overflow from the retention area is the major concern. Therefore, as previously suggested, it's strongly
recommended a drainage and utility easement be dedicated over the southerly portion of the Lyndale
Garden Center site as shown on the attached sketch. The drainage and utility easement will allow for
additional storm water storage and redirecting the storm water overflow from Park Acres Apartment to
the rear area of the proposed Lyndale Garden Center site.
It's suggested if the City is interested in proceeding with construction improvements at this time that the
City initiate the work. The funding could be negotiated between Boisclair Corporation, Lyndale Garden
Center, possibly the school district and the City. It's estimated the construction cost for the improvements
being considered is $15,000 to $20,000.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at this office.
Yours very truly,
MarinA. Hanson
Encl.
34.cor
2335 ~/est Highway 36 · St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 · 612-636-4600
OEVELOPING OUALIP( INVESTMENT~ IN REAL ESTATE
September 18, 1992
Dan Donahue
City Manager - New Hope
4401 Xylon Ave N
New Hope MN 55428
RE: Recurring Flooding
Park Acres Apartments
8007 Bass Lake Rd.
Dear Mr. Donahue:
This week's rainfall is the third significant rain (3 inches
or more) that resulted, in the townhouses at the southwest
end of our property flooding 1% feet since the city built
the holding pond.
After the initial flood experienced on September 3, 1991 we
met with you and Mark Hansen to discuss options to modify
the ponding area to alleviate the persistent problem that we
thought had been solved by the ponding improvement. We were
to write a letter to initiate a follow-up action, however we
chose to wait to determine whether the September 3rd flood
was an aberration and if not, gain further experience with
subsequent flooding to better assure ourselves of a reliable
resolution to our continuing problem.
After the September 3rd rain it was determined the new 6
inch pipe was plugged and required a clean out by the city.
We increased the berm height situated on our property by 18"
for 30 lineal feet as added insurance thinking with' the
cleaned out pipe our problems would be solved. The April
13, 1992 -- 4 inch rain appeared to have justified.this
assumption because no flooding occurred. However, the July
2nd - 3 inch rain disproved this notion, resulting in a 1%
foot flooding condition. Again the 6 inch pipe required
clean cut. The recent September 15th flood once again
required the 6 inch pipe to be cleaned.
It became therefore obvious to us the 6 inch pipe needs to
be replaced with a much larger pipe (12 inches or larger)
that will be less prone to blockage. In addition, the berm
3005 OTTAWA AVE. · ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 · PHONE: (612) 922-3881 · FAX: (612) 922-3071
should be extended it's'entire length heightening it by at
least 2 feet.
In a phone conversation with Mark Hansen e~anding the
holding pond is a possibility coupled with adding another
holding pond on the proposed Lyndale Garden Center property
would perhaps finally resolve our flooding condition in
addition to increasing the pipe size and the be~ height.
We are re~esting the City of New Hope to re-address this
issue with ~e affected property o~ers in an effort to
e~editiously resolve this problem prior to e~eriencing
next spring's rain. We would accept our fair share of the
costs as an additional assessment to finally get this
problem behind us.
I am looking fo~ard to your response and direction in this
matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate
to call me.
Sincerely,
President
cc: Ada PeSa - MHFA
Sally Ruffenach
Jim Connell
Mark Hansen - City Engineer
oCT-- 2-'=)2 F R [ :l. :~; : I ~ C O R R T C K & $ O i"l ]:l R I~I L- L- P . 0 2
CORRIcK& ,,~ONDRAi, L
A ~N~'i'N~I~INtP CHI II'[~I~IE~I~I.O'NAL
L~AL
¢o~w,.i.,~4~w m~ts,u, o~a~ ~*' ~lnb~ ~ecufiv¢ Office P~
~v~. ~, eoND~u,..~ 8525 ~br~k C~st~
TELEPH~E (el~ 4~1
PAX (61~ 42~7
October 2, 1992
Kirk McDonald
Management Asst.
City of New Hope
4401Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE: Lyndale Garden Center Conditional Use Permit
Our File No; 99.49215
Dear Kirk:
I have now had a chance to review the September 25th, la92 City
Engineer's letter in connection with a proposed ponding easement on
the Country Club site at 8001 Sass Lake Road. You have asked the
question whether a ponding or drainage easement could be required
from the developer of the property, Lyndale Garden Center, as a
condition of a CUP.
Basicalqy, acquiring an easement in this manner will be closely
scrutinized in that it is a taking of private property for a public
purpose without compensation to the property owner. This kind of
"exaction" wtll be upheld only if the required easement dedication
is necessary to put the property to a use that would otherwise be
impermissible because of unreasonable burdens it would place on the
public facilities. [n other words, the easement dedication from
the Lyndale Garden development would be valid if the development as
proposed would unreasonably burden the public storm sewer system.
Based on our discussions, it is my understanding that the
development proposal of Lyndale Gardens would not create a drainage
problem necessitating the ponding easement dedication. If that
understanding is correct, the easement dedication would probably be
construed as an unconstitutional taking of private property for s
publto purpose without just compensation disguised as a police
power regulation. Zf Lyndale Gardens development will not create
a drainage problem, we will be required to initiate an eminent
domain action to condemn for the easement and pay the property
OCT-- 2--92 FR I 1 ~ = 14 CORR I OK & SONDRALL P . 0S
Kirk McDonald
October 2, 1992
Page 2
owner the fair market v~lue for the easement and any severance
damages suffered by the remainder property. ! do not believe we
could impose an easement dedication as a condition for a CUP and
take the easement without payment if the proposed development would
not create a drainage problem.
! have also examined the issue of whether the City has any duty to
the Boisclair Corporation to protect the Park Acres Apartments from
recurring flooding resulting from an overflow of the existin9
ponding facilities, The 1988 case of ChabQt v,,, ,City o5 Sauk
a~_j..d~ 422 N.W,2d 708 is dispositive of the Question, The City
does not have a duty to protect property owners from all damage due
to the overflow of drainage facilities, We do have a duty to
repair and maintain our storm sewer systems~ but the Ch_abot~ case
(copy attached) holds that a failure to tnste~ll a system that is
adequate to take care of all water is not the basis of tort
liability against the City,
If you have any further questions~ please do not hesitate to
contact me.'
Very truly yours,
Steven A. Sondrall
slf3
Enclosure
cc: Daniel J. Donahue (w/en~)
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 92-26 ~
Request: Request for Conditional Use Permit, Setback Variance, and Site/Building
Plan Review Approval to Allow a Car-X Muffler Shop
Location: 7900 27th Avenue North
PID No.: 19-118-21-44-0001
Zoning: B-4 (Community Business)
Petitioner: Naftali Alkalai-Mahzal, Inc.
Report Date: October 1, 1992
Meeting Date: October 6, 1992
BACKGROUND
1. The petitioner is requesting a conditional use permit, setback variance, and site/building
plan review approval, pursuant to ~Sections 4.134,4.034, and 4.039A of the New Hope
Code, to allow construction and operation of a Car-X Muffler Shop on the old Burger
King site in Midland Shopping Center.
2. The Design & Review Committee met with Car-X on September 17th. The plans that
were submitted were incomplete and lacked detail. It was the consensus of both the
Committee and the applicant that the Car-X case be tabled for one month pending the
submittal of more detailed pla~__ s and communication with the County on an easement for
Medicine Lake Road. -
3. Design and Review will be meeting with the petitioner again in October.
4. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Planning Case 92-26 be tabled for one month until the November 4th
Planning Commission meeting.
Attachments: Misc. Drawings & Survey
0
NORll~ LINE OF SOUm
0 ,,~?~,~ ~ 111.01' $ 89'52'~0'"E
CURB STOP SCALE: l*m3O'
ON PROPERTY UNE la.*,~ ./.,~-I'RASH A~EA
0.15' OV~;R PROPERTY i.o' I I
~- ~m I 1 -S-BRICK
(, . I (TO BE R~IOV~)
~OSC~E
ROCK
~o~
N~H R~ W~K 8S.01' S 8g~2'~
1.0' ~ PROP[~ UHE- O.g'
HEN~PIN COU~ ~NUME~
S.E. COR. SEC.
M~DICI~ ~K~ ~OAD
~ ~ S Bge52'301
~ V' ~~S~ LINE ~ S.E. ~e ~ S.E. ~ ~ SEC. 19, T. lIB, R. 21
NOt.E: ~ EXISg~ IR~S F~ND
CERTIFICATE of SURVEY
We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundries of:
The East 153 feet of the South 153 feet of the Southeast ~/4 of the Southeast ~/4 except the East
33 feet thereof, Section 19, Township 118, Range 21, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the
Government Survey thereof. Subject to rood easement over the South 53 feet thereof and subject to
port token for widening of County Rood No. 156 os described in Document No. 907802, Files of
Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin.
And of the locations of oil buildings, thereon, and oll visible encroachments, if any from or on said
land. As surveyed by me, or under my direct supervision, this 2nd day of September, 1992.
Barton G. Ahrens Profess/o~' c"ng,~ee,-~.9 Co~sultant.~
Land Surveyor, MN Reg. No. 19162 /OO/ /',~e/~, O~,~:~ Cen/er
Subject to easements of record, /$54~ IN~y,,~o E~/e~d
W~at~ M~nesota 55397
JOB ~ 40230 (612) 473 - 1676
~he ~th 153 ~eet o~ ~e E~ 153 ~ee[ ~ ~e ~~C ~~ ~ S~t~ 19,
T~ship 118,
a ~~t e~t
ly~g s~erly o~ L~e "~" descri~
m ~ ~~ be~8 o~ ~ 89 d~eeS 52 m~uc~ ~ s~s ~t p~allel w~ ~e s~
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 92-27
Request: Request for Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Home Occupation
Location: 3833 Gettysburg Avenue North
PID No.: 18-118-21-32-0006
Zoning: R-1 (Single Family Residential)
Petitioner: Robert Goldman
Report Date: October 1, 1992
Meeting Date: October 6, 1992
BACKGROUND
1. The petitioner is requesting a conditional use permit, pursuant to Sections 4.038 of the
New Hope Code, to allow a home occupation.
2. The request is to continue the operation of a plumbing business in the home and the
application is a result of follow-up on neighbors complaints and an order by the Building
Official to apply for a conditional use permit.
3. The home was constructed in 1964, and in 1970 an attached garage was added by the
previous owner. No improvements have been made since that time. The City began
receiving complaints from neighbors in 1991, about an "illegal business" in the home due
to outside storage and vehicle parking problems, Many discussions followed and there
were visits to the site that confirmed outside problems (no one would answer the door).
An order was issued on 10/15/91 for an unlicensed track stored in the driveway. At that
time the property owner was ordered to apply for a conditional use permit, but refused
and denied that a violation had occurred. In June, 1992, the adjacent neighbor to the
north wrote the enclosed letter of complaint to the City. With subsequent complaints and
other plumbers vehicles coming to the site, in addition to a bookkeeper three times per
week, the Building Official again ordered the property owner to apply for a home
occupation conditional use permit.
4. The property is surrounded by "R-l" single family homes on the north, west, south, and
across Gettysburg Avenue to the east.
5. The property contains approximately 9,000 square feet and the existing structure meets
all setback requirements.
6. The topography of the property slopes form the house towards the street and rear yard.
7. The Comprehensive Plan's "Residential Policies" stresses the need to protect residential
areas from incompatible uses.
8. Traffic and parking need to be discussed in detail, as there is business traffic to the house
and trucks are parked outside because the garage is used for the permanent storage of
undriveable car and plumbing supplies.
9. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff have received a
number of calls regarding the application.
Planning Case Report 92-27
October 6, 1992
Page -2
ANALYSIS
1. The regulation of home occupations within residential structures is intended to insure
that the occupational use is clearly accessory or secondary to the principal dwelling use
and that compatibility with surrounding residential uses is maintained.
2. For purposes of the City Code, home occupations are defined to distinguish between
"permitted home occupations" and "conditionally permitted home occupations". All home
occupations which satisfy the "permitted home occupation" criteria shall be considered
as a permitted accessory use in all residential zoning districts. Home occupations which
fail to satisfy the permitted home occupation criteria, shall require a conditional use
permit and may be located in any residential zonlng district based upon conditions set
forth in the approved conditional use permit.
3. Permitted Home Occupations. Home occupations which meet the following criteria:
A. Structural Changes. Businesses which require no interior or exterior changes
necessary to conduct the business; which are conducted within a principal building;
and which require no mechanical or electrical equipment not customarily found
in a home.
B. Traffic. Businesses which do not significantly alter the traffic pattern of the
neighborhood.
C.Employees. Businesses which do not require employees other than those living
on the prem[qes.
D. Arelt Permitted. Businesses which require no more than twenty percent of the
gross floor area of a dwelling, not to exceed three hundred square feet including
accessory building.
E. Sales on Premises. Businesses which are not involved in direct sales on the
premises except as may be conducted through the use of the U.S. mail or by
taking and ordering delivery of orders by telephone.
4. Conditional Use Permit. Conditionally permitted home occupations shah consist of
those home occupations which do not meet aH of the provisions of #3 above. Said home
occupation may be granted a conditional use permit provided that:
A. Adverse Effect on Ne'_mhborhood. The City Council shall find that all business
related activity occurring on the premtqes shall not cause nay adverse changes to
the residential character of the neighborhood.
B. Screening of Exterior Changes. The City Council shall find that any exterior
changes necessary to conduct the business are sufficiently screened, properly
designed, or separated by distance so as to be consistent with existing adjacent
residential uses and compatible with the residential occupancy.
C. Interior Changes. The City Council shall find that any interior changes necessary
to conduct the business comply with all building, electrical, mechanical and fire
codes governing the use of the residential occupancy.
Planning Case Report 92-27
October 6, 1992
Page-3-
D. Traffic. The City Council shall f'md that the traffic generated by the business
involves only vehicles of the type that typically service single family residences
and that such traffic constitutes neither a nuisance nor a safety hazard.
5. Staff finds that this home occupation is conditionally permitted because provisions 3B and
3C of Permitted Home Occupations (employees and traffic) are not met. There are also
concerns as to whether conditions 4A (adverse effect on neighborhood) and 4D (traffic)
can be complied with.
6. Other general criteria to be considered when determining whether to approve or deny
a conditional use permit include:
A. Comprehensive Plan. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the
specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the
official Comprehensive Municipal Plan of the City.
B. Compatibility. The proposed use is compatible with its adjacent land uses.
C. Performance Standards. The proposed use conforms with all applicable
performance standards contained in the Code.
D. No Depreciation in Value. The proposed use will not tend to or actually
depreciate the area in which it is proposed.
E. Zoning District Criteria. In addition to the above general criteria, the proposed
CUP meets the criteria specified for the various zoning districts.
1. In Residential Districts (R-l, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5, R-0):
a. Traffic. Non-residential traffic is channeled into thoroughfares or
onto a street abutting business or industrial uses leading directly to
thoroughfares, and not onto minor residential streets.
b. Screening. The proposed use will be sufficiently separat~xl by
distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned land so that
existing homes will not be materially depreciated in value and there
will be no deterrence to development of vacant land.
c. Compatible Ap?,arance. The structure and site shall have an
appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent
residential properties.
7. Staff finds that there are four major issues that need to be addressed:
1. Employees/Consultanls coming to the site who do not reside there,
2. The area permitted for a home occupation cannot exceed 300 squ~e feet and the
property owner has declined to allow staff in to verify the extent of the business
use, including the garage,
3. Traffic to and from the home is perceived by at least one neighbor as disruptive
'business~ traffic,
4. The history of complaints on this property.
Planning Case Report 92-27
October 6, 1992
Page -4-
8. The submitted sketch is not clear or accurate and staff have requested a better drawing.
9. The general rule followed in the past is that those businesses which are not visible to the
neighborhood are generally permitted in a home.
RECQMMENDATION
An argument can be made that allows no CUP or if the petitioner is willing to work with the
City and his neighbors to reach a compromise, a ~reduced-visibility~ CUP could be granmd
subject to the following conditions:
1. Dead storage vehicle must be removed form the site, to allow parking of a used vehicle
inside garage.
2. A maximum 300 square feet of garage is illustrated on a scale plan for plumbing business
storage.
3. The large panel-type truck used for dead storage of plumbing supplies in the driveway
be removed from the site.
4. No old toilets, pipes, supplies, garbage cans or debris are to be stored outside.
5. Business visitors limited to three individuals at a time, with ALL vehicles parked in the
driveway.
6. Annual unannounced inspection by staff with no denial of entry.
Attachments: Section/Topo Maps
Survey
Garage Plan
9/1/92 Building Official Letter
8/31/92 Inspection Report
6/12/92 Resident Letter
10/15/91 Inspection Report
1988 Plumbing Permit issued to Affordable Plumbing & Heating
at 3833 Gettysburg Avenue North
Petitioner's Sketch
NORTHWOOD
PARK
/
, 36 TH AVE. N.
899. t 43
43 43'"" 899.5
898,6
43901
9O4,7 /
~( 198,8
900.5
· 904,20,.
898.7'
904.2
~3.3
~ 'e~8901 Lyndale Ave.
CALVIN H. HEDLUND
Bloomington
20, Minn.
Land Surveyor · Civil
DESCm~ AS: Lot i~, ~Ioak
HENi',~PI~; ~L~. ~N~SOTA ~se~ng the utilit: eAse~n~ as
sho~ on ~he reco~ alat ~er~f.
· PLAT~PLAN ~.RO~En . '-.~
~"BUIL, D~,,JG INSPECTOR
V~LLAGE OF NEW HOPE~
DATE~
4401 Xylon Avenue North New Hope~ Minnesota 55428 Phone: 531-5100 FAX (612) 531-517.
September 1, 1992
Bob Goldman
3833 Gettysburg
DeaF Mr. Goldman,
After another complaint about "alleged illegal business activity" at
your home I made an unannounced inspection, yesterday. Neither you or any
other "plumbers" were home, when I spoke briefly to a young woman I assumed
to be your daughter. Ail three vehicles parkied in the driveway were regis-
tered to your family members and currently licensed. It did appear that the
old gray step van may not have been driveable, because it was blocked in
place. If the van is not operable, this is a violation of our zoning code,
as Would be the case if it is used as a storage warehouse for plumbing
materials, rm~her than a motor vehicle. In addition, I found some illegal
plumbing materials, piping fixtures and debris on your driveway next to and
behind the gray van. New Hope ordinances do not allow outdoor storage of
such. The garbage cans were also outdoors, in violation of a city code.
They must be stored in the garage, alleged to be chock full, or screened
from view. I had a chance to speak with you, later in the day, by phone
and discussed the use of the property. You have a bookkeeper coming to the
home three days a week for personal and/or business purposes, and sometimes
have other plumbers stopping in.' Because of some non-residential activities
and repeated instances of illegal outside dumping of plumbing supplies etc.
I must require you to apply for a Conditional Use Permit by September 11,
1992 on the attached form. Please enClose the $75.00 filing fee and a scale
drawing to illustrate exactly which areas of the home and garage are used
for plumbing supplies, offtce etc. A hearing will be held'on October 6 by the
Planning Commission and they will recommend action to the council. A decision
by the council should occur on October 12th.
I had not heard about a "disability" until yesterday and know that the
Council will appreciate any difficulties you may be faced with. Among their
options is denial and approval of the C.U.P. with conditions. Please call
me, if you haVe any questions.
Douglas C. Smith
Director of Fire & Safety
Building Official/Zoning Administrator
c~: Complainant
file
Family Styled City '~~ For Family Living
I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTI
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
(612) 531-5127 Date: .
- Time:
INSPECTION REPORT PIE#
Business Name:
$oume: [] Construction omplaint [] Other [] Annual
Corrected
Comments:
Issued to: Date: Mailed I--1
Representing: Phone:
NOTE days to Correct these Conditions ·
Reinspection Date: / /
SBMPFLHZlNO' 13785! I~spector: agnaure
i ,~t 3841 Gettysburg Ave. No.
OUN I Z Igg . Hope ss427
Mayor Ed Erickson
8216 - 49th Avenue North
New Hope, 1~ 55428
l~yor Erickson:
I am asking your assistance in resolving a vehicle storage problem
in my neighborhood.
- My neighbor, Mr. Goldman, 3833 Gettysburg Avenue North, regularly
· keeps ~ commercial vehicles in his driveway, in the course of
operating his plumbing business.
- I have enclosed pictures, taken last Summer, of two of his trucks.
The third is a white van,' similar to the black one in the photo.
These pictures were taken from my driveway, so you can see the
proximity of the problem.
- The two trucks in the photos are seldom driven in the course of
his business. The third is used on a regular basis.
By way of background, I spoke with Doug Sandstad on several occasions
last Summer regarding what was then a larger matter-of Mr. Goldman's apparent
operation of a plumbing business in my residential neighborhood. I found
Mr. Sandstad to be curteous and helpful, and I sincerely appreciated his
assistance. (He can probably fill you in on some conversations he stated
he had had with Mr% Goldman.) As a result of his efforts, some of the
problems were resolved.
However, a basic matter I was unable to resolve, involves the ongoing
storage of these commercial vehicles in my neighborhood. Mr. Sandstad stated
that storage, with occasional use, is not expressly prohibited in New Hope.
(This may be dependent upon vehicle size . . or whatever.) My point is this:
as a residential citizen and taxpayer in this City for 28 years, I continue to
be stuck with looking at the kind of thing portrayed in the photos. In addition,
I retired last year and will very possibly Wish to sell my home in the near
future, and therefore, I am very concerned about maintaining the market value
of my house.
Mayor Erickson, I would appreciate it if you would look into this
situation. I invite you to drive by and take a look, stop in and chat, etc.
I am not totally clear regarding what local ordinances say on this matter, but
I do know that storage of three commercial vehicles in a residential driveway
ought to be prohibited by law. I am certainly not interested in driving anyone
out of either their business, or the neighborhood, but I can't believe someone's
right to do business permits him to store commercial vehicles in a residential
neighborhood area.
For the record, please pass this letter on to the members of the City
-Council. Thank you for your help.
Sincerely~ ~ ~z-' '
~]/~yles A.
Copy: Doug San~/ad
nclosure (2)
I COMMUNITY DEVE
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
(612) 531-5127 Date: ].0-].5-91
Time: Renu
' INSPECTION REPORT PID#.
Address: 3833 Gettysburg Ave. No.
Business Name:
Type: Co~plaint-"Illegal business in home-unlicensed vehicle in drive"
Source: ~ Construction [][Complaint [] Other [] Annual
Corrected
Comments:
CONFIRMED UNLICENSED CAR IN DRIVE-
NO ANSWER AT DOOR DESPITE THE "OCCUPIED" APPEARANCE (10-i8-91) ~
MN 480 EYX from the st
Remove
unlicensed
choy.
property,
)re
insi~_~_ the g~_rage or !icen_~e ~_t pew ~y ~'~-
R,,bm~.t mppl~eation to the Planning Commission for a C~P in
.~he home as previously advised. This must include the $~ .00
fee and plans. Your plumbin~ business violates several
sections of city code, as you know.
Issued to: Robert Go!,~_~-,_~ Date; " Mailed
Representing: Phone:
NOTE 7 days to Correct these Conditions
Reinspection Date: , ~, 4,. ~ ~'
white: applicant yellow -inspector pink: file
-, · ' .... '-'-- '' ' '~' '-- pERMIT TYPE: F'LUME:ING
4401 Xylon Avenue North Permit Number: ~¢:) [ 1. l.
New Hope, Minnesota 55428 Date Issued: ~7 / 1 ...'-'/' '-,,:,,:,,-,
(612) 533-1521
SITE ADDRESS:
741E~ S3RO PL N
LOT: 11 BLOCK: 2
SUNSET HEIGHTS
P. I .N.: ¢:)8-118-21-2~-{~(~22
DESCRIPTION:
1 BATHTUB
REMARKS:
FEE SUMMARY: VALUATION $5S0
Base Fee $15.~0 ~/
Surcharge ~ ~.:~ '"
Total Fee $1S.S0
-- Applicant --
· :.~.~.~ GETTYSBURG AVE N 741(~ S3RO PL N
MPLS MN 5S427 NEW HOPE MN SS428
APPLICANT PERMITEE SIGNATURE
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PLANNING CASE REPORT
Planning Case: 92-28
Request: Request for a Variance to the Rear Yard Setback Requirement to Allow
Construction of a Three-Season Porch
Location: 4164 Ensign Avenue North
PID No.: 18-118-21-21-0012
Zoning: R-1 (Single Family Residential)
Petitioner: Duane L. Hoff
Report Date: October 1, 1992
Meeting Date: October 6, 1992
BACKGROUND
1. The petitioner is requesting a variance to the 35' rear yard setback requirement to allow
construction of a three-season porch on the rear of the existing structure, pursuant to
Section 4.034(3) of the New Hope Code.
2. The petitioner is proposing to construct a 12' x 14' (168 square foot) three-season porch
on the east side of the existing house. The porch would be located 27 feet (at the closest
point) from the rear yard property line and City Code requires a 35-foot rear yard set-
back, therefore an 8-foot variance is needed for construction to proceed.
3. An existing deck is located on the east side of the home which extends beyond the
setback limit, as permitted by code. The request is to construct a three-season porch
enclosure on top of and with the same dimensions as the existing deck. The City Code
allows open porches and decks as encroachments on yard setback requirements, however,
porches and outdoor living rooms which become closed in and attached to the dwelling
subsequent to initial construction of the principal dwelling are not exempt from yard
setback requirements.
4. The petitioner states on the application that limited buildable space on the lot, the
existence of the deck, trees along the rear lot line that buffer the yard from neighbors to
the rear, improvement to the home, and the desirable location of the proposed porch in
relation to the interior layout of the house are all reasons that should be taken into
consideration in favor of granting the request.
5. The property is located on the southeast comer of 42nd and Ensign Avenues, contains
approximately 10,300 square feet, and the existing structure meets all yard setback
requirements.
6. The site is zone "R-l*,Single Family Residential, and is surrounded by *R-i" Single
Family Residential across 42nd Avenue to the north, across Ensign Avenue to the west
and on the south. On the east the property borders *R-3*townhouses.
7. The topography of the property slopes downward gently to the south and west.
8. The *L-shaped* home was constrUcted in 1967. ~'
9. Property owners within 350' of the request have been notified and staff has received no
comments in regards to this request.
Planning Case Report 92-28
October 6, 1992
Page -2-
ANALYSIS
1. The purpose of the variance is to permit relief from the strict application of the zoning
code where undue hardships prevent the reasonable use of the property and where
circumstances are unique to the property. A hardship may exist by reason of narrowness,
shallowness, or shape of property or because of exceptional topographic or water
conditions. The hardship cannot be created by the property owner and if the variance
is granted, it should not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or unreasonably
diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood.
2. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the
property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed
by the official controls, the plight .of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his
property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the
essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an
undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance.
3. Additional criteria to be used in considering requests for a variance includes the following
and the Planning Commission/City Council shall make findings that the proposed action
will not:
A. Consistent With Purpose of Variance. Be contrary to the purposes of a variance.
B. ~ Air. Impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property.
C. Street Connection. Unreasonably increase the congestion in the public street.
D. Public Safety_. Increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety.
E. Property Values. Unreasonably diminish or impair established property values
within the neighborhood, or in any other way be contrary to intent of City Code.
4. Although the property does not necessarily have a unique shape or unusual topography,
staff finds that the following issues should be take into consideration:
A. Although the lot is large, a high percentage of the north yard area is devoted to
meeting the 35-foot comer side yard setback requirement on 42nd Avenue, which
includes a slice that Hennepin County took off the north side many years ago for
construction and easements for County Road /t9.
B. The area directly east of the porch (R-3 townhouses) is open space, with the
nearest duplex about 70 feet to the southeast and an adequate buffer of trees and
shrubbery separates the properties.
C. The need for the variance results from the narrow/short 41-foot rear yard, which
is a result of the placement of the 43-foot width home on the 114-foot deep lot,
in compliance with the 30-foot front yard setback requirement. There is no other
reasonable place on the lot for a porch.
D. The degree of the variance request is fairly minor; 8-foot variance: 35-foot setback
requirement =23% variance.
Planning Case 92-28
October 6, 1992
Page -3-
RECOMMENDATION
Due to the narrowness of the backyard and the adequate buffer provided, staff recommends
approval of the 8-foot rear yard setback variance request for the construction of a three-season
porch subject to the following conditions:
1. Exterior design to match the existing home in roof pitch and siding.
2. Owner to submit an "as-built* lot survey within 14 days of building permit application to
verify the changes in the lot size and the home/porch location.
Attachments: Section/Topo Maps
Site Plans
Floor Plans
Section View
45 *tH AVE. N; - 4,~4'~
44~'z._..~.__~_ c~v~c
~ ~ CENTER ~
.~c ~ ~! CITY
~~ HALL
~S~ * _
~ 4~ * '
GETHSEMANE
J~, _~___~ .... CEMETERY
PARK
NORTHWOOD
0 / J J //'(~,,/,9.~.945. 1
933.1
~¢ X
ROCKFORB
9~2.3 932.3 928.5 ROAB
919.1
"~ 912
~:~ X
915.3
X
<3 916.
9o
4 .s
l,
CITY OF NEW HOPE
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 30, 1992
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kirk McDonald, Management Assistant/Community Development
Coordinator
SUBJECT: Miscellaneous Planning Issues
1. Beptember 14th Council Mestinq
The two code text amendments regarding setback requirements
for residential uses and establishing signage regulations for
governmental buildings were approved at the September 14th
Council meeting. The Planning Commission resolution regarding
the Crystal Comprehensive Plan Update was also ratified by the
Council and has been forwarded to the City of Crystal and the
Metropolitan Council.
The code text amendment regarding the elimination of the
square footage limitation requirement on limited B-4 uses in
the B-2 Zoning District was tabled, as the Council prefers to
consider it in conjunction with the Lyndale Garden Center
planning case. This issue will be discussed at the October
12th Council meeting, if approved by the Planning Commission
on October 6th.
Also, the planning case regarding the Brinker parking lot
setback variance at 8701 Bass Lake Road was tabled. The
Council directed staff to meet with the petitioner and develop
a new concept plan showing parking against the building. This
concept eliminates green area, but addresses the snow storage
problem (see attachment). This issue will be discussed again
at the September 28th Council meeting.
Attachments: 9/28 & 9/14 Requests for Action, P.C.92-24
2. J.R.Jones Development Agreement
The J.R.Jones Development Agreement has been executed and
construction is underway (see enclosed).
Attachments: Correspondence & Development Agreement
3. Lakeside LTD Expansion
Lakeside LTD has contacted the City regarding a 30,000 square
foot warehouse expansion and an interior expansion of their
existing one-level office area to two levels. This case will
probably be considered before the end of the year.
4. North Ridqe Adult Day Care
North Ridge is in the process of preparing new building plans
which will orient the proposed day care facility to Boone
Avenue and require no variances. I believe this case will be
back on the agenda in November.
Planning Commission
Miscellaneous Issues
October 6, 1992
Page -2-
5. Side Yard Air Conditioners.
Codes & Standards met on September 23rd and have reached a
consensus on a recommended ordinance text change regarding
side yard air conditioners (see attached info). Staff will
advertise for a public hearing and this issue will be
considered by the full Commission at the November meeting.
Attachments: Attorney Correspondence
Ordinance Changes
Planner's Reports
Code Section
6. Subdivision and Plattinq Ordinance Amen~nent
Codes & Standards also discussed recent changes made by the
state on monumentation of plats and this ordinance (attached)
will be discussed in November.
Attachments: Planner's Report & Ordinance
7. &partment Conversions
The initial report on apartment conversions has been prepared
by the Planner and once it has been reviewed by staff and the
City Attorney, a Codes & Standards meeting will be scheduled.
8. B-2 Zoninq District amendment
At the August Planning commission meeting a portion of Lyndale
Garden Center's request was to eliminate the asterisk(*) in
front of the B-4 Zoning District Garden Novelty Store use so
that the use would be permitted in the B-2 Zone. Since that
time the staff and Planner have met and feel that the City
would have more control of the site development if the use was
allowed as a conditional use (permitted with specific condi-
tions regarding fencing, outdoor storage, etc.). The Planner
prepared a report on this change, the City Attorney drafted a
code amendment, and this issue was discussed by Codes &
Standards. Staff and Codes & Standards will be recommending
to the Commission at this meeting that the Garden Novelty
Store be allowed as a conditional use, rather than a permitted
use. Please review the attached material.
Attachments: Attorney Correspondence
Ordinance Amendment
Planner's Report
9. Car-X
Design & Review met with Lyndale Garden Center and Car-X on
September 17th. The Car-X case will be tabled for one month
pending the submittal of more detailed plans and communication
with the County on an easement for Medicine Lake Road.
Planning Commission
Miscellaneous Issues
October 6, 1992
Page -3-
10. Super America
Super America has informed the City that they will not be
constructing a new Super America at the corner of 62nd & West
Broadway, as requested in Planning Case 91-37.
Attachment: Super America Letter 9/25
11. November 3, 1992 - Election Day
The November Planning Commission meeting will be held on
Wednesday, November 4, 1992, because the regular meeting day
falls on Election Day and no public meetings can be held then.
_¥REQ~T FOR ACTION
Originating Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section
Development
City Manager & Planning
9-28-92 Item No.
Kirk McDonald
By: Management Assistant By:
PLANNINQ (~ASE 92-24- REQUEST FOR PARKING LOT SETBACK VARIANCE, 8701
BASS LAKE ROAD (PID b~)6-118-21-31-0001), DARRYL BRINKER, PETITIONER
This item was tabled at the September 14th Council meeting and staff was directed to meet with
the petitioner and develop a new concept plan showing 45-degree angle parking against the front
of the building (Option C). The angled parking requires a distance/width of 19 feet, and 12 feet
would remain for a one-way drive aisle adjacent to the north property line. A 20-foot parking lot
sethack variance would be required for this option. The advantage is that snow from the sidewalk
area would not be thrown onto parked cars. The disadvantage is that green area is lost between
the parking area and property line. The same number of parking spaces would be retained (56).
This item has been placed back on the agenda because the County desires to finalize plans on the
Bass Lake Road widening and channelization project and plans cannot be finalized until a decision
is made in regards to the parking layout.
Please refer to the attached request prepared for the September 14th council meeting for a
description of the other two options discussed. The attached resolution will be modified, pending
Council action.
MOTION BY SECOND BY
TO:
Review: Adn'anlstration: Finance:
r RVA-OOI ~
0 '
~0
COUNCIL
Orlgtnatlng Department Approved for Agenda Agenda Section
Development
City Manager & Planning
9-14-92 Item No.
Kirk McDonald
By: Management Assistant By:.
PLANNING CASE 92-24- REQUEST FOR PARKING LOT SETBACK VARIANCE, 8701
BASS LAKE ROAD (PID ~/06-118-21-31-0001), DARRYL BRINKER, PETITIONER
The petitioner is requesting a variance from the parking lot setback requirement in the I-1 Limited
Industrial Zoning District, pursuant to Section 4.145(4) of the New Hope Code. This request is
made in conjunction with the upcoming 1993 Bass Lake Road widening and channelizafion project
which will impact the petitioner's property at the southwest intersection of Bass Lake Road and
Boone Avenue. The existing setback of the parking lot from the public right-of-way is 15 feet.
City Code states that the minimum setback for parking lots shall be 20 feet adjacent to a
residential district and 10 feet adjacent to a non-residential district. Technically, this property
abuts residential districts, with an R4 District located to the south and an R-1 District located to
the north across Bass Lake Road.
The City has met with the petitioner on several occasions and two alternate plans have been
developed. The original "preferred City.Plan" would leave a 10 foot green area between the right-
of-way and the parking lot, requiring a 10-foot variance, and the "Brinker preferred plan" would
leave 2 feet of green area, requiring an 18-foot variance. While the Brinker plan requires a
greater variance and leaves little green area between the parking lot and right-of-way, more
parking stalls are provided, the 45-degree parking may be more desirable, and a larger clump of
green area is provided on the sides of the parking area. The City plan provides a greater width
of green strip between the parking area and right-of-way but does not provide as many parking
spaces and the parallel stalls may not be desirable. The City's primary concerns are maintaining
some green area and landscaping between the fight-of-way and the parking lot. It certainly could
be argued in this situation that the hardship is not being created bY the property owner and is due
to circumstances beyond his control.
(continued)
MOTION BY SECOND BY
TO:
Review: Administration: Finance:
RFA-00 / ~
Request for Action Planning Case 92-24
September 14, 1992 ---- ~ ~.
Page -2-
The Planning Commission reviewed this case on September 1, 1992, and recommended approval
of the 18-foot variance ('Brinker preferred plan') due to the fact that they preferred the 45-degree
angle parking and felt that more adequate landscaping could be provided in the larger green areas
on either side of the parking area on Bass Lake Road than within a 10-foot wide green strip,
subject to the following conditions:
1. Plant four new boulevard caliper trees (minimum 2-1/2' diameter) in a city-approved
location along Bass Lake Road, to compensate for the scarcity of landscaping on the site
today. Numerous trees and shrubs that were planted in 1980 are gone.
2. Restripe the entire lot in white per approved plan.
3. Install "NO EXIT' sign at location "S'on attached plan to remind users that Bass Lake
Road is only an entry point as agreed by Hennepin County in 1980.
4. Install colored 1" landscape rock in the 2-foot space between the County retaining wall
(low) and the new parking curb.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
4401 Xylon Avenue North New Nope, Minnesota 55428 Phone: 531-5100 FAX (612) 531-5 ~ --'
August 20, 1992
Mr. Bob Jones
J.R.Jones Fixture Company
3216 Winnetka Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55427
Subject: VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SITE IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT/PERFORMANCE BOND FOR EXPANSION OF J.R.JONES FIXTURE
COMPANY AT 3216 WINNETKA AVENUE NORTH IN NEW HOPE
Dear Mr. Jones:
On May 11, 1992, the New Hope City Council approved your requests for a
conditional use permit for a loading berth fronting a street, a variance
to expand a non-conforming building and site/building plan review/approval
for expansion of the J.R.Jones Fixture Company, as submitted in Planning
Case 92-10, subject to specific conditions. One of the conditions was
that a Development Agreement and suitable bond concerning site improve-
ments be executed with the City. I notified you that the City would draft
the Development Agreement and notify you regarding the appropriate
security to be posted.
Enclosed please find three copies of the conditional use Permit site
Improvement Agreement. The City Engineer and Building Official have esti-
mated the cost to install the landscaping and bituminous repair at $6,900
and the total bond to be posted is 150% of the cost of the work, or
$10,350. On Page 4 of the agreement various types of financial guarantees
that are acceptable to the City are outlined under #10, "Financial
Guarantee". The performance bond or other type of guarantee is released
upon completion and acceptance of all site improvement work by the City.
Please review the enclosed agreements, and sign all three copies in the
appropriate place on page 5 and have your signature notarized. Please
return the three executed copies of the agreement to the City with the
appropriate type of financial guarantee. I will have the appropriate City
officials sign the agreements and will return one fully executed copy to
you for your files.
As you are aware, J.R.Jones also made application for variances form
either the green area or parking requirements for this expansion. That
request was denied by the City Council and instead, they approved a
conditional use permit for deferred parking. Condition #5 of the approval
stated that revised plans were to be submitted showing a deferred parking
area whereby parking and green area requirements would both comply with
City Code, which could necessitate removal/reconstruction of the front
semi-circular drive, with a restrictive covenant for deferred parking to
be filed against the property titl~
FamilyS~ledC~'~~ForFamilyLivin~
-2-
At the end of June you w~ote th~ City and indicated that the soil boring~i~-~
on the adjacent property to the north that you are trying to purchase were
proceeding faster than projected and that you were planning on closing on
the property very soon. Once that happens, J.R.Jones would have the
necessary land available to be in compliance with green area and parking
requirements. You indicated that, in light of this fact, you were not
planning to do any reconstructing of the semi-circle front driveway at
this time because it is your intention to reconstruct that area along with
drainage revisions in the future.
The City is willing to cooperate with J.R.Jones over an extended time
period until you determine whether the adjacent property will be purchased
or not. But at some future date the City must either have revised plans
showing adequate parking and green area on the existing property (if the
new property is not purchased) or evidence of title that J.R.Jones has
purchased the adjacent property. If J.R.Jones proceeds to purchase the
property, the City would consider the enclosed plan Al.1 that you
submitted showing future parking on the adjacent property as adequate.
Basically, the City is acknowledging the fact that you are not submitting
revised plans showing proof of parking on the existing property at this
time due to purchase negotiations on adjacent property. However, by
December 31, 1992, the City requires that J.R.Jones either provide
evidence to the City that you have acquired the additional property (by
providing a recorded title to the property) or submit revised plans
showing proof of parking on your existing property, per the original
condition of approval.
Please contact me or Doug Sandstad, Building Official, if you have any
comments or questions.
Sincerely,
Kirk McDonald
Management Assistant/Community Development Coordinator
KM/ lb
Enclosures: Engineer's Letter Re: Bond Amount
Three Copies Variance and CUP Site Improvement Agreement
Plan Al.1
cc: Dan Donahue, City Manager
Steve Sondrall, City Attorney
Mark Hanson, City Engineer
Doug Sandstad, Building Official
Valerie Leones. City Clerk
RoOert Vv' Rosene. PE*Keith ^ Gordon, RE. Isrnael Ma~nez. PE Mark E) ~¢/alhs. PE
Joseph C. An~eflik. ~EEo~e~ R. ~e~e, PE Michael P Eau, PE. Miles 8. Jansen. PE
Rosene Ma~ln L. ~ala. PE. Richard ~ ~er.
Richard E. Turner, RE.Dawd O. ~sko~3, PE. Thomas W ~temon. RE. ~mn L, Wiemen, PE
~ Glenn R C~k. ~E. Eo~ C Rus~k.
Associates :
Susan ~. Ebedin, C.PA Michael ~ ~u~ann.
*~n~or Consul~n[ T~ K. Fietd, RE. Ma~ R, Rolh, EE Chades A ErJckson
Thomas E. Andemon. ~.1.~. Ma~ ~. ~ip, RE. L~ M. P~lsky
'-'~nglneers--a Architects Dona~ C. Bu~.
Thomas E. ~ngus, EE. Daniel J. Edison, PE.James E En~l~a~
May 22, 1992
City of New Hope
4401 X.vlon Avenue
New Hope, MN 55428
Attention: Mr. Kirk McDonald
Re: J.R. Jones Fixture
Our File No. 34-Bond
Dear Kirk:
We have reviewed the bond amount for the above referenced project and recommend the
following:
500 Sq. Yd. Bituminous Repair @ $12.00/sq. yd. $6,000
Lump Sum Landscapes @ $900/LS 900
$6,900
+ 50% Bond Increase 3,450
$10,350
The estimated bond amount is $10,350. If you have any questions please contact this office.
Yours very truly,
BONESTROO, ~OSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Mark Hanson
MH:Ik
cc: Doug Sandsted
Marty Malecha
34genfoond.cor
2335 ~X/est Highway 36. · St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 · 612-636-4600
J.R. Jones
Fixture Company
3216 Winnetka Ave. North
Minneapolis, Minn. 55427 (612) 544-4239
June 29, ~992
City of New Hope
4401Xylon Ave N
New Hope, MN 55428
Attn: Mr. Kirk McDonald
RE: City of New hope correspondence dated May 12, 1992
Item #5; conditions for parking & green area
requirement.
Dear Mr. McDonald:
The soil borings on the adjacent property we are trying to
buy are proceeding faster than our orginal projections.
Therefor~ we are planning to close on this property very
soon. Once that happens we will be in compliance with the
green area and parking requirements. Therefore we are not
planning to do any reconstructing of the semi-circle front
driveway at this time. It is our intention to reconstruct
this area along with drainage revisions in the future as
our budget allows.
If the city has any disagreement or questions concerning
this plan, please call me.
Very truly yours,
J.R. Jones Fixture Co
mJ/jph
Manufacturers of Custom Woodwork
CITy OF NEW HOPE
VARIANCE AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
SITE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by J.R. Jones Fixture Co., a
Minnesota corporation (hereinfter "Developer") and the City of New
Hope (hereinafter "City")i this day of , 1992.
WHEREAS, on May 11, 1992, by Resolution No. 92-93, the City
Council approved Developer's request for a Variance and a
Conditional Use Permit (hereinafter "CUP") for certain rea]
property located in the C~ty of New Hope, County of Hennepin, State
of Minnesota known as 3216 Winnetka Avenue North, legally
described as-
The South 352.7 feet of the West one-half of the
Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 20,
Township 118, Range 21,
(hereinafter "Property") to be used for a warehouse expansion, and
WHEREAS, the City Council also approved Developer's site
development plans for the Property as set forth in Planning Case
92-10 (hereinafter "Plans"), and
WHEREAS, said Variance and CUP were granted subject to the
fo]lowing conditions:
1. Developer to immediately repair/redesign plans for
sawdust collection system including handling. Said plans
to be on paper and approved by Building Official 14 days
prior to a building permit application for the addition.
2. Developer to provide additional landscape ~mprovements
required for the building front yard including 2-~" maple
tree (3) and 20+ shrubs (as per Planning Commission) and
per revised 5-7-92 landscape plan.
3. City Engineer to review site drainage changes and forward
to Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission,
necessary.
4. Developer to sign this Improvement Agreement for
parking lot work and grading/landscaping.
5. Developer t'6 submi~ revised plan showing deferred parking
area whereby parking and green area requirements would
both comply with City Code, which could necessitate
removal/reconstruction of front semi-circular entry
drive, and to sign and file restrictive covenant for
deferred parking against property title.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED as follows:
1. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS. The recitals above are
incorporated herein by reference, specifically including the
conditions of the Variance and CUP.
2. THE WORK. The Work shall consist of the site
improvements described in the Plans, including any amendments to
the Plans which are approved by the City Council. The Work shall
be performed by the Developer to the City's satisfaction in
compliance with all applicable codes, ordinances, standards, and .-
policies of the City. The Work includes all on-site exterior
amenities shown on the Plans that are listed below.
Quantity Item Estimated Cost
500 sq. yd. Bituminous Repair @ $6,000.00
$12.00/sq. yd.
Lump Sum Landscape @ $900 900.00
Subtotal $ 6,900.00
+ 50% Security Increase 3,450.00
TOTAL: $10,350.00
The Developer unconditionally guarantees to the City all of the
Work for a period of one year subsequent to the Completion Date of
the Work. This guarantee shall include failure of the Work due to
poor material, faulty workmanship, or any other failure of the
Work. This guarantee shall continue whether or not all of the
financial guarantee shall have been released by the City.
3. COMPLETION. The Developer agrees that the Work shall be
completed in its entirety on or before the 11th day of May, 1993,
except as this period of time is extended by resolution of the
Council, or by the City taking no action to require completion
hereunder on a timely basis. It is understood and agreed that
2
failure of the City (0 promptly take action to draw upon the bond
or other security to. enforce this Agreement after the expiration of
the time in which the Work is to be completed hereunder will not
waive, estop or release any rights of the City and the City can
take action at any time thereafter to require completion of the
Work, and payment for same. Furthermore, the term of this
Agreement shall be deemed to be automatically extended until such
time as the City Council declares the Developer in default
thereunder, and the statute of limitations shall not be deemed to
commence running until the City Council has been notified in
writing by the Developer that the Developer has either complied
with this Agreement, or that it refuses to for any reason. These
provisions shall be applicable to any person who shall give a
financial guarantee to the City as required below.
4. COST OF WORK. The Developer shall pay for all costs of
persons doing work or furnishing skill, tools, machinery or
materials, or insurance premiums or equipment or supplies and all
just claims for the same, and the City shall be under no obligation
to pay the Developer or any subcontractor any sum whatsoever on
account thereof, whether or not the City shall have approved the
subcontract or subcontractor, and the Developer and its surety
shall hold the City harmless against any such claims, and provide
the City with all necessary lien waivers.
5. DEFAULT. In the event of default by the Developer as to
any of the Work to be performed hereunder, the City may, at its
option, perform the Work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse
the City for any expense incurred therein by the City, provided the
Developer is first given written notice by United States Mail of
the Work in default and required to be done by the Developer, not
less than 48 hours being given thereby to the Developer to remove
the default status, said notice being addressed to the Developer at
the address set forth below. Notice given in this manner being
sufficient as described, by agreement of the parties hereto.
Notice to the Developer shall also constitute, without further
action, notice to any contractor or subcontractor, whether they are
approved and accepted by the City or not. In the event of
emergency, as determined by the City Engineer, the 48 hours notice
requirement to the Developer shall be and hereby is waived in its
entirety by the Developer, and the Developer shall reimburse the
City for any expense so incurred by the Oity in the same manner as
if mailed notice as described above had been given. It is
understood by the parties, however, that the responsibility of the
Developer is limited by strikes and force majeure.
3
6. REVOCATION'~F CUP.' The City Council approved a Variance
and CUP for the Property subject to certain conditions including
completion of the Work. As an additional remedy separate and
independent from any other remedy availab]e to it, upon breach of
this Agreement by Developer, the City may revoke the Variance or
CUP for the Property. Developer acknowledges and agrees that the
City may also revoke the Variance or CUP for failure of the
Developer to satisfy any of the other conditions of the Variance or
CUP.
7. ADMINISTRATION COSTS. Developer agrees to reimburse the
City for the actual costs to the City associated with Planning CaSe
92-10, the Variance and CUP, and this Agreement, including but not
limited to, engineering and attorney's fees. Developer agrees that
the financial guarantee shall not be released until all such costs
have been paid to the City.
8. HOLD HARMLESS. The Developer agrees to indemnify and
hold harmless the City and its agents and employees against any and
all claims, demands, losses, damages and expenses (including
attorney fees) arising out of or resulting from the Developer's
negligent or intentional acts, or any violation of any safety law,
regulation or code in the performance of this Agreement, without
regard to any inspection or review made or not made by the City,
its agents or employees or failure by the City, i~s agents or
employees to take any other prudent precaution. In the event any
City employee, agent or representative shall come under the direct
or indirect control of the Developer, or the City, upon the failure
of the Developer to comply with any conditions of this Agreement or
the Variance or CUP, performs said conditions pursuant to the
financial guarantee, the Developer shall indemnify and hold
harmless the City, its employees, agents and representatives for
its own negligent or intentional acts in the performance of the
Developer's required work under this Agreement or the Variance or
the CUP.
9. COST OF ENFORCEMENT. The Developer agrees to reimburse
the City for all costs incurred by the City in the enforcement of
this Agreement, or any portion thereof, including court costs and
reasonable engineering and attorney's fees.
10. FINANCIAL GUARANTEE. The Developer shall furnish the
City with a financial guarantee acceptable to the City in one of
the following forms: a) cash escrow; b) a performance bond issued
by an approved corporate surety licensed to do business in the
State of Minnesota, and executed by the Developer as the principal;
c) an irrevocable letter of credit; d) an automatically renewing
4
certificate of deposit in Deve]oper's name but assigned to the
City; e) other financial instruments which provide equivalent
assurance to the City. Said financial guarantee shall be furnished
to the City as security to assure completion of the items of Work
as set forth above, and payment of the costs of administration as
set forth above. The financial guarantee shall be in an amount of
150% of the cost of the Work as estimated by the City Engineer.
The financial guarantee provided shall continue in full force and
effect until the City Council approves and accepts all of the Work
undertaken and re]eases the surety and/or the Developer from any
further liability, and until all administrative costs are paid in
full. The City Council may reduce the amount of the financial
guarantee upon partial completion of the Work and payment of all
outstanding administrative costs.
11. NOTICE. The address of Developer, for purposes of this
Agreement is as follows, and any notice mailed by the City to this
address shall be deemed sufficient notice under this Agreement,
until notice of a change of address is given to the City in
writing:
J.R. Jones Fixture Co.
12. SEVERABILITY. If any portion, section, subsection,
paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Agreement is for any
reason held to be invalid, such decisions shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portion of this Agreement.
13. SUCCESSION. This Agreement shall be binding upon the
parties, their heirs, successors or assigns as the case may be.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals.
CITY OF NEW HOPE
By
Its Mayor
By
Its City Manager
J.R. JONES FIXTURE CO. ~
By
Its
By
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of , 1992, by EDW. J. ERICKSON and DANIEL J.
DONAHUE, the Mayor and Manager, respectively, of the City of New
Hope, a municipal corporation of the State of Minnesota, on beha]f
of said municipal corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of , 1992, by and
the and
, respectivel'y, of J.R. Jones Fixture Co., a
Minnesota corporation, on behalf of said corporation.
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
CORRICK & SONDRALL, A PARTNERSHIP
OF PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS
8525 Edinbrook Crossing, #203
Brooklyn Park, MN 55443
(612) 425-5671
CoR~cx & SONDRA~
~ ~ ~L~,* 8525 ~inb~k C~g ~t ,. ~
September 18, 1992
Mr. Kirk McDonald
Management Assistant
¢tty of New Hope
4401Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE: Residential Air Conditioning Setback Requirements
Our File No. 99.40051
Dear Kirk:
! have reviewed the August 27th, 1992 memo from the City Planner in
connection with the referenced matter. Please find enclosed
proposed Ordinance for Planning Commission and City Council
consideration ~ncorporating the comments made by the Ctty Planner.
! have made two =hanges to the conditions for placement of
conditioners in the side yard as follows:
1, I have tied the noise level restrictions to our noise
ordinance found in Sections 9.42S and 9.424 of our Code.
This is amore specific and measurable regulation and in
my optnton preferred to a regulation tying the notes
levels to the nuisance ordinance.
2. ! have amended the screening condition by requiring that
units located in the stde yard are concealed from vtew
from adjacent property and have deleted the reference to
the Butldtng Offt¢tal as the judge in connection with the
acceptability of the screening method used. If wa want
to define a specific screening regulation, it should be
stated. Giving the Building Offtctal complete discretion
concerning what ia acceptable could not be enforced in my
opinion.
Kirk McDonald
September 18, 1992
Page 2 -':
Contact me if you h&ve any questions.
Very truly yours,
Steven A. Sondr&ll
slf2
Enclosure
¢c: Doug $&ndst&d, City Bldg. Offtcl&l (w/eno)
A1 ar~xtua, City Planner (w/eric)
": ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN'ORDINANCE AMENDING NEW HOPE CODE
SECTION ~.032 (3)(i) REGULATING
AIR CONDITIONER SETBACK REQUIREMENTS
The City Council of the City of New Hope ord&ins:
Section 1. Section 4.022 (3) (t) "Air Conditioners" of the
New Hope City Code Is hereby amended to read as follows:
(i) Air Con.ditto~ers, Ne accessory uses or equipment such as
air condittonin~ codlin9 structures or condensers (~roun, d
mounted) which 9enerate noise mcy ~ be located in
,rear yards behind qbe rear building ltn~. ,, Air
~ondition~ng q~lSnm structures,, or R~n~enser~ ,l.,oc&qeq -
withi.n a required side yard ;.....~--' f., ~d. ~ ....
section ~ay }awfully continue an~ may be ramie,ced et such
a location orovid~d_th~,,,fqllowin~.cond~iqn~ are met;
~ The, coo~.inm structure..or ~ond~nser shale,, not
r~_u_~ noise levels. ¢o~tracy to_~9.423 and~9.424
~f this Code.
.~ ~hj coolfnm structur&_ or. condenser sha.~l b~
~creened by 1&nds~apina, fencine, gr othec, means
~enderine i~ ,concealed from view fFom QdJac~0t
~rooe et y ·
_(itt) ~he ~9oline at, rub%pre o.r conQen~,eF shall no~ ,1, ia
~fthin a resulted drainage and/or uttllty easeme.nt.
~.~LJ_9.P__[. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective
upon its Oaasage and publication.
Dated the , . day of ,
Edw. J. ErickSon, Mayor
At t est:
Va1 erie Leckie, ~it'y Cl er~
(Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun=Post the day of
. , , 1952,)
Nor west ssociat Consultan s, Inc
U R B P L A N N G · DES N M A R K E T R S E A R C I~
TO: Kirk McDonald
FROM: Bob Kirmis/Alan Brixius
DATE: 27 August 1992
RE: New Hope Air Conditioner Setback
Requirements
FILE NO: 131.00 - 92.11
Attached please find an Ordinance amendment relating to air
conditioner setback requirements. The amendment essentially
requires all new air conditioners to be located within rear yards.
Air conditioning units which currently lie within required side
yards are allowed to continue to exist at such a location provided
a number of conditions are satisfactorily met.
If you have any questions or conferments regarding this material,
please advise.
pc: Dan Donahue
Doug Sandstad
5775 Wayzata Blvd.-Suite 555. St. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636-Fax. 595-9837
ORDINANCE NO. 92
..:CITY OF NEW HOPE
I-IF. PIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE NEW HoPE ZONING CODE BY REVISING SECTION
4.032 (3) (i) REGULATING AIR CONDITIONER SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW HOPE ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 4.032 (3) (i) "Air Conditioners" of the
New Hope City Code is hereby revised to read as follows:
(i) Air Conditioners. Accessory uses or equipment such as
air conditioning cooling structures or condensers (ground
mounted) which generate noise shall be located in rear
yards behind the rear building line. Air conditioning
cooling structures or condensers located within a
required side yard at the effective date of this
Ordinance may lawfully continue and may be replaced at
such a location provided the following conditions are
met:
(i) The cooling structure or condenser shall not
produce noise levels considered a nuisance as
defined by the Nuisance Ordinance.
(ii) The cooling structure or condenser shall be
screened via landscaping, fencing, or other means
judged acceptable by the City Building Official.
(iii)The cooling structure or condenser shall not lie
within a required drainage and/or utility easement.
Section. 2. Z££ect~ve Date. This Ordinance shall be effective
upon its passage and publication.
DATED: , 1992
Edward J. Erickson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
(Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Post on the day of
, 1992)
July 17, 1992
Kirk McDonald
Management Asst.
City of New Hope
4401Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
RE: Air Conditioner Side Yard Setback Requirements
Our File No. 99.40051
Dear Kirk:
! have had a chance to review the City Planner's June 25th, 1992
memo in connection with the referenced matter. !f we do adopt an
amendment to our zoning code a]3owing air conditioners in side
yards, I agree with the recommendations of the City Planner
relative to the placement of air conditioners in a side yard.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
Steven A. Sondrall
slf
U R B P L A N N I N G DES I G N M A R K E T R E S E A R C H
TO: Kirk McDonald
FROM: Bob Kirmis/Alan Brixius
DATE: 11 June 1992
RE: New Hope - Air Conditioner Setback Requirements
FILE NO: 131.00 92.10
At your request, I have contacted a number of communities in regard
to setbacks imposed upon air conditioners. This effort has been
prompted by some questions raised as to whether the City of New
Hope's existing setback regulations (imposed upon air conditioners)
are appropriate.
Currently, Section 4.032 (3) (i) of the New Hope Zoning Ordinance
prohibits the location of air conditioning cooling structures or
condensers within required side yards (except on side yards
abutting streets). The intent of the stated requirement is
generally to limit potential adverse effects of air conditioning
units upon neighboring properties (noise, visual concerns).
Recently, the City has received numerous requests for variance from
the existing standard.
The following is a listing of City's con~acted and their specific
regulations relating to air conditioner setbacks.
City Setback Requirement
Burnsville Prohibited in side yard, except those
abutting public streets.
Cottage Grove May encroach 2-1/2 feet into required
setbacks.
Eden Prairie Five foot side yard setback (not within
required drainage and utility easement).
Eagan None - must not lie within required
drainage and utility easement.
5775 Wayzata Blvd.. Suite 555 · St. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636. Fax. 595-9837
City Setback Requirement
Edina -'~- Five foot side yard setback.
Inver Grove Heights No requirement.
Minnetonka Varies~' may encroach five feet into
required yard setbacks.
Plymouth Not allowed in side yard.
St. Louis Park Within 6 feet of principal building, must
comply with nuisance ordinance.
As shown above, setbacks imposed upon air conditioners vary widely
in the sampled communities. It should be recognized, however, that
the prohibition of air conditioners within required side yards is
not unco~L~Lon as evidenced in the sample communities previously
listed.
If the City does wish to allow ground mounted air conditioners
within required side yards, it is recommended that the following
conditions be upheld to limit adverse impacts:
1. The air conditioner does not produce noise considered a
nuisance as defined by the nuisance ordinance.
2. The air conditioning unit is.screened via landscaping and/or
fencing as judged acceptable by the City.
3. The air conditioner does not lie within required drainage and
utility easements.
If you have any questions or coam%ents regarding this material,
please do not hesitate to ask. With your authorization, we can
prepare a Zoning Ordinance amendment.
2
~uraqe _and On-$iCe_Park£nq $gace. ~o permit sha~ be issued
loc the consCr~cc~On of more chart one pr£v&Ce accessory
~aga~e sCc~cc~re for each dweLL£ng. Each applicant for a
bu£Lding pecu£C Co c~flsCrucc any dvaLL£flg sheLL be requ£ced
apace ~o ~ ~s~. Every dwelling un~ hereafter erected
sha~L ~ so ~oca~ed on ~he ~o~ so ~haC ac ~eas~ a cwo car
ga~agej eA~e~ a~acAed o~.~e~acned, can ~ ~oca~ed on
~m~ on N~rs. ~ach Xo~ shall ~ l~mi~ed Co one .
accessory building in addi~Lon Co an accessory 9arag~
Alt CondL~ione~l. ~ accessory uses oF ~u~en~ such as ;- t/
a~ condl~kon~ng cooLLng s~cucC~teo or condensers which
generate no,se may ~ located tn a requi~ed s~de ~aFd excep~
equi~en~ sha~ ~ ~u~y sc~een~ ~r~ view.
Ord. 84-3)
C~m~Lca~Lon n~egCLofl/T~afls~tss~gfl oevtces. SafetY,ce
o~s~es, ~eLevtston and radio antennas and
co~ca~ion ~Fansm~ssion/receg~on devices are perm~ed
accessor~ uses w~ALn aX~ zoning d~s~ric~s, provided
nsec ~he ~o~ow~ng cond~iofls=
(t) ~. T~e co~tca~tofl device he~gh~ shal~
~ce~ ~ven~y ~ee~ ~r~ ground
(i~) Yards. The coMuflLca~on device sha~ no~ ~
~fl ~he cequlc~ f=ofl~ ~a=d oF o~de ~a=d sec~ack,
(itl) n~s. X~ vege~a~on or obstructions ~n~e~ere w~h
~s a~ a Loca~ofl ~n any a~ovab~e p~ac~en~ area,
~he c~caZLon devLce may ~ p~aced off ~he roo~
(tvJ Setbacks. The hetght o~ the c~ufl~ca~ofl devLce may
exce~"~tve ~eeC A~ve ~ht ~ll~ of the rooe on~y
conditional ~e ~LC. Co. un,carLos devices sha~X
ad~oiflLng lo~l and IhiX~ floc ~ ~ociC~ viCh/n
oc/X/Cy ~s~enC.
(v) Building Permits. A building permit shall be required
£or Cna installation of any communication device
requiring a cofldL~ioflaX use pemL~, nu~Xdiflg pe~ic
applications shall ~ aecompani~ by a st~e plan and
structural c~nenCs da~a ~oc ~e con~tca~ton
device, inel~ng de~aiXe of anc~orinv. T~e nu~ding
Official nut appr~e ~he plans ~ore
(vi) Lilh~in~ Pro,action. Each c~unica~Lon device shall
~ ground~ ~o procec~ agatna~ na~qriL ~tgh~fltng
~e al ~p~ ~ ~he CL~y o~ H~ Hope.
(viA) Rlec~cical C~e. C~m~ica~ion device electrical
~u~eflC and conflec~iofls shall ~ desigfl~ afld
tnscaX~ in con~omance vt~h the ua~ioflaZ gXeccricaX
4-Z0
U R B A P L N NG · D N · M AR K E R ES E A R C H
TO: Kirk McDonald
FROM: Elizabeth Stockman/Alan Brixius
DATE: 15 September 1992
RE: New Hope - Subdivision and Platting Ordinance
FILE NO: 131.00 92.15
We have revised the Subdivision and Platting Ordinance relative to
the recent revision to Minnesota Statutes which allows up to one
year after the recording of a plat to require the monuments to be
set. The City Code currently requires that monuments be recorded
on the plat and proof of the monumentation (in the form of a
surveyor's certificate) be provided as a condition of the
Certificate of Occupancy.
Given the changes in statute which make reference to a specific
time period and list of several conditions which the Hennepin
County Surveyor's Office recommends, we have attached a draft
Zoning Ordinance amendment which addresses these items. For
reference purposes, we have also attached the letter from Hennepin
County and the existing City regulations.
If you should need any further assistance or changes in this
regard, please contact our office. I assume that this issue will
be addressed at the next Codes and Standards meeting.
pc: Dan Donahue
Doug Sandstad
5775 Wayzata Blvd.- Suite 555 · St. Louis Park, MN 55416, (612) 595-9636-Fax. 595-9837
ORDINANCE NO.
CITY OF NEW HOPE
COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 13.0?3 OF THE ZONING CODE RELATING TO
THE TIME ALLOWED FOR THE SETTING OF MO~S.
The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains.
Section 1. Section 13.073 of the New Hope City Code is hereby
amended to add the following:
(4) Time Allowed for Placement of Monuments. All monuments
as required in Sub-sections (1) and (2) above, shall be
set at the time of recording of the plat at the County or
shall be set within one year after recording, provided
the following conditions are met:
(a) A lesser time has not been set, as specified by the
City, for the setting of monuments.
(b) The exterior plat boundary is not subject to
delayed monumentation for purposes of protecting
adjacent properties.
(c) For survey control purposes, all angle and curve
points, all block corners, and all intermediate
points on the block lines which indicate a change
in direction must be monumented at the time of
recording the plat.
(d) Prior to the setting of any monuments, the
developer must obtain written approval from the
City for any delay in monumentation, including
reference of the specified time delay and to what
extent on each plat the delay will occur. A copy
of this written approval shall be sent to the
County Surveyor's Office prior to any setting of
monuments.
(e) The City may require the developer to post a
security of one hundred twenty-five (125) percent
of cost of monument installation.
(f) No occupancy permits will be issued for any
structure on individual lots until all monuments
are in place.
Section 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective
upon its passage and publication.
Dated this day of 1992.
Edward J. Erickson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
(Published in the N~w HQD~-GQlden Valley Post on the day of
1992)
--~ ~-~ DATE: J~ly 15, 1992
TO: City Administrators
HENNEPIN FROM: Bernard H. Larson, County Surveyor
I [ SUBJECT: Mcnumentation of Subdivision Plats
On August 1, 1992, a revision to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 505.02, Subdivision
1, dealing with the monumentation of subdivision plats takes effect. This revision
gives municipalities the option of allowing up to one year after the recording of the
plat to require the monuments be set. The change is "...or will be set within one year
after recording, or sooner as specified by th~ aporovina local government unit. A
financial guarantee may be required for the placement of monuments."
As a municipality within Hennepin County, it will now be your responsibility to ensure
compliance with this part of the requirements of Minnesota Statute, Chapter 505.02,
Subdivision 1.
Municipalities will need to coordinate with the County Surveyor's Office to administer
this revision. Any delay in the monumentation of a subdivision plat according to this
statute should be reviewed closely before being permitted. There may be some merit
to the revision, because grading and utility operations make it difficult, if not
impossible, to prevent some monuments from being disturbed. However, this could
be handled through an escrow account established to fund the replacement costs for
monuments that have been destroyed.
With the revised statute in mind, the Hennepin County Surveyor's Office would offer
the following comments/suggestions:
1. The exterior plat boundary should never be subject to
delayed monumentation because excavation should not be
occurring across property lines, thereby protecting adjacent
property.
2. The County Surveyor's Office must be notified in writing by
the city if delayed monumentation is permitted or not and
to what extent on each plat. This will determine the land
surveyor's certification and the delineation of
monumentation on the plat.
city Administrators
Page 2
July 15, 1992
3. Lot conveyances and/or building permits should not be
allowed until monuments have been placed in the ground
according to state statute specifications and certified to by
a land surveyor. This will help avoid possible litigation in
the future concerning monumentation and boundary
locations.
4. The municipality could require at a minimum, that durable
iron monuments be set at all angle and curve points on the
outside boundary lines of the plat and also at all block
corners and at all intermediate points on the block lines
indicating changes of direction in the lines. These
boundaries should be monumented at the time of recording
the plat. This would allow for survey control of the
developing subdivision. The adjacent land owners would
know the limits of the development. If another land
surveyor has to be called in to finish the job, the necessary
survey control is in place. The lot corners could be delayed
up to one year if it was deemed necessary.
If you have any questions, or would like to meet and discuss this in more detail,
please don't hesitate to call.
BHL:bd
13.07, 13.071, 13.072,
13.073 (1)
13.07 R£QUIRED IMPROV£M£NTS.
13.071 General.
(1) Sta:f Approvals of Plat. No.-final plat shall be approved by the
Council w~thout first receiving a report signed by the City
Engineer and the City Attorney certifying that the improvements
described %herein, together with the agreements and documents
required above, meet the requirements of the City and
certification by the City Clerk that all fees required to be paid
to the City in connection with the plat have been paid.
(2) Performance Bonds. The City of New Hope shall, where
appropriate, require of a subdivider submission of a bond
acceptable in form and surety to the City in the amoun~ equal to
one and one-half tlmes the original cost of the improvements,
which shall be in force for one year following the final
acceptance of any required improvements and shall guarantee
satisfactory performance of the said improvements.
(3) "As Built' Drawincs. Where improvements are not installed by the
City, reproducible "as built" drawings shall be certified to be
true and accurate by the registered engineer responsible for the
installation of the improvement.
(4) Improvements for Drainage. No final plat shall be approved by
the City Council on land subject to flooding or containing poor
drainage ~acilitles, and on land which would make adequate
drainage of the s:reets and lots impossible. However, if %he
subdivider agrees to make improvements which will, in the opinion
of the City Engzneer, make the area completely safe for
residential occupancy and provide adequate street and
drainage and conform to applicable regulations of other agencies
such as the U.S. Corps of Engineers, or the Department of Natural
Resources, the final plat of the $ubdivi$lon may be approved. In
addition, such plats may not be approved if the cost of providing
municipal services to protect =he flood plain area would impose
an unreasonable economic burden upon the Ci=y.
13.072 Water and Sewer Facilities. Sanitary sewers, and water distribution
facilities shall normally be installed by the City and costs assessed
in accordance with the assessment procedures as regulated under
Minnesota Statutes No. 429.
13.073 Monuments.
(1) Placement of Official Monuments. Official monuments, as
~esignate~ and adopted by the Hennepin County Surveyor's Office
and approved by the Hennepin County District Court for use as
judicial monuments, shall be set at each corner or angle on the
outside boundary cf %he final plat. The boundary line of %he
property to be included wi~h the plat to be fully dimensioned;
all angles o~ the boundary excepting the closing angle %o be
indicated; all monuments and surveyor's irons to be indicated,
each angle porn% cf %he boundary perimeter %o be so monumented.
13-20
07268&
13.073 (2),(3),
13.074 (1) - (5)
Other Monumen%S; Preservation; Plat Detail. Pipes or steel rods
shall be placed a: each lot and at each intersection of street
center lines..~All United States, State, County or other official
bench marks, Monuments %r triangular stations in or adjacent to
the property shall be preserved in precise position and shall be
recorded on.the plat. All lot and block dimensions shall be
shown on the plat and all necessary angles pertain'lng.to =he lots
and blocks, as an aid to future surveys, shall be shown on :he
plat. No dit%o marks shall be permitted in indicating
dimensions.
(3) Second Monumentation Required. To insure that all irons and
monuments are correctly in place following the final grading of a
plat, second monumentation shall be required. Proof of the
second monumentation shall be in the form of a surveyor's
certificate and this requirement shall additionally be a
condition of the certificate of occupancy as provided for in
Chapter 4.
13.074 Street Improvements.
(1) Right-of-Kay Grading. The full width of the right-of-way shall
be graded, including the subgrade of the areas to be paved, in
accordance with standards and specifications for street
construction as outlined in Subsection 13.084.
(2) Street Pavement. All streets shall be improved with pavement in
accordance with the standards and specifications for street
construction as required in Subsection 13.084.
(3) Street Surface Width; Right-of-way Surface. All streets to be
surfaced shall be of an overall width in accordance with the
standards and specifications for construction as approved by the
City Council. The portion of the right-of-way outside the area
surfaced shall be sodded or riprapped by the developer if deemed
necessary.
(4) Curb and Gutters. Curb and gutter will be required on all
streets according to specifications for street construction as
set forth in Subsection 13.084. Ail curb corners shall have a
radius of not less than fifteen (15) feet except at collector and
marginal access streets where :hey shall be not less than twenty-
fivefeet.
(5) Grade and Drainage Requiremen%s. The grade and drainage
requirements for each plat shall be established by the City
Engineer at the expense of the applicant. Every plat presented
for final signature shall be accompanied by a Certificate of the
City Engineer that the grade and drainage requirements have been
met. In an area not having municipal storm sewer trunk, the
applicant shall be responsible, before platting, to provide for a
storm water disposal plan, wi%hour damage to properties outside
the platted area, and said s%orm water disposal plan shall be
submitted to %he City Engineer who shall report to the City
Council on :he feasibility of %he plan presented.
13-21
P . 0 2
September 18, 1992
Kirk McDonald
Management Assr.
City of New Hope
4401Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55&2a
RE: Garden Store as Conditional Use in B-2 Zoning District
Our File No: 9g.49215
Dear Kirk:
Please find enclosed a proposed Ordinance which amends New Hope
Code Section 4.114 by establishing a garden store as a conditional
use in a $-2 zone.
! have made some minor alterations to the Ordinance drafted by the
City Planner and attached to his September 15th, 1992 memo.
Specifically, ! have Ghanged the numbering sequence so that the
enclosed Ordinance is 4(j) instead of 4(k). This change will make
the garden store CUP subject to the size and traffic volume
conditions of Section 4.114 (4) as we~l.
A second change was also made regarding the permitted ty~e of
fenctng. ! pemoved the fencing specifications from the front yard
section and reinserted it in the required fencing section. The
change will make all required fencing subject to the fencing
spect¢tcattone relating to quality of material.
P~ease kee~ in mind that this te also a zoning change requiring a
pu~lt~ hearing and consideration before the Planning Commission.
Sap[ember 18, 1992
Page 2
! am copying the. City Planner and Building Off~cial for their
review &nd commenta es well. -'
Very truly yours,
Steven A. Sondrall
slf2
Enclosure
cc: Doug Sandstad, City Bldg. Official (w?en¢)
A1Brixiua~ City Planner (w/eric)
ORDINANCE NO. 92-15
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING NEW HOPE CODE
'SECT[ON 4.114 (4) BY PERMZTTING
GARDEN NOVELTY STORES AS A CONDITIONAL
USE iN A B-2 ZONE
The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains:
Section 1. Section 4.114 (4)(j) "Criteria for (&) thro_uQh
of the New Hope City Code is hereby renumbered to Section
4,114 (4)(k) &nd amended to read (a) through (j).
Section 2. Section 4,114 (4)(j) "Garden Novelty Stores" of
the New Hope City Code is hereby added to read as follows:
(j) Garden NOvelty Sto~e~. Wt,,~h outdoor storage/sale areas
subject to the f~!lowin~ condi~ton$:
.O¼%door storame/se3es aree¢s) eh,al~ not exceed one
h~ndreQ twenty-five (!,2~ Dercent of the ~ross
f~or area of the bui~in~
, Out_door stor_ege/sa3es__.area.(a)_m~v be a~3owed in a
fron~ yard if a ,fifteen (15) foo~. so, back_ from
mub~ic _d_~hts-of.~v is mr~vided and reQuic, ed
f~ncin.e_&crosa front yard shall be_~t la&st fifty
(50) mercent omen for massage of air and lt~ht~
(iii) Outdoor stoFaee/sales arm~(a3 she33 be fence~
around its pe,riohery end _must be _screened from
reatdentt&~ ,,,z~ojn; districts. The dest~n and
materials ~ed ~n construct~ne the r~ouired
fenctne/screen~nm sha~l be sub~ect to City Counci3
&mmrova~ and constructed of mremium Quality
materia3s such as_masonry, brick...~ualitv wood(s~
~nd/or ~tal(s). not including wife weave/chat~
~ink. ba[b wire. or scra~ metal materials.
(iv) ~tdoor storage/sales a~e~(s) must b~ s~rf~ced~with
~on~rgl dust &nd_t~3__mrovtde a clean, attr_scttve and
U~a~e_surface.
(v) ~.~aa, r storage/sa1 es area(s) do not take q~
~rkina_.~p~c~ necessary to m~t the requiff~ments of
~ h t s Code,
(vi) All 1.~h?~n.~ shall be hooded an~ sq d~rected 'cha~ ....
th~ ...-li,qh'~ ,~ource shal 1 not be visible from
public r~ht-of-way or ~rom ne~ghbo~nm residences
~nd'.shall__beJn c_qmpl~a.~c_e w~th Section 4.033_
of.. t h ~ s
~ectio~ 3. Effective D~te. This Ordinance sh&11 be effective
upon its passage and publication.
Dated the ... day of .... , 1992.
Edw. J, Erickson, Mayor
Attest:
Velerie Leone~ C~ty Clerl~
(Published in the New Hope-Golden V&lley Sun-Post the day of
~ 1992.)
R B A P L A N N G D I G N M A R K E T R S E A R C H
TO: Kirk McDonald
FROM: Elizabeth Stockman/Alan Brixius
DATE: 15 September 1992
RE: New Hope - B-2 Zoning District Amendment
FILE NO: 131.00 - 92.09
We have revised the draft Ordinance amendment based on discussion
which took place on 11 September 1992. It includes garden novelty
stores as a conditional use within the B-2 Zoning District. Please
review the attached and call with any questions or comments.
pc: Dan Donahue
Doug Sandstad
5775 Wayzata Blvd.-Suite 555. St. Louis Park, MN 55416. (612) 595-9636.Fax. 595-9837
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
CITY OF NEW HOPE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNF OTA
AN ORDINANCE A~I~NDING SECTIONS 4. 114 OF THE ZONING CODE RELATING TO
GARDEN NOVELTY STORES ALLOWED BY CONDITIONAL USE IN THE B-2 ZONING
DISTRICT.
The City Council of the City of New Hope ordains.
Section 1. Section 4.114, Sub-section 4 (k) of the New Hope
City Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
(k) Garden Novelty Stores. With outdoor storage/sale areas
subject to the following conditions:
(1) Outdoor storage/sales area(s) do not exceed one
hundred twenty-five (125) percent of the gross
floor area of the building.
(2) Outdoor storage/sales area(s) may be allowed in a
front yard, provided:
a. A fifteen (15) foot setback from public
rights-of-way is provided.
b. Fences extending across front yards be
aesthetically pleasing and at least fifty (50)
percent open for passage of air and light.
c. Required fencing be constructed of premium
quality materials such as masonry, brick,
quality wood(s) and/or metal(s), not including
wire weave/chain link, barb wire, or scrap
metal materials.
(3) Outdoor sales/storage area(s) will require a fence
around their periphery and must be screened from
residential zoning districts. The design and
materials used in constructing the required
fencing/screening are subject to the approval of
the City Council.
(4) All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that
the light .source shall not be visible from the
public-right~f-way or from neighboring residences
and shall be in compliance with Section 4.033 (5)
of this Code.
(5) Outdoor storage/sales area(s) must be surfaced with
concrete, bituminous, or similar material to
control dust and to provide a clean, attractive and
usable surface.
(6) Outdoor storage/sales area(s) do not take up
parking space necessary to meet the requirements of
this Code.
Section 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective
upon its passage and publication.
Dated this day of 1992.
Edward J. Erickson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Valerie Leone, 'City Clerk
(Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Post on the day of
1992)
SuperAmerica Group, Inc.
1240 West 98th Street
Bloomington, MN 55431
(612) 887-6100
SUPERAMERICA .-
-- (612) 887-6158 FAX
September 25, 1992 SFP 2 8 1992
City of New Hope
Honorable Mayor and City Council
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, MN 55428
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
We regret to inform you that we will not be constructing a
new SuperAmerica at the southwest corner of West Broadway
and 62nd Avenue North.
We sincerely appreciate the support of the City Council
during our approval process. We will continue to seek
additional opportunities in New Hope as they present
themselves.
SiDC~rely, ~/~
Glenn Hill
Manager of Design & Construction
Leonard Feilmeier
Regional Vice President
SUBSIDIARY OF ASHLAND OIL, INC.