Loading...
2003 PC Meeting MinutesCRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 2003 A. CALL TO ORDER Page I of 4 The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: K. Graham, T. Graham, Kamp, Krueger, Nystrom, Sears, Strand, and VonRueden. Also present were the following: Planner Sutter and Community Development Assistant Dietsche. R. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Commissioner Krueger nominated and Commissioner Nystrom seconded the nomination of Commissioner Richard VonRueden as chair of the Planning Commission for the year ending December 31, 2003. Commissioner Kamp nominated and Commissioner K. Graham seconded the nomination of Commissioner Todd Graham as chair of the Planning Commission for the year ending December 31, 2003. Because there was more than one nomination for chair, voting was done by paper ballot and tabulated by staff. Voting resulted in a 4-4 tie to elect a chair of the Planning Commission. A coin flip finally determined that Richard VonRueden would be chair of the Planning Commission for the year ending December 31, 2003. Commissioner Kamp nominated and Commissioner Sears seconded the nomination of Commissioner T. Graham as vice chair of the Planning Commission for the year ending December 31, 2003. Motion carried. Commissioner Kamp nominated and Commissioner K. Graham seconded the nomination of Commissioner Rita Nystrom as secretary of the Planning Commission for the year ending December 31, 2003. Motion carried. C. APPROVAL OF MEETING CALENDAR AND APPLICATION DUE DATES Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the meeting calendar and application due dates for 2003 with no exceptions. Motion carried. D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Page 2 oJ4 Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the minutes of the December 9, 2002 meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. Y. PUBLIC HEARINGS Consider Application 2002-24 for a variance to reduce the garage door setback from 20 feet to 8 feet at 4228 Brunswick Ave N. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended denial of the proposed variance request based on the suggested findings of fact in the staff report. However, staff has provided two alternative variance requests for the Planning Commission to consider to allow construction of the garage. Dave Bronson, 4228 Brunswick Ave N, stated the main reasons for requesting the variance. He would like to minimize the impact to the basswood tree and the amount of hard surface area in the rear yard. Mr. Bronson explained that by configuring the garage as he has proposed in the application, the amount of fill required for the garage would be drastically reduced when compared to staff's suggested alternatives. Electrical lines were also a concern and Mr. Bronson stated that he would like the construction of the garage not to interfere with these lines. He also pointed out that the alley's usage is minimal and actually blocked off after his property. Therefore, safety would be less of a concern because of little traffic accessing the alley. The Planning Commission questioned Mr. Bronson about the alternatives suggested by staff and he responded that alternative #2 was a very workable plan. He could still maintain the 24' x 24' garage, but he would have to work around the electrical lines and deal with the cost of the need for additional fill and therefore would prefer approval of the original variance request. Commissioner K. Graham asked Mr. Bronson for an estimated cost of the project and how much more the additional fill would cost. He replied that the estimated total project cost was about $6000.00, but the additional fill would bring the cost up at least $4000.00, for a total cost of at least $10000.00 for alternative #1 or #2. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Kamp to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Commissioner Sears pointed out that the proposed garage would be located at the end of the alley, so he could see no real safety issue with the applicant's request. Planner Sutter responded that there are two other houses that could potentially use the alley if they Page 3 of 4 decided to build a garage on the alley as the applicant is proposing to do. Also, with the possibility of redevelopment along the 42nd Ave N corridor, the city cannot be sure of the future use of the alley. The present condition of the alley may not be permanent. Commissioner Kamp agreed with Planner Sutter and stated that reducing the setback requirement may cause problems in the fixture. In addition, the extra parking area as proposed in alternative 92 would add value to the property and would decrease safety concerns. He also stated that although alternative #2 would increase the cost of the project, the Planning Commission should base their decision on the best use of the property. Commissioner Krueger questioned whether or not the city owns the property at the end of the alley right-of-way. Planner Sutter stated that the alley did go through at one time, although the city may never have owned that portion of the alley. Commissioner Krueger also questioned if the garage would only have access from the alley and Planner Sutter explained that the existing driveway would be required to be removed upon completion of the garage, leaving access only from the alley. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recommend to the City Council to deny Application 2002-24 for a variance to reduce the garage door setback at 4228 Brunswick Ave N. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report and that the Planning Commission feels that alternative #2 is a fair option for the applicant. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Kamp and seconded by Commissioner K. Graham to recommend to the City Council to approve a variance, applicable to Application 2002-24, for additional rear yard structure coverage at 4228 Brunswick Ave N, as proposed by staff in alternative #1 or #2 of the staff report. Motion carried. F. OLD BUSINESS G. NEW BUSINESS H. GENERAL INFORMATION Quarterly Development Status Report Interviews to be held on January 21, 2003 for Planning Commission appointments 1. OPEN FORUM J. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Karrnp and seconded by Commissioner K. Graham to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. r�� - c ei'j Chair VonRueden Seeretary lt"O�ii Page 4 of 4 CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 10, 2003 .A. CALL TO ORDER Page 1 of 2 The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: K. Graham, T. Graham, Kamp, Krueger, Nystrom, Strand, and VonRueden. Also present were the following: Planner Sutter and Community Development Assistant Dietsche. Commissioner Sears arrived at 7:40 p.m. B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the minutes of the January 13, 2003 meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. i, OLD BUSINESS None. E. NEW BUSINESS I. Discuss preliminary draft of the new Zoning Ordinance (proposed C-1 and C-2 district regulations) Planner Sutter reviewed the revised timetable for discussion of the new Zoning Ordinance and summarized the revisions proposed for the C-1 and C-2 districts. Discussion items included the elimination of the C-3 Auto -Oriented Commercial District, whether on -sale and off -sale liquor are appropriate uses in the C-1 and C-2 districts, lot coverage standards, setback requirements, and location and specifications of park-and- ride facilities. The Planning Commission was in agreement that on -sale liquor would be appropriate as an accessory use to restaurants because they would be limited by size and hours of operation. Commissioner Kamp suggested that the permitted lot coverage of 75% may be too lenient for the C-2 district. Planner Sutter explained that all other standards would be required to be met in addition to the 75% lot coverage and that the 75% included anything that is built, such as sidewalks, parking lots, and accessory buildings. Paige 2 of 2 Commissioner T. Graham questioned the reasoning behind the 30 ft front setback from the property line for commercial properties. Planner Sutter responded that staff feels that there is no need for commercial properties to be closer unless, as part of a Planned Unit Development, the Planning Commission and City Council determine that it is desirable to waive this requirement as part of a larger, walkable, mixed-use development. li. GENERAL INFORMATION • City Council actions on Planning Commission items • Update on the redevelopment planning process for the Crystal Heights area ■ Met Council Directions newsletter for Jan -Feb 2003 G. OPEN FORUM R. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Kamp and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 7:46 p.m. hair VonRueden Secretary Nystrom CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION March 10, 2003 A. CALL TO ORDER Page I of 2 The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: K. Graham, T. Graham, Krueger, Nystrom, Sears, Strand, and VonRueden. Also present were the following: Planner Sutter and Community Development Assistant Dietsche. Commissioner Kamp was absent. B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to approve the minutes of the February 10, 2003 meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. M OLD BUSINESS None. E. NEW BUSINESS [. Discuss proposed zoning moratorium along County Road 81 to provide time for completion of planning studies related to roadway reconstruction and bus rapid transit improvements. Planner Sutter summarized the staff memo and explained the reasoning behind the moratorium. He stated that the moratorium would be applied to properties wholly or partially located within 660 feet of the centerline of County Road 81, with the exception of single-family homes, duplexes, and businesses or institutional additions not exceeding 10% of the existing building. The moratorium would cover requests for rezoning, subdivisions, variances, conditional uses, and site plan review. Staff anticipates the moratorium would expire one year after the effective date. However, the City Council would have the authority not only to discontinue it early but also to extend it later if necessary. 2. Discuss preliminary draft of the new Zoning Ordinance: Proposed I-1 district and special districts (Planned Development, Floodplain, Shoreland, Airport). Page 2 of 2 Planner Sutter reviewed the revised timetable for discussion of the new Zoning Ordinance and summarized the revisions proposed for the I- Idistrict and special districts Commissioner Sears expressed concern for the increase in traffic that would result from possible redevelopment of the airport and questioned whether the reconstructed County Road 81 is anticipated to accommodate any increase. Planner Sutter responded that any anticipated traffic increases on local streets and related concerns would be taken into consideration as part of the master planning process for the area. However, staff does not anticipate a significant increase in traffic on the regional road system if the airport is developed into a residential district. Commissioner Sears was interested in discussing the permitted principal uses in the I-1 district, specifically whether or not any sort of metal plating businesses would be allowed in this district. Commissioner Sears and several other commissioners were concerned with the type of chemical discharge that might be associated with this business and if the I -I district is an appropriate location for this use. Planner Sutter suggested that this use should not necessarily be excluded in the I-1 district, but dealt with according to the performance standards listed for the district. Commissioner T. Graham questioned the language of the permitted principal uses of the I-1 district and stated that some of the uses are too general, while others are very specific. He stated that it might be confusing to individuals who are trying to decipher what is permitted and what is not and it would be helpful to clarify this section, so as not to leave anything open to interpretation. Planner Sutter agreed that it might be best to specifically list the permitted principal uses to avoid any confusion or awkward interpretation. F. GENERAL INFORMATION G. OPEN FORUM Commissioner VonRueden reminded the Planning Commission of the Appreciation Dinner on Thursday, April 10, 2003. 1-1. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 7:38 p.m. Chair VonRueden CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION May 12, 2003 A. CALL TO ORDER Page I of 4 The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: Davis, K. Graham, T. Graham, Kamp, Krueger, Nystrom, Sears, Strand, and VonRueden. Also present were the following: Planner Sutter, Community Development Assistant Dietsche, and City Council member Hoffinan. B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the minutes of the March 10, 2003 meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. C. INDUCTION OF TOM DAVIS INTO PLANNING COMMISSION New Planning Commissioner Tom Davis was sworn in by Chair VonRueden. D. PUBLIC HEARINGS Site plan review for a 3,420 sq. ft. addition to an existing office building, together with parking lot and landscaping modifications at 5200 Douglas Dr N (Family Eye Care Center). Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended approval of the site plan based on the suggested findings of fact in the staff report. Commissioner Krueger questioned why there why there was only one handicapped parking space for the facility. Planner Sutter replied that only one handicapped parking space is required for lots with fewer than 50 spaces. Moved by Commissioner Kamp and seconded by Commissioner T. Graham to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-01, site plan review at 5200 Douglas Dr N. Findings of fact are that the plan meets the requirements of City Code, it is a good addition to the community, and that the planting recommendations stated by the City Forester will enhance the site. Page 2 of 4 Motion carried. 2. Consider a variance to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage from 30% to 40% at 3534 Kyle Ave N. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended approval of the variance based on the suggested findings of fact in the staff report. Commissioner Krueger questioned how many garage doors the applicant intended to install for the new 3 -car garage. Planner Sutter responded that such information was not included in the variance application. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Kamp to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Kamp and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-02 for a variance to increase rear yard structure coverage at 3534 Kyle Ave N. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried. Consider a variance to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage from 30% to 50% at 3516 Kyle Ave N. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended approval of the variance based on the suggested findings of fact in the staff report. Commissioner Sears questioned whether or not there would be any negotiation on the trees that the EDA would like to preserve on the site. Planner Sutter replied that although the EDA would really like to preserve the three trees indicated on the site sketch in the staff report, selecting the best house plan for the site is most important. Commissioner T. Graham asked what style of house is favorable to the EDA on 40' wide x 128' deep lot. Planner Sutter stated that in order to maximize square footage on a small lot, the most logical and desirable plan would be a two-story house. Commissioner Kamp stated that he thought one of the reasons the EDA was so interested in redeveloping this area was to widen these 40' non -conforming lots such as 3516 Kyle Ave N to be conforming to City Code. Commissioner T. Graham stated that if the city could make a 40' wide lot viable, then he could see no reason to widen these lots. He also stated that in his opinion, granting the variance would allow reasonable use of the property without negative impact. Commissioner K. Graham asked the anticipated sale price of the new house upon completion. Planner Sutter responded that the target lot price is $50,000 and the target Page 3 of 4 value (lot and new house combined) is $206,000. Commissioner K. Graham questioned if the city were to combine two 40' wide lots, what the 80' wide lot would be valued at. Planner Sutter explained that just because a 40' lot is valued at $50,000, doesn't mean that an 80' wide lot would be valued at $100,000. He stated that the 80' lot would probably be valued around $65,000 because it still could only have one house on it. Commissioner K. Graham responded that it is obvious why the city feels it is beneficial to keep these lots at 40'. Moved by Commissioner Kamp and seconded by Commissioner K. Graham to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner T. Graham and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-03 for a variance to increase rear yard structure coverage at 3516 Kyle Ave N. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried 7-2 with Davis, K. Graham, T. Graham, Nystrom, Sears, Strand, and VonRueden voting aye, and Kamp and Krueger voting nay. Consider a variance to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage from 30% to 50% at 3520 Kyle Ave N. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended approval of the variance based on the suggested findings of fact in the staff report. Moved by Commissioner K. Graham and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Strand to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-04 for a variance to increase rear yard structure coverage at 3520 Kyle Ave N. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried 7-2 with Davis, K. Graham, T. Graham, Nystrom, Sears, Strand, and VonRueden voting aye, and Kamp and Krueger voting nay. 1_,. OLD BUSINESS None. F. NEW BUSINESS Page 4 of 4 Update on a study of potential transit -oriented development around the proposed Bus Rapid Transit station at County Road 81 and Bass Lake Road. Presented by Brad Scheib of Hoisington Koegler Group. C'. GENERAL INFORMATION Quarterly Development Status Report H. OPEN FORUM 1. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 8:02 p.m. n C�Vti � rla 24t_�._ Chair VonRueden Secr ary Nystrom CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION June 9, 2003 A. CALL TO ORDER Page 1 of 2 The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: K. Graham, T. Graham, Krueger, Nystrom, Sears, Strand, and VonRueden. Also present were the following: Planner Sutter, Community Development Assistant Dietsche, and City Council member Hoffman. Absent were the following: Davis and Kamp. It APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner K. Graham and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the minutes of the May 12, 2003 meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS Consider a variance to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage from 30% to 42% at 4331 Welcome Ave N. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended approval of the variance based on the suggested findings of fact in the staff report. Commissioner VonRueden questioned whether the existing garage would be demolished and the applicant replied that it would be demolished. The applicant also stated to the Planning Commission that he would appreciate a variance for the new garage. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-05 for a variance to increase rear yard structure coverage at 4331 Welcome Ave N. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried. D. OLD BUSINESS E. NEW BUSINESS Page 2 of 2 F. GENERAL INFORMATION G. OPEN FORUM H. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 7:07 p.m. Chair VonRueden Sectary Nystrom CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2003 A. CALL TO ORDER Page 1 of 5 The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: Davis, Krueger, Nystrom, Strand, and VonRueden. Also present were the following: Planner Sutter, Community Development Assistant Dietsche, and City Council member Grimes. Absent were the following: K. Graham, T. Graham, and Sears. Also absent was Kamp, due to his resignation, effective immediately. B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to approve the minutes of the June 9, 2003 meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS Consider a Conditional Use Permit for Automobile -Related Uses at 5301 Douglas Dr N (Regal Car Wash). Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit for specific automobile -related uses based on the suggested findings of fact and provided all conditions listed in the staff report are met. Amy Moser, 5307 Edgewood Ave N, stated that Regal Car Wash has not been very accommodating to the neighborhood and neglects to take care of the property. The lawn and bushes are overgrown, the fence is in disrepair, trash enclosure is not adequately screened from adjacent properties, and traffic associated with the business is a constant disruption to the neighborhood. Commissioner VonRueden replied that as part of the approval for the Conditional Use Permit, the curb cut on Edgewood Ave N would be required to be closed. He also stated that the city would do its best to address the code violations mentioned by Ms. Moser. Planner Sutter stated that he was aware of the noise associated with traffic on this property, but had not heard about the other issues mentioned by Ms. Moser. He said that if any code violations exist, this would be a good time to address these issues. Commissioner Strand questioned why Regal Car Wash refused to close the curb cut on Edgewood Ave N in the past. Commissioner VonRueden and Planner Sutter replied that Regal Car Wash felt they would lose too much business if the curb cut was closed. However, new management has recently recognized that closing the curb cut would Page 3 of S Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recconnnend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-07 for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning of 5509 56th Ave N. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried. 3. Consider a variance to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage, allow two accessory parking spaces, and allow encroachment of one of these spaces into the public right-of-way at 6526 59th Ave N. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended approval of the variance to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage, but denial of the variance to allow two accessory spaces at the property, and denial of a variance to allow an accessory parking space to encroach into the public right-of-way based on the suggested findings of fact in the staff report. Ryan Pugh, 6526 59th Ave N, stated that building a two -car garage is not currently in his budget. He said that he is trying to improve the appearance of his property by putting in a hard surface driveway that can accommodate the vehicles that need to be parked at the property, rather than parking the vehicles on the grass. Mr. Pugh confessed that he was confused as to why a variance was required to encroach on the public right-of-way so as to allow him access to his accessory parking space. Planner Sutter responded that the zoning code explicitly states that parking is not allowed in the boulevard portion of the driveway, the property does not have an undue hardship, and that denying the variance does not prevent reasonable use of the property. Commissioner Davis stated that there seems to be other feasible options for a comparable driveway without the need for a variance. The Planning Conunission seemed to be in agreement that because of the unique configuration of the lot, a variance to increase the rear yard structure coverage was justified, but under no circumstances could an accessory parking space encroach into the public right-of-way. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Strand to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-08 for a variance to increase the rear yard structure coverage at 6526 59th Ave N from 30% to 48%. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried. Paa e S of S F. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. The Planning Commission received an update on the Crystal Heights master planning process. 2. The Planning Commission received the Quarterly Development Status Report. The Planning Commission received Conunissioner Kamp's letter of resignation from the Planning Commission. G. OPEN FORUM H. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Chair VonRueden CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION August 11, 2003 A. CALL TO ORDER Page I of 3 The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: Davis, K. Graham, T. Graham, Krueger, Nystrom, Sears, and VonRueden. Also present were the following: Planner Sutter and Community Development Assistant Dietsche. Absent was the following: Strand. B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the minutes of the July 14, 2003 meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Consider a variance to allow two accessory parking spaces at 6526 59th Ave N (continued from the July 14, 2003 meeting). Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended denial of a variance to allow the applicant's original request for two accessory spaces at the property. However, staff has prepared an alternative that balances the intent of the ordinance with the shortness of the driveway and recommends approval of staff alternate 93 based on the suggested findings of fact in the staff report. Commissioner T. Graham questioned why the Planning Commission should grant staff s proposed alternate, if the property owner wasn't interested in pursuing any other configuration than what was originally submitted in his application. The Planning Commission was frustrated that the applicant was not present at the public hearing to answer their questions. Planner Sutter stated that staff did attempt to contact the applicant to discuss staff s alternate, but received no response. Commissioner Davis stated that staff s alternate allows for additional parking as requested, but will also prevent the applicant from having to pave in the right-of-way to access the additional parking space on the property. Commissioner VonRueden agreed that staffs alternate #3 is a good compromise with the applicant's request for additional parking. Planner Sutter reminded the Planning Commission that staff s alternate #3 will limit the amount of driveway pavement on the property, but would not limit how many cars could be parked on the site, as long as they are parked on a hard surface. Commissioner K. Graham commented that some of the Planning Commission seemed too concerned as to why the applicant could not attend the public hearing and that the Planning Commission should not let the applicant's absence influence their decision in Page 2 of 3 determining the best use of the property. She also pointed out that if there isn't enough space for residents to park vehicles on a paved surface at their property, residents will just end up parking their vehicles on the grass, which would have a more negative impact on the neighborhood. Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner T. Graham to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recommend to the City Council to deny Application 2003-08 for a variance to allow two accessory parking spaces at 6526 59`x' Ave N as requested by the applicant. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried 6-1 with K. Graham, T. Graham, Krueger, Nystrom, Sears, and VonRueden voting aye and Davis voting nay. - Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-08 for a variance to allow staff alternate #3 as stated in the staff report. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried 5-2 with Davis, K. Graham, Nystrom, Sears, and VonRueden voting aye and T. Graham and Krueger voting nay. D. OLD BUSINESS E. NEW BUSINESS The Planning Commission discussed driveway standards as they relate to the new Zoning Ordinance. 2. Planner Sutter and the Planning Commission discussed a preliminary draft of the new zoning ordinance (performance standards and parking requirements). F. GENERAL INFORMATION G. OPEN FORUM 11, ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Chair VonRueden Se re �ystrom/ Page 3 of 3 CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 2003 A. CALL TO ORDER Page 1 of 4 The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: Davis, K. Graham, T. Graham, Krueger, Nystrom, Sears, and VonRueden. Also present were the following: Planner Sutter and Community Development Assistant Dietsche. Absent was the following: Strand. B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the minutes of the August 11, 2003 meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS Consider a variance to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage from 30% to 52%, including allowing an accessory parking space 4 feet wider than permitted and a driveway 2 feet wider than permitted at 3549 June Ave N. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended denial of a variance to allow the applicant's original request for a driveway to be 6 feet wider than permitted. However, staff recommended approval of a variance to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage from 30% to 50% to allow a driveway and accessory space as permitted by city code, based on the suggested findings of fact in the staff report. Applicant Kathryn Hillan, 3549 June Ave N, stated that she submitted the permit request without knowing the amount of space that city code allows for driveways and accessory parking spaces. Without the variance, code only allows a driveway and accessory space to extend 30 feet wide across her property. She asked the Planning Commission to consider a variance for an additional 6 feet of asphalt to provide for an imaginary sidewalk between the driveway and accessory space, as well as clean up the edges of her property and eliminate having to maintain this area with sod or landscaping material. Commissioner VonRueden stated that an accessory parking space must be adjacent to the driveway. The applicant's request for an imaginary sidewalk between the driveway and accessory parking space is non -conforming with city code. Planner Sutter stated that the average car is 6 feet wide. Without the variance, the applicant would still have enough room to park a third car in the driveway area, per her request. Page 2 of 4 Commissioner Davis questioned how much of the 40 foot lot width is currently surfaced with gravel. K. Hillan responded the entire 40 feet is currently gravel. She also stated that many of her neighbors have the same situation where a majority of their driveway area is gravel or paved the entire width of their lot. Planner Sutter stated that he was not aware of this, but that staff would certainly investigate these properties. Commissioner Sears was concerned about snow removal and storage with the proposed 36 foot wide driveway. Also, the 4 foot strip of grass along the driveway that would be left over if the variance was granted would be much easier to neglect than a larger area with grass or landscaping material. Sears reiterated that a 36 foot wide driveway was pretty luxurious to park three cars and not really necessary. Planner Sutter confirmed that as part of the project, all gravel areas that are not paved will have to be removed and replaced with sod or landscaping material. Commissioner K. Graham stated that from a maintenance standpoint, the driveway and alley would probably look better if they were paved completely. However, she was in agreement with other commissioners in that a 30 foot wide driveway would provide for sufficient parking on the property. K. Graham also stated that in the future, she would prefer to look at each property individually. Residents are trying to expand their properties to meet current needs of their growing families. Because parking on the street overnight is not allowed, off-street parking restrictions may be something that the Planning Commission should take closer look at. Commissioner T. Graham stated his concern with the amount of pavement in the city and that city code limits this for a reason. He added that although this lot was relatively narrow, without limits, residents with wider lots would be proposing to pave a majority or the entire width of their lot as well, resulting in an overabundance of pavement. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner K. Graham to close the public hearing. Motion carried. =10 Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recommend to the City Council to deny Application 2003-10 for a variance to allow an accessory parking space 4 feet wider than permitted and a driveway 2 feet wider than permitted at 3549 June Ave N. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried 4-3 with Krueger, Nystrom, Sears, and VonRueden voting aye and Davis, K. Graham, and T. Graham voting nay. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Davis to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-10 for a variance to increase the rear yard structure coverage from 30% to 50% at 3549 June Ave N. Page 3 of'4 Motion carried. Consider a variance to establish the minimum front setback at 60 feet from the centerline of the street instead of 30 feet from the front lot line to allow construction of an attached garage at 3444 Yates Ave N. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended approval of the variance, based on the suggested findings of fact in the staff report. Planner Sutter explained that the front lot line does not follow the curve of the street as other homes do on that street, thus the reasoning behind the variance. Commissioner T. Graham speculated that the street may have been built to accoirunodate the old farmhouse that used to be located on the neighboring property. It was probably thought that someday the street would be straightened, but financially that wouldn't really make sense, so the curvature has remained. The Planning Commission was in agreement that the garage would be a great improvement to the property. Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-11 for a variance to establish the minimum front setback at 60 feet from the centerline of the street instead of 30 feet from the front lot line to allow construction of an attached garage at 3444 Yates Ave N. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried. D, OLD BUSINESS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Discuss preliminary draft of the new Zoning Ordinance: Administration; Zoning Map. F, GENERAL INFORMATION G. OPEN FORUM 1-1. ADJOURNMENT =:> Moved by Commissioner K. Graham and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 8:13 P.M. Chair VonRueden 4 ti Secretary Nystrom Page 4 of 4 September 22, 2003 CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES The Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. for a work session with the following present: Davis, T. Graham, Krueger, Nystrom, and Strand. Also present were the following: Councilmember Hoffmann, Planner Sutter, Community Development Director Peters, and Community Development Assistant Dietsche Absent were K. Graham, Sears, and VonRueden. The following is an outline of topics presented and discussed by those in attendance: 1. Review timetable for consideration of the new Zoning Ordinance ❑ October 6, 2003 -Open House from 6:00-8:00 p.m. ❑ October 13, 2003 -Public Hearing at regular meeting ❑ October 23, 2003 -Joint work session with City Council ❑ November 12, 2003 -Consider any additional changes at regular meeting and make final recommendation to City Council '. Review draft of the proposed Zoning Map 3. Review draft of the proposed Zoning Ordinance ❑ General Performance Standards Visibility at intersections, specifically with driveways Fences and walls Noise ❑ Off -Street Parking Requirements General provisions • Design standards 9 Location Number of spaces required ❑ Low Density Residential Principal permitted uses • Two-family dwellings, specifically lot width - Permitted accessory uses • Off-street parking, specifically limitations on the number of vehicles that can be parked outside Coverage and height limitations • Rear lot coverage ❑ Medium Density Residential - Minimum lot requirements Coverage and height limitations Staff will prepare a revised draft of the Zoning Ordinance based on suggestions made by the Planning Commission for the October 6, 2003 open house. The meeting adjourned at 8:42 p.m. Vice Chair T. Graham S retary Ny tro CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION October 13, 2003 A. CALL TO ORDER Page I of 7 The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: Davis, K. Graham, T. Graham, Krueger, Nystrom, Strand, and VonRueden. Also present were the following: Planner Sutter, Community Development Assistant Dietsche, and council member Hoffmann. Absent was the following: Sears. B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Krieger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the minutes of the September 8, 2003 meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the minutes of the September 22, 2003 meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS Consider a variance to allow a detached accessory building in the front yard at 4948 Quail Ave N. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended denial of a variance to allow a playhouse in the front yard. However, staff is recommending approval of a variance to allow patios in the front yard of the subject property and seven similar parcels, provided that the area of patios does not exceed 5% of the front yard, based on the suggested findings of fact in the staff report. Commissioner Davis questioned whether or not other parcels along Twin Lake were allowed to build structures between the house and the lake. He also asked if there were any immediate plans to develop or abandon Twin Lake Boulevard. Planner Sutter replied that most other properties along the lake are treated differently, because they actually have lake frontage, unlike the subject property and the other seven similar properties. Planner Sutter stated that he was unaware of any plans to improve or abandon Twin Lake Boulevard. Commissioner T. Graham questioned how much space was between the house and the south lot line and if there was a possibility of moving the playhouse to this area. Planner Sutter stated that under the current zoning code, structures are not permitted in side yards. Page 2 of 7 However, as part of the new zoning ordinance rewrite, it is being proposed that accessory structures be allowed in side yards. Applicant Kristin Sonquist, 4948 Quail Ave N, stated that prior to beginning construction of the playhouse, her and her husband consulted with city staff by telephone and explained that they wanted to replace an existing shed located in the rear yard with a playhouse. After discussing the building code requirements for structures in the rear yard with staff, they proceeded with construction of the playhouse. It wasn't until they received a stop work order from the city's building official that they became aware that there was obviously a miscommunication, and that they were building the playhouse in the front yard, and not the rear yard as they originally thought. Mrs. Sonquist stated that because of the unique configuration of the property, it did not occur to them that the east yard facing the lake could actually be considered the front yard. Also, because there was previously a shed in this location, they were under the impression that strictures were allowed in this area. She stated that most of their recreation takes place on the east side of the property, and for safety reasons, they would appreciate a variance to allow the playhouse to remain in the front yard. Commissioner Krueger questioned why the applicant continued construction after receiving the stop work order from the building official. Mrs. Sonquist explained that they thought that it was a mistake because the order referred to a "shed". She stated that they tried to speak with the building official to resolve the issue, but he stated that according to city code, the structure was currently in violation, and if they wished to keep the playhouse in the front yard, they could request for a variance to do so. Commissioner T. Graham questioned about the verbal okay the Sonquists received from city staff and the assumed miscommunication. Mrs. Sonquist replied that when inquiring about the construction of the structure, they explicitly stated that the structure would be located in the rear yard. Planner Sutter stated that the question most likely was answered under the assumption that the homeowner was referring to their actual rear yard, not front ,yard. Commissioner K. Graham stated that she was very conflicted with this issue. For properties that face the lake, she always considered the lake side to be the front yard. However, in the case of the subject property, she stated that allowing structures in the rear yard could be more unappealing to the neighbors than allowing them in the front yard. She also questioned if the playhouse was considered a temporary structure and if city code had different regulations for temporary structures. Planner Sutter responded that the current zoning code prohibits any buildings from being permitted in the front yard, whether temporary or permanent. Tracy Bergman, 4934 Quail Ave N, stated that she just recently purchased a neighboring home south of the subject property and feels that the playhouse obstructs her view of lake. She feels that an obstruction of the lake would devalue her property a great deal. Therefore, the playhouse would fit better in the rear yard. Neither the shed, nor the playhouse, were there when she purchased the property, and she does not appreciate the playhouse located so close to her property line. Page 3 of 7 Mrs. Sonquist apologized to Ms. Bergman about the location of the playhouse and stated that she was unaware that the neighbor didn't approve of the location. There have always been tree branches that extend down to the ground in this area, so that view from Ms. Bergman's property has always been obstructed. Marty Gates, 5108 48th Ave N, stated that there seems to be a lot of recent controversy with these eight parcels. She suggested that this is just one of many restrictions that the city and Planning Commission need to clarify for these property owners, to avoid further confusion in this area. A letter was submitted by Bill Felker, 4802 Quail Ave N, requesting that the Planning Commission deny the requested variance. A letter was submitted by Marilyn Kamp, 4824 Quail Ave N, requesting that the Planning Commission deny the requested variance. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner T. Graham to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Commissioner Davis stated that this is definitely a unique property and feels that reasons used to justify a typical variance may not be applicable in this case. Commissioner Nystrom responded that she would love to accommodate the owner as well, but the Planning Commission is required by law to justify any variance by the three criteria for an undue hardship. = Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recommend to the City Council to deny Application 2003-12 for a variance to allow an accessory building in the front yard at 4948 Quail Ave N. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried. => Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Davis to recommend to the City Council to continue until November 12, 2003 the discussion of a variance to allow patios in the front yard of Blocks 1 and 6 of Twin Lake Shores, provided the cumulative area of patios in a front yard do not exceed 5% of the area of the front yard. Motion failed 3-4 with Krueger, K. Graham, and VonRueden voting aye and Davis, T. Graham, Nystrom, and Strand voting nay. Commissioner Krueger questioned why the Planning Commission would grant a variance that an applicant did not specifically request. Planner Sutter stated that after visiting the subject property and witnessing a patio in the Sonquist's front Page 4 of 7 yard, staff agreed that it should be dealt with as part of this application, and could be justified that because of the uniqueness of the property (the patio would meet the three part criteria for an undue hardship). Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to recommend to the City Council to approve a variance to allow patios in the front yard of Blocks 1 and 6 of Twin Lake Shores, provided the cumulative area of patios in a front yard do not exceed 5% of the area of the front yard and comply with the same setbacks as if they were located in the rear yard. Motion carried 6-1 with Davis, K. Graham, T, Graham, Nystrom, Strand, and VonRueden voting aye and Krueger voting nay. Consider a variance to allow division of an existing parcel at 4366 Xenia Ave N in to two lots not having the 60' minimum width. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended the public hearing be continued to allow staff additional time to research the issue . Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Strand to continue the public hearing for Application 2003-13 at the next regular meeting on November 12, 2003. Motion carried. 3. Consider a site plan review for proposed improvements to the Crystal Shopping Center located at the southwest corner of 56th Ave N and West Broadway (103 Willow Bend), together with variances from parking lot setback and sign requirements. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended denial of the variance from the parking lot setback and sign requirements, but recommended approval of the site plan, based on the suggested findings of fact stated in the staff report. Ken l Ienk, Paster Enterprises, stated that they were really excited about this redevelopment project. The purpose of the redevelopment is to keep the shopping center competitive with others in the area. The loss of tenants in one of the end units is the reason they are requesting the variance from the parking lot setback. It is difficult to keep tenants in this location because of the lack of parking and thought it would be a good idea to resolve this problem as part of the redevelopment. Angle parking is preferred because of easier access and safety concerns. Also, because of the reconfiguration of the site, some of the tenants will no longer have frontage on a street and therefore are requesting signage be added as part of their lease. Page 5 of 7 Commissioner VonRueden stated that allowing the second sign would be conditional upon bringing the current sign into compliance with current city code. Mr. Henk responded that they have not researched the cost of bringing the existing sign into compliance. Also, Mr. Henk and Ed Paster stated that at the time of the sign's construction, it was thought to be very important to keep the historic symbol of the crystal ball on that corner. So, the request was made for a larger sign to incorporate this symbol. Several of the commissioners seemed to think that the existing sign may be too tall and may be more effective if downsized. Kathy Anderson, project consultant, stated that as part of this redevelopment, they are trying to achieve more streetscape with buildings facing 56th Ave N. But in order to make this a success, additional parking will be required on the north end of the west building. Because there is adequate access from other drive aisles around the building, Ms. Anderson wasn't quite sure why the fire inspector was requiring the drive aisle along Bass Lake Road to be a minimum of 20 feet in width. Planner Sutter suggested that staff discuss the situation further with the fire inspector. Commissioner T. Graham questioned why there was a need for additional parking if the site already has a surplus of 100+ parking spaces. Ms. Anderson replied that a majority of this parking is in the rear of the building and not close to access off of 56th Ave N. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Strand to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner T. Graham to deny Application 2003-14 for a variance from the parking lot setback at the Crystal Shopping Center (103 Willow Bend), despite the lack of supporting findings of fact by staff. Motion failed with no second. => Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner K. Graham to approve Application 2003-14 for a variance from the parking lot setback at the Crystal Shopping Center (103 Willow Bend). Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried 4-3 with Davis, K. Graham, Strand, and VonRueden voting aye and T. Graham and Nystrom voting nay. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Davis continue until November 12, 2003 the discussion of Application 2003-14 for a variance from the sign requirements at the Crystal Shopping Center (103 Willow Bend). Findings of fact are so the applicant can research the feasibility of downsizing the existing sign and allow the addition of a second free-standing sign on the property. Motion carried. Pare h of 7 Moved by Commissioner VonRueden and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-14 for site plan review for proposed improvements to the Crystal Shopping Center (103 Willow Bend), along with the conditions set forth in the staff report. Motion carried. 4. Consider a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change future land use designations of certain parcels in the City of Crystal. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended approval based on the suggested findings of fact stated in the staff report. } Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-15 for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of certain parcels in the City of Crystal. Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Motion carried. . Consider a new zoning ordinance and zoning map for the City of Crystal. Planner Sutter stated that staff is currently working on revisions to the new draft and would like to continue the public hearing to provide time to consider any additional revisions. Tom Hawes, 3100 Welcome Ave N, addressed the PlansCommission regarding future land use of the property west of Hwy 100 and south of 32" Ave N. Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to continue the public hearing for Application 2003-16 at the next regular meeting on November 12, 2003. D. OLD BUSINESS E. NEW BUSINESS GENERAL INFORMATION Receive an update on a study of potential transit -oriented development around the proposed Bus Rapid Transit station on County Road 81 and Bass Lake Road. Page 7 of 7 2. Receive Quarterly Development Status Report. G. OPEN FORUM H. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:47 p.m. Chair VonRueden Sec Mary Nystrom —A CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION * Work Session * October 23, 2003 The Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. for a joint work session with City Council. Present were the following Planning Commission members: K. Graham, T. Graham, Krueger, Nystrom, Sears, Strand and VonRueden. Also present were: Council members Anderson, Grimes, Hoffmann, Joselyn, Krueger and Meintsma; City Manager Norris; Community Development Director Peters; Planner Sutter; and City Attorney Bubul. The Planning Commission and City Council discussed the proposed Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map. Staff will prepare a revised draft of the Zoning Ordinance for the November 12, 2003 Planning Commission meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:13 p.m. rI t Sicretary Nystr Chair VonRueden Minutes approved at the December 8, 2003 meeting. CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION November 12, 2003 A. CALL TO ORDER Page I of 5 The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: Davis, T. Graham, Nystrom, Sears, Strand and VonRueden. Also present were the following: Planner Sutter and Recording Secretary Van Krevelen. Absent were the following: K. Graham & Krueger. l_ APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Davis to approve the minutes of the August October 13, 2003 meeting with no exceptions. The minutes of the October 23, 2003 work session were not approved because the Commission members had not been able to review them. Motion carried. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS Consider Application 2003-13 for a Variance from the minimum lot width requirement at 4366 Xenia Avenue North. Item continued from October 13, 2003 meeting. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that staff recommended denial of a request for variance from the minimum lot width requirement. After review of the Subdivision Ordinance, staff feels that the practice of prohibiting the re -division of a combined tax parcel into its original parcels only if the original parcels meet all current requirements is incorrect. The correct interpretation would be that parcels of record can be combined and re -divided at the request of the property owner whether or not the parcels of record comply with current requirements, so long as the parcels of record are not changed. Based on that interpretation, the property owner would not need a variance or permission from the city to divide the property back into the original parcels, and if asked, the city would not object. Planner Sutter stated that because the applicant did apply for a variance, it needs to be formally denied to follow procedure, even though the property owner has the right to develop the property. He also mentioned that the City Council will be asked to authorize refunding the $200 application fee the property owner paid since no city action is needed to re -divide the property. Page 2 of S Commissioner T. Graham questioned whether the applicant was approached to withdraw his application and Commissioner Davis suggested continuing the public hearing to allow time for the applicant to withdraw the application. That way the City Council wouldn't have to address this item. Planner Sutter said there wasn't sufficient time to have the applicant withdraw prior to tonight's meeting, and the City Council would need to address this item anyway to authorize the refund. Al Holter, 4366 Xenia Avenue North, said that it was not his request to combine the parcels. He felt the City Assessor at that time had not valued his property correctly, and after discussion, that was the City Assessor's solution. Mr. Holter mentioned that his daughter wants to build on the property next to his. He also questioned whether the $650 he paid for a survey would be refunded since he now feels it wasn't necessary to have one done. Planner Sutter stated that a survey would be required for building the new house, so the survey was not a lost cost. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Davis to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Strand to recommend to the City Council to deny Application 2003-13 for a Variance from the minimum lot width requirement at 4366 Xenia Avenue North. Findings of Fact are that the three criteria are not met. The property in question can be put to a reasonable use if used as required by this Zoning Code, the plight of the landowner is not due to circumstances unique to the property, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Motion carried with Davis, T. Graham, Von Rueden, Nystrom, and Strand voting aye and Sears voting nay. 2. Consider Application 2003-14 for a Variance from the sign requirements at the Crystal Shopping Center located at the southwest corner of Bass Lake Road and West Broadway (103 Willow Bend). Item continaced from October 13, 2003 meeting. Planner Sutter stated that the owner is remodeling the existing sign located at Bass Lake Road and West Broadway. The new sign will meet requirements and won't need a variance, so they are withdrawing their application. =:> Moved by Commissioner T. Graham and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to recommend to the City Council to deny Application 2003-14 for a Variance from the sign requirements at the Crystal Shopping Center located at the southwest corner of Bass Lake Road and West Broadway (103 Willow Bend). Findings of fact are as stated in the staff report. Page 3 of 5 Motion carried. 3. Consider Application 2003-16 for a new Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map for the City of Crystal. Item continued from October 13, 2003 meeting. Planner Sutter distributed an updated draft of the new Zoning Ordinance, and stated that there weren't many changes since the last meeting. He recommended continuing the public hearing until December 8, 2003 to have one last discussion. This would change the effective date to February 14, 2004. Anders Johansson, 8201 32nd Avenue North, explained that the setbacks increase for antenna towers 50' — 75' tall and would like an exemption for antenna towers from side street/side yard setbacks, instead of having to place it in the middle of the rear yard. He stated that lower antennas increase the potential for interference and use more power. He also would like an additional exemption made for antenna placement if it lessens the visibility of the tower to neighbors. Mr. Johansson also questioned if a permit would be required if someone was maintaining, updating, or replacing the antenna only, not the structure. If so, he would like an exemption to the building code because if the antenna is failing, it needs additional energy to get optimum performance. Planner Sutter advised him that it we use the State Building Code and wasn't sure if we could opt out, but he recommended Mr. Johansson get a determination from the Building Official. Commissioner Davis questioned Mr. Johansson about how many amateur radio operators there were in Crystal. Mr. Johansson replied that there were 60 licensed amateurs, but not all of them necessarily have antenna structures. Planner Sutter stated that he feels they have reached a point where there is an appropriate balance between aesthetics and feasible use for amateurs by putting the antenna in the middle of the rear yard. It is the homeowner's choice to put an antenna of that size in their yard. He also stated he felt the antenna needs to be located behind the house and not allowed between the house and the street. Commissioner T. Graham said he didn't think this was much different from a request for a three -car garage, in that there are trade-offs a property owner must accept. He suggested that maybe the antennas could be closer to the rear lot line since many properties already have utility equipment located there and thought maybe nobody would mind. Commissioner Davis said that part of the problem he was having was he didn't have a good feel for lot sizes in Crystal. He was trying to determine if the requirements would impact a significant number of lots to the point where they couldn't build an antenna or if only a small portion would be affected. Planner Sutter said that the minimum lot width is 60' but he gave an example using 75'. He also stated that the current setback is 3' from the side and rear lot lines for a baseline antenna up to 50'. Page 4 of 5 Anders Johansson said that for optimal performance you would need a 120' antenna, 70' is the next best, anything lower than that would need increased power. He also requested an exemption for horizontal antennas and stated the boom would not go into the three foot setback. Planner Sutter stated that the reason not to exempt horizontal antennas is because the view from the neighboring properties may be obstructed. Sean Stephenson, 5520 Yates Avenue North, said that higher antennas promote higher safety for neighbors and can run more power safely. When questioned by Commissioner Strand about the types of risks he was talking about, he said they had to limit uncontrolled exposure, for example, they can't run beams through apartment buildings. He stated as the antenna gets higher, the risk factors lessen. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Strand to continue the public hearing for Application 2003-16, a new Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map for the City of Crystal, to the next regular meeting on December 8, 2003. Motion carried. Consider Application 2003-17 for Site Plan Review of proposed improvements to the Target store at 5537 West Broadway. Planner Sutter stated that Target requested the Public Hearing be continued to December 8, 2003. They are revising the scope of the parking lot and landscaping improvements and did not have time to submit new plans for site plan approval. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Strand to continue the public hearing for Application 2003-17, for Site Plan Review of proposed improvements to the Target store at 5537 West Broadway, to the next regular meeting on December 8, 2003. Motion carried 5, Consider Application 2003-18 for Lot Division at 4068 Hampshire Avenue North. Planner Sutter stated that the owners of the property, Gary & Yleen Joselyn, have a 430' deep lot and they wish to donate the rear 173' of their property for park use. No setback issues would be created. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Davis to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Page 5 of 5 Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Davis to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-18 for Lot Division at 4068 Hampshire Avenue North. Findings of fact are that the lot is large enough and there would be no negative impacts, and it would be easily combined with the existing park parcel. Motion carried. Il. OLD BUSINESS E. NEW BUSINESS F. GENERAL INFORMATION G. OPEN FORUM I1. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Sears to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 8:01 p.m. A ' vel. Ch it VonRueden r= Lfi --�Lozl Secretary ystr'o Minutes approved at the December 8, 2003 meeting. CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION December 8, 2003 .-1. CALL TO ORDER Page 1 of 3 The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:10 p.m. with the following present: Davis, Krueger, T. Graham, Nystrom, Strand and VonRueden. Commissioner Sears was counted present at 7:18 p.m. Also present were the following: Councilmember Hoffman, Planner Sutter and Community Development Director Peters. Absent were the following: K. Graham. B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the minutes of the October 23, 2003 work session and November 12, 2003 regular meeting, with no exceptions. Motion carried (7-0). C. PUBLIC HEARINGS Consider Application 2003-17 for Site Plan Review of proposed improvements to the Target store at 5537 West Broadway. Item continued from November 12, 2003 meeting. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and provided an overview of Target's proposed modifications to the site plan, particularly the components of the plan related to on-site traffic circulation. Commissioner VonRueden questioned whether Target and staff had looked at pedestrian safety, particularly as it relates to crossing of the main access drive in front of the store. Commissioner VonRueden noted that with the improvements to the access drives, traffic crossing in front of Target and bound for the Crystal Shopping Center may increase. Planner Sutter responded that the curvature of the access drive and the landscape plantings in the islands would serve to slow traffic. Alice Roberts -Davis, Real Estate Manager for Target, confirmed that one of the purposes for curving the access drive was to slow traffic. It was also noted that in addition to the main pedestrian crossing directly in front of the store, there were two additional crossings proposed, one at each end of the building. Commissioner Krueger asked if the parking lot drive aisles were intended to remain one- way in their configuration, and Planner Sutter responded that the drive aisles would be reconfigured for two-way traffic. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to close the public hearing. Motion carried (7-0). Page 2 of 3 =!> Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recommend to the City Council approval of Application 2003-17 for Site Plan Review of proposed improvements to the Target Store at 5537 West Broadway, subject to the conditions contained on pages 2 and 3 of the staff report. Motion carried (7-0). Consider Application 2003-16 for a new Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map for the City of Crystal. Item continued front October 13, 2003 and November 12, 2003 meetings. Planner Sutter provided a detailed overview of the staff memorandum, which contained five additional changes to the proposed zoning code amendments. Commissioner T. Graham voiced concern that proposed zoning ordinance language represented in 6.a. of the memo might be misinterpreted. Planner Sutter stated that drawings and handouts accompanying the new zoning ordinance would help to clarify the intent of that language. Commissioner Davis asked about the ability of lots with double frontage. Planner Sutter responded that in the case of double frontage lots, both lot frontages are considered to be front yards, in which case the property owner may have justification for a variance from the ordinance to allow accessory structures in one of the front yards. Mr. Anders Johansson, 8201 32nd Avenue North, appeared and presented information related to the location of ham radio towers and the relationship of tower height and location to system performance. Commissioner Davis noted that this appears to be a case of aesthetics vs. effectiveness of radio operations and that the issue is determining what is reasonable to accommodate the use. Commissioner Sears questioned the practical difference for setbacks of a 50' tower vs. a 75' tower. Commissioner T. Graham suggested that the setback for towers might be established at 25' without regard to tower height. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to close the public hearing. Motion carried (7-0). Commissioner Davis suggested compromise language that would allow wire antennae within the setback and establish a tower setback based upon tower height over either 50' or 60'; he offered that the amount of setback was up for discussion. Commissioner T. Graham noted that the testimony given suggested that setbacks should not be tied to the height of the tower, but it was his feeling that the setback should be more than the usual 3' setback for accessory structures. Commissioner T. Graham noted that consideration should be given to the fact that if someone wants a tower taller than what is permitted, perhaps they should seek out property that can more properly accommodate one. Commissioner T. Graham once again offered the 25' setback for such uses as a good compromise. Page 3 of 3 Chair VonRueden stated that he would prefer to see some of these ideas in writing and asked staff if the code could be adopted without updating the standards for amateur radio towers. Planner Sutter responded that perhaps this matter is better suited to Commission consideration as a separate amendment early in 2004 so that the balance of the ordinance may move forward through the adoption process. Planner Sutter noted that it would be his suggestion that the proposed language be retained for now and that the Commission may consider alternatives later; he suggested that the Commission record transmitted to the Council will make it clear that the Commission remains uncertain if the proposed language is too restrictive until they have a chance to consider it further. => Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Davis to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2003-16 for a new Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map for the City of Crystal as presented in the draft of the ordinance and including the five additional modifications as contained in the staff memorandum dated December 4, 2003. Motion carried (7-0). Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Sears to direct staff to prepare a range of options for Commission consideration with regard to standards governing the height and location of amateur radio towers on residential properties. Motion carried (7-0). OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS GENERAL INFORMATION Planner Sutter handed out a summary of City Council actions on recent Planning Commission items. OPEN FORUM ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to adjourn. Motion carried (7-0). The meeting adjourned at 8:34 p.m. Chair VonRueden LZ4- Secretary Strand Page I ®f' I CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION Work Session December 8, 2003 A. CALL TO ORDER A work session of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 8:42 p.m. with the following present: Davis, Krueger, T. Graham, Nystrom, Sears, Strand and VonRueden. Also present were the following: Councilmember Hoffman, Planner Sutter, Community Development Director Peters and City Attorney Steve Bubul. Absent were the following: K. Graham. B. DISCUSSION City Attorney Bubul provided an overview of the basic principles of planning and zoning and the role of the Planning Commission. Topics covered in his presentation included municipal zoning authority; the Planning Commission and its organization and form; the comprehensive plan; judicial review of zoning decisions; conditional use permits; variances; Commission procedures; and a review of the 60 -day law. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. L -,. I 6'J' � n, 6 1, Chair VonRueden