2017.07.10 PC Meeting Packet
Crystal, Minnesota 55422-1696
Crystal Planning Commission Agenda Summary
Monday, July 10, 2017
7 p.m.
Crystal City Hall Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes*
a. Monday, May 8, 2017 meeting minutes
3. Public Hearings
a. Variance request from Tollberg Homes for a new home at 5140 Lakeside
Avenue North (Application Number 2017-08)
b. Zoning code text amendment to require a conditional use permit for any new
pole for a small wireless facility in the public street right-of-way adjacent to the
R-1 zoning district (Application Number 2017-09)
4. Old Business*
a. Continue review of draft language in the Unified Development Code (UDC)
b. Select date for next work session
5. New Business - None
6. General Information
a. City Council actions on previous Planning Commission item: CUP for vehicle
impound lot at 5425-5431 Lakeland Avenue North and CUP for outdoor
storage at 5425 Lakeland Avenue North
b. Update from Council liaison
c. Staff preview of likely agenda items for Monday, August 14, 2017 meeting
7. Open Forum
8. Adjournment
* Items for which supporting materials are included in the meeting packet
Page 1 of 3
CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION
DETAILED AGENDA
Monday, July 10, 2017 at 7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, Crystal City Hall
Commissioners, please call 763.531.1142 or
email dan.olson@crystalmn.gov if unable to attend
* Items for which supporting materials are included in the meeting packet
1. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at ______ p.m. with the
following members present:
Commissioner (Ward 1) Commissioner (Ward 2) Commissioner (Ward 4)
Sears Selton Einfeldt-Brown \[Secretary\]
Commissioner (Ward 1) Commissioner (Ward 3) Commissioner (Ward 4)
Heigel Vacant Johnson \[Chair\]
Commissioner (Ward 2) Commissioner (Ward 3) Commissioner (At-Large)
Strand Buck \[Vice Chair\] Daly
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *
Moved by _______________ and seconded by _______________ to approve the minutes of
the May 8, 2017 regular meeting with the following exceptions:
Motion carried.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. Variance request from Tollberg Homes for a new home at 5140 Lakeside Avenue North
(Application Number 2017-08)
Staff presented the following:
The following were heard:
Page 2 of 3
Planning Commission discussion:
Moved by _______________ and seconded by _______________ to recommend ______ to
the City Council of the variance for the new home at 5140 Lakeside Avenue North.
b. Zoning code text amendment to require a conditional use permit for any new pole for a small
wireless facility in the public street right-of-way adjacent to the R-1 zoning district (Application
Number 2017-09)
Staff presented the following:
The following were heard:
Planning Commission discussion:
Page 3 of 3
Moved by _______________ and seconded by _______________ to recommend ______ to
the City Council of the zoning code text amendment for small wireless facilities.
4. OLD BUSINESS*
a. Continue review of draft language in the Unified Development Code (UDC)
b. Select date for next work session
5. NEW BUSINESS
6. GENERAL INFORMATION
a. City Council actions on previous Planning Commission items: CUP for vehicle impound lot
at 5425-5431 Lakeland Avenue North and CUP for outdoor storage at 5425 Lakeland
Avenue North
b. Update from Council Liaison
c. Staff preview of likely agenda items for Monday, August 14, 2017 meeting
7. OPEN FORUM
8. ADJOURNMENT
Moved by _____ and seconded by ______ to adjourn.
Motion carried.
The meeting adjourned at ______ p.m.
Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes May8, 2017
CRYSTALPLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
Monday, May 8, 2017 at 7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, Crystal City Hall
1. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7 p.m. with the
following members present:
X Commissioner (Ward 1) X Commissioner (Ward 2) X Commissioner (Ward 4)
Sears Selton Einfeldt-Brown \[Secretary\]
X Commissioner (Ward 4)
Commissioner (Ward 1) Commissioner (Ward 3)
Johnson \[Chair\]
Heigel VonRueden
X Commissioner (Ward 2) X Commissioner (Ward 3) X Commissioner (At-
Strand Buck \[Vice Chair\] Large) Daly
Other attendees: City Planner Dan Olson, City Council Liaison John Budziszewski, Randy
Bickmann, Joe Buck and Steve Schmit
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Moved by Selton and seconded by Buck to approve the minutes of the April 10, 2017
regular meeting. All ayes.
Motion carried.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None
4. OLD BUSINESS
a. Recommendation on a Conditional use permit request from Randy Bickmann for outdoor
storage at 5425 Lakeland Avenue North (Application Number 2017-05)
Planner Olson presented a summary of the staff report, and stated that he is
recommending approval of the conditional use permit with the conditions in the staff
report.
Commission member Daly asked if the CUP should be under New Look Concretes
name. Olson said that the property owner, Randy Bickmann, applied for the CUP and
thats why his name is listed as the applicant in the staff report. New Look is the
applicants tenant.
Commission member Sears asked if the stormwater management plan was in
conformance with the citys requirements. Olson said that the applicants engineer
created the plan and the city engineer has determined that it meets the citys
requirements.
Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes May8, 2017
Motion by Commissioner Buck, seconded by Commissioner Strand to recommend
approval of the CUP for outdoor storage, subject to the conditions in the staff report.
Ayes: all. Motion carried.
b. Recommendation on a Conditional use permit request from Randy Bickmann for a
vehicle impound lot at 5425-5431 Lakeland Avenue North (Application Number 2017-05)
Planner Olson presented a summary of the staff report, and stated that he is
recommending approval of the conditional use permit with the conditions in the staff
report.
Commission member Selton asked if the maximum amount of allowed outdoor storage is
affected by the approval of the impound lot. Olson said that the two uses are called out
as distinctly different conditional uses in the zoning code with different approval criteria.
Therefore for zoning purposes an impound lot is not considered outdoor storage.
Commission member Daly asked if we can prohibit transferring the CUP to another
impound company. Olson said that the city attorney has said we cannot limit
transferability of a CUP. However if another company were to locate on this property,
they would have to adhere to the same conditions and operate in a similar matter to
Schmit Towing. Daly asked if they could limit hours. Olson said that limiting hours is not
one of the ten criteria listed in the zoning code, but the Commission could limit hours if it
was felt necessary.
Commission member Strand said she has thought about this request and believes it is in
conformance with the City Council desires in creating the ordinance in 2015.
Commission member Daly said he checked out Schmits Fridley location and found it to
be well run. Daly said the Commission might consider limiting hours of operation to
ensure that noise impacts from trucks will be reduced for adjacent properties.
Steve Schmit, Schmit Towing, said that trucks will not be entering their site near the
apartments which will eliminate noise impacts on those residents.
Motion by Commissioner Strand, seconded by Commissioner Sears to recommend
approval of the CUP for a vehicle impound lot, subject to the conditions in the staff
report. Ayes: Strand, Sears, Buck, Selton, Johnson, and Daly. Nays: Einfeldt-Brown.
Motion Carried.
Planning Commissioner Einfeldt-Brown said he voted against the CUP because the
combination of having an impound lot and outdoor storage is too much land use intensity
for this area.
5. NEW BUSINESS None
6. GENERAL INFORMATION
Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes May8, 2017
a.City Council actions on previous Planning Commission items:Planner Olson
reported that the garage variance request for 5809 Rhode Island Avenue North was
approved by the City Council. Also Planner Olson said that SVK Development has
made a request to vacate a drainage and utility easement for the Gardendale
Subdivision which the Commission reviewed last year. That request will be on an
upcoming Council agenda.
b. Update from Council Liaison - Council Liaison Budziszewski reported on the
following:
Construction is underway for the phase 16 street reconstruction project and
the wearcourse installation is slated for phase 15 this year
th
There is an event on May 10 to celebrate the last phase of street
reconstruction in the city
The last alley reconstruction project is slated for this year
An Arbor Day event was held at Yunkers Park on May 1
a four-plex facing
Bass Lake Road, and they will be meeting soon to discuss the future of that
apartment building.
c. Staff preview of likely agenda items for Monday, June 12, 2017 meeting
Planner Olson reported that he has not received any new applications for the June
meeting, but that the deadline to apply is not until next week.
7. OPEN FORUM
Planner Olson handed out a portion of the draft Uniform Development Code (UDC) for
review at the May 18, 2017 work session.
Commissioner Einfeldt-Brown asked what is taking place at 4940 West Broadway. Olson
reported that the property owner is renovating the building for a future office use. Einfeldt-
Brown also thanked the Mayor for hosting the housing gap presentation recently and said
that he and some members of the Parks Commission recently planted flowers around the
city.
Chair Johnson announced that Commission member Richard VonRueden has resigned
from the Commission and is retiring up north. Johnson read a resolution of appreciation for
Mr. VonRueden.
8. ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Commissioner Buck and seconded by Commissioner Sears to adjourn. All ayes.
Motion carried.
The meeting adjourned at 7:56 p.m.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 5, 2017
TO: Planning Commission (July 10 meeting)
FROM: Dan Olson, City Planner
SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Variance request from Tollberg Homes for a new single-
family home at 5140 Lakeside Avenue North (Application Number 2017- 08)
A. BACKGROUND
Tollberg Homes is proposing to purchase a vacant lot at 5140 Lakeside Avenue North from
-family
home on the property. Tollberg is requesting a variance to construct the home 20 feet from
the front property line along Lakeside rather than the 30 feet required by the zoning code.
The property is zoned Low Density Residential (R-1). Notice of the July 10 public hearing was
published in the Sun Post on June 29 and mailed to owners within 350 feet (see attachment
B). To date staff has not received any comments on this proposal.
Attachments:
A. Site location map
B. Map showing public hearing notification area
C. Existing zoning map
D. Project narrative
E. Final plat for Bottineau Gardens
F. Site plan
G. House plan
H. Comparison of homes along Lakeside Avenue North
B. VARIANCE
The applicant is proposing to construct a 1,246 SF home which would be accessed off of a
driveway on Lakeside Avenue. The home is proposed to be located 20 feet from the front
property line along Lakeside rather than the 30 feet required by the zoning code. In 2016 the
(attachment E). At that
time additional street right-of-way (boulevard) was dedicated on the plat and this located the
front property line farther back than for other properties along Lakeside Avenue. Although the
new home will not meet the setback, its distance from the street will be about the same as
the other homes on Lakeside (attachment H). The proposed home will meet all other setback
5140 LAKESIDE AVENUE NORTH VARIANCE APPLICATION
PAGE 1 OF 3
requirements. The following are the relevant approval criteria for this variance as outlined in
Section 515.05 Zoning Code, followed by staff response:
a) Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general
purposes and intent of the official control and when the terms of the variances
are consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Response: The intent of the Ce for
regulations to promote orderly development that allows for adequate
access to light, air, and convenient access to property. The approval of a
home that is closer to Lakeside Avenue will not impede access to adequate
light or air for adjacent properproposed home.
Access to the home will be from a new driveway on Lakeside Avenue, and
. If the
variance is approved, the home will be in conformance with the
Compd use
designation.
b) Variances shall only be permitted when the City Council finds that strict
enforcement of specific provisions of this section would create practical
difficulties due to circumstances unique to a particular property under
consideration. Practical difficulties, as used in connection with the granting of a
variance, means that the property owner:
1) proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted
by an official control; and
2) the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the
property not created by the landowner; and
3) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the
locality.
Response: The use of this parcel for a single-family home is a reasonable
use permitted by the czoning code. During the replatting of the lot in
2016 additional right-of-way was dedicated to the city. This means any
new home would be located farther back from Lakeside Avenue than other
homes on that street. This is a unique situation not created by the
applicant. Since the new home will be about the same distance from the
street as other homes on Lakeside, the essential character of this area is
not proposed to change.
c) Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
Response: The applicant has indicated that the shallowness of the lot
caused by the dedication of additional right-of-way makes it difficult to
meet the front and rear setback requirement of 30 feet for each yard.
Therefore economic considerations alone are not the sole reason for
requesting this variance.
5140 LAKESIDE AVENUE NORTH VARIANCE APPLICATION
PAGE 2 OF 3
C.REQUESTED ACTION
The Planning Commission is being asked to make a recommendation to the City
Council to either deny or approve the variance application to allow a new single-family
home at 5140 Lakeside Avenue North that is located 20 feet from the front property line
along Lakeside Avenue. This recommendation should include findings of fact either for
or against the proposal. The Commission may reference the findings for approval in
Section B, above.
Since the variance meets the relevant criteria in the zoning code, staff is recommending
approval of the variance request.
City Council action is anticipated on July 18, 2017.
5140 LAKESIDE AVENUE NORTH VARIANCE APPLICATION
PAGE 3 OF 3
BuubdinfouB
BuubdinfouC
Date: 6/14/2017
060120240ft
Buffer Size:350 feet
Map Comments:
Variance Request 5140 Lakeside Ave N.
This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to
completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any
kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying
purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury
or loss resulting from this data.
For more information, contact Hennepin County GIS Office
300 6th Street South, Minneapolis, MN 55487 / gis.info@hennepin.us
BuubdinfouD
BuubdinfouE
BuubdinfouF
BuubdinfouG
BuubdinfouH
Attachment H
Proposed home location compared to other Lakeside homes.
tƩƚƦƚƭĻķ ƓĻǞ ŷƚƒĻ ğƷ ЎЊЍЉ \[ğƉĻƭźķĻ
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 5, 2017
TO: Planning Commission (July 10 meeting)
FROM: Dan Olson, City Planner
SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Zoning code text amendment to require a conditional use
permit for any new pole for a small wireless facility in the public street right-
of-way adjacent to the R-1 zoning district (Application Number 2017- 09)
A.BACKGROUND
City staff is proposing to amend the
permit (CUP) for a new small wireless facility in the public right-of-way that is adjacent to
properties zoned Low Density Residential (R-1). This amendment is prompted by recent
state legislation allowing small wireless facilities in the right-of-way without any zoning
restrictions except that cities may require a CUP for such new facilities adjacent to the
R-1 zoning district. At the June 20, 2017 City Council work session, the Council heard a
presentation from the city attorney (see attachment A) and directed staff to begin the
nances to comply with the new state law.
Notice of the July 10 public hearing was published in the Sun Post on June 29. No
comments have been received to date. Since the amendment would apply to all rights-
of-way adjacent to those zoned Low Density Residential (R-1), notices were not mailed
to specific property owners.
Attachment:
A. Memorandum from the city attorney to the city council
B.PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMENT
Background
In May 2017 the Minnesota State Legislature adopted a state law relating to siting of
small wireless telecommunication facilities (i.e. cell phone providers such as AT&T,
Sprint, and Verizon) in public rights-of-way. Previously wireless telecommunication
providers were not allowed to place their facilities in the right-of-way. The new law
granted these providers the ability to locate their facilities as a permitted use in the right-
of-way subject to approval of an administrative permit. The only exception to making
them a permitted use is that cities have authority to require a CUP for a new facility if the
ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES
PAGE 1 OF 3
right-of-way is adjacent to a property zoned R-1. The state law also authorizes cities to
limit the height of any new pole that the facility is located on to 50 feet in height. If the
provider is installing their facilities on an existing pole (such as a light pole or traffic
signal) then a CUP would not be required.
Proposed text amendments
To comply with the new state law, the city code will be amended in Section 802 (Public
right-of-way) and the zoning code. The zoning code is proposed to be amended in two
sections: 515.09 (Definitions) and 515.33, Subd. 4 (conditional uses in the R-1 district).
First the following three definitions will be added. Since the State Legislature may amend
the text of these dll not specifically
provide these detailed definitions. Instead the ordinance will cite State Statute 237.162
where these detailed definitions are located.
1. Small Wireless Facilities.
a) A wireless facility that meets both of the following qualifications:
1) Each antenna is located inside an enclosure of no more than six cubic
feet in volume or in the case of an antenna that has exposed elements,
the antenna and all its exposed elements could fit within an enclosure of
no more than six cubic feet;
2) All other wireless equipment associated with the small wireless facility,
excluding electric meters, concealment elements, telecommunications
demarcation boxes, battery backup power systems, grounding equipment,
power transfer switches, cutoff switches, cable, conduit, vertical cable
runs for the connection of power and other services, and any other
equipment concealed from public view within or behind an existing
structure or concealment, is in aggregate no more than 28 cubic feet in
volume; or
b) A small wireless facility that is no larger than 24 inches long, 15 inches wide, and
12 inches high, and whose exterior antenna, if any, is no longer than 11 inches.
2. Wireless Facilities.
a) Equipment at a fixed location that enables the provision of wireless services
between user equipment and a wireless service network, including:
1) Equipment associated with wireless service;
2) A radio transceiver, antenna, coaxial, or fiber-optic cable, regular and
backup power supplies, and comparable equipment, regardless of
technological configuration;
3) A small wireless facility.
b) A wireless facility does not include:
1) Wireless support structures;
2) Facilities used to transport communications data by wire from a wireless
facility to a communication network; or
3) Coaxial or fiber-optic cables (i) between utility poles or wireless support
structures, or (ii) that are not otherwise immediately adjacent to or directly
associated with a specific antenna.
ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES
PAGE 2 OF 3
3.Wireless support structures.A structure in a public right-of-way designed to
support or capable of supporting small wireless facilities.
Second, the following text would add a conditional use in city code section 515.33, Subd 4:
f) New wireless support structures for the siting of small wireless facilities in the
public street right-of-way adjacent to the R-1 zoning district, provided that the
wireless support structure shall be:
1) No taller than 50 feet in height;
2) No less than 5 feet from the street curb;
3) No more than 5 feet from the side lot line extended to the street;
4) To the extent possible, the antenna shall be shrouded or camouflaged;
5) Ground-mounted equipment,
6) Constructed from earth-toned fiberglass;
7) Served by underground power and communication lines. The structure
shall not be served by any above ground power and communication lines.
C.REQUESTED ACTION
The Planning Commission is being asked to make a recommendation to the City
Council to either deny or approve the zoning code text amendments to city code
sections 515.09 and 515.33, Subd. 4.
First reading of the ordinance amending the zoning code is anticipated at the July 18,
2017 City Council meeting.
ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES
PAGE 3 OF 3
Troy J. Gilchrist
470 US Bank Plaza
Kennedy
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis MN 55402
(612) 337-9214 telephone
&
(612) 337-9310 fax
tgilchrist@kennedy-graven.com
http://www.kennedy-graven.com
Graven
Also: St. Cloud Office
C H A R T E R E D
501 W. Germain Street, Suite 304
St. Cloud, MN 56301
(320) 240-8200 telephone
MEMORANDUM
TO: Crystal City Council Attachment A
FROM: Troy Gilchrist, City Attorney
DATE: June 20, 2017
RE: Small Cell Legislation
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The wireless industry is working -of-way
(ROW). To that end, the industry has sought to pass model legislation nationwide. The
telecommunications industry undertook similar efforts to push for such legislation in Minnesota.
The resulting bill was hotly contested and, eventually, what could be described as a partial
compromise was reached with the League of Cities. The League went from being strongly
opposed to being neutral, and recognized that while the resulting legislation does not sufficiently
protect local control in these matters, it was better than the legislation passed in other states. The
small cell language was included in the Omnibus Jobs Bill and is now law. As is pointed out
below, because this legislation has immediate effect staff thought it was important to bring this
issue to the Council for direction on possible amendments to the Code.
1. Wireless Governed by Minnesota ROW Law
Under prior law, munications right-of-way users, were statutorily entitled to access
and install facilities in the ROW. Such right did not include providers of wireless services.
Such rights are subject to reasonable regulations and conditions imposed by the local
government unit (LGU). LGUs are required to enact ROW ordinances to implement this
authority.
Wireless providers may also now small wireless support
structurein the ROW after the change in law.
Because the wireless services providers are currently not recognized in the Code as a right-
of-way user, we need to look at what amendments are needed to include and permit such
users under the new law.
1
501499v2 AMB CR205-30
2. Zoning
The law makes wireless support structures permitted uses, but also provides that LGUs may
make them special or conditional uses, subject to additional criteria.
LGUs are prohibited from adopting a moratorium on the processing and issuance of small
wireless facility permits.
The issue for the Council to consider is whether to exercise the option to require the
installation of such facilities in single-family residential districts.
3. Application Process
LGUs may require permits for placement of new wireless structures or colocation of small
wireless facilities in the ROW. It is unclear whether this is in lieu of or in addition to the
ROW permit already required by most existing ROW ordinances under the new law.
My recommendation is to treat such providers in the same manner as other right-of-way users
to the extent possible.
4. Collocation, Rent and Fees
An important part of this new legislation is the placement of facilities on public infrastructure
(light poles, stop lights) within the ROW. Cities generally must allow such collocation, but
may impose reasonable approval procedures to, among other things, ensure the structure can
handle the additional weight. Cities may also charge rent within certain limits.
State law now allows cities to charge rent of up to $150 annually, plus $25 for maintenance,
for each site. This payment arrangement would presumably be reflected in an attachment
LGUs remain entitled to recover ROW management costs, as defined by state law, from
wireless providers using the ROW via permit fees. However, the law prohibits certain third-
party fees.
5. NO PUC Rules or Dispute Resolution
The PUC will not take an active role in promulgating rules or offering dispute resolution
services related to small cell wireless, as the law did not provide them clear statutory
authority to do so. However, the law does provide that cities may
Cities are authorized to require separate agreements with wireless providers governing
attachments to the LGU
Staff Recommendation
ROW Regulations
The Council should direct staff to take the following steps with respect to treating wireless
providers as right-of-way users that can collocate on City facilities.
2
501499v2 AMB CR205-30
Review the regulations on right-of-way users and develop amendments as needed to include
wireless service providers.
Update/expand permit procedures and fees as needed.
Determine the need for a written agreement regarding collocation and, if needed, prepare the
necessary documents.
Zoning
Staff recommends adoption of a CUP requirement for new poles* in the ROW in the R-1 district
and has three suggested criteria for such CUPs:
No less than 5 feet from the street curb (for snow storage, etc.)
No more than 5 feet from the side lot line extended to the street (to reduce visibility when
people are looking out of their front windows)
Constructed from earth-toned fiberglass (looks better than traditional wood poles)
*Staff recommends no CUP requirement for equipment on existing poles in R-1 because we
want to encourage telecoms to place their equipment on existing facilities instead of
installing new poles.
If the Council wants staff to proceed with a CUP requirement and amendments to the ROW user
regulations, then we need to move quickly to ensure that the requirement is in effect before the
City is forced to allow a new pole because of a 90-day rule included in the new law. To that end,
staff would propose the following schedule:
6/20 Council work session
6/29 Notice of Public Hearing published in SunPost
7/10 Plan Commission Public Hearing
st
7/18 Council - 1 reading
nd
8/10 Council - 2 reading & adoption (short special meeting before budget work
session)
8/14 Ordinance published in Star Tribune
9/13 Ordinance effective
(Note: If, as likely, we don't get any applications by Thu 6/15, this schedule - with 8/10 spec
meeting and Strib publication - would ensure there's no "gap" between the 90-day max decision
period and effective date of the CUP requirement.)
3
501499v2 AMB CR205-30
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 5, 2017
TO: Planning Commission (July 10 meeting)
FROM: Dan Olson, City Planner
SUBJECT: Continue review of unified development code (Application Number 2017- 07)
A. BACKGROUND
Staff is presenting new text language for the draft unified development code (UDC) for
planning commission review and comment. The following is a summary of the new text
language in Sections 515.03, 515.05, and 515.07:
Section 515.03 (Definitions):
New definitions added in Section 515.03 since the June 12, 2017 Planning
Commission work session are highlighted in yellow.
At the June work session, Commission members asked how kennels would be
regulated in the UDC. Staff has now defined kennels according to the definitions
found in city code section 910.
dogs or other animals are kept, and where the business of raising, selling,
boarding breeding, showing, treating, or grooming of dogs or other animals is
conducted. The term includes pet shops, animal hospitals, kennel and other
According to city code section 910, commercial kennels
require a license approved by the City Council. Staff is proposing commercial
kennels as a permitted use in single-family homes in the R-1 district and in the
Commercial and Industrial districts.
premises where more than 3 dogs, 3 cats, or more than 2 dogs and 2 cats not
exceeding a total of 5 dogs and cats over three months of age are kept or
harbored within a dwelling unit. This limitation does not apply to fish, pet fowl,
reptiles, or rodents which are confined or caged at all times and maintained
within the dwelling unit, or chickens regulated by section 910.05. According to
city code section 910, private kennels also require a license approved by the City
Council. Staff is proposing private kennels as an accessory use within
residential districts.
Section 515.05 (Administration):
In early 2017, the City Council amended the text relating to the establishment
and operation of the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) and the
ZONING CODE UPDATE
PAGE 1 OF 2
Environmental Quality Commission (EQC). Staff has now revised text relating to
the establishment of the Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals and
Adjustments. This revised text is similar to what was approved for the PRC and
EQC.
Section 515.07 (Zoning Districts and Use Regulations):
Principal Use Table:
Staff has highlighted changes made to the table since the June 12, 2017
work session.
Use Specific Standards for Principal Uses
At the April City Council work session, the City Council directed that staff
delete requirements for minimum building size for residential uses.
Instead Council requested UDC language to discourage smaller homes by
allowing only one home on a residential lot. That requirement will be
located in the site specific standards of the UDC.
Staff proposes to delete some of the use-specific language for
commercial uses. Some of this language is found in the R-2, R-3 or C -1
district, where commercial development is more regulated than the C-2 or
I-1 district. Instead of use-specific language, staff proposes to regulate
any negative impacts of commercial uses on residential uses through the
use of screening and/or buffering standards. Those standards, which
could include landscaping, increased setbacks, or limitations on operating
hours, will be proposed at a subsequent work session. As a reminder,
any new commercial building will be required to receive City Council
approval of a site plan, after a recommendation by the Planning
Commission at a public hearing.
Accessory Use Table:
Staff has proposed a table showing permitted and conditional principal uses
within each zoning district. Use-specific standards will be provided at a later
work session for Planning Commission review. In some cases staff has
added an explanatory note to clarify what the use-specific standards may
contain for that specific use. Temporary uses will be provided in a
subsequent table.
Attachment:
A. Draft UDC text language
B.REQUESTED ACTION
No action is requested at this time. This agenda item is being presented so the
Commission may provide comments on the draft UDC.
ZONING CODE UPDATE
PAGE 2 OF 2