The URL can be used to link to this page

2008.09.08 PC Meeting PacketMonday September 8, 2008 7:00 p.m. Crystal City Hall - Council Chambers 4141 Douglas Dr N A. CALL TO ORDER B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ® August 11, 2008 regular meeting* C. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Continued from August 11, 2008 meeting - Consider Application 2008-09 to amend City Code Section 515.21 and Sections 515.33 through 515.53 to allow certain types of telecommunications towers in all zoning districts subject to limitations on height, location, adjacent uses and other factors* 2. Consider the 2008 Update of the Crystal Comprehensive Plan* D. OLD BUSINESS E. NEW BUSINESS F. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. City Council actions on recent Planning Commission items* 2. Staff preview of likely agenda items for October 13, 2008 meeting G. OPEN FORUM H. ADJOURNMENT *Items for which supporting material are included in the meeting packet Page 1 of 7 CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Aup,ust 11, 2008 A. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following members present: X Commissioner (Ward 1) X Commissioner (Ward 2) Vacant (Ward 4) Sears Whitenack [Chair] X Commissioner (Ward 1) Commissioner (Ward 3) X Commissioner (Ward 4) Davis VonRueden [Vice Chair] Scheibe X Commissioner (Ward 2) X Commissioner (Ward 3) X Commissioner (At -Large) Nystrom Buck Strand Also present were city staff members John Sutter, Jason Zimmermann and Corinne Elfelt. B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Davis to approve the minutes of the July 14, 2008 regular meeting. Motion carried. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Consider Application 2008-05 for a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor seating and food service in a sidewalk easement adjacent to 6408 56th Ave N (Crystal Bistro). Staff member Jason Zimmermann summarized the staff report. In addition, John Sutter reiterated that there are two issues before the commission, is the north four feet not needed for public use, and if not, then CUPS would be considered on a case by case basis. Commissioner Whitenack inquired as to whether the planters belong to the city, and what the desired width of the sidewalk would be. Mr. Sutter and Mr. Zimmermann indicated the planters belong to the city and are maintained by the city. The planters are placed intermittently along the mall area. Mr. Sutter commented that typically residential sidewalks are five feet wide and in commercial areas it would be more common to see ten to twelve foot wide sidewalks, remembering that in the space being considered the planters take up much of the space. Commissioner Davis asked if there is parking along 56th Ave N. City staff indicated there is no parking along 56th Ave N. Commissioner Strand asked who maintains the four feet of sidewalk closest to the building. Mr. Zimmermann informed the commission this area is currently the city's G\PLANNING\PLANCOMM\2008\08.11 \minutes.doc Page 2 of 7 responsibility, should the easement be vacated, the owners would be responsible, as it would again be private property. Jason Zimmermann addressed Commissioner Sears question about snow removal and other responsibilities of the easement area by clarifying that all responsibilities would revert to the property owner if vacated. Commissioner Whitenack asked if that would include any future replacement cost of the sidewalk. Mr. Zimmermann stated replacement would also be the owners responsibility. Commissioner Davis asked how much space is needed for public traffic, if there is not parking right in front, would seven feet of sidewalk be sufficient for the foot traffic for all of the shops. Commissioner Whitenack stated he felt that it would be good to have the sidewalk enlivened by the additional foot traffic. Jason Zimmermann continued the summary of the Staff Report. Upon completion of the summary, the Public Hearing was opened by Commissioner Whitenack. John, Vice President of FTK Properties, owners of a large portion of the block, indicated Mr. Hadi Mohammadzadah of Crystal Bistro has been a good tenant and as owners, they would enjoy the new feel of an outdoor seating area and this would be an improvement. The owners also would like to see Crystal Bistro succeed. He also indicated that the city, typically, plows about four feet of the sidewalk area. Tom Schmitt addressed the commission and expressed his concern about an outdoor seating area if alcohol is to be served and if so, the need for the three foot fenced area around the seating area. Mr. Hadi Mohammadzadah , owner of Crystal Bistro, informed the commission that he had been in business at this location for three years and is trying to improve the business. He felt that seven feet of sidewalk is sufficient. Commissioner Whitenack asked Mr. Hadi if he planned on serving alcohol outside. Mr. Hadi said that he would like to. Mr. Hadi said he would like to put a rope around the outdoor area. Commissioner Davis discussed that there could be an issue with customers sliding the chairs further into the sidewalk and asked if the area could be defined further with paint, pylons, etc. Mr. Zimmermann pointed out that if there were to be an outside seating area with alcohol served the three foot fence would be required and exit would not be allowed directly onto the sidewalk. This would require a second exit be installed from Crystal Bistro into the outdoor seating are. Other area restaurants such as Buffalo Wild Wings and Chipolte have been required to make the same changes. Commissioner Whitenack confirmed that if no alcohol is served no fence would be required, and any fence would be the owner's responsibility to install and maintain. John of FTK Properties said regarding the fence issue that it does not make sense to him to add the fence if it meant another door would have to be added. Commissioner Davis inquired as to whether there was a sidewalk on the Becker Park side of the street. Mr. Sutter indicated it was a bituminous walkway set back into the park. G:\PLANNING\PLANCOMM\2008\08.11 \minutes.doc Page 3 of 7 Mr. Hadi Mohammadzadah also added that during Crystal Frolics his business was down due to the lack of parking and the city's inability to enforce the 30 minute parking in the lot. Commissioner Whitenack closed the Public Hearing and opened the discussion with the Planning Commission. Commissioner Sears commented that if the four foot easement is vacated, similar requests for other business would be hard to deny. Mr. Sutter explained that whatever finding is made needs to be based on the character of the sidewalk, establishing that the north four feet of sidewalk is not needed for public use. Commissioner Davis asked what is necessary to vacate the easement. Mr. Sutter said that notices would need to be published, utilities would need to be informed, City Council would hold a public hearing and then the council action would need to be recorded. Mr. Zimmermann noted that all commission members had received a printed copy of FTK Properties Mr. Denny Walsh's email expressing his encouragement to the Planning Commission to endorse the plan for outside service for Crystal Bistro and that it will enhance their business and hopefully help them continue to do well into the future. A copy of the email was placed on the dais. Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Buck to recommend to the City Council a finding that the north 4 feet of the easement abutting Crystal Bistro at 6408 56th Avenue North, including the public sidewalk theron, is no longer needed for public use. Motion carried 5 to 2 with Commissioners Davis, Whitenack, Buck, Scheibe and Strand voting aye and Commissioners Sears and Nystrom voting nay. Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Scheibe to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2008-05 for a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor seating and food service in a sidewalk easement adjacent to 6408 56th Ave N (Crystal Bistro). Motion carried 6 to 1 with Commissioners Sears, Davis, Whitenack, Buck, Scheibe and Strand voting aye and Commissioner Nystrom voting nay. 2. Consider Application 2008-08 for Rezoning the property at 5430 Douglas Drive to I-1, Light Industrial and a Conditional Use Permit to allow for outdoor storage. Staff member Jason Zimmermann summarized the staff report. Commissioner Whitenack opened the Public Hearing. An unidentified man from Steen Engineering made himself available for questions from staff or others. None were heard. Commissioner Whitenack closed the Public Hearing. G: \PLANNING\PLANCOMM\2008\08.11 \minutes. doe Page 4 of 7 Hearing no discussion from the Planning Commission, Commissioner Whitenack asked for a motion. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Sears to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2008-08 for Rezoning the property at 5430 Douglas Drive to I-1, Light Industrial. Findings of Fact are as outlined in the staff report. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Buck and seconded by Commissioner Scheibe to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2008-08 for a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor storage at 5430 Douglas Drive. Findings of Fact are as outlined in the staff report. Motion carried. Consider Application 2008-09 to amend City Code Section 515.21 and Sections 515.33 through 515.53 to allow certain types of telecommunications towers in all zoning districts subject to limitations on height, location, adjacent uses and other factors. Staff member John Sutter presented the staff report. Commissioner Whitenack asked if staff is recommending discussion of this item. Mr. Sutter explained that he would be bringing comments that are the result of this discussion to the attorney to consider any further revisions of this proposed amendment to the code regarding telecommunication towers, then bringing it back to the Planning Commission for their September meeting. Commissioner Whitenack asked if each tower would require a CUP. Mr. Sutter confirmed that each location would require a CUP. Commissioner Whitenack asked how the city properties are affected. Mr. Sutter did note that it is a revenue source for the city as it would be for churches or commercial properties. Commissioner Whitenack commented that the 75 foot height is comparable to a four or five story building, asking if it is inconsistent to allow a tower and not a building in a specific area of the same height. Mr. Sutter indicated that these towers would be taller than a light pole without the mass of a building. Commissioner Whitenack asked about the materials these towers would be made of. Mr. Sutter said that is at the city's discretion. It would be dependent upon the site what particular color, material or whether it would look like a fake tree. Commissioner Strand asked the height on the HAM towers that allowed. Mr. Sutter indicated that they too were allowed to be 75 feet in height. Commissioner Strand GAPLANNING\PLANCOMM\2008\08.11 \minutes.doc Page 5 of 7 indicated she was not in favor of the telecommunication towers. However, the idea of the towers looking like trees is more appealing. Commissioner Whitenack asked if the providers will share towers. Mr. Sutter said that the proposed code amendment currently exempts these poles from the co -location requirement, however, that portion could be struck. Commissioner Whitenack asked what happens when a tower is no longer in use, who would be responsible for its removal. Mr. Sutter noted that the code gives the property owner six months to remove the tower once service has been removed. This would apply to towers on city property, also. It would be an issue to keep in mind as a lease was being negotiated. However, should for some reason the provider not take the responsibility for removal, ultimately the property owner is responsible. Commissioner Strand inquired as to how the city would use the revenue the towers might produce. Mr. Sutter indicated that it would likely go to the General Fund. The commission could ask that it, or a portion thereof, be dedicated to parks, police, City Hall, or other activities funded by the General Fund. Commissioner Nystrom asked if the towers or equipment are installed on concrete slab. Mr. Sutter said that that in the case of the T -Mobile proposal it appears the equipment would sit on a slab approximately 12' x 6', but the tower would not be on a pad. Commissioner Sears indicated that an access road would likely be required also. Mr. Sutter noted that an easement would be provided for access. Commissioner Sears asked if Robbinsdale, New Hope and Golden Valley had been approached. He felt that there are better areas, vacated properties that would be better suited to the towers than the parks in Crystal. Cub Foods, Honeywell, near the Junior High School in Golden Valley might be appropriate areas. Mr. Sutter noted that the city did not seek out T -Mobile, they approached the city. There seems to be a demand and possible revenue not only to the city but to other property owners within the city. Cub is a possible option, especially with MN DOT lands. Providers are looking for areas that provide coverage for their customers. We have not consulted other cities, we need to determine what is best for our city. Hearing no further discussion, Commissioner Whitenack opened the Public Hearing. Tom Schmitt addressed the commission. He commented on the need to locate towers so that would not fall on an important place. Consideration should be given to the electromagnetic energy that might be emitted by the towers. He felt that many will not want these in their backyards and parks. He felt it would be better to only allow towers in commercial areas. Having the towers near elementary schools was opening up controversy. It is necessary to remember that unlike a personal cell phone that is on only occasionally as they are used, a cell phone tower is all the time. The same criteria applied to playground areas should be applied to schools. He also noted that the lower height of the towers would make them less expensive but feels there is more potential for electromagnetic energy. He would like to see the city be more conservative as to where the towers are located. G:\PLANNING\PLANCOMM\2008\08.11 \minutes.doc Page 6 of 7 -� Hearing no further discussion, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Davis asked what publication was necessary on this matter. Mr. Sutter said that each tower would require a CUP, and it would need to be published in the Sun and sent to neighbors within 350 feet. Commissioner Whitenack asked what recourse might there be, if the CUP meets the specific criteria that is established, but concerned citizens come forward. Mr. Sutter reviewed the portion of the proposed amendment that addresses the criteria for which the Council has some discretion. Commissioner Davis commented on Mr. Schmitt's thoughts on the rational of not having towers near playgrounds, yet allowing them near elementary schools. Mr. Sutter indicated that the draft could be modified to include language not allowing towers within 82.5 feet of schools also. Commissioner Sears felt that the 350 foot radius for the notice might not be a large enough coverage area when it comes to these towers, especially when located in a park. He questioned whether enough people were being notified. Mr. Sutter informed the commission they could request that the 350 foot radius be doubled or tripled. Commissioner Scheibe asked if the notification radius could be looked at individually as CUPS come in. Mr. Sutter commented that the 350 foot radius is from the edge of the parcel on which the tower would be located. Tripling the notification radius to 1050 feet would be reasonable because we have done it for other large or potentially controversial proposals. There could also be an additional 1,000 foot notification radius from the proposed tower. Commissioner Davis commented that although federal law prohibits taking possible health concerns into consideration when regulating the towers, it may be difficult to get around when having the public hearings. Commissioner Whitenack asked if parents of students in a school where a tower may be proposed would be notified. Mr. Sutter stated that it would be the schools responsibility to let parents know. Commissioner Sears made comment, for the sake of comparison, that the light poles at Becker Park are about 65 to 70 feet in height. He felt that towers 75 feet in height would tower over the trees. Hearing no further comments from the Planning Commission the discussion was closed. Moved by Commissioner Whitenack and seconded by Commissioner Sears to continue until September 8, 2008 the discussion of Application 2008-09 to amend City Code Section 515.21 and Sections 515.33 through 515.53 to allow certain types of telecommunications towers in all zoning districts subject to limitations on height, location, adjacent uses and other factors. Motion carried. G:\PLANNING\PLANCOMM\2008\08.11 \minutes.doc Page 7 of 7 D. OLD BUSINESS Discussion of Comprehensive Plan Update. Mr. Sutter handed out copies of the Citizen Task Force's Final report for the Comprehensive Plan Update to the Commission members that were not at the last meeting and briefly reviewed the items discussed at the last Planning Commission meeting. Public Hearing will be on September 8, 2008. E. NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Whitenack mentioned that there has been a rash of cars being broken into during recent nights in the Ward 2 area. Recommended that vehicles be in garage and/or locked. F. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. City Council actions on recent Planning Commission items were provided in an attachment. 2. Staff previewed likely agenda items for September 8, 2008 meeting. They included the Public Hearing for the Comprehensive Plan, further discussion on Application 2008-09 regarding telecommunication towers, and a possible variance application to reduce a side setback. G. OPEN FORUM — None heard. -- H. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Buck to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:07 p.m. &\PLANNIN&PLANCOMM\2008\08.1 1\minutes.doc M E M O R A N D U M DATE: September 2, 2008 TO: Planning Commission (for September 8, 2008 meeting) 001", FROM: John Sutter, City Planner/Assistant Community Development director SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Consider Application 2008-09 to amend City Code Section 515.21 and Sections 515.33 through 515.53 to allow certain types of telecommunications towers in all zoning districts subject to limitations on height, location, adjacent uses and other factors. T Mobile has approached the city about leasing a site in Bassett Creek Park for placement of a 75 foot tall monopole telecommunications tower. Upon evaluating the information and current city code, staff determined that the current code prohibits this sort of facility. Specifically, the code only allows telecommunications towers on I- 1 zoned property (as a permitted use) and on C-2 zoned property in the West Broadway/Bottineau Boulevard corridor (as a conditional use). The code was drafted in the mid-1990s, at a time when towers were generally taller and more obtrusive than some of the newer designs such as the tower T Mobile would like to place in Bassett Creek Park. Over the past 10 years, demand for telecommunications service has become very widespread, and at the same time the technology and facilities have evolved in a way that allows for much shorter and less obtrusive towers. As a result the industry is seeking more sites to place this newer style of tower. Note: City code already has provisions governing antennas for amateur radio operators ("HAMs') in all zoning districts. The proposed ordinance amendment currently being considered would not impact amateur radio equipment already permitted by city code. At the direction of the City Council, staff drafted proposed changes to Section 515.21 of city code that would allow telecommunications towers by Conditional Use Permit in all zoning districts, subject to significant restrictions and limitations. At its meeting on August 11, 2008, the Planning Commission discussed the proposed changes, continued the public hearing to its September 8, 2008 meeting and suggested that staff make some modifications to the proposed ordinance for further consideration by the Commission. The latest version of the proposed ordinance is attached as Exhibit D. The City Attorney has been provided with a copy of the latest version of the proposed ordinance but has no comments at this time. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT - TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS PAGE 1 OF 2 The following Exhibits are attached: A. Materials submitted by T Mobile. B. Notes from July and August meetings of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission C. Notice of Public Hearing published July 31, 2008 D. Proposed ordinance with changes in red bold text (as of August meeting) and blue bold text (as of September meeting) E. Maps showing some examples of locations where towers would be allowed by the proposed changes The Planning Commission is asked to re -open the public hearing, discuss the proposed changes, and consider a motion recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance attached as Exhibit D. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT - TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS PAGE 2 OF 2 Page 1 of 1 From: Paul Harrington [paulharrington@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 12:53 PM To: John Sutter Subject: T -Mobile Proposal in Bassett Creek Park Attachments: Bassett Creek Park Light Pole Replacement Plan Proposal.pdf; Edina Light Pole.pdf Hello John — Thank you for taking the time to speak with me last week. As we discussed, I am attaching a preliminary plan set for City consideration of a T -Mobile telecommunications facility in Bassett Creek Park. The particulars of the proposal are as follows: • Replacement of one of the existing light standards on the East side of the tennis courts with a 75 -foot low - profile monopole. The antennas would be concealed within a "shroud" to give the pole a cleaner appearance. T -Mobile would remount the lights from the existing pole on the new monopole at no cost to the City. The monopole would/could be painted to match the existing light standards servicing the tennis courts. • Ground space adjacent to the new monopole to accommodate required processing equipment. The equipment would sit on an on -grade, 6' x 12' prefabricated concrete slab. Although not shown, T -Mobile would provide appropriate landscaping — at City direction - around the ground equipment and monopole. • Easements as depicted on the plan set would be necessary to provide utility and maintenance access to the facility. • T -Mobile would enter into a lease agreement with the City for the use of the site. Proposed terms of the transaction would be a 5 -year Initial Term with three (3) additional 5 -year Options to renew. Proposed base rent for the project would be $1000/month with an escalation of that amount by three percent (3%) each year the lease is in effect. In addition to the plan set, for reference, I have attached photos of a facility in Edina which is very similar to the Bassett Creek proposal. Please let me know if you have any questions or require any additional information. Paul A. Harrington CARLSON & HARRINGTON, Inc. 612-810-8174 file://I:\PARKS\Bassett Creek\T-Mobile\2008.06.04 initial proposal - text.htm EXHIBIT A • T Mobile VICINITY MAP PROJECT DATA y� Y $ ..-. AD ®PROTECT ARE rix ENDI LF,SC SPACE T-0' . 20-0 2D.ING Tar BEH. NARK: 869 FEE COORdru ocnT On. ,-MOGILE SIE AID— 2O_Iu1 _,:1. GENERAL NOTES SCOPE OF SUPPLY PROJECT TEAM ioNs .oE: 31,1.'-�9' [ [ _ F a a y TxB D LOS BST SIA, ANDSAIPEATTE AND DIRECT ILL YNRIc, USIxG MS BEST S%ILL AND ATi[nilOH H SMKL BE S0.[, [SPORRBLE OR ALL C..S -,. MEMS. uR'bos, ALLxPo ES, PPOCEDMES AND SEQUENCES FOR COOPdHATxC RNONS O 1H MMM UnOER THE COMRAtt. D. TATE CONTRACTOR S.N.I VSO THE — SITE lD a—. THF SCOPE OF NAM. AND EADDRAO JOB SITE COWraON3 HLDURG. BRA NOR UMIIED TO MECHANA AL ELECTRICA. SERWCE. AND OKRA.L CWRDINATON. 3. 110 E EM xSRPSHKt "I"" ALL ERSIw° COxADdlrOns M i0 SDBAAFFRRG NIS BID. SS. CONFlKTS OR OPSSRnS. ETC. Sx RE REPORTED 10 RC ENGINEER BEFORE PROCEEDING WITN IeIE WORM THE DONFRKTM S PROTE ALL MEAS FROM OAMAOE WN" MUR "IMG MISIPUttXIN. MNAGE TO HER MD E ISNHGT CONpRuCNEN. STRXILRE, OR EQUIPMENT, SNALL. BE NHo OR REPLACED to THE SATMFACRM OF THEYIENANT OR BUM1ONC OMER. M D EP's HpPEBfMAIM. AT THE ExPEHSE OF THE CO.—ES RE S THE CONIMCTOR SNALL RE RESPOnABLE FOR. AND SHALL REFUGE OR REHE 1, AM FAULTY, IAFROPER, OR INFERIOR APPEAR OR wNE YEAR POR MY DANEOMPGE ON A SXALI APPEAR twinrx ONE YEAR MER THE COMPLCMIN AND ACOpTAxCE M ix[ NORM Uxpp iHa [OORACT THE [vRnMCidR SXKL REDS RIaD RUBMsn AHD nASTC 01 A PoS[ SPCTL CONTROL ORTNER JOB O Ai O M1MWDnWI R TOIL RSLUd.c FMK CLFM-UP WON COMPLERw �oDww: ALLAARus ARE TO BE LEFT In A BRDOM CLEAN END OF UOr NAY. D. INE CONTINI SNML SAF[DUMO INE ORHER'S PROPCRP QUORpNE COx3tRUC1IO. MD SHALL REPLACE MY OAUMED fA Y Or THE OMER ,0 ORIGINAL COIMT- M BETTER. rt SMALL BETHE RCSPO .11 Of THE COMRKTM i0 e LACAT[ ALL. 'THE UTILITIES. MNEIHEN SMNH HE Ed M rrol, AIN Tp PPDt[cl IHEu rROR DNAAOE. [ MPACtM SHALL BfM A.L . THAI FM THEAIR OR REPLACE. EM OF MIMICS OR OTHER ARpHNtt auMED IU COMLMCTIOH %ATN THE 1ILE1010 OF WORM. THE CONTNC SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COMPLETE B VEDCDISITH OFT,SSIh wxRE ME JOB C. P PROGRESS AND [ ET[0 PER V.MC. 10. /RL CONSpPURIOR INTIM SHALL CONfORN 10 R( U.B.C. AND cOlONM CONS. ALONG wan ,H GOYERORc RESTRPi[1PS CODES TK CONT PSR AND ALL SUBCONTRACTORS SMALL CONPLY wan ALL OCA. COOS REOVuiq.s AND MATE OCPMTNE. O INK R[QUUTIOn4 MD OwSIOH O MWS,RIA. oL QU( REOUIR[MEMS. REFER ,O (H COCES SEmrox r TMs v,[EZ. 12. IHC CONTRACTOR 5.011 OBTAIN MO PAY FOR ANY RE Mns. L'CF'Ys AND MSF[RrONS 1DOESSMY FOR PERFORIANCC H WORN AND NCLUOE THOSE In TIE COR Of RF WORM TO TIE OMER. IB. RGVPEp E, VISORS NAK PRE[EDEHC O'KR ORAMING SCALL. D DETNT DRARANGS HANE PECE°ENCE -1 S,ULL c4E oRAN+"c5. EHECK ACCUgACt OF Kl DNENS%N$ I" THE OC70 uxlfSS SPECMR:ALLY NOTED. DO NOT FABRICATE ANY ERIALS OFF -SNE, DODRR PERF RI AM CO6iRtMTION UNRL THONGS RAS OF Ix[INSq"SIQUS TALK BEEN KRIFIEO N ALK DE x iMY RE [HGINFEP OF MY CONRIM CMH OSCREPMCIES ..1. MF COMRA[t DOC.. HIS NRH COMRM DOWMEMS AND THE FLB —DMIM3 PPOR 0 E%CCMP1G THE %ARM IN QUESTION. 15. CoSxKI xOR x .E Z11 R M OCEMs MF ONSIOERED Un50URq, UnSKE. NOl WATERPPCOr, OR NO CI'Rmm TOMMY TRADE PRA—E. M K 6 PERFMMfD. rt u BE ASSUUED IHrO THERE IS OH'EC1ION ,O ,H DETAIL OE,NISmm� uopf DDDO i HOR THEEND THEof ESuli 0{ iDESINlln. x r u 0 AS PART K.DE. ,IONS AND LOEATIONS To RE X ED SHALL BE vE iM0 PE,H CMTMCIM BCIOH RUR— ,HFr EIIIEP TAPA INOSE IAOSR ON THE PWS, ,HE { CON,RACIOR BNKL xOTlry ME ENGINEER SUCH THAT .0.F DNS CIN RE AUOE SE{ORE PROCEEDIND IN t Tl. AL1 SYMBOLS AND IBBRENAPONS USED ON THE MAMHG$ ME CO.SrO[REO CONSTRut1ro. SIANDMOS. IF RE CONT— HAS WESIIMDRFEOMO. THEM E%KT uLMIxC. ALK EHFANFER SHALL BE ED FOR 4 FICATIONs BEFORE pOCF[dxD wa. PORH . THE COIRN.IOR SHALL PRDV4IE GERMY OODLIN6. OTHER , PL RED RINC THE OR OTHER SUPPORT FOR ALL ER nCFf RE HANDERS THE SME. . CITY --a PVM SxALI BE AE LNx BO% AND SNALL NOT BE USED P NORKNEN. PALL E�TRUi RDON SEAS Rt- RTAN N GO D CORDRQI. SXA.L N50 u AIx In GOOD COxdi10x, DIE CCJFIEE SCD OF VAIs RMspn3 ApCF.oA 0x0 CHANGE ORDERS —I MC _ZET AT All LHES. CSE ME i0 BE uxOR In CME O TIE JOB SUPEPIHENpE.I. THE �REpp-KM Y M dlIERER POLAO N 116 IN COMPLRIPG Y. PROJECT. RE SITE SPE ST, S DEU r ROM RE I SCOPE OF WMK RECEDE IFN DSCREPMCR.S FOU.D ON THIS SOME OF SUPPLY, vROKu BVflKrnn W RMAEFxT - C/ 2lOC[SRUMTMI E LESS CORP. F Oe+ D.M. NAA"98006 SRI .OBBER { lAL �,OF CA �D 2 n ACtt ExENDl MrHnsrtAF FR YF'rFno f t E-nMxnFAP015 OwEs' " - BD00 M[St lBln SiREfl SURE ♦OD ED RE Nn. A. Ory c�o at F T-u081L[ - urnxFIP0.1 BDDD REST 78A STREET SVITF EBNA un. R ♦J9 E —sE ALR R: .^r t Y RAW LAND SITE CO -LOCATION SITE rLaws,ED BY INSTALLED P NEM rSNEO B Y u -uOBM1f Bt5 PNiFORx MOBgE COMxncTORv NFPUT ORM i-MOBM1E CONTRKYITR BM PWKPl POMDAKN CONTRACTOR BOER d{BLS PLAIIORM lWMulpx COMNAI OA COxipACidt PURCEu CAMET (POWEa/RLCO) - BIL[ rvEi (P OwER/TFLCO) T-AAOBRE COMR—HL PURCELL CARAHET - BATTERHS -;0_9 SITE DIRECTIONS _PRF - BATTERIES - COMRKTOR BTS ?-MOOILE Bis CPBREi$ T-ALORM1E T-MO&.E ME.NA - E SITE DRECIIOn3: {ROM -♦B♦ d IP i62. O NORTH On H. INT FOR t TPLES 10 R qp , A u OCINC opo. FOR ,_ TO DOr PDR N t RN LEFT A, oOUDR— ALR .y R". i0IO_D AK brt AT J2.0 AK. n urtE3. xA i-MOBM1[ COMRARM M VELE - CONTRACTOR Mi[n E COM CABLL {-MOBRf .r —R CAGES - OSILE CONTRACTOR NPEN CMLE3 1-uOBILE NA (LONA 1NBE MPJPER) 1-1 CONTRACTOR L xn (LONA NOS[ NAPLMCR) T -MOBILE OIORACTM GRD "DW KITS FOR CWk 1- 11RE DMRACIM UO G°O1HO1[° ALTS FM CCwx t -NOBLE COxRACTOR SITE DLIG NPERWS EOMRACFOR SITE GROUxOHG RATERWB -TDR CDNTMCTM ANTENNA ~TING PIPE Y BRACKET C RKTOR CONTRACTOR CN.L Rs BE'— DICE. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL MTCnNA uOUxIR4 PATE Y BRKMfl ITnRK'roR COMRACiOR wAKOIWE BRIDGE (SOFT i01wR CONTRACTOR [OMRACIOR ) NAKWIOE BTNOGE (COT TO 'v,A) GOMPM1oR COMRKTM wnKCVIpE lMOEP (LOWER) COMRAC OR CMTRMIM [MKQUIOE LAEOR (TOMER) COniPwcloR FANTRItTOP COMRKTM CONT A OR m MFA 65'-♦y♦-OWi xN. loLLf PREF -800-232-I,e FENCE COMPACTOR CONRUCTM aOVnp vNPK MTRALYOa CODES AND STANDARDS UxOERCRWrvO Moan COx1WC1M EDMRKTM LO.IRA[iON RaCIOR ABBREVIATIONS DRAWING INDEX ST— co aw 1M CO OR CO"ECI A MEIEN 80% coMRAc1M [ O POWER 06CORHtt & METEN B0% [OHTIA ISTEa MHT' MM. MCHIECI Af AVPERE 0a AUMETER BLOC. BOMIIS CMCUa BHAPRq xP FRAN[(RATMO) CB. CFl H "MODEM NG ABOh GRASHOUND QU C.L. ER CM. CEILING 015 AVipuAtd THwsF[R Svn1Cw CONCRETE A SPFRRE OTEREUPxRH: CAPACITY ccDODHBi CONSTRUCDonCAF,LD R RAL'TM Cxl CMtUa BgFAx OWIETIR CUx `:OCHREARiOa DLrG DRCONAL OI u—ND I.WIT INTERRLWTEN � ODNSIDN rtLBN J OS�m<i BOE DAG ORAM,RC xw L E(5) P[(s) H u METE EICG fICC,RIV1 ALIS tRMBF[R SMICx EL , EO PTO. n01 -.rot n0 In RACt E%IST.E%�5lWD PMEL Ge. FDAWVDiex. AN PHASE GILv. GALYMI2EO RPCT PoLMnYI CILOMDF _ EEETKYE RIGID GALYMNIED SELL „TFRDO. egEH° EEflTK Rws SSM srM Elnrcl NFI MEE TEL 103 TSC `IYxE0V3 ttp l F°FUER HIS NOT SCALE .. ON ENTER `;/E „a PL"GR01ND 11 E R w1 NED'D REWMED _HEANNO F. SWM 'ST q N Ss. -'STEEL un0 UxLER HOEDEDt"E-1 SIN. BBRUR SPECS. SPECIE RNS- SID. STMOMO SR. STEEL T1RUV, TOP OSMHE. 10.P. lOP a >/U.NNBC M, 0.5. TOP O' SLAB I/ TOP OF B/ BOTtOR OF - AtOD}♦E_iT PROKp i IxFMMAnOx MO GEnERH MTES w A,02♦2-CI ..... C�NWiGF iYWE PLAN A102a2-AT ExNA MFORuendR tr STANDARD DMMMRY - 10 - 51MWmL[Cwagxwx[xi> [asNFM crerxns NO.No -Axs l'1 - s'MM'.x rOD PW[DacDD[u [WFW[M Oexfl NAR t Au 1+1 - slMowo SH IumOtu[M fP[riT'u1Pre NpMp - ms 1'1 - — c r n - tls IU - T MMc srtcNlcPwMlpM9rs STANDARD - [� III - STMDPp tt[cmICN SPCORUHONS - (') - irtnncmon xrP a CNA OPdmnc - S. (11 - n now Caxx rmA. 'gp'ED-igK^O' NeM - HIS (T) - sl AL d __ cEN[AN, n wuwD [da1AMENW ssEDFMA1MNs - >s fI) - GIx[RK HORS SH[ET I -NITS 1,1 - FMD.MODOSmMisuclgx SPEOI—ONS DEMAA. s HLT - S'S D) - x lWWw1rW _ mei' oC[Mwlxwl vfMLA>toA'. seDO'v.1O's sr v Ms - zO (I) - sNmrPD M1Ex Axo Cou CAO[ rlsuuiNrr COTSRUCRM Sn.dt cMPLv x1TH THE UtFsi MOT[IT EMON OF TIS FO L.... PMBLICATRN3: ASlu (MEPM.w SOtdTr FOR ESTMG AND NATERMLS) ACI (ANEFRC CONCDEtt NBUITTE) 2 SC (ANERIVN NDDFTI E OF STEEL COnSRUCtIOH) A Axa (ANFRRV wEL.dnG --) 3. UBC ( "MORN au'. G CO.) uppi (M x[BOA DEaMTYENI DF 1RMSPORTARM) MSI (MEPCM iuiIORAL STMfMADS .."RE) a 'NDE (M L E OF E—NAM MD ELEttRONCS CNDPAURS) 9 DRANOxK EIECRIFx RMV 10. xENA (NATRIN Of TROk IACTUREPS AROC 001) T NESE (x.ATIONAL ElEtl WEtt COUNtsRxl 11. OSHA (OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND NVitm' wuwSiMnM) O f, En uBOR—, rlKl I♦, MPLIVBLE LOCK CODES MD ORDINANCES MfTER MRItt WATER TOWER SITE ROOFTOP SITE NCM RHISNfO P SIALLEp P I,[u FURNISHED ev wPALUp BY BIS PLAEMM -ROBM1C IONACTOR OFTO, Pu,FORA, 1-MOBLLf MDAC"Da BTS —FORM 1—FARO. MpACtOR RACiOR INA SLED/ATTAMMEM 1-RO61LE MRKIOR Pu au RCELL CAME' (PMEa/TELC01 TouMILE [ONIRAC1oR .DC C—El (POMER/TELCO) T-MMILE CONTRACTOR OURCELL CARNET - BATTERIES '-MOBILE COMpACiOR PURCELL CMREi - BATTERIES t -MOBN[ ONIRACTOR PS ENSNETS T -MOBILE 1 -NRB ITS C.APntts T-MOBRE —I — '-MOBILE CORMCT R MEHw T-MOBM1E cOMR.+iIOa Ax u CWx [ABLE t-uDBILC -TOR CABLE - MILE COMRACloa LEGEND —PER UBlE3 t-uMILE CONFRKTOR VUPCR Cit1LEs -MOBILE CONRACTOP LNA hpw NOISE INPURER) -uMPE MRACIOR LN. how NOES MPLMIEN) i -MOBILE OMaAC10R ' —Kx A, FOR GOA% ,_uOSA.E -TOR GPOmDNG Kai TOR CEA% T -MORS` CSR -TM OFTNI xuMBER t DETAIL SDE DROAL-0 uIIERIKS COMNCTOR TOR SITE CROFREMS NAPE S O01F R OR [ STY( GRWN.N. -EN_ COMRKTOR MTRACTOR SITE OKLISON, NATERULS CONTRACTOR COTRRAC'DR AME.. ATIACMMEMS (TOREN) CO—ALIO. EOMRKTM A. MQUMRG PPE A BIUCMEi COMRACLOR cOM 01 Si OMWNG ON INION ORIIANNA ITE,uL RAs OM BLANK DENOTES DETAIL S ON SME DGx1xGmm SECTIM lEE[R A SECTION S 2 MAMND ON IN- _NK SS.O. NAM a— BVNK ON— SECTION IS OR —1 NAMING ATFIENNA MOLINIRIC PPE A —NET COMRACiOR —TRAC10R ROOFTOP COM ATTACH LENTS CONTRACTOR COMRACIM wAKOTIDE BRIDpF (EDT l0 TYM) OMPKiOR COn1RK10R — AEACHEMORS (TONER) COO—OR C —DA COxRK10R PENCE cOMRACTM T:ONINCTOR O OWER MTM Bo% CO1rLRACTOR QUD xORK CONTRACTOR COSAKTOR 1ETER SITEBB(*X EONTFMIOR CO+TRICTOR PD HA DIS O MEC A METER BO% COMRK M CMTRKFOR NEER U0 UMTP .1 ANN • 11 �{/J�1 T ® ® M ®b 11 EC _ m RJ V MINNEAPOLIS MARKET NOTED THR du H s TH so18 PROPERTY axi °OxoMBpKDOFDPfI (IAD B lIw L Vp-' a[o.TEM 0 Fo F�Oa� NAS OFONEY M M"illp�[n is n ED — La'°. :,:A:w" a�q s °°•a M°�,*�w i ' 17652 ` ti- BASSETT CREEK PARK A10242 PROJECT INFO. & GENERAL NOTES } ! 2/ap ISSLED FOR vROPosAL - cpAlEm Pw x�2s/oe Pte F 60DI 32ND AVE N CRYSTAL, MINNESOTA P R MUMMn p10242 -T1 gt uoa2,LHMe B7 6B 3 f� 32ND AVENUE N r -+ '111 '''1 00 �• EusYNO ECCE [ 5nxc iPEE (rm) mv7 � 1 1 x �- """ 1 1 vxnlilR�CNe`Pfx ;r ,ND IT - 1 1 1 Ell— LWM f�y� 1 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ (''r°)� 0 ExTIND TREE L_______, � lL•rl � Gm�x7 I NfSO[— I - . ` I � X---x—*—L>E—x-- Glsnxo BYndRD WD /r -xoBlr[ ,s' -o' MDE C%ISiIHC YA EM— uNLIR' — — (MnHC TPC[ CCSIDEMYa 1N (,rP) ' — _----_—_ 1YP NG EENCE 1 I,^ z m.J m� x-xx-- Fx MLC (rrP1 FMTIXG ttNExS I W �y'\ CODMs um I ' )E—*—)f—xx--z -WBRF [O G&ETs (1. o• . r2' 12— -o caxcPEi[ W �f `ES�MMW. O P) \ ^ W M - • i R B — ENISrMO FPRA LINE h W \\'F L—)(—x--i(—J( 6' wEn [ED/A RxcC EXRIIXB BIBKEi CxISTMC ELECT ONITT LFtxCLOSYRF EMxIS�INGD NLfCTRIC \ mvl Fxbrxw s' -B- MCN aAnLP+N Er DExML rsrmc R G51MG7 Glstwc M --D EL— s[Bx.L nEN sMxO MG C E—G Pi^YNIrMYS g� 8g �wxu Gailnc d^cNwous N (rwJ @ SITE PLAN scuE: r -m'-D' (e zzox•J x Fel m x E' ,xX xs Nor BEER uals.ED ro reiARNErsroE aRLEM°ERfrro�Ni eww`Eonw rw"r`�ixflns rF a o.. txo IN conslceRxnox a BP°"P°"s;P.,Po .-M al�nm� ta. .N ^aa �n, ae er m. smt. .t Ld,n<.""a E"°" BASSETT CREEK PARK A70242 SITE PLAN I >f4m am EOR PROPD;xE xx.. . _EFE D �z/:s oe / d ■ ■ ® ®� �� ■ .�e v a"'"`rt a u PEVRoa,cLo, Ec°OE�m. LfM"O"DPE B iw�iiEP.ISE o-sros[o m dP[rnr dN Mo-RErnr. xvR ..+ "ID's """E ^ 6001 32ND AVE N MINNEAPOLIS MARKET usEDEdxxr RURROSF drnER ,xrx Nrlcn rt s 17952 CRYSTAL. MINNESOTA anortB �MNxx�Rg10242-Ct REV 1 .[[o Rvo Tdowo i-µ1BRU1.IT' LµCNExPDCEES I " IDE rvOEE: i-MD&lE TO PPOvgf futURE CMG 8 DSCµIRO PER CITY PEWiREUCNR LERsf'µE/. I i .R.E sEEEL RPeR Eo ELEtt - LE R'-0' xqE E[ER ./ER RECI CWEAEiE SLIB xOfiuRN CMCLOSURf "/III iERuiHK A Al I x i-uOdLE W-slRVi BRNREi 10 SUPPORT VE.M RUN N <ON —LE. nS iH[V I - - I EIRVII R Gx? PFRtV URE x �[ EDµ C[KE - . tRµBRgR PROu ROuiMO '"D"E—EO !0 1nE ULlM SPE CµwEi CRBi � EOuiPUENI I X 1 a z I¢ YtE I o3 5 �c Bi E EBI I LOPS �ENNR uOBxE miR S•' I "Y RrtE• I B'i —CRETE SUB RCED RP' 3 I e M 'R I x(W 0"DPOt•P OmDttE PNmH:KPw[B Ofl B[x. BDT P %PfS POP CONA. f u�ROE µ1EnM cµLEz (DrvDERwWRD) I �` � _ f.sP 7 (rExxis calms _ _ _ — _ — _ J J� 1-uOBR[ OMt CDVEP OVER CON CNRCS CEO &. PumEO i0 witx _ RE tS 1 vOxOPOIE µiERNL EN I RE (E—IND NEVI uaNaPDIE) LIGW POLE i0 RE REP ED) J. a HIED SiµNu LWMS [L (fiELO VERPY nflWR) IJ �I( I RB + I I ERSnRO(REE v V vmlrvc R' rvLMN xCE / RO III—E r -D- E11-11- x—X—x—j(—x—)(—j(—�(—x—j(—)(--j(—x yM S ENLARGED SITE PLAN SOME: t/.' -,' oNs q TM : i Roi euR n�a<�znfD .RD E sae a m`,Nwx�e><e a' „sI p__ aea Nnn..M". BASSETT CREEK PARK A10242 rssufD POR PRDPosM .Lwin... a:/}s/DB ■ ■ ■ ■ ® i 'T l�I ob 11 e uµx[! µDi _ a i�cPrnRiioD: Ei e"ooR�E.E raaNF1PmEm o .Mxa , rcDA°ROM: E REs .:E. IEEiEo R[iun n uoa�P[WEm µ0 µa.15 OOR IX "SDR nen the i� V:e 31c,. eI n "� O. cEtSfE(LD ENLARGED SRE PLAN 6001 32nD AVE N DDITMs["EIRVE=D ovE2n[I o"Dvm[ 6 � xfD. CRYSTAL. MINNESOTA MINNEAPOLIS MARKET �� nuE P aNDIm �P��ERA1oza2-C2 RE7 ,ss❑".n .owo v.o Roo !_A_1 EAST ELEVATION C/9A1 64uED FOR PROPoSR. aa�Rw I i " IO E5: omR o oc S— E SETrRicR ooNxTRT AT NE I Of uESiKUN.N. 1-10 G ROD III —OBRLEwcE.iD 111 I -I BRE NrtENNR rAcID FAcw°c D i ul I iill i-IOBR[ AmFI.NAII II T-MOBRE INTENNR A RCtl FAClxO 13D 111,1 III III II 111 II (To PoNBEDEN. —0... S (FIELD A— MONt-IOBEE IO PPONCE Fuiupf FExDNc sMS RG w.oswPER cR* PEOINRE.E LNA REQUIREMENTS nPE (BEBNEE) SECTOR RENEE FML BIND GSI LW... 0. RENEC FULL BAND GSR LW./T.A __L. V LRA/Ix.. IEIEC 'ILL BAND M. LNA/INA —D RRL —D GS L./F. »D LNS LN 1 .. IRO —C — W. GSu L-- NO —ED — —D S. LW./- 3.D E10zOWStzUB UNTS lW./I'IA 1Av REN .(TO BE a.Rrlw*o"x:IFiI ONOPOLE) 4 FON ZONE MFORN— REFER TO SINEARD UMNRG ESS. TMobile ■ 1 • • 1VI ®b i 1 e MINNEAPOLIS MARKET N m"n G�BrsRO'wN DD Nc�eoNRo. FOR 0 2 � NP ' I Po MFnOs[ LDISNPOOISED a -1-1 OR wpriE l ON USED EON wn WRroSE oFNER TNRT AmcN a u SNALCL B[ AVA�CUW� CABLES. BLES roNRl .a BASSETT CREEK PARK Al 0242 ANTENNA INFO. &TOWER ELEVATION tt y¢ LI w.Re. . GE^�EEEEG �:/zs/ae "•«FP 6001 32ND AVENUE N CRYSTAL. MINNESOTA RNxRtl'A10242-AT NOTES. I DOE INTO BASED ON —SE EE ORixnTE NRo Ro q PVNS. w't u6Tn5 LSTED RA M RP ANO IRE NOI ,...ED TO RE BED 1. FARRN:ATIO.. ONE i0 FRLD CC —NS u4 A.i— CABLE L NS NEOTN.. xAT NSr FRO. LE.- IABUuiED. � I 2.E—S TO EEEECTR[N AT 1NREE (]) I'll lOGTpNS USI/3. 100E — h i0P OF TOPER (—NA UNEL) • C I CADRIET CONNEDNOI3. POINT C. aT�BTS OF 3 N Irs cRaDlwfD ENTEE (ONE 1TOP (3AP IT END F T Points TN>♦EP E TOP OF O 1.ORTER.(ANTENNA IEHL) ONE END MEFIIN+N'ILLv A COTNN, O lO t, O. a, PIF E. .ECNAxIUAty CONNfttfO i0 C. AT BIS CIBIRET CON—NDN PdNI. — A. ANT INNS FORT EICN SECTOR SNN. BE SPACED AT NOT LESS D— I AMENNA SEC— SwLL BE xVSNNEO NIM TRUE IORTI hS SNONI aN Mf — PUN. —END — S — ENST OF TRUE .—TL E911 ANTENNA REQUIREMENTS NRENxA hPE a�"y L[MiH iawR OR beLf COIW CODE LI (B—A) _ 1/R- _ ENLARGED ELEVATION ---- - I I -o TMobile ■ 1 • • 1VI ®b i 1 e MINNEAPOLIS MARKET N m"n G�BrsRO'wN DD Nc�eoNRo. FOR 0 2 � NP ' I Po MFnOs[ LDISNPOOISED a -1-1 OR wpriE l ON USED EON wn WRroSE oFNER TNRT AmcN a u nW Npn«tlRalWn, a rePPN wq S " °'•I W ,I E qm 1M I•« aI I IA, M ela "'�L NicIKT Bsz roNRl .a BASSETT CREEK PARK Al 0242 ANTENNA INFO. &TOWER ELEVATION tt y¢ LI w.Re. . GE^�EEEEG �:/zs/ae "•«FP 6001 32ND AVENUE N CRYSTAL. MINNESOTA RNxRtl'A10242-AT NNNNRNE NRo Ro Region: Hennepin Site Code: AIP0702E Address: 5200 DONCASTER WAY City: EDINA Market: MN Site Name: HIGHLANDS PARK Address 2: State: MN Gamma View 1 zip: 55436 v.2007.05.22 - 10:13 Page 6 of 42 a Region: Hennepin Site Code: Al P0702E Address: 5200 DONCASTER WAY Market: MN Site Name: HIGHLANDS PARK Address 2: City: EDINA State: MN zip: 55436 Beta View 1 v.2007.05.22 - 10:13 Page 4 of 42 Region: Hennepin Site Code: Al P0702E Address: 5200 DONCASTER WAY Cit,: EDINA Market: MN Site Name: HIGHLANDS PARK Address 2: State: MN Alpha View 1 zip: 55436 - v.2007.05.22 - 10:13 Page 2 of 42 M14+s i Sil C�'9 Site Media mak$ Printed on: 06/05/2007 07.55AM Region: Hennepin Market: MN Site Code: AIP0702E Site Name: HIGHLANDS PARK Address: 5200 DONCASTER WAY Address 2: City: EDINA State: MN zip: 55436 Site (Bldg Mono Billbd Etc) 1 v.2007.05.22 - 10:13 Page 1 of 42 Crystal Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Notes Excerpt July 9, 2008 There was not a quorum at this meeting: members present were Mr. Gentry, Ms. Haney and Mr. Ayshford. Mr. Mathisen gave a brief background on the request by T Mobile to locate a cell pole at Bassett Creek Park. The present city code was written 10+ years ago when these poles were a relatively new facility. With the increase in technology, the poles have been made to blend in more naturally to the surroundings and be utilized as athletic facility lighting in addition to cell service. An example of a similar structure in Edina was distributed — it is used as hockey rink lighting. Mr. Mathisen added that the new radio read water meters may need collector antennas located a various points in the city and could be located on the pole or a similar structure. Mr. Gentry thought that it is wise for the city to address this issue as more people rely on their electronic devices and expect continuous service throughout the metro area. He didn't see any issue with locating this at Bassett Creek Park. He encouraged the use of the pole by multi carriers. Mr. Mathisen said that would be included in the contract that carriers co -locate. Ms. Norris said that the current ordinance already has that in it. Ms. Haney said she had no problem with this, as did Mr. Ayshford. Other discussion/questions were: • Can the city request that T Mobile upgrade the wiring and possible the light fixtures? Mr. Mathisen indicated that we can try to include that in the contract. • T Mobile indicated that they wanted a lease or easement to access their equipment. Mr. Mathisen said that the city would just let them come in. • Is wildlife affected by these towers? Mr. Mathisen said the only studies he has heard of concerns honeybees — that the frequency may disrupt their abilities. • The lease fee was discussed — it was felt that the fee offered is the same as 10 years ago so that may have to be negotiated. Since there was not a quorum, a motion could not be made. Meeting notes will be forwarded to the City Council for their discussion on July 15th. EXHIBIT B Crystal Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes August 6, 2008 North Bass Lake Park The Crystal Parks and Recreation Commission meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Vice Chairperson Bill Gentry. Commission members in attendance were: Ms. Haney, and Mr. Jungroth, Mr. Lehnert, Ms. Kelvik, and Mr. Mueller. Also present were, Mr. Hoffmann, City Council Liaison; Mr. Rauen, Mr. Mathisen, and Ms. Hackett from the city staff. In addition, the following people attended: Mr. Grimes from the City Council; Ms. Norris and Sgt. Mark Peterson from city staff and several residents from the North Bass Lake Park area. Mr. Gentry gave the background on the neighborhood meetings. Introductions were made. Mr. Mathisen updated the residents on a variety of city projects including Phases 9 and 10 of the street project, the water meter replacement, Highway 81 and the pond project at Twin Oak Park. Mr. Rauen highlighted park projects such as the new boardwalk at the Preserve at Bassett Creek Park and the new playground at the Community Center. Ms. Hackett notified the attendees of the Park Pride Program noting that North Bass Lake was not adopted yet. Sgt. Peterson talked about police activities in the neighborhood. This area hasn't had a lot of calls. He mentioned Sgt. Fealy's neighborhood program and the new traffic officer program. Residents made the following comments: • People drive in the park after 10pm and park for extended times. Residents were urged to call 911 if they see anything suspicious in the park. • Resident called in an incident where 2 people were fighting in the park; when the officers came, nothing was done. Sgt. Peterson explained that these incidents are resolved depending on the situation. It does not necessarily mean that every one will go to jail. • Comment about the NBL playground — there are not enough woodchips so the curbing is quite a bit higher than the level of the playground. This causes a tripping hazard as well as the playground holding water after it rains. • Handicapped children cannot enter the playground because of the lip on the curbing. Mr. Rauen and Mr. Mathisen will look into the park issues. Residents were thanked for their attendance. The neighborhood meeting was adjourned at 7:35pm. `„i The regular meeting was called to order at 7:40pm. Mr. Rauen updated the Commission on the Skyway Park playground. It appears that the Game Time plan was the favorite; however residents asked to add a tire swing. Mr. Rauen will work with Game Time to come up with a final plan within budget. Mr. Mathisen updated the Commission on the proposed revised cell tower/pole ordinance. Mr. Jungroth stated that he is not in favor of a tower in a park unless it is unobtrusive. Mr. Mathisen 'said that the new poles are more aesthetic as the antenna are internal; he also added that poles produce revenue for the city. There will be time for public input on the revised ordinance. Mr. Mathisen informed the Commission of the funding for the proposed Twin Oak pond. Some grant money will be used as well as funding from the watershed and the city utility funds. Mr. Hoffmann gave the City Council Report: • Graffiti ordinance was approved. • Social host ordinance — working on. • Discussed/approved water meter program • Received redevelopment updates • Had EDA meeting Ms. Haney gave the Crystal Frolics report: • This years event went well The Crystal Business Association report: • Participated in the Frolics • Having an event on Sept 11 The City Comp Plan Committee report: Citizen committee work is complete There was discussion concerning the PIR budget and relating it to the Commission Long Range Plan. More discussion will be held in October. Mr. Rauen and Ms. Hackett reviewed the monthly reports, highlighting major activities. The minutes from June were approved as were the meeting notes from July (no quorum). The meeting was adjourned at 8:20pm. Gene Hackett Recorder Page I of 2 CITY OF CRYSTAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL LAND USE APPLICATION 2008-09 ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW CERTAIN TYPES OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS, SUBJECT TO LIMITATIONS ONT HEIGHT, DESIGN, LOCATION AND OTHER FACTORS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Crystal will meet on Monday, August 11, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, at Crystal City Hall, 4141 Douglas Drive North, in said City, to consider the following application submitted by the City of Crystal: Special Land Use Application 2008-09 City code currently only allows commercial telecommunications towers on I-1 zoned property anywhere in the city (as a permitted use) and on C-2 zoned property in the West Broadway/Bottineau Boulevard corridor (as a conditional use). Telecommunications providers have expressed an interest in installing a newer style of tower that is generally smaller and less obtrusive than the towers that were common when the current regulations were first adopted. These newer towers are often called "stealth" towers and are typically used by telecommunications providers to fill gaps in coverage between the larger towers already in operation. The city is considering whether to amend its zoning code to allow such towers and related equipment as a conditional use throughout the city, subject to limitations and considerations including but not limited to (1) the height of the tower; (2) the design of the tower including its shape and materials; (3) the topography of the tower site and adjacent properties; (4) the character of existing and planned uses near the tower site; (5) separation distances between the tower and adjacent buildings, structures and properties; and other applicable factors. Note: City code already has provisions governing antennas for amateur radio operators ("HAMs ") in all zoning districts. The proposed ordinance amendment currently being considered would not impact amateur radio equipment already permitted by city code. On or about August 4, 2008, a copy of the proposed ordinance amendment will be available for public review at Crystal City Hall, 4141 Douglas Drive North, during regular business hours. If you have questions about this application, you may contact City Planner John Sutter by calling 763.531.1142 or emailing iohn.suttern,ci.castal.mn.us. Persons desiring to be heard on this matter are invited and encouraged to attend the public hearing. Persons unable to attend may submit written comments prior to the date of the hearing to: Community Development Department, City of Crystal, 4141 Douglas Dr N, Crystal MN 55422. EXHIBIT C Page 2 of 2 Auxiliary aids for handicap persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk at 763-531-1000 to make arrangements. Deaf and Hard of Hearing callers should contact the Minnesota Relay Service at 800-627-3529 V/TTY or call 711 to be connected to a TTY. TIM BUCK, SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION Published in the Sun Post on Thursday July 31, 2008 GUIDE TO CHANGES PROPOSED FOR CITY CODE SECTION 515.21: ■ Additions are indicated by underlining deletions by stiiket#r ugh. ■ Proposed changes presented at August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in red bold text. • Additional proposed changes to be presented at September 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in blue bold text. ORDINANCE NO. 2008 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 515 OF CRYSTAL CITY CODE PERTAINING TO TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS THE CITY OF CRYSTAL ORDAINS: Section 1. Crystal City Code Section 515.21 (Zoning - Telecommunications Towers) is amended as follows: 515.21. Telecommunications Towers. Subdivision 1. Findings. The Federal Communications Act of 1934 as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("the Act") grants the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) exclusive jurisdiction over the regulation of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions from telecommunications facilities and the regulation of radio signal interference among users of the radio frequency spectrum. Consistent with the Act, the regulation of towers and telecommunications facilities in the city will not have the effect of prohibiting any person from providing wireless telecommunications services. Subd. 2. Purpose. The general purpose of this subsection is to regulate the placement, construction and modification of telecommunication towers and facilities in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, while not unreasonably interfering with the development of the competitive wireless telecommunications marketplace in the city. Specifically, the purposes of this subsection are: a) To regulate the location of telecommunication towers and facilities. b) To protect residential areas and land uses from potential adverse impacts of telecommunication towers and facilities. C) To minimize adverse visual impacts of telecommunication towers and facilities through design, siting, landscaping, and innovative camouflaging techniques. d) To promote and encourage shared use and co -location of telecommunication towers and antenna support structures. C) To avoid potential damage to properties caused by telecommunication towers and facilities by ensuring that those structures are soundly and carefully designed, constructed, modified, maintained and promptly removed when no longer used or when determined to be structurally unsound. fl To ensure that telecommunication towers and facilities are compatible with surrounding land uses. PAGE 1 OF 11 EXHIBIT D GUIDE TO CHANGES PROPOSED FOR CITY CODE SECTION 515.21: ■ Additions are indicated by underlining, deletions by strikethmugh. ■ Proposed changes presented at August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in red bold text. • Additional proposed changes to be presented at September 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in blue bold text. g) To facilitate the provision of wireless telecommunications services to the residents and businesses of the city in an orderly fashion. Subd. 3. Defmitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: a) "Antenna support structure" means any building, athletic field lighting, water tower, or other structure; other than a tower., which can be used for location of telecommunications facilities as an accessory, subordinate use. New structures built for the purpose of attaching telecommunications facilities are "towers" not "antenna support structures" for the purpose of the code. For example, if an athletic field light pole would be replaced by a taller pole to facilitate installation of an antenna, then the new pole would be classified as a "tower" not an "antenna support structure" even if lights would be mounted to it in a manner similar to the way they were mounted to the previous light pole. b) "Applicant" means any person that applies for a tower development permit. C) "Application" means the process by which the owner of a plot of land within the city submits a request to develop, construct, build, modify or erect a tower upon such land. Application includes all written documentation, verbal statements and representations, in whatever form or forum, made by an applicant to the city concerning such a request. d) "Engineer" means any engineer licensed by the state of Minnesota. e) "Person" is any natural person, firm, partnership, association, corporation, company, or other legal entity, private or public, whether for profit or not for profit. fl "Stealth" means any telecommunications facility which is designed to blend into the surrounding environment. Examples of stealth facilities include architecturally screened roof -mounted antennas, antennas integrated into architectural elements, and telecommunications towers designed to look other than a tower such as light poles, power poles, and trees. g) "Telecommunications facilities" means any cables, wires, lines, wave guides, antennas and any other equipment or facilities associated with the transmission or reception of communications which a person seeks to locate or has installed upon or near a tower or antenna support structure. However, the term "telecommunications facilities" shall not include any satellite earth station antenna 1 meter or less in diameter, or any satellite earth station antenna 2 meters in diameter or less which is located in an area zoned industrial or commercial. PAGE 2 OF 11 GUIDE TO CHANGES PROPOSED FOR CITY CODE SECTION 515.21: • Additions are indicated by underlining, deletions by triketh -Gugh. • Proposed changes presented at August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in red bold text. ■ Additional proposed changes to be presented at September 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in blue bold text. h) "Telecommunications tower" or "Tower" means a self-supporting lattice, guyed or monopole structure constructed from grade which supports telecommunications facilities. The term tower shall not include amateur radio operations equipment licensed by the FCC. Subd. 4. Development of Towers. a) A tower is a permitted use in the I-1 light industrial district. A tower may not be constructed unless a site plan has been approved by the city council and a building permit has been issued by the building official. The applicant and property owner must submit a Special Land Use Application including the required application fee for a telecommunications tower in accordance with the fee schedule adopted by the City Council. b) A tower is a conditional use in the C-2 general commercial district, but only on property that that is guided for mixed use - West Broadway / Highway 81, as shown in the future land use map in the Crystal comprehensive plan. The applicant and property owner must submit a Special Land Use Application including the required application fees for a telecommunications tower and a conditional use permit in accordance with the fee schedule adopted by the City Council. A tower may not be constructed unless a conditional use permit has been issued by, and site plan approval obtained from, the city council; and such approval may only be granted if the City Council finds that the general Conditional Use Permit criteria in Section 515.05 Subd. 3 a) are met. A tower also may not be constructed unless a building permit has been issued by the building official. c) A tower is a conditional use in any zoning district if it meets all of the following minimum criteria in addition to other standards contained in this Subsection or elsewhere in City Code: 1) The applicant and property owner submit a Special Land Use Application including the required application fee for a telecommunications tower plus the fee for a conditional use permit in accordance with the fee schedule adopted by the Citv Council. The zoning administrator shall send notice of the public hearing to the party listed as "taxpayer" for any lots wholly or partially within 350 feet of the lot on which the proposed tower would be located, in accordance with the standard Conditional Use Permit requirements contained in Section 515.05 Subd. 3 e). In addition, the zoning administrator shall send notice of the public hearing to the party listed as "taxpayer" for any lots wholly or partially within 1,000 feet of the specific site of the proposed tower. The addressees for such notices shall be based on records provided to the city by the Hennepin County taxpayer services department. Such notices shall be sent via U.S. Mail no less than ten days prior to the public hearing. Failure of a particular party to receive notice shall not invalidate the proceedings. PAGE 3 OF 11 roo GUIDE TO CHANGES PROPOSED FOR CITY CODE SECTION 515.21: • Additions are indicated by underlining, deletions by strikethreugh. • Proposed changes presented at August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in red bold text. • Additional proposed changes to be presented at September 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in blue bold text. 2) The City Council finds that the general Conditional Use Permit criteria in Section 515.05 Subd. 3 a) are met. 3) The City Council finds that the proposed tower site is the best available site within the area where a tower is needed to address a service problem such as a gap in coverage. 4) The City Council finds that the design of the tower, including factors such as shape, materials, and finishes, adequately uses stealth techniques to minimize its impact on the character of the surrounding area. 5) No tower shall be located on a lot having an area of less than 2 3 acres. 6) No tower shall be located on a lot having as its principal use a dwelling, regardless of whether said dwelling is single family, two family or multiple family. 7) No part of the tower shall be located within 165 feet (1/32 mile) of any single family or two family dwelling on another lot or within 82.5 feet (1/64 mile) of any lot line. 8) No part of the tower shall be located within 82.5 feet (1/64 mile) of any building containing a child care facility, elementary school or middle school; or any playground, herein defined as a public or private play area having equipment such as swings, slides, and similar facilities designed primarily for use by children but not including athletic facilities such as baseball or soccer fields designed for use by adults as well as children. 9) The height of the tower shall not exceed 82.5 feet (1/64 mile). 10) The height of the tower shall not exceed 50% of the distance from any part of the tower to the nearest lot line of an adiacent property having a single family or two family dwelling. e !j) The city may authorize the use of city property in accordance with the procedures of this Code. The city shall have no obligation to use city property for such purposes. d e) Unless the applicant presents clear and convincing evidence to the city manager that co - location is not feasible, a new tower may not be built, constructed or erected in the city unless the tower is capable of supporting at least 1 telecommunications facility comparable in weight, size and surface area to the one located on the tower by the applicant; exeep` that —this —requirement is not appheable to towers that are a PAGE 4 OF 11 GUIDE TO CHANGES PROPOSED FOR CITY CODE SECTION 515.21: • Additions are indicated by underlining, deletions by strilethmugh. ■ Proposed changes presented at August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in red bold text. • Additional proposed changes to be presented at September 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in blue bold text. e fj An application to develop a tower shall include: 1) The names, addresses and telephone numbers of all owners of other towers or antenna support structures within a half mile radius of the proposed new tower site. 2) Written documentation that the applicant has made diligent but unsuccessful efforts for permission to install or co -locate the applicant's telecommunications facilities on towers or antenna support structures within a half mile radius of the proposed new tower site. 3) Written, technical evidence from an engineer that the proposed tower or telecommunications facilities cannot be installed or co -located on another person's tower or antenna support structure located within a half mile radius of the proposed tower site and must be located at the proposed site in order to meet the coverage requirements of the applicant's wireless communications system. 4) A written statement from an engineer that the construction and placement of the tower will not interfere with public safety communications and the usual and customary transmission or reception of radio, television, or other communications service enjoyed by adjacent residential and non-residential properties. 5) Written evidence from an engineer that the proposed structure meets the structural requirements of this Code. 6) Written information demonstrating the need for the tower at the proposed site in light of the existing and proposed wireless telecommunications network(s) to be operated by persons intending to place telecommunications facilities on the tower. 7) An application fee in the amount fixed by appendix IV. € l) Setbacks. 1) A tower must be located on a single parcel having a dimension equal to the height of the tower, as measured between the base of the tower located nearest the property line and the actual property line, unless a qualified engineer specifies in writing that the collapse of the tower will occur within a lesser distance under reasonably foreseeable circumstances. 2) Setback requirements for towers are measured from the base of the tower to the property line of the parcel on which it is located. PAGE 5 OF 11 GUIDE TO CHANGES PROPOSED FOR CITY CODE SECTION 515.21: • Additions are indicated by underlining deletions by strikethrGugh. ■ Proposed changes presented at August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in red bold text. ■ Additional proposed changes to be presented at September 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in blue bold text. 3) Towers may not be located between a principal structure and a public street, with the following exceptions: i) In the I-1 district, towers may be placed within a side yard abutting an internal industrial street. ii) On sites adjacent to public streets on all sides, towers may be placed within a side yard abutting a local street. This requirement does not apply to towers that are a conditional use in all zoning districts in accordance with Subd 4 0 above. g Structural Requirements. Towers must be designed and certified by an engineer to be structurally sound and, at minimum, in conformance with the international building code and any other standards set forth in this subsection. h, Height. A tower may not exceed 165 feet in height. -� i ]) Separation or Buffer Requirements. Towers must be separated from all residentially zoned lands by a minimum of 90 feet or 150% of the height of the proposed tower, whichever is greater. The minimum tower separation distance shall be calculated and applied irrespective of city jurisdictional boundaries. Measurement of tower separation distances for the purpose of compliance with this subsection shall be measured from the base of a tower to the closest point of the proposed site. This requirement does not apply to towers that are a conditional use in all zoning districts in accordance with Subd 4 0 above. t Method of Determining Tower Height. Measurement of tower height must include the tower structure itself, the base pad, and any other telecommunications facilities attached thereto. Tower height is measured from grade. k Illumination. Towers may not be artificially lighted except as required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). At time of construction of a tower, in cases where there are residential uses located within a distance from the tower which is 3 times the height of the tower, dual mode lighting must be requested from the FAA. Notwithstanding this provision, the city may approve the placement of an antenna on an existing or proposed lighting standard, provided that the antenna is integrated with the lighting standard. I Exterior Finish. Towers not requiring FAA painting or marking must have an exterior finish as approved by the appropriate reviewing body. PAGE 6 OF 11 GUIDE TO CHANGES PROPOSED FOR CITY CODE SECTION 515.21: • Additions are indicated by underlining deletions by strikethmugh. ■ Proposed changes presented at August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in red bold text. ■ Additional proposed changes to be presented at September 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in blue bold text. m !j) Fencing. Fences constructed around or upon parcels containing towers, antenna support structures, or telecommunications facilities must be constructed in accordance with the applicable fencing requirements in the zoning district where it is located, unless more stringent fencing requirements are required by FCC regulations. ti oLandscaping. Landscaping on parcels containing towers, antenna support structures or telecommunications facilities must be in accordance with the landscaping requirements of city code and as shown in the approved site plan. Utility buildings and structures accessory to a tower must be architecturally designed to blend in with the surrounding environment and to meet such setback requirements as are compatible with the actual placement of the tower. Ground mounted equipment must be screened from view by suitable vegetation, except where a design of non -vegetative screening better reflects and complements the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Accessory buildings may not be more than 2,000 square feet in size. o p) Security. Towers must be reasonably posted and secured to protect against trespass. p yJ Access. Parcels upon which towers are located must provide access during normal business hours to at least 1 paved vehicular parking space on site. ___1q r) Stealth. To the extent reasonably practical, towers must be of stealth design. r Other Telecommunications Facilities. Telecommunications facilities not attached to a tower may be permitted as an accessory use to any antenna support structure at least 7-5 50 feet and no more than 100 feet in height regardless of the zoning restrictions applicable. The owner of such structure must, by written certification to the building official, establish the following facts at the time plans are submitted for a building permit: 1) That the height from grade of the telecommunications facilities and antennae support structure does not exceed the maximum height from grade of permitted structures by more than 20 feet. 2) That the antenna support structure and telecommunications facilities comply with the iftter ,atio.,.,' building code; 3) That any telecommunications facilities and their appurtenances, located above the primary roof of an antenna support structure, are set back 1 foot from the edge of the primary roof for each 1 foot in height above the primary roof of the antenna support structure. This setback requirement does not apply to antennas that are mounted to the exterior of antenna support structures below the primary roof and do not protrude more than 6 inches from the side of the antenna support structure. Screened telecommunications facilities and their appurtenances are exempt from setback requirements. PAGE 7 OF 11 GUIDE TO CHANGES PROPOSED FOR CITY CODE SECTION 515.21: ■ Additions are indicated by underlining, deletions by etilketlusagh. • Proposed changes presented at August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in red bold text. ■ Additional proposed changes to be presented at September 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in blue bold text. s !) Existing Towers. 1) An existing tower may be modified or demolished and rebuilt to accommodate co -location of additional telecommunications facilities as follows: i) Application for an appropriate city permit shall be made to the city council. ii) The total height of the modified tower and telecommunications facilities attached thereto shall not exceed the maximum height for towers allowed under this subsection. 2) A tower that is being rebuilt to accommodate the co -location of additional telecommunications facilities may be relocated on the same parcel subject to the setback requirements of this subsection. However, if it is impossible for the tower to be rebuilt in compliance with the setback requirements of this subsection, such setback requirement shall be waived to allow the tower to be rebuilt in its exact previous location. t u) Abandoned or Unused Towers or Portions of Towers. Abandoned or unused towers and associated above -ground facilities must be removed within 6 months of the cessation of operations of an antenna facility at the site unless an extension is approved by the city manager. A copy of the relevant portions of a signed lease that requires the applicant to remove the tower and associated facilities upon cessation of operations at the site shall be submitted at the time of application. If a tower is not removed within 6 months of the cessation of operations at a site, the tower and associated facilities may be removed by the city and the costs of removal assessed against the property pursuant to section 635 of city code. tF Variances. The city council may grant a variance to the setback, separation or buffer requirements, and maximum height provision of this subsection based only on the criteria set forth in subsection 515.05, subdivision 2. v w) Additional Criteria for Variances. The city council may grant a variance pursuant to subsection 515.05, subdivision 2 if the applicant also demonstrates all of the following with written or other satisfactory evidence: 1) The location, shape, appearance or nature of use of the proposed tower will neither substantially detract from the aesthetics of the area nor change the character of the neighborhood in which the tower is proposed to be located. 2) The variance will not create any threat to the public health, safety or welfare. PAGE 8 OF 11 GUIDE TO CHANGES PROPOSED FOR CITY CODE SECTION 515.21: • Additions are indicated by underlining, deletions by shikethmugh. ■ Proposed changes presented at August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in red bold text. ■ Additional proposed changes to be presented at September 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in blue bold text. 3) In the case of a requested modification to the setback requirement, that the size of parcel upon which the tower is proposed to be located makes compliance impossible, and the only alternative for the applicant is to locate the tower at another site that poses a greater threat to the public health, safety or welfare or is closer in proximity to a residentially zoned land. 4) In the case of a request for modification to the separation requirements of subsection 515.21, subdivision 4 i), that the proposed site is zoned I-1 and the proposed site is at least double the minimum standard for separation from residentially zoned lands. 5) In the case of a request for modification of the separation requirements, if the person provides written technical evidence from an engineer that the proposed tower and telecommunications facilities must be located at the proposed site in order to meet the coverage needs of the applicant's wireless communications system and if the person agrees to create approved landscaping and other buffers to screen the tower from being visible to the residential area. 6) In the case of a request for modification of the maximum height limit, that the modification is necessary to (1) facilitate co -location of telecommunications facilities in order to avoid construction of a new tower; or (2) to meet the coverage requirements of the applicant's wireless communications system, which requirements must be documented with written, technical evidence from an engineer. w Inspections. The city may conduct inspections at any time, upon reasonable notice to the property owner and the tower owner to inspect the tower for the purpose of determining if it complies with the international building code and other construction standards provided by city code, state law, and federal law. The expense related to such inspections shall be borne by the property owner. Based upon the results of an inspection, the building official may require repair or removal of a tower. x y) Maintenance. Towers must be maintained in accordance with the following provisions: 1) Tower owners must employ ordinary and reasonable care in construction and use commonly accepted methods and devices for preventing failures and accidents that are likely to cause damage, injuries, or nuisances to the public. 2) Tower owners must install and maintain towers, telecommunications facilities, wires, cables, fixtures and other equipment in compliance with the requirements of the national electric safety code and all federal communications commission, state and local regulations, and in such a manner that they will not interfere with the use of other property. PAGE 9 OF 11 GUIDE TO CHANGES PROPOSED FOR CITY CODE SECTION 515.21: • Additions are indicated by underlining, deletions by strikethreugh. • Proposed changes presented at August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in red bold text. • Additional proposed changes to be presented at September 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in blue bold text. 3) Towers, telecommunications facilities and antenna support structures must be kept and maintained in good condition, order, and repair. 4) Maintenance or construction on a tower, telecommunications facilities or antenna support structure must be performed by qualified maintenance and construction personnel. 5) Towers must comply with radio frequency emissions standards of the federal communications commission. 6) In the event the use of a tower is discontinued by the tower owner, the tower owners must provide written notice to the city of its intent to discontinue use and the date when the use will be discontinued. Section 2. In Crystal City Code Section 515.33 Subd. 4 (Low Density Residential Conditional Uses), a new item e) is added to read as follows: e) Telecommunications towers in accordance with the requirements of Section 515.21. Section 3. In Crystal City Code Section 515.37 Subd. 4 (Medium Density Residential Conditional Uses), a new item 1) is added to read as follows: 1) Telecommunications towers in accordance with the requirements of Section 515.21. Section 4. In Crystal City Code Section 515.41 Subd. 4 (High Density Residential Conditional Uses), a new item 1) is added to read as follows: 1) Telecommunications towers in accordance with the requirements of Section 515.21. Section 5. In Crystal City Code Section 515.45 Subd. 4 (Neighborhood Commercial Conditional Uses), a new item e) is added to read as follows: e) Telecommunications towers in accordance with the requirements of Section 515.21. Section 6. In Crystal City Code Section 515.49 Subd. 4 (General Commercial Conditional Uses), a new item p) is added to read as follows: P) Telecommunications towers in accordance with the requirements of Section 515.21. Section 7. In Crystal City Code Section 515.53 Subd. 2 (Light Industrial Permitted Uses), a new item p) is added to read as follows: P) Telecommunications towers in accordance with the requirements of Section 515.21. PAGE 10 OF 11 GUIDE TO CHANGES PROPOSED FOR CITY CODE SECTION 515.21: ■ Additions are indicated by underlining, deletions by strikethmugh. • Proposed changes presented at August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in red bold text. • Additional proposed changes to be presented at September 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting are in blue bold text. Section 8. In Crystal City Code Section 515.53 Subd. 4 (Light Industrial Conditional Uses), a new item 1) is added to read as follows: 1) Telecommunications towers in accordance with the requirements of Section 515.21. Section 9. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Crystal City Code, Subsection 110.11. First Reading: Second Reading/Adopted: Summary Publication: Effective Date: ATTEST: Janet Lewis, City Clerk PAGE 11 OF 11 ReNae J. Bowman, Mayor NEW HOPE $' x 4 C w 81,110 o L Ir® z � v L .MOWrtM?� l 9 I 3 CRYSTAL. i WG*T µ tt ry !Sr. AYE. i L � NWTMENN DwvE ' F`� SR. �• �� 'r- NEW HOPE .A • SR00KLYN CENTER o-L i� will • GOLDEN VALLEY .1 v R0581NSD-LE DI LAAELAND AVE. N. GOLDEN VALLEY EXHIBIT E Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County PropertyMap®�`a��a2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or Its derivatives, _ - Selected Parcel Data N'. Date Printed: 8/5/2008 20:30:06 AM Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead, Area (sgft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: Date Printed: 8/5/2008 20:30:06 AM Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County property Map ® Tam Year, The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed bya licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only, Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. m _ G2N1111 N 3 � � �� sTa ARM' USelected Parcel Data Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead: Area (sqft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: Date Printed: 8/5/2008 10:25:14 AM Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page I of I --- ------- - Hennepin County Property Map ® Tax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page Is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The Information on this page should be used for referencepurposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. N 60z7 --1 IMP Selected Parcel Data Date Printed: 8/5/2008 10:32:18 AM F" = F mpg"K Parcel ID: Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Sale Price: Homestead: Sale Date: Area (sqft): Sale Code: Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Hennepin County Property Map ® Tax Year: 2008 Page 1 of 1 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. Selected Parcel Data Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead: Area (sgft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: Date Printed: 8/5/2008 10:34:00 AM Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: 7.Z AL MA'a N #4 http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map - Tax Year® 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. '! 7r f 1� Selected Parcel Data Date Printed. 8/5/2008 11:03:38 AM Parcel ID: Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Owner Name: Parcel Address it Property Type: Sale Price: 4% Homestead: Sale Date: Area (sgft): Sale Code: Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total; Tax Total: http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map - Tax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. < f Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and Is not responsible `cur any misuse or misrepresentation of this Information or Its derivatives. UN Selected Parcel Data http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx Date Printed 8/5/2008 11:04:44 AM Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: AL -------------- N 08/05/2008 Parcel ID. Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead: Area (sgft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx Date Printed 8/5/2008 11:04:44 AM Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: AL -------------- N 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map v Tax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. :? Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. 7 f �s - ae 5705 �r�• 7U3. - � _ u u `b533f 56 2a u5 7, 6504 650 629 6i2a b 43S z_ i t r _�" 4 sG40 1532 652 65 6• 6506 65flU_ 6428 6.42U 641-2 R _ _ BRENTWOOD AVE N ri t- All 661)LI� FhT - b1 _8 8 b132 6436 .6t 6 642e 6408 6446-'= - `�# yr _ • - _ ' F js 56TH AVE N' tit w _6 r Selected Parcel Data Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead: Area (sgft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: Date Printed: 8/5/ 2008 11:05:24 AM Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: http://gis.co.hennepi.Ti.nin.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 f, Hennepin County Property Map ®`fax Year: 200 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed bya licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The Information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. .a- �6Try AVE A StsGD Sfi _ 4 5_S "512 ma9:�i, •aL.3 6� CD3- 5 i, ..?7 • 5 faB 53D3 ��J25� 5 c_ Selected Parcel Data Date Printed: 8/5/2008 11:07:21 AM Parcel ID: Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Owner Name: Parcel Address: _ Property Type: Sale Price: Homestead: Sale Date: Area (sgft): Sale Code: Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: IN h'Ltp://gis.co.hennepin.=.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx D 3 �I i 3i MA" IT 08/05/2008 Henpepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map - Tax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this Information or its derivatives. a � 312 s333 s32s sz 7 ,3119_ s3o �2ay 570_ s 2s �3 :aa s ai 5025 a a soap sot,a ayes P A5 4r 5340 Aft _ 53aa 53=2 Selected Parcel Data Date Printed: 8/5/2008 11:07:57 AM Parcel ID: Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 F-1 Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Sale Price: Homestead: Sale Date: Area (sgft): Sale Code: Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total Tax Total: http://gis.co.hennepin.nm.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Flap ®-fax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. f Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or Its derivatives. "s 4 Selected Parcel Data �..: Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead: Area (sgft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx Date Printed: 8/5/2008 11:10:49 AM Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: N LOR 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page I of I Hennepin County Property Map ® Tax-, ear: .1-008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed bya licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or Its derivatives. 1 7� R -C-77 http://gis.co.hen.nepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx Date Printed: 8/5/2008 11:09:00 AM Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: Z 08/05/2008 Selected Parcel Data Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead: Area (sqft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: http://gis.co.hen.nepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx Date Printed: 8/5/2008 11:09:00 AM Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: Z 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map ® Tax Year® 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives . `µIII! I &�Fvk a, Selected Parcel Data Date Printed: 8/5/2008 11.09:52 AM Parcel ID: Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Sale Price: Homestead: Sale Date: Area (sgft): Sale Code: Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: An 12 http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property dap m Tax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. I Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and Is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. NO Selected Parcel Data Parcel ID: Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 Date Printed: 8/5/2008 11.11:44 AM http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Safe Price: Homestead: Sate Date: L1. Area (sgft): Sale Code: Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 5 Hennepin County Property Map ® Tax Year: 200 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed j 35 land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. i5 . Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. SI +. 4BUtz Selected Parcel Data Date Printed. 8/5/2008 11:12:49 AM Parcel ID: Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2008 http://gis.co.hennepin.nan.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Sale Price: Homestead: Sale Date: Area (sgft): Sale Code: Area (acres): A- T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: http://gis.co.hennepin.nan.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map - Tax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. Selected Parcel Data Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead: Area (sgft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: Date Printed: 8/6/2008 3:10:58 PM Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: http://gis.co.hennepin.nm.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/06/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map ® Tax Year: 2008 a I. The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land m Cor. Th terand area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin $ D County does ots guarantee the accuracy acy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this Information or its derivatives. Selected Parcel Data Date Printed: 8/e/2008 3:13:35 PM Parcel ID: Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 http://gis.co.hennepin.=.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx V 08/06/2008 _ Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Sale Price: Homestead: Sale Date: Area (sgft): Sale Code - Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: http://gis.co.hennepin.=.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx V 08/06/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map e Ta der®2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. i- Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. Aga 5224 3 Selected Parcel Data Date Printed: 8/6/2008 3.17:49 PM Parcel ID: Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 i http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/06/2008 Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Sale Price: Homestead: Sale Date: Area (sgft): Sale Code: Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total.• i http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/06/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page I of 1 Hennepin County Property Map - Tax Year® 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. _-Z 17 Sit 971 a ri - Az 4U M -IF �, - 3 - Date Printed: 8/6/2008 3:20:57 PM Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/06/2008 Select d Parcel Data Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address, Property Type: Homestead: Area (sqft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: Date Printed: 8/6/2008 3:20:57 PM Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/06/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map o Tax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land suryeyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. . Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. -�!3U0 32� 3 20 3200, �320t L t 32ND AVE N 7 � � ��— v2UG E b-- G_2� bi*3 fi'07."� bZt5 h3__ f 6205 6I `1 `I L YA t 1' 62_3 a 6207 l :ibto4 k= �— E•_15 Selected Parcel Data Date Printed: 8/6/2008 3:21:18 PM Parcel ID: Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/06/2008 Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Sale Price: Homestead: Sale Date: Area (sgft): Sale Code: Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/06/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map - Tax Year: 2008' The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed - land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. ? ' Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. Selected Parcel Data nParcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead: Area (sqft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: Date Printed: 8/6/2008 3:22:04 PM Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: http://gis.co.hennepin.nm.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/06/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 • Hennepin County Property Map o 'Tax Year® 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. f Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or Its derivatives. 6 }5 3 .v 27 3s �G 3 7 2 4 Selected Parcel Data Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead: Area (sgft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total" Date Printed: 8/6/2008 3.22.29 PM Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: http://gis.co.hennepin.=.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/06/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page I of 1 Hennepin County Property Map ® Tax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation Of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or Its derivatives. - 67 I : , Tr 4W V L W UOU 67i All D — ------- - --- ---- Selected Parcel Data Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead: Area (sqft): Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: Date Printed: 8/6/2008 3:22:53 PM Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: ITIEW- VN 110 MP -7 #22"" 08/06/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 _ Hennepin County Property Map - Tax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. Theinformation on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this Information or its derivatives. VIEW Ila �I Selected Parcel Data Date Printed: 8/6/2008 3:16:34 PM Parcel ID: Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 http://gis.co.hennepin.=.us/HCPropertyMap[Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Sale Price: Homestead: Sale Date: Area (sgft): Sale Code: Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: http://gis.co.hennepin.=.us/HCPropertyMap[Locator.aspx 08/05/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 46 Hennepin County Property Map - Tax Year: 2008 _ The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor.. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. Selected Parcel Data mss: Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Sale Price: Homestead: Sale Date: Area (sgft): Sale Code: Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: Date Printed: 8/7/2008 8:23:39 AM Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 http://gis.co.hennepin.inn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/07/2008 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map o `fax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of recordsand maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. _ { Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. off Selected Parcel Data Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Sale Price: Homestead: Sale Date: Area (scift): Sale Code: Area (acres): A -T -B: Market Total: Tax Total: Date Printed: 8/6/2008 3:24:28 PM Current Parcel Date: 8/4/2008 http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx 08/06/2008 (iF,.Y.?. - icy A -Am, Coorn ) James M. Strommen 470 US Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9233 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax email: istrommen@kennedy-graven.com TO: John Sutter, Mike Norton FROM: Jim Strommen DATE: September 2, 2008 RE: Proposed Changes to City Code Section 515.21 (Wireless Telecom Structures) INTRODUCTION You have asked for comments on proposed changes to the above City Code Section, as contained in an August 11, 2008 planning commission public hearing document. The August 11 materials include a memo regarding towers and antennae support structures for wireless telecommunications providers and a number of maps of the City showing available sites for towers and other antennae support structures. DISCUSSION The August 7, 2008 memo to the planning commission notes that the original ordinance was adopted in the "mid-1990s." The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("Act") established the framework for City zoning of the facilities in Section 515.21. There was a flurry of litigation in the federal courts after the Act defining the limits and retained powers of local government units when wireless provider applicants sought to establish their infrastructure through the construction of towers and the placing of antennas and support structures. Since about 2003, the number of court decisions appears to have subsided, possibly reflecting less resistance to antenna sites from local governments. In general, even stringent ordinances limiting the locations available to providers within a city have been upheld. The biggest risk to cities remains a finding that the ordinances, as applied, "effectively prohibit" the provision of service in an area, or otherwise prevent the closure of a "significant gap" or other deficiency in wireless service. I don't see any evidence of that type of restriction in the City's ordinance with the proposed changes. Some of my comments below relate to subsections not proposed for amendment, or the possibility of additional subsections. 339043v1 JMS CR225-310 515.21 Telecommunications Towers. Subdivision 1, Findings. It is correct that the Act preempts local regulation based on the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions. There are many other legal conclusions that could be made regarding the Act, but they are not really findings and they would have no effect on the ordinance itself, whether stated or not. Subdivision 2 of Section 515.21 has more relevance as the operative "purpose" statement of this subsection. Subd. 4c(3) I would change to read as follows: The applicant demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that there are no co - location options and no other reasonable alternative sites available The City t-otttYeil finds that the proposed tower- site is -1.- mailable--sites—within the area where a tower is needed to address a material service problem, including but not limited to, a significant gap in [the provider's] service For --- available to the end user sueh as a g i . Comment: The burden should be on the applicant, not the city, to show the above. There is a split in the federal courts over whether the "significant gap" is that of the provider or that of the end user. An "end user" significant gap standard is far more stringent for the applicant because it may be the case that end users are not experiencing a significant gap if they are served by other wireless providers. Some circuits have established that the significant gap applies to the applicant itself. This is a more generous standard that would result in a greater number of providers in any given area. Our Eighth Circuit has not ruled directly on whether the gap applies to the end user or to the provider. The safer standard would be gap to the provider because the provider wouldn't challenge such a test. If the City uses the end user as the test, the provider applicant may well challenge the ordinance based on the holdings that find the "provider" test to be the proper one under the Act. Subd. 4(d). This subdivision references that "the city may authorize the use of city property in accordance with the procedures of this Code." What are those procedures, if separate from the standards set forth in this Section 515.21? The City does become a landlord whenever a provider seeks authority to place a facility on city property for the market rent. This could be an issue if a city were to abuse its governmental authority to funnel providers into city property only and hold them "hostage" in lease rates. After a review of cases under the Act on this issue, however, we have found no cases where a local governmental unit's ordinances were struck down for using its regulatory powers to "corner the market" on facility location and revenue. Only one reported case that we've found has even addressed the issue. In Thornber et. Al. v. Village of North Barrington, 747 N.E.2d 513 (Ill. App. 2001), the Illinois court of appeals upheld an ordinance allowing a tower to be built on village hall property, and no where else, for the stated purpose of asserting greater control over wireless facilities and generating revenue for the city. It found a rational basis for the ordinance under traditional state law zoning principles without even referencing the Act in the opinion. 339043v1 JMS CR225-310 The absence of any cases on the subject under the Act and the deferential analysis given under Village of North Barrington provide strong support for the City's much more modest emphasis on City property as the preferred site for wireless facilities. Further, the City has a variance provision that allows other locations if a "prohibition" or "significant gap" is demonstrated. Subd. 4(m). What is the "appropriate reviewing body?" Final decisions under the Act are going to be those of the City Council. Subd. 4(w)(5). In the fourth line I suggest the following change: close a significant gap in coverage [of the provider] [ or -- to the end user] meet the eever-age needs oi"the ., p nts' wireless eemmunir-atiens-syst *ems --- If not already included in some other area of the Code, the City might consider adding the following provisions (used by a couple of other Twin City suburbs): Additional Requirements: Subd. 5(a). Inspections. The City may conduct inspections at any time, upon reasonable notice to the property owner and the tower owner to inspect the tower for the purpose of determining if it complies with the Uniform Building Code and other construction standards provided by the city code, federal land state law. The expense related to such inspections will be borne by the property owner. Based upon the results of an inspection, the building official may require repair or removal of a tower. (b). Excavation and Monitoring. As a condition of approval for telecommunication facilities, the applicant shall reimburse the City for its costs to retain outside expert technical assistance to evaluate any aspect of the proposed site of telecommunications facilities, including but not limited to other possible sites within the City. The owner of a telecommunications facility shall provide the City with current, technical evidence of compliance with FCC radiation emission requirements, annually or more frequently at the City's reasonable request. If the owner does not promptly provide the City with satisfactory technical evidence of FCC compliance, the City may carry out tests to ensure FCC radiation compliance using a qualified expert. The owner shall reimburse the City for its reasonable costs in carrying out such compliance testing. Failure to Comply: Subd. 6(a). City's Right to Revoke. If the permittee fails to comply with any of the terms imposed by the conditional use permit, the City may impose penalties or discipline for noncompliance, which may include revocation of the permit, in accordance with the following provisions: (b). Procedure. Except as provided in subsection below, the imposition of any penalty shall be preceded by (i) written notice of the permittee of the alleged violation, (ii) the opportunity to cure the violation during a period not to exceed thirty (30)days following receipt of the written notice, and (iii) a hearing before the City Council at least fifteen (15) days after 339043v1 JMS CR225-310 sending written notice of the hearing. The notices contained in (i) and (iii) may be contained in the same notification. The hearing shall provide the permittee with an opportunity to show cause why the permit should not be subject to discipline. `, (c). Exigent Circumstances. If the City finds that exigent circumstances exist requiring immediate permit revocation, the City may revoke the permit and shall provide a post -revocation hearing before the City Council not more than fifteen (15) days after permittee's receipt of written notice of the hearing. Following such hearing, the City Council may sustain or rescind the revocation, or may impose such other and further discipline as it deems appropriate. (d). Record. Any decision to impose a penalty or other discipline shall be in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record. 339043v1 JMS CR225-310 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: September 2, 2008 TO: Planning Commission (for September 8, 2008 meeting) FROM: John Sutter, City Planner/Assistant Community Development Director SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Consider the 2008 Update of the Crystal Comprehensive Plan. Enclosed please find the staff draft of the 2008 Update of the Crystal Comprehensive Plan. The vast majority of the staff draft is comprised of the same materials as the Final Report of the Citizen Task Force but reorganized to fit Metropolitan Council's standard format. (You should have already received the final report at a previous Planning Commission meeting, but if you never received the final report, please let me know and I will provide you with a copy.) Substantive changes between the Final Report of the Citizen Task Force and the enclosed Staff Draft are as follows: ■ City Forecasts (Chapter E) includes employment forecasts in addition to housing and population forecasts. Land Use (Chapter F) will include tables showing the land area occupied by each category of land use. These tables are not yet complete but will be handed out at the meeting. Roadway Jurisdiction (Chapter 1) includes the changes to MSA designations presented at the July Planning Commission meeting (please let me know if you did not receive the maps illustrating these changes). These changes are also reflected in the maps in Roadway Functional Classification (Chapter J), Non -Motorized Transportation (Chapter K) and Parks and Open Space (Chapter N) to reflect different collector streets and sidewalk locations due to these proposed MSA designation changes. The map changes are not yet complete, but in the meantime they are described in the text boxes overlayed on the respective maps. ■ The addition of a Water Resources chapter (Chapter O), which is comprised of sanitary sewer information together with surface water and water supply plans which are being developed separately and will be included in the plan by reference. At this time, the Planning Commission is asked to open the public hearing, take public comment, give direction to staff for any further changes, and continue the hearing and further consideration of this item to the next meeting on October 13, 2008. A copy of the process timetable is attached. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE PAGE 1 OF 1 PAGE 1 OF 2 CITY OF CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE SCHEDULE *** Revised September 2, 2008 *** Items in italics have already occurred. Items in bold have yet to occur. Feb. 22, 2007 City Council appoints the Task Force. Mar. 22, 2007 Task Force meeting #1: Background, discuss timetable and process, review previous plans & studies, Strengths- Weaknesses - Opportunities -Threats brainstorming and mapping exercise. Apr. 26, 2007 Task Force meeting #2: Baseline (Crystal's history, demographics, housing stock, etc.); forecasts/projections for the future. May 24, 2007 Task Force meeting #3: Discuss land use component including housing and development. June 28, 2007 Task Force meeting #4: Continue to discuss land use and redevelopment areas component; review first draft of related maps. Aug. 23, 2007 Task Force meeting #5: Review land use and redevelopment areas maps; discuss public facilities component including transportation, water resources, and parks & open space. Sep. 27, 2007 Task Force meeting #6: Continue to discuss public facilities component; review rough draft of related maps. Oct. 25, 2007 Task Force meeting #7: Discuss/review implementation component including land use regulations and capital improvement programs. Nov. 15, 2007 Community Open House #1 to present the Task Force's work to date and receive public comment. Nov. 29, 2007 Task Force meeting #8: Review and discuss comments from Open House #1; give direction to staff. Jan. 24, 2008 Task Force meeting #9: Transportation and Parks elements. Feb. 7, 2008 Task Force meeting #10: Continue Transportation and Parks elements. Feb. 28, 2008 Task Force meeting #11: Housing, Population and Land Use elements PAGE 2OF2 Mar. 13, 2008 Task Force meeting #12: Land Use and Redevelopment elements. Mar. 27, 2008 Task Force meeting #13: Recap previous four meetings; discuss preparations for Community Open House #2. Apr. 17, 2008 Community Open House #2 (5:00-8:00) to present the Task Force report and receive public comment. Apr. 24, 2008 Task Force meeting #14: Follow-up to Open House #2; final `check-in' before preparation of the Task Force report May 22, 2008 Task Force meeting #15 (final meeting): Review and approve the Task Force report for referral to the Planning Commission and City Council. June 3, 2008 City Council receives the Task Force draft and refers it to the Planning Commission to begin the formal adoption process. Aug. 11, 2008 Planning Commission work session - initial review and discussion of the Task Force report & additional materials comprising the first draft of the updated plan Aug. 28, 2008 Legal notice published for Sep. 8th public hearing. Sep. 8, 2008 Planning Commission holds the required public hearing; directs staff to make additional changes to the Staff ®raft based on public comment received and Planning Commission discussion. Oct. 13, 2008 Planning Commission finalizes the Planning Commission draft and refers it to the City Council. Oct. 21, 2008 City Council work session - initial review and discussion of the Planning Commission draft Nov. 6, 2008 City Council considers a resolution adopting the Comprehensive Plan including any changes to the Planning Commission draft. Nov. 10, 2008 Adopted Comprehensive Plan submitted to adjacent jurisdictions and Met Council May 10, 2009 Six month review period concluded May 19, 2009 City Council considers final changes based on comments received from adjacent jurisdictions (if needed) May 23, 2009 Final version sent to Metropolitan Council _ Crystal Comprehensive Plan Update Staff Draft - August 28, 2008 Table of Contents PAGES - BACKGROUND 49-50 LIST OF CHAPTERS 1-2 _ CHAPTER A PROCESS OVERVIEW 3-4 CHAPTER B PLANNING AREA DESIGNATION 5-8 CHAPTER C BASELINE 9-10 - CHAPTER D METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FORECASTS 11-12 CHAPTER E CITY FORECASTS 13-16 LAND USE LIST OF CHAPTERS 17-18 CHAPTER F LAND USE 19-30 CHAPTER G HOUSING 31-34 CHAPTER H REDEVELOPMENT 33-48 TRANSPORTATION LIST OF CHAPTERS 49-50 CHAPTER I ROADWAY JURISDICTIONS 51-60 CHAPTER J ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION 61-72 - CHAPTER K NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION 73-82 CHAPTER L PUBLIC TRANSIT 83-86 CHAPTER M AVIATION 87-94 _ OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES LIST OF CHAPTERS 95-96 CHAPTER N PARKSAND OPEN SPACE 97-114 - CHAPTER 0 WATER RESOURCES 115-118 BACKGROUND CHAPTER A PROCESS OVERVIEW CHAPTER B PLANNING AREA DESIGNATION CHAPTER C BASELINE CHAPTER D METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FORECASTS CHAPTER E CITY FORECASTS 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 1 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 2 OF 118 CHAPTER A PROCESS OVERVIEW As a municipality within the seven -county metropolitan planning area, Crystal is required to submit an updated Comprehensive Plan to the Metropolitan Council in 2008. The Comprehensive Plan is the city's policy document and guide for land use and related decision-making. For example, the Comprehensive Plan is used by the Planning Commission and City Council when it makes decisions related to zoning, subdivision (platting), public facilities and redevelopment. While the plan does not include more detailed development concept plans for particular sites or designs for public facilities improvements, it does set the stage and provide guidance for such plans and designs to be developed later. On February 20, 2007, the City Council appointed a 27 -member citizen task force to work on an update of the Comprehensive Plan. The task force composition is summarized in Table A-1 on the following page. The task force met 15 times and also held two open houses for the general public, one in November 2007 and the other in April 2008. The Citizen Task Force Report was presented to the City Council on June 3, 2008. The report included most of the material comprising this update of the Crystal Comprehensive Plan, including chapters on housing, redevelopment, land use, transportation and parks. The Planning Commission's public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan is scheduled for September 8, 2008. It is anticipated that the Planning Commission will continue the public hearing to its next meeting on October 13, 2008 to provide an additional opportunity for public comment. It is anticipated that the City Council would consider the Comprehensive Plan in November 2008. If approved by the Council, copies would be provided to other governmental jurisdictions and agencies for a six month review and comment period, as required by Metropolitan Council. Upon conclusion of the comment period in May 2009, Metropolitan Council would complete its review of the Comprehensive Plan. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 3 OF 118 TABLE A -I CITIZEN TASK FORCE COMPOSITION Citizen Task Force for the Comprehensive Plan Update ELECTED OFFICIALS Mayor ReNae Bowman Councilmember Dave Anderson MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Chair Paul Whitenack Vice Chair Joe Sears Secretary Jeff Hester Tom Davis Michelle Strand Rita Nystrom Tim Buck Dick VonRueden Angela Scheibe MEMBERS OF OTHER ADVISORY COMMISSIONS Guy Mueller (Park & Recreation) Dave Luebke Environmental Quality) GENERAL CITIZEN MEMBERS - THREE PER WARD WARD 1 Joel Franz Harley Heigel John Schuneman WARD 2 Alana Fermoyle Darwin Lindahl Melvin Maldonado WARD 3 Helen Bennett Bill Felker Thomas Van Housen WARD 4 Darlene Brenna Tom Jungroth Victoria Morrison OTHER MEMBERS E. Gary Joselyn (at -large citizen) Curt Hotzler (Business Boosters) 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 4 OF 118 CHAPTER B PLANNING AREA DESIGNATION FIGURE B-1 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL PLANNING AREAS 2030 Framework Plannine Areas CRYSTAL Approved January 14. 2004 Phoning Anm Amended December X t6 NOTE: Please refer to the Comprehensive Plans Composite map or the Regional Systems maps for the most recent information. These mans are available at the Metrnnolitnn (nnnr•LI nat., !`.,.a.... Idc I . cm t ten Geographic Planning Areas Additional Information Urban Planning Areas Rural Planning Areas Regional Natural Resource Areas Ikveloping Area Rural Center (includes Tenestual and Wetland Arens) ------- Regional frail Developed Area Agricultural SOURCE: Mctro DNR in coordimon , ilh the Meaop titan (",unoa - "' Transit 2025 Corridor Diversified Rural Regional Park Principal Arterial Rural Residential Open Water Proposed Regional Park 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 5 OF 118 Metropolitan Council has established several different geographic area designations for different parts of the region. Crystal is among the areas classified as Developed. For such communities, Metropolitan Council has established the following general policies and strategies: Policy 1: Work with local communities to accommodate growth in a flexible, connected and efficient manner. Strategies for all communities • Support land -use patterns that efficiently connect housing, jobs, retail centers and civic uses within and among neighborhoods. • Encourage growth and reinvestment in adequately sewered urban and rural centers with convenient access to transportation corridors. • Promote development strategies that help protect and sustain the regional water supply. Strategies for Developed Communities • Work in partnership with developed communities to encourage reinvestment and revitalization. • Provide grants and other incentives to cities and businesses to reclaim, infill and redevelop underutilized lands and structures. Policy 2: Plan and invest in multi -modal transportation choices, based on the full range of costs and benefits, to slow the growth of congestion and serve the region's economic needs. Strategies • Focus highway investments on maintaining and managing the existing system, removing bottlenecks �- and adding capacity. • Make more efficient use of the regional transportation system by encouraging flexible work hours, telecommuting, ridesharing and other traffic management efforts, and by employing a variety of pricing �- techniques such as FAST lanes and HOT lanes. • Expand the transit system, add bus -only lanes on highway shoulders, provide more park-and-ride lots and develop a network of transitways. • Encourage local governments to implement a system of fully interconnected arterial and local streets, pathways and bikeways. • Promote the development and preservation of various freight modes and modal connections to adequately serve the movement of freight within the region and provide effective linkages that serve statewide, national and international markets. • Support airport facilities investments to keep pace with market needs and maintain the region's economic vitality. Policy 3: Encourage expanded choices in housing location and types, and improved access to jobs and opportunities. Strategies • Work to ensure an adequate supply of serviced, developable land to meet regional needs and respond to demographic trends. • Work with regional partners to increase housing options that meet changing market preferences. • Support the production and preservation of lifecycle and affordable housing with links to jobs, services and amenities accessible by auto, transit, biking and walking. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 6 OF 118 Policy 4: Work with local and regional partners to reclaim, conserve, protect and enhance the region's vital natural resources. Strategies • Encourage the integration of natural -resource conservation strategies in regional and local land -use planning decisions. • Work with other regional partners to protect regionally important natural resources identified as unprotected in the Natural Resources Inventory and Assessment. • Work to preserve the quality of the region's water resources. • Work with our regional partners to remain in compliance with federal air quality standards for carbon monoxide, ground level ozone and fine particulate pollution. • Designate additional areas for the regional park system that enhance outdoor recreation opportunities and serve important natural -resource functions. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 7 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 8 OF 118 _ CHAPTER C BASELINE Crystal is a predominantly single family detached residential community. It is largely a product of the period immediately following World War II. As recently as 1945 the community was semi -rural with some scattered subdivisions, but by 1970 the transition to suburban development was essentially complete. After 1970 new housing occurred by infill of remaining vacant parcels or redevelopment of existing land uses. FIGURE C-1 CRYSTAL DEVELOPMENT HISTORY - Homes Built Before 1946 i5 ' J "p -rl At'%j Homes Built 1946 to 1970 Homes Built After 1970 Crystal generally has some of the lowest cost suburban housing in the Twin Cities regional market. This is generally true for all housing types (single family, townhouse, apartments), for units of comparable size/features, and for units with similar occupancy status (ownership vs. rental) when compared to most other suburbs in the metropolitan region. Census 2000 showed Crystal having 9,481 housing units: WEI ■ 7,223 (76.2%) were single family detached (houses) ■ 242 (2.6%) were single family attached (townhouses) ■ 139 (1.5%) were in two family (duplexes) ■ 559 (5.9%) were in buildings with 3-19 units ■ 1,318 (13.9%) were in buildings with more than 20 units From Jan. 1, 2000 through Dec. 31, 2007, the city has seen a net gain of 179 housing units: + 29 single family detached (houses) + 80 single family attached (townhouses) + 4 units in duplexes - 12 units in apartment buildings with 3-19 units + 78 units in apartment buildings with more than 20 units. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 -PAGE 9 OF 118 "p -rl At'%j Crystal generally has some of the lowest cost suburban housing in the Twin Cities regional market. This is generally true for all housing types (single family, townhouse, apartments), for units of comparable size/features, and for units with similar occupancy status (ownership vs. rental) when compared to most other suburbs in the metropolitan region. Census 2000 showed Crystal having 9,481 housing units: WEI ■ 7,223 (76.2%) were single family detached (houses) ■ 242 (2.6%) were single family attached (townhouses) ■ 139 (1.5%) were in two family (duplexes) ■ 559 (5.9%) were in buildings with 3-19 units ■ 1,318 (13.9%) were in buildings with more than 20 units From Jan. 1, 2000 through Dec. 31, 2007, the city has seen a net gain of 179 housing units: + 29 single family detached (houses) + 80 single family attached (townhouses) + 4 units in duplexes - 12 units in apartment buildings with 3-19 units + 78 units in apartment buildings with more than 20 units. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 -PAGE 9 OF 118 bm Therefore as of January 1, 2008, Crystal is estimated to have 9,660 housing units: ■ 7,252 (75.1%) were single family detached (houses) L, ■ 322 (3.3%) were single family attached (townhouses) ■ 143 (1.5%) were in two family (duplexes) ■ 547 (5.7%) were in buildings with 3-19 units L. ■ 1,396 (14.5%) were in buildings with more than 20 units The growth rate was much stronger in 2000-2002 due to completion of two privately -initiated projects: A 78 unit assisted living building at 3000 Douglas Drive and a 40 unit townhouse development at 47xx Adair Avenue and Adair Court. The growth rate slowed after 2002 and there was actually a net loss in housing units during 2007 due to demolition of three 4-plexes. In terms of housing unit occupancy, Census 2000 indicated that Crystal had a 99% occupancy rate, with 9,389 occupied housing units. Of these, 7,286 (78.6%) were owner occupied and 2,103 (22.4%) were ... renter occupied. The state average was 75% owner/25% renter; the U.S. average was 66% owner/34% renter. Among detached single family houses, Hennepin County Assessor data indicate that the percentage of rentals in Crystal was 2.2% in 1998 and 2002, 3.3% in 2004 and 5.0% in 2007. The share of existing single family houses that are renter occupied will probably continue to increase over time, as will the share of total housing units that are renter occupied. This is typical for fully developed communities like Crystal. In terms of existing owner occupied housing that is converting to rental occupancy, over the past 10 years the shift of single family houses towards rental occupancy has averaged just under 0.3% per year. If this trend continues, and absent the development of new rental housing, the city's housing units would be approximately 71% owner occupied and 29% renter occupied by 2030 (the end of the planning period), compared with 78% and 22% in 2000. In terms of population, Crystal's peak census year was 1970. The decrease in the average number of persons per household ("Persons/HH" below) is the reason for the city's population decline since 1970. This has been occurring in most fully developed communities. In Crystal's case, these trends appear to be leveling out: Metropolitan Council's most recent estimate of average household size was 2.34 persons per household as of April 2007. TABLE C-1 CENSUS DATA SUMMARY YEAR HOUSEHOLDS PERSONS/HH 1950 1,591 3.59 1960 5,922 4.10 1970 8,313 3.72 1980 8,994 2.84 1990 9,292 2.56 2000 9,389 2.39 POPULATION 5,713 24,280 30,925 25,543 23,788 22,848 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 10 OF 118 CHAPTER D METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FORECASTS Metropolitan Council has forecasted the change in population, households and employment for each planning jurisdiction in the region through 2030. Their forecasts for the region, each county, and each municipality in Hennepin County are summarized below. Please note that the city has prepared its own forecasts which reflect a more conservative view of the potential pace of redevelopment in the city between now and 2030. This will be discussed further in Chapter E. TABLE D-1 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FORECASTS 2030 Regional Development Framework - Revised Forecasts as of January 9, 2008 = Forecasts revised by Council action in 2006 (pt) denotes part of a city, remainder of city is in neighboring county = Forecasts revised by Council action in 2007 All other forecasts approved by Council actions, January 14, 2004, and August 24, 2005 POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS EMPLOYMENT 2000 2010 2020 2030 2000 2010 2020 2030 2000 2010 2020 2030 ANOKA COUNTY 298,084 362,170 407,710 425,260 106,428 136,370 157,760 168,690 110,050 127,050 141,730 153,810 CARVER COUNTY 70,205 110,740 163,830 195,400 24,356 41,780 62,680 76,180 28,740 39,860 51,540 59,080 DAKOTA COUNTY 355,904 429,160 488,750 520,010 131,151 164,290 193,390 209,400 154,242 179,710 199,540 214,350 Bloomington 85,172 87,500 90,500 93,000 36,400 37,700 39,200 40,000 104,548 118,600 126,200 137,500 Brooklyn Center 29,172 29,500 30,500 29,500 11,430 11,800 12,200 12,100 16,698 18,200 18,600 19,000 Brooklyn Park 67,388 74,500 80,500 85,000 24,432 28,400 32,000 35,000 23,692 26,900 29,100 32,000 Champlin 22,193 23,700 24,500 25,800 7,425 8,500 9,200 10,000 2,734 3,700 5,100 6,200 Chanhassen (pt) Corcoran 0 5,630 0 11,600 0 19,900 0 24,600 0 1,784 0 4,000 0 7,000 0 8,500 979 1,792 1,700 1,700 1,700 Crystal 22,698 2,2,700 22,W 23,500 9,388 9,700 10,100 10,500 5,638 4,000 6400 6,500 7,300 7,200 8,100 Dayton (pt) 4,693 5,600 20,100 28,700 1,546 2,000 7,800 11,000 1,057 3,900 5,800 6,900 Deephaven 3,853 3,900 3,900 3.900 1,373 1,450 1,500 1,500 1,021 1,000 1,100 1,200 Eden Prairie 54,901 61,200 62,500 63,000 20,457 24,200 25,500 26,500 51,006 55,000 62,000 65,000 Edina 47,425 49,000 50,000 51,500 20,996 21,600 22,000 22,500 52,991 57,100 60,000 62,400 Excelsior 2,393 2,500 2,700 2,800 1,199 1,250 1,330 1,400 1,823 1,980 2,250 2,450 Fort Snelling (unorg.) 442 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35,526 36,400 37,200 37,900 Golden Valley 20,281 22,700 23,000 24,000 8,449 9,000 9,200 9,600 30,142 31,700 33,100 34,500 Greenfield 2,544 3,190 4,050 4,300 817 1,000 1,300 1,600 337 1,240 2,000 2,700 Greenwood 729 760 770 780 285 320 330 330 161 220 230 250 Hanover (pt) 332 410 510 630 113 150 200 250 86 60 70 80 Hassan Twp." 2,463 4,580 6,100 4,500 778 1,600 2,100 1,600 721 3,050 4,850 0 Hopkins 17,367 17,900 18,600 18,900 8,359 8,500 8,800 9,000 11,979 13,600 14,800 16,300 Independence 3,236 4,000 4,480 4,900 1,088 1,380 1,600 1,800 169 160 160 170 Long Lake 1,842 2,100 2,250 2,450 756 900 1,000 1,100 2,510 2,600 2,700 2,700 Loretto 570 690 700 700 225 280 290 300 661 280 300 350 Maple Grove" 50,365 64,500 75,700 84,000 17,532 24,900 30.300 34,000 18,309 32.800 42,900 45.900 Maple Plain 2,088 2,550 2,570 2,600 770 920 950 1,000 1,792 2,350 2,800 3,300 Medicine Lake 368 420 440 470 159 180 190 200 10 60 70 70 Medina 4,005 5,800 9,200 12,700 1,309 2,100 3,240 4,450 3,254 5,500 6,700 7,900 Minneapolis 382,747 402,000 423,000 435,000 162,352 172,000 181,000 187,000 308,127 317,000 332,500 346,500 Minnetonka 51,102 51,500 51,500 53,500 21,267 22,300 23,100 24,000 51,276 53,800 56,000 58,600 Minnetonka Beach 614 640 660 660 215 240 240 240 201 210 210 210 Minnetrista' 4,358 6,600 9,400 13,300 1,505 2,450 3,750 5,300 379 820 1,150 1,330 Mound 9,435 10,400 11,000 11,400 3,982 4,350 4,600 4,800 1,811 1,860 2,020 2,170 New Hope' 20,873 22,200 23,000 23,500 8,665 9,300 9,800 10,200 13,565 13,900 14,500 15,100 Orono 7,538 8,300 9,500 9,800 2,766 3,200 3,950 4,100 1,110 1,230 1,420 1,500 Osseo 2,434 2,600 2,850 3,300 1,035 1,100 1,200 1,400 2,312 2,700 2,950 3,050 Plymouth 65,894 73,000 76,000 78,500 24,820 29,000 31,500 33,500 53,491 59,900 63,400 64,500 Richfield' 34,310 38,300 42,700 47,100 15,073 16,700 18,600 20,500 11,762 17,100 17,600 18,100 Robbinsdale 14,123 15,200 16,600 16,500 6,097 6,500 7,000 7,000 7,109 8,100 8,800 9,600 Rockford (pt) 144 240 470 700 57 100 200 300 384 680 740 840 Rogers 3,588 13,000 14,400 24,200 1,195 4,700 5,200 9,000 4,693 6,000 7,100 15,500 St. Anthony (pt) 5,664 5,900 6,200 6,600 2,402 2,400 2,600 2,800 1,992 2,650 3,100 3,400 St. Bonifacius 1,873 2,850 2,750 2,900 681 1,100 1,100 1,200 436 520 600 700 St. Louis Park 44,102 47,000 49,300 51,500 20,773 22,000 23,000 24,000 40,696 46,200 50,500 52,500 Shorewood' 7,400 7,850 8,000 8,100 2,529 2,750 2,870 2,960 782 990 1,160 1,180 Spring Park 1,717 1,850 2,000 2,100 930 1,000 1,080 1,130 1,028 1,330 1,690 1,800 Tonka Bay 1,547 1,800 1,800 1,800 614 750 760 780 266 200 240 280 Wayzata 4,113 4,300 4,500 4,700 1,929 2,100 2,200 2,200 6,268 6,200 6,400 6,600 Woodland 480 500 530 510 173 180 200 200 22 0 0 0 HENNEPIN COUNTY 1,116,206 1,217,330 1,312,430 1,387,900 456,131 506,050 551,280 586,840 877,346 970,090 1,045,610 1,105,230 RAMSEY COUNTY 511,035 547,700 571,260 600,500 201,236 219,170 231,820 246,940 333,305 372,630 405,030 430,090 SCOTT COUNTY 89,498 146,340 186,800 221,770 30,692 53,610 71,800 86,990 34,931 42,310 49,730 56,190 WASHINGTON COUNTY 201,130 258,542 316,083 365,590 71,462 97,749 122,764 145,527 67,649 88,060 110,740 129,700 METRO AREA TOTAL 2,642,062 3,005,000 3,334,000 3,608,000 1,021,456 1,198,000 1,362,000 1,492,000 1,606,263 1,816,000 1,990,000 2,126,000 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 11 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 12 OF 118 CHAPTER E CITY FORECASTS EMPLOYMENT The Metropolitan Council forecasts a net gain of 962 jobs during 2000-2010, another 700 during 2010- 2020 and 800 during 2020-2030, for a total net gain of 2,462 jobs in Crystal during 2000-2030. Metropolitan Council forecasts were developed prior to major changes to the state's eminent domain laws in 2006. Cities now have much less legal authority to facilitate redevelopment than in the years prior to 2006. This means that, even if a redevelopment project yielding more employment is (1) financially feasible, (2) appropriate for its physical setting, and (3) supported by the local elected officials and the broader community, the city would in many cases not have the authority to make such a project happen if one or more of the current property owners within the redevelopment site are unwilling to sell. The Metropolitan Council forecasts are not realistically achievable in this new legal environment. The city has prepared a more realistic forecast based on city staff knowledge and experience regarding potential job -creating redevelopment opportunities in the city, subject to the legal, financial and time constraints which limit the pace of such redevelopment even if there would be unlimited market demand. The city's forecast is for a net gain of 310 jobs during each decade, for a total net gain of 930 jobs during 2000-2030. TABLE E-1 EMPLOYMENT FORECAST EMPLOYMENT 2000 2010 2020 2030 CITY FORECAST 5,638 5,948 6,258 6,568 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FORECAST 5,638 6,600 7,300 8,100 FIGURE E-1 EMPLOYMENT FORECAST 9,000 8,000 ^ 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 ^ 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 .. EMPLOYMENT CITY FORECAST METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FORECAST YEAR (as of January 1st) 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 13 OF 118 HOUSING UNITS The Metropolitan Council forecasts a net gain of 316 housing units* during 2000-2010, another 404 during 2010-2020 and 404 during 2020-2030, for a total net gain of 1,124 during 2000-2030. * Met Council's forecasts are for households (occupied housing units), not total housing units. Housing units are more applicable to the policy issues addressed by the Comprehensive Plan. The Met Council and U.S. Census show the number of households in 2000 as 9,389, which is 1 % less than the number of housing units identified by the U.S. Census. For consistency, we have added 1 % to Met Council's households forecast to arrive at a forecast for number of housing units. As with employment, Metropolitan Council's housing forecasts were developed prior to major changes to the state's eminent domain laws in 2006. Cities now have much less legal authority to facilitate redevelopment than in the years prior to 2006. The Metropolitan Council forecasts are not realistically achievable in this new legal environment. The city has prepared a more realistic forecast based on an average of actual redevelopment pace during the past eight years, which probably represent a more realistic pace for a city like Crystal to add housing units. The city's forecast is for a net gain of 224 housing units during each decade, for a total net gain of 672 housing units during 2000-2030. TART .F. F.-2 1401 TSTNCT i TNTTS FORF,CAST HOUSING UNITS 2000 2008 2010 2020 2030 ACTUAL (US Census 2000; building permit 9,481 9,660 data through Dec. 31, 2007) CITY FORECAST 9,481 9,660 9,705 9,929 10,152 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FORECAST (Forecast is for Households; Housing Units 9,481 9,734 9,797 10,201 10,605 are imputed by adding 1 % vacancy factor FIGURE E-2 HOUSING UNITS FORECAST 10,600 10,400 10,200 10,000 9,800 9,600 9,400 9,200 9,000 8,800 NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS ♦ ACTUAL (through Jan. 1, 2008) - CITY FORECAST METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FORECAST YEAR (as of January 1st) 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 14 OF 118 ■.- L POPULATION Crystal's 2000 population was 22,848. For the purposes of this plan it is anticipated to be essentially stable through 2030. Population is tied to housing by three factors: Number of housing units, number of households (housing units that are occupied), and the average number of people in each household. The Metropolitan Council forecasts are for 22,700 people in 2010, 22,800 in 2020 and 23,500 in 2030. However, their population forecasts are based on what the city believes is Metropolitan Council's unrealistic forecast for growth in the number of housing units. The city's population forecast is based on our more conservative housing unit forecast but uses Metropolitan Council's forecasts for the average number of persons per household. The city forecasts a population of 22,500 in 2010, 22,200 in 2020 and 22,500 in 2030. It is important to note that Metropolitan Council's most recent estimate of Crystal's population is 22,138 as of April 2007, which seems to support the city's more conservative forecast. TABLE E-3 POPULATION FORF,CAST POPULATION 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 ACTUAL (US Census) 25,643 23,788 22,698 CITY FORECAST (based on city's forecast for housing units) 22,698 22,483 22,215 22,513 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FORECAST 22,698 22,700 22,800 23,500 FIGURE E-3 POPULATION FORECAST POPULATION ♦ACTUAL (US Census) - - - CITY FORECAST (based on realistic housing forecast) METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FORECAST 26,000 _ 25,000 24,000 23,000 22,000 l 21,000 20,000 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 YEAR 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 15 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 -PAGE 16 OF 118 LAND USE CHAPTER F LAND USE CHAPTER G HOUSING CHAPTER H REDEVELOPMENT 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 17 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 18 OF 118 CHAPTER F LAND USE CHAPTER OVERVIEW The Land Use chapter's main component is the Future Land Use Map, which is the primary basis for the city's zoning map. In this chapter, the current version of the Future Land Use Map is contrasted with the new version proposed by the Task Force. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES A. For most property in the city, the proposed new Future Land Use map would not differ dramatically from the one currently in effect. It is also generally consistent with the existing zoning map. B. However properties are guided on the Future Land Use Map, existing lawful uses may continue indefinitely ("grandfathered in"). C. The Future Land Use Map does not try to anticipate specific new uses upon redevelopment. Instead, more specific master planning for each redevelopment area would occur if an actual project emerges. If necessary, specific amendments to the Future Land Use Map would be considered at that time. _ D. Areas used for institutional, park or other similar uses will be shown as a hybrid of their existing use and the appropriate future use in case they are ever redeveloped. This will assist the city in determining the appropriate zoning classification for these properties. E. Two of the current plan's mixed use areas ("West Broadway -Highway 81" and "Town Center") would be supplanted by land use guidance more consistent with current uses and realistic near-term redevelopment potential. F. All residential parcels along Bass Lake Road east of Bottineau Boulevard will be guided Low — Density Residential. G. Commercial uses east of the VFW on Bass Lake Road would be guided LDR. H. Areas along Douglas Drive and Highway 100 from 36th south to the Golden Valley border are shown in a manner consistent with the outcome of the corridor task forces that have looked at those areas during the past several years, with one exception: The excess MnDOT parcel at the northwest corner of Hwy 100 and 36th Avenue, presently guided for Medium Density Residential, would instead be guided for neighborhood commercial. — — 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 19 OF 118 TABLE F -I FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES AND ACREAGES - BASED ON THE CURRENT VERSION OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP <<<RESERVED>>> TO BE ADDED LATER 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 20 OF 118 TABLE F-2 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES AND ACREAGES - BASED ON THE PROPOSED NEW VERSION OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP <<<RESERVED>>> TO BE ADDED LATER 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 21 OF 118 FIGURE F-1 Northwest Quadrant 2000 0 Airport GC ® HDR �I LD R LDR/Park NORTHWEST QUADRANT: FUTURE LAND USE MAP CURRENT VERSION MDR ,eMU-Town Center MU-WB/81 0 NC Park ® RAIL - PUBLIC -INSTITUTIONAL 0 MNDOT-HWY 100 LAND 0 Other Undev (LDR) Low Density Residential A 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 Miles 62ND AVE I f )" -, , 60TH AV E %%k9TH AVE 58TH AVE W DC cn a 53RD AVE 51c CORVALLIS W p � O FAIRVIEW N a a a g AVE cn 5 45TH AVE 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 22 OF 118 FIGURE F-2 NORTHWEST QUADRANT: FUTURE LAND USE MAP PROPOSED NEW VERSION w w H cn 2008 LOW DENSITY RESID. MEDIUM DENSITY RESID. HIGH DENSITY RESID. 0 NEIGHBORHOOD COMM. 0 GENERAL COMMERCIAL 0 INDUSTRIAL 0 AIRPORT (LDR) Park - PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL - RAIL Other Undev (1) 0 Other Undev (LDR) - Public -Inst (GC) - Public -Inst (HDR) ® Public -Inst (LDR) Public -Inst (Park) 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 Miles P� 58TH AVE 62ND AVE 60TH AVE 53RD AVE CORVALLIS w OC FAIRVIEW cna Q a AVE A W O J w 0 2-10 O 9, I c e 45TH AVE mm 5V 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 23 OF 118 FIGURE F-3 NORTHEAST QUADRANT: FUTURE LAND USE MAP CURRENT VERSION Northeast Quadrant 60TH AVF— "KI 58TH AVE 2000 Airport GC HDR LD R 0 LDR/Park MDR 0 MU -Town Center 0 MU-WB/81 NC Park RAIL PUBLIC -INSTITUTIONAL 0 MNDOT-HWY 100 LAND 0 Other Undev (LDR) Low Density Residential N A 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 Miles 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 24 OF 118 FIGURE F-4 NORTHEAST QUADRANT: FUTURE LAND USE MAP PROPOSED NEW VERSION 58TH AVE lu Z4 0 v ir 0 2008 WILSHRE BLVD LOW DENSITY RESID. <MEDIUM DENSITY RESID '40 �„ HIGH DENSITY RESID. KIM G a a e� ' 0 0 HBORHOOD COMM. GENERAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL AIRPORT (LDR) Park - PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL RAIL 0 Other Undev (1) 0 Other Undev (LDR) Public -Inst (GC) -' Public -Inst (HDR) Public -Inst (LDR) Public -Inst (Park) 47TH AVE A 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 Miles 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 25 OF 118 FIGURE F-5 SOUTHWEST QUADRANT: FUTURE LAND USE MAP CURRENT VERSION 2000 = Airport ®HDR �I LD R ® LDR/Park MDR „..,A MU -Town Center MU-WB/81 0 NC Park RAIL PUBLIC -INSTITUTIONAL 0 MNDOT-HWY 100 LAND 0 Other Undev (LDR) Low Density Residential z 0 Y F1 Southwest Quad rant Ir I GC a a 38TH AV E'Pr MAVE ❑ a °a 1 w =O z ®® J 34TH AVE, LU ..®. z _ a a I mv 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 Miles C 30TH AVE - 27TH AVE \ 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 26 OF 118 FIGURE F-6 m SOUTHWEST QUADRANT: FUTURE LAND USE MAP PROPOSED NEW VERSION LOW DENSITY RESID. 0 MEDIUM DENSITY RESID. 0 HIGH DENSITY RESID. 0 NEIGHBORHOOD COMM. 0 GENERAL COMMERCIAL [] INDUSTRIAL 0 AIRPORT (LDR) ® Park - PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL RAIL 0 Other Undev (1) [_] Other Undev (LDR) ® Public -Inst (GC) Public -Inst (HDR) �; Public -Inst (LDR) = Public -Inst (Park) Z Y Fl i Southwest Y Quad •.,y 45TH AVE 42ND AVE 91 AVE a Y LU z Q is 38TH AV Efm- 0 34TH AVE w Amcn a 30TH AVE' 0.25 0.5 0.75 27T I H 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 27 OF 118 FIGURE F-7 SOUTHEAST QUADRANT: FUTURE LAND USE MAP CURRENT VERSION FAIR Magnet School LU 2 O U J w F 2000 0 Airport GC HDR _ I LD R LDR/Park 0 MDR yr MU -Town Center - MU-WB/81 0 NC Park RAIL PUBLIC -INSTITUTIONAL 0 MNDOT-HWY 100 LAND Other Undev (LDR) Low Density Residential 36TH AVE EP 36TH AVE Ow M ■t J APOQ 34TH AVE � � Z 34TH AVE 32ND AVE m N A Southeast 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 Miles Quadrant 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 28 OF 118 FIGURE F-8 SOUTHEAST QUADRANT: FUTURE LAND USE MAP PROPOSED NEW VERSION El 4ND m [:?q AVE _ I Q i Magnet �—ff I 36TH AVE 34TH AVE 32ND AV WIZ Lpum 0 w O J w 36TH AVE k7W leon m �� w O cc Z 34TH AVE 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 Miles 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 29 OF 118 LOW DENSITY RESID. 0 MEDIUM DENSITY RESID. HIGH DENSITY RESID. NEIGHBORHOOD COMM. U 0 GENERAL COMMERCIAL w INDUSTRIAL 2� 0 AIRPORT (LDR) ® Park - PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL RAIL 0 Other Undev (1) 0 Other Undev (LDR) Public -Inst (GC) Public -Inst (HDR) Public -Inst (LDR) ® Public -Inst (Park) Lpum 0 w O J w 36TH AVE k7W leon m �� w O cc Z 34TH AVE 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 Miles 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 29 OF 118 PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED (Comments presented as written, without correction.) COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #1 (November 15,2007): • 391h Douglas Drive? Concerned about Frank Gaulkes property — Houses — Apts — Commercial Zoning ETC. Traffic Etc. i • If and when property is developed by sound wall behind Welcome or 32"d to 30th, I hope mistake of L, townhomes on 32"d off Douglas will not be repeated. • I am unhappy with townhouses at 32"d off Douglas Drive. I think they should have faced south toward green area with garages on 32nd. They have not sold well and I think design was not the best for the area. • I do have a specific concern about my particular neighborhood — hence the 4 red dots on 36th and Welcome! The vacant lot on the north east corner of the intersection is still zoned medium density, despite requests at the meeting to make it low density. We have lived here many years and tolerated all the construction without complaint. We now live on a corner, we're not too happy about that. We'd like to see houses next door, not townhouses and certainly not an apartment building! We could have lived elsewhere if we wanted that. Crystal is a nice cozy neighborhood, we'd like that to ►- continue so we can continue to live here. Thank you! • No additional high density or medium density housing in Crystal! NO — NO — NO I read the Comp. Plan Udate over and over and I repeatedly see medium and high density housing suggested. The more of this type of housing that is allowed in the city the higher the crime rate will be. This is a fact. Single Family residential breeds community! • In a number of areas there was mention of possible high density housing. I am very concerned about what affect high density housing can have on a city. Please look at the problems in Brooklyn Center and especially in Brooklyn Park before bringing more of this type of housing to Crystal. COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #2 (April 17,2008): • Crystal would be even better, if it would divest itself of the high density housing. COMMENTS RECEIVED VIA EMAIL: • November 27, 2007: Please consider the impact that building more townhouses or closer built homes has on the need to have more police, sometimes people just do not get along in closer quarters. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 30 OF 118 CHAPTER G HOUSING CHAPTER OVERVIEW The Housing chapter describes the current housing types found in the city and forecasts changes in the number of housing units and population for the planning period (through 2030). It also contains the city's goals and policies related to housing preservation and new development. The 1997 housing market study that was included in the 2000 Comprehensive Plan probably overstated the city's power to effect change in a market that is largely driven by regional and national economic and demographic trends far beyond the city's control. For this reason, this updated plan does not attempt to forecast market demand for specific types or styles of housing. Instead, this plan contains goals and policies designed to preserve the bulk of the city's existing, relatively affordable housing stock while encouraging development of additional housing to meet needs not addressed by the city's existing housing stock. GOALS 1. Preserve most of the city's existing single family detached houses. 75% of the city's housing units are detached single family houses, and these are relatively affordable when compared to houses in other suburbs in the Twin Cities metropolitan region. The vast majority of the city's existing houses will remain, so preservation is critically important. Preservation activities may include not only repairs and maintenance but also major renovations and additions that significantly transform and update an existing house. _ 2. Preserve most of the city's other housing types, such as townhouses, duplexes and apartments, and also seek opportunities to eliminate blighted, structurally substandard, functionally obsolete or lawfully nonconforming properties. 3. Increase the availability of new housing of the type currently underrepresented in Crystal's housing stock, such as move -up single family houses and senior independent living rental or co- op units. This goal recognizes that redevelopment will be controlled and limited by market demand, physical constraints, financial and political realities, and a limited legal environment for the use of eminent domain authority. POLICIES 1. Continue participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act, including compliance with the 1995 housing goals agreement. Crystal is already meeting the goals contained within that agreement, except for the goal for a 75% owner/ 25% renter mix which will likely be met in due course with the gradual, market-based transition of some of the city's existing single family houses from owner occupancy to renter occupancy. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 31 OF 118 2. Use regulatory tools to protect life and property, and to preserve the existing housing stock. Regulatory tools to be used include: ■ Housing maintenance compliance inspections prior to sale, including requiring either the seller (prior to closing) or the buyer (after closing) to complete repair orders issued by the city. (Current ongoing program.) ■ Rental licensing and inspections for all property in the city occupied by someone other than ` the owner. (Current ongoing program.) ■ General code enforcement activities to promote community maintenance and upkeep including enforcement actions necessary to gain compliance with city code. (Current ongoing program.) 3. Provide incentives for preservation of the vast majority of the city's existing single family detached houses, and expand such programs and incentives to the extent funding allows. Specific city -funded programs to be used include: ■ Housing Resource Center, a clearing house for technical and financial assistance related to home improvements. (Current ongoing program.) ■ Home Improvement Incentive Rebates available to both low and middle income households. (Current ongoing program.) — ■ Deferred Home Improvement Loans for low income households. (Current ongoing program.) ■ Use available increment from existing TIF districts to provide additional funding for affordable housing activities, mainly preservation of existing houses. (Possible new programs -- being developed at this time.) 4. Acquire blighted, structurally substandard and functionally obsolete residential property for demolition and replacement with new, move -up houses in accordance with EDA budget parameters, market conditions and other factors. (Current ongoing program.) 5. Work with developers to incorporate the construction of new housing consistent with the city's housing goals into redevelopment projects as appropriate for the physical setting of the redevelopment site. 6. As motor fuel prices and roadway congestion continue to increase, promote Crystal's locational advantage as a first ring suburban community, including its relative proximity to employment concentrations, activity centers and regional attractions. PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED (Comments presented as written, without correction.) COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #1 (November 15,2007): • No more High density Housing We can't even fill the ones we Have now and they drive other Housing prices down creates a bad naberhood. This applies to ALL areas of Crystal where you want high density housing. • I live on Jersey Ave between Kentucky +41. There are 3 vacant houses on the "odd" side. If the city buys them will they be building a "LARGE" house in place of the ramblers. [The whole street is _ mostly ramblers + relatively modest 2 stories] 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 32 OF 118 • Please — No more huge multi-level homes in neighborhoods with smaller ramblers. It devalues smaller ramblers & destroys any views from ramblers!!! • To preserve Wonderful Crystal, city leaders should promote owner -occupied housing. This would promote safety, zero to low crime, pride in our community! COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #2 (April 17,2008): • Please re -think the idea that you need to put 2 houses on every open lot. These lot sizes are then too small. It is also good to have some open space. We have enough buildings already. • All areas where high & medium density housing is mentioned — NO MORE! Keep Crystal owner occupied single family houses. Enforce codes for landlords — make them keep up their properties. • [Redevelopment Area #6] — How about incentives to Thriftway to maintain & update the store? We need grocery stores in the area — seniors live nearby. We need to shop close to home! Gas prices & global warming and all that. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 33 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 34 OF 118 CHAPTER H REDEVELOPMENT CHAPTER OVERVIEW The Redevelopment chapter identifies 22 areas of the city in which there is a significant potential for redevelopment to occur within the time frame of this plan (by 2030). The Task Force is not necessarily advocating redevelopment of these areas. Rather, the Task Force believes that there is strong potential for redevelopment to occur in any number of these 22 areas due to natural market forces, the city's desire to replace blighted or functionally obsolete land uses, or a combination of both. GENERAL REDEVELOPMENT GOALS 1. There are 22 areas of the city where redevelopment is likely to be considered at some point in the future. The identification of these areas does not mean that it is definite that redevelopment would occur within the 20 year time frame of this plan. Depending on the specific site characteristics and market forces at the time of redevelopment, the physical extent of redevelopment activities may be greater or less than the area shown in this plan. Key parcels have been identified that appear to be most likely to trigger redevelopment in each area, but they are not absolutely essential for redevelopment to occur in most of the 22 areas. Areas not indicated as potential redevelopment areas in this plan would not be precluded from being _ redeveloped; this plan describes those areas where redevelopment is most likely to occur but does not limit redevelopment opportunities for those areas. 2. Community reaction to redevelopment often revolves around opposition to density, especially residential density. Many of the descriptions of the 22 potential redevelopment areas indicate that the likely new use would be medium or high density residential. More than anything, this is a function of the cost of redevelopment, in that the new use must be of higher density for the project to be financially feasible. Each project would have to be examined on its own merits and with due consideration to the characteristics of the surrounding area and community input. It may be that in many of these areas higher densities may not be politically supported, and in such cases the existing uses are likely to remain basically as -is for the foreseeable future. _ 3. Redevelopment projects may be completely privately financed, or receive some assistance from the city and its Economic Development Authority, or in rare cases be initiated by the city with the EDA as the developer. However, as a practical matter it is unlikely that many of the 22 areas could be significantly redeveloped without financial assistance in some form. Such assistance may take the form of Tax Increment Financing, Tax Abatement, Housing Tax Credits, grants from other units of government, or other funding sources. Each request for financial assistance will be evaluated in accordance with the policies and procedures governing each respective funding source. 4. Due to a combination of market realities, financial constraints, limited eminent domain powers and community concerns about density, traffic, change in general and other issues, it would be unrealistic to expect that all or even a majority of the 22 areas described in this chapter will be 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 35 OF 118 redeveloped within the 20 year time frame. Instead, this plan should be viewed as a menu from which citizens, developers, the Planning Commission, the EDA and the City Council may compare and contrast various redevelopment opportunities within the city, and select the best 1 60 project sites from among the 22 areas described in this chapter. 5. Redevelopment projects may trigger, or be triggered by, adjacent public improvements such as roadway reconstruction, water and sewer upgrades, streetscaping, etc. In cases where near-term public improvements are being considered in a potential redevelopment area, but no redevelopment project is imminent, due consideration will be given to the impact of said improvements on the future redevelopment potential of the area. DESCRIPTIONS OF SPECIFIC POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT AREAS Area #1- Lakeland Avenue from 60th to 62nd. This area is identified as a potential redevelopment area in the current Comprehensive Plan. Existing uses include auto -oriented commercial and single family residential. The residential parcels along Lakeland Avenue are relatively deep and the houses are generally in fair to poor condition. The right -in and right -out accesses at 60th and 62nd Avenues will be eliminated upon reconstruction of Bottineau Boulevard. The best post -redevelopment uses would be light industrial, destination office/showroom, office/warehouse, but not residential uses or general retail/service uses. The site design of any redevelopment would need to be sensitive to the residential. area directly to the east. Area #2 - Crystal Airport. The Crystal Airport is one of six "reliever" airports owned & operated by ti- the Metropolitan Airports Commission ("MAC"). Closure and redevelopment of the Crystal Airport site are preferred under the current Comprehensive Plan, mainly due to safety concerns (hundreds of housing units in the safety zones) and little local benefit from the facility. MAC is currently considering a Long �- Term Comprehensive Plan ("LTCP") for the facility by which it would eliminate two of the four runways (one primary and one crosswind) and attempt to redevelop a small share of the site for as -yet - undetermined non -aviation purposes. MAC has not indicated that they intend to close the facility, but the type of aviation using this airport is in decline, regionally and nationally. At any point in the future, it is conceivable that MAC would determine that the continued operation of the Crystal Airport is no longer warranted. The 436 acre airport site (336 in Crystal) offers the greatest opportunity in the — northwest suburbs and along the Bottineau transit corridor for significant infill development including new employment centers and housing. For this reason the entire airport site remains a potential redevelopment area. Area #3 - Lakeland Avenue from 56th to 58th. This area is identified as a potential redevelopment area in the current Comprehensive Plan. Existing uses are mostly commercial including the former Crystal- Pierz Marine. There will be impacts from the Bottineau Boulevard reconstruction project due to elimination of the existing frontage road and construction of a new "backage" road which will form the approximate border between non-residential uses along Bottineau Boulevard and the residential uses to the east. The right -in and right -out access to Bottineau Boulevard at 58th Avenue / Airport Road will remain but it will be reconfigured to improve safety and traffic flow. This area would not be quite as — isolated as Area #1, and therefore it might also be able to accommodate some destination retail or office uses. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 36 OF 118 Area #4 - Bass Lake Road east of Bottineau Boulevard (56th Avenue from Zane to Orchard). This corridor contains a mixture of neighborhood commercial, small multi -family and single family residential uses. Single family residential uses along the roadway have been negatively impacted by traffic and lack of buffering, although the recent restriping to three lanes may help reduce these impacts. Commercial uses face challenges due to the out-of-the-way character of this roadway segment and lack of critical mass. The existing multi -family uses are small and scattered, and generally suffer from disinvestment. Any significant redevelopment would likely require a significant amendment to the Future Land Use map. Area #5 - 59xx West Broadway. This area consists of six apartment buildings and a liquor store on West Broadway, plus four houses on 601h Avenue (one of which is in New Hope). This area is embedded is an overwhelmingly residential area, so non-residential uses would probably not be good fit except perhaps for certain institutional uses such as churches, schools or care facilities. The area already has a relatively high number of dwelling units, so for redevelopment to be feasible it would probably have to be of a much higher overall density than presently exists. For this reason, the most likely outcome is preservation of the existing uses in more or less their current configuration by continuing to apply the city's regulatory tools to ensure maintenance of the existing apartment buildings. Area #6 - 57xx West Broadway. The dominant property in this area is the Thriftway grocery store, which due to its relatively large parcel size would be essential to redevelopment of the block. The current uses may continue for the foreseeable future, depending on market conditions. However, because this area is also starting to exhibit some signs of disinvestment and marginal uses, and because it comprises a transition from the Crystal Shopping Center to surrounding residential areas, it would be a strong candidate for redevelopment at some point in the future if current trends continue. If redevelopment does occur, the most likely uses would be medium or high density residential or destination office/retail. Area #7 - 6xxx 56th (Bass Lake Road). This area consists of older strip shopping centers on separate parcels with different owners. It also includes some newer retail development at northeast corner of 56th and Elmhurst. This area exhibits signs of disinvestment and functional obsolescence, but redevelopment may not be likely because (1) it has very limited depth, and (2) it has a high ratio of buildings to land area. If redevelopment were to occur, this area would be a good location for a mixed-use development with multi -story residential above ground floor retail/office. Area #8 - Hanson Court area. This area is identified as a potential redevelopment area in the current Comprehensive Plan. It consists mostly of small light industrial uses with some auto -oriented uses mixed in. Its layout and access points can be somewhat confusing due to adjacent railroad lines and other factors. Its maximum potential level of redevelopment would probably depend on whether the BNSF rail line (running generally parallel to Bottineau Boulevard) is abandoned. Another potentially transformational event would be construction of a connector road from the intersection of Douglas Drive and West Broadway to the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Bottineau Boulevard. Such a roadway would probably only be considered upon BNSF abandonment. Until then, redevelopment will occur on a -, smaller scale with a focus on the most problematic uses. Area #9 - West Broadway & Douglas Drive south of Target: This area is identified as a potential redevelopment area in the current Comprehensive Plan. It consists of mostly small commercial uses, some auto -oriented, that back up to single family residential uses. Many of existing business uses function reasonably well with the adjacent residential uses, but others can be problematic due not only to 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 37 OF 118 site constraints but also noise and other "good neighbor" issues. The scale of redevelopment would be somewhat limited due to small size of the sites. Area #10 - CPRR property & adjacent non-residential uses. This area is identified as a potential redevelopment area in the current Comprehensive Plan. It presently contains some lawfully nonconforming industrial uses and is zoned R-1. Until 2006, this area had been guided for park uses, but L changes in the state's nonconforming use law and consideration of the cost to acquire the property made that approach unrealistic. A Special Area Plan was adopted in 2006 and is included in Chapter 4(Land Use) of this Comprehensive Plan. The Special Area Plan includes guidelines for redevelopment of this area that would need to be met for it to be rezoned from residential to industrial or commercial. In the meantime, the existing uses are lawfully nonconforming and may continue but may not be expanded. ft - Area #11 - Florida Avenue south of 51" Place. This area consists of some vacant lots plus `excess' parts of other lots that have houses on them but have extra land that could be split off and incorporated into a redevelopment site. It is guided for Low Density Residential and the only likely use would be as an infill site for new single family houses. Redevelopment would be a challenge due to fragmented property ownership. The city's EDA could take a leading role in assembling the property for development, but this must be weighed against the other priorities of the EDA at any given time. It is .. quite possible that this potential infill site will remain in more or less its current configuration for the foreseeable future. Area #12 - Douglas Drive - West Broadway - CPRR Triangle. The current Comprehensive Plan includes this area as part of a larger potential redevelopment area. It is dominated by automobile -related uses with little building relative to their land area. These may evolve `upward' over time due to normal market forces. This area also contains some smaller office, service retail and light industrial uses with a lot of building relative to their land area. Redevelopment would likely be office or higher -finish light industrial given its highly visible location and easy access due to Douglas Drive and West Broadway. Area #13 - Corvallis Avenue west of Bottineau Boulevard. The current Comprehensive Plan includes this area as part of a larger potential redevelopment area. It mainly consists of light industrial uses plus some marginal residences just south of Corvallis. The main part of this area (north of Corvallis) would be ideal for redevelopment into office/showroom, office/warehouse or other light industrial uses. Area #14 - West Broadway south of Corvallis Avenue. The current Comprehensive Plan includes this area as part of a larger potential redevelopment area. There is a wide range of potential uses that would work in this area, depending on the specific site. Redevelopment of this area might be triggered by `- reconstruction of the old rural -style section of West Broadway, because it is possible that the existing S- curve railroad crossing may not be reconstructed in its current configuration. For the past 70 years, West Broadway has been gradually transitioning down from a trunk highway to a county road to (ultimately) a local street; and this transition means that the best land uses in this redevelopment area, especially in the south and southwest portions, will likely be residential not commercial or industrial. Medium or high density residential would likely be feasible in the near term on some of the larger sites such as the _ Crystal Ballroom/former Knights of Columbus property. Area #15 - Town Center (Douglas Drive & 42"d Avenue): This is a slight enlargement of a potential redevelopment area in the current Comp Plan. Existing uses range from very low density residential to retail and commercial. While this area will never be the city's main commercial hub, it is the main civic hub due to the presence of the Hennepin County Library and City Hall, plus the Community Center and 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 38 OF 118 pool just a half mile north. Almsted's grocery store is the retail anchor for the area, and could be incorporated into any redevelopment that occurs if market conditions support continuation of the use. Redevelopment would generally require much higher levels of density, and it is likely that the market preference is mostly for multi -story residential with some ground floor retail and office uses. There could also be some transitional redevelopment including medium and even low density residential in certain locations along the edge of the redevelopment area. Redevelopment would be much more likely to succeed if it occurs concurrent with a similar approach along the adjacent Robbinsdale segment of 42nd Avenue. Further, redevelopment might be triggered by reconstruction of 42nd Avenue by Hennepin County because such a project would probably require some limited property acquisition for right-of- way purposes. While such a project is not in the County's current plans, it is likely that they will at least begin planning for reconstruction of 42nd Avenue within the next 20 years. Area #16 - Douglas Drive, east side from 41St to 391h Avenues. This area could be thought of as a southern extension of Area #15. The Gaulke farm remnant parcels are mostly vacant and ready to develop, so it is more of a pure infill site. However, it might trigger consideration of a wider area redevelopment to tie it all together. The area is currently guided for low density residential uses but medium density might be justified as part of a wider area redevelopment plan. Area #17 - 33rd Avenue west of Nevada Avenue. This is a transition area between residential to the north and east and light industrial to the south and west. It is currently guided light industrial but would also be a logical area for medium density residential such as townhouses. The market could take this property in either direction, but given that the bulk of the city's medium density townhouses are located in the southern part of the city, and the city's need for job -creating development wherever such uses make sense, the preferred development in this area would be light industrial including light manufacturing, office/showroom and office/warehouse. Area #18 - Georgia Avenue north of 32"d Avenue. This is a possible infill site for new single family houses or low density townhomes. The area does have challenges related to fragmented property ownership, wetlands and poor soils. The city's EDA could take a leading role in assembling the property for development, but this must be weighed against the other priorities of the EDA at any given time. It is quite possible that this potential infill site will remain in more or less its current configuration for the foreseeable future. Area #19 - Douglas Drive from 36th to 32"d Avenues. This area is a slight enlargement of a potential redevelopment area in the current Comprehensive Plan. It is covered under a Special Area Plan adopted in 2002 and included in Chapter 4(Land Use) of this Comprehensive Plan. Generally it is guided for medium density residential uses along Douglas Drive, transitioning to low density residential uses in the adjacent neighborhoods. There is some potential for redevelopment along the east side of Douglas Drive, but it would be challenging due to topographic conditions and a need to acquire some houses to assemble an optimally sized site. Redevelopment of the west side, along the unimproved Edgewood Avenue north of 34`h Avenue, is mainly limited by fragmented property ownership but otherwise appears to be a good candidate for infill development. As with Area #18, the city's EDA could take a leading role in assembling the property for development, but this must be weighed against the other priorities of the EDA at any given time. The main difference from area #18 is that the Edgewood area has far fewer challenges and therefore might be expected to develop sooner. ^ Area #20 - Douglas Drive, east side from 32nd to 31" Avenues. This area is a small part of much larger potential redevelopment area in the current Comprehensive Plan. This area has been significantly 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 -PAGE 39 OF 118 reduced in size because much of the rest of the previously -identified area has either been redeveloped for assisted living or townhouses, or has been acquired by the city for park land. Area #20's current uses are three single family houses and one vacant EDA lot. It is guided for medium density residential as a way of making it feasible for a private developer to acquire the properties and redevelop the area without financial assistance. how Area #21- Excess MnDOT property from the Highway 100 project. This area is a slight enlargement of a potential redevelopment area in the current Comprehensive Plan. The property consists of parcels on both sides of the freeway. If all parcels are redeveloped as guided, the estimated yield would be: ■ 6 single family houses on scattered site lots ■ South of 32nd Avenue, 12 units of low density townhomes on a new private drive, or 8 single family houses on a new public street ■ Between 32nd Avenue and the Crystal Care Center, up to 12 units of medium density housing ■ At the northwest quadrant of the 36th Avenue interchange, a small neighborhood commercial site ■ At the southeast quadrant of the 36`h Avenue interchange, a landlocked general commercial site accessible only through the Cub Foods property Area #22 - 36th & Noble. This small area is anchored by former supermarket that has been converted into a thrift store with some smaller tenants. The redevelopment potential is based on the amount of land relative to the existing building on the former supermarket site, and is dependent on what happens with L - the current uses over the long term. If it is redeveloped, it would probably be a difficult site for most retailers but might support some. The most feasible redevelopment might involve medium or high density residential above small-scale ground floor retail/office. 60 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 40 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 41 OF 118 FIGURE H-1 NO POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT AREAS NORTHWEST QUADRANT 62ND AVE 1 60TH "E a �I Y 5 59TH AVE H W z 58TH AVE LU - 3 N 0 1000 2000 Feet a G� _ = tp� m 0 c m Z 55TH a 11 a z 47TH AVE O 45TH AVE 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 42 OF 118 ft - D AVE W 10 0 51 CORVALLI W O cc o — FAIRVIEW C'S a 11 a z 47TH AVE O 45TH AVE 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 42 OF 118 ft - FIGURE H-2 POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT AREAS NORTHEAST QUADRANT �i 58TH AVE w G � a 60TH AVE 58TH AVE H z cr l =56 r AVE O STH WILSHME BLVD a 4 8 > W iso � �F0 yon �� o e � o G 13 51ST PL 10� �G _ O W. 14 a W a a N 0 1000 2000 Feet 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 43 OF 118 FIGURE H-3 O Southwest Quadrant POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT AREAS SOUTHWEST QUADRANT � J7 42ND AV 45TH AVE LU 2 N CL 38TH AVE Q AVE�19 z a 5 0 ------ 1 34THAVE L W Z L6 > z _ °C V If o I 1 a a 32ND AVEJ F4 D C) I� I 30TH AVE N 0 1000 2000 Feet 27TH AVE 01 0 cz 0) 0 r) 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 44 OF 118 FIGURE H-4 POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT AREAS SOUTHEAST QUADRANT W <<<MINOR CORRECTIONS IN PROCESS>>> O — U J W 42N&F-- AVE cc 15 FAIR Magnet School 16 21 36TH AVE 22 wL 36THNA _ O w __ui V —'' W p w O > 34TH AVE m Z > 34TH AVE a -� 32ND AVE _ O Oj { 0 U 21 z N m 0 1000 2000 Feet Southeast Quadrant 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 45 OF 118 PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED (Comments presented as written, without correction.) COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #1 (November 15,2007): • We want Thriftway (redevelopment area #6) to stay!!! NOT high density residential housing ! ! ! We DO NOT want A lot more high density housing or rentals!!!! Home Ownership promotes a well - cared for, positively involved + active community. High density housing and rentals promote an unstable community more crime, more fear, more police activity, higher taxes to pay for these things. • Why would you want to get rid of Thriftway? It is a good store to keep! Why build more high L density with so many homes for sale and rental housing empty? That does not make sense to me! What Crystal needs is owner occupied housing; not high density! 6— • I would like to see some redevelopment of blighted residential areas. Douglas Drive is a major thoroughfare through the city, but most of the housing is aged and not very well maintained, particularly around (between 47th + Bass Lake Road) Target. These areas are what people driving through our city see, not the nice homes within a block or two of Douglas. • Land use plan with a great opportunity exists Co-) NE corner of 42nd Ave N. & Douglas Drive for a mixed use facility with rental units built 3 stories above Super Value — Single family residence consumes greater land area, require more energy, emit greater CO2 to the environment & are often remote from office/retail areas- A good series of documents for the CCP — Thank You! (Name) • I would like to see the area (Bis) Area improved around Supervalue. More upscale look. L • Redevelopment Area #16 Keep this as Low Density Residential Crystal needs to move back toward more family owned properties rather than increasing rental properties. Renters don't generally take ownership in the city or community interests. Home ownership always wins out over rental property or renters. • Redevelopment Area #20 Here again, medium density housing? 12 Town Home v.s. 3 single family? Not a good idea. Look at the mostly empty townhomes on 32nd Ave east of Douglas now. Mostly empty — some rented? Is this what we want for our city? I don't think so. Far too much space being considered for high or medium density housing. • I am concerned about the development of Florida Ave No. between 33`d + 32nd and the purchasing of lots on the wetland area on Georgia Ave N north of 32nd (It is wetland area + development there will block drainage of wetland areas owned by others in the area.) COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #2 (April 17,2008): • [Redevelopment Area #6] — How about incentives to Thriftway to maintain & update the store? We need grocery stores in the area — seniors live nearby. We need to shop close to home! Gas prices & global warming and all that. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 46 OF 118 COMMENTS RECEIVED VIA EMAIL: • November 27, 2007: When considering future development which includes taking homes or business', do a market analysis to determine the needs of the residents of any future business. I would limit eminent domain or hardly use it, as to me this doesn't feel like the right way to redevelop. Do we have a model city we are trying to be like? 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 47 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 48 OF 118 - TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER I ROADWAY JURISIDCTION CHAPTER J ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION CHAPTER K NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER L PUBLIC TRANSIT CHAPTER M AVIATION 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 49 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 50 OF 118 CHAPTER I ROADWAY JURISIDCTION CHAPTER OVERVIEW This chapter focuses on the question of which government entity is responsible for each roadway, and anticipated changes to roadway jurisdiction. It includes specific policies related to changing designation of certain local streets as Municipal State Aid. The following acronyms are used frequently throughout this chapter: ■ MSA: Municipal State Aid - a route on which a city is eligible to spend its allocation of the state's motor fuels tax ■ CSAH: County State Aid Highway - like MSA streets, but owned, managed and maintained by Hennepin County. ■ TH: Trunk Highway - owned, managed and maintained by the Minnesota Department of Transportation ("MnDOT"). BACKGROUND 1. CSAH 8 - West Broadway was originally called Territorial Road and was the main route northwest from Minneapolis. In the 1940s its role as a trunk highway was supplanted by what is now CSAH 81. 2. CSAH 9 - 42nd Avenue a.k.a. Rockford Road was a trunk highway (TH 55) until that designation was shifted to Olson Memorial Highway in the 1950s. 3. CSAH 10 - 56th Avenue a.k.a. Bass Lake Road has always been a county road. 4. CSAH 81 - Bottineau Boulevard was a trunk highway (TH 52 then TH 169) until approx. 20 years ago, when MnDOT turned it over to Hennepin County as part of an exchange for the current alignment of TH 169. 5. CSAH 70 - 27th Avenue a.k.a. Medicine Lake Road, CSAH 102 - Douglas Drive and CSAH 156 - Winnetka Avenue are section line roads, meaning that they follow the "square mile" survey lines established under the township -range survey system used throughout most of the U.S. 6. TH 100 was built in the 1930s and 1940s as Minneapolis' first beltway. The segments through and adjacent to Crystal were reconstructed to modern freeway standards in 2000-2005. 7. The current (2000) Comprehensive Plan discusses Hennepin County's desire to eliminate CSAH 8 by turning over those segments of West Broadway north of 56th Avenue and south of Douglas Drive, and extending the CSAH 102 designation in place of CSAH 8 from Douglas Drive to 56th Avenue. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 51 OF 118 ROADWAY JURISIDCTION POLICIES 1. Hennepin County continues to express their intent to eliminate CSAH 8 from their road system and turn it over to the city. The city would accept responsibility for this roadway only after it is reconstructed to urban standards with municipal consent or the county provides the city with the funds to accomplish same. �. 2. To make the MSA street system better fit with traffic patterns, hierarchy of streets and land uses, some MSA designation changes are desirable. However, MSA designations influence the amount of motor fuel tax revenue the city receives from the state. Some of the existing designations were made to maximize revenue for early stages of the street reconstruction program, resulting in a disproportionate share of MSA mileage in the southern third of the city. However, any attempts to un -designate streets that have already been reconstructed might trigger MnDOT requirements for return of MSA funds. Therefore any such changes would require analysis of their financial impacts for the city; if such impacts are significant, the financial impacts would likely trump planning considerations and the changes would not be made. This means that most changes to MSA designations are likely to occur in those neighborhoods where the streets have not yet been reconstructed. The implementation section reflects this reality, and �. the map differentiates between those changes that are practically unlikely (labeled "Idealized") and those that could realistically be accomplished (labeled "Implement'). ROADWAY JURISIDCTION IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS 1. Negotiate with Hennepin County regarding the removal of CSAH 8 (West Broadway) from the county road system (likely after 2010). This includes addressing the question of whether the West Broadway s -curve crossing of the BNSF railroad at 48th Avenue ought to be reconstructed �- as-is, reconfigured, replaced by a crossing in a different location, or eliminated. 2. Implement the following MSA route designation changes: Designate as MSA Sumter Avenue from 56th Avenue to 58th Avenue. This is the best north - south route for designation in the Broadway neighborhood due to the presence of medium and high density residential uses on the west side of the street in New Hope. Designate as MSA 58th Avenue from Sumter Avenue to West Broadway. This is the best ` east -west route for designation in the neighborhood because it is the longer of the two routes connecting to West Broadway (59th is the other). Also, it serves the Crystal Towers apartments which are within New Hope but are located approximately halfway between 56th ... Avenue and West Broadway along the proposed Sumter -58th MSA route). Un -designate as MSA Louisiana Avenue from Fairview Avenue to 56th Avenue. This segment only makes sense as an MSA route if a crossing of the CPRR tracks would be built in the future. This is highly unlikely. Un -designate as MSA 53`d Avenue from Louisiana Avenue to Douglas Drive. This is made necessary because, upon un -designation of Louisiana Avenue, 53`d Avenue would become a 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 52 OF 118 MR dead-end MSA route which is not allowed by the state. (New Hope is not interested in designating 53rd Avenue from Winnetka Avenue to the Crystal border.) ■ Designate as MSA 54th Avenue from Oregon Avenue to West Broadway. With 53rd Avenue being un -designated, 54th Avenue is the obvious alternate MSA route in the Becker neighborhood. Also, it passes by the south side of the Crystal Shopping Center where there is a pedestrian connection to same, as well as the Kentucky Lane apartments which is the only high density residential use in the neighborhood. ■ Designate as MSA Nevada Avenue from Oregon Avenue to 56th Avenue. With un - designation of Louisiana Avenue, designation of Nevada Avenue is necessary to connect 54th Avenue to 56th Avenue. Also, it abuts St. Raphael's school which is the only institutional use in the neighborhood. ■ Un -designate as MSA 47th Avenue from Welcome Avenue to West Broadway. For many years this has been shown as a future collector street and connection across the BNSF railroad, but it is unlikely that such a connection would ever be built. This is due to the grade differential between the railroad and the land to the west, as well as the difficulty of configuring the intersection with West Broadway because of its skew and its proximity to the railroad. The existing S-curve railroad crossing at West Broadway is just one block north of 47th, and it will probably remain (albeit in an improved, reconfigured form) for the foreseeable future. ■ Un -designate as MSA Hampshire Avenue from 47th Avenue to Fairview Avenue. This change is justified by the limited role of Hampshire Avenue as a collector street north of 47th Avenue, compared with its more significant role south of 47th. ■ Designate as MSA 58th Avenue from West Broadway to Elmhurst Avenue. This change is necessary to connect Elmhurst to West Broadway as required by the state. Of the three streets considered for this connection (58th, 59th and 60th Avenues), 58th is the best choice because (1) it has a less constricted right-of-way at West Broadway than 59th, and (2) at West Broadway it could be configured as a right-angle cross intersection (with Kentucky Avenue) rather than 59th which is a skewed cross intersection and 60th which is a skewed "T" intersection. ■ Un -designate as MSA Elmhurst Avenue from 58th Avenue to 60th Avenue, Hampshire Avenue from 60th Avenue to 62nd Avenue and 62 n Avenue from Louisiana Avenue to Hampshire Avenue. None of these segments justify MSA designation based on traffic volumes or access to community facilities; for example, vehicular access to North Lions Park is via Louisiana and Jersey Avenues, not Hampshire or 62nd Avenues. ■ Designate as MSA Regent Avenue from 56th Avenue to 58th Avenue and 58th Avenue from Orchard Avenue to Regent Avenue. Regent Avenue is the primary route to access the eastern part of the Skyway neighborhood as well as MAC Park and the Babe Ruth baseball field; 58th Avenue is the best secondary route. These designations will provide some MSA mileage in a neighborhood that currently has none. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 53 OF 118 Un -designate as MSA Brunswick Avenue from Medicine Lake Road to 32"d Avenue upon sunset of any MSA payback requirements (probably after 2017). Un -designation would allow for closure of the existing gravel segment south of 32"d Avenue; but until it is un -designated, _ the gravel segment would remain. ■ Un -designate as MSA Medicine Lake Road from Douglas Drive to Zane Avenue upon sunset of any MSA payback requirements. Un -designate as MSA 29th Avenue from Zane Avenue east to the cul-de-sac near Trunk Highway 100 upon sunset of any MSA payback requirements. TABLE I-1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED MSA ROUTE DESIGNATION CHANGES NAME OF NEIGHBORHOOD NAME OF STREET APPROXIMATE CHANGE (MILES) SEPARATELY CUMULATIVELY ANTICIPATED YEAR Broadway Sumter Avenue * +0.125 +0.125 2009 Broadway 58th Avenue +0.438 +0.563 2009 Becker & Forest Louisiana Avenue ** -0.688 -0.125 2009 Becker 53rd Avenue -0.500 -0.625 2009 Becker 54th Avenue +0.563 -0.063 2009 Becker Nevada Avenue +0.188 +0.125 2009 Cavanagh Oaks 47th Avenue -0.094 +0.031 2009 Forest Hampshire Avenue -0.250 -0.219 2009 Lions Park 58th Avenue +0.313 +0.094 2009 Lions Park Elmhurst Avenue -0.281 -0.188 2009 Lions Park Hampshire Avenue -0.281 -0.469 2009 Lions Park 62nd Avenue *** -0.094 -0.563 2009 Skyway Regent Avenue +0313 -0.250 2009 Skyway 58th Avenue +0.188 -0.063 2009 Bassett Creek Brunswick Avenue -0.500 -0.563 2017 Bassett Creek Medicine Lake Road -0.313 -0.875 2017 Bassett Creek 29th Avenue 1 -0.250 -1.125 1 2017 The centerline of Sumter Avenue is the municipal boundary from 56t' Avenue to 58th avenue; the City of New Hope has expressed its willingness to designate its half of the street as an MSA route. ft- - h- h- --I The centerline of Louisiana Avenue is the municipal boundary from 49'h Avenue to Corvallis Avenue; the City of ... New Hope has expressed its willingness to un -designate its half of the street. *** The centerline of 62 n Avenue is the municipal boundary from Louisiana Avenue to Hampshire Avenue; the City of Brooklyn Park has expressed its willingness to un -designate its half of the street. IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS LACKING CITIZEN TASK FORCE CONSENSUS 1. Some members of the Task Force do not support un -designating as MSA the segment of Louisiana Avenue from 53rd Avenue to 56th Avenue in the Becker neighborhood. 2. Some members of the Task Force do not support un -designating as MSA the segment of Hampshire Avenue from 47th Avenue to Fairview Avenue in the Forest neighborhood. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 54 OF 118 3. Some members of the Task Force do not support un -designating as MSA the segment of Brunswick Avenue from Medicine Lake Road to 32nd Avenue and the segment of Medicine Lake Road from Brunswick Avenue to Douglas Drive in the Bassett Creek neighborhood. Their preference is for the roadway to remain, whether it is someday built to MSA standards or left indefinitely as a gravel road. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 55 OF 118 FIGURE I -I ROADWAY JURISDICTION NORTHWEST QUADRANT Northwest IMPLEMENT <<<REVISIONS IN PROCESS>>> ■ 58th to be designated MSA, not 59th ■ 54th -Nevada to be designated MSA • 53`dto be un -designated as MSA Quadrant Un -Designate 62nd East of Louisiana IMPLEMENT Add Designation 59th W. Broadway to Elmhurst IMPLEMENT Un -Designate Elmhurst/ IMPLEMENT I Hampshire, N. of 59th Add Designation 58th W. Broadway to Sumter IMPLEMENTLu sC Add Designation Sumter 56th to 58th r_ . i:.4an a _ Z IMPLEMENT Add Designation 53rd West of Louisiana IMPLEMENT Un -Designate Louisiana Fairview to 56th Ave. 53RIJ O O ti T SFS 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 56 OF 118 IMPLEMENT NUn-Designate A Hampshire 47th to Fairview Ave. Suggested MSA Changes Q ADD DESIGNATION o a2 oa M[[ 0 UN -DESIGNATE Road Class: State Trunk Highway °.,/County State Aid Highway 2005 Average Annual '/Municipal State Aid Street Daily Traffic Volumes Crystal Local Streets (Shown for Segments > 1000) Others Local Streets J 53RIJ O O ti T SFS 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 56 OF 118 FIGURE I-2 ROADWAY JURISDICTION NORTHEAST QUADRANT 60TH AVE N 'p - Northeast Quadrant IMPLEMENT Add Designation 58th Orchard to Regent 58TH AVE N IMPLEMENT Add Designation Regent 56th to 58th Suggested MSA Changes Q ADD DESIGNATION ® UN -DESIGNATE Road Class: t State Trunk Highway NCounty State Aid Highw ,V Municipal State Aid Stre Crystal Local Streets Others Local Streets e AVE N 2005 Average Annual '9L Daily Traffic Volumes (Shown for Segments > 1000) <<<REVISIONS /N PROCESS>>> T ■ 4e from Welcome to West Broadway N to be un -designated as an MSA route N r A ... d U Q2 Q4 MIf 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 57 OF 118 FIGURE I-3 ROADWAY JURISDICTION SOUTHWEST QUADRANT Suggested MSA Changes 0 ADD DESIGNATION ED UN -DESIGNATE Road Class: State Trunk Highway County State Aid Highway NMunicipal State Aid Street Crystal Local Streets Others Local Streets _ O` O 4, 18400 42NLrAVE 11— 2005 Average Annual Daily Traffic Volumes (Shown for Segments > 1000) — O r_v O I r 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 58 OF 118 -.1260 z z — m_ > Lu,., a a LU zw z Ll i z >_ 20QO 1300 4 E O — 2_ r ,,. _... w... a Z N J O:. ...... .::.. U N— A Southwest Quadrant " 0 0.2 0.4 MY 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 58 OF 118 FIGURE I-4 ROADWAY JURISDICTION SOUTHEAST QUADRANT 16700 u. i IT ate 29th/ ,f Brunswick A Southeast 0 02 0 Ml� Quadrant 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 59 OF 118 i. 10 24. i9RD Suggested MSA Changes Q ADD DESIGNATION AVE N 0 UN -DESIGNATE Road Class: State Trunk Highway /. County State Aid Highway NMunicipal State Aid Street Crystal Local Streets 2005 Average Annual Others Local Streets Ca i Daily Traffic Volumes �= (Shown for Segments > 1000) /R 16700 u. i IT ate 29th/ ,f Brunswick A Southeast 0 02 0 Ml� Quadrant 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 59 OF 118 PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED (Comments presented as written, without correction.) COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #1 (November 15,2007): • Roadway Jurisdictions — add 59b Ave to W. Bdwy from Elmhurst — shorter distance to Crystal Shopping areas + Broadway Park. • Make 59`" the MSA road because of the park and bus stop on Broadway • Desparately need traffic light on 36''' & Regent - - daily accidents. • Keep Brunswick Ave gravel it is unique to the metro • I would like to see Brunswick paved at 32nd COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #2 (April 17,2008): • Please do not pave Brunswick between 32❑d to end of Bassett Creek Park - It would just create more traffic on Brunswick. COMMENTS RECEIVED VIA EMAIL: • April 23, 2008: I attended the open house and expressed my disapproval of making 59`h Avenue a MSA route/road. Looking at the summary of proposed MSA route designation changes it has a column for the anticipated year of change which is 2009. I realize the key word here is `anticipated' but it still sounds like a done deal. I spoke with many of my neighbors over the weekend and not one of them are for it. At what point can our opinions/suggestions/concerns be heard and is there any chance of this not happening? I understand the city has to meet that 20 percent in order to get county money but at the expense of upsetting neighborhoods? I am open to hearing the "plus" side of this for the neighborhood other than suggesting it's for people walking to the park or bus stop which to my knowledge and neighbor discussion doesn't happen. April 25, 2008: i was unable to attend the task force meeting recently held for the planned updates in our city. i reviewed the info on website tonite and was shocked to see that my street 59th Ave between west broadway and elmhurst was cited as going to be widened and sidewalks added. this is crazy. we already have too much traffic along the street. there is a problem with cars stopping for the stop signs and speeding through. the road is wide enough already. we have young children along our street and the faster traffic would be a hazard. why would expanding our road be needed. there is nothing except single family houses in this neighborhood and it is not needed. besides, money would be better spent on upgrading the streets that have no curbs and have major issues rather than changing a road that is fine as it is. changing our street would not improve anything. i would prefer " putting in a round -a -bout on corner of jersey and 59th to slow traffic down. we have several elderly as well as young persons that walk our neighborhoods and do just fine on roads as they are. no need for sidewalks. please reconsider developing and putting resources on things that need them such as water system and repaving streets that are crumbling and even to get more law enforcement out on our city streets to catch the speeders/stop sign ignorers and such. thank you 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 60 OF 118 CHAPTER J ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION CHAPTER OVERVIEW This chapter describes how each road fits into the regional transportation system and hierarchy of different types of roadways. It considers specific changes to roadway configurations including increasing or reducing the number of lanes on some arterial or major collector roadways. The following terms are used frequently throughout this chapter: ■ Principal Arterial. In the metropolitan area, these are typically trunk highways owned by the Minnesota Department of Transportation ("MnDOT"). Most are freeways (controlled access with grade -separated interchanges) or expressways (limited access with at -grade, signalized intersections at major cross streets). Principal arterials tend to favor maximum mobility (traffic flow) and minimal access (curb cuts). ■ Minor Arterial. Generally county routes, and on average balanced between mobility and access. Older Minor Arterials typically favor access more than more recently constructed Minor Arterials. ■ Major collector. These are typically city streets but also include some county facilities. Major collectors slightly favor access over mobility. ■ Minor collector. City streets that typically have been designated as Municipal State Aid ("MSA") routes. They favor access over mobility. ■ Other local streets. These represent the majority of mileage in the road system. They also favor access over mobility. BACKGROUND Functional Classification designations help identify which routes are most worthy of federal funding, guide local decisions regarding mobility vs. access, and (in developing areas) identify needs for right-of- way preservation and land use regulation for future routes. These designations are based on parameters established by Metropolitan Council. The current (2000) Comprehensive Plan established the following functional classifications: ■ TH 100 is a Principal Arterial. ■ The following routes are Minor Arterials: - Part of CSAH 8 (West Broadway) from Douglas Drive to 56th Avenue - CSAH 9 (42nd Avenue) - CSAH 10 (56th Avenue a.k.a. Bass Lake Road) - CSAH 70 (27th Avenue a.k.a. Medicine Lake Road) - CSAH 81 (Bottineau Boulevard) - CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive south of West Broadway) (suggests re -striping from four lanes to three) - CSAH 156 (Winnetka Avenue from 30th Avenue to 39th Avenue) .. ■ The following routes are Major Collectors: - CSAH 8 (West Broadway) north of 56th Avenue - CSAH 8 (West Broadway) south of Douglas Drive "9 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 61 OF 118 - 36th Avenue (suggests re -striping from four lanes to three) The following routes are (Minor) Collectors: bw - 32nd Avenue - 47th Avenue from CSAH 102 Douglas Drive to CSAH 81 (Bottineau Boulevard). - Fairview Avenue west of CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) (Note: This is called a Major Collector in the text but not shown as such on the map. In any case, it does not appear that the city's past intent was to classify this as a Major Collector on par with 36th Avenue or West Broadway.) - Corvallis Avenue from CSAH 8 (West Broadway) to CSAH 81 (Bottineau Boulevard) - Noble Avenue - Welcome Avenue south of West Broadway - Louisiana from CSAH 9 (42nd Avenue) to CSAH 10 (56th Avenue) r.. ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION POLICIES 6— t All MSA routes except 36th Avenue should be classified as "Minor Collectors", but only after designating or un -designating those particular MSA route segments described in the Roadway Jurisdiction section. 2. Unless traffic volumes or local land use considerations warrant continuation of the current �- roadway configuration, existing four lane undivided roadways without left turn lanes should be considered for re -striping to a three lane roadway with a center left turn lane and one travel lane in each direction. `" 3. No new roadways should be constructed with more than one travel lane in each direction unless E they also have a center left turn lane or, preferably, a median with left turn lanes. One alternative approach would be a three -lane roadway with one travel lane in each direction and a center left turn lane, which can often accommodate traffic volumes comparable to roadway with two travel lanes in each direction but no left turn lane. 4. Streetscape improvements should be used to enhance the visual appeal of the community for visitors and residents alike. Enhanced streetscaping should be a consideration for any major new roadway construction or existing roadway reconstruction project. Also, such improvements may be implemented along existing roadways where reconstruction is not anticipated for some time, provided that the streetscaping will not substantially conflict with anticipated long term improvements for the roadway. ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS Evaluate crash and speed data for roadways that have recently been re -striped from four lane to three lane sections: CSAH 70 (27th Avenue a.k.a. Medicine Lake Road) west of CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive), and CSAH 10 (56th Avenue a.k.a. Bass Lake Road) east of CSAH 81 (Bottineau Boulevard). 2. Study the potential to re -stripe 36th Avenue east of Regent Avenue and west of CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive). Factors to consider include but are not limited to the following: 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 62 OF 118 ■ Results from completed re -striping of CSAHs 70 and 10 (see item a) above) and other applicable, previously implemented examples. ■ Need for concurrence from Robbinsdale for the segment east of Regent, and from New Hope for the segment west of Louisiana. (For both segments, the municipal boundary is the centerline of the street.) ■ Potential need for a traffic signal at the Regent Avenue intersection, including, for eastbound 36th Avenue traffic, a right lane drop/turn lane and a dedicated left turn lane at Regent. ■ Traffic flow impact due to frequent transit bus stops east of Regent. ■ At the signalized intersection with Douglas Drive, evaluate whether the outside through lanes should remain to maximize peak hour capacity (but requiring merging on the other side of the intersection); or be converted into dedicated right turn lanes to reduce idling time for right -turning traffic. ■ At the intersection with Louisiana Avenue, evaluate alternatives to the current four-way stop (i.e., signalization). ■ Potential traffic impact on routes in adjacent neighborhoods (i.e. 34th Avenue, 37th Avenue- _ Markwood Drive, and 38th Avenue). 3. Work with Hennepin County to study the potential to re -stripe CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) from CSAH 8 (West Broadway) south to CSAH 70 (27th Avenue a.k.a. Medicine Lake Road). Factors to consider include but are not limited to the following: ■ Results from completed re -striping of CSAHs 70 and 10 (see item a) above) and other applicable, previously implemented examples. ■ At the signalized intersections with 36th and 42"d Avenues, evaluate whether the outside through lanes should remain to maximize peak hour capacity (but requiring merging on the other side of the intersection); or be converted into dedicated right turn lanes to reduce idling time for right -turning traffic. ■ Traffic flow impact due to frequent transit bus stops along the entire segment. ■ Potential traffic impact on local streets in adjacent neighborhoods (i.e. Adair Avenue and 38th -Hampshire Avenues). 4. Work with Hennepin County to study the potential to re -stripe CSAH 8 (West Broadway) south of CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive). Factors to consider include but are not limited to the following: ■ Results from completed re -striping of CSAHs 70 and 10 (see item a) above) and other applicable, previously implemented examples. ■ Explore options for southbound traffic to transition from two through lanes to one through lane south of Douglas Drive. ■ Consider improving turning motions from/to Corvallis Avenue to enhance West Broadway as a connector from CSAH 81 (Bottineau Boulevard) to Crystal's main commercial area; this might also include steps to reduce West Broadway's role as a through street south of Corvallis where it transitions into a lower speed, lower volume roadway in a predominantly residential area (see item e) below). 5. As part of the county's effort to remove CSAH 8 (West Broadway) from their road system and turn it over to the city, and as part of as part of the planning and design process for the reconstruction of West Broadway to urban standards, the city will study the s -curve crossing of the BNSF railroad at 48th Avenue. The study should consider at least the following four alternatives for dealing with the railroad crossing: I" .. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 63 OF 118 L. ■ Reconstruct the railroad crossing essentially as -is, possibly with some property acquisition to meet current design standards. i ■ Reconfigure the railroad crossing into a more right-angled 48th Avenue crossing. �, ■ Close the crossing and replace it with a new crossing, for example by completing the gap in 47d` Avenue between West Broadway and Vera Cruz Avenue, and possibly also closing i another existing crossing at 451/2Avenue in Robbinsdale. On the east side of the railroad, ` West Broadway would transition north into Vera Cruz Avenue, and on the west side of the railroad, West Broadway would transition south into Welcome Avenue. ■ Close the crossing without replacing it with a new crossing. Again, on the east side of the railroad, West Broadway would transition into Vera Cruz Avenue, and on the west side of the railroad, West Broadway would transition into Welcome Avenue. Any of these alternatives should also consider whether to maintain West Broadway as a Major Collector south of Corvallis Avenue. It might make sense to designate Corvallis Avenue from CSAH 81 (Bottineau Boulevard) to West Broadway as a Major Collector and designate West Broadway south of Corvallis as a Minor Collector. (See item d) above.) 6. Study 36th Avenue from Welcome Avenue west to CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) to determine the appropriateness of the existing four -lane configuration for current and future traffic volumes. •.. The study should examine options to improve safety and handle traffic volumes, including but not limited to the following alternatives: ; ■ Leaving the roadway as -is. ■ Leaving the roadway as -is but restricting left turns during peak hours. ■ Re -striping the roadway so it has two westbound lanes, a center left turn lane, and one eastbound lane. ■ Widening the roadway approximately 12 feet to add a center left turn lane. ■ Widening the roadway approximately 18 feet to add a median with left turn lanes. ■ Some hybrid of one or more of the above alternatives. In addition to the cost of such a project, the impact of widening on the adjacent properties and neighborhoods must be considered along with the traffic and safety benefits of such a project. Alternatives involving widening would not be eligible for federal financial participation through the regional solicitation process unless the classification is changed from Major Collector to Minor Arterial. 7. Work with Hennepin County and the City of Robbinsdale to study CSAH 9 (42nd Avenue a.k.a. Rockford Road) through Crystal to determine the appropriateness of the existing four -lane configuration for current and future traffic volumes. The study should examine options to improve safety and handle traffic volumes, including but not limited to the following alternatives: ■ Leaving the roadway as -is. ■ Leaving the roadway as -is but restricting left turns during peak hours. ■ Widening the roadway approximately 12 feet to add a center left turn lane. ■ Widening the roadway approximately 18 feet to add a median with left turn lanes. _ ■ Some hybrid of one or more of the above alternatives. In addition to the cost of such a project, the impact of widening on the adjacent properties and neighborhoods must be considered along with the traffic and safety benefits of such a project. Because the roadway is classified as a Minor Arterial, widening could be eligible for federal financial participation through the regional solicitation process. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 64 OF 118 8. Work with Hennepin County and the City of New Hope to study CSAH 10 (56th Avenue a.k.a. Bass Lake Road) west of Jersey Avenue to determine the appropriateness of the existing four - lane configuration for current and future traffic volumes. The study should examine options to improve safety and handle traffic volumes, including but not limited to the following alternatives: ■ Leaving the roadway as -is. ■ Leaving the roadway as -is but restricting left turns during peak hours. ■ Widening the roadway approximately 12 feet to add a center left turn lane. ■ Widening the roadway approximately 18 feet to add a median with left turn lanes. ■ Some hybrid of one or more of the above alternatives. In addition to the cost of such a project, the impact of widening on the adjacent properties and neighborhoods must be considered along with the traffic and safety benefits of such a project. _ Because the roadway is classified as a Minor Arterial, widening could be eligible for federal financial participation through the regional solicitation process. _ 9. Consider specific streetscape improvements along existing roadways that are not likely to be subject to major roadway improvements (i.e. full reconstruction and/or widening) for the foreseeable future. IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS LACKING CITIZEN TASK FORCE CONSENSUS Some members of the Task Force do not support additional re -striping projects that would convert existing four lane roads to three lane roads. 2. Some members of the Task Force are opposed to any widening of 36th Avenue from Welcome Avenue to CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive). 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 65 OF 118 FIGURE J -I ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION NORTHWEST QUADRANT Northwest <<<REVISIONS IN PROCESS>>> Quadrant 5e to be a Minor Collector, not 5e OG • 54`h -Nevada to be a Minor Collector, not 53' '_V 90 \ \�V N 59Ti AV E N 4% O 56th Ave Bass Lk Rd (CSAH 10) Widen, add a median and left t urn I an es? (Too much volume for current configuration ) Key: Principal Arterial Minor Arterial /V Major Collector Minor Collector Other Local Streets 2005 Average Annual Daily Traffic Volumes (Shown for Segments >1000) 58"H AVE N Q �G 22300 G ASS L KE Ro j^ M s� M �O 5TH AVE N 0 ti T i 1500 53RD AVE N Douglas Drive (CSAH 102) Re -stripe to 3lanes? (Center left turn lane + 1 lane each way.) Q 0 0.25 0.5 Miles 2050 FAIRVIEW AVE N I 140 47TH AVE N ! Z D Cn C� G L i 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 66 OF 118 FIGURE J-2 ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION NORTHEAST QUADRANT l 58TH AVE N IIRA S 4KE p 7z;, -T o � 2050 � 00 OG WILSHIRE BLVD w K y: 2 r °C Principal Arterial 0 � Minor Arterial Major Collector Broadway -Fairview to Dougla W. Br Minor Collector Re -stripe to 3lanes? Other Local Streets .� PL (Center left turn lane + 1 lane each way.) Z 4JOU 05 Average Annual x COR IS AVE N aily Traffic Volumes D a J Cl) Q J C) O \ Z 165 i UJ 0 O o O LV r r � ( hown for Segments >1000) <<<REVISIONS IN PROCESS>>> ■ 41 from Welcome to West Broadway to not be a Minor Collector 47T\AVEN 6AcO' %'N A 0 0.25 0.5 Miles 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 67 OF 118 FIGURE J-3 ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SOUTHWEST QUADRANT a Key:. Principal Arterial Z w Minor Arterial Major Collector V _ Minor Collector t o� Other Local Streets _ a - 2005 Average Annual _ Daily Traffic Volumes D_ (Shown for Segments >1000) O O — r i 36th Ave West of Douglas — Re -stripe to 3 lanes? (center left turn lane 38TH AVE + 1 thru lane each way). z 36T AVE N W QC, Z � QUJ F— a Z p 5 Z z w 2000 1300 32ND EN N T z A { af x - ry a Z a V/ F O 1 1 �' Southwest 0.25 0.5 Mil s Quadrant 19 MFnICINF L_AKF RIS 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 68 OF 118 FIGURE J-4 O M r ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SOUTHEAST QUADRANT b) 42nd Ave/Rocldord Road (CSAH 9) Widen to add a median & left turn lanes? (foo much volume for current configuration i { t 34TH AVE N z W Q Y V N z m 42ND AVE N 0 Oo T O>- OQ _ViT2T2 2 36th Ave Welcome to Douglas z Widen to add a median & W left turn lanes? > (Too much volume for current Q ® configuration) W >Q z W 036th Ave East of Regent 0 W Re -stripe to 3 Lanes? > N (Center left turn lane 0 + 1 thru lane each way.) N o Key: Principal Arterial wMinor Arterial > /V Major Collector Minor Collector Other Local Streets 2005 Average Annual 0 Daily Traffic Volumes 0 (Shown for Segments >1000) 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Southeast Quadrant 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 69 OF 118 PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED (Comments presented as written, without correction.) 6- COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #1 (November 15,2007): • The Bass Lake restriping was done very well. We feel it is safer now. 6= • Please improve intersection of Douglas Drive and W. Broadway. Could it be made prettier? • Resurface and beautify what you now call Bottineau Blvd. No 6 or 8 lane super Hyway! Before you do anything get the Environment Impact Statement. Increase - holding ponds Water garden Trees - take down no trees They absorb CO2 helping prevent global warming. • Reserface 81 do not widen just repave it and make cloverleaf's at intersections. • Keep 81 to 4 lanes, light at 47th • Restripeing Douglas Drive to 3 lanes would be terrible as far as traffic increase on Hampshire & Adair Avenues between 38th + 42nd Ave's. Traffic is already using Hampshire + Adair to avoid the intersection at 42nd + Douglas. If they turn that intersection into 1 lane each direction Hampshire + 1 Adair will end up with a huge traffic increase. • Come up with a plan that will move the traffic on Hampshire from 42nd Ave to 38th Ave back where L it belongs. - Commuters are currently using Hampshire and 38th Ave to circumnavigate the light at 42nd & Douglas. In doing so they are adding unwanted traffic to these residential streets and have no regard for the speed limit. This is a safety issue! L • Desparately need traffic light on 36th & Regent - - daily accidents. • Please don't widen roads in neighborhoods. Keep the speed on the freeways which they are designed for. Neighborhoods are for our homes COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #2 (April 17,2008): • Have traffic signal warning lights at the crest of the railroad bridge to indicate blind signal color over the crest. Install solar powered speed signs (radar) on 81 through Cavanagh Oaks section. • Bass Lk Rd - Leave as is - enforce traffic laws. East Bass Lk Rd Restriping is not functional or easy flowing. • Too much fast traffic from Douglas Dr - up 32nd Ave down Welcome to 36th. Garbage cans in front of homes, garages • I'm OK w/Douglas Dr. made into 3 lanes if there are designated Bike lanes. We should design bike :- lanes into any reconfiguring of streets. • 36th & Regent area - add stop light, very dangerous intersection. Slow traffic - many speeders - 3 lanes as suggested may help. Area going into school with no stoplight very 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 70 OF 118 _ dangerous, need a turn arrow. Many properties have fencing next to sidewalk — can't see when turning onto 36`h from side streets unless you pull way out, some trees affect this too. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 71 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 72 OF 118 CHAPTER K NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER OVERVIEW This chapter addresses the need for facilities to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle travel. The following terms are used frequently throughout this chapter: ■ Sidewalk. A facility primarily for pedestrians, and typically (but not always) constructed of concrete. Sidewalks may be placed directly behind the curb or may be separated from the roadway by a boulevard area. ■ Multi -Use Path. A facility for both pedestrians and bicyclists, and typically (but not always) constructed of bituminous pavement. Multi -use paths may be placed in the same manner as sidewalks or substantially further separated from the roadway; for example, paths are sometimes located in separate right-of-way or in a public park. ■ Bike Lane. A facility primarily for bicyclists. Bike lanes may be shared as a roadway shoulder ("breakdown lane") or as a parking lane. BACKGROUND Most of Crystal was developed in an era when little thought was given to long-term planning in general and non -motorized transportation facilities in particular. This means that the city's natural, obvious potential routes typically along lowlands, lakefronts, creeksides, etc. were mostly platted and developed many decades ago. Therefore Crystal today has a limited opportunity to create a system of facilities for non -motorized transportation. It must be understood that the city's resources are limited and the city will never have the sort of complete, interconnected system found in many of the more recently developed suburbs. The current (2000) Comprehensive Plan contains this element in its Parks, Open Space and Trails section. It includes a map of existing sidewalks, a policy for building new sidewalks, and a map showing different types of trails and other facilities for non -motorized transportation. In December 2004, the City Council adopted a Sidewalk Construction Program to implement the sidewalk policy in the 2000 Comprehensive Plan. The adopted program included maps showing the existing sidewalk system and three different priority levels for potential future sidewalks. This sidewalk program has been incorporated into this Comprehensive Plan, with some updates and modifications. NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION POLICIES 1. Take advantage of low-cost opportunities to improve and publicize existing non -motorized transportation opportunities. Examples include designating striped shoulders or parking lanes as bike lanes and adoption of an official Sidewalk, Path and Bike Lane Map. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 73 OF 118 i 2. Continue to construct sidewalks in accordance with the Sidewalk Construction Program approved by the City Council in December 2004, subject to changes described in this plan. 3. In some areas where a multi -use path is desired, it may be more practical to utilize a combination of a sidewalk and a bike lane. It is the policy of the city to consider such a combined facility to be an acceptable substitute for a multi -use path. 4. Work to complete regional connections to improve Crystal residents' access to regional destinations and facilities including Theodore Wirth Park, French Regional Park, and Elm Creek Park Reserve. 5. Explore the potential to create additional non -motorized transportation opportunities in those areas where the lay of the land has prevented standard suburban development and some remnants of the pre -development landscape remain. NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS kl- Adopt an official Sidewalk, Path and Bike Lane Map showing existing facilities, and make it available on the city website as well as at community facilities and in the new homeowner packets. To ensure its usefulness by the general public, this map will be updated as additional facilities are added. 2. Consider options for improving safety at the marked pedestrian crosswalk on CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) at Fairview Avenue near the Crystal Community Center / pool complex. 3. Sidewalks are to be constructed in accordance with the Sidewalk Construction Program approved by the City Council in December 2004, with the following changes: ■ Sidewalk along Yates Avenue from Wilshire Boulevard to 57th Avenue changed from Priority 2 to Priority 3. ■ Sidewalk along 51St Avenue east of Toledo Avenue changed from Priority 2 to Priority 3. ■ Sidewalk along Vera Cruz Avenue from West Broadway to Corvallis Avenue added as Priority 1. ■ Sidewalk south from 38th Avenue to Hampshire Avenue via Jersey Avenue and Markwood Drive added as Priority 3. ■ Sidewalk along Medicine Lake Road from Brunswick Avenue to Zane Avenue and north along Zane Avenue to Bassett Creek Park path connection added as Priority 3. 4. A multi -use path to be built by Hennepin County along a reconstructed CSAH 81 through Crystal. This should be regarded as highly likely because the preliminary design including this trail has been approved by the City Council. Ultimately this will provide a regional connection L from Theodore Wirth Park to Elm Creek Park Reserve. 5. A multi -use path to facilitate a regional connection from Theodore Wirth Park to French Regional Park. The preferred alignment for this trail is 36th Avenue between Boone and Nevada Avenues, Nevada Avenue between 36th and 32nd Avenues, and 32nd Avenue between Nevada and Vera Cruz Avenues. New Hope would have to concur for this alignment to be built. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 74 OF 118 6. Roadways with existing striped shoulders or parking lanes on both sides of the street will be '— designated as bike lanes where feasible. These existing segments are as follows: ■ CSAH 10 (56th Avenue a.k.a. Bass Lake Road) east of Yates Avenue. ■ Noble Avenue south of 36th Avenue. ■ 32nd Avenue from Louisiana Avenue to Winnetka Avenue. ■ Louisiana Avenue from CSAH 70 (27th Avenue a.k.a. Medicine Lake Rd) to 32ndAvenue. ■ CSAH 70 (27th Avenue a.k.a. Medicine Lake Road) west of CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive). These should be signed as bike lanes (if too narrow for parking to be permitted) or dual use parking - bike lanes (if wide enough for parking to be permitted). In cases where a striped shoulder is located on only one side of the street, then it should not be signed as a bike lane. 7. As additional roadways are re -striped or reconstructed with shoulders or parking lanes on both sides of the street, they too will be designated as bike lanes where feasible. These potential segments include but are not limited to the following: ■ West Broadway north of 57th Avenue (reconstruction). _ ■ West Broadway from CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) south to Fairview Avenue (re -striping). ■ West Broadway south of Fairview Avenue (reconstruction). ■ CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) south of West Broadway. ■ 36th Avenue west of CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) ■ 36th Avenue east of Regent Avenue. These should be signed as bike lanes (if too narrow for parking to be permitted) or dual use parking and bike lanes (if wide enough for parking to be permitted). In cases where a striped shoulder is located on only one side of the street, then it should not be signed as a bike lane. 8. Study the feasibility of constructing some sort of connection along the "Chain of Ponds" extending from Memory Lane Pond at 45th and Louisiana to the Gaulke pond east of Douglas at 40th. Such study will include consideration of engineering challenges, necessary property acquisitions, and public comment. F" 9. Study the feasibility of constructing a trail along Bassett Creek from 32nd Avenue to 36th Avenue. Such study will include consideration of engineering challenges, necessary property acquisitions, and public comment. 10. Study the potential need for and feasibility of a ped/bike bridge in the general vicinity of CSAH 81 (Bottineau Boulevard) and CSAH 10 (56th Avenue a.k.a. Bass Lake Road). Such a study would be obviously important if the Northwest/Bottineau Transitway is constructed. Until that occurs, the need for a ped/bike bridge is not as obvious. 11. Work with Three Rivers Park District to consider options for improving safety at the marked pedestrian crosswalk on CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) at 32nd Avenue. IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS LACKING CITIZEN TASK FORCE CONSENSUS Some members of the Task Force do not support construction of sidewalks without the support of abutting property owners. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 75 OF 118 2. Some members of the Task Force wanted to see a trail connection over or under the CP railroad between the Cavanagh Oaks and Twin Oaks neighborhoods, but staff did not include this because of the engineering challenges of such a connection and the fact that there will be a multi- _ use trail over the railroad on both sides of CSAH 81 (Bottineau Boulevard) 3. Some members of the Task Force do not support construction of a trail along Bassett Creek from _ 32nd Avenue to 36th Avenue. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 76 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 77 OF 118 FIGURE K- I Northwest Quadrant NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION NORTHWEST QUADRANT R W z z_ Sidewalks: ! N Existing Sidewalks (2007) L =L— Phority 1 - Sidewalks Needed Along Currently Designated MSA or Priority 2 - Sidewalks Needed Along Other Routes Not Currently D N Priority 3 - Additional Sidewalks Desired if Funding Allows �Possible Regional Trail Trails to Be Added as Part of CSAH81 Reconstruction .Trails (2007) N_anes Existing Shoulder Bike Lanes Potential Shoulder Bike Lanes Due to Road Re -Striping and Reco <<<REVISIONS IN PROCESS>>> ■ Delete Priority 1 sidewalk on Elmhurst north of 58th, and delete Priority 2 and 3 sidewalks along 5e ■ Add Priority 2 sidewalk along 5e from West Broadway to Elmhurst ■ Delete Priority 2 and 3 sidewalks along 53' ■ Change Priority 3 sidewalks along 54t - Nevada to Priority 2 0 500 1000 Feet AVE ID r ..Q J k BOTH AVE ° 0 :ion Safety Issue at 51C CCC/Pool Xing at Douglas 11! i != 45TI AVE .., Ii i 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 78 OF 118 FIGURE K-2 NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION — NORTHEAST QUADRANT W ---------------------------------------------------- Northeast Quadrant Cl) J j AVE p I Ped/Bike Bridge f a over CSAH 81 & — Bottineau Transitway? I 58TH AVE 58TH AVE !. FW■■ W 1 0 j f — f 1 I �`L�� «<REVIS/ONS IN PROCESS»> "trO Delete Priority 3 sidewalk on 4e from Welcome to West Broadway Ix �e 9G C i 51STPL � �, COR i o I i J �E a v i I i 0 500 1000 Feet 7TCL Sidewalks _ Existing Sidewalks(2007) Priority 1 - Sidewalks Needed Along Currently Designated MSA or County Routes Priority 2 - Sidewalks Needed Along Other Routes Not Currently Designated - - Priority 3 -Additional Sidewalks Desired if Funding Allows V Possible Regional Trail _ Trails to Be Added as Part of CSAH81 Reconstruction Trails (2007) e anes xisting Shoulder Bike Lanes otential Shoulder Bike Lanes Due to Road Re -Striping and Reconstruction 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 79 OF 118 FIGURE K-3 NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION SOUTHWEST QUADRANT ` 45T , , AVS m Potential Long Term Trail Route along Memory Lane, Brownwood 42 DAVE Hagemeister & Gaulke Ponds Sidewal ks: /\/Existing Sidewalks(2007) N Priority 1 - Sidewalks Needed Along Currently Designated MSA or County Routes Priority 2 - Sidewalks Needed Along Other Routes Not Currently Designated N Priority 3 - Additional Sidewalks Desired if Funding Allows �V Possible Regional Trail NTrails to Be Added as Part of CSAH81 Reconstruction NTrails (2007) Bike I anes i Existing Shoulder Bike Lanes Potential Shoulder Bike Lanes Due to Road Re -Striping and Reconstruction A i Southwest 27TH AVE Quadrant 0 500 1000 Feet 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 80 OF 118 FIGURE K-4 NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION SOUTHEAST QUADRANT 2 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 81 OF 118 A — vi Sidewalks: /\/Existing Sidewalks (2007) N Priority 1 - Sidewalks Needed Along Currently Designated MSA or County Routes Priority 2 - Sidewalks Needed Along Other Routes Not Currently Designated Priority 3 -Additional Sidewalks Desired if Funding Allows — Possible Regional Trail NTrails to Be Added as Part of CSAH81 Reconstruction Trails (2007) N-anes — Existing Shoulder Bike Lanes Potential Shoulder Bike Lanes Due to Road Re -Striping and Reconstruction FA Magnet tSch I Potential Long Term Trail Route Along -� Bassett Creek 36TH AVE Uj L-- Z W LU W O, w 34TH AVE oC z ° --------- -- 4T AVE -- j --- -----� i 32ND AVE' I! N L! I� �! _ z ! I I _ l 0 500 1000 1500 Feet Southeast. --- -------------} A Quadrant 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 81 OF 118 PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED (Comments presented as written, without correction.) COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #1 (November 15,2007): — • No bike path needed at 56d' + Orchard. • No side walks on Quail near Corvallis + 50 – no room. Destroying 100 year old oaks is criminal to do anything re: roads or sidewalks. — • Park trails: Please do not make a trail in Brownwood Park – especially if private property involved. • Proposed? Connection over RR? Use existing at pump house located at Quail & Angeline • Thank you for retaining wall on the east side of my lot – Now I can see what in on the side walk – so you don't hit a pedestrian or bicycle. • Concerned about bike trail and danger having it cross roads like douglas drive. Even wit stoplight; possible still dangerous COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #2 (April 17,2008): • Put bike trail next to sound wall on Hwy 100 to connect trail south of 36th to T.H. 81 trail. • Add pedestrian access to Bassett Ck Park from Douglas Dr. thru wooded area. • Concern about how you would put bike lanes on Douglas Dr. • Please put in the Crystal Newsletter the law about stopping for pedestrians at intersections. Crossing 36d` on Brunswick is a Big waiting game. Drivers can't be bothered slowing down let alone stop. • Sidewalk/591" - I do not want 59th Ave N. designated as a state aid road. I don't want side walks or road striping. I like our street the way it is. It doesn't make any sence to put a sidewalk from a dead end road – Elmhurst to West Broadway – not that much walking traffic. • Please leave 32nd from Douglas to Hampshire the way it is. Do not make any changes for a regional bike trail. • Stop putting sidewalks on MSA Streets, where there is not heavy traffic. It's a waste of funds. COMMENTS RECEIVED VIA EMAIL: • I would like to see at 42nd and Hampshire a pedestrian traffic light and cross walk to connect the MSA street sidewalks. If there are busier MSA Streets that connect that will be getting a sidewalk, please consider a pedestrian traffic light and cross walk to connect these sidewalks. • Please consider bicycle traffic as one of the methods to consider for transportation. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 82 OF 118 CHAPTER L PUBLIC TRANSIT CHAPTER OVERVIEW This chapter discusses Metro Transit's current service to the City of Crystal and the potential for a regional transit line, called the Northwest/Bottineau Transitway. This regional transit route would pass through Crystal generally parallel to CSAH 81 (Bottineau Boulevard), and would likely include a station in the vicinity of CSAH 10 (50h Avenue a.k.a. Bass Lake Road). BACKGROUND Crystal is served by Metro Transit, an arm of the Metropolitan Council. Route locations and frequency/type of service are therefore determined by another government agency and is almost entirely beyond the city's control. The existing route system was recently modified by Metro Transit after an extensive public involvement process. The following Metro Transit routes currently serve Crystal: ■ 14: follows 36`h and Douglas in Crystal; connects to the Robbinsdale transit center (Hubbard Marketplace) and serves Honeywell in Golden Valley as well as downtown Minneapolis via West Broadway. ■ 715: Follows 42nd Avenue in Crystal; connects to the Starlite transit center in Brooklyn Park and the Robbinsdale transit center (Hubbard Marketplace). ■ 716: Follows 42nd Avenue, Douglas Drive and West Broadway in Crystal; connects to the Robbinsdale transit center and serves the 63rd Avenue & Bottineau Boulevard park -n -ride facility as well as the Zane Avenue corridor in Brooklyn Park. ■ 721: Follows 56b Avenue North (Bass Lake Road) in Crystal; connects to the Brooklyn Center transit center (Brookdale) and serves Hennepin Technical College in Brooklyn Park. ■ 755: Follows Winnetka Avenue in Crystal with a limited service loop to Nevada Avenue; serves New Hope as well as downtown Minneapolis via Golden Valley and TH 55. ■ 758: Follows Douglas Drive and West Broadway and a short segment of Noble Avenue in Crystal; connects to the Robbinsdale transit center (Hubbard Marketplace) and serves Honeywell in Golden Valley as well as the 63rd Avenue & Bottineau Boulevard park -n -ride facility in Brooklyn Park. ■ 764: Similar to 715, except that instead of connecting to the Robbinsdale transit center (Hubbard Marketplace), it provides express service to downtown Minneapolis via TH 100 and I-394. ■ 767: Follows 56d' Avenue (Bass Lake Road) and West Broadway on its way from New Hope to the 63rd Avenue & Bottineau Boulevard park -n -ride facility and express service from there to downtown Minneapolis via I-94. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 83 OF 118 The potential Northwest/Bottineau Transitway would pass through Crystal on an alignment roughly parallel to CSAH 81 (Bottineau Boulevard) and the BNSF railroad. This facility is indicated in Metropolitan Council's Regional Framework as a Tier 1 (meaning high priority) facility but it has not progressed beyond the preliminary concept phase. The technology for this transitway is undetermined but would likely be either Bus Rapid Transit or Light Rail Transit. An alternatives analysis is presently Y underway to determine the best transit technology for the corridor. L The current (2000) Comprehensive Plan describes additional transit service desired by the community. i Such discussions are not included in this new Comprehensive Plan because Metro Transit has its own planning process which would solicit community input if such changes are considered in the future. PUBLIC TRANSIT POLICIES 1. It is the policy of the city that the preferred technology for the Northwest/Bottineau Transitway is light rail transit (LRT). Note: Because the city does not have the resources or authority to operate its own public transit service, and is dependent on a regional agency (Metro Transit) for that service, there is little for the city to do in terms of policy regarding the bus route system. I PUBLIC TRANSIT IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS Monitor and, as needed, participate in any Metro Transit consideration of modifying, expanding or eliminating transit service to the city. Im 2. Exercise the city's land use authority and any applicable municipal consent powers regarding any such changes in service or new facilities proposed by Metro Transit. 3. Continue to support the development of the Northwest/Bottineau Transitway with LRT as the preferred technology. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 84 OF 118 FIGURE L-1 PUBLIC TRANSIT NGN�V� x Q EXISTING METRO TRANSIT ROUTES POTENTIAL TRANSITWAY T 14 715 716 721 N 755 758 764 767 (NORTHWEST/BOTTINEAU) 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 85 OF 118 NONE PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 86 OF 118 CHAPTER M AVIATION (CRYSTAL AIRPORT) CHAPTER OVERVIEW This chapter addresses the role of the Crystal Airport in the regional aviation system, describes the city's policies for accommodating the continued operation of the facility by the Metropolitan Airports Commission, and reaffirms the city's position favoring closure of the airport and redevelopment of the site. BACKGROUND Crystal Airport (airport identifier "MIC") is owned and operated by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC), a state agency. The airport also operates five other reliever airports and Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. MAC's other five reliever airports are: ■ St. Paul Downtown in the city of St. Paul (airport identifier "STP") ■ Flying Cloud in the city of Eden Prairie (airport identifier "FCM") ■ Anoka County in the city of Blaine (airport identifier "ANE") ■ Airlake in the city of Lakeville (airport identifier "LVN") ■ Lake Elmo in central Washington County (airport identifier "21D") MAC classifies Crystal, Airlake and Lake Elmo as Minor Relievers which mainly serve personal aviation. MAC classifies its other three reliever airports, St. Paul Downtown, Flying Cloud and Anoka County, as Primary Relievers which mainly serve corporate and business aviation. Crystal Airport was established in the 1940s, immediately prior to development of the surrounding residential areas. The airport was subsequently expanded with longer runways, additional runways and larger taxiways and hangar areas. These expansions occurred after the surrounding neighborhoods had been developed. The state subsequently adopted regulations defining safety zones and limiting or even precluding certain land uses in each zone. These regulations were adopted by the city in its 1983 Airport Zoning Ordinance. In Safety Zone A, nearly all development, including not only houses but also roads, is prohibited. At this time, within the city of Crystal there are 114 single family houses and 14 multi- family dwelling units in Safety Zone A, in addition to many local streets and two minor arterial roads (CSAH 81 and 10). In Safety Zone B, houses are only permitted in an ultra -low-density, rural residential setting. At this time, within the city of Crystal there are 144 single family houses and 2 multi -family dwelling units in Safety Zone B. Because these areas were fully developed prior to the state's creation of airport safety zones, they are allowed to remain as previously developed neighborhoods and new structures may be built to replace existing structures. Crystal Airport takes up approximately 436 acres, of which 336 are within the city of Crystal, 80 within the city of Brooklyn Park and 20 within the city of Brooklyn Center. In Crystal, the airport is zoned R-1 Low Density Residential. Crystal's zoning ordinance has an Airport Overlay that allows the airport to continue operating as a non -conforming use. Expansion of airside facilities such as runways is 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 87 OF 118 I prohibited. Expansion of hangar areas or related landside facilities would require a Conditional Use Permit. 1 Aviation -related use of the Crystal Airport has been generally stable or declining for many years, with a pronounced decline since the Crystal Comprehensive Plan was last updated in 2000. This decline has manifested itself in many ways, including: b. ■ A decline in the number of operations (each takeoff or landing = one operation). ■ A decline in the number of airworthy aircraft (meaning, aircraft that can actually fly). Closure of multiple airport -based businesses. Declining activity is also occurring to varying degrees at MAC's five other reliever airports, and at small airports nationwide, especially those that mainly serve personal aviation such as recreational pilots and hobbyists. MAC has identified those users as the primary users of the Crystal Airport. In December 2007, the Metropolitan Airports Commission directed its staff to prepare a Long -Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP) for the Crystal Airport with a Preferred Alternative that would continue operation of the facility but close two of its four runways (paved primary 14R -32L and turf crosswind 6R -24L). The 30 -day public comment period has been completed and the LTCP is now at Metropolitan 6w Council for review prior to MAC considering formal adoption of the LTCP. If the two runways are closed, the number of dwelling units within Crystal in Safety Zone A would decrease from 128 to 115 and the number in Safety Zone B would decrease from 146 to 110. 6w One of the goals of MAC's Preferred Alternative for the LTCP is to allow some small parts of the j airport to be used for non -aeronautical, revenue -generating business property. Unless such new use 6W wouldbe low density residential, it would require City Council approval in the form of an amendment to the city's Comprehensive Plan, revisions to the Zoning Map and possibly a Conditional Use Permit i depending on the specific use proposed. `' POLICIES 1. The city's current (2000) Comprehensive Plan states that, despite the presence of hundreds of residences within the safety zones, in which by modern standards such development would be prohibited, the Crystal Airport is likely to remain in operation as long as it is necessary for the regional aviation system. However, closure of the airport and redevelopment of the site was stated as the city's long-term policy goal. This was essentially the same policy position taken by the city in the preceding (1993) Comprehensive Plan as well. Since the 2000 Comprehensive Plan was adopted, a dramatic decline in operations has occurred not only at the Crystal Airport but also throughout most of MAC's reliever system and at personal aviation -oriented airports ` nationally. The city no longer accepts the assumption that the Crystal Airport is necessary, or will ever be necessary, for the regional aviation system. However, the city recognizes that it does not have the authority to close the Crystal Airport. For this reason, the city's aviation policies are as follows: _ a) Notify the FAA in accordance with CFR - Part 77, using the FAA Form 7460-1 'Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration". 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 88 OF 118 b) Continue to protect airspace in accordance with the 1983 Joint Airport Zoning Ordinance, as amended. c) Allow lawfully non -conforming airport buildings and uses to continue. d) Allow additional airport buildings and land uses by Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the Airport Overlay zoning district. e) Because the Crystal Airport is embedded in a predominantly residential area and there are hundreds of residences within the safety zones, there shall be no expansion of runways or other changes that would further increase the safety hazard. _ f) If MAC proposes non -aeronautical uses on part of the airport site, the city will consider such Comprehensive Plan amendments, Zoning Map revisions and Conditional Use Permits in accordance with the city's normal exercise of its land use authority for such uses. 2. Because the city believes that continued operation of the Crystal Airport is inappropriate for the community and unnecessary for the regional aviation system, the city's policies towards the Crystal Airport also include the following: a) Advocate closure of the Crystal Airport and redevelopment of the site for a mixture of job - creating commercial and industrial development as well as new residential development consistent with the city's housing goals. b) If closure and redevelopment are to occur, the city will engage a master planning process including extensive community involvement and participation by other units of government to determine a more specific vision for the site. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 89 OF 118 FIGURE M-1 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 RELIEVER AIRPORT OPERATIONS 1997-2007 Total Annual Operations at each MAC Towered Reliever 1997-2007 Total Annual Operations for all MAC Towered Relievers 1997-2007 n^n Inn �- STP �- FCM -� ANE - MIC ■ MIC ■ANE ■ FCM ■ STP Data are actual operations from FAA tower records "STP" is St. Paul Downtown, "FCM" is Flying Cloud, "ANE" is Anoka County, and "MIC" is Crystal 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 90 OF 118 TABLE M-1 C1TRRF.NT 1TTTT.T7.ATTnN nF Arucm1W VAIDA 019rV Airport Capacity 2007 Operations Percent of Capacity Airlake 230,000 45,000 19.6% Anoka County 230,000 80,517 35.0% Crystal 355,000 53,583 15.1% Flying Cloud 355,000 118,178 33.3% Lake Elmo 230,000 40,000 17.4% St. Paul 265,000 117,977 44.5% Total - MAC Relievers 1,665,000 455,255 27.3% %,upuctty ( hrtrtuat aervtce votume )provtaea vy MAc, 2007 Operations provided by FAA (actual for towered relievers, estimated for non -towered) TABLE M-2 2025 FORECAST AIRSIDF. C APACITV Airport Capacity 2025 O erations Percent of Capacity Airlake 230,000 104,009 45.2% Anoka County 230,000 123,990 53.9% Crystal 355,000 89,644 25.3% Flying Cloud 355,000 179,390 50.5% Lake Elmo 230,000 91,020 39.6% St. Paul 1 265,000 181,266 68.4% Total - MAC Relievers 1,665,000 772,713 46.4% Uapactty ( Hnnuat oervtce votume ) provtaea Vy MAC, 2025 Operations forecast provided by FAA TABLE M-3 LANDSIDE CAPACITY (AIRCRAFT STORAGE) Airport Existing Hangar Spaces All Based Aircraft (2007) Airworthy Based Aircraft (2007) Number Number % Capacity Number % Capacity Airlake 160 157 98.1% 136 85.0% Anoka County- 670 440 65.7% 378 56.4% Cr stal 382 250 65.4% 214 56.0% Flying Cloud 4450 418 92.9% 385 85.5% Lake Elmo5 256 228 89.1% 199 77.7% St. Paul 15985 53.5% 84 53.5% Total - MAC Relievers 2,077 1,578 76% 1,396 67.3% woes not tnctuae 61 aaatttonat hangar spaces proposed by MAC at Airlake by 2025 2Includes 160 additional hangar spaces currently under development at Anoka County in the northwest hangar area, but does not include 102 additional hangar spaces proposed by MAC at Anoka County by 2025 3Does not include 74 additional hangar spaces proposed by MAC at Crystal by 2025 4Does not include 176 additional hangar spaces proposed by MAC at Flying Cloud by 2025 SDoes not include 60 additional hangar spaces proposed by MAC at Lake Elmo by 2025 Hangar spaces provided by MAC Based Aircraft and Airworthy Based Aircraft provided by MnDOT 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 91 OF 118 FIGURE M-2 EXISTING RUNWAY CONFIGURATION Safety Zone Impacts - Current Runway Configuration T Based on the runway configuration existing in 2007 N Aerial photo and mapping provided by MAC Safety Zone A 0 Single-family parcels in A 11 Multi -family parcels in A F._ Safety Zone B Single-family parcels in B Multi -family parcels in B 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 92 OF 118 FIGURE M-3 PROPOSED RUNWAY CONFIGURATION Fl - C, TY OF CRYSTAL • L"-, T, M LZ T Safety Zone Impacts - Proposed Runway Configuration T Based on the runway configuration identified as the Preferred Alternative by MAC in December 2007 N Aerial photo and mapping provided by MAC Safety Zone A Single-family parcels in A 11 Multi -family parcels in A Safety Zone B Single-family parcels in B Multi -family parcels in B 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 812812008 - PAGE 93 OF 118 PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED (Comments presented as written, without correction.) COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #1 (November 15,2007): • Keep the airport — a great asset to Crystal. Don't let greedy developers lead you astray! _ • The airport is a good thing — it keeps the large commercial jets away — the WW II planes are enjoyable to watch fly in and out — It is the Crystal airport — it gives Crystal an identity for the _ county wide flying community. • Develop airport light industrial ASAP • I'm all for doing something productive with the airport when it is closed. • Crystal Airport — Update & please keep operations going. • Air Port Leave it alone Add eating establishment. So a person can injoy it. • Air Port - Leave alone or add eating place reason to go to while enjoying air planes • I repeat for the umpteenth time — Keep the airport as is • Please condemn the airport or somehow turn it into light industrial, to provide jobs. I heard someone say it's a buffer zone between their house & perceived crime in Brooklyn Park + Br Center • Because of central location — how about the Vikings stadium on the Crystal Airport site. It's a perfect location. Think big — Hotels, shopping, condo's, etc. • I think the Crystal Airport is a part of Crystal history that should remain as long as there is use. If the airport was closed I would not want to see anything other that single family homes on this land — except right along Lakeland Avenue where maybe commercial or light industrial would be better. COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #2 (April 17,2008): • Airport — As homeowner's who may lose our home due to safety zones — we are NOT in favor of closing the airport. Please be fair in giving a clear and truthful status from the MAC's side — they plan to keep it open - no more negative spin by the city. • Airport — By all means keep it! This is part of Crystal's identity. If some other use needs to be made on the property, a small restaurant or coffee bar would attract both pilots, employees, and observers. — But keep the airport open! • Keep the Airport. It's part of our identity. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 94 OF 118 OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES CHAPTER N PARKS AND OPEN SPACE CHAPTER O WATER RESOURCES 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 -PAGE 95 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 96 OF 118 CHAPTER N PARKS AND OPEN SPACE CHAPTER OVERVIEW The Parks chapter describes the existing system of parks and trails in the city, and describes the land use -related goals and policies necessary to achieve the planned system of parks and trails in the city. Section 1 breaks down the city's existing facilities into five categories and describes the desired characteristics and typical facilities for each type. Section 2 contains the goals and policies addressing not only the general needs of the city but specific approaches to neighborhood parks and natural features. It is important to note that the Comprehensive Plan deals primarily with land use -related impacts. For this reason, it does not include detailed and specific facility or programming changes to the parks and recreation system. Rather, such changes are addressed in the Capital Improvements Program updated annually by the City Council with the input of the Parks and Recreation Commission. Section 3 describes the implementation items necessary to achieve the planned parks and trail system, such as acquisition of additional park property and the need for detailed feasibility studies for potential long-range projects. As with goals and policies (see above), the Comprehensive Plan does not discuss implementation items that have little or no land use impact. Section 3 also contains maps showing the existing system and also what the planned ultimate system would contain if all of these items are implemented. Section 4 contains a summary of public comments received regarding the materials presented at the two open houses. SECTION 1 EXISTING PARKS AND TRAIL SYSTEM A. NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS Neighborhood Parks are the majority of Crystal's parks. They are designed to meet the needs of the residential properties within a walking distance of typically no more than 1/2 mile. They are intended to serve small groups and provide places for unstructured play. Neighborhood parks vary in size, depending on the size of their service area and the structures and equipment they contain. Example: Welcome Park located along Welcome Avenue south of 47th Avenue. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 97 OF 118 List of Neighborhood Parks for the purposes of this plan: Skyway Park Broadway Park North Bass Lake Park Twin Oak Park Lions Soo Line Park Iron Horse Park Welcome Park Kentucky Park Crystal Highlands Park Lee Park Sunnyview Park Yunker Park FIGURE N-1: EXAMPLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK B. COMMUNITY PARKS Community Parks emphasize structured, group oriented activities such as athletic games, aquatics, sliding, large playgrounds, and picnic facilities. They also typically include the same type of facilities and equipment contained within Neighborhood Parks. ft - List of Community Parks for the purposes of this plan: North Lions Park Crystal Community Center - Forest Park (paired) _ Valley Place Park Bassett Creek Park 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 98 OF 118 FIGURE N-2 EXAMPLE OF A COMMUNITY PARK C. SPECIALTY PARKS Specialty Parks focus on a specific activity or activities, although they may also serve as Neighborhood Parks depending on the type of facilities and equipment they contain. List of Specialty Parks for the purposes of this plan: Becker Park Cavanagh Park ^ _ 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 99 OF 118 FIGURE N-3 EXAMPLE OF A SPECIALTY PARK D. CONSERVANCY AREAS Conservancy Areas focus on passive activities and green spaces, including some water retention ponds and similar facilities. List of Conservancy Areas for the purposes of this plan: MAC Park Twin Lake Shores Memory Lane Pond Brownwood Pond Schutz Park Florida Pond The Preserve at Hagemeister Pond The Preserve at Bassett Creek 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 100 OF 118 how W- FIGURE N-4 EXAMPLE OF A CONSERVANCY AREA E. TRAIL SYSTEM -, The trail system consists of Sidewalks, Multi -Use Paths, and Bike Lanes identified in Chapter K (Non - Motorized Transportation). The trail system is intended to make connections among neighborhoods, parks, public or semi-public facilities, shopping areas and workplaces. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 101 OF 118 FIGURE N-5 EXAMPLE OF A SIDEWALK AND SHOULDER BIKE LANE FIGURE N-6 EXAMPLE OF A MULTI -USE PATH 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 102 OF 118 SECTION 2 GOALS AND POLICIES I. Consider specific facility options with the following three general goals of the Park & Recreation Commission in mind: - Preserve and enhance open space - Connect neighborhoods - Upgrade and modernize the infrastructure 2. Increase emphasis on passive recreation as warranted by changing demographics and lifestyles. _ 3. To the extent feasible in a fully developed community, expand existing parks and acquire additional park sites as specific needs are determined and opportunities are identified. _ 4. Planning for the park system should place an increased emphasis on a community perspective, with a secondary emphasis on neighborhoods. 5. Specific park facility improvements should attempt to maximize adaptive flexibility so that the parks may change as the needs of the neighborhood and community change. 6. Facilities within neighborhood parks will be evaluated and improvements will be considered based on the following table: _ TABLE N -I FACILITIES NEEDS IN NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS Important for all Surplus items to be Suggestions for additional neighborhood parks considered for removal facilities to consider Open areas for unorganized Secondary ball fields Drinking fountains play (baseball, soccer, football, etc) Playground equipment Locked & unused shelters Simple, low cost, aquatic toys such as spray fountains Picnic areas Shade structures for picnic & playgrounds Pleasure skating rinks (if Restroom facilities rinks are not available at nearby parks) Security lighting Tricycle trails (intended to keep young children off the streets) Benches, especially near the Community gardens (flower playground equipment & vegetable) Basketball half courts Skateboard spots (usually unfenced) IIndividual benches 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 103 OF 118 r.. 7. Maximize opportunities to make water bodies more appealing, for example, by continuing and expanding the planting of appropriate vegetation adjacent to stormwater ponds, creeks and lakefront in parks or on other public property. In addition to improving the aesthetics of the site, it will help to improve water quality over time. 8. To the extent feasible in a first tier suburb, develop trails to improve the connectivity among park sites, community facilities, residential neighborhoods and commercial areas. 9. Continue to require park dedication or payment -in -lieu, as appropriate, for any new development that results in an increased number of residential dwelling units or acres of other development in the city. Such funds will be used for capital improvements to the parks system including but not limited to land acquisition, clearance and site preparation for parks or open space use; expansion or improvement of existing facilities; and construction of new facilities. SECTION 3 IMPLEMENTATION In general, the implementation items listed in this plan are limited to those that directly impact land use, transportation, or other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Changes that do not impact the elements of this plan, for example, removing a softball field and installing a soccer field in its place, are not listed among the implementation items below. Instead, such programming -related changes are described in other documents and the city's capital improvement program reviewed by the Park & Recreation Commission and approved by the City Council. 1. Adopt an official Parks Map and Facilities Guide, showing existing facilities including an inventory of facilities at each park. Make it available on the city website as well as at '— community facilities and in the new homeowner packets. To ensure its usefulness by the general public, this map and guide will be updated as additional facilities are added. 2. Continue incremental expansion of Hagemeister Pond Preserve in accordance with the adopted 2000 master plan and/or as opportunities for voluntary acquisition arise. 3. Continue to acquire additional park land throughout the city as needed and as funding allows. Such efforts should focus on acquisitions that solve continuity issues (i.e. buying the "last piece" to complete a park site) or allow for specific facilities to be added to the park system. 4. Concurrent with the feasibility study for a trail connection along the `Chain of Ponds' (Memory Lane, Brownwood, Hagemeister and Gaulke) as described in Chapter K (Non -Motorized Transportation), consider opportunities for additional public open space in this area. 5. Concurrent with the feasibility study for a trail connection along Bassett Creek between 32nd Avenue and 36th Avenue as described in Chapter K (Non -Motorized Transportation), consider opportunities for public open space in this area. NOTE: This item was not supported by all members of the Task Force. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 104 OF 118 6. To facilitate an improved pedestrian connection between the Crystal Community Center and the oversize gymnasium at Forest Elementary School, study various options and determine whether additional pedestrian facilities are warranted. Among the options are the following facilities: - Existing sidewalk along 47th Avenue from Douglas Drive to the school. (This is an existing sidewalk which would be reconstructed as part of Forest North neighborhood street _ reconstruction tentatively planned for 2013.) - Marked crosswalk at 48th Avenue. - Potential sidewalk along 48th Avenue from Douglas Drive to the school. - Existing marked crosswalk at Fairview Avenue. 7. Study options for relocating the Public Works materials stockpile from Bassett Creek Park to some other location. Such relocation would likely have to be considered concurrent with the closure of the existing gravel segment of Brunswick Avenue. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 105 OF 118 FIGURE N-7 NORTHWEST QUADRANT EXISTING PARKS AND TRAIL SYSTEM Existing (2007) System A/ Sidewalks Multi Use Paths Bike Lanes Shoulder Bike Lanes N A 0 1000 2000 Feet 6 -------------- w GC rth 4 a (n O g --------- ---- 60TH AVE ' A Br ayll D 59TH AVEUj 9G 58TH AV E a C I I G i B� 53RD AVE 1 CORVALLIS jcc _--F-AiRVIEW N I a Forgst Elementary j z 47TH AV E i I I I I i 45TI AVE I i C� 0 5V Cc 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 106 OF 118 I I ii i. Ira 53RD AVE 1 CORVALLIS jcc _--F-AiRVIEW N I a Forgst Elementary j z 47TH AV E i I I I I i 45TI AVE I i C� 0 5V Cc 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 106 OF 118 FIGURE N-8 NORTHWEST QUADRANT PLANNED UNLTIMATE PARKS AND TRAIL SYSTEM 62ND AVEw Northwest -- ----- ---- >iff __ Quadrant Skyway a rth Lions a O � ------------------ -----• 60TH AVE 2 O r ay j .� HH AVE W z z 5 H` AYE cn icn <<<REVISIONS IN PROCESS>>> ■ Delete sidewalk on Elmhurst north of 5e, and along 591h ■ Add sidewalk along 58th from West Broadway to Elmhurst ■ Delete sidewalks along 5P 1 Planned Ultimate System A/ Existing & Planned Sidewalks Existing & Planned Bike Lanes .0 Existing & Planned Multi Use Paths F� City Limits i1 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Feet I G�!!m 55T W CORV�LIS W O c Q 2 a F4i- 45TH AVE 51c Cl M 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 107 OF 118 FIGURE N-9 NORTHEAST QUADRANT EXISTING PARKS AND TRAIL SYSTEM W. Northeast Quadrant M Park/Wildlife I rea i 4 3 60TH AVE 58TH AVE.) 58TH AVE LU ZW C } LU L_ U 58TH AVE LU North Bass Lake 4V 0 M Twin Oak WILSHHE BLVq,. ji 0 \ 60 � W I Existing (2007) System > I Lions Soo Line ^v Sidewalks + Multi Use Paths , , �- � 4- v cl� Bike Lanes Shoulder Bike Lane: IST P 5 h 5�5' P S q hhu,, bz, Twin La I ej t Shor W OCommunity e — 47TH A e N A 0 1000 2000 Feet nnnnmnff�� 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 812812008 - PAGE 108 OF 118 FIGURE N-10 W PC D 00 O :c )T NORTHEAST QUADRANT PLANNED UNLTIMATE PARKS AND TRAIL SYSTEM ------------------------- Northeast I Quadrant Mac ParklWildlife Area I 60TH AVE `i I 1 58TH AVEN EE �� o � -j 51 ST P� c� CCommunity Ce Municipal Pool �as.3 Lake 1 1 58TH AVE i J `— <<<REVISIONS IN PROCESS>>> f Delete sidewalk on 47th from Welcome to West Broadway Lions Soo Line �9G O ' i O i ana i ,r Twin Lake Shore I J I N A v I 0 500 1000 1500 Feet I I 7TH AVE m alnne_d-MU-Mate System i A/ Existing & Planned Sidewalks Existing & Planned Bike Lanes Existing & Planned Multi Use Paths City Limits 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 812812008 - PAGE 109 OF 118 FIGURE N-1 l SOUTHWEST QUADRANT EXISTING PARKS AND TRAIL SYSTEM I Existing (2007) System A/ Sidewalks Multi Use Paths Bike Lanes Shoulder Bike Lanes 42ND AV AVE Memory j = Library & I City Hall i F agemeister P nd Ke I cky I I i Florida I i 38T AVE Crysta -' hlands l I` i z 0 Y ___,j I � i i nker I 32N[ i N A 0 r�� 34TH AVEC w lZ > ley Place a cn Q M -- o Sunnyview 30TH AVE 0 1000 2000 Feet 27TH AVE 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 110 OF 118 FIGURE N-12 SOUTHWEST QUADRANT PLANNED UNLTIMATE PARKS AND TRAIL SYSTEM 45Th AVE i i Me n I- I42ND A °° Planned Ultimate System Library � City Hall Existing & Planned Sidewalks — Existing & Planned Bike Lanes I Hage is °v Existing & Planned Multi Use Paths I, /��,� City Limits KekyT,` ------------ I l — I i i � �Iorida 8T A aC- C+tal Hi h la nd s _ I 3611H AV z Q _ in o _ a J 34TH AVEW Z Regional Trail > z j Alignment c N p 0 32ND AVE F- o — I ker Our 'e u I N --- _ 30TH AVE Neill Southwest 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Feet 27TH AW Quadrant 19 _ 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 812812008 - PAGE 111 OF 118 FIGURE N-13 SOUTHEAST QUADRANT EXISTING PARKS AND TRAIL SYSTEM cn 11 0 AVE Magnet A Ll 34TH AVE I - NAVE' I Y I'' (0.) Bassett Existing (2007) System An}/Sidewalks V / Multi Use Paths Bike Lanes Shoulder Bike Lanes 4FTH AV1= F - z �ree W � W O oc z 34TO AVE N I z I N 0 1000 2000 Feet Southeast Quadrant 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 112 OF 118 FIGURE N-14 SOUTHEAST QUADRANT PLANNED UNLTIMATE PARKS AND TRAIL SYSTEM C� O a AVE Potential "Chain of Ponds" Trail Connection F ' Magnet Sch 1 111! 36TH AVE Potential O Bassett Creek U Trail Connection J 34TH AVE 3 ND AVEI Bassett Planned Ultimate System A/ Existing & Planned Sidewalks Existing & Planned Bike Lanes A Existing & Planned Multi Use Paths /A \,/ City Limits H W O W 01 '1 See O Z 0 500 10001500 Feet 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 812812008 - PAGE 113 OF 118 SECTION 4 —' PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED (Comments presented as written, without correction.) COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #1 (November 15,2007): • Skyway Park - Could we just update this park to make it safer for the kids. We could form 2 community groups to keep it free of the broken beer bottles & used condoms. • Please improve Iron Horse Park -I mean, enlarge it. When my son was younger, I took him + his friends to the park a lot. I've been a member of the Henn Co./3 rivers Parks too, but Iron Horse is near + nice. Thank you for the new equipment. Please enlarge Iron Horse Park. _ • There is an excellent opportunity to expand Bassette Creek Park to the West & also to remove Brunswick Ave N. thru the park _ • When are we going to put in a dog park? It is needed + would build sense of community getting tired of driving to Plymouth + Champlin! _ COMMENT CARD SUMMARY FROM OPEN HOUSE #2 (April 17,2008): • Put in a new bench on the north side of Bassett Ck. Park along 32nd by either the east or west parking lot. • Dog park needed • 1. Need to be green, ecology, and provide habitat for wildlife. 2. Why/don't cut the trees shrubs, natural vegetation around ponds (Bassett Creek, etc.) • City should encourage, not discourage, sledding on Memory Park Hill. Leave the light on during the evening in winter. • Crystal needs to be green, emphasize ecology, and provide habitat for birds and wildlife. Stop cutting the willows & cottonwoods on the shorelines of Bassett Ck. & other ponds. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 114 OF 118 CHAPTER O WATER RESOURCES CHAPTER OVERVIEW The Water Resources chapter is comprised of three sections: Section 1: Wastewater and comprehensive sewer plan Section 2: Surface water management plan to protect water quality and address water quantity issues Section 3: Water supply plan to ensure a safe and sufficient water supply now and in the future. SECTION 1 WASTEWATER AND COMPREHENSIVE SEWER PLAN Crystal is a fully developed community, and as such, the land use changes contemplated in this Comprehensive Plan are expected to have an insignificant impact on the regional wastewater treatment and disposal system. The city's sanitary sewer collection system is complete and the city's focus will continue to be on maintenance and preservation of the existing system. The city does not anticipate construction of any major sanitary sewer trunk lines or lift stations through 2030. Metropolitan Council forecasts that both average and peak flows will decline slightly through 2030. Their forecasts are based on their growth forecasts for population, households and employment (see Chapter D). However, the city forecasts stability in population, somewhat slower growth in housing units and much slower growth in employment when compared with Metropolitan Council's forecasts (see Chapter E). Therefore the city's expectation is that actual flow rates will trend at or below the Metropolitan Council forecasts through 2030. — TABLE 0-1 SANITARY SEWER FLOW FORECASTS 2010 2020 2030 Sewered Population 22,700 22,800 23,500 - Sewered Households 9,700 10,100 10,500 Sewered Employment 6,600 7,250 8,050 Average Annual Wastewater Flow (MGD) 2.26 2.21 2.22 Allowable Peak Hourly Flow (MGD) 6.32 6.19 6.22 "MGD" means Millions of Gallons per Day 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 115 OF 118 MAP O-1 SANITARY SEWER SERVICE AREA (BOTH EXISTING AND PROPOSED - NO CHANGE) • MCES Meter MCES Interceptor Meter Shed M113 Framework 2030 Developed Area UP ------------------,------------------------=-------- i I r---------- � I i } i I ! 4 lI I!-JI_A) i p _ 1 I I � � r i J � I i I Ir------------; -------- I i ! ! ° •fi=r, L ! i i ! I -----� I t----------------- 1 t ----------------I --J 1 -GV -460 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 116 OF 118 The city is committed to preventing and reducing excessive infiltration and inflow (" UI") in the local sewer system. To that end, the city has implemented the following policies: ■ The city prohibits connection of sump pumps and foundation drains to the sanitary sewer. ■ Upon sale or rental of any residential property in the city, the Housing Maintenance Compliance process includes an inspection for prohibited connections to the sanitary sewer, with corrections required as part of the inspector's orders. ■ The city is inspecting all properties in those areas exhibiting disproportionately high UI for prohibited connections to the sanitary sewer and is ordering removal of any unlawful connections. These inspections and corrections are required even for properties that are not being sold or rented. ■ Upon reconstruction of neighborhood streets, the city offers to install sump boxes in the boulevard in rt those locations where drain tile or storm sewer will be located adjacent to the street. ■ Also as part of its neighborhood street reconstruction program, the city televises its sanitary sewer mains in each project area and repairs or replaces pipes and manholes that have been compromised. Slightly more than half the city's neighborhoods have had their streets reconstructed, and the city expects to reconstruct the remainder of its streets by 2017. _ As part of its 2009-2010 water meter replacement program, each house in the city not previously inspected will be inspected for prohibited connections to the sanitary sewer and the city will order removal of any unlawful connections. SECTION 2 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN The city's surface water management plan is a stand-alone document that is currently in the process of being developed. When completed, it will be included in this Comprehensive Plan by reference. SECTION 3 WATER SUPPLY PLAN The city's water supply plan is a stand-alone document that is currently in the process of being developed. When completed, it will be included in this Comprehensive Plan by reference. 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 -PAGE 117 OF 118 2008 CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - STAFF DRAFT 8/28/2008 - PAGE 118 OF 118 CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS ON PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS August 19, 2008: 1. The Council unanimously approved Second Reading and adopted an ordinance amendment making a technical correction to Sections 515.37 and 515.41 of City Code pertaining to accessory uses in R-2 and R-3 districts. 2. The Council unanimously approved a conditional use permit for outdoor food and beverage service at Crystal Bistro, 6406 56th Avenue North. 3. The Council unanimously approved first reading of an ordinance rezoning 5430 Douglas Drive North from Commercial Planned Unit Development to 1-1 Light Industrial, together with a Conditional Use Permit for outdoor storage. Second reading is scheduled for September 2, 2008.