Loading...
2004.09.13 PC Meeting PacketCRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA SUMMARY September 13, 2004 7:00 p.m. Crystal City Hall — Council Chambers 4141 Douglas Dr N A. CALL TO ORDER B. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 1. Election of a new Vice Chair due to resignation of Commissioner Todd Graham. C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - June 14, 2004 regular meeting D. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Consider Application 2004-07 for a Conditional Use Permit to relocate the Highview Alternative Program to the former Cavanagh Elementary School at 5400 Corvallis Avenue North.* 2. Consider Application 2004-08 for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to implement the TH 100 Study Group recommendations and eliminate the Public/Institutional classification from the Future Land Use Map.* 3. Consider Application 2004-09 for a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to add a non -conforming uses section that complies with a recently adopted state statute.* E. OLD BUSINESS F. NEW BUSINESS G. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. City Council actions on recent Planning Commission items.* 2. Staff preview of likely agenda items for October 11, 2004 meeting. H. OPEN FORUM L ADJOURNMENT * Items for which supporting material will be included in the meeting packet. CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 149 2004 A. CALL TO ORDER Page I of S The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: Davis, Krueger, Nystrom, Strand, VonRueden, and Hester. Also present were the following: City Council Liaison Gary Joselyn, Planner Sutter and Recording Secretary Matthews. B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the minutes of the May 10, 2004 regular meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Consider Application 2004-03 for Site Plan Review to construct a new 15,543 sq. ft. commercial building at 5756 Lakeland Ave N. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated there is currently non acceptable landscape material and asphalt that both the current owner and the previous owner were made aware. The city would like to take this opportunity to current these issues. Staff is comfortable with the revised landscaping plan and we ask that you incorporate this into your recommendations. The recommendations of staff is to approve the site plan as submitted but further modified by the revised landscaping plan. John Maer came forward and stated that he represents the owner and any questions could be directed to him. The only thing I have a question on is that the city is asking for a$30,000.00 retainer for a year, is the city paying interest on that? Planner Sutter stated yes. In addition, we would only hold the landscaping portion of that for an additional year, which would be 10,000.00, $20,000.00 of it would be returned upon completion of the project. Maer asked if there were any questions from the commissioners. Commissioner Strand asked if there were any potential tenants for the other spaces. Maer stated no, not at the moment. We do have a back up plan which could expand into an outlet, and there is a possibility of a rug store or a flooring store. Commissioner Sears asked what about the future scope of the City and the Highway 81 corridor, bus routes and mass transit are the setbacks sufficient? Planner Sutter stated that we have made the property owner aware of what could potentially occur. Commissioner Kruger asked about the rain runoff because there is no sewer there. Are we going to get more run off? Planner Sutter stated the project is actually reducing the hard surface area. Page 2 of 5 Because there will be a net reduction in impervious surface and because of the size of the site the Shingle Creek Watershed has waived any review requirements. For that reason there is no on site ponding required. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Kruger. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Kruger, seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to recommend to City Council to approve Application 2004-03 for Site Plan Review to construct a new 15,543 sq. ft. commercial building at 5756 Lakeland Avenue North. Findings of fact and conditions are stated in the staff report. Moved by Commissioner Kruger, seconded by Commissioner Nystrom. Motion carried. 2. Consider Application 2004-04 for Variance to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage at 5013 Welcome Avenue North from 40% to 52%. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated our ordinance has maximum percentages of what rear yards that can be covered by all structures and pavement. This particular property is over 60% approaching 70% coverage right now. It is staff's opinion that the variance is warranted in this instance to allow for more coverage to access both garages. The 40% coverage would not be adequate to do that. They have submitted a request to bring it down to 52% reduction. However, staff feels it would be possible to achieve access with 50%. Staff recommends approval at 50%. It wouldn't have to be this exact layout out as long as the 50% guideline was followed. Commissioner Kruger asked why does the square footage exceed the footprint of the house? Planner Sutter stated that while the pavement is not grandfathered in, unfortunately staff at the time approved the permit for a garage over 1000 square feet. This would not be allowed with the current ordinance. Commissioner Sears asked why is there such a big apron on the west side, what is the point if the pavement? Planner Sutter state that is one of the reasons why staff is asking that they downsize the hard surface to get down to the 50%. Chair VonReuden stated that this is a Public Hearing is there anyone that would like to speak to the issue? Carol Johnson, owner of 5013 Welcome, said they don't agree with the design that the city proposed. Chair VonRueden asked were you aware when you bought the property that you would have to bring this into compliance, are you willing to get down to the 50%? Johnson stated she thought the 52% was good enough but apparently not. Johnson stated the City's time limit is fine. Chair VonRueden asked if there was anyone else that would like to speak to this issue. Page 3 of 5 Moved by Commissioner Nystrom, seconded by Commissioner Krurger to close the Public Hearing . Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Davis seconded by Commissioner Kruger to recommend to City Council to deny Application 2004-04 for a Variance to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage at 5013 Welcome Avenue North from 40% to 52%. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Sears to recommend to the July 6th City Council to approve Application 2004-04 to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage for 5013 Welcome Avenue North from 40% to 50 % Motion carried. 3. Consider Application 2004-05 for a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to revise Subsection 515.61 (Floodplain Overlay), including adoption of new Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that FEMA restudied Bassett Creek, and as part of their study they have revised their boundary maps for flood hazards. The remapping did remove approximately 30 properties that were previously in Zone A, they were moved out of the flood zone. There were about 10 properties in the city that were not in the flood zone that are now in the flood zone. In addition to this the City is being required by FEMA and the State to replace subsection 515.61 of the zoning code which is the flood plain management section with all new language to meet federal and state standards. Staff recommends that we adopt the new ordinance text and new flood plain maps A resident (name unknown) expressed concerns over the insurance requirements and costs. Planner Sutter explained that flood insurance is not required by law. The city feels obligated to adopt this for the reason that the city would get kicked out of the federal insurance program Mary Luttonmier from 3260 Brunswick said her home is the last one on the hill, there are homes across from her that are actually on the riverbank, why is she now in the flood zone? Planner Sutter responded that there is a process that you can go through to determine if an error has been made involving your property. However, we can not hold up adopting this ordinance. Ken Hyle from 32nd Ave N expressed his concern about the changes. Robert (last name unkown) from 3248 Brunswick expressed his opposition to the changes. Paul Kapesky from 5409 451h Place expressed his concerns about the changes. Chris Wosley from 3940 Edgewood Ave expressed his concerns about the changes. Randall Bergquist from 6408 42nd asked how high does it have to get before its pumped? Planner Sutter stated that that question should be directed to the City Engineer. Shantell Sumner from 3259 Brunswick stated she wanted to build a bigger house, and said she doesn't have any incentive to do so now. Elaine Erickson from 6914 42nd expressed her concerns about the changes. Peggy (last name unknown) from 3254 Brunswick Ave N expressed her concerns about the changes. Page 4 of S Al Jurdeky from 4401 Louisiana Ave N said he received assistance from FEMA in 1987. Jan Jorgenson 4400 Louisiana Ave N expressed her concerns about the changes. Tony (last name unknown) from 3301 Brunswick expressed his concerns about the changes. Bob Bender expressed his concerns about the changes. Steve Gaberr from 3254 Brunswick expressed his concerns about the changes. Motion by Commissioner Nystrom, seconded by Commissioner Kruger to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Davis to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2004-05 for a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to revise Subsection 515.61 (Floodplain Overlay), including adoption of new Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Motion carried. Chair VonRueden stated that Tom Mathisen the City Engineer is best equipped to answer questions regarding the new flood plain. 4. Consider Application 2004-06 for Preliminary Plat of Brunswick Fields (currently 4120, 4130 and 4140 Brunswick Avenue North) to create four lots for a new house construction. Planner Sutter summarized the staff report and stated that these are currently lots that are occupied by older homes. They are all functionally obsolete. Two of them were certainly blighted. The EDA has acquired the properties for redevelopment, and is proposing that the three lots get replatted into four lots. Commissioner Kruger asked if any trees would be removed for this project. Planner Sutter stated that some would be removed but there will also be some bigger trees that stay. Chair VonRueden asked if anyone else would like to speak to this issue this is a Public Hearing. Scott (last name unknown) asked how long the EDA had these lots and how did you manage to get four in a row? Planner Sutter explained how the lots were acquired. Moved by Commissioner Kruger, seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Davis to recommend to City Council to approve Application 2004-06 for Preliminary Plat of Brunswick Fields (currently 4120, 4130 and 4140 Brunswick Avenue North) to create four lots for new house construction. Findings of fact and conditions of approval are summarized in the staff report Motion carried Page 5 of S D. OLD BUSINESS Chair VonRueden confirmed that we all got a copy of the memo concerning Todd Graham's resignation. Commissioner Kruger asked what do we do about a vice chair. Chair VonRueden stated we can do this tonight elect a new vice chair. Planner Sutter stated we can do that at the next meeting and add it to the agenda E. NEW BUSINESS None F. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Strand to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Chair VonRueden Secretary Strand ME M ORA N D U M DATE: September 10, 2004 TO: PI ing Commission (September 13th meeting) FROM: John Sutter, Planner and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Consider Application 2004-07 for a Conditional Use Permit to relocate the Highview Alternative Program to the former Cavanagh Elementary School at 5400 Corvallis Avenue North.* A. BACKGROUND The subject property is a 8.7 acre site owned by Independent School District #281 a.k.a. Robbinsdale Area Schools ("the district"). The east half of the property is used for park purposes. Until the mid 1970s the west half of property was the Cavanagh Elementary School. In addition to the building, the property includes two parking lots, driveways, and some hard surfaced play areas. After the elementary school use ended, the district has used the facility for a variety of programs and activities. This includes leasing it to Intermediate District 287 for a time. Other than routine building permits, we have no records indicating that the city has ever evaluated the district's use of the facility for compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. From a zoning standpoint, only its use as an elementary school would be considered lawfully nonconforming, and even that is questionable since that particular use ended nearly 30 years ago. The district is proposing to retrofit the east wing of the facility to accommodate the Highview Alternative Program. This program is an alternative to traditional high school for students in grades 10-12, aged 16 and older. It has approximately 150 students and 10 staff. Highview is currently located in the Robbinsdale Area Community Education Center at 4139 Regent Avenue North. Retrofitting the Cavanagh facility would be completed in fall 2004 for occupancy by Highview as early as December. The property is guided for public/institutional use and is zoned R-1 Low Density Residential. Due to the changes in use since the elementary school function ended, a Conditional Use Permit should have been required at some time in the past. A CUP is definitely required now due to the proposed addition of the Highview program. The district has submitted an application requesting such a CUP. Notice of the public hearing was mailed to property owners within 700 feet of the property and published in the Sun Post on September 2, 2004. At the September 13, 2004 meeting, the Planning Commission will hold the public hearing and may make a recommendation for the City Council to consider at its September 21, 2004 meeting. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - FORMER CAVANAGH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (5400 CORVALLIS) PAGE 1 OF 5 The following Exhibits are attached: A. Plat map showing the subject property. B. Aerial photo showing the subject property. C. Floor plan of the building. D. Site Plan submitted by the applicant. E. Narrative submitted by the applicant. F. Comparison of estimated daily car and bus trips generated during the 2003-2004 school year (without Highview) versus the 2004-2005 school year (with Highview). G. Comparison of estimated parking demand generated during the 2003-2004 school year (without Highview) versus the 2004-2005 school year (with Highview). H. Zoning ordinance excerpts related to Conditional Use Permit requirements. I. Written comments received from the public. B. STAFF COMMENTS 1. Land use and zoning — generally. The Zoning Ordinance requires that the facility be served by arterial, collector or Municipal State Aid ("MSA") streets sufficient to handle the traffic generated by the facility. Unfortunately, there are no such streets directly abutting the property. The strictest possible interpretation of the ordinance would therefore prohibit any institutional use of this facility, even for an elementary school. Staff feels that if such an interpretation were used, the district would have a very strong argument for a variance because the institutional use pre -dates the ordinance requirement for the facility to be served by arterial, collector or MSA streets. 2. Current traffic patterns on 51St Avenue. In October 2001, the city conducted a week- long traffic count on 51S Avenue between Cavanagh and County Road 81. During the week, the number of vehicle trips per day ranged from 1,291 to 1,527, yielding an average of 1,441 per day during the week. Saturday had 822 trips and Sunday had 714 trips yielding an average of 782 per day on the weekend. The difference between average daily traffic during the week and average daily trips on the weekends was 659 trips. The traffic numbers on 51St suggest that it could justifiably be designated an MSA street. In fact, there are MSA-desiS9nated streets in Crystal that have traffic levels much lower than the segment of 51 s between Cavanagh and County Road 81. However, MnDOT rules do not permit the city to designate MSA streets unless they connect to an arterial or other MSA street. Because 51St ends in the neighborhood without another street directly re -connecting back to County Road 81, it cannot be designated an MSA street regardless of its traffic levels. 3. Traffic generated by the Cavanagh facility. Staff's estimate of trip generation for current and proposed mix of uses indicates that car trips will likely be lessened (- 184) but bus trips will increase slightly (+14). Staff opinion is that this is an acceptable trade-off if trips on local streets are minimized to the extent possible. Special Education buses would continue to use either the north parking lot on 51St Avenue or the bus bay on Corvallis Avenue. Since the Highview buses cannot turn around on the site as it is currently configured, the district is proposing to have those buses circulate through the neighborhood to the minimum extent possible. They CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - FORMER CAVANAGH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (5400 CORVALLIS) PAGE 2 OF 5 would drop-off / pick up on 51St Avenue, then turn north on Toledo Avenue, then turn west on Bernard Avenue, then turn south on Vera Cruz Avenue to County Road 81. Staff opinion is that this routing (or any routing through the neighborhood) is not consistent with the ordinance and can only be allowed as a temporary measure until the district installs proper bus loading and turn -around facilities on the property. 4. Planned street reconstruction proiect as it relates to the Cavanagh facility. Assuming the district decides to make this use of the facility permanent, city staff's preference is to keep traffic concentrated on 51St Avenue between County Road 81 and the east parking lot, rather than attempting to disperse the facility's traffic throughout the neighborhood. One reason is that this is consistent with the current pattern. The other reason is that the city is tentatively scheduled to reconstruct the streets in this neighborhood during Phase 10 of the street reconstruction project, which is tentatively scheduled for 2009. If the Cavanagh facility is still in use at that time, the city may construct 51St Avenue to MSA standards to better handle the traffic generated by the facility, even if 51 St Avenue cannot be designated MSA. Such streets are typically 32' wide (instead of 30'), are striped for one lane in each direction plus a parking lane on one side of the street only, and have a sidewalk directly behind the curb on one side of the street only. Any decision to build 51St Avenue to MSA standards would have to be made by the City Council at the time the street project is ordered. 5. Estimated parking demand versus supply. Staff estimated the parking demand and found that the 140 existing parking spaces are 15 less than needed for the current uses and at least 28 (possibly 65) spaces less than needed for the proposed uses. It is important to note that estimating parking demand for this facility is very difficult because of the number and variety of uses. For this reason, a one year trial period to determine changes in parking demand may be the only way to determine the number of additional parking spaces needed. 6. District request is for an interim, temporary use. Further review by the city will be required if they want to make it permanent. Because of the traffic and parking issues with this facility and its location, staff believes the best long term land use would be redevelopment for low density residential. However, until the district completes its reorganization study it will be unknown what the long term future is for the Cavanagh facility. In the interim, the district is asking that a Conditional Use Permit be granted for a one year period with possible extensions for up to two additional years. If the district chooses to make the use permanent, whether or not it includes Highview, a Conditional use Permit together with Site Plan Review will be required at that time. 7. District request is to defer site improvements. The district is also asking that the normal site plan review requirements be deferred until it makes a decision on the long term future of the facility. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the site improvement issue and finds that, at a minimum, the following items would be needed to bring the site into compliance: Install additional off-street parking and loading areas as deemed necessary by the city, including sufficient space for all vehicles to maneuver on-site so that the CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - FORMER CAVANAGH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (5400 CORVALLIS) PAGE 3 OF 5 only local street they use is 51St Avenue from the east parking lot to County Road 81. The most likely scenario would be expansion of the east parking lot. ■ Remove the pole light and overhead wire from the middle of the east parking lot. ■ Install standard b6-12 concrete curb & gutter around perimeter of all parking lots. ■ Ensure parking lot compliance with design standards in city code, including the minimum 5' setback from any lot line (for example, on the north side of the north parking lot). ■ Eliminate parking/storage uses and create a fire lane along the north side of the middle part of the building. ■ Construct a trash enclosure to code. ■ Remove the commercial -style pylon sign and, if a freestanding sign is necessary, replace it with a residential -style monument sign. ■ Construct sidewalks on the property to provide pedestrian access to, from and around the building, including but not limited to any place where a parking lot directly abuts the building. This is not an all-inclusive list because a full site plan review is not being completed at this time. A more detailed review would be required whenever the city decides it can no longer defer the site plan review requirements. At that time, the normal site plan review application would be required along with a request for a permanent CUP, and the city would hold another public hearing prior to making a decision. 8. Summary of options available to the Planning Commission. Staff feels there are three basic options for the Planning Commission to consider: a) Recommend denial of the Conditional Use Permit. b) Recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit but require installation of site improvements immediately to fully comply with city code. c) Recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit on an interim, temporary basis; defer requirement for installation of site improvements for one year; direct the district that it may seek no more than two one-year extensions of the CUP and site improvements; and find that the facility must either be brought fully into compliance with city code or redeveloped in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan no later than September 30, 2007. C. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested interim, temporary Conditional Use Permit for the former Cavanagh Elementary School, subject to the following conditions: 1. Because the city has insufficient information to make findings of fact related to the proposed use of the facility, this permit shall expire on September 30, 2005. If the district desires to extend the permit for one additional year, it must file a written request no later than August 19, 2005. The city makes no commitment to grant such extensions, and no more than two such one year extensions shall be CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - FORMER CAVANAGH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (5400 CORVALLIS) PAGE 4 OF 5 granted. This interim, temporary conditional use permit shall automatically expire on September 30, 2007, unless a new, permanent CUP is granted that supersedes the interim, temporary CUP. 2. The city is deferring its site plan review requirements for one year so that the district may complete its reorganization study process before making further investment in the Cavanagh facility. If the district desires to defer the site improvements for one additional year, it must file a written request with the city no later than August 19, 2005. The city makes no commitment to grant such extensions, and no more than two such one year extensions shall be granted. In no event shall use of the facility continue beyond September 30, 2007 unless site improvements have been installed after review and approval by the city. 3. In the interim, bus routing to and from the facility shall continue as before, except that Highview buses may drop off and pick up on 51St Avenue then exit the neighborhood via Toledo, Bernard and Vera Cruz Avenues. The City Council would consider the Planning Commission's recommendation at its next meeting on September 21, 2004. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - FORMER CAVANAGH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (5400 CORVALLIS) PAGE 5 OF 5 ..00• __ I Af .r v.012 Ilo 3 v .4 !ode y1h°� ° b N / � 6715) ti -- /�T�__- J917• B S.d� os'1 . _ AVE. ity of CrYsfaf w a 71.25 73 l�tiol So 1115 13.5 6 5 4 3 73.5 14 11 10 ' 9' 8 �7 4- r 2= I_ 7/.25 124 ",glp> baa 0 i 1.t 10 10 �s1r� LOT Imo\ r'r ,VM 75 EMILYS (J�n) (6`0) 77.560 14 15 ' 16 79.5 14 [ o z PAAr a [.ri 5'tNAfF M} `f � f 12 13 ' 14 ' 15 ' 16 — 17 ' 19 T5. E5TATE5� -_ - _ 16 0/e,� 0 12 1317 .5 14 N 7j 5 Its Atr NAR � 1520 03 73 l�tiol So •' �lµpl 75 lti�yol N'<�,l0) N 17.5 l�ti°� 9. M 10� o 75 N�h�i> G 7 ��14 9' o !30 qlv) ���°) 4- 3 2= I_ 1S 124 ",glp> baa 0 i 10 10 �s1r� LOT Imo\ p 601` ,VM N 7j 5 Its Atr NAR � 1520 03 73 l�tiol '^ kwl •' �lµpl 75 lti�yol N'<�,l0) 7.5 17.5 l�ti°� 9. M 10� o 75 N�h�i> G 7 ��14 9' o !30 qlv) ���°) 4- 3 2= I_ 1S 124 ",glp> baa 0 i 10 10 �s1r� LOT Imo\ p 601` ,VM 75 •�, 12 IS 14 15 ' 16 17 l of75�' 20 — Go S 13 9n T5. 6l N /7o v ( 0� `li (ol, 3 LPIQ. loCP LAiw 0 o 4 ' Q 01) SOLCITY w S� 75 7.6 ��,1 ., `�bh1 u 1��6i n �rb6i ���°> `•,,��> w XL' 45b� Yq� s sae � ✓E. 9' o !30 7 6 5- 4- N /7o v ( 0� `li (ol, 3 LPIQ. loCP LAiw 0 o 4 ' Q 01) SOLCITY w S� 75 7.6 ��,1 ., `�bh1 u 1��6i n �rb6i ���°> `•,,��> ���i 15 10 ' 9' 8 7 6 5- 4- 3 2= I_ 1S 124 ",glp> baa 0 9LAU 10 10 �s1r� / jO p 601` ,VM 75 J I I 12 IS 14 15 ' 16 17 18 19 � 20 — Go m,;r- 14 So 75 W >, 2 ' J �x V3 a t� So �,—ASG— • 75 1 5 m (1115) O lytipl 7.6 ��,1 ., `�bh1 u 1��6i n �rb6i ���°> `•,,��> ���i `,���� l ���°1N L (I(0) (2i I�• ,3• e �. -9 � ' �j 3 19 20 2 124 ",glp> baa 0 9LAU 10 10 �s1r� / jO p 601` ,VM L p0> -is fo Go m,;r- 185 O'iwlN-g {-AKt /106. RANIKV/ a o� I r ADD. t" I . YE.- ►tri .... _ Qd Z. o c " / 4� SLff r / 42 O~�I 1 v LOT_ �"J 7 Lot eOF Q Q '� rl U W rCAAN�HS0Ly�3t si INO. DISTRICT 2E31 ; GVko 9 W'_ W3 c r71 ? y) 6 2 5 _ 4 3 2= I 114. r 7 s j m c. L (I(0) (2i I�• ,3• �. -9 � ' �j 3 19 20 2 124 ",glp> baa 0 9LAU 10 10 �s1r� / jO 13" ,VM 0 T— -is fo Go 63 0 6�a •""' N • i° loo $p s i 6d.4 .14 \ 13 I. L (I(0) (2i I�• ,3• �. -9 � ' �j 3 19 20 2 10 10 �s1r� / jO ,EAI 0 T— 63 s i 6d.4 0 m,;r- 14 15 16 12 1317 30 4 LONM v 1 1 A DO. did 2 d r•✓e Cy w i38xo) _ ' ba.9'1' • 6 l' 7S 7s 5° n .160 5e SSD 1 .e fir. \' t o s d wY / 1 m. 8-i 7 6 5 13 2 �1�• X115 14 13 12 11 10 "•[✓n 7 6 5 4 3Nv " r 2 8 15 H ) �• A/DO. 3 3 % u50 J H _ Se x `�h13 rm K n �1 50 - N �p� • ' I < I 22 17 4 2!+ ' 26 2. 28 30 31 32 16 7 I 19 20 21 22 23 24 23 26 27 28 29 30 15) x OO9 v p el r N K+JAMES 11 ��.��, i '• � C 15i I+i ._. r SOMEfts _ So =-- �---�- f3. •pro o „ •. .. � J4pb, 1 MEW �� N .,� AVE. , w OWoLD Al G NINER PoLoposeb 6ANDITSCTS WEST FI T HSTiHgr ST. PAUL, MN 33102 FlraAVj� %4#4612.227.7773 PAX 612.223.5646 24 Iq 25 Ib I 26 E21 Tr2817 I PROVIDE WALL AND OPENING I - SPECIAL ED. CLASSROOM IN WALL FOR NEW DOOR. SEE 2 -SPECIAL EDJADVENTURE G STAFF OFFICES DETAIL 1013-13 - OC -CUP. THERJ5PECIAL ED. 4 - CONFERENCE/MEETING 5 - CREATIVE PLAY 6 - CREATIVE PLAY 1E Orr1 l - 5'5 ALIVE Ib 8 - ADVENTURE GLUE o 4 - ADVENTURE GLOB 10 - ADVENTURE CLUB If - ADVENTURE CLUB tod 15 12 - SPECIAL ED. CLASSROOM 13 - SPECIAL ED. CLASSROOM IO 14 - SPECIAL ED. CLASSROOM I NOI 15 - SPECIAL ED. CLASSROOM 3-I t 14 16 - SPECIAL ED. CLASSROOM I7 - CREATIVE PLAY 18 - CREATIVE PLAY i 19 - PARGR ENT/CHILD PROAM 20 - PARENT/CHILD OFFICES KI n o — 21 - OFF IGE/LIBRARY/RE5�E o Off22 - PARENT/CHILD PROGRAM 23 - PARENT/CHILD PRR OGAM 24 - PARENT/CHILD PROGRAM p 25 - PARENT MEETING ROOM 26 - ADVENTURE CLUB/ SCIENCE RESOURCE 27 - PRE-SCHOOL 51--REENING/ STAFF LUNCH/OFFICE AREA 28 - SPECIAL ED. Io a 12 1 aInsrr nye, � 3 r �o.te) tins cielr) b5s ._ ORDER No. 21 STATE FIRE MARSHAL FILE NO. E02-7104001 9JECT: WALL DATE: 6/4/q-1 COMMISSION NO: 9612'1 REVISIONS A REV. DATE , PROVIDE SMOKE DETECTION (1) ROOM GAVANAGH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL X � o CAVAN H E,,C. C. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISMCT *281 Fc �t,, t CSt5� creme+; �� Play I _,,�,�SIST STREET 57-0• t=CSt Bus ornp e— — — CORVALLIS AVENUE 1 d3=, f0 N a r Ib I� f c� /0 (-'A SSU MED PROPERTY LINE NARRATIVE SUBMITTED BY ROBBINSDALE AREA SCHOOLS (I.S.D. 281). Robbinsdale School District 281 is selling the Robbinsdale Area Community Education Center (RACEC), located at 4139 Regent Avenue North in Robbinsdale. The Highview Alternative Program is currently located in this building. It is the intention of the Robbinsdale School District to relocate this program to the Cavanagh School located at 5400 Corvallis Avenue North in Crystal by December 1, 2004. The Highview Program has served district students in grades 10-12 since 1983. Students are sixteen years or older and most have attended Armstrong High School or Cooper High School. The original site was at the Highview School in New Hope near Cooper High School. The program moved to RACEC in December, 2001. The hours of operation of the Highview Program will be 7:30 a.m.-3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The program has a staff of 10 people and the enrollment is approximately 150 students. Currently, the district plans to modify the east wing of the building to accommodate the Highview Program. Those modifications include office partitions in room #20, lavatory fixture replacement, locking door systems in the corridors, and a wall separating in the cafeteria from the corridor. Students and staff will use the east parking lot. Six busses will transport students daily; 2 at the start of the school day, 2 at the end of the day, and 2 during the day to transport students to the Hennepin Technical College. It is our intention to keep the Highview program at the Cavanagh for one year with a possible request for extensions of this CUP for 2 additional years. fix. E Former Cavanagh Elementary School: 2003-2004 school year (current uses) DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM TYPICAL VEHICLE TRIPS Early Childhood Early Childhood Highview Family Special Creative Play Early Childhood Alternative TIME Education Education Preschool Screening Program car trips bus trips TIME 7:00 AM <: R 7.00AM, 7:30 AM 12 staff arrive 12 36 $ OO A, 8:00 AM 33 staff arrive � 17 b8 30 AMS 8:30 AM 17 staff arrive 6 bus trips 9:00 AM 25 car trips 10 bus trips 140 car trips 168 10 9:00 AM 9:30 AM 9:30 AM 10:00 AM Varies; 2-1/2 3 10:00 AM 50 6 10:30 AM 10:30 AM 50 car trips 6 bus trips days per week; 3 3 6 11:00 AM 11:00 AM 11:30 AM 6 bus trips 12 bus trips 140 car trips staff plus 2-3 140 12 11:30 AM clients/hour. 3 12:00 PM 12:00 PM 12:30 PM 39 car trips 12 bus trips 140 car trips Generalized average of 24 car 179 12 12:30 PM 1:00 PM 8 bus trips trips per day, or 3 3 8 1:00 PM 1:30 PM 1:30 PMper hour. 17 2:00 PM 2:00 PM 14 car trips 2:30 PM 3:00 PM 17 staff depart 12 bus tris 140 car trips 2:30 PM 160 X12 q'3 OO M f 30lVl, 3:30 PM 33 staff depart 12 staff depart 4a 3 4:00 PM4 DO PIVI` 4O.PM. 4:30 PMS, AVERAGE Notes: DAILY 836 72 TOTALS car trips bus trips These figures are estimates by city staff based on data from ISD 289 staff. Buses are of different sizes; ECSE buses are shorter while Highview buses are more of the standard school bus length. Shaded areas represent generalized morning and afternoon "rush hours" in the metropolitan region. comparo-2004.09.09.xls 110/2004 1 Former Cavanagh Elementary School: 1 2004-2005 school year (proposed uses) DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM TYPICAL VEHICLE TRIPS Early Childhood Early Childhood Highview Family Special Creative Play Early Childhood Alternative TIME Education Education Preschool Screening Program car trips bus trips TIME 7:00 AM 10 staff arrive; 40 50, 4 7 00 AM 7:30 AM 11 staff arrive car & 4 bus trips Ta 11 7 30 AM;' 8:00 AM 33 staff arrive 35 ` w� g 00 AM 8:30 AM 16 staff arrive 6 bus trips " ry 16 6 Y. 8 30 AM° 9:00 AM 25 car trips 10 bus trips 70 car trips 98 10 9:00 AM 9:30 AM 2 bus trips 2 9:30 AM 10:00 AM Varies; 2-1/2 3 10:00 AM 10:30 AM 50 car trips 6 bus trips days per week; 3 50 6 10:30 AM 11:00 AM 6 bus trips staff plus 2-3 3 6 11:00 AM 11:30 AM 12 bus trips 70 car trips clients/hour. 2 bus trips 70 14 11:30 AM 12:00 PM Generalized 2 bus trips 3 2 12:00 PM 12:30 PM 39 car trips 12 bus trips 70 car trips average of 24 car 109 12 12:30 PM 1:00 PM 1:30 PM 8 bus trips trips per day, or 3 3 8 1:00 PM per hour. 4 bus trips; 40 40 4 1:30 PM 2:00 PM 14 car trips car trips 17 2:00 PM 2:30 PM 2:30 PM 3:00 PM 16 staff depart 12 bus trips 70 car trips 10 staff depart 99- 12 -,3.,,00 PM: 3:30 PM 33 staff depart 11 staff depart 44 3 30 pM 4:00 PM - 4 60 PM 4:30 PM AVERAGE DAILY 652 86 TOTALS car trips bus trips Notes: These figures are estimates by city staff based on data from ISD 281 staff. Buses are of different sizes; ECSE buses are shorter while Highview buses are more of the standard school bus length. Shaded areas represent generalized morning and afternoon "rush hours" in the metropolitan region. comparo-2004.09.09.xis 09/10/2004 Former Cavanagh Elementary School: 2003-2004 school year (current uses) Parking Calculation DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM Early Childhood Early Childhood Highview Combined Peak Family Special Creative Play Early Childhood Alternative Pick -Up and Education Education Preschool Screening Program Drop -Off 17 staff. 33 staff. 12 staff. 3 staff. [n/a] 179 trips at peak (12:30 p.m.) / 2 = 90 spaces required. TOTAL REQUIRED FOR ENTIRE FACILITY: 17 33 12 3 0 90 155 off-street parking spaces. TOTAL PARKING EXISTING AS OF SEP. 2004: 140 off-street parking spaces. PARKING TO BE ADDED FOR THIS MIX OF USES: 15 off-street parking spaces. comparo-2004.09.09.xls ( 1/10/2004 1 Former Cavanagh Elementary School: 2004-2005 school year (proposed uses) Parking Calculation - using standard method for calculating high school parking demand DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM Early Childhood Early Childhood Highview Combined Peak Family Special Creative Play Family Special Creative Play Early Childhood Alternative Pick -Up and Screening Program Education Education Preschool Screening Program Drop -Off 109 trips at peak 16 staff. 33 staff. 11 staff. 3 staff. 12 classrooms + 109 trips at peak = 50 spaces 75 (150 students (12:30 p.m.) / 2 = required. required. / 2) = 87 spaces 55 spaces 55 required. required. TOTAL REQUIRED FOR ENTIRE FACILITY: 16 33 11 3 87 55 205 off-street parking spaces. TOTAL PARKING EXISTING AS OF SEP. 2004: 140 off-street parking spaces. PARKING TO BE ADDED FOR THIS MIX OF USES: 65 off-street parking spaces. Parking Calculation - using school district's projection of parking demand at Highview DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM Early Childhood Early Childhood Highview Combined Peak Family Special Creative Play Early Childhood Alternative Pick -Up and Education Education Preschool Screening Program Drop -Off 16 staff. 33 staff. 11 staff. 3 staff. 10 staff + 40 109 trips at peak students driving (12:30 p.m.) / 2 = = 50 spaces 55 spaces required. required. 16 33 11 3 50 55 TOTAL REQUIRED FOR ENTIRE FACILITY: 168 off-street parking spaces. TOTAL PARKING EXISTING AS OF SEP. 2004: 140 off-street parking spaces. PARKING TO BE ADDED FOR THIS MIX OF USES: 28 off-street parking spaces. comparo-2004.09.09.xis 09/10/2004 5]S. 33 5ubJ - I 2) Equipment and materials are completely enclosed in a permanent structure with no outside storage; 3) The city council determines that all applicable requirements of subsection 515.05, subdivision 3 a) and section 520 are considered and satisfactorily met. b) Public or semi-public institutional uses including recreational buildings; neighborhood service or community centers; organizations providing social, educational and recreational services to members of the community; public and private educational institutions including day care, nursery school, pre-school, elementary, junior high and senior high schools; and religious institutions such as churches, chapels, temples and synagogues; provided that: Side setbacks shall be double that required for the district. 2) The facility is served by arterial, collector or municipal state aid streets and such pedestrian facilities as are necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the facility. The city council determines that all applicable requirements of subsection 515.05, subdivision 3 a) and section 520 are considered and satisfactorily met. C) Cemeteries, subject to the following: 1) Such use shall not include funeral homes, crematoriums or similar uses. 2) No building, including mausoleums and accessory maintenance buildings, shall exceed 5,000 square feet in area or 20 feet in height. The total footprint of buildings on the cemetery shall not exceed 1% of the area of the cemetery. 3) Such use may include maintenance and equipment facilities accessory to the operation of the cemetery. 4) The city council determines that all applicable requirements of subsection 515.05, subdivision 3 a) and section 520 are considered and satisfactorily met. d) Bed and Breakfast Establishments, provided: 1) The property abuts and the building faces an arterial or major collector street; 2) Signage is limited to 1 sign that indicates the name of and contact information for the bed and breakfast establishment but no other material. There may be 1 such sign not to exceed 4 square feet in area, not to exceed 5 feet in height if free standing, and not to be lighted unless the lighting will not negatively impact adjacent properties. 3) Driveway access and parking areas are adequately buffered from adjacent residential uses; and Page 39 of 129 Ex. f-1 SS� o S d) Variances shall not be granted to allow any use that is not otherwise permitted by this section. e) A request for variance shall be filed using the request for special land use action application form available at city hall. If the applicant does not own the subject property, then the properly owner must provide written consent for the application. All required attachments and fees must be provided by the applicant prior to the application being considered complete. The planning commission and city council will not consider incomplete applications. f) Upon receipt of such request, the zoning administrator shall place the item on the planning commission agenda in accordance with the schedule available at city hall. g) The zoning administrator shall send notice of the public hearing to the party listed as "taxpayer" for any properties wholly or partially within 350 feet of the subject property, based on records provided to the city by the Hennepin County taxpayer services department. Said notice shall be sent via U.S. Mail no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. Failure of a particular party to receive notice shall not invalidate the proceedings. h) The planning commission shall hold a public hearing on the variance. At the public hearing, the applicant, the zoning administrator, and other interested parties may provide oral and written testimony to the planning commission. i) The planning commission shall make written findings of fact and provide them to the city council along with a recommendation for action to be taken on the request. The planning commission may recommend conditions for the granting of a variance to ensure compliance with the purpose and intent of this section, and to protect adjacent properties. Any planning commission action on the request shall be considered advisory in nature. j) Upon receipt of the planning commission's findings of fact and recommendation, the city council may take action on the request. The city council's action may include conditions for the granting of a variance to ensure compliance with the purpose and intent of this section, and to protect adjacent properties. The city council shall be considered the board of adjustment and appeals as provided by law, and its action on the request shall be the final action taken by the city. k) In the event that the planning commission delays action on the request to the extent that automatic approval would occur under Minnesota Statutes, section 15.99, the city council may take action on the request to prevent such automatic approval from occurring. In such cases, further consideration by the planning commission would be moot. Subd. 3. Conditional Use Permit. Any person seeking to establish a use listed as conditional in a particular district may request a conditional use permit from the planning commission and city council. a) In addition to specific standards or criteria included in the applicable district regulations, the following criteria shall be applied in determining whether to approve a conditional use permit request: Page 5 of 129 1) The consistency of the proposed use with the comprehensive plan. 2) The characteristics of the subject property as they relate to the proposed use. C3) The impact ofthe proposed _use the surrounding area. ,- b) A request for conditional use permit shall be filed using the request for special land use action application form available at city hall. If the applicant does not own the subject property, then the property owner must provide written consent for the application. All required attachments and fees must be provided by the applicant prior to the application being considered complete. The planning commission and city council will not consider incomplete applications. C) Upon receipt of such request, the zoning administrator shall place the item on the planning commission agenda in accordance with the schedule available at city hall. d) The zoning administrator shall publish notice of the public hearing in at least 1 of the city's official newspapers no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. e) The zoning administrator shall send notice of the public hearing to the party listed as "taxpayer" for any properties wholly or partially within 350 feet of the subject property, based on records provided to the city by the Hennepin County taxpayer services department. Said notice shall be sent via U.S. Mail no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. Failure of a particular party to receive notice shall not invalidate the proceedings. f) The planning commission shall hold a public hearing on the conditional use permit. At the public hearing, the applicant, the zoning administrator, and other interested parties may provide oral and written testimony to the planning commission. g) The planning commission shall make written findings of fact and provide them to the city council along with a recommendation for action to be taken on the request. The planning commission may recommend conditions for the granting of a conditional use permit to ensure compliance with the purpose and intent of this section, and to protect adjacent properties. Any planning commission action on the request shall be considered advisory in nature. h) Upon receipt of the planning conunission's findings of fact and recommendation, the city council may take action on the request. The city council's action may include conditions for the granting of a conditional use permit to ensure compliance with the purpose and intent of this section, and to protect adjacent properties. The city council's action on the request shall be the final action taken by the city. i) In the event that the planning commission delays action on the request to the extent that automatic approval would occur under Minnesota Statutes, section 15.99, the city council may take action on the request to prevent such automatic approval from occurring. In such cases, further consideration by the planning commission would be moot. Page 6 of 129 Concerns about the impending application to change -use by District 281 at Cavanagh School I have been a resident of the Cavanagh Oaks Neighborhood for almost 13 years. I have heard and seen the traffic problems increase gradually in the neighborhood over the years. The complaints from residents adjacent to the Cavanagh Bldg as well as residents throughout the neighborhood about traffic congestion have gotten worse and worse. At one point several years ago it got to a boiling point as cars were being parked on lawns and in front of driveways across from the facility. As a neighborhood group we took our concerns to the city and District, the compromise they came to was that'No parking' signs were installed along the residential side of the street.... which means that residents also lost the ability to park in front of their homes as well as guests parking in front of their homes. I am not sure that that compromise had the residents' best interest in mind... This neighborhood has just survived almost 4 years of construction from Hwy 100. With it came unbelievable inconvenience for residents. Just getting out of the neighborhood became a daily challenge. Many times having to drive miles out of your way to get to work... (and adding time...) We are scheduled (at this point on -hold for bids in June of 2005) for reconstruction of County Road 81. We are scheduled to have all the streets and curbs redone starting in 2009. 1 do not think that this neighborhood can hold the existing traffic flow during these added projects, let alone adding more traffic. It is my feeling that the neighborhood can not handle any more traffic, especially during construction. During heavy traffic times of the day, I have sat through 3-4 lights to get out of here now, if I want to go at the light.... Trying to get out on 47th or 49th is also hard and with poor visibility, it is dangerous. The estimate I was able to get from Stan Mack, superintendent was maybe 50 students drive .... that is a lot of added traffic for that intersection or all the intersections. There is not enough parking for the parents of the early childhood and the overflow to on street parking makes it almost impossible to get through in the winter. I am asking that the planning commission recommend denying the district the re -use application as the traffic is already maxed out in the Cavanagh Oaks neighborhood. It is my understanding that the district was denied putting Highview in the facility in Golden Valley as the neighborhood did not want it there and the added traffic in a residential area. Sincerely, Janell Janell Felker 4802 Quail Ave N Crystal, MN 55429 Felker M E M O R A N D U M DATE: September 10, 2004 TO: Plan ing Commission (September 13th meeting) FROM: John Sutter, Planner and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Consider Application 2004-08 for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to implement the TH 100 Study Group recommendations and eliminate the Public/Institutional classification from the Future Land Use Map. As part of the T.H. 100 roadway reconstruction project, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) acquired some adjacent land to accommodate the new freeway plus drainage, sound mitigation and other improvements within an expanded right-of-way. As is typical in roadway reconstruction projects of this magnitude, MnDOT will not need to permanently use all of the land acquired for the project, and will therefore turn back or re - convey these excess lands to the city for a public purpose, the prior owners, or some third party. In spring 2004 city and MnDOT staff met and discussed which properties were no longer needed by MNDOT. As a result of this meeting, the City Council appointed a study group to make recommendations on the appropriate land uses along the Highway 100 corridor. The study group concluded its work and made a recommendation on July 28, 2004. At its August 17, 2004 meeting the City Council referred the matter to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. A map and text description of the study group's recommended changes are attached as Exhibit A. Please note that Areas #1- #8 on the map represent areas of potential excess MNDOT property discussed by the study group. Area #9 on the map represents the Crystal Heights area. The recommendation to change Area #9's future land use designation from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential was not a specific recommendation of the study group because this policy direction had already been determined in early 2004 as part of the outcome of the Crystal Heights Redevelopment Feasibility Study. Please note that today we received a memo from Metro Transit re -affirming its interest in establishing a park and ride facility at the southwest quadrant of the Hwy 100 / 36th Avenue interchange. On May 5, 2004, the City Manager wrote to Metro Transit to express the city's objections to such a facility, and the fact that such a facility would be prohibited by city code whether or not the land use designation is changed. Metro Transit continues to express vague interest in that site but has so far failed to respond substantively to the issues raised by the city in the May 5, 2004 letter as well as previous correspondence and meetings. Copies of today's Metro Transit letter and our May 5, 2004 letter are attached as Exhibit B. COMP PLAN AMENDMENT HWY 100 PROPERTY; CRYSTAL HEIGHTS; ELIMINATE PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL CLASSIFICATION PAGE 1 OF 3 The Planning Commission is also asked to consider eliminating the Public/Institutional classification from the Future Land Use map. Properties would instead be guided in a manner consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. A map showing the location of Public/Institutional properties is attached as Exhibit C. The specific addresses and their proposed new classifications are as follows: PROPERTY ADDRESS PROPERTY DESCRIPTION NEW CLASSIFICATION 732358 th Ave N former Thorson Elementary School R-1 7301 56th Ave N St. Raphael's Catholic Church/School R-1 5354 Douglas Dr N North Fire Station Mixed Use 434353 rd Ave N city - sanitary sewer lift station R-1 5400 Corvallis Ave N former Cavanagh Elementary School R-1 5100 Douglas Dr N Glen Haven Memorial Gardens R-1 680047 th Ave N Forest Elementary School R-1 670046 th PI N St. James Lutheran Church R-1 642145 1h Ave N Cambodian Church of the Nazarene R-1 612242 nd Ave N Brunswick Methodist Church Mixed Use 6401 42nd Ave N Hennepin County — branch library R-1 4141 Douglas Dr N City Hall / South Fire Station R-1 4110 Douglas Dr N Crystal Assembly of God Church R-1 4121 Brunswick Ave N city - ground storage reservoir R-1 6125 41st Ave N city - public works department R-1 3915 Adair Ave N FAIR School R-1 3733 Vera Cruz Ave N Bethany Russian Baptist Church R-1 3245 Vera Cruz Ave N Crystal Care Center R-3 2801 Douglas Dr N Latter Day Saints Church R-1 660027 th Ave N Neill Elementary School R-1 COMP PLAN AMENDMENT HWY 100 PROPERTY; CRYSTAL HEIGHTS; ELIMINATE PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL CLASSIFICATION PAGE 2 OF 3 3420 Nevada Ave N Olivet Baptists Church R-1 38xx Winnetka Ave N Beth EI Memorial Park R-1 Planning Commission action is requested making a recommendation on the proposed amendments to the City Council. The City Council would consider the Planning Commission's recommendation at its next meeting on September 21, 2004. COMP PLAN AMENDMENT HWY 100 PROPERTY; CRYSTAL HEIGHTS; ELIMINATE PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL CLASSIFICATION PAGE 3 OF 3 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CRYSTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FIGURE 7 — FUTURE LAND USE MAP Recommended by the Trunk Highway 100 Study Group on Judy 28, 2004. LOCATION MAP-. H r� z -. — 38PT1 AVE 1V -----� 34TH AVE N g D — T D m m m z P z Z m a Z D <D< m nT D t � z �1 35THZAVE N D z Z m z D r�r Z LU z MIXED USE W. BROADWAY/HWY 81 36TH AVE N Q LL INDUSTRIAL Z Q a z Q w i z Q z Q 3 z W� L O d Q d -35 �AVE Vw V) - a Z Z z 34TH AVE N 32tvo A ra < . _u > P m _ o? z Q m a Z C> Z Z Z D t � z 35THZAVE N U Y c Q Q QLL LU MIXED USE W. BROADWAY/HWY 81 Cn Q LL INDUSTRIAL o a w M Q PARK & CONSERVATION 4101-H tv N Q N rr U d Z .Vote: The colors indicating land use are from the current Future Land L'se Vtap in the Comprehensive Plan. Areas where changes are being considered have been identified and numbered to correspond kith the descriptions in the text of the Study Group's recommendation. AVE N z zS' 0 32tvo A ra < . o P m _ o? _ Z m a <D m C> C> i Z rr D t � z 35THZAVE N z 34TH AVE N z z zS' Land Use Classes- 32tvo A ra < . V) �e AVE N LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL _ Z MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL { Q N' Q HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Y NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL z MIXED USE TOWN CENTER MIXED USE W. BROADWAY/HWY 81 INDUSTRIAL CRYSTAL AIRPORT M PARK & CONSERVATION 4101-H tv 30TH N � PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL - Q HIGHWAY 100 PROJECT RAIL RIGHT XHIBIT G.1TH 100 Turnbacks�Siudy Group 2004\Graft Recommendation EA AREA la: Southeast Quadrant of 36th Avenue Interchange (north of 35th) a. Property owners: MNDOT; except for the 47x134 strip between Cub Foods and 35th Avenue which is owned by Supervalu as part of its Cub Foods tax parcel. b. Estimated land area: 1.64 acres. C. Current future land use designation: Highway 100 Project; except for the 47x134 strip between Cub Foods and 35th Avenue which is Medium Density Residential. d. Proposed future land use designations: ■ Community Commercial for 0.74 acres located north of the extended lot line between Cub Foods and the single family houses on 351H ■ Low Density Residential for 0.90 acres located south of the extended lot line between Cub Foods and the existing single family houses on 35th e. Projected end uses: ■ Restaurant, bank, office, or other destination commercial uses on the north 0.74 acres. Access would have to be across the Cub Foods site to the traffic signal on 36th. No access to 35th ■ No more than three single family houses on the south 0.90 acres. AREA lb: Vacant single family lot (formerly addressed as 5417 35th a. Property owner: MNDOT b. Estimated land area: 0.21 acres. C. Current future land use designation: Medium Density Residential. d. Proposed future land use designation: Low Density Residential. e. Projected end use: One single family house. AREA 2: Northwest Quadrant of 36th Avenue Interchange. a. Property owner: MNDOT b. Estimated land area: 0.80 acres. C. Current future land use designation: Highway 100 Project. G:\PLANNING\Applications\2004\07(CompPlanAmendment)\Study Group Recommendation - FINAL - 2004.07.28.doc d. Proposed future land use designation: Medium Density Residential. Note: Some members of the study group felt that Low Density Residential would be the appropriate use on the site, primarily because it will be accessible only after driving past existing single family houses. Those who preferred MDR felt that the high traffic volumes at the 36`h /Hwy 100 interchange would make any new single family houses on this site functionally obsolete, and that market demand for convenient, low -maintenance living arrangements would make MDR more viable on this site over the long term. e. Projected end use: No more than eight townhouse -style units if MDR; no more than four single family houses if LDR. AREA 3: Southwest Quadrant of 36th Avenue Interchange. a. Property owner: MNDOT b. Estimated land area: 0.60 acres. C. Current future land use designation: Highway 100 Project; except for the south 60' which is Low Density Residential. d. Proposed future land use designation: Low Density Residential. e. Projected end use: No more than three single family houses. AREA 4a: North side of 34th between Welcome and the noisewall. a. Property owner: MNDOT b. Estimated land area: 0.24 acres. C. Current future land use designation: Highway 100 Project. d. Proposed future land use designation: Low Density Residential. e. Projected end use: One single family house. AREA 4b: South side of 34th inside frontage road curve. a. Property owner: MNDOT b. Estimated land area: 0.16 acres. C. Current future land use designation: Highway 100 Project. G:\PLANNING\Applications\2004\07(CompPlanAmendment)\Study Group Recommendation - FINAL - 2004.07.28.doc d. Proposed future land use designation: Low Density Residential. e. Projected end use: Vacant unless adjacent commercial building is redeveloped; then incorporated into that site. AREA S: North side of 32nd inside frontage road curve. a. Property owner: MNDOT b. Estimated land area: 1.06 acres. C. Current future land use designation: Medium Density Residential. d. Proposed future land use designation: Medium Density Residential (no change). e. Projected end use: No more than twelve units, either townhouse -style or apartment -style. AREA 6: South side of 32nd, north of "the gap". a. Property owner: MNDOT b. Estimated land area: 2.79 acres. C. Current future land use designation: Medium Density Residential. d. Proposed future land use designation: Low Density Residential. Notes: ■ Some members felt that fourteen units would not be advised because there were originally only six single family houses on the site before Highway 100 was reconstructed. The site at that time also had access to Highway 100 which has since been eliminated. They felt that six single family houses would be more appropriate. ■ The Three Rivers Park District's I" Tier Trails Greenway Master Plan calls for a trail through this site connecting the new pedestrian bridge to 32'd Avenue. This strip of land could also be guided Parks and Conservation in the Comprehensive Plan. If we assume a 30' wide corridor that would reduce the site by approximately 0.4 acres. This would lower the maximum number of units to approximately twelve. ■ Single family houses with the planned trail would seem to be a good compromise that may satisfy the local residents who desired that this property be set aside as part of the park and trail system. C. Projected end use: No more than fourteen units, either townhouse -style or single family houses. G:\PLAN NING\Applications\2004\07(CompPlanAmendment)\Study Group Recommendation - FINAL - 2004.07.28.doc AREA 7: South of "the gap". a. Property owner: MNDOT b. Estimated land area: n/a. C. Current future land use designation: Parks & Conservation. d. Proposed future land use designation: Parks & Conservation (no change). e. Projected end use: Public open space. AREA 8: Between the noise wall and the rear lot lines of the houses along Welcome, from 36th south to 341h Note: Additional documentation from the City Engineer regarding this item is attached. a. Property owner: MNDOT b. Estimated land area: n/a. C. Current future land use designation: Highway 100 Project. d. Proposed future land use designation: Parks & Conservation. e. Projected end use: Public open space and trail corridor. AREA 9: Crystal Heights area between Regent and Highway 100. a. Property owners: Various. b. Estimated land area: n/a C. Current future land use designation: Medium Density Residential. d. Proposed future land use designation: Low Density Residential. e. Projected end use: Single family houses on each of the 67 lots. 62 of these lots already have houses on them; five are in the process of being sold by the EDA to builders for new house construction. G:\PLANNING\Applications\2004\07(CompPlanAmendment)\Study Group Recommendation - FINAL - 2004.07.28.doc MEMORANDUM DATE: July 21, 2004 TO: Patrick Peters, Community Development Director FROM: Tom Mathisen, City Engineer SUBJECT: Highway 100 Remnants Study Group and Welcome Ave As briefly discussed at the last study group meeting, there needs to be an agenda item to discuss the disposition of the remnant property behind the homes on Welcome Ave. between 34th Ave. and 36th Ave. This neighborhood has been told over the last several years that while this corridor has been designated as a trail corridor, that there would still be an opportunity for public input before a final decision was made. The timing would be based on the completion of the Highway 100 project (Segment 2) and discussions with MnDot regarding how much property would be available. That time has now come. A little history is in order. In late 1997 and early 1998 the final design for the Phase 4 street project, which included this area, was underway. At the same time, the City was working with MnDot on the Hwy 100 final design. After meetings with the neighborhood and other parties it was agreed that instead of the Vera Cruz frontage road extension going behind these properties, that Welcome Ave., a State Aid Road, would double as the frontage road and the local street. MnDot participated in the reconstruction of Welcome Ave. and a sidewalk was included on the east side of Welcome, due partially to the concerns of some of the residents of all the traffic that would be using the road. In 1999, after Phase 4 was complete, the City received partial federal funding for the pedestrian bridge at Bassett Creek Park over Hwy 100. At the same time, the Hennepin County Parks 1" Tier Trails Greenway Master Plan was being developed. Crystal initiated the 32 Ave. trail corridor, and a corridor from the ped bridge along the sound, wall to 36th Ave., and on up to Robbinsdale at 38th Ave. Once the master plan was approved, the trial corridor along the sound wall became part of the MnDot Phase 2 plan to the extent that a bench for the trail was graded along the sound wall from 34th to 36th Avenues. Since the trail bench was graded in 2002, there has been no activity other than the recent landscaping. Assuming the Council gives final approval to the trail plan, the tentative schedule is to build the trail in 2004 or 2005, including the segment from 34th to 36th which runs behind the houses on the east side of Welcome Avenue. The less -than -desirable alternative would be to put the trail on street on Welcome Avenue from 34th to 36`h. To accommodate the graded alignment from 34th to 36th, between the noise wall and the rear lot lines of the houses, this strip of land should be guided Parks and Conservation in the Comprehensive Plan. The study group is asked to include this in its recommendation. ilpubworks/hwy 100/segmentVwelcomersdnts f/K 09/10/2004 FRI 13:49 FAX 6123497600 METRO TRANSIT ENGR & FAC MetroTransit 04-0156 September 10, 2004 City of Crystal Planning Commission 4141 Douglas Drive North Crystal, MN 55422 Via Facsimile/ JS Mail (763) 531-1188 Dear Planning Commissioners: As outlined in previous correspondence and meetings with city staff, Metro Transit has indicated interest in the potential placement of a Park and Ride facility in the vicinity of Hwy 100/36' Avenue North. We are in the process of exploring site locations throughout the Hwy 100 corridor, both in and outside of Crystal. Please be advised that one of the sites being considered is the southwest quadrant of the Hwy 100/36th Avenue interchange, which is identified in the Hwy 100 Study Group's plan as Area 3. Sincerely, T. F. Thorstenson Manager, Facilities Engineering cc: Anne Norris; City Manager Peggy Leppik, Metropolitan Council Thomas O'Keefe, MnDOT Heather Lott, NI DOT A service of the Metropolitan Council 560 Sixth Avenue North Minneapolis, Minnesota 55411-4398 (612)349 . -7400 http://w-ww.metrotransit.org Transit Info 373-3333 — - An Equal May 5, 2004 Mr. Tom Thorstenson Mr. George Serumgard Metro Transit Metro Transit 560 Sixth Avenue North 560 Sixth Avenue North Minneapolis MN 55411-4398 Minneapolis MN 55411-4398 Re: Proposed Metro Transit Park -and -Ride Facility at TH 100 & 36th Avenue North Dear Sirs: At a meeting on April 15, you shared with city staff a concept plan for a park-and-ride facility on land currently owned by MnDOT in the southwest quadrant of Trunk Highway 100 and 36th Avenue North in Crystal. (For clarification, presentation of that park-and-ride concept plan and city staff s preliminary review of the concept do not constitute a "request" under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 15.99. As such, the "60 -day rule" is not applicable.) Because city staff had not seen the plan prior to the meeting, we were not prepared to offer comments on the concept at that time. Since the meeting we have conducted a staff -level review of the various components of the plan. Statements 1-6 below address some of the broader issues related to the proposed facility and are intended to clarify the city's position on your proposal. 1. The subject property currently is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential, in the Crystal Zoning Ordinance. Park-and-ride facilities are not permitted within residential zoning districts in Crystal. 2. The Crystal Comprehensive Plan does not contemplate the establishment of a new regional park-and-ride facility on the proposed site or anywhere near the TH 100/36th Avenue interchange. In August of 1999, the Crystal City Council authorized submittal of the updated Comprehensive Plan to the Metropolitan Council for its mandatory review to ensure conformity with regional system plans. At its meeting on July 27, 2000, the Metropolitan Mr. Thorstenson, Mr. Serumgard 2 06/21/2004 Council authorized the City of Crystal to implement its updated Comprehensive Plan. The Metropolitan Council's review of the city's updated plan included review by Metro Transit staff, among others. Neither Metro Transit nor Metropolitan Council staff offered any comments as a result of their review with regard to a near-term or long-term regional need for a park-and-ride facility at TH 100 and 36th Avenue in Crystal. The current land use designation for the property in the Crystal Comprehensive Plan is "Highway 100 Project". This designation: a) Identifies lands acquired by MnDOT for TH 100 reconstruction, which was in process during the most recent update to the Comprehensive Plan; and b) Contemplates the assignment of new land use designations upon completion of the reconstruction project and a determination as to the extent of the land area and specific parcels to be reconveyed for redevelopment. In 2002, the City Council adopted a formal policy statement acknowledging the need to evaluate future uses for all reconveyed properties along TH 100 within Crystal and that it would be appropriate to appoint a study group comprised of residents, commission members, City Council members and City staff to conduct this evaluation and formulate recommendations. The Council policy indicated that the study group would not be formed until MnDOT had determined its right-of-way needs. Now that the Crystal segment of the highway reconstruction is complete, the city is moving forward to determine the appropriate future land use designations for all of the properties currently owned by MnDOT: To initiate that effort, city staff members and MnDOT representatives met on April 14 to' delineate the ultimate TH 100 right-of-way boundaries. The next step is to convene the study group and begin deliberation. Upon completion of the land use study, the City Council will initiate formal consideration of appropriate land use designations. To ensure that development does not occur while the study group is conducting the study, the City Council on April 20, 2004, adopted a Resolution and the first reading of an Ordinance establishing a moratorium on development within the TH 100 corridor. Second reading of the ordinance is scheduled for the May 4 Council meeting. State law allows the Council to impose a moratorium on land use changes to allow time to complete planning studies. The moratorium includes all MNDOT-owned property wholly or partially within 660' of the centerline of Highway 100 and applies to all requests for rezoning, subdivisions, variances, conditional uses and site plan review. 3. At no time during the design and approval process for the reconstruction of T.H. 100 was consideration given to a park-and-ride facility at 36th Avenue. The layout approved by the Crystal City Council in November 1998 under its municipal consent authority does not propose establishment of a park-and-ride facility anywhere Mr. Thorstenson, Mr. Serumgard 3 06/2112004 within the T.H. 100 right-of-way or on adjacent lands. Accommodation of a park-and- ride facility was not contemplated during design or highway and interchange construction. As a result, there was no opportunity during the design process to assess the impact a transit facility would have on the very design and function of the regional highway system, as well as the local street system and adjacent residential land uses. The Crystal City Council, in its approval of the layouts, acted in the best interests of the city and, most importantly, those area residents directly affected by the outcomes resulting from the various components of roadway and interchange designs. The appropriate time for consideration of siting a park-and-ride facility and consideration of necessary design changes necessary to support park-and-ride operations (e.g., site access, traffic movements, pedestrian circulation, local street alignments, signalization, impacts on traffic operations on the trunk highway itself, etc.) was during the design process and prior to City Council approval of that design. 4. The proposed park-and-ride facility disregards outcomes of numerous agreements and negotiated decisions that took place between MnDOT and the City of Crystal during the design phase of TH 100 Phase 2 reconstruction. Numerous discussions and negotiations took place between MnDOT and the City during the design phase of the Crystal segment of the TH 100 reconstruction in order to resolve design issues that would have an impact on adjacent properties, future land uses and traffic management within and adjacent to the corridor. In these discussions, both MnDOT and the city of Crystal worked in good faith, oftentimes with neighborhood residents, to bring about successful outcomes. The most significant and relevant example is the formal agreement that was reached between the city and MnDOT in 1998 to eliminate Vera Cruz Avenue as the frontage road from 34th to 36th Avenue (copy of original plan enclosed). Since the frontage road would no longer be a continuous system upon completion of construction, there would be a dramatic reduction in through traffic south of 36th. As a result, Welcome Avenue could serve both local residential traffic and as a way to access Vera Cruz south of 34th. It is only because of this agreement that the proposed park-and-ride site is not split today by a frontage road. Through the agreement, the affected neighborhood residents realized a significant reduction in the assessment amount for the street reconstruction, and MnDOT was able to eliminate the construction of Vera Cruz from 34th to 36th. To place a park-and-ride lot on a site that has seen considerable cooperative decision- making certainly would diminish, if not destroy, the credibility and good will that was built during those difficult negotiations between MnDOT, the city and neighborhood residents. Again, the aim of these negotiations was not to provide Metro Transit with a site for a park-and-ride, the need for which was not identified. Rather, it was to provide a Mr. Thorstenson, Mr. Serumgard 4 06/21/2004 "win-win" scenario whereby both MnDOT and neighborhood residents could reduce their costs. S. Compatibility with regional trail plans and alignment. The siting of a park and ride facility at the proposed location obstructs an important segment of a regional trail system. A regional trail segment is planned for construction in 2004 and will be located on the west (back) side of the sound wall in accordance with the trail routing approved as part of the T.H. 100 design. The city and MnDOT worked cooperatively to locate the sound wall at the 36th Avenue interchange so to maximize the excess land on the city side of the sound walls for possible future development and enhanced landscaping, and to ensure adequate land area for the future trail along the west side of the sound wall from Bassett Creek to 36th Avenue. Portions of this trail segment already have been graded in preparation for trail construction. The park-and-ride facility would be sited directly in the path of this segment of an extensive regional trail corridor that connects Eagle Lake Regional Park, French Regional Park and the North Hennepin Regional Trail to the Minneapolis Grand round. This particular local trail segment connects neighborhoods in south Crystal, northern Golden Valley and New Hope to the Minneapolis Grand Round, two regional parks to the west and to several city parks. The plan for this trail system, First Tier Trails, Greenways and Parks Plan prepared in 2000 for Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District (now the Three Rivers Park District), received park district approval in 2000 (see enclosure). In 2001, the Metropolitan Council incorporated the plan into the Council's Park and Open Space Policy Plan. A major component of this regional trail segment is the pedestrian bridge connecting Crystal and Golden Valley, constructed over TH 100 as part of the highway project at a cost of over $1.9 million. Federal TEA21 Grant funds for $693,000 were supplemented by contributions from MnDOT ($175,300) and the cities of Crystal and Golden Valley ($555,000 each). The city of Crystal has an agreement with Three Rivers Park District relating to financial contributions to the construction of the TH 100 pedestrian bridge in exchange for support and cooperation in development of this regional trail. In summary, a great deal of money has been invested in this trail system, along with many years of thoughtful planning and a lot of work to garner political support at both the local and regional levels. Consideration of an unplanned park-and-ride lot that obstructs the planned route for this regional trail segment is difficult to understand. Mr. Thorstenson, Mr. Serumgard 5 06/21/2004 6. Park-and-ride facilities can have adverse impacts on adjacent residential uses. This is particularly problematic when facilities such as park-and-ride lots, which are not compatible with adjacent residential uses, are embedded in a residential neighborhood without direct vehicular access from the regional road system. Comments offered below in A -C, while not an all-inclusive list of issues, are the more obvious concerns with regard to the park-and-ride facility itself and its operation. A. Incompatibility with surrounding land uses o The subject property is adjacent land zoned R-1, Low Density Residential, to the south and west. o The proposed surface parking lot and two-story parking structure are out of scale with the surrounding low density residential neighborhood. For comparison, based on the parking requirements in the zoning ordinance, a parking lot of this size would serve a 49,500 sq. ft. office building or retail store. o Any plans for a park-and-ride facility at this location should contemplate acquisition of adjacent single family residential properties in order to increase buffering opportunities. o The city zoning ordinance provides for the establishment of park-and-ride lots that are owned and operated by the regional public transit system, but only by conditional use permit and only within the C-2 (General Commercial) and I-1 (Light Industrial) districts, and provided that: • Access is directly from an arterial or major collector street or a frontage road with access directly thereto. Entrances and exits create a minimum of conflict with through traffic movement. If there is a parking ramp as part of the facility, sufficient vehicular stacking space is provided to minimize the blocking of traffic in the public right-of-way. • Parking spaces and aisles or driveways shall be developed in compliance with applicable provisions of the Code and are subject to the review and approval of the city engineer. • The facility meets the following separation distances and hours of operation requirements. "Facility" means any building or any part of the lot where the city council determines that it is likely that vehicles will be driven, stopped, or parked as part of the operations of the park-and-ride. No such facility shall be located less than 50 feet from any property zoned R- 1, R-2 or R-3. If the facility is located at least 50 but less than 100 feet from property zoned R-1, R-2 or R-3, then it may not be open before 6:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. Mr. Thorstenson, Mr. Serumgard 6 06/21/2004 If the facility is located at least 100 but less than 250 feet from property zoned R-1, R-2 or R-3, then it may not be open before 5:00 a.m. or after 11:00 p.m. If the facility is located at least 250 feet from property zoned R-1, R-2 or R-3, then no hours of operations restriction is specified by the Code. The city council finds that there will be adequate screening and buffering between the facility and adjacent uses. The city council determines that all applicable requirements of subsection 515.05, subdivision 3 a) and section 520 of the City Code are considered and satisfactorily met. (Referenced sections may be • viewed on-line at the city's website: www.ci.crystal.mn.us.) o Crystal's Police Chief reports that a park-and-ride lot would not be compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood due to the potential for increased traffic through the residential neighborhood and the likelihood of increased calls for service for car break-ins, loitering, property damage, motor vehicle thefts and graffiti. B. Park-and-ride facility and its operation o The city has concerns with the protection of nearby residential properties from vehicle headlights, motor vehicle noise and diminished air quality. o The city has concerns with the hours of operation of a park-and-ride facility in the location proposed. C. Traffic Issues o The city has serious concerns about impacts a park-and-ride lot would have on residential properties along Welcome Avenue. That portion of Welcome Avenue that would be used to access the park-and-ride facility is a local residential street. Access to a 198 -car park-and-ride facility must be from the regional road system or, if absolutely necessary, from a major collector street like 36th Avenue. It would be inappropriate to rely on the local residential street network to provide access to the park-and-ride lot. o It should be noted that 36th Avenue is a city street, not a county road. It is not classified as a minor arterial, and it is not part of the regional road system. From a service level perspective, it would be better to site the park-and-ride so it has direct access to either a County State Aid Highway or minor arterial in the regional road system. Mr. Thorstenson, Mr. Serumgard 7 06/21/2004 o The city is concerned that an estimated 400 additional vehicle trips would be generated by the proposed park-and-ride facility on local, residential streets. This number would increase with the use of the facility as a kiss -and -ride. o The city is concerned that the location of park-and-ride and the addition of a traffic signal at Welcome will cause a change in local traffic patterns that will be detrimental to the surrounding residential neighborhoods. For example, • With the signalization at 36th and Welcome, additional general purpose traffic will be attracted to the intersection. Currently, vehicles from the residential neighborhoods on both sides of 36th use the six other local streets that lead to 3 6th. • Non -local traffic will increase as drivers who exit the park-and-ride facility to go southbound on Douglas Drive find that going south on Welcome through the residential neighborhood to 32nd or 34th Avenue offers time benefits over waiting at the 36th Avenue signals at both Welcome and Douglas. o The city is concerned that the signalization'of 36th and Welcome will adversely impact the eastbound and westbound movement of traffic on the 36th Avenue bridge and will create operational issues with the MnDOT signals on 36th Avenue at the Hwy 100 ramps. o The city is concerned about westbound buses stopping in a traffic lane on 36th Avenue and how the resulting backups, especially during the PM peak period, would affect the operation of the Hwy 100 interchange. o The city is concerned about the lack of left turn lanes on 36th Avenue at Welcome Avenue. If there were to be a westbound car waiting to turn left from the inside lane at the same time as a westbound bus is stopped for boarding passengers in the outside lane, both westbound lanes would be blocked. o The city anticipates that kiss -and -ride drop offs will occur within the eastbound lane of 36th. Not only will this interfere with through traffic, but this drop-off activity will also interfere with vehicles intending to use the ramp onto southbound TH 100. o The city is concerned that pedestrian safety within the 36th, Welcome and T.H. 100 area will be compromised by the dramatic increase in passenger car turning movements at Welcome and bus movements onto and off of 36th between Welcome and T.H. 100. o The city is concerned that the safety of the pedestrians crossing 36th to reach the transit facility will be compromised by vehicles turning west onto 36th from the exit Mr. Thorstenson, Mr. Serumgard 8 06/21/2004 ramp. There also is potential for conflict between peak hour pedestrian crossings on 36th and peak hour motor vehicle traffic. o The concept plan suggests that MnDOT would have an interest in how the park-and- ride facility may impact traffic operations on its ramps, on the 36th Avenue bridge, and within other portions of its right-of-way. Regardless of our specific concerns with the facility's design and the impacts of its operation, the greater issue remains: the park-and-ride facility contemplated at this location is neither permitted by City Code nor contemplated in the TH 100 designs previously approved by the Crystal City Council. Its placement in the proposed location seriously compromises the positive results and good will achieved through years of planning and cooperative effort on the part of MnDOT, the city, its residents and the Metropolitan Council. MnDOT and Metro Transit officials have indicated that one of the key attractions to the subject site for a park-and-ride facility is that it lies within MnDOT right-of-way and Metro Transit would not have to acquire the site. However, regardless of the apparent benefits to Metro Transit, there are significant other costs to the community and to the region that can be avoided if, instead of being driven by the availability of MnDOT land, decisions are made with a respect for past agreements and approved plans and a keen understanding of why those decisions were made. The city appreciates the opportunity to offer these comments on your most recent concept plan. Sincerely, Anne Norris City Manager Enclosure cc: Mayor and City Council Peggy Leppik, Metropolitan Council Thomas O'Keefe, MnDOT Heather Lott, MnDOT Patrick Peters, Community Development Director Tom Mathisen, City Engineer John Sutter, City Planner Steve Bubul, City Attorney u:l... drt£1 Use Classes. L`OV, ``'ENSITY RESIDENTIAL ME.`D DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Future u t r Land Us& HIGHH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL MW COMMUNITY COMMERCIALVIN � ON WED 9RO CNTER WAYHWY@':. Clay of Crystal Comprehensive Plan 11 M INDUSTRIAL E CRYSTAL AIRPORT c �r PAR%'& CONSERVATION Figure g u e! HIGHWAY 100 PROJECT ff .. M RAIL RIGHT OFWAY °Na..."r''•-- w`'»'�w°i,`„°�` City of Crystal Comprehensive Plan T � - M E M O R A N D U M DATE: September 10, 2004 TO: Pla . g Commission (September 13th meeting) FROM: 0ohn Sutter, Planner and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Consider Application 2004-09 for a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to add a non -conforming uses section that complies with a recently adopted state statute. On August 1, 2004, a new state law became effective that significantly limits cities' ability to restrict lawful non -conforming uses even after they are abandoned, severely damaged or destroyed. The City Attorney has advised us to add language to the Zoning Ordinance reflecting the new state law. To do so, we are proposing to add a new subdivision 8 to subsection 515.01 (General Provisions). Subsequent subdivisions in that subsection would be re -numbered to make room for the new subdivision 8. A copy of the proposed ordinance is attached. Planning Commission action is requested making a recommendation on the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment. The City Council would consider the Planning Commission's recommendation at its next meeting on September 21, 2004. .N ORDINANCE NO. 2004 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 515 OF THE CRYSTAL CITY CODE RELATED TO ZONING AND NONCONFORMING USES THE CITY OF CRYSTAL ORDAINS: Section 1. Crystal City Code Section 515 (Zoning) is amended to add the following new subdivision to subsection 515.01: Subd. 8. Nonconforming Uses. a) It is the purpose of this subsection to provide for the regulation of non- conforming buildings, structures and uses and to specify the requirements and conditions under which n on -conforming uses may be operated and maintained. The zoning code establishes separate districts, each of which is an appropriate area for the location of uses that are permitted in that district. It is necessary and consistent with the establishment of these districts that non -conforming buildings, structures and uses not be permitted to continue without restriction. b) The lawful use or occupation of land or premises existing at the time of adoption of this ordinance may be continued, including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not including expansion, unless: 1) the nonconformity or occupancy is discontinued for a period of more than one year; or 2) any nonconforming use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent of greater than 50 percent of its market value, and no building permit has been applied for within 180 days of when the property is damaged. The City Assessor will determine market value under this subsection. C) After a non -conforming use has terminated, any subsequent use or occupancy of the land, building or structure must be a conforming use or occupancy. d) No non -conforming building, structure or use may be moved to another lot or to any other part of the parcel of land upon which the same was constructed unless such movement brings the non-conformance into compliance with this Code. e) A nonconforming use may not be changed to another nonconforming use. f) When any nonconforming use has been changed to a conforming use, it may not later be changed to a nonconforming use. g) A nonconforming use may be changed to lessen the nonconformity. Once lessened, the use may not be changed to increase the nonconformity. h) Alterations may be made to a building containing lawful non -conforming residential units to improve livability of the units, provided the alterations do not increase the number of dwelling units or size or volume of the building. Section 2. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Crystal City Code, subsection 110.11. First Reading: , 2004 Adopted: , 2004 Peter E. Meintsma, Mayor ATTEST: Janet Lewis, City Clerk 2 CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS ON PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS July 6, 2004: 1. Approved Application 2004-03 for Site Plan Review to construct a new 15,543 sq. ft. commercial building at 5756 Lakeland Avenue North. 2. Denied Application 2004-04 for a Variance to increase the maximum rear yard structure coverage at 5013 Welcome Avenue North from 40% to 52%. Approved an alternate variance to increase it to 50%. 3. Approved First Reading of Application 2004-05, a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to revise Subsection 515.61 (Floodplain Overlay), including adoption of new Flood Insurance Rate Maps. 4. Approved Application 2004-06 for Preliminary Plat of Brunswick Fields (currently 4120, 4130 and 4140 Brunswick Avenue North) to create four lots for new house construction. July 20, 2004: 1. Approved Second Reading and Adoption of Application 2004-05, a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to revise Subsection 515.61 (Floodplain Overlay), including adoption of new Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Ordinance published July 29, 2004. Effective date August 28, 2004. All were consistent with the Planning Commission's recommendations. Page 1 of 1 09/10/2004