The URL can be used to link to this page

2002.04.08 PC Meeting PacketCRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA SUMMARY April 8, 2002 7:00 p.m. Crystal City Hall - Council Chambers 4141 Douglas Dr N A. CALL TO ORDER B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • March 11, 2002 meeting C. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Application 2002-2: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a Special Area Plan covering areas near Douglas Drive south of 36th Avenue. 2. Application 2002-3: Preliminary Plat of Edgewood Gardens. 3. Application 2002-4: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment and Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a mausoleum at Glen Haven Memorial Gardens (5100 Douglas Dr N). 4. Application 2002-5: Conditional Use Permit for outdoor sales (garden center) at Almsted's Supervalu (4210 Douglas Dr N). 5. Application 2002-6: Conditional Use Permit for outdoor sales (garden center) at Cub Foods (5301 36th Ave N). D. OLD BUSINESS 1. Review City Council action on bylaw changes previously approved by the Planning Commission. E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Set date for joint work session with the City Council F. GENERAL INFORMATION G. OPEN FORUM H. ADJOURNMENT • For additional information, contact John Sutter at 763-531-1142 • G:IPLANNINGIPLANCOMM12002104-081agendasummary.doc March 11, 2002 CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: Elsen, K. Graham, Kamp, Krueger, Magnuson, Nystrom, and VonRueden. Commissioner T. Graham arrived at 7:05. Also present were the following: Planner Sutter and Community Development Assistant Dietsche. Absent (excused) was Koss. Call to order Moved by Commissioner Elsen and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to approve the minutes of the February 11, 2002 meeting with no exceptions. Motion carried. 2. Public hearings None 3. Old business ❑ Review results of City Council consideration of Planning Commission Bylaw changes. Planner Sutter explained that the City Council has not taken action on this topic, therefore the discussion will be postponed until further notice. ❑ Consider initiating a Comprehensive Plan amendment to change future land uses along Douglas Drive, south of 36th Avenue by modifying Figure 7 - Future Land Use and associated text. Staff has drafted some proposed text changes that would be part of a potential Comprehensive Plan amendment to facilitate private -sector -initiated redevelopment along Douglas Drive, south of 36th Avenue. Planner Sutter reviewed the changes and explained that staff might refine these further once the Planning Commission authorizes to proceed with the public hearing on the matter. Staff requests that the Planning Commission authorize consideration of a Comprehensive Plan amendment in accordance with the proposed map and text, with a public hearing to be held on April 8, 2002. Planner Sutter presented the special area plan that staff developed for this corridor: CORRIDOR PLAN — DOUGLAS DRIVE, SOUTH OF 36TH AVENUE. Some of the city's greatest potential for residential infill development can be found among the vacant, underutilized, or inappropriately zoned parcels scattered along both sides of Douglas Drive south of 36 h Avenue. The specific area included in this corridor plan is the area between Brunswick and Florida Avenue from 36th Avenue south to the city boundary. The Future Land Use map (Figure 7) shows these parcels predominantly being guided for Medium Density Residential, with some of the transitional areas being guided Low Density Residential for better compatibility with the adjacent single- family neighborhoods. It is not the intent of the city for these underdeveloped areas to be redeveloped in a haphazard fashion. . Specifically, the city has concerns about the following potential negative impacts of redevelopment along this corridor. CONCERNS REGARDING DEVELOPMENT IN THE CORRIDOR: • Isolation. Redevelopment of some parcels might isolate or otherwise make it more difficult to redevelop other parcels in the area. Compatibility. Due to the odd configuration of many of the parcels and limitations on development such as soils, flood zones and the presence of Bassett Creek, it is likely that redevelopment of many sites will be proposed as a Planned Unit Development. While PUDs offer increased flexibility for the developer and the city, there is also the potential for increased impacts on adjacent low density residential areas. Systems. One of the characteristics of this area that has made it difficult for development is that it is where Douglas Drive, a road with a long history in the area, runs adjacent to Bassett Creek. The area is therefore directly impacted by elements of two regional systems: The transportation system and the natural resources system. The city has determined that preservation and enhancement of both transportation routes and open space corridors are important goals for the future well being of the community, and there is always the potential for development to occur in a way which conflicts with these goals. To address these potential negative impacts, the city has established the following guiding principles for the corridor. These principles shall be used by the city in evaluating any planning, zoning or other land use related_ application within the corridor plan area. GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE CORRIDOR: Development shall be consistent with the density limits established for the residential uses shown on the Future Land Use map. If a development site includes areas guided for different densities, the developer may request that the city average the guided density on a pro -rated basis over the entire site. However, the city may require the developer to conform with each guided density instead of a pro -rated average. Density bonuses in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance may be granted in cases where the city determines that there is a public benefit that will be enjoyed beyond the boundaries of the development itself. • Development shall not reduce the development potential of other parcels by impeding access or leaving undeveloped any adjacent small, isolated, difficult -to -develop parcels. • Development shall include additional right-of-way for Douglas Drive or other public streets as necessary to preserve and enhance the transportation system. • Development shall preserve a public open space corridor along Bassett Creek for the purposes of flood prevention, open space preservation and a possible future public trail. • Development shall be compatible with adjacent land uses and systems, including but not limited to issues of traffic, parking, noise, buffering, screening, impervious coverage, building size, form and materials. The city reserves the right to deny any land use related application that does not include site, building, landscaping, or other information deemed necessary by the city to evaluate the application. Commissioner Elsen expressed her concern about the impact of density and the effects of the rezoning. She did not understand how the commission could effectively guide this area for smaller scale development if a proposal meets all criteria for Medium Density Residential. Planner Sutter explained that the special area plans are designed to reflect the comfort level of the commission. Developers may propose a project with the maximum number of units possible in an area zoned Medium Density. However, the Planning Commission would have the right to deny or require changes be made to the project to coincide with the Comprehensive Plan guidelines. Specific issues such as proximity of units and adequate parking space are two examples of legally defensible reasons that would justify the Planning Commission's approval or denial of the project. Commissioner VonRueden was concerned that the text might be too vague in specific areas. Planner Sutter replied by stating that the text was not meant to be forceful, but rather consistent. As the text reads, the Planning Commission would have the option to require developers to purchase surrounding parcels to ensure the development would be consistent and prevent smaller parcels from becoming difficult to develop. Commissioner Magnuson asked Planner Sutter how the Planning Commission could limit higher density projects from this area. Her concern was the impact future development would have and what kind of transition Medium Density Residential would provide for the surrounding single-family homes. She stated that she would like to hear from the residents in the area before rezoning. Planner Sutter reminded the Planning Commission what these parcels are currently zoned. The rezoning would decrease the impact on surrounding residential areas from Neighborhood Commercial and High Density Residential to Medium Density Residential. Planner Sutter stated that when a developer comes in with a specific proposal, it is up to the Planning Commission to make a decision based on sound reasoning. It is impossible to anticipate every scenario and that is why the Comprehensive Plan is important. It provides a general guide for what kind of development the city would like to see in a specific area. Commissioner K. Graham replied by stating that from what is being said, she feels the Planning Commission is trying to control something that they cannot. It is the responsibility of the Plamling Commission to integrate the new development with the existing area, not prevent development altogether. Commissioner T. Graham and Kamp were in agreement with K. Graham and stated that they are comfortable with Medium Density Residential. The guiding principles provided by staff allow discretion and the text indicates exactly what the city would like to see for future development. Planner Sutter stated that the Planning Commission should use the Comprehensive Plan to provide general principles and review each application on a case by case basis for consistency with these principles. Commissioner Elsen restated that rezoning will limit the control the Planning Commission would have on development. She also said that in her opinion, spot zoning was not as negative as once thought. Commissioner T. Graham disagreed with Elsen and said that he believes that it is not in the best interest of the Planning Commission to risk a commercial or high density development while the commission debates rezoning the area to Medium Density Residential. Commissioner Kamp agreed with T. Graham and stated that he feels that commercial is not necessary in this area. He said that Medium Density Residential is a good buffer for the rest of the neighborhood and that the commission would be doing a disservice not to rezone the area. Commissioner Krueger stated that the current commercial zoning in this area gives small businesses a chance to succeed and taking away this cominercial area would be detrimental to the city. Commissioner Nystrom also brought up the idea of having a public meeting to hear from the residents in the area. Planner Sutter replied that he is concerned that residents will oppose any rezoning that may increase the potential for redevelopment. Therefore, the Planning Commission should decide whether to initiate the application, take it to public hearing, and then consider comments from the neighborhood. Planner Sutter reiterated that conforming uses would remain, even if the property is sold and remains in operation without a vacancy of more than one year. He also stated that if the Plarming Commission is adamant about guiding this area for townhouse development, it might be a good idea to include verbiage into the Comprehensive Plan that states so. Commissioner K. Graham suggested including specific examples in the Comprehensive Plan text of what sort of appearance is desired in this area and what would blend well with the surrounding uses. Planner Sutter agreed and said that staff could develop specific text and include it in the "Guiding Principles" section of the special area plans for consideration. Moved by Commissioner T. Graham and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to initiate consideration of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change future land uses in the area generally along Douglas Drive, south of 36tI' Avenue and including text changes to further guide development in this area. Motion carried. A public hearing is scheduled for the April 8, 2002 meeting. 4. New Business o Redevelopment update Planner Sutter briefly reviewed current and planned redevelopment activities for the city. Specific projects, such as the rehabilitation of various homes throughout Crystal, land banking for future redevelopment, and anticipated redevelopment projects were discussed in detail. The Plamung Commission was very impressed with all of the redevelopment projects. Commissioner Magnuson asked specifically about the area surrounding Cub Foods and wondered if the city had any future plans for that area. Planner Sutter replied by stating that is one of the areas where the city is doing some land banking for future redevelopment. Planner Sutter closed the discussion with a preview of Edgewood Gardens, an upcoming redevelopment project that would create six new home lots for construction. Properties at 6404 38th Ave N, 3821 Douglas Dr N, and 3818 Florida Ave N would be re -platted. Acquisition of the properties, preparation of the preliminary and final plats, completion of the public hearing and approval process, construction of necessary site improvements, and sale of the lots for new home construction would all occur in 2002. 5. General information ❑ City Council action on items previously reviewed by the Planning Commission 6. Open forum 7. Adj ournment Moved by Commissioner Elsen and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to adj ourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 8:27 p.m. Chair Magnuson Secretary T. Graham M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 4, 2002 TO: Planning Commission (for April 8th meeting) FROM:�ohn Sutter, Planner and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Public Hearing to consider Application 2002-2, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a Special Area Plan covering areas near Douglas Drive south of 36th Avenue. A. BACKGROUND As part of the process for considering an application for development at 3200 Douglas Drive North, staff received indications from some City Council and Planning Commission members that the Future Land Use designations for the entire Douglas Drive corridor south of 36th Avenue might be flawed. Staff agreed with this assessment and began reviewing the current designations and whether there were alternate approaches that might make more sense given the conditions in this corridor. Over the past few months, staff has developed a proposal to modify the Future Land Use designations for the areas near Douglas Drive south of 36th Avenue. The proposal would also create a place in the Comprehensive Plan for Special Area Plans, with the first such plan being a description of what type of development the city would find acceptable in this corridor. The Planning Commission discussed staff's concept at the January and February meetings and, at the March meeting, voted to initiate the application and public hearing to consider the proposed Special Area Plan including both new text and changes to the Future Land Use map. Notice of the Planning Commission's public hearing was mailed on March 28th to property owners in an area generally between Adair Avenue and Florida Avenue south of 36th Avenue, with extensions of approximately 350' north of 36th Avenue and in the vicinity of Medicine Lake Road. The mailed notice included the proposed new Comprehensive Plan text as well as color maps showing the current and proposed designations for future land use in the corridor. The public hearing notice was also published in the Sun Post on March 27tH The following exhibits are attached: ❑ map showing the area receiving mailed notice of the proposed amendment; ❑ proposed changes to the text of the Comprehensive Plan; ❑ map showing future land use as it is guided in the current comprehensive plan; and ❑ map showing future land use as it would be guided if the proposed amendment were adopted. B. STAFF COMMENTS 1. Current Land Use Designations. The Comprehensive Plan generally shows High Density Residential throughout much of the corridor, with Neighborhood Commercial clustered at the intersections of 32nd, 34" and 36th. There are also some Public & Institutional and Community Commercial uses near the south end of the corridor. While the high density areas south of 30th Avenue cover existing apartment complexes, most of the areas guided high density north of 30th Avenue are not actually developed as such. In addition, few of the commercial -guided sites at 32nd and 34th are actually being used by businesses, and fewer still are being used by business that are consistent with the Neighborhood Commercial classification. There is also a fair amount of vacant or underutilized land in the corridor. On the east side of Douglas, such areas run from the "Gale property" (3148 Douglas) north to the large lot single family homes at 6115, 6125 and 6203 36th. On the west side of Douglas, such areas run from 34th Avenue to Bassett Creek just south of 361h The following are the Comprehensive Plan's descriptions of Low, Medium and High Density Residential plus Neighborhood Commercial. Low Density Residential (LDR). Low-density residential correlates with the City's established single-family residential neighborhoods which comprise 47% of the City. Within these areas, neighborhood improvements and housing maintenance are intended to achieve neighborhood conservation objectives. Though there is very little vacant LDR land available, the full range of single-family housing (detached and attached) is intended to be accommodated at five or less units per gross acre. Attached single-family housing is especially appropriate at neighborhood edges (adjacent to nonresidential uses or a major street) where infill potential exists. Selective redevelopment is also viewed as appropriate to improve neighborhood quality and character. Whether infill or redevelopment, projects are intended to: 1) be relatively small, 2) be compatible in design with the established neighborhood, 3) increase the ratio of owner occupied housing, and 4) fill unique market niches (e.g. seniors cottages). • Medium Density Residential (MDR). These are primarily transitional areas where a mid -density gradient in housing intensity from high to low density is appropriate and desirable to optimize land use compatibility. These primarily correlate with existing MDR developments and redevelopment areas. Housing types are generally single family attached units that are designed like townhome or garden apartments that fit into a single-family neighborhood character. Medium density housing is intended to have a density of five to 12 units per gross acre. • High Density Residential (HDR). High Density Residential housing areas are generally found along minor arterials and collectors with higher traffic volumes and existing or potential public transit service. These areas consist mostly of established apartment developments including senior housing that exceed a density of 12 units per gross acre. Because of the lack of available privately owned vacant land and the fragility of established neighborhoods, the City will entertain only limited expansion of HDR housing contiguous to established projects at maximum densities of 22 units per gross acre. • Neighborhood Commercial (NC) - These areas are generally relatively small in size and provide day-to-day convenience retail and service opportunities within easy walking and biking distance of surrounding neighborhoods. These generally contain smaller shops in shopping centers or freestanding structures. They are intended to be more personal in scale and as compatible as possible with the neighborhoods they serve. Typical uses include grocery stores, laundromats, barber and beauty shops, pharmacies, hardware stores, offices and clinics, and non -automotive repair shops which are accessory to retail establishments. Automobile -intensive uses, such as filling stations, car washes and drive-through restaurants, should not be located in these areas except as lawful non -conforming uses. 2. Proposed Land Use Designations. The changes proposed by staff would, generally, be either a reduction in allowable housing density and development intensity throughout much of the corridor, or no change from current designations. Existing larger apartment buildings would remain guided HDR, simply in recognition of the likelihood of those uses remaining for the foreseeable future. There may be some small buildings (3, 4, 5 or 6 plexes) that would be made non- conforming by a medium density designation. However, staff feels that these buildings are much more likely candidates for conversion or redevelopment to a different use over time. If conversion or redevelopment does not occur, such uses may continue as lawful non -conforming uses even if they exceed the maximum MDR density of 12 units per acre. Furthermore, such buildings are typically already lawfully non -conforming with current parking, setback, open space and minimum lot area requirements, so the fact that they might become non -conforming with the new (reduced) maximum density would not have a major impact on those existing uses. There are only three areas where the allowable density would be increased: _ • The property at 6203 36th which includes a house plus a large vacant lot at 6213 36th. These properties are owned by the same party and, due to their low ration of building value to land value plus their proximity to the small commercial uses at 36th and Douglas, are likely to be redeveloped for townhomes. Similar properties at 6115 and 6125 36th might also be included in such a development, but because they are east of Colorado Avenue they would remain guided LDR. • The west half of the "Gale property" and the homes on the east side of Douglas Drive south to 30th Avenue would be guided MDR. The area of existing homes along Douglas (currently guided LDR) would be guided MDR in recognition of the fair to poor condition of many of the existing homes and the need for higher density to make it feasible for the private sector to acquire and redevelop these homes. If there are strong objections to this approach, the existing homes could remain guided LDR with the understanding that it would probably delay or prevent redevelopment of those homes. In recognition of Colorado Avenue as the transition to LDR, the east half of the "Gale property" would remain guided LDR. • The apartment complex on the west side of Brunswick between Medicine Lake Road and 29th Place was mistakenly guided LDR in the Comprehensive Plan. This was unintentional and clearly is not reflective of either the current land use or how the land is likely to be used in the future. Staff views this as a non -controversial correction item that we happened to notice during our review of land uses in the corridor. 3. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Change. Staff feels that, in addition to this corridor, there may in the future be a need to discuss the city's development expectations for certain corridors in more detail. While the plan already has separate descriptions for some mixed use areas (i.e. the Town Center area at 42nd & Douglas, and the West Broadway / Highway 81 corridor), there is no section for other corridor plans to be added. Staff is proposing to add a new section in Chapter F(3) "Future Land Use Categories" called (e) "Special Area Plans". The first (and so far only) such plan would be titled "Corridor Plan — Douglas Drive south of 36th Avenue" and would contain the text shown on the attached sheet. In the interest of time, staff will not restate the rationale for the text change because it is explained in detail in the proposed text itself. Generally, the purpose of this new text would be to provide additional guidance to prospective developers so they have a complete understanding of the city's expectations and guidelines for development in this area. Staff feels that this will provide a significantly greater degree of control for the Planning Commission and City Council to exercise when they review development proposals in the future. C. SUGGESTED FINDINGS OF FACT The proposed Future Land Use designations, if adopted along with the proposed Special Area Plan text, would facilitate development that is more consistent with the rest of the Comprehensive Plan and more compatible with adjacent existing single family residential neighborhoods. D. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Application 2002-2, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a Special Area Plan covering areas near Douglas Drive south of 36th Avenue. The Planning Commission is asked to make a recommendation on the request for City Council consideration. The City Council would consider the application at its April 16t meeting. THIS IS A DRAFT OF PROPOSED TEXT TO BE ADDED TO THE COMPEHENSIVE PLAN, TO ACCOMPANY THE LAND USE DESIGNATION CHANGES SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED MAPS. Corridor Plan — Douglas Drive south of 36`h Avenue. Some of the city's greatest potential for residential infill development can be found among the vacant, underutilized, or inappropriately zoned parcels scattered along both sides of Douglas Drive south of 36'h Avenue. The specific area included in this corridor plan is the area between Brunswick and Florida Avenue from 36"' Avenue south to the city boundary. The Future Land Use map (Figure 7) shows these parcels predominantly being guided for Medium Density Residential, with some of the transitional areas being guided Low Density Residential for better compatibility with the adjacent single-family neighborhoods. It is not the intent of the city for these underdeveloped areas to be redeveloped in a haphazard fashion. Specifically, the city has concerns about the following potential negative impacts of redevelopment along this corridor. CONCERNS REGARDING DEVELOPMENT IN THE CORRIDOR: • Isolation. Redevelopment of some parcels might isolate or otherwise make it more difficult to redevelop other parcels in the area. • Compatibility. Due to the odd configuration of many of the parcels and limitations on development such as soils, flood zones and the presence of Bassett Creek, it is likely that redevelopment of many sites will be proposed as a Planned Unit Development. While PUDs offer increased flexibility for the developer and the city, there is also the potential for increased impacts on adjacent low density residential areas. Due to the presence of single family neighborhoods adjacent to the Douglas Drive corridor, it is important that any new development blend in with the existing landscape, adjacent development and surrounding neighborhoods. • Systems. One of the characteristics of this area that has made it difficult for development is that it is where Douglas Drive, a road with a long history in the area, runs adjacent to Bassett Creek. The area is therefore directly impacted by elements of two regional systems: The transportation system and the natural resources system. The city has determined that preservation and enhancement of both transportation routes and open space corridors are important goals for the future well being of the community, and there is always the potential for development to occur in a way which conflicts with these goals. To address these potential negative impacts, the city has established the following guiding principles for the corridor. These principles shall be used by the city in evaluating any planning, zoning or other land use related application within the corridor plan area. The city may reject any application that does not contain the level of detail necessary to conduct such an evaluation. GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE CORRIDOR: • Development shall be consistent with the density limits established for the residential uses shown on the Future Land Use map. If a development site includes areas guided for different densities, the developer may request that the city average the guided density on a pro -rated basis over the entire site. However, the city may require the developer to conform with each guided density instead of a pro -rated average. Density bonuses.in. accordance with the Zoning Ordinance may be granted in cases where the city determines that there is a public benefit that will be enjoyed beyond the boundaries of the development itself. • Development shall not reduce the development potential of other parcels by impeding access or leaving undeveloped any adjacent small, isolated, difficult -to -develop parcels. • Development shall include additional right-of-way for Douglas Drive or other public streets as necessary to preserve and enhance the transportation system. • Development shall preserve a public open space corridor along Bassett Creek for the purposes of flood prevention, open space preservation and a possible future public trail. • Development shall be compatible with adjacent land uses and systems, including but not limited to issues of traffic, parking, noise, buffering, screening, impervious coverage, building size, form and materials. The preferred residential development style would be townhomes or similar structures where each unit has a private entrance instead of apartment -style buildings where residents share a common entrance. The city reserves the right to deny any application for development that it determines to be incompatible with these guiding principles or any other part of the Comprehensive Plan. Current Designations For Future Land Use Land Use: Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Neighborhood Commercial W Park & Conservation Public & Institutional Community Commercial dy Area 0 250 500 750 Feet " w�F 5 Proposed Designations for Future Land Use Land Use: Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Neighborhood Commercial Park & Conservation Public & Institutional Community Commercial 0 250 500 750 Feet W E S Study Area ME11 11 ILII M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 4, 2002 TO: Planning Commission (for April 8th meeting) FROM: A5ohn Sutter, Planner and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Public Hearing to consider Application 2002-3, a Preliminary Plat of Edgewood Gardens. A. BACKGROUND The Economic Development Authority of the City of Crystal (EDA) has acquired the following four parcels for infill redevelopment: Parcel A: 3818 Florida Ave N P.I.D. 17-118-21-44-0013 Lot 9, Block 1, Colonial Acres Status: Vacant. Owned by the EDA. The platted utility easement across the east 2.5' of this parcel has been vacated. Parcel B: 3821 Douglas Dr N P.I.D. 17-118-21-44-0001 unplatted land Status: One single family house. Owned by the EDA. Prior owner (Karen Stombaugh) has permission to occupy house through April 30, 2002 and the rest of the property (garden area) through June 30, 2002. The EDA will rehab and sell the house on the open market. Parcel C: 6404 38th Ave N P.I.D. 17-118-21-44-0006 Lot 2, Block 1, Colonial Acres, together with unplatted land Status: One single family house plus outbuildings. Owned by the EDA. Prior owner (Jeff Tepfer) has permission to occupy property through April 30, 2002. The EDA will demolish the house and outbuildings. Parcel D: 632838 th Ave N P.I.D. 17-118-21-44-0005 Lot 1, Block 1, Colonial Acres Status: One single family house. Owned by the EDA. The EDA is presently rehabbing this house for resale as an affordable home for a first- time home buyer. Notice of the Planning Commission's public hearing was mailed on March 28th to property owners within a 700' radius of the subject property. The mailed notice included a copy of the proposed Preliminary Plat. The public hearing notice was also published in the Sun Post on March 27tH The following exhibits are attached: • map showing the area receiving mailed notice of the proposed amendment; • plat map showing the four existing parcels that make up the subject property; • lot area for each of the proposed lots; • proposed Preliminary Plat; and • proposed locations for new homes and existing homes to be rehabbed. B. STAFF COMMENTS The area is guided Low Density Residential and zoned R-1. This allows single family subdivisions of single family detached homes at densities not to exceed 5 units per acre. The density of the proposed subdivision will be 3.5 units per acre. All of the proposed lots meet the city's minimum width (60'), depth (100') and area (7,500 sq. ft.) requirements. Please note that, while the cul-de-sac lots are not 60' wide along the curve of the street right-of-way, they are at least 60' wide at the building setback line. For cul-de-sac lots, past practice in Crystal (and standard practice in most other communities) is to measure the lot width at the setback line for compliance with lot width requirements. The plat includes the following streets and easement dedications: • 7' along Douglas Drive (to provide a full 40' width along the west side of the centerline in accordance with Hennepin County's requirements); • 45' radius (90' diameter) cul-de-sac right-of-way; • 10' drainage and utility easements along all front lot lines; • 5' drainage and utility easements along all rear lot lines; • 5' drainage and utility easements along all side lot lines (except for the north side of lot 8, which will have no easement due to that existing house having a pre-existing nonconforming setback of 2.7'). To serve the new homes on lots 1-5, a new cul-de-sac would be built �ust south of the existing Edgewood Avenue dead end approximately 300' south of 39t Avenue. Water and sanitary sewer lines to serve lots 1-5 would be extended a short distance south from their current termini at the dead end. The improved street would have b6-18 concrete curb and gutter and bituminous pavement in accordance with standard city street requirements. The cul-de-sac have a 30' radius (60' diameter) from curb -to -curb, which has been approved by West Metro Fire and Rescue. The new home on Lot 6 and the existing (rehabbed) home on Lot 7 would be served with existing infrastructure on 38th Avenue. The existing (rehabbed) house on Lot 8 would be served with existing infrastructure on Douglas Drive. The standard park dedication requirement is now $1,000 per new residential unit. Since this plat would result in a net gain of 5 units, park dedication in the amount of $5,000 is required. The EDA will dedicate as parkland 7,764 sq. ft. (0.18 acres) of the property. At the Hennepin County Assessor's estimated value of $1.15 per square foot (memo in the 6328 38th rehab project file dated March 6, 2002), the value of this dedication is $8,929. In addition, the EDA is proposing to install a wood chip footpath -type trail to connect the new Edgewood Avenue cul-de-sac with the Florida Park property to the west. The value of this improvement probably approaches $2,000, meaning that the EDA proposing park dedications and improvements roughly double the minimum required by city code. The rehab of the existing homes at 6328 38th and 3821 Douglas is expected to be completed by early summer and both homes will be marketed at that time. Site work and installation of public improvements would begin in mid -summer 2002 and be completed by fall. The lots for the six new homes would be sold in the fall and construction on the new homes would be expected to be completed by spring 2003. C. SUGGESTED FINDINGS OF FACT The proposed Preliminary Plat is consistent with the requirements of the City's subdivision and zoning regulations. D. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Application 2002-3, a Preliminary Plat of Edgewood Gardens. The Planning Commission is asked to make a recommendation on the request for Cit Council consideration. The City Council would consider the application at its April 16t meeting. -1 ■ I / ■ 1 ■ I ■ I . - ZT .4 w 0 O O w 0 0 w OAF LLS 37TH �NVE N O � x e� MARKWOOD DR N _i E Im 37TH �NVE N O � x e� MARKWOOD DR N _i E 37TH �NVE N O � x e� �_A i G e MARKWOOD DR N E �_A i G e N V) I✓vv/ / V1 �- � ' . ' I �v �"� � 133.71 i� � 4w.��/.`C 3 6 V ...�� ao 31 133 I .•.-• 3 2I I so 93 75 _ p•�%iTC. - A a 20 �. ;71 9 ad' (337r I 33.71 ; 22 23 N do 76.96 3" 2 1 NQ ^ ZIS / • 5G4 v t1. 4 13 80 11 ,� ° 4 114 y � ,,cif � f� C� 5 7 a ^ 75 3�. I 13.19 M' 35 1 1 B1 S. la 5 ° 0 )0 0 5 ° M103 1 -� V 3 li ' g d = 19 2.0 N 21I- 22 i'. - 23� 24,725- 133. 7 I 0 13Z.17 .t 2.1 33 ,1 34 $ co " 9. 9. J�j W �. 7 4 °0.is ,¢4 (714;64 A L 25 :I 133./r' I .G4 (a 132.14 13Z,14 .. -- - �� 8. 7 8. 7. p4 � 8 �./ cn W R 8 m 7 N 5. 3• :.....; G. * 471.. 1 3..130 1 133.2 go 137.12 Bz 12 - _CS ....../d oB.94 -moi$ - - v� 4 3 a v : v. /3.4 /3 .6 0 60 /39. o o /.9•j• N 60 /33 a- .r /33.6 6 0 /5 1. 14. .4•I �, ^ b/Jjd /1. OAU E Z ^ 7 n 2 2 I S. vi 1o`� 1 -4�^' M _133.5 6 2 '133.5 132 �3 /6 / qi .444. � 3 Z. 4G ° /[, 65 h C. �4. 5o 3 G r ^ ^ 3 - /33.4 3 C=qq.y?o /S3.4S 11.95 (cur 5 h 4 5 ¢ r• j.: ��t» 13541 60 /33.4/ 21 G. /�� 4� o 3 4/ 41 1 C IZS,� �4� t.•r � ; _ w it. I .oa►•��`- 1.>iS.3.�•I 1. Gw {fZp nor .13.714 5• / ` N =�.a1 1. v v� /`�M�/ 9. ^ 4CITY) o r 1 19 N ISS,'!e i33d � 3. - / � i (PT. OF PARCEL 25 C.AC-) uN J/ / ` 4 3°� 9• 4. G% o' i c nor) j.3 13 .. I JS 6 !7J .��. �s5° 1' v ►. (225f7;.; (r.710) Ac "- 7• q�DO�. = • '10 �\ 13. 5 " j 7 G. (9 G• G. 3 . 2. 2L ' •• .ONO „ 79 Ba 6WMI 5 4 3 6 S 4 - 380 2 = I so 93 75 bo 75 A 20 1 9 ad' -• 19 20 21 22 23 N do 76.96 3" 2 1 NQ ZIS / • 5G4 16 15: 14 13 80 .ONO �ll Z •Q 1 �I 37th NO o „ 79 Ba 6WMI 5 4 3 2 civ I .4o r 3 79 80 IV 79.3 71 bo 75 A 20 21 22 23 a 24 o f �1 9 do 76.96 �ll Z •Q 1 �I 37th NO o 00 � o 112.27 3 c v � � 30 1<i a.l N b'1 •C` b, 4 O O e MARKWOOD Q.4 19 . 4 , 79 . ..DRIVE a s ,�;�' r 3 2 1 v r 1 71 bo 75 A ;.10 II 12 713 14 152 3" 2 1 NQ ZIS 17 16 15: 14 13 12 00 � o 112.27 3 c v � � 30 1<i a.l N b'1 •C` b, 4 O O e MARKWOOD 5° ti% :a 3 7 a W 14 , ..DRIVE a s ,�;�' �d ti 75 75 bo 75 , 9 75 ss 7 11 s ° o 4 36 3" 2 1 NQ ZIS 17 16 15: 14 13 12 11 8 114 y 5 7 a ^ 75 10 5 v M' 35 1 1 B1 ° 75 M103 1 29 = o 30N c 3l g d = 19 2.0 N 21I- 22 i'. - 23� 24,725- 26 _ 27 ,,, 26 _ 29 ° 30 31 32 33 ,1 34 $ " 7 °0.is ,¢4 Z61o.E3 N.89'Sjgo"W 25 :I � w ,w. •mow �I V � T I A.' � C �, "'� _ �� .. -- - �� v - am LOT AREAS r LOT 1 = 9955 SQ. FT/ 0.23 ACRES LOT 2 = 10316 SQ. FT/ 0.24 ACRES LOT 3 = 14795 SQ. FT/ 0.34 ACRES LOT 4 = 13933 SQ. FT/ 0.32 ACRES LOT 5 = 8743 SQ. FT/ 0.20 ACRES LOT 6 =- 9480 SQ. FT/ 0.22 ACRES LOT 7 = 9465 SQ. FT/ 0.22 ACRES LOT 8 = 12366 SQ. FT/ 0.28 ACRES PARK = 7764 SQ. FT/ 0.18 ACRES 8633.20' E ls[ nmin tat v eEp�i�rt ttAlFtOrs n+[ sarnisax999.1 x614.2 - _ - �-at - — / sato apa7l I—t110D-- 6 ectal n. mron ria wr°E_a_ _- _ 736.52__ 5 EY'SS'MiE —121.11— mr cur tn0p.wr rise xnv — — t2n.61— ` xsrne "kens. ♦ xnv —�• • r -- --------- -- -� n.35 T l - --- �------- — .� 0MW r S - it11 < o\. \ \ surwu nipt - --- n0 'I Sas,ti I° I� �� '� E \ '�/ ` rp S 0006'10' E \ M w�tn. I °. a i n P r t° .� x a xn77 \ \ �. wwrr«0 I I ,atuatm boa p6NIMT Q 1r II t sE98Aa NE I I c -----------Mae - - --- I \\ I�xpa� I J.Sao D�� `I \, %ono , 1r\•.yx a 1 u rwl I I €� w•!'' F>ok 64919 (� I $I xnna 1 .- .,\ n X." y.; x5°96 IP I I lY 'sr I P I\ eaa� I� I a p -� nze �I I� x5,92 I$ I a k I L' a �x�aem t� i zn29 ..r-'\ ,p ,, 7y� L�� I x �� E 7�A `•M �� 1Y®rt puuwccix - rn 41 P, rI i II Vl �..., o a�.IV l� At rnstvo,r � I p I� i ape.e 1 xapat a - ea�i it9w IS �� 1017 �xn>,o ° y �- --- I AI a 1 �` y. - / �an7x ilex x a .91/1• J 5 a l az1 / I 'G, ,/ a \A t r 7Tu{:e(�nc �?- t� p �__J_ " 1 ------ ------------------ --------�--- Asn CLL �\ - - _ i i i -f7 pial nzt .445�r _ _-�.._ '�_. �-c� NUB- Wnun �a3 L - _ ,.>�' 11a1/'OFiIX• ,o i � /� - '°" 1 \>«ntz \ 1 wJ \aao:a�- 5617'61 w /1 1TI T11 , � A JQ BIwLp�G hn IM lr W1RP9 Q�j �l —_� ,a o,n / /,MANAGE�T g,6.a u4 i �Y Pa97 T _ I I `7-1`Y Q , \ \\1t / ,� I I I P JENARY PLA t_ N 8W4X0Lr 9494 696.6x/ j .\ ,� nt.oX / / I` jcantp � I OF xn1.• X" I s° BWKWOOD GARDENS xepae �, x419 ` I , i / / I 1 I $ , / 011672, UI 1673, OI 1674, (111675 17/11&21 CI'CY OF CRYSTAL r �I I 1 / 2 STMY `R^"E ,r vv �'� ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING CO. IIp /, , i. nzo \ I a . 9 Opam1 x+49.9 IS I i A \ / ' 1 1 5300 S. Hwy. Na IUI Mionewoka, MN 55345 Pb. -(612)4747964 Fux (612) 474 8267 LOT AREAS i • ��°nit ax / \ I / Pa 000LLLttt / m a,ao � nzo � � tar I - 9055 sa FT/ ora ACRES % 3o Nl.l ` '\ Y 1 SURVEY FOR: CITY OF CRYSTAL \ ap I L 2 - 14799 SC FT/ 624 AGREES I > 1 \ .� ,j L 3_ 14705 SC FT/ 974 ACRES a I 1 f9>, wl \ '\ 'v xpw LOTLOT ♦ - 1797] m R/ D_Ti ACRES I.`al tum tTM9e1 IT '7W nc �i \ \\ •D X I s S - 6741 SQ R 0.74 ACRES X i 6915'M E i SURVEYED: December, 2001 DRAFTED: December 31, 2001 tar e - 9480 SlL FT/ 0.22 AaEs `_------- -- -- / P,- ria �5ounl trAv6 9/• ,.' \ ' \ Hk00 I fo• I lOT 7 . 9465 SQ R/ 0.22 ACRES _Soca j' " I coil - pis. /` 11 M0I-01� nn7 .mex�\y `__ u____ t REVISED: March 22, 2002, m change m prelim plat LOT 123615 SQ. ACRES PANG - 7764 S0. FT 610 A065 —TL72— '�� T T _ __ _ _ XptM T _- _ pYT - OMi - / I 6 56'3520' FT/ Mn E-�_-\ 1 DESCRIPTION:LEGAL 5 5635'20' E PARCELT `_-__ _ � --�; _ t- 15 Lot 9, Block 1, Colonial Acros, Hennepin County, Minnesota 9r 5949¢ 81690( l!� X.� �S \ PARCELB ` • \ / / 5 I \ The North 99 feet of dse East 440 feet of the Soul, Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, `$ I ,4F L X_' / I Township 118, Range 21, Hennepin County, Minnesota, ..cep, nuol i y_ ___ _____________ ------- -I T —14475 5 56SfY0';E— 9ort1 PARCEL C: G- ----- ---1- r ------ --r-----1 Lot2,Block 1, Colonial Acres and the Sonh 99 feet ofthe North 198 feet ofthe West 275 fief ofthe Easl440feetofthe South Helf°fthe Southeast QuanerofSectionl7,Tnan wnshipllg,Rge2l, ' t.. a39'AaiatE ,,35 I umry, Mmewta i A N. OWQ I I Hennepin c wasI%994, _ I� �I /J "x PARCELD: _ _f '—L __-' _� _ •-j Lot I, BI«k I, Colonial Acres, Hennepin County, Mmneoos x 1 xtn7.a SCOPE OF WORK: ` I. Showing the length and dimetum of boundary lines of the above legal d—ipti°n. The scope 1' I I • / .I c ofourservicesd«s not include demaroning what you own, which is n legal matter. Please ` 1 puna¢ asn I check the legal description with your records or consult with eomperenl legal counsel, ifnecessary, GRAPHIC SCALE p i I i ; I Mutt T I a to crake sure that it is correct. and that any mutmts of record, such as easements, that you wish shown 1 �') on the survey, have been shown. I 2. Showing the location of exrstiog unpmvements we deemed urtpottmt. (■ Per) 7 I, 5 t I - / 3. Salting new monuments or venfyhtg old munumrnts m mark the comm of the property. e v - no M1 ^ ( erz sawn p i ) I 4. Shnwing elevations on the site at selected locations to give surae indication of the topography of the sim. The elevations shown mlam only to the henchmatk provided on this survey. Use that bmch,..k ( n+o€.a I I uoae and check at least one other f tune shown on the amp when deunhaning other elevations for-- this 1 1K site. - _I 311 -^ 4� , I STANDARD SYMBOLS Yc CONVENTIONS: ' I I dl AF i "r swr¢ " -' Denotes 12" ID pipe with plastic plug hearing State license Number 9235, set, unless olhet,w e noted. lr �. Dara �� t ' W art I hereby certify that this Plan, specification, report or surve was Prepared by me orM.. A under my direct supervision and that I am a licensed Professional Engineer and Professional Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. H P.1i — oat f wsr.► n.9u ' 91.17 J'C xeppe o N ST.iT43' w arae • H. Parker P.E. & P.S. No. 9235 38TH AVENUE NORTH-- �xe9u-- �---%---:.._.--_- X..a Xp�p DWG. N0. 011673 C%41"dc"Sac' 30' p"ewo+ 014443 (s' rdbt-oF wad rad:..$) l5 x9!).7'2.0• E M intra, tsE ff lw 9 jm R )d'774 snrn�rwsroaa.z LIS way I —MoD-- aoum 6 5eL71W 17. roup ,ter lt!! 1 _ ___ - xwv 2 las MIOtMfr vtza ' —256m-- 5 aC3S'20•. E xss � I xvn� xnfas "xst1.y" ♦ f1 Ser xliml — — -� r ---- —_ `-------- - 7 ,24.91 �1 as w / /�I 00ffi4_w- 11.17 < so *_ tJ Sint 9At ntwpt 1 a a I ^ -'Xnf.D-- v,i� �1� to I! r 'kF �• E�'.I 40" E M xoiax 1 a°rsm inert liKrar \t xacria /� . \\ x •, \ ,, ivan.w\ an i i .......,fr ^ - ------------/-1--- 1 1r d I` b'3 •$n I DP L �\ 'Fero I I � I ax \ xna2\ i I I_. xnv �� POI 4+66 1, II�III� I J I -- - xnaa_G \ I xwae f N E -W ani t* �I `.. I I Ste. ea. , . \'., ( vrze , f9 4 I I I Q 1r i �i \ �C p7 I `'y_ --von-\ ou�aT xmv--- 6' x8sui i �.- n1 I x t!r� ��t7• �- fr®,w I I I -r- e n�eAmot' I I 1 49 I� ,o a - ssr tttilaea I I `. `, 50 n I a9ayx / i,ux --- --- Ln T _ x .1 s l\ -� .._� t \°ro7 ,Q'T7- nil / -/ I ' alit I --- - ------- -------------1-- ------� eine- / Ct' P'4 `� ��- -- I / f� nzt �' 20. -i- \', -- O - L o noz �su�er v M 01' lK --ass a �� 1 i tII I (� 7 X°W2 xn,.a -- ,�� \ \ _ _ yaye _ _'I _ _ _ r , K1 g 9uc ie au Ir s aria O Fzy PR$LIIQNAW PLAT o M $ —na74— I lace. ser lo.fa / \ ,\ `�-. �•�'• o I N aT43ar ■ ass`-x/ R 'I l , \\" ` nr.ax / / �t,frste i o 0F I l s x n.4 % 4 I b SDGEI�OOD GARDENS I �+ tc �� ry�aoio� I 1 i NW v\\ \1\\ l ,o.v x.°aJ 1 IS X°°61 'Y x—.5 I I \ I / i I \ \\ I I sCu,.�I $ 4� / 011672, UI 1673, UI 1674, n 11675 17/118/21 C)TY OF CRYSTAL p� / 2 STORY FpA°`'- Ir ' \\ I; I' 1 11 $ ° ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING CO. xwas Ib I II xwaf x I, I I / I I 530NI S. Hwy. No. IU! Minncwdm, MN 55345 Phone (612) 474 7964 Fax (6 12) 474 tS267 LOT AREAS I • I� sM• oex 'I I v av Fz9 \ LOT t . ower SQ rt/ as Baas I / 4 wf.t ,; ' \ ,\; y I / stlRvev FOR: CITY OF CRYSTAL tm x - tnFa ser rt/ 2144 Aeras I I \ s, ao ,i Lai 7 - 14795 ser rtx / aAntes s I I I \ '\ ., x665.5 I LOT 4 . 132M Ser rt x72 ACRES I� / ,.�I M awtR U! or d; \ - \� son. x I a tars . nu ser rt/ a.m Aa115 A I / I norm ,w I Lai a . 94ao Sa rt/ 0.22 Aat6 u__ --__L--- _- -- a I . o� 'I. �'TM 6 ,H \ \ 2400 I I SURVEYED: December. 2UU1 DRAFTED: Dxamber 31.2W1 LOT7. 9465 SC rt/ x22 Aat6 ^ 1 twly - stay s9aau \S - -__ —F&Z3 change pm un -p % ^ sur 1 it — I REVISED. March 22.2002, m than m I pint Lar a. 123166 Ser rt/ ata AfJa; r - -- r PARK 7764 ad IT/ ata ACRES w2w E _ I - zFal tr - Wi-- Sx91T20'E "�_ - ''� t„� _-—SS4J-- LEGAL DESCRIPTION 5 aOSS'TQ' E PARCEL A. L s Lo, 9, Block 1, Colonial Acres, Hennepin County, Mimesma '.., • I aro I xna2 \ x tr >rwraE YwaaaLINE 15 - ` I PARCEL B- _�'�� 'r �1 y' l I The North 99 feet of the East 440 F t of the South Half of the Southeast Qua la of Section 17, L! Y s` xvaae ! J ;� I Township 118, Range 21, Hennepin County, Minnesom, excep, mad. y—t1a.7S 5 x9SS'20' E em e --'� PARCEL C: .. - ---- t-- - _--�- r ------ --T------) Lot 2, Block 1, Colonial Acres and the Smith 99 feet nfthe Norah 199 feet of the West 275 feet nfthe Esst 440 f t ofthe Ssmth Halfofthe Southeast Quarter ofSection 17, Township 11 S, Range 2l, i sE'd-ta�aarult[ . -SS I Hennepin County, Minnesota sea, . Ixaa. _ I 1 /J x I / PARCEL D: Lot I, Block I, Colonial Acres, Hennepin County, Minnesota xsoza � - I 1 xsm. ...I xn9za I I ; SCOPE OF WORK: 1. Showing the length and 41 action of boundary lines of the above legal description. The scrape ufour'—,icesdoes not include determining what you own, which is a legal matter. Pleaas aaµl,,q ,yp I i check the legal description with your records or consult with competant legal counsel, ifmactsary, GRAPHIC SCALE as 1 1 G r ; ; • utun r I/ "I F to make sure that it is correct, and that any matters of record, such as easements, that you wish shown 6 an the survey, have been shown. $ f 2. Showing the location of existing improvements we deemed impomaat. (W lm) : T I 1 1 / 3. Setting new monuments nes a verifying old monuments l m:uk the comets of the property. � I I 4. Showing elevations on the site at selected locations m give xsnfe indication of the topography of the l site. The elevations Shawn relate only w the benchmark provided on this survey. Use that benchmark NEW( I I sanv and check at least one other feature shown on the map when determining other elavations for use on this I Is.7I site. all wL4 r Y i I STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS: �• f ' t4^ s rws¢ • ^ Denotes IR" ID pipe with plastic plug hearing State Lkense Number 9235, set, ualrlu otherwise n r tC sPwrct • I 1 R I ' 14" "1616 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, report or survey was prepared by me or ------------ 1 -4J_ 1 tr SPRUCE under my direct supervision and that I am a licensed Professional Engineer and "� _ ^ t • t Professional Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. —7170C�Immfi 1i — xavaea N 1119xT4W w amt • H. Parker P.E. 6'c P.S. No. 9235 38TH AVENUE NORTH"' xa.a� x xwa, x°°aa DWG. N0. 011673 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 4, 2002 TO: Planning Commission (for April 8t" meeting) FROM:John Sutter, Planner and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Public Hearing to consider Application 2002-4, a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment and Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a mausoleum at Glen Haven Memorial Gardens (5100 Douglas Dr N). A. BACKGROUND Cemeteries are not currently listed as a permitted or conditional use in the city's Zoning Ordinance. However, the city presently has two cemeteries and both are located in the R-1 Single Family Residential district. One of these is Glen Haven Memorial Gardens. Glen Haven Memorial Gardens wants to build a 17'x 24' mausoleum on the existing cemetery site. Staff believes this would be an expansion of the cemetery use, in contrast with the previously approved maintenance building which merely located an existing accessory function of the cemetery. Because it is an expansion of a use that is not currently permitted, staff feels that the ordinance must first be changed to allow the use in some fashion. Staff believes that cemeteries should be added as a conditional use in the R-1 District The way our ordinance is currently structured, this would make them a conditional use in all other residential districts as well. The requested from Glen Haven Memorial Gardens therefore has two parts: • Request a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to add cemeteries as a conditional use in the R-1 District; and • Request a Conditional Use Permit to construct a mausoleum at Glen Haven Memorial Gardens. B. STAFF COMMENTS Staff suggests that the following conditional use be added to Section 515.19 Subd. 4: e) 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 sq. ft. in area or 20 feet in height. The total footprint of buildings on the cemetery cannot exceed 1 % of the area of the cemetery. 3) Such use may include maintenance and equipment facilities accessory to the operation of the cemetery, subject to the screening requirements of Section 515.07 Subd. 9 and Section 520 (Site Plan Review). 4) The use is consistent with the provisions of Section 515.53 Subd. 1(e). Staff feels that the proposed mausoleum would be consistent with these requirements and would also recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit for construction of the proposed 17'x 24' mausoleum at Glen Haven Memorial Gardens, upon the effective date of the Zoning Ordinance text amendment described above. C. SUGGESTED FINDINGS OF FACT The proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the R-1 District. 2. The proposed mausoleum would be consistent with the Conditional Use Permit requirements for cemeteries in the R-1 District, upon the adoption and effective date of a Zoning Ordinance text amendment providing for such Conditional Use Permit. D. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Application 2002-4, a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment and Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a mausoleum at Glen Haven Memorial Gardens (5100 Douglas Dr N). The Planning Commission is asked to make a recommendation on the request for Cit � Council consideration. The City Council would consider the application at its April 16t meeting, with second reading of the text amendment at its May 7th meeting. The effective date of the text amendment and Conditional Use Permit would be sometime around mid-June. ■ 1 ■ ■ s W cn Q ■ ■glow 0 ■ ■ 1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■glow ■ �i � ■ =o 3 PamFAIRVIry ■ AVE N ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ �o 11 '9G, ■ F ■ 2 /■ ■ ■ �i � ■ 3 PamFAIRVIry AVE N ■ ■ ■ - r cn r � � m � ■ Z uj LU 48TH AVE N . Z — PROJECT NARRATIVE Garden Mausoleum Glen Haven Cemetery 5100 Douglas Drive North Crystal. MN 55429 This proposal is to construct a 96 crypt garden mausoleum next to an interior cemetery road to the north of the cemetery office. This building will be constructed of pre -cast concrete units with granite shutter fronts. The footprint will be approximately 23' X 25' and will be about 12' in height. A garden mausoleum contains only burial crypts and cremation niches. It has no chapel. The cemetery has no gates so it is basically open to the public 24 hours per day. The cemetery staff is on the premises during the normal working hours of 8 AM to 5 PM. The construction of this project will not require any additional employees for its operation. This is an additional burial option that will be handled with the existing staff. 020119 9/11821 MANAGEMENT ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING CO. 53041 S. Hwy, No. 101 Minnetonka, MN 55345 Phone (952) 474 7964 F-(952)4748267 SURVEY FOR: SCI MANAGEMENT SURVEYED: March, 2002 DRAFTED: March 11, 2(X)2 LIMITATIONS & NOTES: 1. Showing the location of existing improvements we deemed impoan rtt. 2. Shuwing elevations and cmnoms to show the topography of the sit'. The elevauuns shown relate only Io the benchmark provided on this irvey. Use that benchmark and check at least one other feature shown on the map when determining other elevatiuta for use on this site. While we show proposed improvements to your property, we are not as familiar with your plans as you are nor arc we as familiar with the requirements of gov ental agencies as their employees are. We suggest that you review the survey to comfirra that the proposals are what you intend and submit the survey to such go- mental agencies as may have jurisdiction over your project to gain their approvals ifyau con. 4. Sad all desturbed areas. STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS: COVERED CONCRETE "6 " Denotes 1/2" ID pipe with plastic plug hearing State License Number 9235, set, unless otherwise noted. SLAB X 87(1.11 Denotes Proposed Spot Elevation X 470.0 Denotes Existing Spot Elevation I hereby certify that this plan, specification, report or survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a licensed Professional Engineer and Professional Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. BENCHMARK on EIEV- 873.2 Xen.a ms H. Parker P.E. & P.S. No. 9235 I a` O m uXen.e Xen.e S GRAPHIC SCALE 30 0 16 30 60 ( IN FEET ) 1 INCH - 30 FEET 12' SPRUCE. \20" SPRUCE eras \ 2 �s 6' SPRUCE ena Pp 'Of e y 20" SPRUCE EDGE OF BITUMINOUS ROAD Xena Xe>xa I Xmas a .aop • � •e .. Xerz. o. e � PSK / 4�-- \ xene 0 O Z m O P —.a X 9. eee.s x t^ m � c xeee.. Xerl e M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 4, 2002 TO: Planning Commission (for April 8t" meeting) FROM: John Sutter, Planner and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Public Hearing to consider Application 2002-5, a Conditional Use Permit for outdoor sales (garden center) at Almsted's Supervalu (4210 Douglas Dr N). The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor sales in a temporary garden center, to be located in the south parking lot. The proposed display area would be approximately 17' x 42' and will be constructed of cement block and landscape timbers to create an enclosed shopping area. The following informational items are attached: ❑ applicant's statement; ❑ plan layout for proposed garden center; ❑ map showing existing parking lot conditions on the subject property and proposed placement of the garden center; Staff can foresee no negative impacts resulting from the request and recommends approval of Application 2002-05 for a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor sales at 4210 Douglas Drive N, subject to the following conditions: 1. The area is fenced and screened from view of neighboring or abutting residential uses; 2. The area is limited to 30 percent of the gross floor area of the principle use; 3. Storage is screened from view from the public right-of-way by fencing, screening, or landscaping of sufficient height, width, and density to provide an effective screen; 4. Storage area is surfaced to control dust; 5. All lighting shall be hooded and directed so that the light source shall not be visible from the public right-of-way and neighboring residences; The Planning Commission is asked to make a recommendation for City Council consideration. The City Council will consider the request at its April 16, 2002 meeting. /70uLff'CXYSTAL S upER ata 4200 DOUGLAS DRIVE CRYSTAL, MINNESOTA 5.5422 (763) 537-4551 • FAX (763) 537-4553 March 11, 2002 City of Crystal Planning and Zoning Department 4141 Douglas Drive Crystal, MN 55422-1696 Dear Planning and Zoning Staff. I am submitting an application for a "Special Conditional Use Permit" to be used at 4200 Douglas Drive, Crystal. I am including drawings and notes regarding the proposed use of a portion of our parking lot for outdoor spring sales of bedding plants, hanging floral baskets, perennials and vegetable plants. The area that we are intending to use is along the South side of the building where our presentation will be most visible to the traffic traveling East and West on County Rd. 9 and to the traffic traveling North and South on Douglas Drive. Please see the drawing of our parking lot for the exact location. The 17' x 42' temporary greenhouse and display area will occupy approximately 9 — 9' parking spaces along the South side of the store. The display area in front of the greenhouse will be constructed of cement blocks and landscape timbers to obtain a conal -like appearance and enclosed shopping area. If you have any questions or comments regarding our application or the information, please do not hesitate to call me at (763)537-4551. I will be happy to assist in any way possible. Sincerely, t Roger Olson Store Manager Almsted's Crystal SuperValu M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 4, 2002 TO: Planning Commission (for April 8th meeting) FROM: John Sutter, Planner and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Public Hearing to consider Application 2002-6, a Conditional Use Permit for outdoor sales (garden center) at Cub Foods (5301 36th Ave N). The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor sales in a temporary garden center, to be located in the parking lot. The proposed display area would be approximately 20'x 60' and will be enclosed by a fence. The following informational items are attached: ❑ applicant's statement; ❑ map showing existing parking lot conditions on the subject property and proposed placement of the garden center; Staff can foresee no negative impacts resulting from the request and recommends approval of Application 2002-06 for a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor sales at 5301 36th Ave N, subject to the following conditions: 1. The area is fenced and screened from view of neighboring or abutting residential uses; 2. The area is limited to 30 percent of the gross floor area of the principle use; 3. Storage is screened from view from the public right-of-way by fencing, screening, or landscaping of sufficient height, width, and density to provide an effective screen; 4. Storage area is surfaced to control dust; 5. All lighting shall be hooded and directed so that the light source shall not be visible from the public right-of-way and neighboring residences; The Planning Commission is asked to make a recommendation for City Council consideration. The City Council will consider the request at its April 16, 2002 meeting. M Date: March 13, 2002 To: Patrick Peters From: Tom Land Assistant Store Manager Cub Foods -Crystal Subject: Garden Center The attached drawing is an illustration of the green house and garden center that will be going up in the parking lot of our store. We will be putting up the structure and surrounding fence on approximately April 5th and it will stay up until approximately June 15`h. As a result our parking spaces will be reduced by 30 spaces. The greenhouse within the fenced in area will be 20 feet by 60 feet. If you have any questions please call me at the store at 763-287-9996. 22 1 21 36th AVENUE NORT _ ---.._.-----..____..._.------------------ -- — y _ gP �-1 TIT 1T1 -1-1-I1_ r-11TTT1� � 777 2 3 —n n / / /& Nil 4 I tom sf� mom — o 5 SUPERMARKET 89,260 S.F. 8 N' r ••� 10 12 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 --- 35th AVENUE NORTH M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 4, 2002 TO: Planning Commission (for April 8t" meeting) FROM: John Sutter, Planner and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Review proposed changes to Planning Commission By-laws At its April 2nd meeting, the City Council voted unanimously to return the proposed bylaw changes to the Planning Commission to allow Consideration of additional modifications. These are discussed in detail below. The Planning Commission had previously suggested several changes to the bylaws. These changes are described below, with deletions indicated with stFi ethr^„rh and addition indicated with underlining. Additional changes suggested by staff to address City Council concerns are similarly indicated, with staff comments indicated with italics. Attached for reference are copies of the current bylaws and applicable sections of Crystal City Code. By-laws require approval by the City Council before they can take effect. The City Council has asked that the Planning Commission consider these additional changes to address their concerns. q. ARTICLE I. MISSION STATEMENT The role of the Crystal Planning Commission is to serve the City Council and citizens of Crystal by formulating recommendations in land use matters and by devoting the time necessary to listen to fact to consider public input and to render decisions in an objective manner. To be successful in this role Planning Commissioners acknowledge and honor these values: • Open-mindedness: Decisions are made free from prejudice or bias;. Commissioners are receptive of new ideas and to reason. • Respect: Commissioners listen to and show respect for the opinions and positions of fellow Commissioners as well as those who come before the Commission • Equal treatment: Everyone appearing before the Commission has the same privileges, status and rghts. be e...' faced and i3faefieed. Note: This was recommended by staff but deleted by a unanimous vote of the Planning Commission. The City Council had no concerns regarding this change. ADDITIONAL BYLAW CHANGES FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION — 04/08/2002 Page 1 of 5 • Attack the problem, not the person: Personal attacks are not tolerated but honest and informed debate is encouraged. • Offer and accept constructive criticism: Constructive comments are to be encouraged and welcomed' unfavorable iudgments that find fault and fix responsibility are not • Responsibility to the City of Crystal: The best interests of the city of Crystal are paramount and rise above parochial interests. • Shared responsibility: The Commission as a whole bears the responsibility for decisions and recommendations that are made. ARTICLE Ill. ORGANIZATION A. Election of Officers The officers of the Commission shall be elected by the members of the Commission at the January meeting each year. Officers shall serve for a period of one year, commencing with the first meeting of each year. No officer shall serve for more than three consecutive years in the same position. Note: This was recommended by staff but deleted by a divided 6-2 vote of the Planning Commission. Based on City Council discussions on March 41h and March 19`h, there is some desire for increased rotation of officers through the use of term limits. Staff believes that the three year limit would be acceptable to the City Council but that other numbers (4 years, 5 years, etc.) might also be acceptable to the Council: - C. Duties The Secretary shall be responsible for administrative work necessary for the oberations of the Planning Commission, unless city staff has been directed by the City Manager to assume these administrative duties. In the absence of the Secretary, a temporary Secretary may be appointed by the presiding officer to fulfill the duties of Secretary at that meeting. The Se etar-y in the abs nee of the Ghaifpersea ffia v: e shall pr-eside and per-fefm all,duties of the Chair -per -sen in7�he event of the Chair-pefsenls The Secretary shall keep the minutes of all meetings and all records of the Commission. Minutes of the meetings shall be mailed or delivered to all Commission members and shall include the notice and the agenda for the next regular meeting. The Secretary shall notify all members of any special meeting of the Commission. in the abbe ee of the dutieJ s of See -et ry at that Fneet: Approved minutes shall be " provided to the IiG+ City Council in the next available meeting packet or newsbrief. ADDITIONAL BYLAW CHANGES FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION — 04/08/2002 Page 2 of 5 In addition to these administrative duties The in the absence of the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson, the Secretary shall preside and perform all duties of the Chairperson in the event of the Chairperson's absence, disqualification or disability. Note: The City Council had no concerns regarding these changes. ARTICLE 14 III. MEETINGS A. The Commission shall hold a minimum of twelve regular monthly meetings on the second Monday of each month at 7-.-30 7:00 p.m., unless otherwise set by the Commission at the January meetinlz of each year or cancelled by the Chair due to there being no business to consider. In addition, the date and time for any one monthly meeting may be changed by a majority vote of the quorum. B. Quorum, consisting of a majority of the members aetive in of the Commission, shall be sufficient to transact the business of the Commission. D. The roll shall be called at each meeting and a record made of those members present, absent and exeused present or absent shall also be recorded in the minutes of such meeting. E. The order of business will be as follows: Call to Order Approval of Minutes Public Hearings Old Business New Business Opei For- ffi and General Information Open Forum Adjournment Note: The City Council had no concerns regarding these changes. The additional language in "A " about the Chair canceling a meeting due to there being no business has been added by staff; it merely puts in writing what has been standard practice for some time. ARTICLE IV. ATTENDANCE A. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the following language: Attendance is required at all meetings. In the event that a Commissioner is absent from three or more regular meetings in one calendar year, the Chairperson shall notify the Mayor of such absences. Note: The Planning Commission deleted staff's proposed language whereby the Chair would request removal of excessively absent commissioners. The Planning Commission felt that this language was unnecessary since it is the City Council, not the Planning Commission or its ADDITIONAL BYLAW CHANGES FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION — 04/08/2002 Page 3 of 5 Chair, who have the power to decide whether a Commissioner should be removed for any reason including excessive absences. B. Based on the City Council discussions on March 4th and March 19th, staff is suggesting the following language as an alternative: Attendance is required at all meetings Absence from more than three regular meetings in a calendar year is unacceptable because it impairs the Commission's ability to fulfill its responsibilities to the community. For this reason upon a Commissioner's fourth absence from a regular meeting within a calendar year, the Chairperson shall notify the Mayor of such absences and the City Council may take action to remove the Commissioner. Note: Staff believes this fixes the City Council's main problem with the Planning Commission's language, which does not clearly define an unacceptable level of absences. Staff believes that the use of the "may" in the last sentence is necessary because the bylaws cannot compel the City Council into taking a specific course of action. The important thing here is to establish an attendance standard that is clear and unambiguous for the Planning Commissioners: Missing up to three meetings in a calendar year is acceptable; upon missing the fourth meeting, the City Council may remove the Planning Commissioner. ARTICLE V. GENERAL PROVISIONS Note: The Planning Commission has no power to determine how membership is apportioned amongst the various wards and sections of the city. The City Council had no concerns regarding this change. The City Council has requested that the Planning Commission review the bylaws for additional changes that would address the concerns of the Council. Based on City Council discussions, staff is suggesting the following additional changes to the bylaws to address these concerns: 1. Article II, Section A (Election of Officers) to add the following language: "No officer shall serve for more than three consecutive years in the same position." 2. Article III (Meetings), Section A shall read as follows: "The Commission shall hold a minimum of twelve regular monthly meetings on the second Monday of each month at 7:00 p.m., unless otherwise set by the Commission at the January meeting of each year or cancelled by the Chair due to there being no business to consider. In addition, the date and time for any one monthly meeting may be changed by a majority vote of the quorum." 3. Article IV (Attendance) shall read as follows: "Attendance is required at all meetings. Absence from more than three regular meetings in a calendar year is unacceptable because it impairs the Commission's ability,to fulfill its responsibilities to the community. For this reason, upon a Commissioner's fourth absence from a regular meeting within a ADDITIONAL BYLAW CHANGES FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION — 04/08/2002 Page 4 of 5 calendar year, the Chairperson shall notify the Mayor of such absences and the City Council may take action to remove the Commissioner." 4. Other changes not covered in this memo (to be described in the motion). 5. Any combination of these items. A motion should be made to either (1) refer the bylaws back to the City Council for consideration as they were previously approved by the Planning Commission, or (2) refer the bylaws back to the City Council for consideration with additional changes such as the ones noted above. Planning Commission action is requested. ADDITIONAL BYLAW CHANGES FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION — 04/08/2002 Page 5 of 5 (I ) Plan cew� f'nmks — az� 2�oz Commissioner Elsen pointed out the city used to encourage building fences on the property line. Planner Sutter responded by suggesting that owners adopt a maintenance agreement to ensure future owners of the property know who is responsible for the fence. Commissioner Krueger inquired why this issue wasn't dealt with when the permit was applied for and Planner Sutter stated that in fact, that was when it was discovered by the inspector. Mr. Swenson, applicant and property owner, was asked by the Planning Commission to come forward and help clarify the situation. Mr. Swenson stated that he has been neighbors with Ms. Foster for over 20 years both are willing to negotiate a maintenance easement to designate one property owner as rightful caretaker of the fence. He also explained that the discrepancy was caused by plans that were drawn inaccurately. Moved by Commissioner T. Graham and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2002-01 for a lot combination and division of 5826 West Broadway and 5820 West Broadway. Findings of fact are as follows: The request is consistent with the requirements of the Crystal City Code, provided the following conditions are met: • No later than July 1, 2002, the applicant shall complete the required hard surfaced driveway as shown in the Building Official's notes attached to Building Permit #13156 issued October 2, 1997. • Staff shall include language in the approval letter that puts both property owners on notice that they and any subsequent owners are responsible for ownership and maintenance issues related to the existing fence and the city has no role regarding those issues. Motion carried. Old business 4. New business ❑ Consider proposed changes to Planning Commission Bylaws Commissioner Koss stated that he did not like the suggested term limits proposed by staff. He argued that if an elected official does well in a certain position, then they should not be limited in how long they can serve. C2� Commissioner Magnuson stated that she thought the bylaws used to have a limit of three consecutive terms, but they were eliminated. She also said that she feels that the commission should have the right to appoint whoever they feel is the most deserving of the officer positions without having to be limited by terms. Commissioner K. Graham stated that the officer positions provide leadership opportunities for others on the commission and by limiting the terms, it would give others a chance to take on these roles. Commissioner T. Graham agreed with Commissioner K. Graham in that he thought the term limit was maybe a good idea. He also reminded the commission that they have the ability to decide what the term limit should be, if any. He said that three years maybe just isn't the right number. Planner Sutter stated that the three year number was arbitrary, and that it had been chosen by staff only because it corresponded to the length of Planning Commissioners' terms. Commissioner Krueger stated that he was against any term limit altogether. He reiterated that the best person should lead the commission, and that is proven through the votes of the commission. Commissioner K. Graham agreed that the best should lead, but expressed that others may have a different opinion of who the best is. Commissioner T. Graham suggested that leadership rotation could operate at each Planning Commission meeting by having the chair appoint a specific member to lead at different public hearings. This way, all members could get an opportunity to take on a leadership role and offer their expertise on specific agenda items. The majority of the Planning Commission was in agreement that they should consider developing Commissioner T. Graham's suggestion further. Moved by Commissioner Krueger and seconded by Commissioner Elsen to delete the term limits suggested by staff in the proposed changes to the bylaws. Motion carried 6-2, with Elsen, T. Graham, Koss, Krueger, Magnuson, and Nystrom voting aye, K. Graham and VonRueden voting nay. Concern was also expressed about the attendance of Planning Commissioners at regular scheduled meetings. Staff suggested limiting absences to three per year, whether excused or unexcused, before removing the individual from the P�� C0,1,,1jVj_ W jlqLA��S -- 0211 C 11-2 oo Z Planning Commission. Some commissioners stated that a pattern of deliberate absences by a commissioner may require removal, but most absences cannot be helped. Planner Sutter explained that for the good of the Planning Commission, it is imperative for all commissioners to attend the regular scheduled meetings. For this reason, staff feels that excessive absences cannot be accepted, whatever the reason. In response to the comments and suggestions made by the Planning Commission, Planner Sutter suggested changing the proposal to read "In the event that a commissioner is absent from three or more regular meetings in a calendar year, the Chairperson shall notify the Mayor of such absences." At that time, the Mayor and City Council would then be responsible for making the decision to remove the individual based on the circumstances of the absences. Moved by Commissioner Elsen and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to approve the revised changes to the attendance bylaws. Motion carried. The Planning Commission was in agreement that the mission statement incorporated the role and values of the commission very well, except for the statement "Striving for excellence", which was said to be too vague. Moved by Commissioner Elsen and seconded by Commissioner T. Graham to eliminate the "Striving for excellence" condition from the mission statement. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Elsen and seconded by Commissioner Koss to approve the changes to the Planning Commission Bylaws. Motion carried. ❑ Election of Planning Con-anission Officers for 2002 Commissioner Koss nominated and Commissioner Elsen seconded the nomination of Commissioner Paulette Magnuson as chair of the Planning Commission for the year ending December 31, 2002. Motion carried. Commissioner Elsen nominated and Commissioner Koss seconded the nomination of Commissioner Richard VonRueden as vice chair of the Planning Commission for the year ending December 31, 2002. May, 1989 BYLAWS of the PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CRYSTAL Pursuant to City Code Section 305.67 relating to and providing for the establishment, appointment, organization, and responsibilities of the Crystal Planning Commission, the said Commission does hereby adopt the following bylaws and rules for the conduct of its affairs: ARTICLE I. ORGANIZATION A. Election of Officers: The officers of the Commission shall be elected by the members of the Commission at the January meeting each year. Officers shall serve for a period of one year, commencing with the first meeting of each year. B. Officers: The officers of the Commission shall be a Chairperson and Vice Chairperson and Secretary. In addition, there shall be an official administrative secretary who need not be a member of the Commission. C. Duties: 1. The Chairperson shall preside at all meetings of the Com- mission, shall have such powers of the supervision and management as may pertain to the office of Chairperson. 2. The Vice Chairperson shall preside and perform all duties of the Chairperson in the event of the Chairperson's absence, disqualification or disability. 3. The Secretary, in the absence of the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson, shall preside and perform all duties of the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. The Secretary shall keep the minutes of all meetings and all records of the Commission. Minutes of the meetings shall be mailed to all Commission members and shall include the notice and the agenda for the next regular meeting. The Secretary shall notify all members of any special meeting of the Commission. In the absenc4 of the Secretary, a temporary Secretary may be appointed by the 1 PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS Cont'd presiding officer to fulfill the duties of Secretary at that meeting. Approved minutes shall be referred to the City Council at its next regular meeting. 4. It shall be the duty of each member to notify the adminis- trative secretary if such meeting cannot be attended. D. Task Force: Task Forces shall be formed when deemed necessary by the Chairperson. Such Task Forces shall consist of a leader, who shall be a member of the Commission, and any number of people, members or non-members, the -leader deems necessary to success- fully complete the task. The Chairperson shall appoint the leader of any Task Force, keeping in mind the interests of individual members. The Chairperson and Vice Chairperson shall be ex officio members of any Task Force formed. ARTICLE II. MEETINGS .7 ; A. The Commission shall hold a minimum of twelve re ular monthly meetings on the second Monday of each month at p.m. The date and time for any one monthly meeting may be changed by a majority vote of the quorum. B. Quorum, consisting of a majority of the members active in the Commission, shall be sufficient to transact the business of the Commission. C. The Commission may hold special meetings to complete or initi- ate business at the call of the Chairperson, or upon the re- quest of three members of the Commission. D. The roll shall be called at each meeting and a record made of those members present, absent and excused, shall also be recorded in the minutes of such meeting. E. The order of business will be as follows: Call to Order Approval of Minutes Public Hearings old Business New Business Open Forum and General Information Adjournment. - 2 PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS Cont'd ARTICLE IV. ATTENDANCE Attendance is required at all meetings. Unexcused absences from three consecutive regular or special meetings, or more than half of the meetings in one calendar year, require recommendation for removal from this Commission. Absences shall be deemed excused or inexcusable by the Chairperson, Vice Chairperson or Chairperson Pro Tem. ARTICLE V. GENERAL PROVISIONS A. No member of the Commission shall be authorized to speak on behalf of the Commission publicly until the Commission has first considered and approved such statements. The City Coun- cil or City Manager shall be notified in advance of the nature of any public statement of official policy concerning the Commission. �B•, 03n eno e me s e��ofnm'ssor�ha be -t ou - ci fo ar�ae w' %ed pro oso io y w�iic s att cid ma a pa of e Co i.on ylaw �, �i/�S � ARTICLE VI. AMENDMENTS These rules and procedures may be amended by a majority of the membership at a regular or special meeting. Notice of the Proposed amendments shall be mailed to all members of the Commission -by the Secretary prior to the meeting at which the amendments are to be voted upon. Any member of the Commission may, in writing, propose amendments to these rules and procedures. 3 Crystal City Code 305.09, Subd. 3 Subd. 3. Reappointment. A member of an advisory commission desiring reappointment upon expiration of a term must notify the city council of such intention at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the term. Subd. 4. Notification. The city council must cause to be publicized in the official newspaper and by posting in the city hall lobby a verification of vacancies and impending expiration of terms of members of various advisory commissions together with an invitation to interested citizens to apply for appointment. The notice must be published no less than once each month as long as a vacancy on an advisory commission exists. The council may not make such appointments until at least one week has elapsed from the date of the initial publication and posting. 305.11. Meetings. Subdivision 1. Regular meetings. Meetings of advisory commissions are held at such date, time and places as are set forth in their respective by-laws, and they meet as necessary to fulfill the objectives of the board or commission. The procedure at meetings is governed by the by-laws of the board or commission and Robert's Rules of Order, Revised. Subd. 2. Open meetings. Meetings of advisory commissions are open to the public. Dates, time and place of meetings must be published quarterly each calendar year in the official newspaper and in such other publications as the board or commission may direct. Notice of regular and special meetings of advisory commissions must be posted in a prominent place at the Crystal city hall. 305.13. Attendance; vacancies; resignations; removal from office. Subdivision 1 Attendance. Members of the advisory commissions are expected to faithfully participate in the meetings or other activities of the commission to which they have been appointed. Subd. 2. Vacancies. Vacancies in the advisory commissions are filled by the city council for the remainder of the unexpired term. '**SbSubd. 3. Removal from office. Commission members may be removed from office by a majority vote of the city council. 305.15. Organization; by-laws. Subdivision 1. Organization. Within 30 days after the first appointment of its members, an advisory commission must meet to adopt by- laws for the conduct of its affairs. Subd. 2. By-laws. Commission by-laws must provide for the election from its membership of a chairperson, vice -chairperson, secretary, and such other officers as it deems necessary. The by-laws must specify the month of the election of officers, term of office, duties of the officers, composition of task forces and committees, date and time of meetings, number of members to constitute a quorum, the order of business, attendance requirements, and other matters necessary for the conduct of the business of the advisory commissions. The by-laws of each commission are not effective until approved by the city council. The advisory commissions must endeavor to adopt uniform by-laws. Subd. 3. Recorder. The commission secretary is appointed by the chair; provided however, that the city manager may assign members of the city administrative staff to serve as secretary to a commission as deemed necessary. The secretary performs the clerical duties of the commission. Crystal City Code 305.17 Rev. 1994 305.17. Minutes; reports; liaison. Subdivision 1. Minutes. The proceedings of advisory commission meetings must be recorded in minute form and transmitted to the city clerk, who must furnish copies to each member of the commission, the mayor and city council members. A commission may make copies of its minutes available to other advisory commissions and individuals as it deems necessary. The commission must keep a record of all resolutions, transactions, and findings. These records and minutes are public records. Subd. 2. Reports. Advisory commissions must make an annual report to the city council containing the commission's summary of the commission's activities, conclusions and recommendations. The annual report may include a proposed budget for the commission for the ensuing year. The report must be submitted prior to August 1 of each year. Other commission reports, conclusions, and recommendations must be made from time to time to the city council as may be requested by the council or as the commission deems appropriate in light of the matter being considered. Subd. 3. Requests for expenditure of funds. Advisory commission activities requiring the expenditure of funds from the commission's budget must be submitted to the city manager with estimated cost figures prior to any commitment of the expenditures. Subd. 4. Liaison. The city council must annually appoint one councilmember as an ex -officio member without voting rights to each advisory commission to provide a liaison between the city council and the commissions. 305.19. Application. Subsections 305.07, 305.11, 305.13, 305.15 and 305.17, do not apply to the board of adjustments and appeals. 305.21. Park and recreation advisory commission. Subdivision 1. Policy and purpose. The park and recreation advisory commission is established to promote the systematic, comprehensive development of park facilities and recreational activities necessary for the physical, mental, emotional, and moral health and well-being of the residents of the city of Crystal. Subd. 2. Duties of the commission. The park and recreation advisory commission advises and makes recommendations to the city council in matters pertaining to park and recreation programs in the city. Subd. 3. Membership. The park and recreation advisory commission consists of ten members. One member is appointed from each of the respective wards in the city, and six members are appointed from the city at large. Two of the members appointed at large may be students in a junior or senior high school at the time of their appointment. 305.23. Environmental quality commission. (Repealed, Ord. No. 94-9, Sec. 2) 305.24. Environmental commission. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The environmental commission is to stimulate interest in the proper use of, and care for, the natural resources of the city; be informed about laws, policies and regulations of all levels of government that may have environmental or ecological significance for the city; advise the city council on matters relating to the conservation of environmental resources, including the study and proposal of possible environmental policies; and promote public education and awareness relating to such environmental issues. Crystal City Code 305.29 thereafter, the commission must submit to the city council for approval a description of the commission's proposed program containing program elements and procedures and a proposed budget therefor. Expenditures by commission members and city officers and employees for activities conducted under the program must be made only in accordance with the program and budget as approved by the city council. 305.29. Planning commission. Subdivision 1. Policy and duties. The planning commission has those powers and duties assigned to it by Minnesota Statutes, section 462.351 to 462.364, (the Municipal Planning Act) and by this code. The planning commission is designated the planning agency of the city in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, section 462.354. Subd. 2. Membership. The planning commission consists of nine members. Two members are appointed from each of the four wards of the city and one member is appointed at large. The city manager, building inspector and public works director act as consultants to the planning commission. Subd. 3. Oath of office. Members of the planning commission must, before entering upon the discharge of their duties, take an oath as prescribed by section 12.02 of the city charter that they will faithfully discharge the duties of their office. 305.31. Board of adjustments and appeals. Subdivision 1. Policy. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 462.354, a board of adjustments and appeals is created and continued. The board consists of the planning commission. Subd. 2. Duties of the board. a) The board hears and makes recommendations with respect to appeals from any order, decision or determination made by an administrative officer in the enforcement of the zoning code. b) The board hears requests for variances from literal provisions of the zoning code in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357. c) The board hears appeals from the denial of a building permit for structures within the limits of a mapped street pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 462.359. Subd. 3. Rules; records.. The board must adopt rules governing its procedure. The board must provide for a record of its proceedings including minutes of its meetings, its findings, and its action. Subd. 4. Hearings. A matter may not be heard by the board until the applicant thereon has been given ten days' mailed notice in writing of the date and place of the hearing. The notice is given by mailing to applicant at the applicant's last known address. Subd. 5. Review of decisions. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 462.354, subdivision 2, the decisions of the board are advisory to the city council. M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 4, 2002 TO: Planning Commission (for April 8th meeting) FROM: 45John Sutter, Planner and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Set date for joint work session with the City Council In response to the Planning Commission's request for an annual joint work session with the City Council, staff is suggesting the following possible dates for such a meeting (all assumed to be from 7-9 p.m.): Thursday, June 20th (Note: This is just two days after a regular Council. Also, the Environmental Quality Commission meets the same night.) Monday, June 24th (Note: This is midway between the June and July Planning Commission meetings. Also, the Human Rights Commission meets the same night.) Thursday, June 27th (Note: This is the same night that the City Council normally holds their monthly work session. This makes for convenient scheduling since the Council members already have this date blocked out. however, it could become a problem if other issues come up that the Council has to discuss that evening.) Staff would prefer the Thursday, June 27th date because we can be assured of strong Council participation due to it already being on their schedules and there being no conflicts with other Commissions' meetings. The Planning Commission is asked to discuss these options and select the best one.