Loading...
1998.08.10 PC Meeting PacketCRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA SUMMARY August 10, 1998 7:00 PM A. Approval of Minutes from July 13, 1998 Meeting B. Public Hearings Public Hearing to consider Application 98-13.1 for Rezoning of 6800 56th Avenue North (Boston Market site), P.I.D. 05-118-21-42-0039, from B-3 Auto -Oriented Commercial to B-4 Community Commercial, as submitted by Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC, Maple Grove MN. 2. Public Hearing to consider Application 98-14.3 for Site Plan Review to allow construction of a 13,905 sq. ft. retail store in the B-4 Community Commercial District at 5607 West Broadway and 6800 56th Avenue North (Palace Inn and Boston Market sites), P.I.D. 05-118-21-42-0071 and 05-118-21-42-0039, as submitted by Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC, Maple Grove MN. 3. Public Hearing to consider Application 98-15.1 for Rezoning of 5160 West Broadway (Suttle Car Wash site), P.I.D. 09-118-21-24-0023, from B-3 Auto - Oriented Commercial to 1-2 Heavy Industrial, as submitted by the Crystal Planning Commission (515.53 Subd. 2). C. Other Business Discussion Item: Sign regulations / replatting applicable to regional shopping centers; discussion to include City Attorney Steve Bubul (337-9228) 2. Discussion Item: Briefing by City Attorney Steve Bubul regarding the role and responsibilities of the Planning Commission. 3. Discussion Item: Accessory buildings in rear yards (515.07 Subd. 5-b), parking in yards (515.09 Subd. 6), and yard definitions as they relate to both. 4. Defer public hearing on Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment revising definitions of Auto Repair uses until a comprehensive review of commercial and industrial district use regulations is completed. D. Adjournment • For additional information, contact John Stetter at 531-9142 • August 6, 1998 \\CY_FS1\SYS\GROUPS\COMDEVLP\PLANNING\PLANCOMM\1998\08-10\agendasummary.doc 185 July 13, 1998 CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the following present: Bonnell, Elsen, Graham, Kamp, Koss, Krueger, Magnuson and Nystrom. The following was absent: VonRueden. Also present were Community Development Director Norris, Planner Sutter and Recording Secretary Scofield. A. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to approve the minutes of the June 8, 1998, meeting. Motion carried. B (1). Chair Magnuson declared this was the time and the place as advertised for a public hearing to consider Application 98-10.3 for Site Plan Review to allow construction of a 4,480 sq. ft. one-story office building, in the B-4 Community Commercial District at 5225 Douglas Drive (Builders Insulation), P.I.D. 08-118- 21-11-0006 as submitted by Joseph Friberg, Jr. Planner Sutter stated the property lies north of the railroad tracks, west of Douglas Drive, and is in the B-4 Community Commercial District. The applicant plans to retain two mature trees and put up a six-foot high wooden fence between his property and the residence to the west. Also the air conditioning units will be enclosed with a six-foot high sight -obscuring wooden fence. Chair Magnuson suggested moving the air conditioning units to the southeast corner and screened by landscaping. Tim Hassing, representing the applicant, stated they would try to keep the units away from the resident. No one appeared in opposition. Moved by Commissioner Elsen and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Elsen and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to recommend to the City Council to approve) Application 98-10.3 for Site Plan Review to allow construction of a 4,480 sq. ft. one-story office building, in the B-4 Community Commercial District at 5225 Douglas Drive (Builders Insulation), P.I.D. 08-118-21-11- 0006, as submitted by Joseph Friberg, Jr. Subject to the following conditions: ❑ The northwest parking stall shall be eliminated, with said space being used for additional landscaping area to preserve the existing Black Locust trees. July 13, 1998 ❑ The parking lot shall have a perimeter of concrete curb and gutter. ❑ The air conditioning units shall be located as far from adjacent residential property as possible and shall be screened from adjacent property or public right-of-way. ❑ No building permit shall be issued until the applicant executes the required Site Improvement Agreement. ❑ Staff will work with applicant to move air conditioners away from residence and will use natural screening or fence. Motion carried. B (2). Chair Magnuson declared this was the time and the place as advertised for a public hearing to consider a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to add a new clause (f) to 515.39 Subd. 4, which would have the effect of allowing car washes as a conditional use in the I-1 and I-2 districts. Staff presented the following: this is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. No one appeared in opposition. Moved by Commissioner Kamp and seconded by Commissioner Elsen to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Bonnell and seconded by Commissioner Koss to recommend to the City Council to approve a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to add a new clause (f) to 515.39 Subd. 4, which would have the effect of allowing car washes as a conditional use in the I-1 and I-2 districts, using the same language as that presently used for car washes as a conditional use in the B-3 District. Motion carried. B (3). Chair Magnuson declared this was the time and the place as advertised for a public hearing to consider Application 98-11.3 for Site Plan Review and Application 98-11.4 for Conditional Use Permit, to allow construction of a 9,300 sq. ft. one-story addition to an existing auto body shop, to include a car wash as a conditional use in the I-2 Heavy Industrial District at 5108 and 5120 West Broadway (Crystal Collision Center), P.I.D. 09- 118-21-24-0009 and 09-118-21-24-0064, as submitted by John Neznik. Planner Sutter stated space for the stacking of cars exceeds the requirement. Also parking exceeds the requirement for the proposed uses. John Neznik, owner of Crystal Collision, stated the businesses he would lease to would be non -retail. Bob Timperley of Grand T Builders, Minneapolis, stated the County would allow the 187 July 13, 1998 single driveway on West Broadway. No one appeared in opposition. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Kamp to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Commissioner Koss and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 98-11.3 for Site Plan Review and Application 98-11.4 for Conditional Use Permit, to allow construction of a 9,300 sq. ft. one-story addition to an existing auto body shop, to include a car wash as a conditional use in the I-2 Heavy Industrial District at 5108 and 5120 West Broadway (Crystal Collision Center), P.I.D. 09-118-21-24-0009 and 09-118-21-24-0064, as submitted by John Neznik. The findings of fact are as follows: The architectural appearance and functional plan of the building and site shall not be so dissimilar to the existing buildings or area as to cause impairment in property values or constitute a blighting influence within a reasonable distance of the lot. The building addition would incorporate design elements from the existing building and would be constructed of materials compatible with other buildings in the area. The proposed landscaping along West Broadway would improve the appearance of the area. The removal of the existing non -conforming residential use from 5120 West Broadway would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Magazining or stacking space is constructed to accommodate that number of vehicles, that can be washed during a maximum 30 minutes period and shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. At this time the minimum wash time is not known. Stacking space on the site plan submitted appears to be sufficient to accommodate wash times of 2 minutes 8 seconds. The final site plan shows sufficient stacking for vehicles based on the minimum wash time proposed by the applicant. The entire area other than occupied by the building or plantings shall be surfaced with material that will control dust, and drainage which is subject to the approval of the City Engineer. The parking lot will have a perimeter of concrete curb and gutter, and will M. July 13, 1998 have a concrete or bituminous surface. The entire area shall have a drainage system that is subject to the approval of the City Engineer. The engineering site plan, that has been provided to the City Engineer, shows an on-site storm drainage system. Vehicular access points shall be limited, shall create a minimum of conflict with through traffic movement and shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. The final site plan shows access to West Broadway that is acceptable to the Hennepin County Highway Department. Provisions are made to control and reduce noise. The only anticipated source of additional noise resulting from this project is the air dryers for the car wash. Because the nearest property zoned and used for residential purposes (5609 Corvallis Avenue) is 660 feet southeast of the proposed exit doors for the car wash, such noise is not expected to be detrimental to public health, safety or general welfare. The provisions of Sub -Section 515.53 Subd. 1 e of this code are considered and satisfactorily met. ❑ The project is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. ❑ The geographic area involved is appropriate for the proposed use. ❑ The use is not expected to depreciate the area in which it is proposed. ❑ The project is compatible with the character of the surrounding area. ❑ The demonstrated need for such use is apparent in the marketplace, as the applicant has made the decision to invest in the facility. Subject to the following conditions: ❑ It is understood that the applicant may wish to lease parts of the facility to other businesses or individuals for uses accessory to Crystal Collision Center. If such accessory use is not a permissible use in the I-2 District, then it shall not provide goods or services on the site to the general public nor otherwise generate customer traffic on the site in July 13, 1998 addition to that generated by Crystal Collision Center. ❑ The parking demand generated by the mix of uses on the site shall not exceed the number of parking stalls provided on the site. ❑ No building permit shall be issued until the applicant executes the required Site Improvement Agreement. ❑ No building permit shall be issued until Hennepin County has combined the two parcels into a single parcel, and the applicant has furnished evidence of this combination to the City. ❑ Enclosure of dumpster area to be addressed. ❑ Owner aware that this is not a retail operation. Motion carried. B (4). Chair Magnuson declared this was the time and the place as advertised for a public hearing to consider Application 98-12.3 for Site Plan Review to allow construction of a larger addition than was previously approved by the City Council, in the B-3 Auto - Oriented Commercial District at 5160 West Broadway (Suttle Car Wash), P.I.D. 09-118- 21-24-0023 as submitted by Automotive Concepts, Inc. Planner Sutter stated the applicant wanted an increase in the size of the addition from 82' x 86' to 105' x 86'. There is still adequate parking. The City will call a public hearing to clean up the zoning and make the entire parcel I-2 (Heavy Industrial District). Commissioner Kamp questioned if the outside storage would increase. Commissioner Koss thinks van conversion would be considered major auto repair. Greg Schrader of KMS Construction stated there is adequate parking, and the work is done on new vehicles. No one appeared in opposition. Moved by Commissioner Elsen and seconded by Commissioner Koss to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Moved by Bonnell and seconded by Koss to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 98-12.3 for Site Plan Review to allow construction of a larger addition than was previously approved by the City Council, in the B-3 Auto -Oriented Commercial District at 5160 West Broadway (Suttle Car Wash), P.I.D. 09-118-21-21-0023 as submitted by Automotive Concepts, Inc. 190 July 13, 1998 Subject to the following conditions: ❑ All parking shall be accommodated off street, whether for customers, employees or for vehicles to be worked on, being worked on or that have been worked on. Inoperative vehicles shall not be stored outside. ❑ No building permit shall be issued until the applicant executes the required Site Improvement Agreement. ❑ The applicant will not contest the rezoning to I-2 of the property. Motion carried. C (1). Request to schedule a public hearing for rezoning that portion of the property zoned B-3 (Auto -Oriented Commercial) District to I-2 (Heavy Industrial) District at 5160 West Broadway. Moved by Commissioner Koss and seconded by Commissioner Krueger to set a public hearing before the Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, Monday, August 10, 1998, to consider the request of the City of Crystal in Application #98-13.1 to rezone that portion of the property zoned B-3 (Auto -Oriented Commercial) District to I-2 (Heavy Industrial) District at 5160 West Broadway, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Crystal Securities 2❑d Addition. Motion carried. C (2) Request to schedule a public hearing to review the definitions of auto repair major and minor. Moved by Commissioner Koss and seconded by Commissioner Bonnell to set a public hearing before the Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, Monday, August 10, 1998, to review the definitions of auto repair major and minor. Motion carried. C (3). Request to schedule a public hearing for Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit at 5241 West Broadway (Dunlo Motors). Moved by Commissioner Elsen and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to schedule a public hearing before the Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, Monday, August 10, 1998, to consider applications for Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit at 5241 West Broadway (Dunlo Motors). Motion carried. C(4). Request to schedule a public hearing for Rezoning of 4919 Vera Cruz Avenue from R-1 to R-2 or R-3. 191 July 13, 1998 Moved by Commissioner Graham and seconded by to schedule a public hearing before the Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, Monday, August 10, 1998, to consider an application for Rezoning of 4919 Vera Cruz Avenue from R-1 to R-2 or R-3. Motion carried. C (5). Request to reschedule a public hearing, previously scheduled for July 13, 1998, for Rezoning from B-3 (Auto -Oriented Commercial) District to B-4 (Community Commercial) District at 6800 56`" Avenue North (Boston Market site) and Site Plan Review at 5607 West Broadway (Palace Inn). Moved by Commissioner Kamp and seconded by Commissioner Elsen to reschedule a public hearing before the Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, Monday, August 10, 1998, to consider applications for Rezoning from B-3 (Auto -Oriented Commercial) District to B-4 (Community Commercial) District at 6800 56" Avenue North (Boston Market site), legally described as Lot 4, Block 1 General Mills Crystal Addition, and Site Plan Review at 5607 West Broadway (Palace Inn). Motion carried. C (6). Request to schedule a public hearing for a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment pertaining to sign regulations for regional shopping centers. Planning Commission requested staff contact the City Attorney to get more information before setting a public hearing. C (7). Chair Magnuson requested the City Attorney come and speak to the Planning Commission regarding their duties as commissioners. D. Moved by Commissioner Kamp and seconded by Commissioner Koss to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:07 p.m. Chair Magnuson Secretary Nystrom G APLANNING\PC 7-98MIN. DOC.JRS 'L NW BROOKLYN ►ARK BPOOkLrN CENTER • Y 1 MCI NOK 25. I.Q ,l0 �� �I I I 7 JL V 4 Ir t rl t � 131. 1 s3�'L_��II_:�• I% v.e I.v[ .Rau+c CITY-::�r.LL^��:r e �; �.,: _{{�•'_����,����c OF CRYSTALLi EAD, �C�.�u�LI, �.��I �--- CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION • �'M\\J AUGUST 10, 1998{��'I ]� �� . R°e°INso.�E IF Public Hearings I cyJ L s I e 3�� CRYSTAL . i w•. a I '-- r' 9i W 'rrM�llliil Yiw ;'wL•� 3,illee�]o c iy]o_- rl [ t �� Ell F 1111 MI. I �+ 1i •p Y' y iwarr[•. �1 ,1�1�__.__—_� I ��sr �f��• I II �, Sai es_�� • , f i New HOPE / COLOEN VALLIN EY 3 •� J y" 1 IaOBBINaDALE /� 7Ar. sal 'd� int 1=://�+ • . LL-,'_ A I i a OOLOEN VALLEY M E M O R A N D U M DATE: August 5, 1998 TO: Planning Commission (August 10th meeting — Public Hearing #1) FROM: A John Sutter, Planner SUBJ.: 680056 1h Avenue North — former Boston Market site (P.I.D. 05-118-21-42-0039) Application 98-13.1: Rezoning (The effect of the request would be rezoning of a 151'x 200' [30,200 sq. ft.] parcel from B-3 Auto -Oriented Commercial to B-4 Community Commercial.) A. BACKGROUND Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC is proposing to construct a new 13,905 sq. ft. retail building on the properties presently occupied by the Palace Inn and the former Boston Market restaurant. B.C. Real Estate Investments, Inc. is the owner of both properties. The former Boston Market site is zoned B-3 Auto -Oriented Commercial; the Palace Inn site is zoned B-4 Community Commercial. The use expected to occupy the new building would be prohibited in B-3 but permitted in B-4. Rezoning of the former Boston Market site, 6800 56th Avenue North (P.I.D. 05-118-21- 42-0039), would therefore be required prior to construction of the new building. The following informational items are attached: ❑ plat map showing the subject property and adjacent zoning districts ❑ excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan ❑ proposed Ordinance rezoning the subject property from B-3 to B-4 B. STAFF COMMENTS The proposed Rezoning appears to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The subject property is guided for Community Retail, and the rezoning to Community Commercial would be consistent with this designation. C. SUGGESTED FINDINGS OF FACT Crystal City Code (505.53 Subd. le) states, "The Planning Commission shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed [rezoning]." The following suggested findings reflect the specific factors listed in this section: ❑ The project is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. ❑ The geographic area involved is appropriate for the proposed use. ❑ The use is not expected to depreciate the area in which it is proposed. ❑ The project is compatible with the character of the surrounding area. ❑ The demonstrated need for such use is apparent in the marketplace, as the applicant has made the decision to invest in the facility. D. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of application 98-13.1, a request for the rezoning of 6800 56th Avenue North, former Boston Market site (P.I.D. 05-118-21-42-0039), from B-3 Auto -Oriented Commercial to B-4 Community Commercial. The Planning Commission is asked to make a recommendation on the request for City Council consideration. The City Council will consider first reading of the proposed ordinance at its next regular meeting on August 18th, and second reading at the following regular meeting on September 1st. The Site Plan Review application submitted concurrent with the rezoning application will not be considered by the City Council until second reading and adoption of the rezoning ordinance on September 1St REZONING - 6800 56T" AVENUE NORTH 2 ase.�a o fr, a 0 \ r s 1 11 T9 �74j....' 73I 3 73 73 i 13 ; j "r155 t �f „♦ • � I� � r o� , c�y� 13 ° I IOaI I'% S 4, 3e� I N 9 d 7 6 sAui UO. SUB 0. No. 226fl, Part of Lot 6 `yWoo e �') C lb 5 I r , Q �a s. i 4 u, r 3e 01 7$ 1 O f^s _ v A► Bo ase a5 M • _ °� 1.e7 v /� 2 t ��tib — 10•°� II -I 12 13 9T.�e BARIB R A c AD6.I y - 2as.s 3 4 I S I 6 $CLOVER©AL • J �I 8e ! go 3o I � fT ;' 't 5 '� :I $ CLOVEROALE AVE. _ is X16 9.4 .�-. O Rolf Z17.o1 v'1 114. coli _ BJ.a d li s� to '! a C) SALSBERG �' o16t.1.IS �^ i,�I� — ,S e� k1r" 9 dc 13 I ° o ~ 3RD 1 2t 14 81d 12 I1 �� rJ = 13 14 " IS o 427 32 SUB. So 33 ADD. AU D. ,+n �! 478 �1 L. ♦ o) LO T 9 SPILANE KUB I NSKI ADO.d _ XENSEY X15- PART OF LOT l�jw $ - LOT 'A" 3 A 74.51 W GARLOUGH ,, N O. i e :1 PAL R ADD. IST I ADD. 5 �+' 3 17.:+ Q T— S! T *41E �c35` 279., 49.0 155.21 174 07 ADD. � ~//�i ` 5end61ade '' O GG7�v xkLV S -* 301.1%)32.67 93.95 Z V I GHQ .� ♦ aARr o•LoT a /Z�i i5 •.�� v.a7'a.'w; I SaY'O[ 0 ¢ wo SO POO' s'• ,r! 1 1 31 _ CRYSTAL _ 00 144 ---� � !- � � AGO ° ) gee a• Q r O ,r.c : �`. S.2 \ ti a S"A'Z Ory lei y BAN' = Q^ Q'O G�QO' 3 31 j 0 1 e ( I N P to \ i 1 tT .� 3 } ADO. N oo Qp2 P1 I 5��' �,`� " s y I_ .3 W h P � e * R,,•.1 � 60 ^' � 2(3.46 y♦• eo IIS^5 1a 1 11 95 39 " ♦ ?' K G — �` N 231 t" H d LOW) ;-zu 15ROPAY g_ �.IA. (R.E= %II W C,) L ; 2 r +i 1SSt 3 N $ 181.4 r �\ �, \ . a " III li-iI z CO LEGEND RESDENTIAL j A J M0Low 0*asity Affft ® lMW*M Density W Neigh Retail/ Servlee CITY of CRYSTAL ® Wfth Density MIXED USE TRANSrMNAL HE' Canty Kghway 81 MU m INDUSTRIAL — Employment Oriented MU LAND USE PLAN Panned Unit Dev MU PUBLIC/ Town Center MU CUASI PUBLIC PARKS/ ©Comets" OPEN SPACE School F Fre Station L Library M Murwctpal Facilities Q O i Put> 11 1 uas IWO 20Ya� COMPREHENSIVE PLAN11 FIGURE PKI11111MUMu . •� i 1. Continue to revitalize the Bass Lake Road/West Broadway retail area as the City's central business and entertainment district. 2. Improve existing retail centers to provide viable, safe, convenient, accessible and attractive shopping environments that are user friendly and able to satisfy market area demands. 3. Substantially improve the quality and image and increase the value of retail centers with particular emphasis on the West Broadway/County Highway 81 corridor through Crystal. 4. Intensify but contain existing retail centers to minimize sprawling impacts on adjacent residential areas. Commercial/Mixed Use Plan Elements Community Retail These areas are primarily intended to accommodate the full range of nonautomotive retail trade and service establishments and business and professional offices which serve the entire community or subregion. Generally, retail uses are intended to be clustered in shopping center configurations but freestanding buildings are also allowable. Substantial redevelopment, rehabilitation and image enhancement is proposed within Community Retail areas. Community retail areas are also intended to accommodate convenience retail and service establishments which serve the day-to-day shopping needs of surrounding neighborhoods. Neighborhood Retail 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, small scale offices and clinics, and nonautomotive repair shops which are accessory to retail establishments. City of Crystal/Comprehensive Plan Page 43 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING: AMENDING CRYSTAL CITY CODE (APPENDIX I - ZONING), SUBSECTION 515.61, SUBDIVISIONS 9 AND 10 BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FROM B-3 TO B-4 THE CITY OF CRYSTAL ORDAINS: Section 1. Crystal city code (Appendix I -Zoning), subsection 515.61, subdivisions 9 and 10, are amended as follows: The zoning classification of the following described land is hereby changed as follows: Description of land: Lot 4, Block 1, General Mills Crystal Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota Present Classification: B-3 (District Auto -Oriented Commercial) New Classification: B-4 (Community Commercial) Sec. 2. The Zoning Administrator is authorized and directed to amend the Zoning Map in accordance with this ordinance. Sec. 3. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Crystal city code, subsection 110.11. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk SJB-147390 CR205-30 ME M OR AND U M DATE: August 5, 1998 TO: Planning Commission (August 10' meeting — Public Hearing #2) FROM: John Sutter, Planner SUBJ.: 5607 West Broadway and 6800 561h Avenue North Palace Inn and former Boston Market site (P.I.D. 05-118-21-42-0071 and 05-118-21-42-0039) Application 98-14.3: Site Plan Review (The effect of the request would be construction of a 13,905 sq. ft. one-story retail building.) A. BACKGROUND Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC is proposing to construct a new 13,905 sq. ft. retail building on the properties presently occupied by the Palace Inn and the former Boston Market restaurant. B.C. Real Estate Investments, Inc. is the owner of both properties. The existing buildings on the property, the Palace Inn and the former Boston Market, would be demolished as part of this project. The new retail building is expected to house a Walgreen's drug store. The following informational items are attached: ❑ plat map showing the subject properties and adjacent zoning districts ❑ narrative provided by developer describing the project ❑ set of preliminary plans for the project B. STAFF COMMENTS 1. Property. The subject property contains two separate parcels. The west parcel (former Boston Market) is zoned B-3 Auto -Oriented Commercial; the east parcel (Palace Inn) is zoned B-4 Community Commercial. Because drug stores are permitted in B-4 but not in B-3, the site plan will not be brought to the City Council for approval until after second reading of an ordinance rezoning the west parcel to B-4. The developer should also combine the two parcels into a single parcel. 2. Proposed Building. The building would have a gross floor area of 13,905 sq. ft., with exterior walls mostly of brick and a flat roof. The main entrance would face southeast. A truck unloading area would be located on the north side of the building, and a drive- through pharmacy would be located on the west side of the building. 3. Zoning and Land Use. Assuming the entire site is zoned B-4 Community Commercial, the proposed use, a drugstore, would be a permitted use. Abutting properties are zoned B-3 Auto -Oriented Commercial to the north and west, and B-4 Community Commercial across 56th Avenue to the south and West Broadway to the east. The surrounding land uses are commercial, and are predominantly retail in nature. The subject property is guided for Community Retail in the Comprehensive Plan, which states, in part, "These areas are intended to accommodate the full range of nonautomotive retail trade and service establishments... which serve the entire community or subregion." Staff opinion is that the proposed building would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Parking and Access. 515.09 Subd. 9(w) requires one off-street parking stall per 250 sq. ft. of gross floor area; 56 stalls would be required for the proposed building. The site plan shows a parking lot with 69 off-street stalls, which is 13 more than the minimum required. The plan shows drive aisles of 24' wide; 515.09 Subd. 4 requires aisles to be 25' wide. Removal of the northeastern most parking stall would be desirable to reduce traffic conflicts between vehicles entering the site from West Broadway and cars backing out of their parking spots. In addition, the three southeasternmost parking spots could be removed to provide a larger area for landscaping near the intersection of West Broadway and 56th Avenue. 5. Landscaping, Buffering and Signage. The landscaping appears generally appropriate except for the lack of planting near the intersection of West Broadway and 56th Avenue. Improving the appearance of this intersection is one of the primary goals for the City. To help accomplish this goal, the site plan approval could include a stipulation that the developer install landscaping adjacent to the intersection as determined to be appropriate by the City Forester. Because the property does not abut any residential property, no buffering is required. The signage shown on the site plan (pylon sign) and building elevations (wall signs) does not conform to the requirements of City Code (Section 405). Plans showing signage in conformance with City Code will have to be submitted prior to issuance of a sign permit. SITE PLAN REVIEW - 5607 WEST BROADWAY & 6800 56TH AVENUE NORTH 2 6. Site Improvement Agreement. A Site Improvement Agreement, including estimated financial surety of $215,000, is required for this project. C. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of application 98-14.3, a request for the approval of Site Plan Review for a new retail store to be located at 5607 West Broadway as shown on the plans submitted with said application, and subject to the following conditions: ❑ The existing hydrant near the northwest corner of the property shall remain. ❑ All drive aisles must be at least 25 feet wide. This includes the drive aisle on the west side of the pharmacy drive-through. ❑ As per staff discussions with the Hennepin County Highway Department, the exits from the parking lot to 56th Avenue and West Broadway shall be signed with a stop sign and a right turn only sign. ❑ The northeasternmost parking stall shall be eliminated, to reduce the likelihood of conflicts between traffic entering the site and cars backing out of that stall. ❑ The three southeasternmost parking stalls shall be eliminated, to allow for a larger landscaped area near the intersection of West Broadway and 56th Avenue. Such landscaping shall be as determined to be appropriate by the City Forester. ❑ The pylon sign and wall signs shown on the site plan and building elevations submitted would not comply with City Code (Section 405). No sign permit shall be issued except for signs that would comply with Cit Code. i``7 �.,�y �,, ❑ No building permit shall be issued until Hennepin County has combined the two parcels into a single parcel, and the applicant has furnished evidence of this combination to the City. ❑ No building permit shall be issued until the applicant executes the required Site Improvement Agreement. The Planning Commission is asked to make a recommendation on the request for City Council consideration. The City Council will consider the request at its September 1" meeting instead of its next regular meeting on August 18th, because second reading and adoption of the rezoning of the western parcel would not occur before September 1St. If the rezoning is not adopted, the application for Site Plan Review must be denied. SITE PLAN REVIEW - 5607 WEST BROADWAY & 6800 56T" AVENUE NORTH 3 10=1 I �S 4 3 e� I 19 , d 79 6 �e . s W srAUO. 9U8 D. No. X16 c �`'p� Cyy IL'�4o� C`II10� �5ao) ca IZy�•e �O Part of Lot s SM to , �a f • S! j M O �. ��{' 3 2 1 _ I 1 2 %tib — 10 11 12 t 3 o rgt.se R 2� N Q ' I R - Q N O I r0 26•.Z4 ,a� L 0 v AD6.1 y — ga5.s + 3 :; 4 S I 6 iJJ SCiL(VFROALE 'sa.r �i se se , a 1s e rrs cLovERDALE 3.� N9 x to AVE. S �r+ rs o l , I! r SALSBERV : a Is rzz.T p�4 IIS I `45011 a ._. n s. r.r.ls �I (�/�► is i 3RD ltl I N a► 14 w 858 12 II i 3d rJ'' 174 13 14 15 ADD. S U 8. I � 42Y 32 � oAU D. a Q 478 217 z (`��a� LOT zbl.s l SPILANE KUBINSKI AOO. _XEN"[r no za1 % PART OF LOT iz�s a LOT "A' 3 MANalt s ani A N0. 26 - - W GARLOUGH 5k ���4� �- 1 PAL R ADD. IST I ADD. ^ v • w O O Q— —'-- ^ — v 49.0 155.21 174,07 ADD, 2'19.7 " �S Sena6ladr '' w SSV �.�2 3s 32.a1 / 93.95 Z O I Lip' 9� PART oR LOTn Y.ars'N, I ` 0 N C�0 QO 5�� �r 'SZy(r 1 Ibb CRYSTAL t ; . �Lo 5 .7- - Q, r 0 �4y 147.4c ' QPQRS v rs la STT ATE fri ` a Z J� ALJ CL . = BAN5 Q� ¢o �AA 01 1 p� a i \l ! 3 >- ALL . N (/� O' ��' 13 v O R' 6.o 11 Af eo 115:75 1. 11O 95 39 N N p + M N �• - . n � 247.5 ^ r• Y R: N s •= 3 r �9 L 4 41 v S(A&TEcr �• (srrs Ptd �.em '" ) w� a 2� �a I CgZZoj spit P zt9� 2 s5 cl �\ s B-01 7 Z N T iim TOLD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY July 10, 1998 Application for Site Plan Review 6800 Bass Lake Road and 5607 West Broadway Crystal, Minnesota The applicant, Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC, under this application for Site Plan Review, has obtained Purchase Agreements with the properties commonly known as the Boston Market and the Palace Inn. It is the intention of the applicant to re -zone both lots into a consistent zoning classification, B-4, combine the lots, and to construct a Walgreen's Drug Store on the parcel. The Walgreen's Drug Store will be brick on all four elevations with a drive-through for prescription drop off and pick up (only). The plan will feature approximately 70 parking stalls and landscape will be consistent with the City of Crystal regulations. Curb cuts for the proposed Walgreen's Drug Store development will be on both Bass Lake Road and Broadway Avenue. The Bass Lake Road curb cut will be located generally in the western side of the property, while the curb cut on Broadway Avenue will be generally in the north side of the property. We are presently working with Franchise Associates, Inc., the adjoining property owner to the north (Arby's), to complete a cross easement agreement. This would allow customers to access the Ground Round, Arby's, and Walgreen's internally, rather than having to re-enter Bass Lake Road or Broadway. Construction should take approximately 5 to 5 1/2 months and we anticipate impacts to the surrounding area to be minimal, as little grading is required and sufficient area for on-site mobilization and storage of materials is available. The applicant and Walgreen Company both look forward to being part of the exciting redevelopment at Bass Lake Road and Broadway Avenue in Crystal. MINNEAPOLIS • MILWAUKEE • CHICAGO WEDGWOOD COMMERCE CENTRE • 6900 Wedgwood Road, Suite 100, Maple Grove, MN 55311 • (612) 420-9000 Fax (612) 420-7574 SYMBOLS MAWM TITLE DRAMiJG MAKER 1 PDRA1rfMC NAME OOR PLAN DRANK SCALE / 12 COUAM LIE CFD and TMMEEFS NEIr COLUMN NUMM EaSTING COLUMN NUMBER 1 SECTION TARCET SECTION NUMBER SHEET NUMM i ETi L TA AMM SECTION NUMBER SHEET NUR SECT)ON NUR SHEET NUMiER 41�__SHEET E�ry.��/.�T�K�7l�TwEr SECTION N A0R NUMBER FJOCM PULE° and ROOM NLMM 0MCEf__ ROOM VW OW —ROOM NIAIF£R l FLOC R [LEY UM TAHCET tow -o -LOCK OR LEirit- BUILDING DATUM ElE Ulm FEV13M TAACfT REVISION AREA CLOUDED DRAWING NO. SYSTEM :RCitTF WL CF$MN S ,W ,.7.1`9 MIO NSE 3'lS3TC SFS fAt — :19k ?lE 6ROP N.1H7) Sl At710S THE SLE No WTT�t NOM 1,EACE CR 9MLL THE PRpEiT 100fI101N, iCS YID SE "M M OAOIPS 1111M pTD1RlPIM JE MPHiEg11 WOR M Al = vm� = =us Ab IUM 11 MIM Ply E um me m �x1�x Sean SHOW M SCHMUM A7 A(MVCa exom016 AD fr4TIId0R MTMLS K RIP.c7i., Lilii'A RMIS A3.1 3 Wml-ft= mum MAS (iLDO� uv6 a OEIR amu O 9crIK MM CRYSTAL, 4 OTA ABBREVIATIONS A AB kv"HOR BOLT AoV IBOR AC AQ11hT1 A/C AR CONDITION D ACT .SU`=t 1.E AOL AMATABIE AFF ABOVE Fll 9 FLOW IGC lGGREG,.E ALT ALTERNAM ALIT Aa.;,wer AIDE AN[+IDR. -CHOW" WE Al' ACCIM PANE. APPD APPRO.ED .:F+RaI AP^RORRN.TE AROI MNwrtELT(LRAL) Aura rrtoNATc 7 'E 8 BD 9MID Ba aELOW 31.E BETWEEN BEV 3EVO.0 BLIM AADWN' TIM acm aaT 9Qn01 PG WANW. BIRI a RI 8W a4safoff a5 3011 SEES BTU WMH TFEAIHE LIT �B aNBWEr X MACJTT -EM MiENT CE,II zaveec CC COW" CURD 71/I aMNEFR JDW C.Q-13DAW rR rrrxE ane cAGLRNFEIE]RCE cU CONTROL 1W a .^J4ILA(NN, 0. ::IITTR NOTE aD D5E CLR afAINANCE) LS anSIRE CMU CONCRETE N W_ ,NIT d cL.YIF3T COF COEFF-CDR CSL 'COLUMN OSB CcNBWUT%w .:.or ::(MPnl35(c'D).(iLEEj„(Rw CQIi a_,;*AcE Caw ml"Ec" co"T x16TRLICIION cow. Co"TN10E OR oONTNE Ca TIt CONrR c7m Cas M000OR (YT :UPE?(ED) CS L?ifFA_➢EE C9YT '15E)1ER Cr3AY1WC PILE CU R _cLaQ 'COT (FEET) CU TO a IAAS(S) CW 'OLD NOFR a PF�— 08 OED DEaIEF13) OEM_ JEIAARTIE/NT OET DETNL DF DMXI G ow DwnER DWG OYGOIAL DIM DWNSIOW DIV DSPEMSER ON. DI Bp1 ON. OOWr ON DOOR OS DOWNSPOUT 7r CRANING E :.ITP A 90.1.T , •' .'ItP+WTIM El DEWI" ].EL ELECT"C(AL) ETA. CZYATM ]TER EWERGENCT OGTNG. a UEIRuNWJ `N EO EQUAL EOLIP COMMENT 9 'j WLlTE SIC E.E=rNIc RATER COpD1 'J�. El5O5m Elw E%M48T LIP. EXPOAdi Era. ocEweLON EAT. JLrERIDR F FD FlLRR 55W FON FOU GATION FE FIRE EXTMGU6EER FEC FWE onMc„bMER c ,NET TFL F ,Sm AOR 7.ex-oN FHC EIRE 40SE CABINET FN FINED) FlD[ ..^.FCtRNF RQ FL%W4 FLR PDaR(M(i) FLUOR FLu0RE5CEMf FR. FRMIE(D). (1NG) FT FOOT(Ff" M TTY TM FUR PLewo, F1RI.NG M. FI TUE FYC FIRE VALVE C.,W.Er G GAGL QAUGE ^.ALV :ALVANIZED - MNcN L CoRrwc (DR) GO 3RADE. GRADING GIL GLASS. GLr(E7) a wn. G1AZN: GIP aocrPsull a01ND H b Hos[ a® HC HOLLOW CORE HLP-W40MAP(PED) HD HEAD iZi. HAEDr1RE HEI HOAGONAL HW HOLLOW WETAL HNRIE HORIZONTAL H.P. H16TN PONT HR HOUR M HDGM HTO HEATM IW HEATMC/ VE)RAATIOW QR COMDf?X)N;NG IN HOT WATER HID HTORALRJC I 0 .WOE cvec ER N NCH(o) :NCL NCLUE(D). (N:) Ilio NFOR1Anck ?eUL iNLSU kMED). ()ON) Hir iNTaN R 3 ,om �T yDINr SR KITCHEN RNocT an L L LENGTH IAB LABORATORY LAWNMTE(D) 1T. LATEIAL LAY 4YATORI LB PW -(S) W _EFT -MND US LBRARY ,N dEM LL JK LOW LP. NON POINT T..N.IrT _'O � 19NTNG LTL IRE LYR LOUAEA 'INN `1ANR:YL Ws vAsowrr NAIL +AArteR1Y INFL]i 4ECEWeo(/L) 4ED. NtDIIM WDS NE BRAAE I'm WEII.WFE I—L IMM L7UFIE(R), (D) WL NIMRIN WSC. 4I S NO 4ASONRY OPENING Im UAL WINE NI1l1lI1 N Noam VTC Nor N CONri a W IUNWER 4014 `cwft%L N.TS . NOT TO SCALE OVEANLLL 00 ON TENTEID(S) W OUTSIDE CIAMETER OFF OErCf WI OTFALNFiF.V] CEAW OPERIC cm :.wNasNre OZ OUNCES) P PMI i EL ?BD PARTICLE BOARD Pc PNRErwTT caNCRETE PM PEaIM AGSaNArM) PE�m1ETa P. LATE Pl PROPERTY LINE PMI PLASTIC —NAM PLAT RASTER r+L.aR PWIBAD PLF POUNDS PER ,NEAR FOOT PNL AK1 POL RO SHED(m) 'R `-R PREFAB PRIEFABRCATE(U) iHRE3 P ES1RE PROW PROJECTION PSF POUNDS PEA SQUARE FOOT f9 PWN0.T N£R SaUNRE RICIN Q PTD PM raoEL 0hWE6ER MW PAR"rMON IV PWEV TOWEL �CFPFCR PYO POLyRDC CHLORO[ PL WO PLYWOoO C? ar a.Ataly -nE err QUAHrm B R asER RAD RAZIIA R9 R6tEL.FD CENLMG ,AN RD ROOF DRAW REV REML REVISED) ECA RECEPTACLE 7EF. TEFL REFLECT(",(NE) REG. .RELSTEA REDIAE INOMFORCEO), (RIO) REQ. HN REQURED RIa(T HMD RK 80011 LPW gEVOl.If`I0N5 PER WNum RO ROI CPEJNNC s scum SMI SAWARY 9CIRD M xFNFDL.LE SOAP DISPENSER SECT SELTM SF SQUARE foot (FEET) 9CL SINGLE ZIT 3HEET SIM SWiAR SW SMRORY NAPxM O6PENSER SNR SPEC $BINARY HdPNN RECEPTACLE SPEcMVION 90. SQUARE ss STAWEsS STEEL SLD STANOIRO STL SI SOR 7—,,AGE SfRUCT S'RIC=URE, STRUCTURAL SUSP SUSPEND. 9-twENCED T *TOAD a TGP ^s ^1 TEMP MCH[ 'Ei IEBERATiStE _ERR _RAZZO T&G 'DIIL.lE d 3ROO4 THN TNa((NFST) EfNRII 11RIX:a1 'PD To1IET PAPER IS—. ATP *YFNrx UL LTYUERWIWM3S LAacwvQi ' ':hE]D 'ANEYtJN MED UNO W t.TED OMF'MSE x IRWL V' W ~OR dYNEER 'N L'N1'L tiYTE LCF VWL CCiPOSRDII TEE VERT VERTICAL PEST 'hS WULr VNAYL 1E ;.vert Ari caaa+R+o W A,T W YEm W/ WTN AD e(DDD AND. wMaoW /0 hTtINOIT wP ^3.ER�CA.!IG RPT RORI(MG PONT r OOG T AINf NNFLDED NITRE FARRc Y TO AME M ,a 1 DATA LOT SIZE 78,126.8 SQUARE FEET BUiLDNG SiZE 1.3,90.5SQUARE FEET PERVIOUS 13,518.3 SQUARE FEET IMPERVIOUS 54,608.5 SQUARE FEET IMPERVIOUS/PERNLIC 13/17 PARKING PROVIDED 59 SPACES =SSUE RECORD r DPAWING INDEX TO TITLE SHEET Cf y iL.. Cl GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN AAG-ffECTURAL Al AREA SiTE PIAN A2 BUILDING ELEVATIONS L1 LANDSCAPE PLAN MATERIAL INDICATIONS LOCATION MAP SM AYE K \V — 9 t 8'86 LANCE M O ARCHNET Tt1H Anaff1 ,'rtac ARCHUECRRE . P ANNOR INTERIOR DESM • CONSTRUCMN W41/COW 1961 GRMH 7RO 3001H STILL'NATER, WN 55082 Pf W 912/430• -CMG ,A% 912 43D--0180 Project : TOLD DEVROPMEW SITE PLAN CRYSTAI, MN Project No : 98-120 Drawn r3y : D. RCLF Checked ?y : M. D. Date OAC) -98 Revisions : Item Date i I n—by c.+t fy tHct ihia pi—. Tpenticotion or report Was Pl"-Iad� by m• or under my direct QeTVtp ane fmt I OT D dLly R-q�Eterea pn+reWeMn I er._nit..at under the :awr o1. the Stats of MinrWaota. I Date Reg. No. I U Sheet NUmoer : T-0 .21997 kcnd=h Dl NetWOM 'TIG. EJAIRIN/CGI�&-r FU /WNAAL/t1 YMVEL/rHUS FULL � i / CSTiu l NSH RNNMlgJY CONCRETE PLYMUOD SAl1O/MORTWPUAS'TER ® BATT OR s!/ -RICO 315)ur" COMMIOMN/FAM +'aC�R/)y�AIyS��yyA�T)ON M ! •?d• > MARBLE pROM�Vf1�WInMIA..Iy ROOOK / r D L_J LOCATION MAP SM AYE K \V — 9 t 8'86 LANCE M O ARCHNET Tt1H Anaff1 ,'rtac ARCHUECRRE . P ANNOR INTERIOR DESM • CONSTRUCMN W41/COW 1961 GRMH 7RO 3001H STILL'NATER, WN 55082 Pf W 912/430• -CMG ,A% 912 43D--0180 Project : TOLD DEVROPMEW SITE PLAN CRYSTAI, MN Project No : 98-120 Drawn r3y : D. RCLF Checked ?y : M. D. Date OAC) -98 Revisions : Item Date i I n—by c.+t fy tHct ihia pi—. Tpenticotion or report Was Pl"-Iad� by m• or under my direct QeTVtp ane fmt I OT D dLly R-q�Eterea pn+reWeMn I er._nit..at under the :awr o1. the Stats of MinrWaota. I Date Reg. No. I U Sheet NUmoer : T-0 .21997 kcnd=h Dl NetWOM 'TIG. LEGEND ALL EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC FEATRFS ARE PROPOSED CONT" — 073 — SIOMI WIN A 'QHO$r UDE - SUCH AS ROOL ANY VasTwo CONTOURS PR'OPDtWD SPOT ELEVATION xa� PRwom STCIM SEWER INLET 0 _ .. PROPCGM STORM SEWER --! m PROPOSED OJ! AFD OUTTOt EROSON FENCE ----� PROPOSED BLU DING so� N NOTES 1. COSTING TOPOGRAPHIC NFU MATION FROM S W" LAND SlI1WYM ® 2 SEX DEMOUT10N PLAN FOR DET"nM\PEMrOVAU OF EX37" SITE 11"OVO10:13 3• SEE SITE PLAN FOR: DIM N91OINOWM 9 OF PAVOENTS. WiLLKS. IAMM AND TIEIF ESTE 4. CONSTRUCT NEN INLET OVER DMIM tr DIAMETER STORM SEVER PIPNO. F 03STM a I SEVER PTPIIO VIEV OF K PROPOSED STUCTAE 18 NOT REA"ED, IT SHALL K MUOOED AND AWOONED HEST OF THE STRUCTURE. a RENOW E nIM 12' DINEIER ST RM SETTER P994 FROM STRUCTURE AND INSTALL NEN Ir DIAMETER RCP STORM SEVER N SME OPENINQ 0. COORDINATE SPECIFIC LOCATION AND SEPARATION OF SEROCE LDES AT BUILDING WIN LWIANCAL CONTRACTOR. 7. COOTONATE SPECIFIC LOCATION OF ROOF DRAIN CONNECTOR AT SUWDNO MTH MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR. 6 RAISE CASTING ON E]OSILNO INET TO MATCH FINISHED ELEVATION Of NEW ASPHALT SLRFACN0. S. CONNECT NEW /WE/ XWOMER SERVICE TO D357NG 6' FRE LVE_ w E S SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 60 ,- : EROSION FENCE ...- : : aoac �E : MINIFY - - - Ta 871.40 -. -- .. `.... - - 887.70 IE Nair m [`ITAT?SF FLI TER FlOCJC F]FRL ---- INLET A- TD- a 9so . ,::. +�►' . ¢ I ` - - IE- 070.34 - ROCK BERM -1- • f< c "" , 11 . _..- -fro NOTE � / 7 . O7LJO "Z M+ '8 INLET TE5- " - .40 (S��IE SM) {i. p PROPOSED} BUILDING I , : FlNISHED,-FLOOR ELEY: 874.0 « -•----- � � FOICE s` i +at , ___....__ i TI} 87290 1' aaii C'WATER SOME 1 .".- IE- 870.04 SEE NOTE /6 (CONNECT NEW � H .... .. ...... _ sERwa PIPING To E%ISTI IG I _ LIGE) s t — — — _ c o µ r sANFTARr sotwx SEE ; ... - NOTE /0 (OONNECT NEW S'TTNCE ,. , - ! -.,. Q E-,067.70 ".; PIPING TO DQSTNO SERNCE). ... ,r—,-- .........._..._ _... a . .t 4 INLET II - _ _:. 72'30 :- ;� .... _ _....--- .,._.. ._ +,. L L z: IES a s 7777`7 -{ :_...�_ Vb 34 _..Lr"-J„i+•'W6]/'Nvu:IIiL22= 4 - ,..,.xl,,�....,.,.",.,..,, ., : _ _•-•.vuwnu,�e.. �vucgvvaa.,uv e�• — ....•.°.,.,..,... v:,..v.0 , /,a S ... .. ._ . a FENCE !. AW : BFR11 Y 9Ei NOTE P - y...... — — ____•___`__•_ .. .. ..... 4. ... ... __ ., - t' :,: ... Ato .,,>, �,. i..........! t �, _.... _ .Am Al a trl v r. i RrM � mom• jv" 1 � 0.: ,•i bt IO«Al.L•. a rm ry � ram ttwo m TIM a Y. 10iM1 �N1 t< ►,tL iv ,I. ,t tO, W t ibllm �' ra itwta a >R 10 W IQA �M11 r to r t.. DETAIL FOR JOINING SECTONS XTA L FDR INSTALLATO OF EROSION FENCE :uA41.= tit m., 3 Z - - - - - - - - - - - - - r 1 1 � i i i i 1 57TH AVENUE NORTH CROSS EASEMENT SWGLE HEAD 910E -BOX L'9if olXitRE WD PotE,�— I r 1 15139 —L----------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- r- i __________ � n \ AR BY' S 21100 TRAFFIC COU SITE DATA LOT SIZE BUILDING SIZE PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS/PERVIUOS PARKING REQUIRED PARKING PROVIDED ` POPULATION vrt.atl Sm -1/2 MILE \ O -1 MILE -1-1/2 MILE 12 Os 9 �� Op v s 24•—� * 19'-0' K / OG \ � \ 4 \ � O 3 i\ E HEAD SHOE -Box \ \ nxtlr:E AND POLE L ACIN . IM Aleck NETWM 2* NTERIW DESICII . COf TMXTI0ff WNAUriE 1901 GREELEY STREET S" CRMD S WWE SM07EX -5M mm 612/430-4000 FAX 612 130-4180 .. TOL11 ''i'' Deva oEr COYPt Project : WALL QWUAL, MN 78,126.8 SQUARE FEET 13,905 SQUARE FEET 13,518.3 SQUARE FEET 64,608.5 SQUARE FEET 83/17 56 SPACES 69 SPACES 3,762 11,905 Project No : 98-120 29,695 Drawn By : D. ROLF Checked By : A1D Date : 07-20-98 Revisions : Item Date REVISED 01-02- ----------------------------•-----_----_--------] ` 23,200 -TRAFFIC - — - — - BASS LAKE ROAD (56 AVENUE N.) ---------------T-- -------------------- I I I 1 1 i AREA SrrF PLAN 1 \ COUNT } b \ ----------------------- 0,0 I hereby certify that this p1m swiflcatic or repot eas prepared by me or under r direct supervision, and that I am a du:r registered Architect under the Were of the State of 'Annesota. Cate Reg. No. S gned Vichoei F. Diem Sheet Titre : 9f m PLAN Sheet Number : Al ZIM Architectural !ret%w*. Inc. °4�;ECT.S\rJ9! 201!.1 auwL r,ONypN WAD LATM HALES L1 D1998 Archilncturai Network Inc. PRC„ECT5\198120\ PLANT LIST 5 SHAIADCJf L�OEII 2 1/7 10 Naral,M000 IED WRF 2-1 f Carrt. SNQE SiRACFif (FADER 1 DYWF 3AEt1C OL15H 2t-» SfMfi S -Q as AL1 TREES TO BE S� Flow ! Y DIA 1N. AT PUNifIG ATIN A LNTi1K0'/ Oi AT tFASf 20'- �� `'lam✓ CENIER TREE N HOLE UPPoOHT FASTEN TREE TO it CAKE PUABLE IDC COATED MIRE COIYIELRFD TO BLACK RUBBER _ aum (BUT Nor rmuwJ SECURE ENVY AND WATLY All ENDS AJEWATE STAKW9 DEb< tY bw WOOD Sw (OFlld{� 11 WJW TREE W/ C wOE TREE WRAPPM Ta FlW BR NCHNC ~ 'I 14 CANE PLIABLE WNE -� FIR STAKES li- LAWN OR PLOOM 9@ T PLXM4 MKTURE PFA Rao( E 08" UNDISnAW0 SOL OR COMPACTED DECDUOtkS Tfi� 2 NO SCALE LAWN OR PAVED SURFACE f LAYER OF 'WOOD CHIP MULCH Ill 111—, PIANDNC LOMW L0067:MED OR C01PAM SOL DEMUMs SHRLM 3 NO SCALE auwL r,ONypN WAD LATM HALES L1 D1998 Archilncturai Network Inc. PRC„ECT5\198120\ sg se ROMte6 5 SHAIADCJf L�OEII 2 1/7 10 Naral,M000 IED WRF 2-1 f Carrt. SNQE SiRACFif (FADER 1 DYWF 3AEt1C OL15H 2t-» SfMfi S -Q as C1A70(XIT GROUND ROUND ------------------------- \ O�V (5) SHAWW ROCK MUCK U1DEN TYPIC. • ISLANDS \ \ Q �e � (SASS r , �'� Yi �� CRASS ,tjAv v�� -r33' `-'^�l .'211+6• \\-F.\ '\\\�, ------------- I } \ - __ __ --- _—_— -- _ -----_ — — N BASS LAKE ROAD (56TH AVENUE N.) ------------------------------------------------------------ p \\ C> I LANDSCAPE PLAN 1" RCHNEI Tff ARMIH MAL NnW= AAZ ARCHBECRITE . PLANING. NTERIOR DESIGN . CONSTRUCf10N UWNACEW-, 1961 GREELEY STREET SOUTH STILLWATER. LIN 55082 PHONE 612/130-0606 FAX 612 430-+0180 12%TOLI DEVELOPMENT COMPA: Project : WALWEBS MWAL, MN Project No 98-120 Drawn By D. ROLF Checked By MD Date 07-20-98 Revisions Item Date I hereby certify that this plan speclficati,^ or report was prepared Sy me or under rr'- direct supervision, and tt=t I am a dL registered Architect under to laws of State of Minnesota. Date Reg. No. Signed Michael F. Diem Sheet Title LANDSCAPE PLAN Sheet Number At o o akCK UX OF PWIAPET o WALL o-, i ----- --- -- - 1 r�;���E�T ELE'� �'� r A r/a. = l._.,,. b I - K E L r VAT --', Ii All/,/e" � �.•-7 I 4 3 SIGN AREA SUMMARY EAST ELEVATION o TIE 66ED 86•-8 Ler VALGREEMS SCRIPT U34 I wumm wwr BIL sm cEm a I I I I l 4Tl , - K E L r VAT --', Ii All/,/e" � �.•-7 I 4 3 SIGN AREA SUMMARY EAST ELEVATION o TIE 66ED 86•-8 Ler VALGREEMS SCRIPT U34 mu 7 wumm wwr BIL sm cEm a 102.1 SF VEST ELEVATION ger ALL Q7 mm tmQ la 3m mm a 371-U 1/P VALGREEN SCRlPT SM 117.7 SF 1H' 1-M MOM DCZVMIAL LETTER 810 SF ur PHARMACY 1DIVIDIML LETTER 192 SF 157.9 SF SOUTH ELEVATION 37'-10 V r VAL62EYM SCRIPT SM 10.7 SF U' 1 -HR METTD DMrVIDUAL LETTER 8u SF W PHARMACY BIIVIDLAAL LETTER 192 SF W DRIVE THIN PHARMACY DOV. LTR 177 SF n aw 175A SF NORTH ELEVATION Swm am 9W-8 1/2r VAL IED4 SOUT SMN ISM Sr Ur CRIT 20 VEDUAL LETTER W SF 104.2 SF TOTAL BUILDING SIGNAGE 539.8 SE 1 07E) PYL13N 5126 t LFPER CABDET I x 01IL9 • ff9 LOVER CABDET 1 x 42.3 - 423 SF 131.4 SF i TOTAL SITE SIGNAGE I i TOTAL SIGNAGE AREA 671.2 SF GENERAL NOTES 1. WU $40 RM SM ALL 111144 OPOM AID IODLES 2 OR= WUM UV= WA R PMA wm ON mm 6 MAL IBti01ff A am. 3." r I1101r ww A DQN 390001 a ALL ffi OF SIrOM 4. 900 WHI3 WAIX AW RN SFUM a ALL SEL ARCIMT 1M Ai4811CM&AL NETT= BE ARCHRECfIRE • KAWK- MEWR DE9CN . OX61Z1Ct1)N LIANCEVIX 1961 GRIM Y Slln7 SOMI gala SOIWtE 7U*TER, MN 55082 PHOIE: 612/0 -0606 FAX 612 430-0160 • TOLD T L1Ewm-mE]4T COMPAN Project : WALOFEEM MUM, MN Project No 98-120 Drawn By D. ROLF Checked By MD Date 07-20-98 Revisions Item Date I hereby certify that this plan, specificab, or report eos prepared try me or under m direct, supe. wiza , and thet ! am a du' registered kditsd under the laws of to State of 16nr ta. Date Reg. Nc. Signed Michael F. Diem Shee: TiUe ELBATM Sheet Number : I019M Mchihwbxal Nel lom hc- G P ! VE — I 7' I R L I o TIE 66ED KEYNOTES wumm wwr BIL sm cEm a lJ) 0 uRam cswcs. ger ALL Q7 mm tmQ la 3m mm a t7i.V. '%10aw 00 TOP sm SUN MD AN atoll: sw 10 I= 416 NS UP OFTcaw= _ I SEma M OBIS ® m cw aw. 04NM ]P1}65 n aw ® stl-mme Lm. IEE BS A. Swm am NAM gym S0 I CAIIOPY ® w 3mm 3 caw= A mm416 O Una Nun AI MBI =a ® emu a aw OLiBCUIIC IE l m'E-a1i M sln am FS ® HE ODEA 910041% ELEV._1�'d� am* 9D /' FISM Me" ® ROM ®10001 POST. IBBB® s1@T IE9E 0000%' a9IIXND ® ADI MW OL SS 5. - . 46.2 I11447X SEAM 90 IEA WE 041 wam © 1/r lHM BQ gill TWE (D MOMM IM lath sm m M wwt =11m ® •amor mE aE ML a gm A A6S. ® twaeal Ter aLNtic Efl9Io. %F Dal Of AU ® alas %EBL IBEL9lm aim .-0 ® r-7' 0110 =EKE =m ® am= TOB. . Y® ® 000E %qA-{rl an SEAL TMI — v _ ® t1PAIB01 AR 7 ® ASU LMR -Ply t/ on" GENERAL NOTES 1. WU $40 RM SM ALL 111144 OPOM AID IODLES 2 OR= WUM UV= WA R PMA wm ON mm 6 MAL IBti01ff A am. 3." r I1101r ww A DQN 390001 a ALL ffi OF SIrOM 4. 900 WHI3 WAIX AW RN SFUM a ALL SEL ARCIMT 1M Ai4811CM&AL NETT= BE ARCHRECfIRE • KAWK- MEWR DE9CN . OX61Z1Ct1)N LIANCEVIX 1961 GRIM Y Slln7 SOMI gala SOIWtE 7U*TER, MN 55082 PHOIE: 612/0 -0606 FAX 612 430-0160 • TOLD T L1Ewm-mE]4T COMPAN Project : WALOFEEM MUM, MN Project No 98-120 Drawn By D. ROLF Checked By MD Date 07-20-98 Revisions Item Date I hereby certify that this plan, specificab, or report eos prepared try me or under m direct, supe. wiza , and thet ! am a du' registered kditsd under the laws of to State of 16nr ta. Date Reg. Nc. Signed Michael F. Diem Shee: TiUe ELBATM Sheet Number : I019M Mchihwbxal Nel lom hc- M E M O R A N D U M DATE: August 5, 1998 TO: Planning Commission (August 10" meeting — Public Hearing #3) FROM:ohn Sutter, Planner SUBJ.: 5160 West Broadway — Suttle Car Wash / Automotive Concepts site (P.I.D. 09-118-21-21-0023) Application 98-15.1: Rezoning (The effect of the request would be rezoning from B-3 Auto -Oriented Commercial to 1-2 Heavy Industrial, for that portion of the parcel not presently zoned 1-2.) A. BACKGROUND Automotive Concepts, Inc. is in the process of remodeling, and constructing an addition onto, the former Suttle Car Wash at 5160 West Broadway. A Conditional Use Permit for Auto Repair — Minor including outdoor storage, together with a Site Plan Review, was previously approved by the City Council. The subject property is zoned 1-2 Heavy Industrial, except for the portion of the property roughly corresponding with the building. At its July meeting, the Planning Commission noted that the van conversion operations of Automotive Concepts might be considered to be Auto Repair — Major, which is prohibited in B-3 but permitted in 1-2. The Planning Commission initiated a Rezoning of that portion of the subject property presently zoned B-3 to 1-2, and asked staff to prepare revisions to the definitions of different types of auto repair uses. The following informational items are attached: ❑ plat map showing the subject property and adjacent zoning districts ❑ excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan ❑ proposed Ordinance rezoning the subject property from B-3 to 1-2 B. STAFF COMMENTS The proposed Rezoning appears to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The subject property is guided for County Road 81 Corridor / Mixed Use, which includes as uses intended to be accommodated "employment and commercial uses that do not compete for business with Community Retail areas but are able to comply with County Highway 81 Planning and Design Guidelines." Industrial uses are common within this area; in fact, all other areas between West Broadway and the BNSF Railroad and between the CP Railroad and Corvallis Avenue are presently zoned 1-2 Heavy Industrial. Uses permitted in the 1-2 district can be consistent with the County Road 81 Corridor / Mixed Use designation in the Comprehensive Plan. C. SUGGESTED FINDINGS OF FACT Crystal City Code (505.53 Subd. le) states, "The Planning Commission shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed [rezoning]." The following suggested findings reflect the specific factors listed in this section: ❑ The project is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. o The geographic area involved is appropriate for the proposed use. ❑ The use is not expected to depreciate the area in which it is proposed. ❑ The project is compatible with the character of the surrounding area. ❑ The demonstrated need for such use is apparent in the marketplace, as the applicant has made the decision to invest in the facility. D. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of application 98-15.1, a Planning Commission initiated request for the rezoning of 5160 West Broadway (P.I.D. 09-118-21-21-0023) from B-3 Auto -Oriented Commercial to 1-2 Heavy Industrial, for that portion of the parcel not presently zoned 1-2. The Planning Commission is asked to make a recommendation on the request for City Council consideration. The City Council will consider first reading of the proposed ordinance at its next regular meeting on August 18th, and second reading at the following regular meeting on September 1st. REZONING - 5607 WEST BROADWAY 2 'A yo- ti.s s0-�6 Co s �,�,► s �'� ADD. y ti � 0 a. pip—�h s. �� �iO �'v, 00 ck /' r Bj s 7 E .t2 No �� ��`�,�. 3 Ap zk `o ?� 5i 1 09 9 N � D, p5• Ir 9 -, a065 p 91 b 2 A D D 49 zc. � m 7.1 2ND MARS �a W '0 5p sr .81 g62°56'49' 421.'14 NOPERry(250 ) CE y ��M1 ntia ��, 56 547.93 ° 2. THIRD w � , JOHNSON ADD. TO 3 r 2 2ND INDUSTF GLEN HAVEN ADDITION PARK 357.59 01 MEMORIAL GAIDEN i' ' X00) 357.36 (5 ZQ 2 5°^•SB ,, NEZNIK I ' ADD. r 0 326,86 " 42.35 110. 5 s: FIRST ADD. `�1k� 9 �, �o o L 01 6s s C k L �1 �� s c '`? 241.9 n GsseY (2910) I Z5.11 J TO 6 FATHER 90 Q Q I S WILLIA � II GLEN, HAVEN BLU M ADD. �' County Road 81 Corridor/Mixed_ Use These areas are intended to accommodate a mixture of uses that provide for a higher quality visual image within the County Highway 81 corridor. Uses intended to be accommodated include residential, office, hospitality, institutional, public facility, employment and commercial uses that do not compete for business with Community Retail areas but are able to comply with the County Highway 81 Planning and Design Guidelines. Due to the substantial nature of industry within the corridor and access difficulties, the Study Area is intended to accommodate industrial uses on the west side of County Highway 81. New industrial development is intended to evolve to a higher form over time as rehabilitation and redevelopment occur. Existing single-family areas within the corridor are not intended to change immediately to commercial development. Such areas are intended to be rezoned only when a specific development is proposed. Residential redevelopment is not intended to be piecemeal in nature but must take the integrity of the whole neighborhood into account. PUD is intended to be used for all changes to existing residential areas. Employment Oriented Mixed Use These areas are primarily intended to accommodate employee intensive light industrial and office uses with integrated retail and service accessory uses. Secondarily, they are intended to accommodate compatible automobile service establishments and motor fuel stations by CUP. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Mixed Use This area correlates with the Crystal Airport and its immediate environs and is intended to be planned as an integral unit and developed in phases as a community within a community. It is intended that the PUD Mixed Use area be developed with the full range of residential types and densities, retail, service, office, recreational, institutional and public uses. This mixed use area is proposed to be an urban (vs suburban) development with a dense grid street (vs hierarchical) system, sidewalks and trails, buildings oriented to the street, on -street parking and small parking lots, town squares, neighborhood retail and parks and open space. Uses are intended to be mixed rather than rigidly segregated and performance standards will be required to insure land use compatibility. Existing airport, residential and commercial uses are intended to continue as interim uses but should not be expanded. They are not intended to be rezoned for mixed use until a specific development is proposed. City of Crystal/Comprehensive Plan Page 44 LEGEND RESDE TIAL COMMERCIAL Low Deeaity ® Com Retail/ Service ® Medkm r)W Wty Neigh Retail/ Service fMgh Density IXED USE TRANSITIONAI County Mghway 81 MU Q INOUSTRIAL n-!!!bn-Wy—ment OrientedU 11 1 4 1000 2000 North Air% CITY of CRYSTAL %00 LAND USE PLAN ® Planned Unit Der MU PUBLIC/ '"'-- Town Center MU QUASI PUBLIC © PARKS/ ® Cametary OPEN SPACE School F Fire Station L Library M Municipal Faei> " Q Quael Public COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FIGURE 11 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING: AMENDING CRYSTAL CITY CODE (APPENDIX I - ZONING), SUBSECTION 515.61, SUBDIVISIONS 9 AND 12 BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FROM B-3 TO I-2 THE CITY OF CRYSTAL ORDAINS: Section 1. Crystal city code (Appendix I -Zoning), subsection 515.61, subdivisions 9 and 12, are amended as follows: The zoning classification of the following described land is hereby changed as follows: Description of land: Lot 1, Block 1, Crystal Securities Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota Present Classification: B-3 (District Auto -Oriented Commercial) New Classification: I-2 (District Heavy Industrial) Sec. 2. The Zoning Administrator is authorized and directed to amend the Zoning Map in accordance with this ordinance. Sec. 3. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Crystal city code, subsection 110.11. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk SJB-147353 CR205-30 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 4, 1998 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Anne Norris, Assistant Manager 04k./ RE: Role and Function of Planning Commission As you may recall, each year the City Attorney appears before the Commission to review the role and function of the Planning Commission and answer any questions Commissioners may have. Steve Bubul, attorney with Kennedy & Graven, will be at the August 10 meeting to review: - the relationship of the Planning Commission to the City Council; - the responsibilities of the Planning Commission, - why and when findings of fact are used, what should be included, etc.; - whether the Commission has to follow open meeting/public discussion laws; - responding to the public during public hearings; - considering applications and proposals which may be different from Commissioner's personal views; and - requirements for considering variances. Attached is a 1991 letter from the City Attorney regarding his thoughts on variances. DAVID J. KENNEDY Attorney at law Direct Dial (612) 337-9232 April 29, 1991 Mr. Jerry Dulgar City Manager City of Crystal 4141 Douglas Drive North Crystal, Minnesota 55422 Dear Jerry: HOLLIES & GRAVEN /� n CH.IRTER£D 470 Plllsbw7 ('enter.11innespolis..Nlnnesuts 5ti102 Telephone 16121337-11300 Facsimile 1612) J37-7310 Quite often when zoning variance requests are before the Council (usually in the case of difficult ones) I'm asked to state the grounds for granting a variance. Each time I say something a little different, and I usually think afterwards that perhaps the Council is not fully clear on this rather difficult concept. My response is always a paraphrase (not a very good one) of the following language from Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.357, Subdivision 6, a section of the Municipal Planning Act dealing with appeals and adjustments. The statute authorizes the Board of Appeals and- Adjustments (in Crystal's case, the Planning Commission) ". . . To hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the [zoning] ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question cannot be put to a rea$cnable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not consti- tute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance." Our zoning ordinance contains almost identical language in Subsection 515.52. Page 2 The language of the statute is rather plain and understandable, but its application to specific fact situations is sometimes difficult. I think it's clear to everyone that a request, for example, to vary a front yard setback so that the property owner can add a TV room would not pass muster. On the other hand, a modest front yard setback variance to construct a new building where for some topographical reason (e.g. lot shape, unbuildable soil, a precipitous slope in the rear yard) a structure otherwise meeting all other rules could not be built, would almost surely be appropriate. The problem lies in the situations in between. I think the general principle, recognized by the courts, to keep in mind --is that (i) land use regulations must be uniform as to all similar properties, (ii) a landowner is entitled to a rea- sonable use of the property, and (iii) the landowner's reasonable use of the property should not be prohibited because of conditions affecting the property over which the landowner has no control. Put graphically it's something like this: Uniform Standards baa as set out in zoning code V i Use Use Use Properties A, B (Hardship) Hardship] and C Variance No Variance Variance A B C A - Granting a variance to A allows A to use property subject to uniform standards. B - The typical use meeting all the uniform standards. C - Granting a variance to C allows C to use property in some way not subject to uniform standards. In the graph, A is being treated, in effect, the same way as all other property owners because of the hardship, but C is 'being granted an advantage over all other property owners. Granting a variance to A is fair to A and has no effect on B; but granting a variance to C is unfair (and illegal) and adversely affects A and B. The second general principle to keep in mind is that when the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, hears and decides variance applications it is acting like a court or an administrative agency: it is applying a rule of law (the statutory language quoted above) to a set of facts and deciding whether the facts justify the granting of the variance. (This is generally referred to as exercising a "quasi-judicial" function.) This is quite different from making Page 3 the rule in the first place; that's called exercising a "legis- lative function." When legislating, the Council need only have some reasonable basis for its action (general welfare, public safety, appropriate land use, etc.) but when the Board acts in a quasi-judicial way the rules are different. The Board must keep a record, make factual findings on which it bases its decisions, provide notice, hear all interested parties and formally inform the applicant of its decision. Under Crystal's zoning ordinance the decisions of the Board are subject to final approval by the Council and the Council is, in effect, acting like a reviewing court, again in a quasi-judicial way. Thus, the Council should feel comfortable that the applicant was given a fair hearing and that the Board's findings of undue hardship or lack thereof were supported by adequate factual data. The Council is not bound by the Board's decision but, it should give a good deal of weight to that decision if properly made. Because of the judicial nature of the Board's action on a vari- ance, two questions always come up. First, "Will we be setting a precedent by granting the variance?" The answer is both yes and no. Since the undue hardship must, as the statute says, be "unique" to the property it is unlikely that a set of facts will be identical in two cases. If that did occur the Council could hardly grant the one variance but not the other and avoid the charge of being arbitrary. In that case a true binding precedent would be set. But normally the facts are unique and different ...4 from all other variance requests in some way. Different facts compel different decisions both in courtrooms and Council chambers, and in that sense no precedent is set. But if the Board or Council says that some particular condition (e.g. bad soil) does not rise to the level of "undue hardship" that particular application of the general rule does become a precedent. There's nothing magic about precedents and they can be overruled or changed, but if changed from case to case, or not consistently applied, a court reviewing the Council's action in a specific case might find that the Council had been acting arbitrarily or capriciously. I don't think the Council or the Planning Commission should be overly concerned about precedent as long as each body acts reasonably, fairly, consistently, and with the general statutory rule about variances clearly in mind. The second question is about the neighbors. Surrounding property owners are notified, properly, of the variance public hearing and their views should, of course, be heard. But I think the Board and the Council should give weight only to neighbor's testimony that has some direct bearing on the applicant's claim of hardship or that shows that the reasonable use of the neighboring property will be adversely affected. The ultimate goal of trying to treat all landowners as uniformly as possible should be kept in mind. I do not think a simple finding by the .Board that "the neighbors object" is fair to the applicant or legally entitled to any weight by the Board or the Council. Page 4 The same general principles discussed above apply to variances under the sign ordinance, Crystal City Code, Section 406 (the variance procedure is in Subsection 406.30). Although the sign ordinance is not, strictly speaking, a zoning ordinance, the language of Subsection 406.30 is modeled after the statutory language quoted above, and I'm certain that the idea was that those variances would be evaluated in the same manner as variances from land use regulations. By the way, I should point out that Subsection 406.30 provides that variance requests come directly to the Council as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals with the Council authorized to ask for Planning Commission review. The Planning Commission is now the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, so we'll have to make some amendments to that subsection as part of the review of the sign ordinance now under way. In summary I think that the principles set out above indicate that the granting of a variance should really be an infrequent occurrence rather than a routine one. Perhaps you might want to make this letter available to the Planning Commission. > You very truly, David J. Kennedy DJK:caw CR205-1. M E M O R A N D U M DATE: August 5, 1998 TO: Planning Commission (August 10' meeting — Other Business #3) FROM:�John Sutter, Planner SUBJ.: Accessory Buildings in Rear Yards (515.07 Subd. 5-b), Parking in Yards (515.09 Subd. 6), and yard definitions as they relate to both. In the course of routine inquiries from property owners and informal staff discussions, some parts of the Zoning Ordinance and staff interpretations are in need of clarification and possible amendment. The definitions of "yard" in the ordinance fall into two basic categories: ❑ That open space which is required by the Zoning Ordinance (see "Yard" below); or ❑ That open space which is located between the building and the lot line (see "Yard, Front", "Yard, Rear", and "Yard, Side" below). Excerpts from the definitions section of the Zoning Ordinance (515.05): Yard. An open space on the lot which is unoccupied and unobstructed from its lowest level to the sky. A yard extends along a lot line at right angles to such lot line to a depth or width specified in the yard regulations for the zoning district in which such lot is located. Yard, Front. A yard extending across the front of the lot between the side lot lines and lying between the front line of the lot and the nearest line of the building. Yard, Rear. A yard extending across the full width of the lot and lying between the rear line of the lot and the nearest line of the building. Yard, Side. A yard between the side line of the lot and the nearest line of the building and extending from the front line of the lot to the rear yard. The following are sections of the Zoning Ordinance where problems may exist with these definitions: 1. 515.07 Subd. 5 b (Accessory Buildings) No detached accessory building or structure shall be erected or located within any required yard other than a rear yard, such accessory building or structure shall not 2. exceed one story over 15 feet in height nor occupy more than 30 percent of the area of any rear yard. The maximum rear yard lot coverage shall be computed on the basis of the required rear yard as defined in Subsection 515.13, Subdivision 4 of this Code. I read this to mean that an accessory building located in the required rear yard cannot cover more than 30% of the required rear yard. Past practice has been to calculate this as 30% of the rear yard between the building and the lot line. AeC��r_Y 100,( ccx(i FY r1c �,?c . -Tf o"'#J 3D% C�F -r-fC ARS 5hbWO AS CV5.) Based on this information, I believe the best course of action would be for the Planning Commission to direct staff to continue with the existing interpretation, and to prepare a text amendment to make the ordinance consistent with past practice (i.e., 30% of the rear yard, not the required rear yard), as follows: No detached accessory building or structure shall be erected or located within any required yard other than a rear yard, such accessory building or structure shall not exceed one story over 15 feet in height nor occupy more than 30 percent of the area of any rear yard. 515.09 Subd. 6 d & e (Off -Street Parking) d) Set Back Area. Accessory off-street parking required by this Code shall not be provided in front yards or in side yards in the case of a corner lot, in R-1, R-2, R- 3, R-4, R-0, B-1 a, and B-1 Districts. I read this to mean that required parking spaces cannot be located in the front yard for any lot or in the side street side yard for a corner lot. In other words, the required parking spaces cannot be between the principal building and a street. I believe this regulation would not apply to parking spaces in excess of those required (i.e., the third space for a single family dwelling). I suspect that the intent was to prohibit parking in the required yards (i.e., setback area) along a street rather the prohibiting parking anywhere between the building and a street even if it were to meet the setbacks. DISCUSSION - YARDS VS. REQUIRED YARDS 2 e) In the case of single family, two family or townhouse dwellings, off-street parking is not permitted in any yard except on designated driveways leading directly into a garage or on an open, surfaced space located on the side of the driveway. The accessory parking may be located adjacent to the existing garage, on one side of the garage only, provided the space is surfaced and located no closer than ten feet to the principal portion of an adjacent residential structure. One turn -around space may be considered accessory parking. Accessory parking may not be more than one space located (i) on the side of the driveway, (ii) adjacent on one side of an existing garage, or (iii) as a turn -around space. The parking of recreational vehicles is governed by City Code, Section 1330. I believe this paragraph, as presently written, prohibits parking in any required yard (see definition of "Yard") except on a driveway or on a space alongside a driveway. It does not appear to prohibit parking in the front, rear or side yards provided such parking does not occur in the required parts of those yards. My understanding is that past practice has been to assume that that "Yard" in e) means the open space between the building and the lot line rather than the yard required by the Zoning Ordinance. The net effect of past practice has therefore been to prohibit the construction of more than one additional parking space beyond those located in a garage or on a driveway in front a garage, for single family, two family or townhouse dwellings. Based on this information, I believe the best course of action would be for the Planning Commission to direct staff to continue with the existing interpretation, and prepare a text amendment to revise the ordinance as follows: d) Set Back Area. Accessory off-street parking shall not be provided in required front yards on any lot or in required side street side yards in the case of corner lot, in R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-0, B-1 a, and B-1 Districts, except as provided for in e) for single family, two family or townhouse dwellin s. e) In the case of single family, two family or townhouse dwellings, off-street parking is not permitted in any front, rear or side yard except on designated driveways leading directly into a garage or on an open, surfaced space located on the side of the driveway. The accessory parking may be located adjacent to the existing garage, on one side of the garage only, provided the space is surfaced and located no closer than ten feet to the principal portion of an adjacent residential structure. One turn -around space may be considered accessory parking. Accessory parking may not be more than one space located (i) on the side of the driveway, (ii) adjacent on one side of an existing garage, or (iii) as a turn -around space. The parking of recreational vehicles is governed by City Code, Section 1330. DISCUSSION - YARDS VS. REQUIRED YARDS 3 CITY COUNCIL ACTION ON ITEMS. WHICH APPEARED BEFORE PLANNING COMMISSION July 21, 1998 Consideration of Application #98-10.3 for a site plan review to allow construction of a 4,480 sq. ft. one-story office building in the B-4 Community Commercial District at 5225 Douglas Drive (Builders Insulation)—recommended approval. Consideration of Application #98-12.3 for a site plan review to allow construction of a larger addition than was previously approved by the City Council in the B-3 Auto - Oriented Commercial District at 5160 West Broadway (Suttle Car Wash) as submitted by Automotive Concepts Inc.— recommended approval Consideration of the first reading of a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to add a new clause (f) to 515.39, Subd. 4, which would have the effect of allowing car washes as a conditional use in the I-1 and I-2 Districts. August 3, 1998 No items were considered. G:\P1anning\PC\CCAcfion.D0Cjrs