Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout10-13-2009MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2009 7 :00 P.M. CITY HALL (2052 County Road 24) 1. Call to Order 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda 3. Update from City Council proceedings 4. Planning Department Report 5. Approval of September 8, 2009 Planning Commission minutes Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment of Chapter 88 of regulationsroan City Code creating new zoning g on 6 ulations for futuredevelopment identified in the Mixed Use land use in the City's 2010-2030 property Comprehensive Plan. 7. Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment of Chapter 8, Con e t Plan of Medina's City Code pertaining to the procedures or P Review applications. 8. City Council Meeting Schedule 9. Adjourn POSTED IN CITY HALL OCTOBER 8. 2009 Medina Planning Commission Draft October 13, 2009 Meeting Minutes CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION Draft Meeting Minutes Tuesday, October 13, 2009 1. Call to Order: Commissioner Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. f) PA 7(74/5 it( Present: Planning Commissioners, Jim Simons, Robin Reid, Victoria Reid, Michele Litts, Charles Nolan, and Kent Williams. Absent: Beth Nielsen Also Present: City Planner Dusty Finke, Planning Assistant Debra Peterson -Dufresne, and Stephen Grittman of Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. 2. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda: No public comments. 3. Update from City Council Proceedings: Weir presented the update that the Council: The Council: approved a final draft of the Local Surface Water Management Plan; approved the five sections of the sewered residential ordinance, as recommended by the Planning Commission, and adding EIFS as an accent material, increasing the possible pitch of roofs up to 35 feet if there is sprinkling, as long as the eave height is no greater than 32 feet, and reduced the setback to the side yard buffer to 10 feet in R 4 and 5; - reviewed the letter that will go to all residents, regarding the 2010 budget, that proposes a one percent tax levy increase; directed staff to draw up a resolution for a two-year delay of the closure of access to the Ace in -line shops across the median strip on County Road 101; approved a landscaping master plan for Hamel Legion Park; directed staff to prepare a contract for construction of the Uptown Hamel monument sign; had an initial overview of the Business Park Zoning Ordinance and discussed increasing the minimum lot size back to five acres in BP, with a three acre minimum in integrated development; increased the maximum driveway width at the curb from 22 feet to 24 feet, with 28 foot flair at the property line. All non -conforming driveways will be grandfathered in; gratefully recognized the many Medina Celebration Day volunteers and contributors, and the Field House Task Force volunteers. 1 Medina Planning Commission Draft October 13, 2009 Meeting Minutes 4. Planning Department Report: Finke updated the Commission on possible land use projects forthcoming and ordinance amendments they can expect to see this year. 5. Approval of September 8, 2009 Planning Commission Minutes: Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Williams to approve the September 8, 2009 minutes with recommended changes. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: Nielsen) 6. Public Hearing — Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 8 of Medina's City Code creating new zoning regulations for future development on property identified in the Mixed Use land use in the Citv's 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan. Grittman provided background in the shaping of the Mixed Use District and how some existing zoning regulations were imported into the proposed draft ordinance. Buffering standards were incorporated, differing from the City's existing buffering requirements. The Mixed Use District is proposed to be lateral rather than vertical in design. He further explained the process requiring the following three stages: Stage I Plan Establishes: • land use patterns • developable land • development capacities • public uses • infrastructure • vehicle pedestrian circulation • other generalized site analysis • conceptual development parameters • recordable document Stage II Plan Establishes: • recordable plat • recordable development agreement • provides development details Stage III Plan establishes a staff level review of final plans from Stage II development documents, which requires recording. R. Reid asked if the mixed use district was residential, commercial, or both. Fink V. Reid asked for clarification of flexibility within the mixed use district. Grittman . Williams asked if residential was proposed to have a minimum of 50 percent within a use application. Grittman concurred. Williams asked for an explanation of the difference between a 2 Medina Planning Commission Draft October 13, 2009 Meeting Minutes Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the proposed mixed use district. Williams asked if the •r•;s would be less flexible yet provide more certainty to a developer. eid asked if vertical development was part of the district. Grittman explained vertical is not the intention. R. Reid asked about coffee shops and retail uses. Finke clarified retail type uses would be allowed even though they aren't specifically listed. Public Hearing was opened at 7:44 p.m. John Raskob of 345 Comanche Trail spoke before the Commission voicing concern of density and future process within the proposed district. He explained his past experience with the City has been costly without approvals. He wanted to make sure whatever is adopted will be developer friendly and provide guidance. Grittman explained density would range from 3.5-6.99 units per acre as a residential component. Rascob is concerned with storm water run-off on his property. He asked if the issue would be resolved on his property specifically. Nolan clarified the purpose of the ordinance. Rascob asked if bonuses would be allowed for residential density. Weir explained the bonuses wouldn't take the density above seven units per acre. Nolan explained by doing the right/better design the density would be allowed to be increased, yet not exceed 7 units per acre. Rascob provided a scenario of an eight acre parcel with one acre being utilized for storm water. He asked if the one acre providing storm water would count towards density units per acre. Finke explained the storm water pond area would not be taken away from net density acreage to determine total overall density for the site, though seven units per acre maximum would be the maximum with any credits that may be applied to the project. Jerry Jubert of 2440 St. Albons St. N., Roseville, MN owns acreage in Medina. Jubert asked what determines a buffer. Nolan explained the language within the ordinance regarding buffering and that it is determined by vegetation and distance. Rascob asked for clarification of uses allowed within the proposed draft ordinance. Nolan explained the structure of the ordinance and that some uses are not spelled out specifically, rather identified more broadly so that each type of use would not have to be listed and have the potential of missing a use that may be intended to be allowed. Nolan said he thinks of a mixed use district as a transitional use and would like further language added to the purpose statement to reflect it. 3 Medina Planning Commission Draft October 13, 2009 Meeting Minutes V. Reid asked if the ordinance has a ceiling for commercial or a maximum percentage. Finke explained the ordinance does not have a cap on residential, but commercial uses have a maximum of fifty percent. Public Hearing was closed at 9:45 p.m. The Commission discussed the possibility of transit within the district and asked staff if it should be mentioned in the purpose statement. Finke explained transit is extremely limited in the mixed use district. Finke explained they may want to add uses from the Commercial Highway District rather than just using the Commercial General District uses. The Commission concluded to not reinvent the wheel, and utilizing existing language from other districts would be appropriate. Grittman explained the purpose of Stage I is to use it as a tool to make sure it clearly identifies the guidelines of density and layout. V. Reid asked about five foot side yard setbacks in residential portions of the district. Finke explained the reason for setbacks so • e. Weir asked for clarification on daycare facilities serving 16 or fewer persons in the district. She felt the ordinance limited who could provide daycare because of the distance from Highway 55 requirement. Finke explained it is only to apply to multi -family density. Finke raised concern with the two trees in the front yard requirement. He said it would be difficult on a 60 foot lot in which the driveway takes up 28 feet of the width of the lot. Concern is it would not provide sufficient space for two trees to survive. Finke recommended a minimum of one tree in the front yard. Finke explained building modulation within the recommended zoning district. Nolan suggested consistency amongst districts. Finke explained building height is limited to a maximum of 35 feet under the commercial design standards. The Commission concluded higher buildings along highway 55 would be more appropriate and would buffer any residential that may be adjacent to commercial. The Commission discussed loading docks and asked Grittman of his experience in other communities. Grittman explained some ordinances don't allow loading docks to abut residential. The Commission asked staff to look back at the General Business District and how loading docks were handled adjacent to residential districts/housing. Finke asked if the mixed use district needed separation from loading docks. R. Reid said some residential neighborhoods may expect some commercial adjacent to them. R. Reid stated outdoor speakers in the outdoor dining and/drinking areas didn't seem appropriate. The Commission discussed the rational behind allowing speakers and the distance of 200 feet and why abutting loading docks was only 100 feet in the general business district. Medina Planning Commission Draft October 13, 2009 Meeting Minutes Peterson -Dufresne commented that additional distance for outdoor dining and drinking areas is due to constant noise, rather than the periodic noise from trucks in loading areas. V. Reid raised concern with taller buildings being adjacent to residential yards such as office buildings peering down on residential yards. Nolan suggested transitional language added to avoid a three story office building being constructed next to residential homes. Nolan suggested a paragraph be written explaining transitioning of uses and physical factors. Finke brought up the use of outside storage within the mixed use district. He explained Highway Commercial and Commercial General allowed outside storage. He suggested revisions in setbacks. Grittman suggested outdoor storage not be permitted adjacent to residential. The Commission discussed the Stage III requirements and finalizing of documents. The Commission concluded that they did not want the project to expire after six months as written if the developer has "good cause" wh they need more time. aktrW, <PAN'i) Nolan recommended boards be required for projects. Finke explained that it is currently required under a Site P an Review and not a CUP. Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Simons to keep the public hearing open and request recommended changes to be made for Planning Commission review. (Absent: Nielsen) 7. Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment of Chapter 8, Section 825 of Medina's City Code, pertaining to the procedures for Concept Plan Review applications. Finke explained the Concept Plan Review process and what could be expected. He further explained what other communities require. Nolan asked about notification and distance. inke Simons raised concern with the reduced notification distance. Nolan explained the nee for consistency of notification. The Commission concluded consistency with notification, having flexibility with the information submitted for review with a basic level of information necessary, a general level of building design provided, and identification of natural resources would be necessary during a Concept Plan Review. Weir said there is support from the Council to have the distance of notification expanded Public Hearing was opened at 9:54 p.m. John Rascob of 345 Comanche Trail commented on past Concept Plans submitted and issues he has had in the past with dealing with the City. He asked that builders and developers not have to spend thousands of dollars on a Concept Plan. Nolan explained what his vision was of the Concept Plan. He explained the more specific the plan, the more issues that can be reviewed and commented on. He said if a specific property has a lot of issues, those issues should be provided. \\AThe Commission discussed the expectation of concept plans. 5 L Medina Planning Commission Draft October 13, 2009 Meeting Minutes Public Hearing was closed at 10:07 p.m. Motion by V. Reid, seconded by Litts to approve the ordinance amendment with recommended changes. (Absent: Nielsen) 8. City Council Meeting Schedule: 9. Adjourn: Motion by Williams, seconded by V. Reid to adjourn at 10:15 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: Nielsen) MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2009 7 :00 P.M. CITY HALL (205 2 County Road 24 ) / Call to Order ,2/.' Public Comments on items not on the agenda XUpdate from City Council proceedings prrccnkd q F-� us)tor ^J�k, 5�q'��j�y1f���JS (Planning Department Report Cnow a 5, v574_ _ q t S 5. Approval of September 8, 20Q9 Plainning Commission minutes 611.0 1109•R . e r Z k_ r s' "Cams' Piaa, 6. Public Heanng - Ordinance Amendment of Chapter 8 of Medina's VelIrn� City Code creating new zoning regulations for future development on Gt �Ei�, 4 property identified in the Mixed Use land use in the City's 2010-2030 Irk Q.4, u Comprehensive Plan. Ak-c�`c' 7. Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment of Chapter 8, Section 825 of Medina's City Code pertaining to the procedures for Concept Plan Review applications. 8. City Council Meeting Schedule 9. Adjourn U , V- . �t L1/4.'0"7 POSTED IN CITY HALL OCTOBER 8, 2009 PC Update: October 2009 from Liz Weir The Council: approved the five sections of the sewered residential ordinance, as recommended by the Planning Commission, and adding EIFS as an accent material, increasing the possible pitch of roofs up to 35 feet if there is sprinkling and as long as the eve height stays at 32 feet, and reduced the setback to the side yard buffer to 10 feet in R4and 5; reviewed the letter that will go to all residents, regarding the 2010 budget, that proposes a one percent tax levy increase; directed staff to draw up a resolution for a two-year delay of the closure of access to the Ace in -line shops across the median strip on County Road 101; approved a landscaping master plan for Hamel Legion Park; directed staff to prepare a contract for construction of the Uptown Hamel monument sign; had an initial overview of the Business Park zoning Ordinance and discussed increasing the minimum lot size back to five acres in BP, with a three acre minimum in integrated development, since the district can be immediately adjacent to the Rural Residential district; increased the maximum driveway width at the curb from 22 feet to 24 feet, with a 28 foot flair at the property line. All non -conforming driveways will be grandfathered in, and all new residential construction must conform; gratefully recognized the many Medina Celebration Day volunteers and contributors, and the Field House Task Force volunteers; recognized the leadership of Wayne Nedermeyer, Medina Mayor from 1966 to 1978, and for his leadership in Medina's transition from a village to a city in 1974. elm creek Watershed Management Commission ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 3235 Fernbrook Lane Plymouth, MN 55447 PH: 763.553.1144 FAX: 763.553.9326 e-mail: judie@jass.biz July 25, 2007 Office of the State Auditor State of Minnesota Suite 500 525 Park Street Saint Paul, MN 55103 Dear Sir or Madam: TECHNICAL OFFICE Hennepin County DES 417 North 5th Street Minneapolis, MN 55401-1397 PH: 612.596.1171 FAX: 612.348.8532 e-mail: Ali.Durgunoglu@co.hennepin.mn.us Enclosed is a copy of the Audit Report of the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission for the year ending December 31, 2006 as prepared by Johnson & Company, Ltd. This report was accepted by the Commission at its July 11, 2007 meeting and is hereby transmitted for your files. Sincerely, Judie A. Anderson Administrator JAA:tim Enclosure Cc: Brad Wozney, Board of Water and Soil Resources w/bound copy City/Town Clerks w/bound copy Commissioners w/copy Ali Durgunoglu w/copy Joel Jamnik w/copy JAElm CreekTinancialainancia106T_transmitting audit.rtf CHAMPLIN • CORCORAN • DAYTON • HASSAN • MAPLE GROVE • MEDINA • PLYMOUTH • ROGERS MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: October 1, 2009 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates for October 6, 2009 City Council Meeting Ordinance Updates A) Sewered Residential Zoning Ordinance — Staff made the changes directed by the Council and has Published the ordinance by title and summary. B) Mixed Use Zoning Regulations — staff and consultants from NAC held an Open House on September 29, and NAC is preparing for the Public Hearing at the October Planning Commission meeting. C) Private Recreation Zoning District — with the re -prioritization of the Workplan, the ordinance will be placed on a future agenda after the Council has acted on the Business Park and Mixed Uses zoning ordinances. D) Concept Plan Review Ordinance — staff will prepare an ordinance establishing a less formal concept plan process as directed by the City Council. Staff intends to prepare this ordinance amendment following completion of the Residential ordinances, and has published for a Public Hearing at the October Planning Commission meeting. Land Use Application Reviews A) Holy Name Cemetery — The City Council approved resolutions for the lot combination, CUP/Site Plan, Interim Use Permit and easement vacation. Staff is working with the applicant to get all necessary documents recorded correctly. B) Wrangler's Restaurant — 32 Hamel Road — the Council approved resolutions at the July 21 meeting. Staff has been in contact with the applicant regarding recording of the plat and requirements for submitting building permits. C) Kucala Driveway Waiver — 4517 Trillium Drive S. — the applicant has requested a waiver of the 22 foot maximum driveway width requirement to allow approval of a 30 foot driveway that was already installed when they constructed their home. Staff will present research on driveway regulations as directed by the Council at the October 6 meeting. D) Business Park Text Amendment - The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on September 8 and recommended approval of the ordinance with a number of changes. The Council will begin review at the Special Meeting on October 6. Additional Projects A) Comprehensive Plan Update — The Metropolitan Council has deemed the City's submittal complete for review. Their 120-day deadline for review is October 15, 2009. The Plan has review by the Environmental committee and Community Development committee without significant issues. The Plan will be reviewed by the full Metropolitan Council on October Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 October 6, 2009 City Council Meeting 14, 2009. Staff plans to attend the Met Council board meeting in order to provide information, but is not aware of any concerns as the Plan nears approval. B) Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment — City of Plymouth Staff informed the City of Plymouth that Medina did not intend to provide comments on the small amendment that was discussed in the September 15 Planning Update. C) Review of Comprehensive Plans for Other Communities — Staff received 2010-2030 Comp Plans from Corcoran and Orono, and will prepare summaries for City Council review at future meetings. D) Code Enforcement Staff received 13 tall grass complaints in Bridgewater and a 14th complaint along Hamel Road. Staff contacted property owners and these lots were mowed. Staff identified an erosion concern in the Independence Beach area on a building permit that has been closed out for some time, but vegetation had not been established on the lot. Staff made contact with the owner and vegetation is coming in nicely. E) Watershed Memoranda of Understanding; Wetland Conservation Act revisions The City needs to approve of memoranda of understanding (MOU) with the Watershed Districts in the City regarding authority now that the City has approved the Surface Water Management Plan. The MOU will be discussed at the October 6 Council meeting. Additionally, the Wetland Conservation Act was updated in August, and a number of the changes require action by the City. The Council will need to grant staff the authority to review administrative permits. The City will also need to establish an appeals process and also regulations regarding wetland violation enforcement. Staff intends to work on this project and place necessary ordinance or resolutions on a Council agenda in the coming months. Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 October 6, 2009 City Council Meeting Medina Planning Commission Draft September 8, 2009 Meeting Minutes CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION Draft Meeting Minutes Tuesday, September 8, 2009 1. Call to Order: Commissioner Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Planning Commissioners, Jim Simons, Robin Reid, Victoria Reid, Michele Litts, Charles Nolan, Kent Williams, and Beth Nielsen Absent: None Also Present: City Planner Dusty Finke and Planning Assistant Debra Peterson -Dufresne 2. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda: No public comments. 3. Update from City Council Proceedings: Weir presented the update that the Council: heard a presentation from Hennepin County and the City of Minneapolis on making Economic Development Revenue Bonds available to owner -occupied manufacturing and industrial businesses that seek to locate in Medina and to give them access to tax exempt bonds at no cost to the City. The program's purpose is to retain jobs in Hennepin County; reviewed in detail the new R 1 - 5 sewered residential zoning ordinance, and followed the lead of the Planning Commission to add more flexibility to requirements and to used the recommendations of the Commission; - directed staff to make some changes to the proposed Uptown Hamel Monument sign and bring it back for final approval; - accepted Mary Verbick's resignation with regret and directed staff to draw up a resolution of appreciation for close to nine years of service to Medina; - is pleased to appoint Kent Williams to the PC to fill out Mary's term. Kent is an attorney who lives on Homestead Trail and who is interest in land use issues; contracted with NAC Consulting to assist staff with ordinance writing to support the 2030 Comprehensive Plan; directed staff to simplify the Concept Plan Review process to make it less expensive for developers to bring before the City; heard a presentation from Ehlers and Associates on the three mechanisms available to cities to finance construction of public buildings such as a proposed new Medina Public Works facility. Medina's Public Works is so undersized that much expensive equipment has to be stored outside, there is no room for expansion, it does not meet safety standards, and its heavy use is inappropriate in a rural residential area; awarded a contract for the new Field House in Hamel Legion Park; 1 Medina Planning Commission Draft September 8, 2009 Meeting Minutes - approved a preliminary one percent tax levy; - reviewed a driveway waiver request for a built 30' driveway that exceeds the allowed driveway width by eight feet and directed staff to research and recommend a reasonable driveway width standard for Medina; - approved the changes to the sign ordinance as recommended by the PC in public/semi- public and residential zoning districts, adding further. tweaks; - made minor technical changes to update the Tobacco Ordinance; - eliminated the requirement that no liquor licenses can be granted to properties within 300 feet of a church. 4. Planning Department Report: Finke updated the Commission that the City does not have a land use application for the next PC meeting in October. NAC, a Planning Consultant firm, was hired to assist in ordinance writing. Nolan asked if Woodridge Church would be coming back. Finke explained the application is closed and staff is not aware of any future plans by the Church to proceed. He also informed the Commission that since Woodridge Church has withdrawn their application they would have to resubmit a new land use application. 5. Approval of August 11, 2009 Planning Commission Minutes: Motion by Simons, seconded by R. Reid to approve the August 11, 2009 minutes with recommended changes. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: None) 6. Public Hearing — Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 8 of Medina's City Code Pertaining to regulations of the Business Park zoning district and regulations related to the General Business land use identified in the Citv's draft 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan. Finke presented the application and explained the proposed changes and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. He further explained the breakdown of the Business Park and Business District and the subsection relating to design/development standards which apply to both districts. He reviewed permitted, conditional, accessory, and interim uses. He explained changes in lot standards, setbacks were reduced and new uses were added. Impervious surface was increased. Building height was limited to 35 feet for the BP district and 45 feet in the Business district. Nolan asked for clarification of how to review the draft ordinance and if the Commission should look at the Comprehensive Plan for guidance. Finke explained the City could adopt a moratorium if staff chose to do so and the City has nine months to make ordinance revisions. He said the Commission should be looking at the Comprehensive Plan for guidance. Public Hearing was opened at 7:25 p.m. 2 Medina Planning Commission Draft September 8, 2009 Meeting Minutes Paul Chamberlain, representative of property owner Richard Burke, raised concern with the accelerated process and the negative impact it may have on residential properties i.e. change in uses, lot width, lot sizes, setbacks, conditional uses, as well as setback reduction from 500 to 100 feet when adjacent to rural residential districts. He voiced his opposition on behalf of Burke that allowing such changes could have impacts to his client's properties. He said City staff s draft ordinance has a generally global change with uses and business hours. The current uses would typically have business hours of 9-5 p.m. and he has concern with the change of uses extending business hours later into the evening. The change would impact adjacent residential uses. Williams asked where his client's property was located. Chamberlain explained the properties are located in the general areas of Pioneer -Hamel -Tomahawk Road. Finke continued his presentation explaining design and development standards. Examples of design modulation were provided of the Polaris Building (one modulation per 90+ feet) and the Target Building (one modulation per 53 feet). He explained the preservation of the natural environment, natural drainage, changes in landscaping requirements adjacent to buildings, trees required based on the linear footage of a lot, and parking lot landscaping. He further added the currently adopted tree preservation and wetland protection ordinances would continue to apply to both districts. Finke explained utilities/mechanical equipment and storage of service vehicles. Loading dock regulations were changed at the request of the applicant such as: • Maximum area of loading docks • Location • Screening Rose Lorsung, applicant provided background of why development had not occurred in the area. She also commented on: • senior housing • institutional uses within business park district • the use of EFIS material in moderation • an increase in building height to 40-45 feet She said she liked the creativity of the district and is excited with the changes within the BP District. She concluded her presentation by stating she was very pleased with staff s changes to their recommended ordinance application. -lam ° �-.�1 e c �a• ►..,.,L IS\M C S o,r.. Nolan asked Lorsung about senior housing. Lorsung explained how housing in other communities. �no� Sentirlis,"5 Trod'/ — tn a (of QP o-theK cvr..r^S _P Nolan suggested the Commission start the discussion with uses. Finke explained the BP district was more inclusive. N Williams asked for clarification of the Business Park and General Business district properties and their objectives. 3 Medina Planning Commission Draft September 8, 2009 Meeting Minutes Finke explained staff s assumption that land division would occur with the larger parcels. Finke explained how a development would start the process and how zoning would be applied to the property. Nolan asked for clarification of the two commercial districts and what the difference was between them. Finke explained. Litts brought up the use of laboratories in the BP district and suggested narrowing down types of laboratories to be allowed. Finke explained laboratories are currently allowed in the City's existing zoning ordinance. Litts said some labs are beautiful and others may not be wanted within the proposed district. Williams suggested they be placed as a conditional use. Nolan asked if laboratories should be more clearly defined with conditions. R. Reid asked if certain laboratories could be permitted uses. Finke explained staff would research into it further. R. Reid asked for clarification of "Asphalt and Concrete Recycling". Finke explained the use was put in for an existing use. R. Reid said a new user could start up in the district if allowed under the proposed ordinance. It was recommended the use be placed as an IUP to avoid nonconformity. Nolan suggested taking this type of use out of the district. The Commission suggested eliminating Interim Use Permit's. Williams said he understands the Business Park district has uses with lesser impacts. He thinks of a Post Office or FEDEX business having a lot of trucks and people coming and going. He suggested some of the uses be placed as CUP'S with increased setbacks. The Commission recommended Adult establishments be taken out of BP district. Simons asked where noise and lighting regulations were located within the zoning ordinance. Finke explained lighting limitations are placed within the zoning ordinance but noise regulations are controlled by the MPCA. Williams asked if conditions could be added during the site plan review process. Finke explained new developments require site plan reviews and conditions can be placed on the application. Nolan asked if the City could control hours of operation. Finke explained the City couldn't control hours of operation under a site plan review but could control layout and design for businesses such as banks, financial institutions, medical offices, post office, public services, physical fitness clubs. Finke explained the request to have more permitted uses rather than so many conditional uses was a recommendation through public comments during the City's open house on the district. Nolan suggested businesses operating 24 hours a day should be a CUP. He further asked if staff could think of a different way to accomplish the objective. Litts said existing commercial uses currently abut residential and they are more intensive in hours of operation. V. Reid raised concern with regulating a use by hours of operation since it's 4 Medina Planning Commission Draft September 8, 2009 Meeting Minutes not real manageable. Simons sees physical fitness clubs as standing out from other uses. He asked what happens outside of 9-5 p.m. The Commission asked to exclude urgent cares from medical clinics as permitted uses and physical fitness clubs to be a CUP. Staff was asked to research the distance a business district should be from highway 55. Accessory uses - Finke explained when the Commission discussed general business land uses the thought was to allow warehousing as an accessory use up to 30% and anything over 30% would require a CUP in the business districts. Finke explained residential uses being accessory uses and that it could be allowed under CUP or PUD. Lorsung suggested residential uses be allowed as an accessory use. Finke explained this change would trigger a need for a policy change. Lorsung stated vacant properties zoned business adjacent to rural residential are not as marketable for all businesses. R. Reid asked if it's more a mixed use. Lorsung stated the entire area would not be needed for office and it would have a need for residential. R. Reid said she recalls a high density residential use near rural residential and concern was raised about the higher density near rural residential. The Commission concluded to not add a residential component at this time. V. Reid asked for another column to be added incorporating existing regulations pertaining to lot width, size, and depth. Lifts explained staff s examples aren't adjacent to hobby farms like in Medina. She said Medina is unique with its rural areas. She informed the Commission that no matter what is done within the business districts it would be difficult due to all the rural residential neighboring properties. Finke explained lot sizes were reduced as a recommendation of staff, not the applicant. Nolan said if lots were required to have a 3 acre minimum it would eliminate a lot of uses to be able to develop. Finke explained why subdividing is necessary. Nolan advocated a lesser acreage minimum. Williams interprets the minimum acreage a mandate to develop. He said sometimes the goals can be incompatible and suggested the lot size be reduced. Litts said she was more concerned with setbacks. Finke stated impervious surface was recommended to stay the same. Weir asked the Commission if they wished to put a cap on the maximum impervious surface. The Commission suggested 80 percent be the maximum coverage for the BP district and 85 percent for the B district. Finke explained two ways to look at a property if a lot has wetlands. He said the idea is to avoid paving all upland property. 5 Medina Planning Commission p„ej y-7 Draft September 8, 2009 Meeting Minutes tere R. Reid asked if a 3rd story setback is appferniatc. Weir commented if it faced residential it could be appropriate. Finke clarified to remove a 3rd story setback. The Commission concluded outside storage as recommended was sufficient. Doug — sked the Commission if they knew the height of the fire department ladder. Finke ned the ladder goes to the eave of a 3rd story building. Finke explained Gramercy is three stories and the fire department was actively involved in the process for accessibility. The Commission discussed building materials and Lorsung requested EFIS to be allowed. Williams said he was familiar with EFIS and explained issues relating to installation and building codes. The Commission asked for more research to be done by staff for the City Council to review the material as a possible accent material. The Commission discussed building modulation. R. Reid said 40 foot modulation requirements would make a building appear cluttered. Nolan suggested changing the standards to so many feet or a percentage (25% of length of wall — scale of wall — no wall greater than 100 feet long.). The Commission concluded windows as recommended was sufficient. The Commission concluded multi -sided fa9ade as recommended was sufficient. The Commission concluded rooftop equipment as recommended was sufficient. V. Reid questioned the side yard of loading docks and the Commission discussed. No change recommended. Public Hearing was closed at 9:45 p.m. Summary of recommended changes or research to be completed by staff: 1. Correct page 20 of ordinance to require animal waste to be picked up "daily" plus the language regarding 2000 square feet be taken out. 2. Laboratories as conditional uses 3. Add contractor services to BP district 4. Eliminate all IUP's 5. Move physical fitness clubs to CUP in BP district 6. Add a condition under the B district to require a 300-500 foot limitation to the highway 55 corridor for uses listed as CUP'S 7. Review lot depths and lot widths 8. Add warehouse as CUP in BP district 9. Eliminate Adult establishments 10. Define more medical offices/in patient - urgent cares as CUP 11. Change semi -conductor definition on page 2 to manufacture electronic components'aftel- �/ �- ct SSe_,,,...b 4 Medina Planning Commission Draft September 8, 2009 Meeting Minutes 12. Item 14 — clerical typo regarding products 13. Revise lot standards for BP district to 3 acres and 1-1/2 acres for B district 14. Research the use of EFIS as an accent design material and verify the Fire Marshal's position on the use of EFIS 15. Revise building modulation language (percentage of linear wall space) Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Nielsen to approve the ordinance amendment with recommended changes. (Absent: None) 7. City Council Meeting Schedule: Litts may be able to attend next meeting, otherwise Williams. 8. Adiourn: Motion by Simons, seconded by Nielsen to adjourn at 10:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: None) 7 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. 4800 Olson Memorial H ighway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, M N 55422 Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners(cunacplanning,com MEMORANDUM TO: Medina Mayor and City Council Medina Planning Commission FROM: Stephen Grittman / Laurie Smith DATE: October 7, 2009 RE: Medina — Mixed Use Zoning District FILE: 306.04 BACKGROUND Attached is a proposed Mixed Use Zoning District ordinance. This district is designed to implement the Mixed Use future land use category identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan describes the Mixed Use land use classification as one that would provide opportunities for multiple, compatible uses on a single site including a residential component as well as general business, commercial, office and public semi public uses. In each case, however, the primary use of the site must be residential. The Comprehensive Plan has established that the required residential density in mixed use developments is 3.5 units per acre up to 7 units per acre. ANALYSIS Purpose. The first section of the proposed ordinance outlines the objectives or "purpose statement" of the Mixed Use District. These purpose statements incorporate the objectives for the Mixed Use land use designation as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan as well as guidelines for establishing thoughtful and creative mixed use developments that do not negatively impact surrounding land uses and the community. Uses. In order to meet required densities, permitted residential uses would include small lot single family, two family, townhomes and multiple family units with 16 or fewer units per building. The uses allowed in the City's existing R-2 District (Two Family Residential) and R-3 District (Residential -Mid Density) would fit within the required density range for the Mixed Use District and, as such, we have simply incorporated all of these permitted, conditional and accessory uses as those for the residential component in mixed use developments. For the general business, commercial, office and public semi public component of the Mixed Use District, we have proposed to use the same permitted, conditional and accessory uses as those currently allowed within the City's CG District (Commercial - General). The CG District offers a range of commercial, office and public semi public uses while not being too intensive. Lot Standards. Similar to the way the uses have been established in the proposed Mixed Use District, the lot standards for the various residential and commercial uses are the same as those in the R-2, R-3 and CG Districts. We have compartmentalized the setback, lot width, lot depth and impervious surface requirements into a table so that these standards can be easily accessible to property owners and prospective developers. Design and Development Standards. Design and development standards have also been incorporated into the proposed Mixed Use District by using existing standards for uses in the R-2, R-3 and CG Districts. We have included the full text of these standards in the Mixed Use District, however, an option that the Planning Commission and City Council may want to consider is simply referencing the existing sections of the Zoning Ordinance which contain these standards rather than listing them out completely in the Mixed Use District. We have proposed new buffer yard standards for mixed use developments. These proposed new standards are a modification from the buffer yard standards that were recently adopted by the City. Rather than describing what type of buffer yard is necessary based on the proposed and adjacent zoning districts, we have proposed that the type of buffer yard necessary is based on the proposed and surrounding land uses. This is more applicable to developments within the Mixed Use District as many types of uses are allowed within one type of zoning district and internal (in -district) buffering may be necessary in some cases. Process. The draft Mixed Use District includes a process section that describes the required steps that property owners will need to follow to bring a mixed use development from initial concept to construction. The application process consists of a three stage review process that begins with an overview of the site and the land uses planned for the mixed use project. At Stage I, the focus will be on establishing the parameters for the project, setting the public improvement requirements and identifying the development goals. The Stage I Plan is intended to be a recordable description of the development on all of the land subject to the proposal, even though the project construction may be phased over time. Stage II consists of a more detailed development plan, similar to what the developer would be expected to prepare for a complex Conditional Use Permit request. Coupled 2 with the development descriptions given in the Conditional Use documents would be a Preliminary Plat submission that defines the ultimate subdivision changes to be made. As with many phased projects, the applicant may final plat only a portion of the development for immediate construction, while creating outlots for future development phases — the Stage I Plan will serve as the guiding document when future phases are ready for review and construction. Both Stage I and Stage II Plan reviews follow the process laid out for Conditional Use Permits, thus requiring a public hearing at each stage of review. The proposed Mixed Use District language also grants the Zoning Administrator authority to waive certain procedural regularities to allow the coordinated review of the zoning and subdivision portions of the project. Stage III is essentially a staff -level review to ensure that final development documents reflect the requirements made at the previous levels of approval, and to get all documents, including the development contract, signed and recorded prior to the issuance of construction permits. The Stage III section contemplates that the City may have some flexibility in issuing certain permits, such as grading or utility permits, prior to final recording. This is most often done when the City is certain that it has adequate securities in place to ensure proper work and recovery of costs. This process is a modified Planned Unit Development (PUD) review process. The elements that set it apart from typical PUD requirements are the specificity of the standards that apply to development in the Mixed Use District. Generally, in PUD developments, the applicant and the City need to negotiate from relative unknown positions. The Mixed Use District structure should be able to firmly establish the baseline development requirements and avoid the difficulty that the PUD process often can cause. CONCLUSION The Medina Planning Commission will be conducting a public hearing on the proposed Mixed Use District ordinance at their meeting on October 13, 2009. A copy of the City's Draft Future Land Use Plan showing the parcels guided for Mixed Use development is attached to this report for reference. Also attached is a summary of the City Planner's comments on the initial draft district for consideration by the Planning Commission as a part of its review. c. Chad Adams Dusty Finke Debra Peterson -Dufresne 3 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners@nacplanning.com MEMORANDUM TO: Medina Mayor and City Council Medina Planning Commission FROM: Laurie Smith/Stephen Grittman DATE: October 9, 2009 RE: Medina — Mixed Use Zoning District NAC FILE: 306.04 This memorandum supplements the consultant staff cover memo and is intended to summarize the City Planner's comments on the original draft ordinance. They are included here for convenience of review, and will be integrated into the discussion at the public hearing. The comments are variably related to form, internal referencing, and occasionally, substantive content. We have not made any changes to the original draft, and instead are forwarding all of the material in its draft form for full review at the the public hearing. Subd. 1 (d) (ii). (page 2 of Draft) Noting the reference regarding buffer yards — This should be changed to refer to the internal buffer requirements in the MU District rather than the general buffer standards in Sect. 828. Subd. 2 (table) (page 4 of Draft) Noting that lot width in the R-2 District is 60 feet rather than the listed 75 feet. Subd. 3 (b) (page 5 of Draft) Noting the reference to lots of record — this can be deleted as there are no lots of record in the MU District areas that would require this special exception language. Subd. 1 (c) (page 6 of Draft) Noting a need to locate the referenced density incentives. Subd. 2 (a) (page 6 of Draft) Noting a change to the height limit — changed by the City in the final residential district standards to 32 feet (from the 30 feet referenced in this draft) Subd. 2 (f) (page 7 of Draft) Noting a requirement for Enclosed Parking requirements for Townhouses — questioning whether this requirement should be located in subp.(c) relating to other parking requirements. Subd. 3 (a) (ix) (page 8 of Draft) Noting an exclusion of on -site housing as an allowance for Religious Institutions — questioning whether this exclusion should apply in the MU District. Subd. 4 (a) (iii) (page 10 of Draft) Noting reference to a requirement for planting of 2 front yard trees — suggesting that only one may need to be required in the front yard for the MU District. Subd. 5 (e) (page 14 of Draft) Noting imported references to building design — suggesting that other standards may be better to apply. Subd. 2 (b) (page 25 of Draft) Noting the reference to "Phase I" — suggesting that this should instead refer to the "current Phase). Subd. 4 (b) (page 25 of Draft) Noting the reference to a "time as may be required by Minnesota law" — questioning the need for this reference. Subd. 5 (c) (ii) page 26 of Draft) Noting the General site analysis — suggesting that an identification of "developable land" would be a good addition to the list of required submissions. 2 Subd. 8 (c) (page 28 of Draft) Noting the requirement to use the CUP submission requirements — suggesting that the submission requirements for Site Plan review, or similar, may be more appropriate. Subd. 10 (page 28 or Draft) Referring to the Stage III Plan — considering whether it may be better to add these requirements to the Stage II review and address the administrative components at a permitting level. 3 Map 5-2 City of Medina Future Land Use Plan Legend Guide Plan Rural Residential — Agriculture Developing -Post 2030 Low Density Res 2.0 - 3.49 WA Medium Density Res 3.5 - 6.99 U/A ags High Density Res 7 - 30 U/A ® Mixed Use 3.5 - 6.99 UM - Mixed Use - Business 7 - 45 U/A - Commercial _ General Business ® Industrial Business ® Private Recreation (PREC) 111111 Parks and Recreation _ P-R - State or Regional ® Open Space INN Public Semi -Public 0 U/A Closed Sanitary landfill Right -of -Way "This map is not perfectly predse. Actual boundaries may vary, and should be field verified. Map Date: April 30, 2009 Parcel data current as of October 2006 UTM. Zone 15N, NAD 63 Scale: 1:30.000 DRAFT Miles 0 0.25 0.5 1 CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION - MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT TO THE MEDINA ZONING ORDINANCE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Section of the Medina code of ordinances is added to include the Mixed Use (MU) District as follows: SECTION MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT Section Mixed Use (MU) - Purpose. The purpose of the Mixed Use District is to integrate a mix of uses to promote housing and commercial diversity. New developments in the Mixed Use District shall be consistent with the following objectives: (1) this District shall consist of creat tsidential and conunercial development that preserves open .natures. (2) A residential density shall range from 3.5 units per acre to 6.99 units per acre over a minimum of half of the developable; area. (3) Residential development shall compliment existing development in surrounding. residential neighborhoods. (4) Developments shall incorporate creative design and buttering tecluuques to ensure smooth transitions between different types of development or different intensities of uses. (5) Developments shall be easily accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists A transit users. (6) Development shall include high quality and attractive building materials and architectural design as %yell as extensive landscaping in order'to limit impacts on surrounding land uses and shall be integrated and coordinated in a way to most efficiently utilize site improvements and to protect the natural environment. (7) Development in the MU District must demonstrate consistency with goalspolicies and other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. (8) Development must be designed to be served with public utilities, streets and other infrastructure without separate City investments, including the necessary extension of such infrastructi v c ri r :t with surrounding existing, and/or fixture development, Section (MU) Permitted Uses. Subd. 1. Residential Uses. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT October 7, 2009 Comment [LS1]: Same as R-2 and R- 3 Districts (a) Single Family Detached Dwellings (b) Two Family Dwellings (c) Townhouse Dwellings, provided no structure contains more than six dwelling units (d) Multiple Family Structures, provided that: (i) No structure shall contain more than 16 units; and (ii) A development with one or more structures containing more than eight dwelling units shall install a buffer yard with an opacity at least 0.1 greater than the R3 District requirement as described by Section 828.31.', (e) Parks and Open Space (f) Essential Services Subd. 2. CommercialI[Jsesl. (a) Essential Services (b) Office Uses (c) Parks and Open Space (d) Public Services (e) Retail Uses, except the following uses are not permitted uses: pet stores, pawn shops, and adult establishments. (f) Service Uses, except the following are not permitted uses: hospitals, veterinarian clinics, adult establishments, services related to automobiles, and services delivered off -site, including but not limited to building/lawn contractors, electrical and other skills trades and pest control. (g) Warehousing, Wholesaling, and Distributors not exceeding 10,000 square feet �� 9r undetG Section (MU)Conditional Uses. Subd. 1. Residential Conditional jUses. (a) Religious Institutions (b) Educational Facilities (c) Day Care Facilities serving 16 or fewer persons (d) State Licensed Residential Facility or housing with services establishment registered under Chapter 144D Subd. 2. Commercial Conditional Uses. (a) Structures which exceed 50,000 square feet in floor area (b) Assembly or manufacturing of light industrial products, except not the following uses and processes: leather tanning; paper manufacturing; meat slaughtering or rendering; metal plating; Teflon coating or similar coatings requiring high temperatures; the use of heavy or other drop forges; the use of heavy or other hydraulic surges; or the use of any devices capable of detection at the property line. (c) Automobile, Marine, or Trailer Sales or Rental Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT October 7, 2009 2 qN\ 4/7 (t) Comment [Finkel]: Is this a correct reference, or should it be to the Buffer Yard requirements of the MU district? Comment [LS3]: Same as CG District Comment [LS4]: Same as R-3 District Comment [LS5]: Same as CG District (d) Automobile Repair, Oil Lubrication Service Shops, Auto Body Shops (e) Automobile Towing (f) Car Washes or Auto Detailing (g) Drive -through services (h) Hospitals (i) Indoor Recreational Uses, including but not limited to bowling alleys, dance halls, movie theaters, and live entertainment. (j) Pet Stores (k) Warehousing, Wholesaling or Distributors more than 10,000 but less than 20,000 square feet (1) Veterinarian Clinics Section (MU) Accessory Uses. Subd. 1. Residential Accessory Uses. (a) Garages or detached private structures, except no such structure shall contain components to constitute a separate complete dwelling unit (b) Off-street parking (c) Private swimming pools and sport courts (d) Home occupations (e) Signs, subject to the requirements of the sign ordinance Comment [LS6]: Same as R-2 District Subd. 2. Commercial Accessory IJses. Comment [LS7]: same as cc District] (a) Off-street parking and loading (b) Outdoor dining and/or drinking areas, subject to the requirements established in Section 838.5.08. (c) Outdoor display of goods used in conjunction with and on the same site as the permitted use or conditional use, subject to the requirements established in Section 838.5.08. (d) Outdoor recreational sports courts, subject to a conditional use permit and the requirements established in Section 838.5.08. (e) Outdoor storage, subject to a conditional use permit and the requirements established in Section 838.5.08. (f) Signs, subject to the requirements of the sign ordinance (g) Temporary Outdoor Sales Events, subject to an administrative review of compliance with the requirements established in Section 838.5.08. Section (MU) Lot Standards. Subd. 1. Residential Lot Area Standards. (a) Minimum Lot Size (Single Family Detached): 8,000 square feet, Comment [LSs]: Same as R-2 District (b) Minimum Lot Size (Two Family Dwelling): I5,000 square feet per unit Comment [LS9]: Same as R-2 District Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 3 October 7, 2009 (c) Minimum Net Area per Unit (Townhome and Multiple Family Units): 18,750 square feet per unit{ (d) Maximum Net Area per Unit (Townhome and Multiple Family Units): 12,500 square feet per uniti Subd. 2. Residential Lot Standards. Comment [LS10]: Same as R-3 District Comment [LS11]: Same as R-3 District Setbacks Lot Width Lot Depth Impervious Surface Maximum Front Side (Interior) Street Side* Rear (Single Family 25 feet, 30 feet when garage doors face street, 20 feet for side -load garage 15 feet combined, neither shall be less than 5 feet, at least one shall be 10 feet Local or private street: 25 feet, 30 feet when garage doors face street, 20 feet for side- load garage; Minor Collector: 35 feet; Major Collector or Arterial: 50 feet 25 feet, reduced_ to 15 feet if abutting open space or common area 75 feet, 90 feet for lots adjacent to collector or arterial roadway 90 feet 50%- of Comment [Finke13]: R-2 is 60 feet total lieomment area, 6 District of lot area remaining after wetlands and stormwater ponds are excluded [LS12]: Same as R-2 Two Family 25 feet, 30 feet when garage doors face street, 20 feet for side -load garage 10 feet, reduced to 0 feet for common wall between two dwelling units Local or private street: 25 feet, 30 feet when garage doors face street, 20 feet for side- load garage; Minor Collector: 35 feet; Major Collector or Arterial: 50 feet 25 feet, reduced to 15 feet if abutting open space or common area 50 feet per unit, 70 feet for unit adjacent to collector or arterial roadway 90 feet 50% of total id -Comment area, 5 _District of lot area remaining after wetlands and stormwater ponds are excluded [LS14]: Same as R-2 [LS15]: Same as R-3 Townhome & Multiple Family Units Setback from perimeter of site**: 20 feet, 40 feet if adjacent to 30 feet between buildings Private street: 25 feet except parking areas and Setback from perimeter of site**: 20 feet, 40 feet if adjacent to None None 50% of total lot area, 65% of lot Comment remair. Dissttrict Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT October 7, 2009 4 or across recreational or across after street from less intensive areas, reduced to street from less intensive wetlands and zoning 15 feet if zoning stormwater district; garage doors district; ponds are setback shall do not face setback shall excluded be increased street; Local be increased as necessary street: 40 as necessary to feet; to accommodate Collector or accommodate required Arterial: 50 required buffer yards feet buffer yards * A required yard setback adjacent to a public or private street shall be increased based on the classification of the street in the Comprehensive Plan ** Shall apply to structures, parking and recreational areas Subd. 3. Commercial Lot Area Standards. (a) Minimum Lot Size: One acre. The minimum lot size may be reduced to 0.5 acre if the lot is part of an integrated development utilizing shared improvements such as parking and stormwater management, as approved by the City. (b) A lot of record, which existed on or before December 31, 1999, and has one or more of the following characteristics shall be considered buildable, without requiring a variance, provided all other relevant provisions of the ordinance are met: (i) Less than the required lot size (ii) Less than the required lot width (iii) Less than the required lot depth Subd. 4. Commercial Lot Standards. Comment [Finke16]: This can be deleted...there are no MU lots of record Comment [LS17]: Same as CG District Setbacks Lot Width Lot Depth Impervious Surface Maximum Front Side (Interior) Street Side* Rear Adjacent Residential Adjacent Railroad Parking Areas 25 feet 10 feet Local street: 25 feet; Minor Collector: 35 feet; Major Collector or Arterial: 50 feet 20 feet 50 feet 0 feet except as necessary for safety, fire access, or utility purposes Front yard: 25 feet; Rear/Side (Interior): 5 feet, except to accommodate shared/joint parking across common lot line; Street side: 25 feet; Adjacent residential: 25 feet 100 feet 120 feet 75% of total lot area, 80% of lot area remaining after wetlands and stormwater ponds are excluded * A required yard setback adjacent to a public or private street shall be increased based on the classification of the street in the Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT October 7, 2009 5 Comprehensive Plan Section (MU) Design and Delopment Standards. Subd. 1. General Standar. mum Residents .)inimum Iaximum csidential area. detached dwellir dwellings. Areas within 300 line---f-ar eet ofFrunk highway 55 shall be utilized for business or ------------- commercial land uses. as zoned Mixed 1 fse, and withinl 100 ife_et ofpropel ty designated in the �.. omprehensive Plan for low density residential development, shall be comprised of only single family detached or two family attached dwellings. Aliere the two standards tin (f) and (g) above (conflict, standard (1) shall have --- - -- -- precedence, d Use District: unity: 3.5 dwelling units_per net acre. e devoted to residential uses: 50°0 of net developable land. dwelling units per acre 1(see density incentives).. assist of mote than one dwelling unit style, e g. single family tied townhouses or two-family dwellings, or multiple family Subd. 2. Residential Design and Development Standards. (a) Maximum Building Height. All buildings shall meet the following requirements: (i) Building height shall not exceed 30 feet, but the maximum building height shall be increased to 35 feet if the structure is equipped with a compliant fire sprinkler or if interior side yard setbacks are increased by 50 percent. (ii) No building shall exceed two and one-half stories in height, with a limitation of two stories facing a street. (iii)Maximum distance from ground to eave. In no case shall the vertical distance from the lowest ground level (at the footprint of the building and eight fee out) to the eave be greater than 30 feet. (b) Building Materials. (i) All exterior building materials shall be durable and consistent with relevant codes, regulations and other industry standards. (ii) Multiple Family Units. No less than 20 percent of any fagade facing a public or private street shall be an accent material. These materials may include shakes, brick, stone, face brick, decorative concrete, or others approved by the City. No less than 50 percent of the vertical exterior building materials shall be non- combustible material such as brick, face brick, decorative concrete or others approved by the City. (c) Garages. (i) Single Family and Two -Family Units. Each principal dwelling unit shall include garage space with a minimum capacity of two vehicles. (ii) All Units. In the case that garage doors occupy more than half of the horizontal building fapade facing a street, architectural elements shall be provided to reduce the monotonous appearance of garage doors. These elements may include Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 6 October 7, 2009 COMMent [Finke18]: I could not Find the density incentives Comment [LS19]: option: may Comment [LS20]: 300 feet? Comment [LS21]: 100 feet? Comment [Finke22]: Did we mean (e) and (f) Comment [LS23]: Same as R-2 and R-3 District Comment [Flnke24]: We changed this language on the adopted version. It went up to 32 fet Comment [LS25]: Same as Single and Two Family Standards (Section 840.3) and Multiple Family Standards (Section 841.1) Comment [LS26]: Same as Single and Two Family Standards (Section 840.3) and Multiple Family Standards (Section 841.1) varying setback of garage doors, differentiating roof designs, constructing dormers, and installing garage doors with windows or other design elements (d) Utilities. (i) Utilities shall be placed underground. (ii) Mechanical and HVAC equipment serving individual dwellings shall be screened, to the extent possible, from all public or private streets as well as from adjacent structures. (iii)Equipment which serves more than one dwelling unit shall be screened as follows: • Rooftop Equipment. Equipment shall be screened through the use of architectural elements and materials which are compatible with the overall design of the building. Wood fencing or chain link fencing with slats shall not be permitted. • Ground equipment. Equipment shall be screened with walls which are constructed of materials which are compatible with the building or with landscaping which is opaque during the entire year. (e) Building Modulation and Articulation (Townhomes and Multiple Family Units). Buildings shall be modulated a minimum of once per 50 feet of building perimeter to avoid long, monotonous building walls. This may include varying building height, building setback, building orientation, roof pitch, roof design, or significant differences in building materials/design. (f) (Enclosed Parking. Townhomes shall include garage space with a minimum capacity of two vehicles and multiple family structures shall include a minimum of one enclosed or underground parking stall per dwelling unit. (g) trash and Recycling Facilities. I (i) Trash and recycling bins for individual dwelling units shall be stored so not to be prominently visible from streets or neighboring units. (ii) For all other uses, all trash and recycling shall be stored within the principal building, within an accessory structure, or within an enclosed outdoor area easily accessible from the principal structure. The accessory structure or enclosed area shall be constructed of similar materials and have the compatible architecture as the principal structure and shall abide by yard setback requirements. Subd. 3. Supplemental Requirements for Specific Residential Uses.j (a) Religious Institutions. (i) the minimum.lot size shall be increased to 4 acres; (ii) the minimum lot width and depth shall be increased to 300 feet; (iii)shall abut an arterial roadway or abut a collector roadway no more than 1,500 feet from an intersection with an arterial roadway; (iv) no exterior bells or loudspeakers; (v) buffer yard requirements adjacent to or across a street from property of a less intensive zoning district or the same zoning district shall be increased to an opacity measurement of 0.5. Buffer yard requirements are described in Subd.8 of this Section. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 7 October 7, 2009 Comment [LS27]: Same as Single j and Two Family Standards (Section 840.3) and Multiple Family Standards j (Section 841.1) Comment [LS28]: Same as Multiple Family Standards (Section 841.4) 3 Comment [LS29]: Same as Multiple Family Standards (Section 841.4) r Comment [Finke30]: Should this be up in clause c? Comment RS31]: Same as Multiple Family Standards (Section 841.4) Comment [1.532]: Same as Section 841.4.05 — Supplemental Requirements for Specific Uses within the R-3, R-4, and R-5 Residential Zoning Districts excluding Subd. 3 (Assisted Living Facilities, Nursing Homes, and Similar Uses) since those are not allowed uses in the R-3 District -'r Comment [LS33]: Proposed buffer yard standards specific to Mixed Use (vi)structures shall cover no more than 20 percent of the lot, and the maximum combined floor area of all structures on a property shall not exceed 40,000 square feet; (vii) sanctuary seating capacity shall not exceed 500 persons; (viii)the number of persons on -site at any given time shall not exceed two times the capacity of the sanctuary, with the exception of larger events no more than four times per year. The city may place further limitations on the number of persons on -site based on the number of parking stalls provided; (ix) residential use shall not be permitted, with the following exceptions: • housing for clergy employed at the property, as an accessory use. Such housing shall not exceed 4,000 square feet in floor area of habitable space, which shall be counted against the total floor area allowed on a site; or • continuation of a residential use existing on the property prior to the religious institution being established. Continuation of a residential use shall be limited in term and be subject to Interim Use Permit approval; (x) the property shall not be utilized for for -profit purposes, or regularly utilized by for -profit entities; (xi) playgrounds and outdoor recreational areas shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from residential property with adequate screening to protect neighboring properties from noise and adverse visual impacts; (xii) exterior building materials shall consist of the following materials: brick, natural stone, stucco, Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product, copper, glass, decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or decorative pre -cast concrete panels. A maximum of 20 percent of the vertical building exterior may be metal or fiber cement lap siding or other materials approved by the city, if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall building design. (xiii) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. (b) Educational Facilities. (i) the minimum lot size shall be increased to 4 acres; (ii) the minimum lot width and depth shall be increased to 300 feet; (iii)shall abut an arterial roadway or abut a collector roadway no more than 1,500 feet from an intersection with an arterial roadway; (iv) no exterior bells or loudspeakers; (v) buffer yard requirements adjacent to or across a street from property of a less intensive zoning district or the same zoning district shall be increased to an opacity measurement of 0.5. 'Buffer yard requirements are described in Subd.8 of this Section. (vi)structures shall cover no more than 20 percent of the lot, and the maximum combined floor area of all structures on a property shall not exceed 40,000 square feet; (vii) the number of persons on -site at any given time shall not exceed 700, with the exception of larger events no more than four times per year. The city may place Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 8 October 7, 2009 Comment [Finke34]: Is this necessary in a MU area? Comment [LS35]: Proposed buffer i yard standards specific to Mixed Use further limitations on the number of persons on -site based on the number of parking stalls provided; (viii)the property shall not be utilized for for -profit purposes, or regularly utilized by for -profit entities; (ix) playgrounds and outdoor recreational areas shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from residential property with adequate screening to protect neighboring properties from noise and adverse visual impacts; (x) exterior building materials shall consist of the following materials: brick, natural stone, stucco, Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product, copper, glass, decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or decorative pre -cast concrete panels. A maximum of 20 percent of the vertical building exterior may be metal or fiber cement lap siding or other materials approved by the city, if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall building design. (xi) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. (c) Day Care Facilities serving 16 or fewer persons (i) shall abut an arterial roadway or abut a collector roadway no more than 1,500 feet from an intersection with an arterial roadway; (ii) shall not be operated within a townhome or multiple family structure; (iii) parking requirements shall be based on the number of employees of the facility and the number of clients to be served. Circulation shall be sufficient so drop-off and pick-up of clientele does not interfere with the right-of-way; (iv) sufficient outdoor recreational areas shall be provided; (v) the facility shall meet licensing requirements as required by law; (vi) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. (d) State Licensed Residential Facility or housing with services establishment registered under chapter 144D, serving 16 or fewer persons (i) shall abut an arterial roadway or abut a collector roadway no more than 1,500 feet from an intersection with an arterial roadway; (ii) shall not be operated within a townhome or multiple family structure; (iii) parking requirements shall be based on the number or residents at the facility as well as the number of employees. Parking for residents of the facility shall be enclosed or underground, consistent with the requirements of the zoning district; (iv) the facility shall meet licensing requirements as required by law; (v) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. Subd. 4. Residential Landscaping Requirements. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 9 October 7, 2009 (a) 'Single and Two Family Units. (i) Generally. Each lot shall be landscaped, except for areas occupied by buildings, driveways, walks, patios, recreational areas, wetlands, wetland buffers and woodlands. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs, plantings and turf grass. Properly maintained prairie or natural vegetation may be utilized within buffer yards. Integrated stormwater management practices, such as vegetative swales, vegetated filter strips, bioretention, and raingardens, shall be considered landscaping and shall not be excluded from the gross acreage of the parcel when calculating impervious surface coverage. (ii) Lawn Establishment. The entire lot and adjacent right-of-way to the edge of the street shall be landscaped and vegetation established prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a new home. • Financial Guarantee Option. If vegetation is not established at the time of certificate of occupancy, the city may accept a fmancial guarantee and provide access to the property, as required by the City Council, it ensure that landscaping is completed within one year. • Type of Ground Cover. Low maintenance and water conserving altematives to traditional Kentucky bluegrass are encouraged and may be seeded. Otherwise, sod or hydro -seed application shall be required. (iii)Front Yard Trees. A minimum of two overstory trees shall be required to be planted prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each dwelling unit. Trees shall meet the following requirements: • Financial Guarantee Option. If the trees are not planted at the time of certificate of occupancy, the city may accept a financial guarantee, as established by the city council, to ensure that planting occurs within one year. • Size. Deciduous trees shall not be less than two caliper inches measured four feet off ground, and coniferous trees shall not be less than six feet in height. • Location. For single-family dwellings, lboth trees shall be located within 15 feet of the front lot line. For two-family dwellings, at least one of the trees shall be located within 15 feet of the front lot line. Trees shall be located in a way which does not interfere with utilities. • Type. Trees shall be suitable for the soil and site conditions and compliment others in the area. Native species, as listed within the tree preservation ordinance are required, unless otherwise necessary. Species with known vulnerability to disease or infestation shall not be permitted. The trees shall not be of a single species and, to the extent possible, should be differentiated across the neighborhood so that no more 25 percent are from one species. • Credit for Preserved Trees. The city may reduce the required number of overstory trees if existing trees are preserved in the front yard. In order to receive credit, the trees shall satisfy the requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance, Section 828.41. (iv)Maintenance. The property owner shall be responsible to see that landscaping is maintained in an attractive and well -kept condition and to replace any landscaping Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 10 October 7, 2009 Comment [LS36]: Same as Section 840.3.04 Comment [Rnke371: This is borrowed from the R-1 and R-2 regs. Upon further reflection, it may be better to only require one of the trees to be in the front. that does not survive. Irrigation for landscaping and lawns shall be consistent with city water usage regulations. (v) Tree Preservation. Removal of significant trees and any construction activity within residential districts shall be subject to the requirements set forth by the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance Section 828.41. (b) (Single Family and Two Family Development Sites. (i) Generally. All areas within a development site shall be landscaped, except for areas occupied by streets, sidewalks, trails, buildings, driveways, walks, recreational areas, plaza space, wetlands, wetland buffers, and woodlands. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs, plantings, and turf grass. Properly maintained prairie and natural vegetation is encouraged within common open space and buffer yards. Species with known vulnerability to disease or infestation shall not be permitted. Integrated stormwater management practices, such as vegetative swales, vegetative filter strips, bioretention, and raingardens, shall be considered landscaping and shall be included in the gross acreage of the parcel when calculating impervious surface coverage. (ii) Maintenance. The developer shall be responsible for establishing a long-term maintenance plan to see that common space and buffer yard landscaping and fencing is maintained in an attractive and well -kept condition and to replace any landscaping that does not survive. Landscape irrigation, where necessary, shall be consistent with water usage regulations. (iii)Landscaping Guarantee. The developer shall guarantee the growth and maintenance of all plants for a minimum of two growing seasons following an inspection of all completed plantings. • The developer shall submit a fmancial guarantee and provide access to the property, in forms acceptable to the city, prior to issuance of any building permit to ensure the planting and survival of the plantings. The developer may transfer financial guarantee responsibility to another willing entity. • Any plant which does not survive or has severely declined (for example, 25% of the crown has died in the case of trees) shall be replaced, and the replacement will be guaranteed for an additional two growing seasons. After the additional growing seasons, any of the new plants which do not survive or have severely declined shall be replaced. After provisions have been made for maintenance of these new plants, the city shall release any remaining financial guarantee. (iv)Tree Preservation. Removal of significant trees and any construction activity within residential districts shall be subject to the requirements set forth by the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance Section 828.41. (c) Townhome and Multiple Family Development Sites. (i) Generally. All areas within a development site shall be landscaped, except for areas occupied by streets, sidewalks, trails, buildings, parking lots, driveways, walks, recreational areas, plaza space, wetlands, wetland buffers, and woodlands. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs, plantings, and turf grass. Water conserving alternatives to traditional Kentucky -Bluegrass are encouraged. Properly maintained prairie or natural vegetation is encouraged within common open space and buffer yards. Species with known vulnerability to disease or Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 11 October 7, 2009 Comment [LS38]: Same as Section 840.3.03 excluding Subd. 2 (Buffer Yards) Comment [LS39]: Same as Section 841.4.03 excluding Subd. 3 (Buffer Yards) infestation shall not be permitted. Integrated stormwater management practices, such as vegetative swales, vegetated filter strips, bioretention, and raingardens, shall be considered landscaping and shall be included in the gross acreage of the parcel when calculating impervious surface coverage. (ii) Building Setting. At least 10 feet of landscaped area shall be provided adjacent to all buildings except for walks, driveways, and plaza/patio space. Walks within this landscaped area shall be limited to where practically necessary to serve access points of buildings. (iii)Overstory Deciduous Shade Trees and Coniferous Trees. A minimum of one tree per 60 feet, or fraction thereof, of lot perimeter shall be required. Any lot perimeter for which a buffer yard is required shall be excluded from this calculation. • Size. Deciduous trees shall not be less than two caliper inches measured four feet off ground, and coniferous trees shall not be less than five feet in height. • Location. Tree location shall be approved by the city prior to planting. • Type.. Trees shall be suitable for the soil and site conditions and compliment others in the area. Native species, as listed within the tree preservation ordinance are required unless otherwise necessary. No more than 25 percent of trees may be of a single species. • Credit for Preserved Trees. The city may reduce the required number of overstory trees if an applicant preserves more existing trees than required by the Tree Preservation Ordinance, Section 828.41. The city shall determine the amount of credit granted for such existing trees. (iv)Ornamental Trees. A minimum of one tree per 120 feet, or fraction thereof, of lot perimeter shall be required. Any lot perimeter for which a buffer yard is required shall be excluded from this calculation. One tree per 150 feet shall be required if a water conserving alternative is utilized for the lawn or if bioretention or other low impact development practices are implemented. • Size. Trees shall not be less than one and one-half caliper inches measured four feet off ground. • Location. Tree location shall be approved by the city prior to planting. • Type. Trees shall be suitable for the soil and site conditions and compliment others in the area. Native species are required unless otherwise necessary. No more than 25 percent of trees may be of a single species. (v) Understory Shrubs. In addition to trees, a full compliment of understory shrubs shall be provided to complete a quality landscape treatment of the lot. Shrubs shall be potted and a minimum of 24 inches. In no instances shall the number of shrubs be less than one per 40 feet, or fraction thereof, of lot perimeter. Any lot perimeter for which a buffer yard is required shall be excluded from this calculation. One shrub per 50 feet shall be required if a water conserving alternative is utilized for the lawn or if bioretention or other low impact' development practices are implemented. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 12 October 7, 2009 (vi)Parking Lot Landscaping. A minimum of eight percent of the total land area within parking areas shall be landscaped. Parking lots with fewer than 10 stalls shall be exempt from these requirements. • Landscaping at least 12 feet in width shall separate parking lots into cells of no more than 120 stalls. • Landscaping shall break up rows of parking approximately every 20 spaces. • Species selection shall be guided by soils conditions and plantings shall be designed in a way which increases the likelihood of long-term survival. • Where practical, the landscaping areas shall be designed to receive stormwater runoff from the adjacent parking area. (vii)Maintenance. The developer shall be responsible for establishing a long-term maintenance plan to see that common space and buffer yard landscaping and fencing is maintained in an attractive and well -kept condition and to replace any landscaping that does not survive. Landscape irrigation, where necessary, shall be consistent with water usage regulations. (viii)Landscaping Guarantee. The developer shall guarantee the growth and maintenance of all plants for a minimum of two growing seasons following an inspection of all completed plantings. • The developer shall submit a fmancial guarantee and provide access to the property, in forms acceptable to the city, prior to issuance of any building permit to ensure the planting and survival of the plantings. The developer may transfer responsibility of financial guarantee to another willing entity. • Any plant which does not survive or has severely declined (for example, 25% of the crown has died in the case of trees) shall be replaced, and the replacement will be guaranteed for an additional two growing seasons. After the additional growing seasons, any new plants which do not survive or have severely declined shall be replaced. After provisions have been made for maintenance of these new plants, the city shall release any remaining fmancial guarantee. (ix)Tree Preservation. Removal of significant trees and any construction activity within residential districts shall be subject to the requirements set forth by the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance Section 828.41. Subd. 5. Commercial Design and Development Standards,. (a) Building Size: Structures in excess of 50,000 square feet of floor area shall only be permitted subject to conditional use permit approval, the specific requirements established in Section 838.5.08, and other applicable provisions of the city code. (b) Maximum Building Height: Building height shall not exceed 35 feet. In the case that a structure is not equipped with a compliant fire sprinkler system, the maximum building height shall be 30 feet. (c) Outdoor Lighting: Unless otherwise specified herein, outdoor lighting shall abide by the requirements specified in the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 13 October 7, 2009 Comment [LS40]: Same as Section 838.3.06 — Design and Development Standards for CG District and Section 838.5 — Design and Development Standards for all Commercial Districts (i) Lighting levels at property lines shall be limited to 0.5 foot-candle, except if adjacent to a residential zoning district, where lighting shall be limited to 0.0 foot- candle. (ii) Parking lot and Wallcway lighting fixtures shall utilize full cut-off luminaries with no more than 10 percent of light output above the horizontal plane through the light source. (iii) Landscape and architectural lighting shall be aimed directly at the area of focus. Spill light shall be minimized through the use of narrow distribution luminaries and control devices such as louvers, refractors, barn doors, and glare shields. (d) Building Materials. All exterior building materials shall be durable and meet the following standards: (i) A minimum of 30 percent of the building exterior shall be brick, natural stone, stucco (not Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product), copper, or glass. (ii) A maximum of 70 percent may be decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or decorative pre -cast concrete panels. Decorative concrete shall be color impregnated in earth tones (rather than painted) and shall be pattemed to create a high quality terrazzo, brick, stucco, or travertine appearance. (iii) A maximum of 20 percent may be wood, metal (excluding copper), or fiber cement lap siding, if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall building design. (e) Building Modulation. Buildings shall be modulated a minimum of once per 40 feet of building perimeter to avoid long, monotonous building walls. This modulation may include varying building height, building setback, or building materials/design. The portions of building which exceed two stories or 35 feet shall be set back a minimum of six feet from the lower portion of the building. (f) Building Fenestration and Transparency. Building elevations which face a public street shall include generous window coverage. Alternative architectural elements may be approved by the city when windows are not practical. (g) Multi -sided Architecture. Any rear or side building elevation which faces a public street, an interior access drive for the development, or a residential zoning district shall include design and architectural elements of a quality generally associated with a front fanade. The elevation(s) shall be compatible with the front building elevation. Additional signage shall be permitted for an elevation facing a public street or interior access drive, as regulated within the sign ordinance. Multi -sided architecture shall not be required in situations where the rear or side building elevation is fully screened from view from the adjacent street or residential property. (h) Utilities. All utilities shall be placed underground. To the extent possible, all utility equipment, meters and transformers shall be placed either inside of the building or within an outside mechanical court formed by walls. If not located within the building, these items shall be fully screened from view from adjacent property and streets through the use of opaque landscaping or walls constructed of materials which are compatible with the building. (i) Mechanical Equipment. All HVAC and other mechanical equipment shall be designed, located, and/or screened so they are not visiblefrom adjacent property or public streets. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 14 October 7, 2009 Comment [finke41.]: This is borrowed from the commercial otdinances. Upon further reflection, this may be a bit too busy ( Content [flnke42]: Height is limited to 35 feet above, this wouldn't come into play (i) Rooftop Equipment. Equipment shall be screened through the use of architectural elements and materials which are compatible with the overall design of the building. Wood fencing or chain link fencing with slats shall not be permitted. (ii) Ground Equipment. Equipment shall be screened with walls which are constructed of materials which are compatible with the building or with landscaping which is opaque during the entire year. (j) Trash and Recycling Facilities. All trash and material to be recycled shall be stored within the principal building, within an accessory structure, or within an enclosed outdoor area adjacent to the principal structure. The accessory structure or enclosed area shall be constructed of similar materials and have compatible architecture as the principal structure and shall abide by yard setback requirements. (k) Screening. All structures, parking areas, and loading areas shall be screened from adjacent residential property. In situations where screening is required by the zoning ordinance or as a term of a conditional use permit, the following standards shall be satisfied through the use of fences, walls, or vegetative screens. 0) Standards for vegetative screens. Vegetative screens shall consist of fully hardy plant materials, planted in a way to be at least 80 percent opaque year-round. The height of the screen shall be determined by the city, taking into account the characteristics of the object(s) or area being screened, but shall be of adequate size immediately upon planting. The plants within a vegetative screen shall be in addition to the general landscaping requirements of this section. (*Standards for screening fences or walls. A screening fence or wall shall be constructed of attractive, fmished materials such as masonry, brick or wood. Materials and design shall be compatible with the principal stricture. The height of the fence or wall shall be determined by the city taking into account the characteristics of the object(s) or area being screened. (6) Maintenance. The property owner shall be responsible for ensuring that fences and walls are not in disrepair and that planting screens are maintained in a neat and healthful condition. Failure to do so shall be a violation of this ordinance and may be deemed a nuisance, subject to necessary enforcement procedures. (0 Berming. If an earth berm is proposed to supplement the screening, the berm shall be undulating in order to give a natural appearance. L Outside Storage pf Service Vehicles. A limited number of vehicles utilized for the use permitted on a property may be stored within the required off-street parking area. One vehicle for every 10,000 square feet of building footprint, or portion thereof, shall be allowed. Vehicles shall be currently licensed, operable, less than 24 feet in length, and not more than 12,000 lbs. of gross vehicle weight. Additional vehicles and larger vehicles than allowed above shall be parked inside of buildings, within a loading dock, or within an outside storage area as regulated herein. vo Loading Docks. (i) Screened from Residential. No loading dock shall be visible, to the fullest extent possible, from any residential zoning district. Screening may be accomplished through one or more of the following: using buildings to screen, opaque landscaping, decorative walls, or decorative fencing. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 15 October 7, 2009 (ii) Location. No loading dock shall encroach into the required setbacks for the front yard or a side yard adjacent to a street. Loading docks shall be located, and landscaping shall be utilized so as to minimize visibility from streets. Subd. 6. 1Supplemental Requirements for Specific Commercial Uses;. `J\ (a) Structures which exceed 50,000 square feet of floor area. _�\ (i) The structure may only be utilized for a use which is permitted in the zoning district \A in which it is located. (ii) Required Front, Rear, and Side Yard Setbacks shall be increased to 50 feet. Structures and loading areas shall be no less than 100 feet from residential zo trlc/PParking shall be no less than 80 feet from resldential zoning districts. (iv) The city may require increased landscaping and screening to minimize the impact of intensive traffic within parking and loading areas. (v) The city may require additional landscaping, screening and architectural elements to minimize the impact of longer building facades. (vi) A detailed traffic analysis may be required by the city to determine traffic control needs. (b) Assembly and Manufacturing of light industrial products ('. le structurercontaining the use shall be no less than 200 feet from residential • A (ii) Equipmen specifications shall be submitted. Vibration and noise reduction measures, and conditions related to building layout may be required by the city. Measures may be required regarding ventilation systems in order to prevent adverse effects of exhaust or emissions on adjoining property or tenant spaces. (iii) Specific provisions shall be identified for property storage and disposal of fuels, chemicals, and any other hazardous materials. (c) Automobile, Marine, and Trailer Sales or Rental (i) Inventory shall be stored and displayed inside of a building or within an approved outdoor storage area, which shall meet the standards required herein. (ii) No inoperative vehicles shall be stored on the premises, unless in the process of being repaired and are stored within a building. (iii) On -site repair or maintenance of vehicles shall be subject to the conditions established for Automobile Repair, Oil Lubrication Service Shops, Auto Body Shops above. (iv) No test driving of vehicles shall be permitted on local residential streets. (v) All vehicle dealers shall be licensed by the state. (d) Automobile Repair, Oil Lubrication Service Shops, Auto Body Shops (i) The structure containing the use shall be no less than 125 feet from residential districts. (ii) Vehicles parked outside awaiting service or pick-up shall be located in an area which is fully screened from neighboring properties and from the right-of-way. (iii) No inoperative vehicles shall be stored on the premises, unless in the process of being repaired and are stored within a building. (iv) All repair functions shall occur within an enclosed building. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 16 October 7, 2009 Comment RS43]: Same as Section 838.5.08 excluding Subd.10 (Motor Fuel Stations) since those are not allowed in the CG District (v) No sales, storage, or display of automobiles shall be permitted unless a conditional use permit is granted for such a use. (vi) Equipment specifications shall be submitted. Vibration and noise reduction measures may be required by the city. (vii) Additional screening may be required to limit sight and noise impacts of service bays. (vii) Adequate provision shall be made for proper inside storage of all new and used petroleum, chemical, liquid, and other products. (viii) Towing operations shall be permitted as an accessory use, but only if allowed as part of the conditional use permit and if clearly subordinate to the principal use. The city may apply necessary conditions and limitation on this use. (e) Automobile Towing (i) Towed vehicles shall be stored inside of a building or within an approved outdoor storage area, as regulated herein. (ii) No inoperative vehicles shall be stored on the premises, unless stored within a building. (iii) No salvaging, crushing or recycling of vehicles shall be permitted. (iv) Additional screening may be required adjacent to the area where vehicles are loaded into the building and/or approved outdoor storage area. (f) Car Washes or Auto Detailing (i) The structure containing the use shall be no less than 200 feet from residential districts. (ii) Additional screening may be required to limit sight and noise impacts of service bays. (iii) Equipment specifications shall be submitted. Noise reduction measures may be required by the city. (iv) Adequate provisions shall be made for circulation and stacking. Stacking requirements shall be based on the specifications of the car wash and the amount of time required to wash a car. (g) Drive -through services (i) All parts of the drive -through lane(s) shall be no less than 200 feet from residential zoning districts. (ii) Drive -through lanes shall not be permitted within required yard setback areas. (iii) The site plan shall allow adequate pedestrian circulation, vehicle circulation, and vehicle stacking which does not interfere with on -site parking and loading. (iv) The drive -through shall allow adequate stacking and circulation so as to avoid impacts on adjacent property or public right-of-way. (v) The City may require additional necessary conditions to limit the impact of drive - through lanes on surrounding property, including but not limited to: limiting hours of operation, restricting drive -through lane orientation, limiting the volume of loudspeakers and ordering devises, and/or requiring additional landscaping, berming, or other means of screening. (h) Hospitals (i) Hospital structure(s) shall not be located within 1,500 feet of a residential zoning district. Additionally, the primary vehicular access point to the hospital shall not be located within 1,500 feet of a residential zoning district. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 17 October 7, 2009 (ii) Primary access shall be located on a road designated as a collector or arterial. (iii) No heliport shall be located within 1,500 feet of a residential zoning district. (iv) A traffic analysis shall be submitted which specificallytakes emergency vehicle access into consideration. (v) A detailed plan shall be submitted for parking (long- and short-term), access, and pedestrian circulation based on the operation of the hospital facility. (i) Indoor Recreational Uses. (i) Entrances for public access, as well as other outdoor areas where patrons may congregate, shall be no less than 200 feet from residential districts. (ii) Provisions for noise reduction shall be identified based on the type of use proposed. (j) Outdoor dining and/or drinking areas (i) The outdoor space shall be at least 200 feet from any residential zoning district. (ii) The area shall be directly adjacent to the principal structure, and be clearly delineated by fencing or decorative landscaping. (iii) The area shall not interfere with fire safety access to the building. (iv) Outdoor speakers and lighting shall be designed to limit impacts on adjacent property or right-of-way. (v) Pervious surfacing is encouraged, and if utilized, these areas shall not be considered as an impervious surface. (k) Outdoor display of goods used in conjunction with and on the same site as the permitted use or conditional use (i) The display area shall be directly adjacent to a structure or under a permanent canopy. (ii) The display area shall not exceed two percent of the area of the footprint of the principal building or 400 square feet, whichever is less. (iii) Goods in the display area shall be organized and neatly stored. (iv) The display area shall not occupy parkinWloading or landscaping areas, and shall not interfere with fire safety access to the building. (1) Outdoor recreational sports courts (i) Conditions shall be required to minimize the impact of noise and lighting, and also to minimize the likelihood of the recreational activity spilling over onto adjacent property or right-of-ways. These conditions may include, but are not limited to: limiting hours of use, restricting the location of the court, and requiring fencing or screening. (ii) The sport court shall not be located in the front yard or a side yard adjacent to a right-of-way, and shall abide by structure setback requirements. (m)Pet Stores or Veterinarian Clinics (i) Shall not be located within 200 feet of a residential zoning district. (ii) Animals may not be kenneled outside. However, an outdoor area not to exceed 2,000 square feet may be utilized by the animals. The outdoor area must be well maintained and animal waste must be picked up. The City may apply necessary conditions to limit the impact of the outdoor area on neighboring properties, including but not limited to: fencing and screening, hours of use, number of animals permitted outdoors at one time, and other factors. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 18 October 7, 2009 (iii) The site and building plans shall be designed in a way to reduce noise. This shall include floor plan layout, ventilation plans, and window and door locations. (iv) The site plan shall identify provisions for proper storage and disposal of hazardous materials, medical waste, and animal waste. (n) Outdoor Storage of Materials and Inventory. (i) Outside storage shall not be permitted on parcels less than 3 acres in size. (ii) The area of storage shall not exceed an area equal to 10 percent of the gross area of the lot or 20 percent of the footprint area of the principal structure, whichever is less. (iii) The area of storage shall not be located within the front yard or a side yard adjacent to a right-of-way. (iv) The area of outside storage shall be set back a minimum of 50 feet from all property lines, and a minimum of 100 feet from a residential zoning district (v) The area of storage shall be surfaced with a material approved by the city, and may not be gravel. (vi) The area of storage shall be fully screened from neighboring properties and from the right-of-way. If a fence is used for screening, additional landscaping shall be required adjacent to the area of storage, which shall not be counted towards the landscaping requirements of the site. Similarly, if natural screening is utilized, these plantings shall not be counted towards landscaping requirements. (o) Temporary Outdoor Sales Events. (i) Sales events shall not be conducted on a property for more than 50 days in a given calendar year, and shall not be permitted on a vacant lot. (ii) Sales events shall not be permitted on public sidewalks or streets, or within public right-of-way, except if allowed subject to the City special event ordinance. (iii) The sales area shall not exceed ten percent of the area of the footprint of the principal building or 3,000 square feet, whichever is less. (iv) The sales area shall abide by the front, rear, and side yard setback requirements of the relevant zoning district and shall be located at least 200 feet from a residential zoning district. (v) The sales area shall not be permitted on an unpaved surface. (vi) The sales area may be located within a parking lot provided: • The City determines that adequate parking will be provided for the needs of both the principal use and sales events. However, in no case shall more than ten percent of the parking spaces on the property be occupied by the sales events. • The City determines that adequate vehicular circulation, pedestrian circulation, and emergency vehicle access are maintained. (vii) Sales shall only be conducted by the owner or a leaseholder of a property, unless a transient merchant license is obtained from the City. (viii) No outdoor speakers or music shall be allowed. (ix) Temporary signage for the event shall be regulated by the City sign ordinance. (x) Prior to operating a sales event, the applicant shall submit to the zoning administrator a site plan showing sales area, parking area, and emergency access. Additionally, the applicant shall submit a schedule of operation and any additional information required by the zoning administrator in order to review compliance Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 19 October 7, 2009 with the requirements of this ordinance. The zoning administrator may require any necessary conditions to the use to ensure compliance with this ordinance and to promote public safety, or may deny an application which does not abide by the conditions or otherwise violates this ordinance. The applicant may appeal a decision of the zoning administrator to the city council. The applicant shall be responsible for costs accrued with review of the application and any appeal, as described by city fee schedule. Subd. 7. Commercial Landscaping Requirements. (a) Generally. The entire lot shall be landscaped, except for areas occupied by buildings, walks, trails, parking lots, drives, loading docks, plaza space, wetlands, wetland buffers, and woodlands. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs, plantings, and sod. Areas may be seeded if determined to be practically necessary by the city. Properly maintained natural vegetation may also be utilized. Integrated stormwater management practices, such as vegetative swales, vegetated filter strips, bioretention, and raingardens, shall be considered landscaping and shall not be excluded from the gross acreage of the parcel when calculating impervious surface coverage. (b) Building Setting. At least 10 feet of landscaped area shall be provided adjacent to all buildings except for walks, outdoor sales areas, plaza space and approved loading docks. Walks within this landscaped area shall be limited to where practically necessary to serve access points of buildings. (c) Overstory Deciduous Shade Trees and Coniferous Trees. A minimum of one tree per 50 feet, or fraction thereof, of lot perimeter shall be required. (i) Size. Deciduous trees shall not be less than 2.5 caliper inches measured four feet off ground, and coniferous trees shall not be less than six feet in height. (ii) Location. Tree location shall be approved by the city prior to planting. (iii) Type. Trees shall be suitable for the soil and site conditions and compliment others in the area. Native species, as listed within the tree preservation ordinance are required unless otherwise necessary. No more than 25 percent of trees may be of a single species. (iv) Credit for Preserved Trees. The city may reduce the required number of overstory trees if an applicant preserves more existing trees than required by Subd. 9 of Section 838.5.03. The trees shall satisfy the requirements of Subd. 3 of Section 838.5.03. The city shall determine the amount of credit granted for such existing trees. (d) Ornamental Trees. A minimum of one tree per 100 feet, or fraction thereof, of lot perimeter shall be required. (i) Size. Trees shall not be less than two caliper inches measured four feet off ground. (ii) Location. Tree location shall be approved by the city prior to planting. (iii) Type. Trees shall be suitable for the soil and site conditions and compliment others in the area. Native species are required unless otherwise necessary. No more than 25 percent of trees may be of a single species. (e) Understory Shrubs. In addition to trees, a full compliment of understory shrubs shall be provided to complete a quality landscape treatment of the lot. Shrubs shall be potted and Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 20 October 7, 2009 a minimum of 24 inches. In no instances shall the number of shrubs be less than one per 30 feet, or fraction thereof, of lot perimeter. (f) Parking Lot Landscaping. A minimum of eight percent of the total land area within parking, driveway, and loading dock areas shall be landscaped. (i) Landscaping at least 12 feet in width shall separate parking lots into cells of no more than 120 stalls. (ii) Landscaping shall break up rows of parking approximately every 20 spaces. (iii) Shade trees shall be included within the landscaping. Species selection shall be guided by soils conditions and trees shall be planted in a way which increases the likelihood of long-term survival. (iv) Where practical, the landscaping areas shall be designed to receive stormwater runoff from the adjacent parking area. (g) Maintenance. Provisions shall be made to irrigate landscaping areas as necessary, consistent with the water usage regulations. The property owner shall be responsible to see that the approved landscaping plan is maintained in an attractive and well -kept condition and to replace any landscaping that does not survive. (h) Landscaping Guarantee. The owner shall guarantee the growth and maintenance of all plants for a minimum of two growing seasons following an inspection of all completed plantings. The owner shall submit a financial guarantee, in a form acceptable to the City, prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure the planting and survival of the plantings. Any plant which does not survive or has severely declined (for example, 25% of the crown has died in the case of trees) shall be replaced, and the replacement should be guaranteed for an additional two growing seasons. The City shall retain financial guarantee in an amount necessary for any replacements. (i) Tree Preservation. Removal of significant trees and any construction activity within commercial districts shall be subject to the requirements set forth by the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance Section 828.41. Subd. 8. Mixed Use Buffer Yards Requirements (a) Generally. A buffer yard is a combination of distance, plantings, berms, and fencing. The purpose of a buffer yard is to reduce the negative impacts that may result when land uses of different intensities abut each other or when residential uses abut primary roadways. (b) Buffer yards required. A buffer yard shall be required in the following situations: (i) Adjacent to less intensive zoning district. A buffer yard shall be required when a developing property is adjacent to or across a street from property of a less intensive zoning district, as summarized by the following table. (ii) Adjacent to Collector or Arterial Roadways. A buffer yard shall be required along collector and arterial roadways if the property on the opposite side of the roadway is of the same or a more intensive zoning district, as summarized by the following table. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 21 October 7, 2009 Comment [LS45]: Slightly modified from Section 828.31 to apply more appropriately to Mixed Use developments Required Bufferyard Opacity Type of Mixed Use Development Single Family Two Family Townhomes & Multiple Family Commercial -o Single Family 0.1 * 0.2 0.3 0.4 u o sa Two Family 0.2 0.1 * 0.2 0.3 Townhomes and Multiple Family 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 2 o a.a, * 0 0 E Commercial, Uptown '' 9 c -to 03c) a Hamel, General Business, and Industrial Q 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 NOTES: * Buffer yard only required if the proposed development is adjacent to a collector or arterial roadway with the noted adjacent land use across the street. ** If a specific land use is not listed, or if the adjacent property is a PUD, the City shall determine the most similar district to determine the required buffer yard. (c) The required buffer yard may be achieved through a combination of distance, plantings, berming and fences. The following combinations, or an alternative approved by the city, may be utilized: Potential Combinations to Achieve Bufferyard Opacity Opacity Minimum Buffer Yard Width Minimum # of Buffer Yard Planting Points per 1001inear feet Minimum Required Berm or Fence 0.1 10' 38 Minimum 4' wood rail fence 10' 91 None Required 15' 80 None Required 20' 73 None Required 25' 68 None Required 30' 65 None Required 35' 62 None Required 0.2 10' 84 Minimum 44" picket fence 15' 133 Minimum 4' wood rail fence 15' 198 None Required Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT October 7, 2009 22 20' 173 None Required 25' 158 None Required 30' 149 None Required 35' 140 None Required 35' 10 Minimum 4' berm 40' 135 None Required 0.3 15' 198 Minimum 44" picket fence 20' 320 None Required 20' 240 Minimum 4' wood rail fence 25' 276 None Required 30' 252 None Required 35' 235 None Required 35' 104 Minimum 4' berm 40' 223 None Required 40' 44 Minimum 5' berm 45' 215 None Required 50' 209 • None Required 0.4 20' 330 Minimum 44" picket fence 25' 440 None Required 25' 362 Minimum 4' wood rail fence 30' 385 None Required 35' 349 None Required 35' 208 Minimum 4' berm 40' 327 None Required 40' 148 Minimum 5' berm 45' 310 None Required 50' 299 None Required 50' 56 Minimum 6' berm 0.5 30' 564 None Required 30' 405 Minimum 44" picket fence 30' 492 Minimum 4' wood rail fence 35' 499 None Required Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT October 7, 2009 23 35' 319 Minimum 4' berm 40' 454 None Required 40' 261 Minimum 5' berm 45' 422 None Required 50' 405 None Required 50' 160 Minimum 6' berm 55' 388 None Required 60' 374 None Required (d) Determination of Buffer Yard Planting Points. Planting requirements for the various buffer yard options are calculated in terms of points. Points are calculated based on typical growth rates, mature height, and whether a plant is deciduous or coniferous. The city shall grant additional points, not to exceed a 50 percent increase, for plants which exceed the minimum permitted installation size below. Buffer Yard Planting Points Plant Category Buffer Yard Planting Points per Plant Minimum Permitted Installation Size Overstory deciduous tree 50 2.5" caliper Understory deciduous tree 15 1.5" caliper Tall evergreen tree 50 6' tall Medium evergreen tree 20 4' tall Low evergreen tree 12 3' tall Tall deciduous shrub 5 36" tall Medium deciduous shrub 3 24" tall Low deciduous shrub 1 18" tall Medium evergreen shrub 5 18" tall/wide Low evergreen shrub 3 12" tall/wide (e) Types of planting. Plants shall be suitable for the soil and site conditions and compliment others in the area. (i) Plants shall meet the size requirements described in the table above at the time of planting. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 24 October 7, 2009 (ii) Unless otherwise approved by the city, plants shall be consistent with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources' "Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota, the Eastern Broadleaf Forest Province:" (iii) No more than 25 percent of plants shall be from one species. (iv) Plants shall be selected and placed in a way which most effectively provides a buffer, as approved by the city. Species with known vulnerability to disease or infestation shall not be permitted. The landscaping plan shall consider factors such as survivability of plantings, surrounding topography, and interaction with berms/fences. (f) Credit for existing vegetation. The city shall grant credit for existing vegetation that is preserved within an area where a buffer yard is required. Credit shall be based on (d) above, including the additional points for larger plantings. (g) Berms and Fences. When berms or fences are combined with plant materials in a buffer yard, at least half of the plantings shall be located towards the exterior of the subject property, in relation to the location of the fence or berm. If an earth berm is proposed, the berm shall be undulating in order to give a natural appearance. (h) Buffer yard location. Buffer yards, when required, shall be located adjacent to the outer perimeter of a development site. (i) Buffer yards may be located within required yard setbacks, but a principal structure shall be set back a minimum of 10 feet and an accessory structure a minimum of five feet from the buffer yard. (ii) In the case a wetland interferes with the lineal continuation of a buffer yard, altemative means may be required by the city to reduce the impact of the development upon adjacent property. (i) Recorded document required. A document, in a form provided by the city, shall be recorded against the property over which a buffer yard lies. This document shall include, at a minimum, the location of the buffer yard, the restrictions on the use of this property, and the maintenance responsibility for the landscaping and improvements. (j) Use of buffer yards. Buffer yards shall be left in a predominantly undeveloped state. Passive recreation and pedestrian, bicycle, or equestrian paths may be allowed, so long as the required plantings are provided. No sports courts, swimming pools, storage or other similar use shall be allowed. Paving shall be limited to areas necessary to provide access to the subject property. Section (MU) Development Review and Approval Process. 54.10.a. i, t''roCe�s. .'�L' .iCvelopment. lii file i‘o.i Oi_AilGi shall ioilow the process outlined in this section. No development in the MU District shall be permitted prior to the completion of all states of reviewer nor without the submission of all required documents, including any additional documents that may be required by the City in the review of thepoposcd Mil development. At anv Stage under this Section the City shall have the discretion to consider the following actions: (a) Approve mixed use development as submitted• (b) Approve a mixed use development subject to conditions specifying changes to the submitted proposal; or Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 25 October 7, 2009 (e) Deny any proposed mixed use development if it is found that the proposed development does not meet the objectives of this District or of the Comprehensive Plan, or of any of the standards and requirements herein. Subd. 2. A Mixed Use Development will require approval of the following documents: (a) A Stage 1 Plan which identities the parcels proposed to be subject to the mixed use development, proposed land uses, general site plan layout, phasing; and other general elements of the project. (b) A Stage II Plan which identifies the development details oflPhase l of the project, along. with a Preliminary Plat that identifies lot sizes, Outlot dimensions and future land uses, and all areas to be dedicated to the public, consistent with the City's Subdivision regulations. (e) Stage III Plan which establishes a recordable set of documents regulating the near -term development of Phase 1 of the project, as well as establishing, the longer -term development of future phases. Subd. 3..Each of the three Stages of approval in the MU District shall be considered a separate land use application, and shall be submitted with an accompanying City application form. Subd. °stage I Plan. (a) ire Stage 1 Plan establishes the general layout of land uses and densities of velopment in the MU District. 'lire Stage I Plan further identifies the limits of the MU development for purposes of identifying residential unit counts, acreages devoted to various land uses, and overall compliance with Comprehensive Plan objectives. More than one parcel may be included in an individual Stage 1 Plan for a mixed use development. (b) The Stage I Plan shall be a recordable document_ recorded with the Development _agreement against all parcels in the mixed use development, including. Phase I development and all future phases. The purpose of the Stage I Plan is to provide notice to future owners and developers, as well as City officials, of the land use and development expectations for future phases ofthe-mixed use development. An approved Stage 1 Plan shall not require revision, and may serve as the basis for State 11 plans for any parcel in the mixed use development. The Stage I Plan DOES NOT confer any development rights — such rights are established only upon approval of a qualifying Stage II Plan and associated Preliminary Plat, lot- at another time as maybe required by Minnesota law nor agreed to between developer and City. The approved Stage I Plan may be amended pursuant to a new application process under this section. Subd. 5. Stage 1 Plan submission requirements. The submission requirements for Stage I Plan approval shall include: (a) Narrative description of the mixed use project, including how the project fulfills the purposes of the MU District. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 26 October 7, 2009 (b) lentification of required minimum dwelling unit count for parcel in question based on .._ tilling Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan documents governing land use on the subject property or properties. Lb) Identification of minimum required land area to be devoted for residential uses based on Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan documents governing land use on the subject property orproperties. (c) Submission of a proposed Stage I Plan providing the following information: (i) Documentation of property ownership, interest in title. or authorization from owner(s) of all parcels to make 'application of their behalf. (ii I lGeneral site analysis _identifying developable land, sensitive environmental areas,_ _ important views, and other features. (iii) Identification of important utility and other infrastructure connections and issues. (iv) Connectivity of the site to surrounding land uses, potential pedestrian/bicycle connections, and other external land use relationships. (AL) General traffic circulation plan, including a designation of proposed public and private streets. Said plan shall demonstrate connections to the area transportation network. or logical extensions of the future street network demonstrating consistency with the City's Transportation Plan. Said plan shall further demonstrate how traffic circulation through the area will avoid conflicts between commercial and residential traffic_ (vi) For all business and/or commercial areas, a sketch plan illustrating the proposed layout of commercial buildings and related improvements; in the alternative. where business or commercial areas are not proposed to be developed immediately. the applicant may submit an estimate of the commercial development capacity- of the property in square feet of commercial building space. (vii) For all residential areas, a sketch plan illustrating the preliminary proposed building layout, unit style, street jurisdiction, lot layout, environmental conservation areas, public or private open _space: public or private recreation Space, and other elements of the plan. tviii) For each of the parcels in the mixed use development, a statement identifying the minimum and maximum development capacity. by land use category, for future phases of the project. .Subd. 6. Stage I Plan approval process. The process for consideration of a Stage 1 Plan shall be the same as that required for a Conditional Use Permit under Section 825.43. Subd. 2'— Subd. 5 of the Medina City Code. Subd. 7. Stage 11 Plan. (a) Upon approval of a Stage I Plan, an applicant may proceed to Stage ll PlanAppro \ al. The purpose of the Stage 11 Plan is to cstab .sh the deyelo mrient details for the_phase of the mixed use development covered b the (b) A Stage II approval ma be sou ,ht for an of a of the individual parcels in the proposed mixed use development as identified in the•ha n r 'tan inco •°rated in the Stage I Plan approval. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 27 October 7, 2009 Comment [Finke48]: is it important to determine developable property at Stage I so that the uses are accurately divided'? (c) A separate Stage II Plan approval shall be required for each phase of the mixed use development. If desired, an applicant may combine phases and proceed to Stage II Plan approval for several phases concurrently. Subd. 8. Stage II Plan submission requirements. The submission requirements for Stage II Plan approval shall include: (a) A copy of the approved Stage I Plan relating to development on the mixed use parcel in question. (b) Proposed Preliminary Plat, including each of the documents required by Section 820 (Subdivision Regulations) of the Medina City Code. (i) A proposed development in the MU District shall not be eligible for the exceptions otherwise provided for in that Section. (ii) The Zoning Administrator may waive certain irregularities in the required process to permit coordination of the Plat approval process with the development approval process requirements of the MU District. (c) All submission requirements for Conditional Use Permits ias specilied_in S_ectio_n 825.43. _ Subd. I. of the Medina City Code. Subd. 9. Stage II Plan Approval Process. The process for approval of a Stage II Plan shall be the same as that required for a Conditiona of the Medina City Code. Use Permit under Section 825.43, Subd. 2 — Subd. 5 Subd. 10. jStage III Plan. (a) Upon approval of a Stage II Plan, an applicant may proceed to Stage III Plan approval. A separate Stage III Plan approval shall be required for each phase of the mixed use development. If desired, an applicant may combine phases and proceed to Stage III Plan approval for several phases concurrently. (b) An applicant shall have six (6) months from the date of Stage II approval to submit Stage III plans. (c) An applicant may request an extension far the submission of such request, approval of which is entirely at the discretion of the City Council. (d) If no Stage III application or extension request is submitted within the required six (6) month period, the Stage II Plan approval(s) shall be considered void. Subd. 11. Stage 111 Plan submission requirements. The submission requirements for Stage III Plan approval shall include: (a) Final plans for all approved Stage 11 development documents. revised per City Council conditions and findings. (b) Development Agreement for execution, in a form as approved by the City Attorney, including the approved Stage I Plan as an exhibit. (i) The Stage I Plan shall be recorded against all parcels subject to the mixed use development application. (ii) The City may require the Development Agreement to be recorded against any or all parcels, at its discretion. Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 28 October 7, 2009 Comment [Finke49]: Site Plan Review may be better, or create new list Comment [Finke50]: Option: Beef up Stage II, do away with Stage III. The administrative review could be done upon building permit? r Subd. 12. Stange Ill Plan Approval (a) Approval of a Stage III Plan shall be by written certification of the the Zoning Administrator. upon a finding that the submitted documents conform to the requirements and approvals of the City Council. (b) The Zoning Administrator shall cause the documents to be signed as necessary, fled and/or recorded in accordance with this Ordinance and Minnesota law. (c) No building permit shall be granted for any structure within the MU District until the appropriate documents arc so certified. (d) Other activities within the mixed use development shall proceed only in accordance with City requirements, including all necessary permit approvals, posting of acceptable financial and other securities, and any other applicable regulation. SECTION _. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the city council of the city of Medina this ATTEST: Chad M. Adams, City Administrator -Clerk Published in the South Crow River News this day of , 2009. T.M. Crosby, Jr., Mayor Mixed Use Zoning District - DRAFT 29 October 7, 2009 day of 2009. " Agenda Item No. 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: October 8, 2009 MEETING: October 13, 2009 Planning Commission SUBJ: Ordinance Amendment  Concept Plan Review Procedure  Public Hearing Background Current City regulations allow certain types of applicants to apply for a Concept Plan Review to seek informal feedback from the Planning Commission and City Council prior to applying for a standard land use application. Concept Plans are meant for situations in which the subsequent land use application will involve greater amounts of discretion on the part of the City. These applications include Comprehensive Plan amendments and re -zonings. Generally, this allows an applicant to judge the likelihood of City support before they would invest the time, effort, and money to prepare a complete application. The regulations describe what type of information should be submitted for a Concept Plan Review. This is not necessarily a "back -of -the -napkin" sketch, and does require some up -front work to prepare the information. Earlier this fall, a realtor listing property in Medina expressed concern that the City's Concept Plan Review was too costly and time consuming and that a potential buyer was hesitant to go through the process. The City Council directed staff to review the process and recommend ways to reduce the expense of preparing a Concept Plan. Procedural Changes in Draft Ordinance Expands the Types of Applications Eligible for Concept Plan Review Current regulations describe which types of applications are generally eligible to go through the Concept Plan Review process (although there is language stating that the City can consider concept plan reviews for other projects "if it deems it to be in the City's best interest"). The following applications are eligible in current regulations: (a) Rezonings; (b) Comprehensive Plan amendments; (c) Projects requiring significant public investment in infrastructure improvements; and (d) Planned Unit Developments involving more than 10 acres Ordinance Amendment: Concept Plan Review Procedure ge1of2 nIPA WitriS " `fir % =;=��0 . October 13, 2009 Planning Commission Meeting Staff recommends expanding the list of eligible applications to include the following: ■ "Projects which are requesting assistance from the city in order to achieve stated goals and objectives of the City." This may include a developer that is interested in constructing workforce housing (a goal of the City), but seeks some sort of financial support from the City in order to make the project viable. ■ "Projects which require flexibility from general design or development standards." For example, the wetland protection ordinance explicitly allows flexibility in the width of upland buffers if the developer can use other alternatives to meet the purpose of the ordinance (water quality, natural resource habitat, etc.). Reduces the Amount of Property Owners Receiving Notice of the Public Hearing Current regulations require a Public Hearing as part of the Planning Commission's review of a Concept Plan. Notice of the Public Hearing is required to be sent to owners within 1,000 feet or 2,000 feet (if rural). Obtaining address labels and sending this notice adds to the cost of the application. The requirement for a Public Hearing was recently added in August of 2006, because the City Council felt that neighboring property owners should be notified. Prior to that time, the Planning Commission reviewed the Concept Plan, but no Public Hearing was held, and no notices were sent. The amount of property owners notified is twice the distance as applications such as plats, conditional use permits, and variances. The draft ordinance reduces the distance to which owners are notified to 350 feet or 1,000 (if rural). (see Section 825.69 on page 3 of the ordinance). Requests General Information on Natural Resources and Building Design Current regulations do not require information related to natural resources such as wetlands and wooded areas. Staff believes this is one of the primary considerations to be made on a Concept Plan. While exact locations are not necessary, staff recommends requiring general information. Additionally, the existing regulations do not require any information related to building design. Staff recommends adding a requirement for conceptual elevations (see Section 825.67 on page 2 of the ordinance). Relaxes Submittal Requirements The ordinance relaxes language regarding the submittal requirements. Specifically, the requirement that existing topography be provided was removed. Language throughout the submittal requirements was relaxed so that it was clear that conceptual and generalized information is acceptable (see Section 825.67 on page 2 of the ordinance). Attachment Draft Ordinance Ordinance Amendment: Page 2 of 2 October 13, 2009 Concept Plan Review Procedure Planning Commission Meeting CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO THE CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW PROCESS AMENDING SECTION 825.61 THROUGH 825.71 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Section 825.61 through 825.71 of the Medina code of ordinances is amended to delete the stFieken language and add the underlined language as follows: Section 825.61. Concept Plan Review. Concept plan review is an initial presentation of a land use application which involves a modification to the city's established land use policy, a substantial public investment in infrastructure improvements or a project of community -wide significance. Section 825.63. Puraose. Concept plan review serves as the basis for informal conceptual discussion between the city and the applicant regarding a specific land use proposal. It is designed to assist the applicant in preparing a formal land use application for the city's consideration. The purpose of the concept plan review is to identify significant issues, suggest design considerations and discuss requirements of the city's official controls. Concept plan review is optional, not mandatory, for qualified applicants. Section 825.65. Proiects Eligible For Concept Plan Review. The city has well - established review procedures for all land use applications and finds that, in most instances, such procedures are adequate and appropriate. It is not the city's intent to replace regular land use reviews with concept plan reviews. However, in certain circumstances, projects may benefit from concept plan review prior to regular application. Such applications are generally limited to those involving the exercise of legislative discretion by the city council, requiringpubstantialpublic expenditures or likely to have community -wide significance. Accordingly, applications involving the following are eligible for concept plan review: (a) Rezoningsp) Comprehensive Plan amendments; ic) Projects requiring significantpublic investment in infrastructure improvements or which are ptherwise requesting assistance from the city in order to achieve stated goals and objectives of the City; Id) Projects which require flexibility from general design or development standards when such flexibility is described in the zoning ordinance: and Ordinance ### DATE 1 of 4 Deleted: ¶ - - { Formatted: Right: 0.69" Formatted: Font color: Red, Strikethrough Deleted: ¶ Example` Tree Deleted: <sP> Preservation. - { Formatted: Highlight wetland protectif Formatted: Highlight ordinance both allow for flexibl ordinance or Formatted: Font: Times New if the purpose's Roman, 30 pt met in other ways, (e) Planned Unit Developments involving more than 10 acres. Other projects are not generally eligible for concept plan review. However, the city reserves the right to consider concept plan review for other projects if it deems it to be in the city's best interest. Nothing herein shall be deemed to supersede section 834.09, subd.l of the code of ordinances regarding concept plan review for projects within the Uptown Hamel area. Section 825.67. Application for Concept Plan Review. Concept plan review applications shall be submitted to the zoning administrator and be accompanied by relevant fees as established by the city, Concept plans are not expected to be complete in terms of engineering and architectural design, but shall clearly and accurately convey the proposed concept in relation to existing conditions on the site. Applicants should be aware that the feedback which may be provided by city staff and officials is heavily dependent on the specificity and quality of the infonnation submitted for review. General information on the following subjects shall be submitted unless deemed unnecessary by the zoning administrator: (a) A short narrative from the applicant which includes an overview of the project; (b) A project location map, including layout of the proposed property and/or structures with references to existing development on adjacent properties; (c) General information related to existing site conditions, especially approximate locations of natural resources such as wetlands, floodplains, and areas of significant trees; ( f General topographic and grading information. Although surveyed topography is not required in all circumstances, it is important that the concept plan reflects the potential impact on site topography; (�) Tentative street arrangements; (f) Amenities to be provided such as recreational areas, open space, and trails; (g) Conceptuat_sanitary sewer, water and stone drainage facilities; (b) Proposed density of the project, including the number of housing units and square footage of other uses; (i) `Conceptual exterior building elevations; W Staging and timing of the project; and (�c) Such other information as the city may suggests Section 825.69. Review; Resubmission. iSubd.1. Upon receipt of application for concept plan review, the zoning administrator shall review the application and make such comments or recommendation as may be appropriate. Ordinance NW DATE 2 of 4 { Deleted: d Deleted: <sp> Deleted: and shall be accompanied by 1 the following: J Deleted: Site topography and at least rough proposed grading { Deleted: d Deleted: e Deleted: f { Deleted: Proposed Deleted: g { Formatted: Highlight Thscussion Item - -current Cone Deleted: h plj Deleted: - -ordinansedees not{ Deli: ; and require exterior elevations. Addin this requirement a additional gDno Deleted: (j) Application fee as established by the city. Formatted: Font: Bold forfeedbaclebufa� Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.31", increases the un$ Hanging: 0.19", Right: 0.69" work for an aNiplic Formatted: Bullets and Numbering Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 10 pt tSubd. 2. Planning Commission Review. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing on the concept plan after receipt of a report from the zoning administrator. (a) Notice of the public hearing shall be mailed by the city at least ten days prior to the date of the public hearing to each owner of property situated wholly or partly in Medina and within d1000 feet of theproperty to which the _ review applies, if the applicant's property is zoned RR, RR-1 or RR-2. For property located in any other zoning district, notice shall be mailed to each owner of property situated wholly or partly in Medina and within, - - �50 feet of the property to which the review applies. (b) The presentation to the planning commission by the applicant shall be conducted in accordance with such procedures as may be established by the planning commission. The planning commission may make such comments or recommendations regarding the concept plan it deems appropriate. ,Subd. 3. City Council Review. The city council shall review the application following review by the planning commission. The presentation to the city council by the applicant shall be conducted in accordance with such procedures as may be established by the city council. The city council may offer such comments or suggestions regarding the concept plan as it deems appropriate. ,Subd. 4. Resubmitted Concept Plans. An applicant may revise a concept plan_ and submit it again for a second review following receipt of the city council's comments. Planning commission review of the revised concept plan shall be subject to the notice and public hearing requirements ofrSubd. 2 above. However, the applicant must show considerable change from the first concept plan, and comments received through the first concept review must be addressed prior to review of a second concept plan. No concept plan for the same or a similar project shall be accepted or reviewed by the city more than twice within 12 months of the date of the initial application. { Formatted: Font: Bold J { Deleted: 2,000 { Formatted: Highlight - { Deleted: 1,000 _ - { Formatted: Highlight ,Reduced notie Formatted: Font: Times New areas reduce tl Roman, 10 pt cost of legal notices. Option: Remove -Pahl: i Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 10 pt Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Heap Right: 0.69" renairem6et t Formatted: Font: Bold Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.31", Hanging: 0.19", Right: 0.69" • { Formatted: Right: 0.69" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.31", Hanging: 0.19", Right: 0.69" ' Formatted: Bullets and Numbering Formatted: Font: Bold Deleted: paragraph (a) • - - { Formatted: Right: 0.69" Section 825.71. Effect of Concept Plan Review. Concept plan review is for the purpose of discussion and comment only. Any opinions, comments or observations provided to the applicant by the city staff, planning commission or city council shall be considered advisory only and shall not constitute a binding decision on the proposed project. The applicant may not infer any future approval of a formally submitted land use application based upon the concept plan review and no vested rights shall accrue as a result thereof SECTION II. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication. Ordinance Milt DATE 3 of Adopted by the city council of the city of Medina this day of , 2009. T.M. Crosby, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Chad M. Adams, City Administrator -Clerk published in the South Crow River News thisday of , 2009. _ - 4 Formatted: Font: Times New - - - - Roman Ordinance ### DATE 4 of 4 G, T Y O A a Comment Card Public Forum Agenda Item MEDINA Name of Speaker: ff..e0i-,y �G ,./y7` (please print) , Address: .2 tit/0 5/ /46 A, 5 7 %E /0 eels ?IA, 1q,� Telephone (optional): �y- j- .4/,-"0 _ 9, ej r Representing: Agenda Item (list number and letter): Comments: Approach the podium to speak Meeting Rules of Conduct • Please indicate if comment card is for the Public Forum or an Agenda Item in upper right hand corner. • Please fill out card and provide a brief summary of comments. • Please turn in the card to a staff member who will pass the card to the Mayor. The Mayor will call on you to speak when it is your turn. • Please approach the podium when called on to speak. While Speaking Please give name and address Please indicate if representing a group Please limit remarks to 3 to 5 minutes G% T If A Comment Card �� �� CPublic Forum Agenda Item X MEDINA Name of Speaker: �,�t p S k e lease ri}�t) N Address:. ` S- Co m y t o i. I wi Telephone (optional): / 6 ) - v 1m - u s o t Representing: Agenda Item (list number and letter): 1(9 7 Comments: Approach the podium to speak Meeting Rules of Conduct MEDINA • Please indicate if comment card is for the Public Forum or an Agenda Item in upper right hand corner. • Please fill out card and provide a brief summary of comments. • Please turn in the card to a staff member who will pass the card to the Mayor. The Mayor will call on you to speak when it is your turn. • Please approach the podium when called on to speak. While Speaking Please give name and address Please indicate if representing a group Please limit remarks to 3 to 5 minutes