Loading...
08-26-02 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 26,2002 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday August 26,2002. Chair Pentel called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Those present were Chair Pentel, Commissioners Eck, Groger, Hoffman, McAleese, Rasmussen and Shaffer. Also present were Director of Planning and Development, Mark Grimes, City Planner, Dan Olson and Recording Secretary Lisa Wittman. I. Approval of Minutes - August 12, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting - Eck stated that some of the items in the minutes were numbered incorrectly. Eck referred to page 9 of the minutes and stated that there wasn't a motion written for the rezoning of 917 Lilac Drive. Groger referred to page 8, last paragraph and stated that the word "exits" should be "exists". McAleese stated that page 7, paragraph 4 should be changed to "McAleese stated that the rezoning and Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map requests could be considered in one "hearing" (not "motion"). McAleese again referred to page 7, paragraph 6 and stated that the sentence should say that he "asked" (not "stated") if there were any zoning districts that wouldn't allow switch stations. MOVED by Eck, seconded by McAleese and motion carried unanimously to approve the August 12, 2002 minutes with the above noted changes and corrections. II. Continued Informal Public Hearing - Zoning Code Text Amendment e Applicant: City of Golden Valley Purpose: The City would like to revise the telecommunication requirements of the Zoning Code. Olson referred to his memo dated August 22, 2002 and discussed the changes that the Planning Commission recommended at the August 12, 2002 meeting. He stated that language was added about favoring roof top antennas instead of monopoles in the Multiple Dwelling zoning district. He also stated that language has been added to encourage applicants to exceed the setback requirements when located adjacent to a property zoned Residential, Two Family Residential (R-2) and Multiple Dwelling. Olson discussed taking the definition of switch stations out of the ordinance and including requirements for switch stations in with essential services instead. He stated that the Planning Commission has to decide if switch stations are considered a permitted use or a conditional use. He added that the aesthetics of the building would be reviewed by the Building Board of Review. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 26, 2002 Page 2 Pentel questioned whether or not towers were something the City would want in residential areas. She said she is concerned about the height of the towers. Eck stated that the City might then get more towers and less co-location. Shaffer added that because a Conditional Use Permit is required for towers, then each request could be looked at individually. e Eck questioned whether the language changes to Section 11.30, Subd. 9 were correct if the changes to that section would make telecommunication structures not a permitted use in the Commercial zoning district, which is contrary to what the Telecommunications Ordinance states. Olson stated that Subdivision 9 deals with height restrictions, not whether these structures are permitted or not. Upon further discussion Olson stated that Eck is correct that the proposed language changes could be seen as not allowing telecommunication structures in the Commercial zoning district. Eck suggested including language that would permit the structures in Subdivision 9, but refer to the new Telecommunications Ordinance for height requirements. Eck also suggested this language be included in any other relevant sections of the Zoning Code. Pentel opened the public hearing. Tony Dorland, Moss & Barnett, representing Verizon Wireless, stated that he is not opposed to the property being rezoned to Commercial, but he would like to see switch stations be a permitted use and not a conditional use in the Commercial zoning district. Seeing and hearing no one, Pentel closed the public hearing. - Pentel asked the Commissioners if they thought switch stations should be allowed as a permitted use in the Commercial zoning district or if it they should be allowed as a conditional use. Eck stated that he thought switch stations should remain a conditional use so the City would have some say about the outside appearance of the buildings. Groger agreed and stated that making switch stations a conditional use would allow for more control. McAleese asked staff if they had any concerns about impacts to infrastructure. Grimes stated that there is a permit process in the Public Works Department to allow digging in right-of-way. He stated that if switch stations were allowed with a Conditional Use Permit that that would be another way for the City to control them. Pentel asked about the radius for notification of a conditional use application. Grimes stated that hearing notices go to properties within 500 feet of any site applying for a Conditional Use Permit. Groger asked about parking regulations for switch stations. Grimes stated that he thought it would be more advantageous to the applicant to come up with as many parking spaces as they can or to have them meet the parking requirements for the Commercial zoning district. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 26, 2002 Page 3 Pentel referred to page three of Olson's memo and questioned the wording "where feasible and practical" in regard to towers near residential areas. McAleese said he also thought that wording should be changed. Rasmussen stated that at the last Planning Commission meeting she thought the words "no less than certain amount" were recommended. Shaffer suggested saying that towers shall exceed the setback requirements by up to 50%. McAleese suggested having stronger language that would force applicants to prove that their request is "feasible and practical". MOVED by Shaffer, seconded by Hoffman and motion carried unanimously to approve the Telecommunications Ordinance with the following changes: 1) Switch stations will be made a conditional use in the Commercial zoning district e 2) Subdivision 4(C) should read: Where feasible and practical, towers shall exceed the setback requirements bv 50% when located adjacent to a property zoned Residential, Two Family Residential (R-2) and Multiple Dwelling. Also, where feasible and practical, antennas on properties zoned Multiple Dwelling shall be located on building rooftops rather than have a monopole design. 3) The words "as provided for in Section 11.71 of this Code" be included in relevant zoning district language relating to essential services. 4) The proposed revisions be made to the Zoning Code relating to essential services as stated in Dan Olson's memo dated August 22, 2002. III. Continued Informal Public Hearing - Zoning Code Text Amendment, Property Rezoning, and Comprehensive land Use Plan Map Amendment e Applicant: City of Golden Valley Purpose: The City would first like to delete the Radio and Television zoning district from the Zoning Code. Then secondly, the City would like to rezone 2510 Mendelssohn Avenue North to Commercial. Finally, the City is requesting that the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map be changed for 2510 Mendelssohn from Light Industrial to Commercial. The deletion of the Radio and Television zoning district, the rezoning of 2510 Mendelssohn Avenue North to Commercial and the change to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map for 2510 Mendelssohn from Light Industrial to Commercial were discussed at the August 12, 2002 Planning Commission so the following motion was made: MOVED by Shaffer, seconded by Hoffman and motion carried unanimously to approve the following: Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 26, 2002 Page 4 1) Rezone 2510 Mendelssohn Avenue North to Commercial. 2) The Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map be changed for 2510 Mendelssohn from Light Industrial to Commercial. 3) The deletion of the Radio and Television zoning district from the Zoning Code. -- Short Recess -- IV. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings Shaffer discussed the August 27, 2002 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. Pentel stated that she will be attending the September 24, 2002 Board of Zoning Appeals e meeting in Shaffer's place. V. Other Business A. Discussion of possible changes to the Zoning Code. Pentel referred to a meeting the Planning Commission had with the City Council and the Open Space and Recreation Commission regarding the PUD section of the Code and asked if the suggestions made at that meeting were going to be incorporated in the changes to the Zoning Code. Olson stated that at this time he just wanted to Commission to discuss the possible changes and that he will begin working of preparing draft ordinances for the Commission to review. e Shaffer asked if the Planning Commission could have more time to look at the possible changes to the Zoning Code. He suggested reading St. Louis Park's Code. Pentel agreed with Shaffer and the Commission decided to discuss the Zoning Code changes at their next meeting on September 23,2002. B. Information about first ring suburbs forum in Richfield - September 9, 2002. Olson asked the Commissioners if they would like to attend the first ring suburbs forum in Richfield on September 9,2002. Commissioners Eck, McAleese, Pentel and Shaffer stated that they would be attending the forum. VI. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 PM.