Loading...
08-05-1996I, CITY OF RICHFIELD MONDAY, AUGUST 5, 1996 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL I. 7 :00 -7:30 P.M. MEETING WITH RICHFIELD HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 33 II. 7:30 -8:00 P.M. DISCUSSION OF POLICY AND STRATEGY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT RELATED ISSUES STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 34 III. 8:00 -8:45 P.M. MEETING WITH RICHFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 35 IV. 8:45 -9:00 P.M. DISCUSSION OF FOURTH OF JULY COMMITTEE FINANCIAL REPORT STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 36 V. 9 :00 -9:15 P.M. DISCUSSION OF OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL SITE AREA AT CITY HALL WITH POTENTIAL PURCHASE OF 6758 PORTLAND AVENUE STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 37 VI. 9:15 -9:30 P.M. DISCUSSION OF CABLE TELEVISION REFRANCHISING ORDINANCE a STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. b VII. 9:30 -10:00 P.M. DISCUSSION OF 76TH STREET RECONSTRUCTION 10 :00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT AUXILIARY AIDS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. REQUESTS MUST BE MADE AT LEAST 96 HOURS IN ADVANCE TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR AT 861 -9702. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Study Session Letter No. Agenda August 5, 1996 Issue Statement: Study Session with the Planning Commission to discuss potential changes to the zoning ordinance regarding cluster home developments and telecommunication towers and antennas. Background: The Planning Commission is currently working on two projects related to the City's zoning ordinance it would like to discuss with the Council. The City recognizes a need to encourage a greater variety of housing types in the community. One type of housing that the City has very little of, and that the housing market is seeing an increased demand for, is townhomes. The Planning Commission has spent several months working on an ordinance to facilitate the development of townhomes in the City. The Planning Commission looked at how the City's zoning ordinance currently serves as a barrier to townhome development. Townhomes are treated like apartment buildings and are permitted in one zoning district in the City, unless the project is at least an acre in size and can qualify as a planned unit development. The Planning Commission reviewed ordinances from other cities and found that some cities allow for a type of housing referred to as "cluster housing ". Cluster housing may be attached forms of housing like townhomes or detached housing arranged in a cluster formation. The Commission considered the value of encouraging this type of smaller, infill housing development. They worked to develop ordinance language that could facilitate the development of this type of housing in appropriate areas in the community. A summary of the issues the Planning Commission is exploring is attached. During the month of August, the Planning Commission will review the issues relating to telecommunication towers and antennas and make a recommendation to the Council on an ordinance amendment. A summary of the issues that staff and the Commission are exploring is attached. Recommended Motion: No specific action is required of the Council at this time. This is a discussion item to inform the Council of projects the Planning Commission is working on. Basis of Recommendation: The Planning Commission requested that they have an opportunity to discuss these items with the Council. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion /Decision Mode: This joint study session of the City Council and Planning Commission has been scheduled for August 5, 1996. Respectf y submitted, Jame' D. Prosser City Manager JDP:ds Attachment One CLUSTER HOME DEVELOPMENTS Purpose: To provide opportunities for infill cluster housing development and allow wider varieties in the types of housing available to City residents, provided it is consistent with the single family residential character of the residential district. To provide opportunities for cluster housing to serve as transitions in land use in keeping with the character of adjacent land uses at densities slightly higher than single family housing but less dense than multi - family housing. Zoning Districts: A cluster home development could be appropriate in a single family, two family or multiple residence district if the development is designed to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The ordinance is written to direct this type of development to the appropriate areas. Conditional Uses: Cluster home developments would be conditional uses in the R, MR -1 and MR -2 districts. The conditions would include the following items: design compatible with the surrounding neighborhood (items such as architectural design, scale and mass of the structure) landscaping parking (2 spaces /unit) open space minimized number of driveways and curb cuts Comprehensive Plan: The density of the development would follow the density identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan contains a classification called high density single family attached housing (RSF -H). This classification is used in many commercial to residential transition areas, along arterial streets and in areas close to shopping and services. This classification permits a density between 5 and 12 units per acre. Single family residential neighborhoods not identified as RSF -H have a density of 5 units per acre or less. The following table compares the densities of various types of housing in Richfield. Single family block (> 10,000 sq. ft. lots) 217,800 16 3.2 Single family block (6,000 - 10,000 sq. ft. lots) 217,800 22 4.4 609 West 74th Street (to be built) 25,410 4 6.8 Coach Homes 312,376 92 12.8 7400 -7500 Penn Avenue (walk -up apartments) 217,800 112 22.4 Lake Shore Drive Condominiums 180,074 178 42.9 Note: calculation includes streets ordinance \research \thsummar. doc Attachment One CLUSTER HOME DEVELOPMENTS Definition: Cluster home development" - A development of 3 or more detached one family dwellings or a row, group or cluster of attached one family dwellings. Dwelling units may be located on individual lots or on a lot in common. The maximum number of units in the R or MR -1 district would be 9 units. In the MR- 2 district, the maximum number would be 14 units. Once a development reaches this size, it is more appropriate as a planned unit development. Setbacks and Flexibility: The setbacks of the zoning district would apply to the cluster housing development. The ordinance amendment provides some flexibility in the setbacks if certain criteria are met. Example: In the R District, the setbacks may be reduced to 25 feet in the front and 15 feet in the rear (reduced from 30 feet in the front and 25 feet in the rear) if certain criteria are met. The criteria include the following: demonstrating that a superior design is achieved, not creating any adverse effects on the surrounding neighborhood, and minimizing the impact of the reduced setback by the use of features such as landscaping, limited number of building openings, building orientation or similar features. Example: The Choice Wood development at 609 West 74th Street has smaller setbacks. It also contains several elements of a "superior design ". Natural amenity: The units cluster around an interior courtyard. Garage door dominance minimized: Only two of the four double garages are visible from the street. The presence of the two visible garages is also minimized. Neighborhood compatibility: The roof line and windows suggest the "Richfield character ". Minimized impact: Fencing and landscaping minimize the impact on adjacent uses. Lot Size: The lot size would be similar to the current requirement for duplexes. Projects would need a minimum of 4,500 square feet per unit in the R and MR -1 districts (unless a lower density is required). The size per unit in the MR -2 district would be slightly smaller and would vary depending on the size of the development. ordi nanceVesea rc hUhsummar.doc Attachment Two TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS AND ANTENNAS ISSUES TO ADDRESS Location Communities need to provide reasonable accommodation for towers and antennas Where are towers appropriate? commercial and industrial districts possibly residential districts in parks, schools, churches or institutional uses Towers should comply with the setbacks that are required for principal buildings in the underlying district Towers should be setback an additional distance from residential uses -- a distance equal to the height of the tower or some portion of the height is commonly used by other communities Approval Process Want to encourage locating antennas on existing buildings or other structures they're less obtrusive than towers); permitting them if they are under 10' would provide an incentive to do so New towers could be conditional uses to ensure that the proposed location is appropriate Abandonment If a tower is abandoned, it should be removed at the owner's cost Accessory Equipment /Buildings The accessory equipment should be screened The City's current regulations for accessory buildings (size, setback) can apply Amateur Radio Towers /Satellite Dishes The ordinance currently limits towers to 70' and they must be in the back yard Satellite dishes have to be in the back yard or on top of a roof Co- location The ordinance should encourage co- location (e.g. evidence that the tower could accommodate other one or two other users) Aesthetics /Appearance Require that they be painted a neutral color 1 Attachment Two TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS AND ANTENNAS Require screening of accessory equipment Maintenance is required under the City's nuisance ordinance Encourage that antennas (e.g. in the bell tower of a church) and towers be camouflaged, where appropriate Monopole structure preferred to frame structure FAA Requirements The FAA conducts an obstruction analysis for anything within 6 nautical miles of the airport and will look closely at telecommunication towers The FAA will limit height in some cases and may require lighting or painting in some cases Height The height needed to provide service depends on topography and conditions 75' to 100' is an average height for a tower 150' is the maximum being allowed in many communities The FAA may limit height Co- location requires extra height Health Regulations The federal government applies health standards and limits municipalities from doing so The City might require that towers and antennas comply with federal rules and if federal rules become stricter, they would have to comply with the new rules (or we would take action against them) It's generally believed that towers and antennas are not harmful unless a person has direct contact for an extended period of time. Interference with Public Safety Communications, Radio and Television Companies are prohibited by federal law from interfering with other radio and television signals The City's communications consultant recommends that language be included to prohibit interference and that staff request a copy of the company's interference analysis Proof of Need /Area -wide Analysis The City might require an analysis of why a tower is needed in a requested location, especially to show why an existing building can't be used or why the tower can't be located in another location Attachment Two TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS AND ANTENNAS Industry Input Industry representatives were mailed a survey in .July They were mailed draft ordinance language for comment They've been invited to the Planning Commission study session on August 13, 1996 Estimated Timetable for Ordinance Amendment Planning Commission study session on August 13, 1996 Draft ordinance language revised in August Planning Commission recommendation by the end of August City Council first and second readings in August and September Ordinance language effective in October