102813 RegularPLANNING COMMISSION
AG E N DA
October 28, 2013
7:00 p.m.
Introductory Proceedings
Roll Call
Approval of Minutes: Regular September 9, 2013 meeting.
Opportunity for Citizens to Address the Commission on items not on the Agenda
Public Hearing
ITEM #1 PC Letter#9 Ordinance Amendment—Consider amendment to the City's
Zoning Ordinance to clarify noise attenuation requirements for
new residential construction in the 2007 60-62 and 63 or
greater DNL contours.
ITEM #2 PC Letter#10 Ordinance Amendment—Consider an amendment to the
City's Zoning Ordinance incorporating the 77th Street
Underpass Official Right-of-Way Map for purposes of
roadway planning beneath Trunk Highway 77.
ITEM #3 PC Letter#11 Ordinance Amendment—Consider amendment to the City's
Zoning Ordinance to change the parking requirements for
restaurants serving minimal alcohol that are located within
shopping centers.
New Business
ITEM #4 PC Letter#12 Reschedule December 23, 2013 regular scheduled Planning
Commission meeting to December 9, 2013
Old Business
Liaison Reports
Community Services Advisory Commission
City Council
Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
Richfield School Board
Transportation Commission
Chamber of Commerce
Other
City Planner's Report
Next Meeting Date: November 25, 2013
Adjournment
Auxiliary aid for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96
hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612/861-9738".
Planning Commission
Minutes
September 9, 2013
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Rick Jabs and Commissioners Susan
Rosenberg, Dennis Schuller, Tom Rublein, Gordon Vizecky,
Dan Kitzberger and Josh Root
MEMBERS ABSENT:none
STAFF PRESENT: Melissa Poehlman, City Planner
Matt Brillhart, Planning Technician
John Stark, Community Development Director
OTHERS PRESENT: Trish Rothe (Kimley-Horn for McDonalds)
Chris Grote (McDonalds counsel)
Mark Kampmeyer (Ryan Companies representative)
Dwayne Helm (Mount Calvary Church)
Chairperson Jabs called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/Root S/Rublein, to approve the minutes of the July 22, 2013 regular meeting and of
the August 12, 2013 study session.
Motion carried: 7-0
OPEN FORUM
No members of the public spoke.
PUBLIC HEARING(S)
ITEM #1
13-APUD-04 — Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit and major amendment
to the Cedar Point Commons Planned Unit Development to allow a McDonald's
restaurant to occupy one half of the vacant site at the northwest corner of 66th
Street and Richfield Parkway.
September 9, 2013
City Planner Melissa Poehlman (Poehlman) presented the staff report, highlighting
issues of site design, parking, delivery traffic and landscaping. Poehlman detailed the
findings that must be made to approve the PUD amendment and CUP.
In response to a question from Commissioner Rublein, Community Development
Director John Stark (Stark) stated that staff had discussed future use of the remaining
parcel with Ryan Companies, and they were uncertain what the parcel's use would be.
In response to a question from Commissioner Root, Stark stated that the proposal
would occupy approximately 40% of a typical Richfield City block. Stark stated that
snow removal plans were discussed with McDonald's representatives at the
Administrative Review Committee meeting. Poehlman stated that Target removes all
snow from the parking lot and recommended that McDonald's do so as a condition of
approval.
Commissioner Rublein expressed concerns about the safety of pedestrians crossing
Richfield Parkway to get to the McDonald's from the other portions of the Cedar Point
Commons development. Poehlman stated that there was a crossing point at the
roundabout and other pedestrian connections were provided on site.
Chairperson Jabs opened the public hearing.
Trish Rothe of Kimley Horn, representing McDonald's, described the changes made to
building materials, elevations, and site design, relative to the previous proposal. Rothe
described the modified drive through circulation, landscaping, and the addition of
outdoor seating. She described the amount of parking provided on site, relative to
zoning code requirements, McDonald's standards and industry standards, indicating a
projected surplus of 3 to 13 parking stalls.
In response to a question from Chairperson Jabs, Rothe discussed pedestrian crossing
points and snow removal. Commissioner Root asked for further clarification of internal
pedestrian circulation and connections.
In response to a question from Commissioner Schuller, Rothe stated that size was the
main limitation on the site. Rothe stated that McDonald's/Ryan Companies was not
using the entire vacant site in order to retain a developable parcel to the north.
In response to a question from Chairperson Jabs, Stark stated that concerns regarding
materials and building orientation had been resolved, referencing the previous
McDonald's proposal. Stark noted that staff was not making a recommendation one
way or the other and that the Planning Commission would have to make that judgment.
Poehlman stated that Public Works had reviewed the proposal and did not have major
concerns. Stark noted that the Richfield Fire Department had also reviewed the
proposal.
Commissioner Rublein stated concerns regarding pedestrians crossing the drive
through lane and Rothe suggested that "Yield to Pedestrians" could be installed.
Commissioner Rublein suggested that a speed bump be installed as well.
2
September 9, 2013
In response to a question from Commissioner Rosenberg, Stark stated that city staff
had been talking to Ryan Companies about this site since 2007.
Dwayne Helm, of Mount Calvary Church, expressed concerns about having a fast food
operation located next to church property. He stated that they have a good relationship
with Ryan Companies and expressed disappointment in the failure to get tenants. He
stated concerns regarding traffic and cars stacking in the drive through, exhaust fumes,
food odors, lighting and noise.
M/Rublein, S/Root to close the public hearing.
Motion carried: 7-0
Commissioner Root noted that this was one of very few items before the Planning
Commission that he had been lobbied by residents to vote against. He stated that he
felt this parcel was too valuable. He stated that the approved plan called for four
buildings on this site and that he could not support this proposal.
Commissioner Rublein stated that he was disappointed, but what else can be put there.
He stated that it was a difficult site, and that he was supportive of the proposal, with
concerns.
Chairperson Jabs commended the applicants for addressing the issues with the
previous proposal and coming back with a better plan.
Commissioner Vizecky stated that he actually preferred the previous plan and would
support this plan as well. Poehlman clarified that the remnant parcel to the north had
not changed in size since the previous plan.
Commissioner Rosenberg stated that she was holding out for a better use on this site
and would not support this proposal.
Commissioner Schuller stated that parking was a major concern and that he wished
they would provide additional parking on the adjacent parcel. He would support the
proposal if they used the entire site and provided more parking.
Commissioner Vizecky stated that parking does not pay taxes.
Commissioner Rublein stated that he was unsure if there would be a better proposal for
this site that would be worth waiting for.
M/Vizecky, S/Rublein to recommend approval of an amendment to the Cedar Point
Commons Planned Unit Development, along with staff recommendations concerning
lighting and snow removal.
Motion failed: 3-4 (Schuller, Root, Rosenberg, Kitzberger dissenting)
NEW BUSINESS
3
September 9, 2013
Commissioner Schuller stated that it was not appropriate to hold special meetings of the
Planning Commission for non-emergency situations.
OLD BUSINESS
Commissioner Rublein brought up concerns regarding on street parking on Penn
Avenue and parking issues in general. He proposed a task force to study and address
parking issues in Richfield. Stark noted that study sessions had been held recently
regarding parking requirements as development impediments and that staff were
studying the issue further.
LIAISON REPORTS
Community Services Advisory Commission: No report
City Council: Commissioner Schuller
HRA: Commissioner Root
Richfield School Board: Commissioner Kitzberger
Transportation Commission: No report
Chamber of Commerce: Commissioner Vizecky
Other: Commissioner Rublein — Open Streets / Penn Fest reminder;
Commissioner Schuller— Bloomington and Edina development updates
CITY PLANNER'S REPORT
Poehlman noted that the September 23 regular meeting was cancelled and that a
special meeting may be needed in October for a Public Works item.
ADJOURNMENT
M/Rublein, S/Vizecky to adjourn the meeting.
Motion carried: 7-0
The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:16 p.m.
Dan Kitzberger
Secretary
4
AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA ITEM# 1
REPORT# 9
CASE#
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PC MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 28, 2013
ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing to consider amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance. The proposed
ordinance will clarify noise attenuation requirements for new residential construction in the
2007 60-62 and 63 or reater DNL contours.
I.RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Recommend
approval of the attached ordinance amending Subsection 541.19
related to noise attenuation.
II. BACKGROUND
City staff continually monitors and notes areas of the Zoning Code that may require
review. Staff has identified deficiencies in the City's airport noise attenuation standards.
The proposed changes will clarify existing standards in an effort to improve compliance.
In 2005, the Cities of Richfield, Minneapolis, and Eagan were parties to litigation related
to airport noise against the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). In October 2007,
the lawsuit was settled and under the terms of the settlement, MAC has been providing
varying degrees of noise mitigation measures to single and multi-family homes.
Additionally, as part of the settlement Consent Decree, all of the affected cities were
required to formally consider a draft ordinance (prepared by MAG) for airport noise
attenuation by September 1, 2008.
In July 2008, the Planning Commission and City Council held hearings regarding the
proposed ordinance. The City Council voted to reject the proposed ordinance and
directed staff to write an ordinance that was specific to the needs and goals of the
community. On March 10, 2009 the City Council adopted an ordinance that reflected
the community's needs for noise mitigation, that did not put an undue burden on
homeowners.
Siiice ihe icaiiiaiice's ioval irt MarCh 2009, it has ser'eu ii ii ici i, uui iaii ias
found that the language is unclear for those who may not read and/or review zoning
ordinances frequently. The ordinance will continue to recommend that homeowners
who are remodeling or adding on to existing homes consider noise mitigation measures,
but will not require such measures. This allows for the City of Richfield to promote the
rehabilitation of existing homes without being a deterrent for homeowners to make such
improvements. For new residential construction it is much easier to incorporate noise
attenuation measures. The requirements for noise attenuation are the same as
originally written; only the language has changed. The ordinance will continue to
require the following for new single-family and multi-family construction:
2007 63+ or greater DNL Contours shall utilize building materials with a Sound
Transmission Class (STC) rating of at least 40 and shall include installation of
central air conditioning and mechanical ventilation throughout the habitable area
of the structure; and
2007 60-62 DNL Contours must include the installation of central air conditioning
and mechanical ventilation throughout the habitable areas of the structure.
The proposed language will be easier for homeowners and builders to interpret and
apply the requirements. Additionally, the proposed ordinance will incorporate a map to
more clearly indicate which category applies to specific homes.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. PoL cv
Ongoing review and periodic updating of the Code is necessary to ensure that
regulations are serving their intended purposes.
The ordinance has not changed since originally approved in March 2009.
The proposed changes will make the ordinance more user-friendly.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
New residential structures in the community that are impacted by the noise
contours are required to mitigate structures for airport noise.
C. FINANCIAL
N/A
D. LEGAL
Notice of this public hearing was published in the Sun Current in accordance
with State and Local requirements.
Other Actions:
Council: The recommendation of the Planning Commission will go to the
City Council for two readings.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION S
Recommend approval of the revised ordinance with additional changes.
Recommend denial of the revised ordinance.
V. ATTACHMENTS
Ordinar
Noise Attenuation Areas in Richfield for New Residential Construction Map
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
N/A
BILL NO.
AMENDMENT TO RICHFIELD CITY CODE
SUBSECTION 541.19
RELATED TO
NOISE ATTENUATION
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1 Subsection 541.19, of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows:
541.19. Noise Attenuation.
Subdivision 1. It is in the best interest of the City and of current and future residents that the
integrity of all residential structures which have received a 5dB or; other sound insulation
package from the Metropolitan Airports Commission be maintained subject to the following:
Subd. 2. 2007 63+ or qreater DNL Contour Definition. For the purpose of determininq noise
attenuation for new residential construction on a property, this area is defined as the area in
which noise is greater than within the 2007 60-62 DNL Contour.
Subd. 3. Noise Attenuation Required. Any new °i fomilv „r mi I ifomil i residential
construction on property located within the 68 2007 63+ or greater DNL Contours, or any infill
construction or rebuil ing of residential structures after tearing down the original structure
which takes place within blocks or between structures that have received noise attenuation
pursuant to the Consent Decree or pursuant to previous noise mitigation programs of the
Metropolitan Airports Commission, shall utilize building materials with a Sound Transmission
Class (STC) rating of at least 40 and shall include installation of central air conditioning and
mechanical ventilation throughout the habitable areas of the structure.
Subd. 34. Requirements within the 2007 60-62 Contours. All new residential construction e#
ne^-f;^ located in blocks or between structures that have received noise
attenuation pursuant to the Consent Decree that are in the 60 to 62 DNL contours1.as defined
in the Consent Decreel must include installation of central air conditioning and mechanical
ventilation throughout the habitable portion of the structure.
Subd. 5. Noise Attenuation Recommended but not required. For construction of a habitable
addition to a dwelling unit that expands the habitable area of a dwelling unit which had
previously received 5dB sound insulation package from the Metropolitan Airports Commission
pursuant to the Consent Decree or pursuant to previous noise mitigation program of the
Metropolitan Airports Commission, the property owner is encouraged to consider (i) the
inclusion of central air conditioning and mechanical ventilation for the expanded area and (ii)
utilization of materials with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of at least 40 in order to
achieve similar noise attenuation in the expansion of the structure as existed in the principal
structure prior to the expansion.
Subd. 6. Noise Attenuation Map. Final determination of noise requirements for this ordinance
will be based on the map titled "Noise Attenuation Areas in Richfield for New Residential
Construction". A copy of the map will be on file in the Community Development Department of
the City.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 26th day of
November, 2013.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
i` !
I i.o iiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiii J,
i— —__muw,o`,amnw mimm nnmm__ wuunu0.pnm uumm
iiiiiiii uiini riir°ii iiiiiiiiri w iiiiiiiiii iiiiiiii
wumn wnn iniiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiii iiiiiiiinummunmw
Illlllli IIIIIIIII niiiiii iiiii ii iTi iiiiii ii iiiiiiii iiiiiii i
iiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiii iiiiiiii iriiiiii iiiii iiiiiii aiiii iiiiiiii iiiiiii .
11111111 Illilllll 1111111111 11111111 11111111 I11111111 111111111 1111/111 1111//11 1111111 I
1111/111 11111111 1111 11 111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 1111111
1111 1 11111111 1111111111 111111 11111111 111111/1 11111111 11111111 1111111
111/1111 1111111111 11111 111 111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 1111111
111 11111111111111111 1 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
1111 1 11111111 1111/111 111111 11111111 111111 1 11111111 11111111 1111111
111111 1111111111 IIIIIIII 111111 11111111 111111 1 11111111 11111111 1111111
111111 I 1111111111 IIIIIIIIII I IIIII 11111111 11/11111 11111111 11111111 11111111-
111111 11111//1 IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII 1 111111 1111 1111111 1111111/11111111 11111111
11111 111111111 1111 1111 111111111 I11 11111 II 11111111 11/11111 11111111 11111111 11111111
11111111 11 1 1111 11111//1 11111111 111111 11 11111111 1111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111
11111 1111 1111 1111111111 11111111 11 11111 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111
1111 111111111 1111 111 111111 11111111 11111111 1/111111 11111111 11111111 111111111
1111 IIIIIIIIII 11 11 11111111 1111111 11111111 111 1111 111 1111 11111111 IIIIIIII '.
1
J ll u9 ui i ri:.::ii::::.:49 C:C niiiiiii.::: 11'r
i:;;;,;_;;;;;,;;;;;, ,,..,;;;;;;:;;; ::wnwmi umm m m w inu m mnmuu uuumi nm m.
unumu wum uuun nu u umw uw mn unwuw uuum mn r.
iiiiiiiii iiiiiiii iiiiiiii iiiiiiii iiiiiw ii iui iiriiiiii iiiiuiiiii iiiiiiiiii iiiiiiii i
s s;:
un i uuw mmn uuw w i m uuwu muw unnn mu
un'' ,umu muw uuu m' wu m un uunu unnn nnw
nuup muw iunu mw ,i m u m mmu nunn nn nnm
nnu. uuu num uudl.m uuri nww unm'nn'umn
nnu; nnuu muun=_=uum C nn wimu nuuw mnw um nmu
nuu. umw muuu==ummn unu i ,mu i umun uu w uuu=uum
i ''i°:'::CC:P 9' I
S CC CC" °°°°°°°°C:C .
m mmu muui uu m i un m ui umu unu "
m nnm mmn mum mum uuun uuuu uum u
mu Ynu nmw mm m ini iuim mnw uunu nuw
11111 11111 1111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 1/111111 11111111 1111111 1111
1 i 1 111111 11111111 1 11 11111111 111
11 u u i.I 11111111 . 1
1
1 11 11111111111 11111111 11111/11 Illtlllllll 111111 1 i .1111 1111111
1 IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII I 11111 11 IIIIIIIIIIII 1111 1 1 C 1111 1 11 11
1 11:IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII 11111111 11 111 I11 IIIIII 1111 1111111
1111 11111111111 IIIIIIIIIIII 11111111 IIIIIIIIIII 1111111111 ...1111 1111111 I
Illllllp 1 1 ' I'1111 11111111 111 I I 111111 1111111111 C 1111 1111111 I/1,
1111111111111 1 11 11111111 IIIIIIIII 1111
r' 1 1111 Iltllllj'!I 11111111 IIIII 11 IIII"i i' .I
i' t u m uuu wun !'nnm F .. 1, rnn m...iw u .
m mnn v ll I,,
rii iiii iii" i iiiiiI 1I j
a .•i'lll II i_ muw i i n mm .
y/ nnu' i u umumu munirilll, t yti
II'"'°:G
uuununn u n i I=mumin mv
uumii i mm n muuu= iu i'.ww i
m,,,,i aumuu
nn i u w=i tuuuw
un uw umi mm u nnu nm... r—nni u.iu w wuuu
mn uu nn nmu1 nuup ullnm m l— nn ni in i u u uwu _
nu lulnn nnn 1 Ilulll.lulull 111111 I rllu Il ulu 1111•
111111 111111111111 1111111111 11111111 IIIIIIII 11/11111 IIIIIIIIII 1111
nun wmm unuun nuw um mnm uu uu m u 1 lu I u.-:
1111
nuu timmm mum imw=unmi n munm mn i umn=
nuu unmm uunu wm mwm nnm i uumn nullll IIII
mm nmm w'unu mm i I uunum mun,i umm mnnm=iun un
nnnnu m nnn miu=nmm nuunm inn i muu i mnmu nnun nu
nnnnm mnnm wiu=mmm:i`nnum uunu uuumi wnmm mw nu
mwn unmu nwwu uw_nnmm u mm wuum uuun u nm unu mi
mmn nnnnu ninnm uuw=m inmm uunw uoum m w mnw m wnni:
nuuu mnm uwm muu=wnmu I r innnnn mmuwi uuuu muw umw nu n m
11111111 IIIIIIIII 1 1111111111 1111111 1111111111::::IIIIIIIII 1 J 11 11 11111 11111111 111 1111 1111 Ii1R
11111111 1111111 11 1 IIIIIIIIII 11111111 1111111111 I 1111111 II III IIIII 11111111 111//111 111/1111 1111 11
11
11111111 11111111111 11111111 I 1111 1 11111111 r.11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111111 1 1 1 1
11 IIIIIU III IIIIIIIIII 1111111 IIIIIIIIII O 1111111111 111111 11111111 11111/11 11/1/111 1111
nll 11 1
I ii f IIII 111 5 I Illl ii iii II 1 11111 i i l 11
u lll 1 11 IIIILII 1111 mnu 1111 f. BIIIII U 1111 111/111111111: 11111111 IIII u 111
i 111111111111 I 1111111111 IIIIIIIII: 11111111 11111111 I 1 .
1111111111111111111 111111111:'w IIII I 1111111111 1 IIIIIIIIII 111111111111 11111111 111111111=1
nnumuumm -ur'nunm iummu nunum iummm=5 mum mmn uu
1111111111111111111 111111 IIIIIIIII11111111111111 I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIICC 11111111111111111111 11111111
1111111111111111111 11111111 11111111 111111111111 III IIIIII 111 1111111 11111111 11/11111 11111111 111111 11111111
11111111111111111111111 1111 11111111_IIIIIIIIllllllllllllllllll 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
11111111111111111 111111 OII IIIII III III 111 111111111111 1111 1111 11111111/1/11111 11111111 11111111 1111/111 IIIIIIi
unuumnnn mmm um nnnmm unm i mnmm u i=====mum nmm nunu:mm mn
11111111111111111 1111111111 III IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII 1111111111 I 111111 II IIIIIIII 11111111 11111111 IP//i
111111111111111 1111111 1 11111111 IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIII 1 I 111111 C 111 11111111 11111111 11111 II
111111111111111 111111 1 ill llll 111111 111 Illlllllt:I II 111 `o C LIIIIIIII 11111111=C\IIUj 1I
111111111111 IIIIIIIII 1 11111 IIIIIIIIIIII 1111111_IIIII 1111 III II 1 IIII f'
11111111 11111111 I1 111 Q
IIIIIIIIII 111111111 1 II 111111111111 Illllllllil 111111 I 1 i i C 11111111 11111111 1111111\
AGetvD SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA ITEM# 2
REPORT# 1 O
C SC#
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
F
PC MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 28, 2013
i
ITEM FOR PLANNING COlVIMISSION CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing to consider an amendment to the City's Zoning Ordinance incorporating the 77tn
Street Underpass Official Right-of-Way Map for purposes of roadway planning beneath Trunk
Hi hwa 77.
I.RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Recommend
approval of the attached ordinance amendment to Richfield City Code
Section 551, Zoning: Official Map to include Subsection 551.02. 77t"
Street Under ass.
II. BACKGROUND
Adoption of an Official Right-of-Way Map (Official Map) for the area in which the 77t"
Street Underpass would be constructed, will allow the City to seek additional funding
sources to expedite construction. The Right-of-Way Acquisition Loan Fund (R.A.L.F.) is
one such funding source that the City has used in the past. The fund is administered by
the Metropolitan Council and is designed to reserve right-of-way for road expansion in
areas where the cost of land is escalating and land acquisition is critical to completing
the project. To qualify, the City must adopt an official right-of-way map for the 77tn
Street Underpass project.
According to state law, the Planning Commission may recommend adoption of an
official map to protect land needed for right-of-way for future road expansion. The City
Council must approve the Official Map because the document is considered a special
land use control. Adoption of this map protects the City and State from escalating costs
associated with the purchase of property at a later date when the road improvement is
made.
The Official Map will have an effect on the issuance of building permits. Building
permits are the control mechanism for carrying out the objectives of the Official Map.
Ti eie aie iwo aspects ui ihi5 i trol:
1. Following the adoption and filing of the Official Map, if a landowner, without a
building permit, or in violation of the provisions of a building permit, places a
building or structure within the limits of the proposed street, then when the City
acquires the land for street purposes, it will not have to pay damages for the loss
of that portion of the building or structure lying within the proposed street area.
2. The following procedure for issuing building permits is proposed:
a. If a building permit application discloses that construction is planned within
the proposed street area, the building official should deny the permit.
b. Upon denial, the applicant can appeal the denial to the Board of
Adjustment and Appeals. The Board can grant the permit if it makes
certain findings (1)that the property cannot yield a reasonable return to the
owner unless the permit is granted; and (2) that on balance, the grant of
the permit is required "in the interests of justice and equity".
The proposed 77t" Street Underpass Official Right-of-Way Map (attached) identifies the
additional right-of-way required to complete the underpass project and identifies the
parcels affected. The surplus land may be used for redevelopment where adequate.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
Subsection 547.07 of the Zoning Code requires the Planning Commission to
make recommendations to the City Council regarding map or text
amendments to the code after a public hearing.
An adopted Official Map is required for MnDOT to certify that the project
requires the identified additional right-of-way.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
In order for the City to qualify for various project funding sources, such as
R.A.L.F., it must have an adopted Official Map for the project.
C. FINANCIAL
Adopting the Official Map will have no financial impact to the City.
D. LEGAL
Notice of this public hearing was published in the Sun Current in accordance
with State and Local requirements.
The recommendation of the Planning Commission will go to the City Council
for two readings.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION S
Recommend denial of the proposed amendment; however the City will not qualify for
funding sources that require an adopted Official Map.
V. ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance
Proposed Ordinance — Official Map Section 551
77tn Street Underpass Official Right-of-Way Maps
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
None
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO
THE ADOPTION OF AN OFFICIAL MAP;
AMENDING THE RICHFIELD ZONING CODE
BY ADDING SUBSECTION 551.02
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Appendix Section 1. The Richfield City Code is amended by adding the following
new subsection 551.02.
551.02. Official Map —
77th Street Underpass
Subdivision 1. Adoption. For the purpose of carrying out the
policies of the major thoroughfare plan and the community facilities plan of
the City, the 77t" Street Underpass Official Right-of-Way Map is hereby
adopted.
Subdivision 2. On File. A copy of the official map, or section
thereof with a copy of the adopting ordinance attached shall be filed with
the County Recorder and be on file in the Public Works Department of the
City.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 12th day of
November, 2013.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
o 35-36
I I
I, EAST UARTER CORNER
I I I SECTION 35,TOWNSHIP 28,RANGE 24
I I l I i
I I I I '
I
EXHIBIT AII
I-----
w
l w _ l___ City of Richfield Proposed Acquisition MapsEtrasEii4 . -- I
I -------...._.,
VJ 16
Pursuant to Ordinance#xxxx-xx
W G I I i NE CORNER
SE 114 SE 1/4
Z.S Cedar Avenue)i S89°50 Ol'W
500°004 j'
117 - .
I
I '_ --- '---__ _-. _ _-_
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER,r _
srH srREer ensr
R-248 48
33°^
64 \\
SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 28, RANGE 24
I---. ._. --- - — -- I . NORTH LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF TME SE 1/4 I 57°30'00"
L=223.34 o
C B=525°4 9'19"44 _ ___- I i
I i
CD=215.90 i
z
I __ THE CITY COUNCIL OF RICHFIFLD,MINNESOTA IS HEREBY DESIGNATING THE
aion3sozezasaoaw I
i ___. . _i,____. . __- o r ga g j PROPOSED LOCATION OF CEDAR AVENUE IN SECTION 35,TOWNSHIP 28I
T .IHrz 133 so.fl. s, 3ati R zase.aa NORTH,RANGE 24 WEST,HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA.
d 03°+..„
R=329 8 S51°29'19":v I 'S0.02
i i
i n=aa°oo'oo ss.oo- co Nos°i r+s° r As shown on this map prepared for the city of Richiield,is hereby certified to be the
L=249 'e co=so.oo official ma of that ortion of said Cedar Avenue within said Section 35, ursuant Yoco=sze=z'ie°w i P P P
co=zas.o
p,o /22aa<0zv
MinnesotaStatules505.1792and 505.1793.
I
i . . R=508.5e
v = n ; =zo.sz 600 4,9
zs Mayo[ _- Cler_ Date
CB=N09°15'20,E i
i I CD=60.22
aoasoiez x 4,I ' A . 60per LP
I T ":'
A _: '_so:o4_, M'° I hereby certify thal this map was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and
that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of MinnesotaI
Ii----- -------- pursuant to MS 505.1793. The future acquisition lines shown on this official map are
zso.ei
F38 accurate and can be located on the ground.
507°29'19"W
I
I i o
i------------------_..____ __ - 'Certifiedby__ _.__.RLSLicenseNo_ Date _
i
77TH STREFT EAST 1
m
I -
h EAST LINE O THE SE 1/4 OF THE SF 1l4
I have examined and found this official map has been prepared in sufficient detail to
ermit the establishment of future ac uisition lines on the round. It is recommendedPizezncooePQ9
EXISTING HIGHNlAY
SOUTHLINEOFTHESEil40FTHE5E1/A
CY RP aC , yC I- t
I
f0 8PpfOVaIIIl15____..__C BYOf ZO 3.
I 'a oalc a
3 E
n xz a
5 RI HT OF WAY
P19u ac.O tJ
Ac4 . - .
tie
rrv E.M1.,M1'::ia 4'
1ro 5;'-,Inc a
Coto-_-I'Hiza=5a.D]]su.:t, i 9`""'""`'a"' J Hennepin County Surveyor _ Date
Fioaasozez:nnooca P 0o
Jerrv E.I:.,,•nx'.9
mICIDI.'.io.les Ir,e . ...I,OP
i
IFi. .a.Y.
p.e) ',=0564_, '_
l,a 25. 2
34°19'32 W 4G 29 o,
sei°z se°n
ha
a,, This City of Richfield Proposed Acquisition map is Exhibit A of Ordinance#xxxx-xxIp' recorded as Document Number on the_ day of 2013,in the
i o,'A°5 office of the Hennepin County Recorder,Hennepin County,Minnesota. This map is
0.02 S62
6°. ,
5
filed for record in Plat Cabinet _No. __.I soo•oz'oz'v
IS67°27'S0":V-_
104.6G
a I E i
Notes:
5a ,
soo°or or v, 21 1 Parcel lines are based on GIS ma in and have not been surve ed
T I a.ie N6 e
a_
y
PP 9 Y
2) Parcel total areas are based on Hennipen County tax records
o i 3) Proposed acquisition areas are approximate
E NB9°50'S7„E
0
95.83
I
I
II
matc Parce' L i ne/LOi L i nes- --- --- --- i N.R\C.sii
M^l
1 E — .s+, i ent o; •oy-3s s6
o
W i1 6 Future Acqu I s I t 1 on L i ne
z l hc oas i s o{ Dear i ngs assumos the eos+ I i-ie of 701 Xenla Avenue SOU h,Sui e 300
IY Z.' the Sou+heas r Ouar'er Secrlai 35.Township 2U. Ainnea olis,PJ1N 55416oIFutureCcnter Ine - - -- - -- - - -
Range 24. to heve o bcoring of 500°00'10"F. wSB nvwsbeng.comokExlstngCenterLine --- - -- - --- - - -- - - - --
PLS L ne F—
Ilennep;n Coun+y PAOnumen t O
SOUTH LINE OF THE SE t/40F THE SE tt4- IIO' 0' 80' 160' 240' Fuifi75 1;GEISWCORNERSECORNERSECTION35. 5}5 i,p. ,
c SE 1/4 SE 1/4 TOWNSHIP28,RANGE24 r -' i
c I 7 INfRASTRUCTUR[[I GINEERI\G PlA'1 I:G i CONSTRUCTION '
d.°_' GRAPHIC SCA',_E
m
om
V
eet o 1
s:. .C. . .,. ., : ., .'Nl.,..1 •.{. _=al i ' t s.2^ ' q n. X; tx
t 1'~ 1 :l.1Lp 4 '.
R• '
3
c
y''.r.a s3F;,. .
i'.'4,, §.- •'r '
lt•
q`•
i .}
3' .
a
j ' . ,':. . r .;1 .il ti _: , f . • I 4,.y '%
i` 4 i''
C'
f. 1, rl *
i i
M : •
i ` ,'+k LA !s ;. 1 R JG ._ }. , . .
3
A_'.
ji S` I
y t'ro i r.:t,,.y :`; ' _ .Rt; I t' 4' , y r.35 3u,-
y r '
i v:x
r<`"
i `i; ... '..1 , r
a'.,
t
i i I/ 4 EASTCISARTERG€E.4 2 .' '
r,: o
t
Y q':- ;t q•`. : ir' :
Ft}
j,: d '`
i` +'
F , ? ., o., secricv s r.v asr+ii zz nNC ,
M •,; 1.(.
Tf 4'l@K-- i'f'"1M i ' :, t 1 , .
1 _ .k F•
1'
T I.f ' . lwre _ /
I Il:,= a^;.
t ,. `-
y4 f" 1. n EX H B T A
j s -.-4 f 4 r '' ; ' y j Ib ._,rsi,,...._.t 5 Ii, ;'+,,'t _ .
ai
t " ;
ry tT q, 7....
t,.
i, p Ri
r
NYJCORNER i. . t q; A..
C ,I r ISI IO p
i a =_F . , t; • ..' S.. xy r R .
it of Richfield Proposed Acqu t Ma
ts.[`-r-`,
q'"- •;s=.-.,
r'^'~'..' t sti-` • . ! {
r,s ' "1' 6
q °;
s !? NE o ER Pursuant to Ordinance # xxxx-xxI .
r <= '
I{ .: ,•},.
c ' ^ -,
4:
I J;SE 1/4 E 714 c . I
ry $ `
r `L3T i.- . ; l
f
Y ' .
J ,'`
d 5032'
i
1Z. ..
CedarAvenue)1 : Y
r
i w__.._r 4..._.- ....____ :. ,-.,
l_.._.-
v...._.e__,: _ . .-- _ _.____
r c `_-__. ___._ . . ' 6 _t u 4 -_.___.. //
Y.
7CTH STREET EAST
F -- ----
SOUTH ARTE ,
6 o a 5
e.. EAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QU R
1,. .,. ,i`
qr, . -- yr. z3. ;
s. . ::.' ' g ' !. ! SECIION 35, TOWNSHIP 28, RANGE 24
a•"4
nJ! '+L: . y._... neRrhLIr.ECFrHE E1,4CF7HESE1.4 .._. ,'-3' ' L, ..7." G
I C ,# F
k'
r3 "3,.. "
F: ..
p+,
1. _. ,
s. T
II II
r
R 3`>'"3'` i'ra., j'a l` 'Y#y 'S'. z. G
r
r 7R "_ .. . "
1. : 4'19
T
Y i s ;c 7 t .. .
c 1 t t1.i { r ++=; j -, i ' t• 'THE CITY COUNCIL OF RICHFIELD,MINNESOTA IS HEREBY DESIGNATWG THE
1 s '
itm : ". ,,s i,;• F 3g F '-, " y . ' ! f'.f as PROPOSED LOCATION OF CEDAR AVENUE W SECTION 35,TOWNSHIP 28
II' r#{ *1':'4 - -'' . N,..i ,:
i i` '` NORTH RANGE 24 WEST HENNEPIN COUNTY MINNESOTA.
M .n.3 i * 1 rTCe+ :'& '.. «c .. I . R 2939.a7 Itc.'
t `.
F, ' '" ..'{
F .
Q..
r
r',,
t( 1)`V o3°'2I,.o„ I: . '-y "...! •-.r` .:1 ._'. '..t._ S
d
4 324.48 i5B n2
2
3,; ^ a
x < <°`
i' st As shown on this ma re ared for the cit of Richfield,is hereb certified to be thet '
T °.' , y 4.' ca .os^ ':s' ' P P P Y Y
V .
I
r, . a
D 158.;JC 31`.
a;'. ' _. ._°; ["fr ' ' "<•'.: , :'=' ":', . , f —.i official map of that portion of said Cedar Avenue within said Section 35,pursuant to
7.'r%- h" ` 29 ?J .5"R- i
Ii;+'t„.'',C i} . A' Minnesota Statutes 505.1792 and 505.1793.
r _
f 9P t:' '['SS/',` VZ,. , . 1
el :_ ,
i # 1 r`
f
l .r.,,.k,,,.. , k .... f s x. $'
k '
e
M CI k D tz' P U 3745
r
ayor er a e_
ia
3
n d i
zo;'vr d!
0.
4'tx
7-`:. "J"^.;r e i,..
h
Jy . .
f, '7 . .
y7;,.:
4::
i re Y .'!C t ,.
3
ix`
y. +._._ ' `'- FF.'` r:. v
nI
t q
f . ¢ .; .
t
3 - r• e
y(
9S_. -.`.?-.:. 1
M
a ea s ,.' , :. .
F':7
A€
5 ,
5 l,i", ';'`.k-,t%, . r$ p,s.,,A , ! `' 1R I hereby certify that this map was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and
9 , `'' '
R,: that I am a dul Re, istered Land Surve or under the laws of the State of Minnesotaf :,; _ : :. i k:. .
Y 9 Y
k, i
r
4 . : pursuant to MS 505.1793. The future acquisition lines shown on this official map are
y t 3 accurate and can be located on the ground.
I
r7x k,", 5'°z 3'
A"
t' l t
k {
f
e+r: " - r. '
F
LL _,
3 '
al-
y`r. Mv .` .-ai
I .. ' ^
Z'.....
qr .
a:l, Certified by _ _. RLS License No._ _ Da __i ' te
r
77TH STREET EAST
rt-.,
i ,:.
i u.
q+y..4 , ' 3z_:..
S^ El S i LI\E OF TIIE_..7/4 OF THE SE(4 t
5
F'"x- I have examined and found this official map has been prepared in sufficient detail tojtr _._ ..__. _..._ ._. _ _. _ . _._. _'__,_.. _- ._._._ ,. _ 7 k
esa c. 1:. .
L
i . T F Ti55=Z ,p5 j
C• . , t ' ` -
r` permit the establishment of future acquisition lines on the ground. It is recommended
I c tii;:.n x c E7(I'TIVGHIGFWFlY
ei61c"'E"'for a roval this_ __ da of 2013.SOUTH LINE CF THE SE 1/4 OP THE SE 1;4 I"'. yj.,
r aE.a - .a F_ ic°rysv:,cr esa
r; Pp YI ' .
A'v,.:eFFin #, a'4as.rt F
8 Q rr nn_
r s3,_>i..
a
q,',,, a i; 1 I y,a.
f. '
t y
if 3" J
k 4-' ",• Henne in Count Surve or_ _ _ _ Date_
B P C; ' c
Pio o , ? Q' /i k4 t. ..c
n
P Y Y
x
f.
ti _ oPs
f i r' n. q ,
j
1 ; S
P in,: a. aa.n.'-, // C I
r,. ,., -`
s f,
t
t . ..`,31°37, 6 i4"- ' . j %%/ f s - -
w a 0°27'S8 w
l 1 : i , _ _ ;-C r,. ', t* t This City of Richfield Proposed Acquisition map is Exhibit A of Ordinance#xxxx-xx
r ! .. u T o ; _o-'3 i 15, ,-' , k ` recorded as Document Number on the day of 2013,in the j
r"office of the Hennepin County Recorder,Hennepin County,Minnesota. This map isy
q7 1 t
I
D
r ?
f
y; :; :`'° '' j''° filed for record in Plat Cabinet. —No._ .
i
7i;
i
1.
i
F :/4,1 .i_' - a`'' /
t
r 1it
E, r _ `,,.,,F ,. E ' r: t, # ' s,+
N
nm, 4+. !}^' P, . `
j c otes:
I ` ,': t`' r •"" 9 h ` 1) Parcel lines are based on GIS mapping and have not been surveyed
Pt ' ' - '^ --- `-k-latc 3sr F ' N61
Y-. --=.• f. . s, r;=--; s ,,, 2) Parcel total areas are based on Hennipen County tax records
i --___ —_
x,
y ` , ''
Proposed acquisition areas are approximate3)
na9 _o ar e
U v a
l- -.-e+-
a .._. r
I ,
1 f
y-".'..
4. , - "
e-+"}::' _
s,.., es ..•...
S°... ,a.v--""-,.._. ' -+,xi:. ra._h_ .. ... . . .__l_.. f
s p ..... .
Y` I
e
1
T •1
s_-s .
r. ; ., .
o ... 1 I
IEstimotePaceILtoe/L ot L i nes -------- ----- --- ----- - -- ----- N._R\ The bas i s of oeor;ngs asswnes *he ecsh I'ne of
c°vo
E Existing R'9h+ p{ .y- ----- - --- L3 9\ the Sc theast O,iarfer. Sectlon 35.Tovmsh'p 28. 701XeniaAvenueSouth,Suite300 I
o;l p - 2
Ronye 24, to hove o oeor'ng of 500°00'10°E 1/"Minneapolis MN 55416
N Fu*ure Acquisition Line 2 K
F twc Center Line - -- - - - vy ti V I w n sbengcom
F30'0'60' 160' 24C' L"""-::-r l
ai;
I
E x's t i n g C e•,t e r L n e ___.___.. . .._______.____.___ . ____._ ._.__._______ r7T r 1-7 f I r_3`_:- ..., ::,7 Fa S:i..7 F z 6r.4 L I7IXF. f 1 TT
o; PLS i ne -- - --- -GRAPHIC SCALE
SOUTH LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4-
WFR STRUCTURE ENGINEERING i pIAHtJIM1'G i CONSTRIICTICN
I SW CORNER SE CORNER SECTION 35,
SE 1/4 SE 1/4 Hennep i n County Monument p
I, TOWNSHIP 28,RANGE 24
i _- —_—wai!
p3,
Sheet 1 of 1
I
AGErr a,SECT1oN: PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA ITEM# 3
RGPO2T# 11
CASE#
e
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
4 c-,,;,::,
PC MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 28, 2013
ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing to consider amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance. The proposed
ordinance will change the parking requirements for restaurants serving minimal alcohol that
are located within shoppin centers.
L RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Recommend
approval of the attached ordinance amending Subsection 544.13,
Subdivision 6 related to parking requirements for restaurants within
shopping centers.
II. BACKGROUND
City staff continually monitors and notes areas of the Zoning Code that may require
review. Parking requirements have been, and will likely continue to be, one of the more
challenging regulatory items to contend with as the City works to find a balance that
allows for thriving commercial areas in close proximity to primarily single-family
residential neighborhoods.
Staff will continue to evaluate parking requirements for various uses, but proposes this
initial change related to restaurants located within shopping centers. Shopping centers
require 3.5 — 4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area, depending on the
total size of the shopping center. Parking for restaurants within these shopping centers
is calculated separately at the same (higher) rate as stand-alone restaurants, unless
they meet a number of criteria. One of the triggers of the higher parking calculation is
serving alcohol. Historically, alcohol sales were associated with traditional, sit-down
restaurants. In these cases, it was, and is, reasonable to require additional parking
given that the time an individual customer spends at this type of restaurant is typically
longer. In recent years, "fast-casual" restaurants have begun to offer beer and/or wine.
Alcohol sales tend to make up a very small portion (1-2%) of sales at these locations
and the increased parking requirement does not seem justified.
Proposed Amendment:
Shopping center
Community (under 3.5 per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area
50,000 s
Regional (50,000 sf or 4 per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area
more) I
Restaurants or food Calculated separately unless the restaurant meets all of these
service in shopping j requirements:
centers
The shopping center floor area is over 20,000 square feet j]
j _.__. .__..- . ._"_' ___ __._ . ._._..-._ . .... .. _._. .. . .,...._ __.._. .. _.__.. . ..._. ,._, __ _______._ ......_... __.__.__ .....---
1
The restaurant does not have wait staff serving food directly to the
customer while seated
Intoxicating liquor ' sales ,
i at the restaurant shall not exceed five percent of annual revenue. i
The restaurant does not have in-vehicle sales or service
The combined total or all restaurants and food services total less
than 25 percent of the gross floor area of the building and shopping
center.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
The regulations of the Zoning Code are intended to promote and protect the
public health, safety and welfare.
Ongoing review and periodic updating of the Code is necessary to ensure that
regulations are serving their intended purposes.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
The proposed change is in keeping with the general trend of restaurant
operations. It is expected to make it easier for restaurants that are typically
associated with shopping center locations to lease space, without creating
parking shortages.
C. FINANCIAL
N/A
D. LEGAL
Notice of this public hearing was published in the Sun Current in accordance
with State and Local requirements.
Other Actions:
Council: The recommendation of the Planning Commission will go to the
City Council for two readings.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S
Recommend approval of the proposed ordinance with additional changes.
Recommend denial of the proposed ordinance.
V. ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
N/A
BILL NO.
AMENDMENT TO RICHFIELD CITY CODE
SUBSECTION 544.13 RELATED TO
MINIMUM PARKING STANDARDS FOR
RESTAURANTS OR FOOD SERVICE
WITHIN SHOPPING CENTERS
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1 The "Restaurants or food service in shopping centers" portion of Subsection
544.13, Subdivision 6 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows:
Restaurants or food service in i Calculated separately unless the
shopping centers. restaur•ant meets all of these
iec uirements:
The shopping center floor ar•ea is !
over 20,000 square feet.
The restaurant does not have wait ';
staff sei•ving food directly to the '
customer while seated.
TL, + .a L.
Intoxicating liquor•iee sesales
at the restaurant shall not exceed '
five percent of annual revenue.
The restaurant does not have in-
vehicle sales or• service.
The combined total e of all
restaur•ants and food services
total less than 25 percent of the
gross floor ai•ea of the building
and shopping center.
Sec. 2 This Ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City
Charter.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 26th day of
November, 2013.
Debbie i oettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION: New Business
AGENDA ITEM # 4
PC LETTER# 12
CASE#
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PC MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 28, 2013
ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a motion rescheduling the regular December Planning Commission Meeting.
I.RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the rescheduling of the regular December
Planning Commission meeting from December 23, 2013 to December
9, 2013.
II. BACKGROUND
The regularly scheduled December Planning Commission meeting falls on December
23rd this year. December 24th and 25th are federal holidays. So as to not conflict with
potential holiday plans, staff recommends rescheduling this meeting to the second
Monday of the month, December 9th. A study session is also scheduled for the evening
of December 9th.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
IV. ATTACHMENTS
None