HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-10-19 PC Packet
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
7:00 PM
City Hall Council Chambers
1830 County Road BEast
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes
a. October 5,2010
5. Public Hearings
6. New Business
a. Presentation by Nick Carver-City of Maplewood Green Building Program
7. Unfinished Business
a. Cellular Phone Tower Ordinance Amendment
8. Visitor Presentations
9. Commission Presentations
a. Commissioner Report: City Council Meeting of October 11. Commissioner Nuss was
scheduled to attend. There were no planning commission items requiring Commissioner
Nuss's attendance.
b. Upcoming City Council Meeting of October 25, 2010. Commissioner Bierbaum is scheduled
to attend. The anticipated item for review is the Kohlman Lake area rezoning from F to R1.
10. Staff Presentations
a. Clarification of the city council motion about Metro Transit Park & Ride
11. Adjournment
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2010
1. CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the Planning Commission was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was
called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Fischer.
2. ROLL CALL
AI Bierbaum, Commissioner
Joseph Boeser, Commissioner
Tushar Desai,Commissioner
Lorraine Fischer, Chairperson
Robert Martin, Commissioner
Tanya Nuss, Commissioner
Gary Pearson, Commissioner
Dale Trippler, Commiss.ioner
Jeremy Yarwood, Commissioner
Planner Michael Martin added
Ayes - All
Staff Present:
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Council member Trippler.
Seconded by Councilmem
The motion passed.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Councilmember Martin moved to approve the September 21. 2010 Planninq Commission minutes
as submitted.
Seconded by Commissioner Trippler.
Ayes - All
Abstentions - Commissioners Boser,
& Nuss
The motion passed.
Commissioner Martin moved to request to the city council that they revert back to the previous
format of the planninq commission minutes as summary minutes rather than action minutes.
October 5, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
1
Commissioner Trippler made a friendly amendment that the commission recommend that the city
council direct management to consider minutes that contain key elements of the discussion on
issues that are before the commission, both pro and con.
Commissioners Martin and Bierbaum agreed with the friendly amendment.
Seconded by Commissioner Bierbaum.
Ayes - Chairperson Fischer,
Commissioners Bierbaum,
Desai, Martin, Nuss, Pearson,
and Trippler
Nav - Commissioner Boser
5. PUBLIC HEARING
a. 7:00 p.m. or Later. Rezoning ofthe Rear Portions of 931 to 1117 County Road C
from (farm residential) to R1. (single dwelling residential)
1. Planner Michael Martin gave the report and answered questions of the council.
Chairperson Fischer opened the public hearing.
1. This proposed rezoning wou
classification with the
dressed the commission regarding the
1. Matt Smith, 2611 Cypress Street North, Maplew
zoning and easements of his property.
Chairperson Fischer closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Pearson moved to a ro
Count Road C from farm residential to
reasons:
split zoning by replacing the F, farm zoning
lIing zoning classification.
2. This change would c
classification.
he comprehensive land use plan low density residential
3. The proposed rezoning would meet the following five criteria for a zoning map revision as
required by city ordinance:
a. Assure itself that the proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of
this chapter.
~:
b. Determine that the proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of
neighboring properties or from the character of the neighborhood and that the use of the
property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately
safeguarded.
c. Determine that the proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the
community, where applicable, and the public welfare.
d. Consider the effect of the proposed change upon the logical, efficient and economical
extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers police and fire
protection and schools.
e. Be guided in its study, review and recommendation by sound standards of subdivision
practice where applicable.
October 5, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
2
Seconded by Council member Trippler.
Ayes - All
The motion passed.
6. NEW BUSINESS
None.
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
8. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None.
9. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
a. Commissioner Report: City Council Meetin95\,f September 27,2010.
Commissioner Yarwood was scheduled to attend,,,fl'Il' Martin said the items reviewed were
/s;:."q
Metro Transit's PUD for a parking ramp at the i!ln a ark and ride. The city council
approved the PUD and the applicant's reco / endation ave the parking width Sy, feet not
the 9 foot width recommended by staff. Th' /~il appro d '0'alser Automotive's CUP to
sell used cars at 2590 Maplewood Drive a -'Gladstone Neighborhood rezoning to R3
(multiple dwelling residential) and MU' Staff will update the commission at the
next meeting since Commissioner Ya . sent this evening.
b. Upcoming City Council
Commissioner Nuss is sch
commission at this m
following city cdunci
of~ftober 11, 2010:
~w.~/ There are no potential items for the planning
. sioner Nuss would like to be added to schedule for the
10. STAFF PRESENTATIO
a. Reschedule or cancel the November 2nd Planning Commission meeting due to
elections. Thursday, November 4th may be a possibility if there are items to be heard for a
planning commission meeting. Further information will follow when the time gets closer.
b. Zoning Inconsistencies (added by staff)
Planner Martin asked that the commission look for zoning inconsistencies on the map so staff
can make the appropriate corrections.
11. ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Fischer adjourned the meeting at 7:53 p.m.
October 5, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
James Antonen, City Manager
Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
Green Building Program Presentation-Nick Carver
October 8,2010
INTRODUCTION
Nick Carver, the Maplewood Assistant Building Official/Green Building Manager, will give a
presentation to the planning commission regarding the city's proposed Green Building Program
the department plans to implement.
Mr. Carver provides the following:
INTRODUCTION TO AN EFFECTIVE AND PURPOSEFUL
GREEN BUILDING PROGRAM
The intent of this program is to present the International Green Construction Code and the
National Green Building Standards as the base documents for a responsible jurisdictional "Green
Building Program". The content and philosophy of these documents insure an equal
understanding of sustainability and cost effective energy saving outcomes for present and for
future generations. This program allows jurisdictions to lead by example by adopting the
"mandatory" option for city buildings and providing an array of incentives to residents and the
business community by choosing the "voluntary" option.
This program is more than a rating system. It can be used by manufacturers, design
professionals, contractors, building departments and jurisdictional leadership. Creating these
partnerships leap ahead of the curve in establishing what is a revolutionary movement in the
building environment. Jurisdictions are now able to customize a program to meet geographical
and political agendas by using the minimum standards, special jurisdiction requirements and
project electives.
P:planning commission\Green Building Program Memo 10 10
1
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
VOTE REQUIRED:
DATE:
James Antonen, City Manager
Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
Cellular Telephone Tower Ordinance Amendment
Simple Majority Required for Approval of a Code Amendment
October 11, 2010 .
INTRODUCTION
On September 21,2010, the planning commission reviewed the Commercial Use Antennas and
Towers Ordinance which addresses the installation of cellular telephone towers and suggested
several revisions.
DISCUSSION
The following comments and direction was given by the planning commission September 21:
1. Section 44-1330. Change the word "may" to "shall" to require the removal of no-longer-
in-use towers or antennas.
2. Section 44-1321 (b)(1)(g). Add setback criteria for towers placed in parking lots. There
are setbacks required from a tower to a residential property line (Section 44-1327(9)
requires a setback of the height of the tower plus 25 feet), therefore, we should be
protecting people in parking lots as well.
Staff did not offer a suggested setback for parking lot towers and will add whatever the
planning commission recommends. Staff created a space for the addition of such
setbacks as Section 44-1327(15) under residential tower locations and Section 44-1328
(3)(s) under non-residential locations.
3. Section 44-1326(e). The planning commission liked this clause which requires that the
applicant have a radio frequency specialist at all public meetings. The planning
commission had no recommendations to change the content of the requirement.
4. Section 44-1327. It was suggested to remove the language "but not limited to," from this
section. This section deals with proposed towers in residential zoning districts and
reads, "No person shall build or install a tower in a residential zoning district without
obtaining a conditional use permit from the city council. Such a tower shall be subject
but not limited to the following conditions." Staff recommends keeping this language
since it says that all the following conditions must be met, but also implies that any non-
listed conditions the city feels are pertinent must be met as well.
5. The question was raised, "why can those towers be so high?" "Does the code apply to
them as well?" Yes, the code does apply to KSTP radio towers too. Those towers are
very tall because they preceded the city ordinance. Any changes to them would require
a conditional use permit. Section 44-1322, Definitions, defines "antenna" as any
structure, equipment or device used for collecting or radiating electromagnetic waves,
telecommunication, microwave, television or radio signals. . ."
6. Section 44-1321 (b)(2)(b) requires a CUP for towers that would be placed on "city-owned
property, except water towers, other government-owned property, schools, churches or
places of worship, utility and institutional sites." The preceding section, however, allows
antennas on church steeples and church structures and water towers as permitted uses.
The planning commission questioned this-why "allowed" by one section and
"conditional" by the next?
The distinction is that the code would allow antennas on existing churches or water
towers. However, a CUP must be obtained to install a tower on church or publicly owned
properties.
Changes Made
Staff used the usual strike-outs to show language that is proposed to be removed and
underlines for new language. In cases where the existing language is ok as it is, staff bolded it
just for easier reference. With Section 44-1327(15) and 44-1328(3)(s), staff also bolded them
for easier reference. Those additions await the planning commission's comments.
RECOMMENDATION
Review the enclosed changes to the Commercial Use Antennas and Towers Ordinance and
1) direct staff to make any additional revisions by the planning commission, or 2) refer the
proposed changes to the city council for their consideration.
p:Ord\Cell Phone Towers\Tower Ordinance Amendment PC Suggestions 10 10 te
Attachments
1. Tower Ordinance Amendment
2
ARTICLE XI. COMMERCIAL USE ANTENNAS AND TOWERS
Sec. 44-1321. Purpose; preferences for selecting sites.
(a) To acconunodate the communication needs of residents and bnsiness while protecting the public health,
safety and general welfare of the conununity, the city council finds that this article is necessary to:
(1) Facilitate the provision of wireless teleconunnnication services to the residents and businesses of the
city.
(2) Require tower equipment to be screened from the view of persons located on properties contiguous to
1be site andBor to be camouflaged in a manner to complement existing structures and to minimize the
visibility and the adverse visual effects of antennas and towers through careful design and siting
standards.
(3) Ensure the operators and owners of antennas and towers design, locate and construct antennas and
towers 1bat meet all applicable code requirements to avoid potential damage to adjacent properties
fi'om tower failure tln'oughstrnctural standards and setback requirements.
(4) Maximize the use of existing and approved towers and buildings for new wireless teleconununication
antennas to reduce the number of towers needed to serve the community.
(b) The following preferences shall be followed when selecting sites:
(1) Primary strnctural location preference for wireless conununication equipment as permitted uses shall
be as follows:
a. Water towers or tanks.
b. Collocation on existing towers.
c. Church steeples or the church structure, when camouflaged as steeples, bell towers, or
other architectural features.
d. Sides and roofs of buildings or structures over two stories.
e. Existing power or telephone pole corridors.
f. Light poles or towers at outdoor recreational facilities.
g. Parking lots may be used to locate towers where the strncture replicates, incorporates or
substantially blends with the overall lighting standards and fixtures of the parking lot.
(2) Primary land use areas for towers requiring conditional use permits shall be as follows:
a. Industrial and commercial.
b. City-owned property except water towers, other government-owned property, schools,
churches or places of worship, utility, and institutional sites.
c. Public parks/golf courses, when compatible wi1b 1be nature of the park or course.
d. Open space areas when compatible with the nature of the area and site. (Code 1982, S 36-600;
Ord. No. 812, S 1(36-600),4-23-200])
Sec. 44-1322. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this
section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
Accessory! structure means a use or structure subordinate to the principal use of the land or building with a tower or
antenna.
Antenna means any structure, equipment or device used for collecting or radiating electromagnetic waves,
telecommunication, microwave, television or radio signals including but not limited to directional antennas, such as
panels, microwave dishes and satellite dishes, and omnidirectional antennas, such as whips.
3
Personal wireless communication services means licensed commercial wireless communication services including
cellular, personal conununication services (PCS), enhanced specialized mobilized radio (ESMR), paging and similar
services.
Public utility means persons or governments supplying gas, electric, transportation, water, sewer, or land line
telephone service to the public. For this artie-Ie, commercial wireless telecommunication sources shall not be
considered public utility uses.
Tower means any pole, monopole, spire, or structure or combination thereof, including supporting lines, cables,
wires, braces and masts, intended primarily for the purpose of mounting an antenna, meteorological device, or
similar apparatus above grade.
use means 1be Uniform Building Code, published by the International Conference of Building Officials and
adopted by the state to 'provide jurisdictions with building-related standards and regulations.
(Code 1982, S 36-601; Ord. No. 812, S 1 (36-60 1), 4-23-2001)
Sec. 44-1323. Existing antennas and towers.
Antennas, towers and accessOlY structures in existence as of January 13, 1997, that do not meet or comply with 1bis
article are subject to the following:
(1) Towers may coutinue in use for the existing purpose used and as existing, but may not be replaced or
strncturally altered without meeting all standards in this article.
(2) If such towers are damaged or destroyed due to any reason or cause at all, unless 1be user or owner
voluntarily removes the tower, the owner or operator may repair and restore the tower to its former
size, height and use within one year after first getting a building permit from the city. The location and
physical dimensions shall remain as 1bey were before the damage or destrnction.
(Code 1982, S 36-602; Ord. No. 812, S 1(36-602),4-23-2001)
Sec. 44-1324. Interpretation and applicability.
(a) It is not the intention of this article to interfere with, abrogate or annul any covenant or other agreement
between parties. However, where this article imposes greater restrictions upon the Use br premises for
antennas or towers than are imposed or required by other ordinances, rules, regulations or permits or by
covenants or agreements, the sections of this article shall govern.
(b) This article does not apply to the use or location of private, residential citizen band radio towers, amateur
radio towers or television antennas.
(Code 1982, S 36-603; Ord. No. 812, S 1(36-603),4-23-2001)
Sec. 44-1325. Inspections and violations.
(a) All towers, antennas and supporting strnctures must obtain a building permit and are subject to inspection
by 1be city building official to determine compliance with UBC construe- tion standards. Deviations from the
original construction for which a permit is obtained, other than antenna adjustments, is a misdemeanor and,
upon conviction, the person shall be punished in accordance with section 1-15.
(b) Notice of violations will be sent by registered mail to the owner, and the o\\"er will have 30 days from 1be
date the notification is issued to make repairs: The owner will notifY the building official that the repairs have
been made, and as soon as possible after that the building official will make another inspection. The owner
shall be notified of the results.
(c) Adjustments or modifications to existing antennas do not require a conditional use pelmit or a building
pennit. (Code 1982, S 36-604; Ord. No. 8l2,S 1(36-604),4-23-2001)
4
Sec. 44-1326. Conditional use permit.
(a) In reviewing an application for a conditional use permit for the construction of commercial antennas, towers, and
accessory strnctures. the city council shall consider the following;
(1) Standards in 1bis Code.
(2) Recommendations of1be planning conunission and conununity design review board.
(3) Effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of residents of
surrounding areas.
(4) Effect on property values.
(5) Effect of the proposed use on the comprehensive plan.
(b) The applicant shall provide, at the time of application, sufficient information to show that constrnction and
installation of the antenna or tower will meet or exceed the standards and requirements ofthe UBC(Uniform
Building Code).
(c) Conditional use permits will not be required for the following:
(1) Repair or replacement or adjustment of the elements of an antenna array affixed to a tower or anteDJ:?a,
if the repair or replacement does not reduce the safety factor.
(2) Antennas mounted on water towers; on the sides or roof of existing structures; and on existing towers,
power, light, or telephone poles.
(d) The fee to be paid for the conditional use permit shall be set by city council resolution.
(e) The applicant shall have a property acquisition specialist and a radio frequency engineer attend all city-related
meetings to be available to answer questions.
(Code 1982, S 36-605; Ord. No. 812, S 1(36-605),4-23-2001)
Sec. 44-1327. Communication towers proposed in residential zoning districts.
No person shall build or install a tower in a residential zoning district without obtaining a conditional use peDnit
from the city council. Such a tower shall be subject but not limited to the following conditions:
(1) The city will only consider such a tower in the following residentially zoned locations or properties:
a. Churches or places of worship.
b. Parks, when the city determines the facility would be compatible with the nature of the park.
c. City-owned property, government, school, utility and institutional sites or facilities.
(2) There shall be no more than one freestanding tower at one time on a property that the city has planned
for a residential use or that the city has zoned residentially, unless one of the following applies;
a. The additional towers or antennas are incorporated into existing structures such as a church
steeple, light pole, power line support device or similar strncture.
b. Tbe residential property is at least five acres in size.
c. If the proposed tower is to replace an existing tower and if the owner/user of the existing tower
agrees to remove the existing tower within 30 days of the completion of the new or replacement
tower.
(3) The applicant shall demonstrate, by providing a coverage/interference analysis and capacity analysis,
1bat location of the tower as proposed is necessary to meet the frequency reuse and spacing needs of
1be cellular or personal wireless conununication services systems, and to provide adequate personal
wireless communication or portable cellular telephone coverage and capacity to areas which cannot be
adequately served by locating the antennas in a less restrictive district or on an existing structure.
(4) If no existing structure that meets the height requirements for tbe antennas is available for mounting
the antennas, such antennas may be mounted on a tower not to exceed 75 feet in height. The tower
shall be located a distance of at least the height of the tower plus 25 feet from the nearest residential
structure.
5
(5) The height of a tower may be increased to a maximum of 125 feet if the tower and base area are
designed and built for the collocation of at least one o1ber personal wireless connnunication service
provider's antennas and equipment.
(6) Transmitting, receiving and switching equipment shall be housed within an existing strncture
whenever possible. If a new equipment building is necessary for transmit- ting, receiving and
switching, the owner or operator shall locate it at least ten feet from 1be side or rear lot line and shall
landscape and screen it. The COnunillUty design review board shall review such a building and the
landscaping and screening. The owners and operators of all new equipment or utility buildings and
accessory strnctures for towers shall design and constrUct such strnctures to bleud in with the
surrounding environment.
(7) Towers shall not be located between a principal strncture and a public street, unless 1be city
determines that such a location would lessen 1be visibility of the tower or would lessen 1be negative
impacts of such a facility on nearby properties.
(8) The city may reduce or vary the required setback for a tower from a public street to allow the
integration of a tower into an existing or proposed structure such as a church steeple, light pole, power
line support device or similar structure.
(9) ,Towers shall be built at least ten feet from side and rear property lines, unless the site is next to a
residential property line or next to a property that the city is planning for a residential use. If the tower
would be next to a residential property line or next to a property that the city is planning for a
residential use, the tower must be located at least the height of the tower plus 25 feet from the nearest
residential structure. The owner or operator shall locate ground equipment and accessory strnctures at
least ten feet from side and rear property lines.
(10) The owner or operator of any tower shall screen ground-mounted equipment from view by suitable
vegetation, except where a design of non vegetative screening better reflects and complements the
character of the surrounding neighborhood.
(11) Tower locations should provide the maximum amount of screening possible for off-site views of1be
facility and to lessen the visibility ofthe tower.
(12) The existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum practicable extent.
(13) The community design review board (CDRB) shall make recommendations on the plans for towers,
utility, equipment or accessory buildings, site plans and proposed screening and landscaping.
(14) Towers with antennas shall be designed and constructed to withstand a uniform willd loading as
prescribed by the UBC (Uniform Building Code).
(15) Towers placed in parking lots shall be set back a distance of _ from _'
(Code 1982, & 36-606; Ord. No. 812, & 1(36-606),4-23-2001)
Sec. 44-1328. Constroction requirements, setback and height restrictions in zoning districts or locations other
than residential.
No person shall erect a tower in a location other 1ban residential without first obtaining a conditional use permit from
the city council. Such a tower shall be subject but not limited to the following conditions:
(1) No part of any tower or antenna shall be constructed, located or maintained at any time, permanently
or temporarily, in or upon any required setback area for the district in which the antenna or tower is to
be located.
(2) All antennas, towers and accessory strnctmes shall meet all applicable sections of this Code and this
article.
(3) Antennas and towers shall meet the following requirements:
a. The antennas may be mounted on a single pole or tower not to exceed 175 feet in height. The
pole or tower shall be set back at least the beight of the pole or tower plus 25 feet from any
residential lot line.
b. Metal towers shall be constrncted of or treated with corrosive-resistant material.
c. The use of guyed towers is prohibited.
6
d. Tower locations should provide the maximum amount of screening possible for off-site views
of1be facility and to lessen 1be visibility of the tower.
e. Existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum practicable extent.
f. The installation shall be designed to be compatible with the underlying site plan. The owner or
operator shall landscape the base of the tower and any accessory strnctures. Accessory
strnctures and equipment buildings shall be designed to be architecturally compatible with any
principal structures on 1be site. All new equipment or utility buildings and accessory structures
for towers shall be designed and constructed to blend in with 1be surrounding environment. The
conununity design review board shall review the design plans for towers, utility, equipment or
any accessOlY structures, site plans and proposed screening and landscaping.
g. Towers shall be a light blue or gray or other color shown to reduce visibility. No advertising or
identification visible off site shall be placed on the tower or buildings.
h. Antennas placed upon the tower shall comply with all state and federal regulations about
nonionizing radiation and other health hazards related to such facilities.
i. Wireless telephone or personal wireless communication service antennas, where located on an
existing strncture, shall not extend more than 25 feet above the strncture to which they are
attached. Such antennas are a permitted use in all zoning districts of the city. The city council,
after a reconunendation from the conununity design review board, must approve the plans for
all sets of antennas on a building after the second personal wireless communication service
provider has installed its antennas on the building.
j. Towers with antennas shall be designed and constrncted to withstand a uniform wind loading as
prescribed by the UBC (Uniform Building Code).
k. Telecommunications equipment located on the side of an existing stmcture or on a roof of a
structure shall not be screened.
1. Towers shall not be located between a principal strncture and a public street unless the city
determines that such a location would lessen the visibility of the tower or would lessen the
negative impacts of such a facility on nearby properties.
m. The city may reduce or vary the required setback for a tower from a public street to allow 1be
integration of a tower into an existing or proposed strncture such as a church steeple, light pole,
power line support device or similar structure.
n. Towers shall be set back at least ten feet from side and rear property lines unless the site is next
to a residential lot line. tf the tower would be next to a residential property line or next to a
property 1bat the city is plarming for a residential use, the tower must be located at least the
height of the tower plus 25 feet from the nearest residential structure. The owner or operator
shall locate ground equipment and accessory strnctures at least ten feet fi'om side and rear
property lines.
o. The owner or operator of a tower shall screen ground-mounted equipment from view by
suitable vegetation, except where a design of non vegetative screening better reflects and
complements the character of1be surrounding neighborhood.
p. Tower locations should provide the maximum amount of screening possible for off-site views
of the facility and to lessen the visibility of the tower.
q. The existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum practicable extent.
r. The conununity design review board (CDRB) shall make reconunendations on the plans for
towers, utility, equipmeut or accessory buildings, site plans and proposed screening and
landscaping.
s. Towers placed in parking lots shall be set back a distance of _ from _'
(Code 1982,!i 36-607; Ord. No. 8l2,!i 1(36-607),4-23-2001) CD44:l55
Sec. 44-1329. Lights, signs and other attachments.
(a) No autenna or tower shall have affixed or attached to it in any way any lights, reflectors, flashers, daytime strobes
or steady nighttime light or other illuminating devices except:
7
(1) Those needed during time of repair or installation.
(2) Those required by the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Communications Commission or tbe
city.
(3) For towers in parking lots, lights associated with the parking lot lighting.
(b) any platform, catwalk, crow's nest, or like stJUcture, except during periods of constrnction or repair.
(c) No antenna or tower shall have signage, advertising or identification of any kind visible from the ground or from
other structures, except necessary warning and equipment information signage required by the manufacturer or by
federal, state or local authorities.
(Code 1982, 9 36-608; Ord. No. 812, 9 1(36-608),4-23-2001)
Sec. 44-1330. Removal of abandoned or damaged towers.
Any tower andBor antenna that is not used for one year shall be deemed abandoned aud shall may be required to be
removed in the same manner and pursuant to the same procedures as for dangerous or unsafe strnctures established
by Mitm. Stats. 99463.15-463.26.
(Code 1982: 936-609; Ord. No. 812, 9 1(36-609),4-23-2001)
Sec. 44-1331. Collocation of personal wireless communication service equipment.
(a) The city shall not approve a request for a new personal wireless service tower unless it can be documented by the
applicant to the satisfaction of the city council1bat the telecommunications equipment planned for the proposed
tower cannot be acconunodated on an existing or approved tower or conunercial building within one-half mile
radius, transcending mWlicipal borders, of the proposed tower due to one or more of the following:
(1) The planned equipment would exceed the strnctural capacity of the existing or approved tower or conunercial
building.
(2) The planned equipment would cause interference with other existing or planned equipment at the tower or
building.
(3) Existing or approved structures and commercial buildings within a one-half-mile radius cannot or will not
reasonably acconunodate the planned equipment at a height necessary to function.
(4) The applicant must demonstrate, by providing a citywide coverage/interference and capacity analysis, that the
location of1be antennas as proposed is necessmy to meet the frequencyreuse and spacing needs of the
communication service system and to provide adequate coverage and capacity to areas that cannot be
adequately served by locating the antennas in a less restrictive district or on existing structure.
In addition, no tower shall have constrncted thereon or attached thereto, in any way,
(b) Additional submittal requirements. Besides the information required elsewhere in this Code, all conditional use
permit applications for towers also shall include 1be following information:
(1) A letter of intent committing 1be tower owner and his successors to allow the shared use of1be tower if au
additional user agrees to meet reasonable terms and conditions for shared use.
(2) The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed facility is necessary to fill a significant existing gap in
usersl coverage or to accommodate system capacity needs. This documentation shall include the following:
a. Coverage maps of aU the appllcanfs or the providerts existing antenna sites within one mile of the
proposed facility.
b. A map showing all existing personal wireless communication service antenna sites within one mile of
the proposed facility. .
8
(3) The proposal is the least intrnsive method of achieving the necessary coverage or additional system capacity
in the area and o1ber altematives will not work.
(4) The equipment planned for the proposed tower cannot be acconunodated at any existing tower or antenna
facility. The city may find that a collocation site cannot accommodate the planned equipment for the
following reasons:
a. The planned equipment would exceed the structural capacity ofthe preferred collocation site and the
preferred collocation site cannot be reinforced, modified or replaced to acconunodate the planned
equipment or its equivalent at a reasonable cost, as certified by a qualified radio frequency engineer;
b. The planned equipment would significantly interfere with the usability of existing or approved
equipment at the preferred collocation site and the interference cannot be prevented at a reasonable
cost, as certified by a qualified radio frequency engineer;
c. A preferred collocation site cannot accommodate the planned equipment at a height necessary to
function reasonably, as certified by a qualified radio frequency engineer; or
d. The applicant, after a good-faith effort, is unable to lease, purchase or o1berwise secure space for the
planned equipment at an existing antenna location.
The city may require the applicant to hire or pay for a study or other research by a qualified radio
frequency engineer to determine the need for the proposed tower.
(5) Materials or documentation demonstrating to the city that the applicant has made a good-faith effort to
collocate on existing towers, but he could not reach an agreement to collocate on an existing tower.
(6) Design information and documentation showing how the applicant, owner or operator of the tower has
designed strnctw'ally, electrically and in all respects the tower to acconunodate both the applicant's antennas
and the antennas for at least two additional users if the tower is equal to or more than 100 feet in height in all
locations or for at least one additional user if the tower is equal to or more than 75 feet in height. The
applicant and owner must design and install a new tower to allow for the maximum future arrangement of
antennas on the tower, to accept antennas mounted at varying heights and to acconunodate the equipment and
other needs offuture users.
(7) Photo-illustrations or sinrilar-styled artist's renderings of the proposed tower and base site that show the
appearance of the proposed tower and the proposed ground equipment or buildings after 1be contractor
completes them.
(Code 1982, & 36-610; Ord. No. 812, & 1(36-610),4-23-2001)
Sec. 44-1332. Interference with public safety telecommuuicatious.
All new or existing teleconnnunications service and equipment shall meet or exceed all Federal Conununication
Commission (FCC) standards and regulations and shall not interfere with public safety teleconnnunications. (Code
1982, &36-611; Ord. No. 812, & 1(36-611),4-23-2001)
Sec. 44-1333. Additioual submittal requiremeuts.
Besides the information required elsewhere in this Code, building permit applications for towers shall include a
report and plans from a qualified and registered engineer or others that:
(J) Describes the tower height and design including a cross section and elevation.
(2) Documents the height above grade for all potential mounting positions for collocated antennas and the
minimum separation distances between antennas.
(3) Describes the tower's capacity, including the munber and type of antennas that it can hold.
(4) Includes an engineer's stamp and registration number, if applicable.
(5) Includes all o1ber information necessary for the city to evaluate the request.
(Code 1982, & 36-612; Ord. No. 812, & 1(36-612),4-23-2001)
9
Sec. 44-1334. Variances.
(a) The city council may grant variances to the requirements of this article. All variances must follow Minn.
Stats. ch. 462. For variances regarding antennas and towers, the applicant show the city the following:
(1) There are unique circumstances or characteristics peculiar to 1be property and 1bis article would inflict
undue hardship on the property owner or applicant.
(2) The property cannot be developed or put to a reasonable use by strictly conforming with this Code.
(3) The applicant or property owner did not create or cause the hardship.
(4) The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the area or the zoning district.
(5) The proposed variance is the minimum variance that will afford relieffi'om the standards of1bis Code.
(6) The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this article.
(b) The applicant for a variance for an antenna or tower-related matter shall submit with the variance application
a statement showing how the proposal would meet the fmdings in subsection (a) of this section.
(Code 1982, 9 36-613; Ord. No. 812, 9 1(36-613),4-23-2001)
10
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
James Antonen, City Manager
Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
City Council Motion Regarding Parking Stall Width Reduction
for Metro Transit Park and Ride
October 12, 2010
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
At the October 5, 2010 planning commission meeting, the commission requested
clarification as to the city council's motion regarding the 8 Y, foot wide stalls in the
proposed parking ramp for the Metro Transit Park and Ride.
As the attached draft minutes of that meeting indicate, the city council approved the 8 Y,
foot wide stalls.
p:planning commission\metro transit pud cc decision 10 10 te
Attachment:
September 27, 2010 City Council Motion on Parking Stall Width Reduction
*
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
RESOLUTION 10-09-468
WHEREAS, Lindsay Sheppard, representing the Metropolitan Council, applied for a conditional use
permit for a planned unit development to construct a parking ramp at the Maplewood Mall area Metro
Transit Park & Ride facility.
WHEREAS, Section 44-6 of the city ordinance provides that a PUD can be a development
characterized by a unified site design with two or more principal uses or structures.
WHEREAS, Section 44-1093(b) of the city ordinance provides that the city council may consider
flexibility from strict code compliance in the internal and external design requirements of the project
dependent upon the following findings:
1. The proposed development and the surrounding neighborhood can be better served by
relaxing the code requirements that regulate the ical development or layout of the project
because of its unique nature.
l'!t and"jilurposes of this chapter.
2. The PUD would be consistent with the spi(
3. The planned unit development would pred.u,(:e,qevelopment of equal or superior quality to
that which would result from strict he'I(~IJ~e;tQlhis chapter.
4. The deviations would not con
or general welfare of the OWl'!
5. The deviations are requi1~ f
project.
.<'i/
,jp,~ficant threat to the property values, safety, health
occupants of nearby land or to the environment.
reasonable and practical physical development of the
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting that the city allow a building setback reduction for the
proposed parking ramp from the Southlawn Drive right-of-way line from 30 feet to 15 feet and also a
parking stall width reduction from 9Y, feet to Sy, feet.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located at 1793 Beam Avenue. The legal description
is:
Lot 9, Block 1, Maplewood Mall Addition
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On September 7, 2010, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff published a
notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission
gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning
commission also considered the report and recommendation of city staff. The planning commission
recommended that the city council approve this permit.
2. On September 27,2010, the city council considered reports and recommendations of the city staff
and planning commission.
September 27,2010
City Council Meeting Minutes
16
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city uncil passed the above-described conditional use
permit and building setback and parking stall width re ction to Sy, fIifle...fe t wide (not 8 % feot 3S
proposed), because:
1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with
the City's Comprehensive Plan and this Code.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment ormethods of operation that
would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or
property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution,
drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would not exceed the design standards of any affected street.
6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire
protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks.
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for - blic facilities or services.
10. The proposed development and the
code requirements that regulate th
unique nature.
r e the site's natural and scenic features into
S. The use would maximize the preservation of and in
the development design.
<:!{}
9. The use would cause no more than minimal
neighborhood can be better served by relaxing the
elopment or layout of the project because of its
11. The PUD would be consiste
spirit, intent and purposes of this chapter.
12. The PUD would produce a develo
strict adherence to this chapter.
ent of equal or superior quality to that which would result from
13. The deviations would not constitute a significant threat to the property values, safety, health or
general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land or to the environment.
14. The deviations are required for the reasonable and practical physical development of the project.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city date-stamped July 28, 2010. Staff
may approve minor changes.
2. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
3. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the
permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
4. Comply with the requirements of the city's engineering department in consideration of their review
and the comments provided by the Ramsey County Traffic Engineer and the city's traffic
consultant at SEH.
September 27,2010
City Council Meeting Minutes
17
5. The applicant shall work with the building official and fire marshal to ensure compliance with
applicable codes.
6. This approval does not include landscaping, lighting or architectural plans which shall be
submitted for community design review board approval.
The Maplewood City Council passed this resolution on September 27,2010.
Seconded by Council member Koppen.
Ayes - Mayor Rossbach,
Councilmembers Koppen,
& Nephew
Navs - Councilmembers Juenemann
& Llanas
The motion passed.
The city council took a recess at 8:30 p.m.
1. Dale Trippler, C~!~: ' ental & Natural Resources Commission, addressed the
council. <';)b,
2. Ginny Yingling, En\7i' ntal Natural Resources Commissioner, addressed the
council.
3. Willie Tennis, Co-Owner Tennis Sanitation, addressed the council.
4. Christopher Good, Director of Customer Relations, Eureka Recycling, addressed the
council.
ff toegin Negotiations
e report and answered questions of the
The city €ouncil reconvened at 8:45 p.m.
2. Review of Recycling Proposals and Dir,
a. Environmental Planner, Shann Finwall
council.
b. Community Development and Park
regarding this item.
c. City Attorney, Alan Kantru
; DuWayne Konewko gave further specifics
uestions of the council.
Councilmember Nephew moved to direct staff to proceed with the recyclinq contract neqotiations
in rankinQ order as follows 2,) 11 Tennis Sanitation, LLC; and-'l-) 21 Eureka Recyclinq; 3) Veolia
Environmental Services. Staff should beqin neqotiations with the top ranked vendor. Eureka
Recyclinq. If those neqotiations fail. staff should proceed to the next ranked vendor. Staff shall
brinq a draft recyclinq contract back to the city council for approval in October 2010.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen.
Ayes - Mayor Rossbach,
Council members Koppen,
Llanas & Nephew
Nav - Councilmember Juenemann
The motion passed.
September 27,2010
City Council Meeting Minutes
18