5. SR 04-10-1995ITEM 5_
of
MEMORANDUM
•
River TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Pat Klaers, City Admix~is~
DATE: April 5, 1995 ~
SUBJECT: Application Standards
A few years ago the City Council approved a rezoning request to Planned
Unit Development and also changed the underlying land use to commercial
for an area of the city that is now know as Elk Park Center. This is the area
north of the schools east of Jackson Avenue and west of Highway 169.
After this rezoning request was approved, a development plan was submitted
for the conditional use permit (CUP). When the plan was reviewed, it was
met with public concern, input, and, in some cases, opposition. The plan for
the CUP was also met by some concern and opposition by the City Council.
Some Council members and citizens indicated that they did not know that an
• Elk Park Center type of project was going to be submitted when the rezoning
was approved. During the review of the Elk Park Center plan, some
members of the public and the Council did not like the fact that the land was
already rezoned and, to a certain degree, approval of any reasonable
development plan was legally required.
During the review of the Elk Park Center project, the City Council directed
staff to no longer process any rezoning requests to Planned Unit
Development without the development plan for the CUP being submitted at
the same time. The City Council directed staff to process the rezoning
application and the CUP application simultaneously as a complete package
so that everyone would know what would be happening on a parcel of
property once Council approval was obtained. This is the approach that staff
has adopted and worked on with land owners ever since Council direction
was received. This is how staff has recently worked with the owner and
developers of the Earl Hohlen trailer court area. This direction was given by
the Council so that, for example, the City would not get in a situation in the
future where a Planned Unit Development rezoning request would get
approved for what everyone believed would be a Cub food store and later see
the development plan show a Menards.
Mayor Duitsman has requested that the Council revisit their position of
• requiring a plan for a CUP at the same time as the rezoning request to
13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425
Planned Unit Development. Clearly the staff will follow whatever direction
• is given by the City Council and we want to be as consistent as possible so
that we deal with all land owners and developers in the same manner.
I believe that some of the Mayor's concerns with requiring a development
plan fora CUP with a Planned Unit Development rezoning application
include:
• The fact that the development plan may change if the developer of the
site is not identified or known when the rezoning request is made.
• The fact that expenses will be incurred for putting together a plan
without knowing for certain if the rezoning is going to be approved.
There may be other concerns with requiring a CUP plan with a Planned Unit
Development rezoning application, but these two have been noted to me.
Planning Commission Chair, Louise Kuester has been contacted regarding
this agenda item and may be in attendance Monday night, along with other
Planning Commission members. Also, even though the Council will make the
final decision on whether a plan should be required with the Planned Unit
Development request, it may be appropriate to seek a Planning Commission
recommendation on this issue.
•
LARKIN, HOPFMAN, DALY R LINDGR~IV, LTD.
• IS00 NotweetAFinanc~ul Ce~o r
7400 Xences Avenue South
t3loo n, Miuoeaoh. 55431
Telone: (632)) 833-3800
FAX: (612) 8963333
TO: Mayor Henry A. Duitaman
Members of the City Council
FROM: Peter K. Beck, City Attorney
DATE: April 6, 1995
~: PUD Zoning Requirements
•
Pat has asked that, in lieu of attending the April 10, 1995 City
Council meeting, I put down in writing a brief discussion of the
legal issues involved in determining the appropriate application
requirements for PUD zoning.
Under Minnesota law, rezoning a property on the Cityta zoning map
or changing the land use of a property on the Cityta land use map
are legislative actions of the City Council. The Minnesota
courts have held that City Councils are entitled to wide
discretion with respect to such legislative actions. Only under
the most extreme circumstances will. the courts interfere with or
reverse a legislative decision of the City Council on a zoning or
land use matter.
Conditional use permits, on the other hand, are administrative
actions of the City Council. The courts have generally held that
cities must establish standards for the issuance of a conditional
use permit and can only deny a conditional use permit if there is
a factual basis for determining that a legally sufficient
standard has not been met. The courts generally have considered
it their prerogative to determine whether a factual basis exists
for denying a conditional use permit. City councils have much
less discretion in making such deCerasinationa as they do in
making a rezoning decision.
Under the Blk River Zoning Ordinance, once a property is zoned
PUD, PUD plane are approved by conditional use permit. A
conditional use permit for a PUD can only be denied by the
Council if there is a factual basis for determining that one of
the standards set forth in the Zoning Ordinance for the issuance
of a conditional use permit has not been met. Therefore, a
property zoned PUD can be developed for any use allowed by the
Comprehensive Plan designation for the property, if the developer
•
can show that the standards for issuance of a conditional use
permit have been met.
Several years ago, in response to City Council concerns about the
fact that Elk Park Center needed only conditional use permit
approval, I recommended to the Council chat we "put the plan back
into planned unit development zoning." In other words, that the
City require developers to proceae their conditional use permit
for a specific plan concurrently with rezoning a property to the
PUD district. The legal reason for making this recommendation
was to preserve for the .City Council all of its zoning tools in
acting upon PUD~s. This way the City Council can make a
~.3~s~a i decision on the appropriateness of a proposed PUD, a
decision which will be easier to sustain (whether the decision is
to approve or deny) if the matter ends up before the courts.
It continues to be my advice that the City is in the better legal
position if it rezones land into the PUD zoning district
contemporaneously with the approval of a specific PUD plan, and
it continues to be my recommendation that this be the way the
City processes PUDS. I understand that this imposes a burden on
the potential developer or owner of land proposed to be zoned
PUD, However, the owner/developer has an alternative: rezoning
to a standard zoning district. 2f the property is so unique that
rezoning to a standard zoning district is inappropriate, perhaps
it is property which should have a plan before being zoned PUD.
In addition, in my experience, it is not unusual for a developer
to submit detailed plans before having his property zoned PUD.
• The ultimate decision on this issue fe for the Council. As the
City~s attorney, my advice is ae set forth above, because this
will put the City in the beat legal position. However, I am well
aware that the Council has more than legal issues to consider in
making these types of determinations. I am sure the entire City
staff, myself included, will be able .to work with whatever
proceae the Council directs..
At the moment I am not scheduled to be at the Council meeting
Monday night. If any of you would like me to be there for this
issue I will come. In the meantime, please feel free to call me
at home over the weekend (929=8877). if you have questions.
•
(6) Tha the principal f the property is
not of ch a nature t would be dangerous
or hazar ous to reside the proposed
dwelling nit.
•
(7) That t e propc
other requi ements
.Uniform Bui ding C
dwelling uni by a
Council may, 'f i
for the prote i
welfare of per s
.dwelling unit, p
requirements o 0
and use of th dw
us o
ha it
n of
ed dwelling unit meets all
o the City Code and the
e for occupancy as a
single family. The City
finds it necessary to do so
of the health, safety and
who may occupy the proposed
se additional reasonable
ditions on the 'construction
ling unit.
use allowing such a
trial zone is deemed to
1 use of the property
property and the
tional use permits
n shall therefore
principal use of the
ership of either the
u e of the property
(5) That the proposed dwelling ~init not exceed
eight hundred (800) square feel in size and be
located within a building serving the principal
use o~the property which is~no less than ten
thous d (10,000) square feed in size.
(8) That th Condit onal
dwelling u it in an 'ndus
be unique o the prin ipa
and the o nership of t e
principa use. Any con i
granted under this Secti
automa ically expire if t
prope y changes or the o
prope ty or the principal
ix. Gov rnment buildings and faci
x. S ually Oriented Land Uses
xi. emporary structures
xii.`Zero lot line development
•
15. PUD Planned Unit Development District
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE: The purpose of this district is to
provide design and locational flexibility and variety tracts of
land with adequate sewer and water systems by allowing
modification of lot and building area, width, setback and other
dimensional requirements. PUD's shall be developed in
accordance with an overall design. and an integrated development
plan in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations. PUD's
shall be consistent with the intent and purpose of this
Ordinance and shall .not adversely affect the property adjacent
to the land area to be developed.
a. Regulations
9.32
r11
i. A PUD may be authorized on land in a PUD
district following the issuance of a cnndirinnAl nce
permit and subdivision appro PUD shall comply
with the provisions of this Ordinance except as •
expressly modified herein.
ii. Permitted conditional and accessory uses in
residential and commercial districts may be allowed
in a PUD if the Council determines that such uses are
compatible.
iii. The area of land to be included in a PUD shall
be in uniform control of the applicant.
iv. A PUD shall be designed to form a desirable
unified environment within its proposed boundaries.
v. A PUD shall not cause undesirable impacts on
adjacent lands and land uses. Zn particular, uses in
the PUD perimeter shall be compatible with adjacent
uses outside the PUD.
vi. A PUD shall be served by adequate water and
sewer systems.
vii. A PUD shall not adversely affect existing or
proposed parks, schools, streets or other public
facilities.
~~ viii.The Council may establish varied and reasonable •
- lot area, frontage, side yard, and setback
requirements for a PUD and may authorize a density
which it determines to be appropriate under the
circumstances. Any permitted density shall be
consistent with the Comprehensive Development Plan
and not adversely affect the public health, safety
and welfare.
ix. More than one principal building may be
constructed on a lot within a PUD if authorized by
the Council. Uses within PUD's should be constructed
on individual lots having no less than eighty (80~)
of the minimum area for similar uses within that
district where they are permitted subject to the most
stringent minimum requirements.
Administrative Procedure
i. Prior to the commencement of formal review, any
person may submit a PUD concept plan to the City
requesting staff and Planning Commission review and
advisory comment. //f
ii. The proponents of a PUD shall submit a \~/~
~ preliminary subdivision plat and a site plan, along /7f,~
J with an application for a conditional use permit to
9.33
the Planning Commission and Council. The Planning
Commission shall review PUD proposals and make
recommendations to the Council based on the
• provisions contained herein, in the Subdivision
Ordinance, and in Section 900.42. Such preliminary
plat and site plan shall conform to the provisions of
this Ordinance to the Subdivision regulations. Such
site plan shall show: r-
- Proposed sanitary sewer and water systems,
including size, type and capacity and paving
- Proposed roadways, location, type, capacity and
paving
- The proposed site and existing adjacent
development
- Size and location of building and dwelling unit
density
- Landscaping
- Parking areas and arrangement of stalls
- Site and lot dimensions
- Location and size of park and open space
• - Type of use and use density of each building,
including a relief drawing of the general
building design intended for all buildings other
than single and two family units.
- The proposed schedule for the development of the
site
- Location, type and size of signage
- Statement of the reasons why the PUD will be in
the public interest, consistent with the
purposes and requirements hereof and those in
Section 900.42
The Council shall review a PUD proposal pursuant to
the provisions contained herein and in Section 900.42.
iii. If the conditional use permit and the
preliminary plat and site plan are approved, the
preliminary plat and site plan shall be attached to
and become part of the conditional use permit. Any
modification of the conditional use permit,
preliminary plat or site plan must be approved by the
Planning Commission and the Council. The Council may
• approve the entire PUD or one or more stages of the
9.34
same and may establish conditions respecting the
approval as provided in Section 900.42.
iv. If the conditional use permit is approved, the
final plat shall be submitted to the City in
accordance with the Subdivision Regulations and the •
provisions of this ordinance.
16. SWF~Soli_d_Waste Facility Overlay Zoning Dis
STATEMENT` F PURPOSE: The purpose of the Solid W ste Facility
Overlay Zo ng District is to protect the public health,
safety, and general welfare by providing a spec fic zoning
district for the use of land for the establis ent and
operation of olid Waste Facilities. Since ese uses are so
unique, their errands upon public services, uch as
transportation are so intense and their p ential for causing
harm to the env ronment and to the public ealth, safety, and
general welfare 's so great, a special z ing district is
necessary. Soli Waste Facilities shal not be permitted nor
conditional uses 'n any other Zoning D' trict.
a. Uses - T e Solid Waste Fac' ities Overlay District
is an overlay oning district. Land zoned into the Solid
Waste Faciliti s Overlay Distr ct will also remain in its
original zoning district (the U derlying Zoning
District), All ermitted, a c sory, and conditional uses
allowed in the Un erlying Z n' g District will continue to
be allowed on land oned i t the Solid Waste Facilities
Overlay District, s ject all restrictions and
requirements applica a he Underlying District. In .
addition to the uses a d in the Underlying Zoning
District, there shall llowed in the Solid Waste
Facilities Overlay Dis t the following conditional
uses, subject to all qui ements of the City Code for the
establishment and op ation~of such uses:
a. Solid Wash Facilities licensed under Section
604 of the Ci. Code. `
b. Solid ~7 ste Processing acilities licensed under
Section 604 of the City Code.
c. Sanit ry Landfills licens under Section 604 of
the City; ode.
d. Was a burning facilities lic sed under Section
604 of e City Code.
e. ansfer stations licensed unde~Section 604 of
the ty Code.
1
b. Di ensional and Other Re ulations and Standards•
Perfo ance Standards - Dimension Regulations, Setbacks,
Yard Regulations, Height Regulations, Sign Regulations,
Parking and Loading Regulations, Performance Standards,
9.35