Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/18/20041. Call to Order MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, October 18, 2004, 6:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. October 4, 2004 5. Public Hearings 6:00 Home Occupation License- David Grupa Photography (1994 Duluth Street) . New Business Gladstone Neighborhood Planning Process Presentation . Unfinished Business None 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations October 14 Council Meeting: ?? October 25 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson November 8 Council Meeting: Mr. Tdppler 10. Staff Presentations 11. Adjoumment DRAFT MINUTES OF THE D1APLEVVOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEVVOOD, M)NNESOTA MONDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2004 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7'00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Eric Ahlness Commissioner Jeff Bartol Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Commissioner Mary Dierich Commissioner Michael Grover Commissioner Daniel Lee Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner Dale Trippler Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Roberts reported the public hearing for Maplewood Imports Auto Center has been cancelled because the applicant has withdrawn their current application. Commissioner Desai moved to approve the agenda, as amended. Commissioner Bartol seconded. Ayes- Ahlness, Bartol, Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Lee, Pearson, Trippler The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the planning commission minutes for September 8, 2004. Chairperson Fischer, Commissioner Dierich and Commissioner Trippler had corrections on pages 3 and 4 of the September 8, 2004, minutes. The corrections were made and posted on the City of Maplewood website. Commissioner Dierich moved to approve the planning commission minutes for September 8, 2004, as amended. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes- Bartol, Dierich, Fischer, Lee, Pearson Abstentions- Ahlness, Desai, Grover, Trippler Planning Commission Minutes of 10-04-04 -2- Mr. Roberts welcomed Commissioner Eric Ahlness back to the planning commission. The city council reappointed him to the commission on September 27, 2004. Mr. Ahlness replaces Commissioner Paul Mueller who resigned September 10, 2004. V. PUBLIC HEARING (7:05 p.m.) a. Avis Rent A Car Conditional Use Permit (Sears - Maplewood Mall) Mr. Roberts said Mr. Jeff Higginbotham, representing Avis Rent a Car, is requesting that the city approve a conditional use permit (CUP) to set up an automobile rental office in the Sears store at Maplewood Mall. The request would include a service counter and the storage of about 10 rental vehicles on the west side of the Sears store, north of Beam Avenue. Staff recommends approval of the CUP. Commissioner Trippler asked if the cars would be sitting in the mall parking lot overnight or over the weekend? He is concerned about car vandalism that may occur if the cars sit in the parking lot. Mr. Roberts said he understands from the representative that cars would be reserved and ready for pickup but there wouldn't be a stock of cars sitting in the parking lot waiting for people to rent. There is mall security which could help watch for vandalism but basically he doesn't see this being a problem. However, the applicant should be able to clarify the situation for the commission. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to come forward and address the commission. Mr. Jeff Higginbotham, Agency Manager for Avis Rent a Car, addressed the commission. He said Avis Rent a Car has seven stores in the Twin Cities. Avis rents cars for both business and leisure. The cars wouldn't get serviced in this location, they would be serviced and maintained at the airport. They propose to have 10 to 12 cars parked in the parking lot at any one time so there could be cars sitting in the parking lot overnight but the staff would secure the vehicles. Avis Rent a Car plans on being a member of the Chamber of Commerce and wants to be involved with the city functions in Maplewood. Chairperson Fischer asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak regarding this proposal? No one in the audience came forward. Commissioner Pearson moved to adopt the resolution on pages 11 and 12 of the staff report. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for an automobile rental office in the Sears Store at 3001 White Bear Avenue. The approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The owner or operator shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 3. The normal hours of operation shall be seven days a week, Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Saturday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., and Sunday 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. VI. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-04-04 . . Commissioner Desai seconded. -3- The maximum number of parking stalls for rental cars at this site is limited to 10. The contractor must obtain the necessary building and sign permits from the city. Ayes- Ahlness, Bartol, Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Lee, Pearson, Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on October 25, 2004. NEW BUSINESS Resolution of Appreciation - Paul Mueller Mr. Roberts said Paul Mueller resigned from the planning commission and his letter of resignation is attached in the staff report. Staff recommends the planning commission approve the attached resolution of appreciation for Paul Mueller. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the attached resolution of appreciation for Paul Mueller. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes- Ahlness, Bartol, Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Lee, Pearson, Trippler The motion passed. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Will Rossbach, Maplewood City Councilmember residing at 1386 County Road C East, Maplewood, addressed the commission. Mr. Rossbach stated Lorraine Fischer had asked if the Land Use Plan was correct for the Maplewood Priory property. After further checking he reported the land use was correct. Mr. Rossbach said if the planning commission has further evidence to dispute this that they should contact city staff. IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Mr. Bartol was the planning commission representative at the September 13, 2004, city council meeting. The only item discussed was the Cottages of Legacy Village which was approved by the city council as submitted. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-04-04 -4- b. Ms. Dierich was the planning commission representative at the September 27, 2004, city council meeting. Items discussed included the Mapletree Townhomes that was approved by the city council, the Ramsey County Courthouse which was approved, and the Summerhill Senior Cooperative which was denied by a 3 to 2 vote. (Four votes were needed for approval). c. Ms. Fischer was to be the planning commission representative at the October 11,2004, city council meeting, however, there are no planning commission items to discuss. d. Mr. Pearson will be the planning commission representative at the October 25, 2004, city council meeting. The only item to discuss will be the Conditional Use Permit for Avis Rent a Car at Sears at the Maplewood Mall. X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Mr. Roberts discussed Maplewood Imports Auto Center and the reason for withdrawing their proposal for the public hearing this evening. The engineering department raised several issues regarding the project and the developer wanted to work with the engineering department and the watershed district to ensure a better plan. The engineering department encourages the use of an underground filtration system and or rainwater gardens as part of the drainage system. The applicant will bring the proposal back to the commission at a later date when the issues have been worked out. Commissioner Trippler was concerned about the city's proposed requirement to have an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for this proposal when the city didn't require the other car dealerships to have an EAW when they built in Maplewood. Mr. Roberts said this is a large parcel of land and there is a potential for environmental risks. There are 2,200 parking spaces proposed for this property and there are many concerns to be addressed. Mr. Roberts said the applicant stated each car manufacturer may want their own building. A new car dealership that is not already represented in the city may move in or one of the multiple dealerships may request to have their own building. For example the Mercedes, Audi and Porsche dealerships are located in one building and the applicant has stated the Audi dealership wants to have their own building. Mr. Roberts said this project if approved by the city, would be done in phases and construction could start in 2005. Commissioner Trippler said at a past planning commission meeting he asked staff to check with the city attorney regarding the right to step onto personal property while visiting a site in preparation for the planning commission meeting. Xl. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-04-04 -5- Mr. Roberts checked with the city attorney and was told it depends on the situation. The city attorney advised city staff to revise the application forms adding a disclaimer on the form alerting the applicants that city staff and or board/commission members may be visiting the property in person. If it's a single family home, city staff, board or commission members should go knock on the door and let the homeowner know they are there to visit the site in preparation for the meeting. If it's a commercial property there is the expectation that city staff or commission members would be visiting the site and there shouldn't be any problem. Mr. Roberts asked Rose Lorsung to address the commission and give an update on the Gladstone area. Rose Lorsung, Planning Intern, introduced herself to the planning commission. She stated a survey, proposed timeline and maps have been posted on the city website for the revitalization of the Gladstone area. This survey is to gauge the Gladstone neighborhood regarding the different concepts for the Gladstone area that have been put forward by the consultant. The city staff will post an article in the Maplewood Review which comes out every Wednesday to inform residents of the Gladstone survey. The other possibility is to send another mailing out to residents and business owners in the Gladstone area letting them know about the survey, proposed timeline and maps. Mr. Roberts said there would be a Gladstone redevelopment presentation at the next planning commission meeting. Shann Finwall, Tom Ekstrand and Melinda Coleman along with a consultant have been working on the Gladstone area project. The Gladstone moratorium is proposed to end March 2005 and could be extended by the city depending on what the council decides. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Rose Lorsung, Planning Intern Home Occupation License Mr. David Grupa 1994 Duluth Street October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION Project Description Mr. David Grupa is requesting that the city approve a home occupation license to operate a digital photography studio. If approved, the photography studio would occupy the entire detached garage located on his property at 1994 Duluth Street. Mr. Grupa would then be required by the city to obtain a building permit to remodel the structure in order to effectively operate the business. Mr. Grupa also will be making exterior improvements in the backyard of the residence to accommodate clients. These improvements will include a six-foot fence for screening and landscaping. (Please see the maps and applicant's statement beginning on page 9). DISCUSSION Home Photography Studio The applicant has been in the photography business for several years with a retail location in North Saint Paul since 1981. Due to the dissolution of a business partnership, Mr. Grupa is downsizing and requesting to move the smaller business to his residence. The digital photography studio, planned for the detached garage, will consist of an office, camera room and production studio. The applicant states that he is the only employee of the business which is mostly seasonal with the bulk of consultations in the spring and summer months. The proposed hours of operation are Monday through Friday 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. with an occasional weekend appointment and with no overlapping appointments. If approved, Mr. Grupa will be requesting a building permit to remodel the garage. The applicant states there are size, structural and technical limitations that prevent him from using his house for a studio. As such, he is applying for the use of the detached garage for the digital photography studio. These needs are specific to the technical aspects of digital photography including extended space, ceiling heights and lighting needs. (Please see the garage detail and proposed structural changes beginning on page 12). Neighborhood Comments Staff surveyed the property owners within 500 feet of this residence. Of the 59 neighbors surveyed, there were 16 responses, 7 were for the proposal and 9 were against. Other Comments Tom Ekstrand, the Maplewood Senior Planner, proposed additional screening on the north side of the property. David Fisher, the Maplewood Building Official, stated, "Verify the garage meets the State Electrical Code. Provide a 3-foot door for egress out of the garage. Provide a fire extinguisher. If there are any additions to the garage, a building permit would be required." Dave Kvam, the Maplewood Police Lieutenant for the south district, stated, "After examining the proposal, I do not see any negative impacts on public safety. The change does not appear to be adding any development, dangerous conditions, or increasing traffic to any measurable extent." Chris Cavett, the Maplewood Assistant City Engineer, stated that there were no engineering issues. License Requirements Mr. Grupa is requesting to occupy the detached garage at the residence instead of having the home occupation inside the actual residence. Article II, Section 14-56(b) of the city' s zoning code gives 12 requirements for approval of a home occupation license (see attached requirements starting on page 15). Requirement number four states, "An area equivalent to no more than 20 percent of each level of the house, including the basement and garage, shall be used in the conduct of a home occupation." City staff has calculated the percent of square footage attributed to the home occupation, and this amount equals just slightly over the 20 percent maximum amount. However, the applicant has provided the city with specific reasons why the residence is not suitable for a photography studio. The ceiling heights inside the home fall short of the necessary nine to ten foot ceilings, the lighting is inadequate and the residence does not have enough extra space for an office and studio. Requirement number five of the city code states, "There shall be no change visible off the premises in the outside appearance of the building or premises that would indicate the conduct of a home occupation, other than one sign meeting the requirements of the city sign code in chapter 44, article III." The city believes that the proposed future changes to the exterior of the garage will not be highly visible to the neighbors and will not create a change in the residential neighborhood. In fact, Mr. Grupa is proposing to improve the exterior of the garage by adding larger windows, a three-foot egress door, insulation, an interior-raised roof, and new siding on the exterior. The applicant also proposes to construct a six-foot screening fence along the south side of the property line and add some landscaping to the property. SUMMARY The city is not aware of any home occupations in the city to have a photography business. However, after researching the photography business, the city was made aware of the increasing number of photographers working at their residence. There are several factors that led to the home occupation license request including the dissolution of his partnership, the cost of commercial leasing of space and the physical and structural limitations of the residence. RECOMMENDATION Approve the home occupation license for Mr. Grupa of 1994 Duluth Street to have a photography studio in the detached garage. This approval shall be subject to the following conditions: Meet all conditions of the city's home occupation ordinance. This includes: a. No traffic shall be generated by a home occupation in greater volume than would normally be expected in a residential neighborhood. b. The need for off-street parking shall not exceed more than three off-street parking spaces for home occupation at any given time, in addition to the parking spaces required by the residents. c. No equipment or process shall be used in such home occupation that creates noise, vibration, light, glare, fumes, smoke, dust, odors or electrical interference detectable to the normal senses off the lot. d. There shall be no fire, safety or health hazards. 2. Customer hours for this home occupation are limited to: Monday through Friday 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. 3. There shall be no more than 20 appointments at the business per week. 4. All customers or visitors to the business shall park on the driveway. 5. Provide a five-pound ABC dry chemical fire extinguisher in the garage. 6. The garage and studio wiring shall meet the state electrical code. 7. Provide a 3-foot egress exit door out of the garage. 8. Obtain a building permit before construction. . Provide screening along the south border of the backyard from the southeast comer of the house to the south edge of the lot line and extending at least 10 feet along the east lot line. This screening is to ensure privacy and lessen the intrusion for the residence located at 1211 Ryan Avenue. This screening should be in the form of a 6-foot-high solid fence or with the planting of thick shrubs or large trees. 10. There shall be no processing or developing of film on site. 11. The city council may add additional requirements that it deems necessary to ensure that the operation of the home occupation will be compatible with nearby land uses. 12. The city council shall review this home occupation license again in one year. CITIZEN COMMENTS For 1. We have no objection. (Herron- 1106 Ryan Avenue E.) 2. No problem. (Etal- 1249 Ryan Avenue E.) 3. Great Idea! I wish Mr. Grupa the best of luck with his new business endeavor. (Ohlson- 1706 Barclay Street N.) 4. Mr. Grupa has our full support and endorsement. We wish him the best. (Giesecke - 2023 Duluth Street) o I feel no imposition to my family or myself, so long as their business doesn't get too large. I wish them the best of luck and success in their venture. (Dezelar- 1216 Shryer Avenue E.) 6. We support. Good to have neighbors home during the day. No problems. (Rostron - 1211 Skillman Avenue E.) 7. See attached response. (Pontrelli - 2092 Amy Circle, North St. Paul) Against The concerns I have are with the garage remodeling and that not being attractive for future homebuyers. This use may attract a similar use in the future for this residence, as the garage will not resemble a resident garage. Perhaps Mr. Grupa should incorporate the business into the new Gladstone neighborhood development. (Anderson-2001 Duluth Street) 2. I strongly disagree with this proposal. (Hunt - 1981 Duluth Street) o I am against the studio in the home at 1994 Duluth Street. This area is zoned as a residential neighborhood. If you let one business in the home in whatever scope, what stops anyone else from requesting a home business such as a beauty salon etc.? (Rohrbach- 2048 Duluth Street N.) . We are against the permit, as it will set a precedent in a residential neighborhood that will disrupt the quality of life in this area. The city is redeveloping the Gladstone area to preserve the integrity of the neighborhood and granting this permit would seem to defeat these efforts and plans. We vote no to issuing this permit. (Kelcher- 1210 Ryan Avenue E.) o This is a residential area, that's what it should stay as. I pay taxes to live in a neighborhood that is without businesses. We have enough traffic on this street now. I do not want this in my backyard. I agree with the letter that Wayne Nelson wrote to you. Mr. Grupa can rent another place he doesn't have to have it on this personal property. I have lived here forty years and I can't believe Maplewood would ever think about giving him a license to do this! (Rasmussen - 1211 Ryan Avenue E.) o I know Mr. Grupa from church and have no problems with him personally. However, his business does not belong in a residential neighborhood. I believe he should take his business to a commercial area. (McNulty - 2029 Duluth Street) o This area is zoned R- 1 ! No business of any kind! We already have multiple family residences, lawn service, auto repair, etc. Who is enforcing the zone laws? Why isn't Mr. Grupa, and the others, located in a business area? I am disappointed in the City of Maplewood. (Trustee of Tait- 2032 Duluth Street) , I am not in favor of the home occupation license. I am concerned about traffic and the transformation of the resident garage into a business studio. What about the resale value of the home and our homes? (Long Time Resident) 9. See attached response. (Huntoon, Nelson & Rasmussen - 1995 Duluth Street) REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Existing Land Use: Single-Family Home SURROUNDING LAND USES Single-Family homes to the north, south, east and west and open space also to the west PLANNING Existing Land Use Designation: Existing Zoning: Single Dwelling Residential Single Dwelling Residential CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL Article II, Section 14-56(b) of the city's zoning code gives 12 requirements for approval of a home occupation license. Application Date The city received the application for this home occupation license on September 20, 2004. City staff instructed the applicant to illustrate further the proposed garage changes and received such on October 11, 2004. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for any land use proposal. The 60-day requirement on this proposal ends December 11, 2004. P/secl 6/1994 Duluth Home Occupation PC Attachments: 1. Home Occupation Questionnaire 2. Location Map 3. Zoning Map 4. Site Plan 5. Garage Detail 6. Garage Structural Changes 7. Applicant Statement 8. Home Occupation Ordinance 9. Survey: Huntoon, Nelson & Rasmussen 10. Survey: Pontrelli Attachment 1 HOME OCCUPATION QUESTIONNAIRE (Attach a separate page if additional space is needed) Describe your home occupation' v%~ST~P,-~ - v-,/~DD,~ A,,,E) ~,--~ ;7- f . , . How many nonresident employees would work ~;;~-site? ~ How many nonresident employees would ~w. erk off-site? Hbw often would off-site employees visit your home? ~ '~ What percentage of each level of your home's floor area, including the basement, would you use in conducting the home occupation? ~ 2¢%, If the business would be in an accessory building, what percentage of that structure's floor area would be used? IOC% - ~-~"~ Where on the premises would the home occupation be conducted? . . Describe any changes in the outside appearance of the building or property, other than one wall-mounted sign.of not ~ore than two square feet? What percentage of gross sales would come from the sale of a product(s) produced off- site?.¢ , How man~,',customer or employee vehicles would be parked on the premises at any one time? ~_.,/~,_,~,..r~ ,,4~ o.,.~,.J . / Describe the type, payload capacity and number of each type of vehicle to be used in the home occupation and where they would be parked. ,M//V/V.4/%) 10. What would be the average number of customers expected to visit the premises each week? ~, The average number of employee/subcontractor visits to the premises each week? ¢¢ What time of day and which days of the week would you expect these visits to occur? ! 11. Describe any delivery vehicles that will make deliveries or ship products from the property. Include the type, amount, hours and frequency of deliveries. 12. Describe the type of equipment, including ventilation systems, which would be used. Describe how you would keep the use of this equipment unnoticeable to your neighbors. 13. Describe the amount and type of any chemicals, gasoline, hazardous substances or similar material that would be used. Also, describe where these materials will be stored. 14. Describe how you would dispose of any hazardous materials. Revised: 12/03 P\com._dvpt\word\homeocc.app 2029 Attachment 2 Keller Golf Course 2t66 2023 2017 i 2~01 . . . t 995 t 989 · : i 98't , . 1 ii0 c ][ ~) ., 203 2002 1994 1211 1210 1219 12! 1 1988 1219 12t6 1 ! 06 1202 1210 1216 1225 1227 122.3 12-:26 '1233 230 Location Map Keller Golf Course F2166 2023 · ~o1~ 2009 , 1106 2025 1203 ~2 1994 t 988 1202 R1 1211 S~4R'{ER AWE 1210 R1 1211 1210 Attachment 3 t2!6 12Z'f 1219 !224 1216 Zoning Map 10 Attachment 4 Site Plan 11 Attachment 5 Garage Detail 12 Attachment 6 ,, Garage Structural Changes 13 /p ¢trum Inlag s Inc. 2543 E~st 7th Avenue · North Saint Paul, MN 55109-3004 · 651-745-8779 www. Spectrumlmageslnc. cam Attachment 7 Maplewood City Council RE: 1994 Duluth St Since 1976, I have been an owner of Spectrum Images, Inc., a photography studio specializing in wedding, children, and family portraiture. Since 1981, the studio has been operated out of retail locations, primarily out of convenience to our clients. While a retail location was highly visible, the nature of this business does not depend on walk-in or drive-by traffic. Due to recent industry trends and the impending dissolution of my business partnership, I am looking to downsize and move the business to my residential location. Many of my colleagues operate successful studios in this scenario. Photography is a personal business, and clients want a personal touch and relationship. A residential studio promotes this warmth. A residential studio would not be disruptive to this neighborhood. · All studio business is handled by appointment. . There is no walk-in traffic or "over-the-counter" sales. Portrait appointments and wedding consultations are normally handled between 10am and 5pm, with an occasional evening meeting. · The bulk of my clients are generally families having children photographed, and young engaged couples seeking wedding photography. · Since a professional lab does all processing of photographs, there would be no resulting "waste chemistry" for disposal. · Because I am able to service only one client at a time, appointments are not double-booked. Vehicle traffic will be minimal, and parking in my driveway is provided. · Changes in the appearance of my residence will be minimal, other than the potential addition of landscaping. · Minimal appropriate signage will be used according to Maplewood City Ordinance. (No larger than 2 square feet.) Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. I am excited about the possibilities! Regards, 14 wedding and portrait professionMs since 1976 h'oft~sio~l Photogl'aphers of America THE WORLD'S GREAT STORY'TELLERS. JOBNAME: No Job Name PAGE: 214 SESS: 2 OUTPUT: Tue Apr 8 12:31:10 2003 /first/pubdocs/mcc/3/11217_full Attachment 8 § 14-29 MAPLEWOOD CODE Sec. 14-29. Suspension and revocation. (a) Generally. The city council shall have the power to suspend or revoke the license of any person licensed under this Code whose work is found to be improper or defective or so unsafe as to jeopardize life or property, providing the person holding such license is given 20 days' notice and granted the opportunity to be heard before such action is taken. If and when such notice is sent to the legal address of the licensee and he fails or refuses to appear at the hearing, his license will be automatically suspended or revoked five days after the date of the hearing. (b) Period of suspension. When a license is suspended under subsection (a) of this section, the period of suspension shall be not less than 30 days nor more than one year, such period being determined by the city council. (c) Mandatory revocation for certain Code violations. When any person holding a license issued under this Code has been convicted for the second time by a court of competent jurisdiction for violation of any of the sections of this Code relating to the subject matter of the license, the city council shall revoke the license of the person so convicted. Such person may not make application for a new license for a period of one year. (Code 1982, §§ 17-4--17-6) Secs. 14-30--14-55. Reserved. DIVISION 2. HOME OCCUPATIONS Sec. 14-56. License requirements. (a) Home occupations shall require a license approved by the city council if any of the following circumstances would occur more than 30 days each year: (1) Employment of a nonresident in the home occupation. (2) Customers or customers' vehicles on the premises. (3) Manufacture, assembly or processing of products or materials on the premises. (4) More than one vehicle associated with the home occupation which is classified as a light commercial vehicle. (5) A vehicle used in the home occupation, and parked on the premises, which exceeds a three-quarter-ton payload capacity. (6) If the home occupation produces any waste that should be treated or regulated. (b) Home occupations requiring a license shall be subject but not limited to the following requirements: (1) No traffic shall be generated by a home occupation in greater volumes than would normally be expected in a residential neighborhood. The need for off-street parking shall not exceed more than three off-street parking spaces for home occupation at any given time, in addition to the parking spaces required by the residents. CD14:14 15 JOBNAME: No Job Name PAGE: 215 SESS: 2 OUTPUT: Tue Apr 8 12:31:10 2003 /first/pubdocs/mcc/3/11217_full BUSINESSES AND LICENSING § 14-57 (10) (11) (2) No more than one nonresident employee shall be allowed to work on the premises. Nonresident employees who work off the premises may be allowed to visit the premises. If an on-site employee is parking on site, off-site employees shall not leave their vehicles on site. If there is no on-site employee vehicle parked on site, one off-site employee vehicle may be parked on site. (3) No vehicle associated with the home occupation, including customers or employees, shall be parked on the street or block sidewalks or public easements. Private vehicles used by the residents shall not be included in this subsection. (4) An area equivalent to no more than 20 percent of each level of the house, including the basement and garage, shall be used in the conduct of a home occupation. (5) There shall be no change visible off the premises in the outside appearance of the building or premises that would indicate the conduct of a home occupation, other than one sign meeting the requirements of the city sign code in chapter 44, article III. (6) No more than 20 percent of business income shall come from the sale of products produced off site unless approved by the city council. (7) No equipment or process shall be used in such home occupation which creates noise, vibration, light, glare, fumes, smoke, dust, odors or electrical interference detectable to the normal senses off the lot. If electrical interference occurs, no equipment or process shall be used which creates visual or audible interference in any radio or television receivers off the premises or causes fluctuations in line voltage off the premises. (8) There shall be no fire, safety or health hazards. (9) A home occupation shall not include the repair of internal combustion engines, body repair shops, spray painting, machine shops, welding, ammunition manufacturing or sales, the sale or manufacture of firearms or knives or other objectionable uses as determined by the city. Machine shops are defined as places where raw metal is fabricated, using machines that operate on more than 120 volts of current. Any noncompliance with this subsection shall constitute grounds for the denial or revocation of the home occupation license. The city may waive any of these requirements if the home occupation is located at least 350 feet from a residential lot line. (12) The city council may add any additional requirements that it deems necessary to ensure that the operation of the home occupation will be compatible with nearby land uses. (Code 1982, § 17-21) Sec. 14-57. License application approval procedure. An application for a home occupation shall be filed with the director of community development. Upon receipt of a complete application, the director of community development shall prepare a recommendation to the planning commission. The planning commission's CD14:15 ]6 JOBNAME: No Job Name PAGE: 216 SESS: 2 OUTPUT: Tue Apr 8 12:31:10 2003 /first/pubdocs/mcc/3/11217_full § 14-57 MAPLEWOOD CODE recommendation shall be forwarded to the city council for a public hearing. The city council shall hold a public hearing on the request. Notice of the hearing shall be mailed to the owners of all properties located within 350 feet of the home occupation at least ten days prior to the date of the hearing. The notice shall also be published in the official newspaper at least ten days prior to the date of hearing. (Code 1982, § 17-22) Sec. 14-58. License renewal, revocation. (a) Each person holding a license to conduct a home occupation shall apply to the city clerk each January for renewal. Prior to issuance of a license renewal, the city shall determine that all licensing conditions and city ordinances are being met. (b) The city clerk shall revoke the license where compliance with the licensing conditions or city ordinances cannot be obtained or where the home occupation has been discontinued. Revocation may occur at any time that compliance with license conditions or city ordinances cannot be obtained. (Code 1982, § 17-23) Sec. 14-59. Appeal of license revocation. The owner or his assign of a home occupation whose license has been revoked by the city clerk may appeal the decision to the city council. To request an appeal, a written letter or request must be submitted to the city clerk within 30 days of the license revocation. The city council may revoke, approve or add additional conditions to the license. The city council shall hold a public hearing, using the notification procedures in section 14-57, before deciding on the appeal. (Code 1982, § 17-24) Sec. 14-60. Transfer of license. No license granted for a home occupation shall be transferable from person to person or place to place. (Code 1982, § 17-25) Secs. 14-61--14-85. Reserved. ARTICLE III. ADULT USES AND SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES DIVISION 1. GENERALLY Sec. 14-86. Findings and purposes. (a) The purpose of this article is to control, through licensing and zoning regulations, certain land uses that have a direct and detrimental effect on the character of the city's residential and commercial neighborhoods. CD14:16 Attachment 9 September 23, 2004 1995 Duluth St. Maplewood, MN 55109 Rose Lorsung, Planning Intern City of Maplewood 1830 Co. Rd B East Maplewood, MN 55109 RECEIVE Dear Ms. Lorsung: We received your survey today regarding Mr. David Grupa's license and permit request to remodel his garage, landscape and construct a screening fence on his property at 1994 Duluth St. across the street from us. His purpose is to establish a photography office and production studio in his detached garage. The current zoning is residential R1 and has been so since the construction of the homes in the neighborhood in the 1950's. Our initial reaction to the proposal was to patiently wait to see if the proposed new use could be accomplished without detracting from the residential quality of our neighborhood. We were planning to suggest a one-year conditional use permit to evaluate residential neighborhood character retention prior to a permanent authorization. The proposed garage conversion, business signage and erection of a wall for business use, however, alarm us. The garage conversion will mean that all parking at the Grupa residence will be in the driveway or on the street in front of our homes. Removing the overhead garage door and installing a conventional personal entry door facing the street will make the garage appear to be a business behind a parking lot. Walling off the personal entry door facing south toward the home will further complicate restoration as a garage and decrease the potential for residential future use. Will a wall to facilitate photo shoots look like a residential screening wall? A permit may prevent neighbors from obtaining redress if it doesn't. Mr. Grupa and his family have been good neighbors since they moved in a year ago. We would like to support flexibility for the use of his home but, it is unfortunate that his business plan relies on changing thc residential use and appearance of his property. We oppose weakening residential restrictions. Maplewood has ample commercial zoning nearby. Ironically, the city is agonizing over redevelopment of the Gladstone area, a block south across the bike trail, largely because commercial development within that neighborhood has contributed to deterioration and transitions between uses are critical. Here are some questions that lead us to oppose opening our residential neighborhood to commercialization. Where will Mr. Grupa's children park in a few years when they obtain cars? How about the customers? What business uses would be allowed if Mr. Grupa sells the property? Why should single-family residential neighbors be subjected to the conversion of a garage and home into a full-time commercial business? Why should we be confronted from our living room window with a commercial business structure and 18 signage? What other home and garage businesses would have to be allowed as exceptions in the neighborhood if this is approved? Will the office and production studio have a water supply and sewer connection? If not, how will waste liquids be managed? If so. what future uses could be conducted on these premises? What restrictions will assure that any future use of hazardous or offensive wastes are monitored by public officials and properly managed? Will commercial solid waste disposal be necessary for this or potential future users? How often? How frequently will delivery of photographic supplies or materials for a future business by another owner be necessary? Could the garage be used as an animal processing facility, a materials distribution center, an entertainment business or some other enterprise in the future that could turn out to be a residential annoyance? We don't think our quiet residential neighborhood should be jeopardized because someone wants to conduct a full-time business that won't fit a residential setting w4thout making commercial changes. Our initial response was positive when we thought the production studio was going to be in the home's basement. Expansion of the plan to convert the garage to commercial use has changed our position to opposition and the apprehension that more commercial encroachment is possible from this owner, future owners and others in the vicinity that would use this precedent to commercialize a neighborhood currently restricted to single-family dwellings. Sincerely, Wayne Nelson and Lynn Huntoon cc: Our neighbors and Mr. Grupa 19 Attachment l0 .lohn Pontrelli 2092 Amy Circle North Saint Paul MN 55109 Ken Roberts City of Maplewood 1830 E County Road B Maplewood MN 55109 October 1, 2004 Good Morning! I am writing in support of David Grupa, who has applied for a Home Occupation Business Permit in the City of Maplewood. He is currently in the process of seeking approval to relocate his North Saint Paul photography studio to his residence at 1994 Duluth Street in Maplewood. In addition to being a talented photographer, Mr. Grupa has been a valuable member of the North Saint Paul business community. He has coordinated the NSP Holiday Drive for the past 4 years as well as being involved with other community events. North Saint Paul's loss will be Maplewood's gain. Not only has David been a good citizen in the community, but he was also a great neighbor. David Grupa lived just 3 houses from me in North Saint Paul, and he was often seen playing catch in the front yard or shooting baskets in the driveway with his 2 sons. He also spent time coaching baseball with the NSPAA. I see no reason that the City of Maplewood should hesitate to issue a permit of this kind to Mr. Grupa. Yours?ul,y, / ....... ? ~~~~ /]bhn Pontrelli' North Saint Paul Councilman 2O MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Gladstone Redevelopment Planning Review Discussion Gladstone Neighborhood--English Street and Frost Avenue Area October 6, 2004 INTRODUCTION Gladstone Redevelopment Study The Maplewood City Council directed staff to conduct a planning study for the revitalization of the Gladstone Neighborhood. Gladstone is recognized as the core neighborhood of Maplewood with a hedtage of railroad operations, industry and a housing stock dating back to around 1875. Neighborhood Conditions and Existing Zoning Nei,qhborhood Conditions Today, Gladstone is still considered by many to be the core neighborhood of Maplewood. Many long-time residents remember this area as being called "Gladstone" as opposed to Maplewood. Some long-time Gladstone residents have raised their families and remained in the area for 50+ years. Newer residents are raising their families here today. Residents and business owners alike in Gladstone have a strong feeling of attachment with this neighborhood and have made it their home. Today, parts of Gladstone are in somewhat of a decline. There are businesses that are in need of cleaning up and there has not been much reinvestment in the area by some property owners. The available housing stock has remained the same for the most part since the 1950s with a handful of newer homes added since then. The single family homes in Gladstone are, in general, very nice and well kept. There are also apartments in the neighborhood that provide rental housing opportunities. Existinq Zonin.q Essentially, the Gladstone study area is comprised of existing commercial properties along Frost Avenue and English Street. Refer to the data on pages 5-10 which discusses the uses and density allowed under the current zoning requirements. In summary, the current zoning, land use provisions and density tables that are in place have the potential for allowing up to 325 apartments, 269 townhomes or a combination of these in the Gladstone neighborhood. Single dwellings would not be allowed in any of these commercially- zoned areas under the current regulations. Examples of Mixed-Use Projects In evaluating the potential for Gladstone, the city staff has looked at several examples of mixed- use developments in the metro area. Some of the noteworthy ones are: Excelsior and Grand in St. Louis Park, Heart of the City in Burnsville and 50th and France in Edina. Granted, these areas are considerably more urban in character than Gladstone. They have, however, characteristics that we can use and encourage here. These characteristics are: · Abundant pedestrian ways · Attractive building design that reflects the area's heritage · Attractive landscaping and streetscapes · Needed neighborhood-scale retail and service businesses · Housing opportunities for persons in all stages of their lives · Public spaces to meet, relax and enjoy the outdoors Staff will present examples of mixed-use developments at the advisory committee meetings. Why Do Redevelopment? The city's goal in doing this study is to accomplish the following for Gladstone: · Reinvest/Revitalize · Create housing opportunity · Preserve/enhance existing businesses · Create opportunity for neighborhood retail and services · Enhance open space · Continue investment in streetscape & beautification · Create transportation options; including pedestrian trails and connections to existing amenities Review of the Gladstone Planning Process to Date Last January, the city planning staff, along with our planning/design consultant, Rich McLaughlin of Architecture and Town Planning, began this strategic-planning study. In March, the city staff hosted two open houses at the Gladstone Fire Station to introduce this issue to the area residents and business owners. Since then, we surveyed the community, took part in five planning sessions with the Gladstone Neighborhood Coalition and talked to many area property owners about their wishes and concerns. The five planning sessions with the Coalition are summarized as follows: Meeting #1 April 22, 2004 This meeting was largely introductory for the Coalition members and city staff to begin working together. We held this meeting at the Gladstone Fire Station. During this meeting the Coalition recapped what they did not like about Rich McLaughlin's two development concepts presented at the March open house workshops. The Coalition wanted the existing businesses to remain and wanted only single dwellings-not multi-family-if any housing was to be added. The Coalition also presented their first draft of their neighborhood redevelopment plan, "Concept C." Meeting #2 May 6, 2004 This meeting was held at the Maplewood Community Center. Our objective was to set a schedule for continuing this study, to review the Coalition's redevelopment plan and to review the market feasibility of potential redevelopment. Meeting #3 May 20, 2004 This meeting was held at the Gladstone Fire Station. The Coalition presented their revised plan called "Plan C2." The big change was the inclusion of multi-family in the form of town homes. The Coalition again stressed "no rental." They did include areas that could be mixed-use with retail below residential units. Meeting ~4 June 24, 2004 This meeting was held at the Gladstone Fire Station. The issues covered or presented were the potential redevelopment under the existing zoning; presentation of a developer's analysis of the Coalition's Plan C2; discussion of redevelopment areas; '?inding common ground" between the Coalition's plan and city goals; and,discussion of city staff's continued schedule. Meeting #5 July 20, 2004 This meeting was held at city hall with city staff and the executive committee of the Gladstone Neighborhood Coalition. Tony Kuechle, of United Properties, presented his concept for the redevelopment of Gladstone. Mr. Kuechle prepared a concept plan on behalf of the Gladstone Neighborhood Coalition. This plan was later rejected by the Coalition. City staff also has surveyed the community and talked to many area property owners about their wishes and concerns. We have been tabulating responses as we receive them. To date, we have received 74 replies to our surveys and received many emails and telephone calls on the subject. Staff has conducted two surveys, asked for written comments at three open houses in March and September and have just placed an on-line survey/questionnaire on the city's web page. We are doing all we can to get word of this study out to the community. After the five sessions with the Coalition, Mr. McLaughlin applied the information gained from these meetings to formulate his proposal for Gladstone. Subsequently, the city staff then hosted two meetings. On August 26, 2004 we conducted a planning session with the city council and the city's advisory committees. The public was also present to attend and we heard presentations from Ms. Jan Steiner of the Gladstone Neighborhood Coalition and Mr. Del Benjamin, owner of the Maplewood Bowl. Following this meeting, on September 23, 2004, we held an open house with the Gladstone community and presented Mr. McLaughlin's proposal. Note: City staff mailed a notice to all of the Gladstone property owners and other interested parties to inform them of the upcoming discussion with the advisory committees. Refer to page 11. DISCUSSION Review of the Redevelopment Process As an integral part of this review process, city staff wants to engage the city's advisory boards and get their input and advice. Staff feels it is important to review and discuss the existing conditions of the neighborhood and to consider the ramifications the existing zoning would have on future development/redevelopment in Gladstone. It is equally important to look at examples of mixed-use developments to see what is appropriate for this neighborhood and to determine and envision the "look" or "character" of Gladstone for future years. The redevelopment process is new to Maplewood. Staff, therefore, wishes to get the advisory boards' evaluation of the current process. What can or should we do differently to engage the area property owners? What can or should we do differently in this process? What is your reaction to this process so far?. Do you have any suggestions or advice on how to continue this process? Staff is suggesting that we take a small step back to answer these questions at this time since Mr. McLaughlin will be absent from our planning process for about one month. This will give us a chance to evaluate our work so far, to consider whether we are on the right track and to decide if our schedule (page 12) is reasonable. We look forward to your input. P: Gladston e/GladstoneRed evelo pmentU pdateOctober, 04 Attachments: 1. Gladstone Density/Development Potential 2. Letter to Area Property Owners About the Review Process 3. Proposed Gladstone Strategic Planning Timeline Attachment 1 GLADSTONE DENSITY/DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL June 24,2004 INTRODUCTION This data shows what the development potential is for Gladstone based on the current land use classifications in the city's comprehensive plan. It considers what type of commercial uses and what type of residential uses would be permitted or considered. In order to calculate the development potential for the study area, staff identified areas currently planned for commercial and industrial purposes. The density formulas from the comprehensive plan on page 5 were applied to the land areas to determine the maximum number of units that could be built on the sites shown on the map on page 4. Currently Allowed Land Uses Permitted Non-Residential Uses · Hotel/motel · Retail stores, offices, studios, banks · Day care centers · Restaurants · Publishing, photocopying or printing shops · Indoor theaters · Parking lots "Conditional" Non-Residential Uses (uses that are allowed, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit by the city council) · Apartments and townhomes · Beverage distribution facilities · Outdoor recreational facilities · Exterior storage · Automobile maintenance garages · Pawnbrokers · Trucking yards Apartments and Townhomes The Gladstone Neighborhood Coalition has expressed substantial opposition to there being any new multi-family development built in their neighborhood. As stated above, apartments and townhomes are allowed by conditional use permit throughout the Gladstone neighborhood on the properties zoned for commercial or industrial. Refer to the ordinance on page 6. Density Provisions The city's townhome density guidelines allow 6 units per acre at medium density and 10.4 units per acre at high density. The apartment density guidelines vary depending on the number of units in the apartment building. Refer to the table on page 5. On the average, the density guidelines for apartments allow 7.26 units per acre at medium density and 12. 5 units per acre at high density. Multi-Family Development Potential Using the density provisions, the following calculations show the number of apartment and townhome units at both high and medium density that could potentially be built along Frost Avenue in Gladstone (compare these figures to the site locations on page 4): # of Apartments # of Townhomes Site# Acreage High Medium High Medium 1 1.17 15 8 12 7 2 2.31 29 17 24 14 3 5.00 63 36 52 30 4 6.41 80 47 67 38 5 3.3 41 24 34 20 6 3.3 41 24 34 20 7 .74 9 5 8 4 8 1.49 19 11 15 9 9 1.22 15 9 13 7 10 1.00 13 7 10 6 Total 325 188 269 155 SUMMARY In summary, the current zoning, land use provisions and density tables that are in place have the potential for allowing up to 325 apartments, 269 townhomes or a combination of these in the Gladstone neighborhood. Single dwellings would not be allowed in any of these areas under the current regulations. p:Gladstone/GladstoneDensityPotential6-04 Attachment: 1. Gladstone Study Area Map 2. Site Location Map 3. Density Table 4. City Ordinance Keller Golf Course · . II I · · · Gladstone, Savanna ~L,L,L~ I .' M'-I ?1 - Study Area Gladstone Neighborhood Strategic Planning Study Area Keller Golf Course -. · .................. Gladston Savanna i i : :_J Z TABLE 5 ESTIMATED PERSONS PER DWELLING UNIT AND PLANNED MAXIMUM DENSITY OF DWELLING UNITS People/Gross Acre (approximate) R-3L R-3M R-3H 11.g 13,3 22.8 Type of Dwelling People/Unit~ Planned Maximum Density (Units per gross acre) Single Dwelling~ 2.9 4.1 4.6 Double Dwellings= 2.2 5.4 6.0 10.4 Townhomes 2.2 5.4 6.0 10.4 ~Manufactured Homes 2.0 6.0 6.7 11.4 I(partments 3-4 units/bldg.) 2.4 5.0 5.5 9.5 partments 5-9 units/bldg.) 2.2 5.4 6.0 10.4 partments 10-19 units/bldg.) 1.9 6.3 7.0 12.0 partrnents 20-49 units/bldg.) 1.6 7.4 8.3 14.3 partments 50+ units/bldg.) 1.4 8.5 9.5 16.3 --~p'-~-rt~n-~ ............................................... (1-bedroom senior) 1.1 (Based on bedroom mix.) Apartments (2-bedroom senior) 2.0 (Based on bedroom mix.) Apartments (3-bedroom senior) 2.5 (Based on bedroom mix.) Notes: (1) (2) (3) From the 1990 census. The City shall determine the maximum allowed density by the minimum-lot areas in the zoning code. The City shall determine the maximum number of units from Table 5 if minimum-area lots for each unit are not platted. The City may allow reduced minimum-lot areas in planned unit developments (PUDs) where the overall PUD project does not exceed the maximum allowed density. The City intends to review the density figures in Table 5 after each federal census. " 9 ZONING § 44-512 (11) CNG (compressed natural gas) or LPG (liquid petroleum gas) dispensing facilities. T~nir~ shall not exceed a water capacity of 1,500 gallons for those dispensing facilities whose primary purpose is to produce power and light for nonvehicle uses, such as at 3M, NSP's facility on CenturyAvenue, or for temporary use on construction sites. Refer to the lice .nsing requirements in chapter 14, article X. (12) CNG (compressed natural gas) or LPG (liquid petroleum gas) retail dispensing facilities-Limited capacity. T~-~s shall not exceed a water capacity of 1,000 gallons for dispensing facilities as an accessory use to a motor fuel station or convenience store, the primary purpose of which is the ~ilIi,~g of LPG t~nk~ for recreational vehicles, portable heaters and gas grills. These limited-capacity dispensing facilities shall be at least 350 feet from any property the city is planning for residential use. (13) Repair shop, except motor fuel stations or maintenance garages. All business, storage or display, except signs and parking, shall be in a closed building. (14) Org. nlzed athletic activities, such as dance, physical fitness or karate, that are conducted indoors. (15) Itinerant carnivals, subject to the licensing requirements in chapter 8, article IV. (16) Any use that would be similar to any of the uses in subsections (1) through (15) of this section, if it is not noxious or hazardous. (17) Adult use accessory, subject to the requirements in chapter 14, article HI. (Code 1982, § 36-151(a); Ord. No. 825, § 1, 4-8-2002; Ord. No. 835, § 2, 11-13-2002) Sec. 44-~12. Conditional uses. I~ a BC business corem ercial district, the following uses must have a conditional use permit: All permitted uses in the R-3 district. (2) Processing and distributing station for beverages. (3) Place of amusement, recreation or assembly, other than an indoor theater, indoor athletic activity or itinerant carnival. (4) The exterior storage, display, sale or distribution of goods or materials, but not including a junkyard, salvage automobile, or other wrecking yard. The city may require screening of such uses pursuant to the screening requirements of subsection (6)a of this section. (5) For motor vehicles, ~e following activities, if not within 350 feet of any property that the city is planning for residential use: a. The sale or leasing of used motor vehicles. ,... b. The storage or rental of motor vehicles. CD44:67 Together We Can Attachment 2 October 1, 2004 CHANGE IN THE REVIEW PROCESS REGARDING THE GLADSTONE NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGIC PLANNING STUDY Dear Maplewood/Gladstone ProPerty Owners and Interested Parties: The Maplewood Planning Staff had informed you at recent public meetings of our timetable for future reviews for the Gladstone Neighborhood Strategic Planning Study. We were planning to present our planning consultant's concept and other concept plans to the advisory boards at two upcoming meetings. The first review was to take place on October 12 at the community design review board meeting and the second on October 18 at the planning commission meeting. We need to postpone our review process at this time for two reasons: First, Rich McLaughlin, the city's planning consultant, has indicated that due to a medical emergency, he will be out for one month. Second, city staff would like to take a breather, or a step back to evaluate the process to date and receive feedback from our advisory boards. We need to get input and direction as to how we can do a better job of collecting and synthesizing comments on the vision. Simply put, we need to hear if there are ways we can .improve the input process. Staff also wants to check in with the city policy makers to ensure the planning process is worth pursuing and to determine if this is still a high pdority city project. (Them will not be any plans presented or considered at these two upcoming meetings.) We anticipate that the concept plan review meetings will take place in November. We still welcome and encourage your input in the intedm. Please use the survey forms handed out at the last meeting or check the city web site at www. ci.maplewood.mn.us. for our on-line survey form. Our office will inform you of future public meetings that involve the presentation of plans, whether they are city's consultant, the Gladstone Neighborhood .Coalition or others. Thank you, TOM EKSTRAND - SENIOR PLANNER p~com-dev\Gladstone\CDRB Meeting Neighborhood Notification 10-14(2) 11 OFFICE: Of CommUNiTY DeVE:LOPme:NT · 651-770-4560 · FA](: 651-748-3096 CiTY OF MAPLEWOOD · 1830 EASt COUNTY ROAD B · MAPLE:WOOD, MN 55109 Attachment 3 Proposed Gladstone Neighborhood Strategic Planning Timeline Tue., Oct. 12, 6 p.m.: Gladstone Neighborhood Strategic Planning Update: Community Design Review Board/Open Space/Historical Commission (Maplewood City Council Chambers) Mon., Oct. 18, 7 p.m.: Gladstone Neighborhood Strategic Planning Update: Planning Commission/Housing Redevelopment Authority/Parks Commission (Maplewood City Council Chambers) Tue., Nov. 9, 6 p.m.: Gladstone Concept Plan Recommendation: Community Design Review Board/Open Space/Historical Commission (Maplewood City Council Chambers) Mon., Nov. 15, 7 p.m.: Gladstone Concept Plan Recommendation: Planning Commission/Housing Redevelopment Authority/Parks Commission (Maplewood City Council Chambers) Mon., Dec. 13, 7 p.m.: Gladstone Final Concept Plan Approval: City Council (Maplewood City Council Chambers) Jan. 2005 -March 2005: Zoning and Land Use Designation Changes as Needed Based on the Adopted Gladstone Concept Plan: Public Hearings held at the Maplewood City Council Chambers March 8, 2005: Development Moratorium Expires - Land Owners within the Gladstone Strategic Planning Study Area Free to Develop According to Adopted Gladstone Concept Plan 12