The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-03-24 CDRB Packet AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, March 24, 2015 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road B East 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes: a. February 24, 2015 5. New Business: 6. Design Review: a. Approval of Design Review, Villages at Frost-English, 1955 English Street North b. Approval of Design Review of a Telecommunications Tower, Harmony Learning Center, 1961 County Road C East 7. Visitor Presentations: 8. Board Presentations: a. Election of Officers 9. Staff Presentations: 10. Adjourn MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2015 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Boardmember, Leo Burger Present Boardmember, Bill Kempe Present Absent Boardmember, Jason Lamers Chairperson, Matt Ledvina Present Absent Boardmember, Ananth Shankar Staff Present: Michael Martin, Planner Chris Swanson, Environmental & City Code Specialist JimTaylor, Parks Manager 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Boardmember Kempe moved to approve the agenda as submitted. Seconded by Boardmember Burger. Ayes - All The motion passed. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Boardmember Kempe moved to approve the October 28, 2014, CDRB minutes as submitted. Seconded by Boardmember.. Ayes – Chairperson Ledvina & Boardmember Burger Abstention - Kempe The motion passed. 5. NEW BUSINESS None. 6. DESIGN REVIEW a. Approval of Design Plans for Tuj Lub Courts at Keller Regional Park i. Parks Manager, James Taylor gave the presentation and answered questions of the board. February 24, 2015 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 1 Boardmember Kempe moved to approve the design plan for the building of four Tuj Lub Courts and an ADA accessible trail at Keller Park Golfview site. This project will be a joint partnership between the Ramsey County and the City of Maplewood. Seconded by Boardmember Burger. Ayes – All The motion passed. b. Maplewood Parks System Master Plan i. Parks Manager, Jim Taylor gave the Maplewood Parks System Master Plan and answered questions of the board. No action was required. c. 2014 Code Enforcement Year End Report i. Environmental & City Code Specialist, Chris Swanson gave the report on the 2014 Code Enforcement Year End Report and answered questions of the board. No action was required. d. 2014 Community Design Review Board Annual Report i. Planner, Michael Martin gave the 2014 CDRB Annual Report. Chairperson Ledvina moved to approve the 2014 Community Design Review Board Annual Report with the recommendation that the CDRB is willing to work on broader policy issues, not just reactive reviews. Seconded by Boardmember Kempe. Ayes – All The motion passed. e. Election of Officers i. Planner, Michael Martin briefly discussed the election of officers. Chairperson Ledvina moved to table the Election of Officers due to lack of boardmembers present. Seconded by boardmember Kempe. Ayes – All The motion to table passed. 7. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. 8. BOARD PRESENTATIONS None. February 24, 2015 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 2 9. STAFF PRESENTATIONS None. 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by Chairperson Ledvina at 7:04 p.m. February 24, 2015 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Melinda Coleman, City Manager FROM: Michael Martin, AICP, Planner DATE: March 18, 2015 SUBJECT: Approval of Design Review,Villages at Frost-English, 1955 English Street North A.Design Review Introduction Project Description Sherman Associates is proposing to redevelop the 5.5acre former Maplewood Bowlsite (1955 English) into a three-phased,mixed-use projectto be called The Villages at Frost-English.The first phase will be a four-story,multi-family building with 50 units. Phase two willbe an 80-unit multi-family building rented exclusively to seniors and phase three will be a 6,500 commercial retail building near Frost Avenue and English Street. Both underground and surface parking will be provided for the residential buildings. Requests To build this development, the applicants are requesting that the city council approve the following: 1.Aconditional use permit for a four-story building 2.Lot division 3.Design review Background On January 22, 2014, the Metropolitan Council approved a livable communities demonstration account (LCDA) grant request for the city of Maplewood for $1,900,000. This grant money is being used for public infrastructure improvements along Frost Avenue and has assisted the developer with the purchase of the Maplewood Bowl site. Discussion Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan The Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan (pertinent pages attached to this report) outlines nine guiding principles to redevelopment in the area as follows: 1.Design the future of Gladstone as a village. 2.Transform regional trails into celebrated village corridors. 3.Make Gladstone a compelling quality of life choice. 4.Weave natural systems and ecological function into the built and recreational environment. 5.Allow Gladstone’s future to whisper the story of its past. 6.Make walkability the standard. 7.Think of Gladstone as a neighborhood for all stages of life. 8.Make the Gladstone redevelopment plana model for others to follow. 9.Makemulti-modal links between Gladstone and areas beyond. The Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan further outlines development strategies for Frost Avenue North, which includes the former Maplewood Bowl site,as follows: Achieving a mix of neighborhood retail services fronting on Frost Avenue and English Street Incorporation of rainwater gardens, alternative pavement strategies, shared parking and other techniques to minimize surface water runoff and provide for treatment of runoff. Incorporation of recycled building materials, roof top gardens, solar energy systems and other sustainable building techniques that contribute to the educational and interpretive vision of the Gladstone Savanna. Flexibility to accommodate the bowling alley use and other local neighborhood retail businesses that desire to stay in the neighborhood. Redevelopment of the Frost Avenue North area has important financial relationships with the remainder of the Gladstone Neighborhood. Actual implementation efforts should explore ways that this project can provide financial resources to other parts of the master plan, particularly the improvement of Flicek Park and Frost Avenue. Development may orient toward the regional trails rather than back up to them. Building heights should be “stepped back” from the street as they grow in height. 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Density The city council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan on January 25, 2010. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan incorporated the land uses and densities established by the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. The 2030 Comprehensive Planguides this site as mixed use.Mixed usehas a density range of 6to 31units per net acre. A total of 130 units will eventual be built on the residential sites, 4.6 acresof land, providing a density of 28.3units per net acre. Zoning The siteis currently zoned as mixed use (mu). Thiszoning district allows for amixed use multi- family and commercial retail development. Conditional Use Permit for a Four-Story Building The mixed use district requiresa conditional use permit for any residential buildings more than three-stories or 35 feet in height. The proposed phase one multi-family building will bea four- story building and approximately 43 feet in height as measure from grade to the mid-point of the roof. The Gladstone Master plan encourages buildings along Frost Avenue and English Street to be three or four-stories tall. The planning commission recommended the applicant revise the Frost Avenue elevation to step back the fourth floor from the rest of the building. The applicant is agreeable to this request. The multi-family senior building proposed to be built in phase two, is tentatively planned to be four-stories as well and will need to get city council approval for a conditional use permit. There are two buildings in Maplewood that currently have four-stories. The first one is the Parkview Court Apartments,amulti-family housing development in Gladstone,which is located just to the west of the Shores at Lake Phalen development. Parkview Court Apartments wereconstructed with four floors in 1965, prior to thecity’s requirement that all multi-family housing be limited to three stories without aconditional use permit. The city council did approve a four-story senior housing building, called the Regents, which is part of the Legacy Village planned unit development. Design Review Site Plan The phase one building will be constructed on the southwest corner of the site. The main entry will face Frost Avenueand be just east of the building. The overall parking lot and access drive lane will also provide a connection off of English Avenue. The two access drives will be located where there are currently curb cuts to access the site. This drive aisle is at least 24 feet in width at all points. Phase two, 80-unit multi-family senior building, is proposed to be located on the north side of the site and phase three, 6,500 commercial retail building, will be located near the intersection of Frost Avenue and English Street. The city’s mixed use district requires a front yard setback for multiple dwelling buildings to be no more than 20 feet, with a minimum of zero feet. Because there is a single-family home to the west of the site, the home is also zoned mixed use, a 10-foot side yard setback is required. A rear yard setback is not applicable to phase one. The phase one, 50-unit multi-family building, meets all the zoning ordinances required setbacks. The applicant will be required to apply and go through thecity’s land use and design review processes for phases two and threeto ensure all setbacks are either met or the applicant will be required to apply for a variance as needed. Building Elevations Exteriorbuilding walls adjacent to or visible from a public right-of-way or public open space may not exceed 40 feet in width. New buildings of more than 40 feet in width are allowed if the building wall is divided into smaller increments, between 20 and 40 feet in width, through articulation of the façade. Exterior-building materials shall be classified primary, secondary or accent material. Primary materials shall cover at least 60 percent of all façades of a building. Secondary materials may cover no more than 30 percent of all façades of a building. Accent materials may include door and window frames, lintels, cornices and other minor elements, and may cover no more than ten percent of all façades of a building.The community design review boardmay consider exceptions to the above-mentioned design standards if they uphold the integrity of the guidelines and result in an attractive, cohesive development design as intended by ordinance. The primary materials for proposed 50-unit multi-family building are brick and cement fiber board siding –each being utilized with two different tones of color. Cement fiber board textured panels will be used in isolated spaces throughout the building. The roof will be covered with architectural asphalt shingles. Windows and balconies are generously located throughout the building. During the planning commission’s review regarding the conditional use permit required for a four-story building the commission recommended the application revise the Frost Avenue elevation to step back the fourth floor from the rest of the building. The applicant is agreeable to this recommendation. Phases two and three will be required to come back for design review but ordinance will require them to use compatible materials and colors as the building in phase one. Tree Preservation The tree inventory plan shows 45 significant trees on the site, equaling 678 diameter inches. Redevelopment of the site will result in the removal of 14 significant trees (equaling 177 diameter inches). Four of the 14 trees removed are located in the FrostAvenue right-of-way and are being removed as part of the City’s Gladstone Area Phase 2 street improvements. Two of the 14 trees removed are located in the English Street right-of-way to accommodate the new driveway into the site. Because the applicant is able to preserve two specimen trees and many significant trees located on the north and west side of the site, the City’s tree mitigation calculation for redevelopment of this site only requires the replacement of 16 caliper inches (8 –2” caliper trees). The landscape plan shows 43 new trees planted on the site, equaling 90 caliper inches of replacement trees. In addition, the City will be installing five trees along the Frost Avenue right-of-way as part of the Gladstone Phase 2 street improvements. The applicant meets the City’s tree replacement requirements. Landscaping All areas of land not occupied by buildings, parking, driveways, sidewalks or other hard surface are required tobe sodded or mulched and landscaped with approved ground cover, flowers, shrubbery and trees.Hard-surfaced areas, including sidewalks and patios, must include amenities such as benches, planters and bike racks. For parking lots consisting of 20 or more spaces, interior landscape islands are required. Interior landscape islands shall be at a rate of one landscape island for every ten parking spaces. Landscape islands shall be a minimum of 144 square feet in area and shall be a minimum of eight feet in width, as measured from back of curb to back of curb. Perimeter landscape or pedestrian walls are required for all parking lots and shall be established along the road and edges of the parking lot. The landscape treatment or pedestrian wall shall run the full length of the parking lot and be located between the property line and the edge of the parking lot. The applicant shall submit to staff for approval a revised landscape plan showing the following details: a.Addition of at least two trees to be installed by the applicant in or near the English Street right-of-way to replace the two trees removed with the construction of the driveway. b.Landscape requirements per the Mixed-Use Zoning District including: 1.Landscape Islands: a)One overstory tree with a trunk size a minimum of two-and-one- half inches in caliper shall be provided for every landscape island. b)A minimum of 50 percent of every landscape island shall be planted with an approved ground cover in the appropriate density to achieve complete cover within two years. Mulch may only be used around the base of theplant material to retain moisture. 2.Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping: a)The primary plant materials used in perimeter parking lot landscaping adjacent the road shall be over story trees. Ornamental trees, shrubs, hedges and other plant materials may be used to supplement the over story trees, but shall not be the sole contribution to such landscaping. 3.Over story trees are required at regular intervals along the road to help define the road edge, to buffer pedestrians from vehicles and to provide shade. The over story trees shall be located in a planting strip at least five feet wide between curb and sidewalk, or in a planting structure of design acceptable to the city. Lighting The lighting plan shows 7freestanding lights throughout the parking lot. City ordinancerequires that illumination from outdoor lighting be limited to .4 foot candles at all property lines and that freestanding lights maintain a maximum height of 16feet. In addition, since the Villages at Frost-Englishis a signatureredevelopment project in the Gladstone neighborhood, the city should ensure that the outdoor lighting proposed on this site is compatible to the street lighting proposed for the Phase 2public improvements along Frost Avenue and English Street. The photometric plan submitted does not state the height of the poles and exceed the illuminationmaximums at the shared property lines with the existing liquor store property. To ensure compliance with city ordinanceand compatibility with the Phase 2Gladstone public improvements, city staff recommends that a revised lighting and photometric plan be submitted to stafffor approval. Trash Enclosure All trash and recycling will be maintained within the building, for pick up through the underground garage. Because of the size of this development and number of residents, staff also recommends that there be trash and recycling receptacles located throughout the site to ensure residents, visitors, and employees have access to these containers when walking the trails. Unit Sizes Ordinancerequires minimumunit sizes of 580 square feet per efficiency or one-bedroom units. The 11one-bedroom units will be 807 square feetin size, which meets ordinancerequirements. Ordinancerequires two-bedroom units to have a minimum unit size of 740 square feet. The 22 two-bedroom units will be 994 square feetin size, also meeting ordinancerequirements. Ordinancerequires three-bedroom units to have a minimum unit size of 860square feet. The 17three-bedroom units will be 1,365square feet in size, also meeting ordinancerequirements. Parking Ordinancerequires aminimum parking standard of two parking spaces per unit, with at least one space being covered. The 50-unit building would require a least 100 spaces. Fifty spaces are being provided in an underground garage. The proposed site plan shows144 surface spaces. Phase one parking requirements are being met. In anticipating the parking needs for phases two and three, the 80-unit senior building would require 80 covered and 80 surface spaces and the commercial building would require approximately 33 spaces –depending on the actual user(s). The 80-unit senior building will have at least 80 underground parking spaces. After phase one there will be 94 surface spaces available for use. By ordinance phase two would need 80 surface spaces and the commercial building would require at least 33 spaces, meaning a deficit of 19 spaces. The applicant will likely seek approval of a parking waiver and ashared parking agreement between the three phases once it applies for phases two and three. The senior building will be a likely candidate to waive some of the parking requirementsas every unit will have anunderground space. Lot Division The applicant is requesting that the property be divided in three parcels to reflect the three phases. This will be done to assist with the financing of each individual building but will also clean up the existing conditions of the former Maplewood Bowl propertywhere 12 parcels currently make up the site. Approval of the lot division should be conditioned on the developer dedicating anyneededaccess, pedestrian, drainage, and utility easements along the entire property linesadjacent to Frost Avenueand English Street, as required by the city engineer. Department Comments Police ChiefPaul Schnell,Maplewood Police Department:No concerns. Nick Carver, Building Official: Must meet the current International Building Ordinance requirements. Butch Gervais, Fire Marshal: Shall install all fire protection systems according to state and local ordinances. Must also have minimum 20-foot access road for fire department. Jon Jarosch, Engineering Review:Please see attached report. Shann Finwall, Environmental Review: Please see attached report. Commission Actions Planning Commission On March 17, 2015, the planning commission helda public hearing and recommended approval ofthe condition use permit and lot division.The planning commission did add a recommendation relating to thestepping back of the fourth floor of the building on the Frost Avenue elevation. Community Design Review Board On March 24, 2015the community design review board will reviewthe design plans for this project and make a recommendation. Budget Impact None. Recommendations 1.Approve the design plans for the 50-unit multi-family building and the site plan for the Villages at Frost-English, date stamped February 23, 2015, for the redevelopment project located at 1955 English Avenue. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: a.Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. b.Satisfy the requirements set forth in the staff report authored by staff engineer Jon Jarosch, dated February 26, 2015. c.Satisfy the requirements set forth in the staff report authored by environmental planner Shann Finwall, dated March 2, 2015. d.Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant must submit to staff for approval the following items: 1.Verification of The Villages at Frost-Englishlot division has been recorded. 2.Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall comply with all requirements as specified in the city engineering department’s February 26, 2015review. 3.The applicant shall submit to staff for approval a revised landscape plan showing the following details: a.Addition of at least two trees to be installed by the applicant in or near the English Street right-of-way to replace the two trees removed with the construction of the driveway. b.Landscape requirements per the Mixed-Use Zoning District including: i.Landscape Islands: 1.One overstory tree with a trunk size a minimum of two- and-one-half inches in caliper shall be provided for every landscape island. 2.A minimum of 50 percent of every landscape island shall be planted with an approved ground cover in the appropriate density to achieve complete cover within two years. Mulch may only be used around the base of the plant material to retain moisture. ii.Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping: 1.The primary plant materials used in perimeter parking lot landscaping adjacent the road shall be over story trees. Ornamental trees, shrubs, hedges and other plant materials may be used to supplement the over story trees, but shall not be the sole contribution to such landscaping. ii.Over story trees are required at regular intervals along the road to help define the road edge, to buffer pedestrians from vehicles and to provide shade. The over story treesshall be located in a planting strip at least five feet wide between curb and sidewalk, or in a planting structure of design acceptable to the city. 4.Enter into a developer’s agreement with the city which will cover the installation of all public improvements surrounding and within the property. 5.Sign a maintenance agreement for the ongoing maintenance of all required rainwater gardens and infiltration basins. 6.A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. 7.Revise the Frost Avenue building elevation stepping the fourth floor back from the rest of the building. 8.Revise the photometric plan showing code compliance and height of all light fixtures. e.The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building: 1.Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. 2.Provide continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and driveways. 3.Install all required landscaping and an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. 4.Install all required outdoor lighting. 5.Install all required sidewalks and trails. f.If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: 1)The city determinesthat the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. 2)The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinishedexterior improvements by June 1 of the following year if occupancy of the building is in the fall or winter or within six weeks of occupancy of the building if occupancy is in the spring or summer. g.The buildings for Phases Two and Three of the Villages at Frost-English devleopment are required to be reviewed for design review by the community design review board. h.All work shall follow the approved plans. City staff may approve minor changes. . Citizen Comments Staff surveyed the 62propertyowners within 500 feet of this site for their comments. There were 3written replies. None werein favor, two were against the projectand one had no comment. Against 1.Both my husband and I do not agree with the phase 1 due to the kind of people the bowling alley attracted. We are afraid that these would be the same kind that would rent. Growing up poor myself, I know how wild unsupervised kids can get and a lot of these households the parents are drug users. If we wanted to live in that kind of neighborhood we would have bought a house somewhere else. We love how quiet and peaceful the neighborhood is and we know all our neighbors. With the increase in drug, theft and domestic violence and not to mention vandalism, how will it improve out property value?(Hedin, 1997 English Street) 2.I’m not too eager about having a four story, 50-unit multi-family home being built because a four-story building is too tall and I feel that it will increase the noise level in the neighborhood. I’m fine with the senior housing building as long as it isn’t taller than two stories. (Lee, 1236 Ryan Avenue East) No Comment 1.No Comment (Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority, 1870 English Street) Reference Information Site Description Site Size:5.5Acres Existing Land Use: Vacant–formerbowling alley Surrounding Land Uses North: Gateway Trail South: Liquor store, Frost Avenue and Gladstone Savannah East:English Street and Moose Lodge West:Atlantic Street, a vacant lot, a single-family home and a commercial building Planning Existing Land Use:Mixed Use Existing Zoning:Mixed Use (mu) Criteria for Approval Criteria for Conditional Use PermitApproval Article V, Sections 44-1091 through 44-1105 states that the city council may grant a CUP subject to the nine standards for approval noted in the conditional use permit resolution attached. Application Date The city received complete applicationsfor a conditional use permit, lot divisionand site and design plans approval on February 23, 2015. The 60-day review deadline for a decision is April 24, 2015. As stated in Minnesota State Statute 15.99, the city is allowed to take an additional 60 days if necessary in order to complete the review of the application. Attachments 1.Location Map 2.Land Use Map 3.Zoning Map 4.Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan –Guiding Principles 5.Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan –Development Strategies for Frost Avenue 6.Applicant Narrative 7.Site Plan 8.Landscape Plan 9.Photometric Plan 10.Building Elevations 11.Staff Engineer Jon Jarosch’s comments, February 26, 2015 12.Environmental Planner Shann Finwall’s comments, March 2, 2015 13.Conditional Use Permit Resolution 14.Applicant’s plans (separate attachment) Maplewood Heights Kohlman Lake Hazelwood Sherwood Glen Parkside Western Hills Gladstone Hillside Beaver Lake Battle Creek Vista Hills Highwood Carver Ridge Maplewood, City of Maplewood 1955 English Street - Villages at Frost and English Maplewood, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i- cubed, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, Former Maplewood Bowl site - Overview Map USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, City of Maplewood, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Attachment 2 Maplewood, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthsta 1955 English Street - Villages at Frost and English Legend Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, City Maplewood, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, MapmyIndia, © Low Density Residential Former Maplewood Bowl site - Land Use Map OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Open Space Mixed Use Attachment 3 Maplewood, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthsta 1955 English Street - Villages at Frost and English Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, City Legend Maplewood, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, MapmyIndia, © Former Maplewood Bowl site - Zoning Map OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Single Dwelling (r1) Mixed Use (mu) Open Space/Park Double Dwelling (r2) Attachment 4 Attachment 4 Attachment 4 Attachment 4 Attachment 6 w;zm;·C©·9mzw5;-©z¦·zE TheVillagesatFrostEnglishisaproposed3phaseNewConstructiondevelopment locatedatthenorthwestcorneroftheintersectionofEnglishStandFrostAve.Thecurrentuse ofthesiteisanabandonedbowlingalleyandparkinglot. Thefirstphasewillbea4storybuildingwith50unitsof1,2,and3bedroomlayout options.Fortyofthe,Òz7zmx50unitswillbeaffordableandservehouseholdsatorbelow 60%oftheAreaMedianIncome,and10unitswillbeavailableatMarketRaterentlevels.Solid Ground(formerlyEastMetroWomen'sCouncil)willprovidetailoredresidentservicesthatwill befundedthroughtheprojectoperatingbudget.Theproductdesignhastakeninto considerationthesurroundingareasandneighborhoodsintowhichitwillblendseamlessly.The Villageswillbebuiltwithhighqualitymaterialsandreflectenergysaving/greenmaterials committedtowithintheGreenCommunitiesCertificationWorkbook. Theapartmentswillincludefullyequippedkitchens(range/oven,refrigerator/freezer, dishwasherandmicrowave),amplenaturallight,durableflooringinthekitchensand bathroomswithcarpetinthelivingroomsandbedrooms,balconies,andinunitwasherand dryers.ThebuildingwillprovideacommunityroomwithaTVloungearea,patiowithgrilling area,freecommonareaWiFi,afitnesscenter,andonsitemanagement.Thebuildingwill contain50unitsofundergroundparkingandapproximately50surfaceparkingspaces. FinancingforPhaseIincludesanawardof9%housingtaxcreditsfromMHFA,a conventionalloan,anLCDAgrant,proposedTIFfromtheCityofMaplewood,andHOMEFunds fromRamseyCounty. unitmultifamilybuildingalongthenorthportionof PhaseIIoftheVillageswillbean80 thepropertyrentedexclusivelytoseniors.Thedesignofthisbuildingwillbeverycomparable tothePhaseIbuildingandwillincludesimilaramenitiesandbuildingcomponents. PhaseIII,whichmaybebuiltatnearlythesametimeasPhaseII,isanapproximately ailbuildingbuiltontheverysoutheastcornerofthesitealong 6,500squarefootcommercial/ret theroundabout.Acommercial/retailtenant(s)is/areyettobefinalizedforthisbuilding. Webelievethisdevelopmentisinthe/z·äxbestinterestbecauseittakesan unused/vacatedparceloflandinaprominentlocationandbreathesnewlifeintoit.The constructionofthreenewbuildingswillbringapproximately130+newresidentstothearea pluscommercialspace.Additionally,ithelpsactivatethecorridoralongFrostAve,the Gloster/GladstonePark,andtheGatewayStateTrail.Furthermore,thisnewusewould increasesurroundingpropertyvalues,maintainthecharacterofthesurroundingarea,would notcreateexcessiveadditionalcostsforpublicfacilities,andwouldhaveminimaladverse environmentaleffects.TheVillagesisaanopportunityforafreshstartforthispropertyand ensurestheprovisionofqualityrentalhousingforyearstocome. Attachment 7 Copyright Kaas Wilson Architects11/26/2014 10:55:23 AMP:\1444-Sherman-Maplewood-Frost English MHFA\Models\1444-Sherman Attachment 8 Copyright Kaas Wilson Architects11/26/2014 10:55:23 AMP:\1444-Sherman-Maplewood-Frost English MHFA\Models\1444-Sherman Attachment 9 #DateComments Drawn By: SANDY MAPLEWOOD PROJECT Checked By: ROSS Date:1/29/2015 Scale: AS NOTED Attachment 10 Attachment 10 Attachment 10 Attachment 11 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: Villages at Frost & English – 1955English Street PROJECT NO: 14-21 COMMENTS BY: Jon Jarosch, P.E. – Staff Engineer DATE: 2-26-2015 PLAN SET: Engineering plans dated 1-2-2014 Preliminary Plat dated 2-3-2015 Site survey dated 10-15-2014 REPORTS: Storm Water Management Report – Dated 2-19-2015 The applicant is proposing to redevelop the Maplewood Bowl sitevia a three phase project. The applicant is requesting design approval for the site plan, along with plat approval. As the amount of disturbance on this site is greater than 0.5 acre, the applicantis requiredto meet the City’s stormwater quality, ratecontrol, and other stormwater management requirements.There is a thirty-onepercentreduction in impervious surfacesproposed on this site.The submitted stormwater management plan depicts the project meetingthe City’s requirements as it pertains to infiltration and rate control. Thisreviewdoes not constitute a final review of the plans, as the applicant will need to submit construction documents for final review,along with ratified agreements, prior to issuing building and grading permits. The following are engineeringreview comments on the design and act as conditions prior to issuing permits: Drainage and Stormwater Management 1)The project shall be submitted to the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) for review. All conditions of RWMWD shall be met. 2)The applicant is proposingthe use ofinfiltrationto meet water quality requirements.As such, the applicant shall submit copies of geotechnical information (soil borings, infiltrations tests, etc.) to support the infiltration rates shown in the hydraulic calculations. 3)Construction details shall be provided for the infiltration areas. 4)The infiltration rate noted in the storm-water management report is 0.05 inches per hour and is inadequate to meet the 48-hour drawdown requirement. The applicant shall verify that the infiltration rate utilized is correct. It may be necessary to adjust the design to Attachment 11 ensure the infiltration basins draw down to surface level within a 48 hour timeframe. It should be noted that the maximum depth allowed for infiltration practices is 2-feet. 5)The applicant shall provide storm sewer pipe sizing details for all onsite storm sewer. 6)The overall project site is shown to meet the City’s rate control requirements. The applicant shall provide additional details ensuring that rate control is being met for the sub-drainage areas of the project. The applicant shall work with the City to meet the intent of the City’s stormwater ordinance and standards. 7)The pond at the northeast corner of the development is in close proximity to the Phase II senior facility. As such, it is of great importance to ensure the hydraulics in this area are paid particularly close attention. In particular, it appears that the emergency overflow for the pond is at or above 896 feet in elevation. According to the City’s standards, the lowest floor elevation of the building shall be a minimum of 1-foot above the emergency overflow. The applicant shall review the grading and hydraulics in this area. The applicant shall work with the City Engineer to meet the intent of the City’s stormwater ordinance and standards. 8)The applicant shall provide information ensuring the Phase II senior facility is protected from the lateral movement of water through the soil due to the close proximity with the proposed pond. 9)Emergency overland overflows shall be identified on the plans for the pond and infiltration basins. Similarly, the high-water level (HWL) and normal water level (NWL) shall be noted on the plans. 10)Theapplicant shall provide further grading details depicting the area between the west infiltration basin and the underground parking entrance drives. The applicant shall ensure that the grading in this areaprevents the infiltration basinfrom overflowing into the parking garages. 11)The applicant shall note whether the existing catch basin near the entrance off of English Street is proposed to be removed or reused in the final layout. 12)Sumpedmanholes (typically 3-foot deep sumps) or other pre-treatment devices shall be provided immediately upstream of the pond and infiltration basins to protect from sedimentation. Grading and Erosion Control 13)All slopesshall be 3H:1V or flatter. Attachment 11 14)The proposed infiltration areashall be protected from sedimentation throughout construction. 15)Inlet protection devices shall be installed on allexistingand proposedonsite storm seweruntil all exposed soils onsite are stabilized. Additionally, storm sewerinlets along Atlantic Street, English Street, and Frost Avenueshall be protected throughout construction. 16)Atlantic Street, English Street, andFrost Avenueshall be swept as needed to keep the road clear of sediment and construction debris. 17)Perimeter control, such as silt-fence or bio-roll, shall be installed around the liquor store property to prevent construction related sediment or debris from entering the property. Any construction related materials that leave the construction site onto adjoining properties shall be removed by the contractor immediately. 18)All pedestrian facilities shall be ADA compliant. 19)A copy of the project SWPPP and NDPES Permit shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 20)The SWPPP included in the plans currently notes the use of underground storage chambers under part “D.” The SWPPP shallbe reviewed and updated to ensure it is specific to this project. 21)A dedicated concrete washout area/method shall be provided per MPCA rules. 22)Stabilized construction entrances shall be placed at all entry/exit points to the site, including the access off of Atlantic Street. 23)The Applicant shall provide a phasing plan that details a schedule of the projects progression as it relates to stormwater pollution prevention. Temporary stabilization of exposed soils is likely necessary between the time the existing site infrastructure is removed and the various phases of the development are completed. Sanitary Sewer and Water Service 24)Sanitary sewer service piping shall be schedule 40 PVC or SDR 35. 25)The proposed water service modifications are subject to the review and conditions of Saint Paul Regional Water Services(SPRWS). The applicant shall submit plans and specifications to SPRWS for review and meet all requirements they may haveprior to the issuance of a grading permit by the City. Attachment 11 26)The applicant shall note whether or not the proposed water service and fire hydrant, shown north of the Phase III commercial building, is to be public or private. If public, a utility easement shall be provided. 27)The applicant shall be responsible for paying any SAC, WAC, or PAC charges related to the improvements proposed with this project.Appropriate fees shall be charged during the permittingprocess. Other 28)The plans shall be signed by a professional engineer currently licensed in the State of Minnesota. 29)The applicant shall ensure the site is navigable and accessible by emergency service vehicles. 30)A 40-foot wide sanitary sewer easement (Document No. 1800344) is shown on the site survey but is not shown on the preliminary plat drawing. The plans shall be updated to show whether or not this easement is to be vacated. 31)The plat shall be updated to include standard 5-foot wide drainage and utility easements along lot lines adjoining other plats or properties. The plat shall also be updated to show 10-foot drainage and utility easements along all lot lines adjoining public ways. 32)Agreements or easements between the three proposed lots are necessary to address the drainage, utilities, roads, and parking lots that cross lot lines within the proposed development. These agreements shall detail theshared usage andresponsibilities of each lot as it pertains to these common amenities, including long-term maintenance. A copy of these agreements shall be provided to the City of Maplewood. 33)Two trees are shown to be removed along Frost Avenue in front of the liquor store property. The applicant shall review the need for these tree removals, and if found necessary, coordinate their removal with the property owner. 34)A monitoring well is noted at the front of the existing Maplewood Bowl building. The applicant shall provide information on this well, specifically whether or not it has been sealed per Minnesota Department of Health requirements. 35)A right-of way permit shall be submitted for any work within the public right-of-way. 36)The Owner shall sign a maintenance agreement, prepared by the City, for all storm water treatment devices (sumps, storm sewer, infiltration basins, ponds,etc.). Attachment 11 37)The applicant shall provide information regarding the restoration of the areas not proposed for seeding or planting beds. Are all other areas proposed to be sodded? The following comments were provided by the City’s Natural Resources Coordinator, VirginiaGaynor. General Comments on Large Infiltration Basins Large infiltration basins will ideally be planted with deep-rooted native plants. The city requires a portion of the basin to be plantedrather than seeded; typically a minimum of 5000 square feet of plantings are required on large basins. Using plants rather than seeds hastens establishment and provides a better chance of successful establishment. Basin bottoms and lower elevations almost never establish successfully from seed since the seed is washed away when stormwater flows into the basin. Contractors typically take one of three approaches to plant material for large basins: 1.Plant shrubs in the bottom of the basin and seed the slopes. A 10,000 square foot bottom would require about 275 shrubsplanted 6’ apart. Large shrubs such as highbush American cranberry can be planted at this spacing; most shorter shrub species require closer spacing. If shrubs are planted, they would be mulched with shredded hardwood mulch. 2.On sites that don’t need immediate aesthetic appeal, a combination of seed and plugs is sometimes used. The basin is seeded with a native seed mix, then grasses, sedges, and flowers and are planted in the bottom of the basin 18” apart (about 2250 plants for 5000 sq ft). This spacing of plants does not provide full coverage, it just helps ensure establishment of native species in the basin bottom in case seed is washed away. 3.Plant portions of the basin slopes to better integrate the basin into the site design. This may include shrub beds, perennials (native or non-native), or a combination of trees, shrubs, and perennials. These beds would be mulched and maintained as landscaped areas. For the bottom, do a combination of seeding and planting as explained in #2 above. Requirements: 1.The City would like to see a minimum of 5000 sq ft of planted areas for each of the two infiltration areas. 2.Provide a landscape drawing for each infiltration basin, including list of species, container size, spacing, and quantities. 3.If proposing seeding the bottom of the basins, provide explanation of measures that will be taken to ensure seed does not wash away. 4.For any area using a native seed mix (ex: pond slopes), provide information on maintenance for planting year, Year 2 and Year3, addressing what maintenance activities will be required and what entity (developer, owner, etc.) will take on this responsibility. (See attached note regarding Native Seedings.) If you have questions about plant selection for infiltration basins or about native seeding, please contact Ginny Gaynor at 651-249-2416. Attachment 11 A Note on Using Native Seed Mixes Seeding and establishing vegetation from a native seed mix is very different from, and more difficult than, establishing turf. It is essential the applicant, owner, and groundskeeper understand what they are facing. Here are some important things to know about native seedings: a.The city signs off on native seedings when native species establish, not when the cover cropestablishes. This is typically two to three years after seeding. Escrow to cover the vegetation establishment is typically not released until the prairie vegetation has established. Portions of the escrow may be released if the applicant is on track with maintenance of the prairie vegetation. b.For the first two or three years after seeding, a prairie or basin will have more weeds than native vegetation. It will look very weedy and the owner may need to educate people about the establishment process to make this weedy phase more acceptable. c. For native seedings, Maplewood strongly recommends that applicants contract with a company that specializes in native seedings, rather than a turf contractor or landscaper. d.Maplewood strongly recommends that applicants enter into a 2 or 3-year maintenance contract with their native seeding specialist to ensure successful establishment of the native vegetation. e.Native seedings require maintenance, especially the first few years after seeding. Every site responds differently, but maintenance typicallyincludes: i.Year of planting/Year 1: When weeds or cover crop reach 12”-15” high, cut vegetation with flail mower 5”- 6” high. Expect to mow about once per month if seeded in June. ii.Year 2: Mow once or twice this year when weeds reach 12”-15”. Monitor site for weeds and cut back weeds that threaten the success of the seeding (thistle, spotted knapweed, yellow and white sweet clovers, etc.). May need to spot spray selected weeds. iii.Year 3: Selective weed management (cutting and/or spraying). In fall, evaluate establishment of natives and reseed if necessary. - END COMMENTS - Attachment 12 Environmental Review Project: The Villages at Frost-English Dateof Plans: January 2, 2014 Date of Review: March 2, 2015 Location: 1955 English Street Reviewers: Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner (651) 249-2304,shann.finwall@ci.maplewood.mn.us Background: The project redevelops the Maplewood Bowl site at 1955 English Street into a mixed-use housing and commercial development. The site is located within the City’s Gladstone Area Redevelopment Plan and Mixed-Use Zoning District.The projectmust comply with the City’s tree preservation ordinance and landscape requirements as specified in the Mixed-Use Zoning District. Tree Preservation Ordinance : Maplewood’s treepreservation ordinance describes a significant tree as a hardwood tree with a minimum of 6 inches in diameter, an evergreen tree with a minimum of 8 inches in diameter, and a softwood tree with a minimum of 12 inches in diameter. A specimen tree is any tree that is 28 inches in diameter or larger. The ordinance requires any significant tree removed during redevelopment of the site to bereplaced based on a tree mitigation calculation. The calculation takes into account the size of a tree removed versus overall significant trees situated on the property. The ordinance encourages the preservation of specimen trees. Tree Removal :The tree inventory plan shows 45 significant trees on the site, equaling 678 diameterinches. Redevelopment of the site will result in the removal of 14 significant trees (equaling 177diameterinches).Four of the 14 trees removed are located in the Frost Avenue right-of-way and are being removed as part of the City’s Gladstone Area Phase 2 street improvements. Two of the14 trees removed are located in the English Street right-of-way to accommodate the new driveway into the site. Tree Replacement: Because the applicant is able to preserve two specimen trees and many significant trees located on the north and west side of the site, the City’s tree mitigation calculation for redevelopment of this site only requires the replacement of 16 caliper inches(8 – 2” caliper trees).The landscape plan shows 43new trees planted on the site,equaling 90caliper inchesof replacement trees.In addition, the City will be installing five trees along the Frost Avenue right-of-way as part of the Gladstone Phase 2 street improvements. The applicant meets the City’s tree replacement requirements, but should submit a revised landscape plan showing additional details as outlined below. 1 Attachment 12 Mixed Use Zoning District Landscape Requirements: 1.All areas of land not occupied by buildings, parking, driveways, sidewalks or other hard surface shall be sodded or mulched and landscaped with approved ground cover, flowers, shrubbery and trees. 2.Hard-surfaced areas, including sidewalks and patios, must include amenities such as benches, planters and bike racks. 3.For parking lots consisting of 20 or more spaces, interior landscape islands are required. Interior landscape islands shall be at a rate of one landscape island for every ten parking spaces. Landscaping areas located along the perimeter of a parking lot beyond the curb or edge of pavement shall not be included toward satisfyingthis requirement. Landscape islands shall be a minimum of 144 square feet in area and shall be a minimum of eight feet in width, as measured from back of curb to back of curb. The landscape islands shall be improved as follows: a.One overstory tree witha trunk size a minimum of two-and-one-half inches in caliper shall be provided for every landscape island. b.A minimum of 50 percent of every landscape island shall be planted with an approved ground cover in the appropriate density to achieve complete cover within two years. Mulch may only be used around the base of the plant material to retain moisture. 4.Perimeter landscape or pedestrian walls are required for all parking lots and shall be established along the road and edges of the parking lot. Thelandscape treatment or pedestrian wall shall run the full length of the parking lot and be located between the property line and the edge of the parking lot as follows: a.Perimeter parking lot landscaping adjacent the road shall be at least ten feet in width, as measured from the property line or edge of a private road to the back of curb. b.The primary plant materials used in perimeter parking lot landscaping adjacent the road shall be over story trees. Ornamental trees, shrubs, hedges and other plant materials may be used to supplement the over story trees, but shall not be the sole contribution to such landscaping. c. Perimeter parking lot landscaping along the rear and sides of a parking lot (not adjacent the road) shall be planted with a minimum of 50 percent ground cover approved by the city to achieve complete cover within two years. Mulch may only be used around the base of the plant material to retain moisture. d.In lieu of, or in addition to, perimeter parking lot landscaping, a pedestrian wall along the perimeter of the parking lot may be constructed. The pedestrian wall is limited to four feet in height, must be at least 80 percent opaque and must be architecturally compatible to the principal building or development. 2 Attachment 12 5.Over story trees are required at regular intervals along the road to help define the road edge, to buffer pedestrians from vehicles and to provide shade. The over story trees shall be located in a planting strip at least five feet wide between curb and sidewalk, or in a planting structure of design acceptable to the city. Tree Preservation Recommendation: 1.Revised Landscape Plan - The applicant should submit a revised landscape plan showing the following details: a.Sidewalk to be constructed along Frost Avenue. b.Trees to be installed along Frost Avenue right-of-way as part of the Gladstone Phase 2 street improvements. c. Addition of at least two trees to be installed by the applicant in or near the English Street right-of-way to replace the two trees removedwith the construction of the driveway. d.Landscape requirements per the Mixed-Use Zoning District including: 1)Landscape Islands: a)One overstory tree with a trunk size a minimum of two-and- one-half inches in caliper shall be provided for every landscape island. b)A minimum of 50 percent of every landscape island shall be planted with an approved ground cover in the appropriate density to achieve complete cover within two years. Mulch may only be used around the base of the plant material to retain moisture. 2)Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping: a)The primary plant materials used in perimeter parking lot landscaping adjacent the road shall be over story trees. Ornamental trees, shrubs, hedges and other plant materials may be used to supplement the over story trees, but shall not be the sole contribution to such landscaping. 3) Over story trees are required at regular intervals along the road to help define the road edge, to buffer pedestrians from vehicles and to provide shade. The over story trees shall be located in a planting strip at least five feet wide between curb and sidewalk, or in a planting structure of design acceptable to the city. 3 Attachment 13 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Shane LaFave, of Sherman Associates, has applied for a conditional use permit for a four-story buildingin a MU (mixed use) district. WHEREAS,Sections 44-681of the city ordinances requires a conditional use permit for residential buildings taller than 35 feet or three storiesin a MU (mixed use) zoning district. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located at 1955 English Street. The property’s legal description is: Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22, Block 1, together with the vacated alley adjacent thereto and the East half of vacated Chambers Street adjacent thereto, and Lots 23, 24 and 25, Block 1, except the East 80 feet thereof, together with the vacated East half of vacated Chambers Street adjacent thereto. And Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 , 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16, Block 2, together with the vacated alley adjacent thereto and the West half ofvacated Chamber Street adjacent thereto, all in Lincoln Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, together with the East half of the vacated alley adjacent thereto, all in Lincoln Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Ramsey County, Minnesota; excepting therefrom that part of said Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Lincoln Park, conveyed to the City of Maplewood by Quit Claim Deed dated August 19, 2002, filed December 15, 2004, as Document No. 3815861, and described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of Lot 1, Block 1, said Lincoln Park, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence Westerly along the South line of said Lot 1, a distance of 64.00 feet; thence Northeasterly to a point on the East line of said Lot 2, distant 70.00 feet North of the Southeast corner of said Lot 1, as measured along the East line of said Lots 1 and 2; thence Southerly along said East line of Lots 1 and 2, a distance of 70.00 feet to the point of beginning. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, Kuhl's Rearrangement of Lots 1, 2, 3, 20, 21 and 22, Block 2, Lincoln Park, together with the vacated alley adjacent thereto and together with the West half of vacated Chambers Street adjacent thereto, according to the recorded plat thereof, Ramsey County, Minnesota. And Lots 17 and 18, Block 2, together with the West half of the vacated alley adjacent thereto, all in Lincoln Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Attachment 13 WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1.On March 17, 2015, 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 atthe hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission also considered the reports and recommendation of city staff. The planning commission recommended that the city council ______this permit. 2.On April 13, 2015, thecity council considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council _________ the above-described conditional use permit, because: 1.The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 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 or methods 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 generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 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 public facilities or services. 8.The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9.The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.The engineering department shall review and determine approval of all final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall comply with all requirements as specified in the city engineering department’s February 26, 2015 review. Attachment 13 2.All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped February 23, 2015, and with revisions as noted in this approval. The city council may approve major changes to the plans. City staff may approve minor changes to the plans. 3.This approval is for the phase one, 50-unit multi-family building only. Any future phases with buildings taller than 35-feet or three stories must seek separate approval for a conditional use permit. 4.The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of city council approval or the permit shall end. The city council may extend this deadline for one year. 5.The city council shall review this permit in one year. The Maplewood City Council _________ this resolution on April 13, 2015 MEMORANDUM TO: Melinda Coleman, City Manager FROM: Michael Martin, AICP, Planner DATE: March 17, 2015 SUBJECT: Approvalof Design Reviewfor a Telecommunications Tower, Harmony Learning Center, 1961 County Road C East A.Approval of Design Reviewfor a Telecommunications Tower Introduction Rob Viera, of Buell Consulting representing SBA Network Services and Verizon, is proposing to erect a 110-foot tall wireless telecommunications tower for cellular telephone operations on land leased from Independent School District No. 622 at the Harmony Learning Center located at 1961 County Road C East. This would be the second tower at this site as a 75-foot-tall wireless telecommunications tower was approved in 2009 and built in 2010.The new tower, like the existing tower on site,would have the availability for collocationin the future. SBA Communicationswould lease a 28-by 50-foot site from Independent School District No. 622. Requests In order to proceed with the project the applicant is requesting the following city approvals: 1.A conditional use permit (CUP) for a tower and related equipment at a school. Section 44- 1321(b)(2)b of the city code requires a conditional use permit for communications towers located at a school. Refer to the attached applicant’s letter of request. 2.The tower design and site plan. A conditional use permit must be approved by the city council in order for this project to move forward. Any approval of design review must be conditioned on the city council approving a condition use permit. Background September 14, 1987: The city council approved a land use plan change and a conditional use permit to use the facility for non-profit, education-related and child-care uses. The land use change was from RM (residential medium density) and RH (residential high density) to S (school). 1992: Independent School District No. 622 demolished part of the old school; made structural additions and expanded the parking lot. December 14, 2009: The city council approved a conditional use permit and design plans to build a 75-foot telecommunications tower. Discussion Conditional Use Permit An application for a second towerat the Harmony Learning Center sitewas first made in October 2014. After an internal review, staff deemed the application incomplete and the applicant chose to withdraw the application. In February of this year an application was again submitted and met all of the city’s submittal requirements. The proposed tower itself would meet the city ordinance’s physical placement and setback requirements. The applicant’s RF engineer’s letter, which is attached to this report, states “Verizon Wireless's key objective for this new tower is to have a way to offload capacity from our nearest existing tower that serves the Maplewood Mall area.”Sec. 44-1331(a) requires new telecommunications equipment be collocated on existing structures unless it can be “documented by the applicant to the satisfaction of the city councilthat the telecommunications equipment planned for the proposed tower cannot be accommodated on an existing or approved tower or commercial building within one-half mile radius.” Sec. 44-1331(a)(4)states“the applicant must demonstrate, by providing a citywide coverage/interference and capacity analysis, that the location of the antennas as proposed is necessary to meet the frequency reuse 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.” Coverage maps and a letter from the applicant’s engineer have been attached to this report and detail the coverage achieved at the Harmony Learning Center by collocating on the existing tower, the new proposed tower and coverage provided by making no changes. City staff reviewed the applicant’s submitted materials –both the written lettersand maps – along with City Attorney Alan Kantrud. On the existing conditions coveragemap its shows there arecurrently no dead spots in the area –meaning Verizon has coverage at all points within this area. As stated in the applicant’s request, the desire to increase capacity near the Maplewood Mall is driving this proposal for a new tower. Next, staff comparedthe coverage maps where equipment is installed on the existing tower at the 59-foot level or equipment is installed on a new tower at the 105-foot level and in both scenarios capacity isincreased in this area. There are only small, isolated areas of increased capacity that can be found only on the 105-foot coverage map as compared to the 59-foot coverage map. Again Sec. 44-1331, requires the applicant to prove to the satisfaction of the city council that a new tower is neededto “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.” Within the same parking lot island that this new tower is proposed there is an existing tower, which when approved in 2009 was required to be built to allow collocation, that can provide much of the increasedcapacity the applicant is seeking. Given the submitted application materials and staff and the city attorney’s subsequent review against city ordinances,staff recommendsdenial of a conditional use permit to allow a new telecommunications tower at the Harmony Learning Center. Design and Site Review Sec. 44-1327(13) requires the community design review board to make recommendations on the plans for towers, utility, equipment or accessory buildings, site plans and proposed screening and landscaping. As stated above, staff finds the proposed tower location meets city code setback requirements. The telecommunications towerwould have a flush mounted installation instead of the projectingtriangular antenna installation. The applicant has submitted plans to plant 26American Arborvitaes surrounding the ground equipment and fencing–to match the landscaping of the existing tower.In addition an 8-foot vinyl fence is proposed and it would also match the fence of the existing tower. Sec. 44- 1328(3)g requires towers be light blue,gray or another color shown to reduce visibility. Department Comments Building Official The city requires a building permit for the installation of the telecommunicationsmonopole tower. The 110’telecommunications tower must comply with all the requirements of the adopted International Building Code. A Minnesota registered structural engineer is required to review and sign off on the plans submitted. Special inspection is required for concrete, rebar, bolting and welding. Engineering Department See Staff Engineer Jon Jarosch’s comments attached to this report. Commission Actions Planning Commission On March 17, 2015, the planning commission held a public hearing and recommended denial of the condition use permit. Community Design Review Board On March 24, 2015 the community design review board will review the design plans for this project and make a recommendation. Budget Impact None. Recommendations A.Approval ofthe site and design plans stamped February 23, 2015, for a 110-foot-tall telecommunications monopole and ground equipment within the parking lot of Harmony Learning Center at 1961 County Road C East. Recommendation is based on the findings required by code and subject to the applicant doing the following: 1.Securing city council approval of a condition use permit to allow a second telecommunications tower on this site. 2.Repeating the review in two years if the city has not issued permits for this project. 3.All work shall follow the approved plans. The community development staff may approve minor changes. 4.The flush mount design for the telecommunications tower shall beutilized. 5.An 8-foot-tall non-chain link fence, matching in color and material the fence screening the existing ground equipment to the east,shall screen both the ground equipment and the base of the tower. 6.The applicant shall provide cash escrow in theamount of 150 percent of the cost of the landscaping before a building permit will be issued. Citizen Comments Staff surveyed the 30property owners within 500 feet of Harmony Learning Center for their opinions about this proposal. Of the threereplies, twohad no comment,none were in favor and oneobjected. Opposed 1.Two lettersare attached to this report. (Olson, 2005 County Road C East) No Comment 1.No comment. (Brown,1892 Kohlman Avenue East) 2.No comment. (Bachmans Inc., 2600 White Bear Avenue North) Reference Information Existing Use: School Surrounding Land Uses North:Kohlman Creek County Open Space East:Single Family Home South: Single Family Homes, vacant lots and commercial buildings West: White Bear Avenue, commercial buildings and a church Planning Land Use:Government(G) Zoning:Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ordinance Requirements Section 44-1321(b)(2) requires a CUP for a communications tower at a school. Section 44-1327(13) requires the community design review board (CDRB) to make recommendations on the plans for towers, utility, equipment or accessory buildings, site plans and proposed screening and landscaping. Findings for CUP approval Section 44-1097(a) states that the city council must base approval of a CUP on nine standards for approval. Refer to the findings in the attached resolution. Section 44-1326(a) states that the city council shall consider the following when reviewing a CUP for a monopole: 1.The standards in the city code. 2.Therecommendations of the planning commission and community design and review board. 3.Effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of residents of the surrounding areas. 4.The effect on property values. 5.The effecton the proposed use in the comprehensive plan. Application Date The city received the complete application for a wireless telecommunications tower February 23, 2015. The initial 60-day review deadline isApril 24, 2015. Attachments 1.Location Map 2.Land Use Map 3.Zoning Map 4.Applicant’s lettersof request, January 27, 2015 and February 17, 2015 5.Applicant’s Structural Engineer’s letter, November 25, 2014 6.Applicant’s RF Engineer’s letter,January 21, 2015 7.Proposed Coverage Maps 8.Site Plan, January 21, 2015 9.Applicant’s Renderings 10.Jon Jarosch’s Engineering Report, March 2, 2015 11.Letterfrom Linda Olson, February 26, 2015 12.Letterfrom Linda Olson, March 6, 2015 13.Applicant’s plans (separate attachment) Maplewood Heights Kohlman Lake Hazelwood Sherwood Glen Parkside Western Hills Gladstone Hillside Harmony Learning Center Beaver Lake Battle Creek Vista Hills Highwood Carver Ridge Maplewood, City of Maplewood Location Map -1961 County Road C East - Harmony Learning Center Maplewood, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, Conditional Use Permit and Design Review Requests AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, City of Maplewood, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Attachment 2 Harmony Learning Center Maplewood, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Legend Land Use Map -1961 County Road C East Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, City of Open Space Government Maplewood, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, MapmyIndia, © Conditional Use Permit and Design Review Requests OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Commercial Institution Low Density Residential Attachment 3 Harmony Learning Center Maplewood, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Zoning Map - Legend Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, City of Maplewood, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, MapmyIndia, © 1961 County Road C East Open Space/Park Single Dwelling (r1) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Conditional Use Permit and Business Commercial (bc) Multiple Dwelling (r3) Design Review Requests Planned Unit Development (pud) Farm (f) Attachment 4 Attachment 4 Attachment 4 Attachment 5 Attachment 6 Attachment 7 Attachment 7 Attachment 7 Attachment 7 Attachment 7 Attachment 8 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 10 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: Verizon Cell Tower – 1961 County Road C PROJECT NO:15-02 COMMENTS BY: Jon Jarosch – Civil Engineer II DATE: 3-2-2015 PLAN SET: Plans dated 1-21-2015 The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit (CUP) and design approval for the installation of a 110-foot telecommunications tower to be placed at 1961 County Road C The site currently has an existing 75-foot telecommunications tower owned by another company. The proposed tower would be placed just east of the existing tower, within a new easement/lease.The size of this project falls below the thresholds that trigger the City’s stormwater management requirements. The following are engineeringreview comments on the proposal and act as conditions prior to the release of permits: 1)An access and utility easement is proposed to accommodate the new tower. A copy of the final signed document(s) shall be submitted to the City. 2)Sediment control (silt fencing, bio-rolls, etc.) shall be installed around the perimeter of thelease area prior to the start of construction. 3)Paved areas shall be kept free of construction related sediment and debris and shall be swept regularly. 4)Storm sewer catch basins that could receive runoff from the construction area shall be protected throughout construction. 5) The Owner shall satisfy the requirements of all other permitting and reviewing agencies. - END COMMENTS - Attachment 11 Michael Martin From:Olson, Linda (CI-StPaul) [linda.olson@ci.stpaul.mn.us] Sent:Thursday, February 26, 2015 4:46 PM To:Michael Martin; robertjviera@yahoo.com Cc:'Glen Olson (gleno29@hotmail.com)' Subject:New Verizon Pole image003.jpg Attachments: MichaelMartin Planner CityofMaplewood RobViera BuellConsulting Verizone PlanningCommission Towhomitmayconcern: WhileIhavenoobjectiontoaddingbetterVerizoncoveragetoourarea,andIdidmakethatstatementtoRoboverthe . phone,IdohaveEVERYobjectiontothisproposedlocationofthisnewtower Robmisinterpretedmyremarksfromavoicemailmessagetohisownadvantage.Hefailedtoprovidespecific information,particularlyregardingtheincreasedheightandsizeofthisinstallation,ANDhehasplacedthisnew structureintheMOSTOBJECTIONABLELOCATIONpossiblenexttomyproperty. Whilehisquotesofmystatementsaremostlyaccurate,theyaretakenoutofcontextandweremadewithoutfull disclosure.IstatedIwouldnotobjecttoanothercellphonetowerontheHarmonySchoolpropertyunderthe assumptionthatitwouldbeplacedclosertotheschoolbuilding.IthoughtIwasVERYclearthatIdidnotwant somethingclosertomyhouse.Healsodidnotinformmethetowerwouldbe xtallerthantheexistingstructure.It neveroccurredtomethatthiswouldbesitedasfarawayfromtheexistingtower,andasclosetomybedroomwindow aspossible. TheCitysetbackrequirementofxfromthepropertylinefora structureisbeyondlaughable,andIwasassured bythePlanningCommissionattheTMobilePublicHearingthatsuchinstallationswouldnolongerbepermitted. Accordingtoroughaerialmeasurementsbasedontheproposedsiteplan,thebaseofthestructurewouldbelocated approximately fenceonthepropertyline,soifthistowerweretofallovertotheeast,itwouldalmostcertainly damagethefenceonthepropertyline.Thereisnoxgracespaceformyhome. Itemnumber2intheBuellletterisabsolutelyincorrect.Asingletowerhasbecomeacceptabletothearea.However, twotowersofvaryingheightssetasfarapartaspossible,onasinglelandpeninsulaisthebeginningofaclusterof cationandsurroundingarea. towers,anddefinitelychangesthecharacterofthelo Thereareonlytwotreesonthisgreenislanddividingthetwoparkinglots,andthisproposedlocationwillremovethe onlymature,viabletreeontheeastend.Theplantingsaroundthebaseoftheexistingtowerhavefailedtothriveand beenreplacedthreetimes,accordingtomycount. GiventhesizeoftheHarmonyproperty,Ifindthisparticularplacementhighlyobjectionable.Ifitcannotbelocatedon thecenterislandclosertothefrontentrancetotheschoolbuilding,oronthehillinfrontoftheschoolnexttoWhite BearAvenue(whichcouldlowerthetowerheight),thenIsuggesteffortsbemadetofindanotherlocationentirely.Like CaseyLakePark,orfurthernorthandclosertotheMaplewoodMallifthatisyourobjective. 1 Attachment 11 CreatingaCellTowerForestishighlyobjectionable,andthisparticularlocationisadirectslaptoanyconsiderationsI offeredthroughmylackofobjectionsinthefirstplace. Notethatintheimagebelow,thetopredlinemeasures fromthefenceonthepropertyline,andthebottomred linemeasure xfromthetree. Linda M. Olson 2005 East County Road C Maplewood, MN 55109 651-777-1288 2 Attachment 12 March 6, 2015 Mike Martin, Planner City of Maplewood In reviewing the proposal from Verizon, one item keeps bothering me about this site. I know this was discussed prior to the T-Mobile tower installation, but it seems even more relevant now. City Code Sec. 44-1321 (b): (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 with the nature of the park or course. d. Open space areas when compatible with the nature of the area and site. In researching existing cell towers and locations at that time, I could not find one single other tower location in the City of Maplewood or my zip code or surrounding area at ANY School, Church or in Park. Antennas, yes. Towers - no. Harmony is already an exception. The installation of the tower at Harmony School was the first tower to be located on a school site. All of the other existing towers were in an industrial area, truck parking lot or next to dumpsters. A new preceidence was set by allowing T-Mobile to come in next to my home. Now Verizon is asking for another new preceident by locating a second tower on the same property. They claim they need the added height to reach the Maplewood Mall, and that there is a gap in coverage. Once again I ask, is there NO other place to put this tower? Or is this just the path of least resistance? For that reason I started researching the internet for lists and maps of existing cell towers in this are. I chose to search by zip code, 55109, and concentrate on an area bounded by Highway 61 to the west, Highway 36 to the south, Hwy 120 to the east, and Interstate 694 to the north. I searched for existing towers only. Attached please find maps and data showing those results. Many towers show on one map, and not on another. I did not take the time to combine that data, because I think you need to look at the bigger picture here. Zoomed out, many maps show no gaps in coverage. Zoomed in, many gaps show up. You can also more easily identify other areas which should be under consideration, especially if schools, churches and parks are no longer excluded from cell tower installations. For these reasons, I can no longer find any justification for placing this taller second tower on this property. Please share this information with the Planning Commitssion prior to the next Public Meeting on March 16, when I will once again ask - why here? Why not in another location? Why allow two cell towers to be placed on this one site? And where should the next tower be located? Sincerely, Linda Olson 2005 East County Road C Maplewood MN 55109 Attachment 12 cellreception.com Attachment 12 Attachment 12 Existing Towers according to “Whistle-Out” website: Attachment 12 Attachment 12 Attachment 12 Attachment 12 Attachment 12 T-MOBILE - 4G Attachment 12 T-MOBILE - 4G T-MOBILE - 3G Attachment 12 SPRINT Attachment 12 Attachment 12 Attachment 12 SPRINT T-MOBILE Attachment 12 Alert! 49 Towers (25 Registered,24 Not Registered) found within 4.00 miles of 55109, Minnesota, United States. Info! The NEAREST Tower is .39 miles away and is owned by At&t Wireless Services. Ok! No Applications for Future Towers detected as of 03/05/15. This website provide an excell spreadsheet is too large to include with this document. Attachment 12 Carrier basics: Verizon Wireless The biggest wireless carrier in United States, Verizon Wireless operates a robust and far-reaching 4G LTE network and a strong lineup of smartphones, feature phones, and basic handsets. A joint venture between Verizon Communications and Vodafone, Verizon Wireless was formed in 2000 through a merger between GTE Wireless and Bell Atlantic. AT&T AT&T is the second-largest wireless carrier in the United States after Verizon Wireless. Today, AT&T has an extensive lineup of GSM devices, and a large 4G LTE network. The current company came to be in 2007 when Cingular Wireless, which acquired the original AT&T Wireless in 2004, changed its name to AT&T. Like Verizon. Sprint Sprint was the first carrier to offer a 4G network through WiMax technology, but it has since transitionted to LTE. Sprint carrier offers handsets of all stripes. The name Sprint first appeared in 1983 after Southern Pacific Communications Company merged with GTE. T-Mobile After a failed merger with AT&T in 2012, T-Mobile remains the smallest of the big four U.S. carriers. It now operates an LTE network and after first introducing an HSPA+ "Faux G" network that delivers LTE-comparable Attachment 12 speeds. T-Mobile was the last major carrier to sell the iPhone and it was an early leader in Android. Compared with the other major carriers, its home network is less prevalent in rural areas. U.S. Cellular Based in Chicago, U.S. Cellular is a regional carrier serving 26 states in the Midwest, the Southeast, and the Northwest. Its smartphone lineup is a bit smaller than the Big Four providers and largely sticks to Android models including Galaxy S5. It launched its LTE network in 2012, though coverage is limited to larger urban areas. Unique among carriers, U.S. Cellular offers rewards points that long-term customers can redeem for new phones, accessories, and downloadable content. U.S. Cellular's home network isn't nationwide, but it has roaming agreements with several partners for nationwide service. Cricket Founded in 1999, Cricket was a subsidiary of Leap Wireless International until AT&T acquired Leap in March, 2014. It operates a growing LTE network, but its home network is not nationwide. Also, outside of the iPhone and the Galaxy S4, its handset lineup trends toward basic and midrange models. You'll be using another carrier's network when roaming outside Cricket's home network area. Cricket is now a subsidiary of AT&T. Virgin Mobile For the most part, Virgin Mobile aims its prepaid service at the youth market. In February 2013, Virgin started using Sprint's LTE network while keeping older devices on Sprint's dwindling WiMax network. As for devices, it has a few smartphones, including the Galaxy S5 and the iPhone. First launched in 2001, Virgin Mobile is now fully owned by Sprint. Virgin devices operate on Sprint's network. Boost Like Virgin, Boost Mobile is wholly owned by Sprint and is geared toward budget-minded consumers. Boost does not require contracts. It carries mostly midrange Android models and a variety of basic phones and newer models use Sprint LTE. Originally launched in New Zealand and Australia in 2001, Boost USA launched in 2003. Boost handsets operate on Sprint network. MEMORANDUM TO: Community Design Review Board Members FROM: Michael Martin, AICP, Planner DATE: February 18, 2015 SUBJECT: Election of Officers Introduction The City of Maplewood’s Commission Handbookrequiresthe community design review board (CDRB) elect a chairperson and vice-chairperson. Matt Ledvinacurrently serves as chairperson andJason Lamers serves asvice-chairperson. Discussion The Commission Handbookstates officers should be elected at the first regular meeting in December. However, the CDRBdid not meeting in December, so the commission will need to nominate and elect officers at its meeting in February.Staff is recommending the CDRBelect a chairperson and vice-chairperson to serve in 2015. On February 24, 2015, nominations will again be taken for officers to serve through 2015.The handbook has a section whichdeals with the role of the chairperson and vice chairperson. Below is the excerpt from the handbook: Role of the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson Commissions generally appoint the chair and vice chair at set times of the year. Although the appointment is usually for a year, the chair and vice chair serve at the pleasure of the commission. The willingness and ability of an individual to serve as the chair orvice chair should be taken into consideration. Commissions should try to give all commissioners an opportunity to serve as chair. The responsibility of service as chair or vice chair does take extra time. Responsibilities of the Chair: Preside at all official meetings of the board, commission, or committee. Consult with the staff liaison in drafting the meeting agenda. Attend City Council meetings, in person or through another commissioner as designee, as needed to represent the commission, board, or committee with the approval of the commission, board, or committee. Sign correspondence from the commission with the approval of the City Council. The effective chairperson also, during meetings: Solicits opinions and positions from reticent commission members. Protects new thoughts from being rejected prior to fair evaluation. Discourages blame-orientated statements. Keeps the discussion focused on the issue. Builds trust by even handedness and fairness to all the participants. Responsibilities of the Vice Chair: Substitute for the Chair as needed. The section is silent on the procedure for election of the chairperson and vice-chairperson. CDRBmembers should voice nominations for chair and vice-chair, and the body willthen vote for the positions. If only one nomination emerges for each position, a motion can be made to formally appoint that person to the post. If there is more thanone nomination, the CDRBshould vote publicly to decide which candidate will be appointed. Recommendation Nominateandelect a chairperson and vice-chairperson for 2015.