Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-09-19 PC Packet AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, September 19, 2017 7:00 PM 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. August 15, 2017 5.Public Hearing a. 7:00 p.m. or later: Consider Approval of Conditional Use Permit Revision, Academy for Sciences and Agriculture, 1194 County Road C East b. 7:00 p.m. or later: Consider Approval of Side-Yard Setback Variance, 425 Laurie Road East 6. New Business: a. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Discussion 7.Unfinished Business 8.Visitor Presentations 9.Commission Presentations a. August 28, 2017 city council meeting (Commissioner Arbuckle) Conditional Use Permit, Food Truck, 2520 White Bear Avenue Conditional Use Permit Revision, Home Depot, 2360 White Bear Avenue b. September 25, 2017 city council meeting (Commissioner Donofrio) Conditional Use Permit, Academy for Sciences and Agriculture, 1194 County Road C East Side-Yard Setback Variance, 425 Laurie Road East 10. Staff Presentations 11. Adjournment MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, AUGUST 15, 2017 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the Commission was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Chairperson Arbuckle. 2. ROLL CALL Paul Arbuckle, Chairperson Present Frederick Dahm, Commissioner Present Tushar Desai, Commissioner Present John Donofrio, Commissioner Absent John Eads, Commissioner Present Allan Ige, Commissioner Present Bill Kempe, Commissioner Present Staff Present: Michael Martin, Economic Development Coordinator 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Kempe moved to approve the agenda as submitted. Seconded by Commissioner Ige. Ayes All The motion passed. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairperson Arbuckle and Commissioner Kempe had a correction on page 2, item b. there was confusion in which commission members had voted Aye and who voted Nay. The correction is to move Commissioner Kempe from Aye to Nay and moving Chairperson Arbuckle from Nay to Aye. Commissioner Kempe moved to approve the July 18, 2017, PC minutes as amended. Seconded by Commissioner Dahm. Ayes All The motion passed. 5. PUBLIC HEARING a. 7:00 p.m. or later: Consider Approval of Conditional Use Permit, Exterior Sale of Goods, 2520 White Bear Avenue i. Economic Development Coordinator, Michael Martin gave the report to Consider Approval of Conditional Use Permit, Exterior Sale of Goods, 2520 White Bear Avenue and answered questions of the commission. ii. Applicant, Robert Sanchez-Osorio addressed the commission. Chairperson Arbuckle opened the public hearing. Nobody came forward to address the commission. August 15, 2017 1 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Chairperson Arbuckle closed the public hearing. Commissioner Kempe moved to approve the attached conditional use permit resolution. This conditional use permit allows the exterior sales of goods within the parking lot located at 2520 White Bear Avenue. This approval shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed use must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 2. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 3. The food truck must at all times be in compliance with the ci department. If this condition is not complied with, the food truck must be removed from the site immediately. 4. The approved exterior sale of goods is limited to a food truck only. The existing liquor store and any other tenants of this property are not allowed to store or sell any goods outside of the building. 5. This permit is only applicable to the property located at 2520 White Bear Avenue. If Mr. Sanchez-Osorio decides to move his truck to another location in the city he will have to abide by ordinance requirements for that property. This CUP is not transferable to another property. 6. If a parking shortage develops, the owner of the property will be required to add additional parking or remove the food truck from the site. Seconded by Commissioner Desai. Ayes - All The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on August 28, 2017. b. 7:00 p.m. or later: Consider Approval of Conditional Use Permit Revision, Exterior Storage and Motor Vehicle Rental at Home Depot, 2360 White Bear Avenue i. Economic Development Coordinator, Michael Martin gave the report of Consider Approval of Conditional Use Permit Revision, Exterior Storage and Motor Vehicle Rental at Home Depot, 2360 White Bear Avenue. ii. Representative for the applicant Home Depot, Todd Waldo, 3 Executive Drive, Somerset, New Jersey, addressed and answered questions of the commission. Chairperson Arbuckle opened the public hearing. Nobody came forward to address the commission. Commissioner Kempe moved to approve the attached conditional use permit resolution. This resolution approves revisions for the conditional use permit for the property at 2360 White Bear Avenue (Home Depot). The city is basing this approval on the findings required by ordinance and it is subject to the following conditions (deletions are crossed out and additions are underlined and in bold): 1. All construction, uses and outside storage areas shall follow the site plan dated April 7, 2005 July 11, 2017, in the staff report as approved by the city council. This includes the location and size of the approved outside storage areas. The city will allow the outside sales and storage of trailers sheds and landscaping materials with this revision. City staff shall approve August 15, 2017 2 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes the final layout for all outdoor sales and storage areas. Home Depot shall submit to the city, for review and approval by the community design review board (CDRB), the proposed design and materials of the screening fences for around the two season storage areas. Outdoor storage and sales shall be limited to the dates indicated by the site plan dated July 11, 2017. The director of community development may approve minor changes to these plans. 2. The store shall use the new outside storage and display areas within 239 days one year of one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit revision in one year. 4. This permit allows a waiver of the parking code to allow 122 152 fewer parking spaces than the code allows since there is adequate parking available for the existing and proposed uses. The city may require Home Depot to add more parking spaces or to reduce the amount of area used for outdoor sales and storage if the city determines that a parking shortage has developed. 5. The rental of moving trucks is allowed for this site. All trucks must be located in the area of the trucks will take place onsite. 6. The property owner or store manager shall keep the site clean of all debris and garbage. This cleaning shall be done on a regular basis. The property owner or store manager is also responsible to ensure the concession trailer is located in front of the store against the building as indicated by the site plan dated July 11, 2017. #6 Kempe had an amendment to this to reflect location of the trainer in parking lot. (He wanted staff to word it appropriately and place it where it belongs) 7. The property owner or store manager shall work with the city engineering department on a plan for the protection of the city sidewalk and for the entrance driveway near White Bear Avenue. This plan may include the installation of bollards or other measures to prevent trucks and other large vehicles from damaging the curbing, the pedestrian ramp and the public sidewalks. Seconded by Commissioner Dahm. Ayes - All The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on August 28, 2017. 6. NEW BUSINESS a. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Discussion i. Economic Development Coordinator, Michael Martin gave the update on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. For further information visit the website www.maplewoodmn.gov/2040 and visit the steering committee portion. Items mentioned included: Housing August 15, 2017 3 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Higher density and allowing for more green space Gladstone neighborhood vision Frost English development Rush Line Gold Line Maplewood Mall Hotels Housing Mixed Use Hillcrest Area Rice & Larpenteur Study Area Industrial Areas Accessory Dwelling Units allowed or not 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. 8. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. 9. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. July 24, 2017, City council meeting (Commissioner Eads) Swimming Pool Cover Exception, 2090 Arcade Street which was passed by the council. b. August 28, 2017, city council meeting (Commissioner Arbuckle) Conditional Use Permit, Food Truck, 2520 White Bear Avenue Conditional Use Permit Revision, Home Depot, 2360 White Bear Avenue 10. STAFF PRESENTATIONS None. 11. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Arbuckle adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m. August 15, 2017 4 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes MEMORANDUM TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager FROM:Michael Martin, AICP, Economic Development Coordinator DATE:September 12, 2017 SUBJECT:ConsiderApproval of a Conditional Use Permit Revision,Academy for Sciences and Agriculture, 1194 County Road C East Introduction The Academy for Sciences and Agriculture is requesting approval for a conditional use permit (CUP) revision to allow the operation of a school at Lakeview Lutheran Church which is located at 1194 County Road C East. City code requires the city council to approve a conditional use permit for all educational institutions in the city. The Academy for Sciences and Agriculture is a public charter school and is proposing to operate its fifth and sixth grades at this location –the remaining grades are located atthe school’s main facility in Vadnais Heights. Request The applicant is requesting city approval ofa CUP revision to operate a public charter school at 1194 County Road C East. Background September 8, 1977: The city council approved a CUP for an addition to the church. August 14, 1989: The city council approved a CUP for a day care facility at the church. October 10, 1994: The council approved a CUP revision to expand the church. Discussion Conditional Use Permit Staff became aware that the Academy for Sciences and Agriculture had moved in and occupied space at Lakeview Lutheran Church after an electrician came into the city to pull a permit. At that point staff reached out to the school to notify them the city of Maplewood requires a CUP for all educational institutions. Staff conferred with the city attorney and a decision was made to allow the school to have temporary occupancy of the building, conditioned upon receiving CUP approval by the end of September. The school is placing its fifth and sixth grades at this site and will occupy the former Sunday school space in the building. Students will arrive to the site via a bus from the school’s main campus in Vadnais Heights. This is also spacewhere a day care and preschool had previously operated. The church had previously received CUP approval for the day care. The church would like to keep this CUP active incase the school leaves at some point and there is an opportunity to place a day care on site. The city’s building official, health officialand fire marshalhave all inspected the space in the church the school will occupy and there are no concerns. Staff does nothave any concerns regarding the operation of this school on this site. Department Comments Engineering Staff engineer Jon Jaroschreviewed this project and stated since there are no exterior improvements he would have no comment Building Official, Jason Brash Applicant must meet all Minnesota State Building Code requirements. Commission Review Planning Commission September 19, 2017: The planning commission will hold apublic hearing and provide a recommendation forthis project. Budget Impact None. Recommendations A.Approve the attached conditional use permit revision resolution. This conditional use permit allows a public charter school to operate within the buildinglocated at 1194 County Road C East.This approval shall be subject to the following conditions(additions are underlinedand deletions are crossed out): 1.This permit shall be subject to review after one year from the date of approval, based on the procedures in City Code. 2.The owner/operator acquiring all necessary approvals and licenses from the state of Minnesota to operate the day care facilityor school facility. 3.The day care center or school facilitybe maintained and operated in such a manner as to not create any nuisances for nearby properties. 4.A building permit shall be submitted for review andapproval by the Building Official, prior to any construction activities on the subject property. 5.Any change of use to the building shall be submitted to the City Planner and Building Official for approval. Citizen Comments Staff surveyed the 24surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the proposed site for their opinion about this proposal. Staff received one response –from the property owner of the subject property –which was in favor of the project. In favor 1.Lakeview Lutheran Church believes AFSA Middle School will be an asset to Maplewood. They are renting our former education wing where we held Sunday school. We have previously held day cares/preschools in that space for over 30 years. AFSA has already shownthemselves to be a caring community partner who wants to provide a unique learning environment to their students. (Pastor Rebecca Sullivan,1194 County Road C East) Reference Information Site Description Site Size:1.66 acres Existing Land Use: Church Surrounding Land Uses North: Forest Products South: Kline auto dealership East:Single dwelling and child care center West:Vacant property and Highway 61 Planning Existing Land Use:Commercial (c) Existing Zoning:Light Manufacturing (m1) Application Date The city deemed the applicant’sapplicationcomplete onAugust 29, 2017. The initial 60-day review deadline for a decision isOctober 28, 2017. As stated in Minnesota State Statute 15.99, the city is allowed totake an additional 60 days if necessary to complete the review. Attachments 1.OverviewMap 2.Land Use Map 3.Zoning Map 4.Applicant’s Letter 5.Conditional Use Permit Resolution Attachment 1 Academy for Sciences and Agriculture August 29, 2017 City of Maplewood Legend ! I Subject Property 0240 Feet Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County Attachment 2 Academy for Sciences and Agriculture September 13, 2017 City of Maplewood Legend ! I Future Land Use Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Institution Open Space Government Commercial 0240 Feet Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County Attachment 3 Academy for Sciences and Agriculture September 13, 2017 City of Maplewood Legend ! I Zoning Open Space/Park Single Dwelling (r1) Double Dwelling (r2) Multiple Dwelling (r3) Planned Unit Development (pud) Farm (f) Light Manufacturing (m1) 0240 Feet Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County Attachment 4 2017-18 Attachment 5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Academy for Sciences and Agriculture Hospitalhasapplied for a conditional use permitrevisionto operate a public charter schoolat1194 County Road C East. WHEREAS, conditional use permits are required for educational institutionsand can be located within any zoning district within the city. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the site at1194 County Road C East. The legal description is: Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Speiser's Arbolada And The Northerly3 feet of Lot 12 and all of Lot 3,except theNorth75 feet thereof, Block 1, Speiser's Arbolada And Except the North 180 feet thereof, the East 101.50 feet of the West134.5 feet of Lot 1, W.H.Howard's Garden Lots And Except the Easterly 10feet thereof, all right, title and interest inthe street adjoining the North180feet of the East 101.50 feet of the West 134.50 feet of saidLot 11 in said l\\V. 1-1.W.H.Howard's Garden Lotsin the event said street be vacated. Together with those portions of the adjoining streetaccruingtheretoby reason of the vacation thereof And Except that part of the East 101.50 feet of the West 134.5 feet ofLot 11, W.H.Howard's Garden Lots,according to the plat thereof on fileand of record in the Officeof the RamseyCounty Recorder, which lies Southerly of a line 30 feetSoutherly of and parallel to the following, described line: Commencing at the Northeast corner of Section9, Township 29, Range 22; thence West, assumed bearing, along the North line of said Section 9 adistance of 498.57 feet;thence South a distance 43feet to thebeginning of said linethence South 83 feet thence Southwesterly along a tangential curve, concave to the Northwest, the central angle being 90 degrees, radius 300 feet, a distanceof 471.24 feet to a point thence Southwesterlyalong a tangentialcurve, concavetothe Southeast, the central angle being 89 degrees 13 minutes 15seconds, radius 283.60 feet, a distance of4341.62 feet and there terminating. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1.On September 19, 2017, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council ______theconditional use permit. Attachment 5 2.On September 25, 2017, the city council discussed the conditional use permit. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. 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 not exceed the design standards of any affected street. 6.The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7.The use would not create excessive additional costs for 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(additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out: 1.This permit shall be subject to review after one year from the date of approval, based on the procedures in City Code. 2.The owner/operator acquiring all necessary approvals and licenses from the state of Minnesota to operate the day care facility or school facility. 3.The day care center or school facilitybe maintained and operated in such a manner as to not create any nuisances for nearby properties. 4.A building permit shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official, prior to any construction activities on the subject property. Attachment 5 5.Any change of use to the building shall be submitted to the City Planner and Building Official for approval. The Maplewood City Council __________ this resolution on September 25, 2017. MEMORANDUM TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager FROM:Michael Martin, AICP, Economic Development Coordinator DATE:September 13, 2017 SUBJECT:ConsiderApproval of a Side-Yard Setback Variance, 425 Laurie Road East Introduction Lola Sykes is proposing to expand the ground floor living area of the house at 425 Laurie Road East. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. Living space is required to maintain a ten-foot side yard setback within the R-1 zoning district. Ten feet of the proposed addition will extend from the garage wall and roof line and setback six feet from the side property line instead of the ten-foot setback required by the city code –maintainingthe garage setback line will allow the accommodation ofa handicap accessible bathroom.The remaining portion of the proposed addition would meet the city’s setback requirement. Request The applicant is requesting a four-foot side yard setback variance for a portion of anaddition to her home at 425 Laurie Road East. Background The applicant purchased the house at 425 Laurie Road in August 2016. Since that time the applicant’s adult special needs daughter and two of her adult special needs friends have occupied the upper bedrooms, while Ms. Sykes has resided in the lower level of the home. Ms. Sykes helps herdaughter and her daughter’s friends with their day-to-day living needs. To better accommodate their living situation, Ms. Sykes is proposing to build the addition on the rear of the home toserve as her living quarters. Discussion Variance State Law State law requires that variances shall only be permitted when they are found to be: 1.In harmony with the general purposes and intent of the official control; 2.Consistent with the comprehensive plan; 3.When there are practical difficulties in complying with the official control. “Practical difficulties” means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The applicant originally requested a four-foot variance for the entire 42-foot long proposed home addition. At the July 18, 2017 planning commission meeting, a motion to approve the variance request failed by a 2-5 vote. After the planning commission meeting, the applicant revised her plans and isnow requesting variance approval for only 10 feet of the overall addition to accommodate a handicap accessible bathroom. The remaining 32 feetof the proposed addition would meet thecity’s setback requirements. Original Addition Proposal–RevisedAddition Proposal– Red area indicates variance area; Red area indicates variance area; green area indicates addition bluearea indicates addition meetingsetbackrequirements.meeting setbackrequirements. The applicant’s letter that was submitted with the revised proposal and the letter she submitted from her architect indicates there are difficulties in siting an additional bathroom elsewhere on the property due to the existing location of plumbing hookups, the slope needed for the sewer line and the existing furnace system. Staff believes these constraints need to be considered when applying the state’s variance statute against the applicant’s request. City staff feels the applicant made an effort after the July 18, 2017 planning commission meeting to respond to the concerns the commission expressed. The applicant has greatly reduced the area being requested approval for a setback variance. The only setback variance being requested is for the portion of the addition where an accessible bathroom would be constructed. Department Comments Building Official, Jason Brash Build per 2012 IRC, 2012 IMC, 2012 IFGC, 2014 NEC, 2012 Minnesota State Plumbing Code, and 2015 Minnesota Building Code. Demonstrate compliance with all the requirements of the 2012 Minnesota Energy Code. Permits are required for building, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical. Shall comply with exterior wall requirements for fire rating per 2012 IRC section 302. Citizen Comments Staff resurveyed the adjacent property owners of the proposed project for their opinion about this proposal. Staff received five newresponses. The responses below are only what staff has received since the revised proposal was made. Against 1.At the last meeting 7 different neighbors closest to Lola's home were there to opposing this, not one actual neighbor spoke in favor of this variance or the addition. This was also voted down by the majority of planning committee. We as neighbors have been welcoming and helpful to Lola, my husband has done multiple favors for her, she came over this week to ask for another favor and to inform him she was applying for the variance a 2nd time, she also said that she would put up a privacy fence if she gets the variance, then said "that if she didn't get it, that I would be building up and I would be looking over our whole back yard" and that she wouldn't be putting up any fence. We feel this is a threat and must be taken into consideration. We aren't trying to be difficult we haven't been disrespectful, were just trying to protect our privacy and everyone agrees that this should never be allowed. As 30 plus year residents of our home we have never had a dispute with any of our neighbors. This situation has caught us totally off guard, we never thought something like this would ever be possible. Our home is between 2 group homes and now lola is he asking us to give up our private backyard, by building a 800 sq ft home down our fence line only 200 feet shorter than the original home. This seems crazy. We also have special needs children in our families, we do understand many of the challenges, but Lola's current arrangement really seems ideal, she has the ability to know her daughter is a being well cared for as well as come and go as she please, since her 24 hr staff are the ones in charge of her daughters daily needs. As you may know Lola's home has a large existing addition and this new proposed addition is in no way harmonious with this neighborhood, it would greatly detract from the character of the neighborhood, since we all have ramblers on the front part of our lots. This isn't just an addition in reality it's an entire new home at 800 sq ft with a kitchen, bath, laundry, entry way, bedroom and living room. Wouldn't this be considered a second dwelling? We are completely against the variance and the entire plan as it stands and ask that approval for this variance and second home be denied. When Lola bought this home less than a year ago she knew what she was buying and planning, she could of gotten approval before hand. She commented on how the City of Maplewood has much looser restrictions compared with where she lived before, I believe shethought she could do whatevershe wanted.If Lola chooses to rent her home out as a group home thats her choice but building a second home on this lot would be completely intrusive to many and detract from the neighborhood as a whole. Unlike remodeling space in her basement to make herself comfortable or adding a bedroom upstairs, these are just a few options. Lola is worried she can’t walk stairs in the future or she wants to "live above ground" Then this may not of been the right home for her. But Lola knew what she was getting into when she bought her home and decided to make the main part of the house a group home. Again, these are her choices and we shouldn't have to suffer the consequences of her choices. They do have stair lifts that could solve the problem of walking the steps if she needs help in the next 20-30 years. We are seriously considering taking legal action if any of this is addition/second home is approved. (Mary Pundsack, 415 Laurie Road East) 2.With 4 handicap operations in our neighborhood and with the additional traffic with bus, vehicle movements, street parking, etc. What might become of our property valuation, our concern is with a devalued value when time comes for us to see our home, as we have lived here for 62 years. We reject the revised proposal in your August 29, 2017 revision. Lola does not need a apartment added to her house. She said she was going to have a apartment in her basement. (Lawrence and Laverne Brilla, 433 Laurie Road East) 3.I am writing in response to a letter that was sent to some of my neighbors about the revised single family residence variance at 425 Laurie Rd East.After the planning commission hearing which I and others attended I asked that we benotified when the city council would be looking into the matter. None of us was evernotified. Now the same neighbors that received the first notice have received a second revised notice. You need to know that there are more neighbors involved than just the 3 that got the notice.I can see that she is making an effort to get within city guidelines but I have to wonderwhy she has to build not just an addition on to the house but what looks to me like anapartment complete with kitchen and bath. I believe you need to take a good look at notonly the new plansbut also the layout of the existing home. It looks to me like her newkitchen is going to be a whole 15 ft(if that) from kitchen in the main house. I know that this meeting has to do with a variance to build an addition but it needs to be looked at as awhole. If all she wanted was to have a place with one level where she couldlive with her daughter why did she have 2 more special need adults move in? Whichforced her to move into the basement. HER CHOICE. I know you do not want to hear this but you need to find out how much she is paid for having the 2 others live there. I am sure the city, County or State is paying for the care of all three and paying her rent for 2 or all 3 to stay there.I believe I can speak for the neighbors involved and say she would be more thanwelcome if it was just her and her daughter, with a care giver living in the house but whatshe has done is way over the top. Thanks for the opportunity to hear my side.(Mike Savard, 2202 Clark Street) 4.We are sympathetic with our neighbors at 415 and 433 Laurie Road and dislike the constant movement of cars and vehicles parked on our side lot of Laurie Road and can only imagine the snow plowing problems in certain time. We object to the variance. (Joanne V Lunzer, 2199 Clark Street North) Against 1.It does not affect us. (Grant and Susanne Farnsworth, 416 Lark Avenue East) Budget Impact None. CommissionReview Planning Commission July 18, 2017: The Planning Commission held a public hearing for the variance. A motion to recommended approval of the side yard variancefailed by a 2-5 vote. September 19, 2017: The Planning Commission will holda public hearing for therevised variancerequest. Reference Information Site Description Site size: .53 acres Existing land use: Single Family House Surrounding Land Uses North: Single Family Homes South: Single Family Homes West: Single Family Homes East: Single Family Homes Planning Land Use Plan designation: Single Family Residential Zoning: Single Family Residential Application Date The application for this request was considered complete on June 14, 2017. State law requires that the city decide on these applications within 60 days, or if that timeline cannot be met the City must extend the application in writing, requesting an additional 60 days. The 60-day original deadline for City Council action wasAugust 13, 2017. The city did extend the review of this application by an additional 60 days meaning the revised deadline is now October 12, 2017 Recommendation Approve the attached resolution authorizing a four-foot side yard setback variance for 425 Laurie Road East for aportion of the proposed expansion of the ground floor living area of the houseto allow for an accessible bathroom. Approval is based on the following reasons: 1.Strict enforcement of the ordinance would reduce the proposed addition by four feet reducing the size of the new living spaceand eliminating the ability to provide for an accessible bathroom. 2.Approval would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinancewith the construction of a new single family house on a vacant lot that is zoned and guided in the City’s comprehensive plan as residential. Approval of the variance shall be subject to the following: 1.The house at425 Laurie Road East is to be used as single family dwelling only. The new living space shall not be rented or used as a second dwelling. 2.The approved variance space is for the accessible bathroom only. No other side yard setback variances have been approved. Attachments 1.Overview Map 2. Applicant’s Statement 3.Applicant’s Architect Letter 4.Applicant’s Revised Plan 5.Planning Commission Minutes, July 18, 2017 6.Variance Resolution Attachment Ground Floor Expansion 425 Laurie Road East City of Maplewood Information Overview Map Legend ! I Parcel 0120 Feet Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 Attachment 5 MINUTESOF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JULY 18,2017 7:00 P.M. 5.PUBLIC HEARING b.7:00 p.m. or later: Consider Approval of a Side-Yard Setback Variance, 425 Laurie Road i.Economic Development Coordinator, Michael Martin introduced the item for the Consideration of Approval of a Side Yard Setback Variance, 425 Laurie Road East and answered questions of the commission and answered questions of the commission. ii.Planning Intern, Jane Adade gave the report for the consideration of approval for the Side Yard Setback Variance at 425 Laurie Road East and answered questions of the commission. iii.Applicant and Maplewood resident, Lola Sykes, 425 Laurie Road East, Maplewood addressed and answered questions of the commission. Chairperson Arbuckle opened the public hearing. 1.Gary Pundsak, 415 Laurie Road East, Maplewood, spoke against the proposal. 2.Laverne Brilla, 433 Laurie Road East, Maplewood, spoke against the proposal. 3.Greg Zackner, refused to give his address and spoke against the proposal. 4.Benusi Maduka, 2625 Southlawn Drive North, Maplewood spoke regarding the proposal. 5.Jim Wise, 2199 Clark Street N., Maplewood spoke against the proposal. 6.Mike Savard, 2202 Clark Street N., Maplewood, spoke against the proposal. Chairperson Arbuckle closed the public hearing. moved to approvethe resolution authorizing a four-foot side yard setback Commissioner Dahm variance for 425 Laurie Road East for the expansion of the ground floor living area of the house. Approval is based on the following reasons: 1.Strict enforcement of the ordinance would reduce the proposed addition by four feet reducing the size of the new living space. 2.Approval would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance with the expansion of the house at 425 Laurie Road East. The use of the property as a single family residence will remain the same as zoned and guided in the City’s comprehensive plan as residential. Approval of the variance shall be subject to the following: The house at 425 Laurie Road East is to be used as single family dwelling only. The new living 1. space shall not be rented or used as a second dwelling. Seconded by Chairperson Arbuckle. Ayes – Chairperson Arbuckle & Commissioner Dahm Nays – Commissioner’s Desai, Donofrio, Eads Kempe & Ige The motion failed. Attachment 6 VARIANCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Lola Sykesapplied for a variance from the required 10-feet side yard setback. WHEREAS, this variance applies to the property located at 425 Laurie RoadEast, Maplewood, MN. The property identification number is 08-29-22-33-0015. The legal description is Lot 6, Block 30, Dawsons Suburban Acre Lots, Ramsey County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, Section 44-108of the City’s ordinances (District Regulations) requires a side yard setback of at least ten (10)feetto any covered part of a dwelling. WHEREAS, the applicantis proposing to extend the ground floor living area to the west side of the house, six (6) feet from the property line, requiring a 4-foot side yard setback variance WHEREAS, the history of this variance is as follows: 1.On September 19, 2017, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review this proposal.City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The Planning Commission gaveeveryone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The Planning Commission also considered the report and recommendation of the city staff. The Planning Commission recommended ________ of the side yard setback variance to the City Council. 2. The City Council held a public meeting on September 25, 2017, to review this proposal. The City Council considered the report and recommendations of the city staffand the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council _________ the above- described variance based on the following reasons: 1.Strict enforcement of the ordinance would reduce the proposed addition by four feet reducing the size of the new living spaceand eliminating the ability to provide for an accessible bathroom. 2.Approval would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance with the construction of a new single family house on a vacant lot that is zoned and guided in the City’s comprehensive plan as residential. Approval of the variance shall be subject to the following: 1.The house at 425 Laurie Road East is to be used as single family dwelling only. The new living space shall not be rented or used as a second dwelling. 2.The approved variance space is for the accessible bathroom only. No other side yard setback variances have been approved. MEMORANDUM TO:Melinda Coleman, City Manager FROM:Michael Martin, AICP, Economic Development Coordinator DATE:September 13, 2017 SUBJECT:2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Discussion Introduction At the September 19, 2017 planning commission and community design review board meetings, the city’s comprehensive planning consultant –HKGi –will be present to discuss the first draft of the future land use plan map and the draft land use category descriptions. Discussion Throughoutthe lastmonth the city’s comprehensive planning consultantandstaff have been working on creating the attached draftfuture land use plan for review and discussion with the planning commissionand community design review board.These draft maps and documents have been created by implementing the feedback received at the following: Public engagement efforts Commission and steering committee meetings Discussions with city staff Requirements of the Metropolitan Council. Recommendation Review the attachment andprovide feedback and direction on September 19. Attachments 1.HKGI Memo: Maplewood 2040 Comprehensive Plan –Future Land Use Attachment 1 Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. MEMO Date: September 13, 2017 Maplewood Planning Commission To: From: Rita Trapp and Britt Palmberg, Planning Consultants RE: Maplewood 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Over the last month the Consultant Team and Staff have been working on creating the attached draft future land use plan for review and discussion with the Planning Commission, Housing and Economic Development Commission (HEDC), and Steering Committee. The future land use plan implements the areas of discussion from last months Planning Commission meeting with new mixed use districts and a proposed land use category name change from IndustrialŽ to EmploymentŽ. The proposed land use category descriptions are attached for your reference and review. Analysis of vacant parcels in the community found that there are limited, but significant, opportunities for new development. As seen in the attached maps, there are 391 gross acres of vacant land across 271 parcels with a few, larger areas where development may occur. It is anticipated, therefore, that much of the growth and development in the community will come from redevelopment and reinvestment. A key directional change to support redevelopment and reinvestment is the addition and expansion of mixed use districts in the community. In addition to supporting reinvestment in small neighborhood nodes, the mixed use districts also seek to meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Council to support investments in transit for the Rush Line and the Gold Line. The three proposed mixed use districts are Mixed Use NeighborhoodŽ, Mixed Use Neighborhood High DensityŽ, and Mixed Use CommunityŽ. The Mixed Use Neighborhood Category is the same as the current Mixed Use Category. This category is applied throughout the community at small neighborhood commercial nodes and strip centers. The Mixed Use Neighborhood High Density Category is similar to the existing mixed use category but incorporates higher residential density ranges to meet Met Council requirements for the Rush Line Corridor. Currently this category is only designated around the proposed Gladstone stop. The Mixed Use Community category is guided in multiple locations throughout the community, including the Rice and Larpenteur area, Maplewood Mall, and the areas to the north of 3M and around the Interstate 94 and Century interchange, to support the Gold Line. This category is intended to have higher densities, as well as more regional or commercial scale retail, offices, and services. NOTGNIHSAW YTNUOC N EVA YRUTNEC SMAR YTNUOC YE EVA ERIALLEB DR THGIN KCMN DR THGINK CM R A EB E T IH W R Y IT R E P S O R P H WLEZA TS DOO TS HSILGNE R D 6 Y A W Y 1 6 Y AWH GIH WKPRELLEKN TS EDACRA 7 REGDE N TS NOT 1 0 2 / 2 1 / 9 0 T F A KCAJ N TS NOS R D 2040 PLANNED LAND USE AVE ARYLAND M 5 ") OAKDALE NWA COY A V E 94 § ¨ ¦ 7 1 0 2 / 2 1 / 9 0 T F A R D D R TON AF PER UP ST. PAUL WOODBURY 2040 PLANNED LAND USE E D AV WOO IGH H City BoundaryHigh Density Residential Transitway Mixed Use - Neighborhood Gold Line Mixed Use - Neighborhood High Density Planned Gold Line Stations Commercial Rush Line Alignment Mixed-Use - Community Rush Line Stations Public/Institutional 494 § ¨ ¦ Half Mile Station Buffer Employment RVER CA MRCCA Utility Future Land Use Open Space Rural/Low Density Residential Park Low Density Residential ROW Medium Density Residential Water 00.250.50.751Miles ° NEWPORT OTGNIHSAW YTNUOC N N EVA YRUTN EC AR YTNUOC YESM EVA ERIALLEB DR THGIN DR THG NKCMINKCM M HGINKC DR T R A EB E TI H W R Y IT R E P S O R P H WLEZA S DOO T T S HSILGNE R D 6 Y A W Y 16 Y AWH GIH WKPRELLEKN TS EDACRA 7 REGDE N TS NOT 1 0 2 / 2 1 / 9 0 T F A KCAJ N TS NOS R D VACANT PARCELS AVE ARYLAND M 5 ") OAKDALE 7 1 0 2 / 2 1 / 9 0 T F A R NWA COY A V D E 94 § ¨ ¦ D R TON AF PER UP ST. PAUL # Vacant of Land UseParcelsGross Acres Rural/Low Density Residential1029 Low Density Residential168121 Medium Density Residential3323 High Density Residential1148 Mixed-Use - Neighborhood993 Mixed-Use - Neighborhood HD42 Commercial1436 WOODBURY Mixed-Use - Community1520 Employment718 Total271391 E D AV WOO IGH H VACANT PARCELS City BoundaryCommercial Vacant ParcelsMixed-Use - Community Future Land Use Public/Institutional 494 § ¨ ¦ Employment Rural/Low Density Residential RVER CA Utility Low Density Residential Open Space Medium Density Residential High Density ResidentialPark ROW Mixed Use - Neighborhood Water Mixed Use - Neighborhood High Density 00.250.50.751Miles ° NEWPORT Maplewood Future Land Use Categories Rural/Low Density Residential (0.5 1.5 units per net acre) The City intends the Rural/Low Density Residential classification to offer a rural residential setting and to help protect the Citys natural resources. Future land uses and development shall maintain and embrace the existing rural character as an essential element of neighborhood planning and design. Rural, not urban, planning and servicing principles will apply to these areas. Maplewood intends the rural-style and low density housing to be a long-term and enduring land use in this area. The City may allow the use of density bonuses if the applicant or property owners show how their proposal meets the Citys highest development standards. This classification is intended to have a mix of sewered and non-sewered developments. If appropriate densities are achieved in new developments, they will be sewered. Otherwise, the Citys sanitary sewer plan (contained within the Comprehensive Plan) will be used to determine when urban services should be extended and where it would be appropriate. For developments that are lower in density and will need to utilize on-site systems the Individual Sewage Treatment System (ISTS) standards must be met and will have to provide for adequate acreage. Low Density Residential (2.6 6.0 units per net acre) Low Density Residential is by far Maplewoods largest residential classification. The City intends for residential densities of 2.6 to 6.0 units per net acre in this land use category. Maplewood intends to continue this classification for the Citys present practice of mixing attached and detached single- family housing types (including traditional single-family detached homes, detached town houses and two-family homes). Medium Density Residential (6.1 10.0 units per net acre) The City intends the Medium Density Residential land use for moderately higher densities ranging from 6.1 to 10.0 units per net acre. Housing types in this land use category would typically include lower density attached housing, manufactured housing and higher density single family detached housing units. Some forms of stacked housing (condominiums and apartments) could be integrated into Medium Density areas, but would need to be surrounded by additional green space. High Density Residential (10.1 25 units per net acre) Maplewood intends the High Density Residential land use for higher housing densities ranging from 10.1 to 25 units per net acre. Housing types in this category would include higher density townhome, condominium and apartment developments in stacked or attached configuration. These housing areas are often located along the freeway and major road corridors and near major shopping and employment areas. Also of importance to the location of High Density Residential is proximity to the parks and open space system, employment, goods and services, and transit. Mixed Use Neighborhood (8 31 units per net acre) The City intends the mixed use - neighborhood classification to be for neighborhood serving (small scale buildings that serve a market at a neighborhood scale) commercial retail or service businesses, offices, and medium- to high-density housing. This district would lean residential, with at least 50 percent of development being residential in nature. Commercial and residential development may be combined vertically in the same building or horizontally on the same or adjacent sites. When uses are mixed within a building, retail, service, offices, and civic uses should be focused on the ground floor, while housing should be focused on the upper floors. Parking may be in structures to maximize land development intensity. Park space should be small and intimate and may occur in the form of plazas. The intensity of mixed use - neighborhood development will vary depending on its location within the City, surrounding uses, and transit service. Mixed Use Neighborhood High Density (25 50 units per net acre) The City intends the mixed use - neighborhood high density classification to be for neighborhood serving (small scale buildings that serve a market at a neighborhood scale) commercial retail or service businesses, offices, and high-density housing. This district would lean residential, with at least 50 percent of development being residential in nature. Commercial and residential development may be combined vertically in the same building or horizontally on the same or adjacent sites. When uses are mixed within a building, retail, service, offices and civic uses should be focused on the ground floor, while housing should be focused on the upper floors. Parking should be in structures to maximize land development intensity. Park space should be small and intimate and may occur in the form of plazas. Higher intensities in mixed use - neighborhood high density development are encouraged to support nearby transit service. Commercial The commercial classification includes a wide variety of commercial land use activities that focus on retail goods, services, offices, restaurants, and entertainment. This classification may also include but is not limited to areas for offices and related uses, car dealerships, and auto repair services. Light industrial uses which accommodate manufacturing, processing, warehousing, and research and development are also allowed. Low-intensity commercial uses, such as clinics, child care facilities, and smaller retail uses that cater to convenience shopping are included as well. This land use classification will work to provide for a transition between high-intensity employment and mixed use centers and residential districts. The City may allow high-intensity uses in this area, subject to performance guidelines. Mixed Use Community (25 50 units per net acre) The City intends the mixed use - community classification to be for community and regional serving commercial retail or service businesses, offices, and high-density housing. This district would lean commercial, with at least 50 percent of development being commercial in nature. Commercial, office, and residential development may be combined vertically in the same building or horizontally on the same or adjacent sites. When uses are mixed within a building, retail, service and civic uses should be focused on the ground floor, while housing and offices should be focused on the upper floors. Parking should be in structures to maximize land development intensity. Park space should be actively programmed, surrounded by active ground floor uses, and may occur in the form of plazas and central greens. The intensity of mixed use - community development will vary depending on its location within the City and surrounding uses, but generally will be more intense in nature. Because frequent and reliable transit service greatly benefits mixed use community centers, its construction and maintenance in and around these centers should be supported. Employment Land use activities within the employment designation place a special emphasis on job retention and creation. The employment classification includes both lower- and higher-intensity manufacturing and industrial areas and major employment centers such as the 3M campus and the St. Johns Hospital campus. Higher-intensity office, clinical, and business uses are supported to provide an integrated and attractive employment center. Industrial uses may include but are not limited to; warehouses, laboratories, wholesale businesses, radio and television stations and other manufacturing and industrial uses. Because frequent and reliable transit service greatly benefits large employment centers, its construction and maintenance in and around these centers should be supported. Park Maplewood intends the parks classification to represent active or passive recreation areas. Some uses are informal recreation areas while others are more formal with groomed fields. Open Space The City intends the open space classification to reflect lands that are either undevelopable or that city intends to not develop. Maplewood wants these areas to be used for passive recreational needs, habitat restoration, or as a preserve. Public/Institutional The Public/Institutional classification includes uses such as public schools, fire stations, libraries, water- system facilities, religious institutions, cemeteries, private schools, and other City-used and owned properties. There is currently no zoning district designated for public/institutional uses. The city requires the approval of a conditional use permit for public/institutional land uses in all zoning districts in Maplewood. Utility The utility classification may include uses such as, but not limited to, electrical substations, telecommunication towers, and natural gas storage.