Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-02-20 CDRB Packet AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday,February 20, 2018 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.December 19, 2017 5.Design Review: a.Consider Approval of Design Review, Wakefield Community Building, 1725 Prosperity Road North 6. New Business: a.Election of Officers (No report) b.Presentation of Annual Report to City Council –February 12, 2018 (No Report) 7.Visitor Presentations: 8.Board Presentations: 9.Staff Presentations: 10.Adjourn MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2017 1.CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Kempecalled the meeting to order at6:01p.m. 2.ROLL CALL Chairperson, Bill KempePresent Boardmember,Jason LamersPresent Vice Chairperson,Matt LedvinaPresent Boardmember,Melissa PeckPresent Boardmember,Ananth ShankarAbsent Staff Present:Michael Martin, Economic Development Coordinator 3.APPROVAL OF AGENDA BoardmemberLedvinamoved to approve the agenda as approved. Seconded by BoardmemberPeck.Ayes -All The motion passed. 4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES BoardmemberLamersmoved to approve the October 17,2017,CDRB minutes as submitted. Seconded by Chairperson Kempe.Ayes –Boardmember’s Lamers, Ledvina & Peck Abstention –Chairperson Kempe The motion passed. 5.DESIGN REVIEW a.Wakefield Park Community Building Design i.Economic Development Coordinator, Michael Martin introduced the Wakefield Park Community Building Designand turned the discussion over to the two presenters. ii.Todd Halunen, Kimley Horn, 2550 University Avenue West, Suite 238N, St Paul, addressed and answered questions of the board. iii.Tim McIlwain, Kimley Horn, 2550University Avenue West, Suite 238N, St Paul, addressed and answered questions of the board. Boardmember Ledvina moved to approveOption 2 with the lighter accent colors and Kasota Limestone product for the Wakefield Park Community Building Design. Seconded by Boardmember Lamers. December 19, 2017 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 1 Chairperson Kempe made a friendly amendmentto go with all cedar on the window wall on page 13 of the design plans. The friendly amendment failedfor lack ofa second. Boardmember Lamers made a friendly amendment that the base of the columns and the courtyard materials match. The friendly amendments made by Boardmember Lamers were accepted. Ayes –Boardmember’s Lamers, Ledvina& Peck Nays–Chairperson Kempe Chairperson Kempe voted nay because he preferred the contrast with Option 1 and he doesn’t care for the look of fake wood. Chairperson Kempe commented he still feels it’s a great design. The motion passed. This item will come back before the CDRB for review. 6.NEW BUSINESS a.2017 Community Design Review Board Annual Report i.Economic Development Coordinator, Michael Martin gave the 2017 Community Design Review Board Annual Report. Boardmember Lamersmoved to approvethe 2017 Community Design Review Board Annual Report. Seconded by Boardmember Peck.Ayes –All The motion passed. 7.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. 8.BOARDPRESENTATIONS None. 9.STAFF PRESENTATIONS None. 10.ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by Chairperson Kempeat6:39p.m. December 19, 2017 Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Melinda Coleman, City Manager FROM:Michael Martin, AICP, Economic Development Coordinator DATE: February 13, 2018 SUBJECT:Consider Approval of the Wakefield Community Building, 1725 Prosperity Road North A.Conditional Use Permit Resolution B.Design Review Introduction Project Description Audra Robbins, on behalf of the City of Maplewood Parks and Recreation Department, is seeking city approval to build a 3,300 square foot community use building at Wakefield Park which is located at 1725 Prosperity Road. This new multi-purpose facility at Wakefield Park would serve as a local “hub” and gathering place for residents. This facility will also provide programming space for youth/adult dance classes, artsand education programs, preschool classes and City Special Events. Request The applicant is requesting that the city council approve: 1.A conditional use permit (CUP) amendment for a community building. City code requires a CUP for public uses. 2.Design review. Background April 18, 2017: The planning commission and community design review boardwere introduced to the Wakefield Community Building project. October 17, 2017: Joint Board and Commission meeting to discuss the building’s proposed colors and materials. December 19, 2017: The community design review board reviewed and made recommendations regarding the proposed materials and colors Discussion Conditional Use Permit Wakefield is currently guided by the 2030 Comprehensive Plan as park (P). The site is zoned as open space and parks (OSP). Because the City of Maplewood owns the parks and associated structures a CUP isrequired because of its public use. The proposed community building and parkimprovementsare compliant with the city’scomprehensive plan and zoning designation. Site Plan The proposed building is well beyond the required setback of 30 feet from the front property line. Wakefield Lake is classified as a Class III public water in the City’s shoreland ordinanceand nonresidential developments must maintain a 50-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark of Wakefield Lake. As proposed the Wakefield Community Building will maintain a 104-foot setback to the ordinary high water mark of Wakefield Lake. There is a Manage B wetland located around the edges of Wakefield Lake and the wetland ordinance requires a 50-foot minimum buffer for Manage B wetlands that are adjacent a lake. The building, grading, and all stormwater structures will be constructed outside of the required 50-foot wetland buffer. In addition to the community building, the parking lot will be slightly moved east and expanded, the hockey and pleasure skating rinks will be rebuilt and an additional picnic shelter will be added. The existing playground areas will remain in place and unchanged. Design Review Architectural The exterior of the proposed building will be sided with a combination of vertical cedar tongue and groove boards and cementitious fiberboard siding. The fiberboard siding will be in shades of green and brown. There will also be a “black mocha” trim added to the building. The roof will be constructed with grey standing seem metal panels. Parking City ordinance requires recreational buildings to have 1 space for every 200 square foot of building space. For a 3,300 square foot building, this means 17 spaces are required. The submitted plans show 45 parking spaces being provided withspaces that are nine feet wide. The existing parking lot’s parking spaces are also nine feet wide and it has been past practice of the City to allow the continuance of existing nine foot wide spaces in public uses. Some of the neighborhood comments staff received regarding this project discussed park users parking on the street. Staff appreciates the neighborhood impact a park can have but believes there is also a balance of not building a parking lot that will sit empty most of the time. Landscaping Seven significant trees will be removed with the development of the Wakefield Park Community Building. Five of those trees are ash trees. The landscape plan calls for 29 new trees to be planted with the development: 25 deciduous (2.5 caliper inch trees) and 4 evergreen (8-foot high trees). The Wakefield Park Community building meets the requirements of the tree ordinance. In addition to the trees numerous trees and shrubs will be added near the new building making for an attractive site. Lighting The parking lot and trail leading to the community buildingarea willbe lighted. The applicant’s lighting plan indicates four light poles near the parking lot and four along the trail. City code limits light pole height to 25 feet. The submitted lightingplan meets ordinancecompliance and ensuresthat light spillage does not impact nearby residential properties. Department Comments Engineering Please see Jon Jarosch’s engineering report, dated February 13, 2018, attached to this report. Building Official, Jason Brash Applicant must meet the City’s green building code and all MinnesotaState Building Code requirements. Commission Review Community Design Review Board February 20, 2018: The community design review board will reviewthis project. Planning Commission February 20, 2018: The planning commission will hold a public hearing and review this project. Budget Impact Approval of a CUP and design plans by themselves have no budget impact. The council will consider approval of the project itself – including the budget impacts – under a separate agenda item. Recommendations A.Approve the attached conditional use permit resolution. This conditional use permit allows a 3,300square foot community building within the OSP (open space and parks) zoning district for the property located 1725 Prosperity RoadNorth. This approval shall be subject to the following conditions: 1.All construction shall follow the project plans as approved by the city. The director of environmental and economic development may approve minor changes. 2.The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3.The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4.The use of nine foot wide parking spaces is approved as an expansion of a legal, nonconforming use. B.Approve the plans date-stamped January 31, 2018, for the Wakefield Park Community Building. Approval is subject to the applicantcomplying with the following conditions: 1.This approval is good for two years. After two years, the design-reviewprocess shall be repeated if the developer has not begun construction. 2.All requirements of the fire marshal and building official must be met. 3.The applicants shall comply with all requirements of the MaplewoodEngineering Report from Jon Jarosch, dated February 13, 2018. 4.The applicants shall comply with all requirements of the MaplewoodEnvironmental Report from Shann Finwall,datedFebruary 12, 2018. 5.If a trash dumpster is to be kept outside, build an enclosure for any outside trash containers for this facility (ordinancerequirement). The enclosures must be 100 percentopaque, match the color of the building and have a closeable gate that extends to theground. 6.All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of environmental andeconomic development may approve minor changes. Citizen Comments Staff surveyed the 256surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the proposed site for their opinion about this proposal. Staff received 12responsesas shown below. For 1.In response to the letter I received concerning the community use building to be built at the Wakefield Park, I wholeheartedly agree with the plan and urge a “go ahead”. I live nearby, am retired and am on or near the park a few times a week. It is quite often full of people and an attractive building would serve the area students and users well. I also agree that all measures should be taken to improve the water quality and perhaps turn it into a decent pan fishing fishery. Thank you. (Jon Kalata, 1575 Christie Place) 2.Every suburb has a community center. Let’s have one too. There is lots of trash in the lake. I can’t keep up to it. (Leonard A. Jablonski, 1763 Maryknoll Avenue) 3.It really looks good! I’m already thinking about arranging a multi-state, multi-national family reunion at Wakefield! (Lee Egerstrom, 1808 Prosperity Road) 4. My wife Diane and I live 1 block from Wakefield Park. We are both in favor of the community building, and see the value it adds for community purposes, as well as the potential opportunities with renting on occasion to families and community groups. I don't see this as a wasteful use of tax funding, and know that as the construction costs are paid-off,the annual maintenance costs will have little impact on annual property taxes. Definitely great for rain or shine events! On a related issue, we also realize the importance of getting the water condition of Wakefield Lake cleaned from its current distressed state. It's been a shame that a place of such beauty has had such treatment of the water over the years. We understand that some years back, people could safely swim in the lake.One other issue is that we are baffled at all the tree and bush cutting along the east side of the park -with all the stumps left behind. Does that serve some purpose?Anyway, thanks for your time!(Bob Muldoon, 1885 Maryknoll Ave N) Against 1.I am 100% against the project. (Ricky Stubbs, 1860 Barclay Street) 2.I would rather the city put money into improving water quality in Wakefield Lake. No need for another community center when there is one less than a mile away. (No name or address given) 3.I am against this project.* (No name or address given)*Staff could not read the handwriting on the rest of this letter. 4.I am opposed to the plan for 1725 Prosperity Rd N that is currently written for the following reasons: 1.) I have been a resident near Wakefield Lake for over 20 years. Over 15 years ago, Wakefield Park was updatedwith waking paths, the restroom building was taken down and the lights an the field lights were taken down. The neighborhood was presented a 3 phase plan that included additional walking trails, sand lot volleyball, lighted trails and other enhancements. None of this was ever completed. The area for the sandlot volleyball was started and is now just grass grown over sand. The sliding hill was supposed to have been re-graded for recreational use with lights added. When the street re-development was done andthe water gardens were added, the existing culverts were just buried and you can see the exits of them along the north side of the lake, too. 2.) Wakefield Park was also discussed by the city as a neighborhood park. Adding this large development would change this. 3.) There are issues in the park now with after hours use and things going on at night in the woods at the southeast end of the lake. A walk through of this area will uncover a lot of trash and evidence of over night use. The area behind the East Twins ball park is treated like a yard compost site and also has trash. 4.) The park as it is now is not as well-maintained as I think it should be. The current paved paths are broken up in places, park benches are sometimes left broken for long lengths of time, and trash barrels and picnic tables are thrown in the lake. Tree damage from storms and old age have usually been left un maintained for long lengths of time and the rock fishing piers have sunken in. The ball fields have been getting over usedfor volleyball to the extent that the grass gets worn out. The ball field closest to Hazelwood/Ripley has the recreational ice rink dirt mound as a hazard in right field. The general condition of the ball fields is bad. I would prefer that funding be used to clean up the issues that I have mentioned, remodel the warming house, move the recreation rink away from the Hazelwood/Ripley ball field, fix up the ball fields and enhance the walking paths and spruce up the area with more attractive benches, trash containers and better-looking portable bathrooms. I would like to see the winter accessibility of the warming house increased and communication of its availability improved (Add signage). I would like to see the volleyball area completed and maybe add more to offset the over use of the baseball fields. The boarded ice rink area looks bad in the summer and I could see it being improved with a concrete surface that could be used in the summer for roller hockey or other activities. I think the addition of the building that is being proposed would be a target for vandalism, too, without proper oversight.Instead of the building as proposed, how about another/larger picnic area similar to Oakdale's Walton Park? Maybe include an outdoor entertainment stage... (Tim McKane, 1491 Ripley Avenue) 5.We have lived in our home for 28 years at 1523 Ripley Ave.Unfortunately we will be unable to attend the meeting on Tues. Feb 20th but would like to have the following points discussed: a.When the park was originally redeveloped the main reason of eliminating the 3rd softball field and parking lot was reduce the traffic and parking issues in the neighborhood. b.It was determined back then that the neighborhood roads were not meant to handle high traffic flow. c.When there is any event at the park currently -the roads are packed with vehicles parking in our yards, people walking across our yard, garbage from them left in our yard. d.A 3,300 sq foot building is larger than 3 homes in the area. e.This building would be built right out of our picture window -eliminating our peaceful view of the rolling hills of the park. f.If this building is built the park would then have a warming house, Gazebo and this building. g.If a place is needed to have exercise classes -why not have them atGladstone or the YMCA? h.Another building to encourage vandalism and encourage homeless to seek shelter (we see them staying in the park on a regular basis during summer months) i.Many people also park along Frost Ave and it is very difficult to see oncoming vehicles when trying to pull out from Hazelwood onto Frost Ave. j.Overflow parking also happens at Cross Lutheran Church in their parking lot which should not be happening as that is their private lot. k.I do not believe having this building will help propertyvalues either -in fact for us we feel this will cause our home value to decrease. (Tim and Debbie Walker, 1523 Ripley Ave) Other Comments 1.Before this project goes anywhere, Wakefield Lake needs to be cleaned up. There need to be a plan to address the asian milfoil in the lake. I have been a resident here for over 30 years and this is as bad as I have ever seen the water quality. Please feel free to send me an email to let me know how the water quality will be addressed. Thank you. (Jeffrey C. Brastad, 1887 Dieter Street) 2.Will the ice rink and hockey rink stay? Along with the warming house? Will the play area stay? – Add more benches and tables Improve the amount of parking – the lot is too small I can’t tell if the outside Gazebo is staying Will the building be for rent and will it have a kitchen? They need to have at least a side walk going from Frost Avenue to the Park on the side of the street that the park is on and not the side the houses are on. This is a very active park in the spring, summer and fall with groups and families playing volleyball. They park along the street, making it difficult to walk to the park. I don’t know why it wasn’t done when they did the Hazelwood of Frost Avenue. John Glenn middle school takes the children with physicaland intellectual disabilities to the park in the spring and fall. (Deborah Tschida, 1941 Hazelwood Ave) 3.Before moving forward on the proposed building of a 3,300 square foot building at Wakefield Park there are several questions we would like to have answered: a.It appears that the building would displace the two skating rinks as well as the sand, volley ball area….Is that correct? b.Is the current Eagle Scout wildflower garden going to be retained? c.What is being done to improve the quality of the lake? Will it ever be clean enough to swim in? d.Is the lake still being stocked with fish by the DNR, and if so, how can the city encourage fishing from a lake too polluted to swim in as one that’s OK to eat fish from? e.Is the increased parking area going to displace one of the ball fields? f.Are there plans to add a sidewalk on Hazelwood, along the west side of the park, too? Other concerns: a.The shoreline of the lake is not being taken care of…excessive growth and years of debris. b.The Boy Scout trail along the southeast part of the lake should be improved. c.The sliding hill has been fenced off – will the site be cleaned up and improved so that winter activity will be available for kids again? These are questions and concerns we feel should be addressed before adding the community use building, especially the lack of parking and loss of existing facilities and activities. (Richard and Judith Steenberg 1854 Barclay Street) Reference Information Site Description Site Size: 34.32 Acres Existing Land Use: Park and associated building and structures Surrounding Land Uses North: Frost Avenue and a church South: Residential properties East: Residential properties and a church West: Residential properties Planning Existing Land Use: Parks (P) Existing Zoning:Open Space and Parks (OSP) Code Requirements Section 44-1092(1) requires a conditional use permit for any public service or public building use. Findings for CUP Approval Section 44-1097(a) requires that the city council base approval of a CUP on nine findings. Refer to the findings for approval in the resolution attached to this report. Application Date The city deemed the applicant’sapplications complete on January 31, 2018. The initial 60-day review deadline for a decision isApril 1, 2018. 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.OverviewMap 2.Land Use Map 3.Zoning Map 4.Applicant’s Letter 5.Applicant’s Site Plan 6.Applicant’s Building Elevations 7.Shann Finwall, Environmentalcomments, dated February 12, 2018 8.Jon Jarosch, Engineering comments, datedFebruary 13, 2018 9.Project Presentation 10.Conditional Use Permit Resolution 11.Applicant’s Plan Set (separate attachment) Attachment 1 1725 Prosperity Road North January 31, 2018 City of Maplewood Legend ! I 0490 Feet Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County Attachment 2 Wakefield Park - 1725 Prosperity Road North February 13, 2018 City of Maplewood Legend ! I Future Land Use Low Density Residential High Density Residential Park Institution Government 0490 Feet Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County Attachment 3 Wakefield Park - 1725 Prosperity Road North February 13, 2018 City of Maplewood Legend ! I Zoning Open Space/Park Single Dwelling (r1) Double Dwelling (r2) Multiple Dwelling (r3) Farm (f) 0490 Feet Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County Attachment 4 Wakefield Park ImprovementsNarrative Project Introduction One of the major recommendations and strategies identified in the Maplewood Parks System Master Plan was to build a multi-purpose facility at Wakefield Park that would provide needed space The Parks System Master Plan envisions The new multi-purpose facility at Wakefield and gathering place for residents. This facility will also provide much needed programming space for youth/adult dance classes, arts and education programs, preschool classes and City Special Events. Project Background In accordance with City strategic priority ofCoordinated Communication, a significant public engagement process was utilized to help inform the design process for the proposed improvements as summarized below: Project kick-off at a City Council work session on March 27, 2017 Community Design Review Board(CDRB)meeting on April 18, 2017 Planning Commission meeting on April 18, 2017 Parks and RecreationCommission(PRC)meeting on April 19, 2017 Environmental and Natural Resources Commission (ENRC)meeting on May 15, 2017 Community Open House on June 28, 2017 Parks and Recreation Commission(PRC)meeting on August 16, 2017 Environmental and Natural Resources Commission(ENRC)meeting on August 21, 2017 To engage stakeholders (residents, businesses, and park users) and ensure thatall had an opportunity to participate in the process, a survey was made available to residents and park users in May 2017 to capture the needs of the community and users of the park system.The survey was mailed to Maplewood residents who live near/around Wakefield Park,wasincluded in the Maplewood Living Newsletter(both hard copy and an online link) and was promoted on theCity website, City social media sites,and in the Parks & Recreation brochure. A Community Open House was held at Wakefieldon June 28, 2017.An invitation to attend was mailed to over 500 households,promoted in the Parks & Recreation brochure, Maplewood Living newsletterand on the City website and City social media sites.City staff,along with our consultants and a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission were on hand to talk about the project, gather feedback and answer questions.Over 45 people attended the meeting. Overall, thefeedbackfrom the publicregarding the preliminary park design was positive, specifically concerningthe proposed building location and its proximity to the lake. However,a group of residents did raiseconcerns about the water qualityof Wakefield Lake.As a result, City staff is working in cooperation with the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD)to develop plans to address these water qualityconcerns. Attachment 4 Staff also met with representatives from the Police, Fire and Public Works Departmentsto identify additional design elements that pertainto environmental design standards, crime prevention and maintenance.That information includes the following: The Community Building and its related site improvements will be designed to meet the 2012 Green Construction Code (IgCC) which was adopted by the Cityas a Code requirement. The IgCC includes criteria with respectto the following: o Material resource conservation and efficiency. o Energy conservation, efficiency and CO2 emission reduction. o Water resource conservation, quality and efficiency. o Indoor environmental quality and comfort. o Commissioning, operation and maintenance. Our asset management software, Cartegraph, will be used to track the building condition andmanage maintenance needs and costs. We are proposingto use quality and locally sourced building materials that may be more expensive up front but will result in long-term savings due to reduced maintenance costs and building longevity. These materials include: o Real stone veneer o Prefinished metal roofing o Sustainably grown wood products Attachment 5 Attachment 6 Attachment 6 Attachment 6 Attachment 6 Attachment 6 Attachment 7 Environmental Review Project: Wakefield Park Community Building Dateof Plans: November 21, 2017 Landscape Plan January 25, 2018 Wetland and Tree Plan Date of Review: February 12, 2018 Location:1725 Prosperity Road Reviewer: Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner (651) 249-2304;shann.finwall@maplewoodmn.gov Background Maplewood Parks and Recreation Department is proposing to build a 3,300 square foot community buildinginWakefield Park (1725 Prosperity Road North). Theproject will be constructed near Wakefield Lake, which is a Class III Public Water,and Manage B wetlands adjacent the lake. There are significant trees that will be impacted by the development. Theproject must comply with the City’s shoreland, wetland, and tree preservation ordinance. Discussion 1.Shoreland Ordinance: Wakefield Lake is classified as a Class III public water in the City’s shoreland ordinance. Nonresidential developments must maintain a 50-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark of Wakefield Lake. Shoreland Impacts: As proposed the Wakefield Community Building will maintain a 104-foot setback to the ordinary high water mark of Wakefield Lake. TheWakefield Park Community building meets the requirements of the shoreland ordinance. 2.WetlandOrdinance:There is a Manage B wetland located around the edges of Wakefield Lake. The wetland ordinance requires a 50-footminimum buffer for Manage Bwetlandsthat are adjacent a lake. No building, grading, or stormwater structures can be located within the buffer. Wetland Impacts:The building, grading, and all stormwater structures will be constructed outside of the required 50-foot wetland buffer. The Wakefield Park Community building meets the requirements of the wetland ordinance. 3.TreeOrdinance: Maplewood’s tree preservation 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 defined as a healthy tree of any species which is 28 inches in diameter or greater. The ordinance Attachment 7 does not require tree replacement for public improvement projects. The City should, however, replant one tree for one tree removed at a minimum. Tree Impacts:Seven significant trees will be removed with the development of theWakefield Park Community building. Five of those trees are ash trees. The landscape plan calls for 29 new trees to be planted with the development: 25 deciduous (2.5 caliper inch trees) and 4 evergreen (8-foot high trees). The Wakefield Park Community building meets the requirements of the tree ordinance. 2 Attachment 8 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: Wakefield Park Community Building PROJECT NO: 18-04 COMMENTS BY: Jon Jarosch, P.E. – Staff Engineer DATE: 2-13-2018 PLAN SET: Engineering plansdated 11-21-2017 TheParks and Recreation Departmentis proposing to construct a 3,300 square foot community building at Wakefield Park.They are requesting review of the current design. Drainage and Stormwater Management 1) The amount of disturbance on this site is greater than ½acre. As such,the applicant is required to meet the City’s stormwater volume reduction, rate control, and other stormwater management requirements. 2)The project shall be submitted to the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) for review. All conditions of RWMWD shall be met. Grading and Erosion Control 3)Inlet protection devices shall be installed on allexistingand proposedonsite storm seweruntil all exposed soils onsite are stabilized.This includes storm sewer on adjacent streets that could potentially receive construction related sedimentor debris. 4)Adjacent streetsand parking areasshall be swept as needed to keep the pavement clear of sediment and construction debris. 5)All pedestrian facilities shall be ADA compliant. 6)The total grading volume (cut/fill) shall be noted on the plans. 7)All areas disturbed within the right-of-way shall be restored per the City’s right-of-way ordinance. 8)A copy of the project SWPPP and NDPES Permit shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 9)Two rows of heavy-duty mesh backed silt fencing, or other approved perimeter control measures shall be installed between any disturbed areas of the site and Wakefield Lake. Attachment 8 Sanitary Sewer and Potable Water 10)A SAC determination shall be obtained for this project. The applicant shall be responsible for all SAC and WAC charges associated with this development. Public Works Permits The following permits are required by the Maplewood Public Works Department for this project. The applicant should verify the need for other City permits with the Building Department. 11)Grading and erosion control permit 12)Storm Sewer Permit -END COMMENTS - Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Attachment 10 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Audra Robbins, on behalf of the City of Maplewood Parks and Recreation Department, hasapplied for a conditional use permit to build a community buildingat 1725 Prosperity Road North. WHEREAS, conditional use permits are required for any public service or public building use. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the 34.32 acre site at 1725 Prosperity Avenue North. Theproperty identification number is: 15-29-22-43-0022 WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1.On February 20, 2018, 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. 2.On February 26, 2018,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 servedby 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. Attachment 10 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.All construction shall follow the project plans as approved by the city. The director of environmental and economic development may approve minor changes. 2.The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3.The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4.Theuse of nine foot wide parking spaces is approved as an expansion of a legal, nonconforming use. The Maplewood City Council __________this resolution on February 26, 2018.