HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/18/2005
MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, July 18, 2005, 7:00 PM
City Hall Council Chambers
1830 County Road BEast
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes
a. July 5,2005
5. Public Hearings
7:00 The Woodlands of Maplewood (McMenemy Street, north of Kingston Avenue)
1. Land Use Plan Change (R-1 (single-family residential) to R-3(M) (medium density residential)
2. Zoning Map Change (F (farm residence) to R-2 (single and double dwellings)
3. Street right-of-way vacation (Edgemont Street, north of Kingston Avenue)
4. Conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD)
5. Preliminary plat
7:15 Utility Easement Vacation (Heritage Square Fourth Addition)
7:30 Walgreens (White Bear and Beam Avenues)
1. Land Use Plan Change (LBC (limited business commercial) to BC (business commercial)
2. Zoning Map Change (LBC (limited business commercial) to BC (business commercial)
6. New Business
Land Use and Density Review - EAW Study Area (south of Carver Avenue, east of 1-494)
7. Unfinished Business
None
8. Visitor Presentations
9. Commission Presentations
July 11 Council Meeting: Mr. Yarwood ??
July 25 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson
August 8 Council Meeting: Mr. Trippler
10. Staff Presentations
Annual Tour Update
11. Adjournment
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, JULY 5, 2005
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Commissioner Eric Ahlness
Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai
Commissioner Mary Dierich
Chairperson Lorraine Fischer
Commissioner Michael Grover
Commissioner Jim Kaczrowski
Commissioner Gary Pearson
Commissioner Dale Trippler
Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Ken Roberts, Planner
Erin Laberee, Staff Engineer
Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary
Staff Present:
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Chairperson Fischer requested CommissionerTripplerto give an update regarding the Gladstone
Task Force meeting to be discussed under commission presentations.
Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the agenda as amended.
Commissioner Grover seconded.
The motion passed.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Ayes - Ahlness, Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover,
Kaczrowski, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood
Approval of the planning commission minutes for June 20, 2005.
Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the planning commission minutes for June 20,2005.
Commissioner Desai seconded.
Ayes - Desai, Grover, Kaczrowski, Pearson
Abstentions- Ahlness, Dierich, Fischer, Trippler
Planning Commission
Minutes of 07-05-05
-2-
V. PUBLIC HEARING (7:02 - 7:40 p.m.)
a. Jensen Estates Preliminary Plat (Hoyt Avenue, east of McKnight Road)
Mr. Roberts said Mr. Kelly Conlin, representing Homesites LLC, is proposing an eight-lot plat for
single dwellings in a new development called Jensen Estates. It would be on a four-acre site on
the east side of McKnight Road on the properties now known as 1560 and 1580 McKnight Road.
To build this project, Mr. Conlin is requesting that the city approve a preliminary plat for eight lots
for the eight single dwellings. Staff doesn't find a problem with this proposal in terms of
compatibility and land use. It would be an in-fill plat for new houses on a site surrounded by
single-family homes. The proposal also would include an extension of Hoyt Avenue into a
permanent cul-de-sac (not a through street connection to Currie Street to the north). Staff
recommends approval of the preliminary plat for eight single dwellings to be called Jensen
Estates.
Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission.
Mr. Kelly Conlin, representing Homesites, LLC, addressed the commission. He said they had a
neighborhood meeting and the response was pretty good from the neighbors. The continuation
to connect the road there has a 22 foot grade difference from the top of the proposed cul-de-sac
to the temporary cul-de-sac on Currie Street. The neighbors were happy they decided to have a
cul-de-sac rather than a through street.
Commissioner Trippier said one of the neighbors that wrote in discussed a bike path at Currie
Street to give access to the Priory and he asked for further information regarding that.
Mr. Conlin said Chris Cavett talked to him about that bike path and Homesites doesn't have any
problem putting an easement in for the bike path or even a paved bike path but he is not sure
where it would be stubbed. Whatever the city wants them to do is what they would do.
Commissioner Trippler asked how the name Jensen Estates came about for this proposed
development?
Mr. Conlin said Mr. Jensen is an older gentleman that lives here so they decided to name the new
development after him.
Commissioner Dierich said in visiting the site she noticed lot number 4 is very close to 2289 Hoyt
Avenue and she asked how many feet away they are from the property line they are.
Mr. Conlin said the minimum lot width is 75 feet wide and they increasing it to 86 feet wide.
Mr. Roberts said 2289 Hoyt Avenue said the rear yard setback is 20 feet to the property line and
the side setback for lot number 4 on Currie Street is at least 10 feet. It would be a minimum of 30
feet between the two houses.
Chairperson Fischer asked Mr. Conlin if had any questions for the commission?
Mr. Conlin said no.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 07-05-05
-3-
The following neighbors spoke during the public hearing forthe Jensen Estates preliminary plat.
1. Tim Greeninaer - 2289 Hoyt Avenue East, Maplewood.
Mr. Greeninger said the way this proposal is designed is going to make for an unfair financial
burden on his property. Basically his property is going to be surrounded by three sides of asphalt
with the new cul-de-sac wrapped around his property. He believes there are other ways to design
the project. One is to bring the cul-de-sac through Currie Street. One advantage is a life safety
issue because the traffic would egress out onto Larpenteur Avenue instead of bringing the traffic
out onto McKnight Street. The developer would incur some additional costs with the cul-de-sac.
His letter is enclosed in the staff report on page 25 for further reference.
2. Don Winaer-1649 Currie Street, Maplewood.
Mr. Winger said regarding the statement from Lieutenant David Kvam of the Maplewood Police
Department page 3 of the staff report, he believes the lieutenant underestimates the impact of
Hoyt Avenue to McKnight Road. If it were a through street the speed limit is 45 mph with an up
grade on McKnight Road and given his past experience he knows well enough about the number
of accidents on McKnight Road. Making this a cul-de-sac is an excellent idea. He also thinks the
lieutenant is right that the new houses on the cul-de-sac with Currie Street as the address may be
confusing for people trying to find that small stretch of neighborhood. He would like to
compliment the city staff for the work they did along with the work with the developer on this
proposal to make more people happy having this as a cul-de-sac rather than a through street.
3. Jim Thurston -1595 Mvrtle Street. Maplewood.
Mr. Thurston said the wetland on the site is behind his property and butts up to his property at
1595 Myrtle Street. His neighbors throw stuff into the wetland pond all the time and most recently
they had a big party where people threw beer bottles and cans into the pond. He said he
regularly pulls garbage out of the pond and he is tired of cleaning the pond out. He asked when
the developer works on this property are they going to take the responsibility of cleaning the
wetland pond out or are the new neighbors going to do it? There are wood ducks, deer and other
animals back there and so far a whole family of wood ducks died because of the garbage that is
thrown into the pond. The developer said they were going to remove some of the dead trees on
the site. He would like authorization to remove the dead trees and cut the wood up because he
burns wood in the winter to heat his home. This would help the developer out along with some of
his expense to cut the trees down and remove the debris.
Mr. Conlin said they will pull out what ever they can out of the wetland by hand but they can't
bring any equipment in to remove anything from the wetland. Regarding the trees, they will cut
the dead trees down and bring the wood to Mr. Thurston's property, that way there is no liability or
safety issues for them to deal with. These homes they propose to build will be in the high
$400,000 to $500,000 price range. They want to be good neighbors in the community and will do
what ever they can to make sure the area is cleaned up and look nice.
Commissioner Grover asked how the developer proposed to bring equipment in to develop this
site.
Mr. Conlin said they will demo the house on McKnight Road and come through lots 1 and 2. The
temporary cul-de-sac needs to be reconstructed. So there will be trucks coming through to redo
the street but that is only for 1 day.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 07-05-05
-4-
Commissioner Grover said he just wanted to make sure the existing neighbors would not have
any heavy equipment coming and going from this area.
4. Sharon Platzen - 2289 Hoyt Avenue East, Maplewood.
She is Mr. Greeninger's fiance and resides at 2289 Hoyt Avenue. Tree number 265 is partly on
their property and they would like to see that tree saved. She is concerned about lights shining
into their windows because of the design of the cul-de-sac and she is concerned about where the
street light will be placed on the cul-de-sac. She would like these things considered with the
review of this proposal.
Mr. Roberts said the city is going to put a street light between lot 6 and lot 7 and the light will
shine down onto the road in the cul-de-sac not into the windows of the homes.
Chairperson Fischer closed the public hearing portion of the meeting.
Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the Jensen Estates preliminary plat (received by the
city on June 7, 2005). The developer shall complete the following before the city council
approves the final plat:
1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and
meet all city requirements.
b. .Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control, street identification and no-parking signs.
d. Provide all required and necessary easements including:
(1) all utility and drainage easements.
(2) ten-foot-wide drainage and utility easements along the front and rear lot lines of
each lot and five-foot-wide drainage and utility easements along the side lot lines of
each lot.
(3) Any off-site easements.
(4) All wetland buffer easements for all wetlands and their buffers on the site.
e. Have Xcel Energy install a street light at the north end of Hoyt Avenue near Lots 7 and
8. The exact location and type of light shall be subject to the city engineer's approval.
f. Demolish or remove the existing house (1560 McKnight Road), garages and sheds from
the site, and remove all other buildings, fencing, scrap metal, debris and junk from the
site.
g. Cap and seal all wells on site and remove septic systems or drainfields, subject to
Minnesota rules and guidelines.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 07-05-05
-5-
h. Complete all curb on Hoyt Avenue and restore the boulevards on the south side of the
site. This is to replace the existing temporary cul-de-sac, and restore and sod the
boulevards.
2. "Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall
include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, driveway, trail, tree, and street plans. The
plans shall meet all the conditions and changes listed in the memo from Erin Laberee dated
June 22, 2005, and shall meet the following conditions:
a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code.
b. The grading plan shall:
(1) Include proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home
site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat.
(2) Include contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. This
plan shall account for the existing grades and elevations of the properties and the
houses that are adjacent to the project site.
(3) Show house pads that reduce the grading on sites where the developer can save
large trees. Revise the plan for Lot 4 so the developer and contractor can save the
tree near the south property line (#265 on the tree inventory) and for Lots 6 and 7 to
save additional trees.
(4) Show the proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer.
(5) Include the tree plan that:
(a) Shows where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This
plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site.
(b) Shows no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits.
(c) Shows the spruce trees to be planted as a mix of black hills spruce or
Austrian pines that are at least eight feet tall.
(6) Show drainage areas and the developer's engineer shall provide the city engineer
with the drainage calculations. The drainage design shall accommodate the runoff
from the surrounding areas.
(7) Show all proposed slopes. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications
and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. On slopes steeper
than 3: 1, the developer shall prepare and implement a stabilization and planting
plan. At a minimum, the slopes shall be protected with wood-fiber blanket, be
seeded with a no-maintenance vegetation and be stabilized before the city
approves the final plat.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 07-05-05
-6-
(8) Show all retaining walls. Any retaining walls taller than 4 feet require a building
permit from the city.
(9) Show the sedimentation basins or ponds as may be required by the watershed
district or by the city engineer.
(10) Show no grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements
from the affected property owner(s).
(11) Be revised to lessen the amount of grading on the northern part of Lots Six and
Seven to help save trees on these two lots.
(12) Be revised to show the trail between Lots 6 and 7 from the cul-de-sac to the
property to the north.
c. The street, driveway, trail and utility plans shall show:
(1) The street lot width of 32 feet (with parking on one side), shall be a 9-ton design with
a maximum street grade of eight percent and the maximum street grade within 75
feet of the intersection at two percent.
(2) The new street (Hoyt Avenue) with continuous concrete curb and gutter, except
where the city engineer determines that concrete curbing is not necessary.
(3) The completition of the curb on all of Hoyt Avenue, the removal of the temporary cul-
de-sac and the restoration and sodding of the boulevards.
(4) The repair of McKnight Road (curb, street and boulevard) after the developer
connects to the public utilities and builds the new street.
(5) The coordination of the water main alignments and sizing with the standards and
requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Service (SPRWS).
(6) All utility excavation located within the proposed right-of-way or within easements.
The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be outside the
project area.
(7) A water service to each lot.
(8) The plan and profiles of the proposed utilities.
(9) A detail of any ponds, pond outlets or rainwater gardens. The contractor shall
protect the outlets to prevent erosion.
(10)The cul-de-sac with a minimum pavement radius of at least 42 feet.
(11)A label for McKnight Road and the new street as Hoyt Avenue on all construction
and project plans.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 07-05-05
-7-
(12)The eight-foot-wide trail between the cul-de-sac and the property to the north.
3. Paying for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans.
4. Change the plat as follows:
a. Show drainage and utility easements along all property lines on the final plat. These
easements shall be ten feet wide along the front and rear property lines and five feet
wide along the side property lines.
b. Label the new street as Hoyt Avenue and label McKnight Road on all plans.
c. Show a 20-foot-wide outlot or trail easement between Lots 6 and 7 between the cul-de-
sac and the north property line. This outlot or easement shall follow the approved trail
alignment.
5. Secure and provide all required easements for the development including any off-site
drainage and utility easements.
6. The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site drainage.
The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the developer or
contractor has not completed before final plat approval.
7. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading.
8. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor
will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage and ponding areas, install all retaining
walls, install the landscaping and replacement trees, install all other necessary
improvements and meet all city requirements.
b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Provide for the repair of McKnight Road (street, curb and boulevard) after the developer
connects to the public utilities.
d. Meet all the requirements of the city engineer.
9. If there are any, submit the homeowners' association documents for review and approval by
city staff. These shall include provisions for the maintenance and use of the rainwater
gardens.
10. Record the homeowners' association documents with the final plat.
11. Obtain a permit from Ramsey County for the new street access.
12. Obtain a NPDES construction permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
Planning Commission
Minutes of 07-05-05
-8-
13. The owner or contractor shall get demolition permits from the city to remove the house,
garage and the other structures from the property at 1560 McKnight Road.
14. If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the director of community
development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat.
"The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or
approves the final plat.
Commissioner Ahlness seconded.
Ayes - Ahlness, Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover,
Kaczrowski, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood
The motion passed.
This item goes to the city council on July 25, 2005.
Commissioner Grover encouraged the developer to continue to work with the residents at 2289
Hoyt Avenue regarding their concerns for screening and privacy.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
None.
VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None.
IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
a. Mr. Grover was the planning commission representative at the June 27, 2005, city
council meeting.
The only planning commission item to discuss was the Preliminary Platforthe Pondview Town
House Project at Larpenteur Avenue and Adolphus Street, which was passed by the city
council.
b. Mr. Yarwood was scheduled to be the planning commission representative at the July
11, 2005, city council meeting, however, he has been called away on a business trip,
therefore Mr. Kaczrowski said he could probably take his place.
Items to be discussed include the Lot Width and Setback Variances at 1775 McMenemy
Street, the Lark Avenue Right of Way Vacation (between Hazel and Van Dyke Streets) and
the Richie/Anondson four-plexes at 1349 and 1359 County Road C East for the Land Use
Plan Change and the Zoning Map Change.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 07-05-05
-9-
c. Mr. Pearson will be the planning commission representative at the July 25, 2005, city
council meeting.
Items to discuss include the Jensen Estates Preliminary Plat (Hoyt Avenue, east of McKnight
Road) and possibly Maplewood Toyota Expansion (north site - north of LaMettry's Collision)
for a vehicle storage lot.
d. Commissioner Trippler updating the planning commission on the Gladstone Task Force
meeting.
Commissioner Trippler gave a brief update on the Gladstone Task Force meetings and what
had been discussed. The next Task Force meeting is scheduled for Thursday, July 14, 2005,
at 7:30 p.m. The next public meeting is scheduled for Thursday, August 11,2005, from 6:30
to 8:30 p.m. at the Maplewood Community Center. Visit the city's website for further updates
and more information.
X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
a. Annual Tour
Mr. Roberts asked which planning commissioners were planning on attending the annual city tour
on Thursday, July 28, 2005, at 5:30 p.m. Everyone except Michael Grover is able to attend the
annual city tour.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:12 p.m.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
City Manager
Ken Roberts, Planner
The Woodlands of Maplewood
1740. 1750 and 1766 McMenemy Street (north of Kingston Avenue)
July 12, 2005
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Mr. Chris English, representing Integra Homes, is asking the city to approve plans for a 28 unit
townhouse development. He has prepared a site plan that shows 28 townhouses (in 14 detached
townhomes and seven twinhomes) in a development called The Woodlands. It would be on a 8.2-
acre site on the east side of McMenemy Street, north of Kingston Avenue and south of the Hmong
Church. Refer to the applicant's statement on pages 23 and 24 and the maps on pages 25 - 32. A
homeowners' association would own and maintain the common areas.
The applicant's designer has told staff that each building would have horizontal-lap vinyl siding,
aluminum soffits and fascia and brick veneer on the fronts. In addition, each unit would have a two-
car garage. (See the building elevations on pages 33 - 37 and the enclosed plans.)
Requests
To build this project, Mr. English is requesting that the city approve:
1. A change to the comprehensive plan. This would be from R-1 (single dwelling residential) to
R-2 (single and double dwellings) for the site. (See the land use map on page 26.)
2. A change to the zoning map. This would be from F (famn residential) to R-2 (single and double
dwellings) for the site.
3. A conditional use pemnit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD). This PUD will allow the
townhouses to be on smaller lots than code usually allows (in area and in width) and to have
some of them on private driveways.
4. The partial vacation of the Edgemont Street right-of-way, north of Kingston Avenue.
5. A preliminary plat for 29 lots - 28 lots for the 28 housing units and one lot (Lot 29) for the
ponding areas. (See the plan on page 28.)
6. The project design plans, including the landscaping and the building elevations. (See the plans
on pages 28 - 38.)
BACKGROUND
The area between the proposed development and Larpenteur Avenue is a plat named Monn's Villa.
This area, including Edgemont and Arkwright Streets and Kingston Avenue, was developed in the
mid 1950s. This plat includes the unused Arkwright or Edgemont street right-of-way that is between
the houses at 385 and 395 Kingston Avenue.
The city did not include the subject property in the 1992 inventory of possible properties to buy for
open space. As such, the city did not consider buying this property for open space.
DISCUSSION
Land Use Plan and Zoning Map Changes
To build the proposed townhouses, Mr. English wants the city to change the land use plan and
zoning map for the site. The land use plan change would be from R-1 (single dwelling residential) to
R-2 (single and double dwellings). (See the land use plan map on page 26.) The zoning map
change would be from F (farm residence) to R-2 (single and double dwellings). The city intends R-2
areas for small-lot (7,500 square-foot) single dwellings and for double dwellings with a maximum
density of six units per gross acre. For R-1 areas, the city plans for single dwellings on lots of at
least 10,000 square feet of area with a maximum density of 4.6 units per acre.
The land use plan is the city's long range guide as to how the city expects land to be used or
developed. The zoning designation for a property defines how a property owner may use the
property.
Comcatibilitv
Staff does not find a problem with this proposal in terms of compatibility and land use. The proposed
townhouses would be near McMenemy Street and an existing church and next to single dwellings. In
addition, developers will often build town homes next to single dwellings. A recent example is with the
New Century Addition in south Maplewood. The developer, Robert Engstrom, is developing this
neighborhood with a mix of single dwellings and townhomes. There are many other examples in
Maplewood, such as Afton Ridge, Southwinds, The Gardens, Olivia Gardens and the Carriage Homes
of Maple Hills where this is the case.
Density
As proposed, the 28 units on the 8.2-acre site means there would be 3.41 units per acre. This is
consistent with the density standards in the comprehensive plan for single family and for double
dwelling residential development.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
Conditional Use Permit
Section 44-1093(b) of the city code says that it is the intent of the PUD code "to provide a means to
allow flexibility by substantial deviations from the provisions of this chapter, including uses,
setbacks, height and other regulations. Deviations may be granted for planned unit developments
provided that:
1. Certain regulations contained in this chapter should not apply to the proposed development
because of its unique nature.
2. The PUD would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter.
3. The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or superior quality to
that which would result from strict adherence to the provisions of this chapter.
2
4. The deviations would not constitute a significant threat to the property values, safety, health
or general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land.
5. The deviations are required for reasonable and practicable physical development and are
not required solely for financial reasons."
The applicant has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD)
for the 28-unit housing development. They are requesting the CUP for the PUD to allow code
deviations and more flexibility with site design and development details than the standard city
requirements. Such flexibility includes having a variety of building setbacks, having the townhouses
on lots that would be smaller in width and in area than the code usually requires and to have a
narrower public street right-of-way (50 feet instead of 60 feet) for Kingston Court.
A homeowners' association would own and maintain the common areas of the development,
including the private driveways, retaining walls and the ponding areas. Exchanging the common
land for larger lot sizes would not change the location, design or number of units in this
development. It is the contention of the applicant that the proposed site design details and code
deviations meet the findings in the city code for approval of a PUD.
City staff agrees with the applicant that the development as proposed (shown on page 28), with the
proposed code deviations, would produce a development of equal or superior quality, that the
proposals do not constitute a threat to the area and that the deviations are required for reasonable
and practicable development of the site. Having private driveways with reduced townhouse
setbacks will allow for more common area around each building. If the applicant followed all the city
subdivision and zoning standards and used public streets, such a plan would require larger lots for
each building with public right-of-ways and increased building setbacks. In addition, it is important
to note that the proposed code deviations do not increase the number of lots or the density of the
housing in the development over the density in other townhouse projects.
In addition, the city has approved similar-styled developments in the past such as Holloway Ponds
at Holloway Avenue and Beebe Road, the Dearborn Meadows development on Viking Drive, and
more recently, Olivia Gardens on Stillwater Road. For this proposal, the developer intends to sell
each of the townhomes and expects that each unit will sell for at least $300,000.
Right-of-Way Vacation
The applicant is asking the city to vacate parts of the Edgemont Street right-of-way, north of
Kingston Avenue. The proposal is to vacate the west and east 15 feet (30 feet total) of the right-of-
way and for the city to keep the center part of the right-of-way for public use. In this case, the 15
feet of the right-of-way on the two sides would go to the adjacent property owners and the developer
would use the center part of the right-of-way for a watermain connection to Kingston Avenue, for a
trail for pedestrian and emergency vehicle access - not for general vehicle access. This vacation, if
approved by the city, should assure the neighbors in the area that the city does not expect to use
the Edgemont right-of-way for a public street.
3
Preliminary Plat
Density and Lot Size
As proposed, the 28 units on the 8.2-acre site means there would be 3.41 units per acre (an
average of 12,784 square feet per unit). This is consistent with the density standards in the
comprehensive plan for double dwelling residential development and is well above the 6,000-
square-foot minimum lot area that the city requires for each unit in a double dwelling.
City Engineering Department Review
Chuck Ahl and Erin Laberee of the Maplewood Engineering Department reviewed the proposed
plans. Erin put their comments in the memo starting on page 39.
The major change they are recommending for the proposal is that the city should require the
developer to add more cul-de-sacs within the development for easier movement of larger vehicles.
Specifically, they are suggesting that the developer add a cul-de-sac in the southeast comer of the
site near Unit 4. This change will require the developer to adjust the grading and site plans
accordingly and could cause the loss of units.
Mr. Cavett, the assistant city engineer, also reminded me that the city, in the Capital Improvements
Plan (CIP), has scheduled the reconstruction of Desoto Street from Larpenteur Avenue to County
Road B for 2007. The CIP has not yet identified when the city is planning to reconstruct Edgemont
Street, Kingston Avenue and Arkwright Street.
In response to the comments of the city engineering department, Michael Villari of Metro Land
Surveying (the project engineers), prepared several comments and a sketch plan showing how
additional cul-de-sacs would affect the project design. I have included his thoughts on pages 48 and
49 and the sketch plan on page 50.
Traffic and Access
A major concern of many of the neighbors to the south of the site with the first proposal was with the
increase in traffic that their area would experience if the city approved the earlier proposal. The
developer was proposing to use an existing public street right-of-way (the area between 385 and
395 Kingston Avenue) for street access for 17 of the 24 units. (The other seven units would have
had street access from McMenemy Street).
In response to the neighbors concerns, the developer revised the project plans to now have the
primary access into the site from McMenemy Street. The plans also show a 10-foot-wide trail on the
Edgemont right-of-way between the existing Kingston Avenue and the proposed new street in the
development. This trail would be for pedestrian access and for emergency vehicle use, not for
general vehicle traffic. Unfortunately for the neighbors, the Monn's Villa plat, including the unused
right-of-way, was approved and developed in the 1950s. It has always been the expectation of city
staff that a developer or builder would use the existing street right-of-way that is north of Kingston
Avenue for some type of access to the property to the north.
While staff recognizes that having a new development and new streets in the area with new
neighbors driving past their homes would create changes for the neighborhood, we do not anticipate
a large enough traffic increase from the proposal to justify denying the request. For example, if
each of the 28 townhouse units would generate an average of 6 vehicle trips per day (an average
number I verified with the city's traffic consultant), there would be 168 more vehicles (in total) using
4
McMenemy Street. For a 12-hour day, the 168 vehicle trips would mean an average of 14 vehicle
trips per hour, or an average of about one additional vehicle every 5.5 minutes. Even if one-half of
the expected additional vehicle trips (84) occurred in one hour (either in the morning or in the
evening), that would mean about one additional vehicle for every 43 seconds during that one hour.
The traffic consultant also confirmed for me that, on average, detached single-family homes
generate about 10 vehicle trips per day and that townhouses, whether attached or detached, usually
generate about six vehicle trips per day. The difference in these numbers is because of the
residents and the difference in the size of the families that live in the different units. Townhouses
are usually occupied by young couples starting out in life or by empty-nesters - that is, families with
no children and thus fewer people in each unit. They also have found that more traditional families
with children still prefer to live in detached single dwellings with more living and yard space. As
such, these types of homes will create more traffic (on average), than townhouses.
I also had Dan Solar of Ramsey County review the proposal. He noted that "McMenemy Street is no
longer a county road so the development does not have a direct impact to the county system. The
intersection along Larpenteur Avenue should be able to handle the minimal traffic generated by this
development. "
Public Utilities
Sanitary sewer and water are in Kingston Avenue and in McMenemy Street to serve the proposed
development. There is, however, no storm sewer in this part of Maplewood, so the applicant is
proposing to enhance the low areas on the property to use them as storm water ponds. The
watershed district commented that they will require the grading plan to show that there will be at
least five feet of freeboard (bounce) in the ponds from the first 100 year high water level to the
lowest floor elevation of the units.
Tree Removal/Replacement
The applicant had a tree inventory done for the property. This survey found 239 trees on the
property, including maples, pines, elms, spruce, ash and oak. (See the plans on pages 29 and 30
and in the project plans.) Of the trees listed on the inventory, the city considers 198 of them as large
trees (those eight inches in diameter or greater or pines that are at least eight feet tall).
As proposed, the applicant's contractor would grade most of the property to prepare the site for
construction and to build the storm water ponds. The proposed plans show the developer saving
groups of existing trees in a few areas of the site - including along the east property line, along the
south property line near McMenemy Street, near the front of Unit 16, to the north of Unit 11 and to
the west of Unit 20. In addition, the grading plans show the developer saving scattered individual
large trees throughout the site.
The developer also has indicated that they want to trensplant as many of the existing trees on the
site as possible. This would involve having a forester or an arborist check the size and health of
each of the affected trees and determining which trees could survive moving and which ones could
not be transplanted.
The code requires there be at least 10 trees per acre on the site after the contractor has finished
construction. For this 8.2-acre site, the code requires there be at least 82 trees on the property after
the construction is complete. While city staff is encouraged by the level of interest expressed by the
developer in saving and transplanting trees on the site, the devil in this will be in the details. In other
words, how many and how well the trees survive will be in how the contractor handles the details of
5
the project. The project engineer will need to prepare a detailed grading and tree plan for the entire
site for city staff approval. This plan will need to show the proposed grading, the trees that will stay,
those that the contractor will transplant and those that the contractor will remove. In addition, this
plan should show the size and location of trees the developer would add to the site for screening
purposes and where they would store the transplanted trees before the contractor puts them in their
final locations. I expect that the final tree plans for this development can and will meet the
requirements of the tree replacement code of the city.
Landscaping/Screening
As proposed, the developer would save, plant or transplant at least 200 trees on the site, plant
numerous shrubs around the buildings and install two infiltration ponds/basins with landscaping on
the site. The detailed plan on page 38 also shows the proposed plantings near the sidewalk and
around each unit. These will include spirea, crimson pygmy, globe blue spruce, a mix of perennials
and lilac. The mix of plantings around each building will vary from unit to unit depending on whether
the unit faces north or south and whether it is a 1 % story or full basement walk-out unit.
While the landscape and tree plans are a good start, the developer should add more trees in two
primary areas. These additional trees would be for screening along the south side of the site and
along the west side of the site. The purpose of these additional plantings is to screen the new
townhouses from the existing houses to the south and to screen this site from houses to the west.
The city code requires the developer or builder to install screening along a residential property line
that is at least six feet tall and at least 80 percent opaque. This screening may be accomplished
with fencing, benning, tree planting or a combination of these techniques. It would be prudent for
and helpful to the residents of the existing houses and those in the new townhouses if the developer
installed screening along the south and west sides of the project to help ensure that the new
townhouses and driveways are separated from the existing single dwellings. Staff is recommending
that the developer add several Black Hills spruce and Austrian pines along the south and west
property lines to provide additional screening between this site and the adjacent properties.
Finally, the applicant needs to provide the city engineering department with a detailed landscape
plan for the ponds. The project engineer also should show this detail on the final project landscape
plans. The plantings proposed around foundations of the units and in the proposed detail areas
should remain on the plan. In addition to the above, all yard areas near the buildings should be
sodded (except for mulched and edged planting beds).
Design Review
Building Design and Exterior Materials
The proposed buildings should be attractive and should fit in with the design of the existing homes
in the area. They would have an exterior of horizontal vinyl siding (earth tone, green or grey in color)
with a stone or brick veneer on the fronts and the roofs would have asphalt shingles. In addition,
there would be a mix of 1 %-story and walk-out units and each unit would have white soffits and
accent boards and an attached two-car garage. (See the proposed elevations on pages 33 - 37 and
the enclosed project drawings.) Staff does not have any major concerns about the proposed
building elevations since this development will be on cul-de-sacs and would be somewhat isolated.
In fact, only the buyers of the townhouses would be able to see the fronts of most of the new
buildings.
6
Before the city issues a building permit, the builder should submit to city staff for approval revised
building plans and elevations. These should show or include (but are not limited to) the colors of all
materials, any shutters, window grids, white balcony railings, and provide more detail about the brick
or stone accents.
The community design review board noted in 2001 concerns about "snout-designed" homes. These
are dwellings that have garages as the dominating street-side feature. The proposed townhomes
have this design. The community design review board may want to have the developer change the
proposed designs or add features to the buildings to lessen the impact of the gareges. This could
include additional landscaping in front of the dwelling parts of the buildings, adding covered front
porches, enhancing the design of the garage doors or adding decorative light fixtures next to the
garages and entrance doors.
Site Lighting
The applicant will need to prepare a site lighting plan for the development that shows the installation
of at least seven light posts within the site to provide lighting along the new streets and driveways.
The city code requires the light fixtures to have a design that hides the bulb and lens from view (to
avoid nuisances). The plan also will have to show details about the height or style of these poles
and about the proposed lighting on the buildings.
Parking
It should be noted that the city allows no parking on 24-foot-wide streets, parking on one side of 28-
foot-wide streets and along both sides of streets that are 32 feet wide. In this case, the developer is
proposing to construct the new public street (Kingston Court) and the private driveways 24 feet wide
and then the city would not allow parking on the street or driveways. The project engineer has not
shown any areas for proof-of-parking spaces within the development. This is something that the
final project plans should show. Locetions for such parking could be north of Kingston Court near
Unit 20, north of Kingston Lane near Units 7 and 8 and along Edgemont Lane near Units 10 and 11.
These are locations that the city could require the developer or the homeowners' association to add
more parking if it becomes necessary.
Other Comments
Police Department
Lieutenant Kevin Rabbett of the Maplewood Police Department noted that the proposed street and
driveway names could cause some confusion. He suggested that the developer work with city staff
to pick names for the streets and driveways that fit the city's system and that make sense with the
surrounding streets.
Fire Marshal
Butch Gervais, the Maplewood Fire Marshal, noted the following about the proposal:
1. Need to verify that the cul-de-sacs and the tum-arounds are large enough for proper snow
removal and for emergency vehicle access.
2. All roads and driveways shall be at least 20 feet wide.
3. There shall be addresses on each unit facing the street.
4. The developer shall provide the city with an address plan (street and driveway names and
a numbering scheme) for staff approval.
7
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Approve the resolution on page 51. This resolution changes the land use plan for the
Woodlands of Maplewood plat on the east side of McMenemy Street, north of Kingston
Avenue. This change is from R-1 (single dwellings) to R-2 (single and double dwellings). The
city is making this change because:
1. It would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
2. This site is proper for and consistent with the city's policies for medium-density residential
use. This includes:
a. It is near a minor arterial street (Larpenteur Avenue) and is on a collector street
(McMenemy Street).
b. Minimizing any adverse effects on surrounding properties because there would be
minimal traffic from this development on existing residential streets.
3.lt would be consistent with the proposed zoning and land uses.
B. Approve the resolution on pages 52 and 53. This resolution changes the zoning map for the
Woodlands of Maplewood plat on the east side of McMenemy Street, north of Kingston
Avenue. This change is from F (farm residence) to R-2 (single and double dwellings). The
reasons for this change are those required by the city code and because the owner plans to
develop this property with a mix of single and double dwellings.
C. Approve the resolution on page 54. This resolution is for the vacation of parts of the Edgemont
Street right-of-way, north of Kingston Avenue. The city is vacating this right-of-way because:
1. It is in the public interest.
2. The applicant and the abutting property owners have no plans to build a public street at this
location.
3. The adjacent properties have street access.
4. The vacation of the right-of-way will allow the adjacent residents to expand and improve
their homes.
This vacation is subject to the city retaining the center of the Edgemont Street right-of-way
located north of the north right-of-way line of Kingston Avenue for public purposes.
D. Approve the resolution starting on page 55. This resolution approves a conditional use permit
for a planned unit development for the Woodlands of Maplewood development on the east
side of McMenemy Street, north of Kingston Avenue. The city bases this approval on the
findings required by code. (Refer to the resolution for the specific findings.) Approval is
subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped June 14, 2005 except where the city
requires changes. Such changes shall include:
a. Revising the grading and site plans to show:
8
(1) Revised storm water pond locations and designs as suggested or required by the
watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's standards and the
engineering department requirements.
(2) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of the vegetation and large trees.
(3) All the changes required by the city engineer and by the watershed district.
The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The director of community
development may approve minor changes.
2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval
or the pennit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall
meet all the conditions and changes noted in Erin Laberee's memo dated July 11, 2005,
and the plans shall include:
a. The grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, streets, driveway, trails, tree
preservation/replacement, and parking plans. The cul-de-sac bulb shall have the
minimum radius necessary to ensure that emergency vehicles can turn around.
b. The following changes for the storm sewer plans:
(1) The developer shall enclose the new ponds with a four-foot-high, black, vinyl-
coated chain-link fence. The contractor also shall install a gate in the fences as
may be required by the city engineer.
(2) Provide for staff approval a detailed stonn water management plan.
c. The following for the streets and driveways:
(1) Curb and gutter along the street, if the city engineer decides that it is necessary.
(2) Clearly labeled public streets and private driveways on the plans.
4. The design of the ponds shall meet Maplewood's ordinance standards and shall be subject
to the approval of the city engineer. The developer shall be responsible for getting any
needed off-site pond and drainage easements, if applicable.
5. The developer or contractor shall:
a. Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, complete all public
improvements and meet all city requirements.
b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Remove any debris, junk, fencing or fill from the site.
6. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Woodlands of Maplewood PUD
shall be:
a. Front-yard setback (from a public street or a private driveway): minimum - 20 feet,
maximum - 35 feet
9
b. Front-yard setback (public side street); minimum - 20 feet, maximum - none
c. Rear-yard setback: 20 feet from any adjacent residential property line
d. Side-yard setback (townhouses): minimum - 20 feet minimum between buildings.
7. The developer or builder will pay the city Park Access Charges (PAC fees) for each housing
unit at the time of the building permit for each housing unit.
8. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
E. Approve the Woodlands of Maplewood preliminary plat (received by the city on June 14,
2005). The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final
plat:
1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and
meet all city requirements.
b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Provide all required and necessary easements (including ten-foot drainage and utility
easements along the front and rear lot lines of each lot and five-foot drainage and utility
easements along the side lot lines of each lot).
d. Have Xcel Energy install Group V rate street lights in at least seven locations. These
shall be as follows:
(1) At the intersection of Edgemont Lane and Kingston Court (by Lot 8).
(2) Near Lot 4 in the middle of the block.
(3) At the northeast comer of the site near Lot 1.
(4) At the north end of Edgemont Lane near Lot 11.
(5) At the intersection of McMenemy Street and Kingston Court (Sophia Avenue).
(6) At the intersection of McMenemy Street and the northerly driveway (near Lot 23).
(7) Near Lot 28 at the east end of the driveway.
The exact style and location of the lights shall be subject to the city engineer's approval.
e. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control, street identification and no parking signs.
f. Cap, seal and abandon any wells that may be on the site, subject to Minnesota rules and
guidelines.
2. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall
include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, driveway, trail, tree, and street plans. The
plans shall meet all the conditions and changes listed in the memo from Erin Laberee dated
July 11, 2005, and shall meet the following conditions:
a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code.
b. The grading plan shall show:
10
(1) The proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each building site.
The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat.
(2) Contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb.
(3) Building pads that reduce the grading on site where the developer can save large
trees.
(4) The street and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer.
(5) All proposed slopes on the construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the
plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3: 1.
On slopes steeper than 3: 1, the developer shall prepare and implement a
stabilization and planting plan. These slopes shall be protected with wood-fiber
blanket, be seeded with a no-maintenance vegetation and be stabilized before the
city approves the final plat.
(6) All retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls taller than four feet require a
building permit from the city. The developer shall install a protective rail or fence on
top of any retaining wall that is taller than four feet.
(7) Sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed board or by the city
engineer.
(8) No grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements from
the affected property owner(s).
(9) A minimum of a 10-foot-wide, 10: 1 bench below the normal water level (NWL) of
any pond designed to be a wet pond. The depth of the pond below the NWL shall
not exceed four feet.
(10) Emergency overflow swales as required by the city engineer or by the watershed
district. The overflow swales shall be 10 feet wide, one foot deep and protected
with approved permanent soil-stabilization blankets.
(11) The drainage areas and the developer's engineer shall provide the city engineer
with the drainage calculations. The drainage design shall accommodate the run-off
from the entire project site and shall not increase the run-off from the site.
c. The tree plan shall:
(1) Be approved by the city engineer before site grading or final plat approval.
(2) Show where the developer will remove, transplant, save or replace large trees.
This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site.
(3) Show the size, species and location of the transplanted, replacement and
screening trees. The new deciduous trees shall be at least two and one-half (2 %)
inches in diameter and shall be a mix of red and white oaks, ash, lindens, sugar
maples or other native species. The new coniferous trees shall be at least eight (8)
feet tall and shall be a mix of Austrian pine, Black Hills spruce and other species.
(4) Show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits.
11
(5) Include for city staff a detailed tree planting plan and material list.
(6) Group the new trees together. These planting areas shall be:
(a) near the ponding areas
(b) along the west and south sides of the site to help screen the development
from the existing houses to the west and south.
(7) Show the planting or transplanting of at least 200 trees after the site grading is
done.
d. The street, driveway and utility plans shall show:
(1) The streets and driveways shall be a nine-ton design with a maximum street grade
of eight percent and the maximum street grade within 75 feet of all intersections at
two percent.
(2) Water service to each lot and unit.
(3) Repair of McMenemy Street and Kingston Avenue (street and boulevard) after the
developer connects to the public utilities and builds the new streets, trails and
private driveways.
(4) The developer enclosing the ponds with a four-foot-high, black, vinyl-coated chain-
link fence. The contractor also shall install gates in the fences as may be required
by the city engineer.
(5) The private driveways with continuous concrete curb and gutter except where the
city engineer decides that it is not needed for drainage purposes.
(6) The coordination of the water main locations, alignments and sizing with the
standards and requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS).
Fire-flow requirements and hydrant locations shall be verified with the Maplewood
Fire Department.
(7) All utility excavations located within the proposed right-of-ways or within
easements. The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be
outside the project area.
(8) The plan and profiles of the proposed utilities.
(9) Details of the ponds and the pond outlets. The outlets shall be protected to prevent
erosion.
e. The drainage plan shall ensure that there is no increase in the rate of storm-water run-off
leaving the site above the current (predevelopment) levels. The developer's engineer
shall:
(1) Verify pond, inlet and pipe capacities.
(2) Have the city engineer verify the drainage design calculations.
3. Pay the costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans.
12
4. Change the plat as follows:
a. Show drainage and utility easements along all property lines on the final plat. These
easements shall be ten feet wide along the front and rear property lines and five feet
wide along the side property lines.
b. Show Kingston Court as a public street in a 5o-foot-wide public right-of-way.
c. Label the common areas as outlots.
d. Add drainage and utility easements as required by the city engineer.
e. Label all the names of all the streets and driveways on all plans and distinguish which
are public and which are private.
f. Change the street and driveway names as follows:
(1) Kingston Court and Kingston Lane as Sophia Avenue.
(2) The north/south driveway as Edgemont Lane.
(3) The north private driveway (for Units 23 - 28) shall have McMenemy Street
addresses.
5. Secure and provide all required easements for the development. These shall include any
off-site drainage and utility easements.
6. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor
will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and
meet all city requirements.
b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Provide for the repair of McMenemy Street and Kingston Avenue (street, curb and gutter
and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the new
streets and private driveways.
7. Submit the homeowners' association bylaws and rules to the city for approval by the
director of community development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible
party for the care and maintenance of the common areas, private utilities, landscaping and
retaining walls.
8. Record the following with the final plat:
a. All homeowners' association documents.
b. A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any further subdivision or splitting of the lots
or parcels in the plat that would create additional building sites unless approved by the
city council.
c. A covenant or association documents that addresses the proper installation,
maintenance and replacement of any retaining walls.
13
The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city for
approval before recording.
9. The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site
drainage. The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that
the developer or contractor has not completed before final plat approval.
10. Obtain a permit from the Watershed District for grading.
11. Obtain a NPDES construction permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA).
12. If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the director of
community development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat.
F. Approve the project plans (site plan, landscape plan, grading and drainage plans and
building elevations) for the Woodlands of Maplewood townhouses on the east side of
McMenemy Street, north of Kingston Avenue. The city bases this approval on the findings
required by the code. The developer or contractor shall do the following:
1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for
this project.
2. Complete the fOllowing before the city issues a building permit:
a. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans
shall include: streets, grading, utility, dreinage, erosion control, tree, sidewalk and
driveway plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions and shall also meet all
the conditions and changes noted in Erin Laberee's memo dated July 11, 2005.
(1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with city code.
(2) The grading plan shall:
(a) Include building, floor elevation and contour information for each home site.
The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat.
(b) Include contour information for the land that the construction will disturb.
(c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as may be required by the watershed
board or by the city engineer.
(d) Show all proposed slopes steeper than 3: 1 on the proposed construction
plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and
management practices for any slopes steeper than 3: 1. This shall include
covering these slopes with wood-fiber blankets and seeding them with a
"no mow" vegetation rather than using sod or grass.
(e) Show all retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls more than four
feet tall require a building permit from the city.
(f) Show the proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city
engineer.
14
(g) Show the drainage areas, and the developer's engineer shall provide the
city engineer with the drainage calculations. The drainage design shall
accommodate the run-off from the surrounding areas.
(h) Show details about the proposed pond fencing including the materials,
gate, height and color.
(3) The tree plan shall:
(a) Be approved by the city engineer.
(b) Include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site and shall show
where the developer will remove, transplant, save or replace large trees.
(c) Show the size, species and location of the transplanted and replacement
trees. The new coniferous trees shall be at least eight feet tall and shall
be a mix of Black Hills spruce and Austrian pine.
(d) Be consistent with the approved grading and landscape plans and shall
show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits.
(e) Show additional tree planting for screening along the south and west
property lines of the site.
(4) The street, driveway and utility plans shall show:
(a) A water service to each lot and unit.
(b) The repair and restoration of McMenemy Street and Kingston Avenue
(including curbing, street, and boulevard) after the contractor removes
the existing driveways, connects to the public utilities and builds the new
streets, trails and driveways.
(c) All driveways at least 20 feet wide. If the developer wants to have
parking on one side of the street or driveway, then it must be at least 28
feet wide.
(d) The street and the driveways shall have continuous concrete curb and
gutter except where the city engineer decides that it is not needed.
(e) The developer or contractor shall post the streets and driveways with "no
parking" signs to meet city standards.
(f) The public streets and private driveways labeled on all plans.
(g) The common area labeled as Outlot B on all plans.
(5) The design of the ponding areas and the rainwater garden(s) shall be subject to
the approval of the city engineer. The developer shall be responsible for getting
any needed off-site utility, grading or drainage easements and for recording all
necessary easements.
15
b. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction and have each building staked by a
registered land surveyor.
c. Submit a revised landscape plan to staff for approval which incorporates the following
details:
(1) All lawn areas shall be sodded. The city engineer shall detemnine the vegetation
within the ponding area.
(2) The addition of eight-foot-tall trees and/or fencing for screening along the west and
south sides of the site.
(3) The developer shall install landscaping in the ponding areas to break the
appearance of the deep hole and to promote infiltration. Such landscaping shall be
approved by the city engineer and shall be shown on the project landscape plans.
(4) Having in-ground irrigation for all landscape areas (code requirement).
(5) The plantings proposed around the front of the units shown on the landscape plan
date-stamped February 1, 2005, shall remain on the plan.
(6) A concrete walk from the driveway to the door of each unit.
(7) The manicured or mowed areas from the natural areas. This shall include planting
(instead of sodding) the disturbed areas around the ponding area with native
grasses and native flowering plants. The native grasses and flowering plants shall
be those needing little or no maintenance and shall extend at least four feet from
the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the pond. This is to reduce maintenance
costs and to reduce the temptation of mowers to encroach into the gardens.
Specifically, the developer shall have the natural areas seeded with an upland
mixture and lowland mixtures as appropriate.
(8) In addition to the above, the contractor shall sod all front, side and rear yard areas
(except for mulched and edged planting beds and the area within the ponding
area).
(9) The contractor shall restore the McMenemy Street and Kingston Avenue
boulevards with sod.
(10) Adding more evergreen trees (Black Hills spruce or Austrian pines) along the west
and south property lines of the site. These trees are to be at least eight feet tall,
and the contractor shall plant these trees in staggered rows to provide screening
for the houses to the south and west.
(11) Shows the in-ground lawn-irrigation system, including the location of the sprinkler
heads.
(12) Shall be approved by the city engineer before site grading and shall be consistent
with the approved grading and landscape plans.
d. Show that Ramsey County has recorded the final plat for this development.
16
e. Get the necessary approvals and permits from the watershed district.
f. Submit a site lighting plan for city approval. This plan shall show the installation of at
least seven street lights and how the lighting on the buildings would add to the site
lighting. This plan also shall show details about the proposed light fixtures to ensure
they are a design that hides the bulb and lens from view to avoid nuisances. The light
fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the
adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent residential properties.
g. Have the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) approve the proposed utility
plans.
h. Present to staff for approval color building elevations or building material samples of all
elevations of the townhouses. These elevations should show that the townhouses will
have earth tones, green or grey-colored vinyl siding and either brick or stone accents on
the front elevation. These elevations also should show that the front elevations would
have a wainscot of brick or stone.
i. The developer or builder will pay the city Park Access Charges (PAC fees) at the time of
the building permit for each housing unit.
j. Submit the homeowners' association bylaws and rules to the city for approval by the city
staff. These are to assure that there will be one responsible party for the care and
maintenance of the common areas, outlots, the private utilities, landscaping and any
retaining walls.
k. Provide the city with a letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior
improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work.
3. Complete the following before occupying each building:
a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction.
b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards and sod all turf areas.
c. Complete all landscaping and turf irrigation for that building and its rainwater
garden(s).
d. Install the required concrete curb and gutter.
e. Install a reflectorized stop sign at the exits onto McMenemy Street and addresses on
each building for each unit. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" signs
within the site, as required by staff.
f. Install and maintain all required trees and landscaping (including the plantings around
each unit and around the pond) and an in-ground sprinkler system for all landscaped
areas (code requirement).
g. Install on-site lighting for security and visibility that follows the approved site lighting
plan. All exterior lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light
spread and fixture design. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs
to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and the nearby homes
and residential properties.
17
h. Install a six-foot-high solid screening fence or additional trees along the west and
south property lines of the site where the vegetation does not adequately screen the
townhouses from the existing dwellings. These additional materials are to ensure
there is at least a six-foot-tall, 80 percent opaque screen on these sides of the site.
The location, design and materials of the fence or the additional landscaping shall be
subject to city staff approval.
i. The developer or contractor shall:
(1) Complete all grading for the site drainage, complete all public improvements and
meet all city requirements.
(2) Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
(3) Remove any debris or junk from the site.
4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or
welfare.
b. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all
required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any
unfinished landscaping by June 1 of the next year if the building is occupied in
the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in
the spring or summer.
5. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may
approve minor changes.
18
CITIZENS' COMMENTS
I surveyed the owners of the 81 properties within 500 feet of this site. Of the five replies, two had
comments and questions about the proposal and three were against the proposal.
For
None
Comments/Questions
1. Absolutely do not open the Kingston connecting road to residential vehicular traffic. (Schuldt -
1706 Arkwright)
2. See the e-mail from Margaret Jodeit (1714 Edgemont) on page 42.
Against
1. Even revised - I am still opposed. Over populated, too much traffic for the area. Too much
development, shouldn't there be any wildemess? (Schneider - 433 Larpenteur Avenue)
2. See the letter from the Herthers on pages 43 - 45.
3. See the letter from Kai Huot-Link on pages 46 and 47.
19
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 8.2 acres
Existing land use: Three single dwellings and accessory buildings
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North:
South:
West:
East:
A single dwelling and the Hmong Church
Houses on Kingston Avenue
Houses on McMenemy Street
Houses on Desoto Street
PLANNING
Existing Land Use Plan designation: R-1 (single dwellings)
Existing Zoning: R-1 (single dwellings)
Proposed Land Use and Zoning: R-2 (single and double dwellings)
Findings for Rezoning
Section 44-1165 of the zoning code requires that the city council make the following findings to
rezone property:
1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code.
2. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property
or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the property adjacent to the area
included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded.
3. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where
applicable, and the public welfare.
4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical
extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection
and schools.
Criteria for Conditional Use Permit Approval
Section 44-1097(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards. (See
findings 1-9 in the resolution on pages 55 through 57.)
Ordinance Requirements
Section 2-290(b) of the city code requires that the community design review board make the
following findings to approve plans:
1. That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring,
existing or proposed developments, and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of
investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use
20
and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create
traffic hazards or congestion.
2. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the
surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive
development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan.
3. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable
environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good
composition, materials, textures and colors.
HOUSING POLICIES
The land use plan has eleven general land use goals. Of these, three apply to this proposal. They
are: minimize land planned for streets, minimize conflicts between land uses and provide many
housing types. The land use plan also has several general development and residential
development policies that relate to this project. They are:
Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses should not create a negative economic,
social or physical impact on adjoining developments.
- Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents, regardless of age, ethnic, racial,
cultural or socioeconomic background. A diversity of housing types should include apartments,
townhouses, manufactured homes, single-family housing, public-assisted housing and low-to-
moderate-income housing, and rental and owner-occupied housing.
- Protect neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible land uses by adequate
buffering and separation.
The housing plan also has policies about housing diversity and quality that the city should
consider with this development. They are:
- Promote a variety of housing types, costs and ownership options throughout the city. These are
to meet the life-cycle needs of all income levels, those with special needs and nontraditional
households.
- The city will continue to provide dispersed locations for a diversity of housing styles, types and
price ranges through its land use plan.
The city's long-term stability of its tax base depends upon its ability to attract and keep residents of
all ages. To do so, the city must insure that a diverse mix of housing styles is available in each
stage of the life cycle of housing needs.
Application Date
The city received the complete applications and plans for this development on June 14, 2005. State
law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a
proposal. As such, city action would normally be required on this proposal by August 12, 2005,
unless the applicant agrees to another time extension.
21
p:sec 17\The Woodlands (2) - 2005.mem
Attachments:
1. Letter from Chris English dated June 16, 2005
2. Location Map
3. Land Use Plan Map
4. Address Map
5. Preliminary Plat
6. Removal Plan
7. Tree Plan
8. Proposed Grading Plan
9. Proposed Utility Plan
10. The Boardwalk Elevation
11. The Boardwalk Elevation
12. Rear and Street Side Elevations
13. Twin Home Elevations
14. Twin Home Side Elevations
15. Unit Landscape Plan
16. July 11, 2005 memo from Erin Laberee
17. E-mail from Margaret Jodeit dated June 30, 2005
18. Letter date-stamped July 5, 2005 from the Herthers
19. Letter date-stamped June 30, 2005 from Kai Huot-Link
20. Response letter and sketch plan from Michael Villari dated July 8, 2005
21. Land Use Plan Change Resolution (R-1 to R-2)
22. Rezoning Resolution (F to R-2)
23. Edgemont Right-of-Way Vacation Resolution
24. Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development (PUD) Resolution
25. Project Plans date-stamped June 14, 2005 (separate attachments)
22
Attachment 1
N
METRO
LAND SURVEYING
& ENGINEERING
June 16, 2005
Mr. Ken Roberts, Planner
City of Maplewood
1830 County Road BEast
Maplewood, MN 55109
Subject:
The Woodlands Development Preliminary Plat
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Roberts:
The purpose of this letter is to provide a brief narrative of the changes included in the
latest Preliminary Plat Submittal for the Woodlands Development Project.
1) Additional land to the northwest was purchased. Therefore, the proposed
development will provide 28 attached and detached single-family homes (4 more
than originally planned).
2) The main entrance of the project was moved to McMenemy Street in an effort to
address the concerns of local residents with regard to increasing local traffic if the
entrance was located on Edgemont Place (Kingston).
3) A public street (to be paid for and constructed by the developer) meeting city
design requirements is proposed for accessing the site from McMenemy. The
public street terminates at a cul-de-sac located in the south-central part of the plat.
Private drives spur off of the cul-de-sac to provide access to homes north and east
of there.
4) A paved trail along the Edgemont Place easement serves a dual purpose by
providing a second emergency vehicle access point to the development.
5) We are requesting that portions of the easement for Edgemont Place be
abandoned to allow the existing residents along that easement more flexibility in
the use of their property (i.e., area to construct a detached garage).
RECEIV:'.
JUN 2 0 2005
23
..................
6) Easements were acquired, as necessary, along the southern portion of the
proposed public road to allow sufficient area for building setbacks.
7) As requested by the watershed districts, the stonnwater ponds/infiltration basins
are designed to handle a I DO-year event and will discharge to the stonn sewer in
McMenemy Street only after a back-to-back I DO-year event occurs.
8) Several other minor design changes occurred to comply with setback
requirements, drainage, realignment of the road, etc.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the above information, please contact
me at (651) 766-0112.
Sincerely,
Christopher D. English,
Director of Engineering Operations
RECEIVED
JUN 2 0 Z005
..................
Little Canada Office: 412 East County Road D Little Canada. MN 55117 Phone (651) 766-0112 Fax (651) 766-0612
Burnsville Office: 3200 Corporate Center Drive - Suite 117 Burnsville, MN 55306 Phone (952) 707-9299 Fax (952) 707-0036
Pine City Office: 1639 Main Street North. Suite 7 Pine City. MN 55063 Phone (320) 629-3267 Fax (320) 629-0176
Rogers Office: 12510 Fletcher Lane North - Unit B Rogers, MN 55374 Phone (763) 428-5130 Fax (763) 428-5172
E-mail survey@metrols.com Website: www.metrols.com
24
.1-: II !!~ltjj:l\
lI'l--I~--.~
II ------,
I I II
I 1\ I[
I I \ II
I I I ',- - I
.1,1/1 II II
I ;r I II Ii I I [
I [\1111 -II II
i ill f Iii '\ II II
I 1 I !~III , II II
I' ',I F?I 'I II II
:1 I rl II \ I, 'I
j'111111' 'I II
L 11'11 II \ 1'1 " I
I I \ I" '- II I, ' I
_' .II I
,_ _ _ _ -LI- ~ ... _ _ _ J _ _ J... _
I )~~I,,~j \; -~~ ',- ';,' ~l-l:ffiBi- - - - -llts - l~ ~ -
-1,,\ \ \ II I I I I'! I ,
--.\\"'/'1 II. I E311[[[Qi1 I
=',\\~ I I,' i '" [I
-\11\ 'II \~\: :1:1 II~---:'--::"-:' I I. 11:1 '"
\\1 III : '!lS'H, '---1 ---1j:11 "r~--I-I ri'l
II[ "' : ~I I ,I rJj -LLJ ,V.,
.'/ OVERVIEW ~i ~ 8J II -----&[.i /Y '...,
III I I \ II ..... I ~ -- '\ \ I l' II
III I~II[II 'i-.! I'
I ~ ~ II ~,.', \ I I I
I II ,1~::R _-_-..~~~--~~/~...... ......--1 l.
, ,)'T"fT I II I TflI1- ,'r~ \ . I I ,II
:- MNDOT----J:: / ~ I I , ! I Ii II ::1 ".~I~n---R~-=.-=--=--:.-~:I
,I, 'I' I I
I II! II CHURCH '-----i!,l I r! I I'~rl ,:1
'," III III'W II [I'H' 'I Ii(
11:1 II /I.I)IL~ r-Tlll~...1 //./.llr.'
II II ',I', I'LUIII )--/./,It
II SITE II [LJII ,- ,-
'I ,Iii , 1\ //1 Ilr
I !ll 1\\ \1 I _ II / ' --... '1.'--
I :: II I, i . I '\\~ n'I--j rr., '1 I-l~:r
I' I ffif""'...,.-._.-.j / : \ : HI ,"/ 'I, II \,i
rt: ',I \ I Ii I I I-
II II I" ", I / .'1 I. I I'\,~
1\' II II' I I "'-
III 11\ 1\ II '[I'D' -I' ..' II If
:=-:!.,\__",I_>,,_II____~I ____11__ I~'- ll~ _II Dlr
, " L.ARPENTEtJR';lI;\tE- - - -- - - - - - - -
,,/
....
I
-JI
Attachment 2
, i IJ
iJm.l
, ' , , , , '-'--! I! ><1 ~ B = \"
if I I! 1 i m i\ )11 i !HI I '@ar--1ll~
, ;;... ~--===o - -- - .b-r-J...J \
- : :- - =~-=c--=r=~<t1r=--=--c.-r -.=-= I rI
~ : : :l~
II 'I
I I,
I liP
I 'I:t
II
IlL
II
III~
!\
,o~
SAINT PAUL
LOCATION MAP
\r
N
25
...J _ J' -,.,:.:...",..:~,:~ '---~-~ -.-"..-
L_ / _ - \ 1-'_-:-':---:-=' - - - I. ~~;_-; ::~-= - ::: ::: ::: ::: ::: ::: ~q:3~L;IJYN::A:,!~ = = =: 1,----=;---:.- - -:
'i . ~'11 11.~A.,i~ ~!.i.--! I I Ii . ..III1!!"f~r
I'" 'I ,'''jJ,.. :F8,33'11"11 I
I /1i91i\~_ilL.-"1 Gi ill! I: \: i
ii/I:: "3Il6i~3jS'1'3IlIlIl11~1 1;;,[--,474498; 5
'f \-1811, ;L~J~~I--IIII!i I ~I! 1>0 i i
'I ' .,. "'=-I"^"'~^H"'" , 0" I
/i !1!tl~: ~i~i;!~;\'~~ :1 ~:r 1860 i'~
! I \ 1~1 I 'I 1 .1 i '" : I, .876 I , i:" /
I" I I 1'11.'-- ",,,' "."}
, , I [--.--..-- 1~
I I I I ': !l1866 I ! I I ~.---J .-~
"I I " \ I \ \.JIII.56 I :cn
III I l'I'I~-'1Mil~1
I I 1855 II I! . I '--~"!IIt..si
I' ~. ,.il'~' _.~~.. --,~!.
I ' 8 I ~....,
; . l' il',. 11.' (.-
! I '- ~ i
: II -. ---J83~-I-!.lllk r-1MCI .:1
I I \ I,~ lib ~--~-I ,--
\ I : ! !, :.--".~--l.--r--r--r-~\, I I:; ...0 \-__,"J:, I 11
~:;i' 178~ l'-..I.")~'-~!C'--"-'--" ,.~-.~,-._~j!~.I~I"..' J: :i_~J~.>......'..:'A..l.'
~: '--'---;---jl'.. _ ~ __R~~-",_~'{E,,,, -: ~T~-:-=-=!~-:~" ,::'~_='~ c ,'fill
Wi: f14 .~ dl'le i"I<I!I~","I.i.il." Uae\.1t9E
~, f! : ; ii' . '.lIII I
:!:;;. ' . '. II ,\ -.-1781.
I I 180 'I _.A ,_.~-j....,
II - -~ ;"
Iii 'I~', II! '
I I' I " 'I, il80 '111:. .-:C=_
I 'II-"--Y- .
I I C"~~71
111'" '.'," .164 '
---): \..-=::--:-
__ ___,__._.~_ III 176 ~~ ; 1\ fI
._.____---' .1760
__~uii~_J\11 \_.________._____. ·
I \
I I
, !
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
&11
.. II
III i I I
:1
'I
, t7;;ll.; I !
.l ,i'll',
. i-,_ II
.. II
. i
-----"I
. I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
ILn I,
'"
I,..!. I \\
i
,
\
I I
\ r'
,
I"
I~--
1\
1\
I.. .
ii
I.
I',
1,.-'
I
I.
..
1733
1741
1737
I, I
\
,
..\
'.
I,
\\,
I,
Ii
II
(I.
Attachment 3
"'ill
1750
1748
SITE
1740
I
SI \ \ "=-"_"'--=--=-"-"--__; -
II:. "fi" 1!:J:'; :. . 1// 415 " 1721 ----- I
::124-' "~~GS.Tp,y.'~V~ " ~i. ~ .
:'L'~~~ 1711.1-' WJ41 -. \~ "14 "-T--i~~f, 1~
!i_.~~..1~--~-~--.1;c1:~-~-: i " I,,:
11700 .. .... 2~ -~ ...~ ~-1i'I!II7 433 . ',I. ~ I'
';--""',".16-.,:::; '''iI>' 16.... UJ I!IIl96Ili
i 1194, .....-.. .,UI . .......... ':I:. 0lI--~ . I
:~~~~~-_1~_~_. ..~6~~:i'-~_~ =-l~J-_L..-- I ..mn_.
LARPENTEUR AVE - .- .. - ..
LAND USE MAP
o
N
26
,:~
,
II :1 ::.-:.____--"'0--.----- ~ --'I'
' "'1~
I: :!! II'-i_' I Ii m1835 .1-1 :"
i' Ii' ~~ , "
! I It r-__,_!-----r--r---------~---~-----r-----.'I--r-T--Il,
1",', i.,JlJI1., i I!! I! i'
i'," 178c811'$fA......).'!!"i.I\L:.'. WI. ~!.. .'.i.\....!.'
I I I~"'''''''''''.'''''' ! I, ' ! ! iJ
! ,: l\1 ~ _ (I '--=- RIPlEY'AVI: - - -- --:::-=--:: - .:..-- -) ,- - - -
i 1 ,,[--;;-i .a---;\~, __ ""-~--. =-r= -'.' ---=.-r:=--=;-:'" -, --='=--="r=-=r-=--..:=.,,-~~ /:=--:--':;"""-
:1 I. !./__''"''_~./; I I ,I ' I I 1_' i i\
___ ',:', ,', ~,.i774 : '161' i.'i.1 1..i~I_r!l.i"'l.i.! ."dl.""....,~
I I;. I.", '; - i-m'i i --, ! 'IE, !~ i"l : ! ! 1m " ~'"'
. iT ! ,,' i I ; i ! i I' I : : I ' 13'
11 ' I . '! i : i ! ' i ; """",i ~ lllI ! :.
_ . ._~ 1 ,__.____ __...__~___,.\-._,_.._..._____._,_~_+,__~-~--- I 1 f-._- . ....
i, I ill' a I'J '~ i
:: : ~--iil---; 1801 ~I> ~_
--:1 ': 171i!!1 , " ,',~
: 1-' CHURCH 1770 ~---------I ' , i 1it80
m-a:J--~- __1001 I
: i>-j , I II ;...--..--..-.-;-
------" ~, lD6ll I . ," ~8012
,iZ', .. ';I"~
17~;--~ ., ~,-----'iji------ --'-i;d.-,-:;~- ", ',184
- -_'_-":iE' ~ \--.,
1741 "!li'ij ~;, I _ ,_ 17:-- 1750 ,,~~j,-- '; 1:-.
_____.----,-._____'_____ , __________~_,,______"_____ SITE _____u ", po
I 1740 1747 n'lil!l "
o 173b ' ---,- mi!!lBL___ \
'W,_E'~_._~ _,J
1737 'iii' ,
Ii!]
OVERVIEW
1779
MNDOT
-if:j
1733
Attachment 4
1855
~
,I 1---<1
'1'~I!iI'-
:1 ~,t.J--
'ii.
11.1 1L0
I, mr
1[--. ~
,i 122 "'i
IL___..__..
s
" "
II
I r-'--~~' '6 III
',' ii11;38 0, 377 ill 385 ~ i.395 , 407
, ~:J!I____j II. :IBl, __ .' 415
!: :, 124 _. ;.;~qsIOji~~-;,::~~.i.. _/----'
. ~ -----------~ . ""
il !- ._-.... . I f ..-;- I -~,-" l' ,"
I I : Ii '18 . 1;11-;'-' ,',/ .~4 . _ '~,,\" '114 ~,-------
" :.11108--[ 170. 'i.i':~: r-'. -,----;@:. . 17JJ. "': -i,:'~ i. 'iit,6 '
,,___ _ Jlj(Jlli ' ,~, lllr q
ill Ii, iil700 e---- t I,!::.' ~~ ---'---"-' --- _-'.IJ:I ','-&If'..' 433
[iRjj ,il""!" i __ i!(!)j: ;
! I I i .,'" 18..,01 '. i 18.. i, - '.' . 98 .
, 'ii1. ';! II::!;', ' ,10::" i"
" : 1_~94 --r~. i,:8: :.r'-. ~,~ -~.-.:~: 1--.:-1. I
l! ' 8 \ 'lI" ! wI! ! IJ<( ! ' !
k.,~,-,,=--.:.:::- _' ~ .~J.I "....-=-=--=---=_.._=..-:...:.._="-::.:~-..;;:: \..... _ _ _ _ _ ,_ _ _ _
"
t:l
1721
\. \ .,---
-----~-.i I,
J!&. '
V, ~ <> .,\
---;----~~
id!iJ
~
-'>l-'\';i-
1699
______J 1
LARPENTEUR AVE
SAINT PAUL
ADDRESS MAP
11
N
27
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Attachment 5
.r- 1768 .,
'\ J
"
,
N.~9'f4'E
~l.g!l
-:('
..
".....,.
I"" .
II ('J
\.\ I'
"--_,
"
II"
/ir~-.
'..
:::.."";:'~':':;;..~.::: l;l "..:....,'~...~.';;...'";'..:.?:'-:;~i;...~,TE.:."1"!~:'i.=:..':;:';:--~ ;:--:"':::::-:'':. "=.:'.;'';:'-::
-=-.~.~~":. ....~~~~~':'S:""="..~-,-,,~"""'I'rT~.:::..T_~,-
,"~o__""'"
00.........''''''
DIIKII<U.
,...--,-
,", ~""...., .....
..n:.","'l "" ..".
...... H........ T -~...... ,....-:"...:::-.,,=':'.::..~~~t.:..,.,.:',~;:.;:;_:lt._n..__,_..__
--'-'-1- '-.- ..,- -:"",r,=.'I:""','::="".=.-.---- -----.--
"-"'."T" -. "..- "::=,r.=.""~:;,:=",,.=."""._-'_._'--
\ ......"..i.. ,- '''''''":.::,'...'".:.':.':..':'.";;:..:,:,,..,'::'':;;::::;:'~'::'::'o..:,.'::.::.'_._'''''''''''''''--,",",_
\ \
\___-J
~:;:~
~~::.~::::,~,'"'-
,
>II. ~
-
-0
;.~
-~
CHURCH
N8A~~.tJS'E
S8lI'~'3S''Il
~t..
" ;
I"" --_ _ __ ,..
, I
"--'1 I - _". ,I I
-.-;. ....---,,::--,':'"-"":,-----r---ii
-1::''\'" 1_\ ","
\,' ~ - 29 1 I
...-....,,,,-.
\ ...._..u.....< ~
.......-./
" I
-}.
1771
""'-,
\
\ \
2S \
.......;....",..\......,\
_....<7""':;
'.
I::;
..I~
~
I~
-I~
.
"
t
N1l8'~J'3~"'E ~
2J.OO"i"__
1748
.~ 1765
N~
.
1746 ~
i
'-
1747
N&ll~J'JS"t
13~.OO
-"".-
.
.
('IlBUej
,
\
\\ 1\
LOT AREAS
--'-
v
--- l
I 1736 I
I I
f- --- -----j
I I
I 1724 k.
~ --
I --
---
I 1716 I
,
i,1
412.74
SBB~'J~''fI
I
;'1 '" I
i 1:1 395 I
~ ,'"
\'.' : """.~". I
,...'~' .,.AN[......
~_L_f
--
407
'\
'\
'\
'\
'\
y
/
-- -- ----,1
1713 /
385 I:J:
t"':
'>0'"""",",. .""
.._""".J'. I
377
J.
\-
~
415
1723
"
/"
IV
/+
,
r
.~'"
-.
"".
._"._".",...~
..'...... '-"' ~
--I-
I
/"
/
I
.1
LOT AREAS
"
"
"
357.':155 :;:, 13~: "0:'
46,2J:. SF' (l.O~ "'-C
3j,tiJ}:;:r (0 n AC',
6.1f,.'S,IIJ.......Cl
':'.5843'(0.:511(:)
11.148:;:'(0;:911(:)
"
J.?1153i'" !O'}1j IIC)
1:. ~4~ 3>
J.21:!5>
).~i( "
"
forALPL...T...RE"'-
RICHT_ilF_WAf A!<(A
PRIVATE srREE~ AREII
WE:3T PDN(l liRE'"
EA'5r"OtIOIlRE'\'
TO filL PONu AREA
roTAL NU,"BER Q~ Lors
"\lER'\'~( lor ,onE \1-25)
(.~O-;3 OEfl51 rY
NETOEHSlfy
"
"
"
"
-,
lA,.,,,
.~. .
PRELIMINARY PLAT
11
N
28
Attachment 6
1768 t::J
CHURCH
:~ ;~-:-. ~
,
L .: .IT
I.
L i.
~ Ii
Ii
~Jj!
I.
II
Ii
~Ii
o I',. \-._~
I .'
.r--J" - . '.~". '. ..
I I ~ -- ..,-...... r"
-, i I . "'.- '\ -...-....... -i I
LJ ~ I, =:: l " -"', -. ' ,
I " -.....-. '. [I':;
,j., i i::;: []736 : :;', IL,D'\ d:ill :~:~ /0 407 //
] I] ! f- _ _ _ -I, >....., ',L377 \ 1f-,395 I ~ / "
I III I n I / > , ~,- J ~ -I 1/' " I
I I -i I L2J24 I-..... \....,1723 Y /' -'-'-'--"';'L:~"""~-'-=:- ---- '< /< 4~5 j
I I'll I ~~ / 1\\" .:.1...-'-';~~" . .~. .~, '''' " ././ I
I - - - - - ~ I' I ~. .... ../ ./
I : I 11716 I 1713 n~ --,,1/ '; I ..... ...... .~./ ./ ./ I
, ~ I oj. ~.... '. ',\ I
.
III _-... h_,
".""""'(1'YI'l
. A-........-.
..... ....."'.-..
.-
.-. " :;:'
~'~
--
'--
.--
..-
~I'
~-
1771
.--.--.-----.-.-.--.--.---.-.-.-.-.--.-.-.-.-.-.-.-:w--=---=.
r--.
--
~ \--
\ ..........
\
i
\
,
1765 C
_.w
-~,
1747 i
L
.....>1:""'.........
.'no:("D'_~
_'LO'.....
~="'''''I
..
/
1721
29
\r
N
REMOVAL PLAN
,
I
I
'I
iJ
:.
Attachment 7
~LE:"::... ~
""'-"'""'"""""
..._....,.......
_, """1<I:T___"""'''''
.
t. ! .n
1768 c:J
.
. -
----
CHURCH
~,
,-' ".;:-
1746
--
~l
Ii
I'
I!
I! .'
"91
l I!
-=:111
il
:J I!
II
~Il
II
Ii
~q
I' ..i
o ..
111. ~.
LJ I I l
1 ~: I I 0 1736 I
*' Yl! I I
] I i If----~
Illil n I
I i ~i I L! k
I I i 1_ _ 172~ ~
I ': I n 1716 I
'--'
9
..
/
/
/
'-. ... '[>" I
'-. '-. 0D \ .... .~5 d:!: . 3~~ I;,,,, 407
'-. \ [J .,. 1/ "-
"" I I'.' I ~."" ;'
'~377 \ 'oJ. "
'-.'-. /' ....J- .J. ..~~i~"", /1\ 415 j
1723 y -------.:'.1/.. ,,:;-._r_____. '< " .." ~ /'
__ / q~" .~""'=I'_[j-.~~-:::: '-. v"./..--"--
-- ,. ~ ..--
---- /1/.' ;..:'.,'\..--
1713 n., I 1/ ,: I \., i\ 7
TREE PLAN
30
~,
,.: I
'-.--..J
1771
1765 c::
1747 [
1721
\!
N
"1
Ii
I'
I!
Ii
l il
~ Ii
Ii
:J J-jl
I,
II
Ii
r;:::] .:,i'f
o "
J!
LJ
1768el
"j""", J
I'" .
,! /./
'I I
-J
"
.,
II"
/ ~---
'..
....,:
)
I
I
I I (
\ I
,---j ')
~
,
,
"."
'.U;
I
I I
I~I U"
I . ::::.
~ .n I=:" 1736
GRADING NOTES t'-
l
I
I
I
'; ,,~nl, D\"-.:.~~
_....__..........,.....AtltI!'I>......""''''....... ~
...-_......_1l:......-OI'CUOI. ~
....--........--..-...............,-.....-
._. _ ......I.-.C...l..AI.l...~..... TOlE....... 00
-
...:.......__..ILl'M............'......__u.n.
"IO'C."'~:lO".,_l>C_,,,.._.1'IIttTOO._.....
-"-'..-.........,-.....-......-"-.....,.,,-
...OO\IIC_......-.....llO..OlNI;__."'_..
_...,..._"'............<tI>o....,..un_ou._""""
--.___........"'.._~_""IME_""""_
""....__......._..."'"'_IS"'....__.
10'W"............. -.cy..._ "'lU.U'''' _ ...-._........
_l_T,"""_-...IE........"'..'.....~t.."'TlC
-.l>C...._.......-.rrl"".....-....""""_"....
....--.c........_"'.._...._..--.
.....................,..-............--...
'_.'''''0_ '"' _.............. ""1Il<_ ""__
--......--..,...... THIl~...__.._"'1E
_....._..oc,..........:>t.__...........,.'''....
_ft""'...-....."t,(.Ut..__"'........-...
oo:_,,~, "IUI..-_ "" vlOJnn. !II; ~1Ol.. or-..:....
""""'-'_.... ....... """...__ ~.... THt _-....-no
-""""'........
i:'~'fJ:'...:oi:'.:;::.';':-~~.t--...-"..~ ..--
_..ACftIO..........._ltC,""'..........\Olll...-..__
arl>C""'......:IC'I....-_......'....._"'M
""'..............-,.~.......,.,...""IPIOC:ES......_
__"'_""1IIIEL....u..._....'-'"'___
...............-.......--....-...-..........-
-........_"'''........11:_._....._ ...,.._
-....:...TOED.......~.......'..__I.__I;llI..
....__........_110_........._...""""'_
...........-................................,..OC'UU..._.......
""_........_--....,..
Attachment 8
.
EROSION CONTROL NOTES
....___....._......oum_..____''''
_IlI'W1llllOl_......,_........._-"'I:........1I
Ml(lIlI!fICnOIIm
TE.................._.....(l<<,IN.I$..__..."-"'ZD
__....."""""""'l..........."""'_(MFDI..QCrlolL).
-.n....... "'_......... _.' ....-.lII!................
_..,.'._O~DI_...........__-.....I._
........."..."""'-..-..................,...-...
012<"""-'<_......._........._..._..
...........",.............,....--........-.,.....
_,......................-.,.-.....-..a.
.............---""""".......--......"'.-
_..........................,"'"-........'...11"'1<1............
........._ __..._................_ ~'_I..ln(."
,ou.)..___~.....Tf"'.....I....._.......
............../IlIlT___""'t,...........................
__....1O<>,..<:....,.1I.~"_.....,....._.....,,
...,-.........................-..,.....................
---
........---.....-.......-"'.......-
-,.......-............-.,....-.....................
......,.,.-.-...............-..-
~
i
\
\
\
~771
\
\
1765 0
2J
1747 [
"
/
/
/
1("",",~7 /
I ~'J /
_10-
~, /(A4l
.._-=~~V, ~5
~='~j""- ~. .".,,\
.; I "'-" ... '\ ~ ~
\'" '\- ~
I
I
1721
LEGEND
-"""'-~
.~
,
..,
.
_M____
-~- -~-
'L!
N
PROPOSED GRADING PLAN
31
Attachment 9
l.::J
UTILITY NOTES
.
"1
Ii
Ii
Ii -
~\ i
S :il
Ii j
. I
I I! ~~
~ Jp ~
-II I ~
Ii i' I
III I
2J1
o I'
I. _~.
I! . l
I~i .iil 0 I
,J.. 1;ri.1 I
Ii If.------.j
I Ii i I D I
1.L~"il k-...
I 1'1 1-"'-...
I I! I-n--i
[
SJ
I
"""...............f1IUl_"..._._II..tY.O_"'_"...J10
...._OC.........._..lHl:.............,.."S1l:_.,..
......-.................."""""-"'-.......-
-~~
....._.,.."........____..._'acT...........""
""'" o>LI.' ,.,,_...__.... "'''''''1.0<.0-,,, _ _.. ""',.._
=~...t:'-.:".:"~.::':::..re.:.<:;.,..._=~....
::'..:..~....T............-"""'''.........___
..,.". ....,~"-".. ..................." U"llT.eAlO<_
..OlIT1mI...LWIllO,'.l'ttT......IU.Il.l..__...........
"I~_IUI"_
......1lII_"'............._~.)..............__.._
...._........"'..............1OIII...r<__""Qj..'""-UI
---
"""""'--.-""" """"'"'.....-.... ,..."'..........,..-.
"'_'b_.._",.._...
._"'"..""<D>ClI_..........._.-.m_
':':;.~::":o;::~.~ to ._T_. _ '............ ....._
._"",....................__.r .._,..._..._~
........"".....u..............._.....
.........,___......................_!".~1....1I......
-...,.
......orn>o ...........'..._T"'_ __"<0<1.....__
_t.......-lO.-._--..._"'_
'"
[]
o
...
-'-,
"
'"
"
"
"
-,
/
/
/
!~ /
-L~/Z+
~"
'"
:''''~~': ~:
I
!
LEGEND
:i~ ~T= --~~~
~;~~.~~ f r
""".- . .
""".__. 1.1
r_~~. =~- -~-
:
//
,'1
PROPOSED UTILITY PLAN
11
N
32
Attachment 10
-,
.-.. "_. ...:"
("='
CA"~"''''\..f"
.I'lI>LooLt.~)
'"
'I-
"
-,-,
-*-
~"-_:~=.--jPQ:l..~.i
-~~~: ..j,,:,:!.
--';;j;;~~--:-' .:=-
.- _-:..~.~~~~:~.:- ::-. -1. ',j:.Jj ;;
-' n !~
L
.--".
.... ...~~ ro..
~EH3i......
F-I L.-:-="
,-I !--
'"
,
'-.::.......-;
"-.
~
---r.,
Ii ,,,,,,
'_"",.._...t
,...........-....
'--
-
~,/-'<
"
"
~~......~ ''''''1> ~o..l,
.~
I "i!.h:&at.>~u:lL:.~
).l.oOf<il.- i 7'*"'~
THE BOARDWALK (SINGLE UNIT) SIDE ELEVATION 1r
33 N
Attachment 11
~. 'l!::ro",,~ ~vc;.1'J"(
''''
, r--:: 5;iz.
,"
::I~
y(2.
O LLl
J-
~VII\J.'ih '$ol'Dlo.ly___
! '
i I
I
~
tJi~
-
. I
~1~1"" ~1C12 e~v/;...'1!o.1..J..
Ve;' = \'_0"
THE BOARDWALK (SINGLE UNIT) SIDE ELEVATION 11.
34 N
Attachment 12
"
,r:
0~,
:8
'~'.1{']
ODD
(,"1...."11..
..;:.\.;ol.oJ~1
<'""~ D'
'STfl.eCiTIFF<::IJ>JT' ~"A"a..l
1/21" '$ \ '.0"
'fl,.cA~ .;;L~\lA\ IQJ_
1,1,.".. 11~(7'
35
11
N
REAR AND STREET SIDE ELEVATIONS
~,..
..~
,
+_.~
ill
rn
.--.r'~-
~'I.
. _ L_J
i
. ..1
+-~~~iFl',------'
-~
Attachment 13
Ii "-Ii r:-z:r
lo:Rif-'40.-~~ .
CW"i7Z
. ~n~~_'" ~~V4.1I...l:=._
TWIN HOME ELEVATIONS
36
1!
N
Attachment 14
'8
! ,
ill
I i
t_;
_...~.~_. ""'._,,=___.....l.,
_.~.~.._...c:::;..Y!i:r....)l.lJll;.;.l~".
~ -......
.j---->~
1.0
",
'"
m
r c- .'- --' " -"
..
'i j
===_~ ,;l..,v..-r1boJ:~.~:-:::~:--..
37
1f
N
TWIN HOME SIDE ELEVATIONS
"Attachment 15
S6.0.-.U'I"~
4 ............
--
'50 tmIM e..c..JI u.-P
",.
~'~~fu...,o
.5 "'-'5I'.w-...
'.,.
~IrIo!oAoIl.Sw.InoI.&
~-
Re,Oa>.J<.cc.
~
.I'
DRw..,,.,.,..
-...
..~,.....,
.....
.....w.....
..s~"A1WA
I'I_~
.. ..:.---_..~'-.-
UNIT LANDSCAPE PLAN
38
""'- ....
3___
"K'IIl:l~
~~oOl'lW
.-
IoLaG& ~ SRau
~--
11
N
Attachment 16
Enl!ineerinl! PIan Review
PROJECT: The Woodlands of Maplewood
PROJECT NO: 05-04
REVIEWED BY: Erin Laberee, Maplewood Engineering Department
DATE: July 11,2005
Integra Homes is proposing to develop the properties at 1740, 1750 and 1766 McMenemy Street
into 28 townhomes. They are proposing two on-site ponds to treat runoff from the site. Access for
the development is proposed off of McMenemy Street. The plans also show an emergency vehicle
access with a trail off of Kingston Avenue.
The developer is proposing significant grading on site. As proposed, very little area will remain
undisturbed and few existing trees will remain standing. The proposed grades are very steep around
the new structures and the developer would have to build several retaining walls to tie into the
adjacent properties. There may be too many units proposed to effectively fit the site and the
surrounding topography. If the developer eliminated several units it would allow better grades,
reduce the number of retaining walls needed and would be a benefit to the overall development.
The existing site includes 2 low areas with no outlets that currently store and infiltrate runoff from
most of the site. As proposed, the developer would enhance the low areas to treat runoff from the
new development. The new ponds would function as no outlet ponds and store the 100 year rain
event. An emergency overflow pipe would direct additional runoff into the existing storm sewer on
McMenemy Street.
The developer and the project engineer shall address the following issues.
Streets and Driveways
1. The developer is proposing Kingston Court as a public street. Typically public streets and
public utilities are constructed as a public improvement project, administered and
constructed by the city. If the developer wishes to administer the construction of the public
street and utilities in conjunction with the private construction, then Maplewood's
Engineering Standards must be strictly followed. These standards include a construction
inspection schedule that outlines erosion control, grading, utility and street construction, and
testing requirements. The developer and/or engineer shall submit a letter outlining how
Maplewood's standards will be followed.
The developer shall ensure that all construction activities conform to Maplewood's
standards by entering into a Development Agreement with the city. City staffwill keep a
close watch on the site during all construction activities - especially those relating to the
construction of the public street and utilities.
2. The developer or project engineer shall provide the city with plan and profile plans for the
public street and public utilities.
3. Traffic flow needs to be improved in the development. Larger vehicles such as garbage
trucks and moving trucks will be driving through the development on a regular basis. The
current layout will be difficult to navigate. The developer shall consider implementing
39
additional cul-de-sacs. Ideally 3 additional cul-de-sacs would be constructed at the end of
the private streets. Due to grading issues and space constraints this may not be feasible. At a
minimum, the developer shall add a cul-de-sac near unit 4 at the southeast comer of the site.
If the additional, private cul-de-sac does not meet the city's minimum radius requirements,
the project engineer shall provide to city staff turning movements for larger vehicles such as
garbage trucks or moving trucks that would be turning around in the cul-de-sac.
4. The contractor shall extend the curb through the private drive entrances off of the cul-de-sac
to distinguish the public street from the private streets.
Gradinll: & Erosion Control
1. There are several locations where the proposed grades are greater than 3: 1 slopes and are not
allowable. The maximum allowable grade is a 3: 1 slope although a 4: 1 slope is preferable.
The project engineer shall revise the grading plan to provide more gradual slopes on site.
2. The city requires a building permit for retaining walls greater than four feet high. A plan and
a specific soil stabilization detail for the wall design will be required as part of the building
permit. The top and bottom wall elevations shall be shown on the plan. There are several
retaining walls proposed that would be very close to the adjacent properties. The project
engineer shall ensure that these retaining walls are setback far enough from the property
lines to ensure that construction activities do not encroach onto the adjacent properties.
3. The project plans shall show inlet protection devices at all inlets.
4. The city, Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District, and the MPCA (new NPDES
Construction Permit) all require grading permits.
5. The proposed development is located in the Ramsey Metro Watershed District, but drainage
from the site enters Capitol Region Watershed District downstream. The applicant shall
submit plans to Capitol Region Watershed District for their review.
6. The applicant shall note on plans the exact seed mixtures the contractor is to use in the
different areas.
Drainage
1. There is an inconsistency between the drainage calculations and the plan. The invert
elevation for the outlet of the westerly pond is shown on the plans as 899.50 while the
drainage calculations use an 899.00 elevation. The project engineer shall revise the drainage
calculations to reflect the plan.
2. The project engineer shall provide pipe sizing calculations for the storm sewer pipe and
revise the plan to reflect adequate pipe sizes. The proposed storm sewer pipe appears
oversized as most of the pipes are proposed to be 18 inches or greater in diameter.
3. The project engineer shall verify the grade of the existing 15 inch pipe on McMenemy
Street. The engineer is proposing to connect an 18 inch pipe into the existing 15 inch pipe.
40
This is not acceptable. The project engineer shall verify that there is adequate capacity in the
existing pipe to handle emergency flow from the ponds.
4. The engineer shall include in the plans and specifications 3 foot sumps at storm structures
11, 18, 24 and 29.
5. The east and west directions forthe inverts at CBMH 18 are backwards and should be
revised.
6. The project engineer has designed the ponds with infiltration areas. The project plans shall
show a detail of how the contractor is to construct the infiltration areas.
7. The engineer shall include a minimum 10 foot bench with a dense vegetative barrier at the
anticipated NWL of the infiltration basins as a safety feature to restrict access into the
basins. A dense vegetative barrier in such an application may be accomplished with a mix of
the following shrubs: Red Twig Dogwood, Nanny Berry, High Bush Cranberry, and Button
Bush.
If the developer chooses to not use a dense vegetative barrier around the basins, the
developer may use a 4-foot-tall, black vinyl-coated fence installed at the HWL of the basin.
Utilities
1. The project engineer shall note the material for the sanitary sewer main SDR 35 and the
services as Schedule 40.
2. The applicant shall obtain St. Paul Regional Water Services approval.
Misc.
1. The contractor shall use a native seed mixture around the proposed basins. The project
engineer shall call this out on the project plans.
2. Outlot A shall be dedicated to the city and maintained by the homeowner's association. It is
recommended that the developer screen the south side of Kingston Court and Kingston Lane
with screening fencing and/or landscaping. The homeowner's association shall maintain all
landscaping within the public right of way, within the ponding or drainage basins, the
common areas and in Outlot A.
3. The applicant shall enter into a maintenance agreement with the city for the maintenance of
the ponds, sump structures and any landscaping proposed within the city's right of way. The
city will require a homeowner's association to be the responsible party for all landscaping
maintenance, including right-of-ways, the common areas and the ponding areas.
4. The developer shall enter into a developer's agreement with the city for the construction of
the public street and for the utilities.
41
Attachment 17
Ken Roberts
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Jodeit, Margaret [Margaret.Jodeit@rels.info]
Thursday, June 30, 2005 12:13 PM
Ken Roberts
jodeit@att.net
Proposed development: Revised Woodlands of Maplewood, 1740, 1750 and 1766
McMenemy Street
Hi Ken,
We have reviewed the revised proposal for the Woodlands project.
1. The proposed paved trail along Edgernont place for a 2nd emergency vehicle access: how
wide will this trail be? How will normal traffic be discouraged from using this trail?
Will it ever be possible for this trail to be expanded into a public or private road? My
concern is that future development will determine that this trail should become a road,
and I would like it to be specified that this cannot happen. We still have children who
play and ride bicycles on the street, and I do not want the amount of traffic on our
streets to increase.
2. Maplewood currently has Edgemont Street, Kingston Avenue and Arkwright Street.
I am extremely uneasy about naming additional streets: Edgemont Place, Kingston Court and
Kingston Lane, particularly as Edgemont Place is designated as a trail for emergency
access vehicles. I believe that these streets and trail should be otherwise named for
clarity.
Assuming that these concerns can be resolved and that all other conditions will be handled
as per code requirements, that utilities will have minimal disruption during the
construction process, and will resume as normal when construction is complete, I do not
have any additional objections to the development of Woodlands of Maplewood: 1740, 1750
and
1766 McMenemy Road.
William and Margaret Jodeit
1714 Edgemont Street
Maplewood, MN 55117
651-772-1738
jodeit@att.net
42
Attachment 18
Kenneth Roberts
Planner, Office of Community Development
City of Maplewood
1830 County Road BEast
Maplewood, MN 55105
JUl 0 5 2005
RECEIVED
Dear Mr. Roberts:
We are writing in response to the open letter we received dated June 21, 2005,
concerning the revised, proposed "Woodlands of Maplewood Town House
Development -1740 and 1750 McMenemy Street, Maplewood."
Most of the serious problems that existed with the previous proposal still exist.
We believe that it should be rejected as proposed. Here are just some of our
concerns:
Land use - Is this the best use for the land? Has the city studied the
neighborhood in recent years? Given the enormous growth in housing in the
area bordered by Larpenteur, 35E, Roselawn and DeSoto, we are not aware of
any study that has been done on the neighborhood, the loss of wildlife, trees,
etc., as well as the needs of this growing population for community services. In
the past ten years, the population size has doubled, yet there has been no
developments made to support the current size of the population (roads, parks,
sidewalks, etc.) to support this or any further growth.
One legitimate use of the land might instead be for the development of a park or
recreation area for current residents (and the high numbers of children in the
area). Our children too often play on the streets for lack of a local park.
The proposed development would create a marked disparity in population density
compared to surrounding neighborhood areas.
Well systems - Many people in the Monn's Villa area are still using the water
system under this property with wells. There is no consideration or mention of
this in the proposal. Would the development change the access, quality or
availability of this water? Would the developers or city be responsible for the
quality of the water? How will quality be checked and monitored?
The further contamination of our water table by the projects' chemical run offs is
major concern for some of us who still use ground wells.
Airborne pollution - Many of the neighbors of this project sit on land slanted
downward from the project. Carbon monoxide pooling on lower lands, both
during construction and after, would be an extreme health hazard to many
residents. Has an environmental impact study been done with this in mind? Has
any study been initiated concerning any further developments in our area?
43
The character of the neighborhood - The original proposal states it "will not
change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area." This is
impossible to believe since the revised plan still provides an access route to
Kingston, which would easily double traffic on those streets. Noise, traffic, etc.,
will at least double with the doubling of residents using these streets.
Kingston/ArkwrightlEdgemont streets in this area currently don't even have
curbing, sidewalks, and few if any storm drains along the street, etc. Any repairs
or ch.mges to these would be born by the current residents of these streets, not
by the developer.
Again, the original report states that "traffic volume generated from the project is
not significant," which is impossible to believe since the number of housing units
would double. Without alleys, sidewalks, etc. - and having a connection to
Larpenteur at the base - children often play in the quiet streets now. Where
would this leave them? How many accidents would result from this plan?
Forestation - About eight years ago, a major storm blew over many of the
mature trees in Monn's Villa. It took days for the city and utilities to clean up the
streets and restore utilities. This is proof of the difficulty posed by narrow streets,
some portions of our circle were inaccessible to emergency vehicles and utilities
were out for about a week.
The project's "tree plan" would, in fact, remove most of the trees already on the
prop6sed site.
Developments in recent years - the Ripley street development, the townhouse
development north of the Hmong church, the Hmong church development and
current development on the west side of McMenemy - the forestation in the area
has already declined dramatically in the past 10 years. This impact deserves
consideration.
Street service - Plowing, etc. is already minimal, since these are secondary
streets - yet the incline of the hill can make access to existing houses in Monn's
Villa difficult in inclement weather. Calling this a 'secondary access point' doesn't
change the fact that for at least 16 of the properties, the Kingston egress would
be a close exit and would undoubtedly be used often. Doubling traffic will only
exacerbate the problems already facing the neighborhood.
Perhaps instead of adding more housing units, the developer should look at the
added property that he has acquired since the first proposal to develop roads or
other services for the homes he would be constructing.
We would like to see better study of the actual financial burden this project would
impose on the neighborhood (street upgrades, etc.) done before any more
development is made to the area. More traffic along
Kingston/ArkwrightlEdgemont streets would obviously result in more wear-and-
tear on these streets.
44
In summary:
The development plan is unacceptable and nonsensical. Development in this
area has already been dramatic and without any long-range planning by the city,
at least nothing that has been shared with the residents of the area.
The developer would be better served, if he intends to continue his hopes for
high density housing, by negotiating with the owners of the homes on
McMenemy next to his project which is for sale. This would give him a much
larger land area on McMenemy for egress from his site.
We would ask the city to (1) examine the high growth of new housing and the
capacity of the area to handle such dramatic growth along with significant decline
in treeslwildlife in the area; (2) use this study to determine realistic guidelines for
development in the future; (3) scale back the size of any future development
plans to more rational levels, (4) require any future development's access via
McMenemy only, which is far better suited to handle a higher density of traffic (it
has a better road bed, street lighting, curbs and storm sewers, bus routes,etc.
Maplewood is an attractive city because of the character of the neighborhoods,
the beauty of the settings and the reasonableness of the services. This proposal
ignores all of these aspects and only adds problems that will erode the value of
this area to its citizens - now and in the future.
Thank you for your attention to our concerns. We look forward to hearing more
about these issues as you continue your study of this proposal.
Sincerely,
~~
fl:.Pt~\HWk\..
Nancy He-rlher
407 Kingston Av.
Maplewood, MN 55117
651/771-8436
Cc: Robert Cardinal, Mayor
Kathleen Juenemann, Council Member
Will Rossbach, Council Member
Jackie Monahan-Junek, Council Member
Mavin Koppen, Council Member
Lorraine B. Fischer, Chair, Planning Commission
Tushar Desai, Vice Chair, Planning Commission
45
Attachment 19
RECEIVED
JUN 3 0 2005
To the City of Maplewood:
Regarding the proposed Woodlands of Maple wood Town House DevelopmenR E~ED
like to voice some of my concerns.
JUN 3 0 2005
I live on McMenemy Street across the street from the site. I am very unhappy with the
proposal for several reasons.
1. The development as proposed, would severely impact the landscape by cutting
down many mature trees. These trees, if preserved, would help to obscure the new
development from view, fit in better with the surrounding properties, and make
the new development much more attractive. How can it be called "Woodlands of
Maplewood" when the plan calls for clear cutting the entire site and piling 'units'
Oft-top0f OIW anotHeP-?-'fhis.marketing tactic is especially offensive.
2. I do not believe that town houses are appropriate for this neighborhood. I feel that
this neighborhood is characterized by single family homes with yards. Many of
the people who live here enjoy gardening and landscaping their yards. There are
also many families with children who benefit from the outdoor spaces that these
properties provide. This new development does not provide families with outdoor
spaces for gardening or children. I strongly believe that any new houses built
should emulate the surrounding neighborhoods by keeping structures further apart
from each other as well as have a reasonable amount of yard space. With this type
of development, it may be possible to preserve more of the mature trees on the
property.
3. It would be wonderful if some of this land could be used for a picnic area, park or
play ground. It could serve as a unifying element between the new development
and the neighborhoods on McMenemy, Desoto, and Kingston Ave. It would
attract families with children and encourage neighbors to meet and interact.
Instead, the proposed plan creates a completely different type of neighborhood
that would isolate itself while further dividing the existing neighborhood on
McMenemy street.
4. Many of the houses on McMenemy street are over 100 years old. It bothers me
that two of these historic homes are being tom down to make way for this
proposed development. As an owner of an older home, I would prefer that this
quality of my neighborhood be preserved rather than destroyed.
5. The development surrounds two remaining homes on McMenemy street. These
houses fit perfectly into the existing neighborhood but would be completely
isolated by the proposed development. I don't think this is fair to those homes.
6. While McMenemy street can handle more traffic, it does require more
enforcement to deter speeders. Most cars do not observe the 30mph speed limit. I
46
am also concerned about crime. Is Maplewood going to hire more police officers
or patrol the neighborhood more frequently? My garage was broken into last year
and I do not want this to happen again.
7. When is enough enough? McMenemy street has seen quite a bit of development
in the last five years. I am feeling very unsettled about the changes taking place
around me. I moved here six years ago to a neighborhood that being so close to
the city, I thought was fully developed. I was attracted to the area because of the
older homes, large yards, untouched forested spaces and proximity to the cities. I
may have been naIve in the assumption that there wouldn't be any more
development, but who would have thought that all of the pristine spaces would
disappear in such a short amount of time? I may be old fashioned, but I don't
think I'm the only one who is uncomfortable with the rapid pace of development
in this area. My fear and frustration is that my neighborhood is transforming into
exactly the type of area I was trying to avoid when I moved here. This is causing
me a great deal of unwanted anxiety.
The overall impression I get from the proposal is that it is an attempt at wholesale
profiteering. I strongly question whether it would be in the interest of Maplewood to
allow this practice of self serving development to continue. I think that in the interest of
neighborhood continuity and quality oflife, Maplewood should reject this proposal.
Sincerely,
~:I~ra
Kai Huot-Link
1741 McMenemy Street
Maplewood, MN 55117
47
Attachment 20
N
July 08, 2005
Erin Laberee
Engineering Department
City ofMaplewood
1830 County Road B East
Maplewood, Mn 55109
JUl 0 8 2005
RECEIVED
Re: Response to review letter dated June 29, 2005
Project 05-04
Woodlands ofMaplewood
Dear Ms. Laberee:
This letter is in response to the issues generated from the review letter for the proposed
construction plans dated June 27,2005.
Metro Land Surveying & Engineering is in concum:nce with the majority of the engineering
comments from the city and has begun to incorporate the information into the next design
iteration. In addition, the developer is willing to work with the city to set up a developer
agreement for the construction of the public streets, including pond and sump structure
maintenance. Also, the developer will wode with the city to set up a homeowners association to
address maintenance of the site landscaping, monumentation, fences and other shared
infrastructure. Finally, vegetative buffers around the ponds will be incorporated into the design.
The request of the additional cul-de-sacs to the private streets will need additional review and
discussion with the city engineering department. The addition of three cul-de-sacs causes the
lost of six (6) proposed units. If the need for public right-of way is also included fur the roads,
then setback requirements would cause the loss of an additional fuur (4) to six (6) lots.
The site poses significant grading issues affecting the number of tree removals and relocations.
These changes have resulted from redesign of the project in response to City and public
comments. You may recall that our first design did protect many of the existing trees.
In closing, we will work with the city to develop a plan to address landscape planting, tree
preservation and screening for the site. Color renderings and other exlubits are cum:ntly being
prepared to provide a visual characterization of the final site plan including the addition of fences
as suggested and landscaping.
48
We look forward to working with the city to resolve any further outstan<1;ng issues. Please feel
free to call me at (952) 707-9299 if you should have further questions.
Sincerely,
Metro Lfmd Surveying & Engineering, Inc.
tf/II) Q.lj$. .
Michael Villari, PE
Project Engineer
49
.-. =~ ~u.......-..
-'E'~.- ~,"V~ -.-,
... '-=''' .;;,./ ""'&
OHJ.aw. 00f!_~':':;;;
""".-.-- ...
-..-... ..
---..-
~II i i I{f' j.!..\
~li!IIIJ.'''I''''!
~I i I I" . I
~ 'I
co ! 1!liil'l IIII!1
~ Ililillil.II!!I!1
"',,<~I
~ ~ / ~.-
. i .....V /',-
- '! (j" Y //
-'I .,/ //
~ I. _ / I. /
I ..- - -.J ( (I
"i> ,f ~
t .
- ,. "'","." _~__4- iti' rn
--''!:,:";{/ ':;-:t::.r ;'~
~,.- i
~~~ / r ' ; ITI
I ~U _ I !ni!!:!!;; !
D I I! !!!d! !!!I! j !
~ I Ii !!!I;, 'I'll! i
I . L j! !Illi!~i 111:1 i i;
. I I~ I: 1M' :1,1: i ;'
f / / II illlill! i!llll : II
$ j / I!. Iqld 1'1, = I~I
" j / ;v; Ill; 1!~lil I1I1I i .i
b i ,dnl lib, I II
.'
, 'I Ir - - -11;1;111 ~ Illdl
1"11 . '1,1,111
_ I I Ili!-, f liillli.
-r - I f ~ .,111, ~ Iii I'"
"t ;: 0 , L-J lillil ! 'II Ie I
o L'~. - ~ I 1..:1 ~ i,lil~11
- I . 8. - : - - ~ fi iii~!~ ~! :1!i~I_I,
- ''''IS """.".' _J..'i15 'I'il~ II '1'1'1'1
, -.-,-,--"-,~,-~.-,-,-,-,-+-,-,~,,, Ill~1 ~ '11111
~._._._._._,_._._._._._.--' .. co I,~'I~ I! I 30111
I' ----T-----..--------......i;i,::i.~.I! II!
,Il r1 (J 0 Q ~ Mllli II 1~lliii!
I~;ii, I
,01 ';1 ..
i;ill~. I!'
;-1: j., ,.1
Ir,,~jC ~ II
f!~E~1 : II
.i;,.r, i.1
jllll;:. I II
;1~11t!~II!j ~/
:1 Clf; i I,
bin ~8 ! I~
.~ ! I '
II" I~
i I'! !'~: i
'Ill'.
~ 1.111.11 :1
~.. · II i; II
cl ili ~hlll:g
~ I !p. iii
~ 1;111 !j II !!
~ !lilUnn;
. I . __-,
I \
17''!-c~ ,.
IF.
.
I
I.
at;; N" 'NOllVO
CM)~ :>100101:131\0 l.ZLZL
':)NI 'S3~0l-/ ~~3.1NI
lrBIHX3 :)VS 30 100 I. ~ I ~.
VlOSlJlrl..'aOOM3'IdWI l:lll~.....
aOOM31dlf... ~o ! ; ;; ~
SQNv1aOOM :3HJ.
iCJ I
I 1--
-~---
LJ I
I
c:c=b.
o
50
Attachment 21
LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Chris English, representing Integra Homes, proposed a change to the city's land use
plan from R-1 (single dwellings) to R-2 (single and double dwellings).
WHEREAS, this change applies to the properties at 1740, 1750 and 1766 McMenemy Street in
Section 17, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota. (The property to be known as Lots
1-28 of the proposed Woodlands of Maplewood)
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
1. On July 18, 2005, 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 persons at the hearing a chance to speak and
present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council
the proposed change.
2. On August _, 2005, the city council discussed the proposed land use plan change. They
considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described change
for the following reasons:
1. It would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
2. This site is proper for and consistent with the city's policies for medium-density residential use.
This includes:
a. It is near a minor arterial street (Larpenteur Avenue) and is on a collector street.
b. Minimizing any adverse effects on surrounding properties because there would be minimal
traffic from this development on existing residential streets.
3. It would be consistent with the proposed zoning and land uses.
The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on
,2005.
51
Attachment 22
RESOLUTION: ZONING MAP CHANGE
WHEREAS, Chris English, representing Integra Homes, proposed a change to the zoning map
from F (farm residence) to R-2 (single and double dwellings).
WHEREAS, this change applies to the properties at 1740, 1750 and 1766 McMenemy Street (for
the proposed Woodlands of Maplewood).
WHEREAS, the legal description of these properties are:
OVERALL DESCRIPTION
The South 91.99 feet of the West 407.00 feet of the North 166.99 feet ofthe South 325.39 feet of the West
984.8 feet of the North half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 17, Township 29,
Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
Parcel A
The South 91.99 feet of the West 158.00 feet of the North 166.99 feet of the South 325.39 feet of the West
984.8 feet of the North half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 17, Township 29,
Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
Parcel B
The South 91.99 feet of the East 249.00 feet of the West 407.00 feet of the North 166.99 feet of the South
325.00 feet of the West 984.8 feet of the North half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of
Section 17, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
All in Section 17, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota. (The property to be known as The
Woodlands of Maplewood)
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
1. On July 18, 2005, 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 persons at the hearing a chance to speak and
present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council
the zoning map change.
2. On August _. 2005, the city council discussed the proposed zoning map change. They
considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described change
in the zoning map for the following reasons:
1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code.
2. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property
or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the property adjacent to the area
included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded.
52
3. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where
applicable, and the public welfare.
4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical
extension of pubiic services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire
protection and schools.
5. The owner plans to develop this property for single and double dwellings.
The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on
,2005.
53
Attachment 23
STREET VACATION RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Integra Homes applied to the city for the vacation of the following-described parts of a
right-of-way:
The easterly 15 feet and the westerly 15 feet of the unused Edgemont Street right-of-way
located north of the north right-of-way line of Kingston Avenue. (in Section 17, Township 29,
Range 22)
WHEREAS, the history of this vacation is as follows:
1. On July 18, 2005, the planning commission held a public hearing about this proposed
vacation. The city staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent a notice to the
abutting property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance
to speak and present written statements. The planning commission also considered reports
and recommendations of the city staff. The planning commission recommended that the city
council approve the proposed vacation.
2. On August _' 2005, the city council reviewed this proposal. The city council also
considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission.
WHEREAS, after the city approves this vacation, public interest in the property will go to the following
abutting properties:
1. Lot 1, Block 3, Monn's Villa
385 Kingston Avenue, Maplewood, Minnesota
PIN: 17-29-22-33-0021
2. Lot 10, Block 1, Monn's Villa
395 Kingston Avenue, Maplewood, Minnesota
PIN: 17-29-22-33-0030
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described right-of-
way vacation for the following reasons:
1. It is in the public interest.
2. The applicant and the abutting property owners have no plans to build a public street at this
location.
3. The adjacent properties have street access.
4. The vacation of the parts of the right-of-way will allow the adjacent residents to expand and
improve their homes.
This vacation is subject to the city retaining the center part of the Edgemont Street right-of-way
located north of the north right-of-way line of Kingston Avenue for public purposes.
The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on
,2005.
54
Attachment 24
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Mr. Chris English, representing Integra Homes, applied for a conditional use permit
(CUP) for the Woodlands of Maplewood residential planned unit development (PUD).
WHEREAS, this permit applies to properties at 1740, 1750 and 1766 McMenemy Street.
WHEREAS, the legal descriptions of the properties are:
OVERALL DESCRIPTION
The South 91.99 feet of the West 407.00 feet of the North 166.99 feet of the South 325.39 feet of the West
984.8 feet of the North half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 17, Township 29,
Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
Parcel A
The South 91.99 feet of the West 158.00 feet of the North 166.99 feet of the South 325.39 feet of the West
984.8 feet of the North half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 17, Township 29,
Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
Parcel B
The South 91.99 feet of the East 249.00 feet of the West 407.00 feet of the North 166.99 feet of the South
325.00 feet of the West 984.8 feet of the North half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of
Section 17, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
All in Section 17, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota. (The property to be known as The
Woodlands of Maplewood)
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On July 18, 2005, 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 persons at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements.
The commission also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff. The
planning commission recommended that the city council the plan amendment.
2. On August _' 2005, the city council discussed the proposed conditional use permit.
They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve 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.
55
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. All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped June 14, 2005 except where the city
requires changes. Such changes shall include:
a. Revising the grading and site plans to show:
(1) Revised storm water pond locations and designs as suggested or required by the
watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's standards and the
engineering department requirements.
(2) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of the vegetation and large trees.
(3) All the changes required by the city engineer and by the watershed district.
The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The director of community
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. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall
meet all the conditions and changes noted in Erin Laberee's memo dated July 11, 2005,
and the plans shall include:
a. The grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, streets, driveway, trails, tree
preservation/replacement, and parking plans. The cul-de-sac bulb shall have the
minimum radius necessary to ensure that emergency vehicles can turn around.
b. The following changes for the storm sewer plans:
56
(1) The developer shall enclose the new ponds with a four-foot-high, black, vinyl-
coated chain-link fence. The contractor also shall install a gate in the fences as
may be required by the city engineer.
(2) Provide for staff approval a detailed storm water management plan.
c. The following for the streets and driveways:
(1) Curb and gutter along the street, if the city engineer decides that it is necessary.
(2) Clearly labeled public streets and private driveways on the plans.
4. The design of the ponds shall meet Maplewood's ordinance standards and shall be subject
to the approval of the city engineer. The developer shall be responsible for getting any
needed off-site pond and drainage easements, if applicable.
5. The developer or contractor shall:
a. Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, complete all public
improvements and meet all city requirements.
b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Remove any debris, junk, fencing or fill from the site.
6. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Woodlands of Maplewood PUD
shall be:
a. Front-yard setback (from a public street or a private driveway): minimum - 20 feet,
maximum - 35 feet
b. Front-yard setback (public side street): minimum - 20 feet, maximum - none
c. Rear-yard setback: 20 feet from any adjacent residential property line.
d. Side-yard setback (townhouses): minimum - 20 feet minimum between buildings.
7. The developer or builder will pay the city Park. Access Charges (PAC fees) for each housing
unit at the time of the building permit for each housing unit.
8. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on
2005.
57
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
City Manager
Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
Utility Easement Vacation-Heritage Square 4th Addition
West of Guldens, south of new County Road D
July 7, 2005
INTRODUCTION
Jim Kellison, of Kelco Real Estate Development Services, is asking the city to vacate part of an
existing drainage and utility easement on the site of the future Heritage 4th Addition town house
development. This easement follows the alignment of the previously vacated Lydia Avenue.
Refer to the attachments.
BACKGROUND
On April 25, 2005, the Maplewood City Council approved a preliminary plat, parking lot setback
variance and the project design plans for the Heritage Square 4th Addition.
DISCUSSION
Chris Cavett, the Maplewood Assistant City Engineer, has evaluated this request and finds no
public benefit in retaining this easement. Maplewood has no plans to use the proposed easement
for utilities or drainage purposes. This easement, furthermore, lies beneath a proposed town
house building in the Heritage Square 4th Addition, which is another reason for this vacation.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the resolution vacating the drainage and utility easement within the site of the Heritage
Square 4th Addition town house development that follows the old Lydia Avenue alignment. The
reasons for the vacation are as follows:
1. It is in the public interest.
2. The existing easement is not needed for utility or drainage purposes.
3. The approved Heritage Square 4th Addition site plan has a building proposed on top of the
easement.
REFERENCE INFORMATION
Application Date
The city received the complete application and plans for this request on July 5, 2005. State law
requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a land use
proposal. City action is required on this proposal by September 3, 2005.
p:sec 4\Heritage Sq. 4th Easement Vac te 7'05
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Heritage Square 4th Addition Preliminary Plat
3. Heritage Square 4th Addition Building Unit Summary
4. Applicant's Written Request dated July 1, 2005
5. Vacation Resolution
2
Attachment 1
HERITAGE SQUARE 4TH ADDITION
,/
:'
,
,
i
,
J=
/
! H~zelwood
I i
;' !
I i
i J
) I
l ,I
i }'
I .
i LR4~
II l L
i i
l /
I I
,I I
/ l
,I l
J _I '1
r~// ;t
ri. .1--rI
.~i
3
Attachment 2
'in,
hi-
I -!
, ~ ~ f
"Cc
I
, .
11 ij
! i
.
! !
; ,"
I
UTILITY
EASEMENT
PROPOSED TO
BE VACATED
-I
"!ill'l'
11<1_1 a
',Ill!
..1.
1!I'ii'
1!II'11
.ill~~;f
111"1'
'<'I'
jib I!
'1:!l!1
ill
~~:
Be
-+-
Ii ~U.rl
,lilf,
(") ~ I !"l;,
~.! I' 1:~1
)0--0.-1-( I Inl
(i
I /
, I
/ - /
, r-'
/ .,Lu
, I
/ /
, I
/ /
/ . ,'1-___.
, I
/ /
, I
/ "
, I
/ /
I
'-,
I
I
I
,.J
O ~i~~ ~~~i ~~ lir~,~III:Il'
~._- 8~~~ .~.~ If ~
25 iV7 -./':l . li~ ~~ Ii
J::l! Y .o3~ U !l~ 'liJ I
is: ~ Q '" 2 ~ "
PRELIMINARY PLAT
, I ,
1!laBel
m~~~~
hi ","
j'
1'1
p!
I
EEeassgg;81! B
!!lill'IPIII~~.
h,j j~! r"
im',-,:dl ,'~
It. ~.. 0
Il.l,"j'! 0
~.f t:l
- t:;
"
4
i~
~
..;-.:;y.... ~.~-.:--=.=t-..:..=.:.. - -'.
- .s-:':~7:,~::-..-...,........:>............._'-,-:..,.- - -:).7' ,-;7 . Attachment 3
r'::::-_~ ...,_~ .......;...I,l'
;', ,-7'. '.,' :',<- "
\>" '-. ('
,
I
I
I
~
rc
I-!
~.
-
~
CJCl
rc
fJ)
~
l: ~
-[~
~ I-!
g rc
0-
~~
s' 0
~ ~
~ I-!
-
=-
>
Po
Po
~.
-
~.
o
~
I
UTILITY
EASEMENT
PROPOSED TO
BE VACATED
n...,
;~!5)
....J
L.
-L ._ .-'
"
'L
L
'\;.
,
\~\
t
.....
,,"
\\
I"
t. .~\
"'<,---=",=:- ...J,'
I
..-.... '\"
'\. \\
.\\ \
It: \
i':i \
. ',\ ~
..: n \
i i ~ ~
,It ;
i,j l
jij i"
.'::1' i
.' .: . ~ .
if n j
..~ Of
:/'// /
; .,~ /
} It /
.1// .
,~.: I
!Ii i ./
:......
I-j
I
"-'~":"-"-=\I- i.~ 5-.
'-'i(,~'!...\l!...>- > I'
r_t~.c.;.: ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ......
\:r-!:!? ............. )0"
\N OJ lEI tlI ~,~.~ ~ :-'...
I > ~ ~ ~ -~_. j!C'j(~'eJ;->
\-9:J:':;"(-~:.- -;::::...-:.-...:..-
m
r
o
()
^
-ry~
JT~
1--
I.
'J
5
I
I
I
,
~,-... I
' "'-::'=~:::;'~''7--..../
'---- ...--"
......
~
/~'.'
.~l ::.:-.:.:::~~.
. .:1
/111 /1 Ie c: (::::
:/ l.; i I~---~-...j / ;/ I
/! I i I r ~ '-:.__J ,fl '
lid, i __' ,
! :." i i J " I ..... --.....,.....
-, --', I ...................
; i l jE ~ \ . ,_I ",;.
; " ~ t \ \. . I
; \ \ \ \ \ c) i
\ ~ " \., \ \ I~~I /: !
',: \", 1."\ \ _
\. S \\ \, i..
, \;, . ,'-.
.;~ '\, '- \, " -'
\. \'~\ \\.,.._.- '"
" " \. '~._.-' .
.-. ~., , (
'''\, -"" '\'. I:~:
.\ \",..
r, .. :\;~~:~:~;~::::::::_......_"......
'~'''' ..4$'11.1,........"""1!:~:~.,.v..u.Q.
'~!l_J~~
.... ~..._~~~....~ I ~
.-, --- ~
-: "':"':::;;-.
", c:::::,/~r\~~
\.:.. "'",,)! II,
~ /11
(1/
.f ! !
; i
~
- 1
,OJ
,e
.r
10
,-
:z
b
c
:z
H
iCfJ
iC
:s::
!s::
)>
:D
_UJ1~
~
U'/UO/~UUO l~:u~ ~AA bOl'~u~UOO
L\J:'.Ll"U
~UUl
&
KELCO
Attachment 4
7300 Hudson Blvd.
Suite. 245
Oakdale. MN 55128
OlUce; [651] 730-2020
Fa&: [651] 730-2055
Real Estate Development Services
July 1, 2005
Mr. Tom Ekstrand
City Maplewood
1830 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55109
RE: Trout Land
Vacation of Easement
Dear Tom:
Please find enclosed our application and a copy of the plat for Trout Land in which we are
requesting vacation ofa 33' wide easement that was originally a continuation of Lydia Avenue
(as shown in green in on the enclosed plat). This easelMftt is a holdover from the original
property and needs to be vacated in order for the plat for l'own and Country Homes to be
accepted since this easement oms under their building: TIie new easement for the connecting
walk between the neighborhOlllito the west and County. Road D and the new easement for the
water main connection are shown on the Town and Country plat. Those easements, then,
supersede the purpose of this ellllelllent.
Please nwve this application through as quickly as possible as it potentially will affect the
closing 00 our property.
Thank you in advance for your prompt attention-in-this matter.
Respectfully yours,
RECEIVED
JUL 0 5 2005
JEKljjc
C: Kevin Clark
Gonzalo Medina
6
Attachment 5
EASEMENT VACATION RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Jim KelUson, of Kelco Real Estate Development Services, applied for the
vacation of the following:
Drainage and utility easement described by the following document numbers:
#2156689,#2451070,#2678102 and #2987438
WHEREAS, the history of this vacation is as follows:
1. On July 18, 2005, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff
published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent a notice to the abutting
property owners. The commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak
and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the
city council the public easement vacation.
2. On , 2005, the city council considered this request. The city staff sent a
meeting notice to the abutting property owners. The council also considered reports
and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission.
WHEREAS, after the city approves this vacation, the public interest in the property will go to
the adjoining property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described
vacation for the following reasons:
1. It is in the public interest.
2. The existing easement is not needed for utility or drainage purposes.
3. The approved Heritage Square 4th Addition site plan has a building proposed on top
of the easement.
The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on
,2005.
7
MEMORANDUM
LOCATION:
DATE:
Richard Fursman, City Manager
Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner
Walgreens Pharmacy - land Use Plan and Zoning Map
Changes
Northeast Corner of Beam and White Bear Avenues
July 12, 2005
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Meer Construction and the Maplewood Financial Center, representing Walgreens, are
proposing to construct a 14,480-square-foot Walgreens Pharmacy on a vacant lot
located on the northeast corner of Beam and White Bear Avenues. The plan also shows
a future three-story office building to be located on the east side of the lot, toward the
Maplewood Heights city park.
Requests
To build this development, the applicants are requesting that the city approve the
following:
1. Comprehensive plan change from Limited Business Commercial (LBC) to
Business Commercial (BC).
2. Zoning map change from Limited Business Commercial (LBC) to Business
Commercial (BC).
3. Design review.
The planning commission should review and make a recommendation on the
comprehensive plan change and zoning map change at the July 18, 2005 meeting. The
community design review board will review and make a recommendation on the design
issues at their July 26, 2005 meeting. Final action by the city council is currently
scheduled for August 8, 2005.
BACKGROUND
May 28, 2004: The City of Maplewood received complete land use applications from the
applicants for a comprehensive land use plan change, zone change, and design review
for the proposed Walgreens Pharmacy and future office building. City staff sent a
neighborhood survey notifying all property owners within 500 feet of the properly of the
proposal. City staff received notice from the underlying property owners that the
applicants' lease on the land did not allow the development of a pharmacy and that they
were disputing the applicants' request to rezone the property. City staff notified the
applicants of this issue and discontinued processing the permit until the applicants were
able to obtain the underlying property owners' permission to rezone or a court order
which directed the city to proceed.
November 3, 2004: The Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District approved the
applicants' watershed district permit for the proposed development.
May 12, 2005: The City of Maplewood received a court order which directed the city to
proceed with the rezoning request as proposed by the applicants.
DISCUSSION
Need for Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Change
The LBC land use and zoning designation would allow for limited commercial uses
including offices, medical or health-related clinics, and day care centers. This type of
designation has been historically placed on property that is adjacent residential uses to
ensure no negative commercial impacts to surrounding residential properties.
Therefore, in order to construct a retail store and pharmacy on the property, the city
must reguide and rezone the property to BC, which is a higher-impact commercial
zoning district that would allow for the retail store and a pharmacy.
Land Use Plan Change
The city does not have any specific criteria for land use plan changes. Any changes to
the plan, however, should be consistent with the goals and policies in the
comprehensive plan. In this case, there are six land use goals and eight development
policies in the comprehensive plan that the city should consider when reviewing this
request.
The applicable land use goals include:
1. Provide for orderly development.
2. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods.
3. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase
jobs and provide desirable services.
4. Minimize the land planned for streets.
5. Minimize conflicts between land uses.
6. Prevent premature use, overcrowding or overuse of land, especially when
supportive services and facilities such as utilities, drainage systems or streets are
not available.
The applicable development policies (to implement the plan goals) include:
1. The city will not approve new development without providing for adequate
facilities and services, such as street, utilities, drainage, parks and open space.
2
2. Safe and adequate access will be provided for all properties.
3. Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses should not create a
negative economic, social or physical impact on adjoining developments.
4. Whenever possible, changes in types of land use should occur so that similar
uses front on the same street or at borders of areas separated by major man-
made or natural barriers.
5. The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each neighborhood.
6. Group compatible businesses in suitable areas.
7. Promote the joint use of parking areas, drives and trash containers.
8. Avoid disruption of adjacent or nearby residential areas.
The proposal to change the land use plan for the entire site from LBC to BC would not
meet goal numbers 1, 2, and 5 and development policies numbers 3, 5, 6, and 8 (all
shown in italics) as stated above due to the fact that the property is adjacent a city park
(Maplewood Heights Park) and across the street from residential property. For this
reason, staff recommends that the city reguide only the portion of the property proposed
for development of the Walgreens Pharmacy (western 290 feet) and leave the remaining
portion of the property guided as LBC. This would allow the applicants to construct a
future office building on this portion of the property, but would preclude any other types
of high impact uses, such as a gas station, restaurant, or retail use on the eastern part of
the property.
Zoning Change
A majority of the properties along White Bear Avenue, north of Beam Avenue, are zoned
Be and include higher impact uses such as restaurants and retail facilities. Therefore,
the development of a Walgreens Pharmacy on the portion of the property adjacent White
Bear Avenue is consistent with the existing land uses and character of the
neighborhood. However, properties along Beam Avenue, west of White Bear Avenue,
are mainly residential in nature including a city park and residential to the west and a
bank across the street. For this reason, staff recommends that the city rezone only the
portion of the property proposed for development of the Walgreens Pharmacy (western
290 feet) and leave the remaining portion zoned as LBC. As stated above, this would
allow the applicants to construct a future office building, which would be compatible to
the surrounding residential-type properties, but would preclude any other types of high
impact uses.
Design Review
The community design review board will review all design elements of the project
including site plan, building elevations, landscaping, lighting, etc. During this review staff
will propose changes to the site plan as specified by the city's engineering department
and the county public works department as specified in their attached memorandums
(Attachments 10 and 11). These changes include the elimination of the proposed
driveway on White Bear Avenue and replacement with a shared driveway with the
3
Maplewood East Shopping Center located to the north, as well as the requirement that
the applicant dedicate additional right-of-way along White Bear Avenue. This right-of-
way is needed to accommodate for roadway improvements scheduled for 2008 which
include a future six-lane White Bear Avenue roadway. In addition, staff will address
other areas of the project which need design improvements including landscaping,
increased parking stall widths as required by code, and building elevations.
OTHER COMMENTS
Building Department: Dave Fisher, Building Official, reviewed the applicants' request
and outlines his comments in the attached memorandum dated July 1, 2005 (Attachment
12).
Fire Department: Butch Gervais, Fire Marshal, reviewed the applicants' request and
outlines his comments in the attached memorandum dated June 2, 2004 (Attachment
13).
Police Department: Lt. Kevin Rabbett reviewed the applicants' request and outlines his
comments in the attached memorandum dated June 1, 2005 (Attachment 14).
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Adopt the land use plan change resolution attached (Attachment 19). This
resolution changes the comprehensive land use plan map for the west 290 feet of
the vacant property located on the northeast comer of Beam and White Bear
Avenue from Limited Business Commercial (LBC) to Business Commercial (BC).
The city is making this change because it will:
a. Provide for orderly development.
b. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods.
c. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base,
increase jobs and provide desirable services.
d. Minimize the land planned for streets.
e. Minimize conflicts between land uses.
f. Prevent premature use, overcrowding or overuse of land especially when
supportive services and facilities, such as utilities, drainage systems or
streets are not available.
g. Help to implement the goals of the comprehensive plan including:
1) The city will not approve new development without providing for
adequate facilities and services, such as street, utilities, drainage,
parks and open space.
2) Safe and adequate access will be provided for all properties.
4
3) Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses should
not create a negative economic, social or physical impact on
adjoining developments.
4) Whenever possible, changes in types of land use should occur so
that similar uses front on the same street or at borders of areas
separated by major man-made or natural barriers.
5) The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each
neighborhood.
6) Group compatible businesses in suitable areas.
7) Promote the joint use of parking areas, drives and trash
containers.
8) Avoid disruption of adjacent or nearby residential areas.
2. Adopt the zoning map change resolution attached (Attachment 20). This
resolution changes the zoning map for the west 290 feet of the vacant property
on the northeast corner of Beam and White Bear Avenues from Limited Business
Commercial (LBC) to Business Commercial (BC). The city is making this change
because:
a. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of
the zoning code.
b. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use
of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood and the
use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change
or plan is adequately safeguarded.
c. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of
the community, where applicable, and the public welfare.
d. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical,
efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such
as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools.
5
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Staff surveyed the 43 surrounding property owners within 500 feet of this site for their
comments. Following are the 8 replies received:
Approve
1. Dan Snyder, Owner of Batteries Plus at 2832 White Bear Avenue: "I am the
owner of the Batteries Plus located on White Bear Avenue and Radatz. I believe
having a Walgreens in the proposed spot would be a great boost for the
shopping center just north of the corner. I am in favor of the proposed
Walgreens store."
2. Elmer and Margaret Birkeland, 2015 Radatz Avenue East: "We have no
objection to this project."
3. Bruce and Marilyn Fisher, 2836 White Bear Avenue: "Go for it! (Looks like a
good investigation of the deal.)
4. Vernabelle Mikiska, 2003 Radatz Avenue: "The plan to put a Walgreens
Drugstore on White Bear Avenue and Beam is okay with me. Also other future
office building."
5. Jodi Jefferson, Manager at Concordia Arms Apartments located at 2030 Lydia
Avenue: Refer to attached e-mail dated June 22, 2005 (Attachment 15).
Opposed
1. Thomas Schutte, Azure Properties, Inc., Property Owner of Maplewood East
Shopping Center located at 2950 White Bear Avenue: Refer to attached letter
dated July 7,2005 (Attachment 16).
2. Jerry and Mary Pults, 2965 Frederick Parkway: Refer to attached letter dated
June 29, 2005 (Attachment 17).
3. Madonna Hawthorne, 2030 Beam Avenue: Refer to attached petition signed by .
16 residents on Beam Avenue requesting that the city "not" rezone the property
(Attachment 18).
6
REFERENCE
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size:
Existing Use:
2.75 Acres
Vacant Land
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North:
South:
East:
West:
Maplewood East Shopping Center (Zoned BC)
Beam Avenue and Premier Bank across the street (Zoned LBC)
Maplewood Heights Park
White Bear Avenue and Red Lobster across the street (Zoned BC)
PLANNING
Existing Land Use
Designation:
Existing Zoning:
Proposed Land Use
Designation:
Proposed Zoning:
Limited Business Commercial (LBC)
Limited Business Commercial (LBC)
Business Commercial (BC)
Business Commercial (BC)
Criteria for CUP Approval
Land Use Plan
Land Use Plan Change: There are no specific criteria for land use plan changes. Any
change, however, should be consistent with the goals and policies in the comprehensive
plan.
Rezoning
Section 44-1165 of the city code requires that the city council make the following findings
to rezone property:
1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the
zoning code.
2. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of
neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood and the use of
the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is
adequately safeguarded.
3. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the
community, where applicable, and the public welfare.
4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient,
and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water,
sewers, police and fire protection and schools.
7
Application Date
We received the complete application and plans for this proposal on June 14, 2005.
State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete
applications for a proposal. City council action is required on this proposal by August 13,
2005, unless the applicant agrees to a time extension.
P:\Com-Dev\Sec2N\Walgreens\7-18-05 PC Report
Attachments:
1. Appllcanfs Zoning Map Change Statement
2. Location Map
3. Property UnelZoning Map
4. Site Survey
5. Site Plan
6. Site Plan (Enlarged)
7. Drainage Area
8. Landscape Plan
g. Building Elevations
10. Engineering Report
11. Ramsey County Pubiic Works Memorandum
12. Building Official Memorandum
13. Fire Marshal Memorandum
14. Police Department Memorandum
15. Jodi Jefferson June 22. 2005, E-Mail
16. Azure Properties. Inc., July 7. 2005, Letter
17. Jerry and Mary Pults June 29, 2005, Letter
18. Madonna Hawthorne June 11, 2004, Petition
1 g. Land Use Plan Change Resolution
20. Zoning Change Resolution
8
()
(MEER,\
CONSTRUCTION, INC
~
/ Attachment 1
Rezoning Application
Supplement
April 16, 2004
11800 95th Avenue North. Maple Grove, MN 55369
Office (763) 425-2542 . Fax (763) 425-5728 . www.MeerCompanies.com
MEER Construction, Inc. is proposing to develop a 2.75-acre lot located at the Northeast
corner of White Beat Avenue and Beam Avenue in Maplewood. The proposed
development will be a Walgreen's on the western portion ofthe lot, and a future three-
story office building on the eastern portion of the lot. The proposed zoning, Business
Commercial, is compatible with the properties adjacent to the site, and in the vicinity of
White Bear and Beam Avenues.
A. This zoning change will promote the public welfare by:
1. Reducing traffic congestion?
Access to the Walgreen's Store will be from the northwest corner
of the property off of White Bear Avenue, and from the south off
of BeamAvenue. The Walgreen's Store will be designed with two
drive-through lanes and adequate parking for the expected
customer use. The development of the Walgreen's Store in this
location may reduce traffic congestion at the Walgreen's Store
located less than a mile south on White Bear Avenue, as it will
allow customers a second and potentially closer store option.
White Bear Avenue is a north-south arterial and Beam Avenue is
an east-west arterial. As such, traffic congestion should not
increase at this location given the historic customer usage for
Walgreen's Stores.
ii. Improving safety from fire and other dangers?
It is not anticipated that the development of the Walgreen's Store
or the future two-story office building at this location will have any
positive or negative impacts on the safety from fire or other
dangers. The building will be fully sprinkled in accordance with
the local requirements as established by the local Fire Marshall and
the City of Maplewood Fire Chief.
ZONING MAP CHANGE STATEMENT
M
(MEER"
CONSTRUCTION, INC
~
Rezoning Application
Supplement
April 16, 2004
11800 95th Avenue North. Maple Grove, MN 55369
Office (763) 425-2542 . Fax (763) 425-5728 . www.MeerCornpanies.com
111. Providing adequate light and open space?
Lighting at the Walgreen's Store and future office building will be
in conformance with the City of Maple wood's Zoning Code,
Section 44-20. The source of lighting will be from the Walgreen's
parking lot lights and the security lighting around the building. In
addition, the Walgreen's sign and storefront lights will provide an
additional source of lighting. The lighting system will provide
safety and security. The shielding of the light fixtures will prevent
light from going beyond the boundary of the property.
The entire site to be developed is relatively small. Landscaping, by
use of planters or median strips located throughout the parking
areas will enhance the open spaces provided.
IV. Avoiding overcrowding?
The proposed use of the property is Business Commercial. The
proposed use is compatible and consistent with the adjacent
properties. As such, overcrowding is not an issue in regards to the
proposed use of the property. Walgreen's is a neighborhood store
there to service the local residents.
v. Conserving property values?
The current use of the property is a vacant lot with the remnants of
a parking lot which once served a commercial business. The
structure has been removed from the site as evidenced by the
depression where the building foundation once stood.
Construction ofa Walgreen's Store and a future three-story office
building will add significantly to the value of the property and will
result in a positive impact on the City of Maple wood's tax base. As
well as serving the community.
(J
(MEERl
CONSTRUCTION, INC
~
Rezoning Application
Supplement
April 16, 2004
11800 95th Avenue North. Maple Grove, MN 55369
Office (763) 425-2542 . Fax (763) 425-5728 . www.MeerCompanies.com
b. Why would this zoning change not injure or detract from the use of
neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood?
The zoning change from Limited Business Commercial to
Business Commercial is consistent and compatible with the zoning
for the neighboring properties. The properties to the north and
west are zoned Business Commercial. The property to the south is
zoned Limited Business Commercial, and the property to the east-
northeast is a community park.
c. Are there adequate public facilities, such as streets, sewers, water lines,
schools and parks?
Yes. White Bear Avenue and Beam Avenue are both major
arterials that run north-south and east-west, respectively. A City
storm sewer main and a sanitary sewer main run along White Bear
Avenue and along Beam A venue. In addition, a water main runs
along Beam A venue. And the project will be done in a way that
utilizes the existing utilities, street configuration so that no changes
are needed.
Attachment 2
~;~Cl;i~C~CcC:~:ZC~,J~(1;fBiO~~I1C~1~~~2;1'1~
i \ I II r~ I t I ~~ I I .. ,~--"'P-'=-~~-' -::..:..-
,1\ _______-' _~____ ~ ~lf--"'" h"~~ II ....:I~II-r-- I 1\11 1--'-- I L .".jH-L.U...L; ,0 i I II
---,\ , -----~ Ii '":,.j==-=- I -...---.-----...-. I', :'____I'F1"'illJl II I' :;1;,:1 -'1i...'
2' -----; \_/ ~-7;! '\'--~==.l'J-.-l I -=11~J.~~~IIIllUlli.LillLilWlUI, ~~_1. ~~J:
JI ,,___.,.-' ^1;1 ::J -~"i:""---"""r =-__ -:,,-,]f-=--~-=-"""""-,--:-l' 'i<~i~'lr~h-~' ~d ...
11'-- ,- 'I J ~ \ 11;11 I I I' f-'- 'r\J,-'---j _::J~...tJ>.'-_-.'\C~
,-~., I '--J.- --.~ II' ' ,I' I, -~. -,~ ~- ~..jl~--IL'..., -,"M -\ -
1 ,-~ I A III'" i=1' I--,C~"H=:" -'I'-
l, ll~ Q II: ,:I___~__r-J[:'L"!~_:II;Ib.lTT'C.IJ,__, I! i , I---';I/,::;c:d:..=.--!C'='~\~-':
-;II: -----I--~ii1' ! ~ ~---\Pf'?:~~'~i'~ T ,'E8ir-f9~4F7lr--T-~
II' _1, ht\'---'__lIJ~-'!III\I.-~ ~~~:_~f+-=:g.::~I/::.,f~i:j::ji...-i=i"L' L.l..i...l..::~
'I~_= ,..<_ , \.- oJ " " " ., ~I~' " '/.""0 ~~~-,
y:=::"- ,r- '__.' !. .\.-::'\' a. .. .JU111r-----'----+--- ".::1.1 .'.0\ '''.,~. '-"-:,'H t--' j , ' !.: 1 .;' It-,....:JJ
II: ,.,>=.-jrl~IL_____:'--r"I~ <" 5 . >'!;~-~III:f \. f PARK t:\f::.'~;<;~t>~.1::1~r'~~'~--:~,I-;~>;,:
", ' 'I' , "-'--l" ~ '" I, , i....!1'"'i'-11~'~ '-',-r:-"1 ' ,'-' .
--11\,; ... I -Lril-.-..Ji--,-f rll: ,\,- (-~/---__JIII!:"- ! b~1 ,:i::~~t:j~'.';-,~:;;;L)~.'\~
-..J ' . i-h' '. Ii. ~/, i i SITE -~-.......,-~H++J+.:." '..' ,1 "-':J"':'4\l,L,.'-:ji:~.;
;..;,~..~-=_=..J.-=-=-=-~~.~ BEAM AVENUE~'=""""~~.' \.......J__~...!i. .. ',,',," '..1' ,., i", i, IJIJ:Jh 'J' '.cJ....-..J.......
-r1;?"--4 - ,,- --- :.~-===~--'""'"-=--=-lri;.-iO;=- ~ :-=--r. -~-r.=:'-,~I~---.--i:-rn: !.;.. :"1!!; rr?i :.rn-r=r.! iTfTjT"i-l-"--j-.........-'-
~"I~'~, \ i: y~~7~ Ii U__U i l... ,.,:1 ',~~ll'~-,--;-Tn-~ ~\l~l-_ ~I~,,~.~ :iil~.~.j~+l~Jij
~, /-J--------< :!,..,',.--,....-,----'\~ 1 ;~: ;! iTl I :-~FI : (I. ! I, i i! 1=11: rn:r~1 jl; :_1 ',Ll..' : " ' ' 1: ~
~t~--__~i r~..-:?"':'!~"~-, 1 ~;~~.~t:~~~T~llJ:lr:.- ~~,,'~~:-~+~_I ! ~~~~~1u~wJlttn:;, \', i ,~~~~
-:~ iR's~ 'c........,It.-~-~=.""'-'_;o__!..~J...,;.1 '" I
'I!,! [,'- :-'-',~~~,'-:.,.,lf\,,-'.'j i~i ... ~ - '-C__J" -: -~ -j\:.j~~~1w"~-i
:;;1 ".i~$:~Gtt .~LJ:-~~~~->~2~~
. ;r....;..~t >L';"i\ii I,' . Ii' . !It
--'~I~ !(". .......'.:-~f'- i'\,;~\dl\U-l. :,_ :~'! 1~2("::
;~;I~:=r~".,J i :~~!--7E--:; !".:+:fi :'IEjlTT~--'-i$
----------I\"'--'.7"_f)_J ' '1It..-'---ii ":.-.1 I;, " , . m:
=.-: ff-----''-' ::::::r I ~__,J~ i ,~--_~_j': 0-[":)!i=~~V'-'_.-- UI '
I . . fq ;'. ' " ! :' !:-;11 iT! I 'I !! f'-i+-.Jli-"'-" : ! ~ i , ,
='; r'_-_..-];:~J lJ I L ~~H ,'- ~~~E-li1T~~ . ;-:C=:l__,:~~~
: ~=-_~~ I~_'i--__ i"~~~_,: ;--'--:-' r-~ tTi k'[,'i iT""' t=;-' t' i,.'. :,_;--,1
\..- '--<1\'-' . 11_-~1I--J\L :,' f ' I . .~ ,.... "'-'1
---'I~-. ~t:,,,," r..;::;di,L._]~:"'~:: 'ler' ->fl~~~-;'''l<i,
I JI=1"" -----.I~lc,~, ,J ,,'" ,. . ~
.~~:[~~friT-~~~;~,~t1:~;:r---"-i :,t_..~_,~'~~
~-':II!::::"T ,~lr''-c..L...;_ll~,11 - ~~ c, i!c ,'!_~J' Il,
'--r-'IIS- ,.-,---=8P '. _._~ SPII=r~~- In~.-~c"~~,;.~~~~;~~ ~._==-~;~.~:.::~
~j}~i-: i..' ,;-:-n~~~J_ ~1~ll_~:~~J!il ~;~~~r-- i~,lij-~: I, ~I
'-'----il\! ="1 WJIh-+~U!t....;..... !',:t ,/..; II: : '-"--l
.~~!D']i~~~j-Ir=L~j .-.~=<'C'~~(~~-~--~ :
7;'11--;-~"~lJ:"-tli: ii, ..-"-1
~-~ ......: JI________--<-_ .--,.,
~~::- - :1 M,I: l.--12~-};:~3;~2~~1~:~;?6/~~;~~-~-~.=~===~== ~ --
_.J. _ J_,__ ' 'J. _ -yJ/.L ~ 'I< .\>: - .t ; .'., " ,'" _I.~,II~~"1:;rlt+-,;,-J -=>~~...;\'~-~"iiIti?(mlIL:--I' il II
. .:'~:=J~~---=-I~::;{ rh< Lj _:--~p::j~tJ't-----i'-=1 1\
~I 'I,....,._'_~_....)~ lilt JI r~~ j ,'''''
,'I ...........'if,---------..--j'=--~Il____'_-'I\I-..... I,--(:;;::::;;.,;~
NORTH SAINT PAUL
- - /
LOCATION MAP
11
N
- - - - - - - - -
.- _ - _ - _ -.BEAM..A\LE_ - _ -_-
I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I I
I I ,
I I \
I I I
I I I
\ i I
\ I I
, I
I'
1.1 I
II
I'
II I
':
,
II
,i
II
II
"
II
II
,I
II
J!
, "
II
II
,I
,I
,I
Attachment 3
I I
,
..
,I
~: I
:t.
:;r
m
gj
1>
'"
3:r
'"
"'
f
2030R2
2032
...
,II
2003 R12015
~
2035 20
1995
1l'J_.
__II
-
~
11
N
PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP
Attachment 4
~~V'
of ~~OI~
~ll.
-.-
--_.--
3
I ~
~
PROJECT BENCH MARK
TOP NUT OF FIRE HYDRANT
ELEV.~
>
-J- - __u
----...-
n-- ..
,
1/4SEt:TION r:tT'"'
~ .{'==f.r-'====4===~';,====./.=i,==;.,{=== I
:.l'=.=======",~=========-=f I
SITE SURVEY
11
N
Attachment 5
existing
Building
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
PARK & PONDING AREA
,,'"
-....
;).---
,
'.0-' \
,
,
,
,
"
Site Parkinll Data:
W.lgrMIII~_
'l,"l.J_G"""S8I-.....s.r..:.~lSOplrl<ing_.
2,s:leI.r.GrulsSlnvo,BWwoomo,
lol_nl,,_Splriingl_
(&3)~'IQ~.-quirm
PutuNOIl\coIlulldlng;
7,IOC..f'-._'"lIM60..r.T_
(Il)~.,._...._
(l44)T_F'lriIin\I._..........
(l4<lITotaI_"".po_~
r
----~--
.
,
l-------
,
,
, .
" ~/
.
~
,
"
~
<(
;;
~
'"
..
~
New1.Story
Walgreens Staf'e
,....,....-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NM!"15'42"E
----ain---i
"
IIII_P__
T"'_IUl
[)
l
ISTING
",....,
BEAM AVENUE
,~
,.
114 SECTION UNE
I
"
"
,
,~.
'M'
o Proposed Site Plan
~:1."5O'O"
SITE PLAN
11
N
.::.----rf----
\
\ i
I \-------
I I
1 I
I 85
I
44'-11 ,.
0
I I
" 'u '.(1' I
I
I I
~ I I
I \
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I 73
I
Situ
I
I I
I \
/ \ 72
I \
\
.1. S8goU
Existing
Building
.'-..
'*'~.v
'"
o
,
~ ___-..L_____
- - - ~1- _
cv
:J
s:::
CV
>
<(
.....
Cll
CV
CO
CV
:!:::
..c:
S
,~
~.
.(1'
'.0-
Typ.
~
=t
.
S:>
48
. I
\
\
'-<]',O'..oH
Typ,
......l<.-k
Typ?'!- ..,.-
45
- - --
R
clb
D
New 6'0 wide Cone. SidSWlilJk
BEAM AVENUE
r:J
SITE PLAN
(ENLARGED)
Attachment I
"
,
,
"
,
,
11
N
Attachment~
I
I
I II
: t
_____n__\
,,~ct!';'V"
~.....~",
A r) 10#-
C~'~~ ~
, I
i~K
,i,
I I
I
I
,
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
!p-
I
~
I ~
V
PFroJECT BENCH MARK
TOP NUT or F1RE HYDRANT
o.E\I.~
r"I-~TCMEWllN3
~ll 940.7.5
ItN.9J3.43
_ _IS ---O---cl'
r Ii: I _ l~'. ZII' CORR. d;::'==_===~iDml=
SIoIOOTH WAUED HOPE P1PE
INLET_ U2....
Oun.ET_9J2.18
........
,oil I-CAlCHlIASIH1
RlWi3B.50
INV.QJ2....
"..-
M"
OA'
OA'
,A>
OA'
,A>
'A'
'A'
'AO
"'"
(ACRES)
1l.!ro07
0.081
''''
0.332
O.75e
O.l7C1
O.~
0.178
""""
lNFlLiAATtON S\IIALE HGH FUlWS TO CATCH BASIN 1
INFlLTR.t.TIOHSWAL!I1GHFUlWSTOCliICHIlASINl
CA1(:MlIASIN4
UNlltRGROlJNCDlRECTTllC,l,TCHIII<SIN5
Cl<TCMlIASIH5
CAlCHlIASIN2
CAoTCHlIoI.SIN3
lINOERClltO(J~ DIRECT TO IIoI-UNE SEP.oN.noN UHIT
lRfATMENl'SYSIEt.l
IHFlLTR.I.T10N
INFILTRATION
IN_UNESEPNlAT1ONUNrr
IN-UNE5E:PNlATlOHUHIT
IN-UNEstPARATll;INUNIT
IN_UNESEPARATlONUNIT
IN-UtlESEl"AAATlOHUHIT
IN-UNESEPNlATlONUNI1'
ORAlNAGEAIlEAro
CATCHlWllNS
(ACRES)
C.8 O.~ll
C.S. 0.110
C.B. 0.989
C.B. O.~
C.B. 1.101
~.
TOTALAREADR.llHEllrOltl-UNESEP'ERATlON UNIT.. 2.7B2N:RES
TOTAL AR[.O, OIlAlN[[) TO II<lFlLTAATlON sw.ou:.. O.5UACRES
DRAINAGE PLAN
11
N
W
:::l
Z
W
~
ll:
<
w
III
~
s:
~
lJl
-
1"'"lI~""O"
::"'="'--",-
IY1IiIi~II'.i Ii! i i
D
,
'-.....,..'..._"
W
::l
Z
W
>
<
a=
Li5
lD
W
~
~
;...Ava~cs
I
Q0CANDSCAPe PcAN eNCA~~';';::"':""""
..,~ '. o-c- NT'
T[C.....,..o,IlBOA""..,
loll~ 0 ~ " NtllA $
'-'
BEAM AVENUE
~
i i
,l'
CJ
li!lllllliiiTI\
""-" .-.....
~.:
"
:~~---
'-i
. OlILO"....'......
BEAM AVENUE
Attachment 8
PARK
,
i
,
!
i
!
,
i
,
,
i
i
,
i
,
,
,
,
,
,
!
,
rSW1NG
/ iGATt
~
II i i
_7'/
'..\
-"
LANDSCAPE PLAN
5-I7-oi
11
N
Attachment 9
o Proposed West Elevation-White Bear Ave.
Scale; ,".12'0"
o Proposed South Elevation-Beam Ave.
Scalll:,""12'O"
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
11
N
SIgn. d-.cl byW-...
Pre.lIrliIMdlHlllCllping
BrIclcS......CfI.
C_,G_
.~-
,--
--~~~~~-~----------
S...,M....P....
....,-
o
o Proposed East Elevation
Scale: 1"'12'0"
Sign _ dr_ byW--"
Q
- -~----------
Q
o ~~~~':~'o~orth Elevation
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
11
N
Attachment 10
Enlrineerinl!: Plan Review
PROJECT: Walgreens
PROJECT NO:
REVIEWED BY: Erin Laberee, Maplewood Engineering Department
DATE: July 13,2005
Meer Construction is proposing to develop the lot at the northwest corner of White Bear
Avenue and Beam Avenue. The development would include a Walgreen's store and a
future office building. The lot is currently vacant. Drainage from the site would be
directed into the existing storm sewer on Beam Avenue. Runoff would be treated with a
treatment structure and an infiltration trench.
The following issues shall be address.
Agreements
1. The applicant is proposing to encroach into the northern property for a shared
driveway, connection to the existing storm sewer, cross drainage flow, and truck
traffic. The applicant has indicated the lease agreement between the two
properties includes an easement that would allow for these activities. The
applicant shall provide a written statement from his attorney interpreting the
intent of the lease agreement that would or would not allow for these activities
along with a copy of the agreement.
2. A maintenance agreement outlining annual maintenance procedures will be
required for the proposed treatment structure and infiltration trench.
Drainage
1. A portion of the parking lot is shown to drain to the existing lot north of the site.
The proposed storm sewer is shown connecting into the existing storm sewer
within the adjacent property. The applicant must verify that the lease agreement
allows encroachment for cross drainage flow, permanent storm sewer and the
construction activities associated with the storm sewer connection.
2. The applicant shall submit plans to Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed for
their review.
Grading & Erosion Control
1. The applicant shall provide a permanent soil stabilization blanket such as
Enkamat, NAG C350 or equal at the curb cut to prevent erosion into the
infiltration trench.
2. The applicant shall install silt fence at the northeast corner of the property,
downstream of the 3:1 slopes.
3. Any future retaining walls that are over four feet in height will require a building
permit. A plan and specific soil stabilization detail for the wall design will be
required as part of the permit.
Utilities
1. The applicant shall submit plans to SPR WS for their review.
2. The applicant shall submit plans to Ramsey County for their review. Any
construction proposed within the White Bear A venue right of way requires a
permit from Ramsey County.
Parking
1. The applicant is proposing a 5 foot median to comply with parking lot set back
requirements. The proposed median does not allow enough room for truck turning
movements. The applicant has provided an alternative layout that does not include
the median and shows truck turning movements that encroach into the adjacent
lot. The applicant must verify that the lease agreement allows traffic to encroach
onto the adjacent property.
2. The applicant has expressed interest in eliminating the existing entrance to the site
off of White Bear Avenue and utilizing the existing entrance just to the north as a
shared driveway. If the lease agreement allows for a shared driveway to the
proposed site, it is preferable that existing entrance to the site be eliminated and a
shared driveway used. The applicant shall verify that the lease agreement allows
for a shared driveway to the site and all construction activities associated with
modifying the entrance.
Traffic
1. In conjunction with the 694 improvements scheduled for 2008, White Bear
A venue is also scheduled for reconstruction to a six lane roadway along with
improvements to a portion of Beam A venue. Additional right of way will be
required to allow for these improvements. The amount of additional right of way
required is currently being determined and not known at this time. The city will
notify the developer regarding the amount required and should be known in time
for the planning commission meeting. It should be noted that the additional right
of way requirements may affect the site layout.
Attachment 11
-
~
RAMSEY COUNlY
Department of Public Works
Kenneth G. Haider, P.E., Director and County Engineer
1425 Paul Kirkwold Drive
Arden Hills, MN 55112-3933. (651) 266-7100. Fax (651) 266-7110
E-mail: Public.works@co.ramsey.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Shann Finwall
City of Maple wood
Dan Sol~ ^^
Ramsey c~;blic Works
FROM:
SUBJECT: Walgreens
White Bear A venue at Beam Avenue
DATE:
June 29, 2005
The Ramsey County Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed development plan for
the vacant site on the northeast quadrant of White Bear Avenue at Beam Avenue. This property
is proposed for a new Walgreens drugstore on the site. Ramsey County has the following
comments regarding this proposal.
1. The use of the site will be commerciaVretail on the west portion and office on the east
portion of the site. This development will not have a significant impact on traffic operations
in the area. The development is consistent with the existing uses along White Bear Avenue.
2. The County and City are proposing to reconstruct White Bear Avenue to a six-lane section in
2008. This will include widening through the Beam Avenue intersection. Additional right of
way will need to be reserved along White Bear Avenue to accommodate this widening. A
draft right of way needs drawing was done by Kimley-Horn as part of the scoping work done
for the White Bear Avenue corridor. This document should be reviewed to help determine
future right of way needs.
3. The existing access on White Bear A venue that serves this site is proposed to remain. This is
a right in/right out driveway. This access point is acceptable and should operate adequately
with the new site development.
4. Two existing access points off of Beam Avenue will also serve the site. Beam Avenue is a
city street at this location. The City may want to investigate whether the eastbound left turn
lane into the first driveway should be lengthened.
RECEIVED
JUL 0 1 2005
Minnesota's First Home Rule County
printed on recycJe~ paper with ~ minimum of 10% po,t-.consumer cOlltent
.................
~
5. The developer will be required to obtain a permit from Ramsey County for construction on
County right of way. The developer will also need permits for any utility work within County
right-of-way.
Thanks for the opportunity to make comments regarding this issue. If you have any questions or
need any additional information please give me a call at 266-7114.
Attachment 12
Memo
July 1, 2005 ~
From: David Fisher, Building Official ~L
To: Shann Finwall, Planner
Re: New Walgreens Pharmacy Building
Provide a complete building code analysis when plans are
submitted for permit.
All new office buildings over 2000 square feet are required to
be fire sprinklered and NFPA 13.
The new building must be built to meet Minnesota State
Building Code and 2000 IBC.
I would recommend a pre-construction meeting with the
building department.
Attachment 13
Project Review Comments
Date:
From:
Proj ect:
Building:
Planner:
June 2, 2004
Butch Gervais, Fire Marshal
Walgreens
Retail
Shann Finwall
Comments:
1. Monitoring all parts of the fire protection system and fire alarm system
will be required
2. Maintain 20 foot emergency access clearance to the building for
emergency vehicles
3. Fire protection systems will be required per-code
4. Location of fire protection system needs to be clearly marked
Any questions or concerns please contact me.
Butch Gervais, Fire Marshal
City of Maplewood
(651 )-249-2804
Attachment 14
Maplewood Police
Department
Memo
To:
Shann Finwall /
Lt. Kevin Rabbet! jljL
From:
Date: 6-1-05
Re: Project Review: Walgreen's, Beam and White Bear Ave.
I have reviewed the attached plans and have no public safely ccncems. I would suggest the
standard surveillance lighting system for commerciai buildings. In addition there should be a high
quality video recording system installed, especially covering the pharmacy area because of the
potentiai for prescription forgery and robbery incidents.
If you have any questions or comments, please call me at x2604.
Attachment 15
Shann Finwall
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Jodi Jefferson D1j2@wilder.org]
Wednesday, June 22, 2005 12:29 PM
Shann Finwall
Randall Fowler
Walgreens Development
Hello -
I am writing on the behalf of the residents at Concordia ~ Apartments which is located
on White Bear Avenue and Lydia. If you are not aware, Concordia Arms is a senior building
accommodating residents 62 years and older or mobility handicapped.
Having a Walgreens built so close to their home will be such a huge benefit to them for a
variety of reasons
*They would be able to access their prescription medications easier then to figure out
how they are going to
get to the Walgreens down by Rainbow.
*They could possibly transfer their prescriptions to the new, closer to home pharmacy
and
*It would allow residents with limited transportation to get out on their own and do
"light" shopping for misc.
daily needs
When this came up last year the residents were looking forward to it and when the news
came around that they were not able to go through with the plans it was pretty
disappointing to many here. Your letter encourages us that this may still be possible,
it's something that I can only imagine would be good for the entire neighborhood if it
will make such an great impact for 1 building!
Thank you -
Jodi Jefferson
Housing Manager
Attachment 16
AZURE PROPERTIES, INC.
P.O. Box 17830
Saint Paul, MN 55117-7830
(651) 484-0070
Thomas M. Schuette
Direct Line (651) 486-3452
Facsimile (651) 486-3444
July 7,2005
-----------
-----------
Shann Finwall
Office of Community Development
City of Maplewood
1830 County Road BEast
Maplewood, MN 55109
Facsimile
651-249-2319
-----------
-----------
RE: Proposed Walgreens
White Bear Avenue at Beam Avenue
Maplewood, MN
Dear Ms. Finwall.
I represent the property owners adjoining the proposed site on the north, the Maplewood East Shopping Center
located at 2950 White Bear Avenue. The owners of Maplewood East are opposed to the site plan of the
Walgreens for several reasons.
The trash area of the Walgreens is adjacent to the Maplewood East Shopping Center. This trash area facing
White Bear Avenue will be unsightly with potential for debris and trash outside the containers. The trash area of
the Walgreens store should be iocated behind the Waigreens store on the east side of the building.
Also. the green space and setback should not be eliminated. Maplewood East does have a 5' green space
setback along the south property line. We contest any setback variance to the north. The drive lanes will
connect the properties at the front and rear of the property. Maplewood East has not incurred traffic difficulties
as stated in the letter. Contrary to the information presented by the Walgreens proposal, there is not a problem
with the layout of Maplewood East Shopping Center. Our customers have access from Beam Avenue via an
Easement Agreement through the subject property such that customers can egress east or west on to Beam
Avenue to go north or south on White Bear Avenue. Maplewood East also has northbound White Bear Avenue
entrance and exiting.
Please call if I can answer any questions regarding this matter.
c;X~~
Thomas M. Schuette
On behalf of Azure Properties
TMS/kl
RECEIVED
JUL 0 8 2005
,.................
Attachment 17
June 29,2005
2965 Frederick Parkway
Maplewood MN 55109
Shanri Finwall,AICP, Planner
Community Development Department
CitY of Maplewood .
1830 E County Road B
Maplewood MN 55109-2797
Thank you for the information regarding the application for a new Walgreens Pharmacy and
office building for the northeast corner of Beam and White Bear Avenues.
We have lived at our present location in a cul-de-sac adjoining Maplewood Heights Park to the
north for about 20 years, and like many of the neighbors (including the many walkers from the
senior assisted living facility - Concordia Arms - also abutting the Park) we use the Park
continuously for walking and bicycling its paths, or a variety of other rather quiet uses. As the
neighborhood has grown dramatically, so have the number of Park users, and consequently, the
importance of this Park to all of us.
As part of Maplewood's published park plan, this Park was deliberately left relatively
undeveloped to bring balance into the Maplewood park system, as other more developed parks
are very close by. We feel this Park is a special treasure and care needs to be expended so as to
not harm or destroy its unique nature.
I share the concerns of all in the neighborhood about the incredible amount of development in
close proximity to this proposed building - the historic Bruenthrup farm buildings were less than
a block away (as you know they were moved so that several retail buildings could be constructed
next to the Park) several large town home complexes have been recently built nearby to the
north, the Legacy Village is close by, as are the new buildings being constructed on County D,
west of White Bear Avenue, etc.
With this context of the neighborhood in mind, and because all of us in the area care so deeply
about this Park, the majority of my comments and concerns, enumerated below, relate to the
effects of the proposed development upon the Park.
Firstly, the proposed office building is three stories high. It should be noted that the other
commercial buildings abutting the Park, on the west, and northwest are all single story. These
consist of the strip mall adjoining this property and an Edina Realty office building (recently
reconstructed). The majority of the Park is surrounded by single family houses. Thus, the height
of this building would be most intrusive upon the character of the Park, visible from throughout
the Park. Not only in daytime, but even at night, with shielded lighting, this building would
dominate the skyline. 1 would respectively suggest that it is important that this proposed
building conform to all others, and be no higher than one story.
(Continued)
Page -2-
Secondly, all the other commercial properties cited above have a significant berm, with large
evergreens atop, separating and shielding the Park from the most intrusive characteristics of the
buildings. This includes the strip mall (with an MGM Liquor store at the end) which is would be
separated by a driveway from the proposed development. Under the proposal, this development
would be the only unshielded buildings, and they would be inconsistent with their neighboring
buildings. The proposed plans make no mention of any berm, and the planting proposed are so
minimal as to be of no consequence.
We should insist on nothing less than a continuation of the existing berm and plantings of mature
evergreens for this proposed development so as not to despoil the nature and character of this
Park any more than is absolutely necessary.
The requested set-back variances also seem to be inconsistent with the nature and character of
the Park, which is the dominant neighbor to the proposed development. Thus, I would request
that Maplewood review these carefully in this context.
It should also be noted that the proposed office building will directly abut a small existing Park
basketball court area, on Beam Avenue. As you may know, many neighborhoods in the metro
area have documented their experiences with a variety of policing problems resulting from large
numbers of individuals hanging about in such a confined space. It would seem that the office
building parking lot would be an attraction that some might find irresistible in the evening hours.
A reasonable solution might include a provision that the parking be restricted to office tenants,
with posted notice that violators would be subject to tagging and towing; with appropriate
enforcement of these provisions. Perhaps consideration of fencing of this property may be
appropriate as well.
Finally, on a general basis, I think the request for the rezoning that would allow a retail facility
should be denied. Traffic at this current White Bear Avenue intersection with the current retail
stores already in existence is currently very busy, and dangerous. No matter how carefully
designed for increased traffic, rezoning this property to retail is inappropriate and should be
denied. The original zoning continues to be appropriate and there is no compelling reason that
benefits the neighborhood from such a proposed change.
Although development is perhaps inevitable, I believe that we have a responsibility to the
neighborhood and to the Park to do so in a careful manner that respects and preserves the best of
both. I would respectfully suggest that my suggestions and comments are an attempt bring some
issues forward that will accomplish this objective.
You should feel free to contact us should you have any questions or wish us to elaborate on any
of our comments regarding the foregoing; thank you in advance for your consideration,
!J?~
~ar:d Mary Pults
~ ,,' :/ Attach~nt 18
Wa../5rep,-1S Olr Bectjl)r~"'-J<ol Vvh/r.:: OC'C....f/-/y-c.
Wt2 +'/"e. L.lVlde...rSiCjl1ecJ Sf1'J0Y1~11 u.'J€!. iheC+,
CO(\V1c,1 fa fiA.n1 do "v ,1 f/12. Proposed S;+e. On dELLn1
4veJ1ue ,d W il:-rC Bea,- 4-ve, -?r.'r G... Wcx..I(p'-eeJ1s
O'./Utjs+oi/e.a..Hc.! ORlc..? GLuIJ/fIJ" .
-rk:::..r e j-!;, Sa i11t1...uh -J.. ra...tf/o YJ Ow {} j( t3 ~nl ~ewik<!_
171a7 We who J,- v ~ 0 d -rt is ,S;fr ee-r h a \It CL. ha. v-j
-tlm-e J..(2.-(-/-1/11 au+ o-f au. ,-' d tlV e Wo..ys,
1he fra.W'G Iha..-r ft.-ese bL{....j (J/J1j'-:J \,V;// Jef1etc;.,te
w//( ^~~a./C.2 ;f V1eJf fo II'!(fo:;s/b/e.Th/!i
-r~l.-l.-I-+'/(::'" QnJ /'lOlse.. w;// L e .2.1f hOLJ..IS c~JO-''l
V(\.r fJFt1p~yfies iN.'!! JCJ Jaw>,! /n [/&.../118 TcJu..
SoP ! eaS e.. \.tv e. u.. ,- q e f <J P /ea...s' e nil) l' "D
-J Vd/Yd Ae:z. 0/1 e.
thls .4re,_. / \/
"'- 0, J I i/..e -4/l/ Vo...rrCILY/ C ej',
Tha. 1'1 k YOL{
/"
I~~
ll/~~dJ~
------------------------
d-03o
)o'fJ-
-
:;26l1 ~
Jo?{; 6.M/iVO
;Ld 3'1
WJ0 wrndIL dY~ ;i;~ft~,f~
f<rt ~ .
~r~
i/
Attachment 19
LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Meer Construction and the Maplewood Financial Center,
representing Walgreens, applied for a change to the city's land use plan from Limited
Business Commercial (LBC) to Business Commercial (BC).
WHEREAS, this change applies to the west 290 feet of the vacant property
located on the northeast corner of Beam and White Bear Avenues.
0004.
WHEREAS, the property identification number for the property is 02-29-22-24-
WHEREAS, the legal description for the property is that part of the south 283.58
feet of the south 731.5 feet of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter, Section 2,
Township 29 North, Range 22 West, City of Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota
lying easterly of the easterly line of White Bear Avenue; excepting that part therefrom
described as follows: Beginning at a point on the east line of the northwest )4, Section 2,
distant 175.0 feet north of the center of Section 2, (Being the Southeast corner of said
northwest Yo); thence north, along the said east line of the northwest Yo, a distance of
556.5 feet; thence west, parallel to the south line of the northwest )4, a distance of 354.5
feet; thence south, parallel to the said east line of the northwest )4, a distance of 350.0
feet; thence southeasterly, a distance of 313.3 feet, more or less, to a point on a line
drawn parallel to and 175.0 feet north of the south line of the northwest )4, and distant
120.0 feet west of the east line of said northwest )4; thence east, parallel to the south
line of the northwest Yo, a distance of 120.0 feet, to the point of beginning; and also
excepting therefrom the east 30.0 feet of the south 175.0 feet, taken for construction and
maintenance of a storm water system; and also further excepting therefrom the south
60.0 feet thereof for Beam Avenue.
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
1. On July 18, 2005, 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 prior to their
recommendation.
2. On the city council discussed the land use plan change. They
considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city
staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approved the
above-described change to the land use plan for the following reasons:
1. Provide for orderly development.
2. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods.
3. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase
jobs and provide desirable services.
4. Minimize the land planned for streets.
5. Minimize conflicts between land uses.
6. Prevent premature use, overcrowding or overuse of land especially when
supportive services and facilities, such as utilities, drainage systems or streets are
not available.
7. Help to implement the goals of the comprehensive plan including:
a) The city will not approve new development without providing for adequate
facilities and services, such as street, utilities, drainage, parks and open
space.
b) Safe and adequate access will be provided for all properties.
c) Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses should not
create a negative economic, social or physical impact on adjoining
developments.
d) Whenever possible, changes in types of land use should occur so that
similar uses front on the same street or at borders of areas separated by
major man-made or natural barriers.
e) The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each
neighborhood.
f) Group compatible businesses in suitable areas.
g) Promote the joint use of parking areas, drives and trash containers.
h) Avoid disruption of adjacent or nearby residential areas.
The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on
,2005.
Attachment 20
ZONING MAP CHANGE RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Meer Construction and the Maplewood Financial Center,
representing Walgreens, applied for a change to the city's zoning map from Limited
Business Commercial (LBC) to Business Commercial (BC).
WHEREAS, this change applies to the west 290 feet of the vacant property
located on the northeast corner of Beam and White Bear Avenues.
0004.
WHEREAS, the property identification number for the property is 02-29-22-24-
WHEREAS, the legal description for the property is that part of the south 283.58
feet of the south 731.5 feet of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter, Section 2,
Township 29 North, Range 22 West, City of Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota
lying easterly of the easterly line of White Bear Avenue; excepting that part therefrom
described as follows: Beginning at a point on the east line of the northwest %, Section 2,
distant 175.0 feet north of the center of Section 2, (Being the Southeast corner of said
northwest %); thence north, along the said east line of the northwest %, a distance of
556.5 feet; thence west, parallel to the south line of the northwest %, a distance of 354.5
feet; thence south, parallel to the said east line of the northwest %, a distance of 350.0
feet; thence southeasterly, a distance of 313.3 feet, more or less, to a point on a line
drawn parallel to and 175.0 feet north of the south line of the northwest %, and distant
120.0 feet west of the east line of said northwest %; thence east, parallel to the south
line of the northwest %, a distance of 120.0 feet, to the point of beginning; and also
excepting therefrom the east 30.0 feet of the south 175.0 feet, taken for construction and
maintenance of a storm water system; and also further excepting therefrom the south
60.0 feet thereof for Beam Avenue.
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
1. On July 18, 2005, 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 prior to their
recommendation.
2. On the city council discussed the land use plan change. They
considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city
staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-
described change in the zoning map for the following reasons:
1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the
zoning code.
2. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of
neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use
of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is
adequately safeguarded.
3. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the
community, where applicable, and the public welfare.
4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient,
and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water,
sewers, police and fire protection and schools.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution On
,2005.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
City Manager
Ken Roberts, Planner
Copar Companies Development Plan (Schlomka Property)
City Project 05-07
Land Use/Density Review
July 12, 2005
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
On May 23, 2005, the City Council reviewed the preliminary concept plan for the proposed
Copar Companies development on the Schlomka property and authorized the preparation of an
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the development. Attachment 2 on page 4
(Exhibit 1) illustrates the project area for the EAW. As a part of the City Council's review, it was
discussed that the EA W analysis also should consider the future possible development of the
property east of 1-494 in the area. Staff believes this is important since this future development
may impact the City infrastructure (sewer, water) required for the Copar development. City staff
and the consultant selected for the EAW (Kimley-Hom & Associates) are now requesting input
from the planning commission on possible land uses and densities for the properties east of
1-494. Staff and the city's consultant will use these land use designations in the EAWanalysis.
Attachment 4 on page 6 (Exhibit 2) illustrates the properties in question.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The proposed Copar development will require a change in the land use plan and zoning map for
the site. These changes are from R-1 (single dwelling residential) to R-3(M) (medium density
residential) for the land use plan and from R-1 (R) (rural single dwellings) to R-3 (multiple
dwellings) for the zoning map. The City intends R-3(M) areas for up to 6 residential units per
gross acre. For R-1 areas, the City plans for single dwellings on lots of at least 10,000 square
feet of area while the R-1 (R) zoning deSignation is for single dwellings on 2 acre lots. The R-3
zoning allows for a mix of housing styles including twin homes, town houses, condos, and
apartments. I have included a land use plan map of the area on page 5.
The Copar EAW will investigate the traffic/transportation and municipal utility (water main,
sanitary sewer, and storm sewer) infrastructure required to support the proposed development.
Staff is proposing that this analysis also include considerations for the future development of
properties east of 1-494 as shown on page 6 in Exhibit 2. The city has planned all these
properties for single dwellings and has zoned all of these properties R-1 R (rural residential
single dwellings). I have included an address map of the area on page 7.
For the purposes of the EAWanalysis, staff needs to develop assumptions for the maximum
density that the city may allow for the area east of 1-494. This maximum density will then be
used to develop projections for traffic and utility service needs for the area. Staff is suggesting
that R-3 zoning, with a medium density (R-3M) land use designation (with a maximum density of
6 units per gross acre), be assumed for this area for the EAWanalysis. This is consistent with
the land use and rezonings requested for the Copar development. This assumption is not
suggesting that the city will ultimately rezone this area; rather, it is a prediction of the maximum
density that the city may allow if a land use or rezoning does occur. I have included a current
1
land use plan map of the area on page 5. Staff would like to discuss these density and zoning
assumptions with the Planning Commission before directing the consultant to proceed with the
EAWanalysis.
RECOMMENDATION
Provide staff with direction as to the proposed land use and zoning assumptions for the area
south of Carver Avenue and east of 1-494. Staff will then use these land use assumptions for
preparing the EAW for the area.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Exhibit 1 - Copar Property EAW Project Area Map
3. Land Use Plan Map
4. Exhibit 2 . Adjacent Development Area Map
5. Address Map
2
Attachment 1
C
<(I
~I
I- -
51
- ~
~I
o.
:;: II
I
i I I, ,.' (j // ,/
'~"""'." ,.. I)
/ .I /
;' 1/ ,/ / ..'
/. \
~. -".'~ " -/ 1/ ..-==..1
"/ ;/ r-
i ,/, I /~
, '.
/ <~ .../ /
/ I; / I )1
,/ '/ ,//./..f
/ j/j ; /1",
" :r/: /
;' 'i / I ,.,../
/' -'/ ~/..r
/ 1/ ;/ ('
./' II II
"', / I, 1(/
:2Y 1/>;>/
.j I / ;/ /
_::;;-.l~/!..>~ (~ _.. CARVER AVENUE
~:..-.... ......,/ 1/ I..... /",""::::'-'"
- --I~' fJ: 11;;1;:/
I~'l /111 11,/
/1 fIll lJ l
ill III/ -11"
/, /.
i /) Ill! /
.J"" I
J I! . III,. I
.-., I I
.:' 1,1 ill! I 'I
i II Ii/[
", I
1/1 JIll
"I J J __
/ ~ ,I'll/
,t,' '. I
-,~, (, ) // J
':/ij )'11/ I
~INI'II" I.
I.", I
/..jii IIU. I
J...:- -:~' I ,1
1::-:::_... '."1/ I" /,/\
iIFI, ll~1 II / ./ \ ~,
I ' , I ;(, , ,...
" ;. , i I ..'.... ,.. I
I .'/'" \'D=" ~ i .....,;, _I ~---j'
'/,.,,, I' I.... r '"
.I ./' I "'. ",.. S
i"'/I,:,,~'..i / -111111[/~~~<~:1~=~::"=:~~Jr-7 - 1
',' '--; '" ...., ....
'II r--- II -y'''\ "'.. :o:r
I, i '\ ...... III
',,{ i ..:. /, ,
/1 I W ..', I
~I;'II ~_.., \ \, .
.....;.' CI')
. I Cl
! / Z -c.,--_"
' :J~_-="
j ~ a:'"
w
ti
ili
'I
h
NEWPORT
~
::l
~
o
~
..J
::l
If
I-
Z
~
I-
I
\.. I
~"r
'I
Ifi
i
'-
/'
L-
,
lI!r
/
,
/
/
II
!~--
3
11
N
LOCATION MAP
E
~
~
v
,
"
8
N
~
~
~
.
"
iD
~
,
,.
<(
w
,
~
<(
Q.
o
U
/
~
~
a;
~
x
w
/
<(
~
~
o
~
"
u
~
/
"
o
o
.
.
"
o
:0
o
?:
<J
/
(;
Attachment 2
~L-\R. "LOt} GRA.~.
1418 1-WOO2
G..1.RY SCHLm.lK..l"
241811310001
G..1,RY SCHL011K.~
2-l-2822310017
GARYSCHL" -~
2-1-1822310002
SHELLEY SCHLm...IK....I..
&COP.~
DEVELOP~1ENT ilC
242822320002
PROJECT
AREA
COPAR
DEVELOPlvIENTLLC
2-1-282232003
R...\l.1SEY COUNTY PARKS & REC
242822330001
I
PROJECT AREA = 7.3.19 ACRES
COPAR PROPERTY = 60.13 ACRES
OTHER PROPERTY = 9.86 ACRES
RAMSEY COUNTY PARKS = 3.20 ACRES
AND REC PROPERTY
COPAR DEVELOPMENT EA W
PROJECT AREA MAP
EXHIBIT 1
4
Attachment 3
/
I
. /' .ti
f/ // ,--"I I
1/ / / ./i"
-"" / j /
... /
, // /
." I / I
, ,
1/ I J /
. ./
11,1 / ~
" 1/ / I
...... -.... L-
'---;: ,J-:;-~:';: - - - CARVER AVENUE
- ~U~ 1/ I/I! I,-""=--"
II I, I I; /'
I J/ /r/I /1/
1/ III ill
I I /
/ Ii I II '/
'I II J II
i /Illr-I,
III I / II
,1Jf ! 11/ / II
/:JJ:I I II ' II
/ IJ I J! I 'I
\/11\' '1
ill ,II II
ill "/11 II
I ) I
,ill I I I II
,!/i / /11 . ~
1'1 J' I -,/ I
"----7/.. J I I. ~ ,--
.-----r' ,'I I. I I - ~ ---;.~
,I /I_'}! j 1,.;5-
! ill ,~I .I I
,I ___ ~ 1,";1-1 /
f""-- /" I 1" I I
/- -.-- ,......
-- I.! I I
-----/ I I" I I
'I I
I' III
/ li,/ i
/ .I Ii I /
/1111 i ~-----_-
i, ,I
,I flit I
I, ' I
// //// ,I ~~
/ ,I' L- I
.I // {,' I
" I
.' )}/i / I
,/ I I
Ilri' l I
I II i / II
/lll f I
J I !
/ ;'
l /
! I .
J / I
/
'1
\
\
"
IJI
1lii-
-ii'
-t\
-8
d:~
-~:
, f--J\I
\-.L..-1 .,--_
.. .A\,
-- \ -".,
/". "
\ /"" ,/'"'y
~//
\,,~
/ I
,.
l
Ii--
/
./
,
- ~ _J,
~--.,
',\
)1
,I
>-
II:
:)
lD
C
o
~
R1
I
I
"
I
I
i
~
~
~
~~
,'y
~~
;/
,
..
i
". /
....- '/
./
'\t(,:}f;;~/
-,:,,/
/ I
,./.:..~~..........
- ",
"
NEWPORT
,
i
p--""",,--.'
I
~
.I j
I I
J J
J I
I "
II
"I
II
II
5
{]
N
LAND USE MAP
~
~
Attachment 4
DANIEL T WA1l..o\ND
GA\L.E E WAnAND
2~2822420002
TI:IOM.l.S J ~'WCENTSEN
K..o1.1HY I WrnCENTSEN
2..j.282231oo13
A'UL A LEDO
242822....20010
DAVID JLEDO
GRACIE A LEDO
2.42822420009
nITERGRITY FIN.~CIAI.
SOLUTIONS
242822310015
RODNEY MKORF
SUSANMKORF
241822420004
E
~
~
~
"
I
"
8
N
}"'.lEL VIN C DE.-U
PA1RlCl~ JDE.-U.
242822420005
scaTI' A Scm.01.J:K.-\.
SUZANNE J Scm.Ol1KA
242822310016
ANN'AMMCNE.-\llY
STEPHEN J lICNEALL'
2....2822-1-20006
~
.
~
"
'"
::5
I
~
w
I
'"
~
~
o
U
/
i0
ffi
"
x
w
/
<
'"
,.
o
~
~
u
~
/
~
o
o
.
.
"
o
,.
ONALD R SELINGER
ARBARA E SELINGER
2....28223-10001
JOSEPH v BAn.EY
}'lIc"H.~ F BAILEY
242822340002
1.!ARK 1 BONITZ
242822340007
EUGENE H_ SCHLOJ>..IKA,
C.UOL SCm.01!KA
24282134006
i
MAPLEWOOD CITY BOUNDARY
'0
~
U
/
"
DONALD E SCHL01.lK....I..
SUSAN KAY SCHL01IK..<\
24282234005
TOTAL AREA = 58.50 ACRES
COPAR DEVELOPMENT EA W
ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT AREA
EXHIBIT 2
6
J f I I
I
J /,r
I /Il
} 1;1
I
J /1
I
I II
I III
I III
I;
I! _J
I I I I
1/ J I I
Ii / J I !
J
Ii I I,
I" I/'!
/ Ii J J!
I I J II
! j I I ....l
i ~ jI I I {J:I
!;__-:/IIJ.f.1
I: - -.- . I,! f 1 ....
---- ',,/
--......~ J...l
/. 'II I I II
I)' f I }
/ I I / J /
/ ) I t I I
/ 1 I I f l
J / /1 I /
i !! f I /
i I
/ I ""1 I
/ ,.!! I I
./ I I I f I
,/ ,. J./ I I
I
1// J' II
I I J J i
I l I / I
i , } I )
'I
! I.. I
I .'
f. I
( I
. If i
I. J
I,'
I J,' (
I '
.' 1/ I
/. I
I 1/
, I
J !
1481
I
...
1481
/
I
-
.I
I
I
I
,
I
//
I
i//
/' II
"
.' II
....r l'
I I
/ i}
/ j I
I
Iii
/ I)
/ 1/
,
Ii
/
/
!
/
"
j
/
"
i
Ii
J
i
/ .
;'
,I
I
141
IlIIIII
1525
I
*
,
II
.'
i
,-
i
Attachment 5
I.
I
I
~;/r"
~~/. 11\
-;r
2620
1400
r
II
II
II
I I
II
,I.
,\ 110-
II
I~-- -;;-~
I ~ _~'0 /.:'tI
I I -
I I ..
I,
II
~
.486
""
-- . - .-
1480
--.r--
.
II
1.
[~
~ I / / \
~ 2503 ~" ,/ i/ \
ffi Lilli" / / A 1/ 1519 \'" /
I- - ~ /..... / "" ...... \ ./
::-~~,<// 152:~J~~518
II 2504'/ ...,.. // ,"' ::':""."" ~~~~ .--"--._~ I
I I ./' 2520 / '- '>':: '<" ""itl ~ --'I >-
11 / ../ ',..................... ~.JY./-~~ ~8 D::
~I \.--L / 25~.../ '"\;:-.~~,,,.... --............ L~
I 1 ___.____ /. .. 'I' I ..... ..................... j
I I -.__/. '.," IZi ---__. 1538 '-., Z.
'.~ "-. I~""........ ' >
: : I 2564"" .,2. >';..,;yitl._.,~ ---___.___.__.'1 ~
II I -'- r/i(<~y$..... 2543 . '..; III
-- ~.... 1"./, .."
I I 'lIiIo. I ~// \
. "" -'j' ",
I I 2574 ,..... ~ _ " -,
I I // .. \t81t "
I) ..r'/'" I \"\
I .,_,~/ \
\
I I 573'
\
II \
II \
II
~ : ~
I I ",-' '\" ----,
7,1 .,. ...../ - .....,
r I /..- -..... .... ./ ~J--JIJiJ -- ,.......
I I 1/ ~ - ,------# ~ _6ro~ If #
II .1.1 fr'
//1
,
2553
I
...,~.. I
-"".1
1
,
,
I
,
--1
..-
,.
1645
.
2563
.
"
,
".
\\
\.
"
,
7
\11
N
ADDRESS MAP