Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/20/2006 MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Mondav, March 20, 2006, 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. February 6, 2006 5. Public Hearings None 6. New Business a. Alternative Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan Review b. Concept Plan Review - Carpet Court (NW Corner of Larpenteur Avenue and Arcade Street) c. Environmental Assessment Worksheet Introduction - Carver Crossing (Carver Avenue and Henry Lane) 5. Unfinished Business None 8. Visitor Presentations g. Commission Presentations February 13 Council Meeting: Mr. Kaczrowski February 27 Council Meeting: Ms. Dierich March 13 Council Meeting: ?? (was to be Ms. Fischer) March 27 Council Meeting: Mr. Grover April 10 Council Meeting: Mr. Yarwood 10. Staff Presentations 11. Adjournment MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, MARCH 20, 2006 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Cornrnissioner Mary Oierich Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Michael Grover Cornrnissioner Harland Hess Commissioner Jim Kaczrowski Commissioner Gary Pearson Cornrnissioner Dale Trippler Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood Present Absent Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Melinda Coleman, Assistant City Manager Chuck Ahl, Public Works Director Ken Roberts, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary Staff Present: III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Trippler requested a brief discussion regarding the training session materials that were included in the staff report to discuss during commission presentations. Commissioner Grover requested an update regarding the HRA meeting on March 14, 2006, regarding the SI. Paul Tourist Cabin site to discuss during commission presentations. Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the agenda as amended. Commissioner Pearson seconded. The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ayes - Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Hess, Kaczrowski, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood Approval of the planning commission minutes for February 6, 2006. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the planning commission minutes for February 6, 2006. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -2- Commissioner Yarwood seconded. Ayes - Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Kaczrowski, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood Abstention - Hess V. PUBLIC HEARING None. VI. NEW BUSINESS a. Alternative Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan Review (7:03 - 8:35 p.m.) The city is nearing the point in the planning process where the City Council will need to converge on a preferred master plan for the Gladstone Neighborhood. The redevelopment planning process includes a review by City advisory boards and commissions. The objective of this review is for each board/commission to offer a recommendation on the plan or its key aspects relative to the board/commission's individual mission or purpose. The Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Master Plan is an important part of the community and virtually every advisory board or commission will be involved in the ongoing implementation of the master plan. Staff recommends that the board/commission discuss the master plan from November and the more recent concept alternative with supporting documentation and offer recommendations or opinions on the concept and relevant aspects of the plan. Your recommendation(s) will be assembled with all other advisory board/commission's recommendations and the recommendation from the Task Force and submitted to the City Council for their use in considering the plan at their meeting tentatively set for April 18, 2006. The core difference between the two concepts has to do with the level of public investments that form the basis of the plan (those public investments include improvements to parks, open space, trails, road reconstruction, burial of power lines, streetscape, stormwater systems). In the November 14, 2005, draft, a public improvement budget was established at roughly $18 million. In order to find this investment without using general tax dollars, redevelopment to the magnitude of roughly 800 new units for (plan a) would need to occur. That level of development also would support 50,000 to 75,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial development. The alternative concept (plan b) reduced the public improvement budget about of $11 million in order to reduce the developrnent levels to 490 units. This concept also would support approximately 10,800 square feet of commercial development. Reductions in public improvements were achieved by reducing the scope and magnitude of the $18 million dollar improvements. Chuck Ahl, Maplewood Public Works Director spoke as he went through the power point presentation for the planning commission and members of the audience. This is a development "concept" it is not a "plan". If this were approved this development concept would not look exactly like this. This is a development concept of how it "might" look. Mr. Ahl said that the majority of people in the Gladstone area strongly believe improvements are needed. Commissioner Grover asked between the June estimate and the November and February estirnates with regard to total land acquisition, is that because the city is not including the area around the northern part of Edward Street in the plan? Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -3- Mr. Ahl said part of the land acquisition budget was intended for the city to rnake the developrnent happen faster and provide quality improvements, and payments for land rights in order to get a higher quality development within the area. It was a budget for support for various types of irnprovernents that would be privately installed. This was significantly reduced and went to the approach that very little support frorn private developers would support improvements. An example might be asking a developer to provide a green roof and have the sustainable type of developrnent we talked about, having more raingardens, rnore landscaping, rnore landscape treatments on the private site, and installing electrical generator systems or solar panels for that area. The quality of the structures, with the larger budget in June, was to try to attract the developers and get the highest quality. We have now taken a lesser quality in the November and February plan. We've already taken some of that money out but we didn't reduce that money from the November to the February plan because that was the first area we attacked when the city began cutting costs. Chairperson Fischer asked what land was planned to be acquired? Mr. Ahl said in two approaches the city looked at it as not being likely the city would be the master developer but these would be land agreements between the city and the developer so the city would not necessarily be acquiring land. Although it is possible the city may act as the rniddle man so to speak in the overall negotiations. For example, the Hmong Funeral home is reluctant to relocate. Relocation expenses might need to be paid for that site in order to entice the Hrnong Funeral home to relocate to another location in the City of Maplewood. We put that into a category called "land acquisition" because the city may have to acquire the land and pass it onto a private entity. That allows the development to allow quality in to the overall project and it also allows the concept to be implemented in a shorter period of time. Mr. Ahl said residents and business owners are concerned about the deteriorating Gladstone area. It's not going to get better on its own. If you don't do something now the city will be going through this difficult process again in a few years, trying to come up with a concept and a guide for this Gladstone area. The city wants to improve the tired look of the Gladstone area; people drive by this area and say the city has to do something. On March 2, 2006, there was an informal pole and from the people that voted, 68 people said do one or the other plan but don't ignore the Gladstone area. Only 17 people said don't do anything to the Gladstone neighborhood. We need to prevent the spread of blight and improve the condition of the Savanna. The city has said time and time again; make the public improvements "without" general property taxes. The staff's conclusions are the 800 unit (plan A) has appeared to exceed the acceptable level of density threshold for many of the Gladstone neighborhood residents. The 490 unit (plan B) while it is feasible, it appears to underachieve the abilities of the area. These are the choices and the planning comrnission has to determine what they want the city to do for the area. Thursday, March 23, 2006, is the final task force meeting. The planning commission needs to formulate a recommendation for the city council. Staff is going to ask the city council Monday, March 27, 2006, to have a special meeting dedicated just to the Gladstone Redeveloprnent Plan which staff is planning for Tuesday, April 18, 2006, and that would be a public hearing. Chairperson Fischer asked what they foresee the demolition sites to be and are there any contaminated sites? Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -4- Mr. Ahl said there are two budget items on that. Yes there are contaminated sites. There is nearly $1 rnillion dollars for environmental and dernolition put in the budget. There are a nurnberofsites that in the phase 1 analysis are contaminated and need to be cleaned up. There is contamination on the open space. If the city were to acquire or buy the Hmong Funeral home, the city could demolish a building very cheaply and then sell the bare land to a developer. Those are the types of structures that would be demolished. The plan for concept A and concept B are concepts and not actual "site" plans. Chairperson Fischer asked if in any of these concepts, the city is considering eminent domain to change it from one private use to another private use? Mr. Ahl said it's the city's goal to not use eminent domain. However, it doesn't mean that at some point and time they may need to. When the roundabout was built the project was delayed for more than 6 months due to trying to acquire easements. As staff we're saying don't say the city won't ever use eminent domain. It's probably safe to say the city would not use eminent domain to acquire single family homes. But for a single business, eminent domain could happen. The city has heard from the League of Minnesota Cities that there is legislation for this session being considered regarding eminent domain. If that bill should go into affect, that may take eminent domain out of the possibilities for the city to use on this project. Melinda Coleman asked Mr. Ahl to include the history regarding how many times the City of Maplewood has used eminent domain? Mr. Ahl said in the 10 years he has worked at the City of Maplewood he has only seen eminent domain occur 1 time. That occurred in the early 1980's in the Gladstone area when the Whirlpool Corporation owned the Savanna and the city had to condemn property for the storm water ponds that exist. Chairperson Fischer asked staff if they are comfortable going from the bebo style underpass (the more expensive option) to the box culvert type underpass (the less expensive option) and that it is still safe and rneets the standards of the industry. Mr. Ahl said the box culvert type underpass meets the standards of the industry. You need properly lighting for these underpasses and the city needs to send someone from the city through the tunnel once in awhile to check things out. Deciding between the two different types of underpasses is a value type decision for the city to consider and it's a significant cost saver at $1.6 million. Chairperson Fischer said with basic level 1 and the cost of the lineal roadway foot at $1 versus level number 2 at $4.50 a lineal roadway foot, but noting that number 1 did not have irrigation for the boulevard type planting, what would that have added to the cost if irrigation would have been included? Mr. Ahl said typically irrigation is about $1 a foot extra. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -5- Commissioner Pearson said if the city were to go ahead with the plan for the higher density with level 4 arnenities, is Maplewood prepared to increase the future budgets sufficiently to rnaintain those areas? This is going to be a whole other level of involvement that Maplewood has never had to deal with. A lot of what Maplewood maintains along its streets and drives is pitiful. The city does a terrific job at the parks, but in other areas the grass gets a foot tall before it gets cut and then it lays there turning brown the rest of time until the grass grows through it again. If the city is going to commit to this level of decorative amenities and landscaping it is going to take a considerable larger budget than what the city has to work with to rnaintain these areas. Mr. Ahl said that is a very good question and statement. The city thought of that before the city did the improvements along Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway and has thought about it in this case as well. This is not a new expense that the city wants to take on, it is sornething the homeowners will take on as an expense. Every development agreement in the area will be informed that the city is doing the improvements as a charge to the homeowners association. Each homeowner in that area understands when they buy their house they are paying an extra charge for the city to maintain these areas. Whether the Gladstone area is approved for 490 or 800 units there would be an agreement in their homeowners association that discusses the annual charge to help pay for the maintenance of those areas. Either a homeowner association does it under a contract, the city does it for a contract, or the city does it with city forces. Although the city does not have the work force to send their own people out to take care of that. One thing you don't want to do is invest either $11 million or $18 million on a development plan and not plan for the overall future maintenance of the area. The city doesn't make that mistake with the city sewer system, the roads, or the water systems, we make sure the city maintains things and has the employees to do that. Commissioner Pearson said for example, the strip of land along White Bear Avenue is pitiful and does not come up to this level of landscaping. Mr. Ahl said he would agree that improvements need to be made in that area. Chairperson Fischer asked if the reduced costs for the Savanna still include the trails or walkways? Mr. Ahl said yes although some of the trails and walkways will be wood chips or mowed areas other than paved areas but they will be "walkable". Chairperson Fischer said with the storm water improvements the cost seems to be equal across the board, are these costs necessary improvements or are they at a higher level of service? Mr. Ahl said those storm water improvements are the necessary improvernents needed and is something the city cannot cut from the redevelopment plans. Commissioner Hess asked if storm water and holding ponds would be required in this area? Mr. Ahl said in the mid 1980's when Frost Avenue was built, the city's goal was to get rid of the water as fast as the city could and move it down to Lake Phalen. Over the past 20 years the city has discovered that wasn't a good decision because it puts pollutants into the lake. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -6- Mr. Ahl said the city needs to get back to infiltrating and allowing some of the plants to use up sorne of the nutrients and treat the water and slow it down so it can infiltrate into the ground water system. Corn missioner Yarwood said regarding the background ofthis planning process forthe Gladstone area, the original plan was for 800 units, but wasn't the full range considered frorn the low end to the high end in the beginning and where did the low number of 490 units come from? Mr. Ahl said this question has been asked a lot. The process was put together with the idea of establishing the goals and wish list so to speak of what people would like to see in the Gladstone area and for the Savanna. People said they would like to see streetscapes, sidewalks, storm water improvements, and a quality developrnenl. The city started reducing the number of units from 1,000 to 800 units and that is where the planning process stopped. Then former City Councilmember Bartol asked if the city could cut more units, so the city developed a plan and reduced the costs down to a pretty bare rninimurn. The city started with a wish list and it carne up with the 1,000 units, narrowed it down to the master plan or plan A with the 800 units at $18 million and further reduced the plan down to see the number of units it would take to get to the bare minimum and that is alternate plan or plan B with the 490 units at $11 million. Chairperson Fischer asked if those figures were fairly accurate and ifthere wouldn't be any costly expenses that could pop up? Mr. Ahl said that is a very good question. Staff is very comfortable with these figures. Keep in mind that with the lower number of units of 490 (plan B) which is the lower cost plan you have increased your risk and the amount of time to develop the area has increased, but it is a feasible plan. There is a lot less risk involved with the 800 units (plan A) and is a very feasible plan. Commissioner Desai said he noticed the retail space has been reduced significantly in the two plans. He asked what the total amount of square footage of retail space is currently in the Gladstone area? Mr. Ahl said currently there is about 170,000 -180,000 square footage of comrnercial retail space in the Gladstone area. In plan A there would be about 50,000 - 75,000 square feet of commercial retail space, plan B has about 10,000 square feet of commercial retail space, so there is a major reduction in commercial retail space. Commissioner Desai asked what the reason for the sidewalks to be built in the area is if there isn't much commercial retail space for people to walk to? Part of the reason people would need a sidewalk would be to visit the grocery store, a coffee shop, bakery etc. Now if plan B with the 490 units gets approved with only 10,000 square feet of commercial space, where will people go, there would be hardly any commercial space? People will have to get in their car and drive where they need to go. He asked if we can cut out the sidewalks and that additional cost then? Mr. Ahl said he respectively disagrees with the analysis that sidewalks are not needed. To have commercial or not to have commercial was a value decision. It's a proven fact that residential homes bring in more tax dollars compared to commercial property. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -7- Mr. Ahl said in the master plan (plan A) with the 800 units would probably have more of those types of retail shops such as a coffee shop or a deli shop for exarnple. With (plan B) the 490 units those retail spaces are not there. That doesn't take away the fact that more and more people want walkable communities to visit with the neighbors, visit the parks, and get some exercise. As an example, when the city built the sidewalk on English Street there was a strong comrnunity debate as to whether there should be sidewalks or not along English Street between County Road B and Frost Avenue. Staff strongly recommended to the city council there should be sidewalks. The City Council took a survey of the neighborhood and finally decided to require sidewalks be built. Since then Mr. Ahl said he has received many phone calls from the neighbors thanking the city for putting the sidewalks in because they use them so frequently. In fact, the neighbors were so supportive of the sidewalks that as soon as the sidewalks were installed, people started walking on them when the concrete was still wet and the city had to go back and rope off the area so people would not walk on them until they were completely dry. So for this reason, staff would strongly recommend sidewalks because they are needed and wanted. Commissioner Desai asked if it's the responsibility of the homeowner to maintain the sidewalks or does the city take care of them? Mr. Ahl said in this case the city maintains these. Commissioner Desai said with the Gladstone plan the city would be requiring the homeowners to maintain the sidewalks. He asked how the homeowners going to feel about that? Mr. Ahl said that's a good point. The city provides maintenance to many sidewalks in the city. The city may need to continue to do that with the general tax dollars with snow plowing. However, the maintenance of irrigation systems, trees, and decorative street lights, are things the city does not maintain and those are the types of things that would be charged to the homeowners association. Chairperson Fischer asked if there were going to be medians for all of the plans or just some of them? Mr. Ahl said in the 800 unit concept there are a lot more median improvements on Frost Avenue and in that area which would go all the way to East Shore Drive. When you get into the roundabout there would only be one lane in and one lane out and those medians would be extended. In the 490 unit plan the extent of the medians are limited to right in front of where the bowling alley is and significantly reduced. Chairperson Fischer asked what the purpose of the medians is in the neighborhoods? Mr. Ahl said that's a very good question. Medians help calm traffic flow. The city sees cars driving much too fast in this area. Even though the speed limit is posted on Frost Avenue people are still driving 45 mph and higher. That is not the type of neighborhood and walkable community people want and at those speeds the area isn't walkable. Enforcement cannot reduce speed limits when people feel like they should be driving the speed that feels comfortable to them. Mr. Ahl said medians restrict the vision and move things closer; they also change the overall appearance and reduces the speed. This makes for a safer and walkable community. Chairperson Fischer asked if there are any differences in the safety factors? Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -8- Mr. Ahl said a pedestrian walking across a four lane roadway with a median is safer for the pedestrians than without a rnedian. Commissioner Grover asked if either of the plans change the number of units on the St. Paul Tourist Cabin site or is that nurnber firrn? Mr. Ahl said the number of units is at 150 for both plans on the St. Paul Tourist Cabin site. Comrnissioner Desai said he received inforrnation regarding a possible development on the SI. Paul Tourist Cabin site that would be for low income housing. He asked if the St. Paul Tourist Cabin site is going to be for low income housing won't that be a burden for those people being asked to help pay for the maintenance of the amenities in the area? Melinda Colernan said the current developer that is working on this site is Central Community Housing Trust (CCHT) and they met with the HRA group on Tuesday, March 14th to discuss who they are and the types of projects they work with. (CCHT) doesn't have a specific proposal forthe SI. Paul Tourist Cabin site yet other than it will be rental and mixed use and provide some affordable housing as well as some market rate housing. (CCHT) prides themselves on taking care of their properties and the grounds. You will be hearing more from (CCHT) later on and you will understand what types of projects they do. But this area is not intended to be 100% affordable housing as staff understands it. One of the things the city likes about (CCHT) is that they have been working with All Parks Alliance for Change (APAC) who tries to protect the rights of people who live in mobile home parks and they have been working together to talk about relocation issues. These little cabins tend to attract people of the transient nature and this type of housing is not up to code and is very unsafe. This group would work to find a safe, clean place for these people to relocate. As this plan moves forward the number of units would be better known. Commissioner Desai asked if it was safe to assume that the number of units at 150 is safe to consider as part of this Gladstone plan or should it not be counted in the number of units for the Gladstone plan? Melinda Coleman said the 150 units on the SI. Paul Tourist Cabin site should be included in the density count. The 800 units (plan A) the number of units were around 120-130 units and the 490 units (plan B) which is the alternative concept the density was increased to try to and promote the higher number of stacked housing on that site. The first meeting staff had with the developer (CCHT) estimated the number of units at 100-125 but that number may shift when (CCHT) knows how the land is guided and what happens with the Gladstone plan. Chairperson Fischer said she understood from the HRA meeting on Tuesday, March 14th that (CCHT) would bring a proposal to the city after the Gladstone plan was in place and (CCHT) would comply with whatever the decision was that was made for the Gladstone Redevelopment Plan. Mr. Roberts agreed with those comments. Commissioner Pearson said regarding the (APAC) meeting that was held at the city a few years ago and the ordinance that did not pass; the developer (CCHT) would help the current homeowners at the SI. Paul Tourist Cabin site 2-to-3 times more than the (APAC) ordinance ever would. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -9- Melinda Coleman said when you get an organization like (CCHT) they can tap into a lot of different funding sources that a typical developer would not be able to. The partnership with (APAC) will likely bring a bigger benefit to the relocation amount to those residents. The more rnoney those residents can get to relocate they could possibly even buy their own horne. It gets the residents out of that sub-standard housing and gives them a lift into the cornrnunity and the ability to purchase their own home. Commissioner Kaczrowski said with plan B which cut some of the amenities and things like burying the power lines and road improvements are these things that are still going to need to be done in the near future? Mr. Ahl said those are all value decisions and again this decision could affect the long term solution or the future. The city may want to start at a lower level and as funds become available we may be able to add some of that back in to the plan and still stay at some of the lower level units. With the burying of the power lines, he doubts all the power lines in the city will ever all be buried because it is very expensive. Regarding building the bridge verses the lesser expensive box culvert style, once you start it you can't go back. Adding irrigation and streetscapes can be added at a later date so if the project doesn't pay for itself those are things that would not be installed for two to three years anyway. This is a three to five year plan and those amenities are value decisions for the different commissions and boards to make. Commissioner Grover said based upon what he just heard staff say, would you like to hear from the commissions and boards identifying what money they think should be put towards things in this plan? Mr. Ahl said absolutely. Melinda Coleman has a handout that she would like to give to the planning commission and to the audience. Melinda handed out a Gladstone Advisory Board Discussion Questionnaire. This form is for each persons use to assist thern in the decision making process and is for your own use. Staff went through the questionnaire one by one. Staff showed a power point presentation which had different photos of what developments could look like, different street scapes and the different levels of street scapes, setbacks from the street, etc. Staff encouraged the commission as they go through this process if they have any questions to contact Melinda or Chuck by telephone or e- mail and staff would be happy to assist them. The planning commission decided to fill out the form on their own and bring this back at their next planning commission meeting and review it as a group. This way the PC will have more time to go through it on their own. Chairperson Fischer asked if it would be acceptable if commissioners wrote whether they had no opinion one way or the other regarding certain changes? Melinda Coleman said yes. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -10- Commissioner Trippler said he has been on the Gladstone Task Force for over 1 year now and he has sorne idea what the task force dealt with and how things were addressed. If the PC is not going to deal with this at this meeting he would propose that if the commission wanted to rneet at 6:00 or 6:30 p.m. before the next commission meeting in the Maplewood Room if people had questions he would be happy to respond to any questions regarding what the task force thought. Melinda Coleman said the city council is meeting in the Maplewood Room that evening Monday, April 3, 2006, from 5:00-7:00 p.m. but the planning commission could meet in the city council chambers under a work session before the regular pc meeting begins. Commissioner Yarwood asked if that would be the time to formulate a response to the city council for the Gladstone Redevelopment Plan? Melinda Coleman said city staff would need the recommendation from the planning commission under their public planning commission meeting. The planning commission can still meet prior to their regular starting time to go through issues and have a discussion. Chairperson Fischer said in the past the planning commission has had differing opinions to things, would staff accept a minority report from the planning commission if it came to that? Melinda Coleman said yes. With the Task Force it is city staff's intent that if the city can't get a unanimous report, the city staff will take a minority report and pass everything onto the city council for the final decision. City staff wants everything to be an open record regarding what the boards and commissions are discussing. Commissioner Trippler said in plan B what happened to the Maplewood Bowl on the plan? Mr. Ahl said the Maplewood Bowl will be relocated somewhere else but not located in the Gladstone area. Commissioner Trippler said it was his understanding that the bowling alley was the busiest and most profitable business in the Gladstone area and they have not expressed any interest in moving, is that correct? Mr. Ahl said he is not aware of that. The owner of the bowling alley has been extremely involved in this process and interested in redevelopment in some of the facilities. The 800 unit plan discusses redoing the bowling alley site possibly with an underground facility or first floor facility and putting commercial and housing above it as a combined overall facility. That is shown in plan A. The bowling alley is used and it is a busy site but to make that leap and say the owner of the bowling alley wants to absolutely stay he is not aware of that. Commissioner Pearson said in the master plan the task force had allocated the bowling alley to remain in the general area along with having ample space for the businesses that currently exist and some additional businesses. When he looks at plan B all of the units that are north of the Savanna are single units but where are the garages? Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -11- Mr. Ahl said not all of the units on the bowling alley site which goes from English Street to Flicek Park north of the Savanna are individual stacked hornes. They are not individual attached town home units. The city cannot achieve enough density and came up 80 units short by trying to go with all town homes. So some of the units are stacked and that may be a senior housing unit. Parking on that type of unit would have to be underground. He cautions the commission from looking at this plan as a "site" plan verses a "concept" plan. Details of exactly where things will be located are steps down the road. Commissioner Trippler said plan B crams enough units in to meet the density number of 490 units but with little commercial space. Mr. Ahl said the intent is to show the types of units shown in the slide show that Melinda Coleman showed with the types of units that would work in this type of redevelopment plan. A value choice is to look at going to more of a single attached unit. That gets more expensive because it takes more property up. As soon as you start stacking units you start achieving more green space which allows the site to look less cramped. Commissioner Trippler asked what the value of the individual boxes shown would be? Mr. Ahl said most of the units would be around the $199,900 to $299,900 unit prices. Those are the financial assumptions in order to make this work. Commissioner Trippler said for the benefit of the planning commission, the one location where commercial property is designated on the southeast corner of Frost Avenue and English Street where the funeral home currently resides, would be 10,000 square feet of commercial space and everything else on the site is residential, is that correct. Mr. Ahl said yes. Commissioner Trippler said the trails would not be paved but would have wood chips or something? Mr. Ahl said yes. Commissioner Trippler said that may not be very attractive to the elderly who want to use the trails or for someone who is handicapped and needs to use assistance to get around. Mr. Ahl said correct. Chairperson Fischer said back in February of 2004 the Maplewood Historical Preservation Commission sent a letter regarding their concerns of the mixed use zoning ordinance and the Gladstone area. Do any of the concerns of the Maplewood Historical Preservation Commission factor into the Gladstone Redevelopment Plan? Mr. Ahl said staff met last week with the Maplewood Historical Preservation Commission and they have been involved in this process and this plan. The planning commission decided to bring the form home and bring it back to the meeting on Monday, April 3, 2006, before making a final recommendation to the city council. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -12- b. Concept Plan Review - Carpet Court (NW Corner of Larpenteur Avenue and Arcade Street) (8:35 - 9:12 p.m.) Mr. Roberts said Gary Blair is proposing to develop a 7,848-square-foot retail/warehouse carpet store on a vacant lot located on the northwest corner of Larpenteur Avenue and Highway 61. Mr. Blairwants to relocate his existing Carpet Court store in St. Paul to this new location. The building would consist of approxirnately 3,966 square feet of retail space and 3,882 square feet of warehouse/storage space. He is proposing building with steel horizontal siding, stucco wall finishes, stone wainscot, and a metal roof. Mr. Blair is asking for some feedback from the planning commission for this preliminary plan for a future proposal. This would require several approvals from the city which are listed in the staff report. There was a plan that the planning commission looked at in 2000 that was similar to this plan and that plan is attachment number 7 in the staff report. The planning commission recornrnended that Mr. Blair go back and revise his plan so it would not require so many variances. In October of 2005, Mr. Blair submitted revised plans for this site which is attachment 8 in the staff report. Commissioner Trippler asked staff if they had a discussion with the applicant regarding using pervious materials? Mr. Roberts said Shann Finwall has been the staff member working on this but staff did not believe the applicant and Ms. Finwall have had that discussion but he did not want to speak for her. He asked if Commissioner Trippler was referring to the pervious surfaces Schmelz Countryside used in their parking lot? Commissioner Trippler said yes. Commissioner Trippler said there is the possibility that if things go well if they get up to the 50% then they would be meeting the code and would not need a variance. But if that is not the case, and the applicant is willing to put some type of pervious material in, that would also mean he would not need the variance. Mr. Roberts said if the applicant does not need as much parking and the city works on a parking reduction, the city would allow green space as well. Commissioner Trippler said his preference is to reduce the amount of impervious surface and reduce parking whenever possible. What bothers him is the request for a 43-foot building setback variance when the city requires a 50-foot building setback from a commercial property to a residential property. Mr. Roberts said there isn't a minimum setback for a commercial property adjacent to a commercial property. However, in the other direction is a residential area, and about 8 to 10 years ago the city council approved an increased setback standard for cornmercial buildings to residential property lines. The theory being the city didn't want commercial buildings to have a negative impact on the residential properties. In fact that setback can be bumped up to a 100-foot setback from the residential property to provide separation and protection for the residents nearby. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -13- Chairperson Fischer asked if the legal interpretation differs from existing uses versus approved plans in the Cornprehensive Plan. The Zoning Map and the Cornprehensive Plan seern to be in conflict here. Mr. Roberts said you are correct. The legal ordinance says if it is planned or used residentially then it has to rneet the 50-foot setback or greater. Commissioner Trippler asked if staff had talked to the applicant about rotating the building to another orientation to get away from that or at least minimize the setback? How about moving the building further to the east and putting the parking to the south and have the driveway come out more in line with where we would like to have it come out? He said he uses the service road to get to the Phalen Lake Golf Course and the only reason he can use that service road is because he goes there at 3 p.m. and it's almost impossible to get out onto Arcade Street because of the traffic. So staffs concern about the driveway and MnDot's concern regarding where the driveway is will be a nightmare for the customers to get in and out of that location. Mr. Roberts said staff has not discussed those issues with the applicant. Maybe the applicant has considered those issues. If he hasn't considered those issues this is the time to consider them. Cornrnissioner Trippler said in 2000 he was a planning cornrnissioner and at that tirne the commission asked the applicant to work out another plan so the applicant would not have so many variances. Now in 2006 this plan comes back and we still have the same issues to deal with only this time the issues are rnore extensive. Chairperson Fischer asked if Mr. Ahl thought the water treatment and impervious surfaces that have been discussed would make this site workable? Mr. Ahl said the types of surfaces we use do allow for those types of things. As Mr. Trippler discussed, the Schmelz Countryside parking lot and most recently the LaMettry Collision south of Guldens Restaurant has a pervious pavement in the shoreland area. That is a type of pavement that is used with different types of use, it is where cars are parked and stored for a longer period of time. Here we are talking about retail space. The applicant is looking at 10% more of a pervious area. It's more difficult than simply saying it "can be done" but there are options to consider. One of the options is to reduce the amount of parking. Chairperson Fischer said in the past the city has determined certain retail locations do not need the same parking needs as other retail locations; for example a furniture store might not require as much parking as a restaurant would. Mr. Ahl said the applicant has addressed some of the concerns. The city is concerned about two driveways and if we are going to abandon that frontage road we want to make sure we get that first driveway as far away from Highway 61 as possible. Chairperson Fischer asked if staff they thought that could be worked out. Mr. Ahl said in looking at the site, the building layout is going to have to change in order to get this to work. In his opinion, with the setback issues and the way the building is currently laid out in the plan, something is going to have to change to get this to work. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -14- Chairperson Fischer said she would be comfortable with the proof of parking and the reduction of parking spaces. Commissioner Hess asked if the ADA requirements for handicapped parking equal one parking space? Mr. Roberts said the building code requires 1 handicapped parking stall for the first 25 parking spaces but that is a detail we would look at when final plans were to come in. Chairperson Fischer asked if staff is comfortable with the vacation of the frontage road? Mr. Roberts and Mr. Ahl both said yes. Commissioner Grover asked if the building should go where the parking is now and the parking goes on the other side? Cornrnissioner Trippler said he tried rotating the building counterclockwise 90 degrees and he didn't think that saved anything. Instead of having the parking on the east side of the building on Highway 61 and you move the building where the parking is then you would have the orientation being the same. The driveway would be where the second driveway is. Now whether that would work for trucks to load or unload he didn't know if that would work or not. He was trying to eliminate the setback variance and trying to get the driveway as far away from Highway 61 as you can. This property has an unusual area and if you get the business too far away from one intersection then you move it toward another intersection. The further you can move it to towards the west in terms of getting in and out of this facility is the best. Commissioner Grover said they may still have two driveways but the service driveway could be closer to Highway 61 because it would not be used as often. Commissioner Trippler said he would prefer to see a single driveway but that would be a problem for truckers. Maybe it's possible to move the doorway to another part of the building. It's something to think about. Mr. Roberts said this will go onto the CDRB on Tuesday, March 28, 2006, for design review comments. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Commissioner Trippler said on page 4 of the staff report in item 3. it states City staff recommends that only the portion of the service road located in front of Mr. Blair's property be vacated and removed with the development at this time. The remaining portion of the service road to the north would remain and be used by those properties until such time as they redeveloped. He asked what the rational was for that? Mr. Ahl said the frontage road is under the jurisdiction of MnDol. What the city would do is vacate the portion next to the proposed Carpet Court because of the driveways out to the properties to the north. When those properties would develop, the city would then vacate the rest of the frontage road and remove it. The only way they would have access to the site would be through the frontage road, through a right in and right out off of Highway 61. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -15- Mr. Gary Blair, Carpet Court, 1121 Minnehaha Avenue East, St. Paul, addressed the cornrnission. He said the questions he has heard are excellent questions and they have been dealing with many of them. The property in 2005 was brought up to code, it just wasn't applied to the city council at that time. They were ready to do so last fall and they had the engineer do the holding pond in the back of the property so they would qualify for the 50% which they met at that time but never got to this point. MnDot came in two weeks prior to putting it on the schedule and informed us of the change of giving up the service road. If you look at the drawing dated 2005 you will notice there was a driveway coming to the service road over on Larpenteur Avenue. With that service road they can no longer use that driveway and that would be for the trucks to pull in from the service road off the main drive and come into the facility. Without having that road there that floor plan was no longer usable and they had to find another way to get the trucks in. All the drawings they prepared had to be scrapped then. They met the parking requirements, the 50%, and the setback and then everything had to be changed because now we were looking a different lot. Everyone who has been dealing with this lot has agreed that it has been very difficult to work with. The off set in the corner in the back that was mentioned in the new proposal is about 7 feet from the corner. This did not come up prior to this and then it was noticed that it might be an issue because of that being next to a residential property. That area takes a big drop and the house that occupies that property is quite a ways away from that corner. Mr. Blair said the future drawing, which is shown on the back page of the staff report, shows a future cul-de-sac that is proposed. If you notice that comes up where the corner of where the property is. Maplewood suggested that could possibly happen and that they would get the rights to their property through the back of the property. That would allow that cul-de-sac to be put in so the road to those other houses could be worked out there as well so the remaining of the service road could be closed off completely. If that would be done you can see that the corner of their property would no longer be an issue regarding the property next door. Regarding the drainage, they fully intend to provide a garden in the back to filter the water so it rneets the requirements of the city so they qualify for the bonus. Mr. Blair said the 2005 plan shows the rainwater garden in the back of the property. The parking lot has a drainage to the right corner to a catch basin and is piped underground across the side of the property parallel to Larpenteur Avenue and has a drain running over to the pond where it will drop all the water from the front of the building. From there it will be filtered through a large section of the ground, it will be filtered through there with plants, and then there would be an overflow. That was already provided when the city put the drain system through on Larpenteur Avenue knowing Carpet Court would be building a connection to that line so they could tap into that with their drain field and be able to have any excessive water flow into the pipe going out to the drain eliminating an overflow to the neighbors that would be adjacent to them. They feel that the property is going to improve the neighborhood and look very nice. He came to the city 5 years ago and tried to work with the planning commission. The discussion on hand was if they could turn the building? He then turned the discussion over to his son, Robert Blair. Mr. Robert Blair, 9040 Grey Cloud Trail, Grey Cloud, addressed the commission. Robert went over the different building and site layouts on the screen. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -16- Mr. Gary Blair said regarding the driveway being close to the intersection, when the street was put through and the new curbing, they set the driveway opening in place where it was before which isn't too far from where they propose it to be. They are set back 60 feet from the intersection frorn the curb of Arcade Streetto their driveway. MnDot requires 30 feetfor light residential businesses and 60 feet if it is a commercial business like Menards or Home Depot. Maplewood has a requirernent of 30 feet back frorn the intersection and they are at 60 feet so they have rnoved the hazard back considerably from where the driveway previously was for the service road. Carpet Court doesn't have much customer traffic so they don't need as many parking spaces. However, they hope to increase their business with this building addition. Mr. Blair thanked the planning commission for their time. The applicant will take the comments made by the planning commission and bring a proposal back to the city at a later date. Tonight's meeting was just for the input of the planning comrnission. The planning commission took a short recess from 9:12 - 9:23 p.m. to set.up the presentation for the Environmental Assessment Worksheet Introduction for Carver Crossing of Maplewood. c. Environmental Assessment Worksheet Introduction - Carver Crossing of Maplewood (Carver Avenue and Henry Lane) (9:23 - 9:50 p.m.) Mr. Chuck Ahl said on March 14, 2005, the city council authorized the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed development of the former Schlomka property by the CoPar Development Company. The project is called Carver Crossing of Maplewood and the EAW has been completed and has been approved by the City Council to be routed for public comment. The EAW was prepared by one ofthe City's consultants, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA), Inc. City staff has conducted a preliminary review of the document and suggested several changes that the consultant made to the EAW. Mr. Ahl said the city ordered the EAW for this project area due to City Council concerns about the impacts of the originally proposed 386-unit development. At the time of the order, staff suggested that the EAW might provide significant issues with original site development plans. Since then, the developer has been cooperative in revising their plans to better accommodate and address the environmental concerns. The long preparation time (over 1 year) for the EAW and development plan process is due to the findings and developer revisions to the projected plans. The findings have required the developer to reduce the original planned unit count of 386 units to the current plan of 299 units. The 299 units are consistent with the lowest development level provided within the Maplewood Land Use plan at 4.1 units per acre. Mr. Chuck Ahl, Public Works Director, introduced Brandon Bourbon from Kimley-Horn and Associates. Mr. Brandon Bourdon, Kimley-Horn and Associates, 2550 University Avenue West, Suite 345N, SI. Paul, addressed the commission. The EAW took about 1 year and was just published March 13, 2006. The project site currently includes 26.0 acres of woodland in the 73+ acre site. The project proposes to change 15.4 acres of these woodlands. Woodland impacts will be mitigated according to City Ordinance up to 10 trees per acre. A total of 215 new trees will be required to be planted. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -17- The project includes four wetland complexes covering 7.32 acres of the site. This is the major issue that required significant revisions to the original site plan. The current proposal only irnpacts 0.2 acres which will be mitigated on site with 0.43 acres of new wetland. Additionally, the developer has proposed features that will provide forfuture enhancement ofthe existing wetlands which have been degraded by area construction activity, narnely from the 1-494 freeway. This change provides for a rnuch irnproved site plan. Sorne background about this project include the developer will be CoPar Companies, located at 8677 Eagle Point Boulevard, Lake Elmo. This development will be for seniors 55+. There will be 93-single family homes, and 206-townhomes and condos. The project is expected to begin sornetirne in August of 2006 and take about 5 years to cornplete. The condominiurns are estimated to cost about $168,000, the back to back homes are estimated to cost about $231 ,000, the row homes are estimated to cost about $262,500, and the single-family homes are estimated to run about $378,000. Sewer and water are available to this site from Carver Avenue. A lift station will be necessary to pump sorne of the sewage frorn this site to the Carver Avenue system. Future plans needed to be studied to determine the extent of the sizing of this lift station. The area to the east ofthis site (on the southeast side of 1-494) is currently unsewered. This area is planned under the Cornprehensive Sewer Plan to have sewer at sorne point in the next 3-30 years. The proposed lift station within the Carver Crossing Development would provide service to this area. As part of the construction of the lift station, it is necessary to install a sewer pipe under the freeway to the eastern side of 1-494. It is necessary to construct this crossing pipe as part of this development to avoid major disruption of the Carver Crossing site when homes and roadways are constructed. This new sewer pipe will provide sanitary sewer to the eastern side of 1-494, which is disturbing to some of the existing residents of this area, who enjoy the large lots and septic systems of that area. Other property owners on the eastern side of 1-494 have expressed an interest in developing their property. The sanitary sewer extension will provide them the ability to develop their property. This sewer extension has the potential to be very controversial issue. From an engineering standpoint, if/when the city authorizes the Carver Crossing development, a lift station is required and that lift station must have the sewer pipe constructed under the freeway as part of the development construction to avoid huge costs and disruption in the future. Because this is a proposed development for a community of 55+ which reduces the traffic generation numbers from the site. Most traffic impacts are within acceptable standards, except the Bailey Road - Sterling Street intersection in Newport, which is currently failing standards. This site currently is impacted by the freeway noise and many locations exceed the night time (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) noise standard. The proposed mitigation is to provide climate-controlled units and increased wall insulation. In addition, any outside common areas need to be located on the west side of the condominium buildings. A berm along 1-494 also is being considered as part of the final site planning. These elements should reduce future residents' exposure to adjacent traffic noise and provide the city with a reasonable response to the freeway noise issue. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -18- This is the upcomina process from this evenina forward for this development: 1. March 20, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting to review the EAW. 2. March 30, 2006, Neighborhood Meeting at the London Lane Fire Station from 6-8 p.m. 3. April 12, 2006, EAW comment deadline. 4. May 1, 2006, Planning Corn mission Meeting and public hearing for response/cornments. 5. May 8, 2006, City Council determines the need for an EIS and authorizes preparation of the feasibility report. 6. June 12, 2006, public hearing for public improvements. 7. August 7,2006, estimated start of construction for improvements (assuming approved). Mr. Bourdon said we are here for any comments from the Planning Commission regarding this concept plan. Mr. Ahl said this site density has been reduced significantly to 4.1 units per acre which is the lowest density for a single family home neighborhood. However, this is not a single family home development simply because this is clustered in order to reduce the impacts on the environment and that is the need for the PUD and Land Use Plan Amendment. When the public hearing occurs, one of the controversial natures ofthis particular proposal is the issue of sanitary sewer to the eastern side of 494 and south of that. That is a very rural area of the community. That area has been planned for a number of years for the residents who live there to remain rural. It certainly can, however, as the city extends sewer and water into the area that opens things up to other developers who could enter the area. From an engineering standpoint, now is the time to put the pipe in because if you are going to need it in the next 75 years it will be extremely expensive and difficult if you wait to do it 10 years from now. It creates the issue that the city is opening up development on the east side by extending the sewer and water in that area. Commissioner Trippler said the report states this would result in a habitat loss for a variety of species. Many of the wildlife species that currently inhabit this project site will be displaced. Overall development of this project site is not anticipated to cause substantial impact on the general wildlife population of the region. Commissioner Trippler meant that the paragraph did not make sense because this project is going to displace the animals from the area so it will have an impact on the area. Mr. Roberts said he thinks what they meant to say is when you have a development, there is going to be a loss of trees and animals are going to be displaced. But at the same time there is open space surrounding this site and the theory is that the animals will move to the open space. The theory is the animals will be displaced to another area they just won't be in the same exact location they are living now. Commissioner Trippler said his point is the paragraph just does not read well. He is concerned about the 8-inch water main that is going to be installed to serve this area. He asked if an 8-inch water rnain is sufficient to service this area? If everyone gets up at 6:00 a.m. and flushes the toilet and then takes a shower, is there going to be enough water pressure to do the job? Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -19- Mr. Ahl said a rnajority of the City of Maplewood is serviced by 6 inch and 8-inch water mains. The nice thing about this is that this can be looped through the systern and there is exceptionally good pressure in this area because of the rolling nature and the height of the water tower near Hillwood Drive. The size of the water main is more than adequate. SI. Paul Water does a rnathernatical routing of it and have no problem with this size. The most stress on a water system is the fire flow because of the residential nature and the condominium size units have a higher fire flow and the city needs to sustain that for a certain period of time. Under heavy demand for residential homes when people are sprinklering their lawns or washing cars, the city needs to maintain 20 pounds of pressure under the fire flow condition for a 3-hour period and the city is able to do that because of the looping system and the good water pressure. So basically the 8- inch water rnain is going to work just fine in this area and that is the standard size. Commissioner Trippler said the problem he sees with this project relates to the traffic noise. He knows you can require thick walls, triple pane glass, and insulation in the construction of the homes but if people want to sit outside on their deck, they won't be able to enjoy it because of the terrible noise. Mr. Ahl said that is a significant issue. This noise problem is something the suburbs and the metro area are facing more and more. The night time noise standard along Highway 694 from the power lines and north, the noise is exceeded. Along Highway 36 frorn Cope Avenue and north, the noise is exceeded. From Gervais Avenue south along Highway 36, the noise standard is exceeded. Highway 35E and McMenemy, the noise is exceeded. Highway 94 through the area by Brookview Avenue, the noise standard is exceeded and they are trying to berm the area there. With the urban zone as the traffic volumes skyrocket at 3 to 4% a year on the freeways it is not getting any better, it's getting worse. However, the city has not dealt with the ability to say what are we as a city going to do with our land use accordingly. The land has its value and the land can be used for development and the noise laws say you cannot condemn the property to non use but you need to take steps to minimize the risks. Sitting on your deck is something that may not be appropriate in this area close to the freeway. Then again there are people that enjoy watching cars on the freeway and maybe those are people that will end up buying the units that overlook the freeway. But people have to have the option not to go outside but have the inside be quiet inside the homes. There must be air and climate control on the homes so if you want to stay inside you can have the air conditioning on and not have to open your windows and be bothered by the noise. Commissioner Hess said the traffic flow on the south end is kind of a dead end street. But driving along Sterling Street, Henry Lane and Carver Avenue, adding another 300 people into that area could be a problem, especially for some of the higher price homes in that area. Mr. Ahl said this is going to be a senior type community with people 55 and over which typically generates less traffic. The impact on the existing neighborhood is obviously going to be a change because it was a farm site and by adding a new development there will be a difference. We need to compare this area with the remainder of Maplewood. It will still be a relatively quiet residential area. Carver Avenue and Sterling Street have seen a tremendous traffic volume increase over the past few years as the Wacouta Bridge project has been under construction. When Bailey Road was closed, all of Bailey Road was detoured to this area so there is a lot of changing traffic patterns. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -20- Mr. Ahl said the area is going to develop and what the city is suggesting is to make the turn lanes into the site so that cars can stop and wait for a gap in traffic and turn safely into the site. Those turn lanes are necessary to address the change and to make the change an acceptable standard. Comrnissioner Trippler said near the end of the report it says there is also a City of Maplewood open space north of Carver Avenue. The possibility of a trail connection from the proposed development to the city open space was considered but there was not an ideal location for an off road connection. He asked staff to show the cornmission where this open space is that is referred to is located on the map. Mr. Roberts showed the open space location on the map. This would require a crosswalk and markings to get pedestrians safely across Carver Avenue. Because the Park and Recreation Department had not been in contact with staff city staff was not sure if there would ever be a trail. Mr. Ahl said if the planning commission has any questions please call. If you have any questions please call by April 12, 2006, which is the deadline for comments. The public hearing will be on Monday, May 1, 2006, during the planning commission meeting. Commissioner Trippler said the Environmental Committee which he serves on is looking at revising or making recommendations for the Tree Ordinance. He contacted a member from the Environmental Committee who is working on that. He will give a copy of the EAW report to herto look at because this is a very good site to test drive some of their thoughts. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Mr. Kaczrowski was the planning commission representative at the February 13, 2006, city council meeting. Planning commission items to discuss included the 2005 Planning Commission Annual Report, the Resolution of Appreciation for Eric Ahlness, which passed ayes all. The interviews for the planning commission also took place and the appointments for the PC and CDRB. The Ramsey County Public Library at Southlawn Drive, South of Legacy Parkway (which the PC did not review) was approved. b. Ms. Dierich was the planning commission representative at the February 27, 2006, city council meeting, but she was absent, so Mr. Roberts reported. The only planning commission item was the first reading of the Nonconforming Use Ordinance Amendment, which passed ayes all. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 -21- c. Ms. Fischer was to be the planning commission representative at the March 13, 2006, city council rneeting. Items to be discussed included Menards at 2280 Maplewood Drive for a conditional use perrnit revision and the Code Amendment for Nonconforming Uses but because of the bad weather in Wisconsin, Menards requested this itern be tabled until March 27, 2006. The conditional use permit for Comfort Bus on Rice Street was reviewed. They also discussed the MnOot land on Highway 120 and Holloway Avenue, which was a continuance from January's meeting. d. Mr. Grover will be the planning commission representative at the March 27, 2006, city council meeting. Items to discuss include the second reading of the Nonconforming Use Ordinance Amendment and Menards at 2280 Maplewood Drive for a conditional use permit revision and the Code Amendment for Nonconforming Uses. e. Mr. Yarwood is scheduled to be the planning commission representative at the April 1 0, 2006, city council meeting. Staff is not sure if there will be a need for a planning commission representative at this time. f. Update regarding the HRA meeting, Tuesday, March 14, 2006. Chairperson Fischer said Central Community Housing Trust (CCHT) gave a presentation regarding the possible development on the St. Paul Tourist Cabin site for affordable and market rate housing. CCHT gave a nice presentation and it looks like they build nice developments around the twin cities. CORB member Linda Olson was present and some of the Gladstone residents were also present. When the city makes a final decision regarding the Gladstone area, the developer of the tourist cabins site said they will comply with the city requirements. g. Training materials discussion Chairperson Fischer said training materials have been included in the packet. The sessions are informative and worth while to attend. Mr. Roberts said there is money in the budget for planning commissioners to attend training sessions. If you are interested in attending any of these training sessions please call the Department Secretary, Andrea at 651-249-2301 or Ken Roberts at 651-249-2303. Commissioner Trippler said he plans on attending the session regarding the Comprehensive Plan in SI. Louis Park and if anyone wants to carpool let him know. Chairperson Fischer said the local government publication was included in the packet and there are some questions in it that are very interesting and you could apply some of them to the Gladstone area. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-20-06 X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS None. XI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m. -22-