Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/06/2007 MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesdav. February 6, 2007, 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. December 19, 2006 b. January 16, 2007 5. Public Hearings 7:00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Gladstone Redevelopment Plan (English Street and Frost Avenue area) 6. New Business None 7. Unfinished Business None 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations January 22 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson February 12 Council Meeting: Mr. Desai February 26 Council Meeting: Mr. Hess March 12 Council Meeting:?? (was to be Ms. Dierich) 10. Staff Presentations a. Permanent meeting night change - now on Tuesdays 11. Adjournment DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2006 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the rneeting to order at 7:03 p.rn. II. ROLL CALL Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Cornrnissioner Mary Dierich Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Cornrnissioner Michael Grover Cornrnissioner Harland Hess Cornrnissioner Gary Pearson Cornrnissioner Dale Trippler Cornrnissioner Jererny Yarwood Absent Present Present Present at 7:03 p.rn. Present Absent Present Absent Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Cornrnissioner Trippler rnade a request to discuss the Rice Street Corridor Task Force during Cornrnission Presentations. Cornrnissioner Trippler rnoved to approve the agenda as arnended. Cornrnissioner Hess seconded. The rnotion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ayes - Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Hess, Trippler Approval of the planning cornrnission rninutes for Decernber 5, 2006. Cornrnissioner Trippler had one correction on page 5, under b. Carrnax discussion, in the 2nd paragraph, sixth sentence, first word, should be too instead of !we. Cornrnissioner Trippler rnoved to approve the planning cornrnission rninutes for Decernber 5, 2006, as arnended. Cornrnissioner Hess seconded. Ayes - Fischer, Hess, Trippler Abstentions - Dierich & Grover Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -2- V. PUBLIC HEARING Saint Clair Hills Development (Carver Avenue, east of 1-494) (Development Moratoriurn Variance and Rezoning (R-1(R) to R-1) (7:06 - 8:24 p.m.) Mr. Roberts said Mr. Jarnie Jensen, representing Tyrus Land Cornpany, is requesting city approval of a variance to a rnoratoriurn and a zoning rnap change. He is asking the city for these approvals for the undeveloped property on the south side of Carver Avenue east of Sterling Street. On Novernber 13, 2006, the city council gave second reading to a rnoratoriurn ordinance for rnany of the properties south of Carver Avenue. The adoption of this ordinance by the city council prohibits any developrnent or subdivision of any property south of Carver Avenue that the city has zoned F (farrn residence) and R-1 (R) (rural residential). This rnoratoriurn includes the properties in this request. Mr. Jensen is requesting a variance to the rnoratoriurn so the city rnay consider a zoning rnap change for the property. The city cannot consider the zoning rnap change for the property with the rnoratoriurn that is now in place unless the city approves a variance to the rnoratoriurn. Mr. Roberts added that the state statue requires the city to notify residents within 350 feet of a project site but staff extended the area to all those within 500 feet frorn this proposal and to all those on Carver Avenue between 1-494 and Century Avenue. Staff received one cornrnent forthe proposal and 24 responses against the proposal including the e-rnail that was handed out priorto the start of the planning cornrnission rneeting frorn Joe and Michael Bailey. Chairperson Fischer asked if the planning cornrnissioners had any questions for staff? No questions were asked of staff. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the cornrnission. Mr. Jarnie Jensen, Developer, Tyrus Land Cornpany, 2483 - 15th St NW, Suite C, New Brighton, addressed the cornrnission. He said he's here to request the change in the zoning frorn R-1 (R) to R and the rernoval of rnoratoriurn in south Maplewood. It is his position to find out what the city requirernents are in order to develop property in Maplewood. He said if he rneets the requirernents he should be allowed to develop his property in Maplewood. He said in this case he thinks he rneets the requirernents and should be able to proceed with developrnent. The zoning requirernent is R-1 (R) which requires a 2-acre rninirnurn for the developrnent. He read frorn page 5 of the south Maplewood sewer study the proposed land uses in south Maplewood assurning that the area will be served with sanitary sewer. In areas where sanitary sewer is not instal/ed, the city may want to consider modifying the land use to more of a rural residential use with the minimum lot size as discussed before. The first step is to get sanitary sewer, if you can't get sewer than you look to the larger lot size. Then you would ask, what has the city told developers as far as the irnport of sanitary sewer? Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -3- Mr. Jensen said the first thing he looked at was the city utility code which reads at 40.96 any building used for human habitation or for human occupancy located on property lying inside the city shal/ be connected to the municipal sanitary sewer system within one year from the time that a connection is available to any such property. Additional/y, al/ buildings constructed within the city on property adjacent to a sewer main or in a block through which the sewer extends shall be provided with a connection to the municipal sanitary sewer system for the disposal of al/ human waste. Sanitary sewer is nurnber one. They're not looking for individual sewer systerns. Looking further under the rules of subdivision 34-10 section 11, it states: Before an individual sewer treatment system may be instal/ed, the city manager decides that city sanitary sewer is not available. He said that is another indication that the sanitary sewer systern carnes first, when available. Sanitary sewer is available to this property and staff has indicated that the sewer connect is about 400 feet away frorn the property in question. Mr. Jensen put a rnap on the overhead showing this area in (sewer area 70 as shown on the Maplewood sewer rnap). He put the sewer as-builts on the overhead to represent where the end of the city sanitary sewer line and where the water rnain extends. (To hirn this represented that the sanitary sewer line and water rnain are available to his property.) He said he went to the engineering departrnent with this plan when he first proposed it and the engineering departrnent said the sewer and water services are well within the proxirnity to the property. Mr. Jensen said under the City of Maplewood's ordinances, as the developer he is required to use the city sanitary sewer and water services if there is a sewer line to the property. He said this rnap is frorn 1996,7 years before the R-1(R) designation was even put in. Why is this area indicated as R-1 (R)? Why is there a two lot rninirnurn in this area? This would have corne frorn the sewer study in 2003. The city rnap shows this area as sewer area 70. Mr. Jensen said the south Maplewood sewer study on page 2 states, there are 8 districts within this study area which include sewer district 50, 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57 and 58. Sewer district 70 is not part of the south Maplewood sewer study and shouldn't have been rnade R-1 (R). However, it was touched on when the sewer study was done. In an earlier rnerno frorn Ken Roberts, it states for district area 70 a gravity sewer can serve district 70 and the sanitary sewer flows frorn the 240- acre Bailey Nursery parcel in Woodbury and Newport serve it. When the city or a developer extends the rnunicipal sanitary sewer services to serve district 70, the new pipe rnust be sized large enough to serve the 240-acre parcel of Bailey Nursery. The Carver Lake interceptor is large enough and the interceptor can be attached. Now he has a property where the city requires the developer to use sanitary sewer, it's zoned for 2 acre lot rninirnurns, which you don't use sanitary sewers for. Now he is stuck between a rock and a hard place. This property should never have been zoned R-1 (R) and should have rernained zoned R-1 and rnust follow the Maplewood rules regarding the utilities and subdivisions and use sanitary sewer. Then we corne to the south Maplewood rnoratoriurn question of whether or not this property should be rernoved frorn the south Maplewood rnoratoriurn or left alone. The question is that the rnoratoriurn is put in place to study the area to find out what it should be and in this particular case there is nothing else the property could be zoned. The zoning rule 44.9 gives 7 different zoning districts. The zoning districts are (F)Farrn, (R-1 (R) if that ever gets put in), R-1, R-1 (S), R-2, R-3 R-E. This property has to be zoned either R-1, R-1 (S), R-2 or R-3 for single farnily, twin hornes or rnulti-farnily. He said at this point he is asking for the lowest density allowed where sanitary sewer and water are present. With the rnoratoriurn the question becornes, what can this property ever be which is R-1 (R). Because of the sanitary sewer it will have to be zoned R-1, it is not going to end up being R-E or R-1 (R) because if it is, then you will have to have individual sewer systerns where sewer and water are available which would violate the city code. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -4- Mr. Jensen said he's looking to be steered one way or the other. The Maplewood rules say you have to use the sewer and water connection because it is there, if the sewer is available, you can't use individual sewer systerns, and if you don't use individual sewer systerns, you have an R- 1 (R) district. A delay would be expensive to sit on property for 1 year to wait forthe rnoratoriurn to be lifted when nothing is going to change. He would request that the zoning be changed frorn R- 1 (R) to R-1 and that the rnoratoriurn be lifted frorn this area. Cornrnissioner Trippler said in the research that you did, did you read any language that says the city is required to have lots srnaller than 2 acre lots whether there is sewer there or not? Mr. Jensen said he hadn't read such language, he has looked for sornething that would be that abundantly clear, but he couldn't find anything. Cornrnissioner Trippler asked if he thought the city had the authority and the right to create a zone that allows 2 acre lots? Mr. Jensen said yes, where there is no sewer or water service. Cornrnissioner Trippler asked where the code rnakes that distinction? Mr. Jensen said it doesn't rnake it that clear, it would be nice. It would be inferred frorn the language that he read frorn the south Maplewood sewer study, the proposed residential land uses assurne that the areas will be served with sanitary sewer. In areas where sanitary sewer is not installed, the city rnay want to consider rnodifying the land use to a rnore rural residential use. That is a back door way of trying to get there. It's sort of assurned, which is always a rnistake, then you are going to have an R-1 zoning where there is city sewer and water. Where there is no city sewer and water you can't have R-1 zoning, but it doesn't say here is sewer so you can't have a 2-acre lot. People can buy land and put city sewer and water in but it wouldn't be anticipated that would be the case. He wished it was that clear. Cornrnissioner Trippler said if you acquired a piece of property in this area which was a 2 acre lot and you built a house on it and you put in city sewer and water would that be a possibility? Mr. Jensen said yes it's possible, but it's enorrnously expensive. Cornrnissioner Trippler said the developrnent you are proposing doesn't in any way, shape or forrn fit in with R-1 (R) zoning designation; it doesn't fit in with the neighborhood, or with this area of Maplewood. Why wouldn't you rnake a proposal if you wanted to develop this property to have 2 acre lots with a house on each 2 acre lot? Mr. Jensen said that would not rnake financial sense. He knows the city can disregard any financial considerations but it's no secret that he's in it for the cornrnercial purpose. He is trying to bring the property, as any developer would, to its highest and best use. Having two 2 acre lot rninirnurns with sanitary sewer is nowhere near its highest use. In the future, the Bailey Nursery property is going to develop into rnany parcels and if they go with R-1 zoning that would be 720 hornes within several hundred feet of this property. If they go with higher than R-1 (R) zoning they could build over 1,000 hornes. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -5- Mr. Jensen said everything in the city's docurnentation says, the Bailey Nursery property developrnent is corning, be ready for it and be ready with the sewer systern. This Bailey Nursery property isn't even in Maplewood but your docurnentation says "be ready for it". But the docurnentation says lets get ready for the future developrnent. He's on the road "to" the future Bailey property and he would like to get started. What Maplewood is saying is you are going to be required to have 2 acre rninirnurn lots until the Bailey farnily decides to sell, then Maplewood will bring the sewer line up to the property and charge you (the developer) for it. When the sewer line goes "by" his property he will be assessed as it goes up to Bailey Nursery property, but in the interirn he has to sit on 2 acre lots and he said that isn't fair. Cornrnissioner Trippler said Mr. Jensen is jurnping the gun considerably. The purpose of the rnoratoriurn as he understands it's to give the city the opportunity to look at the R-1 (R) zoning classification and decide if it applies, if the city wants to rnaintain the R-1 (R) zoning in this area of Maplewood then the city council will do that. It's very likely he thinks, given the tone of the city currently, that the R-1 (R) zoning will rernain in south Maplewood whether there is sewer here or not. He firrnly believes the cornprehensive plan is going to be changed to reflect the R-1 (R) zoning which should have been changed in 2003 when it was first proposed and put into place. Whether or not the Bailey Nursery property becornes the next downtown or not is beyond Maplewood's control. That property is located in Woodbury, not in Maplewood. What we do have control over is this area of south Maplewood where Mr. Jensen wants R-1 zoning in an area the city has zoned R-1 (R). In Mr. Jensen's letter all he read was a justification for why it should be zoned R-1 and he didn't see any justification as to why it should be given a variance frorn the rnoratoriurn. Mr. Jensen said there were two letters, and he asked if the cornrnission got the second letter? Mr. Roberts said the latest letter frorn Mr. Jensen is on page 12-14 of the staff report. Cornrnissioner Trippler said the letter he sees in the staff report is dated Novernber 14, 2006, nurnber 1., application for zoning change, nurnber 2., variance regarding south Maplewood rnoratoriurn. Cornrnissioner Dierich asked if this property went frorn (F)Farrn to R-1 (R) zoning? Mr. Roberts said he couldn't recall what the property was zoned in 2003. Cornrnissioner Dierich rernernbered that was what it was zoned. Which rneans when Mr. Jensen bought this property he knew it was zoned R-1 (R) right? Mr. Jensen said correct. Cornrnissioner Dierich said when she proposed the first rnoratoriurn in south Maplewood in 2003 as a planning cornrnissioner the cornrnission thought this property should be zoned R-1 (R) rather than (F)Farrn. She asked if there was any reason why as the developer you would have purchased this property thinking you could corne to the city and tell the planning cornrnission that the City of Maplewood would "have" to connect your property to the sewer line when the planning cornrnission had no intention of doing that? We did the south sewer study to rnake sure that the city was correct in assurning that there was not going to be sewer in that area and that is why sewer area 70 was not included. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -6- Mr. Jensen said he doesn't know what this panel had in rnind at that tirne but the Maplewood written code says if there is sewer available, you connect to it. Cornrnissioner Dierich said that is correct, "if' there is sewer "to" the property, you connect to it. But there "isn't" sewer "to" this property, so there is no reason for the city to hook you up to the city sewer and water. She said she doesn't understand your rational or your logic for that. Mr. Jensen said the sewer connection is within 400 feet of this property, which rneans it is accessible to the property. Cornrnissioner Dierich said it's accessible but it is not "on" the property and there is no requirernent for the city to hook you up. Mr. Jensen said you as the city are not allowed to put sewer "on" rny property without rny perrnission so there would never be sewer on rny property. You would put it "near" rny property and I could connect to it. Cornrnissioner Dierich said the sewer would be put in the street in front of your property and currently it is not in the street in front of your property. The planning cornrnission intended when we decided on this zoning to keep the property "rural" in character and you knew that corning into this. In her rnind, Mr. Jensen either has to wait the rnoratoriurn out or sell this property. The city would love to let you do whatever you want to do with this property but we have put a rnoratoriurn in place to study this to rnake sure we as a city are doing the correct thing for this particular area. In her rnind he has not given her or the cornrnission any rational as to why we should let you have an exception to the rnoratoriurn and nobody else. Mr. Jensen said you rnentioned keeping the property "rural" in character. He said he has been through the code and couldn't find any definition of what "rural character". If Maplewood has elernents of "rural character" in the code he would like to see it. Cornrnissioner Dierich said she lived three houses down frorn this property for 20 years and she knows it's rural in character, so don't tell her it isn't. Mr. Jensen said he is not speaking to her personally, he is just stating the city code does not specify a rural character. Cornrnissioner Dierich said the city has a rural code and has put that in place. We have zoned these particular pieces rural, whether you found it on the website or not, it's there. Mr. Jensen said he has read the entire Maplewood code and it's not in there. Cornrnissioner Dierich asked staff for assistance. Chairperson Fischer asked if it's in the code or if that is one of the pieces we were having the rnoratoriurn to put into place properly? Mr. Roberts said the R-1 (R) zoning code was adopted in August of 2003 and whether it has been put in all the updates and put on the website he can't speak to that. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -7- Mr. Jensen said he has looked and looked for that. Mayor Longrie had relied on the wording serni rural character and when that becarne part of the R-1 (R) zoning in 2003 the wording said in order to maintain the semi rural character of the property. Being an attorney hirnself, and knowing to look for that, the rule is; if there is a conclusion there rnust be a finding of fact, if there is a finding of fact there had to have been a study, if there was a study there rnust be sornebody that requested it. So he went back to look for it and discovered there were no conclusions rnade, there were no findings of fact, there was no study, there was no one that requested it, there is no serni rural character law in Maplewood. It's a declaration, but if this were to go to a court the court would say as every court has ever done, if Maplewood says there is a rural character, show us the definition of rural character in Maplewood. There is none so the courts would say, if you the City of Maplewood have this in your R-1 (R) zoning, what does serni-rural character rnean? The city didn't study it, you didn't conclude it, and therefore there is no "rural" character. Cornrnissioner Dierich asked if Mr. Jensen owned this property in 2003? Mr. Jensen said no. Cornrnissioner Dierich said then you don't know about the three or four rneetings the planning cornrnission had where they discussed this rural character and the rational behind it. The planning cornrnission looked at this code and passed it on to the city council. Mr. Jensen said there is no "rural character" in Maplewood. Cornrnissioner Dierich said that's your opinion. Mr. Jensen said he would ask for the findings then. Cornrnissioner Dierich said the inforrnation is available in the planning cornrnission rninutes frorn the rneeting in 2003. As an attorney you did a great job finding the codes so far. You can go back and look forthe 2003 planning cornrnission rninutes and the city council rninutes and you will see that. Chairperson Fischer asked staff where this inforrnation rnay be in writing? Mr. Roberts said the planning cornrnission and city council rninutes would be available on the internet and there should be copies of the staff reports available. Cornrnissioner Grover said it sounds like you aren't going to find a favorable planning cornrnission for this request. He said there is a difference of opinion here. Mr. Jensen thinks that having sewer and water accessible 400 feet away frorn where he wants to build rneans the city should connect hirn to the utilities. He asked what the city's responsibility is in terrns of sewer and water connection for a developrnent. Mr. Roberts said the Engineering departrnent told staff that a feasibility study would have to be done to see where things are now and how the sewer and water would need to be expanded there and at what depth and size the pipe would need to be. That level of detail has not been done yet. Cornrnissioner Grover asked how long a study like that would take? Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -8- Mr. Roberts said he would guess three to four rnonths. As a caveat the feasibility study would need to be ordered by the city council. The city Engineering departrnent can't just start a feasibility study on their own. Cornrnissioner Hess said the overhead showed the diagrarn of a sewer profile in the area or as- builts and Mr. Jensen was saying the 400 foot differential was rnore like 50 feet frorn there. Mr. Jensen said he was only guessing, he didn't have a ruler on that rnap. That was based on how wide his property is and how wide the neighboring property is and was only an estirnation. That was the as-built rnap. You would have to get the original size frorn the engineers and use an engineer's ruler. This is a reduced sized rnap that was used for faxing and is not to scale. Cornrnissioner Hess said regarding the south Maplewood rnoratoriurn, one of the iterns listed in the staff report regarding the findings for a variance is itern b. which states The application for a variance shall set forth special circumstances or conditions that the applicant alleges to exist and shall demonstrate that the proposed subdivision or development is compatible with existing or proposed land use and zoning. Based on the current zoning and the code as it is, what is it that you the developer felt was an undue special circurnstance for the variance request? Mr. Jensen said the special circurnstance was that the utilities were brought up to the property. This property is within the City of Maplewood yet there is constant reference to the Bailey Nursery property even though it isn't part of the study area the 240-acre parcel located southeast of Carver Lake was reviewed to deterrnine the sewer service should be provided frorn Maplewood. The parcel is owned by Baileys Nursery and is located in Woodbury. So what Maplewood is saying is we are going to set a sewer line for property that isn't even located in Maplewood to do not what "you the developer" wants but whatever the "future" Bailey Nursery property owner wants. If the future developer wants to build high rises they can do that and Maplewood will supply thern with the sewer connection. But as the developer of this property in Maplewood you have to get your own sewer connection and these need to be 2 acre lots which is an expensive option and not financially feasible for hirn and Maplewood isn't going to allow you to take this property to the highest and best use. The city staff has stated a feasibility study will have to be done. Yes, there would have to be a feasibility study if the "city" put the services in. If he as the "developer" puts the sewer service in there would be no need for a feasibility study and he could rnove forward. He said he carne to the Maplewood Engineering departrnent and said he wants to put the sewer in and the city said "they" would prefer to put the city sewer and water in because the city has the Bailey Nursery property in rnind. If he would be delayed 6 rnonths due to the need for a feasibility study, then he will rnove forward on his own. He said he doesn't need a feasibility study to tell hirn if this can be done or not. Cornrnissioner Hess asked Mr. Jensen if he had a copy of the ordinance frorn August of2003 that shows the R-1 (R) zoning designation? Mr. Jensen said yes. Cornrnissioner Hess said on page 11, Section 44, discusses lot sizes. He said it seerned odd to hirn that Mr. Jensen subdivided the parcels into 14 lots that should have been proposed as two 2- acre lots. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -9- Mr. Jensen said yes. On page 10,44-117, states this zoning districtis for the areas of Maple wood that are not suitable for suburban or track development because of topography, vegetation or other factors that make the instal/ation of municipal sanitary sewer unlikely. So, once again the city is stating if there is sewer available we connect to sewer, if we don't have sewer then we follow R-1 (R) zoning. Cornrnissioner Hess said he thinks you have to look at the "character" of this land. Mr. Jensen said you can look at the character if the city has a written rule about character, but they don't. Cornrnissioner Hess said he thinks that is what the R-1 (R) zoning states. Cornrnissioner Grover said if there isn't sewer available the zoning is R-1 (R) and that's what we have here. Who would pay for the sewer and water connection for developrnent ifthis connection was extended all the way to Woodbury? Mr. Roberts said the size and location of the sewer pipe would be studied as part of the feasibility study. The connection rnay not be extended all the way to Woodbury but if the connection were extended farther east, the pipe rnay have to be sized and set at a certain depth so that the connection could easily be extended in the future without tearing up any recently installed pipe. So in 5 or 10 years frorn now, if there was a need for the sewer and water connection, it would be ready to connect. As far as who pays for the sewer and water connection, the sewer users pay, the benefiting property owners pay, and the city pays the Metropolitan Council who runs the rnetro area sewer systern. As Mr. Jensen said, there is a sewer interceptor under Carver Avenue and the sewer pipes would be extensions frorn that, which would also require perrnits frorn the Metropolitan Council for those extensions. Cornrnissioner Grover said in terrns of developrnents throughout the city, is it the policy of the Public Works departrnent to allow developers to do their own sewer work? Mr. Roberts said in rnore recent years it has been the city's policy and direction that the city does the sewer irnprovernents and extensions where there are public irnprovernents on public streets. If there are developrnents on private streets like a townhorne developrnent, the policy has been rnore to allow the developer to install the private sewer systern because the sewer systern would be rnaintained by a private association. The direction for public extensions and public streets would be done as a public irnprovernent project with the city coordinating the work. Cornrnissioner Trippler asked staff to put the zoning rnap on the overhead screen. He asked Mr. Jensen if he knew what (F) zoning was? Mr. Jensen said yes, (F) stands for the Farrn zoning district. Cornrnissioner Trippler asked Mr. Jensen if he would agree Farrn zoning is associated with rnore rural areas then downtown central business district areas? Mr. Jensen said as I stand out on the street, I would agree, but looking at the law, I wouldn't agree. The (F)Farrn you have in Maplewood has no lot lirnit which could rnean a lot 10 X 10. There is no requirernent for size, frontage, depth, size of house, length of driveway, or anything. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -10- Cornrnissioner Trippler said even though the zoning rnap shows (F)Farrn zoning surrounding this property you still contend that this has no "rural" characteristics whatsoever? Mr. Jensen said you indicate "rural" characterization as sornething we should all "get". A city is not perrnitted to just "get" it, it has to be a written rule. He has to be able to refer to the city code and say what is the definition of "rural" in character and show hirn what is the written code for rural. There is very little of it in here anyway. There is no written law. If you were to say "rural" character he would say there has to be a cow or sornething on the property, it has to be a farrn, or wording like that but Maplewood has no such thing. When he looked at the property to purchase it he saw serni-rural character. He asked hirnselfwhat is rural character, what is serni-rural character, there is none. Cornrnission rnernbers keep referring to rninutes that represent what was discussed but rninutes are not laws, and discussions are not laws either. Cornrnissioner Trippler said only an attorney could look at lots zoned (F)Farrn and conclude that it has no "rural" character to it. Chairperson Fischer asked if one of the reasons we went to the rnoratoriurn in south Maplewood was that sorne of the intent, zoning, and terrninology were not in sync with each other and the rnoratoriurn gave the city rnore tirne to put that together. Mr. Roberts said that is part of what will be studied. Cornrnissioner Dierich said she is having trouble understanding why we are arguing about sewers connections and whether this is rural or not rural. The city rnade a decision to have R-1 (R) zoning here and rnade a decision not to put sewer or water in that area at this point and have upheld that decision for a fairly long tirne now. Her rnind has not changed since the city rnade that decision. The sarne houses are in the sarne neighborhood, things look the sarne there and the question she has is shall we break the rnoratoriurn or not? It's wonderful Mr. Jensen that you are able to link together obscure pieces of the ordinances in order to try and rnake your case and hope this goes your way. But you haven't rnade your case for the planning cornrnission to break the rnoratoriurn. Unless she hears sornething that rnakes the cornrnission want to break the rnoratoriurn she isn't sure why we are discussing the other things peripheral to the issue. Cornrnissioner Trippler asked if there was anything in the Maplewood ordinance that require the only application of R-1 (R) is in areas where there are no sewers? Mr. Roberts said he didn't know if it was specifically written like that. Clearly the intent for the R- 1 (R) zoning was for non-sewered areas. It could be applied elsewhere, but that was the prirnary intent for it. Cornrnissioner Trippler asked if it was written in any of the Maplewood ordinances that if you have sewers you can't have R-1 (R) zoning? Mr. Roberts said no. Mr. Jensen said all the rules relative to developrnent have to be Arnerica is the Land of the Free. He said this is his property to do with what he wants, subject to the city of Maplewood's reasonable "written" rules. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -11- Cornrnissioner Dierich said the rules are written. Staff will have to dig thern out and give thern to you Mr. Jensen. Mr. Jensen said those rules can be upheld as long as they are reasonable. Once there is sewer to the property and once you corne up with R-1 (R) zoning that says "where sewer is not available", you have the larger lot size. It then becornes incurnbent on the city to say why he can't have it, then the burden changes. At this point he said he is requesting the change in zoning and the rernoval of the rnoratoriurn. He said he can see where his request is going. He turned to the audience and said the audience carne to cornrnent on this request. Chairperson Fischer asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak regarding this proposal. Mr. Jirn Kerriqan, 2620 Carver Avenue. Maplewood, addressed the cornrnission. His letter is attached in the staff report on page 10. He said he is opposed to the request to rernove the rnoratoriurn and the request to change the zoning. Mr. Kerrigan said part of the reason for the rnoratoriurn is to take a look at the area and the zoning and deterrnine if there needs to be a new zoning classification. Mr. Jensen said there are too rnany lirnitations on this property. City's need to look at their land use laws and see what is best for the area. Mr. Jensen said he is being treated unfairly. If Mr. Jensen can prove that in court he doesn't think Mr. Jensen would win his case. Cornrnissioner Grover asked if the city had ever granted a variance in any other area in the city that had a rnoratoriurn? Mr. Roberts said a variance was granted in 2001 for a parcel of land by Maplewood Mall where the old Bennigan's Restaurant is. There was a rnoratoriurn on property frorn the east side Southlawn Drive to the west side of Hazelwood Avenue and frorn Bearn Avenue to County Road D. The parcel was an outlot that was part of the shopping center and the city council felt the use was consistent and nothing was going to change and the council granted the variance request. Chairperson Fischer asked staff if there were any rnoratoriurns that ended early or if there were any rnoratoriurns that went longer than anticipated? Mr. Roberts said rnost of the rnoratoriurns have gone the full length of tirne and sorne rnoratoriurns have even gone longer. Mr. David Ledo. 14511 Oakhill Road N.. Scandia, addressed the cornrnission. He is the personal representative for the Ledo farnily that own the five acres irnrnediately to the west of the proposed developrnent. At the present tirne he is neither for nor against the rnoratoriurn because this property isn't for sale, but in the next few years it will be. His aunt is in a living trust and when the trust is dissolved he will be forced to sell. His question is, has anything been started to study the area for the rnoratoriurn yet? Mr. Roberts said the rnoratoriurn was put in place in Novernber. Staff is preparing to start on this and doesn't think anything substantial would be cornpleted for at least 6 months. Cornrnissioner Grover asked if that precluded the Ledo farnily frorn selling the property? Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -12- Mr. David Ledo, 14511 Oakhill Road N" Scandia, addressed the cornrnission. He is the personal representative for the Ledo farnily that own the five acres irnrnediately to the west of the proposed developrnent. At the present tirne he is neither for nor against the rnoratoriurn because this property isn't for sale, but in the next few years it will be. His aunt is in a living trust and when the trust is dissolved he will be forced to sell. His question is, has anything been started to study the area for the rnoratoriurn yet? Mr. Roberts said the rnoratoriurn was put in place in Novernber. Staff is preparing to start on this and doesn't think anything substantial would be cornpleted for at least 6 rnonths. Cornrnissioner Grover asked if that precluded the Ledo farnily frorn selling the property? Mr. Roberts said the Ledo farnily can sell their property; they just need to be aware of the rnoratoriurn. Mr. Ron Cockriel. 943 Century Avenue N.. Maplewood, addressed the cornrnission. He said thank you for putting the rnoratoriurn in place and suggesting this to the city council. There are rnany issues with this property in south Maplewood. Everyone with property in this area wants to know what they can do to rnaintain what property they do have in this area or sell it to be developed. These are real questions that hopefully the rnoratoriurn will address these questions. Let's get the inforrnation out there and spend the tirne to deterrnine what the highest and best use of this property is and what the city wants done with this property. As property owners will need to know what they can do and if they can afford the taxes on their property. There was a Rarnsey County Open Space sign on this property for about 30 years and recently that sign as well as other open space signs are now down and he wondered what happened to the signs. He wants to rnake sure the rnoratoriurn rernains so the city can study the area and deterrnine what is best for the property owners. Mr. Mark Weiqel. 2720 Carver Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the cornrnission. He said part of the reason for the rnoratoriurn is to answer the questions that are being raised. How is the rnoratoriurn study going to be done and are the neighbors going to be part of this study? The developer has also stated this property isn't rural in character because a highway runs through the property and there are supposedly planes flying overhead. Mr. Roberts said staff doesn't have the full report regarding how this rnoratoriurn study would be done. There are rnany interested people in the area so the city would be silly to not include these people in the process. It has not been decided yet how the study would be done or who would be involved in the study. The city is aware there are rnany people very concerned and the neighbors have a lot of good ideas and know things that would be good for the city to be aware of. Mr. Weigel said he would suggest the city widen their range of notifying the neighbors in the area to keep everyone involved and aware of the study and the plans for the area. Cornrnissioner Dierich said staff needs to look at the property behind Mr. Weigel, those people behind Mr. Weigel have an easernent for sewer frorn the Bailey property, as do the people down the hill and the people down the hill frorn those people. Before the city can begin to think about putting sewers in here we need to think about disturbing all these property owners. She doesn't see this happening. Especially since Joe Bailey stated he is not selling his property and has no intention of selling at this point. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -13- Mr. Georqe Gonzalez. 2359 Heiqhts Avenue. Maplewood, addressed the cornrnission. He lives in the rnoratoriurn area but he knew nothing about this application, proposal or tonight's rneeting until he heard about it by word of rnouth. The 500 foot notification area in a rural neighborhood like this is a problern. There could have been a lot rnore than 20 people here tonight if all the residents in Maplewood would have been notified about this rneeting and been given a chance to respond. The Bailey farnily couldn't be here tonight because of a funeral in California. He thanked Cornrnissioner Trippler for his knowledge of the zoning laws and the raw character of this land. He hopes the city will keep the rnoratoriurn in place. To lift the rnoratoriurn for one developer would only rnean other developers will be asking for the sarne thing. Cornrnissioner Grover asked how rnany people live in the rnoratoriurn area? Would it be too difficult to notify a larger area regarding upcorning proposals? Mr. Roberts said it wouldn't be "irnpossible" to do. Cornrnissioner Trippler said it occurred to hirn that rnany of the people cornrnunicated to staff through e-rnail. He recently logged on to the city website and he was able to go through the governrnent notification process where you can get notices sent to you via ernail each tirne there is a notice put on the city website. He asked staff if it would be possible to set sornething sirnilar up like that for people who live in this area of the rnoratoriurn so they could log in and request notices are sent via e-rnail to thern whenever sornething cornes up? Mr. Roberts said staff would have to check on that with the IT staff. Cornrnissioner Trippler said it's a free service. He said as rnuch as it would be nice to notify everyone in the city of Maplewood that can be an enorrnous expense at .39 cents a piece. If the city could send sornething electronically that could be a good way of handling that. Cornrnissioner Hess asked if there is sornething that we can put in the language to expand frorn the notification area frorn 500 foot property for large parcel areas like this where the lots are large in order to alert rnore people because he has heard that cornplaint during other proposals too. Mr. Roberts said state law only requires the city to notify people within 350 feet of a site. The city policy has been to expand that notification area to 500 feet. Whether its 600 feet or 2 rniles there are people that think they should be notified about a proposal. He has heard there are people that are interested in knowing what is going to happen in the rnoratoriurn area. He has a hard tirne understanding the direct concern of people living on Haller Lane regarding a developrnent on Carver Avenue. He understands how it affects the people that live within the rnoratoriurn but the people that live in the area that is zoned RE-40 and are not subject to the rnoratoriurn. The land around thern is subject to the rnoratoriurn and the area could change as developrnent rnay or rnay not develop in the future. We as a staff have to rnake judgrnents as to who to rnail inforrnation to. Word of rnouth has been a great way to spread the news. If there are people that want to be added to the rnailing list they should let staff know. There rnay be a way to notify people electronically, staff doesn't know but could check with IT. Cornrnissioner Dierich said if staff would have stayed within the 500 feet notification area that would have included 5 neighbors. She rerninded staff that people in south Maplewood don't have cable and internet access is not as easy as you would like to believe. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -14- Mr. Vince Bastiani. 2513 Haller Lane. Maplewood, addressed the cornrnission. He said he's in support of the rnoratoriurn and he agreed with staff's cornrnents and conclusions. Mr. Jensen rnentioned in his proposal that there are two airports that have flight patterns over this neighborhood, which isn't true. He said he's a private pilot hirnself and those flight paths go over the refinery in Cottage Grove and this area doesn't see jet planes. Only srnall business jets fly in and out of the downtown St. Paul airport. We aren't even in the defined area for FAA for the downtown St. Paul airport. He noticed a rnonth ago during the hearing forthe rnoratoriurn that Mr. Jensen said he didn't have a problern with the rnoratoriurn. Now a rnonth later he's back "requesting" a variance as the developer of this property. Mr. Jensen said he's a private pilot as well and the runways that serve downtown Minneapolis are class B airspace which is 5 rniles on either side of the center line so it would be within it, it is not within the class D airspace of St. Paul but it is within the flight plan of that district. He said he did not have trouble with the rnoratoriurn at the previous hearing. Mr. Greq Thornpson. 1528 Haller Court S.. Maplewood, addressed the cornrnission. He's in favor of the rnoratoriurn. We are concerned not only for the rural character of the area but for the traffic in the area as well. There are two ways in and two ways out of this area. One is on Sterling Avenue and the other is Carver Avenue. If we put this rnany houses on this street and then other developrnent is added, soon you will have 400 to 500 houses in this area. Haller Lane is already dangerous when you corne out onto Sterling Street and he said he couldn't irnagine if another 60 houses were built with additional cars driving on this stretch of road with a speed lirnit of 35 rnph even though people drive faster than that. Chairperson Fischer asked if anybody else in the audience wanted to speak regarding the public hearing. Nobody carne forward. The chair closed the public hearing at 8:23 p.rn. Cornrnissioner Grover rnoved to deny the request of Jarnie Jensen for a variance frorn the developrnent rnoratoriurn forthe property south of Carver Avenue and east of Sterling Street. This variance would allow the city to consider a rezoning request for the properties in question. City staff is recornrnending this denial because: 1. Strict enforcernent of the rnoratoriurn ordinance would not cause an undue hardship to the property or to the property owner. 2. There is no special circurnstance or conditions in this case that warrant the city approving a variance to the rnoratoriurn. 3. The proposed rezoning (and then the proposed subdivision) would be prernature and would not be cornpatible with the land use and zoning designations. 4. The proposed rezoning and subdivision would not rneet the spirit and intent ofthe rnoratoriurn ordinance. Cornrnissioner Grover rnoved to deny the proposed zoning rnap change for the proposed Saint Clair Hills developrnent on Carver Avenue. City staff is recornrnending denial because: Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -15- 1. The request does not rneet all the criteria required by the city for a zoning rnap change. This is because the city cannot deterrnine if the proposed zoning change would have any negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and econornical extension of public services and facilities. 2. Staff is recornrnending that the city not grant the variance to the rnoratoriurn. The rnoratorium prohibits the city frorn considering rezoning or developrnent requests, unless the city approves a variance to the rnoratoriurn. Cornrnissioner Trippler seconded. Ayes - Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Hess, Trippler The rnotion to deny passed. Chairperson Fischer said the planning cornrnission rnakes the recornrnendation to the city council and the city council rnakes the final decision. This itern is tentatively scheduled to go to the city council on January 8,2007. 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 December 11,2006, city council meeting. Planning cornrnission iterns that were discussed included the Alley Vacation for Judy Driscoll, south of Frost Avenue and east of Walter Street, which the city council passed. The Walgreens proposal at the northeast corner of White Bear Avenue and Bearn Avenue for a land use plan arnendrnent frorn LBC to BC, a zoning rnap change frorn LBC to BC and a lot division, was passed by the city council. The Resolution of Appreciation for forrner planning cornrnission rnernber, Jirn Kaczrowski was passed by the city council. b. Mr. Yarwood was scheduled to be the planning commission representative at the December 18, 2006, city council meeting, but did not attend. Mr. Roberts gave the report of the December 18, 2006, city council meeting. Mr. Roberts reported the planning cornrnission iterns that were discussed included the Carrnax Auto Superstore (Northeast Corner of Highway 61 and Bearn Avenue) for a prelirninary plat and a conditional use perrnit for planned unit developrnent, which the city council recornrnended go back before the CDRB to finalize the building elevation changes the board had recornrnended. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -16- They also discussed the easernent vacation for Jensen Estates (north of Hoyt Avenue), which was passed by the city council. The city council adopted the Gladstone redeveloprnent plan 3- 2 with a few corrections. More inforrnation will follow regarding the Gladstone plan and when the final plan is available for people to see staff will let the cornrnission know how to get a copy. c. Chairperson Fischer received a telephone message from Commissioner Pearson requesting to trade planning commission meeting dates with one of the other commissioners for the January 8,2007, city council meeting. Cornrnissioner Trippler volunteered to trade planning cornrnission representative dates with Cornrnissioner Pearson. The only planning cornrnission itern to discuss at this tirne is the Saint Clair Hills Developrnent, off Carver Avenue, east of 1-494 for a Developrnent Moratoriurn Variance and the Rezoning frorn (R-1 (R) to R-1) d. Commissioner Pearson will cover the January 22, 2007, city council meeting. e. Rice Street Corridor Task Force discussion Mr. Roberts said Rarnsey County is forrning a task force to study land uses and other issues for the Rice Street corridor frorn Larpenteur Avenue through Shoreview to Highway 96. The areas affected include Maplewood, Little Canada and Shoreview. There are sorne bottleneck interchanges and intersections and the task force is going to look at how to elirninate those problerns. Rarnsey County was looking for representatives frorn the affected cities to serve on this task force. Chuck Ahl put together sorne narnes which include, Mr. Schroeder frorn Schroeder Milk, Michael Grover frorn the planning cornrnission, and Kathleen Juenernann frorn the city council serving as a citizen representative of Maplewood. Cornrnissioner Trippler said the reason he wanted to discuss this isn't because he has a problern with anyone on the task force. The problern he had was that historically over the 8 years he has served on the planning cornrnission, when a task force is put together if the planning cornrnission is to be involved staff cornes to the cornrnission with the request to put forth a candidate. It took hirn by surprise that sornebody within the city would decide for the planning cornrnission who they want to have as their advisor on this Rice Street Corridor Task Force. He thinks sorneone frorn the planning cornrnission should be on any task force when it cornes to discussing developrnent or planning issues. Having sorneone decide who they want to be on the task force is an overstretching of rnanagernent in his opinion. When rnanagernent starts dictating how the planning cornrnission should operate and what the cornrnission does then he thinks the cornrnission loses their ability to advise and he hopes this doesn't becorne a standard operating procedure. f. Miscellaneous Planning Commission Discussions Cornrnissioner Dierich asked if staff knew about the open space signs that disappeared that are now under private hands? Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -17- Mr. Roberts said he isn't aware of any publicly owned open space that sold and went private. Open space signs rnay be rnissing but he would think the city would have been notified by Rarnsey County if they sold Rarnsey County open space. He thinks it's just a case of rnissing signs rather than a change of ownership. Cornrnissioner Dierich said in the absence of Bruce Anderson, forrner Park and Recreation Director, who was so instrumental in protecting the land, who is going to be the new representative or advocate in Bruce's absence? Chuck Ahl is "for" developrnent and Bruce Anderson always said lets step back, look at things and rnake sure we are preserving the quality of Maplewood. She is very concerned about losing a staff rnernber like Bruce Anderson. Mr. Roberts said clearly there is a lost voice with the resignation of Bruce Anderson. The city recently appointed an Environrnental and Natural Resources Cornrnission who will take a close interest in the open spaces whether they are city or county open spaces, as well as looking at the wetland and tree ordinance. It was staff's understanding that DuWayne Konewko was going to be the staff liaison as the Environrnental Manager overseeing the Environrnental and Natural Resources Cornrnission. As part of the reorganization atthe city, funds have been put into the budget to hire a code enforcernent officer specifically for these concerns. The advocacy will shift frorn Bruce to DuWayne and the new cornrnission. Cornrnissioner Dierich suspected that the new cornrnission will be heard about as rnuch as the planning cornrnission? Mr. Roberts said he wasn't sure. Cornrnissioner Dierich said publicly there would not be the quality of life in Maplewood without Bruce Anderson working for the City of Maplewood all these years. This is a huge loss! She wanted to say thank you to hirn for everything he did for Maplewood She would hope a lot of people would write in to the city and say how rnuch they appreciated his work on Maplewood's behalf. He was a true visionary and it's a great loss losing Bruce Anderson after all these years. Mr. Roberts said his last day is today, Decernber 19, 2006. Cornrnissioner Dierich said she feels bad regarding what happened to hirn. Bruce will get to do sorne exciting things, but for the people of Maplewood it's a real loss. Chairperson Fischer said there are a few planning cornrnissioners whose terrns are expiring Decernber 31,2006, do you know what the process will be when theirterrns expire? Are they still rnernbers of the planning cornrnission until the city council does their interviews? Mr. Roberts said that is his understanding. There will be an application process for current rnernbers and new applicants and then interviews will be done by the city council. Chairperson Fischer said Mary Dierich, Harland Hess and Dale Trippler have terrns expiring Decernber 31,2006. Mr. Roberts said he is assurning that will be the process until he hears differently. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -18- Cornrnissioner Hess said he received a letter letting hirn know he has to go through the interview process. His letter stated the forrns needed to be returned by Decernber 29, 2006, and that he will be notified of interview schedule with the city council. Mr. Roberts said we will need a quorurn for the planning cornrnission so until you have heard sornething different please corne to the planning cornrnission rneetings. Cornrnissioner Hess said he would like to echo the cornrnents rnade by Cornrnissioner Dierich regarding the loss of Bruce Anderson frorn the Parks Departrnent. He worked with Bruce on a project for the Four Seasons Park next to his house on Flandrau Street. Bruce was a great advocate and went further than he needed to as a city ernployee and this is a great loss. Regarding the Environrnental and Natural Resources Cornrnission, he asked how rnany applicants they had and are there any openings still? Mr. Roberts said the city council had 11 applicants and the city council chose 7 people to serve on the Environrnental and Natural Resources Cornrnission. Cornrnissioner Trippler said he was one of the applicants and the city council interviewed 10 applicants and they chose 7 people to serve on the cornrnission. X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Reschedule the Monday, January 1, 2007, planning commission meeting because of the New Years Day holiday to either Tuesday, January 2,2007, or Wednesday, January 3,2007. If the rneeting were scheduled for Tuesday, January 2, 2007, Michael Grover, Harland Hess and Tushar Desai could not be present. The planning commissioners that were present preferred to meet on Wednesday, January 3, 2007. Gary Pearson spoke to the recording secretary via the telephone after the planning cornrnission rneeting date and said either date would work for hirn. Jererny Yarwood was out of town and will be available to respond after the Christrnas holiday. b. Reschedule the Monday, January 15, 2007, planning commission meeting because of the Martin Luther King holiday to either Tuesday, January 16, 2007, or Wednesday, January 17, 2007. Planning cornrnissioners Mary Dierich, Dale Trippler, Lorraine Fischer, and Michael Grover said Tuesday, January 16, 2007, worked forthern. Harland Hess said Wednesday, January 17,2007, worked better for hirn. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -19- c. Possible permanent meeting night change from Monday evenings to Tuesday or Wednesday evenings. Mr. Roberts said the city rnanager requested that staff check with the planning cornrnission to see about the possibility of a perrnanent rneeting night change. The city council rneetings have been ending very late and they rnay have to rneet every week and would like to have every Monday available for their rneetings. Such a change by the council would require rnoving the planning cornrnission rneeting night. If the city council needs every Monday evening to hold additional rneetings we would need to rneet either Tuesday or Wednesday evening. The goal of the city rnanager and sorne of the city council is to get rnore of the cornrnission rneeting's cable cast. Only the city council charnber is set up to televise rneetings. Groups like the Natural Resource and Environrnental Cornrnission and the Park and Recreation Cornrnission rneetings are not currently televised and the city rnanager and the city council would like those rneetings televised as well. Staff is looking for input frorn the cornrnissioners to bring back to the city rnanager. Michael Grover said it would be difficult for hirn to serve on the planning cornrnission if the rneeting was rnoved to Tuesday or Wednesday night so he would prefer to keep the planning cornrnission rneetings on Monday night. Having the planning cornrnission rneeting on a Monday evening was one of the things that attracted hirn to wanting to serve on the planning cornrnission. Lorraine Fischer and Harland Hess said if the planning cornrnission rneeting had to be rnoved frorn Monday nights they would both prefer the planning cornrnission rneeting be Wednesday night. Mary Dierich said she would prefer the planning cornrnission rneeting rernain on Monday evenings but if it has to be rnoved she would prefer Wednesday. Because the planning cornrnission rnet with a bare quorurn with the absence ofTushar Desai, Gary Pearson, and Jererny Yarwood, no decision was rnade at this tirne regarding which night would work better. We will discuss this issue again at the next planning cornrnission rneeting, however the consensus of the planning cornrnissioners seerned to be they preferred to keep the planning cornrnission rneeting on Monday evenings or on Wednesday evening. Chairperson Fischer pointed out that rnoving the rneeting to later in the week affects the recording secretary because she'll have a shorter tirne to get the rninutes done. It also affects staff's ability to get the planning cornrnission packet done and the departrnent secretary has a shorter tirne to copy and rnail the packets out so cornrnissioners can visit the sites before the planning cornrnission rneeting. XI. ADJOURNMENT The rneeting was adjourned at 9:01 p.rn. DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 2007 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the rneeting to order at 7:00 p.rn. II. ROLL CALL Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Cornrnissioner Michael Grover Cornrnissioner Harland Hess Cornrnissioner Gary Pearson Cornrnissioner Dale Trippler Cornrnissioner Jererny Yarwood Present Present Absent Absent Present Present Absent Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Cornrnissioner Pearson rnoved to approve the agenda. Cornrnissioner Desai seconded. Ayes - Desai, Fischer, Pearson, Trippler The rnotion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Because Cornrnissioner Desai and Cornrnissioner Pearson were not present for the Decernber 19, 2006, planning cornrnission rneeting we could not approve the rninutes. However, we discussed changes and clarifications to the rninutes so those could be rnade before the rninutes are brought back for approval at the next planning cornrnission rneeting. Cornrnissioner Trippler asked if it would be appropriate to recornrnend changes to the rninutes. Mr. Roberts said yes, then we can send the revised rninutes in the next planning cornrnission packet for approval. Cornrnissioner Trippler had corrections and clarifications to the rninutes on pages 5, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, and 18. On page 5, in the last paragraph, sixth line, delete the word rnoratoriurn. On page 11, seventh paragraph, first line, change the word tAe to there. On page 12, in the sixth paragraph, first line, after the word look, insert the word at. On page 13, fourth paragraph, last line, delete the words to thorn. On page 16, itern c. Cornrnissioner Trippler said Gary Pearson was not present at the rneeting and he asked that the staternent be reworded asked to clarify the staternent. Planning Commission Minutes of 01-16-07 -2- That staternent should now read Chairperson Fischer received a telephone message from Commissioner Pearson requesting to trade planning commission meeting dates with one of/he other commissioners for the January 8, 2007, city council meeting. In itern e., first paragraph, third line, delete the word area and change it to include, and on the last line, delete the word citizon. On page 17, second paragraph, fourth line, before DuWayne Konewko, add It was staff's understanding that DuWayne Konewko was. On page 18, itern a., fourth paragraph, Cornrnissioner Trippler asked for the sentence to be clarified regarding Gary Pearson being absent frorn the rneeting clarifying it to read Gary Pearson spoke to the recording secretary on the telephone after the date of the planning commission stating either date would work for him. Cornrnissioner Pearson rnoved to table the approval of the rninutes until the next planning cornrnission rneeting. Cornrnissioner Trippler seconded. Ayes - Desai, Fischer, Pearson, Trippler The rnotion to table passed. There was rniscellaneous discussion arnongst the planning cornrnissioners. Chairperson Fischer asked after the last planning cornrnission rneeting when the Maplewood residents frorn south Maplewood stated they wanted the city to notify a wider area of people when proposals corne to the city. That way a larger area of residents would be notified of proposals. Would this direction to widen the notification area have to corne frorn the city council before staff can proceed with this rule? The planning cornrnission and the Maplewood residents in the audience stated they felt a larger notification area should be used so they are rnade aware of proposals. If they hadn't heard about this proposal frorn word of rnouth they rnay not even know about the proposal for the Saint Clair Hills Developrnent (Carver Avenue, east of 1-494) because they didn't receive a neighborhood survey. Mr. Roberts said this is a topic of conversation that staff will have to check into but obviously the people rnade it clear that they would like a larger notification area. Cornrnissioner Trippler said on page 13 of the rninutes, in the fourth paragraph, he had asked staff to check with the IT staff regarding the governrnent notification process and if it would be possible for people to get notices sent to thern via e-rnail through the city. Mr. Roberts said he hadn't had a chance to check with the IT staff about that yet but he rnade a note to check on it. V. PUBLIC HEARING None. VI. NEW BUSINESS a. 2006 Annual Report Mr. Roberts said the city code requires that the planning cornrnission prepare an annual report to the city council by their second rneeting in February. This report should include the planning cornrnission's activities frorn the past year and the rnajor projects for the upcorning year. Planning Commission Minutes of 01-16-07 -3- In 2006, the cornrnission, in addition to the iterns listed in the staff report, attended a tour of developrnent sites and reviewed the AUAR forthe Gladstone Redeveloprnent Plan and the EAW for the Carver Crossing proposal. Cornrnissioner Trippler said in the 2006 Planning Cornrnission's Annual Report on page 4,2007 Activities, number 2., he would like to recornrnend an arnendment at the end of that staternent that staff shall report quarterly to the planning cornrnission on training planned for the next quarter. The reason for his request to arnendrnent this is that for the past 8 years that staternent has been included in the upcorning year's activities but it doesn't happen. In fact in the past the planning cornrnission has really had very little training. This is particularly irnportant now because as sorne of the planning cornrnissioners' terrns have expired and the city council will be interviewing and selecting new planning cornrnissioners training will be especially crucial because of the responsibility of updating and revising the Cornprehensive Plan. Chairperson Fischer, Cornrnissioner Pearson and Cornrnissioner Desai agreed that was a good idea. Mr. Roberts said staff has taken note of that. Staff has also noticed a change that needs to be rnade in the annual report. On page 2, under the 2006 Zoning Map Changes, under the Saint Clair Hills Developrnent the action should be changed under the council action frorn Pending to Denied. When the Annual Report was written staff didn't know what the action was at that time so now staff will rnake that change before this goes to the city council for approval. Cornrnissioner Trippler rnoved to approve the planning cornrnission's 2006 Annual Report as arnended. Cornrnissioner Desai seconded. Ayes - Desai, Fischer, Pearson, Trippler The rnotion passed. This itern goes to the city council on February 12, 2007. b. Resolution of Appreciation - Mary Dierich Mr. Roberts said Mary Dierich resigned frorn the planning cornrnission. Her e-rnail rnessage, resignation and a resolution of appreciation are included in the staff report. Cornrnissioner Trippler asked staff if a resolution of appreciation is sornething that is done for all people serving on cornrnittees, boards and cornrnissions? Mr. Roberts said he only has knowledge of what the Cornrnunity Design Review Board, Planning Cornrnission, and Housing Redeveloprnent Authority does. He wasn't sure what the Park and Recreation cornrnission or sorne of the newer cornrnittees do but the three groups he rnentioned do a Resolution of Appreciation. Cornrnissioner Trippler rnoved to approve the resolution of appreciation for Mary Dierich for her tirne serving on the planning cornrnission. Planning Commission Minutes of 01-16-07 -4- Cornrnissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes - Desai, Fischer, Pearson, Trippler The rnotion passed. This itern goes to the city council on February 12, 2007. c. Rules of Procedure Mr. Roberts said the planning cornrnission should review the rules of procedure for the planning cornrnission. Section L of the rules says the cornrnission should review the rules at the first planning cornrnission rneeting each year. Mr. Roberts said before tonight's rneeting he handed out the 2004 Appointrnent Policy and the 2005 PC rules. The cornrnission had already received the Rules of Procedure for 2007. In paragraph F. Director of Cornrnunity Developrnent, as part of the reorganization plan at the city there no longer a Director of Cornrnunity Developrnent. Staff would propose changing that to say Planning Department instead. In nurnber 2. it says Act as technical advisor to the cornrnission. Staff would propose that to say City Planning Staff in order to leave it rnore nonspecific. Typically staff does that anyway but those duties could shift and the clerical staff helps with that as well. If the planning commission officially needs to move their meeting night from Monday to Tuesday evening, item A. 2. will need to be changed accordingly. There was no further discussion by the cornrnission. Cornrnissioner Desai rnoved to approve the planning cornrnission rules of procedure starting on page two of the staff report. Cornrnissioner Trippler seconded. Ayes - Desai, Fischer, Pearson, Trippler The rnotion passed. This itern goes to the city council on February 12, 2007. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. Planning Commission Minutes of 01-16-07 -5- IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Mr. Trippler was the planning commission representative at the January 8, 2007, city council meeting. The only planning cornrnission itern to discuss was the Saint Clair Hills Developrnent off Carver Avenue, east of 1-494 for a developrnent rnoratoriurn and the rezoning frorn R-1 (R) to R-1, which was denied by both the planning cornrnission and by the city council. b. Mr. Pearson was scheduled to be the planning commission representative at the January 22, 2007, city council meeting; however, there are no planning commission items to discuss so it is not necessary to be present. c. Mr. Desai will be the planning commission representative at the February 12, 2007, city council meeting. Iterns to discuss include the 2006 Planning Cornrnission Annual Report, Resolution of Appreciation for Mary Dierich and the Rules of Procedure for the Planning Cornrnission. d. Mr. Hess will be the planning commission representative at the February 26,2007, city council meeting. It is unknown at this tirne what planning cornrnission iterns will be discussed. X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Possible permanent meeting night change from Monday to Tuesday or Wednesday. Mr. Roberts said it appears the next planning cornrnission rneeting would be on Tuesday, February 6,2007. He left the January 8,2007, city council rneeting at rnidnight so he couldn't say for sure what the final decision was regarding rnoving meeting nights. The planning cornrnissioner's preference was to continue holding the rneetings on Monday evenings and that the attraction to serving on the planning cornrnission was because it was on Monday evenings. I n fact one planning cornrnissioner said he rnay have to resign if the rneeting night is changed perrnanently to Tuesdays. Cornrnissioner Trippler said he attended the last part of the city council rneeting around rnidnight. It was pointed out by one of the city councilrnernber's that the ordinance states that the cornrnissions and boards shall establish their rneeting dates, however, the city rnanager is proposing that the city council would decide when the cornrnissions and boards would rneet. The city council rnay need to look at the ordinance to decide if there is a conflict in the ordinance or not regarding who has the right to rnake that change. If they have the right to change the rneeting dates then the ordinance needs to be changed to reflect that. This subject was tabled by the city council. The city rnanager also recornrnended that all the cornrnissions, boards and cornrnittees elect their officers the first rneeting of the year. However, the terrns expire Decernber 31 and the city council has not always been on top of the reappointrnent process. Planning Commission Minutes of 01-16-07 -6- For exarnple, three of the planning cornrnissioners have been notified in a letter that they need to reapply but haven't been notified "when" the city council would hold the interviews for those openings. The latest city news stated the deadline to apply was January 26,2007. Mr. Roberts said the Cornrnunity Developrnent departrnent is no longer involved in this process so he wasn't positive but he thought he had heard the interviews were going to take place on Monday, January 29,2007, Chairperson Fischer said the city would have to honor the date that was publicized then. She asked if the city council specifically addressed the election of officers before there were new appointments made for cornrnission or board rnernbers? Cornrnissioner Trippler said that was sornething he thought of when he was sitting in the audience but it wasn't a discussion that took place. Chairperson Fischer said if you had a nurnber of cornrnission or board rnernbers whose terrns were expiring there could be a good deal of turnover. If you have the current cornrnission or board rnernbers vote on the election of officers and then rnany of those people are not reinstated there would be new rnernbers who would be under the elected officer with no say as to who is elected as officer. If the city council interviewed rnernbers before the boards and cornrnissioners terrns expired on Decernber 31 then the new appointees would be in place by the beginning of the year. That's sornething the city council should be alerted to when they consider the process that needs to go forward. Cornrnissioner Trippler said the planning cornrnissions Rules of Procedure indicates how the planning cornrnission is supposed to elect the officers which states at the second rneeting of the year and that wording is already incorporated into the ordinances. No rnatter what the Mayor, City Manager, or city councilrnernber says, the comrnission is bound to follow the ordinance. Chairperson Fischer said unless they pass a new ordinance superseding that decision the ordinance is what we should be following. Cornrnissioner Trippler said the ordinance could be changed to reflect that decision but it hasn't changed at this point. He didn't think it was the responsibility of the planning cornrnission to change the ordinance, which would have to corne frorn the city council. Mr. Roberts said he would have to check into that. XI. ADJOURNMENT The rneeting was adjourned at 7:42 p.rn. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DATE: Greg Copeland, City Manager Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner Cornprehensive Land Use Plan and Map Arnendrnent - Gladstone City of Maplewood Gladstone Neighborhood (Intersection of Frost Ave. and English St.) January 30, 2007 INTRODUCTION Project Description The City of Maplewood is proposing to amend its comprehensive land use plan and map. The proposed amendment is for the Gladstone neighborhood located generally at the intersection of Frost Avenue and English Street, east of Trunk Highway 61 in the central portion of the city (refer to the Gladstone neighborhood aerial map attached separately). The city council adopted a rnaster plan for the Gladstone neighborhood (refer to the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan dated December 2006 attached separately). The master plan is intended to provide direction and guidance for the Gladstone neighborhood as it redevelops. The city intends to use the redevelopment plan as an appendix to the comprehensive plan as it relates to the Gladstone neighborhood. Request City staff is requesting that the planning commission review and make a recomrnendation to the city council on the proposed comprehensive land use plan and map arnendment in the Gladstone neighborhood. This amendment would change the comprehensive land use desi9nations in the area from light manufacturing (M-1), business comrnercial (BC), business commercial modified (BC-M), limited business commercial (LBC), medium multiple dwelling residential (R-3M), double dwelling residential (R-2), and single dwelling residential (R-1) to the land use designations as described in the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan which was adopted by the city council in December 2006. This includes land use designations which will be called Gladstone Medium (G-M), Gladstone High (G-H), and Gladstone Mixed Use (G M-U). Background March 2004 the city council established a top priority to be the redevelopment of the Gladstone neighborhood. December 2004 the city council initiated a master planning process for the Giadstone nei9hborhood generally defined as the area along Frost Avenue between US Highway 61 and Hazelwood Street and the area along English Street between Ripley Avenue and the Gateway Trail. January 10, 2005, the city council appointed a 20-member task force to guide the planning process. The task force was made up of city representatives (city council, planning commission, community design review board, housing and redevelopment authority, parks commission, and historical preservation commission), business owners, residents, and rnembers at large. August 8, 2005, the city council adopted a resolution directing the preparation of an Alternative Urban Area wide Review (AUAR) which is an environmental review that evaluates cumulative impacts resulting from multiple re-development projects spread over a larger area. March 23, 2006, the Gladstone task force recommended approval of the draft November 2005 Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. This plan proposed approximately 800 new housing units in the Gladstone redevelopment area. April 18, 2006, the city council heid a public hearing on the draft Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan dated November 14, 2005. During the public hearing the city council heard recomrnendations from various comrnission and board representatives and task force members as well as heard cornments from the public. June through December 2006 the city council held several workshops to review the draft Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan dated November 14, 2005. On December 12, 2006, the city council adopted the finai version of the Gladstone Neighborhood Redeveloprnent Master Plan. This plan proposes 650 new housing units in the Gladstone redevelopment area. On December 13, 2006, the Metropolitan Council approved $8.8 rnillion in Livable Communities grants to ten projects in seven cities. The development/redevelopment projects all demonstrated a cornponent of land use that connect development with transit, intensify land uses, connect housing and ernployment, provide a mix of housing affordability, and provide infrastructure to connect cornmunities and attract investment. The City of Maplewood was awarded the largest grant of the ten projects including $1.8 million to fund Phase I public irnprovements in the Gladstone Redevelopment area (refer to separately attached Phase I public improvement map). DISCUSSION The adopted redevelopment plan shows several land use changes that are not currently part of the cornprehensive plan such as allowing for a mixture of land uses including residential, retail, and neighborhood commercial. The redevelopment plan and proposed comprehensive plan arnendment will direct future developments within the Gladstone neighborhood with the following guiding principles: design the future land uses as a village concept, transform regional trails into celebrated village corridors, make Gladstone a compelling quality of life choice, weave natural systems and ecological functions into the built and recreational fabric, allow Gladstone's future to whisper stories of its past, make walkability the standard, think of Gladstone as a neighborhood for all stages of life, rnake the Gladstone master plan a rnodel for others to follow, and make multi-model links between Gladstone and areas beyond. St. Paul Tourist Cabin Site Developrnent Bart Montanari of Dabar Cornpanies, LLC, will be subrnitting a plan to the city to redevelop the 6.5-acre 5t. Paul Tourist Cabin site located at 940 Frost Avenue with senior housing (refer to attached prelirninary site plan and elevations). The current proposal calls for 180 senior housing units including 20 rnemory care units, 60 assisted living units, and 100 independent units. Walker Elder Care Services will market and manage the facility. Mr. Montanari indicates that the development will create 65 new full-time jobs and will include a library, fitness room (available to residents and non-residents), bank, beauty salon, theater, chapel, and deli. There would be 154 underground parking stalls, 70 surface parking stalls, a transit shelter along Frost Avenue, and several gardens and walking trails throughout the site. 2 Mr. Montanari has hired Link Wilson ofWAI Continuum to design the building. Mr. Wilson was the architect for the Surnmerhill Senior Cooperative building, which has been constructed on the Transfiguration Elementary School site, north of the Maplewood Nature Center. The senior housing building proposed on the St. Paul Tourist Cabin site will have three to four stories with each elevation being constructed of quality building materials. Staff has reviewed the preliminary plans for the project and finds that they meet the guiding principles and density allowances of the adopted Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. The property is currently zoned and guided as rnedium density rnultiple dwelling residential. The existing zoning on the property will allow for the proposed senior housing development. However, the city council rnust approve an arnendrnent to the city's cornprehensive land use plan in order to allow the number of units being proposed on the site (180 senior housing units). Mr. Montanari proposes to submit all required land use applications to the city for this development in March or April, with plans to break ground for the project in September 2007. Comprehensive Plan The Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment proposes densities for future land use patterns supporting approximately 450 to 650 new housing units. The Gladstone neighborhood is currently guided with seven different land use designations in the city's comprehensive land use plan including light rnanufacturing (M-1), business commercial (BC), business commercial rnodified (BC-M), limited business commercial (LBC), mediurn rnultiple dwelling residential (R- 3M), double dwelling residential (R-2), and single dwelling residential (R-1). The master plan reflects several land use changes that are currently not perrnitted under these land use designations such as allowing for a rnixture of land uses including residential, retail, and neighborhood commercial. In order to ensure the comprehensive land use plan will allow for future developments as proposed in the master plan, the city's cornprehensive plan (dated May 2002) rnust include the master plan as an amendment. The rnaster plan will serve as a separate document to the comprehensive plan as it relates to the Gladstone neighborhood. In addition, city staff is proposing to amend the comprehensive land use map in the area with three new land use designations called Gladstone Medium (G-M), Gladstone High (G-H), and Gladstone Mixed-Use (G M-U). The proposed land use designations will reflect the allowable densities in the Gladstone neighborhood as follows: G-M: G-H: G M-U: 7 to 12 unites per acre 12 to 30 units per acre 20 to 30 units per acre State statute requires that a cornprehensive plan amendment of this degree follow a review process to include a public hearing by the city's planning commission with final approval by the city council; notification of proposed arnendrnent to adjacent governmental units; and review and final action by the Metropolitan Council to ensure the amendment is in conformance with regional systern plans, consistency with the Metropolitan Land Planning Act requirements and Metropolitan Council policies, and compatible with adjacent comrnunities. Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. (planning consultants) prepared the Metropolitan Council's required comprehensive plan amendment submittal form. This form, along with a cover letter (cover letter and submittal form attached separately), will be subrnitted to the adjacent governmental units and the Metropolitan Council after the planning cornmission's public hearing. The proposed comprehensive land use amendment is described in detail on the submittal form. 3 Overall changes in the land use and density range can be found on page six, item ten. In addition, the existing and proposed land use designations map is found on Figures 3 and 5. The city council's final review of the cornprehensive land use plan and map arnendment is currently scheduled for February 26. The city council's approval of this proposed amendment would be subject to the Metropolitan Council's final approval. State statute allows the Metropolitan Council 60 days to review and take final action on comprehensive plan amendments. City staff will help facilitate and accelerate the process by following up with the adjacent communities and with the Metropolitan Council. When the city adopts new land use designations such as these, it is usually proposed at the same time as a new zoning district. The Hillcrest neighborhood is an example of this when the city council adopted the Mixed Use zoning district in 2004 and reguided land within the Hillcrest neighborhood to the Mixed Use iand use designation at the same time. If tirne permitted, city staff would do the sarne with the Gladstone neighborhood. But due to the time constraints of the cornprehensive pian amendrnent review process, St. Paul Tourist Cabin redevelopment proposal, and completion of a new zonin9 district, the city must review and adopt the proposed Gladstone comprehensive plan amendrnent before staff has time to complete the writing of the new zoning district. ZoninQ As with the cornprehensive land use designations in the area, the Gladstone neighborhood is zoned with several different zoning districts. These zoning districts are limited in their ability to influence and shape development towards the desired pattern and forrn expressed through the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. As such, a new zoning district is proposed which will enable the city to more clearly articulate and ultirnately achieve the desired pattern and character of uses within the area. City staff and the Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. are creating a form-based zoning approach and framework that will regulate development within the Gladstone neighborhood. Forrn-based codes address the relationship between building facades and the public realm, the form and mass of buildings in relation to one another, and the scale and types of streets and blocks. It places the primary emphasis on building type, dimensions, parking location, and fa<(ade features, and less emphasis on uses. It will stress the appearance of the streetscape, or public realm, over long lists of permitted uses. Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. has prepared an overview of the form- based zoning approach for the planning commission and city council's review (attached). City staff proposes to present the draft form-based zoning district (Gladstone Mixed Use) to the planning commission and community design review board by the end of February. After recomrnendations by the planning commission and comrnunity design review board, final review and adoption of the code by the city council is currently scheduled for March or April. Summarv The purpose of the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan is to help the public and private sector in planning for future physical, social and econornic development within the city, while considering surrounding cities and the region. The city's adoption of the Gladstone master plan as an amendment to the comprehensive plan, along with changing the comprehensive land use map to reflect the proposed Gladstone land use designations within the Gladstone area, is consistent with regional policies and will help manage projected population growth in the rnetropolitan area by fostering more residential and employment opportunities. 4 RECOMMENDATION Adopt the comprehensive land use plan amendment and map change resolution attached. This resolution changes the land use designations in the Gladstone area from light rnanufacturing (M- 1), business comrnercial (BC), business comrnercial modified (BC-M), limited business commercial (LBC), medium multiple dwelling residential (R-3M), double dwelling residential (R-2), and single dwelling residential (R-1) to the land use designations as described in the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan dated Decernber 2006. This includes land use designations which will be called Gladstone Mediurn (G-M), Gladstone High (G-H), and Gladstone Mixed Use (G M-U). The comprehensive land use plan arnendment is based on eight specific comprehensive plan land use and housing goals and four land use policies as follows: Goals: 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. Provide a wide variety of housing types. 7. Provide safe and attractive neighborhoods and commercial areas. 8. Plan rnulti-family housing with an average density of at least 10 units per acre. Polices: 1. Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents. 2. Disperse moderate-income developrnents throughout the city near bus lines. 3. Support innovative subdivision and housing design. 4. Protect neighborhoods frorn activities that produce excessive noise, dirt, odors or which generate heavy traffic. P:\com-dev\gladstone\comp plan and zoning\2-6-07 com plan public hearing memo Attachments: 1. Gladstone Neighborhood Aerial Map (separate handout) 2. Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan (separate handout) 3. Phase I Public Improvement Map (separate handout) 4. 81. Paul Tourist Cabin Site Preliminary Redevelopment Site Plans and Elevations (separate handout) 5. Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment Submittal Form (separate handout) 6. Form-Based Zoning Memorandum 7. Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment and Map Change Resolution 5 Attachment 6 MEMORANDUM Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. 11I13 ~n To: Shann Finawall Date: Brad Scheib, AICP Gladstone Neighborhood Plan Implementation~Regulatory Framework 31 January 2007 From: Subject: This memorandwn provides an overview for the zoning approach and a framework [or the ordinance that will regulate development within the Gladstone Neighborhood. This framework has been assembled so that it may serve as a basis for other districts within Maplewood with some modifications or potentially as is. The City of Maple wood's current zoning ordinance is limited in its ability to influence and shape development towards the desired pattern and form expressed tl-u-ough the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. Like many zoning codes, Maplewood's existing land use regulations focus on "land use" as the principle regulating feature. Districts are organized aroW1d permitted or conditional uses and density or lot size. Under a form-based zoning code, districts are organized more around a desired form and character of development. The form helps guide or dictate the proper use for the district. The Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan and ultimately the Comprehensive Plan establishes the desired character and form of development that a regulatory structure will be built around. A form-based zoning approach will enable the City to more clearly articulate and ultimately achieve the desired pattern and character of uses within the districts. The following outline provides the framework and content for the ordinance: Part I-General Ordinance Items-this section covers many of the basic elements necessary for construction of a zoning ordinance. A. Title B. District Descriptions/Purpose and Intent 1. Open Space district~intent is to have a single district that zones property as open space for what it is. Park lands would be included in this district. The purpose and intent would be to allow active and passive recreational uses, natural resource preservation and education, historical interpretation and public gathering. 2. Neighborhood l~intent for Neighborhood 1 is to accommodate a predominantly lower density neighborhood consisting of single family attached homes. This district is appropriate for redevelopment areas that are adjacent to existing single family residential districts and should serve as a transition to a more intense area. 3. Neighborhood 2~intent is to accommodate a more moderate density consisting of a mix of attached housing and stacked housing. The possibility for live-work units in this district provides for a mixed use character, however, the predominant pattern is residential. 4. Neighborhood 3~intent is to provide a village like development pattern with the predominant use being a true mix of residential and conunercial uses. Uses may be vertically or horizontally mixed. This district 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401-1659 Ph (612) 338-0800 Fx (6]2) 338-6838 www.hkgi.com Direct (612) 252-7122 Emai1 bscheib@hkgi.com Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan Regulatory Framework 25 January 2007 Page 2 would accommodate the highest level of density lintensity of all the districts and is meant to be an active lli'ban center for the neighborhood. C. Applicability (describes where use of the district is appropriate and requires a redevelopment or master plan to be completed prior to rezoning to establish basis for district) D. Definitions (where existing zoning code does not adequately defme key terms, new defmitions will be added) E. Administrative procedures (this part will describe how applications are submitted and reviewed if dilferently than existing processes and procedures) F. Consistency with other city policies and codes required (i.e. storm water, engineering standards and building codes) Part II-Site and Building Standards (addressed on a district level these are the basic standards that will be applied in the cllstrict---dues for these standards will be extracted from the Gladstone Neighborhood Master Plan particularly Chapter +) A. setbacks B. lot coverage C. lot frontage types (porches, stoops, fences, storefronts, patios, yards, etc...) D. building frontage types (% street frontage that is principle building) E. lighting (building and site) F. slgnage (building and site) G. building height H. building materials I. building facades J. landscaping requirements K. base density I site intensity L. sidewalks and site circulation systems M. parking quantities N. parking lot design and siting O. garage placement and design P. driveway access Q. mechanical! utility siting and design R. public space requirements Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan Regulatory Framework 25 January 2007 Page] S. open space/green space requirements T. others.... (this is a work in progress and others may be added) Part III-Sustainable Design Guidelines and Bonus Density Standards--this section is intended to offer incentives for development projects to incorporate the sustainable and eco-friendly design principles described in Chapter 4 of the master plan. A. Purpose of density bonuses B. Calculation of Density Bonuses C. Limits to bonuses D. Quahfying criteria and design standards a. Achievement of LEED certification b. Implementation of Low Impact Development standards (Green roofs-permeable pavers--cistern systems-resource cycling) c. Vertical setbacks d. Alternative parking strategies e. Public circulation systems f. Public amenities (street furniture etc.. ) g. Historical interpretation h. Accessible housing design features i. Others Part IV-use table-this section will establish a table that outhnes and describes uses that would be either permitted as-of- right, permitted with certain conditions or outright prohibited. This table will build off of other City of Maplewood zoning districts in terms of format and will implement directions from the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. Attachrnent 7 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION INCORPORATING THE ENTIRE 2006 GLADSTONE NEIGHBORHOOD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN INTO THE MAPLEWOOD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the applicant, the City of Maplewood, has prepared a master plan for the Gladstone Neighborhood (Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan dated December 2006) which neighborhood is generally described as the properties located east of TH 61 and the north and south sides of Frost Avenue and more accurately described in Exhibit A as attached; and, WHEREAS, the rnaster plan describes a desired land use pattern for the project area that consists of single dwelling residential, double dwelling residential, mediurn density multiple dwelling, high density multiple dwelling, mixed use, open space/park, public/semi-public and regional trails; and, WHEREAS, the master plan outlines a series of projects and actions that will move the Gladstone Neighborhood into the future with consistency in a vision that is commonly held by the Maplewood community and neighborhood; and, WHEREAS, the master plan defines approaches to implementation that include a comprehensive plan amendrnent and map change and potential amendments to regulatory tools; and, WHEREAS, the Maplewood City Council approved the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan on December 18th of 2006. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On February 5, 2005, the planning commission held a public hearing. City staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to speak and present written statements. The plannin9 cornmission recornmended that the city council approve the comprehensive land use plan arnendment and map change. 2. On the city council discussed the land use plan changes. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning cornmission and city staff. WHEREAS, the city council approve the above-described comprehensive land use plan arnendment and map change for the following reasons: 1. The land use plan change is based on eight specific Maplewood cornprehensive plan land use and housing goals as follows: a. Provide for orderly development. b. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods. 1 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. Minirnize conflicts between land uses. f. Provide a wide variety of housing types. g. Provide safe and attractive neighborhoods and commercial areas. h. Plan multi-farnily housing with an average density of at least 10 units per acre. 2. The land use plan change is based on four specific Maplewood cornprehensive plan land use policies as follows: a. Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents. b. Disperse moderate-income developments throughout the city near bus lines. c. Support innovative subdivision and housing design. d. Protect neighborhoods from activities that produce excessive noise, dirt, odors or which generate heavy traffic. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, as follows: The City of Maplewood adopts the entire Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan dated December of 2006, attached as Exhibit B, as an amendment to the city's comprehensive plan. The following land use designations will describe the Gladstone neighborhood and the allowable densities within those designations and will be adopted as part of the comprehensive plan: Gladstone Medium (G-M) - 7 to 12 unites per acre Gladstone High (G-H) - 12 to 30 units per acre Gladstone Mixed-Use - 20 to 30 units per acre The forgoing resolution was rnoved by Council member seconded by Councilmernber dated this 2007. and day of The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Council members voted in the negative: Diana Longrie, Mayor Attest: Karen E. Guilfoile, City Clerk 2