HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-09-1972 SMAGENDA
Maplewood Village Council
7:30 P.M., Thursday, November 9, 1972
Municipal Administration Building
Meeting 72 - 41
(A) CALL TO ORDER
(B) ROLL CALL
(C) PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Zone Change (R -1 to LBC) - West side of White Bear Avenue,
Frost Avenue to Larpenteur Avenue (7:30 P.M.)
2. Zone Change (R -2 to LBC) - East side of White Bear
Avenue north of County Road C (8:15 P.M.)
D) ADJOURN
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD VILLAGE COUNCIL
7:30 P.M., Thursday, November 9, 1972
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 72 -41
A. CALL TO ORDER
A special meeting of the Village Council of Maplewood, Minnesota was held in the
Council Chambers, Municipal Building and was called to order at 7:33 P.M. by
Mayor Axdahl.
ROLL CALL
Lester
G.
Axdahl, Mayor
Present
John C.
Greavu, Councilman
Present
Harald
L.
Haugan, Councilman
Present
Donald
E.
Olmstead, Councilman
Present
Donald
J.
Wiegert, Councilman
Present
C. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Zone Change (R -1 to LBC) - West Side of White Bear Avenue, Frost Avenue to
Larpenteur Avenue (7:30 P.M.)
a. Mayor Axdahl convened the meeting for a public hearing on the request for
a zone change from R -1 to LBC on the West Side of White Bear Avenue, from Frost
Avenue to Larpenteur Avenue. The Clerk read the notice of hearing along with
the dates of publication.
b. Manager Miller presented the staff report. (attached addendum No. 1)
c. Lyman Coombs, Chairman, Maplewood Planning Commission, read the following
Commission's recommendation:
"Commissioner Kishel: Moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the
Village Council that the Planning Commission accepts the staff recommendation
and the Commission recommends that the proposed zoning be approved with the
exception of the staff report item No. 1 on page 7. The Commission would sug-
gest that development strips of a minimum of 300 to 400 feet increments of
frontage on White Bear Avenue be controlled as to access onto White Bear Avenue,
Commissioner Mogren seconded. The motion passed by the following vote:
For Against Abstain Absent
Coombs Barrett Disselkamp
Kishel Batman
Fischer
Singer
Stolzman
Howard
Prow
Mogren"
d. Mayor Axdahl asked if there were persons present who wished to speak in
favor of the proposed zone change. The following were heard:
Arthur Rehnberg, Realtor
- 1 - 11/9
e. Mayor Axdahl asked if there were any persons who wished to speak in op-
position to the proposed zone change. The following were heard:
Paul Holt, 1895 White Bear Avenue
Jim Carney, 1856 Flandrau
Doris Sawackie, 1763 E. Larpenteur Avenue
Norman Anderson, 1603 Frost Avenue
Harry Johnson, 1717 White Bear Avenue, the person who went around with
the petition.
Jim Bothwell, 1704 Flandrau
Vern DuFrense, 1751 E. Larpenteur Avenue
Mr. VanDannecker, 1904 Flandrau
Joseph Savino, 1852 Flandrau
Len Klein, 1751 E. Larpenteur
Louis Furlong, 1725 E. Larpenteur
Mrs. Herbert Walfoort, 1888 Flandrau
Mrs. Brenner, 1860 Flandrau
Eugene Whyte, 1850 Radatz
Robert Jones, 1768 Flandrau
f. Mayor Axdahl then asked for formal objectors to the proposed zone change.
The following were heard:
Paul Holt, 1895 White Bear Avenue
Jim Carney, 1856 Flandrau
Doris Sawackie, 1763 E. Larpenteur
Norman Anderson, 1603 Frost Avenue
Harry Johnson, 1717 White Bear Avenue
Jim Bothwell, 1704 Flandrau
Vern DuFrense, 1751 E. Larpenteur Avenue
Mr. VanDannecker, 1904 Flandrau
Joseph Savino, 1852 Flandrau
Len Klein, 1751 E. Larpenteur
Louis Furlong, 1725 E. Larpenteur
Mrs. Herbert Walfoort, 1888 Flandrau
Mrs. Brenner, 1860 Flandrau
Eugene Whyte, 1850 Radatz
Robert Jones, 1768 Flandrau
John Bradshaw, 1710 Flandrau
Irvin Pogalz, 1884 Flandrau
Mr. Friermuth, 1752 Flandrau
Bob Denison, 1748 Flandrau
Tom Kansier, 1872 Flandrau
Mr. & Mrs. George Schultz, 1864 Flandrau
Mrs. Shaul, 1759 E. Larpenteur
Mr. & Mrs. Lawrence DeRosier, 1909 White Bear Avenue
g. Mayor Axdahl closed the public hearing.
h. Councilman Greavu moved to delay decision on this matter for one weeks
time to allow for additional written testimony; November 16th meeting.
Seconded by Councilman Haugan. Ayes - all.
- 2 - 11/9
2. Zone Change (R -2 to LBC) - East Side of White Bear Avenue, North of County
Road 'C' (8:15 P.M.)
a. Mayor Axdahl convened the meeting for a public hearing for a zone change
from R -2 to LBC on the east side of White Bear Avenue north of County Road 'C'
(2750 White Bear Avenue). The Clerk read the notice of hearing along with the
dates of publication.
b. Manager Miller presented the staff report. (attached addendum No. 2)
C. Lyman Coombs, Planning Commission Chairman, read the following Commission's
recommendation.
"Commissioner Singer: Moved that the Planning Commission recommend in accord-
ance with the Staff Report to the Village Council that the proposed rezone re-
quest be denied.
Commissioner Barrett seconded. Motion carried by following vote:
For Against Abstain Absent
Coombs Mogren Disselkamp
Kishel Batman
Fischer
Singer
Stolzman
Prew
Howard
Barrett"
d. Mayor Axdahl called for persons who wished to speak in favor of the pro-
posed zone change. The following were heard:
Mr. Dick Mills, 505 Harriet Avenue,.H and Val J Rothschild, Inc.
Mr. Robert Johnson, attorney representing Mrs. Schutte, owner of the
property.
Mrs. Schutte, 2750 White Bear Avenue
Mr. Fred Schoenberger, 2711 White Bear Avenue
e. Mayor Axdahl called for persons who wished to speak in oppostion of the
proposal. The following were heard:
Mr. Eugene Whyte, 1850 Radatz Avenue
Mr. Ray Miller, 2778 White Bear Avenue
f. Mayor Axdahl called for formal objections. The following were heard:
Mr. Ray Miller, 2778 White Bear Avenue
g. Mayor Axdahl closed the public hearing.
h. Councilman Greavu moved to hear additional testimony.
Seconded by Councilman Haugan. Ayes - all.
- 3 - 11/9
i. Mr. Mills spoke again to clarify a matter brought up during Council dis-
cussion.
j. Councilman Haugan moved to deny the rezone change request based on staff
report and Planning Commission recommendation as well as the fact that this
spot rezoning.
Seconded by Councilman Olmstead. Ayes - Mayor Axdahl, Councilmen Haugan,
Olmstead and Wiegert.
Nays - Councilman Greavu.
Motion carried.
D. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
1. Manager Miller stated that there were two additional items, one being the
certification of the election results for the Village Election, which includes
the Judge and Special Judge.
Councilman Greavu introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
72 - 11 - 242
RESOLVED, that the Village Council of the Village of Maplewood, Ramsey
County, Minnesota acting as a canvassing board on November 9, 1972, hereby
certifies the following results of the November 7, 1972 Village General
Election:
Judge of Municipal Court
John J. Kirby
5,761
Charlie McCarty
1
Bill Kampf
1
Kenneth ICrumm
1
Captain Kangaroo
1
Rev. Raymond Hedberg
1
Bert Sorenson
1
Special Judge
Roger Hennings 4,464
Lucy McClellan 1
Sluggo Suggs 1
Lynn Ronsberg 1
Seconded by Councilman Olmstead. Ayes - all.
2. Manager Miller also stated that in addition he would like Council's permission
to place on the agenda for Tuesday, November 14, the 1973 Budget; the purpose; being
to reconsider the tax levy. Staff has found some areas which we believe we can
give you substantial reductions in. The County Auditor has also agreed to keep it
open until the 15th. One of the tax reductions is in the form of the bond forms
and also the question of revenue sharing and the SAC Charge.
- 4 - 11/9
Councilman Wiegert moved to place the 1973 budget discussion on the November
14, 1972 agenda.
Seconded by Councilman Haugan. Ayes - all.
3. Councilman Wiegert stated that Council's former action, regarding Beam Avenue,
was to send it to the chairman of the Ramsey County delegation and now that the
election is over, we should send that legislation to each of the senators and re-
presentatives who have to do with our territory; in addition to that, someone per-
sonally should go out and get some authors of the thing.
Councilman Wiegert
e district
of the bill be m,
Seconded by Councilman Greavu. Ayes - all.
4. Mayor Axdahl stated that there is some complaint about the intersection of
East Shore Drive and the 'Y' intersection.
Councilman Greavu moved to direct the County to place a 'Yield' sign or some
sort of traffic control at this intersection.
Seconded by Councilman Wiegert. Ayes - all.
5. Certification of Election Judges.
Councilman Wiegert moved certification of the following Election Judges:
PRECINCT NO. 1 PRECINCT NO. 7
Maggie Oscarson, Chairman Margaret Z. Wolszon, Chairman
Della Conway Mrs. Theodore Haas
Delores J. Burke Eleanor Meacham
Millie Haugan Mary Kansier
PRECINCT NO. 2 PRECINCT NO. 8
Pat Thompson, Chairman
Violet M. Gutterman
Bea Hendricks
Kathleen P. Dittel
PRECINCT NO. 3
Jeanne Schadt,
Mary Finnegan
Ellen State
Doris Broady
PRECINCT NO. 4
Jean Myers, Chairman
Tina Swanson
Audrey Ellis
Mike Wasiluk
PRECINCT NO. 9
Chairman Ida Szcepanski, Chairman
Dorothy L. Johnson
Mary D. Johnson
Yvonne Freerks
Elsie Wiegert, Chairman
Caroline M. Warner
Jean Kittelson
Marjory L. Tooley
PRECINCT NO. 10
Ann Fosburgh, Chairman
Muriel Carlson
Pat Lindner
Mary Lou Lieder
- 5 - 11/9
PRECINCT NO. 5
Jeanne Hafner, Chairman
Sibbie Sandquist
Kay Craig
Emma Klebe
PRECINCT NO. 6
Dorothy Kuehn, Chairman
Marian Moe
Marcella Molohon
Vernus Benson
Seconded by Councilman Greavu
PRECINCT NO. 11
Delores Lofgren, Chairman
Delores M. Fitzgerald
Maxine Olson
Mildred Iversen
PRECINCT NO. 12
Mary Libh ardt, Chairman
Audrey Duellman
Sylvia L. Brown
Barb O'Fallon
Ayes - all.
6. Mayor Axdahl stated that the comment was made tonight regarding the promised
buffer at Krogers. Is there any way of checking anything there?
Manager Miller stated that staff could check it. It sounds like something
some developer promised and the Council did not include this as a condition
and he believes it would be practically impossible to enforce it at this late
date.
Staff is to investigate.
E. ADJOURNMENT
10:33 P.M.
ity lerk
- 6 - 11/9
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT
TO: Village Manager
SUBJECT: Rezone Report
LOCATION: west side of White Bear Avenue between Frost Avenue and Larpenteur
Avenue
DATE: October 24, 1972
1.
Initiated
By:
Village Council
2.
Number of
Acres
Involved: 17.24
3. Number of Separate Ownership Parcels: 34
4. Number of Single Dwellings Located in Rezone: 30
5. Number of Businesses: 1 (Hejny - Equipment Rental, 1829 White Bear Avenue)
6. Existing Zoning: R -1 (Single Dwelling Residence)
7. Proposed Zoning: LBC (Limited Business Commercial)
(see public hearing notice for explanation)
8. History: This office does not claim to know the entire history revolving
around this particular area. But to the best of our ability it appears
that on January 28, 1965 the Village Council held a hearing on rezoning
the west side of White Bear Avenue between Frost and Larpenteur and
subsequently acted to deny any rezone at that time.
Since that time repeated discussions and meetings by the Council and Planning
Commission have occurred which have centered on the rezoning of this strip
of land along White Bear Avenue.
The Planning Commission recommended Land Use Plan indicates that the west
side of White Bear Avenue in this area should be developed with Limited
Service Commercial land uses.
Planning Considerations:
1. Actual Land Uses Planned: The LBC zone requires that before any actual
commercialized use of land so zoned LBC the Village Council shall first
determine the specific uses and approve the plan of development for any
site so zoned.
At this time, no specific proposed use or plan is proposed for any lo*_
or land involved in the rezone described area. Should such a limited
commercial use be specifically proposed then that specific plan and
use would have to be approved by the Village Council prior to any develop-
ment taking place.
2. Existing Land Uses: Should the rezone occur then the existing single
dwellings (30) would all become non - conforming uses of land and would be
regulated as to no expansion of any residence for residential use in
accordance with Chapter 912 of the Municipal Code. However, all non-
I
conforming structures would be allowed to be kept in good repair and
be replaced within 1 year of destroyed by an act of God.
As regards the Hejny Equipment Rental Use the Village Clerk informs
this office that a special permit to operate such use was allowed by
the Village some years ago. Nevertheless, a change in zoning would
require a clarification of use conformity to an LBC zone would be
needed so that the record is clear as to how this existing use relates.
This office would consider the existing Hejny use as a non - conforming
use in an LBC zone in that it does not come under the leteral inter-
pretation of a Professional Office nor does it come close in terms of
functional activity of the use. There is question as to the clarity
of the past issued special permit on this matter as it relates to land
area coverage, signs, outdoor storage, etc. Clarification should be
made regarding this activity, regardless of conformity or not since
the Council's action taken October 5, 1961 granting a special permit
failed to refer to what the specific use was and no detailed provisions
were indicated.
3. Storm Drainage: The west side of White Bear Avenue north of Larpenteur
Avenue to a point opposite Aldrich Arena is provided storm sewer service
and was assessed on a basis of $235/lot at the.time of the Larpenteur
Storm Sewer Project.
However, the proposed zone for LBC could result in developments generat-
ing, additional storm water into the Larpenteur Storm Sewer System.
Three concerns should be surfaced and satisfactorily resolved prior to
rezoning. They are:
(1) Ramsey County Drainage Policy - the drainage of this area as
commercial land use would increase the waters that drain into
Wakefield Lake. Such increase countermands the existing Ramsey
County Board of Commissioners drainage policy resolution.
(2) Storm Sewer. System Capacity: The existing storm sewer system
installed in Larpenteur Avenue must be evaluated and determined that
there is adequate reserve capacity design engineered into the
system of pipes to accommodate the projected runoff of storm
waters from this rezone area if developed commercially.
(3) Storm Sewer Service Availability Charge: Should satisfactory
resolution to items 1 and 2 be developed then the Village Council
must resolve the question of a method of the properties involved
who have paid residential storm sewer assessments paying and
additional storm sewer charge for additional storm water run -off
resulting from a change in zoning use which results in greater
than previously assigned and assessed residential storm drainage.
It is recommended that the Council consider establishing a Storm
Sewer Service Availability Charge which would require any land
previously assessed based upon an existing zoning but subsequently
rezoned to allow usage which results in greater run -off character-
istics to,have to pay a charge at the time of a building permit
determined to be a rate reflecting the difference between the
previous zoned use storm sewer rate and the rate that would
needed to be charged based upon serving the zoned use. Such
difference would then be added to the unpaid balance due of the
initial assessed amount.
2
The question of changed land use, and resultant storm drainage
increases being served by existing storm sewer assessed to the
site on a,lesser rate due to lesser storm water runoff results
in inequitable effects in regards to uniformity of policy
application for storm sewer benefit to similarly used lands and,
further, passes increased improvement costs on to the general
public or otherproperty owners in order to provide increased
storm water service capability for certain properties not paying
their benefited share.
4. Street Access: The existing conditions result in individual residential
lots each having direct driveway access from White Bear Avenue. How-
ever the change in land use to commercial use results in complete
different traffic patterns both on the street of White Bear Avenue as
well as, the demand for access. to and from White Bear Avenue for the
lands on the west side thereof.
The County of Ramsey Engineer's Office and Village Public Works Depart-
ment- has repeatedly indicated that a median device will be needed to
be placed in [ White Bear Avenue between Frost and Larpenteur. As of
this report no specific median plan has been presented.
However, this Office suggests that a series of public street policies
need to be developed and agreed to prior to officially changing the
zoning of this area. They are:
1. Median: This subject is essential to be discussed to not only
channel arterial traffic on White Bear. Avenue, but specific
median openings and channelization areas need to be specifically
assigned in order to determine frontage access points to White
Bear Avenue. Since, this is a County Road the County must be
brought in this matter and it is necessary that they specifically
indicate timing on median placement, the number and location of
median openings, and the location and number of specific allow-
able openings on White Bear Avenue between Frost and Larpenteur.
2, Limited Access Openings: To accomplish planned commercial usage and
allow the street to continue to function reasonably it is essential
that limited access points to White Bear Avenue not only be
designated but established when commercial. development occurs.
Consequently, the Village should require a 40 foot access easement
across all properties involved in rezone between Frost and Larpenteur
along White Bear Avenue so that all lots involved can pass to and
from the specific property to the authorized ingress- egress points
on White Bear Avenue. Such easement shall be voluntarily given
by the property owners and public renumerati.on or improvement of it
for access purposes shall not be provided. Further, unless such
access way easement is surrendered in full for the area rezoned
having frontage on White Bear Avenue then no rezoning would take
place or would be withheld. Simply put it is a case of all or
nothing as regards access passageway - this office will not and
cannot recommend piecing in here and there some easement or allow-
ing development of a parcel which cannot get access to the
designated approved opening and therefore causes additional open-
ings to have to be granted.
3
If such easement way is not secured and the zoning granted then
innumerable driveway openings will occur and this stretch of
street will be nothing more than an extension of the conglomerated
driveway opening mess on the west side of White Bear Avenue south
of Larpenteur. This area is so congested with the openings that
the entire area fails - both land, use as well as, White Bear
Avenue itself.
If that's what the Village wants that's one thing but here is the
opportunity to actually "Plan" and effort should be made to
accomplish it.
5. Land Use Factors: Considerations relative to land use and the surround-
ings should be considered such as:
(1) Adjacent Land Uses on East Side of White Bear Avenue: The Village
has zoned the land area south of Ripley Avenue as B -C general
commercial and its subsequent development has resulted in a variety
of commercialized uses including discount shopping store, 24 hour
operated service station, clothing store, shoe store, restaurant,
Liquor Lounge and Liquor Store. To the north of Ripley the area
is zoned FR farm residence but peculiar as it may seem its
development is farm from that. The area is developed with a major
subregional ice arena and large accompanying off - street parking
lot, and in addition a major nursing home for the elderly is located
north of the arena.
Call. of these uses represent commercialized functional activities
and thereby create an environmental impact upon both White Bear Ave.
as well as the residential properties to the west side so zoned.
As Now zoned this office believes that the residential zoned lands
on the west side are subjected to adverse environmental conditions
which in this office's opinion cause inequitable relief upon the west
side properties.
One of the fundamental practical reasons for zoning residential areas
is to enable a person to buy and live in an environment with the
assurance that surrounding lands will not be put to uses which will
detract from its desirability, and hence its value.
In this case the changing land use characteristics on the east
side of White Bear Avenue to intensive commercial uses, the traffic
on White Bear Avenue with the following traffic trends and counts
indicated by the Ramsey County Engineer's Office:
1966 - 17,050 ADT (Prior to Highway 35E and I694 opening)
1970 - 12,500 ADT
1972 - 14,000 ADT
Further, the Maplewood Police Department informs this Office that
as a result of the improvement of White Bear Avenue in this section
their office has received numerous calls from people in the area
complaining of the excessive traffic speeding on this street. In
addition such environmental traffic problems of noise from vehicles
and excessive exhaust funes. All of these factors would tend to
support the notion that the existing residential zoning character
is adversely affected and that the intent of the current zoning on
4
the properties is not being met as a result of the effects
resulting from surrounding land uses.
(2) Properties to the West Along Flandrau: The properties to the
west along Flandrau Street are residentially zoned and developed.
Of concern in any zoning should be the impact upon these properties.
Due to the unusual depth of these and the -rezone lots (300 feet
each) there is space buffering capability in both cases. Nearly
all the homes to the west along Flandrau have 200 foot deep rear
yards behind their homes to their property line where the proposed
zoning line would occur.
The real concern is and should be that the people to the west
can be assured of:
(1) Knowing what the exact planned uses will be at the time of
development.
(2) Efforts will be taken to require screening, visual exterior
design, eliminate mechanical noises, eliminate odors result-
ing from uses allowed, etc.
(3) Rezone Property Planning Standards: Because no specific development
plans are proposed and, further, because the LBC zoning specifies
that any proposed plan of use must be approved by the Council it
is in this office's judgment reasonable to establish certain
minimum standards which should be used to guide all land use pro-
posals in this rezone area. Such standards would be
(1) Uses - all land uses shall be limited in terms of activity
so as to not become a general retail commercial strip other-
wise the effect of LBC is demolished in terms of integrity
and intent. Therefore, uses should be limited to professional
type offices and retail stores marketing goods should not be
interpreted as a LBC similar use. If retail sales of goods is
desired then LBC isn't the type of zone that should be
considered.
(2) Special Site Plan Development Procedure - any proposed site
development plan should be required to be heard publicly with
notice given to affected owners - such is suggested because
of the intent of LBC requiring both intensive plan review as
to impact upon surrounding residential zoned lands.
(3) Setbacks Standards - Setback guidelines should be established
for front yard and rear yards as related to any and all uses.
It is suggested that a 50 foot minimum front yard setback
be established for all buildings, along White Bear Avenue.
Further, it is suggested that no building be located closer
than 90 feet to the west or mid -block property line and that
a minimum 25 foot wide landscaped open space buffer be pro-
vided adjacent to the west mid -block zoning line on LBC zoned
side.
Further, no off - street parking lot spaces shall be allowed
closer than 40 feet to the White Bear Avenue westerly existing
right -of -way line.
5
(4) Building Height Standard The maximum building or structure
height allowable shall be 3 stories or 38 feet which ever occurs
first.
(5) Maximum Building Bulk Coverage: No building or combination of
buildings on any one lot or parcel of land shall exceed 40%
of the total land area involved.
(6) Maximum Floor Area: The maximum floor area ratio shall not
exceed 1.0 (floor area ratio is determined by the following
formula:
total floor area
Floor Area Ratio = total lot area
(7) Off Street Parking: The adopted Village Parking Code shall
prevail
(8) Landscaping: A landscaping plan shall be required at time of
submittal of proposed development plan approval by Village
Council. A minimum of 10% of the total development cost of
the project (not including land cost) shall be required to be
placed in landscaping the site with no less than 5% of the
total development cost of the project devoted to trees and
bush materials as a part of the site landscaping requirement.
(9) Architectural Compatibility - because of the number of varied
properties there would be need to concern and relate both site
plans and building developments in this area to one another
in order to achieve a harmonious compatibility.
(10) Signs: Sign control should be rigorously regulated so as to
avoid the similarity of sign profusion that exists south of
Larpenteur Avenue. Therefore, effort should be made to
eliminate excessive signs and relate signs to office name
rather than advertising products and goods. Further, signs
should not be allowed in the 40 foot traffic way easement
along the west side of White Bear Avenue so as to keep clear
the on site traffic way. The Village sign codes shall pre-
vail on all other matters related to signs.
(11) Lighting: Each site development plan shall include exterior
and safety lighting of its site particular reference shall
be made to the area to the west side of the properties if
rezoned as they abut the residential zoned lands adjacent to
Flandrau Street and to be concerned about nuisance effects
resulting therefrom.
(12) Sidewalks: As each parcel commercially develops the plans
shall include for sidewalk facilities having a 5 foot
minimum width along White Bear Avenue.
(13) Bus Stop_: A bus stop facility should be planned in this length
of block the precise location to be resolved between the
Village and the Metro Transit Commission.',
ri
Department of Community Development Recommendation
The Planning Commission adopted "Plan for Maplewood" recommends land use for
the west side of White Bear Avenue between Frost Avenue and Larpenteur Avenue
as a "Limited service commercial' area. The proposed zoning district would
meet that planned use in this office's opinion.
However, with zone changing goes the responsibility to see that the consequential
effects of such changed usage will not result in adverse effects upon the public.
Therefore, it is recommended that a zone change for east 1/2 of Block 1 Garden
Acres be allowed for LBC (except the properties addressed as 1756 Frost Avenue
and 1751 and 1759 Larpenteur Avenue which should remain R -1 single dwelling
zoned) only upon the following conditions:
1. Provide a 40 foot public way easement along entire west side of White Bear
Avenue and surrender all commercial access rights except by way easement
to designated and approved commercial access openings onto White Bear Avenue.
2. Ramsey County shall indicate approved locations for curb openings in the
entire block for ingress - egress to White Bear Avenue before any commercial
development is allowed.
3. The Village Engineer shall determine whether the existing storm sewer system
installed has reserve capacity to accommodate the projected additional storm
water run -off resulting from the rezoned area.
4. The Village Council shall determine a payment policy to be applied to these
lands rezoned regarding increased Storm Water service benefits prior to
allowing any rezone and subsequent development which would generate
additional run -off waters to an already installed system but for which the
contributing area was not charged sufficiently for commercialized land use.
5. The Ramsey County Board of Commissioners shall be asked to clarify their
County drainage policy as it would be applied to this specific instance
since the major storm water run -off would result in an increase of water
volume into Wakefield Lake which is a County Lake and which appears to this
office to be directly related to the County Board Policy adopted.
6. Village Council adopt the LBC rezone development guidelines advanced in this
report relating to setbacks, use, building coverage, etc. so as to provide
buides for all development plans which would follow in this area.
7. In resolving the ingress- egress points for commercial use to the west side
of White Bear Avenue a program shall simultaneously be resolved in the ease-
ment agreement for traffic passageway as it relates to the existing single
dwelling accesses onto White Bear. For example, when 1/4 of the commercial
frontage has received development permits then all driveways shall. auto-
matically close on White Bear and utilization of the easement to the
approved openings shall become effective. Also in the easement agreement
there should be public review and approval of methods of its improvement
and maintenance.
Only upon such above conditions can this office'r.ecommend the rezoning.
Without satisfactory resolve to these issues only problems can beset the
Village, the surrounding residential neighborhood, and the traffic efficiency
quotient of White Bear Avenue as a planned and existing Major Arterial Street
in the Village.
7
Upon conducting the public rezone hearing this office suggests that a
rezone final action be withheld until resolve to all issues have been
found answered to the Council's satisfaction either positively or
negatively.
N
X��ti.�.�
Department of Community Development Report
TO: Village Manager
SUBJECT: Rezone Report
LOCATION: East side of White Bear Avenue north of County Road C
DATE: October 25, 1972
1.
Initiated
by:
William M.
Gydesen
2.
Number of
Acres
Involved:
1 acre approximately
(42,525 square feet)
3. Ownership: The proposed rezone is proposed to bisect a total ownership
tract of 5.39 acres into 2 separate parcels. See attached map indicating
resulting parcels.
4. Number of Dwellings on Site: 1 double dwelling structure
5. Existing Zoning: R -2 (double Dwelling Residential District)
6. Proposed Zoning: LBC (Limited Business Commercial District)
(see public hearing notice for explanation)
7. Surrounding Land Use: The character of the area is characterized
residential and the following land uses occur:
To the north: FR and single family dwellings
To the South: FR and single family dwellings and a school
To the East: FR
To the West: FR and single family dwellings
Planning Considerations:
1. Adopted Land Use Plan: The Planning Commission adopted land use plan
indicates this area as "open space ". Earlier preliminary drafts of
land use considered by the Commission considered residential low density but
never commercial. In the final approved Commission land use plan 'Open
space" land use was the designated use for the area. The proposed zone
would appear to permit land use, if allowed, which would be contrary to
the adopted Commission land use plan and procedures adopted by the Commission
which are designed to ensure that land use changes do not occur in such
a fashion that they result in zones that allow uses incompatible with the
"Plan" uses adopted by the Commission.
2. Changed Conditions: The surrounding land uses of the immediate area have
not changed in term of commercial zone changes or land use changes. The
recent immediate changed condition has been the upgrading of White Bear
Avenue to a 4 lane major arterial street.
3. Commercial Zoning Effects: The rezoning of this parcel surrounded by
residential uses and zones tends to either represent spot zoning consider-
ation or represents the initial step to commence on a zoning space where- -
1
-Z.
in similar properties i1 the vicinity with equivalent conditions would be
given equal approval consequently resulting in not only strip type com-
mercial use request but also request for increased residential density
east of this site because of the commercial influence upon this adjoining
vacant land.
4. Particular Use Request: The particular request poses two specific concerns:
(1) Professional Office - the LBC district indicates the allowance of
professional offices - the proposed use is a real estate office and
there must be a determination of whether the proposed office is a
professional office within the spirit and intent of the zoning district
of LBC .
(2) Mixed Use - does the utilization of double dwelling in the same
building as a proposed commercial office use fit within the scope of
the LBC code as a similar use as a professional office. The concern
here is living environment and the effects of commercial use upon
non - commercial use in the same building.
Department of Community Development Recommendation
This item was one of those requests which was filed during the moratorium
period recently past which was set aside to provide an uninterrupted opportunity
for a Community Land Use Plan to be developed upon which requests of this type
could be then measured to.
This office believes that it has the responsibility to uphold the Commission's
adopted Land Use Plan when land use changes are proposed and that in order to
preserve the spirit and integrity of the "Plan" any use changes not in conformity
with the "Plan" should be discouraged and not endorsed.
It is expected by this office that there will be expression that this request
really isn't that drastic but the real issues revolve around whether the Village
intends to relate its zoning and changes thereof to its "Plan" and also whether
there are sufficient facts which justify and warrant changing the zoning character
of this site to a LBC
2
/ O