Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-14-1972 SMAGENDA Maplewood Village Council 7:30 P.M., Thursday, December. 14, 1972 Beaver Lake Elementary School meeting 72 e 45 (A) ROLL CALL (B) PUBLIC HEARING - Zone Change (F -R and B -C to M -1) Bounded by T McKnight Road, Conway Avenue, 2innehaha Avenue and West of Carlton. Street 1. Reading of Notice 2. Staff Report 3. Public Agency Presentations: a. Planning Commission b. Other 4. Proponent. Presentation S. Opponent Presentations* G. Other_ Comments or Inquiries* 7. Council Discussion. C) ADJOURNMENT * Persons wishing to make statements or presentations should sign the list which is placed at the entrance to the Cafetorium. Appearances will be in the order of the listing. Those simply wishing to enter their names into the record in favor of or in opposition to the proposed zone change may sign the appropriate sheet at the entrance. MINUTES OF MAPLEWOOD VILLAGE COUNCIL 7:30 P.M., Thursday, December 14, 1972 Cafetorium, Beaver Lake School Meeting No. 72 -45 A. CALL TO ORDER A special meeting of the Village Council of Maplewood, Minnesota was held in the Cafetorium, Beaver Lake School and was called to order at 7:35 P.M. by Mayor Axdahl. B. 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 HEARING 1. Zone Change (R -R and B -C to M -1) Bounded by McKnight Road, Conway Avenue, Minnehaha Avenue and West of Carlton Street a. Mayor Axdahl convened the meeting for a public hearing on the zone change from F -R and B -C to M -1, property bounded by McKnight Road, Conway Avenue, Minnehaha Avenue and Carlton Street. 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. Public Agency Presentations 1. Chairman Lyman Coombs, Planning Commission, read the following Com- missions recommendation: "Commissioner Mogren moved: That the Planning Commission recommend to the Village Council that the Council consider granting a rezone from F -R (Farm Residence) to M -1 for the 146 acre 3M owned tract in accordance with existing codes of the Village. Further, that no action be taken on the rezoning of the 21 acre tract at this time.. Commissioner Howard seconded. Ayes all." 2. Mr. James J. Bellus, representing the City Planning Board of St. Paul, read a letter from that agency pertaining to the zone change. (Addendum No. 2) Mr. Bellus also presented a resolution passed by the City of St. Paul Council. (Addendum No. 3) Council commented on the letter read by Mr. Bellus. 3. The Clerk read a letter from the St. Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority. (Addendum No. 4) d. Proponents - 1 - 12/14 1. Mr. James Stoker, representing Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, read a report concerning the zone change. (Addendum No. 5) Council commented on the 3M Co, presentation. 2. Mr. Douglas Head, attorney representing Venture Theatres, Inc., stated his clients were proponents to the 3M Co, property being rezoned, but were opposed tb.the theatre property being rezoned. 3. Mr, Bruce Calrson, one of the owners of the Minnehaha Drive -In (Ven- ture Theatres, Inc.),spoke as a proponent to the 3M Co, property being re- zoned and presented a written statement (Addendum No. 6) opposing a zone change for the theatre property. e. Opponents: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Mr, and Mrs. Art Sinn, 2504 E. Minnehaha Avenue Mr. L. Haase, 2512 E. Minnehaha Mr. and Mrs. John Meyers, 2447 E. Minnehaha Mr. Sylvester Rauch, 2252 Fremont (St. Paul) Mrs. William Wyso, 752 Bartelmy Lane Ken Myers, 2256 Fremont (St. Paul) David Anderson, 2223 Conway (St. Paul) Mrs. Cleo Rauch, 2252 Fremont (St. Paul) John Tomlinson, State Representative for District 66B Mrs. John Eichinger, 2241 Conway (St. Paul) Mrs. Dornseif, 2651 Conway Mr. Ray Colosimo, 2343 Case Mr. Bowman, 2550 E. Minnehaha Mrs. Sarracco, 2383 E. Minnehaha Mr. Tim McGill, 575 Mary Street Mrs. Frank Myers, 2256 Fremont (St. Paul) Mike Foley, 1715 E. Third Street (St. Paul) Mr. Edmund C. Mallett, 995 Lakewood Mr. Alfred Sarracco, 2383 E. Minnehaha Dorothy Arbore, 2534 E. Minnehaha f. Mayor Axdahl closed the public hearing. g. Councilman Haugan moved to delay decision on the matter until the meetin of December 21. 1972 to allow for additional written testimonv. Seconded by Councilman Wiegert. Ayes - all. D. PRESENTATIONS 1. Manager Miller requested Council to pass a resolution calling for rehearing of the Battle Creek Improvement No. 71 -24. Rehearing is necessary due to the public hearing notice being published only once. Councilman Wiegert introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 72- 12 -:267 RESOLUTION CALLING FOR REHEARING ON IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 71 -24 (BATTLE CREEK) - 2 - 12/14 WHEREAS: A. A public hearing was held on Improvement Project No. 71 -24 (Battle Creek) for the Village; B. The notice of said hearing was defective because it was published only once; C. Said defect can only be cured by calling a new public hearing pursuant to proper notice thereof; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Village Council of the Village of Maplewood, Minnesota, as follows: 1. A public hearing will be held at the time and place set forth in the Notice of Rehearing hereto attached (see attached addendum No. 7) to consider Improvement Project No. 71 -24 (Battle Creek) for the Village. 2. The nature of the improvements, the estimated cost thereof, and the areas proposed to be assessed therefor are described in the form of Notice of Rehearing hereto attached. 3. The notice of said public rehearing shall be in substantially the form of notice attached hereto. 4. The Village Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of said rehearing to be given two publications in the official newspaper. Said publications shall be one week apart, and at least three days shall elapse between the last publication and the hearing. Not less than ten days before the hearing the Clerk shall mail notice of the hearing to the owner of each parcel of land within the area proposed to be assessed. Seconded by Councilman Greavu. Ayes - all. 2. Manager Miller requested Council to pass a resolution pertaining to the Base Con- struction on Beam Avenue. The resolution is needed due to the work being paid for by Supplemental Agreement to original contract of Improvement No. 70 -5. Councilman Haugan introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 72 - 12 - 268,':. RESOLUTION DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO INCLUDE ADDITION WORK WHEREAS: A. The Village Council of the Village of Maplewood has heretofore ordered made Improvement Project No. 70 -5 and has let a construction contract therefor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. B. Said construction contract was awarded on a unit price basis for a total contract price of $2,340,040.65. - 3 - 12/14 C. It is necessary and expedient that said contract be modified so as to include additional units of work (designated as Improvement Porject No. 70 -5) at the same unit price at a cost of $117,550 which additional amount does not exceed 25% of the original contract price. D. Said additional. units of work have hereto fore been ordered made pursuant to subdivision 1 (or subdivsion 3) of M.S.A. Section 429.031. E. A Supplemental Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, has been presented to the Council for the purpose of effecting such modification. (see attached Addendum No. 8). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Village Council of the Village of Maplewood that the Mayor and Village Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to modify the existing contract with respect to Porject No. 70 -5 by executing said Supplemental Agreement. Seconded by Councilman Greavu. Ayes - all. E. ADJOURNMENT 9:55 P.M. C t4yJ'�e-er k - 4 - 12/14 MEMORANDUM FROM Village Manager, Michael G. miller TO Maplewood Mayor and Village Council SUBJECT: Council initiated rezone of 3M and Minnehaha Drive -In Properties DATE December 14, 1972 BACKGROUND The Village Council initiated this rezoning procedure after a request from the 3M Company to undertake such a rezoning for a 146 acre tract. The Village Council added an additional 21 acres in the northwest corner of the property. The proposed rezoning includes a 146 acre tract of land owned by the 314 Company which is presently vacant and zoned F -R (farm residential). An additional 21 acres is included in the proposed rezoning which is owned by the Minnesota Amusement Company and which is presently utilized as a drive -in movie theater location. That tract of land is presently zoned B -C (business and commercial). The proposed zoning district (M -1, light manufacturing) pro- vides for uses to occur on sites for controlled commercial uses and light manufacturing activities requiring light machinery under controls which will allow them to be located in close proximity to residential areas. The Village Code provides that no building or land may be used for a ... 1 purposes when such parcel is located within250 feet of a residential zoning district, except when authorized by a special permit issued by the Village Council. The Code further provides that "The Village Council shall hold at least one public hearing on each applica- tion for a special use permit after a notice of the hearing has been published in the official newspaper at least ten days before said hear- ing." The Code also provides for mailed notices to the owners of prop- erty within 200 feet of the special permit land. The special use permit section of the Code also provides for the attachment of conditions and guarantees to the permit where they are "necessary in the protection of the public, the rights of others and the Village ". In addition, the Code requires the submission of complete plans to the Council for review and approval at the time of actual proposed development. 1,10 Specific. pro- posed development.plans are now being considered for the parcels in question at this time. Land Use Plan. The land use portion of the Plan for Maplewood, adopted by the Planning Commission and adopted as a guide by the Village Council, designates that the 146 acre tract owned by the 3M Company should be planned for development under a designated classificationof "Develop- ment and Research ". The Plan defines this type of classification as "that land use activity where research and development of prototype industrial and commercial functions occur, but which preclude the principle function of industrialized manufacturing within the area. Further, it is the intent of the land use plan element that such planned and designed research and development areas be developed in a park like environment so as to create a compatible environment with surrounding land uses of dissimilar -se activity. For referencing tine land use plan designates the existing 3M Company Location within the ccmmunity as a planned i..es °arch and de e l.op - ment land use activity. It is this type of example of land use that the land use plan envisions as falling within the definition of a research and development land use activity." The proposed zone (1-1-1) would allow for the kinds of land uses conducted to the south of this rezone site and specific mention is made within the m -1 uses section of• allowing laboratory, research, experimentai and testing activities. On the other Land, the 21 acre tract is indicated in the Plan as being planned as a "Limited Service Commercial Center" area which recognizes that a wide range of commercialized service activities exist and are desired which should be limited as to location, function, mix and quantity. Further, such centers should be planned and developed under performance standard techniques which are designed to more closely integrate such commercial activites into the land use pattern in such a manner that concern is given to the overall environment impact of such activities to surrounding and adjacent land use. within this limited service classification falls many diverse activities such as: a. Highway interchange commercial location; b. Office and industrialized parks; C. Commercial areas adjacent and in close prox- imity to major commercial centers. The current zoning (B -C), although not the most desirable zoning class- ification, would come closer to accomplishing the planned land use character than would the proposed M -1 zone. LBC (Limited Business Commercial) zoning would more properly suit this area. Public Facilities. it is the intent of the Flan for Maplewood that zoning be not only reliant upon the land use portion, but also upon the availability of services to the area. In other words, an area may be suited for a particular use in the future, but not suited for that use at a particular time if municipal facilities and services are not readily available. In all zonina issues it must be kept in mind that the land use plan, is not the zoning ordinance of the Village. I£ the entire land use portion of the Plan were assumed to be the zoning regulations of the Village, it is obvious that the Village would not be capable of delivering services and facilities to all areas of the Village. Therefore, when a.tract of land is determined to be in conformance with the land use plan, we must then determine if the critical municipal services required by the new or proposed land use are available. The area proposed for rezoning is designated a "low pressure area" in the water study recently prepared for the Village by Kirkham, Michael and Associates. The area is not designated as a critical area. The 3M Company is presently utilizing booster pumps to obtain required pressures at the facility south of Conway. Such booster pumps would be necessary for the development of the proposed area also. 314 has indicated a desire to utilize such pumps in the future. Pressures in the area are controlled by the elevation of storage tanks at the Highwood and Hillcrest areas. Increasing the pressures would require tank height changes which appear to be impractical at this time. Engineering information indicates that there is sufficient quantity of water at this time, but the pressure within the system is not sufficient. The St. Paul water Board has within its normal capital improvement program plans to upgrade the Hazel Park numo station and certain transmission mains to provide additional floss to the vicinity. Engineering advice also indicates that 'the aLlH tion of the 3M facilities will not affect the pressure to the surrounding residential areas. Most of the water utilized by 311 is for cooling -2- purposes. Discussions with 3M personnel indicates that it is not known if the existing cooling water towers will be utilized or if ne;,� ones :pill be located on the north side. Actual locations of transmission lines would be dependent upon this requirement. It appears likely that additional transmission lines should be constructed in conjunction with the upgrading of Conway Avenue. The initial phase has already been con- structed with a 20 -inch main in the current Conway and McKnight, project. No public water service is installed at this time in Carlton Street or on minnehaha between McKnight Road and Bartelmy Lane. There is an existing Metropolitan Sewer Board interceptor in the vicinity of Conway and McKnight which has a total capacity of 21.5 cubic feet per second. Presently seven cubic feet per second are enter- ing the Conway interceptor and approximately five cubic feet per second enters the Battle Creek interceptor from the 3M property leaving 14.5 cubic feet per second capacity available in the interceptor for future development in the vicinity of Conway and McKnight. This capacity is, therefore, adequate for the proposed use. The flow is not metered at the present time; however, the Metropolitan-Sewer Board indicates the installation of a meter in the near. future. It would therefore be advisable to require that the development by the-3M Company north of Conway be sewer - ed to this point (Conway and McKnight) to collect and meter the flog: at one location. Prior to development a decision must be made as to whether the Village will install a sewer on Conway concurently with the upgrading program or placed on private property and maintained by the developing company. The Village is presently aiming at the elimination of the lift station at Margaret and Century and anticipates being, able to do this next spring. This.would alleviate the 10 -inch line running through an easement south of Minnehaha. from Ferndale to P9cP.night. It is anticipated that this line would be reserved for development outside the rezone area although some capacity mould be available for the area if the need arises. The rezone area is a portion of a storm drainage network which serves the Village south of Stillwater Road and north of Battle Creek. The rezone site contains a substantial onsite pond which acts in series with other upstream pending areas as a holding basin interconnected by natural drainage ways which make the final ponding stop on the rezoned site prior to discharge into Battle Creek. The 3M Company has constructed the storm sewers on its site with a discharge to the north branch of Battle Creek and some capacity for the Village has been reserved by agreement. The ultimate requirement for discharge by the Village is not known at this time due to the necessity of establishing a policy pertain- ing to upstream holding ponds and wet lands. A comprehensive storm sewer study is planned for the Village which will adequately define the requirements for the rezone site. Due to the Ramsey County drainage policy resolution it will be necessary to assure that internal storm drainage waters are not discharged into Battle Creek at a volume or rate greater than the current discharge rate and volume. The roadway network in this area has long been considered a major problem in the development of the area. The major street plan segment of the Plan for Maplewood adopted by the Planning Commission designates McKnight Road as a major arterial in this area. No standards or guidelines have been advanced as to the minimum right -of -way to be re wired. It would appear at this time 'that. the minimu^ rig; "rt -oL -way nc-eded will be 120 feet as compared :?ith the current existing rightrof_- way of 100 feet from Conway to Minnehaha. This will mean that -3- the addition of 20 -feet of right -of -way will probably be required as the area develops. The McKnight Road alignment between Conway and Larpenteur has not been determined at this time. One alignment hearing has been held by County officials at which two alternative corridor routes were pre- sented. The final alignment of this corridor should be determined prior to development of the rezone area due to the significant traffic already occurring on the existing McKnight Road system. Ramsey County should be encouraged to determine the alignment of McKnight Road whether or not this rezoning is approved. Minnehaha Avenue is also designated as a major arterial street. A minimum of 100 -feet of right -of -way would appear to be reasonable at this time for this street. The current right -of -way for Minnehaha Avenue is 66 -feet. It should be pointed out that a petition was received sometime ago from residents in the Minnehaha area requesting that no improvements.be made to this street. The alignment of Conway Avenue as indicated in the Conway Avenue studv and as it is at the present time is recommended. It is felt that this will result in the least disruption of the residential character of the land located in St. Paul west of McKnight Road. Century Avenue is also designated as a major arterial street by the Planning Commission's adopted Plan. Although this street does not directly abut the rezone site, it is equally important to consider the rezone area impact upon the street in its current state. It must be realized that plans are underway through several different agencies to upgrade Century Avenue to a higher status, but no official plans have been adopted. Century [,venue in this area is at capacity and breaking down during peak hours. It is obvious that major improvements to this street are needed. It should be pointed out that the rezone site in itself is not the sole issue in the Century Avenue traffic problem. A rezoning area will, however, have an impact on the total street system. The perennial problem of "which comes first the street system or the land use demanding the streets" comes to bare in this and the other street questions. Considering the time lapse required between the commitment to building a system and the actual construction of that system, I believe that the commitment to a specific planned street system and program is a necessity prior the land development. Due to the fact that land use changes in an area can dramatically change traffic characteristics in that area a determination of access points from the rezone site onto bordering streets should also be determined prior to development of that site. Additional traffic problem areas to be resolved are the intersections of McKnight Road and Minnehaha Avenue, Century Avenue and Conway Avenue, Carlton Street and Minnehaha. Avenue and Carlton Street and Conway Avenue. If the rezoning is approved and the areas subsequently developed with traffic characteristics remaining essentially as they are today, the Council should prepare for public street congestion in the area. It is suggested that the rate of physical development of the rezone site be publicly regulated or controlled so that the result in traffic demands on the existing public street system are such that 1-hey do not result in the failure of that system. m� Fire Safety The Department of Public Safety has informed me that witit additional industrial zoning and development potential the Council should give consideration to the need for the addition of aerial fire apparatus. It should be pointed out that 3M has a supplementary fire agreement with the City of St.Paul; however, the Council should keep in mind that this has been necessary due to the lack of capabilities from the Village. It should also be kept in mind that development increases policing needs. Site Planning Site planning impact affects upon the of the rezone area. In which we believe should the recommendation sect for this area should be aimed at reducing the residential properties to the north and west the recommendation section a list of requirements be included in the site planning are included in Lon of this report. Tax Legislation Impacts I Due to the fiscal disparities law, which limits the Village in its return from tax revenues from the addition of commercial or industrial tax base, and the tax levy limitation law, which limits the amount of money which a municipality may raise from the property tax without consideration of increases in assessed valuation, the Village must necessarily take into account that the increased assessed valuation realized from the addition of commercial and industrial developments will not result in substantial increases in tax revenues. Therefore, the Council should seriously consider the possi;)ility of requiring financial assistance from developers for the solution of problems caused by those. developments. For example, consideration should be given to requiring due payment of a proportional share for the installation of traffic control devices, additional public safety facilities and other costs which in some way benefit the properties involved. RECONIHMENDATION The 21 acre tract of land now owned by the Minnesota Amusement Company is not consisted with the land use plan and should not be included in a zone change to M -1. If any action is taken on this property, it should be to rezone it to LBC (Limited Business Commercial). The 146 acre tract owned by 3Id is in conformity with the land use portion of the Plan for (Maplewood. It is recommended that this tract be rezoned from F -R to the proposed M -1. It is further recommended that if such rezoning is adopted, that the Council also adopt a resolution stating that it would not intend to approve a special permit as per the Village Code unless the following conditions were met: 1. Adequate looping of the water system in the area must be accomplished or committed in the Minnehaha, Carlton, Conway and McKnight Road area; 2. An adequate supply of water for the special permit area and the immediate surrounding area shall be committed prior to development; 3. Provisions shall be made by the special permittee for onsight p.r'essure adjustments to provide adequate pressure on the site; -5- 4. The development on the special permit site shall be sewered to the Con;aay- .McKnight interceptor sewer; 5. An agreement shall be arrived at between the Village and the property owner relative to the pondi.ng of water on the property prior to the issuance of a special use permit; 6. The special permit must provide for the containing of all internal storm drainage waters so as not to discharge them into Battle Creek at any volume or rate greater than is the current discharge rate in volume now occurring; 7. Additional right -of -way necessary to implement Alternate four of the Conway Feasibility Study abutting the special permit area shall be required; 8. The alignment of McKnight Road between Conway and Larpenteur must be established by Ramsey'County prior to special permit approval; 9. Implementation of all the provisions of the Conway Avenue Feasibility Study, Alternate four must be committed by all public agencies involved prior to issuance of a special permit; 10. Policies regarding the distribution of public capita]_ costs benefiting the special permit area shall be adopted by the Council prior to.the issuance of the special use permit; Il. The following conditions shall apply to the special permit: a. Use Planning: The use plans for the rezone site, if approved, should relate spacing buildings and throughout the site so as to create a office - campus park like enfironment. Further, no outdoor storage activity or uses shall be allowed anywhere in this rezone site due to adverse environmental impact upon the area. b. Building Height Controls: No building or structure having a height of more than 45 feet shall be allowed within 200 feet of a single or double dwelling residential zoning district boundary line. The maximum height for those structures placed closer than 200 feet to an above described residential zoning district boundary line shall be reduced one foot in height for each four feet less than 200 feet from such residential boundary district zoning line. C. Front Yard Setback: The minimum front yard set- back for all_ buildings from any public street shall be 50 feet. Parking or loading shall not be permitted within the front yard setback from any street unless the setback is increased to 80 feet and the first 25 feet is landscaped from the street according to a plan which must be approved by the Village. d. Noises and Vibrations: All noises eminating from any approved use or building within the rezone area shall be muffled so as to not be detectable at the zoning district boundary line as may be M approved in this request. No vibrations or other than those caused by transporting vehicles on public roads, aircraft, or natural acts of phenomena shall be permitted which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. e. Heat and Glare: Except for exterior lighting, operations producing heat or glare shall be conducted entirely within a solid enclosed building. f. Grading and Tree Vegetation: Prior to any grading of the rezone site in any way an approved plan as required by Section 909.020 and 909.030 of the Municipal Code shall be performed first. All trees having a butt diameter of 6 inches measured 1 foot above ground grade shall be indicated and removal of any trees larger than the 6 inch diameter shall be required to be approved by the Village as a part of any total plan approval. Secondly, any siltation occurring from grading, construction, or permanent use of the rezone site into any drainage way or pending area within the rezone site but whivh services the area shall be required to be removed by the party causing such siltation. Such removal shall be under the supervision of the Village Engineer and work removing such shall be done as per his specific direction. g: Landscaping: All areas of the rezone area abutting a residential zoning district shall provide and maintain dense landscaped buffer having minimum width of 40 feet. Further,-all required yards adjacent to public streets and those abutting a residential district shall be continuously maintained in lawn and trees or shrubs in a manner providing a park like character to the area but such landscaping plan shall be required to first be approved by the Village. All other yards and unused property in the rezone area shall be maintained in grass or other suitable ground cover as may be approved b_V the Village. 12. The Council reserves the right to add additional conditions at the time of consideration of a specific special use permit request. -7- XO ZIIICYCt J,�, /ya/ ,-mot. CITY PLANNING BOARD OF ST. PAUL 1010 COMMERCE BUILDING • ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 • PHONE: 2234151 N. R. HEIDEN, Ph D. Director December 8, 1972 Honorable Mayor and Council Village of Maplewood 1380 Front Avenue Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 Gentlemen; This letter is in response to the petition by the Maplewood Village Council for a rezoning from "Farm Residential" and "Business Commercial" to "Light Manufacturing" of a piece of land generally located within an area bounded by McKnight Road, Conway Avenue, Minnehaha Avenue, and Carlton Street, Because the property in question is directly contiguous to the City of St. Paul and because any zoning change and subsequent development of the area will, therefore, most certainly affect the City of St, Paul, I feel that it is imperative that the following planning considerations be taken under advisement during discussion of the rezoning petition in order to insure compatibility between the light manufacturing development and the bordering residential areas within St. Paul as well as between Maplewood and St. Paul traffic, drainage, and land use planning. The first consideration is general in nature but extremely important. In order to lessen the traffic and drainage impact, it is felt that the develop- ment of the area in question should be accomplished in stages. By phasing the development of the area, far better control could be exerted by the Village of Maplewood in cooperation with the City of St. Paul and other concerned parties so as to insure that the necessary utilities and services are scheduled and available as needed to serve each phase of construction. Also, phasing would limit the amount of friction and hardship caused by development outstripping the capabilities of the infrastructure in the area. The second planning consideration is the need for a cooperative effort by the City of St. Paul, the Village of Maplewood, County of Ramsey, and Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing to solve some of the basic transportation problems in the area, If the rezoning is granted and development occurs as presently planned, there will be an increase of approximately 3,000 employees at this site. Such an increase will almost certainly tax the circulation capabilities of such intersections as McKnight Road and Minnehaha Avenue, and McKnight Road and Third Street, as well as several points along Century Avenue within Maplewood as they presently exist. I sincerely hope that some cooperative forethought can be given to this matter. Also, it is felt that serious consideration should be given to realigning Conway Avenue within Maplewood so that it would line up with Third Street in St, Paul. The situation that presently exists on Conway is unbearable from St. Paul's standpoint, and not only promotes poor traffic circulation, but endangers the residents of a purely residential neighborhood, In conjunction with the fifi - Page 2 - first point mentioned above in paragraph 2, such a cooperative effort in transportation planning must be prepared to meet the transportation demands, either in total or in stages, that will be produced by development of the light manufacturing projects at this location. Failure to meet the needed level of service will greatly impair traffic circulation and perhaps even endanger the safety of both commuters to the site and residents in the adjacent areas. Drainage is the third area of concern. Any development in this area similar to the present development at 3 -M Center will cause a great deal of additional storm water runoff. The area under consideration presently drains into a ponding area in and adjacent to the site and is part of a larger regional drainage system. It is a recommendation that the storm drainage from the site continue to be stored internally on the site, and, in accordance with prescribed Ramsey County policy, the developed site not be allowed to discharge any more storm water runoff into Battle Creek than is presently being discharged by the aforementioned undeveloped parcel of land, The final consideration that we feel should be made a part of the develop- ment process of the site in question concerns the relationship of the light manufacturing buildings to the existing residential neighborhoods, especially within St. Paul. There is a definite need to reserve an area of land along McKnight Road for use as a buffer between the two different land uses. Such an area, if treated properly with landscaping, would not only act as a visual and spatial buffer between land uses, but would help beautify the contiguous residential areas as well as provide a pleasant environment, coupled with the ponding area, for the workers within the complex. I hope that you will give careful consideration to the matters presented above. The chance to review and comment on this proposed rezoning has been greatly appreciated. I feel that a cooperative approach to planning such as this will pave the way for a better understanding of problems that transcend boundary lines and increase productive interaction between the Village of Maplewood and the City of St. Paul. To that end the St. Paul City Planning Board staff is extremely interested in continuing to work with the Village of Maplewood concerning matters pertaining to this rezoning in particular and subsequent development of the entire east area in general so that acceptable solutions to "community" wide problems can be achieved by all parties concerned. Sincerely, F_1Ius $a:7Ye I I us Planner III ,J,J B : mb cc: Lawrence Cohen, Mayor, City of St. Paul Rosalie Butler, Council President Robert Peterson, Traffic Engineer Daniel J. Dunford, Acting Director of Public Works J. W. Stoker, Real Estate Division, 3M Bailey A. Seida, Director of Community Development, Village of Maplewood - CITY CLERK 9�g� ! ®V .. �T - FINANCE G-I d OF SA IIl� 1 � PAllT - MAYORTMENT - MR - .. - °sented By Referred To Out of Committee Council q jT1 File N0. 5.;, .,_ Committee: Date Resolved, That the Council of the City of Saint Paul doses hereby request that the Mayor and Members of the Council of the Village of Maplewood consider and approve the comments and recommendations made by the Saint Paul Planning Board Staff in reference to the proposed rezoning from Farm Residential and Business Commercial to Light Manufacturing the land generally located within an area bounded by McKnight Road, Convey Avenue, Minnehaha Avenue and Carlton Street, and that this Council urges both the City's Planning Board Staff and the Village's staff to continue to work in the spirit of cooperation in the future development of this area; and be it Further Resolved, That the City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a copy of this resolution to the Mayor and Council members of the Village of Maplewood together with a copy of the Planning Board Staff letter dated December 8, 1972. COUNCILMEN Yeas Nays Hunt Konopatzki Levine Meredith Sprafka Tedesco Mme . President Butler In Favor Against f sAdopted by Council: Date tifi d s ed by Court' "S,ge, ry'F By r� 'Approved by Mayoy: Date DEC 1 3 19_7 By / Requested by Department of: M Form Approved by City Attorney By Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council 0 55 East Fifth Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101. Edward N. Flelfold, executive director. phone 223 5213 A -1 "�116-41 d a m 11'0 December 11, 1972 Village Council 1380 Frost Avenue Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 Attention: Mr. Michael Miller re: Petition for Rezoning of the 167 Acre Tract East of McKnight Road between Conway and Minnehaha Avenues Gentlemen: In response to the petition for the rezoning of the above referenced parcel, the Authority believes that the proposed land uses would not adversely affect residential property owned by the Authority within the vicinity of the site if proper consideration is given to design elements incorporated into the rezoning petition. Our primary concerns are access to the site via McKnight and Minnehaha Avenues together with the compatibility of light industrial use with adjacent residential areas. We would hope that the Village of Maplewood would consider designation of the site as a planned unit development parcel for light industrial use so that additional vehicular traffic on McKnight Road and Min - nehaha Avenue is minimized. We also recommend the provision of adequate buffer treatment where the parcel adjoins residential uses, Sincerely, W Edward N. Hel eld Executive Director RrsJr;,� ^IL ✓� HiNIANHr"FE DI R. Of f)l Ft. O DIR. OF BFU, ?eesc DA] E /2 — /}! -Zz — °- ®--- -- � Orville E. Anderson, Henry R. Thomas, Rosalie L. Butler, Ruby Hunt, Donald P. Del Fiacco, Kenneth J. Lynch, Willie Mae Wilson,/, , STATEMENT CONCERNING REZONING OF 3M PROPERTY NORTH OF CONWAY AVENUE 3M Company has requested the Maplewood Village Couanei.l rezjne that portion of 3M Center property which lies north of Conway Avemae to the zoning classification of M­ I.. . This action has been requested so that development: and growth of 3M Company's campus --like research and development activities can continue at 3M Center. There have been a number of figures quoted in the press expressing the maximum level of growth for the 3M Center in the past, one of them bei.s-Lg 24, 000 employees, 3M projects a maximum employment level. for 3M Center to be 16, 000 employees which would be reached in approximately 1985 - 1.990 This includes both the existing development south of Conway Avenue and tY5.e property under consideration north of Conway Avenue, The development of this property as research and development facilities is in keeping with the Land Use Plan adopted by the ViV.age Planning Commission, 3M Company is sure that the traffic impact is probably of prime concern to those people who live in the vicinity of the 3M Center. We wish to point out that cooperative traffic studies indicate only 10% of the projected peak period traffic would be attributable to the property under consideration . north of Conway at ultimate development and will contribute only I to 2% of the average daily traffic. 3M recognizes that traffic volumes on the streets and highways in the area will continue to increase as the eastern part of the Twin Cities metropolitan area becomes more urbanized, A portion of that increase will be attributable to the growth of employment of the 3M Company at its present facilities and projected facilities on the property south of Conway Avenue, It should also be recognized that the farther development of Maplewood and other communities in the surrounding area will also co_ntl" bate. to the increase in traffic volumes in this area, 3M will continue t1 do all things practical within its power to rni.aimize this traffic impact:. For example, 3M Company adopted, in May of this yea t.,, a staggered work hour plan which has significantly reduced the peak period demands on the streets and highways in the vicinity of the 3M Center. It may be practical, necessary and advantageous to further stagger work hours in the future to minimize peak traffic demands on the surrounding streets and highways. Page 2 In addition, a subscription bu.s service from the White Bear Lake area to the 3M Center has been operating for almost a year. This service is geared to employee residential locations and work hours. At the present time a small percentage of 3M employees in that area take advantage of this service but progress is being made and this type of program requires a. long period of time to prove successful. The programs for improving transportation and transportation facilities in this area are multifaceted because of the numerous public agencies involved, 3M will cooperate with all of the public agencies in their planning and develop= ment so that those street and highway improvements necessary to provide traffic safety and capacity can be accomplished as needs develop. The utility requirements of the 3M Company from the Village of Maplewood for development of this property north of Conway Avenue are minimal. This property would be serviced by extending those 3M owned and 3M maintained utilities which are presently serving the development south of Conway. The necessary ponding capacity on the north site will be retained to service this area as well as surrounding properties. A storm drainage and ponding agreement will be entered into with the Village of Maplewood when the Village has made their complete storm drainage study. 3M Company intends to develop this property in the same campus -like environment as the present 3M Center. 3M Company intends to maintain the high standard of development as demonstrated on the south site not only for the benefit of the 3M Company and its employees, but as a good corporate citizen in the Maplewood community. As in the past, 3M must continue as required by Village ordinances to submit all development, and building plans for each specific project to the Village for approval. Those plans will. be developed in accordance with all local zoning ordinances, building codes, and all local, state and federal regulations concerning the environment. 3M appreciates the opportunity to present this information concerning its plans and growth in the Village of Maplewood. 3M sincerely hopes that the Village will act favorably on this rezoning request. December 14, 1972 incorporatecl December 14, 1972 Village Council Village of Maplewood 1380 Frost Maplewood, Minnesota Dear Councilmen: We own the property on the southeast corner of McKnight Road and Minnehaha on which the Minnehaha Drive -In Theatre is situa- ted. We are advised that the Maplewood Council will conduct a public hearing on December 14 with respect to the Council's petition to rezone our property from Business Commercial District (BC) to Light Manufacturing District (M -1). With respect to this matter, we appeared before the Maplewood Planning Commission on December 4, 1972, and registered our objection to the proposed rezoning. At that time, we sub- mitted our objections in writing, and a copy of that letter is attached. At the Planning Commission meeting, Barton- Aschman Associates, who serve consultants with respect to traffic, ning matters, appeared and submitted Planning Commission. A copy of that Mr. Richard Braun of as our professional access and site Plan- a written report to the report is attached. In view of questions raised at the Planning Commission meet- ing, we asked our consultants to do additional work with respect to design and engineering problems related to our property. Barton- Aschman Associates prepared a report supplementing their original report and covering matters not previously covered. A copy of that report is attached. There is also attached a report from Richard T. Cox, an independent registered engineer, with respect to the capacity of existing public utilities. In addition to the items stated in our letter of December 4 to the Planning Commission, we cite the following additional points in support of our objection: inoorporated Village Council Page 2 December 14, 1972 1. We are advised by our professional consultants that the present public utilities available are more than adequate to serve any commercial development on our site permitted by the existing B -C zoning, and also that uses permitted in an M -1 district may place greater demands on the utilities than those permitted in a B -C district. Whether the utilities are also adequate to serve a substantial development on the adjacent property, which is expected to occur after rezoning said property, should not be deemed relevant to the issue of whether our property should be rezoned. 2. After hearing interested parties and after due delib- eration, on December 4, 1972, the Maplewood Planning Commis- sion unanimously passed a resolution recommending to the Council that our property should not be rezoned to M -1. 3. The proposal to rezone our property to M -1 contrary to the Land Use Plan (a) does not conform to the resolution of the Council passed November 2, 1972, whereby the Council adopted the land use portions of the Land Use Plan as an interim guide in rezoning matters and (b) does not conform to the proposed ordinance amending the rezoning procedure which had its first reading November 2, 1972. 4. The M -1 zone as presently defined permits many uses which are inappropriate for our property and inconsistent with proper land use planning, and while it is expected, notwithstanding all of the uses permitted in an M -1 district, Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. will build; research and development facilities on its property, there is no such expectation with respect to the use of our property. In view of all of the foregoing, we respectfully urge the Council to move to withdraw its petition to rezone our pro- perty. Yo s ver truly, R E M. SON BMC:kb Enclosures 77 t .fie � ' wJ" incorporated December 4, 1972 Planning Commission Village of Maplewood Maplewood, Minnesota Dear'Commissioners: We are the owners of the parcel of property on the southeast corner of McKnight Road and Minnehaha on which the Minnehaha Drive -In Theatre is situated. We received notice that the Village of Maplewood initiated a petition to rezone approxi- mately 146 acres of adjacent Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co, property from Farm - Residential (F -R) to Light Manufactur- ing District (M -1) and then added to the petition a proposal to rezone the Minnehaha Theatre site from Business Commercial District (B -C) to M-1. We wish to register our objection to the proposed change in the zoning of the Minnehaha Theatre site and, from a planning ,point of view, the following are some of the bases of our objection: 1. We acquired this site in April, 1972, in reliance upon the existing and long - standing B -C zoning, and our pur- chase price reflects a value for the commercial uses that B -C zoning allows. 2. The Maplewood Planning Commission, after three years of study, public hearings and professional planning effort, adopted a land use Plan which designated our site as Limited Service Commercial (LSC). According to the Plan, this classi- fication contemplates many diversified activities, including use for commercial areas. Based on the opinion of professional consultants, use for commercial and retail purposes, as opposed to office or industrial uses, is feasible from the point of view of auto traffic generation and use of utilities. 3. We acquired the site not only in reliance upon exist- ing zoning but also in reliance upon the fact that the land use Plan does not propose any substantial modifications in the basic uses permitted under the present zoning. 4. The Director of the Department of Community Development of Maplewood. in his report to the Village dated November 22, 1972, states that the proposed M -1 zoning of our site is not in conformity with the planned land use adopted by the Planning euitE 131 P,, 777 nico112t n�. ea 11, xninnea,i�oli�, xnix'i n ., 5:402., (S12)3� -�.5 h1 �- incorporatecl Planning Commission Page 2 December 4, 1972 Commission and, accordingly, he recommends denial of the pro- posed rezoning of our site. 5. We assume that the land use Plan represents the decision of the Maplewood Planning Commission arrived at after public hear- ings, professional staff advice and due deliberation. We feel that since the land use Plan did not propose any substantial change in use, the Council should not of its own initiative propose a rezoning contrary to the land use Plan. 6. A rezoning would make the present use for an outdoor theatre a nonconforming use and would deprive of us our right to modify the present theatre operation without further muni- cipal authority. 7. We have been advised that rezoning our site without our consent in the manner proposed would constitute a violation of our legal and constitutional rights and would amount to a taking of our property without just compensation. Y rs very truly, t BMC:kb F tags- Ass;ltssysan Associates, Inc. 1821 University Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55104, Telephone 612- 645 -3911 M310RANDUM TO: Bill Fine Bruce Carlson FROM: Shelly Johnson DATE: December 4, 1972 SUBJECT:, Traffic Generation for Specific Land Uses at Minnehaha and McKnight Road Site Most recently, we have been discussing the traffic generation that would be estimated to occur if retail - commercial land use were to occupy the Minnehaha- McKnight Road Site. Our estimates have been based on the proposal of 200,000 square feet of retail area on the site. Based on this proposal the estimated traffic generated by the proposed development for specific hours of the day has been developed. Subsequent to this, entrance %exit locations were designed in order to accommodate these trips. In order to test these traffic volumes against other types of land use, we have developed traffic estimates for office use and for research - development -light industrial use. The purpose of this com- parison is to test the effect that these uses would have on the adja- cent roadway system during the critical traffic period, the evening peak hour, and compare it to the proposed commercial use of the site in question. If the site were developed for office use, and assuming 20,000 square feet of office per acre, the 23 acre site could accommodate 460,000 square feet of office. The estimated site generated traffic would be as follows: If the site were developed to accommodate research - development -light industrial use, traffic estimates are based on 450,000 square feet of floor area. Therefore, the estimated traffic for peak hour periods is as follows: IN OUT A.M. Peak Hour 780 90 P.M. Peak I -Iour 140 1100 Daily 2575 2575 If the site were developed to accommodate research - development -light industrial use, traffic estimates are based on 450,000 square feet of floor area. Therefore, the estimated traffic for peak hour periods is as follows: Page 2 IN OUT A.M. Peak Hour 76S 135 P.M. Peak Hour 135 765 Daily 2700 2700 Another factor to consider in the industrial type land use is the generation of truck traffic. There is a wide variance in the amount of truck traffic developed in an industrial area, mainly due to the different industrial uses possible. An average value, taking into consideration many possible types of light industrial use shows that approximately 30 truck trips during each peak hour may take place. Again, this value may vary dependent upon the type of industrial use. The estimated traffic values discussed for office and /or research - light industry uses could vary depending on the amount of gross building area developed. Research and development land use very closely approximates that of an office use, therefore an increase in that type of development would increase the amount of traffic generated. Based on the use of the site for commercial purposes, the site generated traffic for 200,000 square feet of gross leasable area is: IN OUT P.M. Peak Hour 580 0 7 -8 P.M. 880 680 9 -10 P.M. 240 780 Daily 6000 6000 The directions of approach to the site are very similar when con - sidering each type of land use. The major direction of approach is from the south on McKnight Road. The estimated approach direction for commercial use is: 20% 20% 16% Site 44% The estimated directions of approach for the site if it were developed as an employment center is: Page 3 7% 0 6% 37% Site t 50% In each case, heavy emphasis is placed on an entrance to the site from McKnight Road. That entrance would have to be fully - directional and probably require signalization. In any case, it becomes important to note that office or R $ D, light industry uses will have its peak traffic periods occurring at the same time as the adjacent street system. A commercial use has its peak period occurring during the 7 -8 P.M. hour. A commercial land use has negligible traffic during the A.M. peak hour while office and R $ D, industrial uses have heavy inbound movements during the morn- ing peak hour. A commercial use of the property will have many of its trips consisting of passing traffic or traffic from adjacent employment centers, there- fore the majority of the trips will not be generated explicitly from residential areas. For instance, an inbound trip to the commercial use from an employment center in the trade area is already using the adjacent roadway system and his trip home is only being interrupted for a short time. So care must be exercised when analyzing the commercial trips as many of them are already using the adjacent roadways. Conversely, the office and /or light industry uses are new employment centers whose trips are indeed additive to the already existing volumes on the adjacent roadways. Taking into consideration the preceding discussion, we feel that from a traffic viewpoint a commercial use of the site would present less congestion problems for the adjacent street system than would an office or R & D, industrial use. SJ /cb ` ton- Aschman Associates, Inc. 1821 University Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55104, Telephone 612 - 645 -3911 MEMORANDUM TO: Bruce Carlson Fine Associates, Inc. FROM: Richard P. Braun Barton- Aschman Associates, Inc. DATE: December 14, 1972 SUBJECT: Supplement to December 4, 1972 memo concerning traffic generation for specific land -uses at Minnehaha McKnight Road site. Our memo of December 4, 1972 dealt specifically with the generation of traffic from your site at Minnehaha And McKnight Road. The traffic generated from the 23 acre site was estimated based on three differing land -use types; commercial, office and a combination of research development -light industrial. We feel it is important to emphasize a particular aspect of these estimated traffic volumes. The important point is the fact that we must be concerned with the P.M. peak hour generated traffic because historically this is the most critical hour of the day regarding traffic congestion on the roadway system throughout the Metropolitan area of Minneapolis - St. Paul. As this is the most critical hour of the day, we feel it necessary to appropriately design the adjacent roadway system to handle the volumes present during this time period. The memo of December 4, 1972 presented three tables regarding the traffic generated by the different land -uses. These tables have been consolidated into one table for comparison purposes. R. F, D. Office Light Industry Commercial- Retail In Out In Out In Out A.M. Peak Hour 780 90 76S 135 - -- - -- P.M. Peak Hour 140 1100 135 765 S80 660 7 - 8 P.M. - -- - -- - -- - -- 880 680 9 -10 P.M. - -- - -- - -- - -- 240 780 Average Daily Trips 2575 2575 2700 2700 6000 6000 Page 2 Mr. Bruce Carlson December 14, 1972 As in the previous memo, these generated trips are based on 200,000 square feet of gross leasable commercial area, 460,000 feet of gross leasable office area, and a combination of research - development - light industrial uses totalling 450,000 square feet of gross leasable area. In analyzing the estimated trips generated during the P.M. peak hours for the different land -uses, it is seen that the office use generates the most outbound trips (1100) while a commercial - retail generates the least amount of outbound trips (660). The second most critical hour of the day, which is the morning rush hour, shows the office and R $ D; industrial uses generate a similar amount of inbound trips while commercial - retail does not generate any trips. Most commercial - retail outlets do not usually open for business until after the morning rush hour which accounts for the absence of vehicular traffic for this type of use. There is another item that should be discussed concerning the nature of the trips generated by the three land -use types. Office and R $ D - industrial developments generate a peak hour trip that is characterized by a home to work and vice versa movement. These trips are indeed additive to the already existing volumes on the adjacent street system. Commercial - retail trips during the P.M. peak hour are characterized by the fact that many of these trips are interrupted trips that are already on the adjacent street system. For instance, an>employee in the general trade area of a commercial center may well interrupt his trip home to accomplish some shopping in a commercial center before he continues home. Therefore, he should not be "double- counted" when attempting to determine his affect on the adjacent roadway system. From previous experience we can estimate that a minimum of 20 percent of the P.M. peak hour trips are interrupted trips. Therefore, rather than siirply adding the 580 inbound and 660 outbound trips to the adjacent street system in order to determine a total amount of vehicles passing a point, we should really talk about 464 inbound and 528 outbound trips. In order to view these comparisons, we repeat the previous table taking into account the interrupted trips for coffmicial - retail land -use. In essence the trips shown for commercial - retail are those trips that are considered to be new trips generated by this land -use not already on the adjacent street system. Page 3 Mr. Bruce Carlson December 14, 1972 Office ui A.M. Peak Hour 780 P.M. Peak Hour 140 7 - 8 P.M. - -- 9 . -1Q P.M. - -- Average Daily Trips 2575 R$D Commercial- Retail 90 765 135 - -- - -- 1100 135 765 464 528 - -- - -- - -- 748 578 - -- -- - -- 204 663 2575 2700 2700 5100 5100 From the comparison of these land -use types and the traffic they generate during the P.M. peak hour, we conclude that a commercial - retail use adds a lesser amount of traffic to the adjacent roadways than the office or R f, D - industrial uses. Pursuant to your request, we have reviewed the Conway Avenue Feasibility Study of January, 1971, and 3M Company's Summary Report of TrafJJc Access at 34 Center, dated April, 1970. These reports are quality reports, seem to be well documented, and will be of great value to the governmental agencies involved if the employment projections, as stated in these reports are realized. It is virtually impossible to discuss these reports without discussing their evolvement with the authors. In any case, based on the content of these reports, we do not foresee any difficulty with the develop- ment of your property as commercial - retail. The traffic generated by such development can be accommodated without any undue congestion to the adjacent street system. RPB SJJ:cls I MEMORANDUM RICHARDT.COX, CONSULTING ENGINEER iE 1203 . RAOISSON CENTER - 44 50. 7TH ST. - MINNEAPOLIS. MINN. 55402 612330.9004 DATE: December 14, 1972 TO: Bill Fine, Bob Dworsky, Bruce Carlson SUBJECT: Municipal Services, Minnehaha Site You have raised some questions regarding the adequacy of municipal services for area uses other than those assumed when I first inspected the site at the time of your purchase. The site then (and now) is zoned BC. From a planning standpoint, I considered retail- commercial as being one of the probable ultimate uses, including the possibility of large and small stores and shops, eating facilities and some services. I felt neither multiple housing nor hotel /motel was too likely. Based on these assumptions, the following determinations were made: Storm -water runoff on the fully developed site would increase approximately 20% but without materially affecting the capability of the lake to contain storm waters from the total watershed. Sanitary requirements could be adequately filled by the present system. A commercial development generates approximately 400 gallons per toilet room per day. Assuming a 200,000 square foot development, this translates to about 4,000 gallons per day. A restaurant, if included, at 7 gallons per patron might add another 2,000 gallons for a daily total of 6,000 gallons. This is roughly equivalent to 100 apartment units. Mater requirements are probably 20 - 30% greater than sewage flows. However, automatic extinguishing systems should be installed with fire flows of 2,000 - 3,000 gpm. To attain this volume might require booster pumps. Other types of uses both on this site and the neighboring 150 acres could have serious consequences. Firstly, light industrial- office - research uses on your site could raise the water and sewage requirements on the order of ten -fold depending on the activities carried on within the complex. This, in itself alone, is not insurmountable. However, to allow these same uses on the adjoining land may preclude the use of your site even as it is now zoned for the following reasons: Any diminution of the present ponding area presents immediate storm sewer development needs. Development of the surrounding land, now Memo to Bill Fine, Bob Dworsky, Bruce Carlson covered with vegetation and low areas, would greatly increase runoff rates. Present sewage capacity is probably adequate except that the 10 -inch line along the south side of your site might have to be redi- rected. The major problem is adequate water supply. It is difficult to fore- cast the -needs without knowing exactly the end use of the land. In my opinion, this should be carefully examined and the supply assured prior to any development on adjacent land. To summarize: A. Present services to your site are adequate for uses contemplated in the BC zone. B. If your property were rezoned to M -1 and your site limited to other than commercial uses, the loads on the utilities would be sharply increased. C. If the adjoining property is rezoned to M -1, retention of BC classification on your site will create less demand for expansion of utilities. R. T. Cox I -2- RICHARDT.COX, CON SULTINGENGINEER fE 1203 - RAOISSON CENTEP - 44 S.. ITN ST. - MINNEAPOLIS. MINN. 55402 - 612 338.9004 MEMORANDUM DATE: December 14, 1972 TO: Bill Fine, Bob Dworsky, Bruce Carlson SUBJECT: Municipal Services, Minnehaha Site. You have raised some questions regarding the adequacy of municipal services for area uses other than those assumed when I first inspected the site at the time of your purchase. The site then (and now) is zoned BC. From a planning standpoint, I considered retail - commercial as being one of the probable ultimate uses, including the possibility of large and small stores and shops, eating facilities and some services. I felt neither multiple housing nor hotel /motel was too likely. Based on these assumptions, the following determinations were made: Storm -water runoff on the fully developed site would increase approximately 20% but without materially affecting the capability of the lake to contain storm waters from the total watershed. Sanitary requirements could be adequately filled by the present system. A commercial development generates approximately 400 gallons per toilet room per day. Assuming a 200,000 square foot development, this translates to about 4,000 gallons per day. A restaurant, if included, at 7 gallons per patron might add another 2,000 gallons for a daily total of 6,000 gallons. This is roughly equivalent to 100 apartment units. Water requirements are probably 20 - 30% greater than sewage flows. However, automatic extinguishing systems should be installed with fire flows of 2,000 - 3,000 gpm. To attain this volume might require booster pumps. Other types of uses both on this site and the neighboring 150 acres could have serious consequences. Firstly, light industrial- office - research uses on your site could raise the water and sewage requirements on the order of ten -fold depending on the activities carried on within the complex. This, in itself alone, is not insurmountable. However, to allow these same uses on the adjoining land may preclude the use of your site even as it is now zoned for the following reasons: Any diminution of the present ponding area presents immediate storm sewer development needs. Development of the surrounding land, now Memo to Bill Fine, Bob Dworsky, Bruce Carlson covered with vegetation and low areas, -would greatly increase runoff rates. Present sewage capacity is probably adequate except that the 10 -inch line along the south side of your site might have to be redi- rected. The major problem is adequate water supply. It is difficult to fore- cast the needs without knowing exactly the end use of the land. In my opinion, this should be carefully examined and the supply assured prior to any development on adjacent land. To summarize: A. Present services to your site are adequate for uses contemplated in the BC zone. B. If your property were rezoned to M -1 and your site limited to other than commercial uses, the loads on the utilities would be sharply increased. C. If the adjoining property is rezoned to M -1, retention of BC classification on your site will create less demand for expansion of utilities. R. T. Cox ,'p4- t ..2_ NOTICE OF HEARING OF If4PROVEMENT TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: WHEREAS, the Village Council of the Village of Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota, deems it necessary and expedient that the improvement hereinafter described, be made, HOW, THEREFORE, notice is hereby given that the Village Council will hold a public hearing on said improvement at the following time and place within the said Village: Date and Time: December 26, 1972 at 7:30 P.M. Location Council Chambers of the Village Hall 1330 Frost Avenue The general nature of the improvement is the construction of storm drains and necessary appurtenances for the "North Branch" of Battle Creek and its contributory drainage area in the following described area: That area bounded by McKnight Road, Interstate Highway I -94, Farrel Street extended and Stillwater Road. Additionally, a portion of that area South of I -94 and North of Mayer Lane extended between Crestview Drive and Brookview Court. The total estimated cost of said improvement is $150,000.00. It is proposed to assess every lot, piece or parcel of land benefited by said improvement whether abutting thereon or not, based upon benefits received without regard to cash valuation. This Council proposes to proceed under the authority granted by Chapter 429 M.S.A. Dated this 11th day of December, 1972. BY ORDER, OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL Mrs. Lucille Aurelius Village Clerk Village of Maplewood Publish: December 13 and 20, 1972 (Maplewood Review) P S VILLAGE OF MAPLEWOOD SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT N0. 5 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. Village Project No. 70 -5 Address: Shafer, Minnesota 55074 M.S.A.S. Project No. 38- 107 -03 Job Location: Beam Avenue - Hazelwood Avenue 38- 116 -03 to White Bear Avenue This contract is hereby amended as follows: Subsequent to construction under this contract, Beam Avenue will be extended westward from Hazelwood. Under the current Beam Avenue contract, unsuitable material under the roadway will be removed and common excavation from the generally rectangular area enclosed by Kennard Street plan station 29 +00 to station 40 +00 and approximately 870 feet west will be used in constructing the embankment for the proposed roadway between Hazelwood Avenue and the Burlington Northern Railroad embankment. The common excavation from the area noted above will be paid for at $0.85 per cubic yard plus $.005 per cubic yard station for overhaul over 800 feet, which in this case averages 36 stations over the base of 8 stations. Item No. Item Unit Unit Cost Estimated Quantity Amount 2105.505 Muck C.Y. 1.00 30,000 +30,000.00 Excavation 2105.501 Common C.Y. 0.85 85,000 +72,250.00 Excavation Overhaul Yd -Sta .005 (36 Sta) +15,300.00 (85,000 C.Y.) TOTAL +$117,550.00 ACCEPTED BY: Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. By: ' / f ��, vX7 Title: O &C 6iP_5 Date: FOR APPROVAL: ISSUED BY: Howar e es, Tammp-n &jBergendoff V LL E F MAPLEWOOD VILLAGE OF MAPLEWOOD I� By. I Raymond Hite By .- . willer Title: S perintendent of Public Works Title: Director of Public Works Date: February 28, 1972 Date: February 28, 1972 APPR VE AS TO ^ORM a Village Attorney APPROVED BY VILLAGE COUNCIL: On. -�? � _19 �2 ra Resolution No.: %�i