Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/20/2003MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, October 20, 2003, 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 1. C=ll to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. October 6, 2003 5. Public Hearings None 6. New Business a. Home Occupation License - 1828 Radatz Avenue (Horvath) b. Heritage Square Townhouses (Legacy Village) 1. PUD Amendment 2. Preliminary Plat Unfinished Business a. Proposed Mixed-Use Zoning Ordinance 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations a. October 13 Council Meeting: Ms Dierich b. October 27 Council Meeting: Mr. Tdppler c. November 10 Council Meeting: Ms. Fisher 10. Staff Presentations a. Reschedule December 1,2003 Meeting 11. Adjoumment DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2003 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Rossbach called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. I1. ROLL CALL Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Absent Tushar Desai Present Mary Dierich Present Jackie Monahan-Junek Present Paul Mueller Absent Gary Pearson Present William Rossbach Present (sitting in as chairperson) Dale Trippler Present Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OFAGENDA Mr. Roberts requested two changes to the agenda. First that item 6. d. be moved to item 6. e. so a new item 6. d. could be added for Kennard Street On-Street Parking, Heritage Square, and Legacy Village PUD. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the agenda with the amended changes. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes- Desai, Dierich, Monahan-Junek, Pearson, Rossbach, Trippler The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the planning commission minutes for September 15, 2003. Commissioner Dierich requested a correction to page 4, in the bottom paragraph, on the seventh- line correcting the word cities to city's. Commissioner Monahan-Junek requested corrections to page 5, in the sixth paragraph, at the end of the second sentence. Please change the words two variancesto.an expansion. Another change is in the same paragraph in the third sentence deleting the sentence ck.. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-06-03 -2- Commissioner Desai moved to approve the planning commission minutes for September 15, 2003 as amended. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes- Desai, Dierich, Monahan-Junek, Pearson, Rossbach, Trippler V. PUBLIC HEARING None. VI. NEW BUSINESS a. Street Right-of-Way Vacation (Karth Road, north of County Road D) Mr. Roberts said Chris Cavett, representing the Maplewood Engineering Department and the adjoining property owners, is asking the city to vacate a street right-of-way. This right-of-way is for Karth Road and is between the properties at 2191 and 2205 County Road D. This right-of- way is between the two properties and has driveway and accessory buildings on it. The city should require the property owners to sign an easement agreement for the existing driveway to ensure that it can remain and for their use of the driveway. This agreement is to be recorded with Ramsey County. Chairperson Rossbach asked in what situation would the roadway not be equally divided? Mr. Roberts said right-of-ways are vacated and turned back to the original property owners. Commissioner Trippler asked staff what happens if the two neighbors don't agree to sign an agreement? Mr. Roberts said it is his understanding that the city wouldn't record the vacation resolution with Ramsey County. Chairperson Rossbach asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak regarding this issue? Maplewood residents David and Susan Huebl at 2191 County Road D, Maplewood, addressed the commission. They said they have no problem with the street right-of-way vacation. They would like to revisit this when the neighbor lady sells her property. Mr. And Mrs. Huebl would like to have that written in somewhere. Chairperson Rossbach asked staff if it is possible to have that statement written in the agreement_ that it could have a termination that goes with ownership? Mr. Roberts said he is sure the city attorney could get something written in. Chairperson Rossbach said if the Huebl's attend the city council meeting on October 27, 2003, they could ask the legal staff that question and they could give an answer at that time if it is something that they could do or not. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-06-03 -3- Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the resolution on page eight of the staff report. This resolution is for the vacation of the Karth Road right-of-way, north of County Road D. The reasons for the vacation are as follows: It is in the public interest. The city is not using the right-of-way for a public street. The right-of-way is not needed for street access purposes as the adjacent properties have street access on County Road D. This approval is subject to the property owners signing an easement agreement for the existing driveway that is in the right-of-way. This agreement is to be recorded at Ramsey County. Commissioner Monahan-Junek seconded. Ayes- Desai, Dierich, Monahan-Junek, Pearson, Rossbach, Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on October 27, 2003. b. South Maplewood Rezonings (F and R-1 to R-I(R)) Mr. Roberts said after the city council approved the new rural zoning district in August, he surveyed the 73 owners of property in south Maplewood that the city might consider the zoning to the new R-I(R) designation. He received five replies to the survey. The R-1 (R) zoning district has a 2-acre minimum lot size and a minimum lot width of 120 feet and is for areas of Maplewood without sewer and water and with a semi-rural, very Iow-density residential lifestyle. The question now for the city to decide is, what if any, of the properties in the study area should have the R-1 (R) zoning designation. A group of properties that warrant special zoning consideration are those in Haller's Woods. The lots in this development range in size from 0.92 acres to 3.46 acres and the city has zoned this whole subdivision RE-40 (residential estate 40,000). This zoning district has a 40,000-square-foot (0.92 acres) minimum lot size and a minimum lot width of 140 feet. Another set of properties that the city should carefully review the zoning for are those that now have an F or R-1 zoning and that are less than two acres in size. If the city changes the zoning of these to R-I(R), the change would make them legal nonconforming properties. The planning commissioners had various discussions with staff regarding the existing and proposed zoning maps that could not be transcribed. This was because the commission asked staff to point to certain properties on the map, which made it difficult to try to put their discussion into words. Commissioner Pearson moved to adopt the zoning map change resolution starting on page 17 of the staff report. This resolution changes the zoning for several properties in south Maplewood to R-I(R) (rural residential) (with a two-acre minimum lot size). The city is approving this change because: 1. The proposed change is consistent with the sPirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. Planning Commission -4- Minutes of 10-06-03 The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. 5. The proposed zoning change would be consistent with the existing land use designation. Commissioner Trippler seconded. Ayes- Desai, Dierich, Monahan-Junek, Pearson, Rossbach, Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on October 27, 2003. c. Proposed Mixed-Use Zoning Ordinance Ms. Finwall said to ensure the city council reviews the proposed ordinance by the moratorium deadline of October 27, 2003, staff's goal is to present the mixed-use zoning district to the city council for their review at the October 27, 2003, city council meeting. Prior to the city council authorizing the rezoning of the Hillcrest Village redevelopment area to the mixed-use zoning district, staff will present the ordinance to all property owners located in the Hillcrest Village redevelopment area for review and comments. Ms. Finwall said it was brought to her attention that dry-cleaning was listed as a permitted use and some of the chemicals in the dry-cleaning service can be deemed hazardous. Staff is reviewing the counties licensing requirements for a drycleaner and if deemed hazardous staff will recommend only dry stores which are dry-cleaning establishments that send dry-cleaning off site to be cleaned. Commissioner Dierich had a question about page 2, in the first paragraph, in the ninth sentence it states that pre-existing prohibited uses would be covered by the city's existing nonconforming ordinance that would allow these uses to remain until such time as the use ceased for one year or more. She asked staff if that time frame could be changed to less than one year? Ms. Finwall said there could be a separate nonconforming section added for this zoning district, however, staff was proposing to use the city's current nonconforming ordinance which would allow these businesses to remain for one year. Commissioner Dierich said she would like it to be less than one year. Ms. Finwall said the city has to sell the proposed zoning district to the current businesses. She asked Ms. Dierich what a fair timeline would be? Planning Commission Minutes of 10-06-03 -5- Commissioner Dierich said if the business is thinking of changing hands, and it would be nonconforming, she thinks sooner rather than later would be better than the one-year timeline. She understands the city does not want to push businesses out but the city also wants to move along with this. She said a year's lag time seems like a long time because you could turn around and sell it and continue that nonconforming use within a year's time, Commissioner Dierich asked staff what the definition of a single-family dwelling was. She asked if that meant row homes, detached townhomes, or a single-family residence? Ms. Finwall said on page 8 of the staff report a single-family dwelling is specified in the table as having 7,260 square feet of lot area. It's envisioned as a detached townhome as a single-family dwelling. Commissioner Dierich asked what (type of commercial use limited production and processing) is on page 6 of the staff report? Ms. Finwall said she was not sure. She said that information came from Calthorpe and it needs some refining to be better understood in the report. Commissioner Dierich said she is not sure how the other commissioners feel but if the plan is to encourage walking in the Hillcrest area the plan should be to limit the number of gas stations in the area. She does not mind buildings with a car wash or grocery or convenience markets but to limit the gas pumping stations in the area because they are not a good fit for what the city's intent is. Ms. Finwall said it was recommended in the studies by Calthorpe and the Metropolitan Council that this type of gas station with a convenience market is allowed in this zoning district. Mr. Roberts added that the city's current ordinance defines motor fuel stations as either a minor or a major fuel station. A minor fuel station can have up to three pump islands and anything more than that is a major fuel station. He said the commission may want to consider that in their decision-making. Regarding the nonconformity issue and the one-year timeframe, that may be a question for the city attorney. If the city you lessens the timeframe to shorter than the one-year in certain areas of the city and treat this area differently, the city may be setting themself up for legal action. In the past, a one-year timeframe has probably been upheld in the courts. Commissioner Monahan-Junek asked if staff could better define the definition of use definitions on page 7, number 6. She would like to have the manufacturing business portion better defined. She said that could be a one-man jeweler working out of his house and living in the upstairs. To her a manufacturing business could mean chemicals, storage, machines, etc. and things that go_ on with a typical manufacturing business. Commissioner Pearson said it looks like the bonuses that are being allowed in the density are really just going around the 16-unit per acre that was decided on. His question is with this development there will be a lot of children and where are the children going to play other than the narrow streets? There is nothing in this development area set aside for a playground or for children to safely play. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-06-03 -6- Ms. Finwall said in all developments the city does not require an actual play area or additional open space for children, however, during the site review that is taken into account. On many occasions the city requires the developer to create a play area that would be addressed at that time. Regarding the density bonuses, the developer could have an increase in density if they erected an open ~pace. Commissioner Pearson said the city has had a number of other developments where the city required the developer to put in a playground space and it is something that should go into the plan. Chairperson Rossbach said he would agree with Mr. Pearson. He asked staff if anyone knew what other city's have done along the lines of parks and play areas for children? Ms. Finwall said in her research on these urban type-zoning districts there has not been any comments made for creating an area for children. Chairperson Rossbach said at a past meeting the commission discussed the Grand Avenue area and the need to have parking structures on top of the buildings because of lack of space. He asked where the children play in that area of the twin cities, are there parks around? Commissioner Desai said there are no play areas in the Grand Avenue area; however, the residents can go a few blocks away towards the river to get to neighborhood parks so kids can play and for open space. Chairperson Rossbach asked people would have to travel outside of their neighborhood to get to a park then? Commissioner Desai said yes the residents have to travel about a 1/2 mile to 3~ of a mile away. He asked staff how far the nearest park is from the Hillcrest Redevelopment area if someone with children wanted to walk? Mr. Roberts said Goodrich Park is to the east up North St. Paul Road and to the west is the Blessed Virgin Mary Church and Wakefield Park and then a little farther away is the Maplewood Community Center. Commissioner Desai said the Maplewood Community Center is too far to walk to from the Hillcrest Area. He said if there was a plan to have walking paths to the parks that were mentioned above this could be a minimal solution for children to have parks and playgrounds. He said in New York City there are no playgrounds and parks and people have to go to Central Park. Mr. Roberts said staff has recommended that sidewalks be put on both sides of the road so that will start that linking process to get to the parks and playgrounds. Ms. Finwall said a developer that would come to the city with plans for a development that would be for families the developer would want to market it in such a way that families would want to live there for their children to have playground space. Otherwise City staff could add something in the additional design requirements that would require a certain amount of play area per amount of space. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-06-03 -7- Commissioner Trippler said he spoke with staff today and one of the issues that caught his attention was on page 9 of the staff report. In footnote number 4 it states the required setback from an alley for a residential garage should be zero (0) or more feet if the garage door faces the interior of the lot, and eighteen (18) or more feet when the garage door faces the alley. He had a family member who lived in South Minneapolis who had a garage right up on the alley. The garage doors were scraped up and battered because of the space issue and he does not think this allows enough space. Chairperson Rossbach said the alleys in St. Paul allow zero clearance but there are some garages that set back 3 or 4 feet and that is an area that should have been alley. The garage doors are still beat up and he thinks it is necessary to have additional width to eliminate this problem. Commissioner Pearson said his question is would there be adequate room to move snow in the winter and where it would be moved to when it needs to be plowed? Will the city plow those alleys or is the residents' responsibility to find someone to plow it? Ms. Finwall said the city is recommending that the city have flexibility on alley widths within the zoning district according to the public works director and approval by the city council. St. Paul with their traditional neighborhood requires a maximum alley right-of-way of 20 feet. She is not sure about the snow plowing issue. Regarding the setbacks of the garages to the alley, in Minneapolis they are very narrow at only 8 or 9 feet wide. Unless it was a one-way would not be allowed in Maplewood. Regarding the snow removal, if it was a public road the city would be responsible for plowing that. Commissioner Pearson said the issue isn't so much who is going to plow the snow but where are they going to move the snow when it gets plowed? In his opinion the alleyways should be 20 feet wide with a zero setback for garages. Chairperson Rossbach asked where St. Paul and Minneapolis put the snow once it gets plowed from the alleys because they seem to get by in the winter. Mr. Cavett said he lives in St. Paul and has an alley. The residents plow the residential alleys because the city is not responsible for plowing the snow. A neighbor hires someone to get the job done and the snow does not get hauled away, they find a place for it even in the bad winter months. Commissioner Trippler said he thinks a 20-foot wide alleyway seems too wide. Chairperson Rossbach asked the commission if 18 feet wide would be a better number for the. alley width? Nobody agreed or disagreed so he said that could be something for the commission to think about. Commissioner Desai said the commission is trying to discourage automobiles in this mixed-use zoning district and now the commission is discussing widening the alleyways to allow for automobiles. It doesn't make philosophical sense for what has been planned for this area. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-06-03 -8- Commissioner Trippler said he understands what commissioner Desai is saying but unless the City of Maplewood outlaws vehicles these types of issues will be brought up to discuss. Commissioner Trippler said he would be fine with the 18-foot alley right-of-way. Chairperson Rossbach recommended that the alleyways be wide enough for two vehicles to pass and allow for storage of snow. He asked the commission members preferred minor or major fuel stations in this area and the majority was for minor fuel stations such as the Holiday Station off Lower Afton Road that has three fuel islands and a convenience store. Chairperson Rossbach thought it was important to limit fuel stations to a minimum number of feet from residential neighborhoods. Commissioner Dierich said she would recommend limiting the minor fuel stations altogether in the Maplewood side of the mixed-use zoning district. She feels fuel stations promote non-pedestrian friendly areas because of the vehicles coming and going from the station/convenience store and also the hours they are open. She also feels a fuel station/convenience store does not fit in with the intent of what the city is trying to do with the Hillcrest Redevelopment plan. Commissioner Trippler said in the staff report on page 10, under building faCade widths, he asked if it was an error on the second line forty (40) feet in width or less? Ms. Finwall told the commission that Mr. Trippler called staff today and recommended that staff remove the or less portion of that sentence because you cannot exceed (40) feet in width or less. Commissioner Trippler also recommended in the remodeling/addition/alterations paragraph, in the third line, removing the word massing or possibly using another descriptive word. Staff will redraft this report for the mixed-use zoning district and bring it back to the planning commission on October 20, 2003. Commissioner Pearson asked when the moratorium expires? Ms. Finwall said the moratorium expires October 27, 2003. d. Kennard Street On-Street Parking, Heritage Square, Legacy Village PUD Mr. Roberts said the recently approved Legacy Village PUD includes the extension of Kennard Street as a north-south collector street through the Hajicek property, from County Road D south. Construction on the roadway is to begin within a matter of days. The first phases of Legacy Village - the rental townhouses and the Senior Assisted Living building - will start construction soon and will rely on Kennard Street. The next phase of Legacy Village - the for-sale townhome site - will come before the Planning Commission on October 20, 2003. That parcel is being_ developed by Town and Country Homes, to be called Heritage Square. On-street parallel parking is proposed on the west side of Kennard Street in front of these proposed townhouses. City staff wanted the commission to be aware of this detail of the street project. Commissioner Monahan-Junek said on the last page of the staff report the parking areas are circled and she asked staff to explain how the parking would work. She asked if the parking would be similar to the parallel parking in downtown St. Paul? Planning Commission Minutes of 10-06-03 -9- Mr. Roberts said yes that area would have parallel parking spaces similar to the way you would parallel park in downtown St. Paul. There will be no overnight parking in this area and the additional parking spaces will be for visitors and guests. Commissioner Trippler said a long time ago there was discussion about the roundabout for Kennard Street and Legacy Village and he asked at that time if the roundabout would be for two lanes going each way as they are in other parts of the world. Now he does not even see the roundabout in the plan. If the roundabout were put back into the plan, he asked if it would be for two lanes so there would be a constant flow of traffic, or would it be for one lane so the traffic would have to constantly stop? Mr. Roberts said the roundabout will be there, however the developer forgot to put it in the plans. Mr. Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer, said the roundabout would be a single lane of traffic similar to the roundabout at English and Frost. Currently, MnDot standards in Minnesota do not allow multiple lanes for roundabouts at this time. Commissioner Trippler said in England, Germany, and in Europe, they all have multiple lane roundabouts so there is a constant flow of traffic. He drives the roundabout at English and Frost and he has to stop every day, if there were two lanes of traffic, he would not have to stop, and it would improve the flow of traffic. Chairperson Rossbach asked staff what the projected traffic count for Kennard Street was? Mr. Roberts said he remembers hearing 3,000 vehicles of traffic a day for Kennard Street. Chairperson Rossbach said his concern is for people being out in the traffic lane and getting hit by cars. Commissioner Dierich asked staff to give an example of a street in Maplewood that would have about 3,000 vehicles traveling a day on it? Mr. Roberts said streets such as Linwood Avenue or Highwood Avenue may have that type of traffic count in a day. People in downtown St. Paul manage to park and not get hit with higher traffic counts than that. Mr. Cavett said the area in question would be 22-feet wide to accommodate an emergency vehicle to get by and for a car to be parked and to be able to move around the car. Mr. Roberts said just as a reminder this area ties in with the mixed-use zone district the. commission just discussed regarding the on-street parking. The developer felt it was important to work in the urban village feel to the area and provide the front door access to visitors. Chairperson Rossbach said he would prefer the on-street parking to be contained within the square. He does not have any real safety concerns regarding the parking other than people getting in and out of their cars safely. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-06-03 -10- Mr. Roberts said that this item requires no action from the commission; this is for information only. The City staff and consultants will bring it to the city council on October 13, 2003, as a change order for the Kennard Street improvement project. e. Planning Commission Applicant Interviews Mr. Roberts said the planning commission has a vacancy created by the resignation of Matt Ledvina. Attached in the staff report is a map of where the current planning commissioners reside and where the two candidates live along with their application forms. The first applicant to be interviewed was Mr. Jeff Bartol, 2702 Pinkspire Lane. Chairperson Rossbach asked if Mr. Bartol has any problem with the time commitment to meet twice a month and possibly staying late into the evening? Mr. Bartol said he has no problem working the two meetings of the month or working late into the evening. Chairperson Rossbach asked if Mr. Bartol would have any difficulty finding the time to review the planning commission packet and doing some site inspections? Mr. Bartol said no his current employment is very flexible and he can work it into his schedule reviewing the planning commission packet and doing the site inspections. Chairperson Rossbach asked Mr. Bartol what he does for a living? Mr. Bartol said he is heavily involved with computers with system integration, consulting, website design and earlier in his career he did engineering work with a computerized design in the architectural field. His background is in architecture from his studies at the .University. Commissioner Pearson said he assumed with Mr. Bartol's background he would not have any difficulty deciphering blueprints? Mr. Bartol said no. Chairperson Rossbach asked how Mr. Bartol felt about affordable housing in the City of Maplewood? Mr. Bartol said like Commissioner Pearson he is concerned about the children in affordable housing and where they will go to play. Many people that live in affordable housing have several. children and they need someplace to play. He commended the commission on the process these projects go through and the questions that are asked. He asked the commission what a CUP and a PUD are? The planning commission members explained what the two meant and how they are used. Commissioner Monahan-Junek asked what Mr. Bartol could do as a planning commission member to foster a sense of community to the residents that live in the south end of the community and the people that live in the north end of Maplewood? Planning Commission Minutes of 10-06-03 -11- Mr. Bartol said that is a difficult question to answer. He said he has only lived in Maplewood for 6 to 8 months and prior to that he lived in the Como Park area. He has really enjoyed the Battle Creek area and wished he had known about it long ago. He thinks that would be a wonderful area to have a citywide get together for people to gather and get to know the people in their community better. He said his daughter lives in St. Paul and uses the dog walk there to walk her dog. Commissioner Trippler said in reviewing Mr. Bartol's application he noticed he wanted to give back to the community and he wondered how Mr. Bartol decided to apply for the planning commission opening with his background and not for the community design review board? Mr. Bartol said he applied for both the commission and the board opening at the request of Mary Dierich who recommended he apply for the commission and one of the city staff members suggested he apply for the board. He said he would feel useful and productive on either the commission or the board. He wants to get back into the urban development, city planning and architectural skills that he acquired 25 years ago and let go by the wayside. The second applicant to be interviewed was Roger Posch, 1583 County Road B. Chairperson Rossbach asked if Mr. Posch has any problem with the time commitment to meet twice a month and possibly staying late into the evening? Mr. Posch said no. Chairperson Rossbach asked if Mr. Posch would have any difficulty finding the time to review the planning commission packet and doing site inspections? Mr. Posch said no. Chairperson Rossbach asked Mr. Posch what he does for a living and on a day-to- day basis? Mr. Posch said he is a realtor at Coldwell Banker Burnet Realty. Outside of work he belongs to a church and is part of the loaves and fishes program and is involved with Weaver Elementary school fundraising. Commissioner Monahan-Junek asked Mr. Posch what he could do as a planning commission member to foster a sense of community to the residents that live in the south end of the community and the people that live in the north end of Maplewood? Mr. Posch said he is open-minded and is not sure about pulling people together. Commissioner Dierich said Mr. Posch's application said he wants to be a voice for his neighborhood. She asked what issues Mr. Posch would like to be able to impact if he were on the planning commission? Mr. Posch said it's not so much any particular issue as much as he would like to help notify all residents to let them know what is going on or what will be happening in the community. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-06-03 -12- Commissioner Dierich asked Mr. Posch if there was a particular issue he would be more interested in such as density, affordable housing, traffic or protection of water that he could speak to? Mr. Posch said there are no individual issues that he is interested in; he just wants to have an understanding of the issues and have a voice in what is going on in Maplewood. Commissioner Desai said there has been a lot of discussion about workforce housing. As a realtor, in your opinion, where do you stand in terms of workforce housing in the City of Maplewood? Mr. Posch said in the past Maplewood has had affordable housing but property Continues to increase and homes are getting more expensive. If Maplewood had more affordable housing as one of the first ring suburbs to downtown St. Paul, people could live here and bus downtown to work so there could be more affordable housing for the city. Mr. Roberts asked Mr. Posch what he thinks the City of Maplewood did really well in terms of development and what the city has done that he did not care for? Mr. Posch said he thinks the Maplewood Mall was something the city did very well with the proximity of the freeway and he also likes the bike trails in the city. The Maplewood Community Center is something he does not like that the city developed. He said he heard the community center is not making money for the city and the only reason he goes there is for the plays and shows in the theatre. Commissioner Pearson asked if Mr. Posch has any problem reading blueprints or plans? Mr. Posch said no. Commissioner Pearson asked if Mr. Posch thought there was anything the planning commission could have addressed during the items that were reviewed tonight? Mr. Posch said nothing comes to mind. Chairperson Rossbach asked staff what Mr. Posch could do if for example he had some real estate listings and he had a conflict of interest with something the planning commission was reviewing? Mr. Roberts said potentially Mr. Posch would have a conflict of interest if the listing he had were going to be redeveloped. Mr. Posch said he understands that he would abstain from the discussion or recommend that another agent take the listing. Mr. Roberts said the two applicants also applied for the opening on the Community Design Review Board and those interviews will be held Tuesday, October 12, 2003. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-06-03 -13- The applicant with the lowest score is the candidate of choice and that person would be recommended to the city council. The results of the voting by the planning commission members were as follows: The first applicant interviewed, Jeff Bartol scored 6 points. The second applicant interviewed, Roger Posch scored 12 points. Mr. Roberts said the candidates would be notified of the city council meeting date for the final interview for the city council to make the final decision. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Mr. Rossbach was the planning commission representative at the September 22, 2003, city council meeting. There were no planning commission items to be discussed but Mr. Rossbach attended the meeting to hear the city council meeting discussion. Mr. Matt Ledvina was given a resolution from the city council for his time on the planning commission. The reconsideration of the Hmong American Alliance church for the comprehensive plan, conditional use permit and the design approval was approved 4-ayes and l-abstention from the mayor because of the proximity of his property to this proposed location. b. Ms. Dierich will be the planning commission representative at the October 13, 2003, city council meeting. c. Mr. Trippler will be the planning commission representative at the October 27, 2003, city council meeting. Items to be discussed will include the street right of way vacation of Karth Road, and the South Maplewood Rezonings (F & R-1 to R-I(R). X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS None. Xl. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Home Occupation License Christine Horvath 1828 Radatz Avenue October 7, 2003 INTRODUCTION Project DesCription Ms. Christine Horvath is requesting a home occupation license to start and operate a naturopathic healing clinic in the house at 1828 Radatz Avenue. Please see applicant's letter on pages 5 and 8 and the maps on pages 7 through 12. DISCUSSION Proposed Business The applicant's business would be using naturopathic medicine (therapeutic natural health care) to help heal various ailments of individuals. Ms. Horvath would be using much of the lower level of the home for the business, including having an office and two bedrooms for treatment rooms. The city's home occupation ordinance limits a home occupation to occupy a maximum of 20 percent of the floor area of house. Her proposed business would use about 620 square feet of the lower level of the home, which is 20 percent of the floor area of the house. This space limit also is important to David Fisher, the Maplewood Building Official, as he noted in his memo on page 18. Ms. Horvath will be living in the home and would be the only employee in the home occupation. The applicant states that she would receive client visits between the hours of 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., Monday through Friday (except Wednesdays) and on Saturday mornings. She expects a maximum of 32 clients per week in the home. Neighborhood Comments Of the 43 neighboring property owners the city surveyed, I received five wdtten replies and two telephone calls. One was fine with the request, one had no objections and four were against the proposal, pdmadly because of traffic concerns. I also received two telephone calls from neighbors who said they were against the proposal, primarily because of traffic concerns. Ms. Horvath told me that she expects to have up to seven clients per day at the home business. If the city approves this home business, the city's home occupation ordinance (on pages 14 - 17) allows only residents of the home, plus one outside employee, to be employed within the business. In addition, the city council may place conditions on the business to ensure that surrounding residential properties are not negatively impacted. Other Comments Butch Gervais, the Maplewood Fire Marshal, stated, "Provide a five-pound ABC dry chemical fire extinguisher." SUMMARY The city council has approved home occupation licenses for hair salons and other small businesses in the past. Although many home occupation requests generate concerns from neighbors, our office has found that most small home occupations are a good fit in residential neighborhoods. RECOMMENDATION Approve the home occupation license for Ms. Christine Horvath to have a naturopathic healing clinic in the house at 1828 Radatz Avenue. This approval shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. Meeting all conditions of the city's home occupation ordinance. This includes that the area of the home occupation is limited to a maximum of 20 percent of the floor area of the house. 2. Customer hours for this home occupation are limited from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 3. There shall be no more than 30 customers visiting the home per week. 4. All customers or visitors to the business shall park on the driveway. 5. Provide a five-pound ABC dry chemical fire extinguisher in the lower level of the home. CITIZEN COMMENTS I surveyed the owners of 43 properties within 500 feet of this site and received five written replies. The written replies were as follows: Against 1. No! We do not need a business on a residential street. We are effected enough by the businesses on Beam Avenue. (Ricke - 1809 Radatz Avenue) 2. Also see the letter on page 19 from Richard McKane of 1825 Radatz Avenue. Comments: 1. No comments - seems fine to me. (Glenna - 1816 Radatz Avenue) 2. We do not have any objections to this proposal. (Morgan - 1861 Kohlman Avenue) 3. Our only concern is increased traffic on Radatz. With the new development on Beam and Southlawn, this is already a neighborhood concern. We have no issues with the business itself. (Pearson- 1808 Radatz Avenue) SITE DESCRIPTION Existing Land Use: REFERENCE INFORMATION Single-Family Home SURROUNDING LAND USES Single-family homes to the north, east and west Town houses to the south PLANNING Existing Land Use Designation: Existing Zoning: Single Dwelling Residential Single Dwelling Residential CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL Article II, Section 17-21 (b) of the city's zoning code gives 12 requirements for approval of a home occupation license. I have attached these requirements on pages 14 - 17. Application Date We received the complete application for this home occupation license on September 23, 2003. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for any land use proposal, unless the applicant agrees to a time extension. The 60-day requirement on this proposal ends November 22, 2003. P/sec2S/Horvath Home Occupation Attachments: 1. Applicant's Letter 2. Location Map 3. Property Line/Zoning Map 4. Area Map 5. Area Map 6. Site Survey 7. Floor Plan 8. Diploma 9. Home Occupation Ordinance 10. September 30, 2003, memo from David Fisher 11. September 30, 2003, letter from Richard McKane Attachment 1 To: City of Maplewood From: Christine F. Horvath, NMD 504 S. Park Avenue Park Rapids, MN 56470 218-732=8150 SEP 2 3 2003 Concerning: Home Occupation License RECEIVED I am considering the purchase of a house at 1828 Radatz Avenue in Maplewood to live and work in. I am relocating from Park Rapids which is about 200 miles northwest of Maplewood. I am 55 and have been self-employed for the last 19 years. I am currently practicing in Park Rapids and I see clients twice a month at a business office location in Minnetonka. I would like to be able to practice in the new home to establish my business and reduce expenses since the house affords plenty of room. I am a Naturopath (Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine, see enclosed diploma) which is a scientific system of Natural Healing and incorporates the use of ak, water, light, heat, food and herb therapy to assist the body in healing itself. I use two reflex therapies using the hands and feet. The information of our bodies' current condition is projected to every other part of the body, like a hologram. Using a map which represents corresponding areas on the hands and feet, I use pressure on these points to find tenderness or sensitivity which indicates an imbalance in organs or tissues. This information is transmitted to the brain through various means including nerve conduction and biochemical information transfer. The information transfer stimulates appropriate areas of the brain that in turn inkiates a healing cycle, including the release of the body's painkillers, endorphins, as well as other healing processes. In addition to this therapy, I use information gathered from an extensive health questionnaire to adjust the diet and recommend herbal and nutritional supplements to further assist the body in healing itself. I see clients in one hour increments, five to seven clients per day from 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM up to four and a half days per week, taking Wednesday off. This would be a maximum of 32 clients per week should I have a full booking. The driveway is suitable for up to five cars at one time, and only one or two cars will be there at any one time. The house is a split level entry and the lower level has a family room that can be used as a waiting area and four bedrooms; two of which can be used as treatment rooms, one for storage, and one as an office. Treatment requires no special equipment, just an easy chair and a stool on rollers. The only supplies are supplements, delivered by UPS or Federal Express I am familiar with the Minnesota Statues concerning Complementary and Alternative Health Care. I do not use the title Doctor on my business cards or in advertising. I do' not diagnose disease but rather assist the body in returning to health. My cliems are required to sign the Client Bill of Rights before assessment and therapy. COUN'Pt' RON) D ST. JOHN'S CT. BLVD. .'YV! L=W CIR. CT. AVE. VIKING BROOKS AVE. z z EDOEHILL RD. AVE. SHERRE~ AVE. AVE. ~ KOHI.~ Attachment 2 WHITE B~.AR LAKE WOODLYNN AVE. AY A~.. VIEW AVE. ^v~ ~ STANDRIOGE NORTH SAINT PAUL AVE. COPE AVE. E N 0' 1700' 3400 LOCATION MAP 0" 1" 2" Attachment 3 r ...... 729.03'- ...... .............. ., ............................. ,.~',~ ~ ~ ,~ 1.6/ I1~ '~1, ' '~ ,' llill RADATZ AVE. ']PUD I~ ~ "' ,"1. I'~ ~99' ~ ..'-' ,, ,' ~ ,, . . ~ ¢o) 8 I , ._., , i 39 fi.7' 1~0.15' /ooJx /oo' IZo' I m a3 ~ ~ RA~ ~ Y 'o Z ''~. .~G~. ~ PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP N Attachment 4 City of Maplewood e Beam Avenue o ~-~ ,,, ~ ~ Radatz Avenue / 9 city of Maplewood Attachment 5 1809 [~ O 1825 1835 1845 1851 Radatz Avenue 1800 1828 1840 1846 1808 1818 1826 SITE AREA MAP 10 -- 61o. oo-- Attachment 6 RADATZ AVE. Denotes Proposed Spot Elevation ~ Denotes Drainage Direction -PROPERTY DESCRIPTION- The East 75.00 feet of the West 610.00 feet of the North 200.00 feet of that part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 2, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota; lying South of Radatz Avenue. Denotes Wood Hub Set PROPOSED TOP OF BLOCK ELEVATION= Denotes Existing Spot Elevation PROPOSED BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION= *NOTE: Verify alt Bldg, Dimensions and_~ -- Floor Heights with Final House Plans. -SURVEYORS CERTIFICATION- I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by n~ or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the,:~,~:%~J~-~.,! the State of ~inn~ota. ~;'" ll ~t~chment ?' FLOOR PLAN Attachment 8 13 Attachment 9 LICENSES § 17-21 license will be automatically suspended or revoked five (5) days aider date of hearing. (Ord. No. 324, § 8, 6-22-72) Sec. 17-5. Same--Period of suspension. When a license is suspended under section 17-4 of this article, the period of suspension shall be not less than thirty (30) days nor more than one (1) year, such period being determined by the city council. (Ord. No. 324, § 9, 6-22-72) Sec. 17-6. Same--Mandatory revocation for certain Code violations. When any person, partnership, firm or corporation holding a license issued under this Code has been convicted for the second time by a court of competent jurisdiction for violation of any of the provisions of this Code relating to the subject matter of such license, the city council shall revoke the license of the person, partnership, firm or corporation so convicted. Such person, part- nership, firm or corporation may not make application for a new license for a period of one (1) year. (Ord. No. 324, § 10, 6-22-72) Secs. 17-7--17-20. Reserved. ARTICLE H. HOME OCCUPATIONS* Sec. 17-21. License requirements. (a) Home occupations shall require a license approved by the city council if any of the following circumstances would occur more than thirty (30) days each year: (1) Employment of a nonresident in the home occupation. *Editor's note-Section 8 of Ord. No. 627, adopted June 27, 1988, amended Art. II in its entirely to read as set out herein. Formerly, Art. II comprised §§ 17-21--17-25, pertaining to licenses for home occupations and deriving from Ord. No. 521, § 1, adopted Aug. 23, 1982. Cross reference~Fee for home occupation permit, § 36-26. Supp. No. 11 1045 14 § 17-21 MAPLEWOOD CODE (2) Customers or customers' vehicles on the premises. (3) Manufacture, assembly or processing of products or mate- rials on the premises. (4) More than one vehicle associated with the home occupation which is classified as a light commercial vehicle. (5) A vehicle(s) used in the home occupation, and parked on the premises, which exceeds a three-quarter-ton payload capacity. ... (6) If the home occupation produces any waste that should be treated or regulated. (b) Home occupations requiring a license shall be subject to, but not limited to, the following requirements: (1) No traffic shall be generated by a home occupation in greater volumes than would normally be expected in a residential neighborhood. The need for off-street parking shall not exceed more than three (3) off-street parking spaces for home occupation at any given time, in addition to the parking spaces required by the residents. (2) No more than one (1) nonresident employee shall be allowed to work on the premises. Nonresident employees who work off-premises may be allowed to visit the prem- ises. If an on-site employee is parking on-site, off-site employees shall not leave their vehicles on-site. If there is no on-site employee vehicle parked on-site, one (1) off-site employee vehicle may be parked on-site. (3) No vehicle associated with the home occupation, including customers or employees, shall be parked on the street or block sidewalks or public easements. Private vehicles used by the residents shall not be included in this requirement. (4) An area equivalent to no more than twenty (20) percent of each level of the house, including the basement and garage, shall be used in the conduct of a home occupation. (5) There shall be no change visible off-premises in the outside appearance of the building or premises that would indicate the conduct of a home occupation, other than one (1) sign meeting the requirements of the city sign code. Supp. No. 11 1046 15 LICENSES § 17-22 (6) No more than twenty (20) percent of business income shall come from the sale of products produced off-site unless approved by the city council. (7) No equipment or process shall be used in such home occupation which creates noise, vibration, light, glare, ~,mes, smoke, dust, odors or electrical interference detect- able to the normal senses off the lot. In the case of electrical interference, no equipment or process shall be used which creates visual or audible interference in anY radio or television receivers off the premisea, or ~auses fluctuations in line voltage off the premises. (8) There shall be no fire, safety or heal{h hazards. (9) A home occupation shall not include the repair of internal combustion engines, body repair shops, spray painting, machine shops, welding, ammunition manufacturing or sales, the sale or manufacture of firearms or knives or other objectionable uses as determined by the city. Ma- chine shops are defined as places where raw metal is fabricated, using machines that operate on more than one hundred twenty (120) volts of current. (10) Any noncompliance with these requirements shall consti- tute grounds for the denial or revocation of the home occupation license. (11) The city may waive any of these requirements if the home occupation is located at least three hundred fifty (350) feet from a residential lot line. (12) The city council may add any additional requirements that it deems necessary to insure that the operation of the home occupation will be compatible with nearby land uses. (Ord. No. 627, § 8, 6-27-88; Ord. No. 729, § 1, 11-14-94) Sec. 17-22. Original license approval procedure. An application for home occupation shall be filed with the director of community development. Upon receipt of a complete application, the director of community development shall prepare a recommendation to the plaxming commission. The planning commission's recommendation shall be forwarded to the city Supp. bio. 11 1047 § 17-22 MAPLEWOOD CODE council for a public hearing. The city council shall hold a public hearing on the request. Notice of the hearing shall be mailed to the owners of all properties located within three hundred fifty (350) feet of the home occupation at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing. The notice shall also be published in the official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the date of hearing. (Ord. No. 627, § 8, 6-27-88) Sec. 17-23. Renewal. Each license holder shall apply to the city clerk each January for renewal. Prior to issuance of a license renewal, the city shall determine that all licensing conditions and city ordinances are being met. The city clerk shall revoke the license where compli- ance with the licensing conditions or city ordinances cannot be obtained or where the home occupation has been discontinued. Revocation may occur at any time that compliance with license conditions or city ordinance cannot be obtained. (Ord. No. 627, § 8, 6-27-88) Sec. 17-24. Appeal. The owner or his assign of a home occupation whose license has been revoked by the city clerk may appeal the decision to the city council. To request an appeal, a written letter or request must be submitted to the city clerk within thirty (30) days of the license revocation. The city council may revoke,- approve or add addi- eOn .al condition_s to the license. The city council shall hold a public armg, using the notification procedures in section 17-22, before deciding on the appeal. (Ord. No. 627, § 8, 6-27-88) Sec. 17-25. Transfer of license. No license granted for a home occupation shall be transferable from person to person or place to place. (Ord. No. 627, § 8, 6-27-88) Supp. No. 11 1048 [The next page, is 1057] Attachment l0 Memo September 30, 2003 From' David Fisher, Building Officia(~.~ To: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Re: Home Occupation at 1828 Radatz Avenue After reviewing the letter and information submitted by Christine Horvath the following code issues would have to be addressed: If the home occupation space exceeds more than 20 percent of the overall gross square footage of the home the building code would call it a mixed occupancy. This requires an accessible route from the driveway and throughout the home occupation area. A fully accessible bathroom will be required. Also a fire extinguisher and smoke detector would be required in the basement. If home occupation space is less than 20 percent of the overall gross square footage of the home it would remain an R-$ or a single-family home. A fire extinguisher and smoke detector would be required in the basement. 18 Attachment ll Kenneth Roberts Associate Planner. Maple.wood' MN. September30,2003 Ref;r;nce: Occupation License Request R E C I live across the street at 1825 Radatz Ave. and I'm against the city approving a home ocC~Pati'on license at 1826 Radatz Ave. MapleWood, _MN.. Radatz Ave. between White Bear and Southlawn does not need the added traffic from a home clinic. If Ms Horvath is looldng 'fora place to conduct a'clinic in this neighborhood, she could look a block north to Beam Ave. She mentions'seeing up to 32 clients per week for treatments, that amounts to an additional 64 travelers per week alqng with UPS and Fed Express deliveries. We choice this area in part because of the quite neighborhood, along with the easy access to the metro highway system and shopping areas. In the 9 years our family has lived at 1825 Radatz Ave. the traffic has increased due to added restaurants at Beam and Southlawn along with drivers mining at White Bear and Radatz and driving to Southlawn to avoid the traffic lights at White Bear and Beam Avenues. Our2 block area between White Bear and Southlawn is a residential neighborhood and should be kept free from any non residential business. If you would like to discuss this future please contact me at 651 770 6492 Richard J McKane 1825 Radatz Ave. Maplewood' Mlq 55109 19 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SU BJ ECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Phil Cadson, AICP, Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc., Planning Consultant Heritage Square (Amendment to Legacy Village PUD, Outlot H) Legacy Village PUD, SW comer of Future Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway October 15, 2003 INTRODUCTION The Legacy Village PUD, being developed by the Hartford Group and approved earlier this year, consists of a number of separate parcels with a variety of land uses. Outlot H of the PUD consists of approximately 20 acres in the southwest comer of the PUD, bound by the new Kennard Street on the east, the power line easement on the north, and abutting the south and west lot lines of the Hijacek Property. Refer to the maps on pages 12-14. 'This parcel was approved in concept by the city council for up to 250 owner-occupied townhomes. Town and Country Homes, a national residential builder, is proposing a project of 221 townhomes, to be called Hedtage Square. Project Description and Background Town & Country Homes proposes to develop Outlot H of Legacy Village with 221 townhomes in 39 buildings on 19.78 acres, or about 11.2 units/acre. The previous approval for the overall Legacy Village PUD assumed 250 units on Outlot H, so this proposal is a reduction of about 10% from the approved density on that parcel. With this project as proposed, the entire Legacy Village PUD is now anticipated to include 589 units of housing, down from the 618 units approved in the PUD, and down over 30% from the 880 units analyzed and approved in the AUAR. Heritage Square involves two building types: the Hometown units, which are back-to-front units with an entry at the front and garage/driveway in the rear, in 4-, 5-, and 6-unit buildings, labeled Building Type A on the site plan; and the Chateau units, which are back-to-back units in 8-unit buildings, four on a side, labeled Building Type B on the site plan. REQUESTS · PUD Amendment (Outlot H of Legacy Village PUD) · Preliminary Plat · Design Review BACKGROUND July 14, 2003: The city council approved the planned unit development, comprehensive plan amendment, tax-abatement plan and preliminary plat for Legacy Village. September 8, 2003: The city council approved the final plat for Legacy Village. October 13, 2003: The city council approved a change order to the Kennard Street construction plans to include the parallel parking spaces shown on the proposed Heritage Square plans. Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 DISCUSSION Density As noted above, the density of Hedtage Square is reduced by about 10% from the approved Legacy Village PUD, keeping both this parcel and the entire PUD below the Land Use Plan guide of 12 units/acre for High Density Residential. Site Plan The site plan is laid out in a gdd pattern with two east-west streets intersecting Kennard Street and two internal north-south streets. All internal streets and driveways are pdvate, except the extension of Legacy Parkway, which is to be dedicated as a public street. The Legacy Parkway intersection allows full movement with Kennard Street in a roundabout; the intersection of Street B with Kennard is dght-in right-out only, due to the median in Kennard Street. Legacy Parkway is designed to function as designed for the Hedtage Square project, or it could be extended west to intersect Hazelwood Street if the adjacent single family properties are ever redeveloped. The design of the Hedtage Square site places the front doors of the Hometown units on Kennard Street with on-street parking in front of them. This arrangement helps create the urban character and feel that Legacy Village is striving for. The developer must dedicate the additional 8 feet of right-of-way to accommodate the on-street parking design and will need to make minor site plan adjustments to keep the 20-foot building setback to the new Kennard Street right-of-way. Across Kennard Street will be the Senior Assisted Living project in a building that will also front Kennard with a significant facade close to the right-of-way, reinforcing this streetscape. No on-street parking is proposed on the east side of Kennard, however. The Hometown back-to-front units are placed on three edges of the site (Kennard, north and south sides); the Chateau back-to-back units are placed on the inside and on the west edge. The Hometown buildings are narrower and somewhat less imposing than the Chateau buildings. The extension of Legacy Parkway is designed with a landscaped median and a small internal roundabout with Street C. The extension of Street C north to the open space under the power line easement is also a linear green space. In the middle of the site is a large linear green space behind the group of eight Chateau buildings. All of these streets, boulevards, driveways, green spaces, and yards are connected with sidewalks to the front doors of every unit. There are two locations within the site plan that I believe would benefit from modest re-design: The linear green space behind the central cluster of 8-plexes provides a strong link internally and a strong identity for the project. Where this green space comes out to Kennard Street it is interrupted by the backs of one of the units that front Kennard. The Hometown building that interrupts this sight line is a 5-unit building on the southwest comer of Legacy Parkway and Kennard. The southern unit of this building could be eliminated, reducing it from 5 units to 4 units, thus continuing the strong linear green connection out to Kennard Street. The landscape treatment of this green space should be continued in similar fashion into this expanded green space. Also within the linear green space is a network of sidewalks. This system would benefit from adding two short north-south segments of sidewalk across the rain gardens. The missing connections are between Driveways K and U, and Driveways G and W. Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 2 In each case a sidewalk connection is provided halfway (out to the central sidewalk) but needs to be extended all the way across connecting the ends of the driveways noted, for full connectivity. If these revisions were incorporated into the site plan the project would lose only one unit, down to a total of 220 units, further reducing its overall density. It should be noted that at the staff level there were minor revisions requested of Town and Country that resulted in the loss of three units from their odginal submission of 224 units. The plans reviewed in this report represent the most recent revisions made by Town and Country. Setbacks The Hedtage Square plan shows setbacks of 20 feet minimum to the external lot lines and to the internal public street right-of-way. Internally all buildings are set at least 20 feet apart, most are much more than this. The previous PUD approval allows a 20-foot setback to the Kennard Street right-of-way. The R-3 Code requires increased setbacks for multi-family development to other residential development, which for this site would mean setbacks of 50 feet from the properties to the west. Town and Country is requesting a vadance to this west edge setback within the PUD approval. -The original submission by Town and Country included one building placed parallel to the west lot line in the northwest comer that would have required a 100-foot setback. The plans being reviewed by the Planning Commission represent revisions made by Town and Country to eliminate that building in favor of two buildings that are perpendicular to the lot line, thus presenting a smaller fa?.ade to the west property line. The proposed setbacks, including the west property line, are reasonable. The Code has numbers and formulas for determining the 50-foot setback for those units, but the purpose of setbacks and the purpose of a PUD would offset those standards. Setbacks are required in order to provide reasonable air, light, and visual relief around a given property. In the case of the existing single family homes, they are on lots that are over 250' deep, some of them significantly wooded. The existing homes are 170'-175' from the rear lot line with Heritage Square. These lots have rear yards facing Hedtage Square that are over 100' deeper than the Code would require and there is little likelihood that new single family homes will be built on the lots any closer than they are now. There would appear to be little adverse impact on them. A preliminary wdtten comment from one of the neighbors opposed the variance, Insisting that any new development be 200 feet from the existing homes - which is exactly what is proposed. In addition, the revision suggested above for the northwest corner would remove the requirement for the 100-foot setback, leaving only the 50-foot setback in contention. A PUD allows a look at the overall property, taking it as a unit rather than individual lots. The overall plan provides internal green space in many locations. A key goal of this development in my view is to provide some reasonably high density housing near the Maplewood Mall area and to keep the project affordable. Inefficient use of the land due to large setbacks for the sake of the very deep back yards of a few adjacent properties (which may be redeveloped soon anyway) is not a reasonable standard for this PUD. Parking All units have two-car garages. The Chateau units are designed with about 65 feet between facing garage doors, and have space for an additional two cars to park in front of each garage. The Hometown units are designed with only about 36 feet between facing garage doors, and so Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 3 they do not have any additional parking behind the units. They need to rely on additional parking spaces for all visitor parking. The first-phase Hartford Group townhouse project was required to provide an additional one half space per unit of visitor parking, with a handful of such spaces within 200 feet of every unit, which standard I would apply to Heritage Square as well. The current site plan meets that standard well. Visitor parking is handled with a combination of on-street parking - on Kennard Street, Legacy Parkway, and the internal pdvate streets - and in small parking lots scattered throughout the development, notably in pairs of spaces at the dead-ends of most internal driveways. The site plan and parking summary graphics from Town and Country do not indicate parking at the ddveway dead-ends of the Chateau 8-plexes, but I believe this is necessary and feasible. Adding them provides additional public spaces in close proximity to those units. Landscapin,q The landscape plan is well designed and generous. Other than modest revisions to accommodate site plan changes suggested here, the plan is more than adequate. Architecture The architecture of the Town and Country units is attractive, but not extraordinary. The Chateau units have partial facades of bdck, the rest being vinyl siding and roofs of asphalt shingles. The Chateau has a more complex roof line, with porch features on the ends, and extended roof overhangs over the garage door and entry. They also include some horizontal offsets at each gable, giving some interest and relief to the fa?.ade. The Hometown units have partial facades of brick or stone, the rest being vinyl siding, and roofs of asphalt shingles. The roof line and facade is less complex. The building is basically a box with a small porch roof and a gable above each unit. The designs of both types of units are tasteful, and affordability is a factor in the architectural design. Affordability The previous approval requires that 50 units be affordable, as that term is defined by Metropolitan Council standards. Furthermore, the developer's agreement between the Hartford Group and the City for Legacy Village affirms that 50 units of affordable housing will be provided and will be determined by the valuation set by the Metropolitan Council. As noted in Town and Country's narrative, that affordability standard is currently $183,000 for owner-occupied housing, but can change annually and usually does, reflecting changes in Metro area median incomes. Town and Country has assured the City that 50 units in Hedtage Square will meet the Metropolitan Council guidelines for affordability in place at the time of the home sales. Monument SiRns/Comer Treatment The project has two monument signs of brick and wrought iron at the comer of Kennard and Legacy Parkway. These are designed to be about 5-6 feet in height, wrapping around the comer, complemented by dense landscaping to define the comer. I believe this comer treatment is important to creating the character of the overall PUD at this intersection. On the two opposite comers of Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street from Hedtage Square will be the Senior Assisted Living building and a future office building. The senior building will be four stodes placed close to the right-of-way, with a two-story entry wrapping around the comer. The office building, although not designed in detail, is represented in similar fashion with a two- or three-story fac_,~ade close to the intersection. The Hedtage Square townhouse buildings are not and cannot reasonably be placed as close to the intersection as the buildings on the other two Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 4 comers, so the intent is to mimic the scale of the other buildings by placing trees or other landscape features that are at least 25 feet in height and close to the intersection, while still maintaining safe sight distances around the comer. The proposed monument signage and landscape treatment is a step in that direction, but I believe the design could go further toward creating a tall presence on the comer with more tall overstory trees, larger sign elements, or both. Kennard Street Parking As mentioned, on October 13, 2003, the city council approved a change order for the Kennard Street construction project. Subsequently, the city engineering staff and their consultants reviewed the specifics of the on-street parking design. Their conclusions and recommendations are: · The city will build on-street parking along the Town & Country frontage on Kennard. The on-street parking bays will be constructed of concrete. The Hedtage Square plan shows 21 spaces; however, the length of the spaces need to be increased from 20 feet to 25 feet, resulting in a reduction in the number of spaces from 21 to 17. This would include 5 spaces north of Legacy parkway, 9 spaces between Legacy Parkway and Street B, and 3 spaces south of Street B. Kennard Street will be widened by 8 feet in the area of the parking bays. We had previously requested that Town & Country dedicate 10 feet of additional right-of-way for the on-street parking. Our request for additional right-of-way can be reduced to 8 feet. Our typical section for the roadway will include that the parking areas will slope back to Kennard at a 4 percent grade, the 8 foot boulevard between the curb and sidewalk will slope to the street at a 5 percent grade and the 6 foot sidewalk will slope to the street at a 2 percent grade. The design considers Town & Country's concems with the grades between the street and their buildings in this area. Any cardage walks between the sidewalk and parking bays will not be constructed as a part of the city contract. Town & Country will need to determine whether and where they want carriage walks. Town & Country would need to construct any carriage walks as a part of the private development work. The city' landscaping plan for Kennard will need to consider the location of any carriage walks. Police Department Comments The standard multi-family housing safety recommendations apply such as adequate signage and unit addressing. The latter is especially important in regards to the tow house design. Numbers on the rear of buildings need to be clearly visible so as to facilitate identification of the correct unit on either approach. Finally, access roads and parking areas need to be wide enough for emergency vehicle access. Buildin,q Official Comments Dave Fisher, the Maplewood Building Official, had several comments relative to building sprinkledng, building accessibility, the availability of accessible parking and plan submittal. He also addressed requirements for a temporary leasing office should the applicant with to use one. Refer to the memo on page 32. Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations incorporate comments from City staff, planning consultant, and engineering consultant. Engineering consultant Jon Horn's review memo is attached to this report. PUD Amendment We recommend adoption of the resolution on pages 33-34, approving the Planned Unit Development for Hedtage Square, Outlot H of the Legacy Village PUD, as illustrated on the drawings prepared by Landform, date-stamped October 15, 2003, except as revised in accordance with the following conditions: 1) Outlot H is approved for 220 units of townhouses as revised according to the conditions in this report. 2) The southern unit of the Hometown (Type A) building, at the southwest comer of Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street, shall be eliminated, reducing it from 5 units to 4 units, thus continuing the internal linear green space out to Kennard Street at a width of at least 70 feet. The landscape treatment of this green space shall be continued into this new area in similar fashion to the rest of the linear green space. 3) Within the linear green space two north-south segments of sidewalk shall be added, one connecting Driveways K and U, the other connecting Driveways G and W. The rain gardens and landscaping shall be revised to accommodate these sidewalks. 4) The dead ends of all driveways behind the Chateau (Type B) buildings - Street B and Ddves G, I, K, M, O, Q, U, V, and W - shall be designed, striped and signed to accommodate two common parking spaces each. 5) The monument signs and associated landscaping at the corner of Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street shall be revised to place trees or other landscape features that are at least 25 feet in height and close to the right-of-way, while still maintaining safe sight distances, that will create a significant tall edge mimicking the scale of the proposed senior building and future office building on the opposite comers of the intersection. 6) The setbacks are approved as shown on the site plan. 7) All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped October 15, 2003. The city council may approve major changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 8) The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this permit for one year. 9) The city council shall review this permit in one year. 10) The homeowners association documents shall state that the visitor parking areas shall be kept open for visitor parking and shall not be used as a storage area for RVs, trailers, campers and the like. Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 6 Preliminary Plat We recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat as illustrated on the drawings submitted by Landform, dated September 12, 2003, except as revised in accordance with the following conditions: 1) The plat shall be revised in terms of the dimensions and numbering of lots if necessary to reflect the recommended revisions to the number and location of buildings in the above conditions for the PUD. 2) Legacy Parkway west of Kennard Street is shown as a public roadway. The following conditions must be met if Legacy Parkway is constructed as a public roadway: a. The City should be responsible for the design and construction of the roadway. b. The developer will need to petition the City for the improvements. c. The roadway needs to be redesigned to a more typical City street design or the developer needs to be responsible for the ongoing maintenance of all of the amenities and rainwater gardens included in the design. The City will grant an easement to the developer for the maintenance of the amenities and rainwater gardens. The developer will be required to prepare a maintenance agreement detailing the specifics of the maintenance operations for City review and approval. 3) The plan shows on-street parking along the west side of Kennard Street. The following conditions must be met if the on-street parking is to remain on Kennard Street: a.An additional 8 feet of right-of-way shall be dedicated by the developer along the west side of Kennard Street to accommodate the parking bays and allow for the necessary sidewalk and boulevard areas. The developer shall be responsible for the costs (construction and 31.5% admin & engineering) to add the parking bays along Kennard Street. These costs are estimated to be approximately $70,000. 4) The plans show grading outside of the property boundary along the north, west and south sides of the site. All grading shall be restricted to within the property boundaries or temporary construction easements need to be obtained from the adjacent property owners. The developer must provide evidence of any temporary construction easements. 5) 6) 7) The developer must prepare an operation and maintenance plan for the proposed storm drainage system for the review and approval of the City. An active operation and maintenance program is critical to the proper function and operation of the system. In the future, the City may desire to extend sanitary sewer and watermain services into Outlot I from the sanitary sewer and watermain utilities in the driveways north of Legacy Parkway. The services may be for future park and/or open space uses on Outlot I. The developer and the Home Owners Association must agree in writing that they will not object to the future installation of these utility services. The plat includes Outlot A for the storm water pond. The pond must be included in a public drainage and utility easement rather than an outlot. The developer must also dedicate a public drainage and utility easement for the pond outlet. Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 8) The plat shall include 20' wide utility easements along all watermain outside of public right-of-way per SPRWS requirements. 9) The developer shall be required to grant the City a dght of entry/temporary construction easement, as necessary, for public roadway construction outside of the limits of the public ri(jh~-of-way. Desi.qn We recommend approval of the site, architectural and landscaping plans date-stamped October 15, 2003, for the Hedtage Square Townhomes at Legacy Village, subject to the developer complying with the following conditions: 1) Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2) Comply with all requirements of the city engineer and his consultants relative to streets, grading, drainage, utilities and erosion control before getting a building permit. The applicant shall also provide any documents, easements and developers agreement that may be required by the city engineer. This approval shall be subject to the conditions outlined in the report from Jon Horn, of Kimley-Hom, dated October 13, 2003. This approval shall also be subject to the following requirements relative to the on-street parking along the west side of Kennard Street: · The city will build on-street parking along the Town & Country frontage on Kennard. The on-street parking bays will be constructed of concrete. The Hedtage Square plan shows 21 spaces; however, the length of the spaces need to be increased from 20 feet to 25 feet, resulting in a reduction in the number of spaces from 21 to 17. This would include 5 spaces north of Legacy parkway, 9 spaces between Legacy Parkway and Street B, and 3 spaces south of Street B. Kennard Street will be widened by 8 feet in the area of the parking bays. We had previously requested that Town & Country dedicate 10 feet of additional right-of-way for the on-street parking. Our request for additional right-of-way can be reduced to 8 feet. Our typical section for the roadway will include that the parking areas will slope back to Kennard at a 4 percent grade, the 8 foot bouleVard between the curb and sidewalk will slope to the street at a 5 percent grade and the 6 foot sidewalk will slope to the street at a 2 percent grade. The design considers Town & Country's concerns with the grades between the street and their buildings in this area. Any carriage walks between the sidewalk and Parking bays will not be constructed as a part of the city contract. Town & Country will need to determine whether and where they want cardage walks. Town & Country would need to construct any carriage walks as a part of the private development work. The city's landscaping plan for Kennard will need to consider the location of any carriage walks. 3) Get the necessary approvals from the watershed district. 4) The setbacks are approved as shown on the site plan. Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 8 5) Revise the site and landscaping plans as follows for staff approval: a.The southern unit of the Hometown (Type ^) building, at the southwest comer of Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway, shall be eliminated reducing it from 5 to 4 units, thus continuing the internal linear green space out to Kennard Street at a width of at least 70 feet. The landscape treatment of this green space shall be continued into this new area in similar fashion to the rest of the linear green space. b.Within the linear green space, two north-south segments of sidewalk shall be added, one connecting Driveways K and U, and the other connecting Driveways G and W. The rain gardens and landscaping shall be revised to accommodate these sidewalks. The dead ends of all driveways behind the Chateau (Type B) buildings-Street B and ddves G, I, K, M, O, Q, U, V and W-shall be designed, striped and signed to accommodate two common parking spaces each. The monument signs and associated landscaping at the comer of Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street shall be revised to place trees or other landscape features that are at least 25 feet in height and close to the right-of-way, while still maintaining safe sight distances that will create a significant tall edge mimicking the scale of the proposed senior building and future office building on the opposite comers of the intersection. 6) Complete the following: 8) 9) 7) 10) Install reflectodzed stop signs at the Legacy Parkway intersection with Kennard Street. Install and maintain an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. Install all required trails and walkways. All curbing shall be continuous concrete curbing as proposed. Install any traffic signage within the site that may be required by staff. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a) the city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare and, b) the developer provides a letter of credit or cash escrow to the city for all required extedor improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping by June 1 if the building is occupied in the fall or winter or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spdng or summer. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. This development shall be signed with clear address signs for direction to the buildings and individual unit signage on the front and back, subject to approval by the police and fire departments of the city. A temporary sales office shall be allowed until the time a model unit is available for use. Such a temporary building shall be subject to the requirements of the building official as outlined in his report. Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 9 CITIZEN COMMENTS Staff surveyed the 53 property owners within 500 feet of this property for their comments about this proposal. Of the 10 replies, 4 had no comment, one had no objection, but offered a comment/concern, and five objected. No Objection Refer to the letter on page 27 from Welsh Companies. They do not object to this proposal but present a caution/concern that sometimes new residents, such as those in the proposed townhomes, may object to future commercial development in the area as it occurs. They encourage the applicant to make their buyers fully aware that there will be future commercial development in this area so there are no false expectations. Objections Refer to the letter on page 28 from Gerald and Linda Peterson of 3016 Hazelwood Street. Their main concern is that the westerly setback should comply with the code unless theirs and their neighbors homes sell for redevopment. If they stay in their homes, then the setback rules should be enforced. I would like to see the setback maintained. 200 feet from existing homes seems too close considering the size of the townhome development. (Larson Enterprises, 3060 Centerville Road, Little Canada) · Refer to the letter on page 29 from Dan and Mickey Gebhard, of 3062 Hazelwood Street. They request that the city council deny any setback reduction from the westedy lot line. · I am opposed to this. Please do not approve this request. I hope you consider my opinion into your decision. Thank you. (Heather Behr, 1613 County Road D) Refer to the letter from Travis Smith on pages 30-31. Mr. Smith objects to commercial development and rental housing, He would prefer no development. He requests that all costs be borne by the builders without screwing the residents of Maplewood. He would oppose any assessments. Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 10 p:Sec3\Hedtage Square PC Report DSU 10-13-03.te Attachments: 1. Loc~on Map 2. Site Plan of Heritage Square Townhomes 3. Legacy Village Final Plat 4. Building Elevations-Hometown Collection Design 5. Building Elevations-Chateau Collection Design 6. Applicant's Narrative dated September 12, 2003 7. Reportfrom Jon Horn dated October 13, 2003 8. Letter from Welsh Companies dated September 29, 2003 9. Letter from Gerald and Linda Peterson dated September 30, 2003 10. Letter from Dan and Mickey Gebhard dated September 30, 2003 11. Letter from Travis Smith date-stamped September 30, 2003 12. Memo from Dave Fisher dated September 30, 2003 13. Condi'donal Use Permit Resolution for a Planned Unit Development 14. Plans date-stamped October 15, 2003, (separate attachments) Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 11 ATTACHMENT 1 ~ HIGHRIDGE CT.~ /I ' VILLA~_E I ..,----.'~ .L-__JJ · ~.~''11 :. _~,' t ~~.~- ~'~ ~ PROPOSED HERITAGE SQUARE ~'~'~ TOWNHOMES SITE ~, ~ o( ~ > .~ ,.. ; ~ ' )11~.~'~ I. ~1 ~ ~ .~ ~ I I ~ ' Iil I~ ' ~ ~ A~I ~ m~l c / I I ~.~/ii/~ - , _1~ ~-~ ~ ~~! ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~- t/ .I VII ' = : LOCATION 12 MAP O0 0 ATTACHMENT HERITAGE SQUARE - MAPI,EWOOD, MN ~E~qS£D 51T~ PlAN 1011410'5 PROPOSED HERITAGE SQUARE TOWNHOMES SITE ATTACHMENT 3 NMV-IH.LFIOS O O O >':o J.33~J.~ CIOOM-13Z'e'H .................. 14 ATTACHMENT 4 15 ATTACHMENT 5 I I ATTACHMENT 6 PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT/CUP AMENDMENT REVIEW FOR Heritage Square at Legacy Village MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA September 12, 2003 Prepared for review by the CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSION, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL Submitted by: TOWN & COUNTRY HOMES ~ca's House of Q~_~alityTM 7615 Smetana Lane, Suite 180 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 PROJECT NARRAT~ HERITAGE SQUARE - MAPLEWOOD, MN 17 Heritage Square - Prelminary Plat/CUP Amendment Project Narrative - September 12, 2003 PROJECT NAME/LOCATION Heritage Square Part of Legacy Village - East of Hazelwood/North of Hospital LANDOWNER Legacy Holdings - Hartford Group DEVELOPER/APPLICANT Town and Country Homes 7516 Smetana Lane, Suite 180 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Contact: Krista Flemming ph. (952) 253-0448 fax (952) 944-3437 SITE PLANNING~ ENGINEERING Landform 650 Butler North Bldg 510 1st Ave N Minneapolis, MN 55403 Contact: Dwayne Sikich ph (612) 638-0225fax (612) 638-0227 DEVELOPMENT DATA Existing Land Use: Proposed Land Use: Proposed Zoning: Agricultural/Vacant High Density Residential Conditional Use Permit (CUP) PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Gross Area: Total Unit Count: Multiple Family- Courtyard Collection: Homestead Collection: Gross Density: 19.78 AC. 224 Homes 128 Homes 96 Homes 11.3 Homes per Acre PROJECT NARRATIVE HERITAGE SQUARE - MAPLEWOOD, MN INTRODUCTION Town & Country Homes is requesting a Preliminary Plat/CUP Amendment for a new multiple family community in Legacy Village called Heritage Square. The proposed project provides opportunities for a combination of two housing styles and price ranges to compliment adjacent land uses, and offer residents affordable housing options. Heritage Square has many nco-traditional elements creating a unique community and emphasizing pedestrian traffic and the streetscape. The layout and product design naturally encourages residents to walk and socialize in common green space areas. The community is interconnected by a series of sidewalks, trails, special green spaces and complimenting rain gardens. Front porches are featured on the main corridors, adding to the streetscape. The main entrance to the community is off the roundabout at Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street. Monumentation with significant landscaping welcomes visitors and residents down Legacy Parkway, which divides into one way streets separated by almost 30 feet of common open space. This open area is a gateway to the community and includes a variety of overstory trees and plantings within the rain gardens. Front doors face Legacy Parkway, and bays of on-street, guest parking make it easy for guests to visit.. The north side of Legacy Parkway features our Hometown Collection (row townhome) with the Chateau Collection (back-to-back townhome) on the south side. Both products have common elements tying them together (i.e. front porches along streets, similar exterior materials, complimenting colors, etc.), and are intermingled throughout the community providing variation to the neighborhood. At the end of the common green space is another, smaller, roundabout to tie in with the circulation patterns on Kennard Street. A monument or structure (that does not disrupt site lines) will be placed in this area as a focal point enhancing views of the Parkway. (The type of structure is still under investigation. Final acceptance will be subject to city staff approval.) North of this roundabout is a shared courtyard area between two Hometown Collection buildings that ties into the large open space area to the north. Similar common courtyard areas are seen throughout the community to offer special spaces to those choose a home not fronting a street. These areas offer another option with a different "sense of place". The Hometown Collection and on-street guest parking are located along Kennard Street, creating a dominant, "mainstreet" presence across from the future senior housing and office buildings. Behind this is an area including the Chateau Collection. The shared space between these buildings includes varying landscape and rain gardens connected by a pedestrian trail. This area is available to everyone in the development, but provides a special space for those living in this area. The attached plans illustrate the general development concept, architecture, road alignments, access and land use. The proposed project includes 224 homes. PROJECT NARRATIVE HERITAGE SQUARE - MAPLEWOOD, MN HOUSING STYLES Hometown Collection The Hometown Collection is Town and Country's row product. It is a two-story, slab-on-grade product with 4, 5, and 6-unit buildings. There are 26 buildings with a total of 128 homes. Four color palettes combining stone or brick with vinyl lap and shake siding will be used. Please see the attached elevations and color palette listing for more details. The Hometown Collection has base prices ranging from $175,000 - $190,000, and offers 1,300 - 1,600 square feet. Additional options can increase the livable area and corresponding price. Please see the attached elevations for more details. Chateau Collection The Chateau Collection is Town and Country's back-to-back product. It is a two-story, slab-on-grade product with 8 unit buildings. There are 12 buildings with a total of 96 homes. One unique product feature is with its varying architectural styles on each end of the building. This home has a prominent angled window/fireplace feature accented by the front porch and entrance on the end units facing the higher-traffic streets. The other end units are more square with a fireplace and porch accent, which is entered by a front door on the garage side. These varying features reduce the monotony sometimes felt with multiple family developments. Three color palettes combining brick with vinyl lap and shake siding will be used. Please see the attached elevations and color palette listing for more details. The Chateau Collection has base prices ranging from $180,000 - $205,000, and offers a product type with more square footage (1,570 - 1,650 sq. ft.) than the Hometown Collection. Additional options can increase the livable area and corresponding price. Please see the attached elevations for more details. HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION All private drives, sprinkler systems, monument signs, and common open space areas will be owned and maintained by one homeowner's association for the multiple family area. GUEST PARKING There are 2 parking spaces in all garages. The Chateau Collection has 2 guest spaces in the driveway. The driveway areas for the Hometown Collection only allow enough room to maneuver a vehicle. There is no guest parking in these driveway areas, which is how they are designed. This design is meant to encourage guest parking along the street, by the front doors to enhance the character of the streetscape. Guest parking is designated on one side of the public and private streets. There are also some off-street parking areas to accommodate homes not next to on-street parking. Overnight guest parking will be available on private streets and parking bays. Guest parking exceeds the ordinance requirement. PROJECT NARRATIVE HERITAGE SQUARE - MAPLEWOOD, MN 4 2O ADJACENT LAND USES There are 5 existing single family homes west of the proposed development. All of the homes are located closest to Hazelwood Street. The property line setbacks of the proposed development adjacent to thc existing single family vary from 20 to 30 feet. Thc closest point to any structure (garage) on the existing lots will be 77'. The minimum distance of a proposed home from an existing home is 200', or about 3A of a football field. This provides quite a distance between the two uses, but also allows for potential future development of the single family area to tie into the overall plan. There are some existing wooded areas on these single family sites that will be complimented by heavy landscaping on the townhome site to continue providing a buffer between the two land uses. Evergreen trees are located at the ends of each driveway area, which will reduce potential automobile glare year-round. AFFORDABILITY An affordability component was approved as part of the final plat approval for Legacy Village. This required the for-sale townhomes to provide 50 homes at a base price meeting Metropolitan Council's affordability standards, which is currently $183,000. This can be achieved by the providing the current mix of products as well as maintaining the standard floor plans and architectural components seen with this submittal. (The current Met Council number is subject to change. If the Met Council raises the current standard, then the new standard would apply to future sales at the time of the increase.) PHASING The project is proposed for site construction in a single phase. The Developer intends to develop the property as soon as all governmental approvals and permits are in place. UTILITIES The grading and utility plan illustrate the general layout of the proposed watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, rain garden and ponding areas. A central storm sewer system is planned to convey street runoff water to a storm scepter and treatment/sedimentation pond before it continues onto wetlands. Rain gardens with a superior underground infiltration system are located throughout the development. EXISTING POWER LINES There are power lines, towers, and an associated easement near the property. The lines are owned and operated by Centerpoint Energy (NSP). A copy of the plan was sent to them for review. PROJECT NARRATIVE HERITAGE SQUARE - MAPLEWOOD, MN Memorandum To: R. Charles Ahl/City of Maplewood Phil Carlson/DSU From: Jon Horn October 13, 2003 Su~e~: Engineering Plan Review Town & Country. Homes Heritage Square at Legacy Village As requested, we have completed an engineering plan review- for the Heritage Square at Legacy Village development as proposed by Town & Country. Homes. The review has been completed based upon the Landform preliminary plan submittal dated September I2, 2003. The proposed development includes the construction of a 224 unit townhome development on Outlot H of the Legacy Village of Maplewood plat. Engineering review comments have been compiled from numerous sources including Jon Horn (general review), Ron Leaf (drainage ~'stem review), Steve Heth (coordination with Kennard Street project), Chris Cavett (general review) and Erin Schacht (general review). The following engineering plan review comments should be addressed by the developer. EXISTING CONDITIONS & DEMOLITION PLAN (SHEET Cl.1) The City's proposed Kennard Street improvements include the construction of a roundabout at the Legacy Parkway intersection. The Kennard Street right-of-way shown on the plan should be modified to include the fight-of-way needed for the construction of the roundabout. This information is available from the project designer for Kennard Street (SEH). Tree removals should be identified on the plan including the type and quantiw of trees to be removed. The plan details an existing right-of-way for Alice Street along the west boundary of the property and states that the fight-of-way is not vacated. The Alice Street figaht-of-w~ was vacated as a part of the Legacy Village platting process and should be identified on the plan accordingly. 22 Engineering Plan Review Heritage Square at Legacy Village October 13, 2003 Page 2 of 5 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN (SHEET 2.1) Legacy Parkway west of Kennard Street is shown as a pubhc roadway. We had previously assumed that this would be a private roadway. If it is going to be a public roadway, there are a number of issues that need to be addressed including: Setback issues need to be addressed or the site plan needs to be redesigned. · The City should be responsible for the design and construction of the roadway. · The developer will need to petition the City' for the improvements. · The roadway needs to be redesigned to a more typical City street design or the developer needs to be responsible for the ongoing maintenance of all of the amenities and rainwater gardens included in the design. The City will grant an easement to the developer for the maintenance of the amemties and rainwater gardens. The developer will be required to prepare a maintenance agreement detailing the specifics of the maintenance operations for City review and approval. The plan should be modified to show the proposed roundabout at the Kennard Street and Legacy' Parkway intersection. This information is available from the project designer for Kennard Street (SEH). Sight distance triangles need to be reviewed at the intersection considering the proposed monument sign~. The construction of the access onto Kennard Street for Street B needs to be coordinated with the design plans for Kennard Street. Street B will have fight-in/right-out access to Kennard Street. The plan shows on-street parking along the west side of Kennard Street. This is not included as a part of the approved final design plans for Kennard Street. If the on-street parking is to remain on Kmma~d Street, the following issues need to be addressed: · An additional 8 feet of right-of-way needs to be dedicated by the developer along the west side of Kennard Street to accommodate the parking bays and allow for the necessaxy sidewalk and boulevard · The site plan either needs to be redesigned or there are setback issues that need to be addressed as a result of the additional right-of-way dedication. · The developer will be responsible for the costs (construction and engineering) to add the parking bays along Kennard Street. These costs are estimated to be approximately $70,000. · This issue needs to be resolved quickly as the construction of Kennard Street is currently underway. Engineering Plan Review Heritage Square at Legacy Village October 13, 2003 Page3 of 5 There are 22-foot wide streets shown on the plan that do not meet the minimum City code requirement of a 24-foot width. The site plan either needs to be redesigned or variances would be needed for these street No parking should be provided within 50 feet of the roundabout at the intersection of Street C and Legacy Parkway. PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN (SHEETS C3.1 - C3.6) The plans show grading outside of the property boundary along the north, west and south sides of the site. All grading needs to be restricted to within the property boundaries or temporary construction easements need to be obtained from the adjacent property owners. The developer must provide evidence of any temporary construction easements. The storm water pond in the northwest comer of the site should be designed with an effort to obtain more of a "natural" looking appearance and to minimize the amount of 3:1 grades. Landscaping and turf establishment for the pond area shall be addressed. This should include a native turf establishment plan with appropriate mix designs. A plan for phasing and protection of the pond area shall be addressed. The turf estabhshment with native vegetation shall be performed by a contractor qualified in native turf restoration. The landscaping plan should also include the use of some appropriate trees and shrubs within and around the pond area. Design calculations need to be submitted for the storm sewer and pond design. Storm sewer design calculations should be submitted for a 10- year design storm. Ponding calculations should be submitted for the 2-year, 1 O-year and 100-year events. The outlet for the pond needs to be coordinated with the adjacent Hartford improvements and should be shown on the plan. The pond inlet pipe should include scour protection measures (i.e., rip rap, erosion stabilization mat, other). Emergency overflows should be shown on the plan for the storm water pond and for the internal low areas/rainwater gardens along the trail corridor between Legacy Parkway and Street B. The proposed grading plan matches the City's current design/profile for Kennard Street. The developer must obtain the necessary RWMWD approvals and permits and prepare the required SWPPP prior to applying for or obtaining a NPDES construction permit from the MPCA. Grading and paving Note 9 on Sheet C3.1 indicates compaction of soils in paved areas. This note should be clarified to exclude soils adjacent to paved areas that will be part of the raingardens. Note 13 on sheet C3.1 should be modified by deleting "turf is established in the project" and replacing it with '~e site is fully restored." 24 Engineering Plan Review Heritage Square at Legacy Village October 13, 2003 Page 4 of 5 10. 11. 12. 13. Indicate the location(s) of rock construction entrance(s) throughout the project. The proposed storm sewer layout at Street B to Kennard will require field changes to portions of the Kennard system currently under construction. Infiltration and storm water conveyance system details generally show, with two noted exceptions, that filtered storm water is allowed to enter the infiltration system. The first exception is the raingarden overflow which may allow floating debris and dead plant materials to enter the system. The second is from the street catch basins. Because of these exceptions, the preparation, submittal and implementation of an operation and maintenance plan is critical to the proper function and operation of the system. In addition, recent concerns for the west nile vires in storm sewer systems further highlights the importance of maintenance. Plan details show discrepancies between the 30" or 36" HDPE infiltration pipes. PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN (SHEET C4.1) It is assumed that all watermain, sanitary sewer and storm sewer improvements shown on the plans outside of the Legacy Parkway right- of-way will be private facilities. It is assumed that the utilities within Legacy Parkway will be pubhc facilities. The design for the proposed sanitary sewer improvements needs to be coordinated with the City's proposed sanitary sewer improvements along Kennard Street. The City will provide ~nitary sewer stubs as needed. The design for the proposed watermain improvements needs to be coordinated with the City's proposed watermain improvements along Kennard Street. The City will provide watermain stubs as needed. Design calculations should be submitted detailing the adequacy of the proposed watermain system to serve the service and fire flow needs of the development. Plans for the watermain system improvements need to be submitted to the St. Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) for review and approval. In the future, the City may desire to extend samtary sewer and watermain services into Outlot I from the sanitary sewer and watermain trdhfies in the driveways north of Legacy Parkway. The services would be for future park and/or open space uses on Outlot I. The developer and the Home Owners Association will must agree to not object to the future ~stallation of these utility services 25 Engineering Plan Review Heritage Square at Legacy Village October 13, 2003 Page 5 of 5 PRELIMINARY PLAT (SHEET C5.1) The plat should be modified to include the necessary right-of-way for the construction of the roundabout at the Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street intersection. The plat includes Ouflot A for the storm water pond. The pond should be included in a drainage and utility easement rather than an outlot. A drainage and utility easement should also be dedicated for the pond outlet. The plat should include 20' wide utility easements along all watermain outside of public fight-of-way per SPRWS requirements. PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANS (SHEETS L2.1 - L2.3 & L6.1) The raingarderdinfiltration basin detail should specify a maximum depth above the planting soil based on the infiltration capacity of the planting soil and a maximum ponding time of 48 hours. In general, the raingarden detail looks functional assuming that an adequate operation and maintenance plan is prepared and followed. However, because the system uses under drain.q connected to the storm sewer system, the plan does not fully take advantage of the native soils. Can additional information be provided to explain why the under drain system is needed or desired in the plan? GENERAL COMMENTS The developer will be required to grant the City a right of entry/ temporary construction easement, as necessary, for public roadway construction outside of the limits of the public right-of-way. Preliminary Storm Water Narrative, September 12, 2003. The pre 'lmmmry submittal and computations appear to meet the enhanced practices criteria through the raingardens and perforated/oversized HDPE storm sewer pipes. We would like to schedule a meeting with the developer to review the proposed storm sewer system in detail due to the unique nature of the design. Please let me know if you have any questions or you need any additional information. Copy: Chris Cavett/City of Maplewood Erin SchachffCity of Maplewood Ron Leaf/SEH Steve Heth/SEH File 160500001.3.004/2.1 26 Attachment 8 OCl 0 12003 MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Copy: Re' September 29, 2003 Tom Ekstrand, City of Maplewood lohn loharmson, Welsh Companies ~)' Dennis Doyle, DJD Partners III (w/attachment) Paul Durra, DJlD Partners III (w/attachment) Ann Hartman, Welsh Companies (w/attachment) Tom Hart, Winthrop & Weinstine (w/attachment) Heritage Square Townhomes at Legacy Village Maplewood, Minnesota We appreciate the Neighborhood Survey which was sent to our attention regarding Heritage Square Townhomes at Legacy Village (copy attached). On behalf of DJD Partners RI, LLC, a nearby landowner, we offer the following observations. In general, we do not have a concern as to the proposed Heritage Square town_home development. Likewise, we do not have a concern regarding the setback issues as addressed in their correspondence. We do, however, ask that the applicant acknowledges that the general vicinity in which this project is proposed has historically and will in the future be primarily a commercial area. We support the integration of different uses within these type of trade areas - however, we have found in the past that in similar circumstances, once the residents are in place, they begin to oppose the existing and future commercial uses within the trade area. As such, our comments are simply that the developer, owners, and future residents of Heritage Square should be fully aware that their project is surrounded by commercial uses at present, and will well into the future be surrounded by commercial uses - which by their nature, typically generate more traffic, loading activities, trash removal activities,-etc. With regards to our property, we will not take kindly to future objections from nearby residents as to the commercial nature of our property. Thank you for the opportunity to present our thoughts. Attachment 27 Attachment 9 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD September 30, 2003 MAPLEWOO CITY HALL Dear Tom Ekstmnd: Thank you for the information. The plan for Heritage square has a lot of homes. The round about on the one side looks out of place with other side. I don¥ see a need for parkway on the one side. Should be same as street B. If it was not a parkway there WOuld be no need for set back change. As for the set back change on the west end. You know there am plans to develop the last 3 homes. Mine and the one on each side of me. If the two builders can work out what set backs work for each other. Then that is fine by me. If we are to stay here then the set backs should not be changed. It doesn't matter how far the house is. What matters is how far the new buildings are from the property line. The buildings could look better on .short end on west side. Sincerely, GERALD AND LINDA PETERSON GERALD AND LINDA PETERSON 3016 HAZELWOOD ST N MAPLEWOOD MN GSP3016~,COMCAST.NET 28 Attachment SEP 3 n 2.003 10 September 30, 2003 Mr. Thomas Ekstrand Assistant Community Development Director City of Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Dear Mr. Ekstrand: This is to respond to the neighborhood survey we received on September 25 regarding the Heritage Square Townhomes. After review of the information provided, we ask the City to uphold the City Code and deny the requested reduced setback from the westerly lot line. We feel the reduced building setback would have negative impacts on us and our daily living and would be detrimental to the future value, sale, and/or development of our property. Sincerely, Dan and Mickey Gebha~d 3062 Hazelwood Avenue Maplewood, MN 55109 ?q September 22, 2003 Together We Can Attachment ll TRAVIS SMITH J'ANIS WALDE~SEN 1663 COUNTY ROAD D EAST MAPLEWOOD MN 55109 NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY - HERITAGE SQUARE TOWNHOMES AT LEGACY VILLAGE (HAJICEK PROPERTY, SOUTH OF THE POWER LINES) This letter is to get your opinion on an application the city received for property in your neighborhood. Town & Country Homes is requesting that the Maplewood City Council approve their proposed 224-unit town house development. This proposed town house complex is part of the recently approved Legacy Village planned unit development (PUD). Town & Country Homes' toWnhomes would be for-sale units and would be located south of the power lines, west of the Kennard Street extension and north of the St. John's Hospital property. Refer to' the attachments. On July 14, 2Q03, the Maplewood City Council approved the overall development in concept. The developer of the for-sale townliomes, however, still needed to submit their plans for council approval. These are the plans now submitted for review by Town & Country Homes. The applicant is requesting the following: a preliminary plat to create the individual lots to sell; revision of the planned unit development to incorporate their project into the Legacy Village PUD, and; building and site design plans. One aspect of the building layout is that the applicant is asking for a reduced building setback from the westerly lot line. The code requires a setback of 50 feet for the southerly four buildings and 100 feet for the northerly building because of its larger wall surface area facing this side lot line. The applicant is proposing setbacks for their westerly buildings of 20 to 30 feet. I need your opinion to help me prepare a recommendation to the planning commission and city council. Please wdte your opinion and comments below and return this letter, and any attachments on which you have written comments, in the enclosed postage-paid envelope by September 30, 2003. If you would like further information, please call me at 651-249-2302 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. I will send you a notice of any public headng on this application. Thank you for your · comments. I ;viii give t.~careful consideration. THOMAS EKSTRAND -ASSISTANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Enclosures: Maps, Drawings and Narrative .... SEP 3 0 2003 I have no comments: C~mments: MO LOLk..) j¢.3..,¢..0114.~__ ~0~~ ~ ~0..~ ~~~ (~e~e Square Townho~/Se~on 3) OFFICE OF COMMUNI~ DEVELOPMENT · 651~,770-4560 · F~: 651- 748- 309~ CITY Of MAPLEWOOD ~0 / Attachment 12 Memo September 30, 2003 ,,,~ ~- From: David Fisher, Building Official To: Tom Ekstrand, Asst. Comm. Dev. Director Re: Heritage Square at Legacy Village After reviewing the letter and information submitted by Town & Country Homes the following code issues would have to be addressed: New Townhomes 1. Comply with requirements of 1306 for sprinklering the buildings. Any building over 8,500 gross square feet is required to be sprinklered. 2. Verify the number of accessible units required for the development based on Minnesota State Building Code 1341 Table 16.2. 3. Provide accessible parking. 4. Submit complete plans using Minnesota registered design professionals. Temporary Leasing Office 1. Temporary per the building code is 6 months or less so this building would require a foundation. 2. Full bathrooms would be required based on Table 29 A of the 2000 IBC. 3. Site approach that is less than 1 to 20 in pitch would be required at one entry. (Ramp) 4. The building would have to be handicap accessible. 5. Two exits would be required. 6. A twenty-foot setback from any other building would be required. 7. MN State Building Code Chapter 1361 requires an IBC certification for code compliance on the prefabricated structure. 32 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION Attachment 13 WHEREAS, Town & Country Homes applied for a conditional use permit for a planned unit development revision to develop Heritage Square, a 220-unit town house development in the Legacy Village planned unit development. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located on the west side of Kennard Street, now under construction, south of the Exel power line easement. The legal description is: OUTLOT H, LEGACY VILLAGE AT MAPLEWOOD WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: On October 20, 2003 the planning commission recommended that the city council this permit. The city council held a public hearing on ,2003. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The council gave everyone at the headng a chance to speak and present wdtten statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approves the above-described conditional use permit because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 12 33 o 9 10. scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to these code requirements: Outlot H is approved for 220 units of townhouses as revised according to the conditions in this report. The southern unit of the Hometown (Type A) building, at the southwest comer of Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street, shall be eliminated, reducing it from 5 units to 4 units, thus continuing the internal linear green space out to Kennard Street at a width of at least 70 feet. The landscape treatment of this green space shall be continued into this new area in similar fashion to the rest of the linear green space. Within the linear green space two north-south segments of sidewalk shall be added, one connecting Driveways K and U, the other connecting Driveways G and W. The rain gardens and landscaping shall be revised to accommodate these sidewalks. The dead ends of all driveways behind the Chateau (Type B) buildings - Street B and Ddves G, I, K, M, O, Q, U, V, and W - shall be designed, stdped and signed to accommodate two common parking spaces each. The monument signs and associated landscaping at the comer of Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street shall be revised to place trees or other landscape features that are at least 25 feet in height and close to the right-of-way, while still maintaining safe sight distances, that will create a significant tall edge mimicking the scale of the proposed senior building and future office building on the opposite comers of the intersection. The setbacks are approved as shown on the site plan. All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped October 15, 2003. The city council may approve major changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this permit for one year. The city council shall review this permit in one year. The homeowners association documents shall state that the visitor parking areas shall be kept open for visitor parking and shall not be used as a storage area for RVs, trailers, campers and the like. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on ,2003. Heritage Square/Legacy Village PUD October 13, 2003 13 34 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DATE: Richard Fursman, City Manager Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Mixed-Use Zoning District City of Maplewood Along White Bear Ave., North of Larpenteur Ave. and South of Ripley Ave. October 15, 2003 INTRODUCTION The planning commission reviewed the draft mixed-use zoning ordinance at the October 6, 2003, planning commission meeting. During this review, the planning commission requested clarification or changes on the following items: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Nonconforming uses. Limited production and processing. Motor vehicle fuel stations. Dry cleaning. Setbacks to non-mixed-use residential zoning districts. Alley right-of-way and pavement widths. DISCUSSION Following is a brief summary of staff's findings and proposed changes to the above-mentioned items: Nonconforming Uses Staff was proposing to use the city's existing nonconforming ordinance when dealing with nonconforming businesses within the mixed-use zoning district. This would allow nonconforming uses to continue until such time as the use ceased operation for one year. The issue of decreasing the time a nonconforming use could continue in the mixed-use zoning district from one year to possibly six months was discussed at the last planning commission meeting. The question of legality of such a proposal was also discussed, i.e., would it be legal for the city to handle nonconforming uses differently in different parts of the city? Staff has requested that our city attorneys review this proposal and give us a legal opinion, which should be available for discussion at the October 20 planning commission meeting. Regardless of the legal opinion, staff has concerns over reducing the nonconforming time limit within the mixed-use zoning district. Adopting the mixed-use zoning district will require selling the new concepts to existing businesses. If a business that becomes nonconforming with the new zoning district doesn't have assurances that they will be allowed an adequate time to sell their property to a similar user, they will not be supportive of the change. The city has the assurance that once the changes are in place, and the market remains strong as indicated in the Maxfield Research study, that a private developer will find the land more valuable than another nonconforming business. Staff has also added language for nonconforming single-dwelling uses that states that they may be expanded, extended, or intensified so long as it would be permitted under the single-dwelling residential district (R-l) and/or the mixed-use district. With this language, a single-dwelling use could construct an addition without following the strict design guidelines required in the mixed-use zoning district, but would have more flexibility with setbacks, etc., allowed in the mixed-use zoning district. Limited Production and Processing It was mentioned that the "limited production and processing" use should be described. Staff included St. Paul's Traditional Neighborhood zoning district's definition in the ordinance for the planning commission's review. In general, limited production and processing include uses that produce minimal off-site impacts due to their limited nature and scale, such as film, video, and audio production, musical instruments, and wood furniture and upholstery. Motor Vehicle Fuel Stations There was concern regarding allowing motor fuel stations within the mixed-use zoning district. Staff has redefined the use to be compatible to the city's existing zoning code definitions, i.e., minor and major motor fuel stations. Staff is recommending that minor motor fuel stations (maximum of three dispensers) be allowed as a conditional use if located at least 100 feet from any residential use within the mixed-use zoning district, including mixed-use buildings that comprise at least 50 percent residential uses. In addition, minor motor fuel stations must comply with the city's existing ordinance which requires these uses to be located at least 350 feet from any residentially zoned property (i.e., R-l). Dry Cleaning Because of possible hazardous materials used in some dry cleaning facilities, staff is now recommending that a dry cleaning plant (the cleaning of clothing or other fabrics by use of volatile solvents) be permitted only in commercial buildings within the mixed-use zoning district. Dry cleaning pick up stations (pick up and delivery of dry cleaning without the operation of any dry cleaning equipment) will be permitted in either a commercial or mixed-use building. Setbacks to Non-mixed-use Residential Zoning Districts As requested, staff has included the requirement that single- and double-dwelling residential uses within the mixed-use zoning district, which are adjacent existing single-dwelling residentially zoned land, maintain the setback of the adjacent single-dwelling residentially zoned land. Alley Right-of-way and Pavement Widths Because of concerns regarding snow storage and passing room for vehicles within an alley, staff has added the following language to the subdivision section of the mixed-use zoning district: "Alley right-of-ways and pavement widths must be adequate for vehicles to pass, unless signed for one-way traffic, and adequate for the storage of snow." RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of the proposed mixed-use zoning ordinance. P:Hillcrest\10-20-O3 CDRB Mixed Use Report Attachment: Draft Mixed-Use Zoning District Mixed-Use Zoning District October 15, 2003 2 DRAFT MIXED-USE ZONING DISTRICT October 15, 2003 Author's notes found in itafics Purpose and Intent: The purpose of the mixed-use zoning district is to provide areas in the City of Maplewood with a mixture of land uses, made mutually compatible through land use controls and high- quality design standards. With this district, the City of Maplewood intends to promote the redevelopment or development of an area into a mixed-use urban center with compact, pedestrian-oriented commercial and residential land uses that are within an easy walk of a major transit stop. The intent of the mixed-use zoning district is to enhance viability within an area and foster more employment and residential opportunities. The placement and treatment of buildings, parking, signage, landscaping, and pedestrian spaces are essential elements in creating the pedestrian-friendly and livable environment envisioned by the city in an area. To ensure these elements are achieved basic design standards are included in the district, which could be expanded by the city as a separate architectural overlay district for a particular area. Uses Type of Use Permitted (P) Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Prohibited (PR) Residential Uses Single-family dwelling Double dwelling Multiple dwelling Secondary dwelling P P P CUP Mixed Commercial-Residential Uses Multiple-dwelling residential and commercial Live-work unit CUP CUP Commercial Uses Adult uses and sexually oriented businesses Antennas which are freestanding and not located on existing structures Bakery/candy shop/catering, which produces goods for on-premise retail sale Bank, credit union Clinic Currency exchange business Drive-through sales and services Drive-up food or beverage window Dry c eanin,q and laundry pick up station Dry cleanin,q plant Exterior storage, display, sale or distribution of goods or materials Health/sports club Hotel/motel/bed and breakfast residence Indoor recreation Indoor theater Laundry PR PR P P P PR PR PR P ~/pR1 PR P P P P Mixed-Use Zoning District October 15, 2003 Type of Use Permitted (P) Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Prohibited (PR) Commercial Uses (continued) Limited production and processing Liquor store Motor ';=hic!e con';=~io.",c= m=rket Maintenance (~araqe Major motor fuel station Minor motor fuel station Motor vehicle wash Office On-sale liquor business Pawnbroker Publishing, photocopying, or printing establishment Restaurant Retail Small appliance repair Accessory use customarily incidental to any of the above uses P/CUP2 P CUP P__B PR PR P P PR P P P P P The city shall allow commercial uses similar to the above if they would not create a nuisance and if they are not noxious or hazardous. The city council shall review uses that are not clearly similar for determination of compatibility. ~ A dry c eaning plant is a permitted use in the mixed-use zoning distdct only if located within a commercial- only bu Idin.q. A dry cleaning plant is a prohibited use in the mixed-use zon ng district if located within a mixed-use building (i.e., residential and commercial). 2Limited production and processing is a conditional use in the mixed-use zoning district only if such use has more than five thousand (5,000) square feet of gross floor area, in which case total floor area shall not exceed ten-thousand (10,000) square feet. 3A minor motor fuel station is a conditional use in the mixed-use zoning distdct subject to the following: ._,:.. All parts of the minor motor fuel station shall be at least 100 feet from any residential use within the mixed-use zoning district, including mixed-use buildings that comprise at least 50 percent residential uses. All parts of the minor motor fuel station shall be at least 350 feet from any non-mixed-use residentially zoned land. All new or replacement underqround fuel storage tanks shall meet the standards of state statutes and the standards of the state pollution control agency. Such tanks shall also have a UL listing appropriate for their use. In addition, installation plans shall be submitted to the state fire marshal's office for approval. There shall be leak detection equipment on all new and existing tanks according to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) schedule deadlines. Leak detection facilities shall include electronic (in tank) monitoring equipment as well as manual daily measurement and recording of tank levels. Records of daily tank levels, fuel purchases, and fuel sales shall always be available on site for inspection by the fire marshal. Use definitions: Drive-through sales and service: An opening in the wall of a building designed and intended to be used to provide sales and/or service to patrons who remain in their vehicles. Mixed-Use Zoning District October 15, 2003 4 Drive-up food or beverage window: An opening in the wall of a building or restaurant designed and intended to be used to provide food and/or beverage sales, and/or food and/or beverage service to patrons who remain in their vehicles. (THIS IS ALREADY DEFINED IN THE BC-M ZONING DISTRICT.) Dry cleaning pick up station: An establishment or business maintained for the pickup and delivery of dry cleaninq without the maintenance or operation of any dry cleaning equipment or machinery on the premises. Dry c eaning plant: An establishment or business maintained for cleaninq clothing or other fabdcs by immersion and ag tation, or by immersions only, in volatile solvents includinq, but not limited to, solvents of the petroleum distillate type, and/or the chlorinated hydrocarbon type, and the processes incidental thereto. Laundry: An establishment or business where patrons wash and dry clothing or other fabrics in machines operated by the patron. Limited production and processinq: These uses produce minimal off-site impacts due to their limited nature and scale, are compatible with commercial and residential uses, and may include wholesale and off- premises sales. Odors, noise, vibration, glare and other potential side effects of manufacturing processes shall not be discernable beyond the property line. Limited production and processing includes, but is not limited to, the following: 2~ 3-. 4-. 5-. 6-. 9_. 10.._~ 11_...~. 12_.._~ 13._~ 14~ 15....~ Apparel and other finished products made from fabrics. Blueprinting Computers and accessories, including circuit boards and software. Electronic components, assemblies and accessories. Film, video and audio production. Food and beverage products, except no live slaughter, grain milling, cereal, vegetable oil or vineqar processinq. Jewelry watches and clocks. Milk, ice cream and confections. Musical instruments. Novelty items, pens, pencils and buttons. Precision dental, medical and optical goods. Signs, including electric and neon si.qns and advertisinq displays. Toys Wood craftinq and carving. Wood furniture and upholstery. Live-work unit: A dwelling unit in combination with a shop, office, studio, or other workspace within the same unit, where the resident occupant both lives and works. Standards and conditions: The workspace component must be located on the first floor or basement of the building, with an entrance facing the primary abutting street. The dwelling unit component must be located above or behind the workspace and maintain a separate entrance located on the front or side far,~ade and be accessible from the primary abutting street. The office or business component of the unit shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the total gross floor area of the principal dwelling unit. A total of two (2) off-street parking spaces shall be provided for a live-work unit, located to the rear of the unit, or underground/enclosed. The size and nature of the workspace unit shall be limited so that the building type may be governed by residential building codes. An increase in size or intensity beyond the specified limit would require the building to be classified as a mixed-use building. The business component of the building may include offices, small service establishments, home crafts which are typically considered accessory to a dwelling unit, or limited retail associated with Mixed-Use Zoning District October 15, 2003 5 fine arts or crafts. The business component shall be limited to those uses otherwise permitted in the district that do not require a separation from residentially zoned or occupied property, or other protected use. It may not include a wholesale business, manufacturing business, commercial food service requiring a license, limousine business, or motor vehicle service or repair for any vehicles other than those registered to residents of the property. Maintenance .qara,qe: A building for the maintenance or repair of motor vehicles. This definition does not include a motor vehicle accessory installation center or motor vehicle wash. (THIS IS ALREADY DEFINED IN THE DEFINITION SECTION OF THE ZONING CODE.) Major motor fuel station: A retail business enga.qed in the sale of motor vehicle fuels that has more than three (3) dispensers. (THIS IS ALREADY DEFINED IN THE DEFINITION SECTION OF THE ZONING CODE.) Minor motor fuel station: A retail business enqa,qed in the sale of motor vehicle fuels with a maximum of three (3) dispensers. Fuel dispensers shall be designed to serve only two cars at once. (THIS IS ALREADY DEFINED IN THE DEFINITION SECTION OF THE ZONING CODE.) Motor vehicle wash: A building for washin.q motor vehicles. This definition does not include the occasional hand washing of vehicles stored in a Darkin(~ qaraqe. (THIS IS ALREADY DEFINED IN THE DEFINITION SECTION OF THE ZONING CODE.) Secondary dwelling: An additional dwelling unit located within and subordinate to the principal dwelling on a single-dwelling lot, designed for a single occupant or small family. Standards and conditions for such a unit shall include the following: A secondary dwelling unit shall be located within a single-family dwelling or above its accessory structure. In the case of an addition to an existing structure, the exterior finish, roof pitch, windows, eaves and other architectural features must be the same or visually compatible with those of the original building. The additional dwelling unit may not contain more than thirty percent (30%) of the principal dwelling's total floor area or eight hundred (800) square feet, whichever is less. There shall be no more than two (2) dwelling units on a lot. At least one (1) dwelling unit on the lot shall be owner-occupied. The minimum lot area shall be two thousand, five hundred (2,500) square feet greater than the minimum lot area required for a single dwelling in the district. Nonconforming Commercial and Multi-Dwelling Uses: Uses that become nonconforming by adoption of the mixed-use zoning district would be covered under the city's existing nonconforming ordinance. In summary, any pre-existing conforming or nonconforming use that would become nonconforming by adoption of the mixed-use zoning district would be allowed to remain until such time as the use of a building or land is voluntarily abandoned and ceases for a continuous period of one year or more. In addition, the use may expand or intensify with the city's approval of a conditional use permit. Nonconforminq Sin.qle-Dwellinq Uses: Any pre-existinq conforming or nonconforming single-dwelling residential uses which would become nonconforminq by adoption of the mixed-use zoning distdct may be expanded, extended or intensified so long as such expansion, extension, or intensification would be permitted under the Sinqle-Dwellin.q Residential District, R-l, and/or the mixed-use zoninq district. Mixed-Use Zoning District October 15, 2003 6 Dimensional Standards Buildin.q Type Single dwelling Double dwelling/ townhouse Residential garage accessed from alley4 Density 6 units/acre 15 units/acre3 n/a Lot Size Per Unit (Square Feet) 7,260 2,904 n/a Structure Setbacks (Feet) Height (Feet) Front Side Rear 35~ 20 to 25 52 152 351 20 to 25 52 152 Per Section n/a 5 0/18s 44-114 Residential garage not n/a accessed from alley4 Multiple dwelling Mixed-use/residential and commercial Commercial/including n/a structure parking 20 units/acre3 20 units/acre n/a Per Section 20 to 25 5 5 44-114 2,178 n/a 0 to 20 06 06 2,178 n/a 0 to 10 06 06 n/a n/a 0to 10 06 06 ~No single dwelling, double dwelling, or townhouse shall exceed a height of thirty-five (35) feet, unless the city council approves a conditional use permit. 2Side and rear yard setbacks as specified, except when a mixed-use zoned sinqle or double dwellin,q/townhouse adjoins a non-mixed-use sin.qle dwelling zoned use, in which case the side and rear yard setbacks must comply with the non-mixed-use single dwelling zoned side and rear yard setbacks. 3Density bonuses are allowed per Section 44-300. In addition, the net acreage for calculating density may be increased by three hundred (300) square feet for each affordable dwelling unit, as defined by the Metropolitan Council guidelines. 4Residential garages must be attached and recessed from the primary front facade (not including porches, bay windows, or other minor projections) by a minimum of eight (8) feet; or attached or detached, placed in the rear yard, and accessed by either an alley or a side-yard driveway. S'l'he required setback from an alley for a residential garage should be zero (0) or more feet if the garage door faces the interior of the lot, and eighteen (18) or more feet when the garage door faces the alley. eT'he zero (0) setback specified above is allowed except as otherwise specified in the building code. Side and rear yards of at least six (6) feet shall be required when a mixed-use zoned, nonresidential use adjoins a mixed-use zoned, residential use. Side and rear yard setbacks as specified in Section 44-20 (c)(6)(b) [additional design standards] when a mixed-use zoned, nonresidential use adjoins a non-mixed-use zoned, residential use. Off-Street Parking Placement of surface parking: Surface parking must be located to the rear of a principal building, or an intedor side yard if parking in the rear is impractical. Surface parking must maintain a ten-foot (10') setback to the street right-of-way when constructed on the side or rear of a building on a comer lot. Mixed-Use Zoning District October 15, 2003 7 Surface parking must maintain a five-foot (5') side and five-foot (5') rear yard setback, unless a nonresidential use adjoins a non-mixed-use zoned, residential use, in which case the required setback as specified in Section 44-19(a) [landscaping and screening]. The city may approve variances to the surface parking placement standard if a building has special needs and site constraints. In these cases, there should be good pedestrian connections between the sidewalk and building entrance, and the area in front of the parking lot should be well landscaped. Amount of parking: The minimum amount of required parking spaces shall be as specified in Section 44-17 [off-street parking]. The maximum amount of surface parking spaces shall not exceed the specified minimum by more than ten percent (10%), or two (2) spaces, whichever is greater. If additional parking is desired, it must be placed underground, within an enclosed building, or in a tuck-under garage. On-street parking located in front of a development may count toward the required number of parking spaces. For retail, medical, service and office uses, if a transit shelter is provided on site, then the minimum required number of parking spaces may be reduced by five percent (5%), but not to exceed five (5) parking spaces total. For retail, medical, service and office uses, required parking may be reduced by the establishment of a parking district for the purposes of sharing parking within one shopping area (i.e., varying peak parking hours or availability of off-street public parking). The establishment of a commercial parking district to allow a reduction in parking required shall be subject to review and approval by the community design review board during the development's initial site plan review or subsequent site plan changes. Retail, medical, service and office uses may participate in a shared parking agreement provided that it can be demonstrated that there will be adequate parking in combination with the other uses. In addition to the above-referenced allowances for parking reduction, the city council may authorize other reduced off-street parking requests through a special agreement. The reduction must be based on proven parking data for a specific development. Parking space size: 90-degree parking: 9 feet x 18 feet 45-degree parking: 8.5 feet x 18 feet Parallel parking: 8 feet x 21 feet Design Standards Exterior building materials: Exterior-building materials shall be classified primary, secondary, or accent material. Primary materials shall cover at least sixty percent (60%) of all fa(;ades of a building. Secondary materials may cover no more than thirty percent (30%) of all facades of a building. Accent materials may include door and window frames, lintels, cornices, and other minor elements, and may cover no more than ten percent (10%) of all fa(;ades of a building. Allowable materials are as follows: Primary exterior building materials may be brick, stone, or glass. Bronze-tinted or mirror glass are prohibited as exterior materials. Secondary exterior building materials may be decorative block or stucco. Synthetic stucco may be permitted as a secondary material on upper floors only. Accent materials may be wood or metal if appropriately integrated into the overall building design and not situated in areas that will be subject to physical or environmental damage. All primary and secondary materials shall be integrally colored. Remodeling/additions/alterations: Remodeling, additions or other alterations to existing buildings (buildings previously approved and built with mixed-use design standards) shall be done in a manner that is Mixed-Use Zoning District October 15, 2003 compatible with the cdglnal scal:, m:ss!ng, d:*~!!!ng and m3t¢ri~?., cf tho original building. Original materials shall be retained and preserved to the extent possible. Additions to a nonconforming building must be constructed with materials required by this ordinance if the addition exceeds twenty-five percent (25%) of the floor area. Exterior remodeling or alterations to a nonconforming building must be constructed with materials required by this ordinance. The director of community development, if the exterior remodeling or alteration requires administrative review, or the community design review board, if the exterior remodeling or alteration requires design review, may authorize the use of other materials if the addition, remodeling, or alteration is deemed to be minor in nature and not visible from a public street. Building fa(;ade width: Any exterior building wall adjacent to or visible from a public street or public open space may not exceed forty (40) feet in width er-less. New buildings of more than forty (40) feet in width are allowed if the building wall is divided into smaller increments, between twenty (20) and forty (40) feet in width, through articulation of the fac~de. This can be achieved through combinations of the following techniques, and others that may meet the objective: Far.~ade modulation - stepping back or extending forward a portion of the fac~,ade. Vertical divisions using different textures or materials (although materials should be drawn from a common palette). Division into storefronts, with separate display windows and entrances. Variation in rooflines by alternating dormers, stepped roofs, gables, or other roof elements to reinforce the modulation or articulation interval. Arcades, awnings, window bays, arched windows and balconies. Material change: Material changes should not occur at external comers, but may occur at reverse or interior corners or as a return at least six (6) feet from external comers. Windows: Buildings containing office and retail uses shall maintain forty percent (40%) minimum window coverage on the first floor that faces a street or public open space. Windows must be placed at a pedestrian scale, at or near eye-level. Awnings: Awnings must be properly maintained, and if in poor repair must be repaired or replaced in a timely manner. Metal awnings are discouraged unless the design of the awning is compatible with the building, as determined by the director of community development director (if the awnings require administrative review) or the community design review board (if the awnings require design review). Storage/service/loading: If an outdoor storage, service, or loading area is visible from adjacent residential uses, or a street or walkway; it shall be screened by a decorative fence, wall, or screen of plant material at least six (6) feet in height. Fences and walls shall be architecturally compatible with the primary structure. Model variety: Each single-dwelling or double dwelling development of one hundred (100) or more units must have at least four (4) models with three (3) elevations and material treatments each. For single- dwelling or double dwelling developments of less than one hundred (100) units, at least three (3) models with three (3) variations each are required. No street block should have more than two (2) consecutive single-dwelling houses with the same house model. Porches and entries: Porches for all residential types shall be accessed directly from a street or pedestrian easement. Porches may extend six (6) feet into the required setback. Front porches must have a minimum depth of six (6) feet clear and comprise a minimum of thirty percent (30%) of the width of a building's primary front fa(~ade (not including the garage) or ten (10) feet clear, whichever is larger. Porches, steps, pent roofs, roof overhangs, and hooded front doors or similar architectural elements shall be used to define all primary residential entrances. Exceptions: The community development director (if administrative review is required) or the community design review board (if design review is required) may consider exceptions to the above-mentioned design Mixed-Use Zoning District October 15, 2003 standards if they uphold the integrity of the guidelines and result in an attractive, cohesive development design as intended by this ordinance. Landscaping Landscape definition: Over story tree: Large deciduous shade-producing tree with a mature height over thirty (30) feet. Landscape requirement: All areas of land not occupied by buildings, parking, driveways, sidewalks, or other hard surface shall be sodded or mulched and landscaped with approved ground cover, flowers, shrubbery, and trees. Hard surfaced public areas, including sidewalks and patios, must include amenities such as benches and planters. At least ten percent (10%) of the total land area within the perimeter of parking lots shall include landscape islands. Each landscape island shall include at least one (1) tree as specified in Section 44-20(c)(8) [additional design standards]. Over story trees are required at regular intervals within the street right-of-way to help define the street edge, to buffer pedestrians from vehicles, and to provide shade. The over story trees shall be located in a planting strip at least five (5) feet wide between curb and sidewalk, or in a planting structure of design acceptable to the city. Lighting All outdoor lighting to be of a design and size compatible with the building, and as specified in Section 44- 19(c)(1) [outdoor lighting], except that light pole height maximum is limited to sixteen (16) feet. Signs Sign review: The community design review board shall review all signage on new buildings or developments to ensure that the signs meet mixed-use sign requirements and are architecturally compatible with the new building or development. In addition, the community design review board shall review all comprehensive sign plans as required in Section 44-736 [comprehensive sign plan]. All signage on existing buildings or developments (buildings or developments previously approved and built with mixed-use design standards) shall be reviewed by the community development director and shall be done in a manner that is compatible with the original scale, massing, detailing and materials of the original building. All signage on nonconforming buildings or developments shall be reviewed by the community development director and shall comply with the mixed-use sign requirements. Overall signage: Allowable area of overall signage for each establishment is one and one-half (1 ~) square feet of signage per lineal foot of building or frontage on a street, public open space, or private parking area. Each wall shall be calculated individually and sign area may not be transferred to another side of the building. Wall signage: Wall signs shall not cover windows or architectural trim and detail. Projecting signs: Projecting signs are allowed as part of the overall signage. Projecting signs may not extend more than four (4) feet over a public right-of-way, and must not project out further than the sign's height. Ground signs: One (1) ground sign for each building is allowed as part of the overall signage if the building is set back at least twenty (20) feet or more from the street right-of-way. Ground signs must meet the following requirements: Mixed-Use Zoning District October 15, 2003 10 Limited to six (6) feet in height and forty (40) square feet in area. Maintain a five-foot (5') setback from any side or rear property line, but can be constructed up to the front property line. Must consist of a base constructed of materials and design features similar to those of the front fa(;ade of the building or development. Must be landscaped with flowers or shrubbery. Prohibited signs: Signs painted directly on the wall of a building; reader boards located in permanent signage, except for reader boards advertising gasoline prices at motor vehicle convenience markets; signs which advertise a product and not a specific business. Temporary and directional signs: As specified in Sections 44-807 [temporary signs] and Section 44-891 [special purpose signs]. Sign illumination: As specified in Section 44-19(c)(1) [outdoor lighting]. Nonconforming signs: Signs that become nonconforming by adoption of the mixed-use zoning district would be covered under the city's existing nonconforming ordinance. In summary, any pre-existing conforming or nonconforming sign that would become nonconforming by adoption of the mixed-use zoning district would be allowed to remain until such time as the sign is destroyed or removed. In addition, the sign may be refaced to the existing size, but may not be expanded without a variance. Subdivision Blocks: Maximum block length of six hundred (600) feet. Right-of-way width: Subject to discretion of the director of public works and approval by the city council. Street pavement widths: Subject to discretion of the director of public works and approval by the city council. Alleys: Interconnected streets and alleys are strongly encouraged within the mixed-use zoning district. Alley right-of-way and pavement widths must be adequate for vehicles to pass, unless si.qned for one-way traffic, and adequate for the stora.qe of snow. Alley riqht-of-way and pavement widths are subject to the discretion of the director of public works and approval by the city council. Cul-de-sacs: Cul-de-sacs are discouraged within the mixed-use zoning district. Sidewalks: Sidewalks are required on both sides of streets. Mixed-Use Zoning District October 15, 2003 11