Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/18/2000MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, September 18, 2000, 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda Approval of Minutes a. September 7, 2000 New Business a. Pineview Estates Preliminary Plat (County Road D) 6. Visitor Presentations Commission Presentations a. September 11 Council Meeting: Ms. Coleman b. September 25 Council Meeting: Mr. Rossbach c. October 9 Council Meeting: Mr. Mueller? 8. Staff Presentations 9. Adjournment MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2000 II. III. IV. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Commissioner Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Jack Frost Commissioner Matt Ledvina Commissioner Paul Mueller Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner William Rossbach Commissioner Milo Thompson Commissioner Dale Trippler Present Present Present Absent Present Present Present Present Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer Recording Secretary: Lori Hansen Ken introduced Lori Hansen as the new recording secretary. She will be taking the meeting notes at all of the Planning Commission and Community Design Review Board Meetings, and preparing the minutes. APPROVAL OFAGENDA Commissioner Pearson moved approval of the agenda, as submitted. Commissioner Thompson seconded. Ayes-All The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES September 7, 2000, corrections to minutes: Chairperson Fisher requested "Ayes" be detailed if not all (page 6). Page 12, last paragraph, was should be changed to were. Commissioner Rossbach noted page 4, last paragraph, demise should be changed to diminish. Ken Roberts noted the date header should read 9-7-00 not 7-9-00. Page 10, second line, should read "stated". Page 11, last line second paragraph, cognizant should replace cognition. Item F, page 11, Mr. Rossbach will be attending the meeting on the 25th. Page 12, item A, 5th line, universally should be removed, and or changed to of. Third item, under A, add: according to callers. Item C, item 9, page 12, add: to a finalist. Commission Trippler moved approval of the minutes of September 7, 2000 as amended. Commissioner Pearson seconded the motion. Ayes - 6 (Frost, Ledvina, Pearson, Rossbach, Thompson, Trippler) Abstention -2 (Fischer, Mueller) The motion passed. I Planning Commission -2- Minutes of 09-18-00 V. PUBLIC HEARING ~--Located on County Road D between Hazlewood and Southlawn Ken Roberts presented the staff report. The proposed plan is the creation of 72 lots for 72 townhouse units that will occupy six 12 unit buildings. The buildings will run perpendicular to County Road D. Each unit will have their own piece of property and will be sold individually. In May of 1999 the Community Design Review Board had approved plans for this project. The project does meet the density standards for high density residential of up to twelve units per acre. The city staff is recommending approval of the plat with eleven conditions outlined in the Staff report. Mr. Goff, of Goff Homes was present to answer questions. Commissioner Thompson expressed concern for the property north of the concrete. Staff explained this area will be a commons area, and an outlot area, that the homeowners association will be responsible for. Commissioner Trippler questioned if a query was completed for the surrounding neighbors, and if there is a sidewalk, or trail associated with the property. A neighborhood survey was not done due to only two properties being affected within the typical 350 foot survey distance. The property to the east has submitted a development application for a twelve unit townhouse development. The other property, the Hajicek's, have received other notifications of the Goff proposals. These two neighbors will be notified of the public hearing when it goes before the city council. The staff initially felt the trail issue should be encouraged with the Hajicek property, or a trail could be added with the connection of County Road D to Highway 61. The commission would like to reserve the right, as a condition of the development and occupancy, to require the dedication of the trail, but not the paving of the trail. Commissioner Thompson felt the one percent grade concrete would become a skating rink of sorts, and felt experience, not the book, .should dictate the product used. Mr. Cavett explained the grades indicated for the blacktop driveway are .8 to 1 percent (% percent grade). The grades are steeper than is what is "by the book". The driveway is considered a relatively short distance and Mr. Cavett felt comfortable with this grade. The prospective age range of the owners concerned Commissioner MueIler due to the lack of an area for children to play. Also, traffic concerns were raised. Staff felt approximately 600 vehicle trips per day would not be an issue at the staff level. Where the staff was going to draw the line was raised by Commissioner Rossbach. Staff felt the capacity problem was not a concern with traffic except at the intersection of County Road D and White Bear Avenue. Mr. Pat Goff, 865 Aspen Circle, Little Canada, was present to provide a summary of the project, and to answer questions. Mr. Goff's decision to build town homes versus apartments was due to the success of an identical project in the past. Each unit has its own entry and double car garage. There are no common hallways or common areas as opposed to a big building. He stated he would not be against building a large apartment complex. In fact, they are thinking of building one or two 100 unit buildings in Vadnais Heights. These apartments would be targeted at more of a 55 and above age group and as a "for sale" type product. They are very successfully developing the same exact project in Woodbury as the project proposed for Maplewood. Each unit will be priced $120,000 to $130,000 for 1240 square feet. The retaining wall that runs east to west is due to a 2 foot grade change in the building pads. The configuration in the back of the lot contains a few parking spaces with a turnaround, rimmed with curbing. Of the sixty homes in the Woodbury development, about 15 of the units have one or two children. The adult age range is 25-50. Due to no one dictating what type of building to build, Mr. Goff explained that the homes are not handicapped accessible. Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 09-18-00 Mr. Goffs rational of going back to his original (May of 1999) plan is twofold: (1) The identical development is selling extremely well in Woodbury. He felt they could have the same success in Maplewood if they mirrored this plan. (2) Research was done regarding outside parking between units with one car garages versus two. The number of cars being parked outside for units with a one car garage was 110 versus 17 for units with double garages. This resulted in the plans returning to two car garages. Commissioner Rossbach stated he is drawing his line precluding any further development along County Road D until the city does something to address its connection to Highway 61, or provide a traffic study showing how each and every project will be handled. Commissioner Rossbach moved to recommend to the City Council, the approval of the Pineview Estates preliminary Plat received by the city on August 24, 2000. The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final plat: Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. b. * Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Pay the city for the cost of any traffic-control or no parking signs. d. Provide all required and necessary easements. · Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall be revised to follow the site plan and preliminary plat dated August 24, 2000, and shall include the grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, driveway and street plans. The plans shall follow the plans dated December 15, 1999, as approved by the Assistant City Engineer on February 14, 2000, and shall meet the following conditions: a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code. The grading plan shall show: (1) The proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat. (2) (3) (4) Contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. The proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer. All proposed slopes on the construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. On slopes steeper than 3:1, the developer shall prepare and implement a stabilization and planting plan. At a minimum, the slopes shall be protected with wood fiber blankets, be seeded with a no maintenance vegetation and be stabilized before the city approves the final plat. Planning Commission Minutes of 09-18-00 (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) -4- All retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls taller than 4 feet require a building permit from the city and shall be designed by a structural engineer. The developer shall install a protective rail on top of any retaining wall that is taller than four feet. Sedimentation basins or ponds as may be required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. No grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements from the affected property owner(s). Revise the westerly most sanitary sewer alignment to improve the connection and flow angle of the sanitary sewer line entering the city's existing sanitary sewer manhole. The city engineer must approve the sanitary sewer connection realignment. Have the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) review and approve the proposed utility plans. Specifically, the former submittal required 4-inch mains to service the buildings with blow-offs at the ends. All fire hydrants shall be next to County Road D. o c. The street, driveway and utility plans shall show: (1) All the parking areas and driveways with continuous concrete curb and gutter. (2) The coordination of the water main alignments and sizing with the standards and requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS). Fire flow requirements and hydrant locations shall be verified with the Maplewood Fire Department. (3) All utility excavations located within the proposed right-of-ways or within easements. The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be outside the project area. Pay the costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. b. * Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Provide for the repair of County Road D (street and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the driveways. Change the plat as follows: a. Add drainage and utility easements as required by the city engineer. bo Show drainage and utility easements along all the site perimeter property lines on the final plat. These easements shall be ten feet wide along the front and rear property lines and five feet wide along the side property lines. Secure and provide all required easements for the development including any off-site drainage and utility easements. Planning Commission -5- Minutes of 09-18-00 7. The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site drainage. The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the developer or contractor has not completed before final plat approval. 8. Submit the homeowner's association bylaws and rules to the Director of Community Development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible party for the maintenance of the private utilities, driveways and structure. 9. Record the following with the final plat: a. All homeowner's association documents. b. A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any further subdivision or splitting of the lots or parcels in the plat that would create additional building sites unless approved by the city council. The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city for approval before recording. 10. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading. 11. If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the director of community development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat. *The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or approves the final plat. In addition, the City Council should be made aware of the planning commissions desire to intergrade the trail system in this area of the city and if they were to deem it appropriate, that there be a designation made for this development for future trail connection. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Motion carries. VI. NEW BUSINESS Ayes-All VII. No new business. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS No visitors were present. VIII. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS September 11th Council Meeting: They had the second reading of the revised curbing ordinance to allow "not necessarily continuous" concrete curbing around parking lots. Therefore, sections can be dropped or lowered to allow drainage into drainage swills off of parking lots instead of just in the catch basins. September 15th Council Meeting: The city budget for next year was the major agenda item at that meeting. By state law, by September 15th, the council had to act on any levy increase if there were going to. If not, they would have to revert back to 1999 levels. Mr. Collins was not in attendance at the September 11th meeting. Several items ended up with 2/2 votes. A special meeting was called that met on Friday, September 15th. Mayor Cardinal was out of town, but participated by internet/video hookup. Planning Commission Minutes of 09-18-00 -6- The council approved a 12% levy increase taking out a couple items from the capitol improvement budget. A referendum will be held on dispatching. The citizens of Maplewood will get to vote on whether they want to actually pay for it. IX. Co September 25th Council Meeting: Commissioner Rossbach will be attending. The main concern for the Planning Commission at this meeting is for the council to have a first discussion on the residential parking issue. In" Maplewood in Motion", Melinda Coleman solicited comments from residents looking for input on the proposed ordinance, and their concerns on the current situation. Seventy to eighty contacts were made. The majority were in support of the ordinance. Commissioner Trippler expressed the need to determine whether the City Council was strongly in favor of doing something about parking, and his desire to bring the Chief of Police to the meeting to find out if they will enforce the ordinance. Commissioner Thompson stated this comments supports the need for more adequate staffing in the police department. The need to "get our ducks in order" with the community development director, and to approach the ordinance cautiously was stressed. All agreed the full issue needs to be addressed, but possibly implemented in stages. E° October 9th City Council Meeting: Birch Glen Apartments and Pineview Estates will be on the agenda. Commissioner Thompson will be attending. (Mr. Mueller will switch meeting dates with Mr. Thompson) F° The City Tour: Everyone seemed quite pleased with the results. Next time possibly a speaker from each neighborhood would be beneficial. Also, inviting a member from the Historical Society could prove informative to the attendees. G. Cellular Tower: A delay has been agreed to, and will be on the next meeting agenda. STAFF PRESENTATIONS None ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:02 p.m.