Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/04/2001MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday June 4, 2001, 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. May21, 2001 5. Public Hearings a. Afton Ridge (Lower Afton and McKnight Roads) 1. Land Use Plan Change (BC-M and LBC to R-3H) 2. Zoning Map Change (CO and LBC to R-3) 3. Preliminary Plat New Business None 7. Visitor Presentations o Commission Presentations a. May 29 Council Meeting: Mr. Frost b. June 11 Council Meeting: Mr. Ahlness c. June 25 Council Meeting: Mr. Trippler 9. Staff Presentations 10. Adjournment MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, June 4, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Lorraine Fischer Present Jack Frost Present Matt Ledvina Present Paul Mueller Present Gary Pearson Present William Rossbach Present Dale Trippler Present Eric Ahlness Present Mary Dierich Absent Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer Recording Secretary: JoAnn Morin III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Roberts added three items under staff presentation to the agenda. a) Planning Commission Training Topics b) Update on Annual City Tour c) Notice of Mr. Barrett's Passing Commissioner Ahlness noted change to Item 8 b. for the June 11 Council Meeting. He stated that Commissioner Rossbach would be attending that meeting. Commissioner Frost added one item under Commission Presentation to the agenda. d) Hillcrest Opportunity Site Commissioner Trippler added one item under Commission Presentation to the agenda. e) Training Seminar Commissioner Frost moved approval of the agenda, as amended. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes -All The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 22, 2001 Mr. Roberts noted a change to the minutes on page 8, paragraph 6. It should read "Commissioner Trippler asked why the location for the trail was between Units 11 and 12. He felt that placing it between Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -2- units 13 and 14 and "' '* *~'~ *'""' between Lot 11 and the ^' '*'^* pond on Ripley would be less disruptive to Lot 11 ." Commissioner Mueller noted a change to the minutes on page 6, paragraph 7, line 1. It should read "Commissioner ,Mu¢llcr asked what the normal..." Commissioner Mueller also noted a change to the minutes on page 6, paragraph 9, line 1. It should read "Commissioner ~ ~B~h stated that he felt..." Commissioner Pearson moved approval of the minutes of May 21, 2001, as amended. Commissioner Frost seconded the motion. Ayes - 7 Commissioner Frost abstained. The motion passed. V. PUBLIC HEARING Afton Ridge (Lower Afton and McKnight Roads) 1. Land Use Plan Change (BC-M and LBC to R-3H) 2. Zoning Map Change (CO and LBC to R-3) 3. Preliminary Plat Shann Finwall, Associate Planner, presented the staff report for this request. She stated that Tim Thone of Thone Builders and Developers is proposing to construct a 40-unit townhouse development on a 4.22-acre parcel of land located on the southeast corner of Lower Afton Road and McKnight Road. This property is zoned and planned as commercial office and limited business commercial. The surrounding properties include the Holiday Station store, to the south are single family homes, to the east is a wetland, to the north is Battlecreek Park, to the west is the City of St. Paul where there is a strip mall and rental housing. Ms. Finwall stated that Mr. Thone is requesting the following approvals for this development; first, an amendment to the city's Comprehensive Land Use Plan from Commercial Office and Limited Business Commercial to Residential High Density. Second, rezone the property from Commercial Office and Limited Business Commercial districts to Multiple Family Residential. Third, preliminary and final plat approval, as well as design approval which will be addressed by the Community Design Review Board next week. Ms. Finwall stated that Mr. Thone's development includes 40-units. Two of the buildings will have access onto McKnight Road, 12-units total. The other two buildings will have access onto Lower Afton Road, 28-units total. The Lower Afton Road building proposed will include 14-units in each building with 7-units on each side, back to back. The interior units will have garages which are one-car wide and two-car deep with exterior units having two-car wide garages. All four buildings will have earth- tone vinyl siding, vinyl shake accents under the windows and brick exterior on the garage level. These townhomes will be marketed to empty nest professionals and will be priced from $160,000 to $190,000. Ms. Finwall stated that Mr. Thone stated that the main reason for proposing a land use amendment and rezoning of this property from commercial to residential is that the times and conditions have changed such that the planned land use is no longer appropriate for this property. He pointed out that the property is ideal for multiple family housing because of the access to an existing major bus route on McKnight and Lower Afton Road, the location of a regional park directly to the north of this property with walking paths and other recreational opportunities, the location of a bike trail on Lower Afton Road, and the fact that the residential use will generate less traffic and congestion than a traditional style retail or commercial development, and finally the strong need and demand for moderate housing compared to the need for more commercial development on this property. Staff does concur with this Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -3- analysis in that the proposal meets many of the required goals, policies, and criteria set forth in the city's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code for residential developments, including increasing the moderately priced housing stock within the city. The existing conditions on this lot include several mature trees, mainly Cottonwoods, and a wetland to the east of the property. According to the proposed grading plan, Ms. Finwall stated that it appears a number of the trees on the southern end of the development can be saved. Mr. Thone is receptive to this idea, as are the adjacent property owners. The landscape plan that was submitted with this proposal does not show the trees that will be preserved. For this reason, landscape screening of the single-family properties, particularly screening from the townhome's vehicle headlights, will have to be addressed. Staff does feel that this can be accomplished with a grouping of evergreens at the ends of all driveways. The developer would also like to create screening from the adjacent Holiday Station store. This will be accomplished by a row of deciduous and evergreen trees along the shared property lines of the Holiday Station store. There is currently a bituminous trail with a split rail fence that is located down the center of this property. This trail was put in place with the construction and platting of the adjacent single-family homes. It was created to gain access for this neighborhood to the bus stop and the convenience store on the corner of McKnight and Lower Afton Roads. This trail will remain with this development. In addition to the two-car garage spaces which are being provided in each unit, also proposed are individual driveways into each unit which can serve as guest parking. There are also a total of 17 additional guest-parking spaces scattered throughout the development. The parking proposed does exceed the city's requirements. Originally planned for this development were four turnaround lanes, required by the city's fire marshal for turnaround access for emergency vehicles. After further review of this project, and the fact that the turnarounds will increase impervious surface on the property, it was determined that this turnaround issue could be better addressed on the eastern portion of this development by creating a 12-foot wide fire access lane to the back of the property. This access lane will only be accessible to emergency vehicles and as a walking path for the development itself. Because of the grade of the western portion of this development, a similar type of proposal will not work. Ms. Finwall indicated that the turnaround in that area could be reduced from 160-feet long to 80-feet long. In order to insure access for this development to the bus stop and convenience store on the intersection of McKnight and Lower Afton Roads, staff is proposing that the developer construct a five- foot wide concrete sidewalk along the McKnight Road right-of-way west of the property. This sidewalk will extend from the southern edge of the property to the existing sidewalk in front of the Holiday Station store. Also, staff is recommending the developer construct a bituminous trail to extend from the western driveway of the eastern portion of the development to the existing bituminous trail. The lighting on this property will consist of exterior lights above each garage. This proposal will insure that light will not shine into adjacent properties, yet still will be adequate to offer enough light within this development for security. There is currently a wetland on the east side of the property which the city requires a 50-foot wide buffer from this wetland. The development does meet this requirement. However, there are four guest parking stalls located directly adjacent to that buffer area. Ms. Finwall indicated that with the removal of the turnaround lane, the parking stalls could be shifted to the south creating more of a buffer for that wetland. In addition, staff does propose that native plantings be planted within this buffer area to help filter any overflow storm water runoff from the project and help restore the wetland to a more native habitat. Staff does recommend approval of this proposal and is requesting three motions from the Commission Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -4- to include: Adopting a land use plan change resolution from Commercial Office and Limited Business Commercial to Residential High Density; Adopting the rezoning resolution from Commercial Office and Limited Business Commercial to Multi-Family Residential; and, Approve the preliminary and final plat date stamped May 11, 2001 with all attached conditions including an additional condition which is being required by the county and includes deeding three-feet of additional right-of-way to McKnight Road. The Community Design Review Board will review this project on June 12, 2001. Commissioner Frost inquired if the turnaround lanes on the Afton Road side could be a pervious surface instead of asphalt. Ms. Finwall stated that the city's fire marshal did not depict that it had to be an impervious service and stated that could be reviewed. Commissioner Frost asked about Item D 2,4 referring to four groups of six-foot high large evergreens and how many trees make a group. Ms. Finwall stated that the intent of that item was that there was adequate screening at the ends of the driveways. She stated that four trees could make a grouping. Commissioner Trippler questioned the documents that the commission received displaying the units. He stated that the elevations that they received displayed eight units versus the seven that were stated in the staff report. Tim Thone, the applicant, stated that when this project was originally started the application was for eight units on each side. This was before the neighborhood meetings and several staff meetings. The current proposal has reduced the total number of units from 44 to 40. Commissioner Trippler inquired where the existing 10-foot wide bituminous trail leads to. Ms. Finwall indicated that the trail extends from Parkview Lane to the south, adjacent to the Holiday station store down Lower Alton Road. Commissioner Trippler asked if there was a trail on the other side of Lower Alton Road. Ms. Finwall indicated that there is a bike path on the north side of Lower Afton Road. Commissioner Rossbach asked why the storm water was being taken off site for this project rather than having an on-site detention or retention of water. Chris Cavett, Assistant City Planner, stated that due to the basic shape and grade of the site there is not a lot of creativity that can be put into the drainage. Some drainage is being directed towards the wetlands, and ultimately gets directed into a regional drainage system. He stated that there are some Design Review comments for the developer and their engineer to perhaps make some modifications or improvements to this. However, based on the grade it is rather difficult to do anything different to the site. Commissioner Rossbach stated that he thought that the rule was that the area could not have any more drainage going off of it after it was developed than it did before. He inquired how did we achieve that if we are taking all the drainage off site. Mr. Cavett stated that that was correct, unless the site is part of a regional drainage system. This site is part of a regional drainage system, the Lower Alton Creek. It would be nearly impossible to limit the flows on this site to pre-development run-off amounts. There are some improvements that the city would like to work with the developer and their engineer, more in terms of water quality rather than Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -5- rate. They are directing flows into the ditch system, which is on Lower Afton Road. Commissioner Rossbach requested a copy of the ordinance to be clear of what it actually says regarding this issue. He stated that he was unaware that there were exceptions to the rule. He also indicated that due to the extent of the building and the impervious surface on the site. This limits the ability to put ponding on the site. Commissioner Rossbach stated that in the staff report it stated that the applicant felt that this development had fewer vehicle trips per day and generally it was a less intense development than if the areas were developed on their current zoning and land use. Commissioner Rossbach asked if there were any kind of figures that indicate what the anticipated vehicle trips per day for the existing land use would be versus what is being proposed. Ms. Finwall stated that a traffic study had not been completed on this project. She also stated that she had no exact numbers at this time but would supply him with that information. The applicant, Tim Thone, addressed the Commission. He stated that the theory behind the townhome look is more of the "Big House" concept versus the traditional townhome look. This project has some unique features, such as the rooflines. He stated that the units that are before the Commission are the rendering drawings that are being proposed to build, less the units on each building that have been taken off. There will be 28 two-bedroom units and 12 three-bedroom units. The square footage will range from 1,460 to 1,722. The target market is more the empty nest professionals. Commissioner Mueller asked about families with children moving into this development. Mr. Thone indicated that of course they have a right to purchase in this development. However, historically this type of development does not attract families with children. He stated that multi-family housing is really not set up for families with children. He also indicated that townhouse living is not for everyone, and is more appealing for empty nesters. Commissioner Mueller commented that he felt that we are good at building expensive places for people with a lot of free cash and putting the families that do not have that free cash out to find rental apartments or properties that need extensive repair. He stated that issue concerns him. Commissioner Ahlness asked about the lighting plan and if the lights on the unit garages would be on photocells or if they would be under the control of the owners. Mr. Thone indicated that the lights would be under the control of the owner. Commissioner Rossbach asked Mr. Thone to convince him that this development would be less intense than the development that would have gone into the existing zoning. Mr. Thone indicated that this could not be done without a car count. He stated that if it were a two- bedroom unit that there are demographics done as to how often those people come and go each day. Commissioner Frost stated that for single family residential it would be basically 10 trips per day/per house. As far as the Commercial Industrial and LBC, it is so much per 1,000 square feet. Without looking at what that site could have held, it is hard to say how many trips would have been generated per day. Mr. Roberts stated that for townhouses it is typically 7 - 8 trips per day. But without having a size of a commercial building, or what the uses are, staff does not have the ability to compare the traffic volumes from the projects. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -6- Commissioner Ledvina asked if the units on the southeast portion of the project are constructed at one elevation. Mr. Thone indicated that they are all at one elevation. Commissioner Ledvina asked if there were any attempt to step the units to reduce the amount of grading on the western part of the site. He stated that the floor elevations would be 25 feet higher than McKnight Road. He stated that there is excessive grading on that part of the site. Mr. Thone stated that he would double-check that issue. Mr. Roberts stated that the southern portion of those units would have tuck-under garages and then two floors above that. The northern portions are two levels at grade and then above. The other portion is all slab on grade. He stated that looking at the grading plan, they do step. The top of floor elevation for the east units is about 943.7 and the units close to McKnight are at 939.5. Commissioner Pearson asked for clarification on Item 3 E, the 8-foot wide bituminous trail. Ms. Finwall stated that the trail would connect from the proposed driveway to the existing 8-foot wide bituminous trail. This trail will help the eastern portion of the development access the trail to the corner where there is a bus stop and convenience store. Commissioner Pearson asked if from that point there was anything planned to take the trail eastward to the front of the site to the crossover point where it would enter the parking lot. Mr. Roberts indicated that the proposed trail is just to connect to the existing trail. Commissioner Rossbach asked staff what the current average cost of housing in Maplewood is. Mr. Roberts indicated that at this time he did not have a number on that. He did state that a report from the Met Council defines affordable at $134,000 or less. Commissioner Rossbach asked if the Commercial Office space and LBC zones were created as transitions between residential communities and more intense uses. Mr. Roberts indicated that that was correct. Ms. Finwall indicated that in this case, the multi-family would also serve as such a purpose. Commissioner Rossbach stated that we are increasing moderately priced housing stock within the city. Mr. Roberts stated that this development was not necessarily affordable housing, and in his opinion it was not high priced housing. Therefore, it seems moderate. Commissioner Rossbach asked what the advantage to the city for making the change from Commercial Office to multi-family. Mr. Thone stated that the times and conditions have changed to where that piece of property is not marketable for a commercial property. The real estate broker has had the property listed for a very long time and there has been no desire for a commercial user for this property. He stated that several years ago it would have not been thought to use that piece of property as a residential area. Times and conditions have changed and it is a nice transition from the Holiday Station to the residential people in the back. The biggest reason is that there has been no users in that area for office buildings. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -7- Commissioner Rossbach discussed that in the past this property had been zoned multi-family residential and then was changed to commercial use. He recalled that the reason this was changed was because the density was too high for the property and they were looking for something that had a lesser density. Mr. Thone stated that at this point there is not a market for what the property is being presented for and that is why he is requesting the zoning change. Resident Emil Sturzinager of 2455 Londin Lane addressed the Commission. He stated that he is not opposing this development but that he is concerned about the traffic and speed problem in this area. He stated that in the past he had requested a speed reduction from 50 miles per hour and also a turn lane on Lower Afton. He stated that there is scheduled millwork and an overlay on Lower Afton Road and felt that turning Lower Afton into three lanes with a turn lane would be beneficial. Chairperson Fischer asked staff if there was plans for upgrading streets in this area. Mr. Cavett stated that yes, there is a mill and an overlay plan for Lower Afton Road between Century and McKnight. There is also a proposal for next year's construction season (2002) for a reconfiguration of the intersection of McKnight and Lower Afton Road, with turn lanes and possibly medians and an addition of a traffic signal. This is just a proposal at this time. There is an additional lane proposed towards the east to accommodate right turning traffic into the development. He stated that the Ramsey County Traffic Engineer has looked at this situation and that it is his assumption that there will be limited left turning traffic. Commissioner Mueller asked if there has been any conversation regarding lowering the speed limits in the Battlecreek Park area. He felt the speeds might be excessive in that area. Mr. Cavett stated that speed limits are controlled by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The City of Maplewood has no authority on setting speed limits. The 50 miles per hour speed limit is based on the traffic conditions and the number of entrances, etc. He stated that he felt that there would be no changes to speed unless there are alterations on that roadway that would warrant a speed change. He stated that the city of Maplewood could make a request to Ramsey County and they would make the request to MNDot. Commissioner Mueller asked Mr. Cavett if the reviews were made on a regular basis or only on request. Mr. Cavett stated that typically it was done by request. There are certain situations that would warrant a speed study, such as traffic accidents. Resident Shawn Schuller of 349 Parkview Lane adjacent to the proposed development addressed the Commission. He stated that he would prefer to see the property stay vacant, but between commercial and residential he would chose the residential proposal. He does have concerns about the turn around for the southern development. He stated that it requires excavation right to his property line, eliminating some of the trees. He stated that they would be cutting into tree roots of trees on his property and may damage them. He questions how excavation would take place without damaging his trees. Commissioner Mueller asked staff what the consequences would be if indeed the trees were damaged and died. Mr. Roberts stated at that point the attorneys would get involved. He also stated that looking at the grading plan there may be some room to make changes. It does take careful attention by the developer and by the contractors working on the site to prevent damage to the trees. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -8- Mr. Schuller stated that there was concern about the path that goes along his property. There has been some undesirable activities occurring on this path. He stated that if that path could be removed or altered it would be beneficial. Mr. Schuller asked if any solution could be done regarding the turn around, such as moving it or scaling it back. Commissioner Rossbach stated that it was necessary to have the turnaround at the end of the driveway for emergency vehicles. Ms. Finwall stated that the length of the turnaround on the western part of the development is currently at 180' in length and could be reduced to 80'. She stated the trail that is currently there going from Parkview to Lower Afton Road was developed as a condition with the AJ Plat. Removal of that trail would require an amendment to their plat. She stated that in some of the citizen comments there were good points brought up about the trail, and that many individuals did want to retain that trail. She commented on the trees in that area stating that grading does cause damage to trees, but if the developer takes care and cuts any roots that go over the property prior to grading it will help retain the trees for a long period of time. If the site is fenced off and not graded onto the resident's property, any of the trees that are not being graded under the drip line should be ok, depending on the type of tree. Mr. Schuller stated that he is aware that there are some grading issues regarding this project. He stated that at the back of the property there is a steeper incline and there are more trees. As the property goes down towards the Holiday Station it flattens out quite a bit and the trees are already removed from that area. He asked if the project could be shifted towards the Holiday Station, preserving trees and reducing grading. Ms. Finwall stated that the developer did discuss shifting the townhomes approximately 20-feet to the north, towards the Holiday Station store with his engineer. Mr. Thone stated that he talked with Randy Hedland who is doing the engineering on this project. He stated that they have a 50-foot setback requirement towards the Holiday Station. He said that the project could be shifted down 15-feet and still meet setback requirements. The issue would be that additional retaining walls would be necessary. Commissioner Rossbach questioned the 50-foot setback for residential next to commercial. He said that it would be a 50-foot setback if you were putting commercial next to residential. Mr. Roberts stated that Commissioner Rossbach is correct, there is not a 50-foot minimum for the residential from the Holiday Store property line. He stated that it does become a balancing act between how close do we want residential units next to a commercial property. He stated that code requires 20-feet. Commissioner Ledvina asked staff if the fire turnarounds are a new requirement for this type of development. He cited other townhome developments where there was not circulation around the building, in those instances he did not believe that there was any fire turnaround. Mr. Roberts stated that the development that Commissioner Ledvina was referring to was Pineview Estates. He stated that there are provisions at the end of those driveways for some type of turnaround, but not as extensive as proposed in this development. Mr. Roberts stated that this is the fire marshal's latest requirement. Commissioner Ahlness stated that the fire/emergency vehicle turnarounds would be blocked with a knockdown barrier so that it will not be available for use to the public. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -9- Ms. Finwall stated that was correct. Regarding the turnaround on the eastern lobe of the development that staff is proposing a 12-foot wide drive lane with fall down bollards at the end of the driveways. Commissioner Ahlness asked it that would also be in place for the southern property as well. Ms. Finwall stated that she did not believe that the bollards would be necessary because it is only an 80-foot length. Fire lane signs should be posted with no parking. Commissioner Ahlness asked if to relieve the residents concerns about the lights of traffic shining onto their property and to avoid people parking on that fire lane, whether it is posted or not, if barricades could be placed there. It would also provide consistency within the development. Ms. Finwall stated that she felt that was an excellent suggestion. Commissioner Rossbach disagreed. He commented that why would you put in parking space and not allow people to use it. He felt that it would make no sense whatsoever to put barricades to block off a T in the road. He stated that a furniture truck or garbage truck coming in would want to use that turnaround. Mr. Schueller asked if having that turnaround space available for public use, such as parking or turnaround, does not defeat the purpose of the turnaround for the fire trucks. Commissioner Rossbach stated that he felt all big vehicles that go into that development will want to use that turnaround. Mr. Roberts stated that the area would be posted no parking. It would be just for vehicle turnaround, primarily the emergency vehicles enabling them to maneuver as easily as possible. He felt with the additional landscaping staff is recommending and the posting of the eastern end of the southern part of the site for no parking will address many of the concerns of the neighbors. Commissioner Frost asked how the requirements of the fire marshal get into the conditions required by the applicant. Mr. Roberts stated that the fire marshal has a lot of discretion under the state fire code. If the fire marshal feels that it is necessary for the emergency vehicles to have that turnaround, he gets a lot of latitude. Mr. Roberts stated that we do try to get consistent, and stated that nine times out of ten the roads or the driveways loop all the way around the buildings on all sides. We are trying to prevent that in this case, but there must be an area where the trucks and vehicles can back up and turn around. Commissioner Mueller asked staff if this was a Design Review Board issue to address. Mr. Roberts stated that was correct, but ultimately it will be the City Council. Commissioner Mueller stated that he would like to encourage the Design Review Board to look at moving this facility farther north if possible, and encouraged them to look at the distance between the farthest east townhome on the McKnight side and where the turnaround actually starts. Perhaps they can decrease the distance of the turnaround from the building. Commissioner Ledvina stated that the Design Review Board does not act on the plat. The plat for this development has the building pads specifically identified, and once that recommendation is made the Design Review Board does not make any recommendations on the plat. He stated that is the Planning Commissioners job to make a recommendation on that. Mr. Roberts stated that he felt the Design Review Board could make some recommendations on the shape of the fire lane and some of the particulars. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -10- Commissioner Pearson asked if when this gets to the Design Review Board that they look at some kind of a lighting plan because he feels that what is planned right now is not anywhere near adequate and may be potential for mischief with the trail and the convenience store locations. Greg Diddle, resident of 341 Parkview Lane addressed the Commission. He stated that he was not in opposition of the project and likes the plan. He questioned who is responsible for maintaining the non- paved path between Lots 11 and 12. He stated that the trail needs attention. The residents on either side of the path have contacted the city and were told that it was the resident's responsibility to maintain the path. He also commented on the bituminous trail and that it has never been plowed and there is a lot of trash being left on that trail. He asked staff who owns these easement paths. Mr. Roberts said that some of the trails in Maplewood are within private easements, some are within public easements, and some are within public right-of-ways. He stated that these particular ones are within easements in the AJ Addition. He commented that the city does not plow any paths, except one on Upper Afton. It has been the policy of the City not to clean them, we do not have the equipment or the manpower. He stated as far as the maintenance, he was not able to answer the question at this time. He stated there would need to be some research with the public works and parks department. Chairperson Fischer stated that we might have answers to that issue by the time this proposal gets to City Council. Mr. Diddle asked if the path on the eastern most edge of the project would remain. Ms. Finwall stated that the path Mr. Diddle is referring to does not affect this development at all and it will be retained. She stated that if a homeowners association were in place for the AJ Addition, it would be their responsibility to maintain the path. If no association is in place, the pathways becomes public property and therefore should be maintained by the city. Mr. Diddle asked about the 50-foot buffer between the wetlands and the new development. He asked where in the wetland does the 50-foot buffer start. Ms. Finwall stated that the 50-foot buffer is from the delineated wetland mark. Mr. Roberts stated that each wetland delineation is different and is based on water characteristics, soil characteristics, and vegetative characteristics. This should be marked with a pink flag as set by a wetlands professional. He stated that this would be reviewed prior to the grading permit. This development will also be reviewed by the Watershed District. Steve Weckman of 345 Parkview Lane addressed the Commission. He stated that his primary concern is with the buffer. He asked for a more specific description of what is required for the cluster of trees, and how many trees define a cluster and what is the size of the trees. He also asked what the green area of the lot is as it is configured now. He said that looking at the code, there is a 35% green area required for this type of development. Ms. Finwall stated that she did not have the answer to the green area required at this time. She stated that in addition, there is a maximum building impervious surface of 30%. Commissioner Rossbach stated that the way the development is laid out, there is more than 35% green space. Mr. Weckman's other concern is about the natural buffer that is already there. Looking at the present plan shows a grade change right up to the property line. He questioned how the trees would stay if the grade changes. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -11- Mr. Roberts stated that his understanding is that much of the area of his concern will be undisturbed, except the turnaround and the trail. He stated that yes, there will be some tree removal, but Mr. Thone has indicated that a good portion will remain undisturbed and exactly how much will have to be reviewed with the final grading plan. Ms. Finwall stated that the grading on the south portion of the eastern lobe will be reduced somewhat with staff's proposal of a 12-foot wide drive as opposed to the hammerhead type turnarounds. That will create more tree preservation in that area. Tree replacement within the City of Maplewood is 2 W' caliper for deciduous trees and a 6-foot high evergreen. The City of Maplewood does have a tree preservation ordinance and it requires that only what the ordinance terms large trees to be replaced. On this property there is approximately 28 large trees, not including the Cottonwoods which do not have to be replaced. Therefore, the developer has to, by ordinance, replace at least 28 trees. With the landscape plan there will be many more trees replaced than that. Mr. Weckman stated that he would like to see the development be moved closer to the Holiday Station Store since the setback will not be an issue. He feels that this would improve the grading situation. He also stated that he felt that as little lighting in the development as possible would be desirable. He feels that there is plenty of light from the Holiday Station. Mr. Emil Sturzinager addressed the commission again. He asked if the path down by the Holiday Station was part of the sewer system. Mr. Cavett stated that was somewhat correct. There is a sewer line through there and that was probably one of the reasons that a trail was recommended there for access and maintenance purposes. Commissioner Frost asked for clarification of the width of the center lane down the private drive. Mr. Thone stated that it was 24 feet. Commissioner Frost stated that he felt that it would take a lot of years before the four 6-foot trees in the clusters would be adequate screening. Mr. Thone stated that the plantings would be Scotch Pines eight to ten feet high. The plantings would be touching the day that they were planted. Ms. Finwall stated that in addition to the concerns regarding screening, particularly on the eastern lobe of the development, that area is lower than the existing single family homes to the south, which will help buffer some of the headlights in that area. She stated that perhaps a cluster of six trees would be more adequate. Chairperson Fischer stated that when the comprehensive plan was first put out, in some areas the buffer zone was high density residential and in some areas it was commercial office. Over the years some of the buffer zone areas were ready to development at times when the market wasn't there for the higher density residential. For several years staff on the city's HRA was concerned about the continuing erosion on the number of acres available for higher density residential because there were requests being submitted and granted for the switch from the higher density residential to commercial office. Staff at that time had been keeping a tally of the number of acres we were loosing that had been originally been intended as higher density residential. Some areas that were thought would certainly go apartments, went to single family. Historically, we have seen an erosion on the number of acres that we had planned for higher density from two directions, some going to commercial office and others going to single family. Commissioner Rossbach stated that he did not see a clear-cut advantage to the city changing the Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -12- existing zoning, other than raising the population in Maplewood and meet more of the Met Council guidelines. He felt that it does not address any particular need. It is too expensive, so it is not affordable housing. He felt that in these situation there should be some reason to make this change, and he does not see that. He stated that without the area resident's support of this project, he would not even consider voting for this zoning change. He again stated that he does not see where there is a significant advantage to the city to make this change. Commissioner Ledvina stated that he felt there were a number of ways of transitioning between land uses and different densities in land use is one way of doing that. He stated that he felt the area lends itself to a residential area. Commissioner Ledvina moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council to adopt the Land Use Plan Change resolution. This resolution changes land use plan from commercial office (CO) and limited business commercial (LBC) to residential high density (R-3H) for the proposed Afton Ridge housing development on the southeast corner of Lower Alton and McKnight Roads. The city is making this change because the proposal will meet the items identified in the staff report, which are to provide the orderly development of land use, help minimize conflicts between land uses, provide additional moderately priced housing stock and create in-fill development with a density of 9.5 units per acre. Commissioner Ledvina also moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council to adopt the Rezoning Resolution. This resolution changes the zoning map from commercial office (CO) and limited business commercial (LBC) to multi-family residential (R-3) for the proposed Afton Ridge housing development on the southeast corner of Lower Alton and McKnight Roads. The city is making the change based on; not detract from the use of neighboring properties, to serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, and has no negativity on the city's public services or facilities. Commissioner Ledvina further recommended the approval of the preliminary and final plat date stamped May 11, 2001. Approval is subject to the applicant meeting the conditions identified in the staff report, conditions la. through h. and adding condition li. "Modify the preliminary plat drawing to shift buildings one and two and associated roads on the southwest portion of the site 20-feet to the north" and Items 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 as indicating in the staff report. Commissioner Frost requested amendment to Item Cl.d. striking "bituminous" Approve the preliminary and final plat date stamped May 11,2001. Approval is subject to the applicant meeting the following conditions: Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, streets, sidewalks, driveways and parking plans with the following changes: a. Reduction in the length of the fire lane turn-around located on the west side of the development from 120 feet in length to 80 feet in length. b. Relocation of the four parking stalls on the west side of the development to ensure a 15-foot setback from the McKnight Road right-of-way. c. A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk within the McKnight Road right-of-way along the west side of the development. This sidewalk shall run from the most southerly end of the development's property line to the existing sidewalk in front of the Holiday Station Store. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -13- Removal of all three fire lane turn-arounds on the east side of the development to be replaced with a 12-foot wide bit~mi~c'..'.~ fire lane which will extend from the ends of the driveways around the buildings. The entrance to the fire lane shall be equipped with a fall-down bollard to ensure access by emergency vehicles only. An eight-foot wide bituminous trail from the most westerly drive on the eastern portion of the development to the existing bituminous trail which is in the center of the development. f. Revising the parking space dimensions revised from 15 foot deep x 8 foot wide to 18 foot deep x 9.5 foot wide. g. Driveways for all units maintaining at least a 25-foot length. h. Showing concrete curb and gutter around all driveways and parking areas within the development. 2. Paying for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans. 3. Signing a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: ao bo Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits, including around all trees to be preserved (construction fence to the drip line of the trees) and around the wetland buffer. c. Install wetland buffer signs at wetland buffer line. do Install a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk within the McKnight Road right-of-way on the west side of the development from the most southerly property line to the existing sidewalk in front of Holiday Station Store. e. Install an 8-foot wide blt~mi~,c~.~ trail on the east side of the development from the most westerly driveway to the existing trail. o Submit all required easement documents (wetland buffer and trail easements) for staff approval before recording them with Ramsey County. Submit homeowner's association documents for staff approval before recording it with Ramsey County. 6. Record final plat with Ramsey County. The motion to approve ends at Item C6. Item D is to be reviewed by the Community Design Review Board at the June 12, 2001 meeting. Commissioner Frost seconded the motion. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -14- Commissioner Rossbach requested that the voting on the conditions be divided by Item A, Item B, and Item C. Item A - adopt the Land Use Change Resolution. Ayes - 7 Nays - 1 (Commissioner Rossbach) Item B- adopt the Rezoning Resolution Ayes - 7 Nays - 1 (Commissioner Rossbach) Item C - approval of the of preliminary and final plat with the addition of Item C1 .i, and removal of the word "bituminous" in ItemCl .d. Ayes - All Motion carries. This proposal goes before the City Council on June 25, 2001. VI. NEW BUSINESS None. VII. VISITORS PRESENTATIONS No visitors were present. VIII. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS Ao May 29 City Council Meeting. Commissioner Frost reported on this meeting. There were two items from the Planning Commission. 1) Vacation of a street and alley (Clark Street off of DeSoto and Roselawn area), Planning Commission approved Ayes All, and so did the City Council. 2) Conditional use permit for the Little School of Montessori and Cross Lutheran Church, Planning Commission approved Ayes All, so did the City Council. An additional item was the Capitol Improvement Program, which was also approved by the City Council. B. June 11: Commissioner Rossbach will attend this meeting. C. June 25: Commissioner Trippler will attend this meeting. Do Commissioner Frost gave his presentation on the Hillcrest Opportunity site. It is the Hillcrest shopping center, a joint project between Maplewood and St° Paul with the Metropolitan Council. April 24th was the original public hearing where people in the neighborhood got involved in trying to figure out what they would like to see in the whole Hillcrest neighborhood. The area runs from North St. Paul Road down to Haffners on both sides of White Bear Avenue. There were six groups of people, who all had different ideas. Using blocks and puzzle pieces the groups depicted the future layout of the area. The consultant then took all of their recommendations and synthesized it into two different scenarios. One, with more residential development and one with more commercial. One closed off North St. Paul Road onto White Bear Avenue, making White Bear Avenue more of a Grand Avenue type approach, bringing all the business up to the street level and putting the parking behind the business and having residential above a lot of the commercial establishments. The second concept was more commercial and less residential. Commissioner Frost stated that he felt they did a very good job. There were 60 - 75 people at the initial public meeting. A smaller amount of people attended the second set of meetings. Commissioner Frost felt that it was a very good planning exercise. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -15- Mr. Roberts stated that it is the consultants and the Met Council's intention to have the two plans placed either at Maplewood City Hall or someplace like the community center to get a comment period from anybody who cares to look at them. He also believes that they want City Council and Planning Commission to comment on them. They will also be placing the plans in strategic locations in St. Paul to get comments on them. Chairperson Fischer stated that Met Council is about to hold several workshops on regional growth and development issues and is asking citizens and advocates to attend. One of these meetings will be at the Maplewood Community Center on Friday, June 22"d from 1:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Other meetings are at Shoreview, Rosemont, and other locations. She stated that if anyone is interested she has additional information. Commissioner Frost indicated that he was at the initial meeting on regional growth and development issues. He stated that what they will be doing is similar to the Hillcrest Opportunity site meetings. They will take the east metropolitan area, all the way from Washington County down to Dakota County and use the blocks and puzzle pieces to show future developments. Commissioner Trippler stated that he had attended the "Beyond the Basics" seminar on May 8. He received a lot of material that he would be handing over to staff for distribution as they see fit. He stated that if anyone was interested in taking any training that this seminar would be a good primer, and encouraged council members to attend. He stated that there are three seminars in this series "The Basics", "Beyond the Basics" and "Advanced Zoning Applications". Chairperson Fischer stated that she had attended the "Advanced Zoning Applications". She stated that it dealt with how much discretion the Planning Commission has, and is the burden of proof on the applicant, or is the burden of proof on the Commission for denial. IX STAFF PRESENTATIONS Mr. Roberts stated it has come out in the training session for our newest members that occasionally having a training topic or discussion at our regularly scheduled meetings would be beneficial. Mr. Roberts asked the Commission for topics that they would like to learn more about. Chairperson Fischer commented that at one time staff had included quotes from some of the ordinances in the staff reports. She felt perhaps if it were an ordinance that the Commission did not see often, that putting a quote into the staff report would be beneficial. Mr. Roberts stated that the City Tour is July 30th. He asked for a volunteer from the commission to speak on some of items of interest during the tour. He again asked the Commission for any ideas on the tour. Mr. Roberts stated that a former Planning Commissioner, Mr. Richard Barrett, has passed away. He was on the Maplewood Planning Commission for over twenty years, May of 1969 to September 30, 1990. The request in the obituary stated that Memorials are to be donated to the City of Maplewood's Planning Commission. Commissioner Trippler brought up the issue regarding pay for volunteering on the Planning Commission. He stated that at the seminar he attended the majority of participants on commissions were paid something. Commissioner Trippler asked staff if that has ever been discussed by City Council. Mr. Roberts stated that the last time that issue was looked at was five or six years ago. He stated that the issue was if you paid the Planning Commission, what about the Parks Commission, the Review Planning Commission Minutes of 06-04-01 -16- Board, the HRA, etc. City Council determined at that time not to pay any commission members. Mr. Roberts did state that there now is a different council. Chairperson Fischer stated that issue has been referred to the City Council more than once. The unanimous decision was that the amount would be small and that it would only "goof-up" their taxes and they were more willing to write off their mileage as a donation rather than cope with it any further. Commissioner Rossbach stated that he had seen in the Review that the parking ordinance has been adopted by the City Council. He asked if there would be notices going out to homeowners that this ordinance will be going into effect. Mr. Roberts stated that the next Maplewood in Motion will have an article regarding this and more information will go into the Review. After August 1st it will be on a complaint basis. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.