HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/06/20021. Call to Order
MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, May 6, 2002, 7:00 PM
City Hall Council Chambers
1830 County Road B East
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes
a. April 15, 2002
5. Public Hearing
a. 2003 - 2007 Maplewood Capital Improvement Plan
6. New Business
a. Conditional Use Permit- Over-sized Accessory Building (Schlomka) - 1481 Henry Lane
b. House Moving Request (Crockett) - Sylvan Street
c. Kline Nissan Vehicle Dealership - 3100 Maplewood Drive
1. Wetland Setback Variance
2. Conditional Use Permit
Unfinished Business
None
Visitor Presentations
9. Commission Presentations
a. Apd122 Council Meeting: Mr. Ledvina
b. May 13 Council Meeting: Mr. Mueller ??
c. May 28 Council Meeting: Mr. Rossbach
10. Staff Presentations
a. Annual Tour- July 29?
bo
May 20
1.
2.
PC meeting
Start time change (8:00 instead of 7:00)
Tentative Items
a. Dearborn Meadow (Castle Avenue)
b. Home Occupation License (Sewing Business) - 2492 Highwood Avenue
c. Lexus Dealership Expansion - 3000 Maplewood Drive
d. Washington County Bank- White Bear Avenue
e. Hmong Alliance Church Expansion - McMenemy Street
11. Adjournment
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, MAY 6, 2002
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Rossbach called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m.
I1. ROLL CALL
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Mary Dierich Present
Lorraine Fischer Absent
Matt Ledvina Present
Jackie Monahan-Junek Present
Paul Mueller Absent
Gary Pearson Present from 7:08 - 8:30 p.m.
William Rossbach Present
Dale Trippler Absent
Staff Present:
Chuck Ahl, Public Works Director
Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
Shann Finwall, Associate Planner
Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Ledvina moved approval of the agenda.
Commissioner Pearson seconded.
Ayes-Dierich, Ledvina, Monahan-Junek,
Pearson, Rossbach
The motion is passed.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Monahan-Junek had a change on page 29, in the sixth paragraph. Please change
the first sentence to read Ms. Monahan-Junek wants people to understand her heart hurts too
when she sees a nice piece of property being developed.
Approval of the planning commission minutes for April 15, 2002.
Commissioner Dierich moved to approve the minutes with changes for April 15, 2002.
Commissioner Monahan-Junek seconded.
Ayes-Dierich, Ledvina, Monahan-Junek,
Rossbach
Abstention - Pearson
The motion is passed.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-2-
V. PUBLIC HEARING
a. 2003 - 2007 Maplewood Capital Improvement Plan
Mr. Roberts presented the report for the proposed 2003-2007 Capital Improvement Plan. The
city updates this report each year. The Capital Improvement Plan is part of the Maplewood
Comprehensive Plan. State law requires the planning commission to review all changes to the
comprehensive plan. The purpose of this review is to decide if the proposed capital
improvements are consistent with the comprehensive plan. There was a 25-minute video shown
indicating the improvements that staff believes are needed in Maplewood over the next five years.
Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the 2003-2007 Capital Improvement Plan.
Commissioner Dierich seconded.
Ayes - Dierich, Ledvina, Monahan-Junek,
Pearson, Rossbach
The motion is passed.
This item goes to the city council on May 13, 2002.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
a. Conditional Use Permit- Over-sized Accessory Building (Schlomka)- 1481 Henry Lane
Ms. Finwall said Gary Schlomka is proposing to construct at 48-foot by 66-foot (3,168 square
foot), 18.5-foot high metal pole barn on his property at 1481 Henry Lane. The pole barn will be
used to store hay and agricultural-related equipment used to harvest hay. He also would store his
personal vehicles in the proposed pole barn.
Ms. Finwall said Mr. Schlomka is requesting that the city council approve a conditional use permit
(CUP) to build a pole barn that exceeds size and height requirements. On a lot the size of Mr.
Schlomka's property, the code allows a maximum of 2,250 square feet for the combined area of
the accessory structures. No accessory structure may exceed 1,250 feet.
The maximum height of accessory structures is limited to 16 feet, measured from grade to the
mid point of the roof. The proposed pole barn will exceed the maximums allowed by 1,918
square feet in area and 2.5 feet in height.
The code allows the city council to approve a CUP to increase the area or height of an accessory
building.
Ms. Finwall said Mr. Schlomka began construction of the pole barn earlier this year. He thought
that because the pole barn would be used for an agricultural use that no building permit would be
necessary. The building official discovered this construction in progress and stopped the work.
Mr. Schlomka then applied for all necessary zoning and building permits.
Currently, the pole barn is framed, with a portion of the siding installed. If the city council
approves the CUP, Mr. Schlomka will obtain his building permit and proceed. If denied, Mr.
Schlomka must remove the pole barn.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-3-
Ms. Finwall said Mr. Schlomka repairs and sells farm equipment, boats, and recreational vehicles
from this site. He also sells wood. His father started these activities there 45 years ago. To
supplement his retirement income, Mr. Schlomka currently purchases boats from auctions,
repairs them and sells them from this property as well as the adjacent 1461 Henry Lane. Years of
this type of activity have left the applicant's property strewn with old boats, old automobiles and
other junk. In addition, the property has several old accessory structures including a barn, two
garages, a bunkhouse, a machine shed, a garden shed and a wood shed.
Ms. Finwall said constructing this pole barn is the first step to cleaning up the property. With his
son's help, Mr. Schlomka would remove five of the accessory structures, leaving only the barn,
bunkhouse, and pole barn (if approved). In addition, Mr. Schlomka proposes to remove all of the
old automobiles and other junk items on the site, including several old automobiles, which were
dumped near Fish Creek.
Mr. Schlomka's property is zoned Farm Residence, as are the surrounding properties. Farming,
including the use or storage of associated equipment, is a permitted use within the Farm
Residence zoning district. Mr. Schlomka has several acres of hay located on the west side of his
property that he harvests. Because Mr. Schlomka has not had appropriate means to store hay,
he was giving the hay to farmers who raise elk or other livestock. The proposed pole barn is
designed with large garage doors that will accommodate Mr. Schlomka's hay bailer, which is
currently stored off site. Mr. Schlomka will now be able to store his hay in the proposed pole barn
and sell it rather than giving it away. Storing and selling hay is allowed in the farm zone.
Ms. Finwall said Mr. Schlomka's part-time business of repairing and selling boats from the
property is prohibited in a farm zone. The city's nonconforming-use ordinance states that "a
nonconforming use existing and does not conform to the provisions of the code." Mr. Schlomka
stated that he would not use the pole barn in his part-time boat business. He, therefore, may
continue the boat business unless he expands or stops this activity for a year or more.
Ms. Finwall said the proposed pole barn would be smaller than two recently approved pole barns.
It will be located on a 30-acre lot, visible only to the applicant and a relative who lives to the
south. The pole barn will not negatively impact surrounding properties and will, in fact, result in a
neater cleaner property. Also, all of the neighbors that responded to the city's survey were in
favor of this proposal.
Commissioner Dierich asked staff about the clean up of the property. She said there are a lot of
old oil drums on the property that seem to her to be hazardous because they are rusted. She
wonders how the city proposes these items be cleaned up and where it will all go? And will there
be some type of supervision of the clean up as well?
Ms. Finwall said the supervision of the clean up has not been examined closely. The city hopes
Mr. Schlomka takes all needed measures to remove all the materials.
Commissioner Ledvina asked if Mr. Schlomka would be able to store boats in the new pole barn?
Ms. Finwall said the pole barn shall not be used for the boat business, only personal boats. The
conditions of the CUP state Mr. Schlomka cannot operate a business in the pole barn.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-4-
Commissioner Dierich said she knows the repairing of the boats is a nonconforming use but she
asked if the sale of the boats was considered a nonconforming use at this point or does that
require a separate permit to be selling boats in a residential neighborhood like that?
Ms. Finwall said it has been going on for the last 45 years so it is considered a nonconforming
use and is grandfathered in.
The applicant, Larry Schlomka at 1481 Henry Lane, son of Gary Schlomka, addressed the
planning commission.
Mr. Schlomka said the pole barn would be 48' X 66' and 3,072 square feet. The staff records
indicate that Gary Schlomka sells boats at 1481 Henry Lane and it should be 1461 Henry Lane.
Gary Schlomka owns approximately 40 acres, verses the 30 acres staff noted. Staff also states
in the staff report that there is junk dumped on Ramsey County Open Space Fish Creek property.
That junk existed on the property when it was bought by Ramsey County. No new junk has been
dumped on the property. This is a dead end street with only one property that can see this area
and it is Gary Schlomka's niece. In the last 20 years a bunkhouse, cattle barn, machine shed,
and a railroad car that was used for a storage shed were removed from the property. The
property is slowly getting cleaned up. He said he just moved into the home at 1481 Henry Lane
in September 2001.
Commissioner Pearson asked the applicant what would be a reasonable time period to clean up
all the junk on the property?
Mr. Schlomka said there are three generations of junk on the property. He is going to get a few
dumpsters on the property and take the stuff to a scrap yard and recycle place. In the past they
have hauled junk into South St. Paul to different scrap yards. As far as a time frame, he said that
one-year would not be enough time.
Commissioner Pearson said the staff is looking at a one-year renewal for the conditional use
permit and should the staff be looking at a longer time period than one year?
Ms. Finwall said the standard condition is that a conditional use permit should be reviewed in one
year. However, upon that review it can be extended an additional year or more.
Commissioner Pearson asked if that would be conditioned upon visible progress?
Ms. Finwall said yes.
Chairperson Rossbach asked if the 30 or 40 acres that are owned are one parcel or a couple of
parcels of land?
Mr. Schlomka said the area that is being discussed contains a couple of different parcels. He
would assume that is where the 30 acres verses the 40 acres is coming from. The Ramsey
County Open Space and Fish Creek divide it.
Chairperson Rossbach asked the applicant if the address of 1481 Henry Lane is incorrect for 30
acres? He asked if the applicant were selling the property would it be for 30 or 40 acres?
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-5-
Mr. Schlomka said if he was going to be selling the property at 1481 Henry Lane it would be
approximately 10 acres. There also is a separate 12-acre parcel next to Fish Creek and
approximately less than 10 acres adjoining the 1481 Henry Lane. How it is sold could go a lot of
different ways.
Chairperson Rossbach said it may not be a large issue, but if staff is saying that this is the
property the city is giving the conditional use permit for, and part of it has to deal with the size of
the property, he just wants to make clear how large the property is that staff is talking about.
Mr. Schlomka said the property that Gary Schlomka owns is approximately 40 acres. The
property has been bought in different parcels over the years. The Schlomka family has always
owned 1481 Henry Lane. The other property belonged to his grandmother's family the Polski
family. 1481 Henry Lane adjoined the Polski property and that is why there are different parcels
right now.
Chairperson Rossbach said he would like to see a time frame set so when the city council reviews
this in one year they can see that something has happened. Just so everyone involved has
something in mind when talking about cleanup process.
Mr. Schlomka said if this is approved the first thing to come down is the equipment from the shed
that is broken down and moved into the new shed. Then the next process is taking the broken
sheds down. That will be a summer project just for that to be done.
Commissioner Pearson asked staff if number 3 of the recommendations applies only to 1481
Henry Lane or to both 1461 and 1481 Henry Lane?
Ms. Finwall said the conditional use permit pertains only to 1481 Henry Lane; however, Mr.
Schlomka is planning on removing the old automobiles that have been dumped in the Fisk Creek
area over 45 years ago, back when his father owned the land.
Commissioner Pearson said there is an awful lot of stuff lying on 1481 Henry Lane.
Gary Schlomka at 1461 Henry Lane, addressed the planning commission. He said the cars in the
Fisk Creek area have been there since the Korean War and there are trees growing through
some of them. That is going to be a major job cutting through the cars to get them out of there.
Commissioner Pearson asked if the junk at 1461 Henry Lane will also be removed?
Gary Schlomka said that is correct.
Commissioner Dierich said she is not clear regarding the selling of boats on the property. It is
happening at 1461 Henry Lane, but the repair of the boats is happening at 1481 Henry Lane?
The boats are lined up along the freeway at 1461 Henry Lane.
Gary Schlomka said the repairs go on in his garage at 1461 Henry Lane.
Commissioner Dierich asked if the CUP is for 1481 Henry Lane?
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-6-
Ms. Finwall said that is correct. The repair and sale of boats has been ongoing at both properties
for many years.
Gary Schlomka said he parks the boats along the freeway to sell and brings the boats to the
garage at 1461 and 1481 Henry Lane to work on them.
Commissioner Dierich said her understanding is that a CUP goes with the land and she wants to
be clear on this.
Ms. Finwall said the nonconforming use is grand fathered in until such time as it is expanded. It is
staff's concern that it may expand into the pole barn.
Commissioner Ledvina recommended approval of the resolution on pages 13 and 14 of the staff
report. This recommendation is for a conditional use permit for the construction of a metal pole
building that would measure 48-feet by 66-feet (3,168 square feet) and 18.5 feet in height for the
property at 1481 Henry Lane. The changes in this recommendation are in bold. This permit shall
be subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community
development may approve minor changes.
2. The applicant shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to resuming construction of the
pole barn.
Within two years of the issuance of the CUP, the applicant will remove five detached
accessory structures from the property as shown on the approved site plan and described as
follows: the two garages located on the east side of the property, the machine shed, the
garden shed and the wood shed. The applicant shall also clean the site of all old automobiles
and other junk items on the site dumped in the Ramsey County Open Space Fish Creek area
to the north as well as old vehicles.
The pole barn shall not be used for commercial or business activities, other than agricultural
related uses as specified in the Farm Residence zoning district, unless the city council
approves such a request.
5. The conditional use permit shall be reviewed by the city council in one year.
Commissioner Pearson seconded.
Ayes - Dierich, Ledvina, Monahan-Junek,
Pearson, Rossbach
The motion is passed.
Mr. Roberts said this goes to the city council Tuesday, May 28, 2002.
Chairperson Rossbach stated that Commissioner Pearson just told him he had to leave the
meeting at 8:30 a.m. and this puts the planning commission in a position of having no
quorum.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-7-
Mr. Roberts said this means the commission can move items forward with discussion but without
an official recommendation to the city council. This will be noted in the minutes to follow.
Because of the time limits and the 60-day rule, the items will be moved along without an official
recommendation from the planning commission.
b. House Moving Request (Crockett) - Sylvan Street
Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bart Crockett is asking the city council to allow him to move a house and a
detached garage from Oakdale to a vacant lot on Sylvan Street. The house is one story with a
white stucco exterior.
On December 18, 1980, the city council vacated the Kingston Avenue right-of-way from Sylvan
Street to a point 135 feet to the east. After this vacation, the former right-of-way was divided
between the adjacent properties to the north and the south. This vacation helped to create the
vacant lot south of 1754 Sylvan Street that is now under consideration for the house-moving
request.
Mr. Roberts said the design of this house would fit into the Sylvan Street neighborhood. The
homes along Sylvan Street were built in the 1940s and 1950s. Most of these homes are
ramblers, but there is a split-level to the south. There also are homes along Sylvan Street with
stucco exteriors.
Several of the neighbors felt that the lot is too small for a house. The zoning code requires lots
for houses in the R-1 zoning district to have 10,000 square feet. This lot, according to the
Ramsey County property records, is 11,941 square feet. As such, the lot and the proposed site
plan for the house and garage can meet all city requirements.
Mr. Roberts said Nick Carver, the Assistant Building Official, inspected the house. His report
outlines most, if not all, the work Mr. Crockett will have to do to the house. This includes bringing
all systems of the house up to the current code standards and repairing and painting the exterior
of the house.
When the city vacated the Kingston Avenue right-of-way in 1980, the city failed to keep a utility
easement over the south part of the site. This area has an existing sewer line and overhead
power lines. To remedy this situation, the city should require the property owner to dedicate to
the city a drainage and utility easement over the south 30 feet of the site.
Staff surveyed 22 property owners within 350 feet of the site. There were eight replies, five were
opposed to the request and three had comments that were included in the staff report.
Commissioner Ledvina asked staff if this building will have to meet all new construction
standards?
Mr. Roberts said that is correct.
Commissioner Ledvina asked staff if a detached garage is acceptable for new construction?
Mr. Roberts said yes, there is no code requirement for a detached or attached garage.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-8-
Commissioner Dierich asked staff if the windows will be up to code and will the windows be
egress windows?
Mr. Roberts said the current windows do not meet the egress standards and they would have to
be changed to meet the standards.
The applicant, Bart Crockett of 5887 Red Pine Boulevard in White Bear Lake, addressed the
commission.
Mr. Crockett said he has spoken to staff a number of times to see if this is a feasible project not
and how much work would be involved. He believes this is a worthwhile project and he would like
to ease the neighbors concerns. He has a mother-in-law who lives up north who recently put her
husband into a nursing home and she has expressed interest in living in the home. If she does
not, he will have to see how the market is doing to determine if it will be a rental property of if he
will sell the property.
Chairperson Rossbach asked the applicant if he has read and understood the conditions in the
staff report? He asked if the applicant had any problems with the recommendations that staff has
made?
Mr. Crockett said he understood the report and has no problems with the conditions.
Commissioner Ledvina asked which direction the front door will face?
Mr. Crockett said the front door will face south.
Commissioner Ledvina said the applicant is showing the house being placed 10 feet from the
north property line and he noticed the front door on the house to the north is very close to that
property line, Is there any possibility of moving the house further to the south to give more
separation between the existing home to the north?
Mr. Crockett said he is sure there is a way. He contacted Xcel Energy and got the setback
requirements for power lines. He said there is a power line that runs east west. He believes it is
7.8 feet for the setback. As the house is shown the setback is 15 feet.
Chairperson Rossbach said there were a number of comments from the neighborhood survey
that staff sent out regarding the appearance of the house. Did the photos generate the
comments or did the neighbors actually go out and look at the house?
Mr. Roberts said the photos in the neighborhood survey generated most of the comments and
one neighbor called and said he drove out and saw the house in the storage facility.
Commissioner Ledvina unofficially recommended the approval to move a one-story stucco house
and a detached garage for Bart Crockett to the lot south of 1754 Sylvan Street. This approval
shall be subject to the applicant doing the following:
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-9-
1. Submit the following to the city for approval before the city issues a building permit:
An irrevocable letter of credit or cash escrow for 1~ times the estimated cost of
completing the construction, including all yard work and exterior remodeling. The
applicant shall complete the work within 90 days of the city issuing the permit. The
Director of Community Development may extend this deadline for sixty-(60)-days if there
has been a reasonable delay. The construction shall meet all Building Code
requirements. (Code requirement).
A new certificate of survey for the site and verify the lot lines with survey pins. (Code
requirement).
Co
A grading, drainage and erosion control plan to the city engineer. This plan shall show
that the proposed house location and grades will not cause any adverse effects or
cause any drainage problems for nearby properties. The city shall not issue a moving
permit until the city engineer approves these plans and the construction shall follow
these plans. (Code requirement).
do
A drainage and utility easement from the owner to the city over the south 30 feet of the
site.
Sign an agreement to convey the title. This agreement shall allow the city to take possession
of the house and property if the required work is not completed within 90 days after the city
issues the moving permit. This agreement would allow the city the right to complete the
construction required by code or demolish and remove the structure. The city attorney shall
prepare this agreement. (Code requirement).
The applicant shall complete and redash the stucco, reshingle the roof, replace and paint the
trim and remove or replace the awnings. The applicant also shall meet all the requirements of
the city's building inspection department.
Move the house between the hours of 3 and 6 a.m. The applicant shall leave the house in the
street until at least 7:00 a.m., but no later than 10:00 a.m. There shall be no excessive noise
or work on the house or site between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (Code requirement).
Place the house ten feet from the north property line. The applicant shall place the house
to the furthest extent from the north property line that is allowable based on restrictions
for the easement for the power line located on the property.
Commissioner Rossbach seconded.
Ayes - only for items 1-4 are Dierich, Ledvina,
Monahan-Junek, Rossbach
Ayes - only for item 5 are Ledvina, Rossbach
Nays - only for item 5 are Dierich, Monahan-Junek
Commissioner Dierich was not comfortable telling the landowner where he has to place his house
on the lot. And as it was mentioned earlier if it were new construction he could put the house
anywhere on the lot he wanted to.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-10-
Commissioner Ledvina said this house is coming into this neighborhood. There is a separate
approval process and he thinks there is input that the planning commission is able to have to
make sure that the house is appropriate for this site. He can see Ms. Dierich's point, but given
the scenario he thinks it is important to review it and do what the commission can for the existing
neighbors.
Commissioner Dierich said she agrees with Mr. Ledvina and hopefully the landowner will make
that choice but she can understand his wish not to put the house near the power lines.
Chairperson Rossbach said due to lack of a quorum the voting was unofficial but this information
will be passed onto the city council.
Mr. Roberts said this request goes to the city council on Tuesday, May 28, 2002.
c. Kline Nissan Vehicle Dealership- 3100 Maplewood Drive
Ms. Finwall said Rick Kline, of Kline Auto World, is proposing to build a 25,502 square-foot, two-
story Nissan dealership with a 16-bay automobile maintenance garage. The dealership will be
constructed at 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive, which is located at the southeast corner of
County Road D and Maplewood Drive (Highway 61). The site is zoned M-l, Light Manufacturing,
and currently contains two vacant single-family homes.
The applicant is requesting that the city council approve:
A 75-foot wetland buffer variance. The Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District
has classified the wetland on the site as a Class 1 wetland. City code requires a 100-
foot-wide buffer along Class 1 wetlands. The applicant is proposing a 25-foot-wide
buffer.
A conditional use permit (CUP) for a maintenance garage. The sale of new and used
vehicles is permitted. City code requires a CUP for service and maintenance garages.
3. The design plans (architectural, site, landscape, and lighting plans). (This will be
reviewed by the Community Design Review Board on May 14, 2002).
The wetland on the proposed Nissan site, which is a Class 1 wetland, has characteristics and
functions that are most susceptible to human impacts; they are the most unique type of wetland
and have the highest community resource significance. The 100-foot wetland buffer is required to
help protect the wetland from human impact.
According to Karl Hammers of the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, grading and
filling have degraded the buffer surrounding parts of the wetland. In addition, some of the buffer
has been overrun by green ash and buckthorn. Rob Langer, also of the Ramsey-Washington
Metro Watershed District, stated that even though some of the buffer has been degraded, the
wetland is a high quality Class 1 wetland, particularly the flood plain wetland to the east of the
property. It is beneficial to maintain as much of a surrounding buffer as possible.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-11-
The applicant proposes to grade up to the wetland edge and to reestablish an "improved" 25-foot-
wide wetland buffer. He would construct the parking lot 25 feet from the wetland's edge. The
applicant is working with Sunde Engineering to design and install a subsurface storm water
infiltration system that will help treat the water prior to being deposited into the wetland. This type
of system was also installed at the Volvo dealership located to the south of the Nissan site.
On April 4, 2002, the Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District approved the wetland buffer
variance. The Watershed District approved the applicant's plan to remove the entire buffer and to
provide an improved 25-foot-wide buffer with reestablished native vegetation after the infiltration
system is installed.
Regarding compliance with the state law findings for variance approval, staff does not feel that
the wetlands pose a sufficient hardship to warrant the 75-foot variance requested. They feel that
a lesser variance is justified. Staff has shown on page 24 how much land would lie within a 100-
foot and a 50-foot buffer as well as the proposed 25-foot buffer. Clearly, with no variance, a 100-
foot buffer would render over half of the site unusable. The 50-foot buffer, however, would allow
considerably more land area to be used by the applicant.
With the 50-foot buffer alternative, the major impact on parking loss would occur along the
northeast side of the site where there are 34 spaces proposed. Staff feels that preserving more
of the natural wetland buffer along this side of the property would be a suitable compromise. It
would be the least disruptive to the site plan while preserving considerably more of the natural
buffer. Mr. Hammers, of the Watershed District, stated that if the city requires a 50-foot-wide
buffer, it would be beneficial to grade within 10 feet of the wetland and reestablish 40 feet of the
buffer with native plantings. He said that the additional improved buffer would help protect the
wetland. Staff does not find as much of a problem with the proposed 25-foot buffer on the other
sides. Allowing the proposed 25-foot buffer on the east and south would preserve much of the
applicant's site plan and cause the least disruption to his parking and traffic patterns as proposed.
With this alternative of requiring a 50-foot-wide buffer on the northeast side, the applicant would
be left with 235 parking spaces. For comparison, this would be 59 more than Lexus of
Maplewood (they have 176 spaces) and 147 more than Kline Volvo (they have 88 spaces).
The council granted 75-foot buffer variances for the neighboring auto dealerships. It does not
seem warranted, however, to grant such a large variance again just because the city has done so
before. Variances should be approved based on the circumstances of each individual request
and circumstances. In this case, staff agrees that a variance is justified, but not the size
requested. With a 50-foot buffer on the northeasterly side, we will achieve a suitable balance
between determining a "reasonable use of the property" and code compliance.
The city's parking ordinance does not clearly define the special parking requirements for an
automobile dealership, i.e., parking spaces for automobile inventory. However, using the ratio for
1 space for each 200 square feet of office/showroom, 1 space for every 1,000 square feet of
parts storage, 3 spaces for each service bay, and 1 space per employee, the Nissan site is
required to have 131 parking spaces. The applicant proposes 269 parking spaces.
The proposed building will have a front exterior of flat metal panel wall systems, corrugated metal
panels, and anodized aluminum frames with insulated glass. The sides and rear exteriors will be
rock-face concrete block and EIFS (exterior insulation finish system - a stucco-look material).
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-12-
The front and the south side of the building will be visible from Highway 61. The south side of the
building has a large expanse of rock-face concrete block, giving the appearance of a very large
and plain wall. For this reason, staff recommends that design elements found on the front of the
building also be implemented onto the south side, including the extension of the flat metal panel
wall systems with decorative corrugated metal panels. Much of the north elevation is already
treated decoratively.
Unloading on public right-of-way has been a recurring problem with auto dealerships along
Highway 61. Unloading on Highway 61 or County Road D is not allowed and should be prohibited
by a condition of the CUP.
The applicant should install a right-turn lane from Highway 61 as required for the Volvo and Lexus
dealerships. This lane should be subject to MnDOT's approval.
Commissioner Ledvina said the plans show a delineation of the wetland but he did not find
anything that described who had completed the delineation and when it was done.
Ms. Finwall said Sunde Engineering conducted the wetland delineation as well as the Watershed
District confirming the engineering firm's delineation.
Commissioner Ledvina asked if it is indicated on Sunde's site plan dated August of 20017
Ms. Finwall said she would have to verify that information.
Commissioner Ledvina asked staff if they had any information on the fluctuation of the water level
in the pond adjacent to the wetland? It appears that it is 871 feet but it is hard to tell in terms of
what the existing water level is. The reason for his question is he is concerned about the effect of
ground water on the seepage design for the storm water plan.
Chuck Ahl, city engineer, said based on the information on this plan, staff has relied on the
Watershed District for a lot of the technical expertise. Mr. Ledvina brings up a point with
infiltration types of devices. Staff's review, in coordination with the Watershed District, indicated
that the water levels in this area are at 871 feet. However, if you look at the overall specifics of
the infiltration types of devices, they are extremely wide at points up to 20-feet wide and only 5
feet of depth. The bottom being down at 876 feet so staff is talking about some shallow area
infiltration devices that will be using probably only 3 or 4 feet in there but with the extra width the
infiltration will occur.
Commissioner Ledvina said looking at the drawings he sees 869.5 feet as the base elevation of
the infiltration zones and they are 4Y2 feet by 20 feet as indicated.
Mr. Ahl said one of the conditions of the Watershed District as well was that the bottom elevation
of the infiltration trench should be no lower than two feet above the water level of nearby
wetlands. Staff feels the extra width and the extensive length of those infiltration trenches creates
a very solidly engineered plan and it is reasonable to assume it will function well.
Chairperson Rossbach asked what were the wetland buffers before the current buffers were put
in place?
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-13-
Mr. Roberts said he believed either 10 or 20 feet.
Commissioner Ledvina said in the engineering memorandum on page 28 of the staff report there
is reference to the Lexus Dealership. He thinks it should be the Volvo Dealership with the similar
type of infiltration system. Is this correct?
Ms. Finwall said correct, the Volvo Dealership has the infiltration system.
Jeff Stearns, who is the Vice President and C.E.O. of Kline Volvo and resides at 2052 Boulder
Road in Chanhassen, addressed the commission. Four years ago when he came to Maplewood
to build the Volvo dealership, they dealt with the setbacks and the parking issues of the
dealership, so he is familiar with how the process works. Everything is fine with him except for
the recommended increased setbacks. He has lived up to his word over the last four years by
putting in an award winning infiltration system in the Volvo building. He is concerned as the
commission is about the wetlands. He is also concerned about some issues that came up four
years ago. One is the size of the dealership and how they were operating back then, i.e. parking
on the grass.
Mr. Stearns said they have now improved on the parking situation. They have had one violation
that was only a warning and they have not had a violation on the parking for the past four years.
He would like to mention that the current facility is on the same acreage that he is moving this
dealership to. For the amount of money he spent for that property he needs every bit of square
footage that he can get. As far as the setbacks, another issue that came up a few years ago is
unloading cars off the trucks and keeping them off of Highway 61. He is just as upset about the
unloading of vehicles as everyone else because he lives and breathes next to Lexus and he
knows what congestion that can cause when those trucks unload there. Number one, they go
flying by his dealership and don't stop. The way the current plans of the new building are they
need those setbacks to be at 25 feet to the wetland because those trucks are going to come in on
the front side. They have set it up so the trucks can pull around so they would never have to
unload on Highway 61. Part of the issue for him at this meeting is the setback issue.
As far as the other issues with the car dealership, he has gotten Nissan to approve two beautiful
entryways into the facility. One will face Highway 61 and there will be another one that will face
Highway 694 or County Road D. With a car dealership, display is very important and that gets
him back to the setbacks. The frontage of the building will be off of Highway 61 and County Road
D and the setback is very concerning to him.
Mr. Stearns said he noticed that the Watershed District approved the 25-foot setback. They are
the experts so he is going by what they said, no offense to staff. He knows there has been some
comparison with the Lexus dealership and with Volvo as far as the size of the building. It is a two-
story building so that does add square footage, but Nissan is a higher volume franchise than
Lexus or Volvo. They sell twice as many Nissan cars as those two dealerships. He wishes he
could afford all the property that the Toyota dealership has. He wants to live up to his promise
that he gave four years ago. He does not want to park cars on the grass, he wants to be a good
neighbor so he just asks that the commission take a look at the setback. He agrees with Ms.
Finwall with the appearance of the south side of the building. He has discussed possibly putting
windows on that side of the building above the service area. This would bring more light into the
service area and it would be a better working environment for the techs inside.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-14-
Commissioner Ledvina asked Mr. Stearns if they have had any issues with maintaining the storm
water management system at the Volvo dealership? He is interested in how that has worked out.
Mr. Stearns said the system has worked fabulous. The requirements that were made by the city
to have the dealership maintain and clean the system have worked out fine. They have been
checked once and it has been cleaned twice. It is an award winning system and a number of
other cities have looked at this system. It is fabulous at protecting the wetlands and the property.
Commissioner Dierich asked staff if they could comment on Lieutenant Banick's report?
Ms. Finwall said Lieutenant Banick had some concerns about the design of the parking lot. He
believes that the location of this development and the proximity to the freeway will promote
vehicle theft. The automobile dealerships generate a fair amount of police activity for the police
department.
Commissioner Dierich asked if staff made any changes or suggestions with this plan based on his
report?
Ms. Finwall said staff did not require any changes. The memo is intended to inform the planning
commission of the police concerns.
Commissioner Dierich said she wanted to thank the staff for the excellent job they did on this
report. To date it is the most complete and thorough job she has seen on a planning commission
report.
Commissioner Ledvina stated he has strong concerns about the wetland delineation. In his
experience he has found that wetland delineations usually follow contours, this map shows a
wetland elevation as high as 876 feet in the southwest corner of the project.
On the northeast side of the site it shows an elevation that is 871 feet and is not delineated as a
wetland. He is having a hard time understanding how this was delineated in this way. He
understands that the process also involves determination of vegetation and that is a significant
element. He would suggest that a major part of the eastern part of the site, essentially the
wetland delineation, is the property line. From what he sees, the wetland goes well into the
property along the east side. He is having a hard time rectifying what he sees on the ground and
the map and what he sees as the edge of the delineated wetland. He says he will be skeptical
until he can see a professional report that shows him the level of expertise that was involved in it.
Jack Grotkin, Vice President of RJ Ryan Construction at 1100 Mendota Heights Road in Mendota
Heights, addressed the commission. Mr. Grotkin said the actual delineation was performed by
Advanced Soils and Engineering. The survey is done after the delineation is marked and is done
by a soils company along with a geologist. They go out and look at the soils and grasses and not
just the elevations. Once a registered engineer marks them, the flags are put onto the survey,
which was done by Sunde Engineering. It is actually two different companies that performed the
wetland delineation and his company has the report.
Chairperson Rossbach asked staff what the Watershed District does?
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-15-
Mr. Ahl said the Watershed District's role in the city's area is to review and monitor those reports.
They send technicians out. Because of the quality of the wetland they will confirm that and take
spot checks. Rather than have a duplicate service, city staff relies on the Watershed District for
that wetland analysis. The city does not have that type of expertise on staff.
Mr. Ahl said the Watershed District has hydrologists on staff and they do delineations. They
enforce the wetland conservation act laws, which govern wetlands in our area. In this case the
city is relying on their expertise to say this is the edge of the delineated wetland and that this
buffer is appropriate.
Chairperson Rossbach asked staff if this is something that has already happened or it would
happen after this gets approved?
Mr. Ahl said staff's understanding is that they have issued preliminary approval of this site plan
pending the special conditions that are in the watershed district permit. They include the
confirmation of the delineation and he assumes that report is currently being reviewed at the
Watershed District.
Chairperson Rossbach asked staff what happens when they go out to do their final delineation
and they determine it is different than the plan submitted. Do we then bump our buffer to follow
whatever they have determined to be the new delineated wetland?
Mr. Roberts said if the Watershed District makes a determination that they do not agree with the
wetland as delineated by the applicant/staff, they would require a change to the setback. If it
shifts five or ten feet and the city requires a 25-foot buffer, the 25-foot buffer will have to remain,
whether it shifts one way or the other.
Commissioner Ledvina said he thinks knowing that it was recently surveyed as of last fall helps
him. It also helps that there is a correction process if indeed there is a disagreement on the
actual placement of the wetland line.
Chairperson Rossbach said that Mr. Stearns commented earlier when the two of them were
talking before the meeting that he recognized Mr. Rossbach from four years ago. What he may
or may not remember is that Mr. Rossbach was not happy with the proposal back then. He voted
against it because he felt the city would be giving away too much of the wetland buffer. Them has
been a lot of discussion with staff and the commission since then having to do with the buffers.
The commission will be glad when they get done with this stretch of Highway 61 because of the
wetland buffer decisions.
For the record, he commented that he has no problem with staff's recommendation. He is going
to vote for it, but he would not be in favor of reducing the buffer for this project. He still feels very
strongly that the city needs to do as much as possible to protect the wetlands. He has modified
his opinion over the years in accepting more of the Watershed District's thoughts that there is not
a very good buffer there now and the city will get a better buffer out of the deal. The wetland to
the north is the highest class of wetlands and he is not willing to allow any more of a buffer area
be removed than they have to.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-16-
Chairperson Rossbach unofficially moved that the city council adopt the wetland buffer setback
variance resolution on pages 31 and 32 of the staff report, approving a 50-foot wetland buffer
variance along the northeast property line and a 75-foot wetland buffer variance along the
southeast and south sides of the property for the proposed Nissan dealership at 3090 and 3110
Maplewood Drive. Approval is based on the following findings:
Strict enforcement of the code would cause undue hardship because of circumstances
unique to the property and not created by the property owner. The lO0-foot-wide
wetland buffer requirement would make development of this site difficult.
The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance, since the
applicant would improve a portion of the wetland buffer substantially over its present
state and will treat storm water from the site with a subsurface storm water infiltration
system.
Co
The city council previously approved similar wetland buffer variances for three
developments near this proposal.
Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following:
Dedicating a 50-foot wetland protection buffer easement along the northeast lot line and
a 25-foot wetland protection buffer easement along the remaining wetland edge. This
easement shall be prepared by a land surveyor, shall describe the boundary of the
buffer and shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the
buffer. The applicant shall record this easement before the city will issue a building
permit.
Submitting a revised grading plan showing compliance with the required wetland
dedications. The grading plan shall include grading to within 10 feet of the wetland edge
on the side where the 50-foot buffer is required, with restoration of the remaining 40 feet
of wetland buffer consisting of native plantings to be approved by staff and the
watershed district.
Co
Submitting a revised landscape plan for the restoration of 40 feet of the wetland-
protection buffer on the northeast side of the site and for the 25-foot buffer in the other
wetland buffer areas. This plan shall be subject to staff and watershed district approval.
Underground irrigation is required for all landscaped areas, excluding the wetland
protection buffer.
do
Installing signs at the edge of the wetland-protection buffer which prohibit any building,
mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer.
Submitting a signed maintenance agreement to the Ramsey/Washington Metro
Watershed District and the city for maintenance of the subsurface storm water infiltration
system that accepts responsibility for any necessary maintenance and upkeep of the
system.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-17-
Chairperson Rossbach unofficially moved that the city council adopt the resolution on pages 33
and 34 of the staff report, approving a conditional use permit for a maintenance garage at the
proposed Kline dealership at 3090 and 3110 Maplewood Drive. Approval is based on the findings
required by the code and subject to the following conditions:
All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. 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 become null and void. The council may extend this deadline
for one year.
c. The applicant shall not load or unload vehicles on public right-of-way.
d. Cars can only be parked on designated paved surfaces.
e. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
Commissioner Dierich unofficially seconded. Ayes- Dierich, Monahan-Junek, Rossbach
Nays- Ledvina
Commissioner Ledvina said the reason he voted nay is that he has a concern about the wetland
delineation. That could be alleviated by more information, but at this point he can't vote for it. He
feels that this is the highest quality wetland that the city has and the city has to do whatever they
can to protect it. The site plan actually shows activities within the buffer, like the displaying of
cars. Although he realizes that staff would prevent the applicant from building those display areas
in the buffer area.
Commissioner Ledvina said he recognizes that the Watershed District has placed a condition on
the construction of the features but he does not know what happens to the site plan if they have
to increase the elevation by two feet perhaps to maintain the separation between the ground
water and the base of those seepage structures. He would commend the applicant for going the
extra mile and making the proposal for the infiltration system, and he thinks it is very appropriate
that they do so. More information is necessary for him to make a more informed decision in this
regard.
Chairperson Rossbach said this is an unofficial vote and this is strictly for information for the city
council. They will make the decision at their meeting on Tuesday, May 28, 2002.
VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
VIII.
None.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 05-06-02
-18-
IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
April 22, 2002, Mr. Ledvina was unable to represent the planning commission at the city
council meeting. The street vacation of Reaney Avenue proposed by Cardinal Realty passed
ayes all. The second item was the code amendment BC(M) the second reading for the Chili's
and the Outback Restaurant.
b. May 13, 2002, Mr. Ledvina will represent the planning commission at the city council meeting.
The Gladstone Park Development on English Street will be discussed.
c. Tuesday, May 28, 2002, Mr. Rossbach will represent the planning commission at the city
council meeting.
X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
a. Annual Tour - July 29, 2002
Mr. Roberts said the annual tour is tentatively scheduled for Monday, July 29, 2002. Members
should think about how many stops they want to make, areas they would like to visit, and who
should be included on the tour. Mr. Roberts will reserve the bus for this date but other ideas will
be discussed again at a later date.
Commissioner Ledvina said he feels it is a good idea to have other commissions there in a social
setting. It is a good opportunity to have everybody together for the tour.
b. May 20, 2002, Planning Commission Meeting
Start time change from 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Mr. Roberts stated the city council would be holding a meeting until 8:00 p.m.
Therefore, the planning commission meeting will start at 8:00 p.m., which is an hour
later than usual.
2. Tentative Items to be discussed will be:
a. Dearborn Meadow (Castle Avenue).
b. Home Occupation License (Sewing Business) - 2492 Highwood Avenue.
c. Lexus Dealership Expansion - 3000 Maplewood Drive (may be an item).
d. Hmong Alliance Church Expansion - McMenemy Street (may be an item).
Xl. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.