The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11/21/1994MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 1994 7:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers 1830 East County Road B 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes: November 7, 1994 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Public Hearings a. Land Use Plan Change--Open Space Site #140 6. New Business a. Conditional Use Permit Revision: 1255 Cope Ave. (Northern Hydraulics) b. 2410 Stillwater Rd. (Gethsemane Lutheran Church) Conditional Use Permit Variance c. 1929 Edgerton Street (Edgerton Elementary School) Conditional Use Permit Revision Variance Termination Setback Variance d. Planning Fees Ordinance 7. Visitor Presentations 8. Commission Presentations a. November 14 Council Meeting: Mr. Frost b. November 28 Council Meeting: Mr. Kittridge 9. Staff Presentations 10. Adjournment WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION This outline has been prepared to help you understand the public meeting process. The review of an item usually takes the following form: The chairperson of the meeting will announce the kern to be reviewed and ask for the staff report on the subject. Staff presents their report on the matter. The Commission will then ask City staff questions about the proposal. 0 The chairperson will then ask the audience if there is anyone present who wishes to comment on the proposal. This is the time for the public to make comments or ask questions about the proposal. Please step up to the podium, speak clearly, first giving your name and address and then your comments. After everyone in the audience wishing to speak has given his or her comments, the chairperson will dose the public discussion portion of the meeting. The Commission will then discuss the proposal. No further public comments are allowed. The Commission will then make its recommendation or decision. 0 All decisions by the Planning Commission are recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes the final decision. kd/misc\pcagd Revised: 6-18-93 MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION November 7, 1994 7 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers 1830 East County Road B I. Call to Order Chairperson Axdatfl called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioner Lester Axdahl Comrmssloner Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Jack Frost Commissioner Comnuss~oner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Kevin Kittridge Dave Kopesky Mary Martin Gary Pearson William Rossbach Todd Sandell Marvin Sigrnundik Milo Thompson Present Present Present Present Present Absent Present Present Present Present Present III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. October 17, 1994 Commissioner Rossbach moved approval of the minutes of October 17, 1994, as submitted. Commissioner Fischer seconded Ayes---Axdahl, Fischer, Frost, Kopesky, Pearson, Rossbach, Sandell, Sigmundik, Thompson AbstentionmKittridge The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Rossbach requested further discussion of the Menard's conditional use permit that was considered at the meeting of October 17, 1994. Planning Commission Minutes of 11-07-94 -2- Commissioner Sigmundik moved to add Menard's to the agenda as item 7 A. Commissioner Rossbach seconded Ayes-all The motion passed. V. PRESENTATIONS Chair Axdahl presented resolutions of appreciation to Sherry Allenspach and Roger Anitzberger and thanked them for their time spent on the Planning Commission. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Comprehensive Plan Change and Rezoning: Maplewood Town_homes (1 lth Avenue and Ariel St.) Secretary Olson read the public hearing notice and presented the staff report. Mr. Olson said that, even though the land use plan is a guide, a city would need justification to deny a use that is consistent with the plan. Ken Haider, Director of Public Works, explained how traffic flow and capacities are calculated. Garrett Carlson, representing Shelter Corporation, introduced Mike Jordan of Winsor/Faricy Architects, Inc., the architect for the project. Mr. Jordan stated that there would be 31 rental town houses (one unit would be completely handicap-accessible), an office and laundry, and a play area. He also stated that landscaping would be used to provide a buffer and discussed parking availability. Chairperson Axdahl opened the public hearing for comments from the public. Louis Kamrath, 2499 Ariel Street, said he is opposed to the project because of noise, traffic and drainage conditions. Patricia Karnrath, 2499 Ariel Street, was concerned about the number of children that would live in the units, the length of the leases, and the separation planned between her house and the development. Jim Malsom, 2466 Ariel, asked how these town houses effect the value of surrounding homes and felt that some type of traffic control was needed on 1 lth Avenue. Carl Keller of Keller Properties, a property management company that manages the neighboring Crestwood Town_home Association, spoke of the traffic problems on 1 lth Avenue. Bradley King, 2033 13th Avenue had questions about the traffic study done on Ariel Street, particularly as it related to 13th Avenue and East County Road C. William Smith, with Biko Associates, Inc. of 2501 Dupont Avenue North in Minneapolis, gave details of a traffic study they prepared for the project. Robert and Vicki Smoyer, 2599 Ariel Street, said they were against the town houses because of traffic and potential water problems. Kathy Stuempert, 2612 Ariel Street, wanted more area left Planning Commission Minutes of 11-07-94 -3- open for watershed. Dorrie Paycer, 2452 Crestwood Drive, spoke about the additional number of children that would be attending district schools. Since there were no further comments, the public hearing was closed. The Commission discussed drainage in this area, especially the property to the north. Ken Haider, Director of Public Works, stated that a number of things could be done on site to make sure that drainage does not go off site to this property. Grading would be such that the new impervious areas, i.e. roofs, driveways, etc., would have to drain internally and then be collected in pipes and probably deposited in the ditch system north on Ariel or to the west in the existing 30-inch outlet. The only external drainage would probably be off an adjacent backslope that would be deterred by grass or turf. Commissioner Kittridge moved the Planning Commission recommend: Adoption of the resolution which changes the land use plan on the west side of Ariel Street, north of 1 lth Avenue. The change is from LBC (limited business commercial) to R-3H (high-density multiple dwellings). This change is based on the following reasons: a. It would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies. b. It would be consistent with the property planned for R-3H to the north. The present LBC (limited business commercial) land use classification would generate significantly more traffic than town houses. Commissioner Fischer seconded Ayes-Axdahl, Fischer, Frost, Kittridge, Kopesky, Pearson, Sandell, Sigrnundik, Thompson Nays-Rossbach The motion passed. Commissioner Kittridge moved the Planning Commission recommend: Adoption of the resolution which changes the zoning on the northwest comer of Ariel Street and 1 lth Avenue from F (farm residential) to R-3 (multiple dwellings). This change is based on the findings required by Code. Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes-Axdahl, Fischer, Frost, Kittridge, Kopesky, Pearson, Sandell, Sigmundik, Planning Commission Minutes of 11-07-94 Thompson Nays-Rossbach The motion passed. Secretary Olson stated that this item would be heard by the City Council on November 28, 1994. Public hearing notices will be sent. B. Maplewood Retail Addition Ken Roberts, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Roberts stated that when statTwrote the report they were waiting for additional traffic analysis. Ramsey County does not have all the traffic information at this time that they need from the developer. Recommendations in the staff report were based on the assumptions that the traffic studies would be ail worked out and Ramsey County traffic concerns would be satisfied. Since this has not happened, staffwould recommend the tabling of this request until those issues are answered. Mr. Roberts discussed the project because residents were present for the public hearing. Marc Kruger of 11395 Fifth Avenue North in Plymouth, Minnesota, the developer, introduced Alan Kretman and John Dietrich, planners with RLK Associates, and Ron Krank of KKE Architects, to present the project. Commissioner Kittridge asked if the developer would comply with the traffic requirements of Ramsey County, when available. Mr. Kruger said they would like the Commission to consider all recommendations, and make approvals subject to satisfaction of County requirements for traffic. The Commission discussed traffic issues on White Bear Avenue. Chairperson Axdahl opened the public hearing for comments from the public. Carl Keller, representing Crestwood Townhomes, asked the developer to explain the east side of the project. Mr. Keller had questions about the closing of Castle Avenue and the density of the multi-family units that will be built. Edmund Berggren (2456 White Bear Avenue), Jerry Crew (2462 White Bear Avenue), Dan'el Berkowitz (2428 White Bear Avenue), Zelma Pitzl (2005 Castle Avenue), Todd Thomas (2031 9th Avenue E.), and other residents of the area spoke in favor of the project. Commissioner Kittridge moved the Planning Commission recommend, contingent on an approved traffic agreement by the Ramsey County Engineer, the Maplewood City Engineer and the developer,: Ao Adoption of the resolution which changes the land use plan from LBC (limited business commercial), R-1 (single dwellings) and NC (neighborhood Planning Commission Minutes of 11-07-94 -5- commercial) to BC (business commercial) and R-3M (medium density multiple dwellings). This change is for the following reasons: 1. The developer is proposing to develop this site for commercial uses. o With the traffic improvements proposed, the streets will have sufficient vehicular capacity to handle the traffic from this development. o The proposed commercial development would be compatible with the nearby land uses on White Bear and 1 lth Avenues. The proposed commercial development would be more compatible with traffic and conditions on White Bear and 1 lth Avenues than the existing homes. The proposed R-3M classification would be compatible with the existing multiple dwellings east of Ariel Street. 6. The existing property owners are in favor. Approval is for ninety days. At the end of that time the City may change the land use back to its current designation if the developer has not started construction. Adoption of the resolution which changes the zoning map from R-1 (single dwellings) and NC (neighborhood commercial) to BC (business commercial) and R-3 (multiple dwellings) for the reasons required by Code. Approval is for ninety days. At the end of that time the City may change the zoning back to its current designation if the developer has not started construction. Adoption of the resolution which approves a conditional use permit (CUP) for outdoor storage, sales and display for a garden center. This permit is based on the f'mdings required by Code and shall be subject to the following conditions: All construction shall follow the site plan that the City stamped October 19, 1994. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. The store shall use the outside storage and display within one year of the Council's approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. Planning Commission Minutes of 11-07-94 -6- 3. The City Council shall review this permit in one year. Do Adoption of the resolution which vacates the street rights-of-way in the project site (Gervais Avenue east of White Bear Avenue and Castle Avenue from Gervais Avenue south to Highway 36.) The City should vacate these street right-of-ways because: 1. It is in the public interest. The proposed development will provide its own access to White Bear and 1 lth Avenues. 3. The adjacent properties have street access. The developer shall record the resolution with the final plat. The City shall not release the resolution until the City has approved the final plat. Bo Adoption of the resolution which authorizes the sale of the 30-foot-wide strip of land owned by the City between Gervais Avenue and Ariel Street. Approval is subject to the City having an appraisal of the property done at the developer's expense. Approval of the Maplewood Retail Addition preliminary plat (received by the City on October 19, 1994). Before the City Council approves the final plat, a developer shall complete the following conditions: ° Sign an agreement with the City that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: 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. Commissioner Fischer seconded Ayes-Axdahl, Fischer, Kittridge, Kopesky, Pearson, Rossbach, Sandell, Sigmundik, Thompson Nays--Frost The motion passed. Planning Commission Minutes of 11-07-94 -7- VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS A. Reconsideration--2280 Maplewood Drive (Menards), Conditional Use Permit Revision Commissioner Rossbach stated he made a motion at the October 17, 1994, Planning Commission meeting to require Menard's to remove existing curb cuts to the frontage road which service a southern portion of the parking lot and then sod this triangular area. This motion was based on a plan that showed an entrance offthe frontage road to the parking lot that went into this small section. This, and other entrances shown on the plan, are actually nonexistent at this time. Commissioner Rossbach asked to change the wording of the motion because there was no access to close off and, if traffic barriers were installed as required, Menard's traffic would be required to exit and then reenter the parking lot to access it fully. Commissioner Rossbach moved the Planning Commission eliminate item 18 b in the minutes of October 17, 1994, as follows, as a stipulation. 18 b. Remove the existing curb cuts to the frontage road which service that section of parking lot and landscape this area. Commissioner Kittridge seconded Ayes--all The motion passed. Commissioner Rossbach moved the Planning Commission eliminate item 18 d in the minutes of October 17, 1994, as follows, as a stipulation. lsd. Install a vehicle-barrier in the northern location which is just south of the existing entrance to Menards' storage yard. The design and location of the barrier and the landscaping shall be subject to the City Engineer's approval. Menards shall install these barriers by December 26, 1994. Commissioner Kittridge seconded Commissioner Rossbach stated that, because Menards had preapproved the placement. of a vehicle barrier at the end of the parking lot by the gas station and one by the entrance, they had effectively approved cutting offthe parking lot. Commissioner Rossbach withdrew his motion as pertains to the elimination of stipulation 18d. Planning Commission Minutes of 11-07-94 -8- VIII. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS A. October 24 Council Meeting: Commissioner Rossbach reported on this meeting. B. Representative for the November 14 Council Meeting: Commissioner Frost Commissioner Fischer asked staff how the land use plan changes that were approved for the town houses on Ariel, north of 1 lth Avenue, effected thc zoning of the house at 2499 Ariel Street. Secretary Olson stated that the house was zoned R-3 (multiple dwellings). IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Secretary Olson stated that, after the Mapleleaf Estates public hearing ended, some residents were disturbed and angry because one of the planning commissioners came down and talked with the developer in a friendly manner. They felt it appeared that the commission was either too friendly with the developer or that a deal had already been made. Mr. Olson cautioned the commissioners about coming down during a meeting and speaking with the developer, particularly after a controversial hearing. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. '" MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Land Use Plan Change--Open Space Site #140 Northeast Comer of English Street and the State Trail November 16, 1994 INTRODUCTION The City Council directed the Planning Commission and Parks and Recreation Commission to review the purchase of a property for open space. The property is north of the State Trail between English Street and the former Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way. (See the location and property line maps on pages 3-4.) Maplewood's Open Space Committee has numbered this site 140. Maplewood is considering buying open space property from a list often sites. (See the list on page 5 and the map on page 6.) State law requires that the Planning Commission advise the Council whether proposed public acquisitions follow the Comprehensive Plan. The City has not shown this site on the land use plan for open space, so we have scheduled a public hearing to consider changing the land use plan. The change would be from R-2 (single and double dwellings) to OS (open space). (See the existing and proposed land use plans on pages 7-8.) BACKGROUND On November 2, 1993, the voters approved the open space referendum. The vote authorized the City to sell up to $5 million in general obligation bonds to purchase land for open space. The Open Space Committee recommended that the City Council consider buying open space from a list of 19 sites. The list included the 14 top-rated sites in the City and five additional sites that were top-rated in their respective neighborhoods, but not City-wide. Site 140 was one of the five additional sites. Since then, the City has narrowed this list to ten properties. These are properties that the owners have expressed an interest in selling. The list on page 5 shows the City-wide open space ranking for these top ten sites. The City Council has authorized the staff to negotiate the purchase of one of these sites--Site 142 (Frost Avenue and English Street). The City should close on this site within 30 days. DISCUSSION Site 140 is in the top ten list. Thc Open Space Committee ranked this site 39 out of 67 sites~ Although it has a low open-space ranking, the Committee included Site 140 in their recommended list because it was thc top-ranked site in thc Sherwood Glen neighborhood. An advantage of Site 140 is that it is at the crossing of two regional trails. The City staffhas negotiated a price of $80,000 for the two-acre site. If not purchased for open space, someone could build two double dwellings (four units) on Site 140. Besides Site 140, the City is investigating thc purchase of the Soo Line parcel at the southeast comer of the two trails. (See the map on page 4.) The Soo Line parcel is 38,300 square feet with an estimated value of $57,500. An advantage of this site is that it is next to a City-owned parcel and undeveloped public right-of-way. Combining the Soo Line parcel with the City land would form an excellent open space site to complement the rest of Site 140. The other advantage is that the trees on the Soo Line parcel screen the trail from the commercial buildings on Frost Avenue. The City staff sent the railroad a letter expressing an interest in the property but the railroad has not yet responded. On September 19, 1994, the Parks and Recreation Commission discussed buying this parcel. They considered using park funds. RECOMMENDATION If the City Council decides to buy Site 140 for open space, they should adopt the resolution on page 9. This resolution changes the land use plan from R-2 (single and double dwellings) to OS (Open Space) for Site 140. The City should make this change because: 1. The City plans to buy this site for open space. 2. This parcel is at the crossing of two regional trails. 3. The woods on this parcel screen the State trail from English Street. p:s~cl 5/openlan2.mem AU~hments: 1. Location Map-Site 140 2. Property Line/Zoning Map-Sit~ 140 3. List of Top-lLated Sites 4. Map of Top-Rated Sites 5. Existing Land Use Map-Site 140 6. Proposed Land Use Map-Site 140 7. Land Use Plan Change Resolution Attachment 1 PAUL SITE #140 LOCATION MAP SITE #140 . I,z ,. I ," I;s I,~, -- BELMONT --FR.,OS Im-- (~') 17 ,YAN [ PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 4 Attachment 3 City ID# 153A 151 142 16lB TOP TEN OPEN SPACE SITES FROM THE OPEN SPACE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDED OPEN SPACE LIST Open Space Rankin~ (67 Sites) 1 6 108 9 116 13 150 18 173 21 140 38 103C 57 property_ Location-Owner Acres Priory 39 East of Rice, South ofB--Zittel & Oren 29 English and Frost 24 South Linwood Ave., East of Sterling St.-- 30 Kayser -- Hazelwood and Beam Pearson 8 Near Spoon Lake--Kuslich & Pillsbury 32 McMenemy St.--MnDOT 5 Sterling, south of Carver 40 Crossing of Trails, N. of Frost on English 2 Between County Road D and Woodlyrm 23 156 1.32 Attachment 4 ~aplewood OPEN SPACE Top Rated Areas Top 10 sites are circled. i OS OPEN SPACE SITE 140 Id-1 Attachment !irt®rial inl~Tchange '/ lC R-3 LB( I i 1 ~M-1 Attachment 6 8 Attachment 7 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Director of Community Development proposed a change to the City's land use plan from R-2 (single and double dwellings) to OS (open space). WHEREAS, this change applies to the undeveloped property located north of the DNR Gateway Trail between English Street and the former railroad right-of-way. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On November 21, 1994, the Planning Commission held a public hearing. The City staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The Planning Commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the plan amendment. 2. On November 28, 1994, the City CouncU discussed this land use plan change. They considered reports and recommendations from the Planning Commission and City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approve the above-described change for the following reasons: 1. The City plans to buy this site for open space. 2. This parcel is at the crossing of two regional trails. 3. The woods on this parcel screen the State trail from English Street. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1994. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: PROJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Conditional Use Permit Review and Revision Northern Hydraulics 1255 Cope Avenue November 17, 1994 INTRODUCTION The conditional use permit (CUP) for 1255 Cope Avenue is due for review. (See the maps on pages 4 and 5 and thc site plan on page 6.) The CUP allows a commercial building within 350 feet of a residential district. John Rose, of Northern Hydraulics, is requesting that the City Council revise their conditional use permit (CUP). It requires their weekday hours be from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Northern Hydraulics' current weekday hours are from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Mr. Rose is requesting that the City Council change the CUP to allow Northern Hydraulics' current hours. (See their letter on page 7.) BACKGROUND Past Actions On September 24, 1990, the City Council approved this CUP. On June 24, 1991, the Council revised the CUP to change the store hours for Saturdays and Sundays and required the owner to replace the weeds and dead grass with sod. The Council changed the hours from 9 a.m.-4 p.m. to 8 a.m.-5 p.m. on Saturdays and fi.om 9 a.m.-1 p.m. to 10 a.m.-4 p.m. on Sundays. On September 23, 1991, September 28, 1992, and September 27, 1993, the City Council reviewed the CUP and required a review one year later. Code Requirement Section 36-442(a) requires nine standards to approve a CLIP. (See the findings in the resolution on page 8.) DISCUSSION CUP Revision--Change In Hours The proposed change in the weekday hours should not cause any problem. This change would benefit the neighbors since the store opens one hour later than is presently allowed. We have deleted the conditions that no longer apply. Outdoor Storage Northern Hydraulics has occasionally been storing trailer bodies and equipment in their parking lot. The CUP does not allow outside storage. Mx. Rose told me that they recently began renting space from Metcalf Mayflower to store these trailers. The City Council should review this CUP in one year to see if the outside storage has stopped. RECOMMENDATION A. Review the CUP for 1255 Cope Avenue in one year. Adopt the resolution on page 8. This resolution revises the conditional use permit for 1255 Cope Avenue. The revisions are as follows: (I have underlined the additions and crossed out the deletions.) All construction must comply with the site plan, received by the City on September 24, 1990. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. The City Council may ,,--,u~t rcv~z;v, :..,~z,-,~ :..--,d approve major changes. ~-2. There shall be no outside storage of goods, materials or trash. 6.3. The canopy shall not be illuminated. The hours of operation shall be from 82 a.m. to 8:;t p.m. Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Saturdays, and 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Sundays. 2 There shall be no overnight parking of trucks. p:sec9~notthenO.cup At~nchments: I. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Letter from Jolm Rose Dated September 27, 1994 5. Resolution ATTACHMENT 24 O0 N. AY ~J AY (I) a4iUlrRI IT TON AY KI#OS?ON AY &V LOCATION MAP ~ .. ATTACHHENT 2 .. · I 20' E,I,O' HWY. 36 18 "'coPE C'T~B · [] · · I ATTACHMENT 3 HZGHWAY 36 SITE PLAN 6 ATTACHMENT 4 Northern ® u. :11 UINC. Domestic Telex 629 17439 ELS~te Foreign Telex 5106 009009· Fax 612-894-102u September 27, 1994 Mr. Tom Ekstrand CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Dear 1~'. Ekstrand: Enclosed please fred a completed application, associated fees, and required information to process our Condition Use Change. At this time we are requesting a change in our Condition Use Permit to shift our current operating hours from the approved hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM - Monday thru Friday, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM - on Saturday's, and 10:00 AM to 4:00 PM - on Sunday's. As shown by the above request, we are only shifting hours Monday thru Friday by one (1) hour to better serve our customers. Please address aH correspondence for this matter to our Corporate Office to expedite any requests or reply's. If you need any additional information, please contact me at 612/895-6802. Sincerely, NORTHERN HYDRAULICS, INC. J;rRo°~cilities Dave LaPorteffNorthern Hydraulics, Inc. JdrMcCfill~orthern Hydraulics, Inc. Mike Stuber/Maplewood Retail Store Attachment RESOLUTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION WHEREAS, Northern Hydraulics, Inc., applied for a revision to their conditional use permit. The conditional use permit allows a commercial building within 350 feet of a residential district. WHEREAS, Northern Hydraulics, Inc., requested a change in the permitted weekday hours of operation from 7:00 a.m.-7:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.-8:00 p.m. WHEREAS, this permit applies to 1255 Cope Avenue. The legal description is: Clifton Addition, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Vac St Accruing & Fol; Com at NW Cot of Lot 16 Blk 13 th E on NL of SD Blk 379.61 ft to Beg th S 29 Deg 14 MN W 117.56 fi to NE Line of Rd as Opened in Doc 2021912 th NW on SD NE Line 368.09 ft to WL of Blk 18 th N on SD WL 68.06 ft to SL of Hwy 36 th E on SL of Hwy 379.43 ft th S to Beg Being part of Lots 19 Thru 25 Blk 13 & Part of Blk 18. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit revision is as follows: On November 21, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council this permit. On December 12, 1994, the City Council held a public heating. The City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The Council gave everyone at the heating a chance to speak and present written statements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations of the City staff and Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approve the above-described conditional use permit revision, because: The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water nm-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fare protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause mirfimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction must comply with the site plan, received by the City on September 24, 1990. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. The City Council may approve major changes. 2. There shall be no outside storage of goods, materials or trash. 3. The canopy shall not be illuminated. 4. The hours of operation shall be from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday-Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Saturdays, and 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Sundays. 5. There shall be no overnight parking of tracks. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on December 12, 1994. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Gethsemane Lutheran Church Addition 24 l0 Stillwater Road November $, 1994 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission should review the conditional use permit and setback variance. The Community Design Review Board should review the design plans. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Gethsemane Lutheran Church Addition 2410 Stillwater Road November 10, 1994 INTRODUCTION Requests Gethsemane Lutheran Church is requesting the following: 1. A conditional use permit (CUP) to expand the church. The City Code requires a CUP for churches. (See their letter on page 11.) An 8-foot, 3-inch side yard setback variance for the proposed classroom addition. The City Code requires a 50froot setback. The church is proposing 41 feet, 9 inches. (See their letter on page 12.) 3. Approval of their building plans (See the location and property line maps on pages 8-9 and the site plan on page 10.) Project Description Gethsemane Lutheran Church is proposing to do the following: 1. Add 13,757 square feet of building 2. Change the parking lot and driveways as follows: a. Narrow the driveway east of the building and remove 23 parking spaces to make room for the building addition b. Add 22 parking spaces south of the church near the west lot line 3. Add trees around the proposed addition DISCUSSION Parking Stall Width The City Code requires that parking spaces be at least 9-1/2 feet wide. The proposed parking spaces south of the church are 9 feet wide. The church should revise this plan to show the non- handicap spaces to be 9-1/2-foot wide. Trash Enclosure The City Code requires that the church enclose their trash dumpster. The church should add a dumpster enclosure to their site plan if they wish to continue having an outside dumpster. Drive Aisle Width The site plan shows a 24-foot-wide, two-way driveway on the east side of the addition. This driveway, however, only measures 14 feet wide. The applicant should revise the plan showing a full 24 feet of width. There is enough room for this, but two proposed trees would have to be moved. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution on pages 14-16. This resolution approves a conditional use permit to expand a church and parking lot at 2410 Stillwater Road. Approval is based on the findings required by the Code and 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. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of Council approval or the permit shall end. The Council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The City Council shall review this permit in one year. Adopt the resolution on pages 17 and 18. This resolution approves an 8-foot, 3-inch side yard setback variance for a proposed classroom addition at Gethsemane Lutheran Church, 2410 Stillwater Road. Approval is based on the following: Meeting the Code would cause the applicant undue hardship. The side lot line runs at a diagonal to the existing building. This makes it hard for the church to add on and still meet a 50-foot setback. 2. The variance would meet the intent of the ordinance for the following reasons: a. The proposed setback variance is minimal. Only a small comer of the addition would encroach into the setback area. b. The addition would not affect the adjacent neighbor's privacy or create a crowding problem. c. The addition would be next to the neighbor's back yard and not near his house. d. Existing trees on the neighbor's property screen his house from the school. e. The adjacent neighbor has signed a letter agreeing to the setback. (See his letter on page 13.) Approve the plans (stamped September 21, 1994) for Gethsemane Lutheran Church, subject to the findings required by the Code. The church shall do the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the City has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Submit the following to the staff before the City issues a building permit: a. A plan showing the location and design of a trash dumpster enclosure. The enclosure shall be of a material and color compatible with the building. b. A screening plan for any roof-mounted mechanical equipment. c. A revised site plan showing a 24-foot-wide driveway on the east side of the addition. This plan shall also move the two proposed trees. 3. Complete the following before occupying the building: a. Install a handicap-parking sign for each proposed handicap-parking space. b. Screen all new roof-mounted equipment visible from streets or adjacent property. (code requirement) c. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure. (code requirement) d. Install site security lighting, subject to the approval of the Director of Public Safety. The light intensity shall not exceed one-foot-candle at any residential lot line. The light fixtures shall be aimed or shielded so the light source is not visible. (code requirement) 3 4. If any required work is not done, the City may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The City determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The City receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work. The amount shall be 150% of the cost of the unfinished work. c. The City receives an agreement that will allow the City to complete any unfinished work. 5. All work shall follow the approved plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 4 CITIZEN COMMENTS I surveyed the nearby property owners. There were only two replies. Both were in favor. We received the following comments: 1. Gethsemane Church has always been a good neighbor and the construction is in their parking lot area. (Haag, 2407 StiHwater Road) 2. Refer to the letter l~om Philip Leeman on page 13. REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: The church site is 6 acres. The total site is 18 acres. Existing land use: Gethsemane Lutheran Church and School and athletic fields SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Stillwater Road and houses South: Athletic Fields West: Stillwater Avenue and the Silver Ridge Apartments East: Bartelmy Lane and houses PAST ACTION On September 22, 1992, the Community Design Review Board approved a 32-square-foot ground sign for the Church. PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: Zoning: F (farm residential) C (church) Ordinance requirements Section 25-70 of the City Code requires that the CDRB make the following findings to approve plans: That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed developments and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the City's comprehensive municipal plan. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. Section 36-437(3) requires a CLIP for churches. Section 36-448(b) states that "all uses existing at the time of adoption of this article shall be considered as having a CLIP which contains conditions which permit the land use and structures as they existed on said date. Any enlargement, structural alteration, or intensification of use shall require an amended CUP." Section 36-28(c)(6)(b) requires a side yard setback of S0 feet for the proposed addition. Findings for CUP Approval Section 36-442(a) states that the City may approve a CUP based on the nine standards in the resolution on page 15. Findings for Variance Approval State law requires that the City Council make the following findings to approve a variance from the zoning code: 1. Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property under consideration. 2. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. "Undue hardship", as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the ot~icial controls. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Al~chment~: i. :CA.~ ~ Iii I~ ,'vatur~ IdlNN~HAHA AV MAROARI 8 Attachment CASE AVENUJE* 2410 GETHSEMANE LUTJ~iERN CHURCH rI _ _ __ XJ~T. 4 E BRAN D ~ AVl SILVER RIDGE APARTMENTS / fi; , /~ 1!13C [ / ~ ," / GETHSEMANE PARK PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP Attachment 2 GETHSEMANE LUTHERAN CHURCH , PROPOSED ADDITION PROPOSED 22-CAR PARKING LOT SITE PLAN 10 Attachment 3 GETHSEMANE LUTHERAN CHURCH 2410 Stillwater Road · Maplewood, MN 55119 Church (612) 739-1264 ° School (612) 739-7640 September 21, 1994 Dear Members of the Maplewood City Council: We, the people of ~ethsemane Lutheran Church and School request a Conditional Use Permit for an addition to our facilities. For over two years now, we have made an extensive study of our membership and the Community at large assessing the trends and needs of those whom we serve. Using the results of our study, we would like to expand our facilities by 13,757 square feet plus remodel some of our existing space. These facilities would include: e new pre-school end kindergar- ten room, space for Sunday School, a new science lab/classroom, a community room used primarily for Senior Citizens and other groups, e.g., scouts, Alanon, accountability groups, etc., as well as expanding our current cafeteria. Our objective is to continue to expand our ministry to the whole community. Our facilities would be built towards the east of our property and would continue with our current structural scheme. We would propose to add extra parking towards the south (main entrance) of the church adding 22 stalls. Our intentions would also be to continue to maintain the integrity of our existing property and to improve all the entrances and exits from our property onto the existing streets. We hope, upon your approval, to be able to begin the footings/foundation, as soon as possible. Thank you. Pastor Christopher Backer Living under the grace of God, we commit ourselves to grow together in our fa/th and to see ourselves, others and the world around us through the loving eyes of our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 1 Attachment 4 GETHSEMANE LUTHERAN CHURCH 2410 Stillwater Road · Maplewood, MN 55119 Church (612) 739-1264 · School (612) 739-7540 October 13, 1994 OCT 1 4 199 '! Planning Commission City of Maplewood 1830 E. County Rd. B Maplewood, MN 55109 The following is a "letter of justification' which is required as part of our request for a variance from the City's 50 foot side yard setback requirement. When Gethsemane Lutheran Chumh's architects, Trossen and Wright, developed the building and site plans for a proposed building expansion, the assumption was made that current property lines as visualized were fairly accurate, and that our proposed building structure would be erected well beyond the fifty foot side yard setback from our east neighbor's property line. (Gethsemane Lutheran presently owns the whole block except for this one adjoining property.) However, when the land was surveyed, we discovered that our proposed structure as drawn on our site plan was 41 feet 9 inches from the newly-drawn surveyed adjoining property line. Rather than go to the expense of drawing a new site plan, and feeling that we had the cooperation of our adjoining neighbor, we make a request to the Planning Commission for a variance from the fifty foot side yard setback requirement. Our proposed building addition which will encroach on the 50 ft. setback is a one-story brick structure which will be used for additional classrooms. It will in no way alter the essential character of the area. It is also of note that part of the property that adjoins us to the east is land that is an unbuildable lot due to the petroleum hazard below ground level. We are currently negotiating with Williams Pipeline Company for a future acquisition of that lot as parking lot expansion for Gethsemane if and when Williams completes pumhase of that property from Philip Leeman. Gethsemane has had a long-time cordial relationship with the City of Maplewood, and we respectfully request approval of our variance request. Signed: j~n'U~e M~'~-essersmith, Business Administrator 12 ' ~t~Ca~hment 5 GETHSEMANE LUTHERAN CHURCH 2410 Stillwater Road * Maplewood, MN 55119 Church (612) 739-1264 * School {612) 739-7540 My permission is hereby granted to Gethsemane Lutheran Church to build at least forty-one feet from my west property line es shown in the site plan dated 9/16/94 by Trossen Wright Architects. Signed: ~- ~ Philip Leeman CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Gethsemane Lutheran Church applied for a conditional use permit to expand their church and parking lot. WHEREAS, this permit applies to 2410 Stillwater Road. The legal description is: Tract A. All that part of the West 1/2 of Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, lying Southeasterly of the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 212 except the East 156.0 feet thereof; Tract B. All that part of the west 1/2 of the Northeast quarter of Southwest quarter of Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, lying Southerly and Easterly of the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 212, except the East 156.0 feet of the North 453.0 feet thereof} Tract C. All that part of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, lying Southeasterly of the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 212; which lies southerly and easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the west quarter comer of said Section 25; thence run easterly on an assumed azimuth of 89 degrees 49 minutes 52 seconds along the east and west quarter line of said Section 25 for 1786.45 feet to the southeasterly line of Stillwater Road; thence on an azimuth of 59 degrees 23 minutes 13 seconds along the southeasterly line of Stillwater Road, for 50.55 feet to a point on the east line of tract A hereinbefore described, which is the point of beginning of line to be described; thence on an azimuth of 239 degrees 23 minutes 13 seconds for 459.05 feet; thence on an azimuth of 209 degrees 43 minutes 31 seconds for 163.42 feet; thence on an azimuth of 180 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds for 13.97 feet; thence run southerly 317.11 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the west, having a radius of 1185.42 feet, delta angle of 15 degrees 19 minutes 38 seconds and a chord azimuth of 180 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds; thence on an azimuth of 180 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds for 90.83 feet; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 458.68 feet and a delta angle of 32 degrees 57 minutes 37 seconds for 263.86 feet; thence on an azimuth of 213 degrees 26 minutes 36 seconds for 365.48 feet, more or less, to a point on the south line of Tract C hereinbefore described and there terminating. Reserving, however, an easement coveting the Southerly 33 feet of the above described premises for roadway purposes, to be hereat~er dedicated for a public highway and to be designated as East Seventh Street. 14 Attachment 7 WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On November 21, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council this permit. 2. On ,1994, the City Council held a public hearing. The City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The Council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations of the City staff and Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approve the above-described conditional use permit, because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is 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. 3.5 The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of Council approval or the permit shall end. The Council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The City Council shall review this permit in one year. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1994. VARIANCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Gethsemane Lutheran Church applied for a variance from the zoning ordinance. WHEREAS, this variance applies to 2410 Stillwater Road. The legal description is: Tract A. All that part of the West 1/2 of Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, lying Southeasterly of the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 212 except the East 156.0 feet thereof, Tract B. All that part of the west 1/2 of the Northeast quarter of Southwest quarter of Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, lying Southerly and Easterly of the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 212, except the East 156.0 feet of the North 453.0 feet thereof} Tract C. All that part of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, lying Southeasterly of the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 212; which lies southerly and easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the west quarter comer of said Section 25; thence run easterly on an assumed azimuth of 89 degrees 49 minutes 52 seconds along the east and west quarter line of said Section 25 for 1786.45 feet to the southeasterly line of Stillwater Road; thence on an azimuth of 59 degrees 23 minutes 13 seconds along the southeasterly line of Stillwater Road, for 50.55 feet to a point on the east line of tract A hereinbefore described, which is the point of beginning of line to be described; thence on an azimuth of 239 degrees 23 minutes 13 seconds for 459.05 feet; thence on an azimuth of 209 degrees 43 minutes 31 seconds for 163.42 feet; thence on an azimuth of 180 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds for 13.97 feet; thence run southerly 317.11 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the west, having a radius of 1185.42 feet, delta angle of 15 degrees 19 minutes 38 seconds and a chord azimuth of 180 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds; thence on an azimuth of 180 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds for 90.83 feet; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 458.68 feet and a delta angle of 32 degrees 57 minutes 37 seconds for 263.86 feet; thence on an azimuth of 213 degrees 26 minutes 36 seconds for 365.48 feet, more or less, to a point on the south line of Tract C hereinbefore described and there terminating. Reserving, however, an easement coveting the Southerly 33 feet of the above described premises for roadway purposes, to be hereat~er dedicated for a public highway and to be designated as East Seventh Street. WHEREAS, Section 36-28(c)(6)(b) of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances requires a setback of 50 feet. 3.7 Attachment 8 WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing a setback of 41 feet, 9 inches. WHEREAS, this requires a variance of 8 feet, 3 inches. WHEREAS, the history of this variance is as follows: 1. On November 21, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council this variance. 2. On ,1994, the City Council held a public hearing. The City staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The Council gave everyone at the hearing an opportunity to speak and present written statements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations from the City staff and Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approve the above-described variance for the following reasons: 1. Meeting the Code would cause the applicant undue hardship. The side lot line runs at a diagonal to the existing building. This makes it hard for the church to add on and still meet a 50-foot setback. 2. The variance would meet the intent of the ordinance for the following reasons: a. The proposed setback variance is minimal. Only a small comer of the addition would encroach into the setback area. b The addition would not affect the adjacent neighbor's privacy or create a crowding problem. c lhe addition would be next to the neighbor's back yard and not near his house. d Existing trees on the neighbor's property screens his house from the school. lhe adjacent neighbor has signed a letter agreeing to the setback. I .~. Maplc~ood City Council adopted on this resolution on ,1994. 18 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Edgerton Elementary School Addition November 17, 1994 The Planning Commission should review the conditional use permit revision, variance termination and new setback variance. The Community Design Review Board should review the design and landscape plans, and the no parking request. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Edgerton Elementary School Expansion 1929 Edgerton Street November 17, 1994 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................... 2 Projec! Description ........................................................ 2 Requests ................................................................ 3 BACKGROUND ............................................................ 3 DISCUSSION .............................................................. 3 RF. COMMENDATIONS ...................................................... 4 ('IIIZENS' COMMENTS ..................................................... 7 RI'D!RI!NCE INFORMATION ................................................ 9 Sill! DESCRIPTION ...................................................... 9 S! 'RROt'NDING LAND USES .............................................. 9 l'l .\NNING ............................................................. 9 I}RI)INANCE REQUIREMENTS ............................................ 9 ('RI1 ERIA FOR CUP APPROVAL ........................................... 9 ('RI'I'ERIA FOR VARIANCE APPROVAL ..................................... 9 l'i B! lC SAFETY. ....................................................... 10 INTRODUCTION Project Description Independent School District (ISD) 623 has revised the plans to expand Edgerton Elementary School. (See the location and property line maps on pages 11 and 12 and the new site plan on page 13.) The City Council approved plans last March. (See the previously approved site plan on page 14.) The District is proposing the following changes to the existing school: Add 14,734 square feet of building. (There would be 14,080 square feet of building demolished and 28,814 square feet of new building added.) The new space is for a gymnasium, cafeteria and additional classrooms. The proposed additions would have exteriors of brick and decorative concrete block. (See the building elevations on Sheet 3 of the attached plans.) (Since the previous plan, the gymnasium has been moved from the southwest comer to the northeast comer of the building.) 2. Revise the parking lot and drives as follows: ao Replace the westerly parking lot with a one-way drive for buses. Six parking spaces would remain. (The previous plan had the one-way drive, but not the six spaces.) Add ten bus-parking spaces north of the building. (The previous plan had a larger bus parking area.) c. Add parking spaces south of the building. (This is similar to the previous plan.) (The District has dropped the easterly parking lot that they proposed on the previous plan.) o Provide 67 general parking stalls and 12 bus parking stalls. The bus parking lot would be available for vehicle parking in the evenings. The District based the number of parking spaces on the projected staff, visitor and community needs. (See the letters on pages 15 and 18.) (The previous plan had 88 stalls plus the bus parking.) Replace the playground equipment that is north of the school. The District would add two new play areas near the north lot line. They would surface the play areas with wood chips and border them with timbers. (The previous plan also proposed to move the play equipment.) Add a new dumpster enclosure at the southeast comer oftbe new parking lot. The enclosure would be concrete block and brick to match the building. (The previous plan had the dumpster enclosure attached to the southeast comer of the building.) 6. Remove an old pump house south of the school and a small shed from the west side of the school. (Same as the previous proposal.) Requests The School District is requesting that the City do the following: 1. Revise the conditional use permit (CUP) to enlarge the school, based on new plans. The Code requires a CLIP for schools. (See the letter on page 17.) Approve a five-foot building setback variance from the Edgerton Street right-of-way for the proposed gymnasium. The Code requires 30 feet. The District is proposing 25 feet. (See the architect's letter on pages 18 and 19.) 3. Approve the design plans. BACKGROUND On March 8, 1993, the City Council authorized the Mayor and City Manager to sign an agreement with ISD 623. The City Council agreed to pay $250,000 from park funds to help finance the proposed gymnasium. On March 28, 1994, the City Council approved the following for the Edgerton Elementary School expansion: 1. A CUP to expand the school 2. A CUP to structurally alter a nonconforming use. The District proposed to curb the edge of an existing driveway with a nonconforming setback. 3. A variance from the requirement for in-ground lawn irrigation 4. A 36.5-foot setback variance for the proposed gymnasium (This variance is no longer needed.) 5. Architectural, site and landscape plans DISCUSSION The architect has stated that the number of parking spaces proposed will be enough. (See her letter on pages 15 and 16.) The CUP states that the City may require additional parking if needed. The problem will be with evening use of the gymnasium. The Director of Parks and Recreation estimates that people coming to the gymnasium at night may have 36-50 cars. The bus lot would hold 26 cars. This means there would be on-street parking. Cars parked on either side of the driveway may block visibility for cars trying to leave the site. The City Council should request that the County post both sides of the driveway for "No Parking." The Director of Parks and Recreation feels that the City may have to pave a parking lot on the City's lot to the north. RECOMMENDATIONS Adopt the resolution on pages 21 and 22. This resolution revises the conditional use permit to expand the school. The permit is based on the findings required by the Code and subject to the following conditions: (I underlined the additions and crossed out the deletions.) All construction shall follow the site plan (stamped August 29. 1994~ approved by the City. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year after Council approval or the permit shall end. The Council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The City Council shall review this permit in one year. fac21~t~zs. The City may require additional parking if needed. The School District shall nrovide for evenine car narkine in the bus-loadine area. The access drives to this parking area shall be open during the evenings. The School District shall allow the City to construct a walkway from the property_ to the north parking lot. Bo Adopt the resolution on page 23. This resolution ends the 36.5-foot side yard setback variance for the gsxtmasium on the west side of Edgerton Elementary School. The School District is no longer proposing this addition. Adopt the resolution on pages 24 and 25. This resolution approves a five-foot setback variance for the gymnasium addition to Edgerton Elementary School. The variance is based on the following findings: 1. It would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance for the following reasons: The closer setback would not effect the houses across the street. The nearest house would be 150 feet from the proposed gymnasium. The typical minimum Do separation is 120 feet (a 30-foot setback on each side of the street and a 60-foot- wide right-of-way). b. The closer setback would not effect the adjacent properties on the west side of Edgerton Street. 2. Strict enforcement of the Code would cause undue hardship. The School District cannot move the gymnasium further back and still meet the size needed by the City. 3. This variance is less than the previously approved 36.5-foot setback variance. Approve the plans stamped August 29, 1994 for the Edgerton Elementary School expansion. The following conditions apply: 1. This approval supersedes the previous plan approval of March 28, 1994. 2. Repeat this review in two years if the City has not issued a building permit for this project. 3. Submit the following for staff approval before the City issues a building permit: a. A revised site plan showing the following: (1) Striping for ninety-degree parking east of the bus striping. (2) Widen the north drive to 42 feet. A plan showing the design of the trash dumpster enclosure. The enclosure must match the color of the building and have a gate that is 100% opaque. (code requirement) c. A revised landscape plan showing: (1) Screening west of the southerly parking lot that is six-feet-tall and 80% opaque. (code requirement) (2) Sod on all disturbed areas. do A grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plan for the City Engineer's approval. The erosion control plan shall be consistent with the Rarnsey Soil and Water Conservation District Erosion Control Handbook. 4. Complete the following before occupying the additions: · a. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. b. Install reflectorized stop signs at all exits and a handicap-parking sign for each handicap-parking space. c. Screen all new roof-mounted equipment visible f~om streets or adjacent property. (code requirement) d. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure that meets the City Code. The enclosures must match the color of the building. e. Install continuous concrete curbing around all existing and proposed parking and drive areas. (code requirement) Install site lighting, subject to the Director of Public Safety's approval. Lighting shall not exceed one foot-candle of light at any residential property line. Lights shall be shielded or aimed so the light source is not visible. (code requirement) 5. If any required work is not done, the City may allow temporary occupancy if: The City determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. bo The City receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work. The amount shall be 150% of the cost of the unfinished work. Co The City receives an agreement that will allow the City to complete any unfinished work. 6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. E. Request that the County post both sides Edgerton Street, adjacent to the school driveway, for "No Parking." CITIZENS' COMMENTS I surveyed the owners of the 61 properties within 350 feet of the Edgerton Elementary School. Of the 24 replies, 16 were in favor, three objected and five had no comment. In Favor 1. Five feet is not very much to argue about. Please get this project going, its been two years. (no name given) 2. We need more space for our children. (Sukhtipyaroge, 605 Roselawn Avenue) 3. This school is a wonderful neighbor. (Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society of Minnesota, 550 Roselawn Avenue) 4. This a better, plan than before. (Dettman, 1897 Edgerton Street) 5. The traffic area for the gym will be a little further from the comer of Edgerton and Roselawn than before. That comer is already too congested. (Kramer, 1855 Edgerton Street) 6. It does not seem to adversely affect any adjoining property lines. (Schreier, 1949 DeSoto Street) 7. It is an improvement to the school and neighborhood. (Evans, 573 Bellwood Avenue) 8. I know the school has put a lot of thought into it. (Thompson, 565 Bellwood Avenue) 9. I do not see that this would affect our property. (Sether, 1743 Roxanna Lane) 10. I have no objection as long as there is not to be a parking lot also on the east side. (Butler, 1967 Payne Avenue) 11. We need a better school!! (Gruber, 549 Bellwood Avenue) 12. The proposed driveway and proposed gym and proposed parking seem to be OK to me. (Ostergren, 2010 Edgerton Street) 13. They should remove the high bank on the northeast comer for safety of auto travel on both Roselawn Avenue and Edgerton Street. (Anderson, 530 Roselawn Avenue) 7 Opposed 1. I do not agree with the building of the gymnasium in the 1 st place. It's a waste of time. 0Bergh, 495 Roselawn Avenue) We don't need a community ed. gym. This property should be for the elementary kids to have their playground. They are more important than a community ed. gym. We are not in favor of the variance. Why make roles and then break them? (Cardinal, 1970 Edgerton Street) I object to this proposal. This expansion should not occur. (Arksey and Barnett, 1982 Edgerton Street) REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 12.78 gross acres and 6 net acres (school site) Existing land use: Edgerton Elementary School SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: West: East: City property (the former Maplewood Heritage Center site) Roselawn Avenue, a house and the Maplewood Good Samaritan Center Houses and ball fields Edgerton Street and single dwellings PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: Zoning: S (school) (See the land use plan on page 20.) F (farm residence district) ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS Section 36-437(3) requires a CLIP for schools. Section 36-28(c)(6)(a) requires a nonresidential building to be set back 30 feet from a street fight-of-way. CRITERIA FOR CUP APPROVAL Section 36-442(a) states that the City Council may approve a CLIP, based on nine standards. (See findings 1-9 in the resolution on pages 21 and 22.) CRITERIA FOR VARIANCE APPROVAL State law requires that the City Council make the following findings to approve a variance from the zoning code: l. Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property under consideration. 2. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. "Undue hardship", as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the landowner, and the variance, if~ranted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. PUBLIC SAFETY Provide an automatic fire suppression system. p:sec 1 'Aedgeno4.cup Aluchmmts: 1. Location Map 2. Propmy Linc/Zoni~ Map 3. l~opos~ S~ Plan 4. Pr~ously Approved Sii~ Plan 5. Archi~ct's Lellcr of Parking Jugd:ficafion ~ August 4, 1994 6. Architect's CUP LcU~ dated $c'pmmbcr 2, 1994 7. Architect's Setback Variance ~ dated August 4, 1994 8. Land Usc Plan 9. Rcsolulion--CUP Revision 10. R~31mion---Setb~ck Vmancc T~rdnalion I I. Resolmion--Selback Yariancc 12. Plato date-romped August 29, 1994 (s~u~arate attachment) l0 NAVE. d~cRNON ,IS AV~.. SKILU~ .WOOD AVE. WOOD ~o IdER AVE. RIPL.[Y AVF. BELMONT AV. ~ O) c ~ ~ .~41NT PAUL Attnchment 2 2021 · --:'.,"' '~' 200S g ISZ. - -- Z4 804 t 7.8o SCHOOL DISTRIC N~_ 623 P~NG FIELDS 80HOOL 1970, 1960~ (7 I, ,77 ? Attachment 3 / / / / / /~ / / ~AY ROSELAWN AVENUI~ SITE PLAN 13 Attach~nt 4 PROPOSED GYMNASIUM : :PI:K)POSED ~ DfllVEWA~ I EXISTING I I I 1 ! I, I ' I I 1~3StrLAWN &V~Ntl/~ · Attachment 5 4 August 1994 ,lexander F. Ritter, A.I.A. 4ichael J Plautz, A.I.A. ,ck B Daniels, m F~tzhugh, ~obert M. Lucius, A.tA )avid C. Norback, A.I.A. erry Wot)ken, AI.A City Council City of Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, lVIN 55109 Edgerton Elementary School Addition and Renovation 1929 Edgerton Street, Maplewood, MN Comm. No. 6211.901.01 Parking Criteria (Revised Plan) Dear Council Members: The intent of this letter is to explain how the number of parking spaces was determined for this project. Although Maplewood's Zoning Ordinance states in Section 36-22(5) that "schools must have a minimum of one (parking) space for every 20 auditorium seats," as proposed, Edgerton Elementary School will not have an auditorium, so the number of parking spaces' was based on projected staff, visitor and community needs. The previously approved site plan (dated 15 October 1993) provided 66 stalls for school staff and visitors and 22 stalls for Family Education Center staff and clients. Due to budget constraints, the Family Education Center has been eliminated from the building's program. The new site plan, dated 15 July 1994, shows areas for parking on the north and south sides of the building. The south parking area is adjacent to the main building entrance and will be used during the day by building staff and visitors; the 67 parking spaces shown will provide one space per person for all full-time and part-time staff (59 people), five spaces for building visitors and three designated accessible spaces (one of which will be van accessible). The north parking area provides a separate drive and parking area for school buses. At night, when the building will be used for Maplewood Park and Recreation programs, an additional 12 spaces can be accommodated in the bus parking area, providing a total of 79 parking spaces. RSP Architects Ltd. 120 First Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55401 FAX 612 · 339 · 6760 612. 339. 0313 15 City Council 4 August 1994 Page 2 We believe that the proposed number of parking spaces will adequately serve the needs of both the School and the City. Please contact us if you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter. Sincerely, Diana B~llgowan, A.I.A. Project Architect Dick B. Daniels, A.I.A. Principal-in-Charge Copy: John Thein, Roseville Area Schools Merrie Zacharas, Roseville Area Schools John Ahem, Edgerton Elementary School File 3 DBD/pjp rsvsch\edg, e~mu~lt07-13 .dbd -~lexander F. Ritter, A.I.A ~ichael J. Plautz, A.I.A. )ick B. Daniels, A.t.A. ~m Fitzhugh, A.IA. :Jobert M. Lucius, A.IA. :)avid C. Norback, A.IA. -erry Wobken, A t A 2 September 1994 City Council City of Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Edgerton Elementary School Addition and Renovation (Resubmittal) 1929 Edgerton Street, Maplewood, MN Comm. No. 6211.01:5.01 Request for Conditional Use Permit Dear Council Members: We respectfully request the City Council to consider this application for a Conditional Use Permit on the Edgerton Elementary School. The proposed school construction will increase classroom size in the existing building, and add a new cafeteria, classroom wing and gymnasium. The new gymnasium will be approximately four times larger than the existing school gynmasium and is partially funded by the City of Maplewood for use as a community recreation gym. Currently, the school's parking lot does not conform to Maplewood's ordinance requiring concrete curbs at parking areas and drives, but this will be remedied in the course of construction and all of the existing and new paved areas will have concrete curbs. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Diana Bellgowan, A.I.A. Project Architect . Dick B. Daniels, A.I.A. Principal-in-Charge Copy: ]o]~ Thein, Roseville Area Schools John Ahem, Edgerton Elementary School File 3 DB/pjp RSP Architects Ltd. 120 First Avenue North Minneapohs, MN 55401 FAX 612 · 339 · 6760 612 * 339 * 0313 17 Attachment 7 4 August 1994 -~lexander F. RitteL A.I.A. ,4ichael J. Plautz, A.I.A. )ick B. Daniels, ~m Fitzhugh, A IA. :{obert M Lucius, A I.A )avid C. Norback, AIA. -erry Wobken, A.I.A City Council City of Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Edgerton Elementary School Addition and Renovation 1929 Edgerton Street, Maplewood, MN Corem. No. 6211.015.01 Request for Variance (Revised) Dear Council Members: We respectfully request the City Council to take into consideration the following written justification for deviations from the Maplewood Zoning Ordinance on the proposed Edgerton Elementary School site plan dated 29 July 1994. The site plan dated 15 October 1993 (previously approved by the City Council), has been revised relocating the gymnasium to the northeast corner of the building and deleting the parking on the east side. Buildine Setback from Residential Property_: Section 36-71(2) of the Zoning Ordinance requires a 30' building setback from the property line abutting Edgerton Street. The proposed site plan shows a setback of 25'-0" between the new gymnasium and the east property line. The new gymnasium is required by the Maplewood Park & Recreation Board to be a minimum of 90 ft. by 115 ft in order to meet their needs. The location of the gym is 10 ft. from the existing Media Center on the east side of the building to allow for an exit corridor and permit access to the gym from the north side of the site. Functionally, this location provides for easy access to parking for community use; a strong connection and adjacency to the existing play fields and the old Heritage Center site, which the City intends to develop for outdoor community activities. We believe the new plan is more amenable for community use. The reduced setback would not cause a threat to the property values, safety, health or general welfare of the residential property owners across Edgerton Street. We are asking that you grant this variance in lieu of the previous setback variance for the gymnasium when it was located in the southwest corner of the site, adjacent to residential property. We believe that the new plan will have less impact on nearby property owners. RSP Architects Ltd. 120 First Avenue North Minneapohs, MN 55401 FAX 612 · 339 · 6760 612 · 339 · 0313 City Council 4 August 1994 Page 2 Thank you for your consideration of this issue. Sincerely, Diana B,llgowan, A.I.A. Project Archit~ Copy: John Thein, Roseville Area Schools John Ahem, Edgerton Elementary School File 3 DB/pip rsvsch\edgeeton~lt07-21 .d~ Dick B. Daniels, A.I.A. Principal-in-Charge 19 .ar~en~eur mi jot irter; E Iq R-3(H) u Attachment 8 2O &tachment 9 RESOLUTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION WHEREAS, Independent School District No. 623 is requesting that the City revise their conditional use permit to expand a school and for the curbing of blacktop with a nonconforming setback. WHEREAS, this permit applies to 1929 Edgerton Street. The legal description is: SUBJ TO STS & EX S 292.96 FT & EX N 155.04 FT OF S 448 FT OF E 468.6 FT & EX N 352.96 FT OF W 108 FT & EXN 160FT OFE 313 FTTHE S 1/2 OF SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SECTION 17 TOWN 29 RANGE 22 SUBJ TO AVE AND ST THE S 448 FT OF E 468 6/10 FT OF NO 1/4 OF SECTION 17 TOWN 29 RANGE 22 SUBJ TO EDGERTON ST THE N 160 FT OF E 313 FT OF S 1/2 OF SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SECTION 17 TOWN 29 RANGE 22 WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: On November 21, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council this permit. On December 12, 1994, the City Council held a public heating. The City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The Council gave everyone at the heating a chance to speak and present written statements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations of the City staffand Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council revise the above-described conditional use permit based on new building and site plans. The City approves the revision because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 21 3. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water mn-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create trat]ic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or se/trices. 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan (stamped August 29, 1994) approved by the City. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year aider Council approval or the permit shall end. The Council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The City Council shall review this permit in one year. 4. The City may require additional parking if needed. 5. The School District shall provide for evening car parking in the bus-loading area. The access drives to this parking area shall be open during the evenings. 6. The School District shall allow the City to construct a walkway from the City's property to the north parking lot. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1994. 22 Attachment 10 RESOLUTION VARIANCE TERMINATION WHEREAS, the Maplewood City Council granted a 36.5-foot side yard setback variance to Independent School District (ISD) No. 623 on March 28, 1994. WHEREAS, this variance allowed the ISD No. 623 to build a gymnasium addition 33.5 feet from their west lot line. WHEREAS, the City Code required 70 feet. WHEREAS, this variance applies to 1929 Edgerton Street. The legal description is: SUBJ TO STS & EX S 292.96 FT & EX N 155.04 FT OF S 448 FT OF E 468.6 FT & EX N 352.96 FT OF W 108 FT & EX N 160 FT OF E 313 FT THE S 1/2 OF SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SECTION 17 TOWN 29 RANGE 22 SUBJ TO AVE AND ST THE S 448 FT OF E 468 6/10 FT OF NO 1/4 OF SECTION 17 TOWN 29 RANGE 22 SUBJ TO EDGERTON ST THE N 160 FT OF E 313 FT OF S 1/2 OF SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SECTION 17 TOWN 29 RANGE 22 WHEREAS, ISD No. 623 no longer proposes to build their new gymnasium on the west side of the school. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council end the variance granted for the gymnasium addition on the west side of Edgerton Elementary School. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1994. 23 Attachment 11 VARIANCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Independent School District No. 623 applied for a variance from the zoning ordinance. WHEREAS, this variance applies to 1929 Edgerton Street. The legal description is: SUBJ TO STS & EX S 292.96 FT & EXN 155.04 FT OF S 448 FT OF E 468.6 FT & EX N 352.96 FT OF W 108 FT&EXN 160FT OFE 313 FT THE S 1/2 OF SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SECTION 17 TOWN 29 RANGE 22 SUBJ TO AVE AND ST THE S 448 FT OF E 468 6/10 FT OF NO 1/4 OF SECTION 17 TOWN 29 RANGE 22 SUBJ TO EDGERTON ST THE N 160 FT OF E 313 FT OF S 1/2 OF SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SECTION 17 TOWN 29 RANGE 22 WHEREAS, Section 36-28(c)(6)(a) of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances requires the proposed gymnasium addition to have a 30-foot setback from the Edgerton Street right-of-way. WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing a 25-foot setback. WHEREAS, this requires a variance of 5 feet. WHEREAS, the history of this variance is as follows: On November 21, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council this variance. On December 12, 1994, the City Council held a public heating. The City staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The Council gave everyone at the hearing an opportunity to speak and present written statements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations from the City staff and Planning Commission. 24 NOW, THE~FORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approve the above-described variance for the following reasons: 1. It would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance for the following reasons: The closer setback would not effect the houses across the street. The nearest house would be 150 feet from the proposed gymnasium. The typical minimum separation is 120 feet (a 30-foot setback on each side of the street and a 60-foot-wide right-of-way). b. The closer setback would not effect the adjacent properties on the west side of Edgerton Street. 2. Strict enforcemem of the Code would cause undue hardship. The School District cannot move the gymnasium further back and still meet the size needed by the City. 3. This variance is less than the previously approved 36.5-foot setback variance. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1994. 25 TO: FROM: RE: AGENDA REPORT City Manager Finance Director and Community Development Director Nc~ifie~ Rejected Date INCREASE IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SERVICE CHARGES DATE: October24, 1994 INTRODUCTION It is proposed that the Community Development Department service charges be revised effective January 1, 1995. BACKGROUND It has been past practice to raise service charges annually to keep up with inflation. In 1993 a User Fee Study was completed for the Community Development Department to insure that service charges finance an appropriate portion of the service costs. The User Fee Study report contained recommendations on 50 individual license/permit fees and service charges for the Community Development Department. For each item, it had information on the unit volume, current fee, costs to provide the service, recommended fee, phase-in schedule for recommended fee, estimated increased revenue from the recommended fee and subsidy amount after the recommended fee is phased in. On 5-24-93, the Council approved the recommended fees for 1993 and made the increases effective July 1, 1993. At this time, it would be appropriate to continue with the fee increases recommended in the User Fee Study. Also, it would be appropriate to increase all other Community Development Department fees by 3 % to keep up with inflation. It should be noted that the recommended fees in the User Fee Study will produce additional revenues of $212,000 over five years. The cost of the User Fee Study was $9,500. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Council (1) approve revisions in Community Development Department license/permit fees and services charges listed in Exhibit A effective January 1, 1995 and (2) approve first reading of an ordinance (Exhibit B) to increase the planning fees. o q:~agn\USERfe¢.CD ~ ... Exhibit Page 1 of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SERVICE CHARGES Esfima~d Annual 1-1-92 7-1-93 1-1-95 Volume Fee Fee Fee PLANNING F£E$ (Set by Ordinance): Zone Change 1 $285* $342* $410' Conditional Use Permit: R1 and R2 1 155' 183' 188' Other 11 185' 295* 404* Conditional Use Permit Revision: R1 and R2 1 57* 37* 38* Other 2 57* 75* 93* Variances: R1 and R2 7 57* 68* 82* Other 5 85* 219' 352* Vacations: R1 and R2 10 60* 72* 86* Other 2 60* 149' 238* Lot Divisions (Fee per lot created): R1 and R2 11 40 48 58 Other 1 40 86 131 I-Iome Occupations: Initial 2 53 72 92 Renewal 5 22 23 46 Sign Erection Permit 100 16-145 18 19 Billboard Erection Permit 1 14 73 75 Each Additional Sq. Ft. 62¢ N/A N/A Comprehensive Plan Amendment 3 285* 429* 573* Code Amendment 1 185 219 352 Planned Unit Development 1 340* 494* 648* Preliminary Plat 7 340 520 700 Plus a surcharge for each affected property to pay for the County's filing fee for resolutions Exhi bi t A Page 2 of 3 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SERVICE CHARGES Annual 1-1-92 7-1-93 1-1-95 Volume Fee Fee Fee Prelimimry Plat Revision or Time 9 57 85 113 Extension Final Plat 5 57 113 169 Time Extensions/Renewals 9 57 85 113 Billboard License 1 270 281 289 UCENSES DUE JANUARY 1 ST Motels: 1 - 15 Units I 60 72 87 16 - 35 Units 2 95 115 118 36 - 100 Units I 145 174 209 Over 100 Units 2 180 216 250 Special Food Handling Establishment 35 57 70 72 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE CHARGE Woodlot Alteration Permit 1 60 12 12 Building Relocation 5 145 260 375 Moving Permit 3 80 42 43 Community Design Review Board: R1 & R2 2 115 138 151 Other 16 115 213 311 Demolition Permit I 40 49 50 Mobile Home Permit I 50 31 32 On-Site Sewage Systems 6 15 24 33 PUBLICATIONS (Includes Sales Tax): Zoning Code 11 5 5 Platting Code 6 2 2 Sign Code 4 2 2 Exhibit A Page 3 of 3 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTME~ SERVICE CHARGES Annual 1-1-92 7-1-93 1-1-95 Volume Fee Fee Fee Comprehensive Plan 12 12 12 Zoning Map 5 2 2 City Map 5 2 2 Section Map 5 2 2 Planning Commission or Community Design Review Board: Minutes - Per Year 10 13 13 Agenda Packet - Per Year 100 88 91 Property Owner List 40 50 52 Q:~AGN~AGN\USERFEE.CD Exhibit B ORDINANCE NO. PLANNING FEES Section 1. Section 36-26 of the Zoning Code of the City of Maplewood is hereby amended as follows: Section 36-26. Fees. The following nonrefundable application fees shall be required: Zone Change $410 Conditional Use Permit: R1 & R2 188 Other 404 Conditional Use Permit Revision: R1 and R2 38 Other 93 Variances: R1 and R2 82 Other 352 Vacations: R1 and R2 86 Other 238 Lot Divisions (Fee per lot created): R1 and R2 58 Other 131 Home Occupation Permit 92 46 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 573 Code Amendment 352 Planned Unit Development 648 Preliminary Plat 700 Preliminary Plat Revision or Time Extension 113 Final Plat 169 Time Extensions/Renewals 113 (initial permit) (annual renewal) Section 2. Section 36-258 of the sign code is amended as follows: Section 36-258. Fees. (1) A sign erection permit fee (except for billboards) shall be $19. (2) The fee for erection of billboards shall be $75. (3) The annual license fee for billboards shall be $289. Section 3. This ordinance shall be'take effect on passage. Passed by the Maplewood City Council on Mayor Attest: Ayes-- Clerk Naves--