Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/19/20031. Call to Order MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday., February 19, 2003, 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. February3,2003 5. Public Hearings 7:00 a. Saint Paul Soccer Center (County Road B) 1. Land Use Plan Change (OS (open space) to P (park)) 2. Conditional Use Permit 7:15 b. Sibley Cove Apartment Building (County Road D) 1. Land Use Plan Change (BC to R-3(H)) 2. Conditional Use Permit for Plan ned Unit Development 7:30 c. Larpenteur Avenue Redevelopment Site (City of Maplewood) 1. Land Use Plan Change (R-1 to R-3(M)) 2. Zoning Map Change (R-1 to R-3) 6. New Business 7. Unfinished Business None 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations a. February 10 Council Meeting: Ms. Fischer b. February 24 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson c. March 10 Council Meeting: Ms. Monahan-Junek 10. Staff Presentations 11. Adjoumment 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 item 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. o 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 close 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. All decisions by the Planning Commission are recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes the final decision. jw/pc\pcagd Revised: 01/95 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2003 CALL TO ORDER Co-chairperson Rossbach called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. I1. ROLL CALL Commissioner Tushar Desai Present Commissioner Mary Dierich Present Commissioner Lorraine Fischer Absent Commissioner Matt Ledvina Present Commissioner Jackie Monahan-Junek Present Commissioner Paul Mueller Absent Commissioner Gary Pearson Present Commissioner William Rossbach Present Commissioner Dale Trippler Present at 7:03 p.m. Staff Present: Shann Finwall, ,Associate Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Desai moved to approve the agenda. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes - Desai, Dierich, Monahan-Junek, Pearson, Rossbach, Trippler IV. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the planning commission minutes for January 22, 2003. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the planning commission minutes for January 22, 2003. Commissioner Trippler seconded. Ayes- Desai, Dierich, Pearson, Rossbach, Trippler Abstentions-Ledvina, Monahan-junek PUBLIC HEARING None. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-03-03 -2- VI. NEW BUSINESS a. Ohlson Landscaping (1949 Atlantic Street (north of Frost Avenue) Ms. Finwall said Erik Ohlson and Stephanie Jacques are proposing to construct at 6,800-square- foot metal building at 1949 Atlantic Street. The building will house two businesses to include Ohlson Landscaping and Oehrlein Lawn and Landscape, with two office units and two separate service bays. The proposal requires two conditional use permits, one for exterior storage and the second for a metal building within the Business Commercial zoning district. Staff is recommending approval of the CUP for a metal building and denial of the CUP for exterior storage. Commissioner Ledvina said he noticed different square footage figures given for the building in the staff report. He asked staff which number was correct? Ms. Finwall said according to the site plan the building is 50 feet deep by 136 feet wide. Commissioner Trippler said this proposed structure is in his neighborhood and he is very familiar with the area. He wonders why staff feels that the outdoor storage of landscaping materials is not conducive to the neighborhood. There are hundreds of junky cars, machinery, cranes and heavy equipment that are parked in the next two lots. The last time he walked on the Gateway Trail people were throwing garbage bags of empty beer cans over the barrier onto the trail. He said there is a monopole there and the rest of the buildings are made of metal. He asked staff what the noise limitations were on the surrounding companies such as D & D, Al's and George',~ garage? Ms. Finwall said none of those businesses have limited hours of operation. Many of those businesses are existing as nonconforming uses which grew over time. Many of them don't have the required conditional use permits for exterior storage. There are a lot of things in the area that are unsightly. She said, however, staff does not feel that the city should be bound bY those nonconformities considering the fact that the area will possiblY be redevelopment. Staff has to take a look at this proposal with that in mind as well as complying with the existing ordinances. The area has a vast amount of exterior storage, metal buildings, and run down buildings, but it is something that the city would like to alleviate. She said this used to be the old downtown Maplewood and the city has a vision for this area. Commissioner Trippler said this piece of property is looking better than it has in the past 17 years he has lived there. He doesn't understand why the other buildings are allowed to do whatever they want. He thinks it is unfair to the applicant to have such restrictions put on Ohlson Landscapes, Inc. Commissioner Dierich asked staff if the applicant's land were in another zoning district would a metal building have been allowed? Ms. Finwall said a metal building is allowed only in a farm zone as a permitted use and this is a Business Commercial zone. Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 02-03-03 Commissioner Dierich stated Mr. Ohlson mentioned in his letter in the staff report that they may be doing small engine repair and tune-ups. She thought that required a special use permit because of the hazardous waste generated on the premises. Ms. Finwall said auto repair would require a conditional use permit, however, repair of the landscape vehicles that the applicants own is an accessory use of their business, therefore, it does not require a separate conditional use permit. The applicants will be bound by the fire and pollution control standards that will be required for changing oil and things of that nature. Commissioner Dierich asked staff how that was different from the Schlomka property when the city would not allow him to perform those types of repairs? Ms. Finwall said Mr. Schlomka's property was zoned farm residence and the city changed the ordinance for him to allow a landscaping business within that zoning district as a conditional use permit. She said a condition of his conditional use permit was no exterior storage, however, repair of his own landscape vehicles was not conditioned. Commissioner Monahan-Junek said a commission member asked staff if other businesses were bound by certain hours of operation, she wondered if the city 'had a noise ordinance? Ms. Finwall said yes, the city has a noise ordinance, which states no excessive noise from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. Monday through Saturday and all day Sunday which follows the recommended hours of operation for this business. Co-chairperson Rossbach asked the applicant to address the commission. Ms. Stephanie Jacques, C of O and Vice President of Ohlson Landscapes, Inc. residing at 1706 Barclay Street in Maplewood, addressed the commission. She said the drawing of the building in the staff report is at a preliminary stage. In working with Ms. Finwall they have shared a few different ideas for this proposal. They want a nice building that conforms to the plans of the future. This would include adding landscaping, perennials, and working around the Gateway Trail. She said they are willing to do pretty much anything for this proposal. They're proposing their metal storage building to be the same color as the maintenance building at the Keller Golf Course. She said the vehicle repair being done inside the building is only done if it is absolutely necessary. Larson Diesel normally inspects the trucks, which is also where the repairs are done. Emergency repairs would be done inside the building where it is warmer. Any oil changes that are done would be put in containers and taken off the site. She said the hours of operation start after 7:00 a.m. and if they did have to work until 7:00 p.m. it would be to clean up and maybe to wash the vehicles. She said they really need this building built. She needs to have an office building where they can do their work because currently she is working out of her home and it isn't very convenient. Commissioner Monahan-Junek asked the applicant if they are proposing to store rock and black dirt in the storage bins? Mr. Jacques said they would store rock in the storage bins but not black dirt. The rock gets used very quickly so they need bins to constantly store the rocks in. She said they need four bins to store their landscaping supplies in. Basically the landscapers would drive a bobcat to the storage bins, load up and be on their way to the job site to do the work. ---r I --'3 Planning Commission Minutes of 02-03-03 -4- Commissioner Ledvina said the city engineer that reviewed the proposal noted there was a difference with the site plan that shows sediment basins. He asked how the planning commissior could understand how the grading plan would work with the site plan? Ms. Jacques said all of the water drains toward the street. She said they have taken brush off of the property that needed to go. She does not think the runoff onto the Gateway Trail is an issue. Ms. Jacques said she would like to work with the engineer regarding the grading plan and go forward with this building. Ms. Finwall said the city engineer could not be here as a representative tonight but he will be at the city council meeting Monday, February 10, 2003. Commissioner Ledvina said the hand drawing of the site plan in the staff report show storage bins that are located within a sedimentation basin. Ms. Jacques said a lot of what the planning commission is looking at in the staff report was done preliminary before the engineer that they're working with had the chance to look at the property. Commissioner Ledvina asked the applicant if it was their intention to store trucks outside as indicated on the site plan? Ms. Jacques said they would need to store trucks outside. They have four pickups, two dump trucks, two bobcats, and three trailers and the business is still growing. They do have lawn equipment that would be stored inside the building. Co-chairperson RosSbach said there are a lot of dumpsters on the property. He asked if they belong to the neighbors next door and why are the dumpsters there? Ms. Jacques said the neighbors are temporarily storing the dumpsters on the property but they never keep them full. The neighbors are growing as well and are in the process of looking for land. The neighbors understand that when the metal storage building goes up, they will have to move. Commissioner Trippler said the city staff is proposing to deny the applicant's request for exterior storage for several different reasons and what impact would this have on your application? Ms. Jacques said it would have a major impact on them financially because the building would have to be larger. A building this size will not accommodate the pieces of equipment that Ohlson Landscape and Oehrlein Lawn and Landscape has. She said over time this building would be enhanced. They are planning on staying in this location for a few years and the building has to work "with" them. Otherwise, they would have to find another location because of their continued growth. The land would not be ruined, it would be enhanced and one day when they move, somebody else could remove the metal storage building and build another more permanent building. Commissioner Pearson said he assumes the fertilizer would be stored inside the building. Ms. Jacques said if they did have to store fertilizer, it would be in granule form only and it would be stored inside. Planning commission -5- Minutes of 02-03-03 Commissioner Pearson asked the applicant if they would be willing to bring the north fence line six to eight feet south to provide more area for vegetative screening to the Gateway Trail? Ms. Jacques said they would be open to any screening ideas. Commissioner Monahan-Junek said she feels the city would be putting a restraint on this landscape companY if they were required to store vehicles in the building. If the applicant would be required to screen the three sides of the property she does not feel there is a need to put a restriction of storing the vehicles inside the building. Trucks are parked outside of companies all over the city. As long as it is screened and the applicant is agreeable to the screening she thinks the commission should consider the outdoor storage of the vehiclesl Co-chairperson Rossbach asked if staff is referring to not allowing outdoor storage of materials or is it for the storage of vehicles, equipment and everything? Ms. Finwall said the ordinance reads "the exterior storage, display, sale or distribution of goods or materials". She said it does not define exterior storage as their landscape vehicles, The conditional use permit is for the exterior storage landscape materials. Ms. Finwall said, however, with a conditional use permit the commission could add a condition that the applicant can't store the vehicles outdoors. Staff is recommending no exterior storage of landscape materials. She said as Ms. Jacques has stated their business has grown and continues to grow. This causes concern for Staff in the fact that the applicant is already proposing four storage bins. She said when you open the door to exterior storage suddenly it looks like another Patio Town on Highway 36 with bins all over the place. She said in this case, staff is referring to the landscape material and not the vehicles. Co,chairperson Rossbach said in the staff report there was a comment made regarding moving the materials inside or designing a separate building to house the materials. He asked if it is staff's concern that the building will be visible from the Gateway Trail and from Atlantic Street? Ms. Finwall said one of the staff's concerns would be the noise, such as the bobcats running and the digging in the bins for rocks or materials. Also for the visual aspects from the Gateway Trail, for the residential property owners to the north, and for any future land uses that may come up including multi-family housing. Commissioner Trippler asked the commission to look at page 21 of the staff report. He said this is a photo of what that area looks like and has for years. He said there are so many vehicles, junk and brush along that area, it just looks terrible. He believes the landscape business will put visual barriers up and landscape and it will look 100 percent better. He said as far as the noise situation goes, he used to walk the Gateway Trail every weekend and some of the other businesses in the area are so loud between 6:00 and 7:00 a.m. that you can hardly hear yourself think. He said maybe at the CDRB meeting February 11, the board could put some restrictions on the number of storage bins the applicant could have. He personally would like to change the first recommendation in the staff report from denial to approval. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-03-03 -6- Commissioner Dierich said she is more concerned about the metal storage building then she is about the storage bins. She said asking the applicant to put dormers and rock facing on th~ building is expensive, you may as well build a new building because of the high cost involved. She would like to see a more permanent building and go from a CUP to a variance here and let the applicant have the storage bins then to put up another metal building in this location. She does not think there is a way to screen that area without berming from the Gateway Trail because there is nothing that could grow that high that quick. She feels the applicant needs to have the outdoor storage to store the landscape materials. Commissioner Pearson asked staff if the conditional use permit would be reviewed on a two or three year basis? Ms. Finwall said the conditional use permit would be reviewed yearly until such time that all the conditions are met then it can be brought back to the city council when there are problems or if there is an expansion. However, staff can always enforce CUP conditions. Co-chairperson Rossbach said he tends to agree with some of the comments that have been made. He said the city is taking the word of the applicant that they will do a good job setting the metal storage building up. In his opinion, some landscape businesses don't do a good job keeping their property up. Co-chairperson Rossbach said although the city is concerned about the noise level, he does not see anything outside the norm that the applicant would be doing. Co- chairperson Rossbach said he favors a nice looking metal building if it is improved a bit, it would be less expensive than building a block or stick built building. The building does not become as expensive, so in ten years or so if the applicant decides they have grown so much they need t¢ move then somebody else could buy this property and take it down and rebuild something that may fit in the area better. He would be in favor of allowing the applicant to have the outside storage as long as the city states in the conditions they have to screen the area excessively. When a motion is made the planning commission should be very specific in what exterior storage the commission will allow the applicant to have. Commissioner Ledvina said he wants to make sure the city gets a very detailed plan from the applicant which identifies screening in relation to the grading plan, the screening, the location of the bins etc. The site plan becomes part of the CUP and enforceable where things are located on the site. Commissioner Ledvina moved to approve the request of Erik Ohlson and Stephanie Jacques for a conditional use permit for exterior storage at 1949 Atlantic Street. The applicant is required to develop a detailed site plan that identifies the locations of storage for landscaping materials and the storage of vehicles on the site, The applicant shall work with the city staff in developing a detailed screening plan for outdoor storage for vehicles or landscape materials, (Chanc~es to the ori~qinal staff recommendation and conditions are in bold and deletions have a strike throuqh them). ......... storage ..... r~-* r,; ,"~ ~'~ r~ .I.; ,..~ I ' ............ propo,"t:c~ Planning Commiss'~on -7- Minutes of 02-03-03 Commissioner Ledvina moved to approve the attached resolution on pages 28 and 29 of the staff report. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for Erik Ohlson and Stephanie Jacques to cohstruct a 6,800-square-foot metal building within the Business Commercial zoning district at 1949 Atlantic Street for a landscaping business. The city council bases the permit on the findings required by code, and the conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions: a. There shall be no noise-making business activity conducted in the lot, or made by vehicles entering or ~eaving the ~ot, between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m., Monday through Saturday, or a~ day Sunday as required by code. b. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. c. The conditional use permit shall be reviewed by the city council in one year. Commissioner Pearson seconded. The motion passed. Ayes-Desai, Dierich, Ledvina, Monahan-Junek, Pearson, Rossbach, Trippler This item will go to the community design review board Tuesday, February 11,2003, and to the city council meeting on Monday, February 24, 2003. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Mr. Rossbach was the planning commission representative at the January 27, 2003, city council meeting. Mr. Rossbach said items that were discussed were: The 2002 PC annual report was approved. The planning commission members that had terms that were up for reappointments were reappointed. The CUP for the accessory building for Mr. Brown's carport on Keller Parkway was approved. The sign for Mr. Tillges was tabled for further discussion. Highwood Farm townhome proposal was moved to the city council meeting on Monday, February 10, 2003. There was discussion regarding the traffic report and the realignment of County Road D. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-03-03 -8- b. Ms. Fischer will be the planning commission representative at the February 10, 2003, city council meeting. The Highwood Farm townhome proposal will be discusSed. c. Mr. Pearson will be the planning commission representative at the February 24, 2003, city council meeting. The CUP for Ohlson Landscapes, Inc., will be discussed and it will be a public hearing. X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS ao Reschedule Monday, February 17, 2003, planning commission meeting because of President's Day to Wednesday, February 19, 2003. A telephone call was made to eaCh planning commission member. Out of the nine members, there were seven commission members that can attend. Planning commission members Mr. Desai and Ms. Dierich are unable to attend. Ms. Finwall said regarding the sign for Mr. Tillges, he met with staff and has agreed to reduce the size of the sign. The size will remain 20 feet high and 14 feet wide but the two bases will be reduced to 2 feet and the sign face will start 6 feet from ground grade. This will give visibility underneath the sign. Ms. Finwall said the reason the Beam Avenue sign was discussed was because Mr. Tillges was requesting a variance to the required setback whereas the sign on the Hazelwood Avenue will comply with the 10-foot setback. Xl. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment and Conditional Use Permit - Sandy Lake Soccer Fields County Road B to the West of 1-35E February 1'2, 2003 INTRODUCTION Project Description The City of St. Paul's Department of Parks and Recreation is propoSing to develop a six-field outdoor soccer park on the northerly portion of the St. Paul Water Utility property south of County Road B. Refer to the maps on pages 12-14. This property is part of the Sandy Lake lime disposal area for the St. Paul Water Utility. The applicant is proposing that these soccer fields would be used during daylight periods. There would not be lights for night play. There would be 235 parking spaces plus a lavatory building. The applicant proposes to buffer the playing fields by planting a 309-foot-wide wooded area along the south side of the fields. There are areas of existing trees for screening on the north/northeast. This soccer complex would fill a need for additional soccer fields needed by the-City of St. Paul for their soccer programs. This facility would be used for regular game scheduling as well as for tournaments. Refer to the narrative on pages 15-17. Requests The applicant is requesting that the city council approve: 1, A comprehensive land use plan amendment from OS (open space) to P (Park). 2. A conditional use permit (CUP) for this soccer park, City code requires a CUP for any public service or public building use. BACKGROUND The City of St. Paul and Ramsey County Parks Departments presented this proposal to the Maplewood Parks Commission in the fall of 2001. The parks commission held two public meetingsmthe first on September 17, 2001 and the second on November 19, 2001. At both meetings nearby residents expressed strong opposition to this project. I have enclosed the background data on this as a separate attachment. On November 19, 2001, the parks commission moved to "no longer take an active role in the review and development of the Sandy Lake Soccer Project." On June 20, 2001, the Maplewood City Council passed a resolution stating "the City of Maplewood encourages the City of St. Paul and Ramsey County to work together to locate and develop soccer fields at Sandy Lake." They further resolved "that the City of St. Paul and Ramsey County are hereby authorized and directed to pursue a plan for the development of public outdoor recreational facilities at the Sandy Lake site working in collaboration with the St. Paul Regional Water Services with a majority of costs to be borne by the City of St. Paul and/or Ramsey County." .The council further resolved "that any plan resulting from the process must be acceptable and ultimately approved by the City of Maplewood and that said plan is subsequently subject to the approval of the Board of St. Paul Regional Water Services and the City of St. Paul." I have attached a memo from Bruce Anderson, the Maplewood Parks and Recreation Director, explaining these happenings in better detail. Refer to pages 18-19. I have attached his memo along with supporting correspondence, council resOlution and minutes from the parks commission meetings in Attachment 19, a separate attachment. DISCUSSION Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment Open Space vs. Park The subject property has been designated as open space since the adoption of the first comprehensive plan. Open space land is intended as property that is set aside to provide a reasonable balance to developed urban land; Open spaces typically include environmental protection areas (wetlands and floodplains), lakes, cemeteries, natural drainage courses, golf courses and passive-use parks such as the Baffle Creek Regional Park with its woods and hiking trails. Parks, conversely, are active recreational areas that are designed to meet the needs of a particular neighborhood and provide for specific recreational activities (baseball, basketball, soccer, etc). The city code does not list any required findings for approval of a comprehensive plan amendment. The comprehensive plan, however, describes the following mission statement and goals for park and trail development. Mission Statement The purpose of the Maplewood parks, open space and trail system is to provide a comprehensive, balanced and sustainable system of parks, open spaces/natural areas, trails and leisure-oriented activities/programs for city residents to use and enjoy in as cost-effective manner as possible. Goals. · To provide city residents with parks and natural areas for recreation al uses as visual/physical diversions from the hard surfacing of urban development and as a means to maintain the character, ambience, appearance and history of the community. · To maximize the recreational opportunities available to city residents through the development of fair and equitable working partnerships between the city and the local school district, adjacent cities, county, churches and civic organizations. · To provide city residents with an interconnected trail system for transportation and recreation purposes and as a mea ns to tie divergent parks and open space with the broader community. Essentially, though, the question must be asked if a soccer park like this is appropriate for this location. What are the potential positive and negative impacts of this project? 2 · It would convert an unattractive and unusable lime pit to an attractive and useable park facility, · It would provide relief for heavily-used soccer fields in Maplewood. · It woUld create and foster a cooperative working relationship with the City of St. Paul and Ramsey County. · It would serve as a regional recreational facility. This is advantageous since recreation is a regional activity and not confined to community borders. Conditional Use Permit A case can be established that the proposed soccer complex meets or, conversely, does not meet the findings for approval of a CUP. On the positive side, parks are a typical land use found in residential areas. Developments are planned with recreation in mind. The City strives to provide recreational opportunities for its residents. Much of this site, in fact, abuts non-residential properties like the St. Paul Business Center, wetlands, railroad tracks and two school sites. The proposed soccer fields would not impact these properties. The applicant is also proposing a 309-foot setback from the fields to the abutting residential properties to the south and about 100-150 feet of setback from the abutting residential properties to the north/northwest. They propose to create a wooded buffer in these setback areas. This site would certainly be improved in appearance. On the negative side, the code requires that the city determine that the use would not cause a nuisance to any person or property because of excessive noise or other type of nuisance. Noise and traffic are the main concerns of area residents. Activity and litter were also noted as concerns. Many neighbors believe they should not have to experience any impacts by this project. Citizen Comments I summarized the comments we received from our neighborhood survey on pages 8-9. Of the 190 surveys sent out, 68 persons mailed theirs back. Of the respondents, 11 were in favor, 48 were opposed, 3 had no comment and 6 offered comments but took no firm position for or against. I have also enclosed a petition signed by 78 neighbors in opposition of this proposal on pages 38-44. This petition was submitted in September 2001. Although there are many reasons noted by the neighbors, these are a summary of the most frequently expressed comments: In Favor · It would be an improvement to the neighborhood. · It would be great to transform the lime pits into park or soccer fields. · It would be better than development. · There should be less soccer fields and add: ice-skating, bike paths, picnic facilities. 3 From a land-use standpoint, the proposal would provide an attractive, Iow-intensity use for this barren, unappealing land. If the city council were to approve this proposal, the applicant must provide the detailed plans as outlined above for a more thorough review. RECOMMENDATION If the city council wishes to proceed with this proposal, staff submits the following resolutions and conditions: Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment Adopt the resolution on page 45 approving a comprehensive land use plan amendment from OS (open space) to P (park) for the City of St. Paul's proposed Sandy Lake Soccer Complex. Approval is based on the following reasons: The proposed soccer complex would conform with Maplewood's mission to provide a comprehensive, balanced and sustainable system of parks, open spaces/natural areas, trails and leisure-oriented activities/programs for city residents to use and enjoy in as cost- effective manner as possible. It would provide city residents with parks and natural areas for recreational uses as visual/physical diversions from the hard surfacing of urban development and as a means to maintain the character, ambience, appearance and a sense of open space. It would maximize the recreational opportunities available to city residents through the development of fair and equitable working partnerships between the city and the local school district, adjacent cities, county, churches and civic organizations. It would provide city residents with an interconnected trail system for transportation and recreation purposes and as a means to tie divergent parks and open space with the broader community. 5. It would convert an unattractive and unusable lime pit to an attractive and useable park. 6. It would provide relief for existing soccer fields that are heavily used. 7. It would create and foster a cooperative working relationship with the City of St. Paul and Ramsey County. 8. It would serve as a regional recreational facility that would serve many communities. Conditional Use Permit Adopt the resolution on pages 46-48 approving a conditional use permit for the Sandy Lake Soccer Complex. Approval is based on the findings required by code and subject to the following conditions: o 7. 8. 9. A detailed site plan shall be submitted to the city for approval. All construction shall follow the approved site plan. 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 city council shall review this permit in one year. The applicant shall submit detailed plans that include, but are not limited to, the following: · A detailed landscape and tree-buffer plan with quantities, sizes, species and locations. · A detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and utility plan. The utility plan must show how sanitary waste would be removed from the restroom building. · Storm run-off calculations. · A site plan that provides setback dimensions, the location of trails, parking-lot dimensions and the location of any fences. · A trail connection to the comer of Adolphus Street and Skillman Avenue. · A right-turn lane into the proposed site. · Showing an area for "proof-of-parking" should the proposed 235 spaces be insufficient. · Post "no parking" signs within the main driveway. · Revise the plans to show a five-field soccer complex with the field space closest to the restroom building reserved for development as a neighborhood park with picnic facilities, tot lot, swing sets, etc. · The revised site plan should include a paved bike path around the perimeter of the site. · Widening the driveway entrance to 26--32 feet. · Provision of a gate at the ddveway entrance. Site lighting shall not be allowed for night play. Staff may approve security lighting if it is found to be needed by the police chief for security reasons. Park maintenance shall be provided by the City of St. Paul. No festivals shall be held at this soccer park. Youth tournaments are allowed. The applicant shall be responsible for locking the gate each evening. The applicant shall also submit a program identifying the hours of use, the teams or groups using this facility and their ages. They shall also submit the management plan for the facility as well as a plan for enforcement should there be any problems. CITIZENS' COMMENTS I surveyed 190 nearby and adjacent property owners for their opinion about the proposed soccer fields. Of the 68 replies, 11 were in favor, 48 were opposed, 3 had no comment and 6 offered comments but took no firm position. Many comments were repeated and shared by the respondents. I have included a summary of the comments I received below and a sampling of the letters received on pages 20-35. The planning commission and city council will receive copies of all of the actual replies as a separate attachment. In Favor 1. It would be an improvement to the neighborhood. 2. There should be walk-in entry points. 3. The plantings should support wildlife and songbirds, plant under-story shrubs. 4. Would be better than a foundry or business development in the back yard. 5. Suggestions: Fewer soccer fields; provide ice-skating rink; bike paths; park be open to others. 6. Need guarantee of no outdoor lighting in the future. 7. Don't allow access to Adolphus or Jackson Streets. 8. Add a walking path, bike path and playground. 9. Wonderful. We would like a direct connection to our site. (Minnesota Waldorf School) 10. A groat asset. (Tri Distdct School) 11. An asset for the community. 12. It would be groat to transform those lime pits into soccer fields. Opposed 1. This is St. Paul's problem, not Maplewood's to handle. Let them provide a park in their city. 2. The tree buffer will take forever to grow. 3. ^dolphus Street can't handle any more traffic. 4. No! No! No! We don't want this. 5. Would create much noise and traffic. 6. Thero is too much traffic already. 7. Would create noise, litter and lighting nuiSances. 8. Make it a wildlife preserve instead. 9. Leave it as green space. 10. We voted to preserve open spaces in Maplewood by raising taxes. How can you consider this? 11. We bought our home because of the open space. 12. Convert this area to a small park or a swamp. 13. We do not need this and the trouble it will bring. 14. This would cost Maplewood money because of police and fire service. Keep costs down in these tight budget times. 15. Stop the politics and start listening to the taxpayers. 16. I am retired now and don't need the noise, lights and traffic. 17. This would increase the potential for adolescents hanging around-drugs, alcohol, vandalism. 18. What is it you folks don't understand about the word NO? 19. This was turned down once. Why aro we doing this again? 20. These fields would be for tournament use causing too much traff~c, noise and activity. 21. 150 to 200 parking spaces is outrageous. We'll fight this tooth and nail. 22. This land is like quicksand. It will keep caving in. 23. Build baseball fields instead. 24. Make it a children's park. 25. Will hurt our property values. 26. Why can't the Maplewood area be for Maplewood rather than serving St. Paul's needs. 27. Our neighborhood is quiet now. Comments from those neither "for" nor "opposed" to the golf course 1. Ok if there would be no assessments and people aren't allowed to park in the street. 2. Single-family homes or town houses are preferred. 3. Preference: a fence around the entire site; no access to Skillman Avenue; plant mature trees. 4. Preserve the area of one of the fields for things like a picnic shelter, playground, horseshoes and basketball. 5. How could you access the area without having to drive? 6. Owner-occupied town homes are preferred. 7. Will this raise our taxes? 8. Don't allow a traffic connection to Adolphus Street. 9. Never allow lights. 10. This park would need policing to prevent the use of the parking lots at night. 11. Add an entrance to the park at ^dol phus street to take the burden off of County Road B. 9 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 37 acres Existing land use: Undeveloped and previously used as a lime-storage area for the St. Paul Water Utility SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: East: West: Single dwellings and County Road B Single Dwellings Undeveloped open space and the St. Paul Business Center West The Soo Line Railroad, the Minnesota Waldorf School and the Tri-District School PLANNING Land Use Plan designations: Zoning: F (farm residential) existing: OS (open space); proposed: P (park) CODE REQUIREMENTS Section 36-437(1) of the city code requires a conditional use permit for any public service or public building use. Findings for CUP Approval Section 36-442(a) requires that the city council base approval of a CUP on nine findings. Refer to the findings for approval in the resolution on pages 46-48. Findings for Amendment of the Land Use Plan There are no specific findings for approval required. The parks section of the plan, however, gives a list of goals the city strives for in the development of parks and trails. These are listed on page 2 of this report. APPLICATION DATE These applications were accepted in complete form on January 23, 2003. State law requires that the city decide on these requests within 60 days. The city council must act on these requests by Ma rch 24, 2003. 10 p:sec18~soccerfields.doc Attachments: 1.' Location Map 2. Address Map 3. Site Plan 4. Conditional Use Permit and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Narrative dated November 20, 2002 5. Additional Sandy Lake Soccer Complex Narrative dated January 13, 2003 6. Memo from Bruce Anderson dated February 5, 2003 7. Letter from Joseph Plumbo 8. Letter from Robert G. Lunzer 9. Letter from Mike and Kelly Thompson 10. Letter from JoAnn Ronning 11. Letter from John Hackman 12. Letter from John and Rose Strantz 13. Letter fro m John W. Chapman 14. Letter from Dan Soler, Ramsey County Traffic Engineer 15. Petition of those opposed to the proposal 16. Land Use Plan Change Resolution 17. Conditional Use Permit Resolution 18. Complete packet of Citizen Comments (separate attachment) 19. Parks Commission Background Data (separate attachment) 20. Colored Site Plan (separate attachment) Attachment 1 LITTLE CANADA RD. B SKID-MAN AVE. [ MT. VERNON AV~ Edger~n Park RDSELAWN AVE. KINGSTON LWOOD dMER AVE.. Z~ VIKING DR. CT. BELLWOOD ,.~ KINGSTON.,~> AVE. :~AV~:. MAP Attachment 2 7O COUNTY ROAD B E PROPOSED SOCCER FIELD SITE SKILLMAN AVE E MOUNT VERNON AVE E ~102i 10ai1161 1~') 132 13~ 14a 158 156i1¢4 170 176 184 . 10~ 10~~ 11~ 12~ 131 137 1~ 151 1 1~ 171, 1~ 185 193 DOWNS AVE E i11,; 12.0 12~ 13~ 1421 15~ 15116i17~ 17~ 18, 940 ,' I'i,15:'12'1 -~29,135la$I'~5,1hS7 'm3 171 177 185 ,193, ROSELAWN AVE E 1108 i 1121120112a 734 i. 141 151 156 ' 162 ! 170 ',178 [ 84 11.9~ 1200 [?-n8 '21~i ~----~t ~ ,, I , I, I I, ADDRESS MAP 13 Attachment .SITE PLAN November 20, 2002 CONDITIONAL USE OR PUD APPLICATION COMPREmqNSIVE PLAN A1V[E~NT APPLICATION For: City of Maplewood 1830 County Road.B East Maplewood, MN 55109 Attachment ECE VED 2003' Intended Use: The intended use for this property will provide park space and soccer facil/ties. This development will help alleviate the strain of overuse that is put on other soccer facilities in the area. The development will include soccer fields, parking, drainage ponds, and a rest room facility. There will be a significant buffer of Wooded space between the residential neighborhood and the soccer fields so the residential area will be positively affected by the. development. The use would change the character of the surrounding area by eliminating an industrial land use and replacing it with an ample amount of woods, open space, and recreation space. Property values w/Il also benefit by being located close to a large expanse of woods and open space that is desirable within urban and suburban settings. 15 Attachment DMSION OF PARKS AND RECREATION CITY OF SAJNT PAUL Randy C. Kelly, Mayor 300 City Hall Annex 25 West Fourth Street Saint Paul, Mi~mcsota 55102 www. c/.stpaul.ran.us/d ept~parks Telephone: 651-266~6400 Facsim/le: 651-292-7405 TTY: 651-266-6378 January 13, 2003 To: Tom Ekstrand City of Maplewood Office of Community Development 1830 East County Rd. B Map!ewood, Mn 55109 AN I 5 ..... From: Kathleen W. Anglo ~:' Re: Sandy Lake Soccer Field Proposal Tom, here is the additional information you requested for our conditional use permit and land use plan change requests in the fax transmittal we received on December 12, 2002, A. parking: The proposed number of parking spaces was determined by the average number of people per team: 11 active players/team + 4 players on the bench + 2 coaches + 1 referee + 30 (2 spectators/player) = 48 people/team 48 x 2 teams/field = 96 96 x 6 fields ='576 people total Based on city zoning codes for outdoor recreation'facilities in St. Paul, MN; Canton, MI and Santa Monica~ CA, there should be 1 space for every 3-4 people at the facility. This equals 144-192 spaces. There is also additional parking to accommodate 20% more people during peal~ usage, and the transition of people fi:om one game being played to the next, for a total of 235 parking spaces. B. Screening: As part of the construction drawing package for this project, we would include a detailed Planting plan and detai/s. The large areas o£planting w/ll be mostly lime tolerant species, particularly fi:om the Maple-Basswood Forest commun/ry. Where there is adequate fi~'~, we will also plant evergreens. AA-ADA-EEO Employer These species include: - Acer, Maples - Aluus, Alders - Carpinus, Hornbeams - Corylus, Hazels - Cratagus, Hawthorns : Fagus, Beech '- Frax/nus, Ash - Juniperus, Junipers - RhUs, Sumac - Picea, Spruce - Pinus, Pines - Sorbus, Mountainash - Tilia~ Basswood - Tsuga, Eastern Hemlock C. Lighting: Not included 'm project. D. Phases of Construction: The entire project is anticipated to be completed in two phases. The first phase includes filling the site; wkich is currently being done by the Board of Water'Commlssioners. The City of St. paul will complete the first phase with final grading, installation of the access road, parking, dra/nage, storm sewers, turf, and landscaping. Phase two includes the installation of the rest room, sanitary sewer, and additional landscaping. Property Owner List: I have attached a 350' buffer list for eac'h parcel. Some of the names may overlap. ccl Tim Agness Bob. Bierscheid 'Vince Gillespie AA-ADA-EEO Employer 17 Attachment 6 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Tom Ekstrand, Asst. Community Development Director Bruce K. Anderson, Director of Parks and Recreation February 5, 2003 for the February 24 City Council Meeting Sandy Lake Soccer Project Introduction The Maplewood Parks and Recreation Commission and department staff formally reviewed the concept of developing a soccer complex at Sandy Lake in the fall of 2001. The concept of developing a soccer complex was .initiated by Ramsey County and St. Paul parks and Recreation Department on an informal basis approximately one or two years prior. The~parks and recreation commission held two public neighborhood meetings which concluded with the parks and recreation commission recommending that the commission no longer take an active role in the public review process of the Sandy Lake soccer complex. A letter was forwarded on January 3, 2002 to the neighbors indicating the parks and recreation commission's position. It is important to understand that the letter cleady stated in paragraph four and I quote: "Since the November meeting, I have .informally reviewed the status of this project with the Maplewood city council. The Maplewood dty council understands that there is no project to review at this time and that it is feasible that the Regional Water Authority, Ramsey County or the city of St. Paul may develop a project which would ultimately need to be reviewed by the city council at a future date.' The Parks and recreation commission has had no further formal discussion on this issue since that date, but they are aware that the project has been resubmitted by the St. Paul Parks and Recreation Department. Background I have attached a vadety of background information to assist in your review of the St. Paul Parks and Recreation Department's proposal for a soccer complex at Sandy Lake. The parks and recreation commission was involved for approximately five monthsfrom August 2001 to January 2002 reviewing the process. The enclosed correspondenCe and' formal commission minutes provides a Snapshot of the commission's action on this issue. In addition to the parks and recreation commission's action and minutes, I have included a copy of a letter dated November 15, 2001 from Vic Wittgensteini director of St. Paul Parks and Recreation, which addresses the questions raised by residents at the September commission meeting. In addition, I have included a letter dated November 16, 2001 from Rob McHattie, president of Soccer Spaces, which outlines'the 'need for soccer in Ramsey County. The parks and recreation commission coordinated two public meetings which were well 'attended. The first meeting was held in September at the Parkside fire station. The Sandy Lake Soccer Project Page 2 February 5, 2003 second meeting was held in October at the Maplewood community center. It was clear that the residents attending strongly opposed the soccer project. The parks and recreation commission was supportive of the project in concept. Following two very contentious public meetings, the parks and recreation .commission voted five to three to not pursue any active support and/or endorsement of the project. The parks and recreation commission has not taken a formal position since that time, but I have kept them appdsed of the-project proposal by St. Paul Parks and Recreation Department. T. he commission informally indicated at the January meeting that they do not desire to be involved in the .review process. They felt it was more appropriate to be reviewed by' the planning commission and ultimately the .city council for a final decision. My professional recommendationis to support and endorse the Concept as presented. There is a great shortage of soccer 'facilities in St. Paul. Although it could, be argued that Maplewood will not directly benefit from the development of Sandy Lake as a soccer COmplex, it is my.position that we wo~ld benefit indirectly by experiencing "relieff on usage of our existing soccer fields by residents of St. Paul. We currently have a phenomena which I-have dubbed "phantom soccer leagues" which regularly use Hazelwood, Harvest, Sherwood and Playcrest Parks. We have addressed the issue of non-permitted soccer field use for the. past three years .and have experienced difficulty in enforcing organized play on public park land. The One addition that I believe needs to be considered in the development of the. soccer complex is a trail connection from the comer of Adolphus Street and Skillman Avenue. The ultimate development of this site will include a trail corridor through the water works property to Rice Street on to Lake'Josephine to the west, and to the south to Roselawn and County Road B. It has been our experience that neighborhood trail connections .greatly benefit and enhance neighborhood property values and provide increased recreational opportunity for our residents. Recommendation It is my recommendation that the proposed development be reviewed formally by the planning commission and city council and that the residents be informed of the process as outlined in the January 3, 2002 correspondence. Should you have any questions regarding the parks and recreation commission's 'involvement in this project, feel free to contact me directly at ext. 4573. kd~sandylksoccer.mem Enclosures 19 January 24,2003 Togethar We Can Attachment NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY - CITY OF ST. PAUL SOCCER PARK This letter is to get your opinion on an application the city received for property in your ne~'ghborhood. The City of St. Paul's Depar[ment of Parks and Recreation is proposing to develop a six-field outdoor soccer park on the St. Paul Water Utility property presently known as Sandy Lake. The applicant is proposing thai the Sandy Lake lime bed be converted to use as soccer fields. They propose to l?.iant trees to screen the fields from the homes to the south. The soccer fields are proposed for only daylight use at this time. Night lighting is not proposed. The site plan is conceptual at this time. The applicant has not developed a specific grading or planting plan for the site yet. Refer to the enclosures. I need your opinion to help me prepare a recommendation to the planning commission and city council. Please wdte your opinion and comments below and return this letter, and any attachments on which you have wdtten comments, in the enclosed postage-paid envelope bY February 3, 2003. If you would Ilk& further information, please call me at 651-770-4562 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. I will send you a notice of any public hearing on this application. Thank you for your comments. I will give them careful consideration. THOMAS EKSTRAND - ASSISTANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTO R Enclosures: Maps and Drawings I have no comments: Comments; ~) t~c,r~, ~ ' ie es / Section 18) riCE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 651-770-Zt560~¢ ,',~ FAX: 651-748-309t; CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1830 EAST COUNTY ROAD B 20 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 Date 1/1/72 Source Water Dept. Publication Story of St. Paul Water Supply Action Lime Recalcining and Waste Water Recovery Plant put into operation. Dded sludge made into small pellets. 7/15/86 MN PCA Noise Pollution Control Rules Section 7010.0020 Definitions marked subparts regarding Daytime and Nighttime hours (7 a.m. to 10 p.m. and 10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) 8/5/87 10/19/87 Meeting of Water Department with area residents Maplewood City Council Meeting List detailing complaints from hauling with names and add resses of residents - dust, noise (starting before 7 a.m. and ending after 7 p.m.), vibrations, popping nails, cracks in walls and stucco, broken pafio door, gas leaks, hauling on Roselawn rather than Court;c/Rd. B, unresponsiveness of Water Utility to complaints from previous 5 years Review of neighborhood concerns regarding St. Paul Water Board's Water Treatment Plant. 10/19/87 Carolyn Peterson Petition presented to Maplewood City Council and state re presentatives to support and enact legislation that would ensure suburban representation on the St. Paul Board of Water Commissioners in the 1988 legislative session signed by over 200 area residents. 0/27/87 Carolyn Peterson Letter to Patrick J. Kelly, Attorney at Law, regarding information on filter presses for removing lime used by Minneapolis and questioning why St. Paul doesn't use this method. 11/3/87 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Noise monitoring on September 15, 1987, found noise levels in excess of State of Minnesota noise standards. Includes letter and report 11/7/87 Carolyn Peterson Letter to Gary Bastian questioning height of dikes and roads to a level even with houses, refers to lack results of study by health department as to the effects of all the lime dust and diesel fuel that Verne Jacobson of the Water Department refers to 12/28/87 Water Utility Cc mments about Maplewood Ordinance on extraction More than 50 years has owned and operated spent lime storage lagoons. Water Utility recognizes that there are problems and concerns it must address but questioned the need for the Material Extraction and Hauling Ordinance, 1/1/88 City of Maplewood Material Extraction and Hauling Ordinance (No. 619) goes into effect RECEIVED JAN 3 1 2O03 23 Date 1/6/88 Source Michael A. McGuire, City Manager .,Action Letter to Tom Mogren, General Manager, St. Paul Water Utility, requesting a written response to neighborhood concerns from the October 19, 1987, meeting. 1/11/88 Letter from 17 residents Letter supporting Matedal Extraction and Hauling Ordinance. Details problems of past 5 years with hauling and the fact that the Water Department says that this will be an ongoing operation. 1/11/88 Newspaper (St. Paul?) Mplwd City Council Mtg Tom Mogren mgr water dept. Suggested that terminating the operation (sludge removal) would interrupt the production and quality water supply 1/11/88 Newspaper (St. Paul?) Mplwd City Council Mtg City attempted to control the mining operations at the site through various means, including neighborhood meetings with representatives of the water utility, negotiations with the board and passing a city noise ordinance, but has limited success. 1/11/88 Newspaper (St. Paul?) Sludge needed to be removed because ponds are nearly filled to capacity. Mplwd City Council Mtg 1/11/88 Newspaper (St. Paul?) Residents complaints - removal of sludge-like spent lime creates unbearable dust, Mplwd City Council Mtg noise, vibrations and general disorder in neighborhood. 1/11/88 Newspaper (St. Paul?) Mplwd City Council Mtg Tom Mogren mgr. water dept. Rehabilitating the site will be impossible even if new technology is enacted that will alleviated the need for the storage ponds since the ponds will remain indefinitely regardless of when the operation ceases. 1/11/88 Newspaper (St. Paul?) Maplewood City Council passed "material extraction and hauling" ordinance Mplwd City Council Mtg 1/11/88 Newspaper (St. Paul?) Ordinance requires excavation operations in the city to be licensed. Mplwd City Council Mtg 1/11/88 Newspaper (St. Paul?) Mplwd City Council Mtg ' Ordinance requires contractors to screen operation from view of residents, hold down dust, no~se and vibration levels, adhere to minimum distance guidelines nearby residences, keep site relatively attractive and renovate the site when done. 22 Date 2/2/88 Source . Proposed bill Chapter 412.319 Action Bill requiring membership on water board or commission by municipalities that are served by another municipality. 2/25/88 Water Board Meeting Resolution 3850 - establish a committee consiSting or representatives of the Board, the Maplewood City Council and residents of the City of Maplewood to address complaints and provide information in regards to spent-lime lagoon system. ' 3/9/88 Board of Water Commissioners First meeting to address problems and concerns of residents. Met throughout 1988 and the results were the-wall and arborvitae behind the houses on Jackson and Skillman (completed in 1989), hauling done on the NE comer, limiting of hours and days of operations 5/12/89 Water Dept. Survey Survey of condition of homes on Jackson and Skillman adjacent to the water department property to aid in future claims against the water department. 1989/1990 6/23/97 Board of Water Commissioners Advisory Committee Star Tribune Notes from two years of meetings as residents worked with Water Department to resolve issues. New treatment process in place fo r removal of lime from water starting 1/1/97. Plans to cover lime pit with 4 feet of dirt creating either a new urban forest or a sedes of sports fields once environmental studies are done.. In 1951 started adding lime to water. Wall now 20 feet above odginal lake surface. Lime 20 - 30 feet deep. 8/11/97 Mplwd City Council Hearing on proposal for lime lagoons by St. Paul Water Utility Plan for renovation of four small lagoons north of Roselawn but not for large lagoon north of Skillman. Plan to rehabilitate one lagoon each year beginning in 1997 and finishing in the year 2000. Site plan labels Basin No. 5 as future Natural Open Space (Landscaping to be Determined). 2/5/1 7/17/1 The Review Dave Wagner, St. Paul Reg. Water Services Engineering/Project Manager Pioneer Press Bruce Anderson, director of parks and recreation for Maplewood 39.2 acre site is 20% filled. Done under the authorization of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and is being conducted similar to that of capping a landfill. Stability needs to be carefully examined. Maplewood doesn't need any soccer fields because it already has 26 of them. 7/17/1 Pioneer Press Vince Gillespie, manager of recreation for St. Paul's division of Parks and Recreation Soil is being studied to see if it can stand up to use as a soccer venue. St. Paul has 5 soccer fields with 10 more in the works. 23 Date 7/17/1 Source Pioneer Press Greg Mack, director of parks and recreation for Ramsey County Action Has awarded grants to improve or develop 20 fields in such communities as Mounds View, White Bear Township. Roseville, Maplewood and the city of St, Paul. 8/1/1 Peter Fischer, ch airperson Maplewood Parks and Recreation Commission 32 acre site - as of 11/3/0, 8.7 acres had been filled. 12/24/1 Dumping on Christmas Eve 12/31/1 Dumping on New Year's Eve 1/1/2 Dumping on New Year's Day 24 Attachment 8 Janua~ 24,2003 Together W~ Can Attachment 9 KELLY A THOMPSON 151 DOWNS AVE E MAPLEWOOD, MN 55117 - 1912 NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY - CITY OF ST. PAUL SOCCER PARK This letter is to get your opinion on an application the city. received for property in your neighborhood. The City of St. Paul's Department of Parks and Recreation is proposing to develop a six-field outdoor soccer.park on the St. Paul Water Utility property presently known as Sandy Lake. The applicant is proposing that the Sandy Lake lime bed be converted to use as soccer fields. They propose to plant trees to screen the fields .from the homes to the south. The soccer fields are proposed for only daylight use at this time. Night lighting is not proposed. The site plan is conceptual at this time. The applicant has not developed a specific grading or planting plan for the site yet. Refer to the enclosures. I need your opinion to help me prepare a recommendation to the planning commission and city. council. Please write your opinion and comments below and return this letter, and any attachments on which you have wdtten comments, in the enclosed postage-paid envelope by February 3, 2003. If you would like further information, please call me at 651-770-4562 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. I will send you a notice of any public hearing on this application. Thank you for your comments. I will give them careful consideration. THOMAS EKSTRAND - ASSISTANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Enclosures: Maps and Drawings I have no comments: JAN 2 9 2OO3 OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 651-770-4560 Fax: 651-748- 3096 CIT~ OF MAPLEWOOD 1830 EAST COUNTY ROAD MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 January 24,2003 vi/cd "~" "~,~ ..... ~ ~:,,,~ ' Attachment l 0 Together We Can NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY - CITY OF ST. PAUL SOCCER PARK This letter is to get your opinion on an application the city received for property in your neighborhood. The City of St. Paul's Department of Parks and Recreation is proposing to develop a six-field outdoor soccer park on the St. Paul Water Utility property presently known as Sandy Lake. The applicant is proposing that the Sandy Lake lime bed be converted to use as soccer fields. They propose to plant trees to screen the fields from the homes to the south. The soccer fields are proposed for only daylight use at this time. Night lighting is not proposed The site plan is conceptual at this time. The applicant has not developed a specific grading or planting plan for the site yet. Refer to the enclosures. I need your opinion to help me prepare a recommendation to the planning commission and city council. Please write your opinion and comments below and return this letter, and any attachments on which you have wdtten comments, in the enclosed postage-paid envelope by February 3, 2003. If you would like further information, please call me at 651-770-4562 betWeen 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. I will send you a notice of any public hearing on this application. Thank you for your comments. I will give them careful consideration. THOMAS EKSTRAND - ASSISTANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN Enclosures: Maps and Drawings OFFICE Of COMMUNI~ D~VE ' -- E ELOPMENT · 65~-770-4560 · F~: 6S1-748-3096 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1830 EAST COUNTY ROAD B 3O MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 Attachment ll John Hackman 2011 Jackson St. Maplewood, ~ _5_5!17 Dear Sir, I'm writing in regards to the proposed soccer fields on SandyLake. ! live at 2011 Jackson Street. My wife and I and our children have lived here ! 7yrs and enjoy this quiet neighborhood and. the scenery that we have now. These soccer fields that are proposed come to the city with high price. More police for all the problems that will occur with this complex and who will do al! the clean up and pay for these after functions. This neighborhood has been to many meetings on this and the city doesn't listen to the people in our area at all..When Mayor Norm Coleman was Mayor of St. Paul they proposed this to him and his response was not in my City. This is St. Paul's problem, not the city of Map!ewood. We do not want this complex in our city. You say no lighting is proposed? In 2 yrs then they will come back to the city to propose adding lights. Please stand by the people in our neighborhood and tell the city of St. Paul to ask another city to accept this complex. We like our neighborhood the way it is. Please keep our neighbors and our neighborhood informed of any meetings that will be held. Again we do not need this complex here. Thank You, Jol,.n Hac -krnan 32 Attachment 12 January 26, 2003 Thomas Ekstrand 1830 E. County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109-2797 Re: Soccer Field Opinion & Comments We are for the idea of having a park developed in this area. We like the idea of planting of trees to screen the area from adjacent residents. I know that this land won't sit dormant. In my opinion a recreational park is a great idea over an industrial park. Ask the neighbors if they would rather see a foundry in their backyard, or soccer fields. If one doesn't think 24 hour a day businesses could be put here, a reminder is the Roselawn Business Park that is adjacent to 35E. I recall 30 years or so back when the local residents were not .happy with this business development and the business park is here today. Our other comments / suggestions are: 1) Do we need 6 soccer fields or could soccer fields and one baseball diamond be feasible? 2) The park could be open in the winter months for ice skating. 3) The park should be open for local residents use, during non- soccer activities. 4). A bicycle path could be built around the perimeter of the park. Are there any ideas proposed for the area west of Jackson Street, adjacent to Roselawn Avenue, to the railroad tracks? Thank you for this opportunity for us to provide comments, John Strantz Rose Strantz 112 Roselawn Ave. E. Maplewood, MN 55117-1924 33 Attachment 13 John W. Chapman 160 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55117 January 30, 2003 Thomas Ekstrand Assistant Community Development Director Office of Community Development City of Maplewood 1830 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 Re: Neighborhood Survey - City of St. Paul Soccer Park Mr. Ekstrand: I am writing to express my opinion on the plans for a soccer park on the Sandy Lake property, as communicated in your letter of January 24th and its enclosures. While I am pleased with many of the ideas that have been implemented in the latest plan, there are a few issues that I feel strongly about. I made some notes on the plan to indicate what I am talking about. There should be an entrance to the park from the south, via Adolphus Street. This would provide direct freeway access to the park, Adolphus being less than 100 yards from the 35E freeway ramps. Allowing access to the park from Adolphus Street would share the load of traffic caused by the park. The current plan would send more cars through the congested, complex and dangerous Rice Street/County Road B/Highway 36 intersection. The section of County Road B between Rice Street and the proposed sole entrance can be extremely busy at times, and -already serves as an overflow route during rash hour. In addition, there is heavy traffic at certain times from the two schools along this section of County Road B and from the St. Jude Medical Center office. The impending opening of the new Joe's sporting goods mega-store will only increase the traffic problem. It only seems natural that a park serving St. Paul, our neighbor to the south, would have a southern entrance, especially when it would be so convenient from the freeway. Adolphus Street should have an entrance to the tmrk as _....~ well. Although on the Soccer Location Study-Concept diagram there is a great deal of attention paid to the planted screen south of the park, I think as much or more attention should be paid to the screen on the northern side, as my house and those of my neighbors are closer to the fields and the parking lots than the majority of the residents south of the park. I would like to see the planned screen north of the park be as thick as possible. Despite my criticisms included here, I believe the park can be a positive addition to Maplewood and to my neighborhood. The plan to not include lights is critical, as this would be a real deal-breaker for all of the neighbors. I would also like to see concrete plans made to ensure that there is adequate security to discourage nighttime use of the parking lots. Thank you for this chance to express my opinions on the Sandy Lake project. I would welcome any further questions you might have, and would like to hear of any meetings or hearings associated with the project. Sincerely, 160 County Road B E. Maplewood, MN 55117 (651) 4284566 3S 36 Attachment 14 RAMSEY COUN'W Department of Public Works Kenneth G. Haider, P.E., Director and County Engineer ADMINISTRATION/LAND SURVEY 50 West Kellogg Blvd., Suite 910 St. Paul, MN 55102 · (651) 266-2600 · Fax 266-2615 E-raail: Public.Works@co.r amsey, mn.us ENGINEERING/OPERATIONS 3377 N. Rice Street Shoreview, MN 55126 (651) 484-9104 * Fax 482-5232 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Tom Ekstrand City of Maplewood Dan S olergrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrg~N Ramsey C6unty Public Works City of Saint Paul Soccer Fields January 28, 2003 The Ramsey County Public Works Departfiaent has reviewed the conditional use permit for construction of a soccer field complex in the City of Maplewood. Ramsey County has several concerns regarding access and traffic flow for this development. The proposed redevelopment of the site will construct 6 new soccer fields along with parking space for 235 vehicles. This will generate additional trips to and from the site at the access point on County Road B. The additional traffic generated is-not exPected to cause operational problems along County Road B. The. proposed access onto County Road B will be constructed at or near the existing gate access into the site. Sight lines are adequate at this location. The access road should be constructed to a width of 26 - 32 feet at the opening to County Road B. This will allow easier turning movements in and out of the site. 3. The existing shoulder along eastbound County Road B should be widened and re-striped to provide a right turn lane into the site. 4. The City of Saint Paul will be required to obtain permits from Ramsey County for any work within Ramsey County right-of-way along County Road B. Thanks for the opportunity to make comments regarding this issue. If you have any questions or need any additional information please give me a call. Minnesota's First Home Rule County printed on recycled paper with a minimum of 10~/posvconsumer con[ent ~ 37 Attachment 15 Mr. Paer F~Omr, c~ ~ P~,s ~-~ Rec Commi~ion 18, 2001 soccer ~ ~ bttilt m Sa~d~ Lak~. September 18, 2001 Mr. Peter Fisct~er, Chairperson Maplewood Pa~k~ and Rec Commission 1830 East County Road B Maptewood, MN 55'109 We, thc tmda'si~e..d Maplcwood msid~s, are NOT in fava- ofti~ soc¢~ ficlds b~in~ built ia Sandy Lake. Name Address Comments bT.//. Mr. Peter Fi,~her, Cheirpemon Mlil0JOW~ Pel'k~ and Roc Commi~siofl 1830 East County Road B Maplowood, MN 55109 September 18, 2001 the undev~gned .M~l~ood residents, ~ NOT in fi~vor of~¢ soo~ fzld~ b~ing bu~t in Sandy La~. Name Address Comments /7,5 ~8 BD~d ~ AB~fl~ 40 8~g888V~g fl~:8I I88g/ZS/8I Mr. Peter F~scher, C~ Maplewood Parka and Rec Commissior~ 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 September 18, 2001 Name Address Comments Sept'enll~ 18, 2001 Wc,tte~ Map~ reside~, areNOrin fav~ofthe Name Address, Comments Attachment 16 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City of St. Paul is proposing a change to the city's land use plan from OS (open space) to P (park). WHEREAS, this change applies to the property located on the south side of County Road B East west of Interstate'35E in Section 18, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On February 19, 2003, the planning commission held a public headng. The city staff published a heating notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning co remission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council not approve the plan amendment. 2. On , the city council discussed the proposed 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 proposed soccer complex would meet Maplewood's mission to provide a comprehensive, balanced and sustainable system of parks, open spaces/natural areas, trails and leisure-oriented activities/programs for city residents to use and enjoy in as cost- effective manner as possible. 2. It would provide city residents with parks and natural areas for recreational uses as visual/physical diversions from the hard surfacing of urban development and as a means to maintain the character, ambience, appearance and history of the community. 3. It would maximize the recreational opportunities available to city residents through the development of fair and equitable working partnerships between the city and the local school district, adjacent cities, county, churches and civic organizations. 4. It would provide city residents with an interconnected trail system for transportation and recreation purposes and as a means to tie divergent parks and open space with the broader community. 5. It would convert an unattractive and unusable lime pit to an attractive and useable park. 6. It would provide relief for existing soccer fields that are heavily used. 7. It would create and foster a cooperative working relationship with the City of St. Paul and Ramsey County. 8. It would serve as a regional recreational facility. This is advantageous since recreation does not follow town borders. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on 45 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION Attachment 17 WHEREAS, the City of St. Paul applied for a conditional use permit to construct the Sandy Lake Soccer Complex. WHEREAS, Section 36-52(4) of the city code requires a conditional use permit for any public service or public building use. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located on the south side of County Road B East on the west of Interstate 35E. The legal description is: Parcel #18-29-22-12-0010: South 140" of North 270' of E 442', 68/100'. North 130' ofSW % of NE % subject to County Road B part of NW % of NE % S.E.LY of 160' W.W. R/W in SECTION 18, TOWN 29, RANGE 22. Parcel #18-29-22-24-0024: Subject to Avenue; except South 15' of East 320' of West 1790' of NW % ex. Part in James 1st Addition part of said NW %, S.E. LY of W.W. R/W in SECTION 18, TOWN 29, RANGE 22. Parcel #18-29-22-24-0001: SECTION 18, TOWN 29, RANGE 22. 100' W.W. PJW across N 2/3 of SW %. 165' W.W. R/VV across S % of NW %. 160' W.W. RNV across N ~ of E % of NW % of SECTION 18, TOWN 29, RANGE 22. Parcel #18-29-22-12-0009: SECTION 18, TOWN 29, RANGE 22. 160' W.W PJW across NW % of NE % of SECTION 18, TOWN 29, RANGE 22. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On February 19, 2003, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. 2. On , 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 headng a chance to speak and present wdtten statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council 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. 46 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 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. 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 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: 1. A detailed site plan shall be submitted to the city for approval. All construction s hall follow the approved site plan. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The city council shall review this permit in one year. The applicant shall submit detailed plans that include, but are not limited to, the following: A detailed landscape and tree-buffer plan with quantities, sizes, species and locations. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and utility plan. The utility plan must show how waste would be removed. Storm run-off calculations. A site plan that provides setback dimensions, the location of trails, parking-lot dimensions and the location of any fences. A trail connection to the comer of Adolphus Street and Skillman Avenue. A right-turn lane into the proposed site. Showing an area for "proof-of-parking" should the proposed 235 spaces be insufficient. Post "no parking" signs within the main driveway. Revise the plans to show a five-field soccer complex with the field space closest to the restroom building reserved for development as a neighborhood park with picnic facilities, tot lot, swing sets, etc. The revised site plan should include a paved bike path around the perimeter of the site. Widening the driveway entrance to 26-32 feet. Provision of a gate at the driveway entrance. 47 5. Site lighting shall not be allowed for night play. Staff may approve security lighting if it is found to be needed by the police chief for security reasons. 6. Park maintenance shall be provided by the City of St. Paul. 7. No large festivals shall be held at this soccer park. Youth tournaments are allowed. 8. The applicant shall be responsible for locking the gate each evening. 9. The applicant shall also submit a program identifying the hours of use, the teams or groups using this facility and their ages. They shall also submit the management plan for the facility as'well as a plan for enforcement should there be any problems. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on 48 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Sibley Cove County Road D, between White Bear Avenue and Ariel Street MWF Properties (David Steele) February 11, 2003 INTRODUCTION Project Description Mr. David Steele, representing MWF Properties, is proposing to build a 100-unit apartment building. He is proposing this project on a 7.1-acre site on the south side of County Road D between White Bear Avenue and Ariel Street. (See the location map on page 21, the property line/zoning map on page 24 and the site plan on page 27.) The project would be a 3-story apartment building with underground parking for 100 cars. In addition, the plans show 100 surface parking spaces and 18 future parking spaces on the site. The building would have a mix of 86 two-bedroom units and 14 three-bedroom units and a storm shelter in the garage area of the building. (See the proposed project plans on pages 27- 33 and the developer's project statement starting on page 15.) Requests To build the development, the applicant is requesting that the city approve the following: A change in the city's land use plan. This change would be from BC (business commercial) to R-3(H) (residential high density). (See the existing and proposed land use plan maps on pages 22 and 23.) A conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) for a 100-unit apartment development. The applicant is requesting the CUP because the existing BC (business commercial) and LBC (limited business commercial) zoning districts limit the uses on the site to commercial, office and retails uses and allows multiple-family residential uses only with a conditional use permit. (See the property line/zoning map on page 24.) 3. Design approval. DISCUSSION Land Use Plan Change To build the proposed apartment building, Mr. Steele wants the city to change the land use plan for the site. This change would be from BC (business commercial) to R-3(H ) (residential high density). (See the existing and proposed land use maps on pages 22 and 23.) The city intends R-3(H) areas for a variety of housing including double dwellings, town houses or apartments of up to 16.3 units per gross acre. For BC (business commercial) areas, the city plans for offices, clinics, restaurants, day care centers and retail businesses. Land use plan changes do not require specific findings for approval. Any change, however, should be consistent with the city's land use goals and policies. There are several goals in the Comprehensive Plan that apply to this request. Specifically, the land use plan has eleven general land use goals. Of these, three apply to this proposal including: Provide for orderly development. Minimize conflicts between land uses. Provide a wide vadety of housing types. The land use plan also has several general development and residential development policies that relate to this project. They include: Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses should not create a negative economic, social or physical impact on adjoining developments. · The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each neighborhood. Include a vadety of housing types for all residents.., including apartments, town houses, manufactured homes, single-family housing, public-assisted housing, Iow- and moderate- income housing, and rental and owner-occupied housing. Protect neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible land uses by adequate buffedng and separation. The housing plan also has policies about housing diversity and quality that the city should consider with this development. They are: Promote a variety of housing types, costs and ownership options throughout the city. These are to meet the life-cycle needs of all income levels, those with special needs and nontraditional households. The city will continue to provide dispersed locations for a diversity of housing styles, types and pdce ranges through its land use plan. This is a good site for apartment-style housing. It is on a major collector street (County Road D) and between two artedal streets (White Bear Avenue and McKnight Road) and is near open space and, of course, shopping and other services. In addition, this property would not be a great site for a commercial or retail business as it is hidden from the main commercial area along White Bear Avenue. As proposed, the 100 units on the 7.1-acre site means there would be 14.1 units per gross acre. This project density is less than the maximum density standard (16.3 units per acre) in the comprehensive plan for apartment buildings with more than 50 units. The city's long-term stability of its tax base depends upon its ability to attract and keep residents of all ages. To do so, the city must insure that a diverse mix of housing styles is available in each stage of the life cycle to meet housing needs. Traffic One advantage with this proposal is that an area that the city once thought would be good for commercial development would become residential. ^ benefit with the proposed change will be its effect on traffic. Mr. Steele had a traffic comparison done between the proposed 100-unit apartment building and a commercial development for the site. (See the traffic study on pages 34 and 35.) This study showed that the proposed apartment building would generate about 300 fewer vehicle trips per day than a commercial development on the same property. This reduced amount of traffic generation will help with the congestion at County Road D and White Bear Avenue. The city engineer has been working with the city council and city staff to prepare a long-range (10 - 15 year) plan to improve the traffic and congestion situation around Maplewood Mall. This plan includes the extension of County Road D west to Highway 61 and rebuilding the 1-694/White Bear Avenue interchange to accommodate more traffic. If the city, county and state are successful in completing the various envisioned street and traffic projects, vehicles will be able to move around the Maplewood Mall area with more efficiency and with a smoother flow. Conditional Use Permit, Planned Unit Development and Site Plan The applicant has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) for the 100-unit apartment development. They are requesting the CUP because the BC (business commercial) and. LBC (limited business commercial) zoning districts limits the uses on the site to commercial, office and retail uses and requires a CUP for multiple-dwellings. Section 36-438 of the code lists the city's purpose, intent and requirements for PUDs in Maplewood. Specifically, the code says that the intent of this section is to provide a means to allow flexibility by deviations from provisions of this chapter, including uses, setbacks, height and other regulations. Deviations may be granted for planned unit developments provided that: (1) Certain regulations contained in this chapter should not apply to the propOsed development because of its unique nature. (2) (3) (4) The PUD would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter. The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or superior quality to that which would result from strict adherence to the provisions of this chapter. The deviations would not constitute a significant threat to the property values, safety, health or general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land. (5) The deviations are required for reasonable and practicable physical development and are not required solely for financial reasons. The proposed site plan does not have any code deviations or variances. In fact, the developer has done a good job in designing the site plan with the building and parking lot while working with and around the limitations of the site. The shape of the property and the existing power lines and pipelines limit the building placement and the location of the parking lot. It is important to have parking spaces and access to the front of the building. In reviewing the above list of cdteda, the proposed PUD would meet these cdteda. Specifically, the proposal would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter, it would produce a development of equal or superior quality and the proposal does not have any code deviations or variances. 3 Compatibility could be a concern with this development proposal. That is, is a 100-unit apartment building in this location compatible with the nearby land uses, including the commercial uses? In this case, the nearest residential land uses to the proposed site are the properties to the east across Adel Street. Specifically, the east end of the proposed apartment building would be about 145 feet from the west side (front) of the Birch Glen apartment building to the east. The city should approve the CUP since the proposal meets the cdteda for a conditional use permit. These criteria include meeting the standards in the comprehensive plan and the city codes, would not change the character of the area, would not depreciate property values, would lower the amount of expected traffic on area streets and would generate minimal traffic on local streets. (See the cdteda in the resolution starting on page 39.) Design Approval Building Design and Exterior Materia Is The proposed building would be attractive and would have three stories above grade and an underground parking area. As proposed, the building would have an exterior of face bdck, horizontal cement board siding on the first floor, horizontal vinyl siding on the second and third floors and on the gable ends, and the roof would have asphalt shingles. (See the building elevation drawings on page 33 and the proposed project plans). The developer has proposed a mix of building colors - pdmarity earth-toned rusts and creams (red, brown and tan). This building style, with the proposed materials and colors, should be compatible with and equal in quality to the buildings in the area, including the Birch Glen apartments. City Engineer's Review Chris Cavett and Erin Schacht of the city engineering department have reviewed the proposed grading, drainage, utility and landscape plans. I have included their memo with their comments on pages 36 and 37. Public Utilities There are sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water in Ariel Street and County Road D to serve the proposed development. Specifically, the storm sewer in ^del Street was designed and installed to accommodate drainage from a large area north of Woodlynn Avenue. The developer's plans will connect their pipes to the existing storm and sanitary sewer pipes. Drainage The developer has designed the storm water drainage for this site to go into a new ponding area on the southeast comer of the site. In times of large storms, storm water may overflow out of the pond into the existing city storm water system. The city will not need a drainage and utility easement over the ponding area, as this will be a private ponding area. This project will need a permit from the watershed district. Landscaping The proposed landscaping plan is a good start but it needs more work. It shows the developer planting at least 50 new, large trees including red oaks, maple, ash, linden, black hills spruce and Austdan Pine. In addition, the plans show the planting of a variety of ornamental trees and shrubs 4 on the site. The proposed plans (pages 27 through 29) show most of the site being graded and the construction of a storm water pond on the southeast comer of the site. This wilt remove much of the existing vegetation and many of the existing mature trees on the property. The landscape plan, however, does not show any landscaping or ground treatment for the ponding area or any rainwater gardens. The city should require the developer to provide a revised landscape plan that would include the landscaping treatments for the ponding area and those for any rainwater gardens that the developer may be including on the site. The proposed tree plan keeps many of the existing mature cottonwood and box elder trees on the north and east sides of the site. However, the proposed grading plan does not save many of the trees in this area. The city should, require the developer to preserve most of the existing vegetation along the north and 'east sides of the site near the daycare center. This existing vegetation in these areas will protect existing slopes and will help provide screening of the building. Site Lighting The applicant provided a site lighting plan (page 32) that shows the expected light spread from the proposed parking lot lights. The proposed poles would be 20-feet tall and would have a sharp cutoff shoebox luminaire with a 250-watt high-pressure sodium light bulb. The city code requires the light fixtures have a design that hides the bulb and lens from view. This plan, however, does not show any of the proposed lighting on the building or any lighting in or near the proposed tot lot. In addition, the proposed plan shows little, if any, lighting where the two driveways on the site would meet the public streets. The applicant should revise the lighting plan in several ways. First, the plan should show how the lighting on the building would add to the site lighting. Secondly, the plan should have additional lighting near the driveways, where they intersect the public streets, so they are adequately lit. Finally, the plan should show details about the proposed light fixtures to ensure they are a design that hides the bulb and lens from view to avoid nuisances. Sidewalks Staff is recommending that the developer install a six-foot-wide concrete sidewalk on the west side of Ariel Street between the existing sidewalk north of Woodlynn Avenue and the south property line of the daycare center. This sidewalk would provide the residents of this building off-street pedestrian access to the shopping area and church to the south. A sidewalk along Ariel Street also would provide a pedestrian link to the existing sidewalk along Woodlynn Avenue and to the sidewalk along Ariel Street south of Woodlynn Avenue. The city installed a new trail along the south side of County Road D in 2002 as part of the County Road D reconstruction. The city needs, however, a ten-foot-wide permanent easement along the south side of the right-of-way (on the project site) to cover the area that the trail is on. Fencing/Screening This site has commercial properties on three of its sides, including an auto repair mall to the west and strip center to the south. It would be prudent for and helpful to the residents of the new apartments if the developer installed screening along the west and south sides of the project to help ensure that the new residents and their vehicles are separated from the adjacent commercial properties. This fence should be solid, be constructed of Iow-maintenance materials and be six- feet high. In addition, the fence should run along the south and west property lines, subject to staff approval. Other Comments Butch Gervais, the Maplewood Fire Marshal, had the following comments: 1. Install a fire protection system in the building per NFPA 13 2. Install a smoke detection system in the main corridors per NFPA 72 3. Install a monitored fire protection system 4. Include a fire department lock box 5. Maintain a minimum of 20-foot-wide driveways for emergency vehicles. Lt. Kevin Rabbett of the Maplewood Police Department noted that theft from vehicles is a chronic problem throughout the area. He suggested that the builder install a quality video surveillance system that would cover the underground garage and its entrance/exit doors. RECOMMENDATIONS Approve the resolution on page 38. This resolution changes the land use plan from BC (business commercial) to R-3(H) (residential high density) for the 7.1-acre site of the Sibley Cove housing development. The city bases these changes on the following findings: This site is proper for and consistent with the city's goals, objectives and policies for high-density residential land use in the comprehensive plan. This includes: a. Creating a transitional land use between the existing residential and commercial land uses. b. Being near a collector street, between two arterial streets and would be near open space and shopping and services. 2. This development will minimize any adverse effects on surrounding properties because: a. The on-site pond and large setback from Woodlynn Avenue will separate the apartment building from the properties to the south. There should be no significant traffic increase from this development on existing local residential streets. The existing street pattern keeps the apartment traffic separate from the existing single dwellings and other residences. c. There should be less traffic from this development than from a commercial development on the same site. Bo Approve the resolution starting on page 39. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the Sibley Cove apartment development on County Road D, west of Adel Street. The city bases this approval on the findings required by code. (Refer to the resolution for the specific findings.) Approval is subject to the following conditions: All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped January 24, 2003. The city council may approve major changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, streets, sidewalks, tree and ddveway and parking lot plans. In addition, the applicant shall include: Changes to the plans to minimize the loss or removal of natural vegetation including keeping and protecting as many of the large trees along the north and east property lines (near the daycare center) as possible. Revised plans for storm water pond locations and designs as suggested or required by the watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's design standards and shall include best management practices and rainwater gardens wherever practical. c. A storm water management plan for the proposal. d. All the changes and meet all the conditions noted by the city engineer in the memo dated February 10, 2003. The design of the pond shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. The developer shall provide the city a 20-foot-wide drainage and utility easement over the storm sewer pipe between the pond and the Arial Street right-of-way. The developer or contractor shall: a. Complete all grading for the site drainage and the pond, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Remove any debris; junk and garbage from the site. d. Install a 6-foot-wide concrete sidewalk along the west side of Ariel Street between the south property line of the daycare center and the sidewalk north of Woodlynn Avenue. Provide the city with verification that the apartment building will meet the state's noise standards. This shall be with a study, testing or other documentation. If the noise on this site is a factor, then the contractor will have to build the apartment building so that it can meet the noise standards. This may be done with thicker walls, heavier windows, requiring air conditioning or other sound-deadening construction methods. The developer shall provide the city with this documentation before the city will issue a building permit for the apartment building. There shall be no outdoor storage of recreational vehicles, boats or trailers. Residents shall not park trailers and vehicles that they do not need for day-to-day transportation on site. If the city decides there are excess parking spaces available on site, then the city may allow the parking of these on site. The developer shall provide an on-site storm shelter in the apartment building. This shelter shall be subject to the approval of the director of emergency preparedness. It shall have a minimum of three square feet per person for 80% of the planned population. 9. The city council shall review this permit in one year. *The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or a building permit. Approve the plans date-stamped January 24, 2003 (site plan, landscape plan, grading and drainage plans and building elevations) for the Sibley Cove apartments. The city bases this approval on the findings required by the code. The developer or contractor shall do the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Complete the following before the city issues a grading permit or a building permit: a.* Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, sidewalk and ddveway and parking lot plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: (1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with city code. (2) The grading plan shall: (a) Include building, floor elevation, water elevation and contour information. These shall include the normal water elevation and 100- year high water elevation. (b) Include contour information for the land that the construction will disturb. (c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. (d) Show all proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 on the proposed construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. This shall include coveting these slopes with wood fiber blankets and seeding them with a "no mow" vegetation rather than using sod or grass. (e) Show all retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls more than four feet tall require a building permit from the city. Show as little disturbance as possible on the north and east sides of the site (near the daycare center). (3)* The tree plan shall: (a) Be approved by the city engineer before site grading or tree removal. (b) Show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. (4) (5) (6) This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site. (c) Show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits, (d) Be consistent with the approved grading and landscape plans. The design of the storm water pond shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. The developer shall be responsible for getting any needed off-site grading or drainage easements and for recording all necessary easements. All the parking a teas and driveways shall have continuous concrete curb and gutter. The driveways shall meet the following standards: 24-foot width--no parking on either side and 28-foot width--parking on one side The developer or contractor shall post the driveways with no parking signs to meet the above-listed standards. (7) The developer shall disturb as little as possible of the area along the north and east property lines near the daycare center. Change the grading plan for this part of the site as recommended by the city engineer. (8) The developer shall install a six-foot-wide concrete sidewalk along Ariel Street between the existing sidewalk north of Woodlynn Avenue and the south property line of the daycare center. Submit a lawn-irrigation plan to staff showing the location of sprinkler heads. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction. Submit a revised landscape plan for city staff approval showing: (1) As much of the existing vegetation (including large trees) remaining along the northern and eastern property lines (near the daycate center) as possible. (2) The manicured or mowed areas from the natural areas. This shall include planting (instead of sodding) the disturbed areas on the south side of the parking lot around the storm water pond with native grasses and native flowering plants. The native grasses and flowering plants shall be those needing little or no maintenance. This is to reduce maintenance costs and to reduce the temptation of mowers to encroach into the pond. Specifically, the developer shall have the natural areas seeded with an upland mixture and lowland mixtures as appropriate. (3) The planting of native grasses and flowering plants around the proposed storm water pond shall extend at least four feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the pond. e. Get the necessary approvals and permits from the watershed district. Submit a revised site lighting plan for city staff approval. This plan shall show how the lighting on the building would add to the site lighting, and the plan should have additional lighting near the driveways, where they intersect the public streets, so the driveways are adequately lit. This plan also shall show details about the proposed light fixtures to ensure they are a design that hides the bulb and lens from view to avoid nuisances. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to propedy shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent properties. g. The developer shall record the following with Ramsey County: (1) (2) A 20-foot-wide drainage and utility easement over the storm water pipe. The documentation to combine the properties into one property for tax and identification purposes. (3) A ten-foot-wide permanent easement for public street right-of-way and public utility purposes along the south side of the County Road D right-of- way. h. Have the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) review and approve the proposed utility plans. i. The fire chief shall approve the access to the back (northeast side) of the building for firefighting needs. Submit plans for city staff approval for any outdoor trash or recycling containers and enclosures. If the developer wants to build such facilities, the enclosure shall have materials that are compatible with the building, and they shall have gates that are 100 percent opaque. k. A letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. 3. Complete the following before occupying the building: a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. Install reflectodzed stop signs at each exit, a handicap-parking sign for each handicap-parking space and an address on the building. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" signs within the site, as required by staff. Paint any roof-top mechanical equipment to match the uppermost part of the building. Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from streets or adjacent property. (code requirement) e. Construct trash dumpster and recycling enclosures as city code requires for any dumpsters or storage containers that the owner or building manager would keep 10 outside the building. Any such enclosures must match the materials and colors of the building. f. Install and taper the concrete sidewalk along Ariel Street to match the driveways. g. Install and maintain an in-ground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas. h. Install continuous concrete curb and gutter along all interior driveways and around all open parking stalls. Install on-site lighting for security and visibility that follows the approved site lighting plan. All exterior lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light spread and fixture design. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent properties. Install a six-foot-high solid screening fence along the south and west property lines of the site. The location, design and materials of the fence shall be subject to city staff approval. Install a quality video surveillance system that covers the underground garage and its entrance/exit doors. This system shall be subject to the approval of the Maplewood Police Department. h The developer or contractor shall: (1) Complete all grading for the site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. (2)* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. (3) Remove any debds or junk from the site. 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. The city receives cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the unfinished work. Any unfinished landscaping shall be completed by June 1 if the building is occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spring or summer. c. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. This approval does not include the signs. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. CITIZEN COMMENTS Staff surveyed the 17 property owners within 350 feet of the site about the proposal. one reply. Comments: 1. We have no objections to this project. (Hause - Hill City, MN) We received REFERENCE Site Description The site is undeveloped. Surrounding Land Uses North: Perkins and Emerald Inn across County Road D. East: A daycare center and Birch Glen apartments across Ariel Street. South: Commercial businesses on the north side of Woodlynn Avenue. West: Commercial businesses on the east side of White Bear Avenue. Reasons for the Requests This proposal needs a land use plan change because: State law does not allow a city to adopt any regulation that conflicts with its comprehensive plan. One of the findings required by code for a CUP is that the use is in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan. The land use plan shows this site for BC (business commercial) uses, which do not include multiple-family housing. The developer is applying for a CUP beca use the zoning on this site is BC (business commercial) and LBC (limited business commercial). The BC and LBC zones allow a vadety of commercial and retail business and multiple dwellings with a conditional use permit (CUP). The developer chose to apply for a CUP, rather than a zone change. A CUP for a PUD is only for a specific use and site plan. A rezoning to R-3 (multiple dwelling residential) would allow a vadety of multiple-dwelling uses and plans. Planning Considerations Existing Land Use Plan Designation: BC (business commercial) Proposed Land Use Plan Designation: R-3(H) (residential high density) 12 CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL Land Use Plan Change There are no specific criteria for a land use plan change. Any land use plan change should be consistent with the goals and policies in the ci~s comprehensive plan. Cdteria for CUP Approval Section 36-442(a) states that the city council may grant a CUP, subject to the nine standards for approval. Refer to the resolution starting on page 39. Criteria for Design Approval 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 contem plated 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. HOUSING POLICIES The land use plan has eleven general land use goals. Of these, three apply to this proposal. They are: minimize land planned for streets, minimize conflicts between land uses and provide many housing types. The land use plan also has several general development and residential development policies that relate to this project. They are: Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses should not create a negative economic, social or physical impact on adjoining developments. Include a vadety of housing types for all types of residents, regardless of age, ethnic, racial, cultural or socioeconomic background. A diversity of housing types should include apartments, town houses, manufactured homes, single-family housing, public-assisted housing and Iow- to moderate-income housing, and rental and owner-occupied housing. Protect neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible land uses by adequate buffedng and separation. The housing plan also has policies about housing diversity and quality that the city should consider with this development. They are: Promote a variety of housing types, costs and ownership options throughout the city. These are to meet the life-cycle needs of all income levels, those with special needs and nontraditional households. The city will continue to provide dispersed locations for a diversity of housing styles, types and pdce ranges through its land use plan. The city's long-term stability of its tax base depends upon its ability to attract and keep residents of all ages. To do so, the city must insure that a diverse mix of housing styles is available in each stage of the life cycle of housing needs. Application Date We received the complete application and plans for this proposal on January 24, 2003. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving corn plete applications for a proposal. City council action is required on this proposal by March 24, 2003, unless the applicant agrees to a time extension. kr/p: Sec 2N/Sibley Cove Apts.doc Attachments: 1. Applicant's Statement 2. Location Map 3. Existing Land Use Plan Map 4. Proposed Land Use Plan 5. Property line/Zoning Map 6. Area Map 7. Site Survey 8. Site Plan 9. Proposed Utility Plan 10. Proposed Grading Plan 11. Tree Preservation Plan 12. Proposed Landscape Plan 13. Proposed Site Lighting Plan 14. Building Elevations 15. Applicant's Traffic Study from RLK Kuusisto Ltd. 16. February 10, 2003 memo from city engineering department 17. Resolulion: Land Use Plan Change 18. Conditional Use Permit Resolution 19. Project Plans date-stamped January 24, 2003 (Separate Attachments) 3.4 Attachment 1 MWF roperties 7645 Lyndale Avenue South · Minneapolis, MN 55423 · 612-243-4639 · Fax: 612-243-5010 TO: City Manger FROM: Dave Steele, VP of Development SUBJECT: Sibley Cove Apartments LOCATION: County Road D and Ariel Street APPLICANT: MWF Properties, Inc. DATE: January 6, 2003 INTRODUCTION Project Description MWF Properties LLC, represented by David Steele, is proposing to build a 100 unit apartment building. This apartment building, named Sibley Cove, will occupy approximately 7.12 acres of vacant prairie located at the southeast quadrant of County Road D and Ariel Street in Maplewood, MN. The site will front on County Road D and is two blocks south of Interstate 694 and one block east of White Bear Avenue. It is notable that this project is planned for 100 apartment units in 2 phases; 80 units in phase I and 20 units in phase II of the development. There will be one parking space per unit located within the underground parking structure and one surface parking space per unit. These ratios will also apply to phase II of the project. (See the location map attached.) The project will be a one building three-story structure with underground parking. The design is somewhat of an "L" shaped single building, which will provide privacy and security while maximizing a two+ acre courtyard for the residents and their children's (Tot Lot) play area. The unit mix will include two- and three-bedroom apartments to meet the demands for work force family housing. (See the proposed building floor plans attached.) The project is bordered as follows: South: West: North: Northwest: East: Small Shopping Cemer...Plaza 3000 Shopping Center & Maple Square Small commercial uses i.e. Auto repair County Road D...Perkins restaurant is on the north side of Co Rd D. Children's World Day Care & Learning Center Ariel Street... on the east side of Ariel Street is Birch Glen Apts. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT 15 Requests MWF Properties, Inc. is requesting the city approve the following: A change in the city's land use plan. This change would be from BC (business commercial) to R-3(H) (residemial high density). 100 Units on 7.12 acres = 14 units/acre. A conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit developmem (PUD) for a 100- unit apartment developmem. The CUP is requested because the current "BC" (Business Commercial) zoning prohibits multiple-family residemial uses. 3. Design approval. DISCUSSION Land Use Plan Change To build Sibley Cove Apartments, MWF Properties requests the city to change the land use plan for the site. This would be from BC (business commercial) to R-3(H) (residential high density). (See existing and proposed land use maps attached). Land use changes should be consistent with city land use goals and policies. The Comprehensive Plan has eleven general land use goals. Of these eleven, three apply to this proposal. They are: Provide for orderly developmem. Minimize conflicts between land uses. Provide a wide variety of housing types. Furthermore, the project maximizes "green space" with over 50% of the site serving essentially as recreation and garden areas. The site provides for equal distribution of traffic flow to both Ariel & Co Rd D. The traffic impact of 100 apartment units will be less than a comparable office building on this site. According to the trip generation comparison (see attached traffic study) the proposed revision fi-om a 90,000 square foot office to a 100-unit apartment complex will reduce the daily site generated traffic by 328 trips. 16 Provides for compatible use and design with Birch Glen Apartments. The land use plan also has several general development and residential development policies that relate to this project. The include: Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses should not create a negative economic, social or physical impact on adjoining developments. The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each neighborhood. Include a variety of housing types for all residents...including apartments, town houses, manufactured homes, single-family housing, public-assisted housing, low- and moderate- income housing, and rental and owner-occupied housing. Protect neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible land uses by adequate buffeting and separation. The housing plan also has policies about housing diversity and quality that the city should consider with this development. They are: Promote a variety of housing types, costs and ownership options throughout the city. These are to meet the life-cycle needs of all income levels, those with special needs and nontraditional households. The city will continue to provide dispersed locations for a diversity of housing styles, types and price ranges through its land use plan. The Sibley Cove site is ideal for apartment-style housing. The front street; County Road D and the next street to the south, Woodlyn, are major collector streets, while White Bear Avenue and McKnight Road act as arterial streets. The site is also within three miles of numerous schools, day care centers, grocery stores, drug stores, banks, and public services. For instance, The Maplewood Mall is within walking distance of Sibley Cove. Public transportation, another important component, is also within a few hundred yards of the development. Also, changing the land use would eliminate a planned commercial area that would have been next to residential areas (Birch Glen). This would adhere to the Comprehensive Plan by creating a transitional land use between the existing single family residential (to the east and south) and commercial land uses. As proposed, the 100 units on the 7.12-acre site means there would be 14 units per gross acre. This is consistent with the maximum density standard (16.3 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Plan for apartment buildings with more than 50 units. 17 The Sibley Cove development would also add to the long-term stability of Maplewood's tax base by helping insure that a diverse mix of housing styles is available in the city, thus attracting and keeping residents of all ages. In addition, the developer's use of "Smart Growth" principles, such as a convenient entrance and ample surface and secure parking garages, will create very little impact on the surrounding areas. A summary of these contiguous properties is on page 1 of this report. Conditional Use Permit, Planned Unit Development and Site Plan MWF Properties has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) for the 100-unit apartment development. Developer is requesting the CUP because the city code allows multi-family dwellings on land that the city has zoned BC conditional use permit. Section 26-438 of the city's code lists the city's purpose, intent and requirements for planned unit developments in Maplewood. The code says the intent of this section is to provide a means to allow flexibility by deviations from provisions of this chapter, including uses, setbacks, height and other regulations. Deviations may be granted for planned unit developments provided that: 1) Certain regulations contained in this chapter should not apply to the proposed development because of its unique nature. 2) The PUD would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter. 3) The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or superior quality to that which would result from strict adherence to the provisions of this chapter. 4) The deviations would not constitute a significant threat to the property values, safety, health or general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land. 5) The deviations are required for reasonable and practicable physical developments and are not required solely for financial reasons. The city may approve the CUP since the proposal meets the criteria for a conditional use permit. These criteria include conforming with the comprehensive plan and codes, would not change the character of the area, would not depreciate property values and would generate minimal traffic on local streets. 18 DESIGN APPROVAL Building Design and Exterior Materials Sibley Cove would have .three stories above grade and an underground parking area. A surface parking lot consisting of 100 spots will also be included in the development. The building exterior would consist of brick, gables, horizontal vinyl siding and a roof incorporating asphalt shingles. (See the elevation drawings attached). Trash dumpsters and recycling enclosures will also be constructed to match the materials and colors of the building. City code will be followed. Public Utilities There is a sanitary sewer in Ariel Street and Woodlyn Avenue to serve the proposed development. The developer's plans will connect their pipes to the existing sanitary sewer pipes. Drainage Instead of storm water ponds, the developer has designed storm water drainage for this site to go into specially designed rainwater gardens. Besides being visually appealing, these rainwater gardens help protect local bodies of water from pollution. The gardens will work as filters. They will collect and hold runoff water while it soaks into the ground. There, microbes will use the runoff water, which often contains fertilizer, animal waste, and other harmful substances, as excess fertilizer. The design of the rainwater gardens shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. Developer will be responsible for getting any needed off-site grading or -drainage easements and for recording all necessary easements. MWF Properties believes these rainwater gardens to be a more environmentally friendly alternative compared to traditional storm sewers. Landscaping The 7.12-acre development is designed for maximum utilization of the developable land as "green space", while incorporating areas that are within utility easements for resident garden plots. The site configuration lends itself to a "wrapping" building or courtyard design to create a large area of privacy, conceal the effects of building mass, and yet remain accessible to the community and utilize the City's bike and walking path on the north side of the development. The site design includes 3+ acres (45%) of green space, "rainwater gardens" for storm water detention, and a Tot 19 Lot area in the cemer courtyard. The Tot Lot area will be designed into the project to create a sense of community and neighborhood, and will incorporate child safety playground equipmem. Developer will leave as much of the existing vegetation (large trees) along the northeast property line and around the wetland preserved as possible. In addition, the developer does not plan to disturb the boulevard and slope along the south side of County Road D north of the building. Site Lights MWF properties will provide a lighting plan indicating the light spread and fixture design. The lighting code requires a plan when near homes. The fixtures installed will be a design that hides bulb and lens l~om view to avoid nuisances. Sidewalks and Driveways The developer will install a five-foot-wide concrete sidewalk around the south exterior of the building that will continue around the entire west exterior of the building. In addition to these exterior sidewalks, and interior concrete sidewalk will be included in the courtyard area that connects the apartment building to the Tot Lot Area, which shall be handicap accessible. Developer shall also install and taper each of the driveways according to city standards. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your time and consideration with this project. Sincerely, David T. Steele Vice President - Real Estate Development M'~VF Properties 20 Attachment 2 BEAR LAKE couN-r,r ROAD EHILL RD. (~) WOODLYNN AVE. O~ 1. N. BARTELblY LN. 2, N. CHIPPEWA CT. 3. BRENWOOD CV, GALL AVE. fKnu~eod Loke /~--__J~ -'1,1 AVE. COPE AVE. RD. LOCATION MAP 21 ST. PAUL 1700' 3400' SCALE ^~.tachment 3 · interchange E ~--=-'~--~I~ arterial I . White Bear Lake =~ "-':' · ..--:,' ' · ~_~-, J'L. ' "'" ~ P IF .... ~~- ~ ~,--~ '~ .~-' ~ '.. .-- ~,. ~, -~' .. ~ . ~/,, __ ,' , _~/, 1 _ ~_ , 'E J interchange I arterial ' Attachment4 White Bear Lake R-1 694 County Hd D m,3jO OS Lydia Be,~m Ave BC North St Paul <: aoo. ,. b ARBY'S ' - ~,=J 5-5" g 3094 c- '34 o.~) ('~} 3088 .- ~ __ I 5) 3050 1985 /'/~ -7~ Attachment 5 3100 3.4-7 o-c. SITE SITE 2029 WOODLYNN AVENUE ~.' I~; PLAZA 3000 [-~PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP Attachment 6 3070 PERKINS 2091 COUNTY ROAD D E DAYCARE SITE SITE SITE 0 2O90 WOODL YNN AVE PLAZA 3000 i AREA MAP 25 Attachment 7 '" PARCEL C *-T _ DAYCARE CENTER 259.02 GRAPHIC SCALE EXISTINC CONDITIONS I ; SITE SURVEY 26 Attachment 8 . ° E'~3SllNG ~L -- '1 COUNTY ROAD r- - '::-:-.-T. ..... - ~ARKING STALI~ DAYCARE CENTER i i i ' 11 i · I I PARCEL I P.~<41 s~l~l.s I I SITE DATA BOUNDARY AREA ................... 5:310.120 Scl. Ft. PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AREA-d:$2.230 Sa.F.t. PROPOSED TOT LOT ~:900 Scl. F.t. PROPOSED BITUtdlNOUS PARKING LOT--..~S3,432 Sq. Ft. PROPOSED SIDEWALK. :~7.207 Sa. Ft. TOTAL IMPERVIOUS 5URF'ACE .~95. 769 Sa. Ft. TOTAL OPEN SPACE d:216..~51 SCl. F.t. NUMBER OF' PARKING STALLS 100 Stalls (INCLUDES 2 HANDICAPED STALLS) SITE PLAN 27 Attachment 9 m DAYCARE CENTER PARCEL [XISTtNG BUILDING ............. ~ .......................... _~ ~,: r."; .',-°, PROPOSED UTILITY~ PLAN Attachment 10 · ,,,,. DAYCARE CENTER PROPOSED GRADING PLAN 29 Attachment ll COUNTW ROAD "D" , A..~'I, COTTONWO00, AND BOX DJ)ER LESS '~-IAN 8' IN 3RUNK D~AM~[ DAYCARE CENTER PRESERVATION TREE TOTALg SlC-NIRCAN'r TRI~ TOTAL SAVE (33. .r£~ovE 3 (ss.?~ TOTAL 4- (100.0%) NON-S~GNIRCANT 'fREE TOTAL ~vE REMOVE TOTAL 49 (1D0.O~') 3REE REPLACEMENT (3) ~mc~n' ~ ~ ~OTEO~ON TREE LIST ~ ~ ~ ~ ~EE PRESERVA~ON P~N ~D TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 30 "::lB LEY COVE Attachment 12 BIT. ...... ~, ~ ..... -2 LANDSCAPE PLAN LANDSCAPE PLAN 31 Attachment DAYCARE CENTER PROPOSED BUILDING SITE LIGHTING PLAN 32 NO~TH ELEEVATION-~ 50UTH EL~=k/ATION,-C, EAST ELtEk/ATION-~ IdEST ELE"VATI ON-E~ EAST EN~ ELEV-P NO~TH EN~ BUILDING ELEVATIONS 33 Attachment 14 >00~ 0~0~ ~Z~, ~0<5 A4. Attachment 1,5 Engineering · Planning · Surveying · Landscape Architecture ( KUUSISTO LTD ) January 6, 2003 Mr. David Steele 7645 Lindale Avenue S. Minneapolis, MN 55423 Re'- Trip Generation at Ariel Street and County Road D RLK ~roject No.: ,,n,,,, RECENED Dear Mr. Steele: RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. has completed our revaew and assessment of the trip generation potential of the proposed project located at Ar/el Street and County Road D in Maplewood. In particular, a comparison of the trip generation potential of the proposed 100-unit apartment building has been compared with the potential of the previously approved 90,000 square foot office building. The following discussion summarizes the methodology and results of the analysis. The number of vehicle trips generated by the proposed development were estimated for the peak hour and daily traffic conditions using the data and methodologies contained in the 6th Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The data contained within this reference has been compiled for a number of land uses based on specific characteristics of these uses such as square feet, number of employees, number of dwelling units, etc. The ITE Land Use Codes used for this assessment were Apartment - Code 230, and General Office - Code 710, and the generation estimates were based on the number of units in the case of the apartments, and the square footage for the office. Table 1 summarizes our findings: Table 1 Trip Generation Comparison IILAND USE I UNITS I AM Peak PM Peak DAILY Enter' £xit ' ~fotai I Enter ' Exit ' Totai ! Apartment 100-dwell unit 8 45 53 42 20 62 663 Office 90,000 ft.sq 123 17 140 23 111 134 991 Difference [1-1151+28 I -87 1+~91 -91 I -72 I -328 The information in Table 1 indicates that the proposed change in land use will result in 87 fewer AM peak hour trips, 72 fewer PM peak hour trips, and approximately 328 fewer daily trips being generated by the site. It is note that the use change will also result ~n a variation in peak directional travel, with a greater number of AM exiting trips and PM entering trips than originally estimated. However, the substantial reduction in total traffic generated by the site will result in improved traffic operations on the surrounding roadway network. In conclusion, the trip generation comparison indicates the proposed revision from a 90,000 square foot office to a 100-unit apartment complex will reduce the estimated site generated Offices: Hibbing · Minnetonka , Ham Lake · Twin Ports (952) 933-0972 · 6110 Blue Circle Drive · Suite 100 · Minnetonka, MN 55343 · FAX (952) 933-1153 Equal Opportunity Employer 34 traffic, and therefore, will result in reduced traffic impacts on the surrounding roadway network. If you have any question or need any additional information, please call Vernon Swing at 952- 933-0972. Sincerely, RL~-Kuusisto, Ltd. Senior Transportation Engineer 35 Attachment Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: Sibley Cove PROJECT NO: REVIEWED BY: Erin Schacht and Chris Cavett DATE: February 10, 2003 MWF Properties is proposing to construct a 3-story apartment building at the southwest comer of County Road D and Ariel Street. Drainage from the site would be treated in a pond at the south end of the property. From there, the storm water would outlet into the existing storm sewer on Ariel Street. The storm water eventually drains to the Maplewood Heights Pond at northeast comer of White Bear Avenue and Beam Avenue. The applicant or his engineer shall address the following comments. Grading and Drainage plan: Implement.additional storm water BMPs into the design of the storm water management system of the site or revise the pond to meet city ordinances and to meet NURP designs standards. An important BMP suggestion: The applicant is strongly encouraged to include bio-infiltration basins, (rainwater gardens), around the storm drains north and east of the proposed building and to direct roof and yard drainage to these areas. For more information on bioretention basins please see the Metro council BMP Manual at their web site: http://www.metrocouncil.org/enviroment/Watershed/bmpmanual.htm Rock infiltration sumps can be added to the proposed basins to improve infiltration. The sumps should consist of 1.5" of clean, clear rock wrapped in Type 5 geotextile filter fabric, (felt). The contractor shall place the top of the rock infiltration sumps about 12 inches below the finished bottom of the basin. The project engineer shall provide a detail and description in the plan of how the contractor will prepare the rock sumps. The applicant shall also include a landscaping plan for the infiltration basins, (rainwater gardens) and for the pond. If the project engineer does not include additional BMP's in the drainage design, then the engineer must revise the design of the NURP pond to meet the phosphorus removal requirement of 60% and the TSS removal requirement of 80%. 3. The plans shall show the pond slopes. The pond must have a 1 O-foot bench at a 10:1 wet bench below the NWL. 36 4. Include a silt fence on the east side of the site at the tree preservation line. Revise the proposed grading plan. The proposed plan has an error in the contours at the N.E. area of the site around the tot lot and catch basin. The grades need revising, as storm water cannot be trapped on adjacent property as a result of the grading on this site. (The applicant should consider this area, as well as the nearby inlet drains, for locations for rainwater gardens). 6. Direct all roof drainage into the turf areas to the north and east of the building. Install a 3.0' sump manhole in the boulevard before discharging into the pond. This is so that sediment deposited in the system can be captured and removed before entering the pond. As an alternative, construct another sediment removal system for the pond. In either case, the applicant, as part of the CUP, must enter into an agreement with the city that the owner will maintain and clean the sump structure or pond as needed or applicable. The BMP maintenance agreement must be signed and executed before the city will grant final occupancy. 8. Provide the City ofMaplewood a 10-foot wide permanent easement for trails, drainage and utilities along the County Road D frontage of the properly. 9. Construct a 6-foot-wide concrete sidewalk with a minimum 7-foot-wide boulevard along the Ariel Street frontage. UtiliW plan: 1. The contractor shall use the sewer service stub on the County Road D side of the building, rather than open cutting into Ariel Street. 2. Obtain approvals from St. Paul Regional Water Service (SPRWS) for the proposed and existing water services on the site. It is our understanding that the spRws will not allow the builder to use the private water main on the west side of the site. If that is the case, the builder shall use the water service stubs on County Road D and Ariel Street. Proved water main or utility easements to SPRWS, as they require. Landscape plan: The applicant shall include for city approval a detailed landscaping plan for the pond. Turf establishment must be with a pre-approved native-grass seed mixture w/forbes, (for upland and low land areas as appropriate). The plan also must include trees and shrubbery in the landscaping of the pond and the pond area. 37 Attachment 17 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, David Steele, representing MWF Properties, applied for a change to the city's land use plan from BC (business commercial) to R-3(H) (residential high density). WHEREAS, this change applies to the undeveloped property located on the south side of County Road D, west of Ariel Street and east of White Bear Avenue. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: On February 19, 2003, the planning commission held a public headng. 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 headng a chance to speak and present wdtten statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the plan amendments. On March ,2003, the city council discussed the 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 changes for the following reasons: This site is proper for and consistent with the city's goals, objectives and policies for high-density residential land use in the comprehensive plan. This includes: a. Creating a transitional land use between the existing residential and commercial land uses. Being near a collector street, being between two artedal streets and is near open space and shopping and services. 2. This development will minimize any adverse effects on surrounding properties because: a. The on-site pond and large setback from Woodlynn Avenue will separate the apartment building from the properties to the south. There should be no significant traffic increase from this development on existing local residential streets. The existing street pattern keeps the apartment traffic separate from the existing single dwellings and other residences. c. There should be less traffic from this development than from a commercial development on the same site. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on March ,2003. 38 Attachment CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Mr. David Steele, representing MWF Properties, applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for the Sibley Cove apartment planned unit development (PUD). WHEREAS, this permit applies to the undeveloped property on the south side of County Road D between Adel Street and White Bear Avenue. The legal description is: PARCEL A: The Easterly 239.00 feet of the Westerly 329.31 feet of the Southerly 428.33 feet of the Northerly 681.33 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 2, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, Ramsey County, Minnesota. PARCEL B: That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 2, Township 29, Range 22, more completely described as follows: Commencing at a point 33 feet South of the North % corner of said Section 2; thence running South on North and South % line of said Section 2, a distance of 615.15 feet to a point; thence East a distance of 90.31 feet to a point; thence North a distance of 615.15 feet to a point on the South right- of-way line of County Road 'D"; and thence West, a distance of 90.31 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL C: The North Ten (N 10) acres of the East Twenty (E 20) acres of the North Half (N %) of the Northwest Quarter (NW %) of Section Two (2), Township Twenty-nine (29) North, Range Twenty-two (22) West, according to the United States Government Survey thereof, subject to White Bear Avenue and County Road 'D", excepting the following portions thereof, to wit: Except the South One hundred (S 100) feet thereof; and Except that part thereof lying West of the Easterly line of White Bear Avenue; and Except that part thereof described as follows: Beginning at the southeast comer of County Road "D' and White Bear Avenue; thence running East along the Southerly line of said County Road 'D", Seventy-five (75) feet; thence running South and parallel with the West line of said Section Two (2), One hundred twenty-five (125) feet; thence West and parallel with the Southerly line of said County Road 'D' to a point on the Easterly line of White Bear Avenue; thence Northerly along the Easterly line of said White Bear Avenue to the point of beginning; and Except that part thereof described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southerly line of County Road "D', a distance of One hundred seventy- five (175) feet Easterly of the Southeast corner of the intersection of County Road "D" and White Bear Avenue; thence running Southerly on a line parallel with the West section line of said Section Two (2) for a distance of One hundred twenty-five (125) feet; thence Westerly on a line parallel to the Southerly fight of way line of County Road 'D' to a point, Seventy-five (75) feet Easterly of the Easterly right of way line of White Bear Avenue; thence Northerly on a deflection angle of Ninety (90) degrees to the Southerly right of way line of said County Road 'D"; thence Easterly along said fight of way line to the point of beginning; and 39 Except that part thereof described as follows: The West One hundred fifty (W 150) feet of the East Three hundred sixty-seven (E 367) feet of the North Three hundred forty and fifty hundredths (N 340.50) feet thereof, except County Road "D" right of way, and Except that part thereof described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of White Bear Avenue and County Road "D"; thence Easterly along the South line of County Road "D" a distance of One hundred seventy-five (175) feet; thence in a Southerly direction and parallel to the West line of said Section Two (2), a distance of One hundred twenty-five (125) feet to the point of beginning; thence in a Southerly direction and parallel to the West line of said Section Two (2), a distance of Ninety-five (95) feet; thence in a Westerly direction and parallel to County Road "D" to the Easterly line of White Bear Avenue; and thence Northwesterly along the East line of White Bear Avenue, a distance of Ninety-five and eleven hundredths (95.11) feet; thence Easterly and parallel to County Road "D' to the point of beginning; and Except that part-thereof described as follows: Commencing at a point on the centerline of County Road "D" and Thirty-three (33) feet East of the centerline of White Bear Avenue; thence in a Southerly direction along the East line of White Bear Avenue, a distance of Three hundred forty and eighty-seven hundredths (340.87) feet to the point of beginning; thence East and parallel with County Road "D", a distance of Three hundred thirteen and ninety hundredths (313.90) feet; thence South, One hundred fifty-three (S 153.0) feet; thence West and parallel with County Road "D", a distance of Three hundred eight and sixty-two hundredths (308.62) feet to the East line of White Bear Avenue; thence in a Northerly direction, One hundred fifty-three and nineteen hundredths (153.19) feet to the point of beginning; and Except that part thereof described as follows: Commencing at a point on the Easterly line of White Bear Avenue, Two hundred twenty and twenty- six hundredths (220.26) feet Southerly of the Southeast corner of the intersection of County Road and White Bear Avenue; thence Easterly on a line drawn parallel to the Southerly right of way line of County Road 'D', a distance of One hundred sixty-seven and s'~( hundredths (167.06) feet; thence Southerly at an angle of Ninety (90) degrees, a distance of Eighty-seven and fifty hundredths (87.50) feet; thence Westerly on a line drawn parallel to the Southerly dght of way line of County Road "D" to the Easterly right of way line of White Bear Avenue; thence Northerly along said Easterly line of White Bear Avenue to the point of beginning; and Except that part of the following described pamel lying Westerly of the Easterly 114.15 feet thereof; That part of the North 10 acres of the East 20 acres of the North Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 2, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Easterly right-of-way line of White Bear Avenue and the North line of the South 100 feet of said North 10 acres; thence Easterly along said North line of the South 100 feet, a distance of 309.40 feet; thence Northerly at a right angle, 155.94 feet to a point on a line parallel with and distant 493.50 feet South of the North line of the Northwest Quarter of Section 2; thence Westerly along said parallel line to the Easterly right-of-way line of White Bear Avenue; thence Southerly along said right-of-way line to the point of beginning. All in the NE 1/4 of Section 2, Township 29, Range 22. (PINs 02-29-22-12-0009, 02-29-22-12- 0010 and 02-29-22-21-0017) 4O WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On February 19, 2003, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. 2. On March ,2003, 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: t. 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. 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 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. 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 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: Ail construction shall follow the plans date-stamped January 24, 2003. The city council may approve major changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. 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. 41 · Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, streets, sidewalks, tree and driveway and parking lot plans. In addition, the applicant shall include: Changes to the plans to minimize the loss or removal of natural vegetation including keeping and protecting as many of the large trees along the north and east .property lines (near the daycare center) as possible. Revised plans for storm water pond locations and designs as suggested or required by the watershed distdct or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's design standards and shall include best management practices and rainwater gardens wherever practical. c. A storm water management plan for the proposal. d. All the changes and meet all the conditions noted by the city engineer in the memo dated February 10, 2003. The design of the pond shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. The developer shall provide the city a 20-foot-wide drainage and utility easement over the storm sewer pipe between the pond and the Adal Street right-of-way. 5. The developer or contractor shall: a. Complete all grading for the site drainage and the pond, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Remove any debds, junk and garbage from the site. d. Install a 6-foot-wide concrete sidewalk along the west side of Ariel Street between County Road D and Woodlynn Avenue. Provide the city with verification that the apartment building will meet the state's noise standards. This shall be with a study, testing or other documentation. If the noise on this site is a factor, then the contractor will have to build the apartment building so that it can meet the noise standards. This may be done with thicker walls, heavier windows, requiring air conditioning or other sound-deadening construction methods. The developer shall provide the city with this documentation before the city will issue a building permit for the apartment building. There shall be no outdoor storage of recreational vehicles, boats or trailers. Residents shall not park trailers and vehicles that they do not need for day-to-day transportation on site. If the city decides there are excess parking spaces available on site, then the city may allow the parking of these on site. The developer shall provide an on-site storm shelter in the apartment building. This shelter shall be subject to the approval of the director of emergency preparedness. It shall have a minimum of three square feet per person for 80% of the planned population. 9. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 42 *The developer must corn plete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or a building permit, The Map lewood City Council approved this resolution on 2003. 43 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM Richard Fursman, City Manager Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Rezoning and Comprehensive Land Use Plan Change City of Maplewood 189, 209, 211 and 215 Larpenteur Avenue and 1701 Adolphus Street February 10, 2003 INTRODUCTION Project Description The city has acquired five single-family houses located on the northwest corner of Larpenteur Avenue and Adolphus Street with the city's Housing Replacement Program funds. (See location map on page 8.) As you recall, the city originally purchased three of these houses after they were flooded during a rainstorm in April 2001. The two adjacent older houses, which were not flooded, were purchased by the city last year in order to combine all five properties to create a more comprehensive land use plan. The city is now proposing to rezone and change the corn prehensive land use plan for the five city-owned properties (189, 209, 211 and 215 Larpenteur Avenue and 1701 Adoiphus Street). The city is proposing this change to accommodate the development of up to 11 townhouse units in the future. The development of the townhouse units will require a separate review and is not being considered at this time. Requests To proceed with this proposal, the city council must approve the following: 1. Zoning change for the five city-owned properties from single-dwelling residential (R-l) to multiple-dwelling residential (R-3); and 2. Comprehensive land use plan change for the five city-owned properties from single- dwelling residential (R-l) to medium multiple-dwelling residential (R-3M). Background On December 13, 1999, the city council approved a Housing Replacement Program .in order to im prove the condition of the city's housing stock. On July 23, 2001, the city council authorized the purchase of three houses at 209, 211 and 215 Larpenteur Avenue with Housing Replacement Program funds. On March 4, 2002, the planning commission reviewed the redevelopment options for the Larpenteur Avenue properties and agreed that if all five lots were obtained, rezoning to a higher density would be a good redevelopment strategy. On April 9, 2002, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) reviewed the redevelopment options for the Larpenteur Avenue properties and recommended that the city maximize the returns from the three lots purchased by purchasing the adjacent two lots and developing townhouses. On May 13, 2002, during a city council workshop, the city council directed staff to negotiate the purchase of 1701 Adolphus Street and 189 Larpenteur Avenue. The city council also stated that the townhouse approach for the area seemed appropriate. On September 23, 2002, the city council authorized the purchase of 189 Larpenteur Avenue with Housing Replacement Program funds. On October 28, 2002, the city council authorized the purchase of 1701 AdolphUs Street with Housing Replacement Program funds. On December 9, 2002, dudng a city council workshop, the city council authorized city staff to begin the public hearing process for the rezoning and comprehensive land use plan change from single-dwelling residential (R-l) to medium multiple-dwelling residential (R-3M). DISCUSSION Existing Conditions Four of the houses have been demolished (189, 209, 211 and 215 Larpenteur Avenue). The previous owners are renting the house at 1701 Adolphus Street until their new house is built in the spdng or early summer of this year. Demolition of this last house will be accomplished by the city soon after. The combined land area of all five lots is 79,992 square feet, or 1,84 acres. Approximately two- thirds of this area is considered developable because of the pond and required setbacks from the pond, as well as a future storm sewer to be placed in the center of the property. Zoning and Land Use Changes All five city-owned lots are zoned and guided as single-dwelling residential (R-l). '(See attached existing zoning and land use maps on pages 9 and 10.) Properties located on the corner of Larpenteur Avenue and Agate Street, directly to the west of the five city-owned properties, are planned and zoned double-dwelling residential (R-2). The opposite corner, across Agate Street, is planned and zoned multiple-dwelling residential (R-3). Therefore, changing the five city-owned properties to a higher-density zoning district and land use plan classification will complement the existing land uses. The city council reviewed two redevelopment proposals for the Larpenteur Avenue properties last December. (See redevelopment proposals attached separately.) Proposal One shows the five lots rezoned to double-dwelling residential (R-2) for a total of six units, and Proposal Two shows them rezoned to medium multiple-dwelling residential (R-3M) for a total of 11 units. Larpenteur Avenue Properties 2 February 10, 2003 Proposal One - Double-Dwelling Residential: Within the R-2 zoning district, the permitted uses include single and double-dwelling units (no multi-unit townhouses). The city's comprehensive plan does not define the maximum density allowed within the R-2 zoning district. Therefore, the density is limited by the allowable lot size and lot width as defined in the city's zoning code. Within the R-2 zoning district, the lot size and width required for double dwellings is 12,000 square feet in area and 85 feet in width for interior lots and 100 feet in width for corner lots. The five city-owned properties combined equals 79,992 square feet in area. Dividing the lot area by 12,000 square feet would create a total of 6.66 double dwellings, or 12 units, that could be constructed on the lot. However, due to the inflexible lot-width requirements, the total number of double dwellings that could actually be constructed on the five city-owned properties would be three (six units). Proposal Two - Medium Multiple-Dwellin,q Residential: Within the R-3 zoning district, the permitted uses include multiple dwellings (including multi-unit townhouses). Within the city's comprehensive plan, the maximum density allowed within the R-3M land use is six units per acre. If the five city- owned properties were rezoned to R-3M, a maximum of 11 townhouse units could be constructed (1.84 acres times six units equals 11.04 units). The R-3 zoning district is also less restrictive than the R-2 zoning district with no minimum lot size or lot width. Because of the inflexible nature of the R-2 zoning district, the city council felt that the best rezoning and land use plan change alternative would be R-3M. (See proposed rezoning and land use change maps on pages 11 and 12.) This scenario would allow for a maximum of 11 townhouse units on the five city-owned properties. Redevelopment Scenario In the newly created single-family Gladstone Park plat, the city was successful in acting as the developer in platting and selling the land. Staff foresees the same development scenario with the Larpentuer Avenue properties. The city should change the zoning and comprehensive land use plan to reflect the desired number of units. Once this is complete and all houses are removed from the site, the city's public works department should prepare the site for development including installing storm sewer and rough grading. Unlike the single-family Gladstone Park plat, however, platting of a townhouse development is not possible until 'a development proposal is created. This proposal would be finalized after the sale of the land to a builder. RECOMMENDATIONS Adopt the zoning map change resolution on page 13. This resolution changes the zoning map for five city-owned properties (189, 209, 211 and 215 Larpenteur Avenue and 1701 Adolphus Street) from single-dwelling residential (R-l) to multiple-dwelling residential (R-3). The city is making this change because: The proposed change is consistent with the spidt, purpose and intent of the zoning code. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. Larpenteur Avenue Properties 3 February 10, 2003 The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. Adopt the land use plan change resolution on page 14. This resolution changes the comprehensive land use plan map for five city-owned properties (189, 209, 211 and 215 Larpenteur Avenue and 1701 Adolphus Street) from single-dwelling residential (R-l) to medium multiple-dwelling residential (R-3M). The city is making this change because: bo Co The site serves well as a transition between the double-dwelling property to the west and the commercial property to the east. The site meets the city's policies for medium multiple-dwelling residential uses since it: 1) Includes a variety of housing types for all types of residents. 2) Supports innovative subdivision and housing design. The site meets the city's goals for medium multiple-dwelling residential uses since it: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Provides for orderly development. Protects and strengthens neighborhoods. Preserves significant natural features where practical. Minimizes the land planned for streets. Minimizes conflicts between land uses. Provides a wide variety of housing types. Integrates developments with open space areas, community facilities and significant natural features. Larpenteur Avenue Properties 4 February 10, 2003 CITIZEN COMMENTS I surveyed the owners of the 17 properties within 350 feet of the five city-owned properties. Of the eight responses received, one was in favor of the proposal, three were in favor with minor concerns, and four were opposed: In Favor 1. Anonymous: We would be in favor of a zone change if you put in a higher-class townhouse that would be purchased rather than rented. We would not want to see Iow- rent housing put in because we consider that to be more of a burden to us taxpayers for maintenance and policing. We already have a drug problem in the park down the block. Concerns 1. Shirley M. Taugner, 1730 Agate Street N: Although I have no current objection to the proposed rezoning, I have concerns regarding parking for 11 townhomes in that small area and possible traffic implications on Larpenteur so close to 35E and with the existing speed limit. 2. Shirley Walker, 1748 Onacrest Curve N: I would have no problem with nice town houses being built providing they are sold to individual owners not as rentals. Rental units can mean problem units. Thank you. 3. Michael & Glenndy Sculley, 1736 Onacrest Curve N: We would probably prefer single- family housing, but townhomes are OK. We would support this proposal - but we hope this will be affordable housing. Against 1. Allan C. Button, 1744 Onacrest Curve N: We would rather not have you rezone the property. We would like to see single dwelling (R 1) houses built there, but with the land filled in so they would be on higher ground which would reduce the chance of flooding. 2. Loretta B. Lonetti, 1722 Agate Street N: I would like to see them stay single-dwelling residential- no changes. 3. L.E. Bettinger, 1714 Agate Street N: We would like to keep neighborhood in single- dwelling residential - R 1. We have enough apartments, townhouses and projects around this neighborhood; we don't need any more around here. There is enough traffic and noise with 35E & Larpenteur Avenue, with the bus stop at the end of Larpenteur and Agate. It is very noisy and polluted in summertime now. 4. Charles J. Berglund, Sr., 1699 Agate Street N: We could use more open space on this side of Maplewood. I believe this would be a perfect spot for a nature trail with parking off of Adolphus Street. Paved trails with lighting, clean up around the pond. This could be a rare chance to do something nice with this area. Don't we really have enough townhouses? February 10, 2003 Larpenteur Avenue Properties 5 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site Size: Existing Land Use: 79,992 square feet, or 1.84 acres Vacant Land SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: East: West: Pond (Zoned Open Space) City of St. Paul Single Family Homes Duplex (Zoned R-2) Sinclair Gas Station (Zoned BC) PLANNING Existing Zoning: Existing Land Use: Single-Dwelling Residential Single-Dwelling Residential CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL Rezoning: Section 36-485 of the zoning code requires that the city council make the following findings to rezone property: The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. Co The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. Land Use Plan Change: There are no specific criteria for land use plan changes. Any change, however, should be consistent with the goals and policies in the comprehensive plan. Seven specific goals apply to this proposal: a. Provide for ordedy development. b. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods. c. Preserve significant natural features where practical. d. Minimize the land planned for streets. Larpenteur Avenue Properties 6 February 10, 2003 e. Minimize conflicts between land uses. f. Provide a wide variety of housing types. Integrate developments with open space areas, community facilities and significant natural features. In addition, three specific residential policies apply to this proposal: Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents, regardless of age, ethnic, racial, cultural or socioeconomic background. A diversity of housing types should include apartments, townhouses, manufactured homes, single-family housing, public-assisted housing and Iow- and moderate-income housing, and rental and owner-occupied housing. b. Support innovative subdivision and housing design. The city will not approve .new developments without providing adequate facilities and services, such as streets, utilities, drainage, parks and open space. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Existing Zoning Map 3. Existing Land Use Map 4. Proposed Zoning Map 5. Proposed Land Use Map 6. Zoning Map Change Resolution 7. Land Use Plan Change Resolution 8. Redevelopment Proposals (Separate Handout) Larpenteur Avenue Properties 7 February 10, 2003 Attachment 1 Larpenteur Avenue ILl S Location Map 8 Attachment 2 Larpenteur Avenue City of St. Paul R-I' Single-Dwelling Residential R-2' Double-Dwelling Residential R-3: Multiple-Dwelling Residential B-C' Business Commercial Existing Zoning Map Attachment 3 R-3H Open Space 211 215 Larpenteur Avenue City of St. Paul LU R-l: Single-Dwelling Residential R-2: Double-Dwelling Residential R.3M: Medium Multiple-Dwelling Residential R-3H: High Multiple-Dwelling Residential LBC: Limited Business Commercial N Existing Land Use Ma , 10 Attachment 4 City of St. Paul Larpenteur Avenue UJ R-I' Single-Dwelling Residential R-2' Double-Dwelling Residential R-3' Multiple-Dwelling Residential B-C' Business Commercial Proposed Zoning Map 11 Attachment 5 City of St. Paul Open Space Larpenteur Avenue R-3H LU R-I' Single-Dwelling Residential R-2: Double-Dwelling Residential R-3M: Medium Multiple-Dwelling Residential R-3H: High Multiple-Dwelling Residential LBC' Limited Business Commercial Proposed Land Use M~p 12 ZONING MAP CHANGE RESOLUTION Attachment 6 WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has proposed a change to the city's zoning map from single-dwelling residential (R-l) to multiple-dwelling residential (R-3). WHEREAS, this change applies to 189, 209, 211 and 215 Larpenteur Avenue and 1701 Adolphus Street, Maplewood, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: On February 19, 2003, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve the rezoning change. On ,2003, the city council held a public heating. City staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to speak and present wdtten statements. The city 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 change in the zoning map for the following reasons: 1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded: The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,2003. 13 Attachment 7 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has proposed a change to the city's land use plan from single-dwelling residential (R-l) to medium multiple-dwelling residential (R-3M). WHEREAS, this change applies to 189, 209, 211 and 215 Larpenteur Avenue and 1701 Adolphus Street, Maplewood, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On February 19, 2003, the planning commission held a public hearing. City staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the plan amendments. 2. On ,2003, the city council discussed the land use plan changes. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE lT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above- described land use plan change for the following reasons: 1. The site serves well as a transition between the double-dwelling property to the west and the commercial property to the east. 2. The site meets the city's policies for medium multiple-dwelling residential uses since it: a. Includes a variety of housing types for all types of residents. b. Supports innovative subdivision and housing design. 3. The site meets the city's goals for medium multiple-dwelling residential uses since it: a. Provides for orderly development. b. Protects and strengthens neighborhoods. c. Preserves significant natural features where practical. d. Minimizes the land planned for streets. e. Minimizes conflicts between land uses. f. Provides a wide variety of housing types. g. Integrates developments with open space areas, community facilities and significant natural features. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,2003. 14 A cD ,g6'66 03,