The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/19/1997BOOK MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 19, 1997 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes May 5, 1997 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Public Hearings 7:00 1998-2002 Maplewood Capital Improvement Plan 6. New Business a. US West Telecommunications Tower Conditional Use Permit (500 Carlton Street) b. Conditional Use Permit - Rear Yard Setback (2431 Carver Avenue) c. Outback Steakhouse Conditional Use Permit (Beam Avenue and Southlawn Drive) d. Summer Tour Date - June 30, 19977 7. Unfinished Business In-fill Development Study o 10. 11. Visitor Presentations Commission Presentations a. May 12 Council Meeting: Ms. Fischer b. May 27 council Meeting: Mr. Kittridge c. June 9 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson Staff Presentations Adjournment WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION This outline has been prepared to help you understand the public meeting process. The review of an item usually takes the following form: o 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. 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~ocagd Revised: 01/95 F THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES O - - LEWOOD~ MINNESOTA t830 cOUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAP MAY 5, 1997 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioner Bunny Brueggeman Commissioner Barbara Ericson Commissioner Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Jack Frost Commissioner Kevin Kittridge Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner William Rossbach Commissioner Milo Thompson III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Present present present Present Present Absent present present April 21, 1997 Commissioner Frost moved approval of the minutes of April 21, 1997, as submitted. Commissioner Thompson seconded. Ayes--Brueggeman, Fischer, Frost, Kittridge, Rossbach, Thompson Abstention--Ericson IV. IV. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Ericson moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Commissioner Frost seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. Commissioner Frost moved approval of the minutes of April 7, 1997, as submitted. Commissioner Thompson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Brueggeman moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Commissioner Frost seconded. Ayes--all Planning Commission Minutes of 05-05-97 -2- The motion passed. V. NEW BUSINESS Resolution of ApPreciation--David Kopesky Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Ericson moved the Planning Commission approve the resolution of appreciation for David Kopesky. Commissioner Brueggeman seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. 5. Commissioner Frost seconded. Chairperson Fischer thanked Mr. Kopesky for serving on the commission. B. Conditional Use Permit--Oversized Accessory Building (2405 Carver Avenue) Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. Larry Grand, the applicant, was present. Mr. Grand was in agreement with the first five conditions of the staff recommendation. He felt Condition 6 to give the city a drainage and utility easement for the ponding area was "out of the realm" of this building request. Mr. Grand dug this pond four to six years ago and would like to keep it as it exists. Ken Haider, city engineer, acknowledged that Mr. Grand had built the pond and maintains it quite well. He felt the city's concern was for future maintenance of the pond. Mr. Haider said the pond is adjacent to the roadway and, because some public water drains into it, a public easement would be in order. Mr. Haider did not feel strongly about requiring this drainage easement. Commissioner Rossbach felt the easement requirement could be added at a future date if continued development in the area necessitated it. Commissioner Rossbach moved the Planning Commission recommend: 1. All construction shall follow the plans dated April 9, 1997 as approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must be started within one year after council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The owner shall not use the storage building for the repair of other persons' motor vehicles or commercial or business activities unless the city council approves such a request. The owner shall only use the storage building for personal use and storage. The city council shall review this permit only if a problem develops. Ayes--Brueggeman, Ericson, Fischer, Frost, Rossbach, Thompson The motion passed. Nays--Kittridge Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 05-05-97 Commissioner Kittridge expects the twenty acres south of Mr. Grand's property to develop in the future and he would prefer that the city get the easement now. VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS In-Fill Development Study Ken Roberts, associate planner, reviewed the status of this study. Mr. Roberts said there is a specific clause in this proposed ordinance that exempts lots created by lot divisions from the standards outlined in this study. Commissioner Rossbach thought only a few of the 28 sites shown in the study would be affected by this ordinance. He felt that lots being divided in established residential areas need to be considered in this study. He was in favor of having a "true" tree-preservation ordinance. Melinda Coleman, director of community development, said that of the 28 sites identified in this study, 17 would have to go through the proposed planned unit development (PUD) process. Ms. Coleman explained how this ordinance would help address neighborhood concerns. Commissioner Thompson thought the emphasis was to put undeveloped property on the tax rolls at a higher value. He preferred utilizing some of the existing city ordinances to a greater extent, particularly referring to drainage. Commissioner Kittridge felt that a neighborhood meeting with the developer, without the involvement of the planning commission and city council, would be of great benefit. He also was in favor of the tree plan. Ms. Coleman said the neighborhood-meeting policy could be required for all planned unit developments. She said the 10-acre or less requirement for developers to have a meeting was arbitrary. Staff felt developments over 10 acres in size created their own neighborhoods. Commissioner Rossbach said the ideas proposed in this study were "mostly good." He saw the in-fill sites as much smaller areas in existing neighborhoods. Commissioner Fischer mentioned that some parcels may have been assessed for four or five potential lots and end up with only two or three. Mr. Roberts said it was his opinion that the site acreage proposed to be developed at a given time would determine whether the parcel fell into the in-fill study guidelines. George Rossbach, 1406 County Road C East, gave some background information about parcels in his area. He felt Maplewood is allowing lot sizes that are too small. Commissioner Ericson's choice was to not use the 10-acre restriction but consider all potential development sites, including lot splits, for community desirability, tree preservation, etc. Commissioner Rossbach favored looking at new guidelines, but also better defining and enforcing existing rules. Mr. Haider spoke about the site grading. He said the accuracy of the preliminary grading plan depends on the expertise of the engineer and the developer. Staff does attempt to confirm the grading plan and asks for an as-built after the grading is complete. Melinda Coleman agreed with Commissioner Fischer that a public meeting place should be provided as close as possible to the neighborhood being affected. This also could be stated in the guidelines. Ken Roberts said the staff does encourage the developer to get input from the city in regard to requirements, background, etc. before his plans are drawn. Mr. Roberts pointed out that the city does have more flexibility with the PUD but it does not have to accept everything the developer submits. City staff can negotiate with developers proposing PUDs. Commissioner Frost suggested making an economic incentive to encourage the developer to preserve trees. Ms. Coleman said staff took an extensive, "very restrictive" tree preservation code to the city council several months ago. The proposed tree ordinance was for the city as a whole, but primarily applied to new residential subdivisions. Planning Commission Minutes of 05-05-97 Commissioner Rossbach moved that the Planning Commission table the In-Fill Development Study until the May 19, 1997 meeting with the following three directions to staff: 1) Develop a more comprehensive tree preservation plan, 2) Require that neighborhood meetings should not be limited to areas 10 acres or less and should be a standard policy for developments, and 3) Expand the planned unit development (PUD) ordinance so it can be used in a greater capacity than it is currently. Commissioner Kittridge seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS There were no visitor presentations. VIII. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS IX. A. April 28 Council Meeting: Mr. Rossbach reported on this meeting. B. May 12 Council Meeting: Ms. Fischer will attend this meeting. C. May 27 Council Meeting: Mr. Kittridge will attend this meeting. STAFF PRESENTATIONS There were no staff presentations. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Capital Improvement Program May 1, 1997 INTRODUCTION I have enclosed the proposed 1998-2002 Capital Improvement Program. The city updates this report each year. The Capital Improvement Plan is part of the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan. State law requires the planning commission to review all changes to the comprehensive plan. The purpose of this review is to decide if the proposed capital improvements are consistent with the comprehensive plan. RECOMMENDATION Approve the 1998-2002 Capital Improvement Program. kr/p: miscell/cipmemo, mem Enclosure (PC only): Capital Improvement Program MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: PROJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Conditional Use Permit and Design Review US West Monopole 500 Carlton Street May 5, 1997 INTRODUCTION Project Description John Holienbeck of CB Commercial, representing US West, is proposing to install a 90-foot-tall monopole for telecommunications equipment. They want to install this monopole on the north side of the US West building at 500 Cadton Street. (Refer to the maps and plans on pages 5-11 and the letter starting on page 12.) There also would be 12' x 9.5' x 6' equipment pad near the base of the monopole. US West would surround the monopole and pad area with bollards to protect the equipment. Requests The applicant is requesting that the city approve: 1. A conditional use permit (CUP) for a monopole and related equipment in a BC-M (business commercial-modified) zoning district. 2. The design and site plans. BACKGROUND On March 3, 1960, the village council approved a rezoning for this site so that Northwestern Bell Telephone could construct their building on the site. On September 7, '1972, the council approved plans for an addition to the north side of the building on the site. This approval was subject to seven conditions. On May 24, 1994, the community design review board approved plans for US West to expand their parking lot by 26 spaces. With these additional spaces, there is a total of 95 parking spaces now on the site. On January 13, 1997, the council adopted the commercial use antenna and tower ordinance. DISCUSSION Conditional Use Permit The city council should approve this request. This project meets the requirements of the tower ordinance and the criteria for a CUP. As proposed, the tower would be 120 feet from the east property line of the site and about 470 feet from the closest house on Femdale Street. The site design would be compatible with the adjacent commercial structures and uses. RECOMMENDATIONS Adopt the resolution on pages 15 and 16. This resolution approves a conditional use permit to allow a 90-foot-tall telecommunications monopole and related equipment. This approval is for the property at 500 Carlton Street. The city bases this approval on the findings required by the ordinance and is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor Changes. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. Approve the site and design plans date-stamped April 14, 1997, for a 90-foot-tall telecommunications monopole and equipment on the north side of the building at 500 Carlton Street. Approval is based on the findings required by code and subject to the applicant doing the following: Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued permits for this project. Before getting a building permit, provide a grading, drainage, driveway and erosion control plan to the city engineer for approval. The erosion control plan shall meet all ordinance requirements. 3. If any required work is not done, the city may allow tempora~ occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work. The amount shall be 150% of the cost of the unfinished work. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2 CITIZENS' COMMENTS City staff surveyed the owners of the 25 properties within 350 feet of the proposed site. We received 7 replies. Two were for the proposal, two objected, two had comments and one reply had no comment. For 1. With the enormous power towers in the area, their monopole is the least of anyones worries. (Conway Auto Clinic - 2545 Conway Avenue) Against 1. Being involved in the communications industry, I know that these towers are required for the emerging technology. Since this tower will be built in the adjacent property to my back yard, I prefer it to be located in a different location. I do know that many towers are located on existing structures such as building roof tops and water towers. There are several of these in the immediate area and I would like those locations to be explored. (Mohwinkel - 529 Femdale St.) 2. We have concerns of a technical nature and require more time to determine any negative impacts. We will meet with US West to determine impacts. (3M) Comments 1. Capital City Investments has no objections to the proposal. (They own property near the site.) 2. Concerns - does the tower make any noise or as claimed will not interfere with electronic devices. I would not object if I was guaranteed replacement of any electronic devices affected and that the tower would not generate any noise. (Mihajlovich - 537 Femdale Street) 3 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 4.26 acres Existing land use: US West building and parking lots SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Child Care Center South: 3M Center across Conway Avenue West: 3M Center and Conway Auto Service across Carlton Street East: Houses on Femdale Street PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: BC-M (business commercial- modified) Zoning: BC-M Ordinance Requirements Section 36-600(5)(b)(1) requires a CUP for a tower in any non-residential zoning district. Findings for CUP Approval Section 36-442(a) states that the city council must base approval of a CUP on nine standards for approval. Refer to findings one through nine in the resolution on pages 15 and 16. p:sec36/500crlt.mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Une/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Site Plan 5. Site Plan 6. Elevation 7. Photo Illustration 8. Applicant's letter dated March 11, 1997 9. Applicant's CUP criteria statement dated 4-14-97 10. Conditional Use Permit Resolution Attachment 1 B~AND MINNEHAHA CONW~Y 222 Tonners Loke UPPER AI~ON l~:). LOCATION MAP Attachment 2 / /~/ ~-' ~o--~--- IIF ~ ' 1 I.' ~ m /!'/~' i--.~i-~ ]~ ~,~ -~-- - ;~--- / ~/ ~[~ ~,~ _~ ~-s; ~-, i CHILD CARE~ . ~"~ '1 ~'~ :*~ · ~ ~ ' -c~.,~. , gl~ ~~:-~-=:~- ~-- ~ _~ -- __ ~ ..... ~n-- . 7_ 549~ ~ I~l" ~-~'~. ~i;i ~e~ ' ~ ,, ~-~ · [ I ~.~ I I, ~E STATION 543 .._j APARTMENTS ' -- - CONWAY AVENUE ,,. PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP :,ttachment 3 NORTH ~CALE 1' ,= 00' A,,03,18,4cj" R-2904.79 L-, 167.99 I · A,03'21'57' s Lin1__ / iI I; S8g'22'22' E 260.15 22o.oe -- 104o0 BUILDING 1 STORY BRICK CONWAY NSg' 11'SE'W 265.00 -" AVENUE S. 2/3, W, I/2, [. 3/4,. 1/4.. SEC. ~e,, T. ~, ~ 22 o. F.. uNr-. w. t/2, ~-. 3/4, ~/4. .o-' NE 1/4. SEC. 3'~. T. 2g. ~r 22 SITE PLAN Attachment 4 i PROPOSIED EQUIP AND MONOPOLE SITE I ~ABLE I ' ] I I I I KING LOT 104.0 --I g / / BUILDING / STORY BRICK / / / / / / / / F////////////I 225.00 CONWAY AVENUE SITE 8 PLAN Attachment 5 FEXISTING C, kBLE VAULT ~ BOLLARD (TYP) I · ~/,---PROPOSED-'OUIPMENT PAD 9'--,6~,"" _v'~/--PROPOSED )0' MONOPOLE . ~.-o .;~ w/co~c~,~ c^,so~. CONCRETE WALK (EQUIPMENTPAD PLAN. '--~'--T~PF 0 4' 8' 16' 32' SITE PLAN Attachment 6 ProPOSED .. ANTENNA 2'-6" (MIN)FROM C~'NTER LINE OF ANTENNA 3' LIGHTNING EL 1081 82 .... il ROD rll FUTURE GROWTH ANTENNAS SEE III III EL. 991.82' r (~) MONOPOLE ELEVATION ANTENNA y EXISTING BUILDING BOLLARD (TYP)h~ 0 4' 8' 16' 171ELEV 32' I!~ W'r. ST ~TE ELF. VATION ~~' m. _ ~ 10 Attachment 7 Communications MIN 171 500 N. Carlton, Maplewood Monopole Height: 90' Building Height: 18' F Attachment 8 CB COMMERCIAL 2550 University Avenue West Suite 159S St. Paul, MN 55114 (612) 603-6129 Fax (612) 645-1526 March 11, 1997 nor Melinda Coleman City of Maplewood 1830 E. County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 RE: U S WEST Site# MIN171 Dear Ms. Coleman: This letter accompanies an application for a Conditional Use Permit by US West that will allow the location of a PCS telephone antenna and cell site on the property at 500 N. Carlton Slxeet. CBC has been authorized by US West to act as their representative for planning and zoning matters. PROPOSED USE US West is proposing to consmact a steel monopole tower on the noted property. A PCS antenna array will be placed at the top of the pole. The foundation for the tower will be a caisson type. The tower steel and foundation will be designed following specifications as determined by the tower manufacturer. These specifications take into account soils, local wind loading guidelines and the type of equipment to be attached to the tower. A safety factor is included in the design parameters resulting in a tower that typically exceeds local building code requirements. Please reference the enclosed drawings and the specification sheet from Engineered Endeavors, Inc. Additionally, the cell site will meet both FAA and FCC requirements for the location. Tower color will be chosen to blend in with the surrounding environment. An unmanned prefabricated equipment pad measuring approximately 12'-0" x 9'-6" x 6'-0" will be located at the base of the pole. The drainage of the site will not be changed. Fencing or landscape will be implemented per the cities requirements. The site will only require single phase 200 amp electrical service and T1 telephone for utilities. These will be brought in underground. Site photographs, a site plan, and a zoning drawing are attached. ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS The site meets the City's standards for conditional uses. The antenna will be visually unobtrusive and go unnoticed by the casual observer. 12 New wireless communication technology has developed rapidly in the past few years and many new applications are vital to industrial and business uses. Business and industry will be seeking out and adapting to these new technologies to remain competitive as the new Information Highway becomes a reality. Having access to these emerging wireless technologies will be an important amenity for the success of future business. This site will enhance public safety and welfare because it will enable US West to bring this new CDMA cellular technology to the area. The ability to transmit data such as fax, paging and computer data transmission will open a whole new way for business, individuals, and government services to communicate. Police can use CDMA cellular fax machines as part of their 6rug enforcement program to obtain immediate search warrants when illegal activity is observed without leaving the scene. Firefighters can receive faxed blueprints of a building in route to more safely fight fires. Ambulances can use it to transmit vital data to emergency rooms which allows the emergency rooms to be better prepared to receive injured accident victims. At spill sites, hazardous material information can be obtained "on site" by accessing computer data bases throughout the country with a CDMA cellular modem. Motorists who do not have the cellular phones are benefited by this system. Passing motorists with a phone can place an emergency call. CDMA Cellular radio transmissions are very safe and pose no health risk. It is really nothing more than a digital low power two-way radio. CDMA Cellular uses lol~lla~ver to insure that the signal stays within the designated "cell" so it will not interfere with neighboring "~l~'?Ilae ~ut for PCS cellular is 40 ~watts. Television and radio station transmitting towers can range from 50,000 watts to one rmlhon watts otpower output. In fact, the output of a PCS antenna array impacts the population at approximately half the output and associated absorption rate of the microwave oven found in most ~t_c.he_ns. The question is often asked if the operation of a cellular antenna will affect home radio and television reception. The use of the frequency spectrum is tightly controlled by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The CDMA cellular system is operated in the 1900 MHz range. This is a higher frequency on the radio spectrum than home radio and television frequencies. This is important because higher frequency users cannot interfere with lower frequency users. Since 1984, over 15,000 cellular antennas have been erected across the United States, and there have been no documented instances of interference with home entertainment equipment. Additionally, CDMA encoding will virtually eliminate the possibility of phone number cloning and cell number theft. I respectfully request that we be placed on the next available planning Commission Agenda. I plan to attend the hearing to answer any questions or concerns that the committee or public may have. I appreciate the assistance I have already received from the Zoning Staff. I look forward to working with you to provide CDMA PCS cellular capability to your area. Sincerely, ~ Zoning Manager CB Commercial Telecommunications Division 13 Attachment 9 · City of Maplewood: Application for a Conditional Use Criteria for Approval of a Conditional Use Permit '7 1. The City's comprehensive plan does not address PCS telephone towers and antennas. 2. The proposed monopole is designed to blend with the surrounding environment. Landscaping and screening will hide the base of the tower. The monopole color will be light blue or gray. 3. PCS towers do not reduce property values. In fact, property values have been known to increase in areas with PCS towers because it will enable US WeSt to bring this new technology to the cornrnunity. US West's PCS system will enhance the community's communications ability yet will not interfere with television, radio, pacemakers or other electronic devices. 4. US West PCS transmissions operate at a very low power level producing no harmful effects upon the health and safety of residents. PCS transmission is really nothing more than a digital low power two-way radio. According to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC): "Measurements that have been made around typical cellular base stations have shown that ground-level power densities are well below limits recommended by currently accepted RF and microwave safety standards." 5. The proposed PCS monopole would not increase the amount of vehicular traffic on local streets. Monopole base stations are serviced only twice each year, thus generating virtually no additional traffic. 6. The proposed use is currently accessible by city streets. No service by any other public facility would be required. 7. The proposed use would not create any additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The proposed use will not adversely affect the surrounding natural environment. The site will be landscaped to blend with the surrounding vegetation; no trees will be removed. 9. The proposed use will include a tower of 90' and an enclosed Base Transceiver Station (BTS) for tower equipment that create no adverse environmental effects. 14 Attachment 10 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Mr. John Hollenbeck of CB Commercial, representing US West, applied for a conditional use permit to install a 90-foot-tall telecommunications monopole and related equipment. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property at 500 Carlton Street. The legal description is: The Part East of Carlton Street of South 2/3 of West 112 of East 3/4 of the SW 114 of the NE 114 (Subject to Road) in Section 36, Township 29, Range 22 in Ramsey County, Minnesota. (PIN 36-29-22-13-0016) WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On May 19, 1997, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. 2. The city council held a public hearing on _, 1997. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described conditional use permit, because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the city's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. The use would The use would not depreciate property values. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 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. 15 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city, The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on 1997. 16 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Conditional Use Permit 2431 carver Avenue May 12, 1997 INTRODUCTION Donald Telin is requesting that the city approve a conditional use permit (CUP) for his property at 2431 Carver Avenue. This permit is to build a new house in the rear yard setback area. The city code requires a 45-foot rear yard setback for the covered parts of the dwelling on this lot. As proposed, the house would be 20 feet from the rear property line at the nearest point. (Code allows uncovered decks to be within 5 feet of a property line.) However, the city code allows the council to approve a CUP to build into a required setback. (See the maps on pages 4-6 and the statement on page 7.) BACKGROUND On June 1, 1995, Mr. Telin applied to the city for a demolition permit to remove an old house from the property. The former house had a rear-yard setback of about 15 feet. DISCUSSION As proposed, the house would not depreciate property values, cause crowding or adverse environmental effects. Mr. Telin has requested this house location to save existing trees on the site and because of poor soils closer to Carver Avenue. The proposed house location would be more conforming with the code than the location of the former house. In addition, the proposed location would be similar to those on the north side of Carver Avenue. The houses on either side of this site are at least 150 feet back from Carver Avenue and this house would be about 170 feet back from Carver Avenue. Of the 7 neighbors we surveyed, all four who responded were for this proposal and none objected. RECOMMENDATION Approve the resolution starting on page 8. This resolution approves a conditional use permit to construct a house on the lot at 2431 Carver Avenue in the rear yard setback area. This permit shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the plans dated May 1, 1997 as approved by the city. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed house construction must be started within one year after council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The owner should connect the new house to the city sanitary sewer. 4. The city council shall review this permit only if a problem develops. CITIZEN COMMENTS Staff surveyed the property owners within 350 feet of this site to get their opinions of this proposal. Out of 7 properties, we received four responses. All four were for the proposal. For 1. Sometimes you just have to do what makes sense, even if it contradicts written rule, but then, that is the beautiful part of America. (Grand - 2405 Carver Avenue) 2. Save all the trees he can and also because of the wetland in front. (Wilds - 2410 Carver Ave) 3. I think it will be a nice added touch for this house to be built. He is leaving the lot wooded and it will look great. (Baumgart - 2445 Carver Avenue) 4. It fits the area~ (Herford - Little Canada) REFERENCE SITE DESCRIPTION Site Size: 43,520 square feet (0.99 acres) Existing Land Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES North: East: South:~ West: City open space Houses on Carver Avenue Houses across Carver Avenue City open space PLANNING Land Use Plan Designation: R-1 (single dwelling) Zoning Designation: F (farm residence) ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT Section 36-72(e) allows the city council to approve a conditional use permit to construct a building into a minimum setback. CRITERIA FOR CUP APPROVAL Section 36-442(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards. (See findings 1-9 in the resolution on pages 8 and 9.) krlp: Sec 24-28/2431carv.mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Applicant's Criteria Statement 5. CUP Resolution ~ LINWOOD Attachment 1 AVE. 1. CUREIE CT. 2. VN. LLrY VIEW CT. 5. LAKLrWOOD Cl'. ~HYUS CT. OAK AVE. AV. Loke CIR. RAMSEY COUNTY LOCATION MAP Attachment 2 CiTY OPEN sPACE ~ttachment 3 SITE PLAN 6 " Attachment 4 ~'~~~ ~-/- ~ 7 Attachment 5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Donald Telin requested that Maplewood approve a conditional use permit to build a house in the required rear yard setback area. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property at 2431 Carver Avenue. The legal description is: Subject to Carver Avenue, the East 170 feet of the South 256 feet of the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 24, Township 28, Range 22. (PIN 24-28-22-21-0003) WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On May 19, 1997, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. 2. On June 9, 1997, 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 Maplewood City Council approve the above- described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approves this 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. 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. All construction shall follow the plans dated May 1, 1997 as approved by the city. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed house construction must be started within one year after council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The owner should connect the new house to the city sanitary sewer. 4. The city council shall review this permit only if a problem develops. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1996. CITY OF MAP ] WOOD 1880 E. COUNTY ROAD B MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA 55109 OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 612-770.4560 May 13,1997 Donald Telin 835 East Magnolia St. Paul, MN 55106 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW - 2431 CARVER AVENUE The Maplewood Planning Commission will consider the above at its meeting on May 19, 1997. The commission convenes its meeting at 7 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers at 1830 E. County Road B. The commission requests a representative be present at the meeting. A copy of the staff report is enclosed for your information. Please call me if you wish to discuss the recommendation or if you have any questions. MELINDA COLEMAN - DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT njm Enclosure Equal Opportunity Employer MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Conditional Use Permit 2431 Carver Avenue May 12, 1997 INTRODUCTION Donald Telin is requesting that the city approve a conditional use permit (CUP) for his property at 2431 Carver Avenue. This permit is to build a new house in the rear yard setback area. The city code requires a 45-foot rear yard setback for the covered parts of the dwelling on this lot. As proposed, the house would be 20 feet from the rear property line at the nearest point. (Code allows uncovered decks to be within 5 feet of a property line.) However, the city code allows the council to approve a CUP to build into a required setback. (See the maps on pages 4-6 and the statement on page 7.) BACKGROUND On June 1, 1995, Mr. Telin applied to the city for a demolition permit to remove an old house from the property. The former house had a rear-yard setback of about 15 feet. DISCUSSION As proposed, the house would not depreciate property values, cause crowding or adverse environmental effects. Mr. Telin has requested this house location to save existing trees on the site and because of poor soils closer to Carver Avenue. The proposed house location would be more conforming with the code than the location of the former house. In addition, the proposed location would be similar to those on the north side of Carver Avenue. The houses on either side of this site are at least 150 feet back from Carver Avenue and this house would be about 170 feet back from Carver Avenue. Of the 7 neighbors we surveyed, all four who responded were for this proposal and none objected. RECOMMENDATION Approve the resolution starting on page 8. This resolution approves a conditional use permit to construct a house on the lot at 2431 Carver Avenue in the rear yard setback area. This permit shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the plans dated May 1, 1997 as approved by the city. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed house construction must be started within one year after council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The owner should connect the new house to the city sanita~j sewer. 4. The city council shall review this permit only if a problem develops. CITIZEN COMMENTS Staff surveyed the property owners within 350 feet of this site to get their opinions of this proposal. Out of 7 properties, we received four responses. All four were for the proposal. For 1. Sometimes you just have to do what makes sense, even if it contradicts written rule, but then, that is the beautiful part of Amedca. (Grand - 2405 Carver Avenue) 2. Save all the trees he can and also because of the wetland in front. (Wilds - 2410 Carver Ave) 3. I think it will be a nice added touch for this house to be built. He is leaving the lot wooded and it will look great. (Baumgart - 2445 Carver Avenue) 4. It fits the area. (Herford - Little Canada) 2 REFERENCE SITE DESCRIPTION Site Size: 43,520 square feet (0.99 acres) Existing Land Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES North: City open space East: Houses on Carver ^venue South: Houses across Carver Avenue West: City open space PLANNING Land Use Plan Designation: R-1 (sinGle dwellinG) Zoning DesiGnation: F (farm residence) ORDINANCE REOUIREMENT Section 36-72(e) allows the city council to approve a conditional use permit to construct a building into a minimum setback. CRITERIA FOR CUP APPROVAL Section 36-442(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards. (See findings 1-9 in the resolution on pages 8 and 9.) kr/p: Sec 24-28/2431carv.mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Applicant's Criteria Statement 5. CUP Resolution Attachment 1 1. CURRI£ CT. 2. VN..LEY VIEW CT. 3. /..AKLr'WOOD CT. lOX'WOOD AV. OV~:Rt. OOK ~' O~R. Loke RAMSEY COUNTY LOCATION 4 MAP Attachment 2 'm --mmmmmmm (. 537.'~) , 2371 2405 CARVER AVENUE 1285 l r 2410 ,, Attachment 3 C~ WIL,~,OW I. CARVER AVE. SITE PLAN 6 Attachment 4 fi"-/'-~/7 Attachment 5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Donald Telin requested that Maplewood approve a conditional use permit to build a house in the required rear yard setback area. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property at 2431 Carver Avenue. The legal description is: Subject to Carver Avenue, the East 170 feet of the South 256 feet of the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 24, Township 28, Range 22. (PIN 24-28-22-21-0003) WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On May 19, 1997, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. 2. On June 9, 1997, 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 Maplewood City Council approve the above- described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approves this 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. 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. All construction shall follow the plans dated May 1, 1997 as approved by the city. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed house construction must be started within one year after council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The owner should connect the new house to the city sanitary sewer. 4. The city council shall review this permit only if a problem develops. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1996. CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1830 E. COUNTY ROAD B MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA 55109 OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 612-770-4560 May 13,1997 Donald Telin 835 East Magnolia St. Paul, MN 55106 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW - 2431 CARVER AVENUE The Maplewood Planning Commission will consider the above at its meeting' on May 19, 1997. The commission convenes its meeting at 7 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers at 1830 E. County Road B. The commission requests a representative be present at the meeting. A copy of the staff report is enclosed for your information. Please call me if you wish to discuss the recommendation or if you have any questions. MELINDA COLEMAN - DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT njm Enclosure Equal Opportunity Employer MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Conditional Use Permit and Design Review - Outback Steakhouse SW Corner of Beam Avenue and Southlawn Drive May 8, 1997 INTRODUCTION Project Description Mark Kronbeck, of Dovolis, Johnson and Ruggieri, Inc., is proposing to build a 7,400-square-foot Outback Steakhouse at the southwest corner of Beam Avenue and Southlawn Drive. Refer to pages 8-10. Mr. Kronbeck said that the Outback would also be applying for a liquor license. The Outback would lease the property from Richard Schreier. The proposed building would have an exterior of cedar horizontal-lap siding painted "nickel" color. Trim would be painted "creamy cream." Both paint colors would have a gloss finish. The mansard roof would have a standing seam exterior colored "patina green." Requests The applicant is requesting: 1. A conditional use permit (CUP) for a restaurant. The city code requires a CUP for restaurants in BC(M) (business commercial modified) districts. 2. Approval of architectural, site and landscape plans. DISCUSSION Conditional Use Permit Cookin.q Odors Two neighbors expressed concern over the potential problem of cooking odors emanating from the proposed restaurant. The BC(M) code requires that Uall cooking odors be controlled so as not to be noticeable to adjacent residences." To comply with this requirement, the Outback must install odor-filtering equipment. Hours of Operation Two neighbors expressed concern over the closing time of the restaurant. They felt that if there would be liquor sales, the Outback would be open until I a.m. and cause late night disruption. Mr. Kronbeck told me there would be liquor sales as a service to dining-room customers who would prefer alcohol with their meal. Closing time, though, would not be 1 a.m. Mr. Kronbeck said the hours of operation would be: 4 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. Monday- Thursday, 4 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. Friday, 3:30 to 11:30 Saturday and 3:30 to 10:30 Sunday. (For comparison, the Chili's restaurant hours are: 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. Sunday-Thursday and 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. Friday - Saturday.) I do not foresee a problem with the proposed 10:30 p.m. and 11:30 p.m. closing times since the Outback would not be open until typical bar-close time (1 a.m.). They would not, therefore, be catering to bar-type customers. CUP Findinqs The proposed restaurant would meet the findings for CUP approval. The city council should condition approval on a maximum closing time of 11:30 p.m., and that the Outback install a cooking odor filtering system as code requires. Building Design and Materials The proposed building design would be attractive. The painted-wood siding, however, is a product that would require periodic maintenance. Maplewood has a policy of requiring only no/Iow maintenance exterior materials on multi-family and nonresidential buildings. Wood is typically allowed only as an accent material. Staff would not support the proposed cedar exterior in this area, even if it was stained rather than painted. Brick is the predominant material used in the Maplewood Mall area. The city should not accept anything less. Cedar accents may be used, but the primary exterior finish should be brick on all sides to be consistent with the development in this area. Landscaping and Screening The proposed landscaping is attractive. The screening proposed along the south lot line should be increased, however, to comply with code. The code requires a landscape screen that is at least six-feet-tall and 80 percent opaque upon installation. The Black Hills Spruce proposed would be spaced 13 feet on center. This is too wide of a spacing to achieve the 80 percent screen requirement. Also, the use of Amur Maples has been prohibited by the city council. The applicant must find a substitute for this plant. Chanhassen Landscape Code On August 12, 1996, the city council directed staff to apply the Chanhassen Landscaping Ordinance on a trial basis for one year. This ordinance bases the minimum amount of landscaping required on the cost of the proposed construction. The Chanhassen code requires that the applicant spend at least 2 percent of this amount on landscaping. (The code requires that the minimum landscape value include only expenditures on trees and plant materials. It does not include sod, seed, labor and grading.) The applicant does not have construction and landscaping cost estimates yet, but plans to by meeting time. In spite of this unknown figure, the proposed landscaping appears attractive. Parking and Curbing The applicant is proposing 121 parking spaces- the code requires 70. Parking will not be a problem. The site is designed with no curbing on the west edge of the parking lot. This would accommodate expansion to the west in the future when the adjacent land develops. However, It must be curbed with continuous concrete curbing to meet code. The applicant should revise the plans to show curbing in this area prior to getting a building permit. Roof-Equipment Screening The proposed building would have a tall parapet that would hide all but the top of the roof- mounted mechanical equipment. Additional screening of this equipment would not be necessary. The applicant must, however, paint the equipment to match the uppermost color of the building. Sidewalk The city required the Ramsey County Library to install a five-foot-wide concrete sidewalk in front of their site along their Beam Avenue frontage. We should require the same of this project. It would provide another link in the eventual sidewalk needed along the south side of Beam Avenue. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Adopt the resolution on pages 11-12. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for a restaurant at the southwest corner of Beam Avenue and Southlawn Drive. Approval is based on the findings required by the code and subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. The developer shall control cooking odors so they are not noticeable to adjacent residences as code requires. Approve the plans, date-stamped April 16, 1997, for the proposed Outback Steakhouse at the southwest corner of Beam Avenue and Southlawn Drive, based on the findings required by the code. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall: a. Revise the landscaping and site plans as follows for staff approval showing: (1) Substituting the amur maple trees with another species. (2) Providing additional screening materials along the south lot line to meet the 80 percent screening requirement. (3) The layout for in-ground irrigation for all landscaped areas. 3 (4) Continuous concrete curbing along the westerly edge of the parking lot and future driveway connections to the abutting land. (5) A five-foot-wide concrete sidewalk along the Beam Avenue right-of-way on the north edge of the site. This sidewalk shall run from the west edge of the Outback Steakhouse site to the intersection of Southlawn Drive and Beam Avenue. The plan shall show pedestrian ramps to both streets. b. Submit grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans to the city engineer for approval. c. Revise the building elevations for staff approval. The elevations shall have face brick as the predominant material on all four sides. 3. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building: a. Install reflectorized stop signs at both exits, a handicap parking sign for each handicap parking space and an address on the building. Paint the rooftop mechanical equipment to match the color of the upper part of the building. (code requirement) The community design review board waives the requirement for enclosures around this equipment because of the tall parapet. c. Construct a brick trash dumpster enclosure to match the building with a 100 percent opaque gate. d. Install an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. (code requirement) e. Install a five-foot-wide concrete sidewalk on the Beam Avenue right-of-way north of the site. 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: o a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work. The amount shall be 150% of the cost of the unfinished work. This approval does not include the signs. Signage will be reviewed by staff through the sign permit process. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. CITIZENS' COMMENTS I surveyed the 21 property owners within 350 feet of this site. Of the eight replies, four were in favor, three objected and there was one neighbor who expressed several concerns. In Favor 1. It fits into the area. (DeSoto Associates LTD Partnership) 2. The Chili's Restaurant has not been a problem, so why not another restaurant? (Clintsman, 2114 Arkwright Street) 3. This addition does not impact the library. Good use of this location. (Director of Ramsey County Libraries) 4. It is consistent and complimentary to the surrounding uses. (Keystone Holding Co., Denver, Colorado) Opposed 1. I object because of insufficient knowledge about this restaurant -- the hours open -- liquor license, etc. If it is only an eating restaurant and closes by 11 p.m. OK B but if it has a liquor license and open to 1 a.m. I would be against it. We have no problems now with Chili's Restaurant or the Olive Garden B they both close by 11 p.m. Also, where are our sidewalks to take the people living East of the public library? Will they complete the sidewalks on Beam Avenue on the south side of the road? To Southlawn Drive? (Early, 2812 Southlawn Drive) 2. I object to this proposal because there are enough restaurants in this area. The smells from cooking foods such as onions, peppers, garlic has forced us to close our windows in the summertime and stay indoors. Our street used to be quiet but now there is a lot of traffic just from Chili's. We get a lot of noise from Chili's, from them dumping their trash to being awakened from the plowing of snow in the winter months. It would be nice to have businesses that are closed evenings and weekends next to residential areas. (Ricke, 1809 Radatz Avenue) 3. Would like to know hours open ~ do they sell liquor? This is very close to our house. Could not find out any information from the above number. Definitely need more information to make any comments. (Steinbring, 1795 Radatz Avenue) Concerns (did not state whether he was for or against) 1. Will there be alcohol? If so, there may be unacceptable late night noise and disturbances. 2. There should be a berm and appropriate screening along the south lot line for site and sound dampening. 3. There should be filters installed for cooking odors. (Brandt, 2831 Southlawn Drive) 5 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: acres: 1.7 acres Existing land use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Beam Avenue and the Olive Garden Restaurant South: Double dwelling West: Undeveloped property zoned BC(M) East: Southlawn Drive and Chili's Restaurant PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: BC(M) Zoning: BC(M) Ordinance Requirements Section 36-155(c) requires a CUP for restaurants in BC(M) districts. Section 25-70 of the city code requires that the CDRB make the following findings to approve plans: That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed developments, and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. Criteria for Conditional Use Permit Approval Section 36-442(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards. (See findings 1-9 in the resolution on pages 11-12.) p:sec3\outback.cup Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Conditional Use Permit Resolution 5. Plans date-stamped April 16, 1997 (separate attachment) '7 Attachment 1 VADNAIS HEIGHTS COUN'I'Y KOHl. MAN ROAD 1. SUMMIT CT. 2. COUHI'RYVIEW CIR. ,3. DULUTH CT. 4. LYDIA ST. ('0 CHAMBE"~'S ST LOCATION MAP ~ ~ N Attachment 2 BIRCH RUN STATION SHOPPING CENTER BC J · OLIVE GARDEN MAPLEWOOD MALL MAPLEWOOD II '°'"" ~ ~_,vu,._ JVIE THE~ATRES i'm ~i'a, m_JB~~ mlljB ~AVE .~j I ~= -~- '~ " ~MSEY COUNTY.o.,, : ~ .,.. . - ~ , ,...o., ........ .... PUBLIC LIBRARY g = ~ ,CHILI'S .m2836-38 ~'~'~ ., (~ inn .R A. DAT Z PROPOSED OUTBACK SITE · .[~ Attachment 3 BEAM A VENUE SITE PLAN 10 Attachment 4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Dovolis, Johnson and Ruggieri, Inc., applied for a conditional use permit for an Outback Steakhouse: WHEREAS, this permit applies to property on the southwest corner of Beam Avenue and Southlawn Drive. The legal description is: N 244 ft of E 210 ft of NE 1/4 of SE 1/4 (Subject to Roads) in SEC 3, TN 29, RN 22 and Except N 244 ft of E 210 ft; the N 444 ft of E 910 ft of NE 1/4 of SE 1/4 (Subject to Roads) in SEC 3, TN 29, RN 22. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On May 19, 1997, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. On _, 1997, 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 based on the building and site plans. The city approves this 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. 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 runoff, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 11 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. The developer shall control cooking odors so they are not noticeable to adjacent residences as code requires. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ., 1997. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner In-Fill Development Study May 12, 1997 INTRODUCTION The city council directed city staff to study possible zoning or code changes for in-fill development sites. This would be to ensure that new developments are compatible with the characteristics of the existing neighborhood. BACKGROUND On January 6, 1997, the council reviewed the first in-fill study report. In this report, city staff had identified 28 sites that probably will develop with residential land uses. After discussing the study, the council directed staff to explore further the use of conditional use permits (CUPs) for the regulation of in-fill sites. This direction was with the understanding that the city would need to. carefully write any such provisions. On March 24, 1997, the city council again reviewed the in-fill report, including possible code changes. At this meeting, the council gave first approval to code changes about lot divisions, subdivisions, conditional use permits and planned unit developments. On April 21, 1997, the planning commission reviewed the in-fill development study for the first time. The commission tabled action on the proposed code changes to allow for more time to review the study and proposed changes. On May 5, 1997, the planning commission again reviewed the in-fill development study. After much discussion, the commission reached consensus on several general matters for future policy direction for the city. These include: 1. Having a more comprehensive tree preservation ordinance - not just a tree replacement ordinance. 2. Requiring developers to hold a neighborhood meeting before submitting any development application to the city. 3. Expanding the use of the PUD ordinance. 4.' Reviewing how lots created by lot split affect the nearby area. That is, are they similar in size to those near the site? Should the city be concemed about such lots? 5. Having no site size limitation for using of PUDs for new subdivisions. 6. Reviewing the in-fill sites that staff identified for possible city acquisition for open space. DISCUSSION Study Review In reviewing this study request from the council, city staff first needed to decide what distinguishing characteristics or features define the character of a neighborhood or area. Staff discussed several possibilities including land uses, lot area, lot width, amounts of tree cover, numbers of trees, house sizes and values, housing styles, street and traffic patterns and property values. These are all items that usually concern neighbors near proposed developments. The city can have regulations about land use, minimum lot area, minimum lot width, wetland preservation and tree protection. All zoning regulations should protect and conserve property values, and should protect the health, safety, morals and welfare of the citizens. The courts have ruled that cities cannot directly try to regulate or legislate home values, house styles and aesthetics or minimum property values if these do not affect the public health, safety, and welfare. Staff then did a review of the city to identify all the probable remaining residential development sites in Maplewood. These are sites that the council has not approved a preliminary plat for that staff expects .will develop with residential land uses. Our review found 28 possible residential development sites ranging from 1.5 acres to over 50 acres in size. At an average of 2.5 lots per acre, the remaining sites could have from 4 to 138 houses if developed for single-family homes. Of the 28 sites, 17 are less than 9 acres in size. The 10 largest sites range in size from 11.9 acres to over ,50 acres in size. Of the 10 largest sites, 6 are south of Lower Afton Road. · Another issue for staff was to decide what projects or developments would be "in-fills" and thus would be subject to any new city development standards. That is, when should the characteristics of the existing nearby development dictate (if at all) the standards and design of a new development. A factor in setting this standard is that municipalities must treat similarly situated people alike when applying city standards. In reviewing the size and location of the remaining development sites, staff first suggested using 10 acres as a maximum size for in-fill sites. That is, if a site is less than 10 acres, then any new city standards for in-fill developments should apply. Based on this size, 17 of the 28 possible residential development sites would be in-fill sites and they each would have from 4 to 25 lots if developed. City staff also suggested that the city not apply any in-fill standards to sites greater than 10 acres. This is because these sites would be large enough to set and create their own standards and characteristics. Staff also recommends that any lots created by administrative lot division be exempt from any new in-fill standards. Other factors and development constraints the city should consider with these sites include pipelines, slopes, wetlands and the availability of public utilities. After reviewing the above information about in-fill sites, the planning commission suggested that the city require all future subdivisions be processed and approved as PUDs. That is, any developer wanting to plat property would need to apply for a PUD for their project. The commission hopes that requiring plats to have a PUD will create developments that are more sensitive to existing natural features. Another point for the city to consider with these sites is the 1992 open space study. Of the 28 possible residential sites, the open space study had reviewed 9. These were Sites 4, 7, 16, 18, 22, 24, 25, 26 and 28. Of these 9 sites, 2 were less than 10 acres in size (Site 4 and Site 24). The city may now want to consider buying some of these sites with the remaining open space funds. 2 Code Changes Staff believes that adding language to the code that requires in-fill development to use the average lot size of the existing lots within 500 feet of the site to set the average lot sizes in the new plat would address the council concerns for these developments. Such a standard would help ensure that lots in a new development would be similar in area to the average lot size of the surrounding area. Thus, the developer would have to design the new lots using the size standard set by the existing neighborhood. However, all city regulations and standards must not be arbitrary. The city cannot deny a plat just because of aesthetics. (Such a denial would be arbitrary if the proposal meets all city requirements.) As such, the city will need to document how any code change is to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. Similar to creating a standard about nearby lot size, the council also might want to consider the existing tree cover and tree preservation for the in- fill sites. That is, how would the proposed development fit with the "tree character" of the sun'ounding area. Such an analysis would require more tree inventory work from a subdivision applicant. The tree inventory would have to include the development site and the area surrounding the site. The tree character of the surrounding area would include the amount of tree cover, the size and species of the existing trees, the age of the trees and whether the existing trees were planted or if they are native to the site. A review of the existing zoning and subdivision ordinances shows that the city could change parts of these codes to meet the council's goals. The city would need to add language to Section 36-69 (R-1 single-family residential) and to Section 30-8 (subdivisions) of the code to require the use of nearby average lot sizes in in-fill developments. A proposed code change for these parts of the code starts on page 46. Specifically, the code change language about preliminary plats (including in-fill sites and tree inventories) is on page 47. In addition, if the council wants to use or require PUDs for plats, then the city should update and change the PUD ordinance. I have attached a PUD code change starting on page 61. I also have updated much of the language in the proposed .code changes to clean up the existing code language. For using the tree character when reviewing an in-fill site, the council would then need to add language to the code. The city could accomplish this two ways; adopt an amendment to the R-1 and subdivision code about in-fill lots or adopt a city-wide tree preservation ordinance as the council reviewed earlier. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Approve the code change beginning on page 46. This ordinance revises Subsection 36-69 (lot dimensions) and Section 30 (Subdivisions) of the city code. B. Approve the code change beginning on page 61. This ordinance revises Subsections 36-438, 36-440, 36-441, 36-442, and 36-443 about CUPs and planned unit developments. C. Approve the administrative policy about neighborhood meetings starting on page 66. kr/p/misc/infill.-6 Attachments: 1. List of Potential Residential Development Sites 2. 8 Location Maps 3. 28 Property Line Maps 4. R-1 and Subdivision Code Change 5. PUD Code Change 6. Neighborhood Meeting Administrative Policy 3 Attachment 1 POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SITES - 12-18-96 28 total sites, 19 with trees '(Pages 4 - 8) .SITE 1 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 1/2 Sec 1 (County Road D and Gall Avenue, east of McKnight Road) 01-29-22-22-0096 Yes 2.5 acres R-1 R-1 .SITE 2 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: S 1/2 Sec 3 (West of Hazelwood, north of County Road C) 03-29-22-31-0004 through 0009 and 03-29-22-34-0001, 0002, 0003, 0004, 0005 Yes 2.6, 1, 0.6, .91, 1.37, .55, .55, 2.9, 2.6 = 13 acres R-1 R-1 .SITE 3 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 1/2 Sec 4 (Carey Heights Ddve) 04-29-22-12-0001 through 0011 No .28, 2.38, .3, .36, .6, .24, .51, .46, .22, .5, 2.5 = 8.35 acres F R-1 .SITES 4, 5 AND 6 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 1/2 Sec 10 (north of Sextant, between Four Seasons park and Barclay Street) (3 sites) 10-29-22-13-0091, 0092, 0023, 0067, 0086 and 10-29-22-21-0001, 0002 and 10-29-22-24-0013 Yes 4.5 acres, 4 acres, 2.3 acres All R-1 All R-1 SITE 7 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 1/2 Sec 10 (south of County Road C, west of Hazelwood) 10-29-22-21-0001, 0002 No 17.5 acres R-1 R-1 .SITE 8 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: S 1/2 Sec 11 (West of Van Dyke, north of County Road B) 11-29-22-33-0006, 0010, 0012, 0016, 0018, 0020, 0021 Yes 1.21, 1.12, .17, .94, 2.26 = 5.63 acres (34 potential units) BC and R-3 BC and R-3(M) SITE 9 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: S 1/2 Sec 14 (2135 Larpenteur Avenue) 14-29-22-43-0002 No 3.8 acres F R-3(M) SITE 10 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 1/2 Sec 17 (east of McMenemy, north of Roselawn) 17-29-22-23-0057, 0056, 0073 Yes .94, .91, 1.74 = 3.59 acres R-1 R-1 SITE 11 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan S 1/2 Sec 17 (south of Ripley, along Jessie Street right-of-way) 17-29-22-34-0007 through 0016, 0003 Yes 9 x. 11=.99, .16, .35 = 1.5 acres R-1 R-1 SITE 1.2. Location: PiN: Trees: Size: Zoning: comp. Plan: S 1/2 sec 17 (east of McMenemy, north of Arkwfight) 17-29-22-33-0005, 0007 No 7 acres F R-1 SITE 13 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: ZOning: Comp. Plan N 112 Sec 24 (west of Idaho, east of Lakewood Ddve) 24-29-22-21-007, 0008, 0054 Yes 14 acres R-1 R-1 SITE 14 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 112 Sec 24 (South of Currie Street, east of McKnight Road) 24-29-22-22-0059, 0036, 0034 Yes .89, 1.79, 1.79 = 4.47 acres R-1 R-1 5 SITE 15 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: S 1/2 Sec 24 (1240 and 1250 McKnight Road, north of Maryland Avenue) 24-29-22-33-0015, 0018 No 6.4 acres R-2 R-2 ,SITE 16 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 1/2 Sec 25 (east of Lakewood Ddve, south of Maryland Avenue) 25-29-22-21-0009 Yes 25.19 acres (151-250 potential units) R-3 R-3(M) SITE 17 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan S 1/2 Sec 25 (2415 Minnehaha Avenue) 25-29-22-34-0087 No 3.4 acres R-1 R-1 SITE 18 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 1/2 Sec 12 (south of Lower Afton Road, north of Conemara) 12-28-22-21-0002, 0003, 0004 Yes 15 acres F R-3(M) SITE 19 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: S 1/2 Sec 12 (2401 - 2437 Linwood Avenue) 12-28-22-34-0004, 0011, 0012, 0006 Yes 5.6 acres F R-1 SITE 20 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: comp. Plan: S 1/2 Sec 12 (NE comer McKnight Road and Linwood) 12-28-22-33-0077 No 7.5 acres F R-1 SITE 21 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 1/2 Sec 13 (2516 Linwood Avenue - Jim Kaysers) 13-28-22-12-0010 Yes 11.9 acres F R-1 .SITE 22 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 112 Sec 13 (North of Highwood, west of Century Avenue ) 13-28-22-11-0008, 0013, 0014, 0015, 14-0018, 0019, 0020?, 00217 Yes 50+ acres F R-1 and OS SITE 23 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: S 1/2 sec 13 (2492 Highwood Avenue) 1'3-28-22-31-0067 No 3.5 acres F R-1 SITE 24 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 112 Sec 24 (2410 Carver Avenue) 24-28-22-24-0010 Yes 8 acres F R-1 SITE 25 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: ZOning: Comp. Plan: N 112 Sec 24 (East of Heights Avenue, west of Henry Lane) 24-28-22-31-43009 (2 maps) No 12.6 and 17.5 acres = 30.1 acres F R-1 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: S 112 Sec 24 (west of Henry Lane, south of Fish Creek) 24-28-22-32-0001, 0002, 0003 Yes 29 acres F R-1 SITE 27 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: N 1/2 Sec 24 (2510 Carver Avenue) 24-28-22-13-0001, 0002 Yes 5 + 5.2 acres = 10.2 acres F R-1 SITE 28 Location: PIN: Trees: Size: Zoning: Comp. Plan: S 1/2 sec 24 (1530 Stealing Street) 24-28-22-42-0007 Yes 38 acres F R-1 kr/p:misc/vacntres, mere 8 ,UNTY COUNTY COURT KOHL.MAN ~/AIS ROAD wOODLYNN WHITE B~_AR LAKE NORTH SAINT PAUL C) WOODLYNN RD. O' 1700' 3400' Attachment 2 (pages 9 - 16) ~ 1. CHIPPEWA C1 -, 2. BARTELMY LN. 5100' 6800' SCALE LOCATION MAP ,SITE 1 9 COUNTY VADNAIS (1) CHAMBERS HEIGHTS KOHLMAN ROAD GEEVNS JUNCTION 1. SUMMIT CT. 2. COUNTRYV1EW CIR. 3. DULUTH CT. 4. LYDIA ST. BEAM SHERREN AVE. AVE. AVE, BRO0~S Kn ~ ad COUNTY RADATZ COUNTY COURT KOHLMAN AVE. EDGEHILL RD. (~ CT, ;ASTI F AVE. COPE AVE. LOCATION SITES 2 - 7 MAP ~ ELDR ~ [LIdONT SKill MAN Nodh C~ DEMONT BROOKS AVE. :DGEHILL RD. VIKING Z SHERREN AVE. K~l,U~[Od Lake AVE. CT. AVE. -- ROSEWOOD AVE. AL~ICI' ARENA KOHLMAN LIJ COPE ^VE. RD. RAUSEY COUNTY NURSING HOME AND FAIR GROUNDS GOODRICH GOLF' COURSE RIPLEY AVE. KINGSTON PRICE AVE. C) O~ 1700' 1" NORTH KINGSTON MCKNIGHT L.N 2400N PLAZA ¢~R 2 ALVARADO DR BELLECR[$T DR 4 DEAUVfl. LE DR 5 1~4[RIDIAN DR 3 c~-~i BURKE CT. SAINT PAUL ~S~r COUNTY ~NG HOME AND ,R GROUNDS GOODRICH GOLF COURSE RIPLEY AVE. KINGSTON PRICE AVE.. NORTH ~ KINGSTON MCKNIGHT LN SAINT / LARPENTEUR PAUL KNOLL CIR. AVE. (N. St P.) 1. MARYJOE LN 2. TIERNEY AVE. 3, MEADOW DR. 4, RIPLE'Y AVE 1440N 1200N 7 8 NEBR~ 1 AHTELOP£ WAY HA;499.tORNE MICHA~.. D~ REBECCA DR PINETRE/ D~ BIRCHVIEW D~ mN£ TRE~ D~ 7 ROLUNG HILLS 8 9 960N LOCATION MAP SITES 9 AND 13 - 16 CASE AVE, CONWAY 209 AVE. ST. 222 LOCATION ANTELOPE WAY AMBERJACK LN BOBCAT LN LN SITES 15 - 17 14 MINNEHAHA MAP HAWTHORNE HARVESTER BRAND AVE. E. 7th ST. MARGARET AVE. L~ke 16 1. HUNTINGTON CT. 2. OAKRIDGE LA. UPPER AFl'ON RD, =~ CT. 2 CT. U~. <)RI.AND DR. LOWE:R iC'T. LONDIN LN. HILLWOOD DR. DR. RAMSEY COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACIL/TY CT. 17 1. CURRIE CT. 2. VALLEY ViEW 3. LAKEWOOD CT. PHYUS CT. CT, VALLEY OAK HEI! CT. IdORE:CAND CREST LOCATION MAP SITES 18 - 23 15 1. HUNTINGTON CT. ~ 2. ON(RIDGE LA. ~ 17 1. CURRIE CT. 2. VALLEY VIEW CT. 3. LAKEWOOD CT. PI-h~S CT. ~ OAK HEI, CT. MORELAND BOXWOOD AV. TIMBER VALLEY ~,~C RES'I' AVl[. ~ c~ Lake CARVER AVE. =,AMSEY COUNTY WASHINGTON COUNTY -_ !1 2310 (~) PARK EAST SITE I 17 ~tr) ,$ I_Y D Il A 2813 OPEN SPACE 2809 2801 2781 2775, 2767 SITE 2 __ 2759 2747 2727 ,, ,' ~, 5 2707 , :t 1534 r 1406 ;; ~ ~-~' _/=:~ _ ~- ~.,,~ .... ~ (z) - "i k SITE 2 18 r)~ 9 LYDIA AVE. VADNAIS HEIGHTS 1134 1138 SITE 3 ?~.~ ....... ,04,~, POWERLINES I 1174 2999. ,' :'" '5 ¥, < MINING SITE sUMMtT CT. ~RD ~ SITE 3 19 '..OUN'[n¥ ~' ,C I I~CI_.P-~ 21 2O I& 14 4-00' <71) : (%) ~0 ' 5 2474 2468 , ~') - SITE 4 2452 ,o??.,,' +,~.~. ~ AVE. 4 zz SITE 4 2O ,.' 39 a<- ,'/E, ac 3 AVE. 1522 BROOKS AVENUE. ,N ,- ,~o 1586 :~ 2479 2474 2 ST BROOKs 08) '~ SITE (.?.~) I ~o' HARVEST CITY or PARK MAPLEWOOp ~ ,0 . BROOKS ~-°,-"', AVE. 2467 2467 · ,.,:', J ~,~ Z.28ac SITE 6 4 Glo' I ' SITE 6 22 (q 1 2458 -G E RVA+S- ---- 1 ,-, ,'r"' t ' 1 ,.,.'L/., ,,/' ~" I '"" , ~ / :.I'.:,, ,.~'.'~'~ ... / , I '- ':': '' . '~f'"':,: _,,.o I., ..,.": ..... ~ -~ i , ~,-,,;o · %_:, ,~-z~=~, / : : I~-~ ' ,' , 4,- 1477 1495 1505 ~ 2645 ; .... i: .~f ;; -- ~:" ---. ?:-:-. COUNTY RO^~ C _~ZO'~ ~.~..r ¥_ __~ a,~ ~ ~ .... "- ~,;; !_.['~ :,:¢ ~ ' :/ - ~ i! 1534 . ,,,.: / 1;" ' ' .~,:~.e--: I/: I zL:: ~-1, ~, ,~ .... ~ ""' ,.. ll~. ~ -L.. .... ,~.. ,. ,..,::~.-~ . .~:~---=~ · ~i. i ~ ..... . ~ (~; /~[.' J SITE 7 (z, ' I 2574 ..,, ',~,,,.~ i ,~, .~,,..~ ~ Oz) ,: - · . CHURCH ,~w' , ,,,..~ ~__ ~. .... m 2544 - ~-~ .._ ....,.~. ~ , /,"'-", ._ ~..-'-:~;~~,~ ~~. ..,.~ o ..~-~:, ~., ~, u .~, ~., ~ i ~ }~;~-~ ~ I ~ ,'~ ~ '-~) ~'" ~ '"'~ . I I~*~E. BROOKS,-' ...... AVE. '~ ~ · , · , ,,,, ~.,-, ,,- ~) i : ~i;~, '1.1 ~J~ J [~. ~ I _. ,,, , ,~ . SITEz3 7 ~- COPE :,' ----...",~, COPE ........ ., .,~' ~.';, . e :'-~ ,' ~ ~ ~ ........ I"'.,:.' ~:~~g' -'1 kARK I I / U-HAUL: ~ ~'~J~ - ~ I ~. ~:~c.5~s ~ -- ~1 ~w I) .~,,...,. ,,,. ..,~ ~ LAURIE /1~. _,~ 1 ~1 J ' ~ ._..,,.. , , ~"' '~ .... '" ,' I ~ i~ ..... ~ ~-:; ......... _ :J ~~' 2182 ,~ ~ ~'. f ~;~_ t.L-Z-~;!- / ........ ~.~ -, · ~ -~7,- - ,. ~ '": - ~ 0 U N T Y COUNTY ROAD B SITE 8 24 '8 3 .... c.~.,~z , PUMP J 1695 1689 '2155 , 2169 2147 i : i .~;, e,~_LARPENTEUR AVENUE SAINT PAUL SITE 9 25 II HILLCREST CC 1993 1983 · PONDING AREA' AVE. SITE 10 26 S'l'. PAUL CEME' PLAT A )ND 2 RIPLEY AVENUE . ? .~soo ' GSTON ) ~7oo SITE 11 --KINC_~TON PRICE -- '" LARPENTEUR AVENUE SITE 11 2"/ 1I i~TY I RKFO RTf,~) OUt LOT ~ R IPLEY AVE. ,~ RIPLEY 1766 (' 4-) ,/ CHURCH 'C 1750 (~) 1746 1740 " E ,~ . Wotke SITE 12 KINGS TON AVE. · ~s~- 1771 1765 ir L A R P-EN TEUR ; f 1! ] I ir · 67~ ~ /4- · r, 4,~,~ 1747 SITE 12 28 AVE --~ 2'99 2402 (~)! ' 2416 ~) UJ APARTMENTS LARPENTEUR AVl 2444 SITE 13 1617 1611 1603 3 Ll.J"4 5 ,~E. IDAHO (~) Z r) I0 M6N-TANA 1562 AVE. 0 O.L.C FUTURE OAK RIDGE PLAT 20) SITE 13 29 £. HO__' ,/. 161 1560 ~ -- 1540 2'279i El 1579 o MONTANA ,o I0 (¢.) '~ ~ (/~) I0 'it 40¢ 5(~')' ~ ~,_ ACORN GREENHOUSES --- T LOT ~'Z- .'-c° 1 \ 1262 1250 ('~s) 15 1245 TILSEN AVE. 19 - £ 1240 SITE SITE 15 31 ~.73,,~.. MANUFACTURED HOMES (~) I GERANIUM 8 6 )85:7) 1083 1070 .1068 1084 SCHOOL DIST. N[ 6?-?- (v~) SITE 16 32 &,.,bi to Ftow~c E.s~t ~D,,c.# tl~5.~r.I- ~ 5 6o)' G 7 (74) 21 19 i ?...'7' %,17_ 6: 4\ 2415 ~ ,o , =~ '=;' ': SITE 17 ~ II J 14 I1~ C~ !. T LOT A- BATTLE CREEK PARK FOR PARK PONDING AREA ,1'5, ~.. : ;. LOWER AFTON ROAD -- C/?Y OF ~APLE~VO0O SITE 18 EIG ,OD OUT/OT tUNTIN 8 I.(~ G. a.c. [ 25) 681 2383 2401 OAKRI DC II .~) 682~ SITE 19 16 L I N WOOD ~' 2NI') KOLB* t SITE 19 2437 i ;2440-'. D. 9 F41LLVvo0 D , ('4~) , (49) DR. /47 2447 2457 SPRI NcSID E ,+ 90 622 LINWOOD OUTLOT u~ 0 EIG OUTLOT B ~l.n-, kOrA ::3'2~ SITE 20 2305 2262 ' ,~,: ~ LINWOOD AVENUE '---~" I:',. ~ .~.~ =, _~. _~ ~'~ ~J~l~ T,,. ~ ,,/,,...~1 ~ ! ~= ~, .{ fl SITE 20 3~ ;pRiNCSIDE 702 O.L. I't O. L. 2516 SITE 21 C '~c°~. OPEN SPACE FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK GHWOOD ri; SITE 21 37 SHOOTING RANGE LINWOOD AVENUE ,~,~ ~,~ '~'. ~ ~ }:.o~ 2616 DR. · SHOOTING RANGE LINWOOD AVENUE 2616 (~o~ OPEN SPACE DR. ~LLEY VIEW AVE. JE · 751 775 V SITE 22 38 Z D O :ARVER REPAIR II 992 1000 1008 1016 1024 79 or $. 54. ~.. 1021 ?. ~ _ £5~. _ 971 (~4) I Z 2492 I SITE 23 1 1016 987 ~z) ~o, 4995:, 1003 1011 I ' 2 (759 (.~0 g (Jo) 8 / 7o.p~ 6 (~) i(~) I $ (~) NEMITZ ~ Ax (~) SITE 23 39 'D (~) 7 2405 ('~) ~ , 2445 ,' 'T,' ~ ~ 2431 .... Z 2410 '~p', SITE 24 ~ O~ <~... ~.. ~o (~) .~4.9, 7A7 ~ Coc~ mi FISH CREEK SITE 24 40 0 1285 1 w 1285 SITE 25 41 FISH CREEK ~'- ~';~- ~ 1481 SI:I'E 25 / / ~ ~ 17,$1~- /-*."P.c. / / ~'1 at/ 05? 1501 i,/ / / COUNTY OPEN SPACE SITE 25 42 Ni U 1501 SiTE 26 COUNTY OPEN SPACE SITE 26 43 OI 2510 2511 '; 2575 CARVER AVENUE SITE 27 ~) 2595 Coca N'T 'y I · COUNTY OPEN SPACE (2) , T!"' 1420 '~s ~' 1440 1400 SITE 27 44 COUNTY OPEN SPACE /&.~ 3, CAR 91 1486 '7 ° 1530 1525 0 4 '"/4-at. .t ~0' UJ ~7) SITE 28 >. I- // ~,. 2: ?· (% _. ~ ./ Z~ /13o~.~ '-{~-. --~ · -~ ' ,' ~' ;';~=.~ "~,~. ' ' (~. 1645 1670 ~ / ~ / ' ~'~::-- ~ [ - - ,/ .~// I~O~.Z~ ~'- ~ / /~/ ~,~ Attachment 4 (Pages 46 - 60) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA CHANGING PARTS OF THE CITY CODE ABOUT MINIMUM RESIDENTIAL LOT SIZES, SUBDIVISIONS AND PRELIMINARY PLATS The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: Section 1: This section changes Section 36-69 as follows: (I have crossed out deletions and underlined the additions.) Sec. 36-69. Lot dimensions. ~). The minimum lot area in an R-1 Residence Distdct shall be as follows: 'c". ,, Ten thousand (10,000) square feet (excludin,q draina.qe and wetland easements); except For lot sizes in subdivision or plattinl:l sites up to ten (10) acres in ~lross area, see Section 30-5 of the city code for minimum lot size information. For lots with no municipal sanitary sewer available, the minimum lot area shall be determined by the house pad area and enough area to have two on-site sanitary sewer systems, including tanks and drainfields. The owner or developer shall provide the city with site plans showing the location of the house pads and the on-site sewer systems. In no case shall such a lot be less than one (1) acre in area (excluding drainage and wetland easements). (b~ The minimum lot width at the building setback line shall be seventy-five (75) feet, except that interior lots-of-record that are sixty (60) feet wide or greater may be allowed by conditional use permit if: f~vided-~M~ (1) The findings required by code for a conditional use permit can be met=; and (2) There are at least two (2) developed lots-of-record with the same or less width than th..._~e proposed lot width, within three hundred fifty (350) feet of the site on the same side of the street. Larger minimum side yard setbacks may be required to ensure adequate bala~me.4he separation between adjacent structures. 46 Section 2: This section changes Section 30-1 through Section 30-8 as follows: (I have crossed out deletions and underlined the additions.) SUBDIVISIONS Sec. 30-1. Purpose. The Maplewood City Council finds the followinA re.qulations are necessary to: 1_. Protect and promote the public health, safety and Aeneral ',v=lfare of the community 2_..Provide for the orderly, economic and safe development of land. 3~ preserve a.qdcultural lands. Provide for adequate transportation1 water supply, sanitary sewer disposal, water resourc-- management, schools, parks, plavcirounds, open space and other public services and facilities for residents. ,To accomplish these purposes, Maplewood adopts subdivision reAulations establishin,'. standards1 requirements and procedures for the review and approval or disapproval o~' subdivisions. Sec. 30-2. Definitions. For U',e-~l~this chapter, the following words, terms and phrases shall have the following meanings respectively ascribed to them by this section: A//ey is a public right-of-way which affords a secondary means of access to abutting property. Boundary//nes are lines indicating the bounds or limits of any tract or parcel of land. Bu//d/ng//ne also ~lled the ref~ setback//ne, means the line beyond which property owners or others have no legal or vested right to extend a building or any part thereof, without special permission and approval of the proper authorities. C/ty means the City of Maplewood, Minnesota. City council means the city council of Maplewood, Minnesota. Contour map means a map on which irregularities of land surface are shown by lines connecting points of equal elevations. A contour interval is the vertical height between contour lines. · 47 Comer lot is a lot within a plat situated at the comer of a block the~'eof so that it is bounded on two (2) sides by streets. This term applies to any lot within a plat at street intersections and bounded on two (2) sides by streets. Design standards are the specifications to landowners or subdividers for the preparation of preliminary plans indicating, among other things, the optimum, minimum or maximum dimensions of such features as fights-of-way and blocks, as set forth in Section 30-8 of this chapter. Director of community development means the director of community development of Maplewood, Minnesota. Director of public works means the director of public works of Maplewood, Minnesota. Double-frontage lots means a lot which fronts on two (2) or more public, streets. Easement is a grant by a property owner for the use of a-~Fip-ef land by the general public, a corporation or certain persons for specific purposes. Final plat is a map or plan of a subdivision and any accompanying material, as described in Section 30-7 of this chapter. Frontage is the width of a lot or building site measured on the line separating it from a public street or way. Lot means a parcel of land described separately from other parcels of land by a plat, metes and bounds, registered land survey, auditor's plat or other accepted means. The lot description must be recorded by Ramsey County. Lot area means the area of a lot, excluding drainage easements, wetlands and land below the ordinary high water mark of public waters. Lot division means the division of a property by metes and bounds description. . .. · ..... ,~,.'-3,', ''7 ....... ~- -. -w .... ,, ................... '.h~'-' ~,, ~, ,.~,,~,~ Tk~ 6A,,.~ ~ ..6,', ,.,4 ,,,-~-, , ,"~.'~ ;__.L." ...... ;=" ,.: b::n .......... "' ~ '-' .... ' ............... ~ ............... Off/c/a/control or controls means ordinances and regulations which control the physical development of the city or any part thereof or any detail thereof and implement the general objectives of the comprehensive plan. Official controls may include ordinances establishing zoning, subdivision controls, site plan regulations, sanitary codes, building codes and official maps. Out/or means a parcel or tract of land not part of a block or lot, shown by a letter or labelled as a.n ,/ Owner means a person having a vested interest in the property in question, a purchaser, devisee, or fiduciary, and includes his duly authorized agent or attorney-in-fact. 48 Pedestrfan way is a public c: pdvat= right-of-way across a block, or providing access within a block, to be used by pedestrians ~"" ~"' ,r.~ ;..~,.....;......~,,,..,;,., .,..... Planning commission means the planning commission of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota. Plat means the drawing or map of a subdivision prepared for filing of record pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 505 and containing all elements and requirements set forth in applicable city regulations, adopted pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358 and Chapter 505. Preliminary approval means official action taken by the city on an application to create a subdivision which establishes the rights and obligations set forth in Minnesota Statutes, SectiOn 462.358 and the applicable subdivision regulation. In accordance with Section 462.358, preliminary approval may be granted only following review and approval of a preliminary plat and other map or drawing establishing, without limitation, the number, layout, and location of lots, tracts, blocks, outlots and parcels to be created, location of streets, roads, utilities and facilities, p. arks and trails, p=~ =nd drainage facilities, and lands to be dedicated for public use. Preliminary plan or preliminary plat is a tentative map or plan of a proposed subdivision as described in Section 30-5 of this chapter. Public waters means any waters as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 103F.005, Subdivisions 15 and 16. Reserve strfps are strips of land usually withheld from the street right-of-way to form a barrier between certain property and the public street or thoroughfare. Right-of-way is the land covered by a public road, or other land dedicated for public use or for certain pdvate uses, such as land over which a power line passes. Street is a public or private right-of-way which affords primary access by pedestrians and vehicles to abutting properties, whether designated as a street, avenue, highway, road, boulevard, lane or however other, vise designated. Subdivision means the separation of an area, parcel or tract of land into two (2) or more parcels, tracts, lots or long-term leasehold interests for 'sale, rent or lease, except those separations: (1) Where all the resulting parcels, fi'acts, lots or interests will be twenty (20) acres or larger in size and five hundred (500) feet in width for residential uses and five (5) acres or larger for all other uses; (2) Creating cemetery lots; (3) Resulting from court orders, or the adjustment of a lot line by the relocation of a common boundary. Subdivision regulation means an ordinance adopted pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358 regulating the subdivision of land. 49 T~c~'..'ghf:~ ! g :,' ............................. ~ .... Wetland means a surface water feature classified as a wetland in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Circular No. 39 (1971 edition) or Minnesota Rules Part 8420.0110, Subd. 52. Zoning is the reservation of certain specified areas within the city for buildings and structures for certain purposes, with other limitations such as height, lot coverage and other stipulated requirements. Sec. 30-3. Conformance with existing codes and regulations. (a) The provisions of this chapter are in addition to and not in replacement of the state building code and the city zoning ordinance. Any provisions of the building code and zoning ordinance relating to platting shall remain in full force and effect, except as they may be contradictory to the provisions hereof. (b) Subdivisions, approved by the city, shall be consistent with the city's official controls and comprehensive plan. (c) The city shall not approve a rezoning, conditional use permit, subdivision or lot division A to accommodate : ..!.. -,,.., ..,-., ~--~ unless each new lot would be large enough r... :" "g ...... ";;.'" ~'~ al_L:.'::,' existing accessory buildings, as required in Section 36-77(a). (d) The city shall not approve a subdivision where the owner or developer would later need a variance to use the lots for their intended purpose. Sec. 30-4. Applicability. (a) No conveyance of land to which the subdivision regulations are applicable shall be filed or recorded if the land is described in the conveyance by metes and bounds or by reference to an unapproved registered land survey made after April 21, 1961 or to an unapproved plat made after such regulations become effective. The foregoing provision does not apply to a conveyance if the land described: (1) Was a separate parcel of record Apdi 1, 1945 or the date of adoption of subdivision regulations under Laws 1945, Chapter 287, whichever is the later; or (2) Was the subject of a written agreement to convey entered into prior to such time; or (3) Was a separate parcel of not less than two and one-half (2 112) acres in area and one hundred fifty (150) feet in width on January 1, 1966; or (4) Was a separate parcel of not less than five (5) acres in area and three hundred (300) feet in width on July 1, 1980; or (5) Is a single parcel of commercial or industrial land of not less than five (5) acres and having a width of not less than three hundred (300) feet and its conveyance does not 5O result in the division of the parcel into two (2) or more lots or parcels, any one of which is less than five (5) acres in area or three hundred (300) feet in width; or (6) Is a single parcel of residential or agricultural land of not less than twenty (20) acres and having a width of not less than five hundred (500) feet and its conveyance does not result in the division of the parcel into two (2) or more lots or parcels, any one of which is less than twenty (20) acres in area or five hundred (500) feet in width. (b) In any case in which compliance with the foregoing restrictions will create an unnecessary hardship and failure to comply does not interfere with the purpose of this chapter, the city council may waive such compliance by adoption of a resolution to that effect and the conveyance may then be filed or recorded. Any owner or agent of the owner of land who conveys a lot or parcel in violation of the provisions of this chapter shall forfeit and pay to the city a penalty of not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00) for each lot or parcel so conveyed. The city may enjoin such conveyance or may recover such penalty by a civil action in any court of competent jurisdiction. Sec. 30-5. Preliminary plat procedure. (a) To plat or divide any property or tract of land into four (4) or more lots, the following shall '* aDDIv: The city requires city council approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD). As such, a subdivider or owner of a site 10 acres or less shall submit complete applications for preliminary plat approval and for a conditional use permit for planned unit development to the director of community development. (Refer to Article V, Sections 36-436 through 36-450 of the city code about conditional use permits.) 2~ The city shall review and process all such planned unit developments pursuant to the applicable sections of the city code. 3. For any such site. the ao~)licant shall only pay the application fee for a preliminary plat. The director of community development shall determine the necessary application requirements and have them on forms that are available to the public at city hall. The director may waive any requirements that do not apply to the proposed subdivision. Besides all other application requirements, the applicant shall have a tree inventory prepared of the site and all developed or improved properties within 500 feet of the site. This inventory shall document the size, species and location of all eight (8) inch or greater diameter deciduous trees and of all 10-foot-tall or greater coniferous trees. o If the average area or size of the existina sinale-familv lots in Maplewood within 500 feet of the site is at least twelve thousand (12,000) square feet, then the average lot size of any new lot shall meet or exceed the average size of these existing lots, up to a maximum average size of 20,000 square feet. Lots in Maplewood within 500 feet of the site that are 20,000 square feet or more in area shall each be considered 20,000 square feet for calculating the area average lot size. This provision does not apply to new lots approved and created by administrative lot division as outlined in Section 30-15 (Lot divisions). 51 7. The developer or applicant for any such proposed preliminary plat shall hold a neighborhood meeting. This meetinl:l is to discuss the proposal with all property owners within 500 feet of the site. The developer shall hold this meeting consistent with the city's policies for such meetin!:lS. The city will schedule the item for planning commission and city council consideration after the developer holds the neighborhood meeting. developer shall be required to pay a fee to defray the expenses incurred by the city in having ..... =,,. fee to be paid for such review the preliminary plat reviewed in all particulars. The ..... ' --'f shall be imposed, set, established and fixed by the city council, by resolution, from time to time.,_,-""...,"k'*"._,, ..~'- ,--,-""~" -,k" ,r,,.. ,~ The owner or developer shall pay all such fees to the city ity ry pi '"'"'"' before the c reviews the proposed prelimina at. ,.... ,k~.. ,..,.'* ...... ..~., ....... ..-.,,,.,,-,,..;;*" _.v ...................... ; .......; '.' ..............i ..... !.., "~ (c) (1) The director of community development shall deliver to the city finance director tmasur~ for deposit any moneys received as fees herein required with each preliminary plat. p!=r,. The finance director treasur-~ shall credit same to the general fund of the city. All moneys so received shall be used to defray the expenses of processing the application. The director of community development shall prepare a report and recommendation. This report shall then be forwarded to the planning commission. The planning commission shall forward a recommendation to the city council. The city council shall hold a public headng on the application. The headng shall be held following publication of notice of the time and place thereof in the official newspaper at least ten (10) days before the day of the headng. The applicant, property owner, and all other property owners within three hundred fifty (350) feet of the property to be subdivided shall be notified by mail at least ten (10) days before the day of the headng. (2) A subdivision application shall be preliminarily approved or disapproved by the city council by ...... within the time limits required state law, ;".+'.hln c~-. k,,,.-' -- ,. --.-,- ~4'~m -- ...... .~ =!!V=."; "~ "" ! ! ' L", : ..... .~k ~k...~k...,..4 ....... : -..pp . .... ,. .................. , ........... , ....... ~ unless an extension of the review period has been agreed to by the applicant. When a division or subdivision to which the regulations of the city do not apply is presented to the city, the city clerk shall within ten (10) days certify that the subdivision regulations of the city do not apply to the particular division. If the city fails to preliminarily approve or disapprove an application within the review pedod, the application shall be deemed preliminarily approved, and upon demand the city shall execute a certificate to that effect. (d) Following preliminary plat approval, the applicant may request final plat approval by the city._~ a~l up_-'r. Upon such a_request, the city shall certify final plat approval within sixty (60) days of receiving a complete final ~_~t application. City staff will only schedule a final plat for city council consideration if city staff receives all necessary information and plans at least fourteen (14) days before a city council meeting. Also, the council will only consider a final plat request if the applicant has complied with all conditions and requirements of applicable regulations and all conditions and requirements upon which the preliminary plat approval is expressly conditioned either through performance or the execution of appropriate agreements 52 assudng performance. If the city fails to certify final plat approval as :--' required, and Jf the applicant has complied with all conditions and requirements, the application shall be deemed finally approved., ""'~ ' P"" '~ .... .~ ,k- ..~,...-~.3,, -..-~*-. c~,~'~'c.=*'' . ................. ~....., ....., ....~..~,..~..;A..~ ~.'~ .... '~"" After the city council approves the final plat, the owner or developer shall record the final plat and all accompanvin.q documents with Ramsay County. (e) For one year following preliminary approval and for two (2) years following final approval, unless the subdivider and the city agree otherwise, no amendment to a comprehensive plan or official control shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedication or platting required or permitted by the approved application. Thereafter, pursuant to its regulations, the city may annually extend thepreliminary plat approval.-pe~ied-by ........ , ...;,~. ,~, .... ~-.~:..;" .... "subject to all applicable performance conditions and requirements., c: !*. Each year after preliminary plat approval, the city may end the preliminary plat approval and may require submission of a new ~application, unless substantial physical activity and investment has occurred in reasonable reliance on the approved application and the subdivider will suffer substantial financial damage as a consequence of a requirement to submit a new application. In connection with a subdivision involving planned and staged development, the city may by resolution or agreement grant the dghts referred to herein for such periods of time longer than two (2) years which it determines to be reasonable and appropriate. (0 A person conveying a new parcel of land which, or the plat for which, has not previously been filed or recorded, and which is part of or would constitute a subdivision to which adopted city subdivision regulations apply, shall attach to the instrument of conveyance either: (1) recordable certification by the city clerk that the subdivision regulations do not apply, or that the subdivision has been approved by the city council, or that the restrictions on the division of taxes and filing and recording have been waived by resolution of the city council because compliance will create an unnecessary hardship and failure to comply will not interfere with the purpose of the regulations; or (2) a statement which names and identifies the location of the appropriate city offices and advises the grantee that city subdivision and zoning regulations may restrict the use or restrict or prohibit the development of the parcel, or construction on it, and that division of taxes and the filing or recording of the conveyance may be prohibited without prior recordable certification of approval, nonapplicability, or waiver from the city. In any action commenced by a buyer of such a parcel against the seller thereof, the misrepresentation of or the failure to disclose material facts in accordance with this subdivision shall be grounds for damages. If the buyer establishes his right to damages, a district court hearing the matter may in its discretion also award to the buyer an amount sufficient to pay all or any part of the costs incurred in maintaining the action, including reasonable attorney fees, and an amount for punitive damages not exceeding five (5) percent of the purchase price of the land. Sec. 30-6. Qualifications governing approval of preliminary plat. (a) The planning commission may recommend and the city council may require such changes or revisions of a preliminary plan submitted under this chapter as deemed necessary for the health, safety, general welfare and convenience of the city. (b) The approval of a preliminary plat by the planning commission and the city council under this chapter is tentative only, involving merely the general acceptability of the layout as submitted. 53 (c) Before any preliminary plan is approved by the city council under this chapter, the information furnished with said plan must show conclusively that the area proposed to be subdivided is drainable and that the land is of such nature as to make its intended use practical and feasible. If these features are not apparent, the owner shall be required to enter into an agreement guaranteeing that all adverse conditions will be corrected and that drainage will be accomplished in a satisfactory manner. The final decision in this matter shall be made by the city council acting upon the advice and recommendation of its engineer or other authorized representative. (d) The city council may condition its approval on the construction and installation of fully operational sewers, streets, electric, gas, telephone, cable television, storm water management, dmi,,m~e, and water facilities, and similar utilities and improvements or, in lieu thereof, on the receipt by the city of a cash deposit, certified check or irrevocable letter of credit in an amount and with surety and conditions sufficient to assure the city that the utilities and improvements will be constructed or installed according to the specifications of the city. The city council may condition its approval on compliance with other requirements reasonably related to the provisions of these regulations and to execute development contracts embodying the terms and conditions of approval. The city may enforce such agreements and conditions by appropriate legal and equitable remedies. (e) The city council may require that a reasonable portion of any proposed subdivision be dedicated to the public or preserved for public use as streets, roads, sewers, electric, gas and water facilities, storm water drainage and holding areas or ponds, and similar utilities and improvements. The city may require that a reasonable portion of any proposed subdivision be dedicated to the public or preserved for public use as parks, playgrounds, trails or open space; provided that: (1) The city may choose to accept an amount in cash from the applicant or buildin,q contractors for part or all of the portion required to be dedicated to such public uses or purposes based on the city's park availability charge; (2) Any cash payments received shall be placed in a special fund by the city used only for the purposes for which the money was obtained; (3) In establishing the reasonable portion to be dedicated, the city council may consider the open space, park, recreational or common areas and facilities which the applicant proposes to reserve for the subdivision; (4) The city reasonably determines that it will need to acquire that portion of land for the purposes stated in this subsection as a result of approval of the subdivision; (5) Within the legal boundaries of the city's designated critical area, the city council may require dedication for public open space or scenic easement, bluffiands which are eighteen (18) percent or greater in slope and which are in direct drainage to the Mississippi River Bluffs or Fish Creek. The city council may release the developer in part or in total from a park dedication fee in lieu of the value of the above-dedicated blufflands. Sec. 30-7. Necessary data for final plat. The final plat required by this chapter shall be prepared bya registered land surveyor and shall conform to all state and county requirements and the provisions of this section. All information required on the final plat application provided by the director of community development shall be shown on the final plat. Sec. 30-8. Minimum subdivision design standards. (a) Generally. A proposed subdivision under this chapter shall meet the minimum subdivision design standards set forth in this section. (b) Streets: (1) Street plan. The arrangement, character, extent, width and location of all streets shall conform to standards for street construction on file in the office of the director of public works, including relation to existing and planned streets, to reasonable circulation of traffic, to topographical conditions, to the manal:lement .-'.:'.-.cfi of storm water, to public convenience and safety and in their appropriate relation to the proposed uses of the area to be served. No full-width street shall be less than sixty (60) feet wide. (2) Half-width streets. The use of half-width streets shall be prohibited, except where essential to the reasonable development of the subdivision in conformity with the other requirements of these regulations and the overall plan of the neighborhood in which the plat is situated. Wherever a half street is adjacent to a tract to be subdivided, the other half of the street shall be platted within such tract. (3) Cul-de-sacs. Cul-de-sacs,--v,~-~ed~, shall be hek;t-te as short a-distal:me as possible between the origin or main street and the end of the cul-de-sacs. In no case shall cul-de- sacs exceed one thousand (1,000) feet in length, unless no other alternative is possible. Each cul-de-sac shall have a terminus of nearly circular shape with a minimum right-of- way diameter of one hundred twenty (120) feet, and shall meet all city standards. (4) Reserve strips. Privately owned reserve strips controlling access to streets are prohibited. Publicly owned reserve strips may be required by the city council, where necessary to assure equitable payment, for streets. (d) Trails and pedestrian ways: (1) Trails. Trails shall be a minimum of eight (8) feet wide. Trails between property lines shall be centered within a right-of-way or other public r)roDertv that is at least ten (10) feet 55 wider than the trail pavement. If the trail is in an easement, the trail shall be centered in an easement that is at least thirty (30) feet wider than the trail pavement. (2) Pedestrian ways. Pedestrian ways, where permitted, shall be at least fifteen (15) feet wide. (e) Easements: Drainage and utility easements. Each lot shall have drainage and utility easements that are at least five {5) feet wide on side lot lines and ten (10) feet wide on the front and rear lot lines. This easement shall be ten (10) feet wide on both street sides on comer lots. The city may require additional easements. All the storm water drainage within plat or subdivision shall be collected within the plat or subdivision, unless the city determines that this requirement is not feasible, would only have marginal benefit or if the developer gets the necessary off-site easements. The developer shall install the storm water improvements to direct the storm water to the city storm water system or to approved pondinc~ areas. Each sanitary sewer that is not in a street right-of-way shall have a utility easement centered on the sewer pipe. This easement shall be at least twenty (20) feet wide. Each storm sewer that is not in a street right-of-way shall have an easement with a minimum width of twenty (20) feet. All water mains that are not in a street d!:lht-of-way shall have at least a 30-foot-wide easement. The city engineer shall approve the size of all easements and may require larger widths for any easements. %'1 Ponding easements. When a subdivision or plat drains into a ponding area that the city does not own or have a drainage easement for, the developer or applicant shall acquire drainage easement or fee title for the pondinS:l area. The developer or applicant shall convey any such easements or fee ownership to the city. If the ponding area is within the plat, the developer shall show the ponding area as an outlot and shall dedicate it to the city. The city engineer shall approve the pond size and it shall hold an additional vertical one (1) foot of freeboard above the high water level within the easement or outlot. Wetland easements. The city may require a wetland easement over and beyond a wetland. The wetland easement shall prohibit any structures, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the easement. The city shall decide the easement's size based on information from the watershed district and the wetlands quality, the amount and quality of sun'ounding habitat, the site's building restraints. The city may require a developer to place signs around the easement boundary. These signs shall identify the easement's boundary and restrictions. Lots: (1) Lot dimensions in F and R-1 zones. R-1 zone shall be: The minimum lot dimensions to subdivide in an F or Interior lots. 1. Seventy-five (75) feet wide at the established building setback line; 2. Not less than sixty (60) feet at the front lot line, except that lots located along the outside curves of curvilinear streets or on the bulbs of cul-de-sacs shall be no less than forty (40) feet in width at the front lot line; and 3. Not less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet in area for lots in plats ¢~reater. than ten (10) acres in ¢~ross area. 4_. The followin minimum lot size standard shall a I for new lots in a tract or Drol~erty of ten (10) ¢~ross acres or less:. (a). If the avera · area or size of the existin sin le-famil lots in Ma lewood within 500 feet of the site is at least twelve thousand 12 000 s uare feet then the avera · lot size of an new lot shall meet or exceed the avera e size of these existin lots u to a maximum avera e size of 20 000 s uare feet. Lots in Ma lewood within 500 feet of the site that are 20 000 s uare feet or more in area shall each be considered 20 000 s uare feet for calculatin the area averaoe lot size. This rovision does not a to new lots a roved and created b administrati · lot division as outlined in S~_~ion 30-15 (Lot divisions). b. Comer lots. 1. One hundred (100) feet wide at the established building setback line; and 2. Not less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet in area, unless a larl:ler lot size is required as in Section 30-8(fl(1~(a~(4~(a~ above. (2) Lot dimensions in R-I(S) and R-2 zones. The minimum lot dimensions to subdivide in an ~R-2 zone shall be: a. Interior lots. 1. Sixty (60) feet wide at the established building setback line and front lot line; 57 (3) (4) 2. Not less than forty (40) feet of width at the front lot line on the bulb of a cul-de-sac or the outside curve of a street; and 3. Not less than seven thousand five hundred (7,500) square feet in area. b. Comer lots. 1. Eighty-five (85) feet wide at the established building setback line; and 2. Not less than seven thousand five hundred (7,500) square feet of area. Rear lot lines. The minimum dimensions at the rear lot line of any lot shall be thirty (30) feet. Location. All lots shall have frontage =~ut on a publicly dedicated, improved and maintained street. ' (5) Side lot lines. Side lines of lots shall be substantially at dght angles or radial to the street line. (6) Double-frontage lots. Double-frontage lots shall not be permitted, except where topographic or other conditions render subdividing otherwise unreasonable. Such double-frontage lots shall have an additional depth of at least twenty (20) feet ~ to allow space for a protective plant-screen along the back lot line. (Sections 30-8 (f)(7-13), 30-9 (Soil Tests), 30-10 (Residential Zoning) and 30-11 (Variations and exemptions) remain unchanged.) 58 Section 3: This section changes Sections 30-12 through 30-15 as follows: (I have crossed out deletions and underlined the additions.) Sec. 30-12. improvements--Generally. ~a) The developer or contractor shall build every public street within a plat or subdivision with the followin¢i iml3rovements: (1) Sanitary sewerpipes and appurtenances..faeilities; (2) Public water pipes and appurtenances, facilities; (3) Storm water pipes and appurtenances ratifies; (4) Street, _concrete curb and gutter; (5) Street ~ ~; (6) Boulevard turf establishment; (~) 7~ Street identification and traffic-control signs. The city shall install these si.qns and the developer shall pay all costs.. (Sections 30-12 (b) and (c) remain unchanged.) he cit, council shall not ar'nrove a final nlat without first receivin a re orr from the '_ n~')'ine~r certi in that the im rovements and construction of the land and streets with all other necessa facilities in the lat have been com leted or satisfactori arran ed for accordin to rovisions of the ci re ulations for land im rovement and construction. The develo er shall rovide the ci en ineer with a cash scrow or letter of credit to uarantee the com letion f the unfinished public improvements. 59 (Section 30-13 remains unchanged.) Sec. 30-13. Reserved. Sec. 30-14. Same-Compliance prerequisite for issuance of building permits. The city will not issue a buildin;i permit for any build n,q or structure until the: .a. Developer or contractor has met all requirements of this chapter and the city code. b_. Development or improvements meet the requirements of the fire code includin,q providinfl water service and an all-weather street surface to the building site. ""'~ ;'"'""'"*"~"* h=v.., k-c. ..... '~": ...;,k "" full. Sec. 30-15. Lot divisions. (a) A lot division shall not result in the creation of more than three (3) lots. (b)The director of community development may approve or cause to be modified plans for a lot division. The director must first determine, however, that the plans meet all city ordinances and policies, and that the proposal would not have an adverse impact on the subject property or surrounding properties. If the director makes a negative determination or the applicant wishes to appeal the decision, the city council shall make the final decision. '- .... k`m,, k .... , ,.. o~._ ,.,,, "..c'.'n"~l for =~on. (c) A letter of credit may be required as a condition to lot splits on plats in order to guarantee the proper repair and patching of streets after the installation of utilities in the streets or rights-of- way. ~ The city will accept only one lot division application for up to three (3) new lots from each lot or tract of land once every five (5) years. (e) Deeds must be filed with Ramsey County within one year of city approval ~ of a lot division. If the owner or applicant does not file the deeds within one year of city approval, thc approval shall be null and void. Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect after the city council approves it and the official newspaper publishes it. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on ,1997. 60 Attachment 5 (Pages 61 - 65) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ABOUT CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS The Maplewood City Council approves the following ordinance: (I have underlined the additions and crossed out the deletions.) Section 1. Section 36-438 is changed as follows: Sec. 36-438. Planned unit developments'. ~ definition, ~ intent, required plan ~q~m~me~. (a) Definition. A planned unit development (PUD) is any new development that the city c, ouncil approves with a conditional use permit (CUP) for a PUD. A PUD may consist of one or several uses or buildinl:lS..~ d:;':~c';..--.:nt .._....,,~-~,,;"-' "'"'...v ,.,"~' ...... v...._., pdn-J;:~ = ......... ...... -. '" '""' ....... .... -.. _--..-.--..'-~-~ ;~,~-~1,,;~ ~,~'~P~ 6k,,~ ~ k,,;l~4;~ ~,~l,l~; ,,~,~ ~6~,,m,6, :.----~--,,, v, ,v~ ~,,~,~"''~1~ ~,~"]~' ~,,~ ~.~'~'~'~,~,,,v,,, k, ,;l~,l;~,,~,, ,, (b) Intent. It is the intent ~ of U~s~,,eefie~-a~ the eth~ sections of this article ;elatk~ te about planned unit developments to~.........","";'~- = ........ ..... '-'.. allow desi.qn flexibility. This may occur with b,; =,.:'b=*.=r.'.~=l deviations from the provisions of this chapter, including uses, setbacks, height and other regulations...-......-..-r~"*'"*; ....... ...-, ..~' ..... =.-...--°'" ~,,,... ;,._....__,~ .....' ,,,;, -~..._._' ..... ,.........' ...... ,....._..:"~" ;b='. The city may allow deviations for planned unit developments if the following aor~lv: (1) Certain regulations contained in this chapter should not apply to the proposed PUD dev~ 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 b_~e ~ a significant threat to the property values, safety, health or general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land. (5) The city requires deviations am-required for reasonable and pmetieable practical physical development and are not required solely for financial reasons. (6) The deviations would help maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural land scenic features into the development desi;n. This shall include large trees, wetlands. slopes and other natural features that the city council deems important or significant. (c) Required plan. The city requires specific plans with a PUD. The development shall conform to the plan(s) as filed with the city. Any substantive changes in the plan(s) shall require a recommendation by the planning commission and approval by the city council after a public hearing. The director of community development may approve minor chanl:les to the approved plans. 61 ~ PUD Required. The city requires council approval of a conditional use permit for a PUD for all preliminary plats. For such a site, the city shall notify all property owners within 500 feet of the site of all public meetin,qs and all public hearin,qs. (e) The city shall not approve a division of the land under an approved PUD, unless the density distribution approved in the PUD is ensured after the land division. Section 2. Sections 36-440 through 36-443 are changed as follows: Sec. 36-440. Application. Any ............. person may aoolv Af~-a~al~ for a conditional use permit '--'-y k.,,:......,'--"-'_, ;..,..~.., :. ,k ...... , ,'"'.., .... ... .~... ;,. ,k. .... rr';"'';'"' An applicant also shall apply for community desitin review board approval, if applicable. An applicant shall submit all completed applications A!! =;;!!c.:t!c.-,= =h=l! b= :'.'bm~,'t=d to the director of community development upon the forms supplied by the city. The director shall not accept an application that is not complete. The director shall list specific Sfleei~ application requirements shall-be et.~ed on this form. , k, ,, ..k,.,, ;.,..,, ,.~..., ~.,..., ,k. ,.......~.... ;..,.........,;...,, ;~ ,.....,;....~,~.. cr tbs Cc'_'nc!!': r-d,:isc:'; The applicant shall also, at the time of filing such application, pay a fee to the city. dir-e~ter--ef "; "'J=v=!cp,m,=nt. This fee shall be to defray administrative expenses incurred by the city in handling of the application. The city council shall set this fe=, ':.,'h.~"..h k., ,k~ ,',-',.. ,', ..... :' by ordinance '-'--'- ' ---' .; ..... _; ....... ] ......., .. C .... ~ .... t-'O' EeC. 36-441. Procedure. ( ) pi pplicati ,.....,:...,: ... ~.... ,. .... .. a After a developer submits acom ete a on, "" _ ................. the director of community development shall prepare a report and recommendation. The director shall submit this report and recommendation :,-._'J :'.'bm!'. it to the planning commission and community design review board, as appropriate, for a recommendation to the city council. The planning commission and community design review board shall take-aetie~ act on the application within sixty (60) days of their respective hearing dates, unless the applicant approves an extension._. ......... -rt.----" ...:' --..-..,,'"'""" -,"" '"-..- .... -,-r"~"-.' .... * The staff shall then send the report and the planning commission's and community design review board's recommendations ~ ~ to the city council. (b) The city council shall hold at least one public hearing on each application for a conditional use permit. The city council shall not hold this 'rhP-. hearing i~q~l~.Re~be-he~ until the council has received written recommendations or reports from the city staff, planning commission and community design review board..--r"-'"'~ -;'"-. ~ The director of community development shall have a notice of the headng published in 62 the official newspaper at least ten (10) days before said hearing. The director shall also ~ mail a hearin.q notice ~ to each of the owners of property within three hundred fifty (350) feet of the boundary lines of the property c~.c~ which ~ sa6h-ase has beer requested a permit., .;.'h~ch The city shall mail these notices a~.e-te-be-ma~ed to the last known address of such owners at least ten (10) days before the date of the hearing. Such notice shall include the date, time and place of the hearing and shall describe the conditional use request. Failure of property owners to receive notice shall not invalidate any of the proceedings in this section. (c) The council may refer the application back to the planning commission when the council finds that the planning commission did not conside.r specific questions or information that may shall only use this procedur= ~'*" ~'"c.='4 ' ""'" cn!y ~' .... -~ once for each application. (d) The city council may approve, amend or deny an application for a conditional use permit by a majodty vote. (e) All decisions by the city council shall be final, except that any person aggrieved by a decision may, within thirty (30) days of the decision, appeal to the county distdct court. .. Sec. 36-442. Standards. (a) The city council may approve, amend or deny a conditional use permit .... ~-,- .v.. =m=nd=d c' d--:''" based on the following standards for approval, in i::_,,'m,,~t .... , ..v =;~ .... =-, . ...... addition to any standards for a specific conditional use found in this chapter: (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. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. (2) (3) (4) (5) (7) (8) The use would not depreciate property values. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage water runoff, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. This shall include large trees, wetlands, slopes and other natural features that the city council deems important or significant. 63 (9) The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. (10) The city council may waive any of the above requirements for a public building or utility structure, provided the council shall first make a determination that the balancing of public interest between governmental units of the state would be best served by such waiver. (b) The applicant shall have the burden of providing that the use would meet all of the standards required for approval of a conditional use permit. The city may require the applicant provide, at his or her cost, any information, studies or expert testimony necessary to establish whether these standards would be met or to establish conditions for approval. Sec. 36-443. Conditions. (a) The city council, in granting a conditional use permit, may impose such conditions and guarantees that it considers necessary, and as supported by the record of the proceedings, to protect adjacent properties and the public interest, and to achieve the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. (b) Conditions and guarantees may include but are not limited to the following: (1) Controlling the number, area, bulk, height, illumination and location of such uses. (2) Regulating access to the property, with particular reference to vehicle and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic control and emergency vehicle access. (3) Regulating off-street parking and loading areas, including the number and width of parking spaces. (4) The location and design of utilities, including drainage. (5) Berming, fencing, screening and landscaping, including underground sprinkling. (6) Compatibility of appearance with surrounding land uses. (7) Preservation of the site's natural, historic and scenic features in the development design. (8) Limiting the number, size, location or lighting of signage, notwithstanding the provisions of Article III (sign ordinance). (9) The location, dimensions and upkeep of open space. (10) Increasing required lot size, yard dimensions or setback requirements. (11) Compliance with any plans presented to the city, including the approved site and buildinl:l elevations. (12) A time limit for review of the permit. (13) (14) (15) A wdtten agreement, cash escrow, letter of credit or other guarantee to ensure that the project will be built as approved by the city council. Restrictive covenants. Control of the intedor and exterior components of a building, provided that such condition does not conflict with the building code. Such components may include, but not be limited to, the finished exterior materials and installation of elevators. (16) Control, includinR the size and location, of potential noise generators. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on ,1997. 65 Attachment 6 ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS Applicants for development proposals located next to or within a residential zoning district shall hold a neighborhood meeting for the following applications: preliminary plat, conditional use permit, planned unit development, rezoning or multiple applications. STATEMENT OF POLICY PURPOSE It is the city's intent to expand and enhance the distribution of information to the residents and to encourage involvement by the residents in the planning process. Therefore it is the applicant's responsibility to hold a neighborhood meeting that meets the guidelines described in the following paragraphs. PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES 1. The applicant shall schedule the meeting, send out notices/invitations* at least 10 days before the meeting. Meetings shall be scheduled Monday through Thursday evenings after 6 p.m. and not on an evening precading a holiday and not on Halloween. The applicant shall be the host of the meeting and present the project for questions and answers. 2. The meeting shall be held after the city has accepted the application but before the planning commission meeting on the application. 3. Notices/invitations to the neighborhood meeting shall be sent to those names and addresses listed on the public hearing notice list (within 500 feet of the subject property, obtained from Ramsey County). 4. The applicant shall hold the meeting in a location near the proposed development site, if possible. If there is not a suitable location for the meeting near the site, then the applicant shall hold the meeting elsewhere in Maplewood. 5. A representative from the city will be present at the meeting as an observer and to be available for city-related questions. 6. The applicant shall make available a complete description of the request, including copies of printed materials and maps, where appropriate. 7. City staff will provide the schedule of dates for planning commission and city council meetings, if known. 8. When the meeting notice is mailed to adjacent property owners, a copy of the invitation shall also be sent to the members of the city planning staff, planning commission and city council. Please contact the Maplewood Community Development Department (770-4560) for the current member rosters. *See affached sheet. 66 MINIMUM INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN MEETING NOTICE Name of applicant, contact person, address and phone number Proposed development name Property location description (location map) Descdbe proposed project and application request Meeting time, day and location Provide a copy of notice to: All property owners within 500 feet City staff All city council and planning commission members (see attached list) The city suggests that the applicant or developer provide a location map and a copy of the proposed development plan with the meeting notice/invitation. Also, additional copies of the development plans should be available at the meeting. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. 67