The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07/07/1997BOOK Call to Order MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, July 7, 1997 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East Roll Call Approval of Minutes June 2, 1997 4. Approval of Agenda New Business a. Kohlman Overlook Park Addition Preliminary Plat Front Yard Setback Variance Zoning Map Change b. Hawthorne Avenue Street Vacation APT Telecommunications Tower Conditional Use Permit (1779 McMenemy Street) 6. Unfinished Business 7. Visitor Presentations 8. Commission Presentations a. June 9 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson b. June 23 Council Meeting: Ms. Fischer c. July 14 Council Meeting: Ms. Brueggeman d. July 28 Council Meeting:?? (was to be Mr. Kopesky) 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: 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 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA JUNE 2, t997 I. CALLTO 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 Absent Present Present Absent Present Present Present Present III. APPROVALOF MINUTES May 19, 1997 Commissioner Pearson moved approval of the minutes of May 19, 1997, as submitted. Commissioner Thompson seconded. Ayes--Fischer, Kittridge, Pearson, Rossbach, Thompson Abstention--Frost, Ericson IV. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Rossbach moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Commissioner Ericson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. NEW BUSINESS A. Conditional Use Permit--Storm Water Facility (Century and Margaret Avenues) Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. Cliff Aichinger, administrator with the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, gave a fact sheet to the commissioners that explained alum treatment of storm water. Mr. Aichinger said this is one of four projects being started this summer to improve the quality of Tanner's Lake. Eighty-five percent of the flow from the largest watershed to Tanner's Lake will be treated. This watershed is the northern area from Stillwater Road to Hadley and Century Avenue (about 1 block into Maplewood) down to Minnehaha Avenue. Mr. Aichinger said this watershed contributes about 65 percent of the Planning Commission Minutes of 06-02-97 -2- phosphorous load to Tanner's Lake. The alum treatment system is 90 percent effective at removing phosphorous. Mr. Aichinger pointed out that they will be mounting a small monitoring station on top of the manhole at the outlet pipe. This will contain automatic sampling equipment that will allow continual monitoring of the quality of the water leaving the pond. He explained that alum is a natural occurring element that is used to treat drinking water and for pickling cucumbers. He emphasized that there is no danger from the alum to pets or humans if they wander into the pond. Mr. Aichinger spoke about ten other optional project combinations that the watershed district considered as a result of a diagnostic feasibility study to improve the water quality of Tanner's Lake. Commissioner Pearson moved the Planning Commission recommend: Approval of the resolution which approves the conditional use permit to build a storm water treatment facility on the northwest corner of Century and Margaret Avenues. The city bases this permit on the findings required by the code 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. Commissioner Ericson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. B. Conditional Use Permit--Merit Chevrolet (165 Century Avenue) Ken Roberts, associate planner, gave the staff report. Mr. Roberts answered questions from the commissioners. Roger Bortnem, general manager of Merit Chevrolet, said there are two separate parcels, so both 2695 Brookview Avenue and 165 Century Avenue are correct addresses. Mr. Bortnem related some history of the property. According to Mr. Bortnem, a fence requirement was a condition of an effort by a previous potential owner of the site to get it zoned for an auto dealership. This purchase never materialized and several years later the land was.purchased to become Merit Chevrolet. Originally this site was a rolling cornfield abutting residential lots. The land was leveled in 1971 to construct the dealership building. As a result of the grading, the south border then ended up to be approximately eight feet high. A six-foot screening fence was not constructed because it would have been two feet shorter than the grade. Mr. Bortnem said that in approximately 1976 a request was made to build a storage building at the rear of the property. At this time, the fence issue also arose. A vegetation screen was planted as a more attractive visual barrier. Mr. Bortnem was agreeable to adding a fence as a condition of this conditional use permit, but he did have an issue with limiting the hours of operation until 11 p.m. He said this 12-hour per week Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 06-02-97 cut in operation would possibly put 12 people out of work. Commissioner Thompson commented that he had walked the land and was not impressed with the trash enclosure. Mr. Bortnem confirmed this and said major repairs were needed to the enclosure. Tracy Cunnien Hayek, 2685 Brookview, felt her house was most impacted by the proposed construction. She hoped this project would not be allowed but thought adding a ten-foot-high fence would be best if the city approves the project. She was concerned about the hours of operation and encouraged that a sensing device be required for allowing cars to enter the bays instead of using horns. Joe Korba, 2659 Brookview Drive, spoke about the need for a barrier to help stop the noise and vandalism. He also mentioned the odors that come from a chemical poured in carburetors. Bruce Maples, an employee of Merit Chevrolet, pointed out the benefit to customers of having their vehicles repaired in the evenings. He also mentioned the minimal customer traffic and deterrent to vandalism by having the shop open. Darwin Lindahl, the architect for the project, addressed the issue of honking horns. He said the proposed addition will be equipped with loop detectors to automatically open and close the bay doors. Roger Bortnem assured Mr. Korba that there would no longer be chemicals, which create odors and fumes, poured in cars outside the building. Commissioner Rossbach felt the major issue was the hours of operation. He thought Merit Chevrolet should not be allowed to operate until 2 a.m. He also recommended no outside storage and that no work be allowed to take place outside with the possible exception of large motorhomes. Commissioner Kittridge questioned how this proposal could be considered before Merit Chevrolet complied with the fence requirement and the hours of operation that are required by code. Commissioner Ericson agreed with Mr. Kittridge and was in favor of requiring a ten-foot- high fence, no outdoor storage, no outdoor work, and trash removal before this was reviewed. Melinda Coleman, director of community development, felt the most amicable way to solve this problem would be to make a recommendation on the conditional use permit and tie it to the occupancy. Commissioner Rossbach moved the Planning Commission recommend: Adoption of the resolution which approves a conditional use permit to expand the auto dealership service garage at 2695 Brookview Drive. This permit is based on the standards 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. 2. The proposed construction must be started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. The city council shall review this permit in one year. The service garage shall not be open between the hOurs of 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. The applicant shall change their hours of operation to meet this requirement within one month of this city council action. o The property owner or applicant shall install at least a six-foot-tall, 100 percent opaque decorative wood screening fence along the south and west parking lot edges of the site. The screening fence should be placed on top of the slope at the same grade elevation as Planning Commission Minutes of 06-02-97 the parking lot for maximum screening. There is no need for the fence behind the storage building. The owner or contractor must install this fence within two months of this city council action. 6. There should be no outside storage of new or used parts, tires or equipment. 7. There shall be no outside work done on vehicles, with the exception of interior work to motorhomes. In the event the applicant does not proceed with the proposed expansion plans, they shall still do the following: Change the service garage hours to comply with the code within one month of this city council action. The service garage shall not be open between the hours of 11 p.m. and 6a.m. Install a six-foot-tall, 80 percent opaque decorative wood screening fence along the south and west parking lot edges. The screening fence should be placed on top of the slope at the same grade elevation as the parking lot for maximum screening. There is no need for the fence behind the storage building. The owner or contractor must install this fence within two months of this city council action Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes--Brueggeman, Ericson, Fischer, Pearson, Rossbach, Thompson Nays--Mr. Kittridge The motion passed. Commissioner Kittridge voted against the motion because of the preivous testimony and his feeling that this should not have been considered without compliance with the fence and hours of operation. VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS US West Telecommunications Tower Conditional Use Permit (500 Carlton Street) Ken Roberts, associate planner, handed out a letter from US West. This item was tabled from the last planning commission meeting to allow time for US West and 3M to do some testing about possible interference with equipment or processes. Mr. Roberts said it was his understanding that this testing has not been completed. This item is scheduled for public hearing before the city council on June 9, 1997. It was Mr. Roberts feeling that this would be tabled by the council until the June 23, 1997, council meeting to allow time for completion of the testing. Mr. Roberts cautioned that the planning commission and city coancil should take actiOn on land use matters and not try to regulate, control or monitor interference issues. These are functions of the Federal Communication Commission (FCC). Mr. Roberts said the commission could either take action on this item or table it until the next meeting. He also answered questions from the commissioners. John Hollenbeck of CB Commercial Real Estate (representing US West) was present. He said the FCC regulates all broadcast radio of which this tower is a part. Commissioner Rossbach felt Planning Commission Minutes of 06-02-97 -5- the planning commission should not hold up its decision until the results of the testing with 3M are available. Mark Beady, manager of the corporate real estate department at 3M, said the technical staff at 3M have been concerned about the adverse affect that these towers can have on 3M's research and development activities. He said the three requirements of any radio frequency communication system, such as PCSs, are: 1) have no adverse effect on people, 2) have no interference with electrical equipment such as computer, laboratory equipment, etc., and 3) have no interference with other communication equipment. Based on information which has been made available to the city, 3M now concludes that this tower will likely have a negative impact on 3M and its operations at the Maplewood site. Mr. Beady elaborated on 3M's concerns about interference. Mr. Beady also asked, if the tests show there are not concerns about interference at this time, that provision be made by US West, the planning commission, and the city council to notify 3M if the frequency is increased at this installation and afford 3M the opportunity to retest. Commissioner Rossbach moved the Planning Commission recommend tabling the conditional use permit request by US West for a telecommunications monopole at 500 Carlton Street until the interference study is completed by US West and 3M Company. Commissioner Kittridge seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. The commission agreed that, if a report was received indicating that there was no interference at this point, the staff recommendation would have been adopted by a vote of five to one. B. In-Fill Development Study-Subdivision Code Change Ken Roberts, associate planner, summarized the staff report. Commissioner Pearson moved the Planning Commission recommend approval of the code change which revises Subsection 36-69 (lot dimensions) and Section 30 (subdivisions) of the city code. Commissioner Ericson seconded. Aye all The motion passed. C. Tree Preservation Ordinance Ken Roberts, associate planner, gave the staff report. Commissioner Rossbach had a concern about the developer and city staff deciding which softwood deciduous trees are worth keeping. He felt the person making this decision should be qualified. He also asked about replacement size. Mr. Roberts said most ordinances use diameter inches as a measurement. Mr. Roberts also said he wanted to emphasize preservation rather than replacement in the tree ordinance. Commissioner Kittridge moved the Planning Commission direct city staff to prepare a tree preservation code amendment to meet the city's goals as noted in the staff report of May 28, 1997. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-02-97 Commissioner Ericson seconded. The motion passed. -6- Ayesmall VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS There were no visitor presentations. VIII. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS A. May 27 Council Meeting: B. June 9 Council Meeting: C. June 23 Council Meeting: IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Mr. Kittridge reported on this meeting. Mr Kittridge will attend this meeting. Mr. Frost is scheduled to attend. Ken Roberts reminded the planning commission of the city tour scheduled for June 30, 1997. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:23 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: PROJECT: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Preliminary Plat, Front Yard Setback Variance, Zoning Map Change Kohlman Overlook Park Plat June 19, 1997 INTRODUCTION Project Description Bruce Anderson of the Maplewood Parks and Recreation Department is proposing to develop three lots for houses on a 1.17-acre site. The proposed development would be north of the houses at 2997 and 2998 Frank Street on a cul-de-sac. Maplewood is developing these three lots as part of the Kohlman Overlook Park project. The name of the plat is Kohlman Overlook Park Addition. See the maps on pages 4 - 8. Requests To create these three lots, city staff is asking the city to approve the following: 1. The preliminary and final plats for the lots. (See the maps on pages 6 and 7.) 2. A 20-foot front yard setback variance for the three proposed lots. 3. A zoning map change from F (farm residence) to R-1 (single dwellings) for the site. BACKGROUND On January 27, 1997, the city council approved the Kohlman Overlook park master plan. The city developed the plan after several neighborhood park planning meetings and negotiations with adjacent property owners. This plan (on page 8) shows the three proposed house lots. On May 12, 1997 the city council awarded the bid for the construction of Kohlman Overlook park, including the Frank Street cul-de-sac, utilities and the grading of the three house lots. DISCUSSION Density and Lot Size As proposed, the three lots would range from 10,170 square feet to 15,012 square feet with an average lot size of 13,111 square feet. These lot sizes are very similar to the size of the existing lots on Frank Street south of this site.. All the proposed lots meet or exceed Maplewood's standards for lots for single-family homes. Utility Plans The city's park development contractor is installing the cul-de-sac, sanitary sewer, water and storm water facilities for the proposed lots. This plan will create a permanent end for Frank Street and includes the utilities for each lot. Front Yard Setback Variance City staff is recommending that the city council approve a 20-foot front yard setback variance for these three lots. Having a 10-foot front yard setback on these cul-de-sac lots will lessen the amount of grading that will be necessary to build the houses. The reduced setback also will put the new houses nearly in line with the front of the existing houses on Frank Street. Zoning Map Change City staff also is recommending changing the zoning map for this site. This change is from F (farm residence) to R-1 (single dwellings). This change would eliminate the possibility of farm activities that could be disruptive to the single-family homes in the area and would be consistent with the comprehensive plan. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Approve the Kohlman Overlook Park preliminary plat (received by the city on June 13, 1997). B. Adopt the resolution on page 9. This resolution approves a 20-foot front yard setback variance for the three lots in the Kohlman Overlook Park plat on Frank Street. The city should approve this variance because: 1. Strict enforcement of the code would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property and not created by the property owner. 2. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance, since the applicant would lessen the grading on the site. 3. Since all the houses on the same street would have the same front yard setback, they would all be located consistently with each other. C. Adopt the resolution on page 10. This resolution changes the zoning for the property north of 2997 and 2998 Frank Street along Frank Street. This change is from F (farm residential) to R-1 (single dwellings). The reasons for this change are those in the city code and because the owner plans to develop the property for single dwellings. 2 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 1.17 Acres Existing land use: Undeveloped (under construction) SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: West: East: New Kohlman Overlook Park Houses on Frank Street Houses on Edward Street Houses on Carey Heights Drive PLANNING Existing Land Use Plan designations: R-1 (single family residerttial) Existing Zoning: R-1 (single family residential) P:\...\sec4\kohlplat.mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line / Zoning Map 3. 6-13-97 Preliminary Plat 4. Proposed Grading Plan 5. Kohlman Lake Overlook Park Master Plan 6. Setback Variance Resolution 7. Zoning Map Change Resolution 8. 6-13-97 Preliminary Plat (Separate Attachment) 3 Attachment 1 C, ervis LLJ Loke ! PL/~-A OR 2 ALVARADO D~ 4 /:~AU~LL£ DR 5 M~DtAN DR V~KING LAURIE: CT. BURK[ AV. VADNAIS HEIGHTS BEA~ AV~. ~ COUNTY ROAD 1. SUMMIT CT. 2. COUNTRY~/IEW CIR. 3. DULUTH CT. 4. LYDIA ST. [ GERVNS JUNCTION (~) CHA~BE'RS ST KOHLMAH ^¥ OEMONT AVE. · BROOKS ~'-~ SHERREN A~:. Loke AVE. AVE. LARK AV~. ROSEWOO0 AV~. S. At.t. achment 2 ~. ,OU,~, -fY 3064 3054:: ~044 3034 3026 3020 3012 LYDIA AVE. PIPELINE F S ji ,51 POWER LINES ':'" <'i MINING AREA ~c;oo L~ 140 03 2990 ~, 2986 ~98~: ~i 2988 1215 ~ 2978, SUMMtT ., 2976 1216 ~ 2970,' PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP 5 1 I I Attachment 3 !1 Ii]~ i 1 ili' Attachment 4 :! Attachment 5 t ....... iSANDEI~S WACKER ~N BE~IQLY KO~LM~N L,,&KE O'v'E~LOOK, City of Maplewood Attachment 6 VARIANCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Director of Parks and ReCi~eation requested a variance from the zoning ordinance. WHEREAS, this variance applies to the three lots on Frank Street, north of 2997 and 2999 Frank Street in the proposed Kohlman Overlook Park development. The legal description is: That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota; described as follows; Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block One, Kohlman Overlook Park Addition. WHEREAS, Section 36-70 of the city code requires a 30-foot front yard setback for houses. WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing front yards of 10 to 15 feet. WHEREAS, this requires a variance of 15 to 20 feet. WHEREAS, the history of this variance is as follows: 1. On July 7, 1997, the planning commission reviewed this request. The planning commission recommended approval of this request. The city council held a public hearing on July 23, 1997. City staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The council gave everyone at the hearing an opportunity to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described variance for the following reasons: 1. Strict enforcement of the code would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property. 2. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance, since the applicant would lessen the grading on the site. 3. Since all the affected houses would be on this cul-de-sac, they all would appear to have similar front setbacks to the existing houses on Frank Street. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on July ,1997. 9 Attachment 7 RESOLUTION: ZONING MAP CHANGE WHEREAS, the Director of Community Development proposed a change to the zoning map from F (farm residential) to R-1 (single dwellings). WHEREAS, this change applies to the property north of 2997 and 2998 Frank Street along Frank Street. WHEREAS, the legal description is: That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota; described as follows; Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block One, Kohlman Overlook Park Addition. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On July 7, 1997, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this change. On July 23, 1997, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council gave everyone at the hearing an opportunity to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described change in the zoning map for the following reasons: 1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. 3. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. 5. The owner is proposing to develop the site with single-family homes. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on July ,1997. 10 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Chad Bergo, Community Development Intern Street Vacation Hawthorne Avenue, East of Farrell Street July 2, 1997 INTRODUCTION Residents of the Century East Town Home Association (CETHA) are requesting that the city vacate a part of the undeveloped Hawthorne Avenue right-of-way. This right-of-way is east of Farrell Street and west of Century Avenue. (See the maps on pages 3 and 4.) BACKGROUND On 3-5-81, the city council vacated part of Hawthorne Avenue (as part of Cave's Century Additions) for the following reasons: 1. The portions of Hawthorne Avenue are not planned for use as a street. 2. To make Lot 24, Block 3 legal for development. (See the minutes on pages 6 and 7.) On 3-27-81, the city council revised resolution for vacation of East Hawthorne Avenue. DISCUSSION CETHA is requesting this vacation so the area will remain a quiet residential setting. Maplewood has no plans to develop a street in the proposed vacation area. The city must keep a utility easement over the vacated right-of-way for existing sanitary and storm sewers. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution on page 8. This resolution vacates part of the unused Hawthorne Avenue right-of-way, east of Farrell Street. The city should vacate this street right-of-way because: 1. It is in the public interest. 2. The city and the adjacent property owners have no plans to build a street in this location. 3. The adjacent properties have street access. This vacation is subject to the city keeping utility, drainage and pedestrian easement over all of the vacated right-of-way. REFERENCE SITE DESCRIPTION Existing land use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Apartment Building and a house on Farrell Street East: Hawthorne Avenue right-of-way South: CETHA Town Homes West: Single-family homes p:sec24-29/cetha.vac Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line Map 3. Site Plan 4. 3-5-81 Council Minutes 5. Hawthorne Avenue Vacation Resolution 2 Attachment NORTH SAINT PAUL ~.v'[ q~s ' i D*~C' LOCATION MAP ? R'OLLfNG ~I~.S D~ Attachment 2 I Property Line Attachment 3 lost line of Block .3. Cove's Century .3~d Add~t~or~ ~ Lot 7. Block 3, Cove's Century 3rd Addition--~ T HAWTHOR. ~_~--~////// / / / OUTLOT / 30 -~ ~ 120.5 ~ / / /"Southwest corner of Outlot . CENTURY EAST /--- Southwest corner of Outlot A. CENTURY EAST L-southeost corner of Lot 24. Block 1, Cove's Century ,.~'d Addition PROPOSED FOR VACATION A SITE Proposed Vacation PLAN 5 Attachment 4 Street Vacation: Hawthorne Avenue (Cave) - 7:30 P.M. ~ ~ ~- / a. Mayor Oreavu convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding a request of Samuel Cave to vacate a portion of Hawthorne Avenue. The Clerk stated the hearing notice was in order and noted the dates of publication. b. Manager Evans presented the staff report. c. Vice Chairman Duane Prew presented the following Planning Commission recom- mendation: "Commissioner Kishel moved approval of the vacation of that portion of Eawthorne Avenue from the west line of the Century East Apartment property to Ferndale Street, except that part shown on the preliminary plat for street use and except that 20 foot part planned for bike trail to the Century East Apartments. Approval is based on the finding that such right-of-way has no public purpose and is in the interest of the City to vacate. Commissioner Sherburne seconded. Ayes all." d. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. None were heard. e. Mayor Greavu called for opponents. None were heard. f. Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing. g. Councilman Nelson introduced the followin~ resolution and moved its adoption: 81 - 3 - 34 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851, thereof, the Maplewood City Council, upon petition of a majority of the owners of the land abutting Hawthorne Avenue, proposed to be vacated, and after a public hearing preceeded by two (2) weeks published and posted notice, proposes the vacation of the following described Hawthorne Avenue from the west line of the Century East Apartment property to Ferndale Street, except that part shown on the preliminary plat for street use to wit: PROPERTY AFFECTED BY THE STREET VACATION: Century East Outlot A, Lots ! - 7, Block 2, Myhra Addition and the adjacent property North of Hawthorne Avenue described as follows: Unplatted Lands Ex W 483 ft & ex N 435 ft of S 795.87 ft of SE 1/4 lying N Of Mybra Add (subj to Rds & Esmts) in Section 24, Township 29, Range 22 W 483 ft of SE 1/4 of SE 1/4 lying N of Myhra Add (subj to Rd & esmts) in Section 24, Township 29, Range 22 WHEREAS, [he Maplewood City Council finds that the vacation of the above described street and alley are in the interest of the public due to changing land uses and obsolete platting; NOW,'THEREFORE? BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council, Ramsey County, Minnesota, that the above described Hawthorne Avenue be and hereby are, vacated and the City Clerk is hereby directed to prepare a notice of completiom of the proceedings pursuant to the p~ovisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 4!2.851 thereof, and shall cause the same to be presented to the County Auditor for entry upon his tranmfer records and the same shall be thereafter filed with the Ramsey County Recorder, subject to the City retaining a 20 foot wide pedestrian and bike trail easement along the southerly 20 feet of that portion of Mawthorne Avenue located between vacated Farre!l Street and the west lot line of the Century East Apartment property. Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all. Attachment 5 STREET VACATION RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Century East Town Home Association applied for the vacation of the following- described street right-of-way: That portion of Hawthorne Avenue East that is adjacent to Lot 7, Block 3, Caves Century 3rd Addition and that is east of the east line of the vacated Farrell Street right-of-way lying south of Hawthorne Avenue in Section 24, Township 29, Range 22 WHEREAS, the history of this vacation is as follows: On July 7, 1997, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this vacation. On , the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent a notice to the abutting property owners. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission. WHEREAS, after the city approves this vacation, public interest in the property will go to the following abutting properties: Outlot A, Century East, to the Century East Town Home Association in Section 24, Township 29, Range 22. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described vacations for the following reasons: It is in the public interest. The city and the applicant have no plans to build a street in this location. The adjacent properties have street access. This vacation is subject to the city keeping utility, drainage and pedestrian easement over all of the right-of-way. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1997. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: PROJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Chad Bergo, Community Development Intern Conditional Use Permit and Design Review American Portable Telecom Monopole 1779 McMenemy Street July 2, 1997 INTRODUCTION Project Description Michelle Johnson, representing American Portable Telecom, Inc., is proposing to install a 165- foot-tall monopole for telecommunications equipment. They want to install this monopole on the site that the Minnesota Department of Transportation owns at 17~,9 McMenemy Street. (Refer to the maps and plans on pages 5-9.) There would also be a 5' x x 3' prefabricated equipment cabinet near the base of the monopole. APT would lease a 50' x 50' area from the property owner and would enclose the lease area with an 8-foot-high chain link fence. Requests The applicant is requesting that the city approve: 1. A conditional use permit (CUP) for a monopole and related equipment in an M-1 (light industrial) zoning district. 2. The design, site and fencing plans. BACKGROUND On January 13, 1997, the council adopted the commercial use antenna and tower ordinance. DISCUSSION Conditional Use Permit Concerns of the neighbors included esthetics of the tower, interference with other radio frequencies, safety issues, and decreased property value if the tower would be approved. This project meets the requirements of the tower ordinance and the criteria for a CUP. The site design would be compatible with the adjacent commercial structures and uses. The city council should approve this request. City staff received numerous comments from nearby property owners expressing their concerns that the tower might cause interference with other radio and satellite systems. Michelle Leseman had several concerns with maintenance and ice build up in the winter months. See the attached letter dated June 18, 1997 on page 11. Design and Site Issues Access to the lease area and tower would be from the existing driveway from Larpenteur Avenue. As proposed, the monopole would be at least 400 feet from McMenemy Street and 100 feet from Interstate 35. The site design would fit in with the nearby commercial buildings. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Adopt the resolution on pages 12 and 13. This resolution approves a conditional use permit to allow a 165-foot-tall telecommunications monopole and related equipment. This approval is for the Minnesota Department of Transportation property located at 1779 McMenemy Street. Approval is based 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. 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 applicant or owner shall allow the collocation of other providers' telecommunications equipment on the proposed tower with reasonable lease conditions. B. Approve the plans date-stamped June 6, 1997, for a 165-foot-tall telecommunications monopole and equipment on the property at 1779 McMenemy Street. Approval is based on the findings required by code and subject to the applicant doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued permits for this project. 2. 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. Before getting a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall remove and dispose of any debris and ensure that the site is cleaned up. 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work. The amount shall be 150% of the cost of the unfinished work. All work shall follow the approved plans. approve minor changes. o The director of community development may 2 CITIZENS' COMMENTS We had sent surveys to 20 property owners within 350 feet of the proposed site. One of the 20 property owners copied the survey and distributed it to a neighboring apartment building. Of the 27 replies the city received, I had no comment, 1 was in favor, 24 objected and 1 had other comments. For If they need it and it helps them, I'm for it. They do nice work. (Lewis - 1766 McMenemy St N) Objections 1. I object to the proposal because it seems to be a problem area during storms. They are not good neighbors and (the tower) an eyesore for the neighborhood. (Webb - 382 Ripley Ave. N) 2. I object to this proposal because it will affect our property. (Xiong - 305 Bellwood Ave.) We object, we do not want this awful 150 foot high structure in our immediate area. Put it where there are fewer homes and playgrounds. (Stepenson - 1860 McMenemy St. Unit J) 4. I object to this proposal because it would be an eyesore in the winter. (Waegener - 1739 McMenemy St.) 5. We do not want this structure so close to dwellings where there are children. (Scarella - 1860 McMenemy St. Unit B) This is a residential area, this would be an eyesore for the area. The state has land at 35 E and Maryland to erect a tower where no homes are located for long distances. During last year's storm when high winds blew down sheds on this property, damage was done to my property. I reported this damage to the state. They did not return calls or come out. They are not good neighbors. (Vogt - 378 Ripley Avenue) I am very opposed to this significant intrusion into our neighborhood. In addition to the tower being a terrible eyesore added to a property that has, for the last three years, been the subject of neighborhood concern because of loud noises and general lack of upkeep, it will significantly impair the view of sunsets from several residences on McMenemy St. (Swenson - 1780 McMenemy St. N) 8. I object to this proposal because it will cause too much interference and trouble. (Wendt - 1746 McMenemy Miscellaneous Comment Repair of street is needed. (Keulty - 334 Bellwood Ave.) REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 2,500 square feet (.57 acres) Existing land use: Minnesota Department of Transportation vehicle storage SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Vacant property planned residential South: Houses on McMenemy Street West: Interstate 35 East: Town houses, house and a church across from McMenemy Street PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: M-1 (light industrial) Zoning: M-1 Ordinance Requirements Section 36-600(5)(b)(1) requires a CUP for a monopole in an industrial 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 12 and 13. p:secl 8\apttower. mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Enlarged Site Plan 5. Elevations 6. Applicant's letter dated June 12, 1997 7. 6-18-97 letter from M. Leseman 8. Conditional Use Permit Resolution Attachment 1 LI'I-I'LE CANADA COUNTY RD. FENTON AVE. KINGSTON ~ Sondy Loke SKILLMAN AVE. ~ MT. 'vERNON DOWNS AVl, BELLWOOD AVE. SUMMER AVE. ,.v ~_ BURKE BELMONT LN. ~ ~d~ne ~1 BELMONT J ~ . ~ Loke~ j~ SKILL~N m A~.~ LM~ ~ RO~E~WN ~.[~woo~ ~ .~ .~woo~ ~v[. SAINT LOCATION MAP 5 Attachment 2 !LAWN. AVENUt · iii n · nI-I .q XI. It · · · · m · I m Iii.i 1881 1894 1876 1866, T'(~WN 1860 HOUSES R3;~ SITE 1780 RIPL. EY AVE. RtPl.£y ,,'-'"- 1774 ,~-.~.",,, . ." I; - ;?:-" . ~.' / , .'- . - ~',,' ..',~.~, ~ ~,~ "~' .'CHURCH '* ~':: "--.~'" .~DL~-o.~ F ..... ~ ~=~ 1766 i ",~ _ .,) ,..,~ O I ~ -unnnnnnt I~/-~l ~1724= ~ '~~ = . . , : ; APARTMENTS g"'"~~~_ ;"1 ' ,]~ PROPOSED TELCO ROUTE t 5 TREES TO BE RELOCATED SITE Attachment 3 ,---PROPOSED CELL SITE ,- EXISTING PAVED / SURFACE / / EXISTING BUILDING PLAN I I x',,-EXiSTING EXISTING BUILDING PAVED SURFACE Attachment 4 I PROPOSED TELCO ROUTE 50'-0" LEASE AREA 48'-0" PROPOSED APT ~:"~~= ANTENNAS FACING 240' PROPOSED APT EQUIPMENT & FOUNDATION x ix PROPOSED ! APT ANTENNAS FACING O' I PROPOSED APT 50 METER MONOPOLE PROPOSED APT ANTENNAS FACING 120' .,~- ::~-- ~ ~ ~ -- PROPOSED APT ~ '"'" WAVEGUIDE BRIDGE ~ PROPOSED APT GATE 8'-0' WIDE PROPOSED APT CHAIN LINK FENCE ' 8'-(~" HIGH w/ THREE STRANDS OF E~ARBED WIRE X X SITE PLAN ENLARGED PLAN '8 Attachment 5 PROPOSED COLOCAT[ ANTENNAS PROPOSED APT ANTENNAS FACING 0' PRO~0SED APT ANTENNAS FACING 240' PROPOSED APT GUARD RAIL AND PLATFORM PROPOSED COLOCAT£ ANTEI PROPOSED APl ANTENNAS FACING 120' PROPOSED APT §OM WONOPOLE-- PROPOSED 8'-0' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE WiTH 5 STRANDS BARBED WiRE PROPOSED ICE BRID~[ PROPOSED APT EOUIPMENT PROPOSED APT FOUNDATION NORTH ELEVATION SCALE 1" ~ 20'-0' SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE I' = APT 1701 E. 79th Street Suite 19 Minneapolis, MN 55425 612-858-0000 Fax 612-851-9103 ,4 TO5 CONIP,ANY Attachment 6 JUN I 6 1997 12 June 1997 Ken Roberts Associate Planner 1830 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 RE: Application for Conditional Use Permit Proposed PCS Wireless Telephone Antenna Tower Site A1 N061 Dear Mr. Roberts: On June 5, 1997, APT submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit for a proposed Personal Communications Services (PCS) wireless telephone antenna tower and cell site at 1779 McMenemy Street in Maplewood, Minnesota. The property at issue is owned by the State of Minnesota. The application contained incorrect information in that it stated that the Minnesota Department of Transportation intended to be a co-locator on this tower. In fact, the DOT has no current plans to utilize this tower for their own needs. APT will be the highest user on the tower at the height of 165 feet. Other future users may negotiate space below this on the tower. APT apologizes for the confusion about this use on the application. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Michelle R Johnson Zoning Coordinator, Cellular Realty Advisors, Inc., on behalf of APT 858-0090 (office), 854-4105 (fax) 10 Attachment 7 ~C June 18, 1997 · To Maplewood Neighbors: , · ....... --._.iL~ 7~'~"~. Attached please find a copy ora survey I received fi.om the City of Maplewood regarding a proposed 165- foot monopole for telecommunications equipment to be built at 1779 McMenemy Street. (If you received this survey already, I encourage you to complete it by opposing building the proposed telecommunications tower.) My reasons for opposing the tower and questions that arise are as follows: Current radio frequencies from KSTP AM Radio located on 61 near Beam Avenue already interfere with neighborhood telephone and television fi'equencies. We can also pick up cellular telephone conversations on our television. This tower may compound the problem. The proposal states that "interference is not generally a concern.., and if a problem were to arise, APT would act 0romptly to correct it." Since there will be no personnel located at the tower, how quickly would APT be able to react? If this tower were to pose a safety issue (i.e., tomadces, severe weather), how quickly could APT APT's antennas must be located at 150 feet, yet they are proposing an approximate 165 feet with nine panel antennas 77" high mounted on the top of that tower. If you drive around where other cellular towers are located you will see how high 165 feet looks. In fact, APT has recently installed one at 36 and English by Mayflower moving. The fact that the tower is not required to be lighted does not aid in the resident's view of it in the daytime. Additionally, in the .winter months, this gal ,v~.ed steel _ . tower will be an eyesore to the residents of MeMenemy Street. Crfh~ ~~ $ 6//~io-, The memo further states property values will not "diminish or impair property values within the area" ~,. and asks the city to see attached property value analysis. The residents who received this survey did not receive this property value analysis to see how it affects our property. The tower requires heating, ventilating, and air conditioning equipment to be located inside the cabinets, yet no personnel will be located on site. The questions: 1) how much power will the tower use; 2) if an outtage were to occur, how does this affect power to other neighboring residents; 3) how quickly would power be restored to the neighborhood? / If the structure is approved, what is to prevent APT fi.om adding additional frequency equipment? What will prevent other co-locators from using it? Would Maplewood residents be able to have input : if the structure were to be modified? What are APT's long term plans for expansion? Please send your completed surveys to: Community Development Department City of Maplewood 1830 E County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109-2797 Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. M. J. Leseman 1741 McMenemy Street 11 Attachment 8 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Ms. Michelle Johnson, representing American Portable Telecom (APT), Inc. applied for a conditional use permit to install a 165-foot-tall telecommunications monopole and related equipment. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located at 1779 McMenemy Street. The legal description is: Subject to McMenemy street; the North 132 feet of the northeast 1/4 of the southeast 1/4 of the southeast 1/4 in Section 9, Township 29, Range 22 in Ramsey County, Minnesota. (PIN 09- 29-22-41-0019) WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On permit. , the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this The city council held a public hearing on 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 wdtten statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. At this meeting, the council tabled action on this request. 3. The city council continued discussion about this request on NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described conditional use permit, because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the city's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 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. 12 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 site plan approved by the city. 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 applicant or owner shall allow the collocation of other providers' telecommunications equipment on the proposed tower with reasonable lease conditions. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on 1997. 13