HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/05/1996MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, February 5, 1996
7:00 PM
City Hall Council Chambers
1830 County Road B East
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
a. January 2, 1996
b. January 16, 1996
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Unfinished Business
a. Lexus Dealership - Highway 61 North
Wetland Buffer Variance
Conditional Use Permit
New Business
a. Hideaway Lounge Conditional Use Permit (70 County Road B)
b. 1995 Annual Report
o
Visitor Presentations
Commission Presentations
a. January 22 Council Meeting: Mr. Rossbach
b. February 3 Joint Meeting with council: Ms. Coleman
c. February 12 council Meeting: Ms. Fischer
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.
o
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.
o
The Commission will then make its recommendation or decision.
All decisions by the Planning Commission are recommendations to the City Council.
The City Council makes the final decision.
jw/pc~pcagd
Revised: 01/95
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
JANUARY 2, t996
I. Call to Order
Chairperson Axdahl called the meeting to order at 7 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Commissioner Lester Axdahl
Commissioner Bunny Brueggeman
Commissioner Barbara Ericson
Commissioner Lorraine Fischer
Commissioner Jack Frost
Commissioner Kevin Kittridge
Commissioner Dave Kopesky
Commissioner Gary Pearson
Commissioner William Rossbach
Commissioner Milo Thompson
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Rossbach moved approval of the minutes of December 4, 1995, as submitted.
Commissioner Kittridge seconded.
Ayes-all
The motion passed.
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Thompson moved approval of the amended agenda, adding Item 9.c. January 8
Council Meeting.
Commissioner Frost seconded. Ayes-all
The motion passed.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Ismaili Muslim Community Church--1460 Skillman Avenue: Land Use Plan Change (L to C),
Conditional Use Permit, and Street Right-of-Way Vacation
Ken Roberts, associate planner, read the public hearing notice and presented the staff report.
Mr. Roberts answered questions from the commission. Val Parranto Davis, attorney for the
church, also answered questions. She said the church had no problem with any of the conditions.
A member of the church said the congregation was composed of mostly professional people,
many who were originally from India, Pakistan, and East Africa. He said their church services
would primarily be on Friday evening and Sunday morning. The church has approximately 100-
125 members.
Chairperson Axdahl asked for comments from the public. Wallace Ristow, 2019 Dieter Street,
asked if the area was large enough for future expansion of the church. He also asked if the
requirement to clean up the area would include the pillars of concrete buried on the site. The
Planning Commission
Minutes of 01-02-96
-2-
church member responded that the building was more than adequate because the size of the
community has remained stable. He also said they planned to maintain the property and upgrade
the building. Dawn Anderson Johnson, 1459 Skillman, was concerned about any planned
changes to the exterior and interior of the building and the amount of traffic that would be
generated. The church representative responded that traffic would be minimal. He said they
were uncertain about exterior changes but the inside would be remodeled to include a prayer hall
and classrooms for the children.
Since there were no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Kittridge moved the Planning Commission recommend:
Adoption of the resolution which changes the land use plan for the property at 1460 Skillman
Avenue. This change is from L (library) to C (church). The city should approve this change
because:
1. A church would have less affect on neighborhood traffic than an office building or the
former library.
2. A church would be just as compatible as an office or library with the existing and planned
land uses around this site.
Adoption of the resolution Which approves a conditional use permit for a church at 1460
Skiliman Avenue. The council should approve this resolution based on the findings required by
the city code and with the following conditions:
All construction shall follow the plans the city received on November 15, 1995. The
Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. The city council must
approve a conditional use permit revision for any expansion of the church building or
parking lot.
2. The building must be used for a church within one year of council approval or the permit
shall end. The city council may extend this deadline for one year.
3. Fill any potholes in the parking lot and driveways (code requirement).
4. Sweep and restripe the parking lot to current city code requirements.
5. Remove and clean up any junk or garbage on the property.
o
The church shall keep any outdoor trash or recycling containers in a 100 percent opaque
enclosure, as required by code. The design of the enclosure shall be subject to staff
approval.
7. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
C. Adoption of the resolution which vacates the Barclay Street right-of-way between Skillman
Avenue and the DNR Gateway Trail. The city should vacate this street right-of-way because:
1. It is in the public interest.
2. The city has no plans to build a street in this location.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 01-02-96
-3-
3. The adjacent properties have street access.
4. The county has been using this right-of-way for a parking lot.
Commissioner Frost seconded.
Ayes-all
The motion passed.
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. Shoreland Ordinance
Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. He said this ordinance was given to
the commission again because, after a considerable delay, the DNR had requested some minor
changes. Mr. Roberts then answered questions from the commission. Commissioner Rossbach
questioned the section that stated a lot division should not result in the creation of more than
three lots. Mr. Roberts explained that lot divisions can be done with administrative approval. The
creation of four or more lots would require a preliminary plat application and council approval.
Commissioner Rossbach commented about the limitations of PUDs by requiring them to have
more than one use. The commission and staff discussed the restrictions of the ordinance on
anything but routine maintenance of vegetation in the shoreland.
Commissioner Frost moved the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the corrected
shoreland ordinance, adding the word Uthe" on page 9, (h), (5) before ~[[tJg.~3_.~Y.~ and
changing page 23, c., first line, to read "shall not grade bluffs."
Commissioner Rossbach seconded.
Commissioner Axdahl asked if lot division requests to add a home near the lake in the
Arcade/Keller area would be affected by the setback requirements of the ordinance. Mr. Roberts
said the biggest problem encountered is the lack of frontage on a public street required by the
subdivision code.
Ayes-all
The motion passed.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Adult Use Ordinance
Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report and answered questions from the
commission. Melinda Coleman, director of community development, suggested that Pat Kelly, the
Maplewood city attorney, be asked for specific comments on how the ordinance relates to the
comprehensive plan. Commissioner Thompson felt the ordinance should clearly state that the
distances cited will cross geo-political boundaries in interpretation and application. Mr.
Thompson also thought the ordinance should specifically designate the Maplewood department
that would handle any citizen complaints. Ms. Coleman said this would be a licensed facility and
complaints should be handled by the police department. Licenses are issued through the city
clerk's office and can be revoked.
VIII.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 01-02-96
Commissioner Ericson asked about the possibility of having a further definition of holding
corporations so that names of actual owners could not be hidden. Ms. Ericson was also of the
opinion that a person who had previously had an adult-use license revoked should become
permanently ineligible for any future such license. Commissioner Rossbach felt this consequence
was too harsh for a misdemeanor, but was agreeable to requiring a longer period of time before
issuance of a new license. Commissioner Kittridge thought the proposed ordinance seemed very
tight and anticipated no problems.
Commissioner Rossbach moved the Planning Commission recommend acceptance of the adult
entertainmentJsexually-oriented business ordinance, amended as follows: (1) page 9, Section c.
2. -further define holding corporation so identity of owners is public, (2) page 10, Section 3. (a) -
delete last sentence, "upon rejection of any applications for a license, the finance director shall
refund the amount paid," (3) page 11, Section 5. (f) - add "has had an adult use license revoked
under an ordinance or statute similar to this ordinance, (4) page 12, Section 9. (a), (b), and (c) -
delete "in Maplewood" and add "in any city," and (5) page 15 - add a new section after d. to
address compliant processing.
Commissioner Pearson seconded.
Ayes-all
The motion passed.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
There were no visitor presentations.
IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
A. December 11 Council Meeting: Mr. Kittridge reported on this meeting.
B. December 18 Council Meeting: Ms. Frost reported on this meeting.
C. January 8 Council Meeting: A representative is not necessary for this meeting.
Commissioner Rossbach recommended that the planning commissioners, as they travel, observe
various communication towers to aid in forming an opinion on their shapes and sizes. He related a
personal experience where a tower blended so well with the environment that he was almost unaware
of it.
X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
There were no staff presentations.
Xl. ADJOURNMENT
The commission adjourned at 9:12 p.m.
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, t996
I. Call to Order
Chairman Axdahl called the meeting to order at 7 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Commissioner Lester Axdahl
Commissioner Bunny Brueggeman
Commissioner Barbara Ericson
Commissioner Lorraine Fischer
Commissioner Jack Frost
Commissioner Kevin Kittridge
Commissioner Dave Kopesky
Commissioner Gary Pearson
Commissioner William Rossbach
Commissioner Milo Thompson
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
III. APPROVAL OFAGENDA
Commissioner Frost moved approval of the agenda as submitted.
Commissioner Pearson seconded.
Ayes-all
The motion passed.
IV, NEW BUSINESS
A. Lexus Dealership---Highway 61 North: Wetland Buffer Variance and Conditional Use Permit
Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report and answered questions from the
commission. Commissioner Thompson was concerned about the dumping of snow on the back
of the lot in the buffer area. Ken Haider, city engineer, said the city does use areas adjacent to
wetlands and ponds for snow disposal because no other place is available. He said the intent of
the dumping restriction in this easement was meant to be debris, tires, etc. Commissioner Frost
asked about a provision for maintenance of the catch basins and protection of the quality of the
drainage. Mr. Haider said curbs would be required to direct the runoff.
John Dietrich of RLK Associates, representative for the Luxus dealership and Ryan Construction,
was present. Mr. Dietrich said they read the staff report and concurred with the
recommendations. He said all uncontrolled runoff will be channeled through catch basins down to
the Iow level of the wetland with proper erosion and sediment control systems in place.
Mr. Dietrich also pointed out the location of the three proposed catch basins. Mr. Haider asked
the commission to keep in mind that, although this is a wetland, it also is the conveyor of the
storm water from a large portion of White Bear Lake and Highway 61.
Commissioner Rossbach said he was disturbed by the proposal. Mr. Rossbach said he was told
that wetland buffers less than 75 feet are almost worthless and, therefore, the 25-foot buffer
would afford no protection for the Class 1 wetland. He said that when the owners filled the
property, the displaced dirt caused problems for the adjoining property because the soil they
propose to build on is muck. Mr. Rossbach also felt that the runoff from the dealership would be
Planning Commission
Minutes of 01-16-96
-2-
unprotected and would be dumped in the wetland. He said the developer was planning to bypass
the buffer with catch basins. Mr. Rossbach also indicated that other wetlands to the north are
filtering some of the runoff from White Bear Lake and Highway 61. He favored a bigger buffer
area and controls to cleanse the drainage before it goes into the wetland.
Commissioner Fischer asked if skimmers the city required on another dealership site in
Maplewood were effective. Mr. Haider said, to the best of his knowledge, there has been no
testing or evaluation on the previous application. Commissioner Kittridge said he thought the city
had made a commitment to better protect the environment for the future and he wasn't sure if this
proposal would be a step in that direction.
Ms. Coleman, director of community development, said the watershed, in a meeting with the city
and applicant, supported this proposal and felt it would improve the buffer area and enhance the
quality of the slope. She said the classification of the wetland as a Class 1 was questionable
because it is filled with urban runoff. Ms. Coleman said future development of this site with a 100-
foot setback requirement is unlikely because it would take about forty percent or more of the site.
Mr. Dietrich said the watershed identified the Kohlman/NSP wetland basin in a functional
classification for storm-water ponding. This high level of classification caused it to be put in the
city's class of Group 1 wetland. He said they were willing to work with the watershed and perhaps
put one outlet with a skimmer at the base of the slope.
Commissioner Frost moved the Planning Commission recommend tabling this proposal until the
February 5, 1996, Planning Commission meeting. It is requested that a representative of the
watershed district be present at this meeting.
Commissioner Rossbach seconded.
Ayes-all
The motion passed.
B. AT&T Tower--1899 Clarence Street: Tower Moratorium Variance, Street Vacation (Curve Street),
and Conditional Use Permit
Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. In response to a question from the
commission about neighborhood opposition, Melinda Coleman, director of community
development, responded that there doesn't seem to be the same level of concern for this proposal
as the previous one on English Street. She received one phone call, and noted that some council
members had received calls in favor of the tower at this location.
Peter Beck, attorney for AT&T, and Ted Olson, property manager for AT&T, were present at the
meeting. Mr. Beck said the proposed site is lower that the location originally proposed and will be
less effective, but the tower would be at the same height (150 feet). He then showed pictures of
the area on which the pole was drawn at scale and colored. Mr. Beck also said the applicant was
agreeable to all conditions recommended by staff. Mr. Olson also answered questions from the
commission.
David Bartol, 1249 Fdsbie Avenue, said he spoke with Jan Sundgaard (the owner of a
neighboring mobile home park and house). He said that Mr. Sundgaard was opposed to the
tower. Mr. Bartol thanked the commission for the tower moratorium. He asked them to consider
whether they felt they would approve this proposal after a year of study. If the commission is
unsure, he recommended they table the application.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 01-16-96
-3-
Commissioner Pearson moved the Planning Commission recommend:
Ao
Adoption of the resolution which apProves a variance from the monopole installation
moratorium for AT&T's proposed 150-foot-tall cellular telephone tower at 1899 Clarence
Street. Approval is based on the following reasons:
1. The proposed AT&T monopole and building installation would be compatible with the
existing and proposed land uses and zoning.
2. Ninety-four percent of the surrounding neighbors notified of this project voiced no objection
to this request.
3. The use would be in keeping with the spidt and intent of the ordinance because of
compatibility.
4. The proposed facility is needed to improve service to AT&T's users based on their tower-
spacing requirements.
5. The proposed monopole would not cause any radio or television interference.
6. The proposed monopole would be designed by a qualified structural engineer.
7. All setback and building code requirements would be met.
8. The facility has met with the approval of the Maplewood Community Design Review
Board.
B. Adoption of the resolution which vacates the Curve Street right-of-way between Summer
Avenue and Frost Avenue. It would be in the public interest to vacate Curve Street because:
1. There are no abutting lots that could benefit from its construction.
2. The fight-of-way width is only 30 feet wide. The minimum right-of-way width required is 60
feet.
3. The city has no intention to build Curve Street.
Approval of this vacation shall be subject to the city retaining an easement for utility purposes
over, under and across all that part of vacated Curve Street adjacent to Block 6,
GLADSTONE, Ramsey County, Minnesota, which lies Southerly of the Westerly extension of
a line drawn parallel with and 20.00 feet Northerly of the South line of Lot 1 of said Block 6,
and which lies Northerly of the Westerly extension of a line drawn parallel with and 10.00 feet
Southerly of the North line of Lot 2 of said Block 6, GLADSTONE.
Co
Adoption of the resolution which approves a conditional use permit to allow a 150-foot-tall
cellular telephone tower at 1899 Clarence Street. Approval is based on the findings required
by the ordinance 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.
Planning Commission -4-
Minutes of 01-16-96
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 property owner shall dedicate a utility easement for storm sewer purposes to the City
of Maplewood over, under and across the North 10.00 feet of the West 65.00 of Lot 2,
Block 6, GLADSTONE, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
Do
Approval of the plans date-stamped December 21, 1995, for a 150-foot-tall cellular telephone
tower and equipment building at 1899 Clarence Street. Approval is based on the findings
required by code and subject to the applicant doing the following:
1. Repeat this review in one year if the city has not issued a building permit for
this project.
2. Obtain the following city council approvals:
a. A variance from the moratorium ordinance.
b. A conditional use permit.
c. The vacation of Curve Street west of Woodbury Mechanical's property.
Before getting a building permit the applicant shall submit revised building elevations, for
staff approval, showing a hip roof on the proposed equipment building. The color of the
building shall match, or be compatible, with Woodbury Mechanical's building.
4. Before getting a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall:
a. Remove and dispose of the round concrete culvert sections behind the Woodbury
Mechanical building and make sure the site is cleaned up.
b. Relocate or remove the semi-trailer, truck and small fiat-bed trailer from the north side
of the Woodbury Mechanical building to allow access to AT&T's two parking spaces.
c, Pave a driveway extension and two striped parking spaces for this facility (code
requirement).
5. 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.
6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may
approve minor changes.
Commissioner Frost seconded.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 01-16-96
-5-
Commissioner Fischer commented that, since there was no ordinance at this time for guidance,
placing a pole in a business commercial or manufacturing zone is better than putting it in a
residential or open space area.
Ayes-all
The motion passed.
C. Election of Officers
Commissioner Frost moved that Les Axdahl be reappointed chairperson and Lorraine Fischer be
reappointed Vice-Chairperson of the Maplewood Planning Commission.
Commissioner Kittridge seconded.
Ayes-Brueggeman, Ericson, Frost, Kittridge,
Kopesky, Pearson, Rossbach, Thompson
Abstention-Axdahl, Fischer
The motion passed.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
There were no visitor presentations.
VI. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
A. January 8 Council Meeting: Ms. Coleman repOrted on this meeting.
B. January 22 Council Meeting: Mr. Rossbach will attend this meeting.
Commissioner Fischer commented that Carolyn Peterson, a member of the Maplewood Parks
Commission who utilizes handicap parking, questioned the placement of these designated parking
areas at the new Tri-District School. She explained that the requirements should be more than just
meeting a specific number of spaces~distance from the doors should also be considered. Ms.
Peterson plans to introduce this concern at a community design review board meeting.
Commissioner Fischer asked about the Good Value application that was distributed with the agenda
packet. Ms. Coleman said she would like the commission to give careful consideration to the request
to upgrade the commercial zoning (LBC and commercial office) next to this site.
VII. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
Ms. Coleman requested that the planning commission meeting on February 19 be rescheduled to
February 20 because of the holiday. It was agreeable with the commission to meet on the 20th.
Ms. Coleman asked the commission to prepare a list of four issues to be discussed with the city
council. This list will be presented at a meeting with the mayor, council and other advisory boards
and commissions. Each board will then be given one-half hour to talk to the mayor and council about
these items. The commission responded that they would like to discuss the following: (1) PUD
ordinance, (2) commercial property study, (3) use of the Phalen Chain of Lakes Watershed district
study and findings, and (4) public headngs at planning commission meetings.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 01-16-96
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:48 p.m.
-6-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
City Manager
Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner
Lexus Automobile Dealership
Highway 61
January 29, 1996
INTRODUCTION
The planning commission should act on the wetland buffer variance and the conditional use
permit (Recommendations A & B). The community design review board should act on the
design issues (Recommendation C).
p:sec3\lexus2.mem
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
City Manager
Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner
Lexus Automobile Dealership
Highway 61
January 29, 1996
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Ryan Companies is proposing to build an 11,000-square-foot, one-story Lexus dealership north
of Venberg Tire on Highway 61. Refer to the maps on pages 8-10. The proposed building
would be rock-face concrete block, EIFS (exterior insulation finish system), a stucco-look
material and glass.
Requests
The applicant is requesting that the city council approve:
A 75-foot wetland buffer variance. City code requires a 100-foot-wide wetland buffer along
the east edge of this site. The wetland buffer is to protect the adjacent wetland to the east,
classified by the Ramsey-Washington Metro District as a Class 1 wetland. Class 1 wetlands
are those with conditions and functions most susceptible to human impact, are most unique,
have the highest community resource significance and similar characteristics. The applicant
is proposing a 25-foot-wide buffer. Refer to the letter on pages 11-12.
A conditional use permit (CUP) for a maintenance garage. The sale of new and used
vehicles is permitted. City code, however, requires a CUP for service and maintenance of
cars.
3. Architectural, site and landscape plans.
BACKGROUND
April 10, 1995: The city council approved a RLS (registered land survey) for the Ramsey-
Washington Watershed District. The RLS created five tracts east of Highway 61 and south of
County Road D. Tract E, east of the proposed Lexus site, was shaped to follow the outline of
the existing wetlands. The watershed district owns Tract E.
January 3, 1996: The Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District approved the grading
permit for Lexus. According to Mr. Pat Conrad of the watershed district, their assessment of the
adjacent wetland was to accept the proposed 25-foot-wide wetland buffer. It is still the city's
decision whether or not to approve it, however.
January 8, 1996: The city council ordered a water main extension project to provide city water to
the proposed Lexus site.
DISCUSSION
Wetland Buffer Variance
All setbacks meet code with the exception of the wetland setback to the east. The watershed
district has agreed with the proposed 25-foot-wide wetland buffer, provided the applicant
improve the quality of the buffer over its present condition. According to Cliff Aichinger of the
watershed district, the buffer around the wetland is very poor. Even though the required buffer
width is proposed to be only 25 feet wide, its quality would be enhanced by the applicant over its
current state. Refer to Mr. Aichinger's letter on pages 16 to 21. The applicant's architect, RLK
Associates LTD, has agreed to meet his requirements for improving the buffer. These
improvements include reshaping the slope to a maintainable 3:1 ratio, planting a native wetland-
sensitive seed mixture and controlling all the runoff with catch basins.
Conditional Use Permit
The city council should approve the CUP. The proposal would meet the findings for approval.
Since the city council ordered the extension of water to this site, approval of this CUP should be
contingent upon the city entering into a contract for the construction of the water main extension.
Design Considerations
The applicant proposes to store all refuse and parts within the building. There is no need,
therefore, for an outdoor trash enclosure. If trash is kept outside anytime in the future, a
permanent outdoor enclosure would be required.
The rock-face concrete block and~EIFS exterior would be compatible with the other three auto
dealerships south along Highway 61. The building colors should be submitted to the community
design review board (CDRB) for approval.
Landscaping
The landscape plan is acceptable for the most part. The applicant, however, may need to add
plantings along the wetland buffer if required by the watershed district. The applicant should
also sod the boulevard instead of seeding it. Essentially, the boulevard is part of the front yard.
It should be treated the same as the applicant's own property.
Billboard Setback
The future building expansion on the north end of the site would be too close to the existing
billboard. The sign code requires that billboards be at least 100 feet from an on-site building or
sign. According to the site plan, the billboard would be 37 feet from the future building. Lexus
would have to apply for another CUP to be allowed to build within 100 feet of this sign.
2
Parking
The applicant is proposing 117 parking spaces with the first phase-the code requires 55. The
applicant proposes to use the remaining 62 spaces for auto-inventory parking. The city should
require that Lexus post signs designating at least 55 parking spaces for their customers and
employees. This is needed so they do not end up with the shortage of spaces and the
congestion typical of auto dealerships.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution on page 22. This resolution approves a 75-foot wetland buffer variance
for the proposed Lexus dealership on Highway 61. Approval is based on the following
findings:
Strict enforcement of the code would cause undue hardship because of circumstances
unique to the property and not created by the property owner. The 100-foot-wide wetland
buffer requirement would make development of this site difficult. The difficulty was
created by the new ordinance.
The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance, since the
applicant would improve the quality of the wetland buffer substantially over its present
state.
Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following:
1. Submitting a grading and landscaping plan subject to the requirements of the city staff
and the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for the wetland buffer.
Dedicating a wetland-buffer easement. This easement shall describe the boundary of
the buffer and prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer.
The applicant shall record the deed for this easement before the city will issue a building
permit.
Adopt the resolution on pages 23-24. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for
a maintenance garage at the proposed Lexus dealership on Highway 61. Approval is based
on the findings required by the code and subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community
development may approve minor changes.
The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council
approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline
for one year.
3. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
Before the issuance of a building permit, the city must have a signed construction
contract for the extension of the water main to the Lexus site. The water system must be
operational before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
3
The future expansion is not allowed. The applicant must apply for design approval and
an amendment to the conditional use permit prior to building this expansion. The future
expansion must be at least 100 feet from the billboard.
Approve the plans (stamped December 7, 1995) for proposed Lexus dealership on Highway
61 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:
Dedicate and record a wetland-buffer easement. This easement shall describe the
boundary of the buffer and prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping
within the buffer.
Submit a revised landscape plan providing for any planting and ground reshaping or
restoration of the wetland buffer as may be required by the Ramsey-Washington
Metro Watershed District. Replace the seed on the Highway 61 right-of-way with sod
if allowed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The right-of-way shall
have an in-ground lawn irrigation system unless prohibited by MnDOT.
Before the issuance of a building permit, the city must have a signed constr, uction
contract for the extension of the water main to the Lexus site. The water system must be
operational before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
4. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building:
a. Replace any property irons removed because of this construction.
b. Install reflectorized stop signs at both exits, a handicap parking sign for each
handicap parking space and an address on the building.
c. Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from streets or adjacent property. (code
requirement)
d. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure, subject to staff approval, if there would be
outside trash storage. (code requirement)
Install an in-ground lawn irrigation system for the parking lot islands and the sodded
areas between the highway and the parking lot. Lawn irrigation in the right-of-way
may be waived if MnDOT will not allow it.
f. Post signs designating at least 55 customer and employee parking spaces.
g. Post one-way traffic signs for the narrow driveway beneath the canopy on the south
side of the building.
The future expansion is not allowed. The applicant must apply for design approval and
an amendment to the conditional use permit prior to building this expansion. The future
expansion must be at least 100 feet from the billboard.
6. 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.
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.
Traffic flow in and out of the Lexus dealership shall be reviewed by MnDOT. Any site
plan change is subject to staff approval.
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 3.63 acres
Existing land use: Backyard Building Systems shed sales lot and Rainbow Play Systems
play equipment sales lot
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Owner-displayed used car sales lot
South: Venberg Tire
West: Highway 61
East: Vacant property (wetland)
PAST ACTION
May 28, 1991: The city council approved a variance waiving the requirement for in-ground lawn
irrigation and approved the site plan for Backyard Building Systems. They display their buildings
on the south half of the proposed Lexus site.
September 28, 1992: The city council approved a CUP for Rainbow Play Systems. They display
and sell backyard play equipment on the north half of the proposed Lexus site.
June 13, 1994: The city council approved a CUP for a used motor vehicle sales lot for Clarence
Lacktodn on the lot north of the proposed Lexus site.
PLANNING
Land Use Plan designation: M-1 (light manufacturing)
Zoning: M-1
Ordinance Requirements
Section 36-151 (b)(9)(c) requires a CUP for maintenance garages.
Section 36-196(h)(3) of the wetland protection ordinance requires a 100-foot-wide wetland buffer
for the proposed Lexus site adjacent to the lot to the east.
Section 36-292(b)(2) requires that billboards be no closer than 100 feet to a commercial,
industrial or institutional building or an on-site sign.
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.
Findings for Variance Approval
State law requires that the city council make the following findings to approve a variance from
the zoning code:
1. Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the
property under consideration.
2. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance.
"Undue hardship", as used in granting of a variance, means the property in question cannot be
put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The plight of
the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the landowner, and
the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic
considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property
exists under the terms of the ordinance.
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 23-24.)
p:sec3\lexus2.mem
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Property Line/Zoning Map
3. Site Plan
4. Applicant's Narrative Statement for the Variance Request dated December 5, 1995
5. Applicant's Conditional Use Permit Justification dated December 28, 1995
6. Letter from Cliff Aichinger dated January 26, 1996
7. Variance Resolution
8. Conditional Use Permit Resolution
9. Plans Date-stamped December 7, 1996 (separate attachment)
Attachment 1
VADNAIS HDIGHTS
CT.
".~, ....:.'~ ...: '? ,~
G'ERVAJS AV~.
COJNT
EDGEMII..L
OF. MONT
BROOKS
LOCATION MAP
8
N
1320 1322
SPARKLE AUTO SALES
1")4 .20
0 ', v r...:- --$... i N
~. $0~c.
$110
~o~o
'~ i~OAD D i,'h m ~
~0. \5
I~IAPLEWOOD
( OWNER TO OWNER
AUTOMART
lOW PLAY SYSTEMS
f ~,0.
NSP SUBSTATION
E
WETLAND
BACKYARD BUILDING SYSTEMS
.~ VENBERi TIRE
~ p,~G; R~D 1~O 5, URVE
(9) .~
~ 2eeo
PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP
~ PROPOSED LEXUS SITE
:
NO.
.~'
!"13
N
Attachment 3
I
I
· ' I I
/,
t
~ I
t t
/
t t
%~..~
I
I
I
I"m)POSL'D IrXUS
II,ooo
SITE PLAN
10
N
NARRATIVE STATEMENT FOR VARIANCE APPLICATION
Lexus Devdopmeut - Highway 61
Tract D sad G RLS No. ~2~
third parcel directly ~ of Treat D. T~ site iocat~ mi request for dev~l~ of Tracts D
and (}will require a varianm to Socticm 9-196 va~hnd mi strmms, site plan approval, and a
whereas a site plan approval applicatian is being submit~ ~ and a public heating for
flJe watcrmain p~ is schMulM fro' January 8, 1996.
The subject property has bern existing inits currmt state for decades, currently the sites contain a
billboard and sheds for sale. The zoning classificati~l M-1 Light M~m~h~iug allows thc
mstem p~ line of Tracts D md G. The delinmtkm and analysis was provided by the
Watcmhedsmfl~ The w~hnd is classified as a Oroup 1 Wetland. TheCityofMaplewo~Zonin~
Code Section 9-196, W~Jands md Stmum, Itun (h) ~ i~,~i~_,~ fl~ awragc and
minimum ~ of a Group I wethml~~ 100fl~ SUict~ofa 100'wide
buf~ yard win mmi~ T~ D md GofRLS 525 not dt~elopable to a rcasomble use. The buffer
196 in April of 1995. The w~land in question is completely east of the proper~ li~e mci is under
the ownmUip o the Rmscy M ro Watmh
The application dated Decanber 5, 1995, las bom dimas~ with City staff mi tie admini~hator
ofth~ Watml~ Dimict ~ ~ improw th~ ~xisting ~ffer ~i$¢ ccmditim.
The 100' buffn, yard was not in mdsten~e prior to April 1995, and if applied would restrict
reasonable use of the properS. 'l'ne subject parcels avm'qe less than 300' in width and imposition
necessary on Sta~e ~y 61, the prop~y cannot be put to a reasonable use under the existin~
z~ng with n 100' buffm' ~ ~m.
1995 - 1 - NARRATIVE
pg. 11
eliminatcd. Thc proposed 25' buffer win enable the parcels to be dc~"~ to a reasoaablc use and
Ryan ~ Comlmay of~ Inc., requests the City Plmmin~ Coauniss~ ~nd City
Council approv~ a vatianae fix & 25' Imfl~ yard alon~ ~ eastern edt~ of Tract D and G of RLS
525. ~ne applicant prolmses to develap ~be site mxx~rd~ng to d~e plans subm~__~ on December 5,
1995, provided a public watennain services the property.
pg. 12
N~TIVE
~ASSOC IATES LTD~
Attachment 5
~ClVILENGINEERING · URBAN PLANNING * TRANSPORTATION · ENVIRONMENTAL
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE · CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT · LAND SURVEY
D~zmb~r 28, 1995
Mr. Tom Ei~.h~ud
City of Mapl~wood
Associa~ Plainer
1830 East County Road B
Maplewooa, ~ 53709
Site plan submittal
Cond/fional Use Permit
~ Dcalcn~ Stat~ I~wa~ 61
On behalf of Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, Inc., the applicant is requesting a Conditional
Use Permit for construction of a maintenance garage/n association with the site plan approval
variance, and watershed permit approval. As stated in the City Code Sections 36-151 (b) (9) on page
2241, the ma/ntonance garage portion ofthe site plan application requires a cond/fiona] use permit.
The pr/mary function of the Lexus Dealership Shall be the sellinE and display of new Lexus vehicles; a
The following ~ tothe criteria for a wnditional use permit are based upon the site plan
package submitted to the City of Maplewood on Dec.bet 6, 1995 and on the grading permit plan s~
submitaxl to the Ramsey Washington M~xo Wamahed District on December 8, 1995,
The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity wtth the City's comprehenstve plan and Code of Ordinances.
The existing zoning is M-I ~ which allows as an outright use car dmlerships
md display lots. The majority of car dealerships on Highway 61 have as a service to their
custonm~ a maintmance facility specifically ~,into tbe car dealership o~ration.
The property to the south, Vmlm'g Tire, currmtly has operational maintenance garages as
does the Toyota Dealership located across Highway 61. The Proposed maintmance garage
w/il occupy approximately 3,$00 sq. fl. ofthe proposed ll,000 sq. fl. facility. All
mainte~znce on thc vehicles w/Il occur wJth/~ the structure as required by Code. The
exterior of the nmintcnance area will be consuucted of the same rock-faced concrete
masc~y units as the showroom and customer service ama.
13
(612) 933-0972 · 6110 Blue Circle Drive · Suite I00 · Minnetonka, MN 55343 · FAX (612) 933-1153
page 2 ~
Deceanber 28, 1995 ' :.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
The proposed use would improve thc c~dsting land usc fi'om a lot selling wooden sheds to a
permanent structure compatible with all applicable Design Review Commit~e criteria and
building codes. Removal of thc blighted visual condition of thc lot would occur if the site
plan, public watermain and variance am approved. Thc plann~ cham~r of thc area is
M-1 and thc proposed structure ~ thc d~sign requiremen~ of a manufacUa'ing
The use wouM not depreciate property values.
The property values will increase due to the water availability to the property and
inv~aneat in thc building and site. Secondly, the improvement to the slope adjacent to the
w~land will c 'hminatc thc crodable slope conditions and undesirable ground cover. The
- proposed grading plan will improve thc water quality, rcvcgctate the slope with native and
appropriate grass sp~ies, conducive to an improved w~and and wildlife habitat.
The use would not involve any activity, process,' materials, equipment or methods of
operation that wouM 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.
Thc proposed will not involve any oftbe above activitie~ due to its location in an M-1
district and lack of residential properties nearby. The exterior lights are a down cast cut
off fixture at a 24' height and will illuminate the parking lot and display areas.
The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create
tra~c congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
Thc proposed site plan will only have a~cess from the northbound lanes of State Highway
61. Southbound tra__fflc on State Highway 61 will not have access to thc site. The eatrance
to the site will be coordinat~ with the Minnesota Depamnent of Tr~n.~n-tation and will
~ a driveway ac, cess permit. The location ofth~ Ixxus d~lership was sel~-xed based
upon the tra~c already on Highway 61 and the surrou, ain~ land uses. 'ghis car dealership
will not adversely affect the existing tra~c on Highway 61 or any local str~.
The use would be served by adequate public facilities and serv~ccs, ~ncluding streets, police
and fire ~'ote~on, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks.
The project will requ~ a public ~ source, which has a~ready bee~ pctitioned by
the applicant. A public hearing has be~n scheduled for ilanua~y 8, 1996..Without a public
watem~in ~our~, this project will not proceed. The MWCC has been contacted and will
allow connection to the sanita~ sewer. Storm drainage f~om the site has been discussed
with the City and W~. A grading xmmit and plan ,,~'t has be~n ~bmiued to the
watersh~ for approval.
14
7. The use would not create excessive additional cOsts for public facilities or services.
The public facilities of Mapl~wood will be expanded and the general public be~r served
in terms of fire safety by the installation of a watermain from Bean Avenue to County
Road D. Additionally, the value of the properties which would have fire and domestic
water will/ncrease the anticipated tax base in Maplewood.
The use would max~rn~ze the preservation of and incort~rate the site's natural and scenic
features into the development desigr~
Tho proposed use has been' designed ~o enhance the wetland edge and provide a buffer yard
area between the development and thc w~and. The erodable slopes will be Climirm~,'d and
a buffer yard at a'3:l slope will be created along the entire wetland boundary. The buffer
yard width of 25 f~t will allow the site to be developed, and the wetland edge and buffer
yard improved ~t no cost ~o the watershed district. The applicant has m~t with Cky staff
snd waIersbed staff prior W submiiml of the site plan. The proposed plan presm~s a win-
win si~_ ~m for the applicant, City and waIershed.
9. The use would cause tn~nirnal adverse environmental effects.
appropriate rip rap and erosional/sedimentation controls in place. Secondly, the
maimeaance garage ot~'~on~ will be located within the proposod structure. All
llaaintenan~e operafi~ ~ recyclinE waste products/oils of the vehicles will be
pa, formed to state bui~di~ codes and MPCA regulations.
TImnk you for your timely response to the site plan, variance and conditional use permit on the
proposed Lexus dealership on Highway 61. If you have any additiona~ questions in regard to this
application, please do not hesitate to contact Gary Prinsen at 336-1214 or mys¢ffat 933-0972.
Sincerely,
RLK Assodates, Ltd.
John Distich, ASIA
~ Pm.sen
M¢linda Coleman
C_.~mt~ooal Use Application Form
Attachment 6
Ramsey -Washington Metro
District 902 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55'!09
777-3 S
MEMO
January26, 1996
fax (6'12) 777-6307
TO: Ken Roberts, Maplewood Community Development
FROM: Cliff Aichinger, Administrator
SUBJECT: Wetland Buffer Recommendation for Lexus Dealership Site.
At your request I am forwarding this memo outlining the reasons for our recommendation
and the process followed in our wetland classification process.
The determination of the wetland classification is the key to the buffer size requirement
under the Maplewood Wetland Buffer Ordinance. However, determination of the
wetland classification is a complex, and somewhat subjective process. It uses best
available wetland science and biological information, but includes several required
subjective steps and determinations. In the administration of any wetland management or
buffer ordinance, it is always good to recognize the limitations of the planning process
and know where some flexibility is appropriate. I will try to acquaint you and the
Planning Commission to these limitations.
Classification Process
The wetland classification process used by the District is predicated on protecting the
existing vegetative community of the wetland. To do this, the process begins with
determining the sensitivity of the wetland vegetation community to impacts from
stormwater runoff.
Attachment 1 illustrates the decision tree process we followed in making the wetland
classifications and the information needs of the process. The Maplewood classifications
are 1 through 5. Your class 1 wetland is equivalent to our "protect" classification. The
Maplewood ordinance added a classification for unique wildlife habitat. This
classification is not specifically identified in our process, but was derived from our
function and value assessment of each wetland.
As a bit of background, the District completed an inventory of all wetlands in our
District. We also included those small portions of Maplewood that are outside of the
District boundaries. Each of these wetlands were field inspected and a function and value
assessment was completed for each wetland basin This assessment identified a 0-4 value
for each wetland function; floral diversity, wildlife habitat, fishery habitat,
flood/stormwater attenuation, water quality protection, and
aesthetics/recreation/education. This assessment provided much of the information
needed to complete the decision tree process.
The wetland inspection also provided the information needed for determining the wetland
sensitivity to stormwater impacts. Each wetland basin was classified according to its
16
Ken Roberts MEMO
January 26, 1996
P~e2
wetland vegetation into one of the four sensitivity classes; highly sensitive, moderately
sensitive, slightly sensitive, or least sensitive. One of the limitations of the process lies in
this step. For highly diverse wetland basins we must still make one wetland vegetative
type classification. Even though the basin is classified as highly sensitive, a portion of
the basin may be least sensitive. In most cases we would rather err on the side of
protection, but in cases where the adjacent land is particularly unique or valuable it may
warrant another look to make sure the classification and final buffer classification is
appropriate.
The second step is to develop a general determination of the wetland condition. Again
this is a somewhat subjective judgment on the part of the wetland inspector. The
implication is significant since any basin identified as "excellent" is automatically
elevated to the next level in the decision tree. Attachment 2 gives some of the factors
used in making the condition rating.
The third step is to determine the significance rating. Attachment 2 also gives the factors
used in making this rating. Again this can be somewhat subjective and a significant
rating automatically elevates the wetland basin to the next level.
Although this process includes some subjective aspects, the subjective decisions are made
by individuals with scientific background and experience. In most cases i believe the
classification would pass a rigorous challenge. However, it is also a process where
another expert could easily argue that the wrong decisions were made.
The main point I want to make is that this, as with any other process I've seen, is not a
black and white issue. There can be disagreement based on best professional judgment.
Lexus Dealership Site
This is a classic case for identifying the shortfalls of the process I discussed above. It
probably illustrates every limitation in this process and why there has to be a variance
process available.
First, the wetland lying to the east of the dealership site is a matrix of wetland types and
conditions (see attachment 3). This area was farmed until approximately 1970. County
Ditch 18, north branch, divides the site north and south. Two other smaller drainage
ditches were cut from County Ditch 18 to the east to provide agricultural drainage. Since
agricultural activity has stopped, the area has reverted to a mosaic of wetland types.
In one respect the area is no where near "natural", since it has been altered significantly
over the years. On the other hand it has reverted into a wetland complex that contains
some very good quality habitat. The west side of the wetland has been filled. This is
where the Lexus dealership is proposed.
Consideration of the west side of this site illustrates the shortcomings of the classification
process. We had to average the wetland to identify its general susceptibility rating,
condition and significance. This process resulted in a "protect" management
classification (level 1 in the Maplewood Ordinance). However, when you examine the
west side of this basin, it is clear that the wetland is partially filled and receiving
significant sediment loads from the eroding fill slope. Also the wetland immediately
adjacent to this fill area is primarily reed canary grass. The major influence of the
County Ditch on this side of the wetland is also a significant influence. If this wetland
17
Ken Roberts MEMO
January 26, 1996
Page 3
basin were classified using only the features of the west side, the ranking process would
work like this --
1. Reed Canary grass vegetation community - slightly sensitive
2. Wetland condition - highly altered
3. Resource significance - nonsignificant
4. Management strategy - Utilize (Maplewood buffer classification 5)
District Recommendation
Due to the known condition of this wetland and the problems with the eroding fill on the
west side, I came to several conclusions when reviewing the proposal.
1. The intent of the buffer ordinance is to preserve the existing "natural" buffers
around wetlands to protect water quality, wildlife habitat, and ecological
diversity. There is NO buffer on the west side of the wetland in its current
condition. Preserving what is there would be a detriment to the wetland - not
help it.
2. The condition on the west side of the wetland will continue to deteriorate unless
it is stabilized and maintained.
3. The slope will not be addressed unless the site develops with a more permanent
type use.
4. A 100 foot buffer requirement would almost eliminate the potential of any
viable use of the property and would likely result in a challenge to the buffer
ordinance.
5. Establishment of a vegetative buffer, even a small buffer would eliminate
existing erosion problems and provide improved habitat.
6. Agreeing to a smaller buffer (25 feet) with the requirement that the developer
establish a buffer to our specifications helps the west side of the basin and in no
way diminishes the value of the remainder of the wetland basin.
7. A 25 foot buffer is consistent with the wetland classification if the adjacent
wetland were rated without consideration other parts of the wetland complex.
18
~FF~lCH i~e_l, aT _d_
Wetland Management Plan
Notes for Determining Condition and Significance Ratings
FACTORS INFLUENCING WETLAND CONDITION RATING:
Rating Categories: Excellent
Moderate
Highly Impacted
Rating factors:
1. Function/Value code.
A high F/V code in any one category would give it a
moderate rating. A high F/V code in two or more categories would give the
wetland a excellent rating. Any F/V code with two or more "0" ratings would
be an automatic highly impacted rating.
2. Any excavated or created basin is an automatic highly impacted rating.
3. Any wetland adjacent to a major roadway and receiving stormwater discharge
is an automatic highly impacted rating.
4. Any wetland with visible signs of sedimentation or impacts from stormwater
discharge is an automatic highly impacted rating.
5. Wetlands that are immediately adjacent to residential or commercial
development and receiving direct stormwater discharge and/or are turfed to the
edge of the wetland are an automatic highly impacted rating.
6. Wetlands that are somewhat removed from existing development and have no
obvious signs of alteration or stormwater impacts have a moderate rating.
FACTORS INFLUENCING RESOURCE SIGNIFICANCE RATING:
Rating Categories: Significant
Non-significant
Rating Factors:
1. All wetlands not receiving a significant rating are non-significant.
2. Significant wetlands are the following:
Wetlands adjacent to or in a school site.
Wetlands adjacent to or in a city, county or regional park.
Wetlands adjacent to or in a nature center.
Wetlands with unique, threatened or endangered flora or fauna.
Wetlands that are rare for our watershed district.
Wetlands that are of high value to the District for water quality management
or flood control.
20
X
Attachment 7
VARIANCE RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, Inc, applied for a variance from the
zoning ordinance.
WHEREAS, this variance applies to property on the east side of Highway 61 between Beam
Avenue and County Road D. The legal description is:
Tracts D and G, Registered Land Survey No. 525
WHEREAS, Section 36-196(h)(3) of the wetland protection ordinance requires a 100-foot-
wide wetland buffer.
WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing a 25-foot-wide wetland buffer.
WHEREAS, this requires a variance of 75 feet.
WHEREAS, the history of this variance is as follows:
1. On January 16, 1996, the planning commission recommended that the city council
this variance.
The city council held a public hearing on ,1996. 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:
Strict enforcement of the code would cause undue hardship because of circumstances
unique to the property and not created by the property owner. The 100-foot-wide wetland
buffer requirement would make development of this site difficult. The difficulty was
created by the new ordinance.
The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance, since the
applicant would improve the quality of the wetland buffer substantially over its present
state.
Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following:
1. Submitting a grading and landscaping plan subject to the requirements of the city staff
and the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for the wetland buffer.
Dedicating a wetland-buffer easement. This easement shall describe the boundary of
the buffer and prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer.
The applicant shall record the deed for this easement before the city will issue a building
permit.
Adopted on
__,1996.
22
Attachment 8
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, Inc. applied for a conditional use permit
for a motor vehicle maintenance garage as part of a new Lexus dealership;
WHEREAS, this permit applies to property on the east side of Highway 61 between Beam
Avenue and County Road D. The legal description is:
Tracts D and G, Registered Land Survey No. 525
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On January 16, 1996, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve
this permit.
On m, 1996, 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.
o
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 run-off, 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.
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
23
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.
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.
Before the issuance of a building permit, the city must have a signed construction contract
for the extension of the water main to the Lexus site. The water system must be operational
before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
The future expansion is not allowed. The applicant must apply for design approval and an
amendment to the conditional use permit prior to building this expansion. The future
expansion must be at least 100 feet from the billboard.
Adopted on ,1996.
24
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
City Manager
Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
Hideaway Lounge Expansion
70 County Road B
January 2, 1996
INTRODUCTION
James and Sharon Tulgren are proposing to expand the Hideaway Lounge at 70 County Road B.
(See the location and property line maps on pages 5 and 6 and the site plan on page 7.) They
are proposing the following changes to the existing restaurant and lounge:
Expand the outdoor deck and add a screened porch on the north and east sides of the
building.
Add two lighted outdoor volleyball courts. They also may use these courts for winter sports
such as broomball and boot hockey.
3. Add a softball field with fan seating, dugouts, lighting and perimeter fencing.
4. Move part of the entrance driveway and revise part of the parking lot.
The Tulgrens are requesting that the city approve a conditional use permit (CUP) to have the
outdoor place of amusement and recreation in the BC (business commercial) zoning district.
(See their letter on page 8.) They will ask the city to approve the design plans for the deck and
screened porch after the city approves the conditional use permit. The plans they submitted also
show future building and parking expansion areas on the south side of the building.
BACKGROUND
This site has had a restaurant and bar since at least 1969. The first restaurant here was the Oak
Hill Ranch and Supper Club.
On February 20, 1975, the city council approved remodeling and expansion plans for the
Hideaway Lounge.
On June 25, 1991, the community design review board (CDRB) approved plans for the existing
outdoor deck.
On August 14, 1995, the city council approved the Tri-District Elementary School west of this
site. This school is now under construction.
DISCUSSION
Liquor near School
Section 5-110 of the city code states 'No on-sale (liquor) license may be issued for the first time
under this division for premises located within one thousand (1,000) feet of a church or school
building in the city." Since the Hideaway has had an on-sale liquor license for many years, the
location of the new school is not a factor with its liquor license.
Fire Marshal Concerns
I had Jim Embertson, the Maplewood Fire Marshal, review the proposed site plan. Because of
the proposed changes to the site, including the dropping of access around the building, he asked
for several changes to the proposed plans. These include adding a gate at least 12 feet wide to
the fence between the proposed deck and the rear of the softball field. This gate would provide
emergency vehicle access to volleyball courts and to the softball field. Adding this gate will
require the owner to drop two parking spaces northwest of the ball field backstop. Mr. Embertson
also wants the owners to install another fire hydrant near the front of the building and move the
outside fire department connection to the front of the building.
For the drive aisle on the west side of the volleyball courts, the fire marshal is requiring that a 32-
foot-wide lane be kept clear for emergency vehicle access. This will require the owner to do
several things. These include dropping at least seven parking spaces on the west side to keep
the minimum aisle width, the posting of all fire lanes with "no parking fire lane" signs and
painting all the fire lane curbs yellow. The city should require the owner to make these changes
while they grade the site and install the volleyball courts to insure the safety of everyone there.
Parking
The proposed site plan shows 193 striped parking spaces, 44 parking spaces on an existing
gravel lot plus two areas for 38 future spaces. This is a total of 275 spaces. The changes I noted
above require the owner to drop at least nine parking spaces. This would leave 266 parking
spaces on the site. Based on the seating capacity of the building with the deck, there should be
plenty of parking on the site. The city should require the owner to add more paved parking
spaces if parking becomes a problem.
TF~$
Maplewood's tree preservation code requires a developer to have at least 10 trees per acre on
the property after they complete grading or construction. For this 8.6 acre site, there should be at
least 86 trees left after grading and construction. According to the site plan, there are 140 large
trees now on the site. The proposed grading and construction would remove 17 large trees,
leaving 117 on the site. Thus, the proposed plan meets the Maplewood tree preservation code.
Conditional Use Permit
Maplewood should judge whether the proposed expansion would be compatible with the existing
and planned land uses and character of the area. The proposed outdoor recreation areas meet
the Maplewood City Code standards for a conditional use permit.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution on pages 9 - 11. This resolution approves the conditional use permit to
expand the Hideaway Lounge at 70 County Road B. The city bases this permit on the findings
required by the code and is subject to the following conditions:
2
All construction shall follow the site and lighting plans stamped December 5, 1995 as
approved by the city. The plans shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. The director of community development may approve minor changes.
Before grading starts, the owner shall have the city engineer approve the grading,
drainage and erosion control plans. These plans shall meet all city standards and shall
reserve enough area for adequate on-site storm water ponding.
Adding a gate at least 12 feet wide to the fence between the proposed deck and the
rear of the softball field. This gate is to provide emergency vehicle access to volleyball
courts and to the softball field. The owner shall drop two parking spaces northwest of
the ball field backstop to allow for access.
d. The owners shall do the following, subject to the fire marshal's approval:
(1) Install another fire hydrant near the front of the building.
(2) The owners shall move the outside fire department connection to the front
(entrance side) of the building.
(3)
Provide a 32-foot-wide drive aisle west of the volleyball courts for emergency
vehicle access. This will require dropping at least seven parking spaces on the
west side of the site to keep the minimum aisle width.
(4) Posting all fire lanes with 'no parking fire lane' signs and painting all the fire lane
curbs yellow.
The owner shall make and install these changes when they grade the site and install
the volleyball courts to insure the safety of everyone there.
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 city council shall review this permit in one year.
4. The city may require additional paved parking if needed.
5. The outdoor activities shall be between 8 a.m. and 11 p.m.
The owner or operator shall direct or shield all exterior lighting so it does not shine or
cause any undue glare on County Road B or on adjacent properties.
The city approves the idea of the future building expansion area and the future parking lot
expansion areas with this plan. The specific plans for these areas shall be subject to the
approval of the community design review board.
3
CITIZENS' COMMENTS
City staff surveyed the 14 property owners within 350 feet of the site. All three replies had no
comment.
SITE DESCRIPTION
REFERENCE INFORMATION
Site size: 8.6 acres
Existing land use: Hideaway Lounge and parking areas
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North:
South:
West:
East:
Businesses across County Road B
Tri-District Elementary School property and Sandy Lake across railroad
TH-District Elementary School
Houses across railroad right-of-way
PLANNING
Land Use Plan designation: BC (business commercial)
Zoning: BC (business Commercial)
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS
Section 36-151(b) requires a CUP for places of amusement, recreation or assembly.
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 9 -11.)
PUBLIC SAFETY
See the section with the fire marshal's concerns on page 2.
p:sec18/hideaway, cup
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Property Une/Zoning Map
3. Proposed Site Plan
4. Applicant's letter dated November 20, 1995
5. Conditional Use Permit Resolution
6. Plans date-stamped December 5, 1995 (separate attachment)
4
Attachment 1
.~..~.
AV
AV~..
CS'TON ~ AV~..
~I(ILLMAN AY.
OFFICE
)EAWAY
Attachment 2
F
4;/ ~.;
VERNON,N...--
BIT.
__co. ~,.
!
I
i/'
I
;/
~IIIIIVDI
SCALE: t' ' 30'
flMI)ING & rr.~l~
....... SiLT FENCE
DIRT OUANT I1 lES:. ( BALLF Irr~l) ONLY!
CUT 6,964 C.Y.
FiLL 16`~68 C.Y.
SEED & NLLC14 ALL DISTURBED AR[kS
iIHEN CONST. CO1431-ETE
{3.EAR & GIIU6 ALL TREES MITHIN COI~T. LP
SITE AREA 6.6 kCOE6
m O mn~eo~
TULGREN PROPERTIES
TULGREN SQUARE
:502 SECOND STREET
HUDSON, WISCONSIN 54016
715 -386 ~:~44
Attachment 4
11/20/95
Maplewood Council
City Of Maplewood
1830 E County Road B
Maplewood, MN. 55109
Dear Council Members;
The property known as Hideaway Lounge has been a nightclub
for the past 25 years. Our purpose is to upscale the operation
to add two volleyball courts and a softball field with a 300 foot
fence line. In the future, the building will be expanded to
accomodate larger seating areas for dining patrons.
As shown on the submitted plans, the ballfield and volleyball
courts will be completely enclosed with an eight foot chain
link 'fence. The access to the playing areas will be through
the building. Overlooking the ballfield and volleyball courts
will be a large deck on two levels with a screen porch on part
of the deck. This will allow comfortable outdoor dining and
viewing of game participants. The ballfield will be lighted
according to the electrical contractor's pl.an. The light is
adequate for evening games and should not impact neighbors due
to the lengthy distance away of the closest residence. There
would be no adverse effects from traffic onto County Road B.
Customers would be more spread out during the day and evening.
The proposed changes to the'Hideaway create an enhanced fac-
ility that will provide recreation and dining opportunities in
the community. Additional tax dollars will also be generated
through property value improvements, additional sales taxes,
and expanded employment opportunities,for':he community.
Ne look forward to working with the City of Maplewood on the
approval and completion of this project. ·
8
Yours truly,
Attachment 5
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, James and Sharon Tulgren, the property owners, are requesting that Maplewood
approve a conditional use permit to expand the Hideaway Lounge by adding outdoor volleyball
courts and a softball field.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to 70 County Road B. The legal description is:
That part of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 18, Township 29, Range 22
bounded and described as follows: Beginning at the North 114 comer of Section 18 and running
Westerly along the North line of said section 660 feet, more or less, to a point; thence Southerly
650 feet, more or less, to a point, thence Easterly on a line parallel to the North Section line
433.5 feet, more or less, to a point in the West right of way fence of the Minneapolis, Saint Paul
and Sault Ste. Marie Railway; thence Northeasterly along said right-of-way fence 527 feet, more
or less, to a point where said right of way fence intersects the North and South 1/4 section line;
thence Northerly along said 1/4 line 180 feet, more or less, to a point of beginning. Subject to
public easement in highway, County Road B, on the North side of tract. (PIN 18-29-22-21-0001)
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On February 5, 1996, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve
this permit.
On February 26, 1996, 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:
The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance
to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes,
water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical
interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create
traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
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 and lighting plans stamped December 5, 1995 as
approved by the city. The plans shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. The director of community development may approve minor changes.
b. Before grading starts, the owner shall have the city engineer approve the grading,
drainage and erosion control plans. These plans shall meet all city standards and shall
reserve enough area for adequate on-site storm water ponding.
c. Adding a gate at least 12 feet wide to the fence between the proposed deck and the
rear of the softball field. This gate is to provide emergency vehicle access to volleyball
courts and to the softball field. The owner shall drop two parking spaces northwest of
the ball field backstop to allow for access.
d. The owners shall do the following, subject to the fire marshal's approval:
(1) Install another fire hydrant near the front of the building.
(2) The owners shall move the outside fire department connection to the front
(entrance side) of the building.
(3) Provide a 32-foot-wide drive aisle west of the volleyball courts for emergency
vehicle access. This will require dropping at least seven parking spaces on the
west side of the site to keep the minimum aisle width.
(4) Posting all fire lanes with 'no parking fire lane" signs and painting all the fire lane
curbs yellow.
The owner shall make and install these changes when they grade the site and install
the volleyball courts to insure the safety of everyone there.
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 city council shall review this permit in one year.
]0
4. The city may require additional paved parking if needed.
5. The outdoor activities shall be between 8 a.m. and 11 p.m.
6. The owner or operator shall direct or shield all exterior lighting so it does not shine or
cause any undue glare on County Road B or on adjacent properties.
7. The city approves the idea of the future building expansion area and the future parking lot
expansion areas with this plan. The specific plans for these areas shall be subject to the
approval of the community design review board.
The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on February 26, 1996.
]]
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
MEMORANDUM
City Manager
Jim Ericson -- Planning Intern
Planning Commission's 1995 Annual Report
January 19, 1996
INTRODUCTION
The City Code requires that the Planning Commission prepare an annual report to the City
Council by their second meeting in February. This report should include the Commission's
activities in the past year and major projects for the new year.
1995 ACTIVITIES
The Commission considered the following:
9 changes to the land use plan
1 conditional use permit for a planned unit development
6 changes to the zoning map
6 preliminary plats
1 preliminary plat time extension
2 ordinances
17 conditional use permits
10 vacations of right-of-ways or easements
5 variances
2 other changes to the comprehensive plan
2 lot divisions
13 miscellaneous requests
The Commission also reviewed and approved the wetland ordinance, performed a review of
proposed open sl~ace sites, took a tour of development sites with the new community
development director, reviewed and approved the livable community act and housing goals for
Maplewood.
1995 LAND USE PLAN CHANGES
The Commission considered nine changes to the land use plan in 1995.
Changes PC Action Council Action
Open Space Site 116 Approved Approved
(Keller Pkwy., Forest St., Brooks Ct., and Gervais Ave.)
From M-1 (Light Manufacturing) and R-1 (Single Family Residential) to
OS (Open Space).
Open Space Site 108 Approved Approved
(W. of Hazelwood St. and S. of Beam Ave.)
From BC-M (Business Commercial Modified) and R-1 (Single Family Residential)
to OS (Open Space).
Open Space Site 16 lB Approved Approved
(E. of Sterling St., N. of Schaller Dr. and O'Day St.)
From R-1 (Single Family Residential) to OS (Open Space) and P (Park).
Carefree Cottages -- Phase III Approved Approved
(Gervais Avenue)
From LBC (Limited Business Commercial) to R-3(H) (Residential High Density).
Charles Kennedy Denied Withdrawn
(3095 McKnight Road)
From OS (Open Space) to R-1 (Single Family Residential).
Tri-District School Approved Approved
(County Road B, S. of Cub Foods)
From BC (Business Commercial) to S (School) and OS (Open Space).
Holiday Store Approved Pending
(S.E. comer of McKnight and Lower Afton Roads)
From CO (Commercial Office) to BC (Business Commercial).
Southwinds of Mplwd -- 3rd Addn. Approved Approved
(Beebe Road)
From R-3(M) (Residential Medium Density) to R-1 (Single Family Residential).
Dr. Mary Pariseau, DDS. Approved Approved
(1 lth Avenue)
From R-3(H) (Residential High Density) to LBC (Limited Business Commercial).
1995 ZONING MAP CHANGES
The Commission considered six changes to the zoning map in 1994..
Changes PC Action Council Action
Parkview Town_homes Approved Denied
(Londin Lane)
From CO (Commercial Office) and F (Farm) to R-3 (Residential High Density) and
from F (Farm) to LBC (Limited Business Commercial).
Holiday Store Approved Pending
(S.E. comer of McKnight and Lower Afton Roads)
From CO (Commercial Office) to BC (Business Commercial).
Amber Hills Fifth Addition Approved
(Sterling Street, S. of Linwood Avenue)
From F (Farm) to R-1 (Single Family Residential).
Approved
Southwinds of Mplwd -- 3rd Addn. Approved Approved
(Beebe Road)
R-3 (Residential high Density) to R-1 (Single Family Residential).
Dr. Mary Pariseau, DDS. Approved
(1 lth Avenue)
From F (Farm) to LBC (Limited Business Commercial).
Approved
1995 ATTENDANCE
Name
Appointed Term Expires
Lester Axdahl 08-08-74 12-98
Bunny Bmeggerman 10-09-95 12-98
Barbara Ericson 10-09-95 12-97
Lorraine Fischer 1970 12-98
Jack Frost 12-10-90 12-97
Kevin Kittridge 10-12-92 12-97
Dave Kopesky 08-08-94 12-98
Gary Pearson 12-10-90 12-96
William Rossbach 10-10-89 12-96
Milo Thompson 10-10-94 12-97
*Completing the term of a previous member
1995 Affendance
13 out of 17
2 out of 2*
2 out of 2*
16 out of 17
16 out of 17
14 out of 17
14 out of 17
12 out of 17
14 out of 17
16 out of 17
MEMBERS WHO RESIGNED IN 1995
Mary Martin
Todd Sandell
Marvin Sigmundik
3
1996 ACTIVITIES
The following are the possible activities of the Planning Commission for 1996:
1. Commercial Property Study - follow closely and work with the City Council to move the
study along.
2. Have an annual tour of development sites.
3. Do a review of the Comprehensive Plan for possible changes or updating. This should include
a review of the housing plan for meeting the goals of the livable communities act.
4. Have a video tape made about the public hearing process.
5. Have in-service training for the Planning Commission.
6. Review the Phalen Watershed Study and recommend an implementation plan to the City
Council.
P:\...h'niscell\95 annrep.mem