The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/20/1996Call to Order Roll Call Approval of Minutes a. February 5, 1996 MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 20, 1996 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 4. Approval of Agenda o Public Hearing a. Parkview (Londin Lane and Lower Afton Road) Land Use Plan Changes Zoning Map Changes Preliminary Plat New Business a. Ramsey County Correctional Facility Conditional Use Permit Revision - Nursery Operation (290 Century Avenue S.) b. Highwood Fifth Addition - O'Day Street Street Vacation Preliminary Plat Visitor Presentations commission Presentations a. February 12 council Meeting: Ms. Fischer b. February 26 Council Meeting: Mr. Kittridge 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. o After everyone in the audience wishing to speak has given his or her comments, the chairperson will close the public discussion portion of the meeting. The Commission will then discuss the proposal. No further public comments are allowed. The Commission will then make its recommendation or decision. All decisions by the Planning Commission are recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes the final decision. jw/pc~pcagd Revised: 01/95 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 5, 1996 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 III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ve Present Present Absent Present Present Present Present Present Present Present A. Commissioner Fischer moved approval of the minutes of January 2, 1996, as submitted. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes-all The motion passed. B. Commissioner Fischer moved approval of the minutes of January 16, 1996, as submitted. Commissioner Pearson seconded. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ayes-all Commissioner Fischer moved approval of the amended agenda, adding 8.d. Phalen Watershed Committee. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. The motion passed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Ayes-all Lexus Dealership-Highway 61 North: Wetland Buffer Variance and Conditional Use Permit. __ Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Rossbach moved the Planning Commission table this item until Cliff Aichinger of the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District arrives later in the meeting. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-05-96 -2- Commissioner Thompson seconded. Ayes-all The motion passed. VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Hideaway Lounge Conditional Use Permit (70 County Road B) Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report and answered questions. Commissioner Fischer questioned the location of the recommended gate. Commissioner Thompson asked if requiting curb around parking areas, paving of the drive and future parking lot, altering the drainage pattern and cleanup of debris on the site would be reasonable requirements. Mr. Roberts agreed and said they could be added as conditions. Ken Haider, director of public works, said that since Hideaway is not creating any new impervious area, the drainage is not going to change with this project. He said there doesn't appear to be significant problems at this time, so staff was not recommending any improvements now. Greg and Jim Tulgren, the applicants, spoke about the proposed recommendations. They also answered questions from the commission. Commissioner Rossbach expressed concern about allowing outdoor activities until 11 p.m. Commissioner Kopesky also said he was concerned about the availability of emergency access from County Road B. Commissioner Frost moved the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the resolution which 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 seven 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. bo 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. Add 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. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-05-96 -3- (4) Posting all fire lanes with "no parking fire lane" signs and painting all 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. 6. The owner or operator shall direct or shield all extedor lighting so it does not shine or cause any undue glare on County Road B or on adjacent preperties. 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. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Commissioner Thompson asked that the motion be amended to include a condition that addresses clean-up of the site and pavement of the future parking lot before it is used. Commissioner Rossbach suggested waiting to require pavement of the future parking area until it was warranted. Commissioner Fischer asked to amend the motion to have 1 c. read: Add two gates at least 12 feet wide to the fence to provide emergency vehicle access to volleyball courts and to the softball field. Commissioner Rossbach asked to have a vote taken on the odginal motion and then consider amendments. Commissioner Fischer moved to amend Item 1 c. of the conditions to read: Add two gates at least 12 feet wide to the fence to provide emergency vehicle access to volleyball courts and to the softball field. Commissioner Kopesky seconded. Ayes-all The motion passed. Commissioner Pearson moved to amend Item 1. d. (4) of the conditions to read: Posting all fire lanes, including the entrance drive, with "no parking fire lane" signs and painting all the fire lane curbs yellow. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Ayes-Axdahl, Brueggeman, Fischer, Frest, Kittridge, Kopesky, Pearson, Rossbach Nay-Thompson The motion passed. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-05-96 Commissioner Rossbach moved to amend Item 5 of the conditions to read: The outdoor activities shall coincide with lighted city field use. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes-all The motion passed. Commissioner Thompson moved to amend Item 7 of the conditions to include a requirement for paving of the future parking lot area at this time. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. The motion failed. Ayes-Thompson Nays-Axdahl, Brueggeman, Fischer, Frost, Kittridge, Kopesky, Pearson, Rossbach Commissioner Kopesky moved to add Item 8 to the conditions to read: The owner shall clean up any debris on the site during construction. Commissioner Brueggeman seconded. Ayes-all The motion passed. Commissioner Frost moved the Planning Commission recommend the stipulations as amended. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Ayes-all The motion passed. B. 1995 Annual Report Commissioner Fischer suggested the Planning Commission have a display at a future city open house. This could include colored charts of the comprehensive plan for the city and, perhaps, planning commissioners to answer questions. This was added as Item 7 for 1996 activities. Commissioner Frost moved the Planning Commission accept the Planning Commission's 1995 Annual Report and forward it to the City Council, as amended. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. The motion passed. VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS There were no visitor presentations. VIII. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS A. Ayes-all January 22 Council Meeting: Mr. Rossbach reported on this meeting. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-05-96 -5- B. February 3 Joint Meeting with Council: Ms. Coleman reported on this meeting. C. February 12 Council Meeting: Ms. Fischer will attend this meeting. Chairperson Axdahl reopened the discussion on Item 5.a., the Lexus Dealership. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (continued) A. Lexus Dealership-Highway 61 North (continued) John Dietrich of RLK Associates, representing Ryan Construction Company and Lexus Dealership, was present. Greg Madsen of Ryan Construction, the project architect, and Steve Blumer, the Lexus dealership owner, were also at the meeting. Cliff Aichinger, administrator of the Ramsey- Washington Metro Watershed District, explained the wetland classification of the project area. He said the watershed distdct was willing to reduce the size of the buffer in exchange for having a private builder improve, vegetate, slope back and stabilize a raw, actively-eroding slope. Commissioner Rossbach asked if the catch basins were a good idea. Mr. Aichinger said, in this case, it was difficult to treat the runoff. He further explained the characteristics of this wetland area. Mr Aichinger said the district was doing quite a bit of water quality monitoring. If they found a significant amount of impact from the storm water runoff from Lexus, they would discuss potential changes with the owner to mitigate the problem. He also said that, if it would fit, a sedimentation pond would be a substantial improvement over a catch basin. Commissioner Rossbach felt the 100-foot setback requirement would be an undue burden to this property, 50 feet might be reasonable, but 25 feet was nothing in terms of a barrier. He thought this property might not be meant for a development this large. Greg Madsen, of Ryan Companies, said the area between the Lexus site and the drainage ditch, which is inside the wetland, will essentially work as a sedimentation basin. Essentially, he said they were making the existing buffer better to stop the sediment from coming from the site. John Dietrich said they would be improving the slope by making the grade 3:1, planting specified and native mixture seed that will be beneficial to the area, and are willing to add catch basins. He said they feel this would be adding a significant contribution to the watershed with this development. Mr. Dietrich answered questions from the commission. Commissioner Kittridge said he felt this proposal did nothing to improve water quality. Commissioner Pearson disagreed with the previous comments and felt the watershed district had made a good analysis of the area. He said he was in favor of the project. Commissioner Fischer asked staff if the water coming from the site could be directed or treated with the plan and conditions as they now exist beyond what has been discussed. Ken Haider, city engineer, responded that there didn't seem to be any place on the site, due to the grades, to put a treatment system large enough to do some good. Chairperson Axdahl felt there should be some way to trap a significant amount of sediment before it goes into the wetland. Commissioner Kittridge moved the Planning Commission recommend denial of the Lexus automobile dealership request. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Ken Roberts reminded the commission that there were two items under consideration that needed action. Commissioner Kittridge moved denial of both items. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-05-96 Commissioner Rossbach moved to divide the request and consider the wetland buffer variance and conditional use permit as separate issues. Commissioner Fischer seconded. Ayes-all The motion passed. Commissioner Kittridge moved the Planning Commission recommend denial of the wetland buffer variance for the Lexus automobile dealership. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Ayes-Kittridge, Rossbach Nays-Axdahl, Brueggeman, Fischer, Frost, Kopesky, Pearson, Thompson The motion failed. Commissioner Kittridge moved the Planning Commission recommend denial of the conditional use permit for the maintenance garage. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Ayes-Kittridge Nays-Axdahl, Brueggeman, Fischer, Frost, Kopesky, Pearson, Rossbach, Thompson The motion failed. Commissioner Pearson moved the Planning Commission recommend: A. Adoption of the resolution which 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. 2. 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. Adoption of the resolution which 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: VIII. Planning Commission -7- Minutes of 02-05-96 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. 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. o 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. Commissioner Brueggeman seconded. · Ayes-Axdahl, Brueggeman, Fischer, Frost, Kopesky, Pearson, Thompson Nays-Kittddge, Rossbach The motion passed. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS (continued) D. Phalen Watershed Committee: Mr. Rossbach spoke about this group and upcoming projects in the area. IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS There were no staff presentations. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:03 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Plan Amendments, Rezonings and Preliminary Plat - Parkview February 13, 1996 INTRODUCTION Project Description Good Value Homes is proposing to develop lots for 42 single-family homes. They call this development Parkview. It would be between Lower Afton Road and Londin Lane, west of Connemara Condominiums. Refer to the maps on pages 13-18. Requests To build this project, Good Value Homes and Amie Johnson, the property owner, are requesting that the city approve: 1. Several changes to the comprehensive plan. These would include a change from: · R-3(M) and CO (commercial office) to R-1 (single dwellings) for the house lots in the preliminary plat. · R-3(M) to OS (open space) for the existing pond. · CO (commercial office) to BC-M (business commercial modified) for the future commercial lot on the south side of Lower Afton Road. · R-3(M) and CO to LBC (limited business commercial) for the future commercial lot on the east side of McKnight Road. See the existing and proposed land use maps on pages 14 and 15 and the letter on page 21. 2. Several changes to the zoning map. These include a rezoning from: · F (farm residence) and CO (commercial office) to R-1 (single dwelling) for the house lots in the proposed plat. · CO (commercial office) to BC-M (business commercial modified) for the future commercial lot on the south side of Lower Afton Road. · F and CO to LBC (limited business commercial) for a 40-foot-wide strip of land west of the proposed house lots and for the future commercial lot on the east side of McKnight Road. Refer to the existing and proposed zoning maps on pages 16 and 17 and the letter on pages 22 and 23. 3. A preliminary plat for 42 house lots, three commercial lots and an outlot around the existing pond. (See the maps on pages 18-20.) BACKGROUND On July 10, 1995, the city council held a public hearing to review a request of Town and Country Homes to build 116 town houses on this site. At this meeting, the council directed staff to prepare findings of fact to deny the town house proposal. On July 24, 1995, the council adopted findings of fact to deny a zoning map change, preliminary plat and design plans for the proposed town house development on this site. On February 12, 1995, the council approved several requests to build a Holiday Stationstore on the southeast comer of Lower Afton and McKnight Roads. DISCUSSION Land Uae Plan and Zoning Map Changes - Residential Lots An advantage of this project is that the applicant would develop this property with single dwellings instead of multiple dwellings. The current land use plan allows for up to 116 multiple dwellings (six units per gross acre) on this site. This could include double dwellings, town houses and small apartment buildings. As proposed, the land use plan and zoning map changes would lower the allowed density on the site. Having 42 houses would be a much lower density than 116 multiple dwellings that the existing R-3(M) land use designation would allow. A concern of some neighbors is the increase in traffic that this project would create. The proposed land use plan change would benefit the existing neighborhood by reducing the allowed density on the site. This means there would be less traffic from the residential areas of the site than if the owner developed the property according to the current land use plan. Land Uae Plan and Zoning Map Changes - Commercial Lots As proposed, the preliminary plat would have three commercial lots on Lower Afton and McKnight Roads, The comer lot is for the proposed Holiday Stationstore. In addition, there would be one lot east of the proposed Holiday site on Lower Afton Road and another lot south of the Holiday site on McKnight Road. Mr. Johnson is asking the city to plan and zone the two future commercial lots (one on either side of the proposed Holiday Store) BC (business commercial). (See his letter on page 24.) Mr. Johnson does not have any specific plans or developers yet for these lots. Maplewood has zoned these areas CO (commercial office) and LBC (limited business commercial). The BC designation is Maplewood's general commercial zone and allows a variety of commercial uses. These include retail, restaurants, on-sale liquor, offices, clinics, banks, personal services, car sales, indoor theaters, bakeries, repair shops and indoor organized athletic activities. By conditional use permit, the council could allow places of amusement, recreation or assembly, exterior storage, display or sales, used motor vehicle sales and motor fuel stations. For the future commercial lot on Lower Afton Road (Lot 1, Block 1), city staff is recommending a change from CO (commercial office) to BC-M (business commercial modified). Maplewood intends the BC-M distdct to provide for the orderly transition between more intensive commercial uses and residential areas. The city allows retail uses, offices, clinics, day care centers, repair shops (except motor fuel stations and vehicle repair garages) in this district. With a council- approved conditional use permit, sit-down style restaurants (no ddve-up windows) and indoor 2 places of amusement or recreation also could go here. The zoning code specifically prohibits ddve-in restaurants, exterior storage or sale of goods, car washes, repair garages and major motor fuel stations in the BC-M zone. As listed above, the possible uses in this location would be appropriate on Lower Afton Road and shoUld be compatible with the proposed Holiday Station to the west. For the future commercial lot on McKnight Road, (Lot 3, Block 1), city staff is recommending a change from CO to LBC (limited business commercial). This would expand the existing LBC zoning area along McKnight Road. This change would be to fit the proposed property lines for Lot 3, Block 1. The existing LBC area is about 33,600 square feet (0.7 acres). As proposed, Lot 3, Block 1 would be about 1.6 acres. Most of the increase to the LBC area would be to the north into the existing CO (commercial office) area. This proposal would create one, larger LBC lot between the houses on McKnight Road and the proposed Holiday Stationstore. As proposed, the changes for Lot 3, Block 1 should provide more protection from commercial uses to the houses in the area. Maplewood intends the LBC zone to be a transition area between more intense commercial areas and residential areas. The zoning code only allows offices, clinics and day care centers in the LBC zone. The CO zoning district allows offices, clinics, banks, and related commercial uses including restaurants, pharmacies and retail sales to serve the primary office uses. In addition, the council could approve a conditional use permit for supportive commercial uses in the CO zone including gift stores, office supply, ticket agency, or travel service. Any of the uses in the LBC zone would provide a better transitional use between the houses on McKnight Road and the proposed Holiday Stationstore than those in the CO zone. All the proposed land use plan and zoning map changes would be consistent with city goals and objectives and the findings for approval required by the city code. Open Space and Parka The Maplewood Open Space Committee called this property Site 15gA. They ranked this site lOth out of the 66 they rated and first out of the three they rated in this neighborhood. Maplewood has not included this site in its park or open space acquisition plans. Many neighbors prefer to keep this property for open space or a park. Maplewood or Ramsey County would have to bw this property to keep it as open space. Ramsey County has no plans to buy the property. The city offered to buy this property from Amie Johnson, the property owner, as part of the city's open space acquisition program. Mr. Johnson and the city did not agree on a price and the city moved on to consider other properties to buy for open space. In addition, the city council directed staff to only work with willing sellers for buying open space. There is no shortage of open space in this area with Battle Creek Regional Park directly to the north. Preliminary Plat Density and Lot Size Several neighbors thought that there were too many lots in this plat and that they were too small. As proposed, the lot sizes range from 10,000 square feet to 24,275 square feet with an average lot size of 12,554 square feet. The four house lots west of this site on the east side of McKnight Road range in size from 10,062 to 21,000 square feet. For the area south of Londin Lane (the Crestview additions), the house lots range in size from 10,660 square feet to 26,605 square feet. The city code requires at least 10,000 square feet above a drainage easement and 75 feet of width. All the proposed lots meet or exceed city standards. Maplewood cannot reduce the number of lots if the developer is meeting the city's ordinances. 3 Trees The applicant has designed the plat to preserve the main tree groupings south and southwest of the pond. As proposed, the applicant is exceeding the required minimum of ten trees per acre as the code requires. Refer to the grading plan for the tree preservation plan (separate attachment). Maplewood's tree ordinance does not apply to trees under eight inches in diameter or box elder, cottonwoods or poplar trees. The developer plans to grade much of the site and thus remove many of the trees on the site. Before grading the site, the city should require the developer to submit a tree plan to staff for approval. Maplewood's tree ordinance requires there be at least ten trees per gross acre on the site after grading if there were at least ten large trees per acre on the site before construction. Wetlands There are three wetlands on this site. The largest wetland is near Lower Alton Road on the northeast part of the site and there are two smaller wetlands near the center of the site. Several residents were concerned about the impacts on or the loss of the wetlands on the site. (See the wetlands on the drawings on pages 19 and 20 or the larger plat drawings that I have enclosed.) As proposed, the developer will preserve these wetlands and would not do any filling to them. Maplewood should require wetland buffer easements to protect the wetlands. The wetland protection ordinance requires a 100-foot-wide wetland buffer around the pond. Building foundations must be at least 110 feet from the pond. In addition, the code does not allow any ground disturbance within the 100-foot buffer. As proposed, the plans meet these requirements. The contractor should place the silt fence so it protects this buffer during grading and construction. Drainage~DNR and Watershed District Concerns The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Metro Waters Division, and the Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District have received the proposed construction plans. Pat Conrad, of the watershed district, has been involved with the wetland delineation on the site. The applicant must get a permit from the watershed district before starting grading or construction. Peter Leete of the DNR has preliminarily accepted the proposed grading/drainage plan. The proposed grading/drainage plan for the single dwellings is very similar to the previous town house plan. Mr. Leete said, however, that the DNR has not set an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) for the pond. If the developer wants a storm water outfall from the proposed sediment pond that would be below the OHWM, the applicant must get a permit from the DNR. As such, the applicant should determine the OHWM, finalize the storm water design and get a permit if applicable. Dedioations Dan Solar, the Ramsey County traffic engineer, said that the applicant should dedicate three additional feet of right-of-way along McKnight. This is because the Ramsey County right-of-way plan requires a total right-of-way width of 86 feet for McKnight Road. The applicant also should show the wetland easement over the pond (shown as Outlot A on the proposed plat) with a 100- foot wetland buffer surrounding it on the final plat. Maplewood's wetland protection ordinance requires this buffer. 4 Trail Several residents asked the city to require a trail from the plat to the north to Lower Alton Road. The purpose of a trail would be to provide safer pedestrian access to Battle Creek Park and the bike trail on Lower Aflon Road. This trail would be for the residents in the new plat and for those on living on Londin Lane and Dorland Road. The only way these residents have to get to the park is on McKnight Road. As traffic increases, the need for this trail will grow. The developer should pave a trail from Parkview Lane on the utility easement between proposed Lots 6 and 7, Block 2. This trail would be from the proposed street to the proposed sewer manhole and then north to Lower Afton Road. The trail should be eight feet wide from Parkview Lane to the proposed sanitary sewer manhole. From the manhole to Lower Aflon Road, the trail should be ten feet wide. This would be wide enough for city maintenance crews to get to the proposed manhole. The developer should build a fence on both sides of the trail within this plat. Another advantage of a paved trail within the plat is that it would provide access to maintain the sanitary sewer line. Without a trail, adjacent owners will probably start planting gardens and maintain lawns and fences over the sewer line. In case of a sewer problem, the city would have to remove this landscaping. '~ Neighbor Concerns (Refer to page 10 for the full summary of replies) Traffic increase on Lower Alton and at McKnight Road would be hazardous. Dan Solar, the Ramsey County traffic engineer, said that McKnight and Lower ^fton Roads are designed to handle about 5,000 more vehicle trips per day than the cun'ent counts show. The city engineer and Mr. Solar both say the current four-way stop is functioning well. Mr. Solar believes this intersection will continue to operate well after the construction of the proposed Holiday Store. He also said that if in the future the traffic at the intersection becomes too congested, the county would consider changing the traffic lanes or installing signals. The proposed layout puts all the plat traffic on Londin Lane. Some neighbors believe there is too much traffic on Londin Lane already. Connecting a street from the plat to Lower Aflon Road would require more grading and tree loss and could have more impact on the wetlands. This development would lower the property values. The Ramsey County assessor's office does not feel that this development would adversely effect the property values of the surrounding neighborhood. Poorly kept, rundown developments could have an effect. There should be no concern about effect on neighboring property values. This development would affect the wetlands, trees, and wildlife habitat. The developer has designed this site to preserve the primary stands of trees south and southwest of the pond. Maplewood's wetland protection ordinance and the proposed sedimentation basin will help protect the wetlands. Saving the major stands of trees would lessen the loss of wildlife habitat. Neighborhood Preference :_-_ Almost every reply said the city should either buy this land as open space or develop it with single dwellings. The city offered to buy this property from Arnie Johnson, the property owner, as 5 part of the city's open space acquisition program. Mr. Johnson and the city did not agree on a pdce and the city decided to consider other properties to buy for open space. The city council directed staff to only work with willing sellers. There is no shortage 'of open space in this area with Battle Creek Regional Park directly to the north. Several neighbors said they prefer single dwellings to town houses or apartments. This proposal is the best if the owner is to develop the site. RECOMMENDATIONS Adopt the resolution on page 28. This resolution changes the land use plan for the single dwellings and the pond for the Parkview plat. These changes are from R-3(M) (residential medium density) and CO (commercial office) to R-1 (single dwellings) and OS (open space). The city is making these changes because: 1. It would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. 2. The developer is proposing to develop this part of the site with single dwellings. 3. It would reduce the allowable density and traffic from this site. Bo Adopt the resolution on page 29. This resolution changes the comprehensive plan for the future commercial lot on the south side of Lower Aflon Road (proposed Lot 1, Block 1 of Parkview). This change is from CO (commercial office) to BC-M (business commercial modified). The city should make these changes because: 1. It would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. 2. The BC-M designation would serve as a transition area between the proposed Holiday Stationstore and the residential area to the south. Co Adopt the resolution on page 30. This resolution changes the comprehensive plan for the future commercial lot on the east side of McKnight Road (proposed Lot 3, Block 1 of Parkview). This change is from R-3(M) (residential medium density) and CO (commercial office) to LBC (limited business commercial). The city should make these changes because: 1. It would be consistent with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. 2. The larger LBC area would increase the transition area between the existing houses and the proposed Holiday Stationstore. Adopt the resolution on pages 31 and 32. This resolution changes the zoning map from F (farm residence) and CO (commercial office) to R-1 (single dwellings). This rezoning is for the property proposed as Blocks 2 and 3, Parkview that is north of Londin Lane and west of the Connemara Condominiums. The city bases this rezoning on the findings required by the code. Adopt the resolution on pages 33 and 34. This resolution changes the zoning map change from CO (commercial office) to BC-M (business commercial modified). This rezoning is for the proposed Lot 1, Block 1 of Parkview for the future commercial lot on the south side of Lower Afton Road. The city bases this rezoning on the findings required by the code. Fo Adopt the resolution on pages 35 and 36. This resolution changes the zoning map change from F (farm residential) and CO (commercial office) to LBC (limited business commercial). This rezoning is for the proposed Lot 3, Block 1 of Parkview including a remnant strip of property east of the existing LBC-zoned land east of McKnight Road. The city bases this rezoning on the findings required by the code. Approve the Parkview preliminary plat (received by the city on January 18, 1996). The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final plat: 1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. Install permanent signs around the edge of any wetland buffer easements. These signs shall mark the edge of the easements and shall state there shall be no mowing, vegetation cutting, filling, grading or dumping beyond this point. City staff shall approve the sign design and location before the contractor installs them. d. Install survey monuments along the wetland boundaries. e. Have NSP install street lights in three locations, primarily at street intersections. The exact location and type of lights shall be subject to the city engineer's approval. f. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control and street identification signs. g. Provide all required and necessary easements. h. Demolish or move the existing buildings on the site. Abandon any wells or septic systems, subject to the Environmental Health Official's approval. Construct an eight-foot-wide paved walkway and fencing between Lots 6 and 7, Block 2. This trail shall be between the street and the proposed sanitary sewer manhole on the west property line of Lot 6, Block 2. Also construct a 10-foot-wide paved walkway from the proposed sanitary sewer manhole on Lot 6, Block 2 to Lower Afl*on Road or to the proposed Holiday Store driveway on Lower Afl*on Road. The developer also shall provide a fence on both sides of the trail and shall install posts at each end of the trail to prevent cars or trucks from using the trail. The developer shall build the entire trail and any required fencing with the street. The city engineer must approve these plans. Maplewood is requiting the developer to pay for the trail within the plat since the trail will provide access to Battle Creek Park to the residents of the new plat. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, trail and street plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code. b. The grading plan shall: (1) Include proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site. (2) Include contour information for the land that the street construction will disturb. (3) Show sedimentation basins as required by the watershed board. (4) Show housing styles that reduce the grading on sites where the developer can save large trees. There shall be backyard drains connected to the storm sewer system in at least three locations in Block 3. These shall be between Lots 2, 3 and 9, between Lots 4, 5 and 6 and between Lots 10, 12 and 13. The developer shall dedicate all necessary easements for these drains and pipes. Extend the storm sewer in Parkview Lane east to at least Lot 13, Block 3 and provide two additional catch basins in the street. Change the grading and utility plans to follow the lot and street design on the preliminary plat received by the city on January 18, 1996. Provide a tree plan for the city engineer's approval before grading or final plat approval. This plan shall show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan also must show the size, species and location of any trees that the developer will plant as replacement trees. All trees that the developer will plant shall be at least 2-1/2 inches in diameter. There shall be no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. The street and utility plans shall show a paved trail between Lots 6 and 7, Block 2 from Parkview Lane and Lower Afton Road. This trail shall be 8 feet wide from Parkview Lane to the sewer manhole and shall be 10 feet wide from the sewer manhole to Lower Afton Road or the proposed Holiday Store driveway. 3. Change the plat as follows: Make the utility easement between Lots 6 and 7, Block 2 and between Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1 a utility and pedestrian easement. This easement shall be at least 30 feet wide between Parkview Lane and the sanitary sewer manhole. b. Add drainage and utility easements as required by the city engineer. c. Show the wetland boundaries on the final plat as approved by the watershed district. do Show drainage and utility easements along all property lines on the final plat. These easements shall be ten feet wide along the front and rear property lines and five feet wide along the side property lines. - - Provide all easements required by the city engineer. These shall include wetland easements over the wetlands. The eaSementS shall cover the wetlands and any land within 100 feet surrounding the large wetland. The easement shall prohibit any building or structures within 100 feet of the wetland or any mowing, cutting, filling, grading or dumping within 100 feet of the large wetland or within the wetland itself. For the smaller wetlands, the easement shall be at least 20 feet wide. The purpose of the easements is to protect the water quality of the wetlands from fertilizer, runoff and to protect the wetland habitat from encroachment. o Record the following with the final plat: a. A deed dedicating Outlot A to the city with a 100-foot-wide wetland buffer easement surrounding the wetland. b. A deed dedicating a wetland easement around the smaller wetlands along with a wetland buffer surrounding the easement. The city engineer shall approve the width of this buffer based on the wetland classifications in the city code. c. A deed dedicating three feet of additional right-of-way along McKnight Road for future street widening. The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications to the city for approval before recording. The applicant shall show all the wetlands on the final plat. 6. Show the wetland boundaries on the plat as delineated on the site. A trained and qualified person must delineate the wetlands. This person shall prepare a wetland delineation report. The developer shall submit this wetland information to the Watershed Distdct office. The Watershed District must approve this information before the city approves a final plat. If needed, the developer shall change the plat to conform to wetland regulations. 7. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for any wetland filling. 8. Determine the elevation of the ordinary high water mark for the pond south of Lower Alton Road for the Department of Natural Resources. Apply for and receive any permits the DNR requires. 9. Dedicate cross easements for ingress, egress and maintenance between the proposed comer property shown as the proposed Holiday Stationstore and the adjacent parcels. If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the director of community development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat. *The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or approves the final plat. 9 CITIZENS' COMMENTS I surveyed the owners of the 340 properties within 350 feet of this site. Of the 100 replies, 10 had no comment, 28 were for, 57 objected and 5 had other comments. (I have summarized the comments due to the large number and duplication of replies.) For 1. I like the idea of single-family homes (good use of the land). 2. Single-family homes are better but I prefer that it stay green. 3. I like having houses but wish the lots were bigger and there would be fewer houses. 4. It is better than having town houses or apartments. 5. Maplewood can use the extra taxes (broader tax base). 6. It would increase my property value and those in the area. Objections There were several letters and comments in opposition. The main objections or concerns were: 1. The density is too high. Increase the lot sizes and have fewer houses. 2. Low-cost housing would lower the nearby property values. 3. There would be a loss of wildlife habitat. Wetlands and trees would be lost. 4. There already is enough development and housing available in south Maplewood. 5. The traffic increase would be hazardous, especially on Londin Lane. Connect one street to Lower Alton Road. Also see the three letters on pages 25, 26 and 27. These represent the comments staff received. Miscellaneous Comments 1. What would be the value of the houses? 2. Would there be landscaping or a sidewalk on Londin Lane? 3. Could there be a trail from the plat to the north to Lower Afton Road? Preferred Land Uses 1. Leave this land undeveloped or buy it for open space. 2. Three surveys suggested senior housing for the site. 10 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: gross acreage - 25.87 acres, proposed single-dwelling site - 14.6 acres Existing land use: Undeveloped (the city also has received a proposal for a Holiday Station at the comer of Lower Afton and McKnight Roads) SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: West: East: Lower Alton Road and Battle Creek Regional Park Londin Lane and McKnight townhomes Single dwellings and undeveloped commercial property Connemara Condominiums and undeveloped property north of Connemara PAST ACTIONS July 1, 1971: The city council granted a special use permit over the entire 25.87-acre site. The permit was for 375 apartment and town house units. This permit expired in 1972. October 10, 1983: The council rezoned the southeast comer of Lower Afton and McKnight Roads from F to CO. The council also approved a comprehensive plan change from RM (medium density residential) to LSC (limited service commercial) for this property. (LSC was the classification before the city began using zoning classifications in the comprehensive plan.) Early 1980s (specific date unknown): The city council rezoned part of the commercial site to LBC (limited business commercial) for a day care center. This center was not built. December 12, 1988: The council approved a conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) on this property. This PUD included a 33,600-square-foot retail center with gas dispensers at the southeast comer of McKnight Road and Lower Afton Road and 152 town houses. The council also changed the land use plan from LSC to SC (service commercial). This CUP expired on June 1, 1991. March 14, 1995: The CDRB approved the design plans for the Holiday Stationstore. August 21, 1995: The planning commission recommended that the council approve a change from CO to BC for the land use plan and zoning map for the proposed Holiday Stationstore. The commission also recommended that the council approve a conditional use permit (CUP) and code change about minor fuel stations for the proposed Holiday Stationstore. December 11, 1995: The city council held a public hearing about the proposed Holiday Stationstore. The council tabled this request to get more information on several subjects. January 22, 1996: The council again considered the requests to build the Holiday Stationstore. The council tabled the proposal to get more information about the proposed driveways. PLANNING Existing Land Use Plan designations: R-3M (multiple dwelling residential), CO (commercial office) and LBC (limited business commercial) 11 Proposed Land Use designations: R-1 (single dwellings), OS (open space), BC-M (business commercial modified) and LBC (limited business commercial) Existing Zoning: F (farm residence), CO (commercial office) and LBC (limited business commercial Proposed Zoning: F (farm residence), R-1 (single dwellings), BC-M (business commercial modified) and LBC (limited business commercial) Findings for Rezoning Section 36-485 of the zoning code requires that the city council make the following findings to rezone property: 1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. 2. 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. 4. 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. p:sec 12~oarkview.6 Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Existing Land Use Plan Map 3. Proposed Land Use Plan Map 4. Existing Properb/Une/Zoning Map 5. Proposed Property Une/Zoning Map 6. Preliminary Plat 7. Utility Plan 8. Grading Plan 9. 12-27-95 letter from Good Value Homes (plan amendment) 10. 12-27-95 letter from Good Value Homes (razoning) 11. 1-26-96 letter from Arnie Johnson 12. 1-17-96 letter from Richard and Virginia Peterson 13. 1-16-96 letter from Kathleen Laska 14. 1-18-96 letter from Dennis Palmer 15. Plan Amendment Resolution (R-3(M) to R-1 and OS) 16. Plan Amendment Resolution (CO to BC-M) 17. Plan Amendment Resolution (CO and R-3M to LBC) 18. Rezoning Resolution (CO and F to R-l) 19. Rezoning Resolution (CO to BC-M) 20. Rezoning Resolution (F and CO to LBC) 21. Plans date-stamped January 18, 1996 (separate attachment) 12 7'~i ~ ':" ~ .' .2..' " 0 ['*':" ~ UNwOOD A~. ,, · :.'~ . :, · ~ ~ ~ ~ ..:. '~'~ ~ ' / ' REVISED major ~ RA~£y CO. minor collector - I I i ~ LBC = LIMITED BUSINESS COMMERCIAL ~ ~ ~ OS = OPEN SPAOE ~ ' ~ I ; ~__J ~ ~ I "-1 = SINGLE DWELLINGS ~ R-3(M) = MEDIUMI DENSIT'Y RESIDENTIAL ~ I R-3(H) = HIGH 6ENSlTY'RE~IDENTIAL 14 Attachment 3 REVISED L ,~- ~ II ]~ LBC = LIMITED BUSlNES~ COMMERCIAL ~ I '~ OS = ~EN SPACE ~ ~ R-3(M) = MEDIUM, DENSITY R~SIDENTIAL ~ ~ R-3(H) = HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 15 Attachment 4 RESERVED OR F ' ~. BATTLE CREEK 'PARK LO ERA O..OA ---- ~~ -~ "?,~,~ ...... ~~= LOW · ~4. ~7 Illll Illllllllllllll~ · · · 328 PROPOSED PARKVIEW PLAT SITE 346 2271 [~ 2299 PAEK II I o40' O-ND IN JT LOT F: FARM RESIDENCE lvi¢I<NII. HT To w/~ Ho ~E;5 co-oP R-1 = SINGLE ~S CO = COMMERCIAL OFFICE LBC = LIMITED BUSINESS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP (EXISTING) 16 C A N J Attachment , ,, ~ ~1t..~--.. ~.~.~...~ ~ LOWER AFTON ROAD I ! PARK 346 328 r--] 2299 PROPOSED PARKVIEW PLAT SITE F = FARM Ri~IDENCE R-1 = SINGLE DWELLINGS u'~ ,~ ,',,~ . .~.~_, .,,',: ~.. '_:-. U~.. :' CO = COMMERCIAL OFFICE . ~ 1~: 14~~>, LBC: LIMITED BUSINESS COMMERCIAL JT LOT C A / mi_ ~'~.:..~ / BC-M = BUSINESS COMMERCIAL MODIFIED" ~4 PROPOSED · · · ,- tNtN· BC (OWNER PROPOSAL) H~i~¥ I BC-M (STAFF PROPOSAL) ~~ "-.. STORE · · ', ~ / ""~'~ IIII~ ' ~nnnnnnnmnB~ ,.., .__. BC (O~NER PROPOSAL)~~~ '----'1-''"-' LBC (STAFF PROPOSAL) Attachment 6 PAR!<VIE LOWER AFT.~,~' $ OUTLOT A DATA CO P, 2 ROW LONDIN LANE ROw McKNI~HT RETAIL Oe£N SPACE: ' t~S~.O ZON~H~ P~OPOS~ ZON~ (~[~) (~) 0.65 ~CRES 1.62 1652 ~CRES 0 ~ 0.81 A~ES 0.81 0, 5 0 *~S 3.~4 A~ES 0 A~ES 0 A~ES e.M &CRES LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PROPO~D RE~ID£NTIAL ZONING TOTAL AC~S TOTAL U~NG UNI~ ~N~ ~ C~U~Q~ Z~ING LOT 1 BL~ 1 LOT 2 BL~ 1 LOT 3 BL~ 1 ~ED ~[N ~A~ Z~ING ~OT A LOW DD~S~TY (R2) 14.61 42 2.B'7 UNITS P~R AC~E 2.~ A~ 1.24 1.62 II ~ I I HAPLEWOOD ILOCK t I I I ~ ARNI[ JOHNSON DEVELOPER cooo VALU£ HO~£$. tNC. ~445 ~ R3¥F_R RO&D, ~ 201 C~ ~IDS, MN 5~3 PH~[: 755-979~ ENGINEER-SURVEYOR I~lON£: 755-6240 PRELIMINARY PLAT 18 Attachment 7 1 7 WETLANDS, OUTLOT A O~' POND 925.7 8/19/94 DNR t~'TLAND ~162-247W _100' W~TLAND SETBACK 17 UTILITY PLAN N 19 Attachment 8 ,3 / // -1 OUTLOT A 0~' POND 925.? 8/19/94 DNR WE'n. AND lI~2-247W 100' St.,1,~ACK ~ENERAL GRADING LIMITS" GRADING PLAN 20 Attachment 9 December 27, 1995 Mr. Ken Roberts Planner City of Maplewood 1830 E. Co. Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Re: Parkview Dear Mr. Roberts, This application is to request a change to the Comprehensive Plan for the subject parcel from Medium Density Residential to Single Family Residential. It has become apparent over the past several months that the City of Maplewood and the property owners near the' subject parcel would like to have the land use designation modified to prohibit medium density development. This proposal is in response to the objections which have been expressed to medium density proposals. We would like to develop a 42 lot single family.neighborhood, on the 15 acre parcel described in the attached legal description. S~,cerely,,x Joh/[ 1~. Peterson President 9445 East River Road N.W. · Minneapolis, MN 55433 * Phone 612-755-9793 * F~x 612-755-6207 * Minnesota Bailder # 1583 Attachment 10 December 27, 1995 Mr. Ken Roberts Planner City of Maplewood 1830 E. Co. Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Re: Parkview Dear Mr. Roberts, This application is to request rezoning of the parcel described in the attached application. The proposed rezoning involves 3 parcels per the attached exhibit. The largest area would be rezoned fi.om Rural to Single Family Residential. This request appears be 'a technical change intended to more accurately comply with the proposed land use. It is my understanding that single family homes could be constructed on the current zoning but it is the Cities preference to change the zoning more accurately describe the proposed use. The other two parcels are on Lower At'ton Road and McKnight. The applicant would like to have both of these parcels rezoned form Commercial Office to Business Commercial. Single Family Impact: 1. Traffic - The proposed single family use would be have less traffic impact than virtually any developed use. 9445 East River Road N.W. *, Minneapolis, MN 55433 * Phone 612-755-9793 * Fax 612-755-6207 * Minnesota Builder # 1583 2. Safety - The development of the site would not result in any unsafe 3. Light and Open Space - The subdivision would have adequate street lighting. The open space needs would meet by the County Park. 4. Overcrowding - The proposed land use would represent the lowest possible developed state density. Overcrowding would not e an issue. 5. Property Values - The single family homes being proposed would not reduce the value of neighboring properties. J ~.. Peterson Presi~ ent Januaw 26,1996 Ken Roberts City Planner City of Maplewood 1830 E Co. Rd. B Maplewood, MN 55105 Re: Rezoning of 4 Acres at McKnight and Lower Alton Roads Attachment JAN 261996 Dear Mr. Roberts: This letter is a simple request asking you to help me to develop my property so that it can be of more benefit to the people who are living in this area and to those future people who will find Maplewood to be an attractive place to live. Request: As shown on the attached map of the corner of Lower Alton Rd and McKnight Rd there is one acre on the corner designated as a Holiday Station store. The adjacent property along McKnight and Lower Afton Roads is designated as LBC and CO. I am requesting that this zoning be changed to BC. This zoning will enable me to attract buyers to complete the development of my property as previous City Councils have requested. This zoning will be of benefit to all of the people who live in this area and in South Maplewood. Developers who have been interested in developing my property have stated that the possibility of a convenience shopping center in this location would increase the attractiveness of my property for homesites. This zoning will work in conjunction with the request for R1 zoning for the 15 acres to be developed by Good Value Homes. This zoning will provide the highest benefit to the City of Maplewood since there is no other feasible zoning for this corner property. In addition, this zoning to BC will indicate to a developer just what I have to sell, and will expedite getting this property on the tax rolls. Please note that i do not have any specific development in mind at this time; My intention will be to sell the property to a developer. We know that these changes have to happen; My plea is to be proactive and to eliminate some of the divisiveness that has been generated by Connemara. Sincerely, A. E. Johnson 2299 Londin Lane St. Paul, MN 55119 PIN 12-28-22-22-000 C: Mark Nelson Holiday Companies P. O. Box 1224 4567 West 80th Street Minneapolis, MN 55440 John Pecchia Christoffel, Elliot & Albrecht 386 North Wabasha Street St. Paul, MN 55102 John Peterson Good Value Homes 9445 East River Road Coon Rapids, MN 55433 24 Re: Attachment ~-{-~-q~9 12 Application by Good Value Homes of Coon Rapids for zone change and application to develop land facing Londin Lane (aka Arnie Johnson property). We are aware that Mr. Johnson is eager to sell his property. We can all appreciate this fact. In spite of the fact that present residents, in that immediate area, can remember that they had to "put up" with all the building and improvements that have come with the years, we, also have memories. We remember that poor planning was a factor in sabotaging a proposed housing development on Londin Lane in the early 1950's. The developer did not plan for where the children would go to school, for sewers or water supply. The development never got any farther than the three model homes that still stand on the south side of Londin Lane. Poor planning might well be said for this proposal. Now,the problems are different, but, problems they are and they must be factored in. They are: 1. Too many housing units on this small area. 14.6 acres can not support 42 homes. This plot of Where are the children going to play? No allowance has been made for children· The lots are too small for them to play on and the builder has not allotted any playground area. Parking! There are teQ houses proposed to face Londin Lane, backing'~to a fast moving street· Where will any visitors to these homes park? In the street? Nothing has been mentioned about the style and price range of the proposed housing. d. What type, if any, of landscaping. The Traffic Problem. There is no traffic control. What has been done about getting directional signals in this area. This intersection at McKnight and Lower Alton Rd. has been surveyed and found to be one of the most heavily traveled in the area. Pollution in the form of water run-off. Denser population and terrain upheaval always changes where surface water goes...More heavy duty storm sewers will be needed, especially if a Holiday station is put on the corner of McKnight and Lower Afton Rd. Do the builders realize how high the water table is in this area? Will they supply each proposed home with a sump pump? Finally, has any thought been given to affordable senior housing occupying this land? Senior housing, similar to the units on Larpenteur and White Bear and those in Cottage Grove along Highway 61. Wishful thinking .... A ... nature center is this ~ea. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Attachment 13 Kenneth Roberts, Associate Planner, City of Maplewood, Minnesota Kathleen Laska, 2332 Dorland Pl., Maplewood, MN 55119 January 16, 1996 "Parkview" Development Proposal by Good Value Homes Dear Mr. Roberts, Thank you for your letter dated January 9, 1996 in which you request citizen input regarding the proposal by Good Value Homes to develop the land bounded by McKnight Rd, Connemara Condominiums, Lower Afton Rd. and Londin Lane in south Maplewood. I am otmosed to develot~ment of this land in general and to the Good Value Homes propos~ai in particular for the following reasons: · this is an area of natural beauty and home to much wildlife: it contains a variety of trees, a wetlands area and is part of an existing wildlife corridor. · there is an abundance of existing housing available in the area in all price ranges from government-subsidized housing to executive home developments, from rental units to owner-occupied dwellings, from single family homes to multi-family structures. (The Park, an apartment/townhouse complex located NW of the proposed development site, was renovated about two years ago and is under new ownership--and continues to have vacancies. New homes are currently being built off south McKnight towards Bailey Rd., and throughout the area, homes are for sale on a continuing basis.) · an increase in housing means an increase in traffic, an increase in people and vehicular noise, and the potential for increase in crime. (Due to the increase in new housing toward Bailey Rd., traffic on McKnight and Century Ave. is ever increasing. The addition of the proposed Holiday Stationstore on the SE comer of McKnight and Lower Afton will add further congestion at that intersection. There is no need to compound that congestion by adding additional traffic from Londin Lane.) B. Recommendations: · The city of Maplewood, in the interest of environmental conservation and the lack of need for additional housing in the area, purchase the land from Mr. Amie Johnson and maintain it in its natural state. · Development contingent on Rezoning Lot 1 from Commerical to Open Space, deeding the Open Space to the city of Maplewood, and increasing the buffer area between the wetlands and the development from 100 to 150 ft. · Decrease the number of proposed units by at least 25% Thanks again for seeking community input as you prepare to make a recommendation on the Parkview Town Home proposal to the Maplewood planning commission and city council. While any city looks to increase its revenue, I hope the people of Maplewood government can see beyond increasing a tax base at the expense of the environment and look to what we must preserve for ourselves and our progeny. Please notify me of any public heatings concerning this proposal. Regards, · Attachment 14 Once again we are faced with this property trying to be developed. The reasons, once again, are as follows: Londin Lane is a small two lane street in bad shape at the present time. There is no way it can possibly handle anymore traffic than it already has. The intersection of Londin Lane and McKnight Road is almost a suicide mission to go to work. McKnight is only a two lane road. There is parking on both sides of the road and the traffic is unbelievable, as we all know. With more developing to the south and east of us, the traffic gets worse every day. The new overpass just finished on 494 doesn't seem to help us either. The traffic seems to have picked up more since then. Just trying to get my mail in the middle of the day is a challenge in itself. School buses are an other issue. There are an average of 6 school buses a day on the intersection of McKnight and Lower Alton. There's no place for them to pick up and drop of children, so some of them use the right mm lane on Lower Alton to do this. And others just pull over to the side of the road on Lower A_qon and McKnight. This in itself is a very dangerous act. Adding more children to this area would only mean more school buses, no place for them to pick up and drop off and putting more children at danger then there already is. The property owner of 328 Mcknight Road S. has had a problem with the sewer system in the past. The City of Maplewood has paid over $2,000 in damages because the system is insufficient for the area as it is. Again, adding more development to this area would only make the problem worse. In the past, we, the property owners of 328 and 338 and 346 McKnight Road South have shown a $10,000 loss in property value if the land in question is developed. In the 5 years that I have lived at 338 McKnight Road, I have driven by the Fire Department in our area and have seen signs of volunteer fire fighters needed. This suggests to me that we might have borderline fire coverage in our area. I have also in the past asked Maplewood Police Department to run traffic control on McKnight Road and have been told by several officers that they are understaffed and do not have the time nor the manpower to do so. This also suggests to me that our police coverage is at a minimum. Again, adding more homes, more people and an average of 3,000 more vehicles is ludicrous. This is a quote from the Maplewood Mayor himself. In closing we are not trying to be unreasonable, but the facts speak for themselves. :)38" '"" '''~ ' ST. PAUL, MN 55119 27 Attachment 15 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, John Peterson of Good Value Homes proposed changes to the city's land use plan from R-3(M) (residential medium density) and CO (commercial office) to R-1 (single dwellings) to OS (open space). WHEREAS, these changes apply to the undeveloped property located between Lower Afton Road and Londin Lane, west of Connemara Condominiums. WHEREAS, these changes apply to the proposed Blocks 2 and 3 and Outlot A of Parkview. WHEREAS, the history of these changes are as follows: 1. On February 20, 1996, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff published a heating notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the plan amendments. 2. On March 11, 1996, the city council discussed the land use plan changes. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described changes for the following reasons: 1. They would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. 2. The developer is proposing to develop this part of the site with single dwellings. 3. It would reduce the allowable density and traffic from this site. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1996. 28 Attachment 16 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Amie Johnson proposed a change to the city's land use plan from CO (commercial office) to BC (business commercial). WHEREAS, city staff proposed to change the city's land use plan to BC-M (business commercial modified) for the site. WHEREAS, this change applies to the undeveloped property on the south side of Lower Afton Road, east of the proposed Holiday Stationstore and west of Connemara Condominiums. WHEREAS, this change applies to the proposed Lot 1, Blocks 1 of Parkview. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On February 20, 1996, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the plan amendments. 2. On March 11, 1996, the city council discussed the land use plan changes. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described city staff proposed change for the following reasons: 1. They would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. 2. The BC-M designation would serve as a transition area between the proposed Holiday Stationstore and the residential area to the south. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1996. 29 Attachment 17 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Amie Johnson proposed a change to the city's land use plan from R-3(M) (residential medium density) and CO (commercial office) to BC (business commercial). WHEREAS, city staff proposed to change the city's land use plan to LBC (limited business commercial). WHEREAS, these changes apply to the undeveloped property located on the east side of McKnight Road, south of the proposed Holiday Stationstore. WHEREAS, this change applies to the proposed Lot 3, Block 1 of Parkview. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On February 20, 1996, the planning commission held a public headng. The city staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the plan amendments. 2. On March 11, 1996, the city council discussed the land use plan changes. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described city staff change for the following reasons: 1. They would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. 2. The larger LBC area would increase the transition area between the existing houses and the proposed Holiday Stationstore. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1996. 30 Attachment 18 RESOLUTION: ZONING MAP CHANGE WHEREAS, Good Value Homes applied for a change in the zoning map from CO (commercial office) and F (farm residential) to R-1 (single dwelling residential). WHEREAS, this change applies to the property north of Londin Lane, west of 2445 Londin Lane. The legal description is: That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 28, Range 22, Ramsay County, Minnesota; described as follows; Commencing at a cast iron monument found for the Northwest comer of said Section 12, thence South 00 degrees 17 minutes 21 seconds East, on an assumed bearing basis, along the West line of said Section 12, a distance of 362.00 feet; Thence North 88 degrees 15 minutes 57 seconds East, with the South line of the North 362 feet of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 705.53 feet; Thence South 00 degrees 18 minutes 10 seconds East, a distance of 265.08 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING herein; Thence South 69 degrees 43 minutes 28 seconds East, a distance of 280.33 feet; Thence North 88 degrees 15 minutes 28 seconds East, a distance of 349.07 feet; Thence South 00 degrees 18 minutes 10 seconds East with the East line of the said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 548.15 feet to the North right of way line of Londin Lane; Thence South 88 degrees 18 minutes 55 seconds West with said right of way line, a distance of 1067.16 feet; Thence North 00 degrees 18 minutes 23 seconds West, a distance of 417.10 feet; Thence North 88 degrees 19 minutes 35 seconds East, a distance of 40.11 feet; Thence North 00 degrees 17 minutes 24 seconds West, a distance of 235.21 feet; Thence North 88 degrees 15 minutes 57 seconds East, a distance of 415.46 to the POINT OF BEGINNING herein, containing 14.6118 acres of land area. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On February 20, 1996, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve the change. 2. On March 11, 1996, 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 spidt, purpose and intent of the zoning code. 2. 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. 31 4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on 32 Attachment 19 RESOLUTION: ZONING MAP CHANGE WHEREAS, Amie Johnson applied for a change in the zoning map from F (farm residential) to BC (business commercial). WHEREAS, city staff proposed a zoning map change to BC-M (business commercial modified) for the site. WHEREAS, this change applies to the undeveloped property on the south side of Lower Alton Road, east of the proposed Holiday Stationstore (the proposed Lot 1, Block 1 of Parkview). The legal description is: That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 28, Range 22, Ramsay County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a cast iron monument found for the Northwest comer of said Section 12, thence South 00 degrees 17 minutes 21 seconds East, an assumed beadng, with the West line of said Section 12, a distance of 362.00 feet; Thence North 88 degrees 15 minutes 57 seconds East with the South line of the North 362.00 feet of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 285.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING HEREIN; Thence continuing North 88 degrees 15 minutes 57 seconds East, a distance of 420.53 feet; Thence South O0 degrees 18 minutes 10 seconds East, a distance of 265.08 feet; Thence South 88 degrees 15 minutes 57 seconds West 415.46 feet; Thence North 00 degrees 17 minutes 24 seconds West, a distance of 40.08 feet; Thence South 88 degrees 15 minutes 57 seconds West, a distance of 25.13 feet; Thence North 00 degrees 17 minutes 21 seconds West, a distance of 125.00 feet; Thence 88 degrees 15 minutes 57 seconds East, a distance of 20.00 feet; Thence North 00 degrees 17 minutes 21 seconds West, a distance of 100.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING containing 2.6111 acres of land area. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On February 20, 1996, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve the change. 2. On March 11, 1996, 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 city staff proposed 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. 2. 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 interest and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. 33 4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on ,1996. Attachment 20 RESOLUTION: ZONING MAP CHANGE WHEREAS, Amie Johnson applied for a change in the zoning map from F (farm residential), CO (commercial office) and LBC (limited business commercial) to BC (business commercial). WHEREAS, city staff proposed a zoning map change to LBC (limited business commercial) for the site. WHEREAS, this change applies to the property north and northeast of 328 McKnight Road South (the proposed Lot 3, Block 1 of Parkview). The legal description is: That part of the Northwest Quarter of Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 28, Range 22, Ramsay County, Minnesota, described as follows; Commencing at a cast iron monument found for the Northwest comer of said Section 12, thence South 00 degrees 17 minutes 21 seconds East, an assumed bearing, with the West line of said Section 12, a distance of 362.00 feet; Thence North 88 degrees 15 minutes 57 seconds East with the South line of the North 362.00 feet of said Northwest'Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 40.00 feet to the East line of the West 40 feet of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter;, Thence South 00 degrees 17 minutes 21 seconds East with the aforementioned East line, a distance of 245.00 feet of the POINT OF BEGINNING herein; Thence North 88 degrees 15 minutes 57 seconds East, a distance of 100.00 feet; Thence North 00 degrees 17 minutes 21 seconds West, a distance of 20.00 feet; Thence North 88 degrees 15 minutes 57 seconds East, a distance of 150.13 feet; Thence South 00 degrees 17 minutes 24 seconds East, a distance of 275.30 feet; Thence South 88 degrees 19 minutes 35 seconds West, a distance of 250.13 feet to said East line of the West 40 feet; Thence North 00 degrees 17 minutes 26 seconds West with the aforementioned East line, a distance of 255.03 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING herein containing 1.5337 acres of land area. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On February 20, 1996, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve the change. 2. On March 11, 1996, 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 wriffen 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 city staff proposed 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. 2. 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 interest and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. 35 4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on ,1996. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Conditional Use Permit Revision and Design Review-Ramsey County Correctional Facility Nursery Proposal January 30, 1996 The planning commission should review the conditional use permit. The community design review board should review the site plan and the greenhouse design. p:sec12\workhous.nur MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Conditional Use Permit Revision and Design Review-Ramsey County Correctional Facility Nursery Proposal January 30, 1996 INTRODUCTION Project Description Ramsey County is proposing to quit their farming and cattle raising operation at the county correctional facility, 297 South Century Avenue. They propose to switch to a plant-nursery operation to grow trees and shrubs. They would use the county's property north of Lower Afton Road. The area south of Lower Afton Road would be left as is. Refer to the site plan on page 11 and the written statement on pages 12-14. The applicant expects that the animal-raising operation will end by fall of 1996. Farm buildings, corrals and old fencing may be removed as the plant nursery operation grows. There is no specific time-table for removing farm-related structures, but the county anticipates some removal as the nursery program expands. The county is proposing to build a 30- by 96-foot, poly-exterior green house at the southerly corner of the correctional facility building in 1996. They plan to build two more as the operation grows-one anticipated in the year 2002 and the other in 2008. Refer to the plans ,(separate attachment). Requests The applicant is requesting the following: 1. A revision to their conditional use permit (CUP). The code requires a CUP for public buildings. 2. Approval of the greenhouse design. BACKGROUND March 13, 1995: The city council approved the following for the county correctional facility to make several building changes including the expansion to the medical ward and visitor area (this work is presently under way): 1. A CUP revision. 2. A waiver from the requirement for screening new roof-top mechanical equipment. 3. Site and architectural plans. DISCUSSION Conditional Use Permit The city council should allow this change to the correctional facility's operation. It is a positive change and is supported almost whole-heartedly (85% of those responding were in favor) by the neighborhood. The city code, furthermore, allows commercial greenhouses and nurseries in this zoning district. A private business could operate this same nursery activity without a CUP. The CUP is only needed because the code requires one for a public agency to build a building. The CUP allows the county to exceed the 29% felon limit established by the city council, but requires that the county let the city know when the county exceeds this limit. (Refer to the letter on page 16.) The correctional facility's administration has no control over the type of inmates admitted. The county district court system determines this. The council should accept this report. I have combined Condition 2 with Condition 4 since they stated the same thing. I am recommending dropping the required annual review stated in Conditions 3 and 6 because there is no reason to do so unless.a problem develops. Condition 3 should also allow the director of community development to approve minor construction projects on the site. Amendment of the CUP should not be required for simple changes that are well within the site and does not affect neighbors. Condition 5 should be dropped since the farming operations are proposed to end. Dropping this condition would not be a problem since the code allows the council to bring a CUP back before themselves for review if a problem occurs. Greenhouse Design and Site Considerations The proposed greenhouse design is acceptable. There are no site concerns. Neighbor Concerns 1. Tax payers should not have to fund this or have higher taxes. The applicant explained that the first two years of this operation would be funded by the state of Minnesota. There will be expenses for the first five or six years, but, the applicant expects the nursery to be making money by the seventh year. 2. What will happen with the land south of Lower Afton Road? Don't let it develop with any construction. The county is not proposing to use the land south of Lower Afton Road for their nursery operation. If in the future the county expanded their plant-growing operation south of Lower Afton Road they could do so without city approval. Any future building construction south of Lower Afton Road, however, would require an amended CUP. The city has not received a development proposal for this land. Building construction cannot occur without city council approval. 3. There will be more inmates outside. Will there be more guards? Since there will be more inmates working outside, the number of guards will also be increased. 4, There would be more traffic, The proposed nursery operation would not generate additional traffic. $. Will there be an increase in fertilizers used and fertilizer runoff? The applicant said that fertilizing will take place at the individual plant. The applicant said they will not use broadcast-type fertilizer methods. The county is planning on using organic methods of fertilizing. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution on pages 17-18. This resolution revises the conditional use permit for a correctional facility at 297 South Century Avenue. The revised conditional use permit allows a change in operation to include a plant nursery. Approval is based on the findings required by ordinance and subject to the following conditions (I have underlined the additions/revisions and crossed out the deletions): 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The county correq:ti0ns department shall file an annual report with the city manager informing the city of the following: If the percentage of felons increases above 29% of the inmates or if the percentage of gross misdemeanors increases above 33% of the inmates. b. Of any applications for a license for the facility that increase the maximum number of inmates above 293. If the daily population exceeds the county's license for more than 21 (twenty-one) consecutive days. If condition 2.a. or 2.c. occurs, the city council may reconsider the conditional use permit. The city must approve any increase in the facility inmate population license prior to it becoming effective. The city council shall review this permit in one year if the greenhouse is not built. Future reviews shall be done only if a oroblem arises or if ma!or construction is orooosed. Minor construction shall be aoDroved by the director of community The proposed 9i-eei-~house uu, ,~u u~,uu,, n-,LiSt Approve the plans (stamped December 29, 1995) for the greenhouses at the Ramsey County Correctional Facility at 297 South Century Avenue. Ramsey County shall do the following: 1. Repeat this review in one year if the city has not issued a building permit for the first greenhouse. Comply with the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 3. Apply for city council approval of any building construction on county property south of Lower Afton Road. CITIZENS' COMMENTS I surveyed owners of the 261 properties within 350 feet of the county's property. Of the 118 replies, 100 were in favor, five objected, nine had no comment and four had miscellaneous comments. In Favor Almost every "in favor" reply had a written response. There were many repeated comments. The following are the comments we received: 1. Good idea. Good use of the land. 2. This would be a better environment for the neighbors. 3. It would be an efficient use of the land. 4. This would benefit the community. 5. I am in favor, but tax payers should not have to fund this or have a tax increase. 6. It would be good for the inmates. It would be a productive activity. 7. It beats cow and pig odor. 8. In favor, but don't allow any construction south of Lower Afton Road. 9. In favor, but don't sell to the public and don't sell land for home development. 10. Refer to the letter on page 15. (Breault, 408 O"Day Street) Opposed I object because of additional people needed and more traffic. Make this land a wild area. There are geese and ducks that use it now and in the past. I know because of the many years that I have lived here. The deer and other animals are disappearing, we are not developing 10-acres of which we own in Woodbury and Maplewood, you can do the same. Have any of you (thinkers) lived east of the work house in spring when Pig stuff is used? Maybe you are used to it, I am not. (Herget, 6016 Linden Road, Woodbury) I and my wife both enjoy the rural farm-like atmosphere. I think that the property should not be developed. Current set-up makes the workhouse self sufficient. (Anderson, 2465 Londin Lane ~401) Our property abuts the corn field off of Lower Afton and Century. We have enjoyed the field with corn, geese in summer and fall, also deer out there. Also would this increase the number of inmates working the Fields? The nursery near the facility sounds good, but increased supervision would be necessary. (Lance, 454 O"Day Street) 4. You will take away our wildlife. We have enough greenhouses. We think it should be left alone. (Meyer, 6033 Oakwood Road, Woodbury) I object to this proposal because I would like additional information first. Will there be any increase in fertilizer runoff from the growing areas ? With increased inmates in the fields, will there be increased guards? Children have heard stories of verbal insults from inmates now. What will happen to the land south of Lower Afton Road? Will a golf course be built as in the city plan or what? Yes, Please! (Poradek, 376 O"Day Street) Miscellaneous Comments These persons responding did not state whether they were for or against the project: We are fully comfortable with the farm. We would object to any increase in herbicides, pesticides or other toxic substances being use. Doubling the population at the facility is a security concern. (Fischer, 6016 Birchwood Road, Woodbury) I was under the impression that any development there had been voted down. This property should be left as it is. We have enough density and traffic in this area already. I would rather like it as a nature area. (Anderson, 2465 Londin Lane #201) 3. The greenhouse is ok. I would like to see a nine-hole golf course on the land south of Lower Afton Road. (Lais, 2465 Londin Lane #409) I assume the stock planted will be trees from the DNR. If so, what will you buy with the $100,000 and the $85,000 per year? What are the current costs of farm seed? Will you quit the beef raising? What will you do with the fields south of Lower Afton Road? (Charpentier, 1333 Cederwood Drive, Woodbury) 5. What will happen to the correctional facility land south of Lower Afton Road? (Many neighbors responded with this question) 6 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 54 acres (proposed nursery and correctional facility) Existing land use: Ramsey County Correctional Facility and county farm land SURROUNDING LAND USES The proposed nursery operation would be surrounded by adjacent county property on the north, south and west. There are single dwellings east of Century Avenue in Woodbury. PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: G (government facility) and OS (open space) Zoning: F (farm residential) Ordinance requirements Section 36-437(1) requires a CUP for a public building. Section 36-448(b) requires an amended CUP to enlarge or structurally alter a building for which a CUP has been granted. Section 36-442(a) requires that the city council base approval of a CUP on ten standards. Refer to the resolution on pages 17-18. p:sec12\workhous.nur Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Land Use Plan Map 3. Property Line/Zoning Map 4. Site Plan 5. Statement of Proposed Land Use date-stamped December 29, 1995 6. Letter from Gene Breault dated January 15, 1996 7. Letter from Steve Dornbach dated January 30, 1996 8. CUP Resolution 9. Plans date-stamped December 29, 1995 (separate attachments) '7 Attachment 1 LOWER LN CORREC~ON~. i' D~ DR. S~R,. ~ " ~¢$iDE LINWO01 ',~,, ~~~ v~ ~, e~ i ~,i'P ~}I- ~, ~t~ ~ ~IIIIP LOCATION MAP 8 At'~achmen~; 2 interchange ~ CO Upper Alien Lower Alton OS OS OS P major collector OS interchenge BATTLE CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN Attachment 3 PROPERTY LINE ! ZONING MAP Attachment 4 GREENHOUSE OPERATIONS EN AREA UJ Z CORRECTIOAL ~ i'.,^c...-r~, :.~' ~..'" ~.7 '. 7'2..;' '... ~ N SITE PLAN 11 Attachment 5 STATE1VIE OF PROPOSED LAND USE RE: Ramsey county Correctional Facility Greenhouse me i its lruna=e programming anu ~anu_~-~ -_ r~s~-ructur~-~??--~A~ve around what is called #Produc~lve ? ~ ----= -~ -A-e realistic and proauctlve use o~ inmate populations in several designated counties throug~ out =ne state. It is the intent in Ramsey County, to use much of this money in the development of a Landscape Nursery Program at its facility in Maplewood. The Landscape Nur_sery.Progr~m %nte~ to ~$~~::~ the production o~ various p~an~ crops .... ~= -~ number of inmates busy, offer a more realistic work experience, aha at the same time be more compatible with the surrounding The resulting plants will then be sold at a reduced neighborhood. price to Parks and Recreation Departments through out Ramsey County for installation back into the community. As art of the Landscape Nursery Program there are plans to erect P se. The Greenhouse will a 30' x 96' Poly Tex Style Greenhou .... =-~ ---~ -~so primarily be the production site for an annua£ crop, mu~ w~ -- have some pro~agation and perennial projects on an ongoing basis. Its constructLon allows for an extension o~ the work season through the winter while still maintaining the Lntegrity of producing a viable and marketable product. ~ NUR__SERY/GR~_~HOUSB Op_w~_ATION OFFERS= 1. More efficient use of land and resources. resources. N.ursery ~roa~c=s w~._¥~__w[~[~Arhood' In addition, the land env~ronmen= ana surrounaan~ .. ' .... ,- ~ .... --ater ~overnmental market compared to ~ne nursery suo~a ~-= - ~-- yet~the change from farm to nursery the existing farm operation. . ....... would still take great advantage of the exls=lng equlpmen=, s=a~, and su crt building. Staff w%ll use much of their existing PP · d · i ment. Likewise, farming knowledge of so~ls, chemicals, an qu p . much of the equipment could be used as is, and replace~ only as needed. 12 Statement of Proposed Land Use Ramsey County Correctional Facility Page Two 2. More compatible to the i~ediate neiahborhood and more restorative to the broader com~unitv. The Nursery Operation will be seen as a benefit to the community. The surrounding neighborhood will have an aesthetically pleasing addition which is viewed as environmentally positive. The increase in visible labor and activity will be hard to miss. The broader co~unity will see the effects first hand as various planting projects become a reality throughout Ramsey County. In turn, the offender will see a visible positive part of the community which he helped create. 3. Better use of the inmate work force. The Nursery Operation at the Workhouse is expected to use substantially larger numbers of inmates than the current farm. It is estimated that twice the number of inmates would.be working on a daily basis which translates to a more positive environment. Further, producing such a visible end product assists with improving self-worth and increase rehabilitative opportunities. 4. More realistic career trainina for inmates. The Nursery Operation provides a work experience and training opportunity in a realistic job or career field. The Nursery Industry is a strong and growing field in the State of Minnesota. It is labor intensive and employs large numbers of low skill level workers. The experience and training gained at the Workhouse could be just the factor which translates to a job or a higher starting wage. There are realistic job opportunities for release offenders. There is potential for workshop certificates, school credit, and accreditations which further enhance employment opportunities. THB RELATIONSHIP TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR The Workhouse Nursery Program intends to be a supplemental source of nursery stock for governmental units within geographic Ramsey County. A survey of governmental units within Ramsey County indicates very strong support of a County Nursery at the Workhouse but only as a supplementary source of nursery stock. We have to limit our market because we do not have the capacity to be the exclusive supplier of plants for the agencies involved. We anticipate to grow only 1/3 of the plant needs of these agencies. This statistically breaks down to less that 1% of the plant sales in the State of Minnesota. 13 Statement of Proposed Land Use Ramsey County Correctional Facility Page Three We intend to limit the scope of our market by selling only to governmental units within Ramsey County for planting withi~ams~ County. Contractors wor~ing under contract for a governmen=az unzu could also obtain materials for that specific project purpose. The Workhouse Nursery Program will also be a substantial consumer of nursery/landscape products from local sources. Start up expenditures from the private sector are estimated at over $100,000.00. Future annual purchases of nursery goods including plant stock, equipment, hard goods, etc. are estimated at over $85,000.00 for each of the first ten years of operation. I respectfully request approval for construction of the proposed greenhouse at the Ramsey County Correctional Facility. It is a part of a program change that will have substantial and long lasting positive effects for both the facility and the community in general. Attachment 6 January 15, 1996 RE: Comments in response to the Nursery Program Proposal. Dear Sir; I have no objections to the Nursery Program idea. It seems, in fact, to be a very good idea. I do, however, object strongly to any proposal that includes buildings of any sort to be placed on the county land south of the Correction Facility and Lower Afton Rd. Since no mention is made of any plans for this land, it leaves one with an uneasiness, if not suspicion, that such an objectionable plan is in the works. Plans for this land must be made clear before initiating any program for the northern properties. If the County Correction Facility has no further use for this property, now or in the future, it should become part of the Regional Park system. Sincerely, Gene Breault 15 RAMSEY COUNTY Corre onzl Facility Arthur J. Cavara, Superintendent Stephen J. Dornbach, Asst. Superintendent 297 South Century Avenue St. Paul, MN 55119 Attachment 7 Tel: 612-298-5466 Fax: 612-295-§432 January 30, 1996 Tom Ekstrand City of Maplewood Planning Office 1810 E. CO. Rd. B Maplewood, Mn. 55109 Dear Mr. Ekstrand: This letter is our annual report on the population breakdown for 1995 here at the Ramsey County Correctional Facility. This is to satisfy the requirements of our conditional use permit. In 1995 the RCCF had 3488 admissions. The average daily population was 285. The population was broken down as follows: 30% (1039) felons, 28% (991) gross misdemeanors, and 42% (1458) misdemeanors. cc:Art Cavara, Superintendent Joan Fabian, Director, Ramsey County Community Corrections Dept. Harley Nelson, Assistant Director, Ramsey County Community Corrections Dept. 16 Hinnesota's First Home Rule Comity printed on mc,~cled paper with a minimum of 10~ post.onlmumer content Attachment 8 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Community COrrections Department applied for a conditional use permit to switch from a farming operation to a'plant nursery and greenhouse operation at the Ramsey County Correctional Facility. WHEREAS, this permit applies to 297 South Century Avenue. The legal description is: EX PART SWLY OF NEW AFTON ROAD; N 1/2 OF NE 1/4 & EX CRESTVIEW; PART NE OF AFTON RD OF SW 1/4 OF NE 1/4 & SE 1/4 OF NE 1/4 & NE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 (SUBJ TO RDS & PIPE LINE ESMT) IN SEC 12 TN 28 RN 22. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On council 1996, the planning commission recommended that the city this permit. The city council held a public hearing on ,1996. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT :RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described conditional use permit, because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. The city council may waive any of the above requirements for a public building or utility structure, provided the council shall first make a determination that the balancing of public interest between governmental units of the state would be best served by such waiver. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The county corrections department shall file an annual report with the city manager informing the city of the following: a. If the percentage of felons increases above 29% of the inmates or if the percentage of gross misdemeanors increases above 33% of the inmates. b. Of any applications for a license for the facility that increase the maximum number of inmates above 293. c. If the daily population exceeds the county's license for more than 21 (twenty-one) consecutive days. If condition 2.a. or 2.c. occurs, the city council may reconsider the conditional use permit. The city must approve any increase in the facility inmate population license prior to it becoming effective. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year if the greenhouse is not built. Future reviews shall be done only if a problem arises or if major construction is proposed. Minor construction shall be approved by the director of community development. Approved by the Maplewood City Council on _, 1996. 18 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: PROJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Street Vacation and Preliminary Plat Highwood Fifth Addition O'Day Street, north of Schaller Drive February 12, 1996 INTRODUCTION Mr. Dennis Gonyea, representing Gonyea Corporation, Inc., is proposing to develop one lot for a house. The project's name is Highwood Fifth Addition. This plat would be on a 1.11-acre site that is on the north end of O'Day Street, north of Schaller Drive. The proposed site is Outlots A and B of the Highwood Third Addition. (See the maps on pages 4 through 7.) To build this plat, Mr. Gonyea is asking the city to approve: 1. A street vacation for part of O'Day Street. This vacation would allow Mr. Gonyea to replat part of existing Outlot B for the proposed cul-de-sac. (See the maps on pages 6 and 7.) A preliminary plat for two lots. The lot on the east side of O'Day Street (Lot 1) would be for a new house. The developer would deed the lot on the west side of O'Day Street (Lot 2) to the city. BACKGROUND On May 11, 1987, the city council approved the Highwood Second and Third Addition preliminary plat. This approval was subject to 12 conditions and included these outlots. The city had the developer plat the outlots to allow for the possible extension of the street to the north. On April 25, 1988 and March 27, 1989, the council approved one-year time extensions for the preliminary plat. On May 14, 1990, the council approved a one-year time extension and revisions to the plat conditions. On November 15, 1990, the city council approved the Highwood Third Addition final plat. This plat created lots for twenty-two houses and this site (Outlots A and B). The council required the developer to plat this property as outlots since the city did not know what would happen with the property to north. On April 10, 1995, the council approved buying 24 acres of the Kayser property (north of O'Day Street and east of the pipelines) for open space. At this meeting, the council decided not to buy Outlots A and B of the Highwood Third Addition from Gonyea Company. The city has closed on the purchase of the 24 acres from the Kaysers. On May 22, 1995, the city council approved buying eight acres of property north of O'Day Street and east of the pipeline for city park purposes. The parks and recreation director expects the citY ~ ' to develop this park in 1997 or 1998. DISCUSSION Street Vacation As proposed, the street vacation cleans up the map, drops the excess street right-of-way and allows the developer to replat the property. (See the map of the existing conditions on page 6.) As proposed, replatting allows for the new right-of-way for the proposed cul-de-sac and for the reshaping of the lots. (See the proposed plan on page 7.) Preliminary Plat Utilities There are utilities in O'Day Street to serve Lot 1, Block 1. The city should not charge the developer or house builder a cash connection charge for this lot since the developer installed the utilities when he built O'Day Street. Lot 2 (west side) Mr. Gonyea has agreed to deed Lot 2 to the city in exchange for the city building a permanent cul-de-sac for O'Day Street. Maplewood would make this lot part of the future city park. Mr. Gonyea should record the deed transferring this property to the city with the final plat. Cul-de-sac Location The proposed cul-de-sac is set to the east of the existing temporary cul-de-sac. (See the proposed street plan on page 7.) The city engineer requested this design. This would give the house at 857 O'Day Street a typical front yard and driveway. RECOMMENDATIONS Adopt the resolution on page 8. This resolution vacates the O'Day Street right-of-way north of Lot 3, Block 1, Highwood Third Addition. The city should vacate this street right-of-way because: Bo 1. It is in the public interest. 2. The city and the developer have no plans to build a street north of this site. 3. The adjacent properties have street access. The developer shall record the street vacation resolution with the final plat. Approve the Highwood Fifth Addition preliminary plat (received by the city on February 2, 1996). Before the city council approves the final plat, a developer shall complete the following conditions: 1. Change the street relocation plan to show the cul-de-sac right-of-way on the final plat. 2. Deed Lot 2 to the city and record this deed with the final plat. 2 REFERENCE SITE DESCRIPTION Area: 48,248 square feet (1.11 acres) Existing land use: Undeveloped Property Owner: Gonyea Company SURROUNDING LAND USES North: East: South: West: City park property Houses on Schaller Drive Houses on Schaller Drive House lots in Amber Hills on Sterling Street PLANNING Land use plan designation: R-1 (single dwellings) Zoning classification: R-1 (single dwellings) (See the zoning map on page five.) The Open Space Committee ranked the property north of this site (site 161 B) 6th out of 67 sites and first of the sites in this neighborhood. They said that the open space site had several advantages: It is part of linear open space corridor It has esthetic value with detailed diversity It has a valuable example of upland brush There are wetlands on the site that buying it would help protect There is safe and easy access to the area The site could have multiple uses including trails and nature interpretation There has been strong neighborhood interest in preserving the site TREES In October 1994, the Williams Brothers Pipeline Company cleared all the trees from about a 50- foot-wide strip of their easement area (on the rear on Lot 2). This is for ease of maintenance, aerial surveillance and emergency access to the pipeline. There is a mix of trees spread out over the two lots. The city's tree ordinance does not apply to trees under eight inches in diameter or box elder, cottonwoods or poplar trees. The developer plans to grade Lot 1 when he builds a house. He will remove many trees to build the house. p:sec13-28/highwd5.mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Une/Zoning Map 3. Existing Conditions Map (Proposed Preliminary Plat) 4. Proposed Street Plan (Street location Plan) 5. Street Vacation Resolution 6. Project Plans (separate attachment) 16 1. HUNTINGTON CT. 2. OAKRIDG£ L~ OS 17 1. CURRIE CT. 2. VALLEY VIEW CT. 3. LAKEWOOD CT. Attachment 1 Pl-eti~ ~T. HIGHWOOD X OAK HEI MORELAND N£ ~ITZ AVE. BOXWOOD AV. AVE. LOCATION MAP Loke 4 : L 0 T E C3~) }\ Attachment 2 FUTURE CITY PARK 2563 :, !.2555.,' % 2571-' DR. ' 842 841 2587 ' 2 ID VALLE ¥ V i EW AVE V l EW AVE. VALLEY Attachment 3 0 30 60 90 SCALE: I iNCH · 30 PEET PRELIMINARY PLAT H IGHWOOD 5TH ADDITION CITY OF MAPLEW00D ~ PROPOSED STREET VACATION ............... N sg'sg'24' ~ '""~,,. "",.. 6~3.2s ....... = ~:': ...... 232 .~4 . ,'~. X '--~ I~// ~'";~ - 21 EXISTING CONDITIONS Attachemnt 4 ISTREET RELOCATION PLAN H IGHWOOD 5TH ADD I T 0 30 ~0 g0 sc~E: , ,~ - 30 FEET C I TY vrf~ IdAPLEWOOD ION 24' E *m"E, ~ PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY L PROPOSED STREET PLAN N STREET VACATION RESOLUTION Attachment 5 WHEREAS, Mr. Dennis Gonyea applied for the vacation of the following-described street right-of-way: That part of O'Day Street north and east of an eastedy continuation of the North line of Lot 3, Block 1, Highwood Third Addition in Section 13, Township 28, Range 22 WHEREAS, the history of this vacation is as follows: On February 20, 1996, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this vacation. -2. On March 11, 1996, 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 headng 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: Oultlots A and B of Highwood Third Addition 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 developer have no plans to build a street north of this site. The adjacent properties have street access. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on March 11, 1996.