Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/15/1996 MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, April 15, 1996 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes e. March 4, 1996 4. Approval of Agenda 5. New Business a. Rear Yard Setback Conditional Use Permit - Haessig (379 Ripley Avenue) b. Backyard Building Systems Conditional Use Permit Revision (Highway 61 North) 6. Visitor Presentations 7. Commission Presentations a. March 11 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson b. March 25 Council Meeting: Mr. Frost c. April 8 Council Meeting: Ms. Brueggerman d. April 22 Council Meeting: Mr. Koepesky 8. Staff Presentations a. City Open House - August 6, 1996 9. Adjournment WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION This outline has been prepared to help you understand the public meeting process. The review of an item usually takes the following form: o The chairperson of the meeting will announce the item to be reviewed and ask for the staff report on the subject. Staff presents their report on the matter. The Commission will then ask City staff questions about the proposal. The chairperson will then ask the audience if there is anyone present who wishes to comment on the proposal. This is the time for the public to make comments or ask questions about the proposal. Please step up to the podium, speak clearly, first giving your name and address and then your comments. After everyone in the audience wishing to speak has given his or her comments, the chairperson will close the public discussion portion of the meeting. The Commission will then discuss the proposal. No further public comments are allowed. The Commission will then make its recommendation or decision. All decisions by the Planning Commission are recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes the final decision. jw/pc~pcagd Revised: 01/95 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MARCH 4, 1996 I. Call to Order Chairman Axdahl called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. I1. ROLL CALL Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Comm~ssmner Commissioner Commissioner Lester Axdahl Present Bunny Brueggeman Present Barbara Ericson Present Lorraine Fischer Present Jack Frost Present Kevin Kittridge Present Dave Kopesky Present Present Present Present Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner William Rossbach Commissmner Milo Thompson III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Fischer moved approval of the minutes of February 20, 1996, as submitted. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes-Axdahl, Ericson, Fischer, Frost, Pearson, Rossbach, Thompson The motion passed. Abstentions-Brueggeman, Kittridge, Kopesky IV. APPROVAL OFAGENDA Commissioner Frost moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Commissioner Fischer seconded. Ayes-all The motion passed. V. NEW BUSINESS A. Menard's Conditional Use Permit Revision--Temporary Greenhouse (2280 Maplewood Drive) Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Roberts answered questions from the commission. Greg Stachowiak, representing Echo Lake Greenhouse, was present. Mr. Stachowiak had no comment on the staff report or the recommendations. He said they would be renting the property from Menard's and it would be well maintained. Commissioner Frost moved the Planning Commission recommend: Ao Approval of the resolution which revises the conditional use permit for Menard's outdoor storage yard with the following changes (I have crossed out the deletions and underlined the additions): Adherence to the site plan dated March 15, 1988, and the oreenhouse Dian dated January 8, 1996, unless a change is approved by the city's community design review board. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Compliance with the following screening-fence reguirements: a. The property owner shall continue to have. and keep in a maintained condition, wooden screening-fences as follows: An eight-foot-tall fence running north-south on the west side of 1071 County Road B. This sectigrt of fen~.e shall have "no parking" signs displayed. L2_J An eight-foQt-tall fence running east-west from the northwest comer of 1071 County Road B to the northwest comer of 1101 County Road B. (3) A 14-foot-tall fence behind 1101 end 1115 County Road B: also alone the west lot line of 1115 County Road B where it abuts Menard's. ~.~ A 14-fQ0t-tall fence alone the west side of the outside storage yard. 0-foot-tall fence algl~g the remaining south property line of Menard's and northerly along the east lot line to the point where the prol3erty !ocs to the east. b. No material on the storage racks, adiacent to the fence behind 1101 and 1115 County Road B, shall extend above the 14-foot-tall fence. No more than 2 1/2 feet of the 17 1/2-foot-tall storage racks shall be visible from the homes to the south that are at street level alone County Road B. This excludes those houses that sit higher on a hill. d. Menard's shall be responsible for the safety of the neighbors in regard to the materials stored over the height of the fence. Hours of operation in the storage yard shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. ~1 I~11 ................................. dj the ¢.,,~ ~,, ox,end =~,~ [ho 14-¢001 ,~,,~.. An extedor public address system shall not be allowed. All lighting in the storage yard that is not needed for site security shall be turned off after business hours. The city council shall not review this permit ag~;n i,~, s;x months unless a problem develops or unless the proPerty owner proposes a ma!or change to their plans. No .... 2 ' '" ¢e ....... 17 i/2 ........................ fron~ ....... of the ~Oi-~ LII~IIII I1~, WI. ~/I [11~ -I~.¢~/t I~'~.~[~ ,,~ll~lll k/~ ¥1~1l,,/1~ LII~ I~'Sl [ha[ .... t ........................ ~11~ ~ ~tl~t I~V~[ ~'~ ~,uu[ity nuau . Planning Commission Minutes of 03-04-96 -3- 13. Plowed snow shall be stored away from the southern and eastern property lines to avoid runoff problems on residential property. Thc ............................ f&,,~ ' th~ ~,-o, ;Y .......... · ,,~,, ,~ propedy ,,, ,~ o,,,-,, b~ ~>,i~,,d~d appFox',r,~-;[e 1 i0 few, ,~, ,he ,,~, ,,,, 14.8. ;',N, ~,,,~,o~ =,,..,, occur ~,~,,~,,~ ,,,~ [&,,,.~d ..,~o. Menard's shall store all their materials within the fenced storage area. Plant disulavs shall be permitted outside the greenhouse. 17.9. Sanitation facilities shall be provided by Menard's for the workmen emuloyees. 10. The owner or operator shall get a building uermit annually for the ureenhouse. 11, Greenhouse hours of ooeration shall coincide with those of Menard's. 12. The .greenhouse structure shall be temuorary. The owner or ooerator shall remove the greenhouse after each three-month season. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Ayes-all The motion passed. North Glen Fourth Addition (Castle Avenue): Front Yard Setback Zoning Map Change, Preliminary Plat, and Increased Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Roberts answered questions from the commission. Commissioner Rossbach commented that the drainage plan shows most of the development draining down to a gully to the southwest, and he asked where it goes from there. Russ Matthys, assistant city engineer, said he asked for a revision of the grading plan. He is requesting that all the runoff from the development be directed toward the frontage road. All the drainage would then remain in the natural, existing pattern of flow. Mr. Matthys said they are asking the developer to have no impervious surface drainage directed to the south of the lots. Mario Cocchiarella, representing Maplewood Development, Inc., was present at the meeting. The commission asked Mr. Cocchiarella about the reference to liens from the citizen comments. Mr. Cocchiarella said this was an issue between the contractor who developed a street, within a development of Mr. Cocchiarella's, in North St. Paul and the city of North St. Paul. A maintenance bond was called by the city of North St. Paul when they contractor didn't pay for restoration of a curb section that failed. Mr. Cocchiarella explained the procedure where, after the city accepts a new road, a maintenance bond is placed on a project for one whole year after it is completed. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-04-96 -4- David Kaup, 2289 Ariel Court, was concerned about the placement of the sewer and water for this development. He felt some of the residents of Ariel Court would lose the oak trees in their backyards. Mr. Matthys said the existing Maplewood utilities were water at the end of the old German Street right-of-way on the frontage road and sanitary sewer at German and Cope Avenue. It would be costly, if not impossible because of grades, to connect sanitary sewer from this location. Mr. Matthys said it would be much easier to connect sanitary sewer the way the developer has proposed it. The North St. Paul engineer apparently desires the water main be looped from Ariel Court to the frontage road to 7th Street. Mr. Cocchiarella indicated on a map the location of the 15-foot-wide easement for sanitary sewer and the 12-foot-wide easement prepared specifically for water main. North St. Paul requests the utilities be installed in this manner because they prefer to have no "dead-ends" in their system because water begins to smell and becomes distasteful when it sits in the line. He added that they do not plan to take out any trees outside the existing easements, but will be coming very close to them. Commissioner Thompson moved the Planning Commission recommend tabling approval of the North Glen Fourth Addition (Castle Avenue) until engineering questions with the city of North St. Paul are resolved. There was no second so the motion died. Commissioner Rossbach moved the Planning Commission recommend: Ao Adoption of the resolution which changes the zoning map from R-1 (single dwellings) to R-I(S) (small-lot single dwellings). This change is for the North Glen Fourth Addition plat. The reasons for this change are those in the code and because the developer plans to develop the site for small-lot single dwellings. Bo Approval of the North Glen Fourth Addition preliminary plat (received by the city on February 7, 1996). Before the city council approves the final plat, a developer shall complete the following conditions: 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. c. Pay the city for the cost of any traffic-control and street-identification signs. d. Provide all necessary easements. The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site drainage. The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the developer or contractor has not completed before final plat approval. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, and street plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-04-96 -5- b. The grading plan shall: (1) Include proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home. (2) Show sedimentation basins as required by the watershed board. (3) Show housing styles that reduce the grading on sites where the developer can save large trees. Co 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. d. The city engineer shall not approve the utility plans until after the North Saint Paul Engineer approves the plans. 4. Change the plat as follows: a. Add drainage and utility easements as required by the city engineer. 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. 5.* Provide all easements required by the city engineer. These shall include any drainage easements for the off-site drainage areas that this project would affect. If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the city 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. C. APprove front setbacks of 50 feet for Lots 1-5, North Glen Fourth Addition. Commissioner Fischer seconded. Commissioner Pearson requested discussion of an amendment to the motion. He proposed adding "e." to B.3. which would require replanting a sufficient number of 2-~" trees to provide a buffer between the south adjoining properties. Mr. Pearson said the tree replacement requirement in the recommendations did not specifically apply to the south boundary. Mr. Roberts suggested the commission add a sentence to Item B.3.c. to address this concern. Mr. Pearson asked to have "the developer will plant, as replacement trees, a sufficient number to provide buffer on south adjoining properties" added to B.3.c. Commissioner Rossbach asked when buffers between residential developments started becoming a requirement. Commissioner Fischer responded that this would be for replacement of any oaks killed by adjacent grading close to the property line. She emphasized that this would not be as a buffer, but a replacement of damaged property that is presently existing, if damage should occur. Commissioner Rossbach said there was not a clear definition of buffer in this area. Commissioner Planning Commission Minutes of 03-04-96 -6- Fischer asked Commissioner Pearson it the motion could be cladfied to say that any trees, of whatever size that the code covers, that go down because of this work will be replaced. Commissioner Pearson explained that, whether the utilities are jacked or dug, he wants to be assured that there will be replantation of any damage to quality trees in that area. He was not looking for additional buffer. Commissioner Rossbach asked if this discussion was being limited to the areas where either a sewer or water was being installed in Maplewood. Commissioner Pearson specified that it would be limited to any work that would affect the rear lot line of the Maplewood proposed development on the south. He thought there was a considerable amount of ambiguity in that neither the Maplewood nor the North St. Paul city engineer have seen and approved this plat and no tree plan has been submitted. Ms. Coleman said we cannot require trees to be planted in the city of North St. Paul. She stated that, if a tree plan is submitted that meets the Maplewood code, it would be difficult to require the planting of additional trees. Commissioner Thompson said that a tree plan can look beautiful on paper, but two years later an owner may have to remove dying trees. The damage is not apparent immediately. Russ Matthys suggested that trees are less susceptible to being shocked when work is done in the spring or late in the fall. Commissioner Kittddge commented that the utility lines are coming from North St. Paul and the damage that occurs on the North St. Paul side of these utilities is something that must be controlled by that city. Commissioner Pearson withdrew his motion to amend the original motion. Ayes-Axdahl, Fischer, Rossbach, Kopesky, Frost, Kittridge Nays-Brueggeman, Ericson, Pearson, Thompson The motion passed. C. Hill-Murray High School Conditional Use Permit (2625 Larpenteur Avenue) Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Frost asked to have Item 8 added to the recommendation. This would require 30 trees to be planted for screening between the new fields and the homes on Knoll Circle. Commissioner Thompson suggested addressing the parking issue now as part of this expansion. Rich Gray, of Toltz, King, Duvall, Anderson and Associates (TKDA), said the catch basin on the north field has been installed. Other catch basins on the plans will be added as the fields and track are regraded and improved. As part of the wetland mitigation performed in the fall, a depression · was formed and two small wetlands were created. Commissioner Rossbach inquired about the need for some type of sedimentation basin, particularly at the end of the catch basins coming from the activity field, as well as the parking lot. Commissioner Frost proposed requiring a turf management plan. Mr. Gray said they had no problem with the requested 30-foot setback for the bleachers. Mr. Gray asked what the city considered "impervious" because on the walking/jogging trail some of the areas do come closer within the 50-foot setback, in particular the maintenance drive. He also asked if the backstop for the baseball field (fencing) could infringe into that area. Mr. Roberts said the buffer area is intended to have no disturbance, including fence. Jim Westerhouse said the backstop is in place already. He said it was even more important, with the 50-foot buffer, is to be able to get emergency vehicle to the upper part of the performance field. Mr. Westerhouse and Mr. Gray also answered questions from the commission. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-04-96 -7- Commissioner Pearson moved the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the resolution which approves a conditional use permit for the school and related athletic fields at 2625 Larpenteur Avenue East. Approval is based on the findings required by ordinance and subject to the following conditions: All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city date-stamped February 1, 1996. The director of community development may approve minor changes. The city council shall review this permit in one year to monitor the traffic and parking situations related to the use of the athletic fields. Any new lights shall be installed to meet the city code. This requires that they be screened or aimed so they do not cause any light-glare problems on streets or residential properties. Dedicate and record a 50-foot-wide wetland-protection buffer easement. This easement shall descdbe the boundary of the buffer and prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer. The property owner shall submit a revised site plan for staff approval if wetland-buffer compliance results in any site plan changes. The part of this wetland buffer area that is already mowed lawn may remain as such. o Post signs on the edge of the wetland-protection buffer prohibiting any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping with the buffer. Wetland buffer signs in the mowed area shall be placed at the edge of the lawn. That portion of the proposed walking/running path within the wetland buffer shall be built with a pervious matedal or the path shall be kept outside the wetland buffer. Revise the site plan for staff approval providing a 30-foot setback for the proposed bleachers from Steding Street and Larpenteur Avenue. Commissioner Pearson also recommended the addition of Item 8. to read "Plant 30 trees for screening between the playing fields and the homes on Knoll Circle." Commissioner Fischer seconded. Commissioner Frost recommended the addition of Item 9. to read "The school shall prepare for city approval a turf management plan for the athletic fields." and Item 10. to read "Revise the grading and drainage plan for city approval to provide sedimentation control at the stormwater discharge point before it dumps into the south wetland area." Joe Peskis of Hill-Murray answered questions from the commission. Ayes-all The motion passed. VI. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS There were no visitor presentations. VII. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS A. February 26 Council Meeting: Mr. Kittddge reported on this meeting. B. March 11 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson said he would attend this meeting. VIII. IX. Planning Commission Minutes of 03-04-96 STAFF PRESENTATIONS There were no staff presentations. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:48 p.m. -8- TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Conditional Use Permit 379 Ripley Avenue March 25, 1996 INTRODUCTION William and Sharon Haessig are requesting that the city approve a conditional use permit (CUP) for their house at 379 Ripley Avenue. This permit is to put a patio enclosure on the existing deck on the rear of the house. The city code requires a 20-foot rear yard setback for the covered parts of the dwelling on this lot. As proposed, the patio enclosure would be 16 feet from the rear property line at the nearest point. (Code allows uncovered decks to be within 5 feet of a property line.) However, the city code allows the council to approve a CUP to build an addition into a required setback. (See the maps on pages 5-7 and the statement on page 8.) BACKGROUND On December 3, 1992, Joe Miller Construction, Inc. applied to Maplewood for a building permit to build the house at 379 Ripley Avenue. The city made the final inspection of this house on March 25, 1993. The Haessig's added the deck to the house in July 1993. DISCUSSION As proposed, the porch enclosure would not depreciate property values, cause crowding or adverse environmental effects. Also, the addition would be in keeping with the character of the houses in the area. Twelve of the 15 neighbors who responded to our survey were for this proposal and none objected. RECOMMENDATION Approve the resolution on page 9. This resolution approves a conditional use permit to construct a patio enclosure on the existing deck of the house at 379 Ripley Avenue. This permit shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the plans dated March 11, 1996 as approved by the city. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed patio enclosure 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 only if a problem develops. CITIZEN COMMENTS Staff surveyed the property owners within 350 feet of this site to get their opinions of this proposal. Out of 20 properties, we received 15 responses. Twelve were for the proposal and three had no comment. For 1. 4. 5. 6. o o 10. 11. 12. This is what the Haessig's want to do to improve their home and add some enjoyment to their lives. I see no reason for them to have to go through all of this for what they want to do. (Vogt - 378 Ripley Avenue) It's in the best interest of this family and increases the market value. (VVebb - 382 Ripley Avenue) They are good neighbors! (Gresback - 383 Ripley Avenue) It is their property - let them do what they want. (Colvard - 386 Ripley Avenue) It is only on one comer of the porch. (Albert - 387 Ripley Avenue) The back of the property faces an apartment building so it is not infringing upon another property owner. (Schreier - 398 Ripley Avenue) This enclosure will not affect anybody adversely, adds to their property value and most important, adds to their comfort. (Kidman - 405 Ripley Avenue) It will give them time to be out and enjoy themselves. (Lewis - 1766 McMenemy Street) It will not effect or create a big difference for the neighbors. (Hmong Church - 1768 McMenemy Street) It will not create any major problem or block the view of the neighbors. (Owner - 1770 McMenemy Street) It appears to lend to the overall improvement of the area. (Dahlquist - 1774 McMenemy) It does not sound like it will bother anyone. (Frans - 1866 McMenemy Street) REFERENCE SiTE DESCRiPTiON Site Size: 11,542 square feet (0.26 acres) Existing Land Use: Single dwelling SURROUNDING LAND USES North: East: South: West: Townhouses on McMenemy Street Houses on Ripley Avenue Houses on Ripley Avenue Houses on McMenemy Street PLANNING Zoning and Land Use Plan Designations: R-1 (single dwelling) ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT Section 36-72(e) allows the city council to approve a conditional use permit to construct a building addition into a minimum setback, CRITERIA FOR CUP APPROVAL Section 36-442(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards. (See findings 1-9 in the resolution on pages 9 and 10.) kr/p: Sec 17/379riply.mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Patio Enclosure Elevations 5. Applicant's Criteria Statement 6. CUP Resolution 3 LITTLE CANADA COUNTY RD. ~"EHTON AVE. KING~'TON ~ Sana'y ~ '* Lake SKI~ AV'[. f~'. ~RNON BE:LLWOOD AVl. SUMMER AVE. BEI. J,4 ON1' LN. SKILL.MAN 2400N z avE.G ~Av ~ Attachment 1 AVE. BELLWOO~D SUI~I~ER CSTON <~ AVE. AVE. VIKING DR. LAURIE CT. BURKE BELI~ONT AV. SAINT PAUL G< Attachment 2 CHURCH OF' T. JEROME 1860 TOWHHOUSE$  l~mme mmmmmmemm~mmmm~llmmmmmemmmmm~m~' . 382~ 86 ,390 94 398. ]770 HMON~ CHURCH / ZONING MAP PROPERTY LINE SITE 5 N Attachment 3 20.80 19.76 REAR SETBACK LINE 15.32 55.18 34.85 95.00 S 89'54'15" W 7 SITE PLAN PROPOSED PORCH LOCATION Attachment Attachment 5 REPONSE TO CRITERIA QUESTIONS l. The proposed 3 Season Enclosure w~l conform with lt~e cities comprehensive plan and code of The proposed 3 Season Enclosure w~ enhance the use of the backyard. The use s~ not del~ec~te prope~ value. It act~ly increases the value of the property. 4. We ~ be us~g the ~ Season En¢losu~e fo~ ou~ own family pleasure. It v~ promote peace tra~q~ty and ~ow us to be outdooFs bug f~ee. O~ cl~ug~Xe~ ~s cspec~a~y sensitive to insect ~y h~s~a~cl is b~d and ! am visibly h-flpa~e~, t~erefore, we spend mo~e t~ne ~ ~ home because of 6. OLLT 3 Season Enclosure v~ ha~e no effe¢~ on ~'~Efic congestion ~n o~r 6. ~ 3 S~on Enclos~e ~ not ~te a b~ ~n p~c u~es, po~ ~ ~e ~e ~e ofo~ 3 S~on Enclos~e wo~ no~ ~eate ex~ssJve afi~fion~ ~ fo~ pu~c ~fies ~ces. & sclc f~. It ~ ~ce o~ ~jo~t ofo~ out~oo~ space. Sharon Haessig Homeowner 8 Attachment 6 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION ~ WHEREAS, William and Sharon Haessig are requesting that Maplewood approve a conditional use permit to put a patio enclosure on the deck on the rear of their house at 379 Ripley Avenue. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property at 379 Ripley Avenue. The legal description is: Lot 8, Block 1, Mad<fort Second Addition (PIN 17-29-22-32-0039) WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: On April ,1996, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. On ,1996, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council gave everyone at the headng a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Maplewood City Council approve the above- described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approves this permit because: 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. o 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. o 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. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: All construction shall follow the plans dated March 11, 1996 as approved by the city. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. The proposed patio enclosure 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 only if a problem develops. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1996. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Associate Planner Conditional Use Permit Revision and Site Plan Review Highway 61, South of County Road D Larry Kidd April 2, 1996 INTRODUCTION Larry Kidd, of Backyard Building Systems, Inc. is requesting a conditional use permit (CUP) revision. He is proposing to relocate his backyard shed sales business north of the recently approved Lexus automobile dealership site - approximately 600 feet north of his existing sales lot along Highway 61. Refer to the map on page 6. He needs to move his business because the Lexus dealership will begin building soon at his current location. Mr. Kidd proposes to purchase the site which is presently owned by Clarence Lacktorin. In 1994 the city council granted Mr. Lacktorin a CUP to pave a parking lot and operate a used-car lot (the "Maplewood Owner to Owner Automart") at this location. Mr, Kidd plans to operate the car lot as well as his shed sales business. Refer to the site plan on page 7 and statement on page 8. The city code requires a CUP for outside displays. DISCUSSION Conditional Use Permit The city council should approve this CUP revision. The applicant has ol~rated a neat and presentable business at his current location for the past five years. I am recommending revising the 1994 CUP conditions since the parking lot is now paved and there would be a new site plan. If the council approves this CUP revision, the annual review scheduled for next July should be postponed to one year from the date of the revision. Site Plan Mr. Kidd plans to install decorative split-rail fencing like he has at his present site. He would also relocate his shrubbery from that location to the proposed site. Wetland Considerations Building and parking lot setbacks from the wetland to the east were a major concern with the recent Lexus proposal. There is no concern with this proposal, however. The applicant is not proposing any additional impervious surface on this site. The existing parking lot pavement is about 150 feet from the adjacent wetland. The code requires a 100-foot-wide buffer from any impervious surface. RECOMMENDATION A. Adoption of the resolution on pages' 9-10. This resolution revises a conditional use permit for a used car sales lot along Highway 61 and allows the addition of a backyard shed display and sales business. Approval is based on the findings required by the code and subject to the following conditions:. 1. All construction shall follow the site plan date-stamped March 29, 1996. The director of community development may approve minor changes i,,.~,,,~:,-,- · ,-~, ..... The .......... ~ ~ ;:V~'.':~¥ ...... ~ .... lot may be expanded to fifty spaces with the community design review board's approval. 2. The city council shall review this permit in one year. -r~,~ ,,:~ ........ I:::c;,~,.i*. i,. ~n ,4 .... 3. If there is not enough parking, the operator or property owner shall provide more spaces. The city staff must approve a plan before paving begins. 4. The operator shall not allow parking on Highway 61 or outside of the parking lot. 5. The operator shall keep the weeds and tall grass cut along the front property line. B. Approval of the site plan date-stamped March 29, 1996 for a used car sales lot and backyard shed sales business on the east side of Highway 61, south of County Road D. The director of community development may approve minor changes. ,. REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 2.32 acres Existing land use: Maplewood Owner to Owner ^utomart SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: West: East: Single dwelling Existing site of Rainbow Play Systems and Backyard Building Systems Highway 61. Across Highway 61 is Sparkle Auto Sales Vacant property (wetland) PAST ACTION Previous Backyard Building Systems Approval May 28, 1991: The city council approved a variance waiving the requirement for in-ground lawn irrigation and approved the site plan for Backyard Building Systems at their current location north of Venburg Tire. Mr. Lacktorin'a Car Lot Approval on the Proposed Site June 13, 1994: The city council approved a CUP for the car sales lot subject to five conditions. At the same meeting, the council approved lawn sprinkler and paving variances. Mr. Lacktorin has since paved the parking lot. September 12, 1994: The council reviewed the CUP and scheduled review again on July 10, 1995. July 10, 1995: The council reviewed the CUP and scheduled review again on July 10, 1996. PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: M-1 (light manufacturing) Zoning: M-1 Ordinance Requirement Section 36-151(b)(4) requires a CUP for the outside display of goods or materials. 3 Criteria for Conditional Use Permit Approval Section 36-442(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards. Refer to findings in the resolution on pages ~-10. p:sec3~sheds.cup Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Applicant's Statement 5. Resolution Attau~nt 1 VADNAI$ HEIOHTS ¢ou~n~ ~D. D Kohl~ BEAM K ~ H IJ,/.A,N AV'F_ ~ ~ PAt.~ GERV,~S AV AVE. VIKIN~ D~ 1320 1322 SPARKLE AUTO SALES Attachment 2 ~NT~t' i~OXD O~ A NSP SUBSTATION :~OWNER TO ~INBOW Pi~Y SYSTEMS O0' WETLAND /: BACKYARD BUILDING SYSTEMS CURRENT LOCATION .¥ NO. 466 J PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP ~ PROPOSED LOCATION OF BACKYARD BUILDING SYSTEMS Attachment 3 SITE7PLAN Backyard Building Systems, 3030 Highway 61 Applicant's Statement Attachment 4 Inc. March 28, 1996 The intended use of the application is to display portable storage sheds. We will use one as an office as we did on 3030 Highway 61. I will landscape in front of the buildings with shrubs and decorative fence. There is security lighting there, and ! will also provide a portable toilet for Backyard Building Systems. I have operated Backyard Building Systems for the past five years at 3030 North Highway 61. In that time ! have maintained a clean and safe environment. I have kept my sales lot in a manner that complies with the City of Maplewood by cutting the grass and weeds and by picking up all papers and waste from Highway 61. ! have kept my display painted and presentable because my desire is to have a first class operation. Respectfully submitted, Larry Kidd President, Backyard Building Systems, Inc. 8 Attachment 5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Larry Kidd applied for a conditional use permit to install a backyard shed display and sales business on a lot along the east side of Highway 61. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the following described property: Tract C, Registered Land Survey Number 525 WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On April 15, 1996, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. The city council held a public hearing on ,1995. 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. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. The use would not depreciate property values. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. -The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. The lot may be expanded to fifty spaces with the community design review board's approval. 2. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 3. If there is not enough parking, the operator or property owner shall provide more spaces. The city staff must approve a plan before paving begins. The operator shall not allow parking on Highway 61 or outside of the parking lot. The operator shall keep the weeds and tall grass cut along the front property line. ,1996. 5. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on l0