Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/15/20041. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, March 15, 2004, 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 4. Approval of Minutes a. February2, 2004 5. Public Headngs None 6. New Business a. Easement Vacation - Van Dyke Village (Van Dyke Street) Venberg Tire (Highway 61 North) Setback Variance Conditional Use Permit c. Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway Landscaping Plan 7. Unfinished Business None 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations a. February 9 Council Meeting: Mr. Desai b. February 23 Council Meeting: Ms. Dierich c. March 8 Council Meeting: Ms. Fischer d. March 22 Council Meeting: Mr, Pearson e. April 12 Council Meeting: Mr. Trippler 10. Staff Presentations 11. Adjournment DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2004 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Jeff Bartol Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Commissioner Mary Dierich Commissioner Paul Mueller Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner Dale Trippler Present Present Absent Present Absent Absent Present Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Dierich moved to approve the agenda. Commissioner Bartol seconded. Ayes - Bartol, Dierich, Fischer, Trippler The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the planning commission minutes for January 20, 2004. Chairperson Fischer had corrections on pages 6 and 13. Chairperson Fischer said on page 6 in the 7thparagraph in the sentence "this discussion was open" the first was in the sentence should be stricken. The second change is on page 13; item d. in the second sentence, it should read, "The application form that gets filled out by prospective commission members is in the staff report." Commissioner Bartol said on page 13 in item d. 8. it should read "Candidates should be encouraged to watch several meetings on cable so they have a better he, rs c,n understanding of what happens during a meeting before serving on a commission" please strike have an and adding have a. Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the planning commission minutes for January 20, 2004, with changes. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes - Bartol, Dierich, Fischer, Trippler Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -2- V. PUBLIC HEARING a. Hillcrest Area (Larpenteur and White Bear Avenues) Ms. Finwall showed a power point presentation while describing the proposed changes to the Hillcrest area. Ms. Finwall said the City of Maplewood is proposing to change the comprehensive land use and zoning map for the Hillcrest area. These changes would be from business commercial (BC), single-dwelling residential (R-l), and church (C) to the newly adopted mixed- use (M-U) land use designation and zoning district. The comprehensive land use and zoning map changes are intended to promote the redevelopment of the Hillcrest area into a mixed-use urban center with compact, pedestrian-oriented commercial and residential land uses. State law requires comprehensive land use map changes to be passed by a two-thirds city council vote (4 votes). Commissioner Trippler had concerns with the way the area was described. He thought the property description should be defined better. Ms. Finwall said she would confer with the city attorney to ensure a legally binding description. Chairperson Fischer opened the discussion to the public. She asked anyone who wanted to speak on this item give their name and address prior to addressing the commission. Mr. Ken Schwartz, Performance Transmission business owner at 1735 Van Dyke Street, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said he is against the rezoning of commercial property because he believes it devalues the property. He said when you rezone residential property to commercial property you raise the value of the property. But when you go from business commercial to mixed use it devalues property. Rezoning his property to mixed use would not fit the criteria of his business. He said when you rezone a building you change the value of the building. When the time came that he wanted to sell his property it would limit him as to who he could sell his property to. The city needs to address what would be taken away from the individual when someone's property gets devalued. He wants his property to remain business commercial. Commissioner Bartol asked what the nature of his business was? Mr. Schwartz said his business is auto/transmission repair. Mr. Al Meister, business owner at 1696 to 1698 White Bear Avenue, and 1715 Van Dyke Street, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He agreed with Mr. Schwartz that by doing this the city would be devaluing his property. He said he had a tenant in one of his properties that moved out already because of what the Met Council has told everyone. The tenant said "who knows, next year the building may be gone", so he left. He said they are having a hard time getting tenants because of the future changes. Very few companies could relocate to that location because of the new changes. Unless you have a developer that would come in and buy everyone out, people don't have the money to upgrade because of the economy. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -3- Mr. Ken Schwartz, addressed the commission again. He said 1 year ago the city adopted Fire Code 1306. The code reads if you change the occupancy within your building you have to sprinkler the whole building. He is looking at remodeling a portion of his business. Within the guidelines of the adopted rule the city would consider the remodeling change to the occupancy, which requires a sprinkler system. He said in Mr. Meister's case to replace the tenant that was in the Laundromat space would run about $60,000 to get a new renter in the building to bring the building up to code. It's hard for a property owner to spend $60,000 not knowing if you can get the money back or not. He doesn't have a problem spending money on his building if his building would be there 30 years from now. He does have a problem spending that kind of money on a building that may be demolished in the next few years. The city needs to ask what impact would this have on the people in the community? He said it's not easy to move a business. It's expensive to retain your customers and you hope they follow you to the new location. Mr. Dave Hulke, residing at 1831 White Bear Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said he would like his property to be considered as one of the properties for this change. He said his property is located just north of Hejny Rental and is about 1 acre in size. The Hejny Rental property is roughly 1¼ acre in size. He said his father passed away in December 2003 and they have been trying since 1969 to get this property changed to commercial to upgrade its value. He spoke to several neighbors and another one of his neighbors is interested in having their property considered for this change as well. Chairperson Fischer asked what the street frontage was for Mr. Hulke's property? Mr. Hulke said his property has 150 feet of street frontage and Hejny Rental has about 200 feet of street frontage. Mr. Bob Cutshall, Building Committee Chair for the Woodland Hills Church located at 1740 Van Dyke Street, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said the church wants to be a good neighbor. They want to understand the rezoning of this property. Their understanding is under the new zoning they would be a permitted use under a conditional use permit as they are currently. Ms. Finwall said churches would remain under the conditional use permit as they are currently. Chairperson Fischer asked if the permit the church currently has has been is grandfathered in? Ms. Finwall said yes. Mr. Cutshall asked if he understood correctly that the church would not be a non-conforming use? Ms. Finwall said the use itself would not be a non-conforming use, however, the parking lot and building would be non-conforming under the new design standards. Mr. Cutshall asked if they would be expected at some point to bring the building up to the design standards? He said the new design standards would be difficult for the church to meet since the building is over 40 years old. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -4- Ms. Finwall said the ordinance would not require the church to update the building unless the church was proposing an addition or exterior remodeling. If the addition exceeded 25% of the floor area of the building it would have to be constructed with the new design standards and any exterior alteration or remodeling would have to meet the design standards? Mr. Cutshall asked if this would have an impact on the finishing of the inside of the building since they are half done? Ms. Finwall said that would not affect the interior building the church has proposed. Ms. Darlene Duran, residing at 1849 White Bear Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the commission. Her property is next door to David Hulke's property and she would like her property to be considered for the rezoning of the area. She is concerned that the commercial zoning has spread past Ripley Avenue. She said Hejny Rental could sell their business to many different companies that wanted to relocate in that location. Chairperson Fischer asked staff to explain the difference between the proposed mixed-use zoning and the current business commercial zoning? Ms. Finwall said Ms. Duran lives north of Mr. Hulke's property. Currently Hejny Rental is operating with a CUP for the exterior storage and the rental facility but they are a non-conforming use because they are located in a residential zoning district. Currently Hejny Rental could sell to a similar type use or the property could be converted to residential property. When the property is rezoned, lower impact commercial uses such as retail or restaurant could be developed or multi- family housing could go there. It appears that the residential portion would develop along the western side of White Bear Avenue before commercial property. Ms. Duran said she would still like her property to be considered as the same zoning as Mr. Hulke. She thinks it's a strange place to make the cutoff on White Bear Avenue and she thinks including one more property shouldn't make difference. Mr. Schwartz asked if there would be a minimum lot size requirement under the new rezoning? Ms. Finwall said only for a single-family home. She doesn't foresee a small lot such as the size of the Duran property developed on its own but the lot could be included with other properties for future redevelopment. Mr. Kevin Johnson, residing at 207 West Kenwood, Maplewood, and a member of the pastoral staff at the Woodland Hills church, addressed the commission. He said the church wants to be supportive of the efforts of improving the community and want to do their best job of being a good neighbor. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the comprehensive map change in the Hillcrest area from business commercial (BC), single-dwelling residential (R-l), and church (C) to mixed-use (M-U). The comprehensive map change includes properties located north of Larpenteur Avenue and south of Ripley Avenue, along White Bear Avenue and Van Dyke Street as follows: (changes to the original motion are underlined and additions are in bold), Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -5- Properties 295 feet west of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to the north property line of 1849 White Bear Avenue; all properties east of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue; all properties east and west of Van Dyke Street from Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue, including 1847, 1887, and 1899 Larpenteur Avenue. The comprehensive map change is based on eight specific comprehensive plan land use and housing goals and four land use policies as follows: Goals: Provide for orderly development. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase jobs and provide desirable services. Minimize the land planned for streets. Minimize conflicts between land uses. Provide a wide variety of housing types. Provide safe and attractive neighborhoods and commercial areas. Plan multi-family housing with an average density of at least 10 units per acre. Policies: Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents. Disperse moderate-income developments throughout the city near bus lines. Support innovative subdivision and housing design. Protect neighborhoods from activities that produce excessive noise, dirt, odors or which generate heavy traffic. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the zoning map change for the Hillcrest area in the City of Maplewood from business commercial (BC) and single-dwelling residential (R-l) to mixed-use (M- U). The zoning map change includes properties located north of Larpenteur Avenue and south of Ripley Avenue, along White Bear Avenue and Van Dyke Street as follows: (changes to the original motion are underlined and additions are in bold), Properties 295 feet west of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to the north property line of 1849 White Bear Avenue; all properties east of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue; all properties east and west of Van Dyke Street from Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue, including 1847, 1887, and 1899 Larpenteur Avenue. The city is making this change because: a. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. Co The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -6- do 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. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes - Bartol, Dierich, Fischer, Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on February 23, 2004. VI. NEW BUSINESS a. Woodhill Subdivision (Linwood Avenue) Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bruce Nedegaard, representing Nedegaard Custom Homes, is proposing to develop a 16-lot plat for single dwellings called Woodhill. It would be on a 12.44-acre site on the south side of Linwood Avenue, east of Sterling Street. Mr. Roberts said the developer intends to sell each of the houses and expects that each will sell for at least $400,000. A homeowners' association would own and maintain the landscaping, rainwater gardens and retaining walls. As proposed, the lots in the plat will range from 11,496 square feet to 22,890 square feet with an average lot size of about 15,939 square feet. The city requires each single dwelling lot in the R-1 (single dwelling) zoning district to have at least 75 feet of width at the front setback line and be at least 10,000 square feet in area. All of the proposed lots would meet or exceed the standards in the city code. Commissioner Trippler asked if it was correct that even though it's the homeowners own property within the 100 foot setback for the pristine wetland there can be no development on the 100 feet on the south half of lots 1 and 2 and the south portion of lots 3 and 4? Mr. Roberts said correct. Commissioner Trippler asked if the city thought people would want to buy a house that they can't do anything with except from 5 feet from the back of their house? He said on page 29 of the staff report it says the best way to ensure protection of the wetland is to enforce the 100 foot wetland buffers and to limit the amount of surface runoff entering the wetland by directing it into rain gardens and swales for infiltration. He asked how the city intended to enforce that? Mr. Roberts said the city has this same issue at different developments in Maplewood. He said the city hopes through proper signage and through education that the homeowners realize they cannot do anything to that part of the property. If a complaint should occur that activity has been occurring in a buffer area beyond the signage and limits the city would investigate it. If there is no complaint the city may not know about the occurrence. Mr. Roberts said he thinks people would jump at the chance to look at a wetland and not have the grass or maintenance to deal with as well as not have another home in their backyard. Commissioner Trippler asked what the city could do if someone started mowing the grass in an area where they shouldn't be? Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -7- Mr. Roberts said the city would try and let the homeowner know what the rules are and handle it that way. If they don't comply the homeowner could end up in court. Commissioner Trippler asked how many cases the city has had go to court for noncompliance of the wetland buffer? Mr. Roberts said there haven't been any cases and that is why the city has been successful in getting compliance and not having to go to court. Commissioner Trippler asked if there were three or four retaining walls planned on page 23 of the staff report? Mr. Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineering for Maplewood said there are three, three-foot high retaining walls. Commissioner Trippler asked if the three foot high retaining walls pose any type of a safety hazard for children? Mr. Cavett said as long as there isn't a falling hazard over four feet tall, and there is a grassy turf area, then it's typically not a hazard. Mr. Bartol said those retaining walls are on private property and are outside the buffer area. If the homeowner wanted to put some type of railing up to keep from any hazard happening they could do that. Commissioner Dierich asked Mr. Cavett why the retaining walls weren't going to be constructed as far over as lot 1 and how the retaining wall should be stabilized? Mr. Cavett said the reason the retaining walls are proposed is because of the difference in the grade in that location. He said according to the building code any retaining wall four feet and over requires a building permit. However, because of the difference in height the city is going to require a building permit for the three three-foot high retaining walls. As part of the building permit process the applicant would be required to submit details of the design. He said typically a retaining wall like this would require a geogrid, which would help stabilize the soil and would be done by the developer as part of the grading of the site. The other concern was to be a covenant or restriction so the homeowners know who is responsible for long-term maintenance of the retaining wall. Commissioner Dierich said the grading is coming very close to the buffer area on lots 1 and 2. She asked how the city would recommend the homeowners to stabilize the area until vegetation and landscaping was put into place? She said the whole hillside slid into the wetland behind her house and now there isn't much of a wetland left. Her concern is that this wetland has vegetation that isn't any place else in the Ramsey County area. Mr. Cavett said he agrees that this is a big concern of the city and the Watershed District. He said anytime you have construction activity taking place there is the potential for problems especially near buffer areas. There are no guarantees but it will have to be looked at very closely and cared for by the developer and the builder. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -8- Commissioner Bartol said in the staff report it states lots 6, 7, and 8 don't comply to the appropriate setbacks, he asked if staff meant lots 5, 6, and 8? Mr. Roberts said that is correct. Commissioner Bartol asked if there was a reason there wasn't a house shown on the plans for Lot 1 Block 1 and Lot 9 Block 2? Mr. Roberts said it his understanding that those are general pads with full basements and lookouts or walkouts would not work there. One of the requirements of the final plans is that all of those details should be shown. Commissioner Bartol asked if there is an anticipated use for the buffer zone north of the wetland area? People are going to walk there so unless there is a plan for people to walk in a specific area they will walk through people's backyards. He said homeowners might be upset having people walk through their property. He asked if Outlot B could be slightly larger to allow actual usable city space north of the pond to accommodate a public path? He said if you don't put a path there people will create their own walking path and will generate an erosion problem. Mr. Roberts said it is staff's opinion that if the trail is built to the cul-de-sac and staff did not anticipate much foot traffic around the north side of the pond. Clearly it's a possibility and Commissioner Bartol raised a good point. Commissioner Bartol said with that many houses and that many kids, not to mention the kids coming over from the New Century development, traffic will increase as the population increases. He said because this is a wooded area it will be a magnet for kids. Mr. Roberts said the public may walk where they want to walk but neither staff nor the parks department anticipated having a trail put there and because of the erosion, buffer area and the sensitivity, he hopes people don't won't walk through peoples property. He said the outlot could possibly be enlarged but he is not sure that would accomplish much. Commissioner Bartol said the single-family lots are already larger than the minimum size, it would give the city greater control over the buffer zone. Mr. Roberts said it would be more under fee ownership verses easement if that was changed, and the question becomes is 10 feet enough space? Chairperson Fischer asked what the paved area of the street would be? Mr. Roberts said the paved area is 28 feet wide instead of the standard 32 feet wide. Chairperson Fischer asked if there would be any problems with on-street parking in this location? Mr. Roberts said 28 feet is wide enough for parking on one side of the street. Chairperson Fischer asked if the city had any plans to visit any of these "no mowing areas" to see if people are complying or not? Planning Commission -9- Minutes of 02-02-04 Mr. Cavett said all the wetland setbacks will have signs as part of the development. One advantage this site would have over other sites is that this will be part of the open space. He spoke with Ginny Gaynor, the Open Space Coordinator, and she said they have volunteers that go through the open spaces to check for those things. He said there will be more eyes policing the area. Neighbors will also be policing the area and the signs indicate what the rules are. Chairperson Fischer asked if neighbors have blown the whistle on other neighbors? Mr. Cavett said the city has received calls from residents asking what was going on and have asked the city to check it out, which keeps the city and the Watershed District more involved. Commissioner Dierich asked if the retaining wall would be built during the grading process or during the construction of the homes? Mr. Cavett said it is important that these retaining walls are built as part of the grading process and not as part of the home construction process. Commissioner Dierich said there are some huge drums in the back yard of the house, she asked what they were used for and if there would be some clean up charges because of pollution? Mr. Roberts said the applicant could address that issue. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Mr. Roger Humphrey, Humphrey Engineering, Inc., 145 Main Street, Woodville, Wisconsin, representing the applicant, addressed the commission. He said they have worked very closely with staff and with the Watershed District early in the process and they will do the best they can in addressing the issues. Commissioner Trippler asked what the small rectangles represented on the plans off the back of each house? Mr. Humphrey said originally an architect drew up the plans and the rectangles are depicted on the plans as elevated decks for that type of building and are shown for illustration purposes only. Commissioner Trippler asked how many levels these homes would be? Mr. Humphrey said they would be one and two story homes. Commissioner Trippler asked for an answer regarding what the drums were in the yard of one of the homes? Mr. Humphrey said those drums are salvaged milk tanks that the homeowner used for landscaping purposes. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant if he had any concerns regarding the conditions listed in the staff report? Mr. Humphrey said no. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -10- Commissioner Bartol said he would agree with Commissioner Dierich regarding the concern of the erosion during the construction process. Concerns such as soil run off, concerns for the trees and killing the vegetation. He was glad to see the developer trying to save as many trees as possible. He has seen less challenging conditions where runoff killed the trees. Trees can only tolerate so much silt and dirt on its root system before it gives way and dies. As a result of the construction process in his neighborhood in the Homes of New Century, the trees are dying and falling over and these too were protected areas. Every measure should be taken to save the trees that are marked. As a result of any trees that don't survive the construction process and die there should be a penalty charged to the developer. Commissioner Trippler said there are a lot of things he likes about this proposal but he's going to vote against it. The reason he is against this is there is over 40 feet of elevational drop from the wetland to the top of the hill. To put the three or four houses on lots 1-4 at the 100-foot setback, is courting sheer disaster. Even if the homeowners are conscientious of not going over the 100-foot setback anything they do to their property will end up in the wetland. He said if this is the most pristine wetland left in Maplewood the city is doomed to put this section of homes in this location. Commissioner Dierich said like Commissioner Trippler, she is very nervous about the grading and elevation of these lots and homes. She is also concerned about homeowners having decks on the rear of the property. Commissioner Dierich asked Chairperson Fischer what her opinion was about this proposal? Chairperson Fischer said recognizing the difficult situation with the large drop in elevation, the wetlands, and the pipelines, many things have been addressed in this report. She said if staff is comfortable with the conditions that are listed, than she is comfortable too. Commissioner Dierich moved to approve the resolution starting on page 34 of the staff report. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the 16-unit Woodhill development on the south side of Linwood Avenue. The city bases this approval on the findings required by code. Approval is subject to the following conditions: All construction shall follow the plans approved by the city. The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes to the plans. Such changes shall include: Revising the grading and site plans to show: (1) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation including keeping and protecting as many of the trees as possible. (2) Revised storm water pond locations and storm water system designs as suggested or required by the watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's design standards. 2. The proposed construction of the plat must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. o Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall meet all the conditions and changes noted in the city engineer's memo dated January 22, 2004. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -11- 4. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Woodhill development shall be: Front-yard setback (from a public street right-of-way): minimum - 20 feet, maximum - 45 feet. bo Front-yard setback (public side street right-of-way): minimum - 20 feet, maximum - none. c. Rear-yard setback: 30 feet from any adjacent residential property line. do Side-yard setback: minimum - 10 feet from a property line and 20 feet minimum between buildings. 5. The developer or contractor shall: ao Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, install all retaining walls as required and any other site improvements required by the city engineer and meet all city requirements. b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Remove the house, any debris or junk from the site. 6. The city council shall review this permit in one year. Commissioner Dierich moved to approve the Woodhill preliminary plat (received by the city on January 2, 2004). The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final plat: (additions to the conditions are underlined), 1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: ao Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all retaining walls, site landscaping and meet all city requirements. b. *Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. C° Have Xcel Energy install Group V rate street lights in two locations - primarily at the street intersections and at the west end of the cul-de-sac. The exact style and location shall be subject to the city engineer's approval. Provide all required and necessary easements (including all utility easements and ten- foot drainage and utility easements along the front and rear lot lines of each lot and five- foot drainage and utility easements along the side lot lines of each lot. Install permanent signs around the edge of the wetland buffer easements. These signs shall mark the edge of the easements and shall state that there shall be no mowing, vegetation cutting, filling, building, grading or dumping beyond this point. City staff shall approve the sign design and location before the contractor installs them. The developer or contractor shall install these signs before the city issues building permits in this plat. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -12- f. Install survey monuments along the wetland and wetland buffer boundaries. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control, street identification, wetland buffer and no parking signs. h. Provide all required and necessary easements, including any off-site easements. Demolish or remove the existing house and garage from the site, and remove all other buildings, fencing, trailers, scrap metal, debris and junk from the site. Cap and seal all wells on site that the owners are not using; and remove septic systems or drainfields, subject to Minnesota rules and guidelines. ko Complete all curb on Linwood Avenue on the north side of the site. This is to replace the existing driveways on Linwood Avenue, and restore and sod the boulevards. *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 all the conditions and changes listed in the memo dated January 22, 2004, and shall meet the following conditions: A specific detailed erosion control plan shall be submitted for staff approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. b. The grading plan shall show: (1) The proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat. (2) Contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. (3) House pads that reduce the grading on sites where the developer can save large trees. This shall include changing the house pad locations on Lots 6, 7 and 8, Block 2 so they meet the approved development setback requirements, to more closely match the other house setbacks and orientation on the street. (4) The proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer. (5) All proposed slopes on the construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. On slopes steeper than 3:1, the developer shall prepare and implement a stabilization and planting plan. At a minimum, the slopes shall be protected with wood-fiber blanket, be seeded with a no-maintenance vegetation and be stabilized before the city approves the final plat. (6) Include the tree plan that: · Shows where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -13- · Shows no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (7) All retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls taller than 4 feet require a building permit from the city. (8) Sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed district or by the city engineer. (9) No grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements from the affected property owner(s). (10) As little grading as possible north and south of the proposed street. This is to keep as many of the existing trees on the site as is reasonably possible. (11) The pipelines and the 8-foot-wide trail from the cul-de-sac to the south property line. (12) The developer is encouraged to make the footprint on lots 1 and 2 on Block 2 as small as possible. c. The street and utility plans shall show: (1) (2) The street shall be a 9-ton design with a maximum street grade of eight percent and the maximum street grade within 75 feet of the intersection at two percent. The street with continuous concrete ribbon curb, except where the city engineer determines that concrete curbing is necessary (3) The completion or replacement of the curb on the south side of Linwood Avenue and the restoration and sodding of the boulevards. (4) Water service to each lot. (5) Repair of Linwood Avenue (street and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the new street. (6) The coordination of the water main alignments and sizing with the standards and requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS). (7) All utility excavations located within the proposed right-of-ways or within easements. The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be outside the project area. (8) The plan and profiles of the proposed utilities. (9) A detail of any ponds, the pond outlets and the rainwater gardens. The contractor shall protect of the outlets to prevent erosion. (10) The cul-de-sac with a minimum pavement radius of at least 42 feet. Planning Commission Minutes of 02o02-04 -14- (11) Label the street as Dahl Avenue on all construction and project plans. d. The drainage plan shall ensure that there is no increase in the rate of storm water run-off leaving the site above the current (predevelopment) levels. The developer's engineer shall: (1) (2) Verify inlet and pipe capacities. Submit drainage design calculations. A landscape plan for the areas along the street, including the rainwater gardens and the cul-de-sac island. The coniferous trees shall be at least six feet tall and any deciduous trees shall be at least 21/2 inches in diameter. 3. 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. c. Label any common areas as outlots. d. Label the street as Dahl Avenue on all plans. e. Change the lot lines for Lot 8, Block 2 so they are more radial to the street right-of-way. f_ Move the north boundary of Outlot B north 20 feet behind lots 1,2, and 3. 4. Pay for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans. o Secure and provide all required easements for the development including any off-site drainage and utility easements. These shall include, but not be limited to, an easement for the culvert draining the pond at the northwest corner of the plat. The developer shall complete all site grading and retaining wall construction. The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the developer or contractor has not completed before final plat approval. 7. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: Submit the homeowners' association bylaws and rules to the director of community development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible party for the maintenance of the common areas, landscaping and retaining walls. 9. Record the following with the final plat: a. All homeowners' association documents. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -15- b. A covenant or deed restriction with the final plat that prohibits any driveways on Lots 1 through 7, Block 1 and Lot 9, Block 2 from going onto Linwood Avenue. Co A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any further subdivision or splitting of the lots or parcels in the plat that would create additional building sites unless approved by the city council. d. A covenant or association documents that addresses the proper installation, maintenance and replacement of the retaining walls. eo Deeds transferring the ownership of Outlots A and B to the city. The city will accept ownership of these outlots in lieu of charging PAC (park access charges) with the building permits. The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city for approval before recording. 10. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading. 11. Obtain a NPDES construction permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). 12. Submit to city staff a copy of the written permission from the pipeline company for any grading or construction within the pipeline easement. 13. 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. C. Commissioner Dierich moved to adopt the zoning map change resolution on page 36 of the staff report. This resolution changes the zoning map from F (Farm Residence) to R-1 (Single Dwelling Residential) for the proposed Woodhill plat on the south side of Linwood Avenue. The city is making this change because it will: 1. Be consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. 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 include in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. 3. Serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. 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. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -16- 5. Serve the site better as the owner plans to develop this property for lots for single-family houses. Commissioner Bartol seconded. The motion passed. Ayes- Bartol, Dierich, Fischer Nay - Trippler This item goes to the city council on February 23, 2004. Commissioner Dierich said she would like to thank the staff for a great job on the report. This item has been before the planning commission before and the report was very complete. She also thanked the developer for listening to the past concerns of the commission and incorporating the issues and concerns into this proposal. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Mr. Bartol was unable to attend as the planning commission representative at the January 26, 2004, city council meeting. Mr. Roberts reported that issues discussed included the 2003 Planning Commission Report, which was approved, the easement vacation of Teakwood that was approved, and the first reading of the Mixed-Use Zoning District was approved as the first reading. b. Ms. Desai will be the planning commission representative at the February 9, 2004, city council meeting. Items to be discussed include the CUP's for ©hlson Landscaping and the resolutions of appreciation of Mr. Rossbach and Ms. Monahan-Junek. c. Ms. Dierich will be the planning commission representative at the February 23, 2004, city council meeting. Items to be discussed include the Hillcrest Area Land Use Plan Map Changes and Zoning Map Change, and the Woodhill Subdivision for 16 single family homes on Linwood Avenue. Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -17- X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Reschedule the February 16, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting due to the Presidents Day Holiday. Mr. Roberts asked planning commission members what day works the best to reschedule the planning commission meeting due to Presidents Day falling on a regular meeting night. Because two members were out of town, the recording secretary or staff would make phone calls to ask members whether Tuesday, February 17, 2004, or Wednesday February 18, 2004, would work better. Xl. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: PROJECT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Easement Vacation Van Dyke Village Townhouses Van Dyke Street, north of County Road B March 9, 2004 INTRODUCTION Mr. Bruce Mogren, representing the developer and the property owners, is asking the city to vacate an existing drainage and utility easement on the site of the Van Dyke Village townhouses. (See the maps on pages four through seven.) This easement is shown on the survey on pages six and seven. Please also see the applicant's statement on page three and the maps on pages four through seven. DISCUSSION Mr. Mogren is requesting the vacation because the existing easement would interfere with the proposed location of one of the buildings within the development. There is, however, an existing sanitary sewer line in the easement. As such, the city needs an easement over the sanitary sewer but it does not need all of the existing easement in its current location. In trade for the city vacating the existing easement, the owners have agreed to provide the city a new easement over the sanitary sewer. Maplewood has no plans to further develop or use the existing easement and it is not needed in its current configuration for the utilities. RECOMMENDATION Approve the resolution on page eight. This resolution is for the vacation of a drainage and utility easement within the site of the Van Dyke Village townhouse development on Van Dyke Street. The reasons for the vacation are as follows: 1. It is in the public interest. 2. The existing easement in its current configuration is not needed for utility purposes. This vacation is subject to the owner providing the city a new 30-foot-wide drainage and utility easement for the existing sanitary sewer line, subject to the approval of the city engineer. REFERENCE INFORMATION Application Date The city received the complete application and plans for this request on February 24, 2004. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a land use proposal. As such, city action is required on this proposal by April 23, 2004. P:\sec11\van dyke village easement vacation Attachments: 1. Applicant's Statement 2. Location Map 3. Area Map 4. Site Plan 5. Site Plan Detail 6. Vacation Resolution Attachment 1 Mogren Development Company Bruce M. Mogren · President FEB 2 ~ 200~ Vacation or Easement Explanation RECEIVED The developer of Van Dyke Townhomes is hereby requesting a vacation of an existing easement for sanitary sewer (description and survey are attached). We propose to redefine the easement to provide a more practical access for the city and developer. It appears that the only remaining issue is the proximity of the actual pipe to our most easterly-attached garage. Our architect and engineer have determined that there should not be a problem if repairs or replacement of the pipe become necessary. If a problem did occur regarding the proximity issue any repairs to the adjacent buildings and landscaping would be the owner's responsibility and expense. 1801 Gervais Avenue · Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 · (651) 777-3600 Phone · (651) 777-5151 Fax 3 Attachn~ent 2 AVE. z ~J~ AVF.. AVE. AVF_ AVE. AV~. NORTH 1700' LOCATION 4 GOODRICH MAP NOF Attachment 3 1250 /¢ o [~ o 221( PROJECT SITE 2200 ~ 0 0 219R I EMMA'S PLACE \ CORD B E Z AREA MAP 2260 LARK AVE E 2242 ~ ~230 LAURIE RD E 210~m 2194 2215 SANDHURST AVl r~82 [] Eli c~ Attachment 4 EASEMENT (600O~LL) DRAWING FOR: BRUCE MOOREN ....... ~ ,,~ ~1 ~ ~2o,~ ALLEY VACATED ~.a-..~ NOTE: ,////./,' '~ /THIS EASEMENT IS PROPOSED.___~///,/' TO BE RELOCATED. , NOR~AST CORN~ ......... / ,0.- ~-,~ _~.~q .... h .... 2 .... 2 .... ~ r 1,'~ B L 0 C K PROPOSED BUIlD,NC z7+ P~CEL '~ .'' b~ VACATED--' ..... ~E ~.~] ,' . ' "~'~. ,'- f .~'~'~'w z~o. oo f - 20 ~ / ;,:~ ~,~ ~ . ~ / ~ ~"~?~f ~ J PROPOSED BUILDING ~O(NT OF BEGIN SITE PLAN ~ EASEMENT IS PROPOSED BE RELOCATED. INDERGROUND SEWER ~ANCES TO AN FEET UARY 16. 1967 ALLEY. VACATED _l 320.4_.0__ NORTHEAST CORN E"R OF LOT 2 BLOCK 13 F-FI F-Fq F,F-I ADDRESS: 2231 VAN DYKE ST PROPOSED BUILDING 20.00 LINE "A" ---, · :NUE, VACAT ,oo. ~,o. ,689~,2. ~,o. ~c. 2. ,,~6) TO AN EASEMENT FOR :E OF SANITARY SEWER MAIN) C N PROPOSED BUILDING ADDRESS: 2211 VAN DYKE ST. 10.0 Attachment 5 ~T~ ri[ ~9o52'26"W ADDRESS: 2201 VAN DY~<E ST. PROPOSED BUILDING ALLEY SITE PLAN DETAIL Attachment 6 VACATION RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Bruce Mogren, representing the developer and property owners, applied for the vacation of the following: A part of a drainage and utility easement located in the vacated Laurie Road right-of-way lying west of Van Dyke Street in Section 11, Township 29, Range 22, Maplewood, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the history of this vacation is as follows: On March 15, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve the public vacation. On April 12, 2004, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent a notice to the abutting property owners. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission. WHEREAS, after the city approves this vacation, the public interest in the property will go to the adjoining property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described vacation for the following reasons: 1. It is in the public interest. 2. The existing easement in its current configuration is not needed for utility purposes. This vacation is subject to the owner providing the city a new 30-foot-wide drainage and utility easement for the existing sanitary sewer line, subject to the approval of the city engineer. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,2004. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Venburg Tire Relocation North of 2999 Maplewood Drive (Gulden's Roadhouse) March 10, 2004 INTRODUCTION Project Description Carol and Pat McFarlane, the owners of Venburg Tire, are proposing to relocate their tire business across Highway 61 to the north side of Gulden's Roadhouse. They are moving their business because County Road D is being realigned to run through the current Venburg Tire site. Refer to the maps on pages 17-21. Because the applicants' construction proposal would take away existing parking spaces from Gulden's, they are proposing to relocate much of Gulden's front parking lot to a new parking lot behind the restaurant. The owners of Gulden's, Brenda and Mike Gingler, would install their own screening for the proposed parking lot. Another aspect of this project is the construction of a shared private roadway that would separate Gulden's from the proposed Venburg Tire site. This private roadway would intersect future County Road D north of the proposed Venburg Tire building and connect with the driveway in front of LaMettry Collision to the south. The city will construct this roadway as part of the County Road D project. Requests The applicants are requesting that the city approve the following: A CUP (conditional use permit) because the proposed building would be less than 350 feet away from the R1 (single dwelling residential) district to the west. This is a requirement of the M1 (light manufacturing district). The proposed building would be 220 feet from the west lot line. Refer to the applicant's justification on page 22. A variance because the proposed building would be less than 350 feet away from the R1 district to the west. This is a requirement for motor vehicle repair garages in M1 districts. As noted above, the proposed building would be 220 feet from the west lot line. Refer to the applicants' justification on page 23. A parking lot setback vadance for the front parking lot from the front lot line. Code requires 15 feet. The applicants are proposing a five-foot setback. Refer to the applicants' justification on page 24. 4. A lot division to split their proposed site from the Gulden's property. 5. Architectural, site and landscape plans. Gulden's would also need the following approval: 1. Approval of a parking lot screening plan and a parking waiver to have 11 fewer parking spaces than the code requires. BACKGROUND The city has purchased the existing Venburg Tire site in order to extend County Road D on the east side of the highway. The applicants are now renting from the city until their new facility opens. DISCUSSION Conditional Use Permit and Variance Requests The code requires that the proposed Venburg Tire building be at least 350 feet from a residential lot line. This separation is to provide a separation between residential properties and automotive-repair buildings to lessen any negative impact. As proposed, the Venburg Tire building would be 220 feet from the residential lot line to the west. This is an undeveloped property, however. The proposed building would be 440 feet from the rear lot lines of the nearest developed residential properties to the west. Several of the homeowners to the west commented that they feel the reduction to 220 feet should not be approved. The 350-foot separation is easily being met for the existing homeowners to the west. The proposed reduction to 220 feet would only affect the abutting property, which is proposed for townhome development by James Kellison of Kelco. In his survey reply, Mr. Kellison supported the Venburg proposal and did not object to the 220-foot setback from his property. It should be noted that the city code does not prohibit developments closer than 350 feet to an abutting residential property, it just requires that the applicant get a CUP. The city council may deny a CUP, of course, but it also gives the council the opportunity to require substantial screening or other safeguards. Staff feels this CUP and vadance should be approved because: The properties of the neighbors along Duluth Street will be 440 feet from the proposed Venburg Tire building. This exceeds the 350-foot separation noted by ordinance. 2. These property owners, furthermore, will be separated from the proposed Venburg building by Mr. Kellison's future town house development. 3. Mr. Kellison feels that the proposed 220 foot building placement from his adjoining lot line is a sufficient separation. 4. The applicants must provide a planting screen as a buffer for Mr. Kellison's future development. Variance from the 15-foot Parking Lot Setback Requirement The applicant is requesting approval to build their front parking lot five feet from the front lot line. Staff supports this request because of the large setback this parking lot would have from the highway edge, a distance of 95 feet. The abutting property on the highway side of this site is not right-of-way, but a separate parcel that has no ownership. This property was set aside for highway use many years ago and never needed as such. It shows up on property data to have no owner. For all intents and purposes, it serves as right-of-way, but technically is not. Typically, highway boulevards are 50 to 60 feet wide. The boulevard on the west side of Highway 61, at the nearest point adjacent to the proposed parking lot, is 95 feet wide. This small encroachment into the actual setback area would not be noticeable and would meet the intent of the code. In a similar case, in 2000, the city council approved a parking lot setback variance for Forest Products at the northeast comer of Highway 61 and County Road C. Forest Products' parking lot was proposed to have an eight-foot setback at its point nearest the highway. The council approved Forest Products' parking lot to be seven feet closer to the right-of-way because the adjacent highway boulevard had a substantial width of 75 feet. Lot Division Guldens' Parking Needs The proposed lot division would cause the loss of parking for Gulden's. As part of this proposal, the applicants will build a new parking lot for Gulden's behind the restaurant. According to parking requirements, Gulden's must have 125 parking spaces. Gulden's presently has 125 spaces, but with this proposal, they would end up with 114, which is 11 short of the code requirement. To accommodate this shortage, the applicants have agreed to a reciprocal-parking arrangement with the owners of Gulden's. With this arrangement, parking would be available for Gulden's customers on the Venburg Tire site. Being that Gulden's busy time is after normal business hours, this would provide beneficial overflow parking. As a condition of approval, staff recommends that the applicants provide verification that they have signed an agreement with the owners of Gulden's for cross parking. Assemblage of Other Parcels The realignment of County RoadD will create three remnant pieces of land. (I labeled these One, Two and Three for ease of discussion. Refer to the map on page 20.) 3 Parcel One, which is part of the original Gulden's site, would be attached to the abutting property. Parcel Two, which is presently part of the abutting property to the north, would be attached to the Venburg Tiro property, and Parcel Three, which is presently part of the original Gulden's site, will end up lying north of future County Road D. This piece would be dedicated to the city as right-of-way for County Road D. As conditions of approval, staff recommends that Parcel One be deeded to the abutting property, Parcel Two be joined by legal description to the Venburg Tiro site and Parcel Three be deeded to the city for right-of-way. Shared Private Driveway The proposed lot-division line will, for the most part, follow the shared private roadway that the city would construct. This driveway should be covered by an easement document granted by the owners of all affected properties. Architectural, Site and Landscape Plans Architectural (Building Design and Materials) The applicants' architect has indicated that they aro still making final selections of building materials and colors. The following is the most up-to-date proposal: The proposed building would be constructed of precast concrete panels with the exception of the two front entry exposures. These would be accented with a wainscot of rock-face concrete block veneer, face brick above the block, a standing-seam metal awning above the brick and EIFS (exterior insulation finish system). EIFS is a material having a stucco-look finish. The precast concrete panels aro shown to have a combination of smooth and aggregate-texture finish. The proposed building colors would be light gray concrete panels, black brick, black metal awning and canopy, and light gray EIFS. Other details include the painting of the rooftop mechanical equipment to match the precast panels. The trash enclosure would be located directly behind the building. It would have sides of precast concrete panels with chain link fence gates facing west. The applicants also propose to build a concrete pad to park a used-tiro trailer next to the shared access ddveway to the south. The city code requires that commercial buildings be designed to be compatible with the others in the aroa. The nearest building is Gulden's that is concrete block. The proposed building is compatible with Gulden's in the type of matedal proposed. Moro recent buildings in the near vicinity, however, have been upgraded with moro decorative finishes like the Lexus and Volvo dealerships, LaMettry Collision and Maplewood Toyota. In terms of appearance, the look and finish of the proposed Venburg Tiro building should be designed to fit somewhere between Gulden's and the newer buildings in the area. Staff does not object to decorative concrete panels, but if used, should be a color and design that fits this aroa of improving architectural materials. Regarding color, staff feels that the gray of the concrete panels should not be the finish color. Natural concrete has a cold and unappealing appearance. The building should have a warmer tone. 4 Another point to consider is that there will be future commercial development north of the proposed County Road D alignment. Staff feels that the city should continue the recent precedent of improved design with this proposed building since we will be looking for the same with future proposals. Site Design Considerations Parking: The proposed building must have 27 parking stalls according to ordinance. There are 32 proposed. Used Tire Storage: The proposed location for the used tire storage should be moved to a concealed location. Used tires should be kept within an enclosure as would the trash container. Signs: The site plan shows the placement of a freestanding sign at the northeast corner of the parking lot. This review does not consider signage. The applicants will need to work with staff on their signage proposal. Site Lighting: The applicants' photometric plan indicates that there would not be any light spillover that exceeds the maximum-allowed limit of .4 footcandles. The fixture design would be shoebox style that conceals the lens and bulb. The only concern staff has is with the two west-facing wall packs that sometimes glare toward abutting properties. These lights should be further evaluated to make sure that they do not cause any nuisance to future neighbors. Well Abandonment: Gulden's is presently on a pdvate well that is located on the proposed Venburg Tire site. A condition of this approval should be that the owners of Gulden's properly abandon this well in accordance to state requirements. Gulden's will then hook up to the city water supply. Landscaping: Staff has several concerns about the proposed landscaping plan. The proposed landscaped buffer on the west side of the site must provide screening that is at least six feet tall and 80 percent opaque upon planting according to code. This is to screen Venburg Tire from the residential properties to the west. Staff acknowledges that screening may be difficult to attain because of the grade drop from the shared roadway to the proposed parking lot. The trees shown, though, are too few to meet this requirement. Staff is supportive of the CUP for this building placement, but it should be contingent on stdct adherence to the city's screening requirements. There are no plantings on the highway side of the proposed parking lot. Staff recommends some landscaping in this area to enhance the site as is the typical requirement. The proposed building would be six feet from the adjacent pdvate roadway. This is very close in terms of providing sustainable landscaping. Staff feels that the proposed row of spirea will not hold up to seasonal crushing by plowed snow. Plantings along this building elevation are essential to help visually break up this large surface. Staff recommends that the applicant revise the planting detail in this area, perhaps with a row of trees spaced 20 feet on center. Granted, special attention must be given to selecting trees that will grow suitably next to a building and, also, that are salt resistant. The proposed Autumn Blaze maple trees on the south side of County Road D are spaced at approximately 65 feet on center. The city typically requires boulevard trees to be spaced at 30 feet on center. Staff recommends additional trees for a closer spacing. · The applicants are proposing a seed mix on the westerly hillside of the site and sod on the remainder. The applicants propose to irdgate the site to the base of the westedy slope. Staff feels that this is acceptable as long as the applicants make sure to water the seeded slope by hoses and sprinklers. Gulden's Parking Lot Setback The proposed Gulden's rear parking lot is shown to have a five-foot setback. The city code requires 20 feet since the abutting property is proposed for residential use. The owners of Gulden's have said that they intend to meet the 20-foot setback requirement. Parking Lot Screening The owners of Gulden's are proposing to plant seven spruce trees on the west side of their proposed parking lot. As stated above, this number would be too few to provide the required screening. Staff recommends that the owners of Gulden's resubmit a screening plan that complies with the city code for the required screen that is six feet tall and 80 percent opaque. Parking Waiver The city code requires that Gulden's has 125 parking spaces. With the proposed rear parking lot, there would be 114. This would require approval of a parking waiver for Gulden's. As stated above, Gulden's and Venburg Tire would have a reciprocal parking agreement for cross parking. Staff finds this to be a good solution and feels that the waiver for 11 fewer spaces should be approved. Site Li,qhting The photometric plan indicates that there would not be any light spillover that exceeds the maximum-allowed limit of .4 footcandles. The fixture design would be shoebox style that conceals the lens and bulb. Department Comments Building Official The building must have an automatic sprinkler system and meet all building code requirements. Police There are no significant public safety issues. Fire Marshal 1. Fire protection will be required in accordance to Section 1306 of the IBC (International Building Code). 2. Monitoring of the fire protection will be required. 3. Maintain a 20-foot emergency access road. 4. There must be a fire department lock box. 5. Storage of tires must be done according to MSFC 2505 Outside Storage and MSFC 2509 Inside Storage. If a fence is going to be used for tire storage, MSFC 2507 shall be followed. City Engineer Refer to the report on pages 29-30 from Chris Cavett, Maplewood Assistant City Engineer. Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District The following are comments from Cliff Aichinger of the watershed district: 1. The site would add impervious surface to the area. Drainage patterns are not shown, but I assume the site drains to the western Highway 61 ditch and south to Kohlman Creek and Kohlman Lake. The project would require water runoff treatment for the new impervious surface area. Since the Gulden's property is not treated by any water quality feature, it is recommended, though not required, if a joint facility could be designed. 2. The site has some steep slopes. We assume some retaining walls will be incorporated into the plans. In either case, a site erosion and sediment-control plan will be required which addresses erosion issues dudng construction and after. 3. A distdct permit is required. Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Engineers from MnDOT have stated that the following permits are required: platting permit, entrance permit, drainage permit and utility permit for the proposed construction and site development. The applicants' engineer should contact MnDOT and obtain any required permits as a condition of these approvals. The platting permit is needed because new subdivisions adjacent to MnDOT right-of-way need a permit. RECOMMENDATIONS Ao Adopt the resolution on pages 31-32 approving a conditional use permit for the proposed Venburg Tire building to be located 220 feet from the adjacent residentially-zoned property to the west. Approval is based on the findings required by city code and the following reasons: 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. 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. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. 10. The neighboring properties along Duluth Street would be 440 feet from the proposed Venburg Tire building. This exceeds the 350-foot separation noted by ordinance. 11. These property owners, furthermore, will be separated from the proposed Venburg building by a future town house development. 12. The owner of the abutting westerly property that is proposed for townhomes approves of the proposed 220 foot building placement from his adjoining lot line. Approval of this permit is conditioned upon compliance with the following: construction shall follow the site plan that the city stamped February 3, 2004. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. The proposed construction must be substantially started, or the proposed use utilized within one year of council approval, or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. The applicants shall submit a revised landscape plan, prior to the issuance of a building permit, providing a six foot tall and 80 percent opaque landscaped screen for the abutting property to the west as required by the code. The applicants shall sign a maintenance agreement with the owners of Gulden's and the city for the upkeep of the private roadway. o Outdoor tire storage is not allowed by this permit. All tires shall be kept within a screening enclosure. The potential for excessive noise from this business is a concern of neighbors. The operator shall take care to keep doors closed to prevent nuisance noise from affecting residential neighbors. The city council shall review this during its periodic reviews of this permit. Adopt the resolution on pages 33-34 approving a variance to locate a building, that would be used for automotive repair, 220 feet from an abutting residential property. Approval is based on the following findings: Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship to the applicants because the site is not large enough to accommodate the proposed building without approval of a variance. The vadance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance since the grade slopes downward from the existing home sites to the west, which helps to obscure some of the mass of the proposed building. 3. The owner of the adjacent property to the west, the most affected neighboring owner, is in favor of the proposed building placement. Approval of this vadance is conditioned upon the applicants submitting a revised landscape plan for staff approval providing for screening on the west side of the proposed parking lot. This screening shall comply with city code that requires a visual screen that is at least six feet tall and 80 percent opaque upon installation. This landscape plan shall also include a turf establishment plan for this area. Adopt the resolution on pages 35 approving a vadance from the 15-foot front parking lot setback requirement. Approval is based on the following findings: Stdct enforcement would cause undue hardship to the applicants because it would cause them to set the parking lot further back needlessly, with no benefit. The vadance would be in keeping with the spidt and intent of the ordinance since there would be 95 feet of setback from the highway edge, which is approximately 40 feet more than the typical parking lot setback in this situation. Approval of a lot division to split the proposed Venburg Tire site from the Gulden's Roadhouse property, at 2999 Maplewood Ddve. Before the city signs the deeds creating the new lots, the owners of Venburg Tire shall do the following: Agree in wdting to provide a new rear parking lot for Gulden's Roadhouse to replace lost parking due to the creation of the Venburg Tire site. The construction of this parking lot will be coordinated with the construction of the Venburg Tire site. Agree in writing to a reciprocal parking arrangement with the owners of Gulden's to accommodate at least 11 parking spaces on the Venburg Tire site for use by Gulden's patrons after Venburg Tire is closed. 3. Agree to a maintenance agreement with the owners of Gulden's and the city for the maintenance of the shared pdvate roadway. Dedicate the small triangular remnant piece, in the northwest comer of the odginal Gulden's parcel, to the property owner northwest of the new shared pdvate roadway. This is denoted as Remnant Parcel 1 in the staff report. Dedicate the excess property in the northeast comer of the Venburg Tire site to the City of Maplewood for right-of-way. The city engineer shall determine the exact configuration of this additional right-of-way. This is denoted as Remnant Parcel 3 in the staff report. ]0 The triangular-shaped remnant property located south/southeast of the intersection of proposed County Road D and the proposed pdvate roadway shall be adjoined with the Venburg Tire site. This is denoted as Remnant Parcel 2 in the staff report. Provide drainage and utility easements as recommended by the assistant city engineer in his memo dated March 8, 2004. Since the exact locations of these easements may need to be determined after the stamping of deeds to split the lot, these easements must be dedicated pdor to the applicants obtaining a building permit. The deeds creating the Venburg Tire site must be recorded before the city shall issue a building permit. Approval of the site plan date-stamped February 3, 2004, the civil drawings date- stamped March 1, 2004, the photometric plan date-stamped March 1, 2004 and the revised elevations date-stamped March 9, 2004, for Venburg Tire. Approval is subject to the applicants complying with the following conditions: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Before getting a building permit, the applicants must: a. Provide the following for staff approval: 1) A grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plan to the city engineer for approval. 2) A revised landscaping plan including the following: A planted screen on the west side of the site to provide screening that is at least six feet tall and 80 percent opaque upon planting according to code. There are no plantings on the highway side of the proposed parking lot. Staff recommends some landscaping in this area to enhance the site as is the typical requirement. Substitution of the row of spirea on the south side of the building with a row of trees spaced 20 feet on center. Special attention must be given to selecting trees that will grow suitably next to a building and, also, that are salt resistant. Increasing the number of trees on the south side of County Road D to accomplish a spacing of 30 feet on center. ]] The applicants propose to irrigate the site to the base of the westerly slope. Staff feels that this is acceptable as long as the applicants agree to water the seeded slope by hoses and sprinklers. All sodded areas must have an in-ground lawn irrigation system. 3) A revised site plan with the following changes: The addition of a sidewalk to connect the proposed sidewalk on the south side of County Road D to the Venburg Tire parking lot. · Used-tire storage placed within a screening enclosure. 4) Wall-pack lighting details to vedfy that the fixture type will not cause excessive glare to the westedy neighbor. 5) Revised building elevations that provide for a brown-tone color scheme for the proposed building. 6) Revised building elevations that provide for the screening of roof-top mechanical equipment as required by code. 7) Record the deed with Ramsey County for the creation of this site. This recording also includes the dedication of right-of-way to the city, the dedication of excess property to the neighboring property owner west of the pdvate roadway and the combination of the remnant property with the Venburg Tire site in the northwest corner of the property. Apply for all required permits from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Ramsey/VVashington Metro Watershed District. Comply with all requirements of the Maplewood Building Official and Fire Marshal. Signs are not part of this approval. The applicants shall work with staff on site and building signage. All proposed signs must meet the requirements of the city's sign ordinance. Comply with all of the requirements of the assistant city engineer in his memo dated March 8, 2004. ]2 Fo Approval of the proposed conceptual changes to the Gulden's Roadhouse site for a new rear parking lot, site lighting and landscaping. Approval is subject to the owners of Gulden's submitting the following plans before the city will issue a grading and paving permit for the new parking lot: A revised landscape plan for staff approval providing for screening on the west side of the proposed parking lot. This screening shall comply with city code that requires a visual screen that is at least six feet tall and 80 percent opaque upon installation. This landscape plan shall also include a turf establishment plan for this area. 2. A detailed grading and drainage plan. A revised site plan showing compliance with the required 20-foot minimum parking lot setback from the west lot line. The proposed parking lot shall have continuous concrete curb and gutter. 4. Seal the well on the proposed Venburg Tire site according to State of Minnesota Department of Health well-abandonment requirements. ]3 CITIZEN COMMENTS Staff surveyed the 27 surrounding property owners within 500 feet of this site for their comments. Of the seven replies, one was in favor, three were opposed, one had no comment and two did not take a for-or-against position but had comments. No Comment This reply came from the owners of the Country View Golf Center. In favor Kami, Inc. supports this use. It is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. We look forward to Venburg Tire being our neighbor. (Jim Kellison for Kelco Real Estate Development Services representing Kami, Inc.) (Mr. Kellison is the owner/developer for the vacant property to the west of Gulden's and the proposed Venburg Tire site. He is proposing to develop this property with town houses.) Opposed Refer to the letter on pages 26-27 from Richard and Joyce Lambert, 2986 Duluth Street. In summary, the concerns noted are relative to potential noise problems, screening from the proposed Gulden's parking lot, compliance with shoreland requirements (their mention of a watershed area), possible negative impact on the residents to the west and disagreement with granting a CUP from the 350- foot spacing requirement. Refer to the email response on page 28 from Edc Curtin, 3003 Duluth Street. In summary, Mr. Curtin raised the concerns about increased congestion, noise and pollution. He is also opposed to a CUP for the reduction of the 350-foot spacing requirement. I do not object to Venburg Tires relocation, but I do object to the conditional use permit for the building to be 220 feet rather than 350 feet away from the west lot line. Why have the requirement of 350 feet if you do not enforce it? Let them be 350 like all the others have to be! All auto places are supposed to be 350 feet from the westerly lot line. (Richard and Carolyn Buchman, 2954 Duluth Street) Comments Consideration needs to be given to this new Venburg location, the realignment of County Road D and the increased business activity at Toyota and LaMettry's. We live on Duluth Street and our property overlooks Highway 61. Please require a property landscape plan and sound abatement to insure they meet the neighborhood integrity. This also includes updating LaMettry (very noisy) and Toyota. Thank you. (Don and Marguerite Newpower, 2946 Duluth Street) ]4 2. We already have Toyota so it doesn't make much difference. (Thomas and Kathleen Myers, 2914 Duluth Street) REFERENCE SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: Two acres Existing Use: Gulden's Roadhouse parking lot SURROUNDING LAND USES North: The future realignment of Duluth Street and proposed commercial development South: Gulden's Roadhouse East: Maplewood Drive (Highway 61) and the existing location of Venburg Tire West: Vacant property proposed for town homes (pending proposal) PLANNING Land Use Plan Designation: M1 Zoning: M1 Criteda for CUP Approval Section 44-1097(a) states that the city council may grant a CUP subject to the nine standards for approval noted in the resolution on pages 31-32. Findings for Vadance Approval State law requires that the city council make the following findings to approve a variance: 1. Stdct enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property under consideration. 2. The variance would be in keeping with the spidt and intent of the ordinance. Undue hardship, as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by the official controls. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the landowner, and a variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. APPLICATION DATE We received the complete applications and plans for these requests on March 1, 2004. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a proposal. City council action is required on this proposal by April 30, 2004 unless the applicants agree to a time extension. p:sec 4\Venburg Tire Relocation. CUP Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line Map 3. Zoning Designations and Land Use Plan Classifications 4. Site Plan 5. Venburg Tire Landscape Plan 6. Conditional Use Permit Justification 7. Building Setback Variance Justification 8. Parking Lot Setback Variance Justification 9. Gulden's Roadhouse Landscaping Plan 10. Letter from Richard and Joyce Lambert 11. Letter from Eric Curtin 12. Memo from Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer dated March 8, 2004 13. Conditional Use Permit Resolution 14. Building Placement Variance Resolution 15. Parking Variance Resolution 16. Plans (separate attachments): a. Site Plan date-stamped February 3, 2004 b. Civil Engineering Plans and Building Elevations date-stamped March 1, 2004 c. Photometric Plan date-stamped March 1, 2004 d. Revised Building Elevations date-stamped March 9, 2004 e. Venburg Tire Landscape Plan date-stamped March 1,2004 Attach~=nt 1 VADNAIS HEIGHTS G GULDEN'S RESTAURANT PROPOSED VENBURG TIRE . LOCATION r. ~'s 1. S~li~ .... ,I.. L~'1)IA A~'E. m,~ ~c m ~[XTA,NT A~.... ~I~'Q, NS AV~... ',Z AVE. LOCATION 17 MAP Attachment 2 COUNTY ROAD D CORD D E DSTN PROPOSED VENBURG TIRI GULDEN'S ~ EXISTING VENBURG TIRE LOCATION LOT DIVISION -'TRY COLLISION MAPLEWOOD TOYOTA . BEAM AVE PROPERTY LINE MAP 18 Attachment 3 140.o3 1(3~) SU~T CT. ~ i Mi 4.~ ac PROPOSED VENBURG TIRE LOCATION °Undary (3)) .% 8 ~ 20 cT. Ri 14 '~ Attachment 4 REMNANT PARCEL 2 REMNANT PARCEL 1 - PROPOSED LOT DIVISION REMNANT PARCEL 3 SITE PLAN e~oseuu!lAI pooMelde~ 331A~3S ~ 3WII ~RSN3A Attachment 5 I /I i/ Attachment 6 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: MCFARLANE PROPERTIES, LLC The Property ("Parcel A") has been selected as the site for the relocation of the current Venburg Tire Store, which business involves retail, commercial and wholesale tire sales, and automotive repairs. The Applicant requests the City Council for the City of Maplewood to approve the Conditional Use 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. o 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 be adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the develoPment design. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. 22 F:\Clients\1779~0401 - Conditional Use Permit.wpd Attachment 7 BUILDING SETBACK VARIANCE APPLICANT: MCFARLANE PROPERTIES, LLC The Property ("Parcel A") has been selected as the site for the relocation of the current Venburg Tire Store, which business involves retail, commercial and wholesale tire sales, and automotive repairs. The City of Maplewood Zoning Code requires a 350 foot setback between a retail tire and automotive repair store and a residential property line. The Applicant is proposing a 200 foot setback between the proposed building on proposed Parcel A and the residential property line. This will require a variance of 150 feet. The Applicant requests the City Council for the City of Maplewood to approve the variance for the following reasons: 1. Strict enforcement of the City Ordinances would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property, as the Applicant cannot put the property to reasonable use if the City denies the variance. The 350 foot setback requirement makes development of the site extremely difficult. The proposed variance would not alter the essential character of the area. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Ordinance. The proposed variance would not be excessive and would still protect the residential property, which is the intent of the Ordinance. 23 F:~Ciients\1779\0401 - Zoning Code Variance [Building].wpd Attachment 8 PARKING LOT SETBACK VARIANCE APPLICANT: MCFARLANE PROPERTIES, LLC The Property ("Parcel A") has been selected as the site for the relocation of the current Venburg Tire Store, which business involves retail, commercial and wholesale tire sales, and automotive repairs. The City of Maplewood Zoning Code requires a 15 foot setback between a parking lot and the right of way. The Applicant is proposing a 5 foot setback between the proposed parking lot on proposed Parcel A and the right of way. This will require a variance of 10 feet. The Applicant requests the City Council for the City of Maplewood to approve the variance for the following reasons: 1. Strict enforcement of the City Ordinances would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property, as the Applicant cannot put the property to reasonable use if the City denies the variance. The 15 foot setback requirement makes development of the site extremely difficult. The proposed variance would not alter the essential character of the area. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intern of the Ordinance. The proposed variance would not be excessive. 24 F:\Client$\1779\0401 - Zoning Code Variance [Parking Lot].wpd Attachment 9 VENBURG TIRE GULDEN'S SI f~ .... ~, ,,.?-',, , SEVEN SPRUCE TREES PROPOSED· , .~ /I Attachment l0 February 14, 2004 Thomas Ekstrand City of Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 I am in receipt of your letter dated February 10, 2004 regarding Venburg Tire relocation. Since I have already spoken with your on the phone, I would like to put in writing some of my concerns. It would be much easier to give feedback if the maps were more comprehensive. I know County Road D will be impacting the proposed area for Venburg Tire, however, the map does not indicate where County Road D will be routing through the area. On the Property Line Map/Zoning Map the north boundary line indicates the Venburg Tire or Gulden's has vacated the 33' of land that was to be Lydia Ave. Is this the case? This same map has very detailed numbers regarding the size of the residential lots, however, the dimensions for the Gulden's and Venburg lots are not on the map. It is very difficult to visualize and compare this proposal when information is not included. On the Site Plan map there is a parking lot behind Gulden's. This parking lot currently does not exist. Is there a request from Gulden's to construct a parking lot, or has that already been approved? I have not seen or heard anything 'about this parking lot, but have observed construction activity behind Gulden's. My other concern is the noise Venburg Tire will create. Although we live away from the Lametry business, we are able to hear noise created from their operation. I am very concerned about the noise level Venburg Tire would generate. I did not see any landscaping addressing this issue. ,---:__-----:~-F-F':'i:'--' i ii~ , ..... 26 ii ! My other concern is the property behind Gulden's. We have always been told that this is a watershed area and would not be developed. However, during our discussion, you informed me that there would be some development on this property. I view this development as having a negative impact on the properties abutting this land. As with the property development south of Gulden's where there is a good amount of space between the business's and homes, it should be the same for the property behind Gulden's. To ask for a conditional use permit to deviate 120' from the code when there is a possibility of purchasing additional footage behind the proposed site and requesting a zoning change does not make sense to me. The space is there, just how much does the city want to cram into it? For the above reasons, We are against granting Venburg Tire the conditional use permit. Richard and Joyce Lambert 2986 Duluth St. Maplewood, MN 55109 27 Attachment ll Tom Ekstrand From: Sent: To: Subject: Eric Curtin [curtin@lP-FIRM.com] Fdday, February 13, 2004 11:38 PM Tom Ekstrand Venburg Tire - Proposed Relocation Tom: I am responding via this email to your letter of February 10, 2004 regarding the above-referenced'matter. The lot division to divide the proposed site from Gulden's Restaurant would increase the number of residents per unit area along that strip and therefore generate a more congested feel. In addition, the division with corresponding construction of a new commercial enterprise will increase noise and other pollution in the area. Given the relatively immediate nature of the adjacent residential area, I believe it paramount that the larger lot size be maintained to facilitate lower congestion along that area. I oppose the conditional use permit for similar reasons. The code requiring 350 feet of space between any building and the westerly lot line serves a significant purpose - keeping space between a residential area and a commercial area. The proximity of residential areas with commercial areas dictates that existing rules and lot divisions be maintained. We strongly oppose the division of the Gulden's Restaurant site and the approval of the conditional use permit. Thank-you for your attention and for apprising us of this matter. Good luck in solving the surrounding issues - regardless of the decision that is made, people will be disappointed and in that regard, you have a difficult job. We appreciate your efforts. If you would, please confirm that you have received this email by responding with a brief acknowledgment. If necessary, I can return the letter you sent to us with these comments attached. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Eric J. Curtin Attorney at Law Crawford Maunu PLLC Intellectual Property Attorneys 1270 Northland Dr., Suite 390 St. Paul, Minnesota 55120 651/686.6633 x103 (office) 651/686.7111 (fax) 612/747.2828 (mobile) curtin@ip-firm, com <mailto:curtin@ip-firm. com> <http://www. ip-firm, com/> / www. ip-firm, com NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY AND ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED/WORK PRODUCT This transmission contains confidential information. The attorney-client privilege and the attorney work-product doctrines may protect this confidential information. This confidential information is to be reviewed only by the addressee identified above. If you have received this transmission in error, you are instructed to destroy all pages immediately and to call the sender at the telephone number indicated 28 Attachment 12 Maplewood Engineering Review Project: Venburg Tire & Venburg/Guldens Lot Split Reviewed by: Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer Date: March 8, 200~ Background Summary: In conjunction with the County Road D Realignment projects, the Maplewood Public Works Department has been working directly with the McFarlanes over the last year with regards to the relocation of Venburg Tire to this new proposed location. The Maplewood engineering department and the city's consultant URS has been working closely with the Venburg site plan and the layout of the proposed frontage road. There is a considerable amount of project coordination that must take place as part of this project. As part of the relocation and exchange agreements associate with the County Road D Realignment projects, the frontage will be constructed by the city as well as the rough grading of the proposed Venburg site. Construction on the Guldens/Venburg frontage road is scheduled to begin in late-April. Guldens must be connected to the proposed water main before the applicant can begin much work on the proposed Venburg site, as it is the location of Guldens well. In addition the applicant has an agreement with Guldens to construct the rear parking lot of Guldens before the Guldens north Parking lot can be eliminated. No ponding is required on this site as the runoff from this property has been accounted for in a regional pond located to the SW of the Guldens property. Pre-treatment of runoff will be accommodated by individual private treatment structures. Review Comments: In concept the Venburg Tire project as presented in the submittal material is feasible; however there are still a few details that must be addressed in revised plans. The engineering staff is quite comfortable that these details can be addressed before any permits are issued. With that said however, there appears to be a lack of coordination between applicant's plans and the city's frontage road plans. A design review meeting will take place with applicant's project manager, engineer, architect, the city's consultant - URS and the Maplewood Engineering Department before final plans will be accepted. The following issues shall be addressed: The city and their contractor shall be responsible for initial erosion control following the rough site grading. The applicant shall show on their Grading and Erosion Control Plan where and what permanent and temporary erosion control measures will be utilized. 29 o o It will be impractical to have any private utilities installed in the frontage road due to timing and coordination of the projects. Show the water, gas and electric entering the building in a location away from the street construction. It is extremely doubtful that St. Paul Regional Water Service, (SPRWS), will permit the water service in the right-of-way to be located in such close proximity to the gas and electric services, nor is it a good practice within the property. Coordinate any water service issues with Mike Anderson of SPRWS. The sanitary sewer was shown being extended in from the proposed main in County Road D. It appears that the segment of sewer may not be constructed until the realignment project takes place. Therefore staff and URS have proposed that the sewer service be located on the T.H. 61 frontage. It would seem logical that both the sewer and water services be located next to each other also. The connections of the Venburg and Guldens storm sewer systems to the proposed city storm system shall be located at one of the storm structures being constructed during the city's project. Location and size shall be coordinated with the URS plans. Provide the city with the proper drainage and utility easements over the public sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer. Easements will be needed from both the Guldens and Venburg Properties for the public infrastructure along the T.H 61 frontage and from the Guldens property along their south property line. Exact locations and sizes will be determined with the revised plans. Provide 20-foot drainage and utility easements on either side of the common lot line, (proposed frontage road). Provide 1 O-foot drainage and utility easements along the west property lines of both properties and the north and east property lines of the Venburg Tire site. Before utility permits will be issued for the construction of storm sewer, provide design calculations and sizing determination of the treatment structures, (Stormceptors), for both the Venburg site and Guldens site. Before utility permits will be issued for the construction of storm sewer, both the owners of Venburg Tire and Guldens shall sign respective BMP Maintenance Agreements with the city ensuring private maintenance of their respective storm water treatment structures. At~er the above conditions have been met, the applicant(s) may submit applications for Grading and Utility permits. Applications for both permits may also be obtained on the city's website: www. ci.maplewood.mn.us 30 Attachment 13 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Carol and Pat McFadane applied for a conditional use permit to construct their new building closer than 350 feet to an adjacent residential district. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property to the north of Gulden's Roadhouse, 2999 Maplewood Ddve. The legal description is: That part of the north 409.50 feet of the east 500.00 feet of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota, lying northerly of a line drawn from a point on the east line of said Northeast Quarter of Section 4 distant 235.77 feet south of the northeast comer of said South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4 to a point on the west line of said east 500.00 feet of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4 distant 115.53 feet south of the northwest comer of said east 500.00 feet of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: On March 15, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council this permit. The city council held a public hearing on City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present 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: 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. 31 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: o All construction shall follow the site plan that the city stamped February 3, 2004. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. The proposed construction must be substantially started, or the proposed use utilized within one year of council approval, or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. The applicants shall submit a revised landscape plan, prior to the issuance of a building permit, providing a six foot tall and 80 perceni opaque landscaped screen for the abutting property to the west as required by the code. The applicants shall sign a maintenance agreement with the owners of Gulden's and the city for the upkeep of the pdvate roadway. Outdoor tire storage is not allowed by this permit. All tires shall be kept within a screening enclosure. The potential for excessive noise from this business is a concern of neighbors. The operator shall take care to keep doors closed to prevent nuisance noise from affecting residential neighbors. The city council shall review this during its pedodic reviews of this permit. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on 32 Attachment 14 VARIANCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Carol and Pat McFadane applied for a variance from the zoning ordinance. WHEREAS, this vadance applies to the property north of Gulden's Roadhouse, 2999 Maplewood Ddve. The legal description is: That part of the north 409.50 feet of the east 500.00 feet of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota, lying northerly of a line drawn from a point on the east line of said Northeast Quarter of Section 4 distant 235.77 feet south of the northeast comer of said South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4 to a point on the west line of said east 500.00 feet of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4 distant 115.53 feet south of the northwest comer of said east 500.00 feet of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4. WHEREAS, Section 44-512(8)(c) of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances requires that all parts of a motor-vehicle repair facility be at least 350 feet from a residential district. WHEREAS, the applicants are proposing to build their building 220 feet from a residential district. WHEREAS, this requires a vadance of 130 feet. WHEREAS, the history of this vadance is as follows: On March 15, 2004, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council this variance. The City Council held a public headng on ,2004. City staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The Council gave everyone at the heating an opportunity to speak and present wdtten 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 vadance for the following reasons: Stdct enforcement would cause undue hardship to the applicant because the site is not large enough to accommodate the proposed building without approval of a variance. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance since the grade slopes downward from the existing home sites to the west, which helps to obscure some of the mass of the proposed building. 33 3. The owner of the adjacent property to the west, the most affected neighboring owner, is in favor of the proposed building placement. Approval of this vadance is conditioned upon the applicant submitting a revised landscape plan for staff approval providing for screening on the west side of the proposed parking lot. This screening shall comply with city code that requires a visual screen that is at least six feet tall and 80 percent opaque upon installation. This landscape plan shall also include a turf establishment plan for this area. Adopted on ,2004. 34 Attachment 15 VARIANCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Carol and Pat McFadane applied for a vadance from the zoning ordinance. WHEREAS, this vadance applies to the property north of Gulden's Roadhouse, 2999 Maplewood Ddve. The legal description is: That part of the north 409.50 feet of the east 500.00 feet of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota, lying northerly of a line drawn from a point on the east line of said Northeast Quarter of Section 4 distant 235.77 feet south of the northeast comer of said South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4 to a point on the west line of said east 500.00 feet of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4 distant 115.53 feet south of the northwest comer of said east 500.00 feet of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4. WHEREAS, Section 44-20(c)(5)(a) of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances requires that all parking lots shall be 15 feet from a street right-of-way. WHEREAS, the applicants are proposing to build their front parking lot five feet from their front lot line. WHEREAS, this requires a variance of 10 feet. WHEREAS, the history of this vadance is as follows: On March 15, 2004, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council this variance. The City Council held a public hearing on ,2004. City staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The Council gave everyone at the headng an opportunity to speak and present wdtten 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 vadance for the following reasons: Stdct enforcement would cause undue hardship to the applicants because it would cause them to set the parking lot further back needlessly, with no benefit. 2. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance since there would be 95 feet of setback from the highway edge, which is approximately 40 feet more than the typical parking lot setback in this situation. Adopted on ,2004. 35 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Legacy ParkwaylKennard Street Landscaping Plan Legacy Village PUD-South of County Road D between Hazelwood Street and Southlawn Ddve March 9, 2004 INTRODUCTION Request City staff is requesting approval of the right-of-way planting plan for Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway in the Legacy Village planned unit development (PUD). Staff has been working with the engineering firm of Short Elliot Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH), who has prepared the enclosed proposal for boulevard and median plantings. Refer to the attachments. Proposal Veronica Anderson, of SEH, has designed landscape plans for each right-of-way. Refer to the landscape plan and narrative from Ms. Anderson. Kennard Street would be planted with Honey Locusts along both sides of the boulevard at a spacing of 30 feet on center. The center median would be planted with Lindens at 25 feet on center. Beneath the Lindens would be red and pink shrub roses. The medians would also have pavers installed for a color and material accent. Legacy Parkway, between Kennard Street and Southlawn Ddve, would be planted with Elm trees spaced at 60 feet on center. Elm trees are now available in disease-resistant varieties. A greater spacing is needed for the Elms due to their greater crown size when mature. The proposed landscape plans do not include the portion of Legacy Parkway west of Kennard Street. This section of Legacy Parkway would be a public roadway, but is to be landscaped by Town and Country Homes, the developer of the 220-unit Heritage Square Town Homes development. Town and Country would landscape this westedy section as part of their landscape proposal. Streetscape landscaping west of Kennard Street would consist of a mix of overstory trees along both boulevards and trees and planted rainwater gardens in the medians. Refer to the plan on page 6. BACKGROUND Legacy Village Past Actions July 14, 2003: The city council approved the Legacy Village PUD. September 8, 2003: The city council approved the final plat for Legacy Village. October 13, 2003: The city council approved a change order to the Kennard Street construction plans to include the parallel parking spaces along the west side of Kennard Street. November 24, 2003: The city council approved revisions to the Legacy Village final plat. November 25, 2003: The community design review board (CDRB) approved the plans for Ashley Furniture located at the southwest comer of County Road D and Southlawn Drive. December 8, 2003: The city council approved the Heritage Square PUD. December 16, 2003: The CDRB approved the Hedtage Square architectural plans. DISCUSSION The proposed landscaping would provide beautiful enhancements to these roadways. Staff welcomes comments from the planning commission and CDRB. Staff mailed this proposal to the CDRB for their comment since there were no upcoming meetings scheduled for project reviews. I received no replies. RECOMMENDATION Approve the right-of-way planting plans date-stamped February 3, 2004 for Kennard Street and the portion of Legacy Parkway between Kennard Street and Southlawn Ddve in Legacy Village. p:sec3\Kennard.landscaping.l-04 Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Proposed Planting Plan 3. Narrative 4. Heritage Square Landscape Plan 5. Landscape Proposal date-stamped February 3, 2004 (separate attachment) Attachment 1 /ADNAIS HEIGHTS G KENNARD STREET LEGACY PARKVVAY 1o SUMMIT CTo 4. L~A LOCATION MAP J 3 A[[achmpn~ ? K. EY s=e~t Ligl,~; ASSISTED LI~NG PLANT SCHEDULE KENNARD MEDIANS QTY COMMON NAME/BOTANICAL NAME SIZE ROOT SPACING 'mc4~_ upus'nm~ 29 Linden 2.0" C. AL. B&B 25' OC 658 pink Roses . #1 Grade Cont. 3' OC KENNARD BOULEVARDS QTY COMMON NAME/BOTANICAL NAME SIZE ROOT SPACING L _L5~ Honey Locust 2.0" CAL.. B&B 30' OC KENNARD ROUNDABOUT QTY COlvIMON NAM~/BOTANICAL NAM~ SIZE ROOT SPACING DECIDUOUS TREE5 ~6 ~ L~aeg 2.0" C. AC ~GA~ BOU~V~ ~ CO~ONN~/BOT~I~N~ Sl~ ROOT 5PA~G Attachment 3 GENERAL DESIGN CONCEPT The design intent for the tight-a-way landscaping along Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway is to accentuate the grand I/near character of Kennard Street and the soft sweeping curve of Legacy Parkway. A simple landscape palette was chosen to re-create the traditional urban tree-lined neighborhood streetscape. Each roadway was assigned a signature overstory tree species. Selection depended on the general street configuration and surrounding uses. The medians in Kennard Street and the Roundabout at the intersection of Kermard Street and Legacy Parkway were given a th/rd landscape treatment that provided visual continuity and interest through the corridor. The following h/gblights each of the main planting areas: KENNARD STREET BOULEVARDS The boulevard areas along both sides of Kennard are defined using Honey Locust. Honey Locust provides filtered sunlight with its airy canopy to the adjacent bu/idings and shade for the pedestrians using the sidewalks. The "wispy" nature of the tree will complement rather than dominate the architectural lines of the closely set-back structures. The robust tree species, most notably "Skyline" has been a proven work horse in urban settings. It can tolerate smaller areas and most soil, moisture, and salt conditions. Since the strength of the planting is in numbers, trees planted 30' on-center, along Kermard, this attribute is very important. The delicate leaf structure of the Honey Locust also offers a visual play of light and shade on the hard surfaces throughout the summer bursting into a soft buttery yellow in the fall. KENNARD STREET MEDIANS The medians in Kennard Street have been given a semi-informal landscape treatment using colored concrete pavers, Lindens underptanted with a blend of pink and red hardy shrub roses and panels of mowed turf grass. Medians where the width is 18' wide, beds of Lindens, planted 25' on-ceurer and shrub roses are shown. The combination of the architectural pyrimidal form of the Linden underplanted with a nubby ribbon of continuous color and texture of the shrub roses complement the formal pattern of dense development within the neighborhood. The planted medians produce a traffic calming affect while guiding the motorist towards the roundabout. They also provide pedestrians with a colorful visual diversion as they walk beneath the canopy of Honey Locust. To provide contrast, turf grass was used at the ends of the planting beds in the long median south of the roundabout. KENNARD STREET LEGACY PARKWAY ROUNDABOUT The roundabout at the intersection of Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway continue the Linden-shrub rose theme of the median plantings. The closely compacted planting of trees and shrubs within the center of the roundabout create the "knot" at the center of the colorful ribbon. The use of shrub roses in the roundabout, while beautiful to admire from a distance, provide a deterrent for approaching or lingering. A wide band of turf grass edged with colored concrete pavers surround the planting bed providing continuity of landscape materials throughout the Kermard Street corridor. LEGACY PARKWAY The cUrVing nature of Legacy Parkway through a range of uses landscape complexity from a naturally planted park with a formal entry point to corporate and commercial areas to residential areas planted with rain gardens creates an oppommity for traditional simplicity. The elm, an American neighborhood icon is re-introducedalong Legacy Parkway. The trees are spaced 60' on center to provide an opportunity for specimen-1/ke growth. Attachment 4 '~'~-~ U 1. S a o o M 3 Z ¥ H 6