HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/10/1997BOOK
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
JUNE 10, 1997
7:00 P.M.
CITY HALL
MAPLEWOOD ROOM
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
May 13, 1997
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Communications
6. Unfinished Business
a. In-fill Development Study
b. 1996-1997 HRA Annual Report
7. New Business
8. Date of Next Meeting
July 8, 1997
9. Adjournment
c:HRAAGEND.MEM
MINUTES OF THE
MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MAY 13, '1997
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
ROLL CALL
HRA Commissioners:
Lorraine Fischer, Tom Connelly, Larry Whitcomb, Joe O'Brien,
Gary Pearson (arrived at 7:09 p.m.)
Staff: Ken Roberts, associate planner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
August 13, 1996
Commissioner Connelly moved approval of the minutes of August 13, 1996, as submitted.
Commissioner Whitcomb seconded. Ayes--all (Fischer, Connelly, Whitcomb,
O'Brien)
The motion passed.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Whitcomb moved approval of the agenda as submitted.
Commissioner O'Brien seconded. Ayes--all (Fischer, Connelly, Whitcomb,
O'Brien)
w
The motion passed
COMMUNICATIONS
Ken Roberts, associate planner, said the annual Maplewood tour is tentatively scheduled for
Monday, June 30, 1997.
NEW BUSINESS
A. Section 8 Housing Program--Kathy Kline, Metro HRA
Ken Roberts, associate planner, introduced Kathy Kline and Robin Anderson of the
Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority (Metro HRA). Ms. Kline said the
Metro HRA is one of twelve housing authorities in the Twin Cities area that administers
federal, Section 8, income-based rental assistance. She said the Metro HRA alone has
funding for 4,800 families and has 5,000 on a waiting list.
Maplewood HRA
Minutes of 05-13-97
-2-
Ms. Kline spoke about the difference between certificates and vouchers-- certificates have a
rent limit and vouchers do not. The Section 8 tenant with a voucher would pay the 30 percent
plus any amount over the payment standard limit. She mentioned the difficulty encountered
in finding apartment units willing to accept Section 8 because of the Iow apartment vacancy
rate, and the ability of landlords to terminate a Section 8 lease if they have other tenants
available.
Ms. Kline presented a packet of summary information which included referral phone numbers
to the commissioners. She and Ms. Anderson, a coordinator who has direct contact with
Section 8 participants in Maplewood, answered many questions about the program.
Commissioner Pearson noted that he had observed numerous Section 8 cases in unlawful
detainer court. He thought the time taken by these cases might be a reason why some
landlords would choose to not participate in Section 8 rentals.
B. In-Fill Development Study
Ken Roberts, associate planner, said he thought the in-fill development study was generated
by a need for different criteria to require projects to more closely reflect in size and character
the area in which they are proposed. There was a discussion on the concept and function of
planned unit developments (PUDs). Mr. Roberts said the sites listed in the in-fill study are
parcels remaining in Maplewood that he felt could probably develop residentially.
Mr. Roberts explained how staff was uncomfortable with development standards that would
prevent people with small parcels from developing them. He felt the city needed more control
and tools to enable them to respond to and help developers. He also thought that sites larger
than ten acres were large enough to create their own standards. Mr. Roberts noted that the
planning commission did not agree with this. They thought every subdivision that created a
new street should be approved as a PUD. This would make lot layout within the
development more negotiable and sensitive to the topography. He gave examples how
specific sites in the in-fill study would be affected.
Mr. Roberts said the in-fill development study was brought to the HRA for review because
how these parcels develop will often affect the availability of affordable housing. He also
added that the planning commission wished to be involved early on in the design of projects
rather than reacting to them once they are presented. Mr. Roberts emphasized that it was
not the role of the city to design. The commission then discussed the enforceability of
covenants within plats.
In summary, Mr. Roberts reiterated that the purpose of the in-fill development study was to
give the city council more ways, through ordinances, to enable them to control lot sizes and
natural characteristics in developments. It was suggested the city pass the proposals
contained in this study but then allow five years before it becomes active. This would give
property owners time to develop before these restrictions would apply. The commissioners
generally agreed on the benefit of neighborhood meeting requirement.
The HRA agreed on the following:
- Neighborhood meeting requirement.
- Expanding the use of the PUD ordinance.
Maplewood HRA
Minutes of 05-13-97
-3-
Preservation of the property owners' rights.
The HRA unanimously agreed to table the in-fill study until the June 10, 1997, meeting.
C. 1996-1997 HRA Annual Report
Ms. Fischer noted a minor change on page 2 of the draft annual report. Because of the late
hour, the HRA unanimously agreed to table this report until the June 10, 1997, meeting.
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Maplewood HRA will be Tuesday, June 10, 1997.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:22 p.m.
MEMORANDUM
City Manager
TO: Ken RobertS, Associate planner
FROM:
SUBJECT: In-Fill Development study
DATE: June 3, lgg7
iNTRODUCTION
The city counCil directed city staff to study possible zoning or code changes for in-tilt
development sites. This would be to ensure that new developments are compatible with the
characteristiCS of the existing neighborhood.
this report, city staff
BACKGROUND .... first in-fill study repOrt. !n After discussing the studY,
nua 6, 1997, the counCil r.e. vieweC u,=. · · land uses.
ed ~J~ use of conditional use permits (,cUPs) for the
sites that probably will develop with res~denbal dty would need to
~~~~ition of in-flit sites. ThiS direction was with the .
the council directed staff to explOrs further the understanding that the
carefully write any such provisions.
On March 24, 1997, the city council again reviewed the in-fill report, including possible code
changes. At this meeting, the council gave first approval to cod. e changes about lot divisions,
o ment study for the first
subdivisions, conditional use permits and planned unit developmentS.
· ---d th in-flit devel P .. . ,A, ~,ore time to
in commission revlew=~, :~e~ china tO allow '~'"'
On Aptil 21, 1997, the plann g ..... ,he aroposea uu,~ ....... es
time. The commiSsion tabled action
review the study and proposed changes. After
On May 5, 1997, the planning commission again reviewed the in-fill development study.
much discussion, the commission reached consenSus on several general matters for future
policy direction for the city. These include:
1. Having a more comprehensive tree preservation ordinance ' not iust a tree replacement
any development
ordinance.
2. Requiting developerS to hold a neighborhOOd meeting before submitting
application to the city.
3. Expanding the use of the pUD ordinance, the nearby area. That is, are they similar in size
Reviewing how lots created by lot split baff;cCtoncemed about such lots?
4. .
to those near the site? Should the city
5. Having no site-size limitation for requiting pUDs for new subdivisions.
6. RevieWing the in-flit sites that staff identified for possible city acquisition for open space.
again reviewed the in-fill development studY. At this
· ' e oliCY aboUt
_--.~,~nded approvm u.:_,,_,.-..~ The commls~,~,- --
On MaY 19, 1997, the planning commission -, -, *~,e admimstratW .~:..,, also reviewed the
__~esion recu,,,--' _4 mUD oroma,,,-~, discussion, the
__-,~,,n the com'''~' ---~ the aroposeu r After some
., ~. neighbOrhood meetings
proposed code change about tot divisions and subdivisions'
Commission recommended several changes to the COde change about lot divisions and asked to
review Jt again at their next meeting.
On June 2, 1997, the Planning COmmission once again diSCUSsed part of the in-fi//development
Study. The COmmission recommended approval of the Proposed Subdivision COde change and
also directed staff to prepare a new tree preservation ordinance.
DISCUSSION
Study Review
In reviewing this Study request from the COuncil, city staff first needed to decide what
distinguishing characteristics or features define the character of a neighborhood or area. Staff
discussed several possibilities including land uses, lot area, lot width, amounts of tree COver,
nUmbers of trees, house sizes and values, housing styles, street and traffic patterns and property
values. These are all items that usually COncern neighbors near Proposed developments. The city
can have regulations about land use, minimum lot area, minimum lot Width, wetland Preservation
and tree protection. All zoning regulations should protect and COnserve property values, and
should protect the health, Safety, morals and we/fare of the citizens. The courts have ruled that
cities cannot directly try to regulate or legislate home values, house styles and aesthetics or
minimum property values if these do not affect the public health, safety, and welfare.
Staff then did a review of the city to identify all the probable remaining residential development
sites in Maplewood. These are sites that the council has not approved a Preliminary plat for that
staff expects vv..ill develop with residential land uses. Our review found 28 POssible residential
development s!t.es ra?.gmg from 1.5 acres to Over 50 acres in size. At an average of 2.
Of the 28 sites, 17 are less than 9 acres in size. The 10 largest sites range in Size from 11.9
acre, the remaining sites Could have from 4 to 138 houses if developed ~ ....... '3 lots per
'- '"" =mgle'l~amily homes
acres to Over 50 acres in size. Of the 10 largest sites, 6 are south of Lower Afton Road.
Another issue for staff was to decide what projects
Would be subject to any new city development or developments Would be "in-fills" and thus
characteristics of the existing nearby development dictate (if at all) the Standards and design of a
standards. That is, when should the
new development. A factor in setting this standard is that municipalities must treat similarly
situated People alike when applying city standards.
In reviewing the Size and location of the remaining development sites, staff first SUggested USing
10 acres as a maximum size for in-fill sites. That is, ifa site is less than 10 acres, then any new
city standards for in-fi//developments should apply. Based on this size, 17 of the 28 Possible
residential development sites WOuld be in-fi//sites and they each Would have from 4 to 25 lots if
developed. City staff also Suggested that the city not apply any in-fi//Standards to sites greater
than 10 acres. This is because these sites WOuld be large enough to set and Create their Own
standards and characteristics. Staff also reCOmmends that any lots created by administrative lot
division be exempt from any new in-fi/
city should ·
Consider with thes ,.;,-- . I s. tandards. Other c' - d ~d~e,v~e/.o~p~ent c~.?straints the
publicutilities, eo,,~lncludepipelines' slfoap~,Os,rL:~an..o,,,umeavaliabilityo,
After reviewing the above · ' .
p' c!ty require all future ,..i.n~ml..at,on.about in-fill · s ·
ueveloper want/n. ~., _,"_.°uudwlslons De oro~._~o.~.,Ite ' the plannln CO · , _
= -,- p~a[ prone~ ....... ,- --..oa~u and an,, ...... g _ mmlss~o, suggested that
r , ~.v woUlCl nea,.l. .... -e.~,, ~,v~cl as PL//~e Ti._.
· -,, ~u apply mr a PUD fo- --.~:---"', :.u~ is, any
' '"-- project. The
2
commission hopes that requiring plats to have a PUD will create developments that are more
sensitive to existing natural features.
Another point for the city to consider with these sites is the 1992 open space study. Of the 28
possible residential sites, the open space study had reviewed 9. These were Sites 4, 7, 16, 18,
22, 24, 25, 26 and 28. Of these 9 sites, 2 were less than 10 acres in size (Site 4 and Site 24).
The city may now want to consider buying some of these sites with the remaining open space
funds.
Code Changes
Staff believes that adding language to the code that requires in-fill development to use the
average lot size of the existing lots within 500 feet of the site to set the average lot sizes in the
new plat would address the council concerns for these developments. Such a standard would
help ensure that lots in a new development would be similar in area to the average lot size of the
surrounding area. Thus, the developer would have to design the new lots using the size standard
set by the existing neighborhood. However, all city regulations and standards must not be
arbitrary. The city cannot deny a plat just because of aesthetics. (Such a denial would be
arbitrary if the proposal meets all city requirements.) As such, the city will need to document how
any code change is to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. Similar to creating a
standard about nearby lot size, the council also might want to consider the existing tree cover
and tree preservation for the in-fill sites. That is, how would the proposed development fit with-
the "tree character" of the surrounding area. Such an analysis would require more tree inventory
work from a subdivision applicant. The tree inventory would have to include the development site
and the area surrounding the site. The tree character of the surrounding area would include the
amount of tree cover, the size and species of the existing trees, the age of the trees and whether
the existing trees were planted or if they are native to the site.
A review of the existing zoning and subdivision ordinances shows that the city could change
parts of these codes to meet the council's goals. The city would need to add language to Section
36-69 (R-1 single-family residential) and to Section 30-8 (subdivisions) of the code to require the
use of nearby average lot sizes in in-fill developments. A proposed code change for these parts
of the code starts on page 47. Specifically, the code change language about preliminary plats
(including in-fill sites and tree inventories) starts on page 48. I also have updated much of the
language in the proposed code changes to clean up the existing code language.
For using the tree character when reviewing an in-fill site, the council would then need to add
language to the code. The city could accomplish this two ways; adopt an amendment to the R-I'
and subdivision code about in-fill lots or adopt a city-wide tree preservation ordinance as the
council reviewed earlier.
3
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Approve the code change beginning on page 47. This ordinance revises Subsection 36-69
(lot dimensions) and Section 30 (Subdivisions) of the city code.
B. Approve the code change beginning on page 62. This ordinance revises Subsections 36-438,
36-440, 36-441, 36-442, and 36-443 about CUPs and planned unit developments.
C. Approve the administrative policy about neighborhood meetings starting on page 67.
kr/p/misc/infill7.-2
Attachments:
1. List of Potential Residential Development Sites
2. 8 Location Maps
3. 28 Property Line Maps
4. R-1 and Subdivision Code Change
5. PUD Code Change
6. Neighborhood Meeting Administrative Policy
4
Attachment 1
'(Pages 5 - 9)
POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SITES - 12-18-96
28 total sites, 19 with trees
SITE 1
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
N 1/2 Sec 1 (County Road D and Gall Avenue, east of McKnight Road)
01-29-22-22-0096
Yes
2.5 acres
R-1
R-1
SITE 2
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
S 1/2 Sec 3 (West of Hazelwood, north of County Road C)
03-29-22-31-0004 through 0009 and 03-29-22-34-0001, 0002, 0003, 0004, 0005
Yes
2.6, 1, 0.6, .91, 1.37, .55, .55, 2.9, 2.6 = 13 acres
R-1
R-1
SITE 3
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
N 1/2 Sec 4 (Carey Heights Drive)
04-29-22-12-0001 through 0011
No
.28, 2.38, .3, .36, .6, .24, .51, .46, .22, .5, 2.5 = 8.35 acres
F
R-1
SITES 4, 5 AND 6
Location: N 1/2 Sec 10 (north of Sextant, between Four Seasons park and Barclay Street)
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
(3 sites)
10-29-22-13-0091, 0092, 0023, 0067, 0086 and 10-29-22-21-0001, 0002 and
10-29-22-24-0013
Yes
4.5 acres, 4 acres, 2.3 acres
All R-1
All R-1
SITE 7
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
N 1/2 Sec 10 (south of County Road C, west of Hazelwood)
10-29-22-21-0001, 0002
No
17.5 acres
R-1
R-1
SITE 8
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
S 1/2 Sec 11 (West of Van Dyke, north of County Road B)
11-29-22-33-0006, 0010, 0012, 0016, 0018, 0020, 0021
Yes
1.21, 1.12, .17, .94, 2.26 = 5.63 acres (34 potential units)
BC and R-3
BC and R-3(M)
5
SITE 9
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
S 1/2 Sec 14 (2135 Larpenteur Avenue)
14-29-22-43-0002
No
3.8 acres
F
R-3(M)
SITE 10
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
N 1/2 Sec 17 (east of McMenemy, north of Roselawn)
17-29-22-23-0057, 0056, 0073
Yes
.94, .91, 1.74 = 3.59 acres
R-1
R-1
SITE 11
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan
S 1/2 Sec 17 (south of Ripley, along Jessie Street right-of-way)
17-29-22-34-0007 through 0016, 0003
Yes
9 x.11=.99, .16, .35 = 1.5 acres
R-1
R-1
SITE 12
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
S 1/2 sec 17 (east of McMenemy, north of Arkwright)
17-29-22-33-0005, 0007
No
7 acres
F
R-1
SITE 13
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan
N 1/2 Sec 24 (west of Idaho, east of Lakewood Ddve)
24-29-22-21-007, 0008, 0054
Yes
14 acres
R-1
R-1
SITE 14
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
N 1/2 Sec 24 (South of Currie Street, east of McKnight Road)
24-29-22-22-0059, 0036, 0034
Yes
.89, 1.79, 1.79 = 4.47 acres
R-1
R-1
SITE 15
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
S 1/2 Sec 24 (1240 and 1250 McKnight Road, north of Maryland Avenue)
24-29-22-33-0015, 0018
No
6.4 acres
R-2
R-2
SITE 16
[.ocation:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
N 1/2 Sec 25 (east of Lakewood Drive, south of Maryland Avenue)
25-29-22-21-0009
Yes
25.19 acres (151-250 potential units)
R-3
R-3(M)
SITE 17.
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan
SITE 18
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
S 1/2 Sec 25 (2415 Minnehaha Avenue)
25-29-22-34-0087
No
3.4 acres
R-1
R-1
N 1/2 Sec 12 (south of Lower Afton Road, north of Conemara)
12-28-22-21-0002, 0003, 0004
Yes
15 acres
F
R-3(M)
SITE 19
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
S 1/2 Sec 12 (2401 - 2437 Linwood Avenue)
12-28-22-34-0004, 0011, 0012, 0006
Yes
5.6 acres
F
R-1
SITE 20.
Location:
PiN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
S 112 Sec 12 (NE comer McKnight Road and Linwood)
12-28-22-33-0077
No
7.5 acres
F
R-1
SITE 21
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
N 1/2 Sec 13 (2516 Linwood Avenue - Jim Kaysers)
13-28-22-12.0010
Yes
11.9 acres
F
R-1
SITE 22
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
N 1/2 Sec 13 (North of Highwood, west of Century Avenue )
13-28-22-11-0008, 0013, 0014, 0015, 14-0018, 0019, 0020'~, 00217
Yes ·
50+ acres
F
R-1 and OS
SITE 23
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
S 1/2 sec 13 (2492 Highwood Avenue)
13-28-22-31-0067
No
3.5 acres
F
R-1
SITE 24
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
N 1/2 Sec 24 (2410 Carver Avenue)
24-28-22-24-0010
Yes
8 acres
F
R-1
SITE 25
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
N 1/2 Sec 24 (East of Heights Avenue, west of Henry Lane)
24-28-22-31-0009 (2 maps)
No
12.6 and 17.5 acres = 30.1 acres
F
R-1
SITE 26
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
S 1/2 Sec 24 (west of Henry Lane, south of Fish Creek)
24-28-22-32-0001, 0002, 0003
Yes
29 acres
F
R-1
8
SITE 27
Location:
PiN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
N 1/2 Sec 24 (2510 Carver Avenue)
24-28-22-13-0001, 0002
Yes
5 + 5.2 acres = 10.2 acres
F
R-1
SITE 28..
Location:
PIN:
Trees:
Size:
Zoning:
Comp. Plan:
S 112 sec 24 (1530 Sterling Street)
24-28-22-42-0007
Yes
38 acres
F
R-1
krlp: misc/vacntres, mem
WHITE B~.AR LAKE
Attachment 2
(pages l0- 17)
,UNI~
ROAD
RADA I'Z
COUNTY
COURT
WOODLYNN AVE.
AVE.
ViEW AVE.
AVE.
NORTH SAINT PAUL
WOODLYNN
~ 1. CHIPPL='WA
,., 2.. BARTELM¥
v
RD.
:iV'NS
JJ 1
RD,
N
1700' 5400' 5100' 6800'
SCALE
LOCATION
SITE 1
10
MAP
VADNAIS HEIGHTS
COUNTY
RD. D
1. SUMMIT CT.
2. COUNT~EW CIR.
3. DULUTH CT.
4. LYDIA ST.
GEEVNS
JUNCTION
(1) CHAMBERs ST
BEAM
'FI1
Z
b..I
® []
KOHLMAN
RO~ h
C
LOCATION MAP
SITES 2 - 7
11
AVE.
LARK
COUNTY
EDGEHILL RD.
®
RADA'I'Z
CT,
RAMSEY
COUNTY
COURT
KOHL.MAN
COPE AVE.
, '/ z ~o~ ~ Lake
/ ~ ~ AV. ~ NU lNG HOME ~D
' ~ ~RICH ~'
LOCATION MAP
SITES 8 AND 9
12
1
PLAZA
ALVARADO DR
BELLECREST DR
DEAUVILLE DR
MERIDIAN DR
J
PALM
CT.
v
CONN
CT.
CT.
2400N
Sandy
· ~:' Lake
SKILLMAN AVE.
MT. VERNON
DOWNS AVE.
BELLWOOD AVE.
SUMMER AVE.
BELMONT
;KILLMAN
LN.
SUMMER
VIKING DR.
CT.
BURKE
BELMONT
AV.
BELLWOOD
~N ~ AVE.
AVE.
BURKE CT.
LOCATION MAP
SITES 10 - 12
SAINT
PAUL
RAMSEY COUNTY
~RSING HOME AND
FAIR GROUNDS
GOODRICH
GOLF
COURSE
Goodrich
Pork
RIPLEY AVE.
KINGSTON
PRICE AVE.
1440N
1200N
7
8
NORTH
Hl#elde
Pa~k
I--
)-
KINGSTON
SAINT
/
~CKNIGHT LN
LARPENTEUR
NEBRASKA ~1 AVE.
PAUL
(N. s~ p)
1 MARYJO[ LN
2. TIERN EW AVE
.3. MEADOW DR
4 I~ PLE'Y AVE'
AVE. I ' '
KNOLL CIR.
AVE.
AVE.
ANTELOPE. WAY
AMBERJACK
808C~T
HA~CrHORNE
I
2
4
MICHN3_ DR
REBECCA DR
PINE'TREE DR
BIRCHVIEW DR
5 P~Em~E DR
6 BIRC1.MEW DR
7 ROLUNG HILLS DR
8
Z
960N ~ ^w.
ANTELOPE WAY
AMBERJACK LN
BEVERDALE RD
HAWTHORNE
~OLIA AVE.
BRAND
I E. MINNEHAHA
CONWAY
[209
222
LOCATION MAP
SITES 15 - 17
15
m ,.,ke
16
1. HUNTINGTON CT.
2. OAKRIDGE LA.
17
1. CURRI£ CT.
2. VALLEY ViEW CT.
,3. LAKEWOOD CT.
LOCATION
SITES 18 - 23
15
MAP
1. HUNTINGTON CT.
2. OAKRIDGE LA. 1. CT.'
17
1. CURRIE CT.
2. VALLEY V1EW
3. LAKEWOOD CT.
P~SCT.
CT.
MORELAND
(WOOD AV.
TIMBER
VALLEY
NEMITZ
CREST AVl[.
CARVER
a~r
Lake
r~MSEY COUNTY
WASHINGTON COUNTY
LOCATION MAP
SITES 19 - 28
17
Attachre~t 3
(Pages 18 - 4~) '1
1-694
2310 I, ?.%,-..
I.~
(%)
973 ·
PA R
EA.
SITE I
lB,
,.-)
OPEN SPACE
2813
__ SITE 2 .....
~ 2809
~' 2801
~' 2781i
2775
2767
2759
2747
2737
2731
2727
2707
(7;
CHURCH
SITE 2
19
VADNAIS HEIGHTS
7 ¢~/)
tqo. 30
AVE.
1134 1138
SITE 3
- ~0WERLINES
~__
(~
2999
MINING SITE
SUMMIT CT,
itl 20
19
i'/
16
//
I&
~eoo'
(%)
2.01 '
$/$.
2474
2468~
'),~.,s
IZ.Z.
(TZ) 0~,
.75 ac
75 &c
2
SITE 4
194/
)KS ~o-~"~'~" AVE. -.o
4.
?~
2467'
AVE
.~,~.
~15' lO'x. BO ~ IJO' -'~ I£0' I00'
_ .;' ..
1572 ~ 1586~
F (~.oo~.) ~/*'
. 2469',
SITE 5
2458~ ~45
2450~
r
2434~. (~)
....... ,..~' . SE TAI
2474
246L~8,)
Z .$1 ia.c..
2452
EAST
IO~O. &4-'
AVE.
SITE 5
22
, ¢'~)
· ~
HARVEST
crT"/ or PARK
' ?~)
MAPLEWOOD
,3
(7;2467
0:2463
1(~2.Z¢
~o, ,~ /.,:~ ~-~o/ /
"~-~~k ~1,
~'t~E. BROOKS ~-~'-"" AVE.
1518 1522
~.2~.~.
SITE 6 4 2467
~10'
(~o) 37
(50
.GO &c
&,~'l. 5'
,~0~ ~
(~)
-GER~----
SITE 6
23
9
AVE., ] ~' / -~'l ~ m"' ,~c ' .'.. ~
;'~ FIRE STATION
'"""'
1448
HARVEST PARK
· ' 2517
CITY
~APLtWM~
SITE 7
24
SITE 7
CHURCH ~-5~'ii'~
2546
2544 ~'~
,, j~ ,,~ ~ .... ~ --
~'~' ', i . ~
. ......
I .' ~,~! _ _
~ , 1.9~. / -' " /~ I r I ] i 41/] i ~~] ~ l
~ ~ ~ ~ '" '- - ~--~ L i: ~:~-
d ~ .-..' ,8,.
--:.~ ~...' ~ ...... ~1~41 ~,, i,, I,,-I., I,, I,, I,. I.. 1.~,~ ~T ~';-~-~..~.'
co.~ ';:: ---- .,~ ..... coPE .....
e(,~ ,,, . .. ~__~-
<. ~ ~(s) ~> ..'-.
, ~ ' ~ ~ I I~(,~ I
(~e) ., · ~ '~ /~ 2
L:-~-~a-/~.:~.~-~:~ '/--1 A ~""AND~% RST ....
LUBE,~: ' r~> ~ ,t < ~.~:ff ~, ~,~:
~~F~-~-''~'~'~''~: :.l ~t?~$~'4~~'1~;-'+*:-'-~:; ;--::~
- C O U N T Y COUNTY ROAD B
SITE 8
25
G
(,,4-.0~. o.,c... )
(~)
O.L. A
~2Z.O~
J9
,ol
II~S
r~)
(7..e) . sz
3.5'.4'1 ':
4 ~7)
I (:") °°
' °- - G t .,gZ
1.0~ o.c..
., PUMP
1695
STATION
1689
~0. 30(~
~°°' 2-7
I.
(-Zoo) Rw,.e. o
\ E~tfT
SITE g xx PONDING AREA
2135
2147J
2169
.. ,B,~' ~_LA_RPENTEUR AVENUE---
SAINT PAUL
T~&(
SITE 9
26
II
HILLCREST CC
1993
1983
PONDING AREA
SITE 10-
-- ' e~z:~ee -- ROSELAWN AVENUE
.S4~c. CHURCH OF T. JEROME
SITE 10
27
AVE.
(77)
D 2
(7~
RIPLEY AVENUE
ST. PaUL CEME'
PLAT a
INGSTON
SITE 11
--KINC~TON
LiSe~.
RICE
, LARPENTEUR AVENUE ----'
SITE 11
28
Il
I I 1 ! I
~ ! 95 RIPLEY ' AVE.' ~ RIPLE¥ ": AVl[
~ Woth~ ·
SITE 12
29
N
·I APARTMENTS
z ~'-%T 5'./"~ L ! ['.~ ~." ".-" ! LARPENTEUR AVENUE ': ,
~ ' ~ I' ~=r~' :2402~ z41o ~ ~ ~?~' ' : .=, ~ ~ ~ ~
~s' ': ~ ' , ~ ~ '1653
~(.), . ~ ~ =~ SITE 13 ~ : ~ .E. IDAHO
-' ~
· ~
~'~ :~ 1587'-~ - '~ /.~ ~"4
~ 99. 7o ..... .1~.o~ - ~_ -
d) Z ~ ~, 1552 ~ ~
M~'N~ANA~. ¢ AVE. .- ~
, ~ 7~ 7~ 7~ 1o~.~ .:
,st .~(' ~ (7)~ ~ ~' FUTURE OAKRIDGE PLAT
/ x 0 O.L, C
SITE 13
3O
1_ 4~) 4
~'~) 5
~$0. OB
1600
1580
/32,.^.
1623
/35
6
1624
1616
SITE 14
(* 3ff$ .o.~)
~ (:~,0 156o
1540
HOYT
_C R
A~
2286
(~')
1615
2 ~ '~so5 ~
.~1595
8/./,~~ (~') ',
3&,et
'41
I40.S&
MONTANA
170
j~
CoNI)O/~III~IUI'4 NO. ~-I~-
^¢oR~/ (iRE£NHOU$£S
OUT LOT
T f-/~t ~ 7,4.
(~)
~99.45'
Z 9 9. ~,~'
_
i~o~
I
-:7 ~
40¢'
bp__.
8~)..
15 e~fl'T.
SITE 14
31
1262
1250
15
TILSEN
1245
AVE.
19
(2~)
1240
SITE 15
Iv[ ,'n['I'N-TT--/"% I ~
13:'Z,5 1 --
T [ I
· .73 ~.
SITE 15
32
I
I
MANUFACTURED HOMES
~.~ ,< ~r~.~_~ MARYLAND AVENUE'
RANIUM AVE.
50o
2
ROSEWOOD ESTATE
LL~-~:~-, I SITE 16
I
8
6
D-~
1085 ("7)
1070 (7,)
1068 o,)
.4-4- o.c.. ('~0
Leo ~c
1083
~°ROSE AVE.
GERANIUM
1084
~sc.ooc! D, s'r.
" N[ 6ZZ
SITE 16
33
BUSH
I
'~' , '~'t ~.~s' ~' .
762
I ?.7'
2415
(s~)
SITE
3M PROPERTY
SITE 17
34
,4,
J~
: "S" ,'fl I
J 1.04oc. J I
/Il:
~1'
(~q
1,4
25
Ig
\
\J~' (,
?i
IO J
ti I
I
MiNNEHAHA '~.,
AVENUE ~-~ L_ :.. .--,~- . --~, -
FOR ~
PARK
BATTLE CREEK PARK
LOWER AFTON ROAD
I?UTLOT
:4:' '
PONDING AREA
/
ii1.$-~
[:sMT [:)O~ Ie~°~2z
IT LOT A
457)
LONDIN LANE ~:~
't Z..~v ,
POND
SITE 18
EIGt
,LWOOD
OUTLOT B
~'~U NT I N
5
~2'7 ~:,,o
(29)
~ (.~)
OAK~IDGE
SO
/~JLLWoo D DR.
"% I
147
I.~,~ &¢. /. B$
{~ ~" 2383 2401
SITE 19
2457'
SPRI NGSIDE
(~.)
I N ~ 2441
WOOD C ~-~ /~'~'
I ~ /I ~ ~
,I /
/
SITE 19
36
( - J~3,)
622
(~)
:,,,.~. LI NWOOD
: OUTLOT C
(~
EIGI
5
.~27.
O
e~ -'1
81TE 20 ~' ~
/
~ ~; ~
~ - -e ...... ~ - ~ -: ~, LINWOOD AVENUE
/:1 t~"~E~ ~ '
' · . 4
/'a=
/~
/9
SI.TE 20
37
DR.
· ~ oo
SI=RiNd. SIDE
J
-\
ou-r L O'r J(~4)
COURT
O.L. M
($&,, 39,
CT.
2516
O, Lo
~,46.15
SITE 21
c
,I
SHOOTING RANGE
OPEN SPACE
FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
HIGHWO00 Fir
DR.
SITE 21
38
SHOOTING RANGE
- LINWOOD AVENUE .... ~---
~ 616 .!~ ~.
721 ~
743 ~
751 :i~
(~l)
OPEN SPACE
SITE 22
DR.
775
(~z) ~ LLI
2665
CARVER REPAIR:
SITE 22
39
l
AVE ~ ]~ VALLEY V I EW
~ ~32L
2539
2475
(23')
~ ~"-i-~g:~'£ AVENUE'--'.~~~
'~ i 971
~ ~) ~ or ~.S4~ I--,
2492
~?~ (~7) SITE 23 ~4 995
1000 I ~ '
,
':~003
~008 e
~101~ ~
1016 ' 2
/
" ~ " i ~,'I_.
SITE 23 '~
N
Z
OVERLOOK
2445
2410
SITE 24
· ,.08 ~.
(~s) 7
~o (~)
,~$. &l
Il
.~4- 9~ 7,! 7 ~
G46.8 ?
FISH CREEK
q05 t
SITE 24
41
1285
%;O
: 2410 ~o~
UJ
/
~s~ SITE 25
CO(/NTy ~!0
FISH
,~, 1 '~ /~.~
I l~~'- ~ ~.~
I
Iff,:
SITE 25
42
1501
I.~O1.19°
Z&.3,.,~,7
FISH CREEK ~'
(~)
1481
(~)
COUNTY OPEN SPACE
SITE 25
/
/
~. 17,51a.~.-
./
~ /
/
/
/
(,~)
SITE 25
43
U
(~)
1501
,,;1 ~,5
1481
' -z~).~ --
FISH CREEK ,
/
/ /
I
/.
SITE 26
',l
COUNTY OPEN SPACE
SITE 26
44
t-. ;,,t-15 £ Y J
' ?l
~;'~,. ~;J,~c;OUNTY OPEN SPACE
il .' (2) I.~'
·~
2511
~'°""~"~ ..a ;o~-t'J CARVER AVENUE L
~ , 2510 I :
~' "~a__ SITE 27 I ,,r' : /'
"' , ~ ~
I, , ' /.x (') I ~' , l
,Il:/ : I i /
! I .I ,
I~¢(./ '1 ~/ ~ II ,, / I
I J '~399 l lz/ /-/-/-/-/-/-,/. ,,. ~.~-,- II i /I
I~ -il=~ ...x¢ ~ / !II
I ~ ,_:.,:~ t,&;~,-2"- ~ ,.,-,,~. II , / I
11~~'i~.~7-~ '~- '~ II : / I
1,'7, '"'" . "ll~r..~~(~)~. ~' II : t I
I ¢'..~..._ ~._ °''' ~1 ~"[ "'-::7' ,,,,,o. 'I __ ,,, .... ~... ~,~ ,,,..,..,..~ ...~o ~ i
f'-' SITE 27
· 45
1530 '
Attachment 4
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA CHANGING PARTS OF THE CITY
CODE ABOUT MINIMUM RESIDENTIAL LOT SIZES, SUBDIVISIONS AND
PRELIMINARY PLATS
The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of
Ordinances:
Section 1: This section changes Section 36-69 as follows: (I have crossed out deletions and
underlined the additions.)
Sec. 36-69. Lot dimensions.
(a) The minimum lot area in an R-1 Residence District shall be as follows: *-"-.v.. , r,.. ._ .._. ..., ~/4n..-,---,nnn~
(1) Ten thousand (10,000) square feet (excluding draina.qe and wetland easements); except
(2) For lot sizes in subdivision or platting sites, see Section 30-8(f) of the city code for minimum
lot size information.
For lots with no municipal sanitary sewer available, the minimum lot area shall be determined
by the house pad area and enou,qh area to have two on-site sanitary sewer systems,
including tanks and drainfields. The owner or developer shall provide the city with site plans
showin.q the location of the house pads and the on-site sewer systems. In no case shall such
a lot be less than one (1) acre in area (excluding draina,qe and wetland easements).
(b) The minimum lot width at the building setback line shall be seventy-five (75) feet, except that
intedor lots-of-record that are sixty (60) feet wide or greater may be allowed by conditional use
permit if: p~=evi~;t4ha~
(1) The findings required by code for a conditional use permit can be met=; and
(2) There are at least two (2) developed lots-of-record with the same or less width than the
proposed lot width, within three hundred fifty (350) feet of the site on the same side of the
street. Larger minimum side yard setbacks may be required to ensure adequate bala~me-the
separation between adjacent structures.
47
Section 2: This section changes Section 30-1 through Section 30-8 as follows: (I have crossed
out deletions and underlined the additions.)
SUBDIVISIONS
Sec. 30-1. Purpose.
The Maplewood City Council finds the following regulations are necessary to:
1_. Protect and promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the community.
2_. Provide for the ordedy, economic and safe development of land.
3. Preserve a.qdcultural lands.
Provide for adequate transportation, water supply, sanitary sewer disposal, water resource
management, schools, parks, pla¥.clrounds, open space and other public services and
facilities for residents.
To accomplish these purposes, Maplewood adopts subdivision regulations establishing
standards, requirements and procedures for the review and approval or disapproval of
subdivisions.
Sec. 30-2. Definitions.
For the-p,.~ee~,e-ef-this chapter, the following words, terms and phrases shall have the following
meanings respectively ascdbed to them by this section:
Alley is a public right-of-way which affords a secondary means of access to abutting property.
Boundary lines are lines indicating the bounds or limits of any tract or parcel of land.
, v,c. ......... setback line, means the line beyond which property
Building line also called the -=* '"~'~ ' ....
owners or others have no legal or vested right to extend a building or any part thereof, without
special permission and approval of the proper authorities.
City means the City of Maplewood, Minnesota.
City council means the city council of Maplewood, Minnesota.
Contour map means a map on which irregularities of land surface are shown by lines connecting
points of equal elevations. A contour interval is the vertical height between contour lines.
48
Comer lot is a lot within a plat situated at the comer of a block thereof so that it is bounded on
two (2) sides by streets. This term applies to any lot within a plat at street interseCtions and
bounded on two (2) sides by streets.
Design standards are the specifications to landowners or subdividers for the preparation of
preliminary plans indicating, among other things, the optimum, minimum or maximum dimensions
of such features as rights-of-way and blocks, as set forth in Section 30-8 of this chapter.
Director of community development means the director of community development of
Maplewood, Minnesota.
Director of public works means the director of public works of Maplewood, Minnesota.
Double-frontage lots means a lot which fronts on two (2) or more public streets.
Easement is a grant by a property owner for the use of c ='.d~. cf land by the general public, a
corporation or certain persons for specific purposes.
Final plat is a map or plan of a subdivision and any accompanying material, as described in
Section 30-7 of this chapter.
Frontage is the width of a lot or building site measured on the line separating it from a public
street or way.
Lot means a parcel of land described separately from other parcels of land by a plat, metes and
bounds, registered land survey, auditor's plat or other accepted means. The lot description must
be recorded by Ramsey County.
Lot area means the area of a lot, excluding drainage easements, wetlands and land below the
ordinary high water mark of public waters.
Lot division means the division of a property by metes and bounds description.
Official control or controls means ordinances and regulations which control the physical
development of the city or any part thereof or any detail thereof and implement the general
objectives of the comprehensive plan. Official controls may include ordinances establishing
zoning, subdivision controls, site plan regulations, sanitary codes, building codes and official
maps.
Outlot means a parcel or tract of land not part of a block or lot, shown by a letter or labelled as an
outlot on a plat.
Owner means a person having a vested interest in the property in question, a purchaser,
~see, or fiduciary, and includes his duly authorized agent or attorney-in-fact.
49
Pedestrian way is a publicv.-'- ~.,,._.v'-'~'"-~ right-of-way across a block, or providing access within a
block, to be used by pedestrians ""'~ ~"- °~'~' ""~'"""°;"" "*"°;"~" ';"~'~
Planning commission means the planning commission of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota.
Plat means the drawing or map of a subdivision prepared for filing of record pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 505 and containing all elements and requirements set forth in
applicable city regulations, adopted pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358 and
Chapter 505.
Preliminary approval means official action taken by the city on an application to create a
subdivision which establishes the rights and obligations set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section
462.358 and the applicable subdivision regulation. In accordance with Section 462.358,
preliminary approval may be granted only following review and approval of a preliminary plat and
other map or drawing establishing, without limitation, the number, layout, and location of lots,
tracts, blocks, outlots and parcels to be created, location of streets, roads, utilities and facilities,
parks and trails1 p=r~ =nd drainage facilities, and lands to be dedicated for public use.
Preliminary plan or preliminary plat is a tentative map or plan of a proposed subdivision as
described in Section 30-5 of this chapter.
Public waters means any waters as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 103F.005,
Subdivisions 15 and 16.
Reserve strips are stdps of land usually withheld from the street right-of-way to form a barrier
between certain property and the public street or thoroughfare.
Right-of-way is the land covered by a public road, or other land dedicated for public use or for
certain private uses, such as land over which a power line passes.
Street is a public or private right-of-way which affords pdmary access by pedestrians and
vehicles to abutting properties, whether designated as a street, avenue, highway, road,
boulevard, lane or however otherwise designated.
Subdivision means the separation of an area, parcel or tract of land into two (2) or more parcels,
tracts, lots or long-term leasehold interests for sale, rent or lease, except those separations:
(1)
Where all the resulting parcels, tracts, lots or interests will be twenty (20) acres or larger in
size and five hundred (500) feet in width for residential uses and five (5) acres or larger for
all other uses;
(2) Creating cemetery lots;
(3) Resulting from court orders, or the adjustment of a lot line by the relocation of a common
boundary.
Subdivision regulation means an ordinance adopted pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
462.358 regulating the subdivision of land.
50
Wetland means a surface water feature classified as a wetland in the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service Circular No. 39 (1971 edition) or Minnesota Rules Part 8420.0110, Subd. 52.
Zoning is the reservation of certain specified areas within the city for buildings and structures for
certain purposes, with other limitations such as height, lot coverage and other stipulated
requirements.
Sec. 30-3. Conformance with existing codes and regulations.
(a)
The provisions of this chapter are in addition to and not in replacement of the state building
code and the city zoning ordinance. Any provisions of the building code and zoning ordinance
relating to platting shall remain in full force and effect, except as they may be contradictory to
the provisions hereof.
(b) Subdivisions, approved by the city, shall be consistent with the city's official controls and
comprehensive plan.
(c)
The city shall not approve a rezonin.q, conditional use permit, subdivision or lot division A
· v?v, ,~,, ~k-,~ll ,,q~i k~
..... ~ ............ =pprc;.=d unless each new lot would be large enough to accommodate
al_LI ==y existing accessory buildings, as required in Section 36-77(a).
(d) The city shall not approve a subdivision where the owner or developer would later need a
variance to use the lots for their intended purpose.
Sec. 30-4. Applicability.
(a) No conveyance of land to which the subdivision regulations are applicable shall be filed or
recorded if the land is described in the conveyance by metes and bounds or by reference to
an unapproved registered land survey made after April 21, 1961 or to an unapproved plat
made after such regulations become effective. The foregoing provision does not apply to a
conveyance if the land described:
(1) Was a separate parcel of record April 1, 1945 or the date of adoption of subdivision
regulations under Laws 1945, Chapter 287, whichever is the later; or
(2) Was the subject of a written agreement to convey entered into pdor to such time; or
(3) Was a separate parcel of not less than two and one-half (2 1/2) acres in area and one
hundred fifty (150) feet in width on January 1, 1966; or
(4) Was a separate parcel of not less than five (5) acres in area and three hundred (300) feet
in width on July 1, 1980; or
(5) Is a single parcel of commercial or industrial land of not less than five (5) acres and
having a width of not less than three hundred (300) feet and its conveyance does not
51
result in the division of the parcel into two (2) or more lots or parcels, any one of which is
less than five (5) acres in area or three hundred (300) feet in width; or
(6)
Is a single parcel of residential or agricultural land of not less than twenty (20) acres and
having a width of not less than five hundred (500) feet and its conveyance does not result
in the division of the parcel into two (2) or more lots or parcels, any one of which is less
than twenty (20) acres in area or five hundred (500) feet in width.
(b) In any case in which compliance with the foregoing restrictions will create an unnecessary
hardship and failure to comply does not interfere with the purpose of this chapter, the city
council may waive such compliance by adoption of a resolution to that effect and the
conveyance may then be filed or recorded. Any owner or agent of the owner of land who
conveys a lot or parcel in violation of the provisions of this chapter shall forfeit and pay to the
city a penalty of not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00) for each lot or parcel so
conveyed. The city may enjoin such conveyance or may recover such penalty by a civil action
in any court of competent jurisdiction.
Sec. 30-5. Preliminary plat procedure.
~ To plat or divide any property or tract of land into four (4) or more lots, the following shall
aDolv:
The city requires city council approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit
development (PUD). As such, a subdivider or owner of a preliminary plat site shall submit
complete applications for preliminary plat approval and for a conditional use permit for
planned unit development to the director of community development. (Refer to Article V,
Sections 36-436 throu.qh 36-450 of the city code about conditional use permits.)
2. The city shall review and process all such planned unit developments pursuant to the
applicable sections of the city code.
3. For any such site, the applicant shall only pay the city application fee for a preliminary plat.
The director of community development shall determine the necessary application
requirements and have them on forms that are available to the public at city hall. The
director may waive any requirements that do not apply to the proposed subdivision.
Besides all other application requirements, the applicant shall have a tree inventory
prepared of the site and all developed or improved properties within 500 feet of the site.
This inventory shall document the size, species and location of all six (6) inch or greater
diameter deciduous trees and of all eight-foot-tall or greater coniferous trees.
o
If the average area or size of the existing sin.qle-family lots in Maplewood within 500 feet of
the site is at least twelve thousand (12,000) square feet, then the average lot size of any
new lot shall meet or exceed the average size of these existing lots, up to a maximum
average size of 20,000 square feet. Lots in Maplewood within 500 feet of the site that are
20,000 square feet or more in area shall each be considered 20,000 square feet for
calculating the area average lot size.
This provision does not apply to new lots approved and created by administrative lot
division as outlined in Section 30-15 (Lot divisions).
52
(b)
(c)
(d)
7. The developer or applicant for any such proposed preliminary plat shall hold a
nei,qhborhood meetin,q. This meeting is to discuss the proposal with all property owners
within 500 feet of the site. The developer shall hold this meetin,q consistent with the city's
policies for such meetin,qs. The city Will Schedule the item for plannin,q commission and city
council consideration after the developer holds the neiqhborhood meetin,q.
developer shall be required to pay a fee to defray the expenses incurred by the city in having
the preliminary plat reviewed in all particulars. The ---mount cf fee to be paid for such review
shall be imposed, set, established and fixed by the city council, by resolution, from time to
time., -"" ~*'*'" ~'" "";'~ k.. ,~,~. The owner or developer shall pay all such fees to the city
before the city reviews the proposed preliminary plat. "-
('1) The director of community development shall deliver to the city finance director Veas~areF
for deposit any moneys received as fees herein required with each preliminary plat. p~=n.
The finance director t~eas~-e~ shall credit same to the gene. ral fund of the city. All moneys so
received shall be used to defray the expenses of processing the application. The director of
community development shall prepare a report and recommendation. This report shall then
be forwarded to the planning commission. The planning commission shall forward a
recommendation to the city council. The city council shall hold a public headng on the
application. The hearing shall be held following publication of notice of the time and place
thereof in the official newspaper at least ten (10) days before the day of the headng. The
applicant, property owner, and all other property owners within three hundred fifty (350) feet
of the property to be subdivided shall be notified by mail at least ten (10) days before the day
of the hearing.
~ A subdivision application shall be preliminarily approved or disapproved by the city council
within the time limits required by state law, '"~"': .... ~.,,...~.... ,. .... ,.. ~.,n~. .... ,..,, .... .',...
~ unless an extension of the review pedod has been agreed to by the applicant. When
a division or subdivision to which the regulations of the city do not apply is presented to the
city, the city clerk shall within ten (10) days certify that the subdivision regulations of the city
do not apply to the particular division. If the city fails to preliminarily approve or disapprove an
application within the review pedod, the application shall be deemed preliminarily approved,
and upon demand the city shall execute a certificate to that effect.
Following preliminary plat approval, the applicant may request final plat approval by the city~_T
· -,-,~ p,--, Upon such arequest, the city shall certify final plat approval within sixty (60) days o._.~f
receiving a complete final plat application. City staff will only schedule a final plat for city
council consideration if city staff receives all necessary information and plans at least
fourteen (14) days before a city council meetin.q. Also, the council will only consider a final
plat request if the applicant has complied with all conditions and requirements of applicable
regulations and all conditions and requirements upon which the preliminary plat approval is
expressly conditioned either through performance or the execution of appropriate agreements
53
assuring performance. If the city fails to certify final plat approval as sc required, and if the
applicant has complied with all conditions and requirements, the application shall be deemed
finally approved , '-'" ., .....~ 0r.~ ..~,....r...,, ...... , .... ,,..r,..~ ~.. ~k..~ ~;~.., A;~.
.... L:~c~ ............ · ..........................................
r,...., ........ , ....~..~..=~; ...... ~.~ r,,..,~ ....... .,~.~ After the city council approves the final
plat, the owner or developer shall record the final plat and all accompanyin~ documents with
Ramsey County.
(e) For one year following preliminary approval and for two (2) years following final approval,
unless the subdivider and the city agree otherwise, no amendment to a comprehensive plan
or official control shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or
dedication or platting required or permitted by the approved application. Thereafter, pursuant
to its regulations, the city may annually extend the preliminary plat approval ~
=gr==..'=.=nt '::!th th= =,.:'5-d!v!d=r =nd subject to all applicable performance conditions and
requirements., cr ~t Each year after preliminary plat approval, the city may end the preliminary
plat approval and may require submission of a new preliminary plat application, unless
substantial physical activity and investment has occurred in reasonable reliance on the
approved application and the subdivider will suffer substantial financial damage as a
consequence of a requirement to submit a new application. In connection with a subdivision
involving planned and staged development, the city may by resolution or agreement grant the
dghts referred to herein for such pedods of time longer than two (2) years which it determines
to be reasonable and appropriate.
(f) A person conveying a new parcel of land which, or the plat for which, has not previously been
filed or recorded, and which is part of or would constitute a subdivision to which adopted city
subdivision regulations apply, shall attach to the instrument of conveyance either: (1)
recordable certification by the city clerk that the subdivision regulations do not apply, or that
the subdivision has been approved by the city council, or that the restrictions on the division
of taxes and filing and recording have been waived by resolution of the city council because
compliance will create an unnecessary hardship and failure to comply will not interfere with
the purpose of the regulations; or (2) a statement which names and identifies the location of
the appropriate city offices and advises the grantee that city subdivision and zoning
regulations may restrict the use or restrict or prohibit the development of the parcel, or
construction on it, and that division of taxes and the filing or recording of the conveyance may
be prohibited without prior recordable certification of approval, nonapplicability, or waiver from
the city. In any action commenced by a buyer of such a parcel against the seller thereof, the
misrepresentation of or the failure to disclose material facts in accordance with this
subdivision shall be grounds for damages. If the buyer establishes his fight to damages, a
district court hearing the matter may in its discretion also award to the buyer an amount
sufficient to pay all or any part of the costs incurred in maintaining the action, including
reasonable attorney fees, and an amount for punitive damages not exceeding five (5) percent
of the purchase price of the land.
Sec. 30-6. Qualifications goveming approval of preliminary plat.
(a) The planning commission may recommend and the city council may require such changes or
revisions of a preliminary plan submitted under this chapter as deemed necessary for the
health, safety, general welfare and convenience of the city.
(b) The approval of a preliminary plat by the planning commission and the city council under this
chapter is tentative only, involving merely the general acceptability of the layout as submitted.
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Before any preliminary plan is approved by the city council under this chapter, the information
furnished with said plan must show conclusively that the area proposed to be subdivided is
drainable and that the land is of such nature as to make its intended use practical and
feasible. If these features are not apparent, the owner shall be required to enter into an
agreement guaranteeing that all adverse conditions will be corrected and that drainage will be
accomplished in a satisfactory manner. The final decision in this matter shall be made by the
city council acting upon the advice and recommendation of its engineer or other authorized
representative.
The city council may condition its approval on the construction and installation of fully
operational sewers, streets, electric, gas, telephone, cable television, storm water
mana.qement, drai~,~e, and water facilities, and similar utilities and improvements or, in lieu
thereof, on the receipt by the city of a cash deposit, certified check or irrevocable letter of
credit in an amount and with surety and conditions sufficient to assure the city that the utilities
and improvements will be constructed or installed according to the specifications of the city.
The city council may condition its approval on compliance with other requirements reasonably
related to the provisions of these regulations and to execute development contracts
embodying the terms and conditions of approval. The city may enforce such agreements and
conditions by appropriate legal and equitable remedies.
The city council may require that a reasonable portion of any proposed subdivision be
dedicated to the public or preserved for public use as streets, roads, sewers, electric, gas and
water facilities, storm water drainage and holding areas or ponds, and similar utilities and
improvements.
The city may require that a reasonable portion of any proposed subdivision be dedicated to
the public or preserved for public use as parks, playgrounds, trails or open space; provided
that:
(1)
The city may choose to accept an amount in cash from the applicant or building
contractors for part or all of the portion required to be dedicated to such public uses or
purposes based on the city's park availability charge;
(2) Any cash payments received shall be placed in a special fund by the city used only for the
purposes for which the money was obtained;
(3)
In establishing the reasonable portion to be dedicated, the city council may consider the ·
open space, park, recreational or common areas and facilities which the applicant
proposes to reserve for the subdivision;
(4) The city reasonably determines that it will need to acquire that portion of land for the
purposes stated in this subsection as a result of approval of the subdivision;
(5)
Within the legal boundaries of the city's designated critical area, the city council may
require dedication for public open space or scenic easement, bluffiands which are
eighteen (18) percent or greater in slope and which are in direct drainage to the
Mississippi River Bluffs or Fish Creek. The city council may release the developer in part
or in total from a park dedication fee in lieu of the value of the above-dedicated bluffiands.
55
Sec. 30-7. Necessary data for final plat.
The final plat required by this chapter shall be prepared by a registered land surveyor and shall
conform to all state and county requirements and the provisions of this section. All information
required on the final plat application provided by the director of community development shall be
shown on the final plat.
Sec. 30-8. Minimum subdivision design standards.
(a) Generally. A proposed subdivision under this chapter shall meet the minimum subdivision
design standards set forth in this section.
(b) Streets:
(1)
Street plan. The arrangement, character, extent, width and location of all streets shall
conform to standards for street construction on file in the office of the director of public
works, including relation to existing and planned streets, to reasonable circulation of
traffic, to topographical conditions, to the mana.qement ,".'=cff of storm water, to public
convenience and safety and in their appropriate relation to the proposed uses of the area
to be served. No full-width street shall be less than sixty (60) feet wide.
(2)
Half-width streets. The use of half-width streets shall be prohibited, except where
essential to the reasonable development of the subdivision in conformity with the other
requirements of these regulations and the overall plan of the neighborhood in which the
plat is situated. Wherever a half street is adjacent to a tract to be subdivided, the other
half of the street shall be platted within such tract.
(3)
Cul-de-sacs. Cul-de-sacs,~~ shall be hetd-te as short a-distanee as possible
between the origin or main street and the end of the cul-de-sacs. In no case shall cul-de-
sacs exceed one thousand (1,000) feet in length, unless no other alternative is possible.
Each cul-de-sac shall have a terminus of nearly circular shape with a minimum right-of-
way diameter of one hundred twenty (120) feet, and shall meet all city standards.
(4)
Reserve strips. Privately owned reserve strips controlling access to streets are
prohibited. Publicly owned reserve stdps may be required by the city council, where
necessary to assure equitable payment for streets.
(c) =~cc~=: (c) Reserved.
(d) Trails and pedestrian ways:
(1) Trails. Trails shall be a minimum of eight (8) feet wide. Trails between property lines
shall be centered within a right-of-way or other public property that is at least ten (10) feet
56
wider than the trail pavement. If the trail is in an easemen{, the trail shall be centered in
an easement that is at least thirty (30) feet wider than the trail pavement.
(2) Pedestrian ways. Pedestrian ways, where permitted, shall be at least fifteen (15) feet
wide.
(e) Easements:
Drainage and utility easements. Each lot shall have draina,qe and utility easements that
are at least five (5) feet wide on side lot lines and ten (10) feet wide on the front and rear
lot lines. This easement shall be ten (10) feet wide on both street sides on comer lots.
The city may require additional easements. All the storm water drainage within plat or
subdivision shall be collected within the plat or subdivision, unless the city determines
that this requirement is not feasible, would only have marginal benefit or if the developer
gets the necessary off-site easements. The developer shall install the storm water
improvements to direct the storm water to the city storm water system or to approved
ponding areas.
Each sanitary sewer that is not in a street d.qht-of-way shall have a utility easement
centered on the sewer pipe. This easement shall be at least twenty (20) feet wide. Each
storm sewer that is not in a street ri,qht-of-way shall have an easement with a minimum
width of twenty (20) feet. All water mains that are not in a street right-of-way shall have at
least a 30-foot-wide easement. The city engineer shall approve the size of all easements
and may require larger widths for any easements.
Pondin.q easements. When a subdivision or plat drains into a pondin.q area that the city
does not own or have a drainage easement for, the developer or applicant shall acquire a
drainage easement or fee title for the pondin.q area. The developer or applicant shall
convey any such easements or fee ownership to the city. If the pondin,q area is within the
plat, the developer shall show the ponding area as an outlot and shall dedicate it to the
city. The city engineer shall approve the pond size and it shall hold an additional vertical
one (1) foot of freeboard above the hi.qh water level within the easement or outlot.
57
(f)
(3)
Wetland easements. The city may require a wetland easement over and beyond a
wetland. The wetland easement shall prohibit any structures, mowing, cutting, filling or
dumping within the easement. The city shall decide the easement's size based on
information from the watershed district and the wetlands quality, the amount and quality
of surrounding habitat, the site's building restraints. The city may require a developer to
place signs around the easement boundary. These signs shall identify the easement's
boundary and restrictions.
Lots:
(1) Lot dimensions in F and R-1 zones. The minimum lot dimensions to subdivide in an F or
R-1 zone shall be:
a. Interior lots.
1. Seventy-five (75) feet wide at the established building setback line;
Not less than sixty (60) feet at the front lot line, except that lots located along the
outside curves of curvilinear streets or on the bulbs of cul-de-sacs shall be no less
than forty (40) feet in width at the front lot line; and
Not less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet in area, except= if the average
area or size of the existin.q single-family lots in Maplewood within 500 feet of the
site is at least twelve thousand (12,000) square feet, then the avera.qe lot size of
any new lot shall meet or exceed the avera,qe size of these existin.q lots, up to a
maximum average size of 20,000 square feet. Lots in Maplewood within 500 feet
of the site that are 20,000 square feet or more in area shall each be considered
20,000 square feet for calculating the area avera,qe lot size.
This provision does not apply to new lots approved and created by administrative
lot division as outlined in Section 30-15 (Lot divisions).
b. Comer lots.
1. One hundred (100) feet wide at the established building setback line; and
2. Not less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet in area, unless a larger lot size is
required as in Section 30-8(fl('1)(a)(3) above.
(2) Lot dimensions in R-I(S) and R-2 zones. The minimum lot dimensions to subdivide in an
R-I(S) or in an R-2 zone shall be:
1. Sixty (60) feet wide at the established building setback line and front lot line;
2. Not less than forty (40) feet of width at the front lot line on the bulb of a cul-de-sac
or the outside curve of a street; and
3. Not less than seven thousand five hundred (7,500) square feet in area.
58
b. Comer lots.
1. Eighty-five (85) feet wide at the established building setback line; and
2. Not less than seven thousand five hundred (7,500) square feet of area.
(3) Rear lot lines. The minimum dimensions at the rear lot line of any lot shall be thirty (30)
feet.
(4)
(5)
(6)
Location. All lots shall have fronta,qe :b'.:'t on a publicly dedicated, improved and
maintained street.
Side lot lines. Side lines of lots shall be substantially at dght angles or radial to the street
line.
Double-frontage lots. Double-frontage lots shall not be permitted, except where
topographic or other conditions render subdividing otherwise unreasonable. Such
double-frontage lots shall have an additional depth of at least twenty (20) feet ~ to
allow space for a protective plant-screen along the back lot line.
(Sections 30-8 (f)(7-13), 30-9 (Soil Tests), 30-10 (Residential Zoning) and 30-11 (Variations and
exemptions) remain unchanged.)
59
Section 3: This section changes Sections 30-12 through 30-15 as follows: (I have crossed out
deletions and underlined the additions.)
Sec. 30-12. Improvements--Generally.
~ The developer or contractor shall build every public street within a plat or subdivision with
the followin,q improvements:
· ~ · ;,,~ ~e,., ;~1 ~l,~e ek~ll ;,,.,~1, ,Aa.
(1) Sanitary sewer pipes and appurtenances fatalities;
(2) Public water pipes and appurtenances facilities;
(3) Storm water pipes and appurtenances fac~ilities;
(4) Street, concrete curb and gutter;
(5) Street li,qhts ~;
(6) Boulevard turf establishment;
(.8)(7) Street identification and traffic-control signs. The city shall install these si,qns and the
developer shall pay all costs.
(Sections 30-12 (b) and (c) remain unchanged.)
(cl) The city council shall not approve a final plat without first receivin,q a report from the city
engineer certifyin.q that the improvements and construction of the land and streets, with all other
necessary facilities in the plat have been completed or satisfactorily arranged for according to
provisions of the city re.qulations for land improvement and construction. The developer shall
provide the city en,qineer with a cash escrow or letter of credit to ,quarantee the completion of the
unfinished public improvements.
60
(Section 30-13 remains unchanged.)
Sec. 30-13. Reserved.
Sec. 30-14. Same-Compliance prerequisite for issuance of building permits.
The city will not issue a buildin,q permit for any buildin.q or structure until the:
a. Developer or contractor has met all requirements of this chapter and the city code.
b. Development or improvements meet the requirements of the fire code includina ~)rovidina
water service and an all-weather street surface to the building site.
Sec. 30-15. Lot divisions.
(a) A lot division shall not result in the creation of more than three (3) lots.
(b) The director of community development may approve, or cause to be modified, plans for a
lot division. The director must first determine, however, that the plans meet all city ordinances
and policies, and that the proposal would not have an adverse impact on the subject property or
surrounding properties. If the director makes a negative determination or the applicant wishes to
appeal the decision, the city council shall make the final decision, cc,=~ =~'=",, ,, ~. ~' .... ..,,,,* *",., *~'",,,v ";*"v,.,
(c) A letter of credit may be required as a condition to lot splits on plats in order to guarantee
the proper repair and patching of streets after the installation of utilities in the streets or rights-of-
way.
~ The city will accept only one lot division application for up to three (3) new lots from each
lot or tract of land once every five ('5) years.
(e) Deeds must be filed with Ramsey County within one year of city approval by-the--c~ of a
lot division. If the owner or applicant does not file the deeds within one year of city approval, the
approval shall be null and void.
Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect after the city council approves it and the official
newspaper publishes it.
The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on
,1997.
61
Attachment 5
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ABOUT CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENTS
The Maplewood City Council approves the following ordinance: (I have underlined the additions
and crossed out the deletions.)
Section 1. Section 36-438 is changed as follows:
Sec. 36-438. Planned unit developments: Gc.-.--'.'--!!y; definition, pm=peee-a~l intent,
required plan ,~,quh=eme~.
(a) Definition. A planned unit development (PUD) is any new development that the city
council approves with a conditional use permit (CUP) for a PUD. A PUD may consist of one or
several uses or buildings a dc;'=!cp..--.:nt hc;'!n~ "-'"/')~ ....... '~"""""' ........ "~'~' ........
(b) Intent. It is the intent h=~aUeR of th~s-se~fieR~aRd the ethe~ sections of this article r-elath~
te about planned unit developments to~..v,.,v;" ....... _ .,,_,,., '",_ allow design flexibility. This may
occur with by =.,:'bgt=nt!=! deviations from the provisions of this chapter, including uses, setbacks,
height and other regulations, r-~,,;,,~; ....... ~, ..... ,~,~ ~,,, .., .... - ,,,,.'~ - .... [ ..... ~. p .... ;-~-
th='. The city may allow deviations for planned unit developments if the following apply:
(1) Certain regulations contained in this chapter should not apply to the proposed PUD
deveJ~ because of its unique nature.
(2) The PUD would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter.
(3) The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or supedor quality to
that which would result from stdct adherence to the provisions of this chapter.
(4) The deviations would not b_.~e se,~stitute a significant threat to the property values, safety,
health or general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land.
(5) The city requires deviations are-requked for reasonable and ~ practical physical
development and are not required solely for financial reasons.
(6)
The deviations would help maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural
and scenic features into the development design. This shall include lar.qe trees, wetlands,
slopes and other natural features that the city council deems important or significant.
(c) Required plan. The city requires specific plans with a PUD. The development shall
conform to the plan(s) as filed with the city. Any substantive changes in the plan(s) shall require
a recommendation by the planning commission and approval by the city council after a public
headng. The director of community development may approve minor changes to the approved
plans.
62
(cl) PUD Required. The city requires council approval of a con~litional use permit for a PUD
for all preliminary plats. For such a site, the city shall notify all property owners within 500 feet of
the site of all public meetin.qs and all public hearin,qs.
(e) The city shall not approve a division of the land under an approved PUD, unless the density
distribution approved in the PUD is ensured after the land division.
Section 2. Sections 36-440 through 36-443 are changed as follows:
Sec. 36-440. Application.
Any person may apply ~ for a conditional use permit .... · ........... · p=rscr.
h=v!n; -- '"'"'"" ~"* .... ~ :" ~'~ p:c~c.'t.y '~"'~:'~'~ :" "' .... i-',..~;,.,. An applicant also shall apply
for community desi.qn review board approval, if applicable. An applicant shall submit all
completed applications .~.!!.,.:..w....~""':""~= .... ....r'"".... __r' .... __.........r'"'="~" to the director of community
development upon the forms supplied by the city. The director shall not accept an application
that is not complete. The director shall list specific ,?,pec=i~ application requirements shall-be
stated on this form. , r., ,, ~..,,, ~nc!'.'d= ''~ '~""° *~'~ ~"" .... ;"-' ~nfc..'m.."t!cn, ''~ """';"'~""'
or thc Council's
The applicant shall also, at the time of filing such application, pay a fee to the city.
w. ....... ..........~:"' dcv=!c~'.m=nt. This fee shall be to defray administrative expenses incurred by the city
in handling of the application. The city council shall set this fee, ':;h[c.h
,Sec. 36-441. Procedure.
(a) After a developer submits a complete application, ..... '""'-':'-" :-"~ ~- ...... r,.,,;,,=,~ *h~
director of community development shall prepare a report and recommendation. The director
shall submit this report and recommendation =nd ='.'bm!: !t to the planning commission and
community design review board, as appropriate, for a recommendation to the city council. The
planning commission and community design review board shall take-ai~tieR act on the application
within sixty (60) days of their respective hearing dates, unless the applicant approves an
extension._ ~= .~ppllvll~~,~ II,"+:~.llI''' 'U '~r''' "..... .... .,':..W...."''''''* The staff shall then send the report and the
planning commission's and community design review board's recommendations eka~thel~be
fe~var-d~ to the city council.
(b) The city council shall hold at least one public hearing on each application for a conditional use
permit. The city council shall not hold this Th!= hearing shaiP{~Hbe-he~ until the council has
received written recommendations or reports from the city staff, planning commission and
community design review board." .... ,:, ~:..,../,-m. .... r........ ~, .... . ,....,. ,k~ :.. ·
~ The director of community development shall have a notice of the hearing published in
63
the official newspaper at least ten (10) days before said headng. The director shall also ¢,ause-a
mail a headn.q notice te~ to each of the owners of property within three hundred fifty
(350) feet of the boundary lines of the property '_'pc~ which the applicant such-use has beer
requested a permit., ':;h!ch The city shall mail these notices a,~e4e-be-R~a~ to the last known
address of such owners at least ten (10) days before the date of the headng. Such notice shall
include the date, time and place of the hearing and shall descdbe the conditional use request.
Failure of property owners to receive notice shall not invalidate any of the proceedings in this
section.
(c) The council may refer the application back to the planning commission when the council
finds that the planninR commission did not consider specific questions or information that may
affect the final decision._ we.-= .""'._. .... w.._.__.;'~'-~'~.. ~"' '~'"...v P?-r.n!n; ........ ~.~! .... The city council
shall only use this procedure ~'=~..... ~.. .... v~.u.'~ -~'...~'"".... """'...., ~'.. ..... ..v.'~ once for each application.
(d) The city council may approve, amend or deny an application for a conditional use permit by a
majority vote.
(e) All decisions by the city council shall be final, except that any person aggrieved by a decision
may, within thirty (30) days of the decision, appeal to the county district court.
Sec. 36-442. Standards.
(a) The city council may approve, amend or deny a conditional use permit A cc~...!'.!cr.=! us=
,,~,,.~=~ .... ~, .........,~ .... ,~,4 ,,, ,~,,,,=~,,~ based on the following standards for approval, in
addition to any standards for a specific conditional use found in this chapter:
(1) The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances.
(2) The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
(3) The use would not depreciate property values.
(4)
The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance
to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes,
water or air pollution, drainage water runoff, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical
interference or other nuisances.
(5) The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create
traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
(6)
The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and
parks.
(7) The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
(8)
The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic
features into the development design. This shall include large trees, wetlands, slopes and
other natural features that the city council deems important or siRnificant.
(9) The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
(10)
The city council may waive any of the above requirements for a public building or utility
structure, provided the council shall first make a determination that the balancing of public
interest between governmental units of the state would be best served by such waiver.
(b) The applicant shall have the burden of providing that the use would meet all of the
standards required for approval of a conditional use permit. The city may require the applicant
provide, at his or her cost, any information, studies or expert testimony necessary to establish
whether these standards would be met or to establish conditions for approval.
Sec. 36-443. Conditions.
(a) The city council, in granting a conditional use permit, may impose such conditions and
guarantees that it considers necessary, and as supported by the record of the proceedings, to
protect adjacent properties and the public interest, and to achieve the goals and objectives of the
comprehensive plan.
(b) Conditions and guarantees may include but are not limited to the following:
(1) Controlling the number, area, bulk, height, illumination and location of such uses.
(2) Regulating access to the property, with particular reference to vehicle and pedestrian
safety and convenience, traffic control and emergency vehicle access.
(3) Regulating off-street parking and loading areas, including the number and width of
parking spaces.
(4) The location and design of utilities, including drainage.
(5) Berming, fencing, screening and landscaping, including underground sprinkling.
(6) Compatibility of appearance with surrounding land uses.
(7) Preservation of the site's natural, histodc and scenic features in the development
design.
(8) Limiting the number, size, location or lighting of signage, notwithstanding the
provisions of Article III (sign ordinance).
(9) The location, dimensions and upkeep of open space.
(10) Increasing required lot size, yard dimensions or setback requirements.
(11)
Compliance with any plans presented to the city, includin,q the approved site plan(s)
and buildin,q elevations.
(12) A time limit for review of the permit.
65
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)
A wdtten agreement, cash escrow, letter of credit or other guarantee to ensure that
the project will be built as approved by the city council.
Restrictive covenants.
Control of the intedor and exterior components of a building, provided that such
condition does not conflict with the building code. Such components may include, but
not be limited to, the finished extedor materials and installation of elevators.
Control, including the size and location, of potential noise generators.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication.
The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on
,1997.
66
Attachment 6
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS
Applicants for development proposals located next to or within a residential zoning district shall
hold a neighborhood meeting for the following applications: preliminary plat, conditional use
permit, planned unit development, rezoning or multiple applications.
PURPOSE
STATEMENT OF POLICY
It is the city's intent to expand and enhance the distribution of information to the residents and to
encourage involvement by the residents in the planning process. Therefore it is the applicant's
responsibility to hold a neighborhood meeting that meets the guidelines described in the following
paragraphs.
PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES
The applicant shall schedule the meeting, send out notices/invitations* at least 10 days before
the meetin,q. Meetings shall be scheduled Monday through Thursday evenings after 6 p.m.
and not on an evening preceding a holiday and not on Halloween. The applicant shall be the
host of the meeting and present the project for questions and answers.
2. The meeting shall be held after the city has accepted the application but before the planning
commission meeting on the application.
o
o
Notices/invitations to the neighborhood meeting shall be sent to those names and addresses
listed on the public hearing notice list (within 500 feet of the subject property, obtained from
Ramsey County).
The applicant shall hold the meeting in a location near the proposed development site, if
possible. If there is not a suitable location for the meeting near the site, then the applicant
shall hold the meeting elsewhere in Maplewood.
A representative from the city will be present at the meeting as an observer and to be
available for city-related questions.
The applicant shall make available a complete description of the request, including copies of
printed materials and maps, where appropriate.
City staff will provide the schedule of dates for planning commission and city council meetings,
if known.
When the meeting notice is mailed to adjacent property owners, a copy of the invitation shall
also be sent to the members of the city planning staff, planning commission and city council.
Please contact the Maplewood Community Development Department (770-4560) for the
current member rosters.
*See attached sheet.
67
MINIMUM INFORMATION TO BE
INCLUDED IN MEETING NOTICE
Name of applicant, contact person, address and phone number
Proposed development name
Property location description (location map)
Describe proposed project and application request
Meeting time, day and location
Provide a copy of notice to:
All property owners within 500 feet
City staff
All city council and planning commission members (see attached list)
The city suggests that the applicant or developer provide a location map and a copy of the
proposed development plan with the meeting notice/invitation. Also, additional copies of the
development plans should be available at the meeting.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
68
June 3,1997
City Council
Maplewood City Hall
1830 County Road B East
Maplewood, MN 55109
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ANNUAL REPORT - MARCH 1996-
FEBRUARY 1997
Following is the Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Authority's Annual Report for March
1996 through February 1997. The HRA had three meetings in the last year. On June 24, 1996,
the council appointed Joe O'Brien to the HRA. A list of the members and their attendance is on
page 5.
Proflram Participation
Maplewood participated in three programs run by the Metro HRA and six programs run by local
lenders in the past year. These nine programs are shown in Exhibit B. A total of 425 housing
units received aid through the rental programs (Exhibit C). Of these, 177 had families and 248
had elderly residents. The number of units receiving Section 8 aid decreased from 173 in 1995 to
164 in 1996. This is still less than the 189 Section 8 households in 1989. With the loan programs,
37 Maplewood households received more than $1,198,381.
Housing and Plannin.q Items Considered
In 1996, the HRA recommended that Maplewood approve the 1996 Maplewood Housing Action-
Plan as part of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. We expect that the HRA will have
more work to do in the next 18 months with updates to the Housing Action Plan for the Livable
Communities Act and the update of the Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan.
The HRA also considered in 1996 the Maplewood Housing Program Study as proposed by Steve
Quam of QSA, Inc. The goals of this program are to keep the housing market viable and values
stable by upgrading and improving houses, eliminating problem housing and creating a sense of
unified action in the housing program. Another item the HRA reviewed was the code change to
allow Minneapolis truth-in-housing evaluators to work in Maplewood.
Other Areas of Involvement
Commissioner Fischer served on the Maplewood Seniors and Others with Special Needs
Advisory Committee and on the Maplewood Planning Commission.
Current and Emer.qin.q Concerns
After years of looking at senior housing needs, the HRA continues to believe that support
services are a necessary part of housing for seniors. There are many services available from a
variety of sources-public, private, quasi-private and informal. Information on available services
and how one may get them is not always readily available for those in need. Others have put
together a comprehensive directory of what services are available throughout the region.
However, there are still areas of concern that we could be looking at locally. Having the
Maplewood Seniors and Others with Special Living Needs Committee active is a benefit to the
city.
An area of concern of the HRA is that of older neighborhoods with deteriorating housing. This is
because Maplewood has areas of older housing that could deteriorate if owners do not care for
them. Another matter that could be a concern to the HRA might be that of deteriorating multiple-
family housing. The HRA will review the issues as appropriate and consider possible solutions to
lessen the problems.
Another concern of the HRA is the enforcement of the truth-in-housing ordinance. The city does
not have a formal review process to check to see if property owners are having truth-in-housing
evaluations done. Maplewood may want to consider ideas for ensudng that property owners are
following the ordinance.
Maplewood participates in the Share-a-Home program that Lutheran Social Services (LSS) runs.
This program had a 1996 budget of $178,000 for the five-county area. For 1997, the Share-a-
Home program has a budget of $206,000 for the five-county area. This includes $117,000 from
the Minnesota Department of Human Service (MDHS) and $23,500 from city and Ramsey County
CDBG grants. It also includes $30,500 from fees collected and other contributions of $35,000
from the Saint Paul United Way. Maplewood°s share of the cost in 1996 was $3,300 and in 1997
Maplewood's share is $3,500. LS$ has received inquiries and applications from 69 Maplewood
residents since 1993 to be in the Share-a-Home program. In addition, there have been 27 total
matches since 1986 and there are now two active matches. From 1986 through December 1997,
Maplewood paid $26,295 to the program that created to date 27 total matches. LSS received a
Ramsey County CDBG grant in 1996 and they hope to get another grant from Ramsey CDBG
funds in 1997.
2
1997-98 Work Program
1. Study and make recommendations to the city council about Maplewood's
enforcement of the truth-in-housing ordinance.
2. Work with city staff to prepare the housing action plan for Maplewood's participation
in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act.
3. Continue to review ordinances and policies that may affect housing.
Sponsor or review any necessary code or law revisions to deal with problem areas in
housing for city residents.
4. Study the issue of deteriorating housing and consider possible solutions.
5. Continue to participate in Metropolitan Council and MHFA programs.
6. Review subsidized housing plans for consistency with the city housing plan and the
guidelines for tax-exempt, tax-increment and Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) financing.
7. Keep informed on happenings and changes that will i~fluence the availability of Iow-
to-moderate cost housing.
8. Use various media to improve public awareness of housing issues and opportunities.
Media could include Maplewood in Motion, Maplewood Review, St. Paul paper, sewer
inserts, local cable-access TV, etc. This should include information about housing
programs and developments in the city. The Maplewood in Motion could have items on
T-I-H, housing maintenance codes, and a story explaining what each commission is and
does. Another suggestion is an article on each city commission, possibly identifying the
current commissioners. This is so the city makes residents more aware of the role and
opportunity of citizen involvement in the city.
9. Encourage and aid in the provision of life-cycle housing, including alternative
housing for older adults.
Strive to develop a strategy for provision of various support services for housing. These
enable the elderly to continue to live independently in a suburban city like Maplewood.
Decide how Maplewood can maintain an information and referral service to aid older adults
in finding services. The East Metro Senior Advisory Committee could help with this.
Continue participation in the Older-Adult Home-Share program as an alternative to
premature nursing home placement. Recommend necessary code, law or policy revisions
that will make the above possible.
10.
Have a tour for the HRA, council and planning commission members of development
and housing areas of interest or concern in Maplewood.
Have the city council classify each item above as high, medium or Iow priority to work on
as time permits.
Workin,cl with the Council
If we feel there is a need for additional guidance from the city council, we will make a request for
a shirt-sleeve work session. The HRA also could make a presentation under the "Visitor
Presentation" item on the council agenda.
Also included with this report, as Exhibit E (page 12), is an item we thought might interest you.
This is a summary of rental housing developed with tax-exempt financing. This includes the
number of units, the bond issue amount, fees paid, and federal financing restrictions.
LORRAINE FISCHER, CHAIRPERSON
Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Attachments
kr/c:hrarpt97.mem
4
Attachment
EXHIBIT A
Name
Thomas Connelly
1193 E. County Road B, 55109
Lorraine Fischer
1812 N. Fumess St., 55109
Ga~j Pearson
1209 Antelope Way, 55119
Larry Whitcomb
518 E. County Road B, 55109
Joe O'Brien
1706 Lark Avenue, 55109
HRA COMMISSIONERS
Appointed
1/84, 3/85, 7190, 5196
4~75, 3/81, 3~86, 3/91, 5/96
11/89, 6/94
11/89, 3~92
6/96
Term Expires
3/00
3/01
6/99
3/97
3/98
Meeting Connelly Fischer
ATTENDANCE
Pearson Whitcomb
5-14-96 x x x x
7-9-96 x x x
8-13-96 x x
O'Bden
X
X
kr/anmpexA, mem
5
Attachment 2
EXHIBIT B
ACTIVE HOUSING PROGRAMS IN MAPLEWOOD
(All loan numbers refer to loans made in Maplewood)
Funds made available by the Metropolitan Council HRA
a. Deferred Loan Program - Owner-occupied (funded by MHFA):
One deferred loan: Total of program was $7,895.
Maximum loan amount per application: $10,000.
Households with an adjusted income of $10,000 or less are eligible for this aid. This
program offers deferred payment loans. The loan payment is deferred unless the borrower
transfers the property within ten years of the loan date. If this occurs, the loan amount must
be repaid to the MHFA, but without interest.
The purpose of this loan program is to help eligible applicants repair their homes to correct
deficiencies directly affecting safety, habitability, energy use or handicap accessibility. The
maximum loan amount per applicant is $10,000.
The State's data privacy act protects the locations of the loan recipients.
b. Revolving Loan Program - Owner-occupied (funded by MHFA):
No revolving loan: Total of program was $0.
Maximum loan amount per application: $10,000.
Households with an adjusted income of $18,000 or less are eligible for this aid. The
offers Iow-interest (3 percen~ loans to eligible applicants that are unable to get
program
rehabilitation funding aid from other sources.
The purpose of this loan program is to help eligible applicants repair their homes to correct
deficiencies directly affecting safety, habitability, energy use and handicap accessibility.
The maximum loan amount available per applicant is $10,000.
The State's data privacy act protects the locations of the loan recipients.
c. Section 8 Rental Subsidy Program (funded by HUD):
Eligible tenants pay a maximum of 30 percent of their gross income toward the monthly
rent payment in the certificate program. The difference between the rent that the tenant
can afford and the total rent is the Section 8 amount paid to the landlord by HUD. In the
voucher program, tenants have greater choice and may pay more or less than 30 percent
of their income. In December 1996, 164 Maplewood households (50 senior and 114 family)
were receiving rental help. See Exhibit C for more information about this program.
Funds Made Available by Local Lenders
a. Great Minnesota Fix-up Fund (funded by MHFA):
The MHFA made no loans for a total of $0 in 1996.
Households with an adjusted annual income of $41,000 or less may be eligible for home
improvement loans of up to $15,000. The MHFA determines the loan interest rate (2-8
percent) by the borrower's income.
Home Energy Loan Program (funded by MHFA):
The MHFA made 13 loans for a total of $42,345 in 1996.
Homeowners may be eligible for loans at 8 percent interest rate. Under this program, loans
of $1,000 to $5,000 are available for energy efficiency related improvements only. There
are no income limits.
c. MHFA Minnesota Mortgage Program (funded by MHFA):
The MHFA made 13 loans totalling $938,251 in 1996.
This program is for first-time home buyers (FTHB). To qualify, an applicant's adjusted
gross household income cannot exceed $34,500 to buy an existing dwelling unit in the
Twin City metro area. The below-market interest rate mortgage money is available to buy
existing single-family units, townhomes, condominiums or duplexes.
d. Homeownership Assistance Fund (HAF) (funded by MHFA):
The MHFA made 8 HAF loans totalling $58,137 in 1996.
Through this program, qualifying lower-income MHFA home mortgage recipients could
receive down payments and help with their monthly payments. Households must have an
adjusted annual income of $26,000 or less for this program.
e. Purchase Plus Program (funded by MHFA):
The MHFA made 1 loan totalling $67,776 in 1996.
This program is a purchase/rehabilitation mortgage program that allows borrowers to
purchase and rehabilitate, or refinance and rehabilitate, existing housing with a single
mortgage. This program is to encourage the preservation of the existing housing stock by
providing financing for homes that need moderate rehabilitation, for those that are
abandoned or boarded up or for those that are substandard or deteriorating. There are no
income limits for this program.
7
Urban Indian Housing Program (MHFA):
The MHFA made 1 loan for $83,977 in 1996.
Through this program, Iow to moderate income American Indian families receive housing
assistance in the urban areas of the state. The program provides below-market interest
rate financing for American Indian families buying their first homes. Low and moderate
income American Indian families, or nonprofit organizations that want to develop programs
to meet urban Indian housing needs, are eligible for this program.
kr~an repexB, mere
8
Attachment 3
EXHIBIT C
RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS IN MAPLEWOOD
Existing Units - Section 8
Household Types
Family Elderly Totals
One Bedroom 27 14 41
Two Bedroom 68 36 104
Three Bedroom 17 0 17
Four Bedroom 2 0 2
114 5O 164
Of these 164 units, 145 are in multiple dwellings, 12 are in double dwellings and 7 are in single
dwellings. In addition, these 164 units have 131 certificates and 33 vouchers.
Section 8 and Section 236
Family Units Archer Hei,qhts(1)
Lund,qren Maple Knoll Totals
One Bedroom 30* 5 35
Two Bedroom 55** 13 32 100
Three Bedroom 4*** 16 20 40
Handicapped - - - 2
89 29 57 177
Elderly Units Archer Hei,qhts(1) Concordia Arms
One Bedroom 64**** 124
Two Bedroom
Villa,qe on Woodlynn(2) Totals
20 208
40 40
(1)
Archer Heights has 121 Section 8 units, 27 Section 236 units and 20 market rate units.
Section 8 and 236 income guidelines are the same. Section 8 and 236 rent guidelines
vary.
(2) The Village on Woodlynn has 31 lower and moderate income units (including 12 Section
8 Units).
*There is also 1 market rate unit.
**There are also 8 market rate units.
***There ara also 2 market rate units.
****There are also 9 market rate units.
9
Section 8 and 236 Income and Rent Ceilings
Household Size (Persons)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Maximum Annual Gross Family Income
$20 050
$22 900
$25 800
$28 650
$30 950
$33 250
$35 550
$37 800
Maximum Allowable Rent (Includes gas and electricity)
Unit Type
One Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Three Bedroom
$486/month
$621/month
$841/month
In the metropolitan area, the Section 8 and 236 programs are available only to the Iow income --
80 percent or less of the median income for the metropolitan area.
kr/anrepexc, mem
10
Attachment 4
EXHIBIT D
HOUSING AND PLANNING PROPOSALS CONSIDERED
Meetin,q Date
5-14-96
Item
Livable Communities Act-
Housing Action Plan
HRA Annual Report
HRA Interviews
Action Taken
Recommended approval
Recommended approval
Recommended 2 persons
for vacancy
7-9-96
QSA Maplewood Housing
Program
Truth-in-Housing Code Change-
Evaluator Licensing
Recommended approval of
part of plan and also tabled
further action
Tabled for more information
8-14-96
Truth-in-Housing Code Change-
Evaluator Licensing
QSA Maplewood Housing
Program
Recommended approval
Reached consensus about
proposed housing program.
kr~anrepexD.mem
3.1
Attachment 5
~1 ~
z ~m c~.
12
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
City Manager
Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
HRA INFORMATION
May 27, 1997
I am including the attached information as a follow-up to the May 13, 1997 HRA meeting. This
includes more information from the Metro HRA and from Lutheran Social Service.
kr/hrainfo.mem
Attachments:
1. May 20, 1997 Metro HRA information
2. 1996 Lutheran Social Service information
Metropolitan Council
Working for the Region, Planning for the Future
Attachment 1
Metro HRA
May 20, 1997
Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
CJ~ of Maplewood
I$$0 £ Counfy Road B
Maplewoo~, MN $$109
Dear Mr. Roberts:
Thank you for ~ivin~ Robin Anderson and me the opportunJt~ to speak before
your ltR4 Advisory Committee. Enclosed is the budget, work pro#ram and
mission statement information which you and the committee members
requested. You will note that the information encompasses the entire
Communit~ Development Division of the Metropolitan Council and includes the
Metro HRA which is one component of that division.
ff you have questions or need additional information, please feel free to call
me at 802.1800.
Sincerely,
Kathy KlJne
Pro, ram Operations Supervisor
Metro HRA
enclosure
cc: Robin Anderson, Metro HIZ4 Coordinator
230 Easl Fifth Streel
St. Paul. Minnesota 55101- 1634
(612) 29 ] -7428
2
Fax 291-6313
TDD/TTY 291-0904
Metro Info l.ine 229-3780
Metropolitan Council 1997 Unified Budget
Community Development Division
COM3Cu-NITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
MISSION
EXPECTED
RESULTS
To provide high quality, coordinated planning of regional growth and redevelopment;
identify and analyze strategic regional issues; provide leadership in facilitating
community collaboration; and deliver assisted housing services.
· Reliable research, analysis and policy development that provides the basis for high quality
v io- pan ng
· Local comprehensive plans align with regional development tutti-nee
· Internal and external patmerships are functioning ~o ensm~ regional planning and
operations are well coordln~t~d
· Assisted housing programs delivered in a comprehensive, cost effective manner consistent
TACTICAL
GOALS
· Recommend preferred growth option
· Implement second year of Metropolitan Livable Communities Act
· Coordinate and implern~t a new framework for policy plans-'Regional SWategy'
· Determine appropriate role and level of direct involvement in local government
coordination and collaboration efforts
· Ensure divisional policy, planning and research activities are coorain~*~ with agency
planning and operations
· Implement sector plan to improve agen~ ~ and r~mdts
· Define long-term function and role of Metro HRA
· Establish an economic development agenda for region
3
Metropolitan Council 1997 Unified Budget
Community Development Division
ORGANIZATION
Effective March 1, 1996 the Community Development Division was reorganizid into two units - the Research,
Analysis and Policy Development unit and the Housing Development & Implementation unit. The division' s
proposed 1997 work program and budget reflects the new structure. The research, analysis and policy function
includes the consolidation of the office of policy, development and implc-men~_~on, the office of research, the
geographic information unit, the library and the public safety radio unit. The housini~ development and
implementation function includes the consolidation of the office of local assistance, the Metro I-IRA and the parks
and open space unit.
Work Program Objectives:
1. Identify and analyze strategic regional Issues:
A. Policy research
Rural policy Wols
· Redevelopment tools: analysis of regional fiscal devices to implement urban ~hategies possibly
including bond/credit enhancement authorities and redevelopment/reinvest,uent investment fund.
· Fiscal incentive based tools
B. On-going data collection and research
· Regional Development research
· D~x~raphic research
· Economic research
· Collec~ and analyze information on residential building permits, property ia.xes, assessor data, fiscal
disparities, employm~ daia, shopping cen~ers, retail sales and office buildln?
· Complete annual MCD population and household e~imaIes W s~an~ acceptable for municipal ~
aid road formula and deliver to both Department of Revenue and Deparanen~ of'Transportation.
C. Geographic Information $~ (GI$) - M~o Council
· Provide the Council with ihe ability to determine land availability, land use and to display such
~ information geographically. Specific applications include d~rminagon of'non-poinI source pollution
loads, illegal sewer discharges, and other environmental indicaWrs, iden_~ying land use by parcel and
~ lranspo~on planning and ad~ini_~ation o£ISTEA fimds.
· Development o£GIS as an in~al part ofanalyiic res~u~ which contributes si?ificanfly to
investm~ decision mald~g and policy making.
D. Library
· l~uint~in a library collection of' Council, local and natio~l planning and operational maIerials and
make available as needed for implcunen~ation of Council' s work plan. And provide re£erence service
for staff and Council members.
2. Provide high quality, coordin,ted plannins o~ regiotlal growth and redevelopment:
A. Policy Development
· Develop urban sWategy to help implement the preferred growth option
4
Metropolitan Council 1997 Unified Budget
Community Development Division
· Continue evaluation and development of regional strategies, with particular emphasis on
implementation of urban strategy for all communities within the MUSA'
· Develop regional investment shategy to help implement the preferred growth option
· Collaborate with other government agencies, nonprofits and business to make the most efficient use of
public resources, and bring the greatest benefit to the most people possible.
· Develop a regional economic strategy and define a regional economic development strategy
Policy Implementation
· Implement Preferred Growth Option
-Provide specific direction and implementation tools for carrying out the Council' s adopted
urban growth form.
Land Planning Act implementation (Comprehensive Planning/Sector Reps)
-Strengthen technical assistance to local units of government in plan development through
sector representative approach.
-Provide for coorrlinat~ reviews of local comprehensive plans.
Livable Communities Act implementation
-Work in partnership with local units of government, fundin~o agencies and others to implement
the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act
-Help communities develop and rehabilitate affordable and life-cycle housing.
Metro HRA
-Help Iow-income households find decent, affordable housing throughout the metropolitan
area, especially outside areas of concentrated poverty.
-Help stabilize families and help them work toward economic self-sufficiency
-Upgrade and revitalize the region's housing stock.
Bo
· Parks
-Establish policies to guide acquisition, development and redevelopment of a ~'gional recreation
open space system; create and implement a system plan an~ implement policies and system plan
through master plans and a capital improvement program.
-Provide support to Metropolitan Parks Opm Space Commission, conduct referral reviews and
manage grants
Provide regional leadership in facilitafinE community collaboration:
A. Radio project
· Plan implementation of a regional trunked radio communications system in partnership with local
governments and other service
Metro GIS
· Development of Metro GIS which promotes inter-agency cooperation and data sh~ring for use in GIS
Lake Min~etonka project
· Develop cooperative service sharing arrangements in the metropolitan area
Bo
Co
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1997 BUDGET, S ,UMMARY
$50.5 million-TOTAL BUDGET
Consisting of:
$29.2 M
$13.7M
$ 4.4M
$ 3.1M
Pass-through funding administration
~YRA $27M; Parks $2M)
Grant funding administration
(LCA $11.8M; Planning grants $1.9M)
Operating expenditures-Non-HRA
(Personnel, contractual, etc.)
Operating expenditures-l~2A
(Personnel, contractual, etc.)
$50.5M
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
6
Description
M~TROPOLITAN COUNCIL
SUMMARY BUDGET
COlVIMUNI~ DEVELOPMENT DMSION
1997
Research, Analysis and Policy Development
I[
TABLE 6
Revenue
Policy Dev &
Implem GIS Research Library Radio Division Mgr
PrOperty Tax 719,175 714,872 938,880 135,427 188,198 316,91
Intergovernmental Revenue-
State
F~deral
Local/Other
Miscellaneous Revenue-
Interest
Other
Total Revenue 719,175 714,872 938,880 135,427 188,198 316,9:
Expenditures
~-'alaries & Benefits
Contract S~rvices
Rent i Utilities
HRA Admin Fees
Materials & Supplies
Other Direct Expenses
?assthrough Grants
Debt Service
Total Expenditures
Other Financing Sources/Uses
Interdivtsional Expense Allocations
Fund Transfers/Internal Revenues
(Addition to)fUse of Fund Balance
Transfers from Other Funds
Operating Transfers to Other Funds
Fund Transfers/Internal Revenues
TotalOther Financing Source~/(Uses)
Balance/(Deficit)
515,275
53,700
33,900
116,300
719,175
455,472 698,680 87,777 150,598 260,6.~
540,500 15,000 10,050
38,100 50,800 8,500 8,500 12,7(
130,800 174,400 29,100 29,100 43,6(
1,164,872 938,880 135,427 188,198 316,9!
450,000
- 450,000 - -
450,000
7
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
SUMMARY BUDGET
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
1997
Housing, Development and Implementation
I I
OPERATING
Local TOTAL lIRA
Assistance & Park~ & Special Revenue & GENERAL
Referrals Open Space Fund-HRA FUND
Pass-Through
Grants
Debt Service
1,083,149 149,567
79,500
20,000
205,700
3,091,000
50,000
68,200
4,246,225
205,700
3,170,500
20,000
50,000
68,200
11,508,700
3,986,400
24,981,000
217,500
467,400
4,424,300
551,000
TABLE 6
(continued)
Total-Memo Only
20,179,225
4,192,100
28,151,500
20,000
818,500
535,600
1,182,649 149,567 3,414,900 7,760,625 41,161,000 4,975,300 53,896,925
805,849 111,967 1,234,984 4,321,259
99,000 485,000 72,400 1,275,650
62,700 8,500 137,800 361,500
1,114,536 1,114,536
215,100 29,100 185,825
1,182,649 634,567 2,745,545
953,325
8,026,270
41,143,500
41,143,500
3,914,365
3,914,365
4,321,259
1,275,650
361,500
1,114,536
953,325
41,143,500
3,914,365
53,084,135
445,000
445,000
445,000
- 485,000 '
- 485,000
450,000
485,000
(1,517,500)
1,500,000 I
935,000
(17,500)
(1,060,935)
(2,128,435)
1,985,000
(1,060,935)
(143,435)
485,000
(445,000)
224,355
490,000
224,355
(17,500)
(1,060,935)
(588,435)
224,355
8
1/227971:2~ PM ~
TABLE 11
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
STAFF COMPLEMENT IN FTE's FOR 1994-1997
1~4 1~5 1996 ' 1~7
CHAIR AND REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICES , .
Council and Chair's Office 2 5 5 ' 5
Regional Administrator's Office 2 4 4 4
Human Resources 2.8 2.8 25.4 23.87
Diversity 1 I 1 2
Internal Audit 1 1 2 5
Intergovernmental Relations 1 3 2.8 2.8
Public Safety 1
Risk Management 2
Communications and Data Center 9.6 13 14 14
Legal 5 5 8 11
Fiscal Services 10.6 14.6 12.6 13.6
Information Services 15.9 16.9 24.9 73.15
Budget and Evaluation 4 4
Regional Administration 50.9 66.3 103.7 161.42
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Division Director Office 1 1 3
GIS 2 6 6 9
Policy Development 12.8 12.8 8 8
Research 20 20 16 12
Library 2 2 2 2
HRA 26.5 28 29 27
Local Assistance & Referrals 13.8 16.8 16.8 14.8
Parks and Open Space 2 2
Radio 2 2
Water Management 8 9
Transportation 12
Community Development 97.1 95.6 82.8 79.8
Total Regional Admin~.-[ion & Planning 148 161.9 186.5 24122
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
Division Director Officss 50 50.6 25.7 22.7
Management Services 89.7 96.2 87.4 64.3
Wastewater Services 897.5 896.6 897.9 815.3
Environmental Planning/Evaluation 128.7 127.2 134 129.2
Subtotal 1165.9 1170.6 114,5 1031.5
Additional Budgeted Reductions -.30 -25
Total Environmental Services Division 1165.9 1170.6 1115 1006.5
SUBTOTAL 1313.9 1332.5 1301.5 1247.72
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION'
Divismn Director 1 1 1
Transportation & Transit Development 38 28.6 25 26
Metro Mobility 15 14 12 12
Rideshare 6 8
Total Other Transit 53 43.6 44 46
MCTO
Drivers 1469.1 1435.4 1371.5 1371.5
Mechanics 475.9 458 439.7 439.7
Administration-General 287.1 272.9 248.9 218.4
Adminetrafion-Cledcal 196.4 188.4 179.3 179.3
Administration-Police 42.8 34.8 27.4 27.4
T~al MCTO 2471.3 2389.5 2264.8 2236.3
3530.02
TOTAL FTE' S 3838.2 3765.6 3610.3
· Transportation staffing levels for 1997 are still being determined as MCTO completes its Business Plan
9
Attachment 2
L UTHEI~-L\'
L
S
~OCLkL SER\qCE OF
Minneapolis Area Office
2414 Park Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55404
612/871-0221
1-800-261-6482
Fax 612/871-0354
July 1. 1996
Craig Dawson
City of Maplewood
1830 County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55109
RE: LSS Share-A-Home Quarterly Statistics for the City of Maplewood.
Dear Mr. Dawson:
The following is the report for activity in the City of Maplewood.
Reporting Period: January 1, 1996 to June 30, 1996.
Units of Service:
Inquiries from households in Maplewood 9
New matches 0
Maplewood matches terminated l
Total Current matches l
Number of months of service to homeowners l0 mos.
Number of months of affordable housing 10 mos.
Average length of all active matches in Maplewood - 16 mos.
Outreach activities:
* Ongoing distribution of Share-A-Home Newsletters.
* Distribution of new Share-A-Home informational brochure.
* Requested Share-A-Home information be included in Community or
Senior Center Newsletters in Metro area.
* On-going communication with nursing homes, senior centers, colleges and social
service staff to keep them informed about our services.
* continued participation the East Metro/Maplewood Seniors and Persons
with Disabilities Committee.
Our thanks t° the City of MaPlewood for their support.
Sincerely,
Judy Loehrer
Community Programs Specialist
Share-A-Home
10
Minneapolis Area Office
2414 Park Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55404
612/871.0221
Fax 612/871-0354
December 4, 1996
Craig Dawson
City of Maplewood
1830 County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55109
RE: LSS Share-A-Home Statistics for the City of Maplewood.
Dear Mr. Dawson:
The following is the report for activity in the City of'Maplewood.
Reporting Period: July 1, 1996 to November 30, 1996
Units of Service:
Inquiries from households in Maplewood 2
New matches 0
· Maplewood matches terminated 1
Total Current matches 0
Number of months of service to homeowners 4 mos.
Number of months of affordable housing 4 mos.
Outreach activities:
* DistributiOn of Share-A-Home informational brochure.
* Requested Share-A-Home information be included in Community or
Senior Center Newsletters in Metro area.
* On-going communication with nursing homes, senior centers, colleges and social
service staffto keep them informed about our services.
* Continued participation the East Metro/Maplewood Seniors and Persons
with Disabilities Committee.
Our thanks to thc City of Maplewood for their support.
Sincerely.
:John Bringewatt
Community Programs Specialist
Share-A-Home
]]