Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/01/2008 AGENDA MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, July 1, 2008 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. June 17, 2008 5. Public Hearings 6. New Business a. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update - Review and Discussion of Land Use Plan Update 7. Unfinished Business 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations June 9 Council Meeting Follow-up: Mr. Boeser June 23 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson July 14 Council Meeting (Gethsemane Senior Housing): Mr. Martin July 28 Council Meeting: Mr. Walton 10. Staff Presentations a. TIF Review Process b. Special Meeting: July 29 for Continuing Comprehensive Plan Update Discussion 11. Adjournment DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 2008 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the rneeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioner Joseph Boeser Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Comrnissioner Harland Hess Comrnissioner Robert Martin Commissioner Gary Pearson Comrnissioner Dale Trippler Comrnissioner Joe Walton Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood Absent Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Absent Staff Present: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Ginnv Gavnor, Naturalist III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the agenda as submitted. Commissioner Desai seconded Ayes - all The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. June 3, 2008 In some instances, concerning visitor comments, it was found the minutes were a little too brief in how visitor comments were noted, Direction was given to staff to have the minutes be more complete when quoting visitors. After the discussion on the visitors' comments in the minutes, Commissioner Trippler moved approval of the minutes of June 3, 2008, as submitted. Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes - all The motion passed. V. PUBLIC HEARING None VI. NEW BUSINESS a. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update - Review and Discussion of Land Use Plan Update City planner Tom Ekstrand introduced Ginny Gaynor, city naturalist, who will speak on the natural resources chapter of the comprehensive plan and Mike Martin and Rose Lorsung, consultants with MFRA. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-17-08 -2- Mike Martin explained that tonight the Introduction and Community Profile, Land Use, Natural Resources, and Historical Resources chapters of the comprehensive plan would be reviewed. >- Natural Resources Plan Ginny Gaynor, spoke concerning natural resource issues and explained the natural area greenways concept is a new subject in the natural resources plan. The concept is to look at large natural land areas that are connected, both public and private, together with the smaller neighborhood local habitats, parks and trails. Ms. Gaynor described the additional natural resource strategy for an issue- based approach, such as storm water or buckthorn. Commissioner Trippler said the Groundwater Benefits description does not include that groundwater provides drinking water or irrigation. Ms. Gaynor said these items can be added to the description. Commissioner Hess questioned the 660-foot minimum corridor width in a greenway for a developed suburb like Maplewood. Ms. Gaynor responded that an additional proposal for the greenways would be to consider widening narrow areas if possible. Ms. Gaynor said that it is proposed in the future that overlays would be done to possibly add buffer areas to the greenways. Commissioner Pearson noted these natural resources concepts are referred to as being mandated and he finds it distressing that this would take away the rights of the property owners who pay taxes on the property. Mr. Pearson said if properties would be grandfathered in, it should be explained to the public what this would mean. Naturalist Gaynor referred to the City Planning and Zoning section language stating that these are simply considerations. Ms. Gaynor noted that this is a general plan meant to provide options. Commissioner Trippler commented it is not known yet what kinds of things the buffer will need in order to function as a greenway for wildlife to move from one greenway to another and when that is known, those things can be encouraged to be provided by those who live in the greenway area. Commissioner Fischer said each cornmission comes from a different perspective and she referred to past commission discussion on the taking of land, what is a reasonable taking and what will be paid for the property taken. Ms. Gaynor suggested that the word "consider" be removed from this description on page 11 and replaced with "study". Commissioner Desai said he would like to have "study" inserted and the language on "incentives or mandate" rernoved at this time. Rose Lorsung, consultant with MFRA, explained the responsibility of every chapter in the comprehensive plan is to talk about the policy and what the implementation strategies are. Commissioner Pearson said the basis of his sensitivity in this matter is that when the wetland ordinance was initially being considered, he was informed that 12-15 of his Beaver Lake Estates manufactured homes would not be allowed to be changed out in the future because of the expanded setback. Mr. Pearson said he does not believe the city has this right. Commissioner Martin said he has not seen the interactive map system mentioned at the previous meeting and commissioners are still using 11 x 17 maps. Mr. Martin explained the commission needs more detailed tools in order to make recommendations. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-17-08 -3- Commissioner Desai questioned the last sentence on page 11 concerning a buffer width change and Ms. Gaynor agreed the sentence should be either corrected or removed. Commissioner Trippler suggested the last sentence of the first full paragraph on page seven should be revised to read "Blanding's turtles were also recorded as living in this greenway." Ms. Gaynor agreed. Commissioner Martin questioned whether the suggested five-year plan review language on page 11 under Implementation Strategies is rnandatory. Naturalist Gaynor responded this is a general strategy and it is in the document to encourage plan review and is not a mandatory time period. In response to discussion on the last paragraph of the implementation strategies on page 11 regarding a five-year plan review, Ms. Gaynor said this paragraph will be replaced with language stating the plan will be reviewed in the future as part of the ten-year comprehensive plan review. Ms. Lorsung commented that when the city's five-year Capital Improvement Plan is reviewed, the improvements impacting the natural resources plan should also be considered for possible opportunities to enhance these corridors. Commissioner Fischer noted a typographical error in the second item under Urban Tree Management. Ms. Gaynor said the sentence will be corrected. Commissioner Trippler mentioned that the Figure 2 Natural Area Greenways map shows the classification for lakes as light blue with the lakes shown as colored green and blue. Mr. Trippler noted this is confusing and should be changed. Mr. Trippler said a definition is needed on Figure 3 for Local Habitats and also, noted the color on Figure 4 of the Mississippi Natural River and Recreation Area needs to be corrected. Ms. Gaynor said the color was changed due to the gray overlay, but she would have the color corrected on the legend. Commissioner Walton said the greenways are a good idea because they block out large areas for habitat rather than the small, piecemeal effect, but he does not think anything should be forced or mandated. Commissioner Desai agreed saying that it is a good idea and to go forward. Naturalist Gaynor said she would make the suggested changes for the next review. Mike Martin said the Introduction and Community Profile, which came out of the background report from the planning commission at the beginning of this process, would be discussed next. >- Introduction and Community Profile Commissioner Fischer rnentioned that a Health and Welfare goal was dropped due to a keyboarding error from the prior comprehensive plan. There were no further comments on these sections. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-17-08 -4- >- Land Use Plan Commissioner Fischer pointed out that in the demographics information the numbers for comparison to Maplewood used in the past were for the entire Metropolitan Area and now Ramsey County's numbers are used for comparison. Commissioner Trippler mentioned that on page 2-13, the last sentence under Residential mentions three subdivisions and the third subdivision is missing and needs to be added. Mr. Martin said he did not have the code in front of him, but believes that two of the subdivisions deal with the same density but different design characteristics. Commissioner Desai questioned whether this should be further defined. Cornmissioner Fischer said town homes are not listed in the residential category and should be recognized as the appropriate category. The commission discussed the Metropolitan Council's figures used on page 2-11 and suggested a sentence be added clarifying that the figures are from the Metropolitan Council. Commissioner Pearson said the wording of the second sentence of paragraph four on page 5-1 needs to be revised. Commissioner Walton suggested that the projected population forecast number on page 2-1 be added to the last paragraph of the Land Use Plan section on page 5-1. Commissioner Trippler said in reference to the Goals and Objectives listed on pages 5-2 through 5-6, that if the city council does not think that it's going to devote the time, the energy and the resources to do the things that are in here, they should take them out because it is foolish to have things in here that the city does not intend to do. . Commissioner Martin responded saying that if the Goals and Objectives are omitted from the plan, it is an out-of-sight, out-of-mind issue that comes into play and they should be kept in the plan at least on the back burner. Commissioners Hess and Fischer both agreed the objectives should be left in the plan. Referring to Goal 12 on page 5-6, Commissioner Fischer mentioned that additional parking for some developments has been allowed to be delayed until some future time if it is found to be needed. Ms. Fischer suggested this information be noted in Goal 12, since the city does not want to add any more impervious surface than is necessary. >- Mississippi River Critical Area Commissioner Fischer asked whether the large acre lots existing in some neighborhoods were included in Future Land Use Table 5.2. Mr. Martin responded that this table describes how the land use plan has been guided thus far. . Ms. Lorsung explained this table is the land use plan and what Commissioner Fischer's question deals with is a policy change or a zoning issue and will be addressed later as part of the zoning districts discussion. Ms. Lorsung said it is not too late to make this change and it could be discussed with the map of the low density properties at the next meeting. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-17-08 -5- Ms. Lorsung said she and staff would get the information together and get it to the commission for discussion at the first meeting in July. Commissioner Trippler said that "industrial" appears under Institutional on page 5-17. Mr. Martin said that is a typo and will be corrected. Commissioner Trippler questioned whether the text in this section reflects that there are no zoning districts designated for institutional uses. Ms. Lorsung responded that the institutional land use designations are governed within other zoning districts by conditional use. >- Historical Resources Commissioner Trippler said the last paragraph of this section is circular and redundant and could be taken out without losing the idea that it conveyed in the previous chapters. Mr. Trippler further stated that there are typo errors and it is very poorly written. Planner Ekstrand said that changes discussed at the meetings have been made in content, but it still needs to be gone through to correct and clean up the wording so that it reads properly. Mr. Martin assured the commission that this is not the last review and they will have the opportunity to review the entire revised document. Commissioner Fischer relayed a language problem in number ten on page 6. Mr. Martin responded with the correct wording and said this language will be corrected. Commissioner Walton asked whether the second sentence under Discussion, Challenges and Issues was part of the last plan. Staff responded that it was included in that plan and that "now" should be removed from the sentence. Mr. Martin said the commission would receive further chapters of the plan to be reviewed at the next meeting. b. Election of Chairperson and Vice Chairperson Commissioner Martin nominated Lorraine Fischer as chairperson. Commissioner Hess nominated Tushar Desai as chairperson and Dale Trippler as vice chairperson. Commissioner Walton nominated Tushar Desai as vice chairperson. The commission voted as follows for Lorraine Fischer as chairperson: Ayes -four Nays - two Abstention - Fischer, Desai Commissioner Fischer was voted as chairperson. The commission voted as follows for Tushar Desai as vice chairperson: Ayes - four Nays - two Abstention - Desai Commissipner Desai was voted as vice chairperson. The commission voted as follows for Dale Trippler as vice chairperson: Ayes - one Nays - five Abstentions - Desai, Trippler Planning Commission Minutes of 06-17-08 -6- VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS . June 9 Council Meeting: Mr. Boeser will report at the next meeting. . June 23 Council Meeting: No planning items. . July 14 Council Meeting: Mr. Martin will attend. . July 28 Council Meeting: Mr. Walton will attend. X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Annual Tour Update - June 30, 2008 Staff asked for confirmation from those commissioners planning to attend the tour. Commissioner Desai asked whether the regularly scheduled planning commission meeting on July 1 will be held. Staff responded that the July 1 meeting will be held as planned. XI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:22 p.m. 2030 Comprehensive Plan City of Maplewood MEMORANDUM To: From: Subject: Date: Acting City Manager Rose Lorsung and Michael Martin, MFRA Comprehensive Plan June 25, 2008 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission has finished its work on making policy and land use plan changes and has moved into review and editing mode of the Draft Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission will continue its review over the next three meetings. As the review of the draft chapters progresses, City Staff and consultants are finding that the City's other Boards and Commissions are taking more time in order to conduct a thorough review. There has also been an expressed desire from a few members of the Planning Commission to allow for more time to review each chapter. Therefore, we will be dividing the review of the draft chapters over the next three Planning Commission meetings. At the July 1 meeting, the Planning Commission will be reviewing the Transportation and Sanitary Sewer chapters. Also at this meeting, the Planning Commission will discuss appropriate land use for residential areas with larger lots. The Planning Commission will review the Surface Water, Sustainability, and Housing chapters at its July 15 meeting. The Historic Preservation Commission had requested to take a second look at the Historical Resources chapter, meaning that the Planning Commission will review that chapter again on July 15. The Planning Commission will be meeting on July 29 to review the Parks, Trails, and Open Space chapter as well as finishing reviewing any of the other chapters as needed. As the Planning Commission continues its review, the City Council will have the chapters introduced to them in a workshOp setting. The first scheduled workshop is on July 7 with another tentatively scheduled for July 28. DISCUSSION The City's consultants Kimley-Horn have prepared the Transportation and Sanitary Sewer chapters. These two chapters have been coordinated and developed with the City's 2030 Land Use plan. Each 'chapter will be presented and discussed. Consultants and Staff will be looking for the Planning Commission to give its thoughts and comments based on the content of each chapter. As at the last meeting, the Planning Commission should give Staff and consultants typos and minor wording issues after the meeting and keep discussion focused on larger and substantive policy issues. At the June 17 meeting the Planning Commission discussed the issue of larger residential lots in the City that are being guided Low Density Residential. Some members felt that using a lower density category could be appropriate in order to maintain existing neighborhood character. MFRA is analyzing the number and location of such properties and will lead a discussion and make recommendations as to what the appropriate land use should be. The Planning Commission will receive an overview of the number and location of parcels in question. MFRA will also discuss with the Planning Commission whether a Future Land Use designation or zoning controls would be more effective in protecting existing neighborhood character throughout the City. RECOMMENDATION Please review the two chapters before the July 1 Planning Commission meeting. Be prepared to share your thoughts and comments on each of the chapters. The Final Draft Comprehensive Plan will incorporate the feedback received on Tuesday. Also, be prepared to continue the Land Use discussion about the appropriate designation for larger residential lots currently guided Low Density Residential. If you have any questions about the comprehensive planning process, please contact Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner, at 651-249-2302 or Tom.Ekstrand@cLmaplewood.mn.us. -~~ OTYOFMAPLEWOOD 2030 COMPREHENSIVEPL4..."< Chapter 8 - Transportation Introduction The purpose of the Transportation Plan is to plan for adequate road, transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The City is planning these facilities to complement and support the other Comprehensive Plan elements. This is to ensure that the transportation system works so that citizens may enjoy reasonable mobility, access, and safety. The plan also is to ensure that the transportation system protects and enhances neighborhoods while being integral, but not intrusive to residents. In addition, the transportation system should work for individuals so that various types of travel can coexist and accommodate individual choices. Transportation Issues Maplewood's transportation system is well established. The City will, however, need to focus on several . transportation issues including the following: . What should the City do about continued traffic growth in Maplewood? The automobile is expected to stay as the dominant mode of travel in Maplewood and in the region for the foreseeable future. Compared to other transportation modes, the tremendous investment already made in automobiles and auto-oriented infrastructure ensures the cars will remain the primary mobility mode for years to come. In this region, continued support of auto-dependent development patterns further strengthens the cars dominance as the mode of choice. This growth in car use is driven by several factors including: More households have more than one wage earner More households are using larger numbers of vehicles The number of trips each person takes each day is increasing Vehicle occupancy is low Development patterns encourage automobile use and discourage pedestrian and bicycle use. As a result, traffic volumes have increased and now exceed the intended street capacity in parts of the City, especially near Maplewood Mall. While the City is addressing those congestion issues it has control over, the City of Maplewood, like other cities, has limited ability to change regional transportation patterns and car use. . Reducing traffic congestion near Maplewood Mall. Growth in the area of the Mall along with development west of the Mall site continues to generate increased vehicle traffic. Both the arterial and the collector streets in the area are operating at high levels of congestion which continued growth will only make worse. A comprehensive traffic study has been completed to analyze traffic operations and congestion in the area surrounding the Maplewood Mall (URS, November 2001). The traffic study included the identification of numerous transportation improvements that are necessary to reduce congestion in this area of the City. The City is currently in the process of implementing these improvements, and many have already been completed. . What are the implications of LRT service or the addition of a busway or passenger rail service in Maplewood? How can the City maximize the potential for economic development while also minimizing Transportation impacts on residential areas? How should LRT or passenger rail service be extended to the Maplewood Mall? How can the number of at-grade crossings with the rail corridor be minimized? . How much the City should be involved with MnDOT in the development of plans for improving or expanding the highways and freeways in Maplewood? Many of the existing highways and freeways in and near the City have capacity deficiencies as identified by MnDOT in their current Transportation System Plan. As traffic volumes continue to increase, deficiencies in traffic capacity on the regional road system, including the Maplewood area, will get worse. . As transportation system needs continue to grow, how can the City pay for the necessary improvements when City budgets limit capital solutions? The City (and other agencies) cannot continue to address traffic congestion and access problems by simply increasing the physical capacity of the transportation system. The financial and political costs are too high and the potential for community disruption is too great. . What shouid be the City's policies about the development of sidewalks and trails? if such facilities are to be developed, where should they be located? How can the City's plans and policies better serve bicycles? How should the Parks and Recreation Department be involved with the planning, installation and maintenance of trails and sidewalks? Major Street System Figure 8.1 illustrates the existing and planned system of major roads and their functional classification. Street Classification System Maplewood adopted its street classification system from the Twin Cities Metropolitan Council's "Transportation Development Guide/Policy Plan." The roadway functional classifications are described as follows: Principal Arterials - roadways designed to carry the highest volume of traffic (15,000+ ADT), allow the highest speeds (40-55 mph), handle the longest trips and provide subregional, regional, and intercommunity access. These roadways do not provide direct access to abutting properties. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and Ramsey County set the spacing standards for principal arterials. This roadway type connects with other principal arterials, minor arterial, and collector streets. Minor Arterials - roadways that connect subregions. These are roads which are the closest routes running parallel to the principal arterial system. Minor arterials supplement and provide relief for traffic to the principal arterial system. These roadways also may provide direct access to abutting properties as determined in the Maplewood City Code, Chapter 32, Article IV, Driveways. Spacing of minor arterials is determined by MNDOT and Ramsey County standards, with site specific exceptions. This roadway type serves inter- and intra-community needs for trips, carries high traffic volumes (5,000+ ADT), and allows moderate-to-high travel speeds (35-45 mph). These roads also serve medium to long distance suburb to suburb trips, connect major trip generators, funnel traffic between collectors and restricted access arterials, and contain at least two drive lanes in each direction. Collector Streets - roadways designed to carry traffic between the arterial system and the local roadway system. These convey intra-community traffic between neighborhoods, business centers, industries, parks and the like, and provide direct access to abutting properties. This type of roadway carries moderate traffic volumes (1 ,000 -15,000 ADT), allows moderate-to-high speeds (30-40 mph), satisfies local trip needs (one to four miles) and connects local streets with arterials. Spacing ofthese roads typically piaces them about one-half mile apart. Transportation 2 local Streets - roadways primarily designed to serve short trips at low speeds. Local streets connect blocks, provide direct access to properties and convey traffic to and from higher level roadways. This type of roadway carries the lowest traffic volumes (generally less than 1,000 ADT), allows low speeds (maximum 30 mph) and the horizontal curves need not accommodate 30 mph travel speeds. Spacing of local streets is one block or as needed. Figure 8.2 illustrates the typical street sections for a variety of road types. These street sections may vary based on the particular constraints of a project. The various watershed districts in the City of Maplewood have stringent stormwater capture and treatment requirements which cause significant impacts on the storm water treatment methods that are required on most projects with the City. Reducing the area of impervious surfaces, including roadways, is one method that will be used by the City, particularly in residential areas, to reduce the impacts and costs of the required stormwater treatment facilities (NURP ponds, stormwater detentions ponds, etc.). Access Management is the practice of controlling the spacing and design of roadway intersections for the purpose of , maintaining the functionality of a given roadway. MnDOT and counties control the number and frequency of access points that are added to roadways under their jurisdiction. Higher functional ciass roadways will typically have greater spacing between access points and the turning movements allowed at the access points may be restricted to help maintain a higher roadway speed and improve safety. Local roadways will have more densely spaced access points in order to improve mobility. MnDOT access management policy is documented in the MnDOT Access Management Manual. This manual provides recommended intersection spacing and vehicular movements allowed for roadway intersections and private drives based on each roadways assigned category and subcategory. Ramsey County's Public Works Department provides input on access management requirements during the planning process. The City of Maplewood will work with the appropriate agencies to determine the required access requirements during the planning and design phases of a City led project. Figure 8.3 illustrates the number of vehicle travel lanes on the arterials streets and roads in Maplewood. Traffic Analysis Zones The Metropolitan Council has divided Maplewood into 28 traffic analysis zones (TAls). Figure 8.4 illustrates the TAZs in Maplewood. These zones, corresponding to data collected via census, are used to forecast population, households, and employment demographics throughout the metropolitan area. Actual 2000 census data along with forecasts for each TAl in Maplewood for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030 are included in Table 8.1. 2006 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) data on key roads in the City of Maplewood (obtained from MnDOT) and the projected 2030 ADT for the same road segments are detailed in Figure 8.5. 2030 ADT forecasts were created using a trend analysis of MnDOT ADT data from 1992-2006 since Maplewood is a developed community. Transportation Plan Goals A major goal of the City of Maplewood is having safe, enjoyable neighborhoods. The Comprehensive Plan shows 13 neighborhood areas within the City, where neighborhood integrity is respected and people feel secure and satisfied where they live, work, shop and play. A second major goal for the City of Maplewood is providing residents with reasonable mobility. The City's residents often depend on and enjoy relatively relaxed pace and ease of travel. This plan recognizes the desire and need for Transportation 3 good mobility in every aspect of their lives. A major part of meeting this goal means that the City must provide good access between businesses and their customers, materials and workers. Maplewood's transportation system must fit into the county and regional system. The plan envisions a City that has its own unique identity, but also contributes to, and benefits from, the strength of the whole region. Street System Policies The City will continue to design and maintain its roads and review site pians according to the functional classification system of roads iliustrated by Figure 8.1, and the design standards illustrated in Figure 8.2. These standards will ensure that streets serve Maplewood's needs and enhance regional efforts to reduce traffic congestion. The City will do what it can to help implement Improvements to the metropolitan highway system planned through 2030, although locations for those improvements will frequently occur on state or county rights-of-way. Maplewood should participate in county and regional planning efforts to improve the City's connection with the , region's street and road system. Travel Demand Management Policies Travei Demand Management (TOM) is designed to increase the efficiency and utilization of the existing roadway system by leveling peak demand periods using number of management strategies. The goal is to increase the number of people who share rides, utilize transit and reduce single occupancy vehicle trips during peak rush hours. These techniques are mandated for communities in the metropolitan area to mitigate congested portions of the regional highway system particularly in cities that have regional business centers. TOM combined with thorough transit planning has proven to be a more cost effective way to address transportation growth than by simply building more highway lanes. The 3M Company, Maplewood's major employer with nearly 12,000 employees, also is one of the region's leaders in developing ridesharing programs. The company maintains 105 employee-operated vans providing service to 850 employees. 3M has been supporting ridesharing for over 30 years and its Rideshare Services Department also coordinates commuter van services for other 3M facilities across the United States. Maplewood's location and strong mixture of housing and commercial areas may help to reduce travel on the metropolitan highway system by allowing people to live near their place of work. The Land Use Plan supports the growing number of people who want to live in an "inner ring" suburb like Maplewood as a way to minimize travel times to work, shopping and recreation. The City continues to guide land use development in ways that reduce vehicle trips and promote the use of alternative modes of travel. The City should work with other agencies to promote an infrastructure and system management that supports transit, carpooling, bicycling and walking as viable mode options in the full transportation spectrum. Maplewood should ensure that its land use controls and other City regulations reasonably allow workers to telecommute. The City urges the Minnesota Department ofTransportation and the Metropolitan Council to continue educational programs which encourage ride sharing, staggered work hours and off-peak travel. Such campaigns are most effectively mounted at the regional level. Transportation 4 Transit Policies Effective use of transit can make a significant difference in the level of congestion in certain corridors. Maplewood is currently served by 14 Metro Transit regular bus routes. A general purpose dial-a-ride service called Northeast Suburban Transit (NEST) is available to residents of Maplewood. First Transit is the service provider that provides ADA paratransit services for the Metro Mobility program within the City. Independent School District 622 Seniors Program also provides special transportation services for the elderly and disabled. Figure 8.6 shows the existing transit routes, existing transit facilities, and planned transit corridors. Maplewood now has four park-and-ride lots. City residents and businesses participate in the Metro Commuter Services programs. The City of Maplewood is located primarily within the Market 11 Transit Service Area. This area is characterized by a moderate concentration of jobs, housing, and activities. This area Is generally serviced by reguiar-route locals and all-day expresses depending on land use patterns, and experiences service frequencies of 15-30 minutes or 30-60 minutes 7 days per week. Some sections ofthe City south of 1-94 and west ofTH 61 are classified as being within , the Market III Transit Service Area. This area is characterized by a lower concentration of jobs, housing, and activities. Service is typically provided for peak-only express routes, midday circulators, and small vehicle dial-a-ride. Service for this area will generally be limited to 1-2 hour midday frequencies for 10-14 hours per day on weekdays and will have limited service on weekends. The City will work with the regional transit agencies to develop future transit services consistent with the City's market areas. Maplewood will work with regional transit agencies to help secure transit service that better serves the needs of the residents of the City. The City supports the expansion of the Metro Transit Rideshare carpoollvanpool rider matching and supports Metro Transit's Guaranteed Ride Home Program for transit riders. Maplewood supports Metro Transit's construction of new or improved bus stops and shelters. The City supports efforts by Metro Transit to focus service on the Maplewood Mall transit hub, improve off-peak service and improve express service to Sl. Paul and Minneapolis. Maplewood supports efforts by other agencies to improve transit service in the City by the addition of transitways on the arterial roadways. When transitways are added to arterials, the City will encourage higher-density economic development and redevelopment near such corridors. The City will review major new developments for inclusion of shelters and pull-outs, if such sites are along Metro Transit bus routes. The City should coordinate its sidewalk and trails plan to encourage bus usage. Licht Rail TransiUBuswav The Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) has identified the Rush Line Corridor as being a candidate for an express commuter bus service. The Rush Line Corridor Task Force has requested state funding to launch the service and improve bus facilities such as park and ride lots. Ramsey County has identified the Vento Trail Corridor as a possible location for a busway alternative to LRT. The county has not yet decided an exact location and possible stops for this service. In addition, Ramsey County officials have not yet determined whether or how Maplewood Mall would be linked with a busway. The RCRRA will analyze this issue during design development of the Rush Line Corridor. Transportation 5 The City will continue to actively participate in the planning for light rail transit and bus systems in the City. Maplewood will work closely with RCRRA officials in the siting and design of potential LRT or busway station locations, including park-and-ride facilities. These stations should maximize access for residents and complement the City's land use plan. The RCRRA should provide a LRT line or a bus link to the medical campus (Saint John's Hospital area) and to Maplewood Mall with a station. The RCRRA should place a high priority on providing as many grade separated roadway crossings as possible along LRT and busway lines. Safety The 2006 crash toolkit was obtained from MnDOT that includes accident data summarized for all intersections on the state highway system. The intersection in Maplewood that are on the top 1000 cost ratings are summarized below: Remarks , Intersection Cost Rank Highway 61 & Beam Avenue 93 Highway 5 & McKnight Road 133 Highway 36 & English Street 148 Highway 5 & Stillwater Road 511 Highway 61 & Larpenteur Avenue 752 Highway 36 & Hazelwood Avenue 770 Highway 61 & County Road C 870 Reconstructed in 2007 - Monitor Crash Data Cooperative agreement funding was not approved in 2006 Intersection to be reconstructed Access to be removed Several of the identified intersection have or are programmed to be modified. Th~ City should continue to identify where opportunities for improvements at these locations can be implemented that will improve the safety at these intersections. Street Capacity Management Policies Maplewood should use traffic controls, enforcement, design practices and land use policies to maintain the current function of streets as designated in this plan. Specifically, the City should ensure that arterials are used for longest trips, collectors for intermediate and local trips and local streets for local access. The City should ensure that traffic management policies discourage increased volumes and speeds and protect pedestrians and neighborhoods. The City will follow Urban State Aid design standards for appropriate parts of the system to better accommodate pedestrians and to help calm traffic. The City will work with county, state and federal agencies to implement capital improvements which mitigate traffic congestion where operational capacity improvement cannot adequately address the needs. Maplewood should design streetscapes and operations in ways that alleviate the negative impact of major streets on their surroundings and to protect and improve pedestrian safety. Transportation 6 The City should work closely with Ramsey County and MnDOT to ensure compatibility with county, state and federal standards. Neighborhood Protection and Enhancement Policies The City should use a neighborhood traffic management process to address neighborhood requests to caim or divert traffic while maintaining access. The City shouid work with neighborhoods to promote this process and commit City staff to work closely with the neighborhood during any project design. Maplewood should expiore a variety of traffic-calming street design options with interested neighborhoods when local street construction or reconstruction is being planned. Realizing that a variety of traffic calming strategies exist and each must be tailored to individual project needs, the City supports impiementation of traffic calming as a principal but will determine the specifics on a case by case basis. Maplewood supports the consideration of roundabouts as an alternative to traditional intersection control methods such as the all-way stopped control or signalized intersection. A roundabout can significantly improve the safety of an intersection because there are less confilct points when compared to a traditional full-movement intersection and lower travel speeds. Roundabouts typically have less maintenance when compared to a traffic signal but the right-of- way requirements can be significant. Roundabout installations have also been used as a form of traffic calming. MnDOT now requires that an Intersection Controi Evaluation (ICE) be completed on the Trunk Highway System instead of a Signal Justification Report (SJR) which requires that a roundabout be considered as a design alternative. Ramsey County and MnDOT State Aid do not require ICE reports at this point although where a roundabout has merit an ICE report should be considered by the City. The City should continue its current policy concerning the installation of neighborhood stop signs on local streets. This policy requires all neighborhood stop sign installations and removals to be supported by a neighborhood petition and approved by City Council. Maplewood supports the use of smaller buses for neighborhood circulators as part of the redesign of the transit system. . The City should limit the negative impacts on residential properties caused by parking spillovers from commercial areas by regulating land uses. Maplewood staff shall work with developers to plan access points and parking facilities for commercial uses when near residential land uses. The City should incorporate streetscape guidelines that emphasize the enhancement of the neighborhood environment. Such improvements shall maintain and improve pedestrian quality and the feeling of personal safety among users. Maplewood should require parking lots to have strong landscaped edges and encourage landscaping in parking lots. The City should encourage or require improvements in existing parking lots and in newly constructed parking lots. The City should continue its residential street reconstruction program, setting construction priorities based on cost effectiveness, neighborhood support, community development goals and public safety goals. The CITY should use its land use and regulatory powers to reinforce or create major transit destinations and transfer station locations. If transitways (busways or LRT) are built, the City should work with planning and implementing agencies to ensure they are designed to support human scale, social fabric and neighborhood identity. Transportation 7 The City and other agencies should continue the practice of using neighborhood or community-inclusive design processes for transportation projects. Bicyclist, Pedestrian, and Accessibility Policies In a community survey conducted in the fall of 1989 by Decision Resources, 75 percent of the respondents supported construction of a city-wide trail system. This finding is consistent with survey results which showed that walking, hiking, jogging and bicycling are among the most popular outdoor activities in Maplewood. Because of citizen opposition, however, the City has had difficulty in building new trails with improvement projects or in subdivisions. Trail use in Maplewood is primarily for recreational activities and not for commuting purposes. A coordinated sidewalk and trails system plan is outiined in the Parks and Recreation part of this plan. Figure 8.7 illustrates the existing sidewalks and trails. Maplewood should consider both on and off-road traii options when designing road improvement and construction projects. The City will consider the following goals when designing sidewalks and traiis: . Emphasize harmony with the environment. . Protect users from vehicular traffic. . Create a network of relatively uninterrupted trails. . Tie parks together into a comprehensive park and trail system. . Tie the City trail system with those of adjacent cities and counties. . Are coordinated with school district busing policies. . Provide safe and convenient access to parks, community facilities, work, shopping and schools. . Encourage transit usage. . Support county and regional traii systems. . Tie neighborhoods together. Mapiewood should install new sidewalks or trails where pedestrian safety is at risk and where they would provide access to popular pedestrian destinations. The City should use its development policies and design standards to improve pedestrian facilities in Maplewood. The City should not remove sidewalks unless there is a compelling reason to do so. The City should work with other agencies to ensure that the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) are met with transportation facilities and in new construction or development sites. The City should identify potential easements during the development/redevelopment process when land acquisition is not possible. The trail system will be available to promote and encourage residents to be active through the development of an efficient and accessible trail system. Maplewood supports transit service that is accessible, convenient and affordable for persons with disabilities, as well as being cost-effective for the system. Transportation 8 Transportation Action Plan Figure 8.8 identifies significant roadway projects that are anticipated by 2030. The majority of these projects are located on MnDOT or county roadways. Table 8.2 lists activities that Maplewood should undertake in the coming years to implement the Transportation Plan. This table also shows the responsibility, timing, funding and coordination for each activity. The City will periodically review and update this table. In addition to City and county projects, MnDOT is planning several large projects near and through Maplewood for the years 2001-2030. A summary of the projects identified in Figure 8.8 is included below: A. Improvements to the 1-94 interchanges at Century Avenue and McKnight Road inciuding revised access to 3M. Since much of the land to the south is a regional park and 3M has developed the land to the north, these changes should not affect the land use plan. The City will work with the MnDOT and 3M in the planning of these changes to coordinate any necessary City transportation changes. B. The improvement and expansion of Highway 36 from 1-35W in Roseville to 1-694 in Oakdale. This project could include adding a HOV or a transitway lane, metered ramps and HOV by-pass lanes at ramp meter locations. This work will eliminate signalized intersections and close several accesses to Highway 36. This will be a joint effort between Maplewood and the Cities of Roseville, Little Canada, North St. Paul, and Oakdale. C. Complete a study of alternatives to improve safety around the 3M site on Century Ave between 1-94 and Conway Avenue in partnership with MnDOT and Oakdale. D. The expansion of 1-35E from 1-94 in downtown Saint Paul to 1-694 in Little Canada. This project may include HOV lanes, a thru-lane for transit service or be designed to accommodate a t.RT line in the future. Due to FHWA interchange spacing standards this project may result in the removal of the 1-35E Interchange at Roselawn Avenue. The City will stay involved in the planning process to help ensure the appropriate mitigation measures to City roadways are made to accommodate the proposed 1-35E changes that impact the local roadway system. E. Complete a transportation plan and program improvements for White Bear Avenue between Larpenteur Avenue and Radatz Avenue. This will require close coordination with Ramsey County since White Bear Avenue is under the jurisdiction of the county. F. Improvements to 1-694 from i-35E in Little Canada to Highway 36 in Oakdaie. Such improvements would optimize safety and add capacity to the highway where there are existing bottlenecks. Examples of possible improvements include interchange reconstruction, bridge replacement, the addition of HOV or transitway lanes and safety management improvements. Particular emphasis should be placed on improvements to the 1-694/McKnight Road interChange in concert with Ramsey County. G. Continued implementation of the Maplewood Mall Area Transportation Improvements (MMA TI) Program. This comprehensive transportation improvements package addresses key transportation infrastructure needs surrounding the Maplewood Mall area and supports redevelopment of large parcels located west of the Mall area. The key elements of this program that remain include: . Reconstruction of the White Bear Avenuell-694 interchange. . Reconstruction and widening of White Bear Avenue between Radatz Avenue and County Road D to a 6-lane roadway. Transportation 9 . Reconstruction of County Road D between Kennard Street and White Bear Avenue. . Other signal and access management improvements in the area to increase safety and better manage access in this high traffic volume area. H. The reconstruction of Joy Road west of Century Avenue to improve the alignment and safety of this roadway. I. Study the feasibility of a roadway connection north of Highway 36 between Hazelwood Street and Gervais Avenue. This would provide an additional connection across Highway 36 for the general public and fire department access based on the proposed modifications to Highway 36 between Highway 61 and White Bear Avenue. J. Study the feasibiiity of extending Century Avenue to Baiiey Road. The need for this roadway would likeiy be driven by anticipated development in the area that is allowed by the land use plan. Transportation 10 Chapter 11 - Sanitary Sewer 07/01/08 draft Introduction The Sanitary Sewer portion of the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan was last updated in May 2003. The primary purpose of the 2003 update was to address some inconsistencies in previous versions of the Plan, to consider development/redevelopment that was being planned within the City, and to address sewage ftow issues for the Legacy Village development as required by the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for the development. This update has been prepared to be consistent with the requirements of the Metropolitan Council's Local Planning Handbook. The Local Planning Handbook describes the content requirements for the sewer element of comprehensive pians. This report serves as both the sewer element of the City's comprehensive plan (Tier I) as well as the City's local sewer extension plan (Tier II). The information included in this update allows the Metropolitan Council to plan and manage their regional sewage collection and treatment systems. The current major population characteristics of Maplewood are summarized below based upon the current , Comprehensive Plan update: Estimated Year Households 2000 13,758 2010 15,600 2020 16,500 2030 17,500 Sanitary Sewer Service Districts The City is divided into seventy-four (74) separate sewer districts. The district boundaries included in this update are consistent with the boundaries identified in the 2003 update. A map illustrating the current sewer district boundaries is attached as Figure 11.1. Estimated Population 35,258 37,500 38,100 39,300 Estimated Emplovment 29,259 36,600 41,000 44,500 Some of the sewer districts discharge Maplewood sewage directly into adjacent communities without any metering of outflow. The Maplewood sanitary sewer system also receives some direct inftow from adjacent communities. Figure 11.1 illustrates the inftows from and outftows to the adjacent communities. Attached Table 11.1 below provides a summary of the discharge connections and metering locations for each of the sewer districts. Land Use and Zoning This update has been prepared considering the City of Maplewood's current zoning and land use maps. For the purposes of estimating sewage ftows, we have assumed the following: . The zoning map illustrates 2008 development within the City . The land use map illustrates projected 2030 development within the City Projected Sewage Flows Projected sewage ftows have been determined for each of the seventy-four (74) sewer districts in the City. The projections have been made on an annual basis for years 2008 to 2012. Projected sewage ftows for the years 2020 and 2030 have also been determined. Sanitary Sewer As stated in the land use and zoning section of this update, the following assumptions have been made in determining the estimated sewage flows: . 2008 flows have been estimated considering the current zoning map. . 2030 flows have been estimated considering the proposed land use map. . 2009 - 2012,2020, and 2025 flows have been estimated by interpolating between the 2008 and 2030 flows. The following flow rates have been used for each land use and zoning type: Zoninq Land Use Predicted Flow Rate Single Dwelling Low Density Residential 275 Gallons/Unit/Day (R-1, R-1 S, RE-30 & RE-40) 1 Unit per Parcel Single and Double Dwellings (R-2) Low Density Residential 275 Gallons/Unit/Day 2 Units per Parcel , Multiple Dwellings (R-3, R-3L & R-3C) Medium Density Residential 275 Gallons/Unit/Day 6 Units per Acre Multiple Dwellings (R-3M) Medium Density Residential 275 Gallons/Unit/Day 7 Units per Acre Multiple Dwellings (R-3H) High Density Residential 275 Gallons/Unit/Day 12 Units per Acre Mixed Use (PUD) Mixed Use 1,900 Gallonsl Acre/Day Commercial Land Uses Limited Business/Business 800 Gallons/Acre/Day (LBC, NC, CO, BC(M) & BC) Industrial Land Uses Light ManufacturinglHeavy 800 Gallons/Acre/Day (M-1 &M-2) Manufacturing Community Service Land Uses Government/Institutional 800 Gallons/Acre/Day (S, C, W, FS, G, L & CH) Community Service Land Uses/No Flow ParkslOpen Space o Gallons/Acre/Day (OS, F, P & CEM) The projected flow rate for residential properties of 275 gallonslunit/day and the projected flow rate for non-residential properties of 800 gallons per acre have been estimated based upon discussions with Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) staff and some calibration of the projected flow rates with actual metering records. The number of units per acre for multiple dwelling residential properties is based upon density assumptions Included in the City's land use plan. The estimated flow rate for mixed use (PUD) property of 1,900 gallonslacrelday has been estimated assuming a mix of 45% high density residential use and 55% commercial use. Attached Table 11.2 details the zoning and projected sewage flows by sewer district for year 2008. Attached Table 11.3 details the zoning and projected sewage flows by sewer district for year 2020. Attached Table 11.4 details the land use and projected sewage flows by sewer district for year 2030. Attached Table 11.5 provides a summary of the projected 2008 - 2012, 2020,2025, and 2030 sewage flows for each district. Sanitary Sewer Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS) There are currently approximately 135 individual sewage treatment systems (ISTS) in the City of Maplewood. Approximately 98 of these systems are located in the portion of the City south of Linwood Avenue. Additional information on the ISTS in the southern portion of Maplewood south is provided In the South Maplewood Sewer Study, prepared by SEH, Inc. dated May 19, 2003. Each year, the City prepares an AnnuallSTS Report summarizing the status of the ISTS sites. This report states which sites have sewer available and which sites are required to connect to the City sewer. in conjunction with a Ramsey County program, the City sends post cards every three years to each of the ISTS owners. Upon the receipt of the post card, the owner of the ISTS is required to have their system inspected by a State certified ISTS inspector. On January 28, 2002, the City of Maplewood approved City Ordinance Section 9-950 regulating the location, design, installation, use and maintenance of ISTS within Maplewood. The ordinance became effective on June 1,2002. , Infiltration/lnflow (III) In 1998, the City of Maplewood initiated a program to identify and address infiltration and infiow (III) issues in the City's sanitary sewer system. This program includes a quarterly review of fiow reports to identify critical III areas. The City is making annual investments to address III problems. These investments have included sewer main lining, sealing manholes, and the replacement of sections of sanitary sewer main. A majority of the III program has been focused on the portion of Maplewood north of Minnehaha Avenue. The City's current Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes annual improvements to address illegal sump pump connections. This program was initiated in 2004. Proposed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) A number of trunk sanitary sewer improvements have been identified that should be considered as a part of the City's future Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to address deficiencies in the system.. A summary of these improvements and a proposed schedule for their completion is provided in Table 11.6 below. The scheduie for a number of these improvements will be driven by development pressure. Projected dates for the completion of the improvements have not been determined since they will be constructed when necessary to serve future development. Table 11.6 Sewer Improvement District No. Date 7 -1 2015 - 2020 10 -1 Development Driven 18 -1 Development Driven Sanitary Sewer Proposed Improvement Construction of gravity sewer connection to eliminate Maplewood Lift Station #8. Construction of sewer extension and two lift stations along Sterling Street to connect to MCES Carver Lake Interceptor. Construction of gravity sewer connection to MCES Beltline interceptor to serve Miggler development. This improvement must occur concurrent with the development of the Miggler property. 19 -1 51 -1 56 -1 57 -1 66 -1 70 -1 Within 2 Years of Improvement 18-1 Development Driven Development Driven Development Driven Development Driven Development Driven Construction of gravity sewer connection to trunk sewer main in Sewer District 18 to eliminate Maplewood Lift Station #12. Improvements identified above for Sewer District 18 must be completed prior to these improvements. Construction of sewer extensions along Linwood Avenue and Highwood Avenue west of Century Avenue to connect to existing City sanitary sewer. Construction of sewer extension along Henry Lane and Sterling Street to connect to MCES Carver Lake Interceptor. Construction of sewer extensions to serve future development that will directly connect to or discharge to the MCES Carver Lake Interceptor. Construction of sewer extension aiong Century Avenue south of 1-694 to connect to MCES Carver Lake Interceptor. Construction of sewer extension along Carver Avenue to connect to MCES Carver Lake Interceptor. Summary and Recommendations This update has been prepared to be consistent with the requirements of the Metropolitan Council's Local Planning Handbook. The Local Planning Handbook describes the content requirements for the sewer element of comprehensive plans. This report serves as both the sewer element of the City's comprehensive plan (Tier I) as well as the City's local sewer extension plan (Tier II). The information included in this update allows the Metropolitan Council to plan and manage their regional sewage collection and treatment systems. Based upon the results of this update, the following recommendations are presented for consideration: 1. The City Council adopt this update of the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan for 2008 and order that it be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment. 2. That the City's existing ordinances and inspection policies for individual sewage treatment systems be maintained. 3. That 1/1 issues in the City's sanitary sewer system continue to be addressed. 4. That the sanitary sewer CIP as outlined herein be adopted and revised on a regular basis as appropriate. Sanitary Sewer CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 2008 COMPREHENSIVE SANITARY SEWER PLAN UPDATE TABLE 11.1 SEWER SERVICE DISTRICT DISCHARGE CONNECTIONS Sewer District # Outflow 10: Meler: 1 MCES Trout Brook Interceptor{I-SP-222) #M015A , MCESlnlerreplorl-SP-221 Nooo 3/L1 LiIUeCenadaSewer Nooo 4 MCESlnlerceplorl-SP-221 None 5 MaplewoodLiftSta~0l1101oMaplewoodSeW\1fDistricI4 None 6 MCESlnterwplorl-SP-221 #MOt6 7 MaplewoodLiftStatioo8toMaplewoodSewerDistrict6 #MOt6 . MCESBelUinelnterceplor(~7122} Nooo 9 MCES BelUine Interceplor (1-7122) Nooo 10 MCESCarverLakelntelreplor(l-7402) Nooe(#MOO2nolioSeNice) 11 Maplewood Lift Station 18 10 Map!ewood Sewer Dlstrict 8 Nooo 12fLl Li"le Caoeda Sewer None 13 MaplewoodUltSlatloo 17 10 Maplewood Sewer District 14 #M025A 14 MaplewoodLiflSlation14 10 MaplewoodSllWll!Dislrict22 #M025A 15 MCES BelUine Interceptor (H122) #M025A 16 MCES BelUine Interceplor (H122) #M025A 17 MCESBelUinelnteJreplor(l-7122) #M025A 18 MCES BelUine Intercep\of (1-7122) #M025A 19 Maplewoad Uft Slafion 12 10 Maplewood Sewer Disbict22 #M025A 20 MCESBelUinelnterceptor(I-7122) #M025A 21 MCES8eIUinelnterceplor(I.7122) None 22 MCESBeminelnterceplor(I-7122) f/-M025A 23 MCESBelmnelnterceploI(I-7122) f/-M02SA '4/NI NorIhSlPaulSewer None 25/NI NorIhSlPaulSewer None 26 MCESlnterceplorl-SP-217 f/-M011 27 MaplewoodSewerOislrlcl211 f/-M011 28/SI Sl. Paul Sewec No". 29/S\ SI.PaulSewec No". 30 MCESlnrerceptorl-SP-215 No". 31 MCES NorlhSI. Paul Interceptor(I-MW-413) No". 32 MCESlnlerceptorl-SP-215 No". 33/S\ Sl. Paul Sewec (I-SP-214 to ooConveyed to Sl. Paul) ..... 34/S\ MaplewoodSewecDislricl36 ..... 35/S\ Sl. Paul Sewec (I-SP-214 10 ooConveyed 10 Sl. Paul) ..... 36/S\ SI.PaulSewec Noo. 37 MaplewoodUflSta~on6toMaplewood SewerOisbjcl39 f/-MOO8 38 MCESlnterceplorl-SP-211 #MOO7 39 MCESlnlerceplorHl566-371 'M\\OO 40 MCES Oakdale Inlerceplor(I-WO-501) {to 00 Conveyed to Oakdale) #M021 41 MCESlnterceplorl-SP-211 'MOO' 42 MCES BatUe Creek Interceptor (I-MW-411) 'MOOS 43 MCES BallleCreek Interceptor(I-MW-411) 'MOOS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 2008 COMPREHENSIVE SANITARY SEWER PLAN UPDATE TABLE 11.1 SEWER SERVICE DISTRICT DISCHARGE CONNECTIONS Sewer Dislrict# Outflow to: Meter: 44 MCESBatUeCreekjnte(ceplor(~MW-411) #MOOS 45 MCESBalUeClOOklnterceplor(I-MW-411) #Ml105 46 MCES BatUeCreek Interceplor(I-MW-411) #MOPS 47 MCESWoodburylnlerreplor(I-MW-410) 'MOM 48(5\ SI.PaulSewer Noo. 49 MCESWoodburylnlerceplor(I-MW410) #MOM 50 MCESHinhwoodlnlercenmrll-SP-202\ Noo. 51IWI WoodbllrvSewel Noo. 52(51 SI.PauISewer Noo. 53IS1 SI.PaulSewer Noo. 54 MCESCarverLilkelnterceplor{I-7402) None (#M002 nol in Se!Vioo) ,,(S\ St.paulSewer Noo. " MCESCarverLllllelnlerceplor(1-7402) Nooe(#MOO2nolin Swice} 57 Maolewood Sewer Dislrict56 None (#M002 nol in SetVioe) 5SfSI Sl.PaulSewer Noo. 59/01 OakdaleSewer Noo. 60r5\ SLPaulSewer Noo. 61INI North Sl. Paul Sewer Noo. 62 Ma"lewoodSewer Dislrict32 None 63 MCES Nocth Sl. Pool Inlerceplor(I-MW-413} Noo. 64 MCESBelmnelnlerceptOfr~7122} Noo. 651L1 Little Canada Sewer Noo. " MCES Carwr Lake Interceptor (i-7402) Nooe(#lulO02nolin Servioe) 67 MCES BelUinelnterceptOf(~7122) #M025A 68M Vadfl8is Heights Sewer Noo. 69INI North Sl. PaulSllW€f Noo. 70 MCES Carver Lake Interceptor (l-7402) None (#MOO2 not in Servioo} 71INI North Sl. PaulSllW€f Noo. 72INI NorthSLPaulSewer Noo. 73 MaDlewood UltSlation 20 10 MCES Utile Canada lnte!te torH-8151} Noo. 741S1 Sl.PaulSewer Noo. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Acting City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Gethsemane TIF Analysis-Review Process June 23, 2008 INTRODUCTION On June 10, 2008, the planning commission questioned whether they do, in fact, need to review and forward a recommendation to the city council on the Gethsemane Senior Housing TIF (tax increment financing) application. Staff had the understanding that the planning commission should do so based on our conversations with the city's financial consultant who has been doing the TIF analysis. Upon getting clarification on this matter, staff was told that the "project" must be found to be in compliance with the city's comprehensive plan in order for TIF to be considered. Therefore, being that the planning commission recommended approval of the comprehensive land use plan amendment and PUD on June 2nd, that matter has been satisfied. The HRA, housing and redevelopment authority, will consider the TIF request on June 25. CONCLUSION Thank you for seeking a clarification on this point. The planning commission does not need to review this TIF proposal. p:/PC/Gethsemane TIF Review Requirement 6 08 te