The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06/10/2008 AGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Tuesday, June 10, 2008 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes: a. May 27, 2008 5. Design Review: a. Gethsemane Senior Housing (south of 241 0 Stillwater Road) 6. Unfinished Business: None Scheduled 7. Visitor Presentations: 8. Board Presentations: 9. Staff Presentations: 10. Adjourn DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, MAY 27,2008 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Olson called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Boardmember John Demko Vice-Chairperson Matt Ledvina Chairperson Linda Olson Boardmember Ananth Shankar Boardmember Matt Wise Present Present Present Absent Present Staff Present: Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Boardmember Ledvina moved to approve the amended agenda, adding item 9.a.-Dynamic Display Ordinance Update and 9.b.-Proposed Ordinance on Cable Casting Update. Boardmember Demko seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. April 22, 2008 Boardmember Wise moved approval of the amended minutes of April 22, 2008, adding "revision" after "ordinance" and deleting the remainder of the sentence in the fourth paragraph on page eight. Boardmember Demko seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all b. May 13, 2008 Boardmember Olson moved approval of the minutes of May 13, 2008 as submitted. Boardmember Wise seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all V. DESIGN REVIEW a. Salvation Army (2080 Woodlynn Avenue) Planner Shann Finwall presented the staff report regarding the request from Salvation Army to expand their facility. Ken Nordby of NAI Architects and Don Tikhouse from the Salvation Army were present at the meeting. Mr. Nordby explained that the proposal is a fairly simple addition and that they tried to hold with the existing architectural value. Mr. Nordby said he and Mr. Tikhouse would be happy to address any questions the board might have. Community Design Review Board Minutes 05-27-2008 2 Boardmember Wise asked if they planned to match the existing brick on the present building. Mr. Nordby responded that the brick is still available and are trying to match it, but they have not seen a sample at the site yet. Boardmember Ledvina asked about the materials for the retaining wall. Mr. Nordby responded that a buff-colored keystone retaining wall is planned and will be about 30 inches high on the woodland side with the rainwater garden sloping up to it on the inside. Boardmember Olson asked about the plans for the parking lot. Mr. Nordby replied that their proposal is to either overlay or seal coat the parking lot. Mr. Nordby said the parking lot lighting would be repaired and then reinstalled. Mr. Nordby said the roof will match the roof that was installed on the daycare building. Boardmember Ledvina moved to approve the project plans dated April 21, 2008 for the. remodeling and expansion of the Salvation Army Lakewood Chapel at 2080 Woodlynn Avenue. The city bases this approval on the findings required by code. This approval is subject to the applicant or contractor doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Complete the following before the city issues a grading or building permit: a. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, retaining wall, tree, sidewalk, driveway and parking lot plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: (1) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with city code. (2) The grading plan shall: (a) Include building, floor elevation, water elevation and contour information. (b) Include contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. (c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as may be required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. The ponds or basins shall meet the city's design standards and shall include best management practices and rainwater gardens wherever practical. (d) Show all proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 on the proposed construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3: 1. This shall include covering these slopes with wood-fiber blankets and seeding them with a "no mow" native vegetation rather than using sod or grass. (e) Show all retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls more than four feet tall require a building permit from the city and a fence on the top to help prevent falls. The design and materials for the retaining walls are subject to staff approval. Community Design Review Board Minutes 05-27-2008 3 (f) Show all public and private sidewalks. (3) The tree plan shall: (a) Be approved by the city engineer or city environmental planner before site grading or tree removal. (b) Show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site. (c) Show the size, species and location of the replacement trees. The spruce and pine trees shall be at least eight feet tall and shall be Austrian Pines or Black Hills spruce. (d) Show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (4) Make all the changes and meet all the conditions as required by the city engineer and as noted by Steve Kummer in the memo dated May 8, 2008. b. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction. c. Submit a revised landscape plan to staff for approval that incorporates or shows the following details: (1) The location of all large trees on the site. (2) That all new trees would be consistent with city standards for size, location and species. (3) The plantings proposed around the building shown on the landscape plan date-stamped April 21, 2008, shall remain on the plan. . (4) No landscaping being put in the Woodlynn Avenue boulevard. The contractor shall restore the boulevard with sod. d. If necessary, get the approvals and permits from the watershed district. e. Provide city staff with design details (height, depth and materials) about the proposed retaining walls, including any fencing for those that are more than four feet tall. f. Submit to the city a letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior improvements. The amount of the escrow shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. 3. Complete the following before occupying the building additions: a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. Sod all landscaped areas, except for the ponding areas, which may be seeded. c. Install a handicap-parking sign for each handicap-parking space and an address on the building. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" signs along all the driveways and drive aisles within the site and elsewhere, as may be required by staff. Community Design Review Board Minutes 05-27-2008 4 d. Paint any visible roof-top mechanical equipment to match the uppermost part of the building. (code requirement) e. Install on-site lighting for security and visibility that follows the approved site lighting plan. All exterior lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light spread and fixture design. All light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent properties. f. The developer or contractor shall: (1) Complete all grading for the site drainage and meet all city requirements. (2) Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: ..a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping by June 1 if the contractor finishes the new parking lot in the fall or winter or if the building additions are occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building additions are occupied in the spring or summer. c. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. 5. All work shall follow the approved plans. City staff may approve minor changes to the project plans. 6. This approval does not include signage. All proposed signs must be approved the community design review board and the applicant shall get sign permits from the city before the installation of any signs. Boardmember Wise seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Comprehensive Plan - Sustain ability Section and Design Provisions Planner Finwall presented the staff report and asked for comments from the commission regarding the design-related and sustainability sections of the plan to be included in the 2008 plan. Boardmember Ledvina said he likes having the sustainability chapter as a separate chapter rather than sprinkled throughout the document. Mr. Ledvina said the city of St. Paul's sustainability document, which was given to the board for review, is very interesting and detailed and is also very specific regarding their projects and policies. Mr. Ledvina said he feels the staff report covers the all of the topics and is a good addition to the comprehensive plan. Mr. Ledvina said he does not have anything further to add to it. Boardmember Demko said he feels the draft report is complete and that he has nothing further to add to it. Boardmember Wise suggested the clarification that the city will try to provide education for developers and business owners on incentives, so they can be made aware that there are Community Design Review Board Minutes 05-27-2008 5 incentives available to help with funding for some of the projects. Mr. Wise suggested that staff be cognizant of lack of flexibility and said some of the standards seem a little excessive at times and that there might be alternatives that could be allowed that would encourage sustainability and balance cost and environmental impact. Mr. Wise suggested that the city could benefit by having a representative get tested and certified through the USGBC. Boardmember Olson complimented planner Shann Finwall on her work completing the draft report saying she feels all of the board's comments are included and the report appears comprehensive. Boardmember Ledvina said he would like to see specifics and analysis with tactical plans for being a sustainable community, similar to the city of St. Paul's document, which could be included in Maplewood's final document. planner Finwall commented that as an environmental planner, this would be the next step of the process to create the implementation strategies and plans. Boardmember Olson said that she feels that this issue is only now being introduced into the city of Maplewood and that this may need enhancement over the next few years, VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS None IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Dynamic Display Ordinance Update Planner Shann Finwall gave an update on this ordinance and said that staff feels this ordinance should at this point be discussed at a workshop with the city council, which has been scheduled for July 9 at 6 p.m., and suggested that a board representative be present at this meeting. Boardmember Ledvina volunteered to attend this meeting. b. Televised Broadcast of City Meetings Planner Finwall updated the board saying that the proposed ordinance is going to be further reviewed by the city attorney. X. ADJOURNMENT Boardmember Olson moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:50 p.m. Boardmember Wise seconded Ayes - all MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: Acting City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Gethsemane Senior Housing Planned Unit Development South of 2410 Stillwater Road June 4, 2008 INTRODUCTION Project Description Robert Van Slyke, of Presbyterian Homes of Minnesota, and Gethsemane Lutheran Church and School, are proposing to build a 111-unit senior housing facility on the property owned by Gethsemane south of the church. There are 10 acres of land south of the church that is owned by Gethsemane but has been leased to the city for park purposes for the past 25 years. The applicants are proposing to utilize six acres for the proposed senior housing facility and are negotiating with the city to sell or lease the remaining four acres to stay in park use. The project would be approximately 155,000 square feet in size and would have 61 independent-living units, 32 assisted-living units and 18 memory-care units. The facility would have a small town center or common area consisting of a commercial kitchen, independent dining room, assisted-living dining room, cafe, barber/beauty shop, community room, lobby and offices. The residence portion of the building would be three stories tall. The town center part would be one-story tall. The applicants are proposing walking paths around the building as well as pedestrian access to the church and to the potential park. All units would be set up for house keeping. There will be 24-hour home health care services available. Requests The applicants are requesting that the community design review board (CDRB) approve the site, architectural plans and landscaping. The applicants are also requesting the following approvals which the planning commission has reviewed (with the exception of the TIF request which is pending): . A land use plan amendment from P (park) to R3H (high density residential) . A conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) . A parking waiver to have fewer parking spaces than code requires . A preliminary and final plat . Tax Increment Financing (TIF)-(to be reviewed by the PC on 7/1/08) DISCUSSION Building Design The proposed building would be attractive. It would have an exterior of low- or no- maintenance materials consisting of: brick, rock-face concrete block, cement board siding and siding panels, metal soffit and metal fascia. Landscaping and Tree Replacement Environmental Planner, Shann Finwall, reviewed the tree plan and landscaping plan and determined that the proposal would exceed city code requirements for the replacement of trees on the property. Site Lighting The proposed photometric plan meets city requirements for light-spread cut-off and light intensity. The proposed light fixture schedule proposes decorative pole lights on 14-foot- tall poles and single-head shoe-box style pole lights on 25-foot-tall poles. This pole height of 25 feet is the maximum allowed. Refer to the enclosed light-fixture details. Trash Storage The plans show a "trash and recycling pick-up area" by the garage door entrance. The floor plans aren't clear whether these containers would be kept inside the garage. If the containers are stored outside the garage, a screening enclosure may be needed if the retaining wall does not adequately hide them from view. Sidewalks and Trails The site plan provides for a pedestrian trail system on the property for the residents of the proposing housing facility. The slope of these trails would meet "accessible" requirements and would not exceed a grade of 20: 1 according to the architect. Parking/Parking Waiver The applicant is proposing to provide 108 parking spaces-81 garage stalls beneath the building and 47 surface parking spaces. Refer to the attached letter of justification by the applicant. City ordinance requires two stalls for each unit for multi-family units. The city has found that this apartment/town house ratio is excessive for senior facilities and has approved parking waivers for recently-approved projects. Examples are: . The Shores (180 units) . The Regent (150 units) . Summerhill (44 units) . Comforts of Home (42 units) 360 spaces required 300 spaces required 88 spaces required 84 spaces required 115 allowed 145 allowed 78 allowed 25 allowed 2 Staff is supportive of the proposed parking reduction. The city council has supported the concept that senior-housing facilities, especially those with assisted- and memory-care units, require considerably fewer parking spaces than typical multi-family housing. Also, Gethsemane is in agreement to provide overflow parking for the proposed use within their large parking lot. This would be covered by a cross parking and access easement agreement. The planning commission reviewed this request on June 3, 2008 and recommended that the city council approve the parking waiver. Potential Park Site / Housing Expansion Site The city has been in negotiations with the church for the purchase of the easterly four acres of their property. The city wants to purchase this land and the church is wishing to sell it for continued park use. The details for a possible purchase are still being negotiated. Early in the review of this proposal, this easterly four acres had been considered as an expansion site for the proposed housing development. This is no longer being considered by the applicants. Their goal is to continue negotiations with the city for the sale of this four-acre tract for park use. Traffic Impacts According to the Traffic Impact Study, performed by Westwood Professional Services, Inc., it was concluded that "senior housing complexes are typically low traffic generators that do not appreciably impact the surrounding roadway network. The little traffic that is generated typically occurs during off-peak times. The proposed Gethsemane Senior Housing development is no exception." Westwood gave the following data and suggestions, but also refer to the Conclusions section of their report in the attachments: . Average Daily trips (ADT) on Bartelmy Lane is expected to rise by approximately 17% of 220 trips, or 37 trips per day with completion of the site. Compared with the anticipated 2010 No-Build ADT of 390 trips, this amounts to less than a 10% increase. The anticipated 2010 Build ADT of 427 falls well within the acceptable range for a local residential street. . Despite the very minimal increase anticipated for traffic on Bartelmy Lane, in order to best minimize any potential impacts, it is suggested that the shuttle bus and any delivery or service trucks be instructed to use only the west and north site accesses. Placement of appropriate "No Trucks" or similar signage near the Bartelmy Lane driveway could be considered to reinforce this message if necessary. Neighbors' Comments Staff surveyed the 77 property owners within 500 feet of this site for their comments. There were 61 written replies. One person had "no comment," five were in favor and 71 were opposed. 3 Many of these replies were on a questionnaire that the city did not generate. A person or group forwarded their own questionnaire to the neighborhood with direction to return this to Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner. Due to the very large number of printed responses, in an attempt to conserve paper, staff has included a sample of survey replies of our own as well as that which was circulated by other individuals. A full set of survey replies will be available at the meetings. Reasons for Opposition The response from neighbors overwhelmingly shared these views: . Our property value would go down . The neighborhood needs this park . Loss of green space . There are too many senior-housing facilities in Maplewood now . Children would be in danger due to increased traffic Other Concerns . Construction disturbance . Site lights could be a nuisance City Department Comments Enoineerino Comments Refer to the attached engineers' report by Steve Kummer, staff engineer with the city dated February 13, 2008. Buildino Official's Comments Dave Fisher, Maplewood's Building Official, gave the following comments: . The city will require a complete building code analysis when the construction plans are submitted to the city for building permits. . All exiting must go to a public way. . Verify the building meets all the requirements for noise based on the Minnesota Guide to Noise Control in Minnesota from the MPCA. . Provide adequate fire department access to the buildings. . The building setbacks must comply with 2000 IBC for exterior wall protection. . Retaining walls over 4 feet require engineering and a building permit. . Provide fire sprinklers to NFPA 13. . Building must meet the current 2006 International Building Code requirements. 4 . A pre-construction meeting with the contractor, the project manager and the city building inspection department is recommended. Police Comments Lieutenant Mike Shortreed reviewed this proposal and has the following comments: . Construction site thefts and burglaries are a large business affecting many large construction projects throughout the Twin Cities metro area. The contractor/developer should be encouraged to plan and provide for site security during the construction process. On-site security, alarm systems and any other appropriate security measures would be highly encouraged to deter and report theft and suspicious activity in a timely manner. . Appropriate security and exterior lighting should be provided and maintained in order to assure that entry to and exit from the facility is readily recognizable and accessible. . Appropriate staffing should always be available to assure residents with Alzheimer's disease or dementia do not walk away from the facility, especially with several roadways located within walking distance of the facility. . With Stillwater Road being a state highway and a very busy road, the city should consider posting the exit as a right turn only if possible. It should be anticipated that increased vehicle traffic turning southbound onto Stillwater Road from the new facility will result in an increase in motor vehicle crashes in the area. . The Maplewood Police Department anticipates that calls for service to the new facility will be primarily for medical services. As such, it is highly encouraged that all entrances and exits on the building are clearly marked in order to expedite the arrival of first responder and medical personnel. Fire Marshal Butch Gervais, assistant fire chief and fire marshal, reviewed the proposal and requires the following be provided: . Fire protection per code . Fire alarm system per code . A 20-foot-wide fire department access road . A fire department key box (order from AC/FM) . Annunciation panel at the main entrance . Proper marking of fire protection room and fire alarm room . Mini sounders in every unit 5 Other Agencies MnDOT The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) responded to staff's project- review request and stated the following regarding noise concerns and noise mitigation: "Residential uses located adjacent to highways often result in complaints about traffic noise. Traffic noise from this highway could exceed noise standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Minnesota Rule 7030.0030 states that municipalities are responsible for taking all reasonable measures to prevent land use activities listed in the MPCA's Noise Area Classification (NAC) where the establishment of the land use would result in violation of established noise standards. MnDOT policy regarding development adjacent to existing highways prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures in such areas. The project proposer should assess the noise situation and take the action deemed necessary to minimize the impact of any highway noise. If you have any questions regarding MnDOT's noise policy please contact Peter Wasko in our Design section at 651-234- 7681. Refer to the attached letter from William Goff of MnDOT dated January 4, 2008. COMMITTEE ACTIONS On June 3, 2008, the planning commission recommended approval of the comprehensive land use plan amendment, CUP, parking waiver and preliminary/final plat. The planning commission added a requirement the applicant post Bartelmy Lane to restrict truck, trash hauling and delivery access and that the city engineer shall explore the closure of Bartelmy Lane from Stillwater Road to Brand Avenue. RECOMMENDATION Approve the plans date-stamped February 1, 2008, for the Gethsemane Senior Housing project, located south of Gethsemane Lutheran Church, 2410 Stillwater Road. Approval is based on the findings for approval required by ordinance and subject to the developer doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the applicant has not obtained a building permit by that time. After two years this review must be repeated. 2. Obtain the requested zoning approvals before the city will issue a building pennit. These approvals are: a comprehensive land use plan amendment from P (park) to R3H (high density residential), a conditional use permit for a planned unit development, a parking waiver and a final plat. 6 3. The applicant shall comply with the requirements in the city engineering report by Steve Kummer dated February 13, 2008. 4. The developer of the housing facility shall obtain a cross easement from Gethsemane Lutheran Church for access and overflow parking before the city will issue a building permit for this development. 5. The developer shall provide a trash enclosure for trash and recyclables if they are not kept within the garage and if they would not be properly concealed by the retaining wall if they would be kept outside the garage. 6. Before obtaining a building permit, the applicant shall provide an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of completing landscaping and other site improvements. This irrevocable letter of credit shall include the following provisions: . The letter of credit must clearly indicate that it is an irrevocable letter of credit in the name of the City of Maplewood, payable on demand, to assure compliance with the terms of the developer's agreement. . The letter of credit must allow for partial withdrawals as needed to guarantee partial project payments covered under the terms of the letter of credit. . The letter of credit shall be for a one year duration and must have a condition indicating automatic renewal, with notification to the city a minimum of 60 days prior to its expiration. 7. All parking and drive areas shall have continuous concrete curbing. 8. The applicant shall install in-ground lawn irrigation as required by city ordinance. 9. Post Bartelmy Lane for "No Truck, Trash Hauling or Delivery Access," subject to the approval of the city engineer. 10. Obtain any necessary permits from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District. 11. The applicant shall comply with applicable noise-mitigation requirements. This will require the applicant to provide a noise study to evaluate the noise level generated by traffic on Stillwater Road to determine what, if any, mitigation measures are required for the proposed living units. 12. All work shall follow the approved plans. The city planner may approve minor changes. 7 CITIZEN COMMENTS Staff surveyed the 77 property owners within 500 feet of this site for their comments. There were 61 written replies. One person had "no comment," five were in favor and 71 were opposed. Many of these replies were on a questionnaire that the city did not generate. A person or group forwarded their own questionnaire to the neighborhood with direction to return this to Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner. Due to the very large number of printed responses, in an attempt to conserve paper, staff has included a sample of survey replies of our own as well as that which was circulated by other individuals. A full set of survey replies will be available at the meetings. Reasons for Opposition The response from neighbors overwhelmingly shared these views: . Our property value would go down . The neighborhood needs this park . Loss of green space . There are too many senior-housing facilities in Maplewood now . Children would be in danger due to increased traffic Other Concerns . Construction disturbance . Site lights could be a nuisance Additional Survey Sent by Others As stated above, a person or group forwarded their own questionnaire to the neighborhood with direction to return this to Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner. This questionnaire presents a slanted view of the proposal. As the reply by one neighbor states, "all the above comments sound awful-like no one should agree to this project." 8 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: Six acres Existing Use: Gethsemane Park SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Gethsemane Church and School South: Single dwellings East: Single dwellings West: Silver Ridge Apartments PLANNING Land Use Plan: P (park)-existing, R3H (high density residential)-proposed Zoning: F (farm residential)-existing, PUD (planned unit development-proposed APPLICATION DATE The city received the applicants' requests on December 10,2007. Since then there have been several extensions to the review schedule all of which have been in accordance with the statutory requirements for review extensions. The current deadline for the council's review of these requests is August 6, 2008. p:sec25\Gethsemane PUD 5 08 Attachments: 1. Land Use Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Preliminary/Final plat 4. Site/Landscape Plan 5. Building Perspective 6. Letter of Parking Reduction Justification dated December 10, 2008 7. Traffic-Study Conclusions by Westwood Professional Services 8. Engineering Report dated February 13, 2008 9. Neighbor Survey Samples 10. Letter from MnDOT dated January 4, 2008 11. Tree Preservation Review by Shann Finwall dated February 13, 2008 12. Light Fixture Schedule and Fixture Designs 13. Plans date-stamped February 1, 2008 (separate attachments) 9 Attachment L. c:::tJ - J;A-SF:~ , I j '" .. j:j .. j:j ~ ciJ cb o c c CJC o <lRAWl8\IE::' be "'EJ .,flD r;] 2.4670 ~ ~ '" o o ,~ Jil.J~l'iAliE II ...... .,. IN 11"0 110 I N ~ I ......, ,..- 1\ ! I ~ "I LAND USE PLAN MAP 'fr N Attachment 2 I I I I b I- ,- - f,l f,l --- --- --- -- --- -CAlSiOAVE------ ---:./' ----------------------~~------- ...u - L1' ' 'I /' .,'~.';:,.,.- I I v- .--::"'"........- I t, ~.-e::.-.c:\\..~_.... l ,.- "'_'.r'.'-- .--' .- .,;;:. f -, r' <Ill I I I I I " I .. " D~D ~ ]U <l J " 0 0 I 1 I I I I - \ !:l \ / ~. ffi/ .:' I :1 I i i I I I ) I .--' I I -i [ \ I \ '. ". Cb CJ N lake :tHlQI -c ~.. -'.- Jilu\ijJiJ '" PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP 'fr N Attachment 3 1 i j ;~ J F~ i! ! III .fi~ ~ rl. ~ ~ hth.51~jl ~11i ., "I!, "Ill' '!"l"j~l';''';'~'i~i;' ''Ill "'"m "'!,,!,!.il;"'j'i"'j,hH;Jm,,!::; !liilllilllili!!lil;jJ;!l1ll111ilJi11111iilJiJmmliJJJj, 'i:-:~J:;~.;'~.;miiHhlii;UH~~hHJaDaaa j,ij.mllhm..,,,... '. I". aaao f~'i!~~hi~hHN~~I!~Vh~~~ ~h~~<a~~H ~H CiI a a-nn5fla!ll~..aU . ~~ !:I ~'S;~~.a~~ '; .~ .1 -.J Q-i~ :l~\~ll,- ~ ._j' -14ft.!-; T~!f[;;~-::~n;--- l;'J,', ~';", >'-~ ~T "1 ~;~ ':'.- ;:.~ ')'~ '- I / .L - ~_r",fJI; I \'1-~_7~ ~l ~\Ji ill:" r-,~ 'I\~: i-.J -'I tu ~ m i ~ 'l ~ ~~1 ~ ~ it!! f ~ ~ "'," I ~:H p ~ " ~ Hi~~;~ UIB}! mUH -== <I> I ~ 3~!i~!:!d ". I. ,. ,. j,', r 11 , ; i~ I 'I I Il , :~ a u~ i ~ ~'j .r ~ j ii' P '1',I.!!. l" h l\ !, .. Ii J~ Hi J!. !~ I i ~hii 1 i~ t ~~fHm l ~!,1 n.'.i ~ :Hl'Fi~ ~ ~: ~~)t~ ~ i~H::i 1I ~~: ~~~~ i i~ 1,~j~ fj ~~Ii ~,~~~ I ; .~.:c, If' ~ i. ~ ~ '.H!;~;i -I "j" ~B!' ~. 1H ~ ~! ;,;:i gi25 II'; i~'ili~1 ~I ~~~ ...~ . ~'~"3rr J~ ~l~ :~~. :g 1~ iHt.!ll' ~l ~l: ~~~l . it .A1~!~~! ~! 11'. llu i a l!~{i~~i ~~ ~ji IU! ! !li ~"j.i~li h i~-' I ih~i!]i! ~1' jfi l ~! fI !.ihhii' 3~ _ .. J J i c= :l ~ "1":".,? ':1" ..- -. "'-,.. - : i ':~: ,>, c, ~. :,.----." '''' I . , Y"', , 1 j 1 i f a I : I i ~ 1 ~ ! ~ ilL l~ 1, S' .1.\'L MHii11ij\ I.', 'it ,I, "" I.a ~ ,,~ _ '" :l ::< .. "I = QO = ~ .... <::> cr: w.J I.J.. ~ @ ~ ~ >. 5 a. ..J <( Z LL - ~ <( Z - ~ ..J W 0::: a. Attachment 4 , lI~itl . r '''l I !!l1 Ii' c I','" . . '~i N ! 'b " ...",~ ill )! . ~ E!~i"''' . ~i~ " !l/ -, ] ~: I I! I Jil! 'l'"'I ~ I' .il n' ii _ . ~ . ~ ~: lWld adll;)sptrn'l nll~a"o lilld! ~- ' '; ~ . ! ! I ~,~, i~.i .~~ ~ .~j ~ 11' n ' in~ H~~' iN jl 31~ ~~ i!ih Ii ,g!1 ;~i 11 id; ~~ !~l .~ ;}i~~ !~ ini I ~j;l ~h sl!~~ it ill !i nm ij !dl . J~~i ,f~ l~:~~ ~~ I" I~ ".e~~~ ~~ II!~ ~ ~~i~ !~t ;!i~i ~~ ,n . h H!;i h . -~n i mi iti g~ni ~1 "~i ':~i . H~H ~n ~'!li! ! i~i~ !h !]~l; ;11 <:!~ '~\', ;. ',:i~." I;' ", """""'\"i" ,', .' .,.",. ~~~~ ~ !h:; ijU ~d ~ .l; ~!'.; n i:~~~,! l .- " "~ , ',' j~~ ~5 h l. 11~'j' ~l ~U~l~" ~l~ ~;~ il'; 'lut ll~ ~! .l~ ",lli i~J * I,',,', ~~ -.~ --Ii . ~ I"hi!!'d'lll ~~3'~ !~! II; ~';l lili! m n~ I~U "I!j~ ~j~ "l~ ~i.~ t...lh l~l ;;.H , 1 . i . L,i , , q"l j , , Hill , 1 I l i , 1un , ! , 1 Pd h ~ . H~Hlq~~ ~ nnp]Hpl ~~,::o;~J!~]J~~J ; 1 ~ '! ~ ~ ;> Hill '.'Ii 'li! = ~ = 11 ;1 bnnnnn inn t o. r ~ ~ 1_ p ;; " K l'; " ~ ~ _ ~ ! j ~ ;< _ n , , .. I' n ,ia., ! . ~ ~i ! !d ~ ~q . " ' ..I , ~ !! 1 i ~i ! ~~l;dH!Hi~ ~ ~a ~ I ~'h ~tn } III IU!~lllil!'l!l . l"l {;'i' 1 ~~ d ~i ~ Illthllii, illU n nm ~' ,'", ..., ", .... . ~"~i'!~.~l ~ t! ~~ J;;:.~ ~i ~~r ~~9~!~Si~al; ~~ ",,,1.',0'''')'11,,,1,, "'~~~I~H'l'l-ll I'>!~ ~ 'l ~! 3m~~ [~i l~. i~ ~~~ i~ - ".... r.d. . , i il ~i 1 i bi:1 ~ s ili! llll ~. i~~ ni ! ~ji'~~!h~ ;:j ;~ l~. ~h I ounnn i ",liQh1Ul L ! i " " ~i j:!!JJ U1 ~-, '0/ , _ . \"..0 'r.! L~!~~" :JN~ '~..~ ._.~l'!..7#!:!!.rJ! .-.}~ <;: ira"~o '0 -~eJ D(~~OGl;O~O';&l u 0:, .'" ~e a;Pj'O')n:' 0.. ,0'/" i"" .. .), .'~~ - ~;\~;;'I!@~!~' ! i" anm _16 III Ill,) ~ P1!Hi"P1.$'.':".'. ~l! '-~iH ~~lH ,ii~~:~~'. - ~d ~lU ~'H~ '~&f&_13 H fit~~ 0 H ..-6 0.. :'.'!-}~~ ~. % '[t' ~ 1 i!" . ,ililf' A,' , .. ~ , "" ,. ';:11 ~::g ~.- .s:.! gJ B~ "3 a ~ ~ :Q1' 1 .J ) I.'::'.':!I 00 S = = "" = ,....... ~ eo @ cr. u., u., ~ ~ >, !Xl z ::i 0- <9 z 0- <( o CI) o z <( ......I - ill f0- CI) 1 i I ~i !:i~ ~1 .J r=J ~ = = e=o '" = - ~ ~ @ \t ~& - Attachment 5 =w ..!S ~ ~'p: ~- --;l:: ,,~ =w JI ;0 ,.~ ~, Ii ~ ." (j w > l- e) W a.. CJ) cr: w a.. (9 z o -I :J m ---- Attachment 6 . Innovations in Senior Living Communities SENIOR HOUSING PARTNERS December 10, 2007 Mr. Tom Ekstrand Senior Planner City of Maple wood 1830 County Road BEast Maplewood, MN. 55109 Re: Gethsemane Senior Housing Project Parking Variance Dear Mr. Ekstrand, Gethsemane Senior Housing, Inc. has submitted applications to the City of Maplewood for a 111 Unit Senior Housing Project. The project will consist of 61 Independent Apartments, 32 Assisted Living Apartments, and 18 Memory Care Apartments. We are requesting a variance to the current City of Map1ewood parking standard which would require 222 parking spaces for the Project to 108 parking spaces per our site plan . submission. Below is our rational for the reduced parking requirement. The proposed project is a partnership between Gethsemane Lutheran Church and Presbyterian Homes and Services. The average age in Presbyterian Home's senior housing complexes in the Twin Cities is approximately 82 for both Independent and Assisted Living residents. Many of these residents are single occupants and thus the number of vehicles is significantly less than a typical multi-family apartment complex. The percentage of underground parking usage is typically around 70% of the total number of Independent Apartments in our complexes. This would equate to around 43 of the 61 underground stalls being occupied. The percentage of surface stalls utilized for parking is typically about 10% of the number of Independent Apartments. This would amount to 6 outside spaces being utilized. In Assisted Living and Memory Care, only 1 or 2 people at the most will have a vehicle at the complex. Thus, the total resident parking usage at the Gethsemane site will be approximately 51 parking spaces out of the Project total of 108. At full occupancy, the Project pro-forma projects approximately 27 Full Time employees per day working 3 shifts at the complex. The highest number of these would be during the day shift and we estimate this could be around 18 employees. We will first use the excess spaces. in the underground garage (estimated at 18) and then the surface stalls furthest away from the main entrance for employee parking. It is entirely possible at this 2845 North Hamline Ave. -:- Suite 100 -:- RosevilleJ Minnesota -:- 55113 <- www.seniorpartners.com-> (651) 631-6300.;. Fax (651) 631-6301.;. 800-891-9126 I Project that only 6 of the outside stalls would be used at any given time by both residents and staff thus leaving 41 stalls for visitors. The Project will also enter into a Reciprocal Parking Easement Agreement with Gethsemane Lutheran Church whereby the Project may use some of the Church's parking spaces in the event we ever needed additional parking spaces at the Project. Sincerely, f2 ~1,.q- V..A.- Robert VanSlyke Project Manager Gethsemane Senior Housing, Inc. Attachment 7 2010 No-Build 2010 No-Bui ra IC Ooerations Intersection Level of Service Longest 95th Percentile Queue (AM I PM) (AM I PM) West Site Access - C/C 40 reet I 40 reet Westbound Annroach Stillwater Road! B/A 140 feet (Westbound) I 120 feet (Northbound) Lakewood Drive North Site Access- BIB 30 reetl 30 reel Northbound Approach East Site Access- AlA 40 feet I 30 feel Eastbound Approach Table 4 IdT ffi All levels of service remain unchanged from 2008 Existing conditions. 95th percentile queues similar as wen. No mitigation is suggested as operations remain well within acceptable limits. 2010 Build Results for the 2011 Build scenario, post-site redevelopment, are summarized in Table 8. An optimized signal timing plan was assumed. Intersection Level of Service Longest 95" Percentile Queue (AM I PM) (AM I PM) West Site Access- C/C 50 reet I 50 feel Westbound Approach Stillwater Road! BIA 140 feet (Westbound) 1120 feet (Northbound) Lakewood Drive North Site Access- BIB . 40 feet 130 feet Northbound Approach East Site Access - AlA 40 feet I 30 feet Eastbound Approach Table 5 2010 Build Traffic Operations All intersections remain at acceptable levels of service and nearly unchanged from No-Build conditions. All 95'h percentile queues remain moderate and nearly unchanged from the No-Build scenario. CONCLUSIONS . Results for 2008 Existing conditions show that an studied intersections operate at acceptable levels of service and with acceptable 95th percentile queuing. Operations ofBartelmy Lane as monitored in the field indicate the ro~d fii.nctions as a typical local residential roadway. . Results for the 2010 No-Build scenario, or future conditions without the development in place, remain similar to those for Existing conditions. Levels of service remain constant and 95th percentile queues increase only very Traffic Impact Study Page 12 Gethsemane Senior Housing - Maplewood, Minnesota slightly. No appreciable changes to the character of Bartelmy Lane would be expected to occur. . Results of the operational analysis with the added trips (2010 Build scenario) show that levels of service and queues remain unchanged, or very similar to, those for the No-Build scenario. No appreciable impact to Bartelmy Lane operations is anticipated. . Average Daily traffic (ADT) on Bartelmy lane is expected to rise by approximately 17% of220 trips, or 37 trips per day with completion of the site. Compared with the anticipated 2010 No-Build ADT of 390 trips, this amounts to less than a 10% increase. The anticipated 2010 BuildADT of 427 falls well within the acceptable range for a local residential street. . Despite the very minimal increase anticipated for traffic on Bartelmy Lane, in order to best minimize the any potential impacts, it is suggested that the . Shuttle Bus and any delivery or service trucks be instructed to use only the west and north site accesses. Placement of appropriate "N 0 Trucks" or similar signage near the Bartelmy Lane driveway could be considered to reinforce this message, if necessary. . Tn summary, senior housing complexes are typically low traffic generators that do not appreciably impact the surrounding roadway network. The little traffic that is generated typically occurs during off-peak times. The proposed Gethsemane Senior Housing development is no exception. Traffic; Impact Study Page 13 Gethsemane Senior Housing - Mapfewood, Minnesota Attachment 8 Maplewood Engineering Comments 2-13-08 Page 1 of 7 Enaineerina Plan Review PROJECT: PROJECT NO: COMMENTS BY: REVIEWERS: Gethsemane Senior Housing; PIN 252922310032 07-29 Steve Kummer, P.E. - Staff Engineer Michael Thompson, P.E. - Civil Engineer II Virginia Gaynor - Staff Naturalist DuWayne Konewko - Environmental Manager Mark Maruska - Parks Maintenance Superintendent John DuCharme - Senior Technician I Inspector DATE: PLAN SET: COMPS: 2-13-08 City Submittal Set: Civil/Landscape Drawings - Dated 1-31-08 Stormwater Computations by Clark Engineering - Dated 1-31-08 Gethsemane Lutheran Church is proposing a multi-story senior housing building within the 9.4+1- acre undeveloped property located at the northeast quadrant of the Stillwater and 7'h Street E intersection, just south of the existing Church. . Gethsemane Park is currently located on the site. The proposed layout would maintain a park area to the east of the proposed 111- unit senior housing building. Storm Water Hvdroloav and Pondinallnfiltration Basins 1. While the use of the infiltration basins on the site exceeds the 1-inch volume control requirement for the site, several design modifications shall be considered for Infiltration Basins 1 and 2: a. The grading configuration of Infiltration Basin #1 is unacceptable and shall be modified. Based on the design computations, the basin accepts 3.08 acres of drainage - 2.14 acres of which is hard surface. The basin impounds 1,041 cubic feet between the 1005.0 and 1006.3 contours. The infiltration requirement for the church lot is 6,985 cubic feet. With the flows that are proposed to enter the basin - even for a 2-year storm - the volumes and velocities of water entering and leaving the basin will present a long-term scour and maintenance problem. The following recommendations are suggested: i. The elevation below the CB outlet intended for infiltration should be expanded such that the inflow and outflow velocities are limited to 1 ftIsec or less and such that the depth of the ponding area is at least 18 inches but not more than 24 inches deep. ii. The infiltration volume should be expanded to meet as close as possible the 1-inch volume of runoff from the existing parking lot (6,985 cubic feet). The full one-inch may not be achieved in the space available, but it is recommended that the area north of the trail crossing be maximized and that a portion of the area south of the trail be considered for additional ponding and infiltration - especially in the vicinity of Catch Basin B. A culvert connection under the trail is acceptable. Maplewood Engineering Comments 2-13-08 Page 2 of 7 iii. The size of the Infiltration Basin #2 can be adjusted (presumably, decreased) with the increase in volume allotted to Infiltration Basin #1. b. The curb cut from the existing church parking lot in letting to Infiltration Basin #1 (north of Catch Basin J) is not acceptable and shall be replaced with a curb-inlet catch basin with a sump and pipe outlet to the bottom contour of the basin. The curb along the south edge of the parking lot shall be a barrier (B) type curb. Energy dissipation may be accomplished with rip-rap, but other forms of energy dissipation that is more aesthetic to the infiltration basin may be utilized. c. The infiltration storage below the outlet invert of Infiltration Basin #2 shall be limited to a depth of 24 inches. 2. A shallow infiltration trench shall be graded between the proposed park property to the east and the trail bisecting the property between the park property and the building. The trench shall be the length of the soccer field to intercept runoff from the soccer field. The swale should outlet with a culvert or area drain transporting the drainage under the trail. 3. Overflow routes and elevations shall be shown on every defined ponding and infiltration basin. The overflow route on Infiltration Pond #2 and the Stormwater Pond shall be lined with a heavy-duty erosion control mat such as an Enkamat or equivalent. 4. The project engineer shall provide the city with soil boring information at the proposed infiltration basin locations. Prior to establishing the landscaping for the ponding areas, the owner shall provide the city with a split-ring infiltrometer test on the proposed infiltration areas. 5. The engineer shall provide computations showing the change'in flow rates to the Stillwater Road ditch comparing existing vs. proposed conditions. 6. The plans indicate native plants are used around the perimeter of the pond and infiltration basins. A detailed planting plan for the pond and infiltration basin shall be submitted. Plan should delineate area with natives, species to be used, plant spacing, approximate number of plants, size of plants, mulch type and depth. Infiltration basin should have plants throughout, not just on perimeter. 7. The project engineer shall add a note to the plans indicating that the infiltration basins shall be protected from construction traffic. The plans shall show orange construction fence along the top contours of each infiltration area to keep construction traffic out of those areas. GradinQ and DrainaQe 1. More defined grades shall be shown around the building to show conveyance of roof water away from the building. 2. Drainage across area trails should be avoided wherever possible - especially in drainage area "D". Area drains or catch basins on the north side of the "circle" area just southeast of the proposed patio shall be installed to convey runoff into culverts under trails. Maplewood Engineering Comments 2-13-08 Page 3 of 7 3. Catch basin pickups shall be provided at the driveway entrance and connected into the storm sewer system discharging into the Highway 5 ditch. 4. Flat landings shall be provided at all trail intersections. All trails shall meet ADA requirements for design. 5. The emergency vehicle access trail running along the ponding areas shall have a minimum 5-foot wide flat bench graded off the pond-side of the trail. Other walking trails in the area shall have a minimum 1-foot flat bench off the edge of trail where slopes drop off into ditches or ponding areas. 6. A split-rail fence or shrub hedge between the trails and pond shall be installed. A shrub hedge should also be proposed for the south end of the soccer field. 7. A railing or fence shall be provided along all retaining walls with a maximum height greater than 30 inches. A rail or fence shall be provided along the entire length of retaining wall on the east side of the soccer field fronting Bartelmy Lane. 8. Retaining wall systems greater than 4 feet in height (including tiered-wall systems with a total height greater than 4 feet) shall be designed and certified by a professional engineer and will require building permits from the City. Signed plans shall be provided to the City. 9. Retaining wall top and bottom elevations shall be clearly marked on the plan with callouts legible. 10. A salt corrosion-resistant coating or agent shall be specified for the retaining wall fronting Bartelmy Lane. 11. A drainage and utility easement is required for the trunk sewer running between the soccer field and the building and for the drainage runoff from both the park area and the church. The easement shall be wide enough to accommodate OSHA safety requirements for trench excavation in the event that excavation needs to occur within the easement. It is recommended that the storm sewer be realigned closer to the soccer field to accommodate this easement location. 12. A drainage and utility easement will be required for the northwestem storm sewer run discharging into the Mn/DOT ditch since drainage from the church parking lot is piped across the senior living facility property. 13. The contours along the south side of the soccer field shall be adjusted and maximized to accommodate a roughly rectangular flat area. Grades across the area should be a minimum of 2%. Construction Site Sediment and Erosion Control Plan I SWPPP Maplewood Engineering Comments 2-13-08 Page 4 of 7 1. The plans shall have a separate erosion control and SWPP plan that is separate from the grading plan. All erosion control details should conform to the City of Maplewood standard plates. 2. A Wimco catch basin insert or approved equal shall be provided for all curb-inlet catch basins, proposed or existing. A corresponding installation detail shall be provided. 3. Ditch checks with a corresponding installation detail shall be provided for the Stillwater Road ditch. 4. A note shall be placed on the plans indicating that the existing pavement at the driveway entrance from Stillwater Road shall remain in place during construction and until the parking area is to be paved. 5. A note shall be placed on the plans indicating that construction traffic is not allowed on the bordering City streets (I.e. Bartelmy, East 7th, Meyer). All construction traffic shall enter off Stillwater Road. 6. The plans shall clearly identify disturbed area by delineation and they shall provide a numerical value of disturbed acreage. Any disturbance of one acre or more necessitates a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The approved grading and erosion & sediment control plans shall be incorporated into the SWPPP. 7. Locations of onsite storage of topsoil, backfill and borrow material shall be shown on the SWPPP. The plans shall also indicate the methods of erosion and sediment protection on slopes and stockpiles (I.e. seed/blanket, silt fence, straw wattles, etc.) 8. The project plans shall identify the locations for equipment/material storage, debris stockpiles, vehicle/equipment maintenance, fueling, and washing areas. The plans also must show the contain area and specify that all materials stored on site shall have proper enclosures and/or coverings. 9. The project plans shall identify the locations and provide details for concrete truck washout areas. 10. Identify (on the plans) the quantity of materials that the contractor will be importing to or exporting from the site (cu-yd) along with site cut and fill quantities. 11. The project plans or their details shall describe the measures (e.g... temporary sediment basin, etc) the contractor will use during the rough grading process to intercept and detain sediment-laden run-off to allow the sediment to settle. They also must describe how the contractor will dewater the settled storm water and how it will be introduced to the public drainage system. 12. The plans shall describe the measures the contractor will use for onsite dust control (Le.... water as needed). The plans also shall provide call out a street sweeping plan for adjacent streets. Maplewood Engineering Comments 2-13-08 Page 5 of 7 13. The erosion and sediment control plans should refer to Maplewood Plate NO.350 for approved methods of erosion and sediment control. 14. A temporary sedimentation basin shall be called out at the southeast corner of the site near the intersection of Bartelmy and J'h Streets. 15. Temporary and permanent seed mixtures shall be indicated on the SWPP plan. 16. Rip-rap at all pond outlets shall be shown to the bottom of the pond. 17. All slopes 4:1 and greater shall be covered with a straw erosion control blanket - preferably a degradable type that can be mown over at a later date when the seed has established. An installation detail shall be shown on sheet C5. Utilities 1. The sanitary sewer pipe extending from the proposed building to the public system in Seventh Street should reflect PVC SDR-35 as consistent with Maplewood Standards. 2. The invert of the sanitary sewer manhole for which the 8-inch sewer service is entering shall be finished such that the benches and troughs inside the manhole funnel toward the outflow invert. A note or detail shall be indicated on the plan. 3. The applicant shall also submit plans to Saint Paul Regional Water Services (Richelle Nicosia) for review and approval of all water main service installation. . a. Verify that a combined 8" domesticlfire protection service is acceptable. b. Verify that the 90-degree bend to connect into Bartelmy Street is acceptable and will not need to be changed to two 45-degree bends. . c. Verify flow rates and pressure for fire protection to the building. 4. The existing warming shelter on the south side of the site has existing electrical and gas utilities. No water or sewer is currently supplied to the shelter. 5. Trash guards are not allowed on flared-end sections with a diameter of 18 inches or less. 6. An easement for the sanitary sewer and water main service between the soccer field and the building will be required and shall be shown on the plans. The easement shall be wide enough to accommodate OSHA safety requirements for trench excavation in the event that excavation needs to occur within the easement. 7. An exterior fire hydrant on site may be required. The project engineer shall confirm this with Fire Marshall Butch Gervais (651) 249-2804. Site Geometries and Lavout Maplewood Engineering Comments 2-13-08 Page 6 of 7 1. Typical width dimensions of area trails shall be shown on the plan. Minimum trail width will be 6 feet. 2. Ball diamond and soccer field dimensions shall be shown. Show distances from the nearest corner of the buildings to the soccer fields and the edge of the trails. 3. Show retaining wall heights on the geometric plan. 4. Crosswalk striping and signage shall be shown for the crossing over the loading dock access and the north-south trail crossing across the driveway entrance. 5. The owner shall conduct a traffic study regarding the impacts of the site on Stillwater Road. Sight distances from the driveway entrances and traffic volumes should be considered in the report. Landscaoino/Plantino Plans (Citv Naturalist) 1. Slopes 4: 1 or greater bordering trail edges shall be planted with a native seed mix or native flowers. 2. A rain water garden shall be established around catch basin B. Trees 1. All trees shall be darkened in plan view and not screened on the L 1.1 plan sheet. 2. Refer to Tree Preservation Plan Review comments by Shann 'Finwall. Aoencv Submittals and Permittino 1. The applicant shall submit plans to Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District (Tina Carstens) for review and approval. 2. The applicant shall submit plans to Mn/DOT for review and approval. The proposed development entrance is off of the MnlDOT Trunk Highway and drainage is being piped into Mn/DOT right of way. 3. Agency submittals are not necessarily limited to those mentioned above. The owner and project engineer shall get all necessary permits and shall satisfy the requirements of all permitting agencies. Miscellaneous 1. The Owner shall enter into a developer's agreement with the City of Maplewood for the completion of all private site and proposed park area improvements. As part of the Maplewood Engineering Comments 2-13-08 Page 7 of 7 developer's agreement, the owner shall provide a letter of credit or cash escrow for 150% of the cost for all private site improvements as mentioned in the developer's agreement. An estimate of the total cost of improvements shall be provided to engineering staff. 2. The project engineer shall provide a benchmark elevation and location description on each civil plan sheet. Plans shall also be signed and dated by the professional engineer. 3. A dedicated driveway or access easement needs to be dedicated to the development property from the Church property in order to "granf' access to the senior living facility property to the south. This needs to be shown on the plans along with the required drainage and utility easements. 4. Drainage and utility easements are required over all ponding and infiltration areas and shall be shown on the plan. 5. The owner shall sign a maintenance agreement, prepared by the city, for all stormwater treatment devices (list devices I.e.,.. sumps, basins, ponds, etc). The city shall prepare this agreement. This document would have to be signed prior to the building department issuing a certificate of occupancy. The applicant shall submit 8.5 x 11 exhibits with all on-site storm water treatment measures shown individually. 6. The project plans shall show all easements within the development site, both existing and proposed. ~-rVfl1.:c1l.f. ~..V"e~/a~~Jbt. oihet"S (~~~) '1\ -H~;e are some of the questions asked by residents at the initial propos~tw.~~1fIj~ field at the church in September. Tile questions were answered by the representative from Presbyterian Homes, the developer and business partner of Gethsemane Church: Q: Why is this development the best use for this property? What about single-family homes? A: This is the best use of the land from our perspective, as it will increase the value of the church property, <Idding a lot of members to the church and <:reating a faith-based community. NOTE; A local resident is a Real Estate Appraiser and stated that this development will actually LOWER the property values of the homes that are in the area. A large apartment building complex placed so close will "significantly decrease property values." Q: Do you know that there are already 2 senior housing facilities within a half a mile from this location? Why do you think there is a need for another complex so close? k. There is a huge demand for senior housing in Maplewood. Those other places are co-ops where the residents must own their apartment. This is rental only, which is much more desirable by seniors. We h<lve done a market study. NOTE: Presbyterian Homes already operates a senior facility in Maplewood. Also, there are already 15 senior housing facilities in Maplewood and 3 nursing homes, with 3 new large independent living complexes about to be built. Q: Will the 4-acre grassy area be granted to the city as a permanent city park? A: No. Gethsemane will still owrt that parcel of land, but allow its use by the public. We think it's a sufficient "buffer zone" for those residents who own homes along Bartelmy & 7th. Q: Will you ever decide to develop that land? A:. Probably... .we have plans for a second ph~se of development which will imdude either a large nursing home or Senior town homes there. That may not be for a few years. Q: The small area designated as "Tot Corner" is in an area that routinely is flooded. What are you going to do to make that actually utilizable by children? A: We have to see about that. We didn't know that. Maybe the city will have an idea. Q: Are you going to install playground equipment for the children to play on? A: No, but maybe the city will install something. Q: 3 stories (plus the roofing) is a major visual obstruction for those residents living along Bartelmy_ Why does the Independent Living side need to be 3 stories tall? A: We need that much rent money to pay for the expense of building the place! Plus, there's a 3 story apartment complex acrosS McKnight Road. Why don't you complain about that? You know, we could make it 4 stories if we want to! ~ . __0 _0__ _0__.,. 0 Q: How will the increased traffic impact the road conditions on Bartelmy, 7th, MarY & Bush? I . A: It won't be much different than it is already. A slight increase of residents' traffic, that's all. There are only 61 underground parking stalls available to the 61 Independent Living apartments. Q: What about the employees? With 61 Independent units and 50 Assisted Living and Memory Care units, won't that size of a facility require numerous employees? A: NO! There Will be no more that 15-20 employees at the complex at any given time of the day. There's no need for that many employees. Q: What's to prevent the residents and employees from using the parking lot entrance off of Bartelmy as a short-cut to and from work or home, adding to the already dangerous conditions for anyone walking Or riding bicycles on our.oon-sidewalk-equipped rQads, especially children? - 0 . '"0 _00". - . ~ '. A: ,Everyone will be told to use the main entrance off of McKnight. Q: How long will the area be under construction? A: Anywhere from 12 to 15 months, full-time. Q: How will the "12-15 months of construction" traffic affect the condition of the already deteriorating roads (Bartelmy, Mary, Meyer, 7th & Bush?) A: As homeowners, I assume that you will be assessed that fee. That's why you pay property taxes, 'isn't it? Q: As a non-profit organization, will this complex be paying any property taxes? A: It's a complicated formula, but I'll try to simplify it for you. For the first 15 years, the city of Maplewood will rebate us 90% of our property taxes in exchange for providing a certain number of efficiency apartments at an affordable price, like $1200/month. The formula gets changed at that time, depending on when we start Phase 2 of construction (nursing home.) Q: When do you intend to begin construction? A: We need to apply for a building permit and do the re-zoning, which should be done by December, 2007. . TO: Mr. Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner - Community Development Department, City of Maplewood . " As a resident of the neighborhood affected by the Gethsemane Senior Housing proposal, please consider the following concerns I have about the development: The elimination of a park and open space within walking distance of my home: . The future development of a nursing home and/or senior town homes on the 4-acre lot currently proposed be temporarily leased to the City as a park: very much slightly not concerned concerned concerned o o o o The significant reduction of my Property and Home Value as a direct result of the development AND as a homeowner, f:'.-- I will not receive just compensation for this decreased value: l~ . The project increases the neighborhood size substantially, +66% o o o o The burden of an additional 111 households plus the facility itself on the current sewer and water system and possible e- special assessments on my home to improve the infrastructure: ~ The proposed "Tot Lot" play area is located in an area which floods frequently (NWC of Bartelmy and 7~h): My kids will need to cross busy roads to access public parks: The concern for the safety of pedestrians and children due to the significant long-tenm increase in daily traffic: The rapid deterioration of the roads due to the 60-70% increase in daily traffic through the neighborhood and the probable special assessments on my home to pay for the improvement and maintenance of the neighborhood roads: This commercial building will drastically change the character of this quiet, residential neighborhood: The increased construction traffic through the neighborhood for 12 - 15 months and the dirt, noise and other nuisances involved: o o J~:{ \\l ~0 ".~ ~ ~ o o o o o o o o o o o o ~~ d'/ ~~h~.. Liui Sj . .a Additional Comments: 'b<~ NAME: 6utzt 7Jt~ ) 55717 J'( J( ~ '1i 0( q< )l( ~ P< t/, ~ ~ (;;:{Ed - , ~.P/rZ4<> Cd.H ~ (j;/4r<I' 1 '7 r~/ ,1"-; By , December 10, 2007 Mr. Tom Ekstrand Community Development Department City ofMaplewood 1830 County Road BEast Maplewood, MN 55109 Re: Gethsemane Senior Housing Proposal Dear Mr. Ekstrand: We are voicing our strong support for the senior housing proposal at Gethsemane. For many years Gethsemane has provided the community with needed services, church, school, playground and now the need of senior housing. For the past year we have been going through the very trying experience of fmding quality housing for a senior parent. We were fortunate enough to secure an apartment in a presbytenan Homes Assisted Living Facility in Woodbury. This experience has led us to believe there is an apparent need for quality senior housing in this area. There are some good neighbors that have a long list of reasons why this proposal shouldn't come to fruition. We believe the bottom line is, they are selfish, and-don't want their world to change. They need to realize that for almost 50 years Gethsemane has supplied a place for recreation and asked for nothing in return. Looking at their proposal, Gethsemane and Presbyterian Homes are doing everything they can to build much needed senior housing and still retain play fields. It would be sad that a few neighbors would object to the many seniors in need of quality housing. Their objections appear to be as follows: Increased traffic will ruin Bartelmy. The roads in this area have been in poor condition for 20+ years. Not all seniors drive. Increased traffic will endanger the neighborhood chi1dr.en. We drive these streets everyday and seldom see any small children to say nothing of the fact children do not belong playing in the street. Losing their green space. These neighbors seem to forget the land belongs to Gethsemane, and that the church will still be providing play fields. There is a nature center one block away. This area offers far more recreational space than most neighborhoods. The proposal will lower their property values. These neighbors should be far more concerned with the pipeline running though the community than a senior housing proposal. Many have the pipeline in their front yard. There could be a potential for the senior housing to increase the property values by folks believing if senior housing is built close to the pipeline it must be a safe place to live. Thank you for listening to our comments. We have been residents of this community for over 20 years and will continue to support this proposal as we deem it to be an asset not a drawback. Sincerely, ~ 1:~~YDO~ 2471 7th St E Map1ewood,MN 55119 ~ ;/ " Together We Can December 4, 2007 GETHSeMANE SENIOR HOUSiNG PROPOSAL This letter is to get your opinion on a proposal by Gethsemane Lutheran Churcli and Presbyterian Homes of Minnesota to build il111-unit senior housing facilityon land owned by Gethsem'ane '. .south of the church. This is the land currently leased to the city for a park. Please refer to the atta.ched letter and maps. . I would like YOllr opinion to help me prepare a recommendati9n to the planning commission and city council. Please write your opinion and comments below and return this letter and any attachments on which you have written comments by December 13, 20()7. ' If you would like fllrther.lnformation, please call me a.t651-249-2302 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.'m. You can a.lso email mea.ttom.ekstra.nd@cLmaplewood.mn.us. I will send you notices of the publi.c hearing on this request when it is scheduled. Th,mk you for your comments. I will give them careful consideration. or -- as:J, TOM EKSTRAND - SENIOR PLANNER I have no comments: ~1~1:iJ!li!ftzt1t.~!fiJf -i"vL a ~4(hV<- WtL:4, we.~. C(/71-L fb e.evL<;j...u.,.... , ~'-s (!p..i/ l.full.L-f - I + ~u ~, a.. ~. L/UJl;}tfh"VL- l~,ue d- PVl. +c1- . ~ 'f-Lt 4 I.l C-e iVL P\.-.Lv vU--< ~, W[E @ lli U \TI~ r~ W OEe 1 ! 1On7 ~ ~.. OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 651-249-2300 CITY OF'MAPLEWOPD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST FAX: 651-249-2319 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 TO: Mr. Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner - Community Development Department, City of Maplewood "...... As a resident of the neighborhood affected by the Gethsemane Senior Housing proposal, please consider the following concems I have about the development: very much slightly not concerned concerned concerned The elimination of a park and open space within walking ~_ distance of my home: * g.-~"-- .. 0 0 The future development of a nursing home and/or senior ~'r'\.i"" bt, Ojh., r ~ town homes on the 4-acre lot currently proposed be .~.JO.J. Ie. -10/ . temporarily leased to the City as a park: - ,- 0 . /0 g--'-- The significant reduction of my Property and Home Value as a direct result of the development AND as a homeowner, I will not receive just compensation for this decreased value: r....'.......'...-. / El/ o o The project increases the neighborhood size substantially, +66% w./-/ o o The burden of an additional 111 households plus the facility itself on the current sewer and water system and possible special assessments on my home to improve the infrastructure: Jd""'" ..' o o The proposed "Tot Lot" play area is located in an area which floods frequently (NWC of Sartelmy and ih): e.......... 0 o My kids will need to cross busy roads to access public parks: "," ",/ 0 o The concern for the safety of pedestrians and children due to the significant long-term increase in daily traffic: ....-~~ ............. ?" er' 0 o The rapid deterioration of the roads due to the 60-70% increase in daily traffic through the neighborhood and the probable special assessments on my home to pay for the improvement and maintenance of the neighborhood roads: Er.......... r"'- o o This commercial building will drastically change the character of this quiet, residential neighborhood: "" ../ a-"' 0 o The increased construction traffic through the neighborhood for 12 - 15 months and the dirt, noise and other nuisances involved: . 13-'''/ 0 0 Additional Comments: "-j1 rt ~~,IJ?o1r1;"..u ~L XJi-///A ~ .. tUJ 37lIJ .. ab.-- I/-.. I ~~ I TO: Mr. Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner - Community Development Department, City of Maplewood " As a resident of the neighborhood affected by the Gethsemane Senior Housing proposal, please consider the following concerns I have about the development: very much slightly not concerned concerned concerned The elimination of a park and open space within walking distance of my home: . o o The future development of a nursing home and/or senior town homes on the 4-acre lot currently proposed be temporarily leased to the City as a park: . o o The significant reduction of my Property and Home Value as a direct result of the development AND as a homeowner, I will not receive just compensation for this decreased value: lit o o The project increases the neighborhood size substantially, +66% WI o o The burden of an additional 111 households plus the facility itself on the current sewer and water system and possible special assessments on my home to improve the infrastructure: III o o The proposed "Tot Lot" play area is located in an area which floods frequently (NWC of Bartelmy and ih): . o o My kids will need to cross busy roads to access public parks: It o o The concern for the safety of pedestrians and children due to the significant long-term increase in daily traffic: ", o o The rapid deterioration of the roads due to the 60-70% increase in daily traffic through the neighborhood and the probable special assessments on my home to pay for the improvement and maintenance of the neighborhood roads: WI! o o This commercial building will drastically change the character of this quiet, residential neighborhood: II o o The increased construction traffic through the neighborhood for 12 - 15 months and the dirt, noise and other nuisances involved: .. 0 0 Additional Comments: ~. ~rf' 5811/0/1,< on () l/xe/ /f1?IfJnf!> Are.. PJ1PpeJ1t!'v tltF;Ctf'Y. 1t8?'e '(lJl1e tiP az,.e;/tjtJf/'()fhe !,f..<f7u/o yeb'J5 J ).);/ 35 tt;e Ii} A/tPIV' ei/c.'i^y dhe/ CiJsi5' !t!/ye -tone v f()()f [sG-A year' j.. hQj>e. less G IeS5 i8J:r:.-IJ.'me ;ay* / . / 1 NAME: lJ1i l2wj,(Jof ADDRESS: 'Sf }k/7v b f, J!I I 1 " Together We Can December 4, 2007 CATHERINE E CARLSON 2490 7TH ST E MAPLEWOOD MN 55119-3818 GETHSEMANE SENIOR HOUSING PROPOSAL This letter is to get your opinion on a proposal by Gethsem..ne Lutheran Church and Presbyterian Homes of Minnesoia to build a 111-unit senior housing facility on land owned by Gethsemane .', .south of the church. This is the lam:j currently leased to the city for a park. Please refer to the attacheoletter and maps. . I would like your opinion to help me prepare a recommendation to the planning commission and city council. Please write your opinion and comments below and return this letter and any attachnients on which you have written comments by December 13, 2007. . If you woulc! like further Information, please call me at651-249-2302 between 8 ".m. and 4:30 p.m. You can also email meattom.ekstrand@cLmaplewood.mn.us. I will send you notices of the public hearing on this request when it is scheduled. Thank you for your comments. I will give them careful consideration. OP~~. TOM EKSTRAND - SENIOR PLANNER I have no comments: . IrBfE @ fE D W fE~ tJU DEe 1 2 2007 !J.JI By OFFICE: OF COMMUNITY DE:VE:LOPME:NT 651-249-2300 CITY OF MAPLE:WOOD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST FAX: 651-249-2319 MAPLE:WOOD, MN 55109 '" Together We Can December 4, 2007 JEFF & CHRISTY KLEVE 822 MEYER ST N STPAULMN 55119-3831 GETHSEMANE SEN,OR HOUSiNG PROPOSAL This letter is to get your opinion on a proposal by Gethsemane Lutheran Church and Presbyterian . Homes of Minnesota to build a 111-unit senior housing facility on land owned by Gethsemane '.south of the church. This is the lanQ currently leased to the city for a park. Please refer to the attached letter and maps. . I would like your opinion to help me prepare a recommendation to the planning commission and city council. Please write your opinion and comments below and retum this letter and any attachnients on which you have written comments by December 13, 2007. ' If you would like further information, please call me at651-249-2302 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. You can also email meattom.ekstrandt.1ilci.maplewood.mn.us. I will send you notices of the public hearing on this request when it is scheduled. Thank you for your comments. I will give them careful consideration. or--~ TOM EKSTRAND - SENIOR PLANNER I have no comments: , J1. t.. C\ v\.~ mlE@~G\U~w! ~U DEe 1 22007 ~ By : OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 651-249-2300 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST FAX: 651-249-2319 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 Attachment 10 f!~"NESIOIf ~ Minnesota Department of Transportation ~ E Metropolitan District '\; l' Waters Edge OFTR~" 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113-3174 January 4, 2008 Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner City of Maplewood . 1830 County Road BEast Map1ewood, MN 55109 SUBJECT: Gethsemane Senior Housing - MnlDOT Review #S07 -111 NW Quad. ofTH 5 and East 7th Street Map1ewood, Ramsey County Control Section 6230 Dear Mr. Ekstrand: Thank you for the opportunity to review the above referenced site plan which our agency received on December 5, 2007. Before any further development, please address the following issues: Drainage: A Mn/DOT Drainage Permit will be required to ensure that current drainage rates to MnlDOT right- of-way will not be increased. The drainage permit application, including the information below, should be submitted to: Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan District - Permit Office 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 The following information must be submitted with. the permit application: I) A grading plan showing existing and proposed contours 2) Drainage area maps for the proposed project showing existing and proposed drainage areas. Any off-site areas that drain to the project area should be included in the drainage area maps. The direction of flow for each drainage area must be indicated by arrows. 3) Drainage computations for pre and post construction conditions during the 2, 10, 50, and 100 year rain events. 4) An electronic copy of any computer modeling used for the drainage computations. 5) The proposed apron and riprap located along TH 5 appear to be located within the clear zone which causes a driving safety hazard. The riprap and apron should be removed from MnlDOT right-of-way. 6) Storm water pretreatment should be added prior to the proposed infiltration basin and the proposed wet pond. 7) As shown, the wet pond has a high potential to short-circuit during rain events. Either reconfigure the pond ort change the location of the inlets/outlets of the pond to eliminate short- circuit potential. ffD)[E @ [E D m [Em UIJ JAN 0 7 2008 @I An equal opportunity employer By Please note that additional information may be required once a drainage permit is submitted, and after a detailed review. For any questions, please contact Rusty Nereng, Mn/DOT's Water Resources Section, at (651) 234-7510. Permits: As noted previous, a Mn/DOT Drainage permit will be required. Further, as noted previous, the storm water pond will not be allowed to encroach within Mn/DOT right-of-way. Lastly, any use of or work impacting Mn/DOT right of way will require a permit. Permit forms are available from MnDOT's utility website at www.dot.state.mn.us/tecsup/utiIitv . Please direct any questions regarding permit requirements to Buck Craig, MnDOT's Metro Permits Section, at (651) 234-7911. Residential Noise Statement: Mn/DOT's policy is to assist local governments in promoting compatibility between land use and highways.," Residential uses located adjacent to highways often result in complaints about traffic noise. Traffic noise from this highway could exceed noise standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Minnesota Rule 7030.0030 states that municipalities are responsible for taking all reasonable measures to prevent land use activities listed in the MPCA's Noise Area Classification (NAC) where the establishment of the land use would result in violations of established noise standards. Mn/DOT policy regarding development adjacent to existing highways prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures in such areas. The project proposer should assess the noise situation and take the action deemed necessary to minimize the impact of any highway noise. If you have any questions regarding Mn/DOT's noise policy please contact Peter Wasko in our Design section at (651) 234-7681. Thank you again for this review opportunity. We look forward to working with your city as this development progresses through the planning process. As a reminder, please address all initial future correspondence for development activity such as plats and site plans to: Development Review Coordinator Mn/DOT - Metro Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, Minnesota 55113 Mn/DOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2) copies of other review documents including site plans. Failure to provide three (3) copies of a plat and/or two (2) copies of other review documents will make a submittal incomplete and delay MnIDOT's 30-day review and response process to development proposals. If you have the Property Id # available, please include that with the submitted materials. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in providing the necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us from having to delay and/or return incomplete submittals. If you have any questions regarding this review please feel free to contact me at (651) 234-7797. Copy: Dan Soler, Ramsey County Engineer Jon Pope, Pope & Associates Engineering Copy Via Groupwise: E.Buck Craig tod Sherman Marc Goess Michael Geertsema Rusty Nereng Ann Braden 1 Metropolitan Council Copy to Mn/DOT files: MnlDOT Division File CS 6230 MnlDOT LGL File - Maplewood Jon Pope Pope & Associates, lnc. 1255 Energy Park Drive St. Paul, MN 55108-5118 Dan Soler Ramsey County Traffic Engineer 1425 Paul Kirkwo1d Drive Arden Hills, MN 55112-3933 Attachment 11 Tree Preservation Review Project: Gethsemane Senior Housing Date of Plan: January 31, 2008 Date of Review: February 13, 2008 Reviewer: Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner (651) 249-2304; shann.finwalllalci.maDlewood.mn.us Background: The city's tree preservation ordinance describes a significant tree as a hardwood tree with a minimum of 6 inches in diameter, an evergreen tree of 8 inches in diameter, and a softwood tree of 12 inches in diameter. A specimen tree is defined as a healthy tree of any species which is 28 inches in diameter or greater. Specimen trees are also considered significant trees. The tree preservation ordinance requires any significant tree removed to be replaced based on a tree mitigation schedule. The schedule takes into account the size of a tree and bases replacement on that size. In essence, it penalizes developers for removing larger trees by requiring a greater amount of replacement for those trees. Tree Removal: There are 959 caliper inches of significant trees located on the property. The plan does not clearly specify the number of trees which encompass these caliper inches. The plan calls for the removal of 24 significant trees equaling 533 caliper inches, which is a removal of 55 percent of the trees on the property. According to the figures submitted by the applicant and the tree replacement calculation in the city's tree preservation ordinance, the applicant needs to replace 285 caliper inches of trees on the site. It should be noted, however, that the trees that are shown as being preserved on the property do not add up to 426 caliper inches, which is the remaining caliper inches of trees proposed to be preserved on the plan. This may indicate that the tree plan includes trees on the church's property as well as the property to be developed. For this reason, the applicant should include a table on the plan which shows the number and sizes of significant trees located on just the property to be developed so that city staff can ensure the replacement calculation is accurate. Tree Replacement: The proposed landscape plan calls for 111 deciduous and 41 evergreen trees to be replanted on the site. In addition, the applicant is proposing to relocate three deciduous trees onto the church site to the north. Overall tree replacement is proposed at 326 caliper inches, which would exceed city code if the number and sizes of trees on the property is found to be accurate. Some modifications to the landscape plan are recommended as follows: The property lines need to be better defined. It appears trees proposed along the east and south side of the property will be planted in the right-of-way. This may be appropriate if this area of the development is acquired as city park, but not appropriate if it remains part of the development. To ensure adequate screening between the single-family house on the south side of the site, along Stillwater Avenue, the applicant should plant a scattered row of evergreens along the shared property line. W' ...J ::J C W J: U CI) w 0::: :J ~ LL I- J: C> ::i Attachment 12 N N CD 0] o 0 ~ ~ ~ 1Il ..J ~ , N N ~, CD 0] LO en en ~ ~ ~ :;; NN :;; :;; gJI ar'9 i :t. o~ ::L:J :2 :2 ZlO ~~()ONbN ~m~:2:gs~co~CC Z~J,u)f'..-,~-,~ O::LOf'-.l'-"';"<(U1<(LO <(~";''';'CIJ()"(),, ~<(J-OO:J:t:<(:;;;;<( C..q-I''''tCVCo;;t" OCl)Q:Q:r--;-OU)OCJJ en Cf) I 'I- If) if) (/) en '-OCIIo'-ClJ'-CIJ G3::u::~~o~:u:LB:u: 3:!Q:u:=tt:~3:~~!Y roO~-C=tt:roOroO L..O-roro L.. 1-0- (9.;;EE..Q<B:E'B~ ~ '3= .3 .3 ~ :2 .~ ~ .~ I :g,:;; E :s: .. U) ..Jr-- ~ :r::r::c:r: :;;:;;:;;:;; :S::S::S::S: 1.01.000 f'..l'-OO r"T""'I"""V I :;; ~ o ... " N~ 0000 0 NNNN '" O~ T""T""T""T"" ~ > '" " " ., " " '0 1l1l:il'O '0 :0:::;0.. m ct:l (J) a. a. " '" 'l:'l:1l'" '" " '" :J::J lD (f.I '" o '" CI)("j)rr:::ag '" :EO] 0] I x x x x x x - LL " o '" => .0 E U> is g> .- " :g~ ~ c ~ 8 <( ., > ~ o o ., o oj '0 a. " ~ "0 ~~ " o ~ .0 E '" is " = '0'- - N Q) ~ ,~., ., " 0 g~gl- ~~'t-c I 10:: ro tl=lt::c~ 00 (\) 1_ ~:J a.~ (JOQ C' , I ,.- ~.::III!._CI) o Olg-'= " "'.. Q) a.a..~O ==;::0. (U ro 0- :S::S:O~ c: o ~ .0 'C 1;) is > Q) ,!i: .... ,," '" ., -'= j U; oj '0 a. Co '" 0..00",- :S::S:Xo. XX X > ~ a. X COOPER LIGHTING lUMARI{@ DESCRIPTION The IMPACT Trapezoid cutoff wall luminaire makes an ideal complement to site design. U.L Listed and CSA Certified for wet locations in down mount applications and damp locations in up mounted applications. Rugged construction and full cutoff classified optics provide facade and security lighting for light restricted zones surrounding schools, office complexes, apartments, and recreational facllities. SPECIACA1l0N FEATURES GETHSMANE A ... Housing The housing Is a two-piece design of die-cast aluminum for precise control of tolerances and repeatability. B _,_ Mounting Gasketed and zinc plated rigid steel m-ounting attachment-fits directly to 4" J-Box or wall with -':'Hook-N~Lock" mechanism for quick installation. Secured with two (2) captive corrosion resistant black oxide coated aHen head set screws concealed but accessible from bottom. imPACT'" C;Ul<>ff Wall luminal,,,. A B C .,_ Optical Modules All optical modules utilize high performance 95% reflective sheet. Type II opticai module is standard. D ... Ballast HID luminaires supplied with high power factor ballast with Class H insulation. Minimum starting temperatures are -40"C (-40"Fl for HPS and ~30"C (-22"F) for MH. Compact Fluorescent luminaires feature electronic universal 120~277V high efficient 50/60Hz ballast with -1S"C (D"Fl minimum st<;!rting. c D f IT 81/2' I_ I I I I 161!Z"[419mm) HOOK-N-LOCK MOUNTING J:.o.Door Ole-cast door features, 1/8" heat- and impact-resistant clear tempered glass lens mounted with internal plated steel clips and sealed with EPDM gasketlng. Hinged door secured in place via two (2) captive fasteners. F 0" Finish Durable polyester powder coat finish. Standard color is bronze. Optional white and black colors available_ Other finish colors available. Consult your Cooper lighting Representative concerning special color requirements. E F 9"1229mml (Mol/nllngaUachmentlncll/ded. J-BolCnOlincluded./ In downlight IlPplicutions only. ~ i ~ . COOPER LIghting wwwcooperUghling.com Specifications and Dimensions subiect to change without notice, Con.ullyourrepre,o"loUvolor.dditlo"olopllon.o"dllnl.h." never ordinary IP IMPACT TRAPEZOID 5D-175W High Pressure Sodium Metal Haiide 26 ~ 52W Compact Fluorescent FULL CUTOFF WAll MOUNT LUMINAIRE TECHNICAL DATA 2S"C Maximum Ambient Temperatura ExtarnaISl/pplyWlring90.C Minimum Down Mounted-Wet location Up Mounted-Damp Location ENERGY DATA High Reactanca Ballast Input Watts SOW HPS HPF (55 Watts) SOW MH HPF (12 Watts) 70WHPS HPF{91 Watts) 70W MH HPF (90 Watts) lOOWHPS HPF (130WattsJ 100W MH HPF (129 Watts) 150WHPSHPF(190Watts} 150W MH HPF (185 Watts) CWABallastlnputWatts 175W MH HPF (210 Watts) BectronlcBa!lastlnputWatts 26WPLHPF{29Watls) 32WPlHPF(36Watlsl 42WPlHPF{45Watls) 52WPlHPF{55Watls} SHIPPING DATA ApprolCimateNetWelght: lB Ibs. (Bkgs.) ~5H., --- J1>'-//j ~f~"'" ADH060603 07102I20074;12:16PM DESCRIP1l0N The Acorn tastefully compllments roadways, parks and residential roadways. SPEClFICA1l0N FEATURES McGRAW-EDISON@ x- XPD GETHSMANE A n. Globe Textured potycarbonate globes (Optional internal Type III refractor available) C... Ballast Easily accessable, tilt-back power module. Standard plug-in starter when applicable. D... Photocontrol NEMA peR photocontrol receptacle available. Accessible through door assembly, B n. Socket Mogul-base socket for SOW through 150W HPS and 17SW and 250W Metal Halide; SOW through 150W MH is medium base socket. -'All sockets are 4KV pulse rated. A B c E ... Housing Cast aluminum housing. Standard with two position terminal block, Seven standard color options, Other finish colors available. F ... Mounting Post-top mount fits 3" tenons. Stainless steel mounting bolts. 271/2" 17115mml 0 0 E 111/4' f286mml F L """ J t114mm] t61/2"1419mml FINIAL OPTIONS .. - ARN ACORN 50 - 250W High Pressure Sodium Metal Halide DECORA TlVE LUMlNA1RE ~ ~ ~ ~ VIctorian Modern Architectural Nostalgic ~ COOPER lighting www.coope/lIghllng..com Specifications and Dimensions subject to change without notice. Con.ultyourr.pr..ent"I'V"for"tldltion.lop~"nsbndllnl.hBd EPA Effective Projected Area: 1,7 Square Feet SHIPPING DATA Appro)Cimate Net Weight: 301bs, (l4kgs.) ~~.. !h'-i/l <'~~o ADH060793 0312B1211072:26:0SPM DESCRIPTION The McGraw-Edison Concourse III is the most versatile, functionally designed, universally adaptable outdoor lighting luminaire available, Through a variety of mounting styles, it offers a family of low profile sharp-cutoff luminaires that make optimum use oftoday's high output HID sources, Enhancing natLJrallandscapes as well as cityscapes, the Concourse !II brings outstanding performance and style to walkways, parking lots, roadways, loading docks, building areas, and any security lighting appllcation. U,L listed and CSA certified for wet locations, SPECIACATION FEATURES McGRAW-EDISON@ CAL-400-MH-MT-3S-BZ-LjCA40-BZ XPl GETHSMANE A ... latches Two spring-steel quick release latches on housing for toolless entry. D ... Gasketing Closed cell gas-filled high temperature sll1cone gasketing completely seals optical system from dirt, bugs or other foreign material. B ... Socket Porcelain mogul-base screw shell type lamp socket with spring-loaded center contact, ,C ... Housing One~piece, die-cast aluminum 'housing features aesthetically pleasing soft-corner design, E.., Lens Thermal shock- and impact resistant clear tempered glass. F... Optics Optional high efficiency segmented or hydroformed reflectors available in a range of distributions, Reflector modules attach to the housing. All reflectors are field rotatable in 90" increments.(5) A B c D ~ E F G H J e 3 e DIMENSIONS G ,u Mounting Universal mounting clamp concealed in housing fits 1 1/2" to 2 3/8" 0.0. horizontal tenons without adapters. Provides a +5" vertical leveling adjustment. AI mounting option includes arm and round pole adapter with the fixture for single carton shipment H ... Ballast Easily removable high power factor HID multi~tap ballast is standard. J ... Hinges Integral hinges prevent door rocking and optimize sealing capabilities, OJRECT ARM MOUNTINGS ~ ~ ~ WALL MOUNT ADAPTER ~" 81/2" 1203mml DlJi~231%' DlJi~231:;', I I I I 63[8" 61/4" ~mJ ~ml Round Pole Square Pole Specifications and Dimensions subiect to change without notice. Con.ully"urr.p....onlolivoforaddlli"nal"pllon$ondnni.hu ,,- COOPER Lighting wwwcooperUghtlng_wm 147/8" Levl378mml=:]---, 55/B" ~ml .. - CAt CONCOURSE III 70 - 400W High Pressure Sodium Metal Halide ARCHITECTURAL AREA LUMINAIRE I' . Feo COMPLIANT f.IIC.loll ENERGY DATA Hi.Real'tanceBallastJnputWatts 70W HPS HPF (9S Watts) 70WMHHPF(94Watts) IOOWHPSHPF(130Watts} 100W MH HPF (129 Wattsl CWA Ballast Input Watts 150W MH HPF (210 Wattsl 176W MH HPF (210 Wattsl 260WHPSHPF(300Watts} 250W MH HPF (295 Wattsl 400W HPS HPF (465 Wattsl 400W MH HPF (455 Wattsl EPA Effll<;tivlI Projlldlld Area; 0.9 SHIPPING DATA ApprolCimatoNetWelght: 39Ibs.{18kgs.1 .~. ff>'-IIJ ..~., ADHOS0022 03{20120071:34:12PM