Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/02/20041. Call to Order MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, February 2, 2004, 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. January20, 2004 5. Public Hearings a. Hillcrest Area (Larpenteur and White Bear Avenues) 1. Land Use Plan Map Changes (BC and R-1 to Mixed Use (MU)) 2. Zoning Map Changes (BC and R-1 to Mixed Use (MU)) New Business a. Woodhill Subdivision (Linwood Avenue) Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plat Zoning Map Change (F to R-l) 7. Unfinished Business None 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations 10. a. January 26 Council Meeting: Mr. Bartol b. February 9 Council Meeting: Mr. Desai c. February 23 Council Meeting: Ms. Dierich Staff Presentations a. Reschedule the February 16 PC Meeting - Presidents Day Holiday 11. Adjournment I I 1 I I MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2004 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. I1. ROLL CALL Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Jeff Bartol Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Commissioner Mary Dierich Commissioner Paul Mueller Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner Dale Trippler Present Present Absent Present Absent Absent Present Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary II1. APPROVAL OFAGENDA Commissioner Dierich moved to approve the agenda. Commissioner Bartol seconded. Ayes - Bartol, Dierich, Fischer, Trippler The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the planning commission minutes for January 20, 2004. Chairperson Fischer had corrections on pages 6 and 13. Chairperson Fischer said on page 6 in the 7thparagraph in the sentence "this discussion was open" the first was in the sentence should be stricken. The second change is on page 13; item d. in the second sentence, it should read, "The application form that gets filled out by prospective commission members is in the staff report." Commissioner Bartol said on page 13 in item d. 8. it should read "Candidates should be encouraged to watch several meetings on cable so they have a better have-a~ understanding of what happens during a meeting before serving on a commission" please strike have an and adding have a. Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the planning commission minutes for January 20, 2004, with changes. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes - Bartol, Dierich, Fischer, Trippler I I I ! ! ~ ! Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -2- V. PUBLIC HEARING a. Hillcrest Area (Larpenteur and White Bear Avenues) Ms. Finwall showed a power point presentation while describing the proposed changes to the Hillcrest area. Ms. Finwall said the City of Maplewood is proposing to change the comprehensive land use and zoning map for the Hillcrest area. These changes would be from business commercial (BC), single-dwelling residential (R-l), and church (C) to the newly adopted mixed- use (M-U) land use designation and zoning district. The comprehensive land use and zoning map changes are intended to promote the redevelopment of the Hillcrest area into a mixed-use urban center with compact, pedestrian-oriented commercial and residential land uses. State law requires comprehensive land use map changes to be passed by a two-thirds city council vote (4 votes). Commissioner Trippler had concerns with the way the area was described. He thought the property description should be defined better. Ms. Finwall said she would confer with the city attorney to ensure a legally binding description. Chairperson Fischer opened the discussion to the public. She asked anyone who wanted to speak on this item give their name and address prior to addressing the commission. Mr. Ken Schwartz, Performance Transmission business owner at 1735 Van Dyke Street, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said he is against the rezoning of commercial property because he believes it devalues the property. He said when you rezone residential property to commercial property you raise the value of the property. But when you go from business commercial to mixed use it devalues property. Rezoning his property to mixed use would not fit the criteria of his business. He said when you rezone a building you change the value of the building. When the time came that he wanted to sell his property it would limit him as to who he could sell his property to. The city needs to address what would be taken away from the individual when someone's property gets devalued. He wants his property to remain business commercial. Commissioner Bartol asked what the nature of his business was? Mr. Schwartz said his business is auto/transmission repair. Mr. Al Meister, business owner at 1696 to 1698 White Bear Avenue, and 1715 Van Dyke Street, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He agreed with Mr. Schwartz that by doing this the city would be devaluing his property. He said he had a tenant in one of his properties that moved out already because of what the Met Council has told everyone. The tenant said "who knows, next year the building may be gone", so he left. He said they are having a hard time getting tenants because of the future changes. Very few companies could relocate to that location because of the new changes. Unless you have a developer that would come in and buy everyone out, people don't have the money to upgrade because of the economy. ] I I I I Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -3- Mr. Ken Schwartz, addressed the commission again. He said 1 year ago the city adopted Fire Code 1306. The code reads if you change the occupancy within your building you have to sprinkler the whole building. He is looking at remodeling a portion of his business. Within the guidelines of the adopted rule the city would consider the remodeling change to the occupancy, which requires a sprinkler system. He said in Mr. Meister's case to replace the tenant that was in the Laundromat space would run about $60,000 to get a new renter in the building to bring the building up to code. It's hard for a property owner to spend $60,000 not knowing if you can get the money back or not. He doesn't have a problem spending money on his building if his building would be there 30 years from now. He does have a problem spending that kind of money on a building that may be demolished in the next few years. The city needs to ask what impact would this have on the people in the community? He said it's not easy to move a business. It's expensive to retain your customers and you hope they follow you to the new location. Mr. Dave Hulke, residing at 1831 White Bear Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said he would like his property to be considered as one of the properties for this change. He said his property is located just north of Hejny Rental and is about 1 acre in size. The Hejny Rental property is roughly 11A acre in size. He said his father passed away in December 2003 and they have been trying since 1969 to get this property changed to commercial to upgrade its value. He spoke to several neighbors and another one of his neighbors is interested in having their property considered for this change as well. Chairperson Fischer asked what the street frontage was for Mr. Hulke's property? Mr. Hulke said his property has 150 feet of street frontage and Hejny Rental has about 200 feet of street frontage. Mr. Bob Cutshall, Building Committee Chair for the Woodland Hills Church located at 1740 Van Dyke Street, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said the church wants to be a good neighbor. They want to understand the rezoning of this property. Their understanding is under the new zoning they would be a permitted use under a conditional use permit as they are currently. Ms. Finwall said churches would remain under the conditional use permit as they are currently. Chairperson Fischer asked if the permit the church currently has is grandfathered in? Ms. Finwall said yes. Mr. Cutshall asked if he understood correctly that the church would not be a non-conforming use? Ms. Finwall said the use itself would not be a non-conforming use, however, the parking lot and building would be non-conforming under the new design standards. Mr. Cutshall asked if they would be expected at some point to bring the building up to the design standards? He said the new design standards would be difficult for the church to meet since the building is over 40 years old. I I I I Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -4- Ms. Finwall said the ordinance would not require the church to update the building unless the church was proposing an addition or exterior remodeling. If the addition exceeded 25% of the floor area of the building it would have to be constructed with the new design standards and any exterior alteration or remodeling would have to meet the design standards? Mr. Cutshall asked if this would have an impact on the finishing of the inside of the building since they are half done? Ms. Finwall said that would not affect the interior building the church has proposed. Ms. Darlene Duran, residing at 1849 White Bear Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the commission. Her property is next door to David Hulke's property and she would like her property to be considered for the rezoning of the area. She is concerned that the commercial zoning has spread past Ripley Avenue. She said Hejny Rental could sell their business to many different companies that wanted to relocate in that location. Chairperson Fischer asked staff to explain the difference between the proposed mixed-use zoning and the current business commercial zoning? Ms. Finwall said Ms. Duran lives north of Mr. Hulke's property. Currently Hejny Rental is operating with a CUP for the exterior storage and the rental facility but they are a non-conforming use because they are located in a residential zoning district. Currently Hejny Rental could sell to a similar type use or the property could be converted to residential property. When the property is rezoned, lower impact commercial uses such as retail or restaurant could be developed or multi- family housing could go there. It appears that the residential portion would develop along the western side of White Bear Avenue before commercial property. Ms. Duran said she would still like her property to be considered as the same zoning as Mr. Hulke. She thinks it's a strange place to make the cutoff on White Bear Avenue and she thinks including one more property shouldn't make difference. Mr. Schwartz asked if there would be a minimum lot size requirement under the new rezoning? Ms. Finwall said only for a single-family home. She doesn't foresee a small lot such as the size of the Duran property developed on its own but the lot could be included with other properties for future redevelopment. Mr. Kevin Johnson, residing at 207 West Kenwood, Maplewood, and a member of the pastoral staff at the Woodland Hills church, addressed the commission. He said the church wants to be supportive of the efforts of improving the community and want to do their best job of being a good neighbor. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the comprehensive map change in the Hillcrest area from business commercial (BC), single-dwelling residential (R-1), and church (C) to mixed-use (M-U). The comprehensive map change includes properties located north of Larpenteur Avenue and south of Ripley Avenue, along White Bear Avenue and Van Dyke Street as follows: (changes to the original motion are underlined and additions are in bold). I I I I Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -5- Properties 295 feet west of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to the north property line of 18_49 White Bear Avenue; all properties east of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue; all properties east and west of Van Dyke Street from Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue, including 1847, 1887, and 1899 Larpenteur Avenue. The comprehensive map change is based on eight specific comprehensive plan land use and housing goals and four land use policies as follows: Goals: Provide for orderly development. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase jobs and provide desirable services. Minimize the land planned for streets. Minimize conflicts between land uses. Provide a wide variety of housing types. Provide safe and attractive neighborhoods and commercial areas. Plan multi-family housing with an average density of at least 10 units per acre. Policies: ao Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents. Disperse moderate-income developments throughout the city near bus lines. Support innovative subdivision and housing design. Protect neighborhoods from activities that produce excessive noise, dirt, odors or which generate heavy traffic. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the zoning map change for the Hillcrest area in the City of Maplewood from business commercial (BC) and single-dwelling residential (R-l) to mixed-use (M- U). The zoning map change includes properties located north of Larpenteur Avenue and south of Ripley Avenue, along White Bear Avenue and Van Dyke Street as follows: (changes to the original motion are underlined and additions are in bold). Properties 295 feet west of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to the north property line of 1849 White Bear Avenue; all properties east of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue; all properties east and west of Van Dyke Street from Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue, including 1847, 1887, and 1899 Larpenteur Avenue. The city is making this change because: a. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. I I T I I i~ · Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -6- The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes - Bartol, Dierich, Fischer, Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on February 23, 2004. VI. NEW BUSINESS a. Woodhill Subdivision (Linwood Avenue) Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bruce Nedegaard, representing Nedegaard Custom Homes, is proposing to develop a 16-1ot plat for single dwellings called Woodhill. It would be on a 12.44-acre site on the south side of Linwood Avenue, east of Sterling Street. Mr. Roberts said the developer intends to sell each of the houses and expects that each will sell for at least $400,000. A homeowners' association would own and maintain the landscaping, rainwater gardens and retaining walls. As proposed, the lots in the plat will range from 11,496 square feet to 22,890 square feet with an average lot size of about 15,939 square feet. The city requires each single dwelling lot in the R-1 (single dwelling) zoning district to have at least 75 feet of width at the front setback line and be at least 10,000 square feet in area. All of the proposed lots would meet or exceed the standards in the city code. Commissioner Trippler asked if it was correct that even though it's the homeowners own property within the 100 foot setback for the pristine wetland there can be no development on the 100 feet on the south half of lots 1 and 2 and the south portion of lots 3 and 4? Mr. Roberts said correct. Commissioner Trippler asked if the city thought people would want to buy a house that they can't do anything with except from 5 feet from the back of their house? He said on page 29 of the staff report it says the best way to ensure protection of the wetland is to enforce the 100 foot wetland buffers and to limit the amount of surface runoff entering the wetland by directing it into rain gardens and swales for infiltration. He asked how the city intended to enforce that? Mr. Roberts said the city has this same issue at different developments in Maplewood. He said the city hopes through proper signage and through education that the homeowners realize they cannot do anything to that part of the property. If a complaint should occur that activity has been occurring in a buffer area beyond the signage and limits the city would investigate it. If there is no complaint the city may not know about the occurrence. Mr. Roberts said he thinks people would jump at the chance to look at a wetland and not have the grass or maintenance to deal with as well as not have another home in their backyard. Commissioner Trippler asked what the city could do if someone started mowing the grass in an area where they shouldn't be? Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -7- Mr. Roberts said the city would try and let the homeowner know what the rules are and handle it that way. If they don't comply the homeowner could end up in court. Commissioner Trippler asked how many cases the city has had go to court for noncompliance of the wetland buffer? Mr. Roberts said there haven't been any cases and that is why the city has been successful in getting compliance and not having to go to court. Commissioner Trippler asked if there were three or four retaining walls planned on page 23 of the staff report? Mr. Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineering for Maplewood said there are three, three-foot high retaining walls. Commissioner Trippler asked if the three foot high retaining wails pose any type of a safety hazard for children? Mr. Cavett said as long as there isn't a falling hazard over four feet tall, and there is a grassy turf area, then it's typically not a hazard. Mr. Bartol said those retaining walls are on private property and are outside the buffer area. If the homeowner wanted to put some type of railing up to keep from any hazard happening they could do that. Commissioner Dierich asked Mr. Cavett why the retaining walls weren't going to be constructed as far over as lot 1 and how the retaining wall should be stabilized? Mr. Cavett said the reason the retaining walls are proposed is because of the difference in the grade in that location. He said according to the building code any retaining wall four feet and over requires a building permit. However, because of the difference in height the city is going to require a building permit for the three three-foot high retaining walls. As part of the building permit process the applicant would be required to submit details of the design. He said typically a retaining wall like this would require a geogrid, which would help stabilize the soil and would be done by the developer as part of the grading of the site. The other concern was to be a covenant or restriction so the homeowners know who is responsible for long-term maintenance of the retaining wall. Commissioner Dierich said the grading is coming very close to the buffer area on lots 1 and 2. She asked how the city would recommend the homeowners to stabilize the area until vegetation and landscaping was put into place? She said the whole hillside slid into the wetland behind her house and now there isn't much of a wetland left. Her concern is that this wetland has vegetation that isn't any place else in the Ramsey County area. Mr. Cavett said he agrees that this is a big concern of the city and the Watershed District. He said anytime you have construction activity taking place there is the potential for problems especially near buffer areas. There are no guarantees but it will have to be looked at very closely and cared for by the developer and the builder. I I I I I I · Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -8- Commissioner Bartol said in the staff report it states lots 6, 7, and 8 don't comply to the appropriate setbacks, he asked if staff meant lots 5, 6, and 8? Mr. Roberts said that is correct. Commissioner Bartol asked if there was a reason there wasn't a house shown on the plans for Lot 1 Block 1 and Lot 9 Block 2? Mr. Roberts said it his understanding that those are general pads with full basements and lookouts or walkouts would not work there. One of the requirements of the final plans is that all of those details should be shown. Commissioner Bartol asked if there is an anticipated use for the buffer zone north of the wetland area? People are going to walk there so unless there is a plan for people to walk in a specific area they will walk through people's backyards. He said homeowners might be upset having people walk through their property. He asked if Outlot B could be slightly larger to allow actual usable city space north of the pond to accommodate a public path? He said if you don't put a path there people will create their own walking path and will generate an erosion problem. Mr. Roberts said it is staff's opinion that if the trail is built to the cul-de-sac and staff did not anticipate much foot traffic around the north side of the pond. Clearly it's a possibility and Commissioner Bartol raised a good point. Commissioner Bartol said with that many houses and that many kids, not to mention the kids coming over from the New Century development, traffic will increase as the population increases. He said because this is a wooded area it will be a magnet for kids. Mr. Roberts said the public may walk where they want to walk but neither staff nor the parks department anticipated having a trail put there and because of the erosion, buffer area and the sensitivity, he hopes people don't won't walk through peoples property. He said the outlot could possibly be enlarged but he is not sure that would accomplish much. Commissioner Bartol said the single-family lots are already larger than the minimum size, it would give the city greater control over the buffer zone. Mr. Roberts said it would be more under fee ownership verses easement if that was changed, and the question becomes is 10 feet enough space? Chairperson Fischer asked what the paved area of the street would be? Mr. Roberts said the paved area is 28 feet wide instead of the standard 32 feet wide. Chairperson Fischer asked if there would be any problems with on-street parking in this location? Mr. Roberts said 28 feet is wide enough for parking on one side of the street. Chairperson Fischer asked if the city had any plans to visit any of these "no mowing areas" to see if people are complying or not? Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -9- Mr. Cavett said all the wetland setbacks will have signs as part of the development. One advantage this site would have over other sites is that this will be part of the open space. He spoke with Ginny Gaynor, the Open Space Coordinator, and she said they have volunteers that go through the open spaces to check for those things. He said there will be more eyes policing the area. Neighbors will also be policing the area and the signs indicate what the rules are. Chairperson Fischer asked if neighbors have blown the whistle on other neighbors? Mr. Cavett said the city has received calls from residents asking what was going on and have asked the city to check it out, which keeps the city and the Watershed District more involved. Commissioner Dierich asked if the retaining wall would be built during the grading process or during the construction of the homes? Mr. Cavett said it is important that these retaining walls are built as part of the grading process and not as part of the home construction process. Commissioner Dierich said there are some huge drums in the back yard of the house, she asked what they were used for and if there would be some clean up charges because of pollution? Mr. Roberts said the applicant could address that issue. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Mr. Roger Humphrey, Humphrey Engineering, Inc., 145 Main Street, Woodville, Wisconsin, representing the applicant, addressed the commission. He said they have worked very closely with staff and with the Watershed District early in the process and they will do the best they can in addressing the issues. Commissioner Trippler asked what the small rectangles represented on the plans off the back of each house? Mr. Humphrey said originally an architect drew up the plans and the rectangles are depicted on the plans as elevated decks for that type of building and are shown for illustration purposes only. Commissioner Trippler asked how many levels these homes would be? Mr. Humphrey said they would be one and two story homes. Commissioner Trippler asked for an answer regarding what the drums were in the yard of one of the homes? Mr. Humphrey said those drums are salvaged milk tanks that the homeowner used for landscaping purposes. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant if he had any concerns regarding the conditions listed in the staff report? Mr. Humphrey said no. ~ I 1 I Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -10- Commissioner Bartol said he would agree with Commissioner Dierich regarding the concern of the erosion during the construction process. Concerns such as soil run off, concerns for the trees and killing the vegetation. He was glad to see the developer trying to save as many trees as possible. He has seen less challenging conditions where runoff killed the trees. Trees can only tolerate so much silt and dirt on its root system before it gives way and dies. As a result of the construction process in his neighborhood in the Homes of New Century, the trees are dying and falling over and these too were protected areas. Every measure should be taken to save the trees that are marked. As a result of any trees that don't survive the construction process and die there should be a penalty charged to the developer. Commissioner Trippler said there are a lot of things he likes about this proposal but he's going to vote against it. The reason he is against this is there is over 40 feet of elevational drop from the wetland to the top of the hill. To put the three or four houses on lots 1-4 at the 100-foot setback, is courting sheer disaster. Even if the homeowners are conscientious of not going over the 100-foot setback anything they do to their property will end up in the wetland. He said if this is the most pristine wetland left in Maplewood the city is doomed to put this section of homes in this location. Commissioner Dierich said like Commissioner Trippler, she is very nervous about the grading and elevation of these lots and homes. She is also concerned about homeowners having decks on the rear of the property. Commissioner Dierich asked Chairperson Fischer what her opinion was about this proposal? Chairperson Fischer said recognizing the difficult situation with the large drop in elevation, the wetlands, and the pipelines, many things have been addressed in this report. She said if staff is comfortable with the conditions that are listed, than she is comfortable too. Commissioner Dierich moved to approve the resolution starting on page 34 of the staff report. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the 16-unit Woodhill development on the south side of Linwood Avenue. The city bases this approval on the findings required by code. Approval is subject to the following conditions: All construction shall follow the plans approved by the city. The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes to the plans. Such changes shall include: Revising the grading and site plans to show: (1) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation including keeping and protecting as many of the trees as possible. (2) Revised storm water pond locations and storm water system designs as suggested or required by the watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's design standards. 2. The proposed construction of the plat must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year, Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall meet all the conditions and changes noted in the city engineer's memo dated January 22, 2004. T I T ] T Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -11- 4. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Woodhill development shall be: Front-yard setback (from a public street right-of-way): minimum - 20 feet, maximum - 45 feet. bo Front-yard setback (public side street right-of-way): minimum - 20 feet, maximum - none. c. Rear-yard setback: 30 feet from any adjacent residential property line. d. Side-yard setback: minimum - 10 feet from a property line and 20 feet minimum between buildings. 5. The developer or contractor shall: Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, install all retaining walls as required and any other site improvements required by the city engineer and meet all city requirements. b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Remove the house, any debris or junk from the site. 6. The city council shall review this permit in one year. Commissioner Dierich moved to approve the Woodhill preliminary plat (received by the city on January 2, 2004). The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final plat: (additions to the conditions are underlined). 1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all retaining walls, site landscaping and meet all city requirements. b. *Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. Have Xcel Energy install Group V rate street lights in two locations - primarily at the street intersections and at the west end of the cul-de-sac. The exact style and location shall be subject to the city engineer's approval. do Provide all required and necessary easements (including all utility easements and ten- foot drainage and utility easements along the front and rear lot lines of each lot and five- foot drainage and utility easements along the side lot lines of each lot. Install permanent signs around the edge of the wetland buffer easements. These signs shall mark the edge of the easements and shall state that there shall be no mowing, vegetation cutting, filling, building, grading or dumping beyond this point. City staff shall approve the sign design and location before the contractor installs them. The developer or contractor shall install these signs before the city issues building permits in this plat. I I 1 I [ Planning Commission -12- Minutes of 02-02-04 f. Install survey monuments along the wetland and wetland buffer boundaries. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control, street identification, wetland buffer and no parking signs. h. Provide all required and necessary easements, including any off-site easements. Demolish or remove the existing house and garage from the site, and remove all other buildings, fencing, trailers, scrap metal, debris and junk from the site. Cap and seal all wells on site that the owners are not using; and remove septic systems or drainfields, subject to Minnesota rules and guidelines. Complete all curb on Linwood Avenue on the north side of the site. This is to replace the existing driveways on Linwood Avenue, and restore and sod the boulevards. *Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, and street plans. The plans shall meet all the conditions and changes listed in the memo dated January 22, 2004, and shall meet the following conditions: A specific detailed erosion control plan shall be submitted for staff approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. b. The grading plan shall show: (1) The proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat. (2) Contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. (3) House pads that reduce the grading on sites where the developer can save large trees. This shall include changing the house pad locations on Lots 6, 7 and 8, Block 2 so they meet the approved development setback requirements, to more closely match the other house setbacks and orientation on the street. (4) The proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer. (5) All proposed slopes on the construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. On slopes steeper than 3:1, the developer shall prepare and implement a stabilization and planting plan. At a minimum, the slopes shall be protected with wood-fiber blanket, be seeded with a no-maintenance vegetation and be stabilized before the city approves the final plat. (6) Include the tree plan that: · Shows where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site. 1' I ] I T Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -13- · Shows no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (7) All retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls taller than 4 feet require a building permit from the city. (8) Sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed district or by the city engineer. (9) No grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements from the affected property owner(s). (10) As little grading as possible north and south of the proposed street. This is to keep as many of the existing trees on the site as is reasonably possible. (11) The pipelines and the 8-foot-wide trail from the cul-de-sac to the south property line. (12) The developer is encouraged to make the footprint on lots 1 and 2 on Block 2 as small as possible. c. The street and utility plans shall show: (1) (2) The street shall be a 9-ton design with a maximum street grade of eight percent and the maximum street grade within 75 feet of the intersection at two percent. The street with continuous concrete ribbon curb, except where the city engineer determines that concrete curbing is necessary (3) The completion or replacement of the curb on the south side of Linwood Avenue and the restoration and sodding of the boulevards. (4) Water service to each lot. (5) Repair of Linwood Avenue (street and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the new street. (6) The coordination of the water main alignments and sizing with the standards and requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS). (7) All utility excavations located within the proposed right-of-ways or within easements. The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be outside the project area. (8) The plan and profiles of the proposed utilities. (9) A detail of any ponds, the pond outlets and the rainwater gardens. The contractor shall protect of the outlets to prevent erosion. (10) The cul-de-sac with a minimum pavement radius of at least 42 feet. T I I I I Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -14- (11) Label the street as Dahl Avenue on all construction and project plans. d. The drainage plan shall ensure that there is no increase in the rate of storm water run-off leaving the site above the current (predevelopment) levels. The developer's engineer shall: (1) Verify inlet and pipe capacities. (2) Submit drainage design calculations. e. A landscape plan for the areas along the street, including the rainwater gardens and the cul-de-sac island. The coniferous trees shall be at least six feet tall and any deciduous trees shall be at least 21/~ inches in diameter. 3. Change the plat as follows: a. Add drainage and utility easements as required by the city engineer. b. Show drainage and utility easements along all property lines on the final plat. These easements shall be ten feet wide along the front and rear property lines and five feet wide along the side property lines. c. Label any common areas as outlots. d. Label the street as Dahl Avenue on all plans. e. Change the lot lines for Lot 8, Block 2 so they are more radial to the street right-of-way. f_. Move the north boundary of Outlot B north 20 feet behind lots 1,2, and 3. 4. Pay for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans. 5. Secure and provide all required easements for the development including any off-site drainage and utility easements. These shall include, but not be limited to, an easement for the culvert draining the pond at the northwest corner of the plat. 6. The developer shall complete all site grading and retaining wall construction. The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the developer or contractor has not completed before final plat approval. 7. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: 8. Submit the homeowners' association bylaws and rules to the director of community development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible party for the maintenance of the common areas, landscaping and retaining walls. 9. Record the following with the final plat: a. All homeowners' association documents. T I I 'f Planning Commission -15- Minutes of 02-02-04 b. A covenant or deed restriction with the final plat that prohibits any driveways on Lots 1 through 7, Block I and Lot 9, Block 2 from going onto Linwood Avenue. A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any further subdivision or splitting of the lots or parcels in the plat that would create additional building sites unless approved by the city council. d. A covenant or association documents that addresses the proper installation, maintenance and replacement of the retaining walls. eo Deeds transferring the ownership of Outlots A and B to the city. The city will accept ownership of these outlots in lieu of charging PAC (park access charges) with the building permits. The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city for approval before recording. 10. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading. 11. Obtain a NPDES construction permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). 12. Submit to city staff a copy of the written permission from the pipeline company for any grading or construction within the pipeline easement. 13. If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the director of community development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat. *The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or approves the final plat. C. Commissioner Dierich moved to adopt the zoning map change resolution on page 36 of the staff report. This resolution changes the zoning map from F (Farm Residence) to R-1 (Single Dwelling Residential) for the proposed Woodhill plat on the south side of Linwood Avenue. The city is making this change because it will: 1. Be consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. Not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the property adjacent to the area include in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. 3. Serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. Have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. T I I ~[ T Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -16- 5. Serve the site better as the owner plans to develop this property for lots for single-family houses. Commissioner Bartol seconded. Ayes- Bartol, Dierich, Fischer Nay - Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on February 23, 2004. Commissioner Dierich said she would like to thank the staff for a great job on the report. This item has been before the planning commission before and the report was very complete. She also thanked the developer for listening to the past concerns of the commission and incorporating the issues and concerns into this proposal. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. IX, COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Mr. Bartol was unable to attend as the planning commission representative at the January 26, 2004, city council meeting. Mr. Roberts reported that issues discussed included the 2003 Planning Commission Report, which was approved, the easement vacation of Teakwood that was approved, and the first reading of the Mixed-Use Zoning District was approved as the first reading. b. Ms. Desai will be the planning commission representative at the February 9, 2004, city council meeting. Items to be discussed include the CUP's for Ohlson Landscaping and the resolutions of appreciation of Mr. Rossbach and Ms. Monahan-Junek. c. Ms. Dierich will be the planning commission representative at the February 23, 2004, city council meeting. Items to be discussed include the Hillcrest Area Land Use Plan Map Changes and Zoning Map Change, and the Woodhill Subdivision for 16 single family homes on Linwood Avenue. T I Planning Commission Minutes of 02-02-04 -17- X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Reschedule the February 16, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting due to the Presidents Day Holiday. Mr. Roberts asked planning commission members what day works the best to reschedule the planning commission meeting due to Presidents Day falling on a regular meeting night. Because two members were out of town, the recording secretary or staff would make phone calls to ask members whether Tuesday, February 17, 2004, or Wednesday February 18, 2004, would work better. Xl. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. T I T I