Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/21/20041. Call to Order MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, June 21, 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. June 7, 2004 5. Public Hearings None o New Business a. Maple Tree Townhouses (Southlawn Ddve) Preliminary Plat 7. Unfinished Business None 8. Visitor Presentations 10. 9. Commission Presentations a. June 14 Council Meeting: Ms. Dierich b. June 28 Council Meeting: Ms. Fischer c. July 12 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson Staff Presentations a. Annual Tour 11. Adjoumment ! DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JUNE 7, 2004 I. CALLTO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Jeff Bartol Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Commissioner Mary Dierich Commissioner Michael Grover Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Daniel Lee Paul Mueller Gary Pearson Dale Trippler Present Absent Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Staff Present: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Ken Roberts, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary Erin Laberee, Staff Engineer II1. APPROVAL OFAGENDA Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the agenda. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes - Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Lee, Mueller, Pearson, Trippler The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the planning commission minutes for May 17, 2004. Chairperson Fischer had a correction on page 8, in the 6th paragraph changing the word budto abut. Commissioner Trippler had a correction on page 18, in number 6. changing the word herto here. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the planning commission minutes for May 17, 2004, as amended. Commissioner Desai seconded. Ayes - Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Mueller, Pearson, Trippler Abstention - Grover, Lee Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -2- V. PUBLIC HEARING Heritage Square Second Addition (Legacy Village - Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway) Mr. Ekstrand said Town and Country Homes is proposing to build for-sale townhomes on the portion of the Legacy Village PUD (planned unit development) that was previously approved for rental townhomes and an executive office site. The applicant is proposing to build 178 townhomes. This site was previously approved by the city for 198 rental townhomes and the office building. The applicant is requesting that the city council approve the following: A comprehensive plan amendment to build townhomes where the executive offices were previously approved. The applicant is, therefore, requesting a change from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential). A revision of the Legacy Village PUD for the change in ownership/rental status as well as the change from the office site to townhomes. 3. A preliminary and final plat for the new lot line configuration. Site, building and landscape plans. The community design review board (CDRB) reviewed these plans on May 25, 2004. The planning commission should review and take action on items 1 through 3. Commissioner Trippler said on page 2 of the staff report it states on April 26, 2004, the city council approved a revision from rental to for-sale townhomes. He asked if the city council had already approved this why was the planning commission reviewing this? Mr. Ekstrand said that was only a change to the development agreement and that was an element that had to take place before staff could go forward. Because the developer's agreement had denoted several specific items, one of which was that these be rental units. This had to be approved by city council to change the units from rental to for-sale townhomes before it could be forwarded to the planning commission. Commissioner Trippler said he spent a lot of time researching the parking situation. It seems the parking doesn't meet the criteria required by staff. Staff asked for 87 visitor parking spaces, however, he only sees 50 public parking spaces and 53 private parking spaces, which equals 103 parking spaces. If the private parking spaces are to be designated for residents to park there then those spaces wouldn't be available for visitors to use. Staff wanted at least five additional parking spaces available within 200 feet of the front door of each unit. In using his compass he discovered there were a number of units that didn't meet the 200-foot criteria. For example, they didn't meet the criteria in block 1, lot 3, unit A, and block 1, lot 5, unit A, and block 2, lot 1, unit A. There are 5 spaces in Block 2, lot 15, unit A & B1 that are technically within 200 feet but in order for people to use those spaces people would have to cross Kennard Street and get on the other side of Kennard Street. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -3- Commissioner Trippler said hopefully we aren't asking people to walk 400 feet to get to those units. He said the applicant did a good job squeezing parking spaces in they still came up short in their calculation. Commissioner Trippler asked if the sidewalks mentioned on page 5, item b. and item i. in the staff report meant the sidewalks are required or were they removed from the plan completely? Mr. Ekstrand said the sidewalks are still in the recommendation but are shown on page 5, in item h. Changes were made in the motion because of the redundancy. Some of that wording came from the old Legacy Village conceptual plan and changes have been made. Commissioner Trippler said he just wanted to make sure there would be ample sidewalks for people to use without walking on the street. Mr. Ekstrand said regarding the parking shortage mentioned by Commissioner Trippler, Mr. Ekstrand said he would concur that the applicant doesn't meet the 200 foot distance requirement mentioned in the staff report. This needs to be met and the applicant would have to make some plan revisions to meet those criteria. The public street parking is intended to be used by visitors to visit residents and should be counted in the number of total visitor parking. Commissioner Trippler said he understood the blue highlighted parking spaces on the plans were public parking spaces but he didn't understand why there was a distinction between private and public parking spaces and he assumed the private parking spaces could be allocated to people that live there but have more than 2 cars and need more space. If the parking spaces were private the spots wouldn't be available if the additional parking spaces were spoken for by the residents who have additional cars. Mr. Ekstrand said that is something the applicant could address. However, it's his understanding that the spaces shown on the plan are intended to be visitor parking spaces. Mr. Roberts said he estimates that items listed under item b. and h. are covered under the city improvement projects for County Road D and Kennard Street and aren't needed as conditions. Commissioner Mueller said even if those items are covered under the city improvement project he would like the words if at all possible stricken on page 5, in condition h. A good friend of his lives in Woodbury and lives in a townhome development similar to this proposal. He said the driveways are so short you can't park in their driveway because your car sticks out into the street. When you have a gathering such as the graduation party he attended there is no parking and it's a problem for people visiting. Either the residents live with the problem or the planning commissioners have the opportunity to recommend changes be made to the plan now so additional parking is available. Before experiencing this parking problem at the graduation party he thought there was ample parking, but now he believes there isn't enough parking available. Commissioner Dierich asked how wide the streets would be in order for a car to turn into the driveway? Mr. Ekstrand said it's a narrow area at 36 feet wide and is similar to an alley. The normal width of a drive aisle for two-way traffic within a parking lot is 24 feet wide. This isn't going to be a high traffic situation but if a vehicle is parked in the driveway opposite your home it could be very tight to maneuver around. Mr. Ekstrand said this area will be posted no parking. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -4- Mr. Ekstrand said the applicant said they want people to pull into their garages; they don't want vehicles left out in the driveway. Commissioner Mueller said he didn't remember the planning commission approving 198 units for these previously for-rent units. After reading that the applicant had reduced the number of units from 198 down to 178 units and that the units are now owner occupied, he thought that was great but now he's thinking maybe the number of units should be reduced even more. He asked if the units increased in size when the units went from rental to for-sale units? Mr. Ekstrand said when the planning commission originally looked at this plan it was a conceptual plan. The plans did show more units but staff cannot compare the two because the plan wasn't officially proposed it was only a concept for density purposes. Commissioner Mueller asked how the density fit the city code in terms of acreage? Mr. Ekstand said it's a reduction in density because they reduced the units by 20 but it fits within the high density, which is what this was patterned after. Commissioner Mueller asked how much it was over for medium density? Mr. Ekstrand said he would have to calculate that out. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Ms. Krista Fleming, Land Acquisition Manager with Town & Country Homes, 7615 Smetana Lane, Suite 180, Eden Prairie, addressed the commission. She thanked the commission for the opportunity to present another development in Legacy Village. She said the first model home in Heritage Square should be ready in time for the fall Parade of Homes. Ms. Fleming went into some of the details regarding the appearance of the buildings and how they designed them to fit in with the Heritage Square development. The city council stated they were agreeable to either rental townhomes or owner occupied townhomes and decided to develop the owner occupied townhomes. These townhomes are called the Majestic Collection and fit into the overall planned unit development and provides another balance to the lifestyle people can have living in this community. These units will be 1,900 square feet with the option of adding additional livable square footage totaling 2,900 square feet. The price of these homes will be $220,000 to $240,000. They are trying to encourage the pedestrian friendly feeling in this development. The plan encourages people to drive their cars into the garage and be a part of their front entrance way and to their neighborhood by using the front decks and sidewalks. Everything is connected with a personal sidewalk to your home and a common sidewalk connects to your personal sidewalk and the general public sidewalk that runs throughout the development. The townhome development will be homeowner-association maintained. Town & Country Homes has built a similar development in Apple Valley and it's been selling very well. It's not the same product but the people in the City of Apple Valley have the same concept as the City of Maplewood does with a pedestrian friendly neighborhood. The private and public street parking was to determine where there are private areas set aside that are not on a street. The additional parking isn't set aside for somebody to have an extra parking space those are for the guests to park. Town & Country will work with the city to meet the requirement to have an appropriate number of parking spaces within 200 feet from the front door. T ~ Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -5- Commissioner Trippler said he has a neighbor with six cars, and if he were to buy a home in this development he asked what the neighbor would do with his four other cars? Ms. Fleming said the focus market groups that typically buy these homes usually don't have many cars. They are usually single people, married couples with no children, married couples with one child, divorced parents with a child living with them, empty nesters, or retired individuals. They don't have a restriction that quantifies people's automobile usage. However, in the homeowner's association documents they regulate over night use of parking within these areas so the situation is monitored. In situations where this has been a problem they send notices out and identify areas where people need to park there car. This discussion is also brought up when the sale of the unit takes place. They state the homeowner has two parking spaces inside the garage and any other space that is needed they would have to find space off site someplace. Those additional parking spaces are for visitors only. Commissioner Trippler said he thought the idea of this development was to be community friendly but as he looks at the plan it appeared most of the units are facing the street and not facing each other. Four units along Kennard Street face the street instead of facing their neighbors. Ms. Fleming said that provides another aspect of the pedestrian friendly neighborhood. This is also the situation in Heritage Square I where they have on-street parking on Kennard Street. It's to satisfy the market that wants to have pedestrian activity on the street scene. People can park in front of the homes and walk up to the door and have a sense of community with people sitting on their decks in front of their home or people walking by your home giving a street presence. There are also units that will face each other and have a courtyard area so there will be both types of living situations available. Commissioner Desai asked if Hazelwood Street and Kennard Street would be no parking? Mr. Ekstrand said Kennard Street is a traffic mover but there will be on-street parking on the west side of Kennard Street. On the east side of Kennard Street will be the Senior Housing, which has not been reviewed yet. Hazelwood Street is a residential roadway and with the upcoming Southwinds townhome development which will go where the five residential homes are currently, there may be on-street parking. Commissioner Mueller said parking is always an issue in developments. He noticed on some of the ends of the alleyways show bump-outs but other areas don't. He asked if that was a setback issue or did the applicant decide not to put the bump-outs in those locations? Ms. Fleming said in most cases it's a setback issue. Other times it was because of a retaining wall because of the existing grade problems with the regional trail that goes through there and also because of the power line easement. She said they have placed parking and bump-outs in every possible location that they could and would have placed more parking in the development if there was space available. Commissioner Mueller said there are areas where it appears there could be more bump-outs but it may appear that way on the plan when really there is a legitimate reason there isn't a bump-out on the plan. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -6- Ms. Fleming said they will take another look at the plan to be positive bump-outs are in every possible location. She said they want to make the customer happy and when you get into a certain price range of homes they would like to make sure they have used every possible location for increased parking for the future usage. Mr. Ekstrand said condition f. on page 5 of the staff report addresses that issue. Some areas abut wetlands and slopes that make it difficult or impossible to have additional bump-outs even though it appears on the plans that there's enough room. Commissioner Trippler asked if it was an economic reason for removing the office complex from the plan? He understood the reason to delete the rental office from the plan but it may be an attractive feature for a potential homeowner to have an office complex close to home so they could walk to work instead of driving. Ms. Fleming said economics played a part in that decision, however, there are still areas within the PUD that provide office space and maybe staff could offer more information. Chairperson Fischer asked if anybody in the audience wanted to address the commission? Mr. Travis Smith, 1663 County Road D East, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He is the President of the homeowner's association at the Emerald Townhomes. He said he moved to Maplewood two years ago but he didn't know the people in the townhomes would be assessed $1,000 for a development going in across the street. Town & Country Homes mentioned the price per unit would be $220,000 to $240,000. With a base price of $220,000 going up from there the units could be selling for a quarter of a million dollars ($250,000). He asked if this was the price for each unit then why were the current residents in the area being charged to pay for the road assessments and not the developer since this benefits them and not the current residents? Mr, Ekstrand said he isn't comfortable addressing assessment issues. He said assessments are levied where the improvements are found to be a benefit to property owners along the roadway. He said he would be happy to get Mr. Smith's phone number and pass it along to the Public Works/Engineering department and ask someone to call him back with more information. Ms. Erin Laberee, Staff Engineer for Maplewood, said she hasn't been very involved with the County Road D project but she is aware that assessments are for road and utility improvements. Mr. Smith said his property taxes for 2005 are now $2,100 for a 1,700 square foot townhome is outrageous. At that tax rate for the twelve townhome residents that comes to over $24,000, which is new money for the City of Maplewood. He asked why that money isn't being utilized for the street assessment? Mr. Roberts said to clarify the property taxes go to at least four different taxing groups. They include Ramsey County, the Watershed District, City of Maplewood, the Maplewood/North St. Paul/Oakdale school district, and the Met Council. The City of Maplewood's portion of the property tax is only about 18%. The largest portion of the property tax is for the school district and the next largest is for Ramsey County. The city's portion of Mr. Smith's property tax bill is only a small portion of his tax statement. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -7- Mr. Smith said Town & Country Homes should still have to pay for the street assessments since the assessment wasn't there when he moved in two years ago. As president of the association he is speaking on behalf of the other homeowners in the Emerald Townhome development as well. Granted he prefers to look townhomes rather than an office building. Now the homeowners have to pay from their pockets for somebody else's pleasure and that isn't right. Mr. Roberts said there is an upcoming assessment hearing for the County Road D project and the proposed assessments. This is the time to voice your objections and go through the process that is mandated by state law. The planning commission can't deal with this situation at their level. Mr. Smith said he is aware of the meeting on June 14, 2004. Mr. Smith left his name and number for Mr. Ekstrand to pass onto the proper department. Commissioner Dierich said Mr. Smith said he thought paying $2,100 for property taxes for a 1,700 square foot townhome is not out of line but in reality there are other townhomes in the city with similar square footage that are paying close to $4,000 for their property taxes. She said when we live in a city all of the residents have to pay for roads and improvements whether we will directly benefit from them or not. These are huge improvements that will be done to County Road D. She likes the fact that these townhomes will be owner occupied rather than rental but she is concerned about the lack of parking. She believes adding more bump-outs could take care of the lack of parking in the development and the commission should request the developer to add more parking. Because the developer has already reduced the number of units from 198 to 178 she doesn't believe it would be appropriate to request another reduction of units. Commissioner Trippler said staff has already included that criteria in the conditions. The commission doesn't need to specify where to put the parking, the applicant just needs to include additional parking. Mr. Ekstrand said when Phil Carlson, the original city consultant for this project, included that as part of the recommendation, staff felt that was an important condition for reasons stated by Mr. Mueller with things such as graduation parties or gatherings that require additional parking spaces. Commissioner Dierich said 89 parking spaces for a development of this size seems too small and she would be more comfortable increasing the number. Commissioner Mueller said the plan says 103 parking spaces on the plan so the developer has already increased the parking spaces on the plan. To him the convenience of the parking is more important than the actual number of parking spaces. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the resolution on page 44 of the staff report approving the comprehensive land use plan amendment from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential) for a 1.5-acre parcel previously planned for an office building in Legacy Village at Maplewood. Approval of this change is because the proposed townhomes would be more compatible and in character with the adjacent townhome development than the previously approved commercial building. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -8- Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the resolution on pages 45-49 of the staff report approving a revision to the Legacy Village planned unit development as it relates to the previously approved rental townhomes and executive-office suites and clubhouse sites. Approval of this revision is based on the findings required by the ordinance and subject to the following conditions (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): 1. The development shall follow the plans date-stamped April 30, 2004, except where the city requires changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. The applicant shall comply with the requirements in the Assistant City Engineer's report dated May 28, 2004. 5. The applicant shall sign a development agreement with the city before the issuance of a grading permit. 6. The applicant shall provide a copy of the homeowner's association documents to staff for approval. 7. Rental Townhomes a''~ r~.'?,~,/r,~..h~, ...... The project will be constructed according to the plans from Town and Country Homes date-stamped April 30, 2004 frcm '~"'~"-'~ ~-'"" '"' '~*"'~ ~/o/no ~,. ~,, ,~..,~,o except as specifically modified by these conditions. bo Sidewalk connections will be added connecting the power line trail to the curb of and 8 in at least four locations and connectinq the power line trail to the curb of Village Trail East (east of Kennard Street) in at least three locations to be approved by staff. do Village Trail East (east of Kennard Street) Stmet-B and Flandrau Street East Street C. serving the townhomes will be constructed in their entirety with the townhomes, regardless of the status of the multi-family and commercial parcels to the east. Parking spaces will be provided at the ends of the driveways as shown on the plans and wherever else they may fit '-* *~' ...... ' ~''';''~;'''''' ~ o ~ ..,,~ ,~ 157 ~ ~ Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -9- A six-foot-wide sidewalk should be provided if at =!'. r-------.-.-,~k'~ on the south side of County Road D for the entire length of the project from Hazelwood Street ~ to Southlawn Drive ,h,,-,..¢, ,,,-,,,,; .... a ,4; ...... i,-,r~ ~,,-,*, ..... *~'~' ";~" ,`"'a Hartford focusing "' ..... + o;~;..... ..... ..'u ,,,;,.;,k..._..., ~,.,,.,,`+; .... ,-; ,i,.,~,+_,.,, .......... '~- *'"' + .... [ancs a-Rd other *"~*'""° cf *~'~' Count:,' ,-,,-,~,4 The grades of the power line trail and all sidewalks will meet ADA guidelines for slope. The landscape plan is approved as proposed with the exception that the boulevard trees alonq Kennard Street shall be planted accordinq to the approved Kennard Street Boulevard-Tree Plantinq Plan. ~ ..... +,.,..,,, ....... :,, ~.. ,-,,,`..,.-.,4 ,`,....,-. ~,,,,~, ~i,,,I,~ ,-,~ C~+r,-,,-,* A ,`+ CP. ~,,,~ro,',,~ ,',,~ O~' ~,', `4~' ,-,,', ,,-,~n+,',r i.-,~,~,`,-I ,,',f +1'~,~ ,`,,,~r~,',,', 70' The curve in the middle of Village Trail East (west of Kennard Street) Strcct A ..... · '*'- ~";',4;""- ~0 "",4 !2 '"';" shall be flattened as much as possible to limit headlight qlare on c!mcd i¢~ the front of the units. All setbacks are approved as shown. Frcr, t I~..;I,-,l;~,~.r. q d K, '1`4 ilK, O'1 "JO 0"2 0,4 ~i:: ,`,,~,.,I O~ f,-~ I-I,`.-~,.-~hA,,-~,-~,4 r~rh,,-, I1,-,r~,-~r,-,I ccdc crc ....;~;",`" .......... '~ '";~';" +~';" PUD ,`" "~' ....... +~'". ";+" "'~" q. Visitor-parking spaces for the mnta~townhomes will be added or modified as follows: Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -10- 1) least-~-~s. In addition to the parking spaces in front of each garage door, the applicant shall provide additional visitor-parking spaces at the minimum quantity of one-half space per townhome unit. This works out to a minimum of ~ lO0-visitor parking spaces required. Furthermore, the visitor-parking spaces must be placed such that the front door of no unit is more than 200 feet from a group of at least five spaces. 2) s. An easement over the power line trail on this parcel will be provided to the city for access and maintenance. Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the preliminary and final plat for Heritage Square Phase II, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall comply with the requirements in the assistant city engineer's report dated May 28, 2004. The applicant shall sign a developer's agreement with the city engineer before the issuance of a grading permit. ~ Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -11- The applicant shall dedicate any easements and provide any written agreements that the city engineer may require as part of this plat. The applicant shall pay the city escrow for any documents, easements and agreements that the city engineer may require that may not be ready by the time of plat signing. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes - Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Lee, Mueller, Pearson, Trippler Commissioner Dierich added a friendly amendment changing item Q., number 1. from 89 parking spaces to a minimum of 100 spaces. The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on June 14, 2004. VI. NEW BUSINESS a. Cahanes Estates Preliminary Plat (2145 Minnehaha Avenue) Mr. Roberts said Mr. Kelly Conlin, representing Homesites LLC, is proposing a 10-lot plat for single dwellings in a new development called Cahanes Estates. It would be a 3.39-acre site on the north side of Minnehaha Avenue on the property at 2415 Minnehaha Avenue. To build this project Mr. Conlin is requesting that the city approve a preliminary plat for 10 lots for the 10 single dwellings. Mr. Roberts said staff recently discovered that Ramsey County is requiring an additional ten feet for a right of way on Minnehaha Avenue and that condition has been added as part of the final plat on page six of the staff report. Commissioner Trippler said lot number six concerned him in the northeast corner. It drops off substantially to the garage on the other side of the lot line. When looking at the plan he wasn't sure how the landscaping would keep runoff from leaving the property. He asked if the developer would bring fill in for that area? Ms. Laberee said they could use a rainwater garden or a swale in the area to control volume and runoff to the property. During large rains they may receive some runoff but additional measures can be made to reduce the runoff. Commissioner Trippler said he noticed the property at 2405 Minnehaha Avenue which runs the length of the property was for sale and he wondered if the owner was interested in selling to the developer to be included in the development? Mr. Roberts said he worked with the buyer of that property and the city recently approved a lot split to create two more lots fronting on Meyer Street. The person selling the property at 2405 Minnehaha Avenue recently bought the property from an estate and has approval for two more lots. Mr. Roberts said the property could still be incorporated into this development but maybe the applicant can address that issue. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -12- Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Mr. Kelly Conlin, representing Homesites LLC, residing at 11855 Isleton Avenue, Stillwater, addressed the commission. They held a neighborhood meeting to find out their concerns and the main concern was the drainage in the area. They have been working with Hedlund Engineering regarding the drainage issues and have come up with a new drainage plan that will improve the drainage situation. His partner, Mr. Keith Koecher, representing Homesites LLC, addressed the commission. Commissioner Trippler asked if the developer had checked into acquiring the property at 2405 Minnehaha Avenue? Mr. Conlin said Homesites was interested in acquiring the property but when he spoke to the owner of the property he stated he would be developing the property himself. Chairperson Fischer asked if item e. on page 4 of the staff report should be stricken? Mr. Roberts said yes item e. is a duplicate of item i. and that would be corrected and updated for the city council. Chairperson Fischer asked if the road should be called Chris Court or Cahanes Court? Mr. Roberts said public safety would like the road labeled Cahanes Court and that is a condition listed on page 6, item 4. b. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the Cahanes Estates preliminary plat (received by the city on May 18, 2004). The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final plat: (changes or additions are in bold and deletions are stricken) 1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: ao Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. b. *Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control, street identification and no-parking signs. 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). Have Xcel Energy install a streetlight at the intersection of Minnehaha Avenue and the proposed street (Cahanes Court). The exact location and type of light shall be subject to the city engineer's approval. §. f. Provide all required and necessary easements, including any off-site easements. Planning Commission -13- Minutes of 06-07-04 h..g. Demolish or remove the existing house, garages and sheds from the site, and remove all other buildings, fencing, scrap metal, debris and junk from the site. Cap and seal all wells on site; and remove septic systems or drainfields, subject to Minnesota rules and guidelines. Complete all curb on Minnehaha Avenue on the south side of the site. This is to replace the existing driveways on Minnehaha 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, driveway, trail, tree, and street plans. The plans shall meet all the conditions and changes listed in the memo from Erin LaBeree dated June 1,2004, and shall meet the following conditions: a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code. b. The grading plan shall: (1) Include proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat. (2) Include contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. (3) Show house pads that reduce the grading on sites where the developer can save large trees. (4) Show the proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer. (5) Include the tree plan that: (a) (b) 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. Shows no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (c) Shows all spruce trees as a mix of black hills spruce or Austrian pines. (6) Show drainage areas and the developer's engineer shall provide the city engineer with the drainage calculations. The drainage design shall accommodate the runoff from the surrounding areas. (7) 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. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 o -14- (8) All retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls taller than 4 feet require a building permit from the city. (9) Sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed district or by the city engineer. (10) No grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements from the affected property owner(s). c. The street, driveway and utility plans shall show the: (1) Street with a width a 28 feet (with parking on one side), 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. (2) New street (Cahanes Court) with continuous concrete curb and gutter, except where the city engineer determines that concrete curbing is not necessary. (3) Completion of the curb on the north side of Minnehaha Avenue and the restoration and sodding of the boulevards. (4) Repair of Minnehaha Avenue (curb, street and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the new street. (5) Coordination of the water main alignments and sizing with the standards and requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Service (SPRWS). (6) All utility excavation located within the proposed right-of-way or within easements. The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be outside the project area. (7) A water service to each lot. (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 the outlets to prevent erosion. (10) The cul-de-sac with a minimum pavement radius of at least 42 feet. (11) Label Minnehaha Avenue and the new street as Cahanes Court on all construction and project plans. Paying for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans. Change the plat as follows: Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 o 10. 11. -15- a. 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. b. Label the new street as Cahanes Court and label Minnehaha Avenue on all plans. c. Show any additional required right-of-way for Minnehaha Avenue. Secure and provide all required easements for the development including any off-site drainage and utility easements. The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site drainage. The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the developer or contractor has not completed before final plat approval. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage and ponding areas, install all retaining walls, install the landscaping and replacement trees, install all other necessary improvements and meet all city requirements. b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Provide for the repair of Minnehaha Avenue (street, curb and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities. d. Meet all the requirements of the city engineer. Submit the homeowners' association documents for review and approval by city staff. These shall include provisions for the maintenance and use of the rainwater gardens. Record the following with the final plat: a. The homeowners' association documents. b. A covenant or deed restriction with the final plat that prohibits any driveways on Lots 1 and 10 from going onto Minnehaha Avenue. c. A covenant or association documents that addresses the proper installation, maintenance and replacement of the retaining walls and the gardens or drainage systems. The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city for approval before recording. Obtain a permit from Ramsey County for the new street access. Planning Commission -16- Minutes of 06-07-04 12. Obtain a NPDES construction permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). 13. The owner or contractor shall get demolition permits from the city to remove the house, garage and the other structures from the property. 14. The property owners shall submit a petition to the city requesting the installation of the public improvements. 15. 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. Commissioner Trippler seconded. Ayes - Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Lee, Mueller, Pearson, Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on June 28, 2004. b. Code Amendment- Public Hearings Mr. Roberts said staff is proposing that the city council amend various sections of the city code about public hearings. There are several sections of the code that now say the city council will hold a public hearing when the city is considering a land use, planning or rezoning proposal. To be consistent with the recent direction of the city council, the city needs to change the code to say that the planning commission will hold such hearings. There are several parts of the current city code that are not consistent with the recent directive of the city council. The council must change the code to make it consistent with the new policy. Commissioner Trippler said on page 5 of the staff report, under permit termination, on the second to the last line it says suspension of operations until the city holds a public hearing. He asked who is the "city"? Mr. Roberts said the way that is written it could mean the planning commission or the city council could hold the public hearing. If the city had to shut down an operation in Maplewood, he isn't comfortable having the planning commission hold the public hearing verses the city council. Because in the end the council will be making the final decision and then there would be two public hearings. He said if the planning commission had a strong feeling one way or the other, the wording could be changed. Commissioner Dierich recommended writing "either" the planning commission and/or city council. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -17- Commissioner Pearson said if the planning commission does the public hearing and a violation occurred it would have to be heard by the city council anyway for the final decision. If there was a cease and assist situation having the planning commission and the city council hold public hearings would delay the process even longer. Mr. Roberts said he would agree with Commissioner Pearson. Chairperson Fischer said she understood this to mean that the planning commission would be holding the public hearing but in the end the final decision is to be made by the city council. Mr. Roberts said correct. Chairperson Fischer asked if it is necessary for the planning commissioners to receive some additional training on how to hold public hearings? Mr. Roberts said if the commission felt it was necessary staff could invite the City Attorney and Melinda Coleman to come in and speak on the do's and don'ts of holding a public hearing. Chairperson Fischer said the city council has had the added advantage of having the City Attorney at the hearings as well, which is an advantage that the planning commissioners don't have. Commissioner Pearson moved to adopt the proposed ordinance amendment about public hearings starting on page two of the staff report. Commissioner Trippler wanted the word "city" changed to planning commission on page 5., item a. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes - Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Lee, Mueller, Pearson, Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on June 28, 2004. c. Code Amendment- Planning Commission and CDRB Mr. Roberts said staff is proposing that the city council amend several sections of the city code about the planning commission and the community design review board (CDRB). There are several actions of the code with language about the duties and chairpersons of the planning commission and CDRB. These code sections now say that the respective commission or board will elect or appoint the chairperson. To be consistent with the recent direction of the city council, the city needs to change the code to say that the city council will make such appointments. In addition, the planning commission and CDRB should revise their respective rules of procedure to reflect the new policy of the city council. (additions and changes are in bold deletions are stricken) Commissioner Dierich asked if councilmember Rossbach could address this item with the commission? Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -18- Mr. Will Rossbach, City Councilmember, residing at 1386 County Road C, Maplewood, addressed the commission. His understanding of this change was to allow a procedure to be in place so if a person wanted to pursue being a chairperson for their commission they had a way to do that. As an example in the 14 years he served on the planning commission there were times he would have liked to be the chairperson but he felt the historical precedence that was in place with Lorraine Fischer as chairperson she would continue as chairperson. He felt it wasn't appropriate for him to put his name out as chairperson nor did anybody volunteer his name as chairperson. There were always commissioners with more seniority on the commission and it did not seem appropriate for him to put his name in the process as long as the chair wanted to continue being the chairperson. This policy was not proposed because of what happened to him. However, all the commissions and boards tend to act the same way, if there is a chair in place they tend to stay there unless they decide to step aside or retire. This proposed policy was put in place so if there was another person that was interested in being a chair it could be a way to become chairperson. He believes the city council is a reasonable group of people and for example the planning commission was unanimously set on having Lorraine Fischer remain the chairperson and didn't submit another name he believed the city council would accept that. The code amendment document says you "shall" submit two names to the city council. He believes if the commission submitted one name it would be agreeable to the city council, however, he would have to check on that. The change is not being made so the city council can make sure the commission rotates chairs but it would allow for change to be made. It would allow somebody who wanted to become chair to have that opportunity. Especially if a chairperson was not performing to the extent that they should, Commissioner Dierich said this situation is unusual because typically when you serve on a board or commission you are allowed to choose your own chairperson. She asked what would happen if the city council picked a chair and the planning commission did not care to have that person as the chair. Would the city council be speaking to the planning commissioners before they made a chairperson change? Chairperson Fischer said for many of the years she was on the planning commission the city council named the chairperson. That was not true of the other commissions but it happened for the planning commission. Somewhere along the line the city council decided they had not chosen the chairperson for the other commissions or boards so they asked why were they choosing the chairperson for the planning commission? Mr. Rossbach said in a study of the cities that surround Maplewood the City of Maplewood is the only city that allows the planning commission to choose their own chairperson. Making this change would align Maplewood with other cities' common practice. The commission can use their council contact person, which is Mr. Rossbach, to voice their questions and or concerns and he would bring those back to the city council. Commissioner Dierich said this process seems a bit like high school where you put the peoples name in and the politically correct thing to do is to select the most popular person. Mr. Rossbach said the difference is that the commissioners are to write down two people's names that they feel are qualified to serve as the chairperson and those two people want to serve as chairperson. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -19- Commissioner Trippler said he had called Mr. Rossbach on Sunday June 6, 2004, to discuss this issue as the contact person for the planning commission. He sees the planning commission's primary goal as being an advisory group to the city council and he would hope that as an advisory group they would be free to give their advice without worrying about political implications. By having the city council have the authority to choose who chairs the group, there may come a time when the city council could decide they don't like the choice the planning commission made and they could pick somebody else which could give a direct implication by the selection of the new chair. As he read the proposal on chair and vice chair it says "the planning commission shall submit two names for nomination as chairperson to the city council every two years. The city council will elect the chairperson for the planning commission". It doesn't say they will select a chairperson from the two names that were submitted. It says "the planning commission may submit two names" he read that to mean the city council could select somebody from the two names but they could decide to select a different chairperson for the commission. Mr. Rossbach said that is certainly possible, although he doesn't believe that is the intent of the city council. Commissioner Trippler said he didn't think that was the intent either but it's a concern of his that as an advisory group the city council will give direction to the commission of how to move ahead while trying to do their business. He thinks it's counter productive, which doesn't serve the city council very well. Mr. Rossbach said he has never known the planning commission to feel stifled in their ability to give comments so he's not too concerned about that. The city council is looking for the commissions to be more involved in the process. By holding the public hearing earlier in the process means that issues could be addressed ahead of time before getting to the city council for the final decision when it's too late to make changes. Mr. Rossbach said the most common complaint by Maplewood residents has been why are they there to speak at a public hearing when it's too late to make changes or address the issue when the city council is to vote tonight on the final decision. The city also wants to make sure the residents feel the public hearing was done right and that they had the chance to speak on the issue and possibly get the issue resolved. Mr. Rossbach said he doesn't believe the proposed code amendment change is for the city council to remove people from the boards or commissions. He believes the city council would like to rotate chairs and allow others to have an opportunity to become chair if they would so choose. The council could ask to meet with someone or even ask them to step down if they for example missed several meetings, did not speak at the meetings, or were difficult to work with. This would be referred to as being removed from cause. Commissioner Desai said in the time he has served on the planning commission he hasn't seen the chairperson's position as being influential in any decision making process for any subject matter. He sees the chairperson's role as the person that keeps the process moving along and in order. He doesn't see the driving force in making this code amendment change. The planning commission just voted for the chairperson and vice chair in January and he didn't hear anybody say they wanted to be chairperson so the commission voted to reelect Lorraine Fischer as chairperson. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -20- Commissioner Pearson said he will be voting against this change. He doesn't see where this is coming from. He doesn't feel anybody is afraid to speak out if they wanted to be the chair or vice chair. He said Mr. Rossbach was not timid about the issues or his opinions at the meetings and he shouldn't have been timid about speaking out regarding becoming the chairperson. He said Mr. Rossbach certainly wasn't timid about seeking a spot on the city council. He personally has nominated Lorraine as chairperson for the last two elections because she does a fine job and has been very sensitive to residents in the community, especially during public hearings and has a hard time finding where the displeasure is with the city council. Mr. Rossbach was the vice chair the last two times and he handled some meetings when Lorraine was out and did a fine job as acting chair. He thinks this change will become political and he will not be voting for this. Mr. Rossbach said he appreciates Mr. Pearson's comments and believes Mr. Pearson should vote his conscience. The point about him not being shy regarding the issues and his opinion is true; however, he said he still felt inhibited about the historical precedence set so he never felt it was appropriate for him to put his name out there as chair. Commissioner Dierich said she doesn't necessarily see this as a bad thing, however, she could see it being manipulated by the city council. She sees both points. Suppose somebody is a chairperson for a few years and then another person is the chairperson for a few more years. And there is no connection between the vice chair and the chairperson. You can lose a lot of continuity. The boards that she has been involved with for organizations have groomed the vice chair to move into the role of chairperson. The two chair's work together and when it comes time to change chair's the vice chair moves into the chairperson role and a new person becomes the vice chair to begin the process of working together all over again. This would make more sense than what the city council has proposed. She believes the idea is to get new blood in and this is the best way to move people around by preparing them for their new role. Commissioner Dierich said she would hate to lose the continuity that the planning commission and other commissions have with the history or knowledge the chairs have serving time. As liaison between the commissions and boards, Mr. Rossbach may need to sit down with the city council and state the issues that planning commissioners have. Commissioner Grover asked if someone would review for Commissioner Lee and himself how the process of becoming the chair and vice chair? Chairperson Fischer reviewed the current procedure of voting during the second meeting in January for the chairperson and vice chair therefore by writing names on a piece of paper to nominate them and if those people are willing to serve a vote is taken and agreed upon. Commissioner Trippler said he can understand the concern the city council may have for individuals that are serving on a board or commission that are not performing adequately. He thinks that is one of the things the city council should be looking at to make sure good people are serving on commissions and boards. He disagrees with the manner in which the city council has approached this. A better mechanism of doing this is to look at when terms come due for renewal. After the three year term the city council should thank the member for their service and let them know it's time for them to move on. By giving the city council the authority to select the chair doesn't resolve issues like that. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -21- Mr. Roberts said the council added some language about reappointments which states "The council will not impose term limits, however, they will make annual or reappointments through an open or community wide process. Each year every commissioner seeking reappointment will reapply and possibly interview again with the city council along with other candidates." He believes the city council would get more people to apply for openings and in January interview candidates. If the members aren't reappointed there would be openings for the new applicants to interview for. Mr. Rossbach said to clarify that would only happen when the person's term was up. Everybody is not reviewed every year it is only when your individual term is up. Commissioner Dierich said to separate this from the political process, the city council could vote for the vice chair with the understanding that the vice chair would automatically move into the chairperson position after a three year term. Commissioner Mueller said the city council has the opportunity to have or not have the current board and commission members. He wasn't aware everyone had to be interviewed every three years. If the city council wants advice from the commissioners without any strings attached or fear associate, don't start appointing the chairs for the boards and commissions by telling them this person must be your leader. He said there may not be anything political with this but it could happen in the future. Mr. Rossbach said he knows the recording secretary is getting these comments down for the city council to review and then they will know how they feel about the proposed code amendment change. Commissioner Desai said regarding interviewing commissioners after their terms expire, maybe the city council should be working with the commissioners "while" they are serving their term to fit in as a commissioner. Waiting until their term expires when it is too late to make changes is a reactive way to handle the situation rather than proactive. Mr. Rossbach said while he was serving his time on the planning commission there were a few times he was coached by the city council and was told he wasn't following the protocol as he should have been and was asked to correct things. The council lets you know if there is a problem. This should not be viewed by the commissioners as a way of moving them out, it is more a way to get residents involved in applying for a position on a commission or board. The city council would like to be able to evaluate current members and interview new applicants to find the most qualified individual to serve the city in a role as a planning commissioner or board member. Mr. Rossbach said for instance, if there is an area of Maplewood that is not well represented on a commission or board and the opportunity arises to cover that area in the city that would be something for the city council to weigh. If a Maplewood resident spent their career as a planner and decided to apply for a spot on the commission, they would be an asset as well and something for the city council to consider. Other cities have higher participation rate on their boards and commissions with this particular open interview process. Historically Maplewood has had very little participation and has many of the same people on the commissions. This open interview process gives residents in other cities the feeling that they have a chance to serve on one of the commissions and this is what the city council has proposed for Maplewood as well. Commissioner Desai asked if the reason people haven't applied was because the city is discouraging people from applying or was there some other reason why residents aren't applying? T ~ Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -22- Mr. Rossbach said people have not been discouraged from applying, people just haven't applied. Commissioner Pearson said the city has advertised openings over and over again so it hasn't been a matter of not advertising for openings. He asked how the city council planned on getting more applicants other than going out and actively seeking applicants from the various neighborhoods that don't have current representation. Mr. Rossbach said already this year the city has had more applications than they have had in previous years, so the process is already beginning. The city just finished interviews to fill an entirely new committee and has recently added a new board member and two new planning commissioners, the police civil service and the parks commission, so people are applying. Commissioner Desai asked if any thought has been given to limiting the number of terms a person can serve in order to have more opportunity for new members to serve the city? Mr. Rossbach said he hasn't heard any discussion of limiting terms of any board or commission. He said he has also been in any meeting where the council has discussed any displeasure with the performance of a board or commission member. It's more about giving responsibility and input to the commissions and what are the things for the city council to consider if the council is going to do those things. Mr. Rossbach said the city council is trying to put some things in place to get the best performance from the people serving on the board and commissions. Mr. Rossbach said the commission is taking the wrong view if they think the city council's intent is to push people off the commission. Commissioner Desai said he meant if the intent was to get residents to apply for openings by limiting the number of terms people can serve as done with the President of the United States and other offices that have limited terms this would be one aspect to create more openings on the board or commission. Mr. Rossbach said one comment he heard by a city councilmember was this is an experiment and if it doesn't work out things can be changed. The city council believes this is going to work but they are very interested in hearing the board and commissions comments. Commissioner Lee said he hears the city council is going to be giving more responsibility to the boards and commissions but on the other hand he hears the council is going to be taking things away. Mr. Rossbach asked what the city council is taking away? Commissioner Lee said the city council is taking away the right to vote for their chairperson. He doesn't understand if things are running smoothly why take that right away? As the saying goes if it isn't broken why fix it? Mr. Rossbach said the comments will be reflected in the minutes but he would recommend that the commission forward their motion to the city council and the city council will consider it. Commissioner Trippler said he just wanted to point out that he has been spoken to by the city council as Mr. Rossbach was so the city council does coach the members before it is too late to make changes. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -23- Mr. Rossbach excused himself from the meeting so the planning commission could vote on this item in his absence. Chairperson Fischer said if the commission had the prerogative to submit two people's names and they were limited to choose one of the two names that may meet some of the concerns about the situation that is being expressed here. Commissioner Trippler said he spent some time as a rule writer for the State of Minnesota and in statutory language the word "shall" means must. So that means the commission must submit two names for chairperson. What would the planning commission do if only one person wanted to be chair? If the commission submitted one name then they would not be following the ordinance. To him the question is does the commission think it's a good idea to allow the city council to appoint the chair and do they want to relinquish that authority. Commissioner Dierich said the issue is that the city council wants to make this code amendment change and they will vote yes for this is whether the planning commission is displeased with it or not. She believes the planning commission should mold this ordinance so that it is palatable to the commission and then let the city council know this is something the planning commission can live with and something the city council can live with. Commissioner Dierich said if the city council vote for a chairperson and the planning commission is unhappy with the decision, you will have some displeased commissioners because of the city council's decision. Mr. Roberts reminded commissioners that the minutes will be forwarded to the city council and even though this policy change was adopted by the city council in March 2004, the city council may change their mind. Commissioner Pearson said if this gets changed you can be sure the amendment will be cast in stone. Commissioner Mueller said he is a volunteer and will speak his mind even if the city council has to appoint the chair. He would like the commission to be as free and honest as they want to be. When it boils down to it this is a political issue and it shouldn't be. The city council has the opportunity to keep or remove members when the council appoints members to the boards and commissions. If the city council is serious about this when your term is up for review he is not sure how that will all play out. If it all plays out that will be the time the council removes members or even the chairperson. He likes the way things work now and doesn't want to be politically savvy. Commissioner Pearson said it feels like the commission is losing a basic freedom or autonomy of this commission that was set up. Chairperson Fischer said she has been in both situations so she doesn't feel intimidated either way. At times she has felt intimated by the voting process held in January. When nobody else wants to put their name down for chairperson during the voting process she has felt intimidated. She realizes not everybody feels comfortable taking control of a meeting and serving as a chairperson. She has remained chairperson for a long time because nobody else has said they wanted the position. As Commissioner Dierich stated earlier you need some history of the city to carry forth as chair. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -24- Commissioner Mueller said maybe the term limit shouldn't be for the commission maybe it should be for the chairperson, which would require a rotation of chair people because the term limit was up. Commissioner Mueller moved to adept deny the proposed code amendments about the planning commission starting on page three of the staff report. For the Planning Commission, adept deny the proposed revision to their Rules of Procedure on page six. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes - Desai, Grover, Lee, Mueller, Pearson, Trippler Nay- Fischer Abstention - Dierich Chairperson Fischer asked how may commissioners would vote aye if the code amendment was reworded? Commissioners Dierich, Fischer and Grover said then they would have voted aye. The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on June 28, 2004. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Mr. Bartol was the planning commission representative at the May 24, 2004, city council meeting. In Mr. Bartol's absence Mr. Roberts gave a report. The planning commission appointments took place appointing Michael Grover and Daniel Lee, Mounds Park Academy 2051 Larpenteur Avenue East Expansion passed ayes all, the Capital Improvement Plan for 2005- 2009 was approved ayes all, the Chesapeake Properties Retail Center 3091 White Bear Avenue for PUD and Preliminary Plat was approved ayes all, and the Toenjes Hills Estates off McMenemy Street was approved ayes all. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-07-04 -25- b. Ms. Dierich will be the planning commission representative at the June 14, 2004, city council meeting. Items to discuss include Heritage Square Phase II, Olivia Gardens on Stillwater Road for 7 twin homes, and the Trout Land Development west of Highway 61 and the new County Road D, and the CUP at 2088 Edgerton Street for Ronald Rygwalski. c. Ms. Fischer will be the planning commission representative at the June 28, 2004, city council meeting. Items to discuss include the Code Amendment-Public Hearing, City Code Amendment for PC and CDRB, and the Cahanes Estates at 2415 Minnehaha Avenue. X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Annual Tour Mr. Roberts said the planning commission should start planning their annual tour of the city. Commissioners agreed to Wednesday, July 28, 2004 for the annual tour date. The commissioners wanted to visit Legacy Village and the extension of County Road D, Gladstone redevelopment area, and possibly the MnDot site behind the Priory property. b. Rescheduling of the Monday, July 5, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting Mr. Roberts said since Monday, July 5, 2004, is a city holiday; the planning commission needs to reschedule their meeting scheduled for that date. Staff suggested Tuesday, July 6, or Wednesday, July 7, 2004, as possible alternative dates for a planning commission meeting. Commissioners agreed to reschedule the Monday, July 5, 2004, meeting to Wednesday, July 7, 2004. Xl. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. T ¸t TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Ken Roberts, Planner Mapletree Townhomes Southlawn Ddve, south of Beam Avenue June 14, 2004 INTRODUCTION Project Description Mr. Jon Brandt is proposing to build nine townhouses (in three, 3-unit buildings) and ten additional detached garage spaces in a development called Mapletree Townhomes. It would be on a 1.51-acre site on the west side of Southlawn Drive, south of Beam Avenue. Refer to the applicant's statements on pages 14 - 21 and the maps on pages 22 - 34. A homeowner's association would own and maintain the common areas. The proposal would have three, 3-unit townhouse buildings, two detached garage buildings (with a total of 10 parking stalls) and a 20-foot by 40-foot maintenance/community building. Each town house would have a two-car attached garage, a deck and a patio area. Each building would have brown shingles, horizontal-lap vinyl siding, white aluminum soffits and fascia and brick or stone accents on the fronts. (See the elevations on page 34 and the enclosed plans.) There also would be 11 open parking spaces. Requests To build this project, Mr. Brandt is requesting that the city approve: 1. A preliminary plat to create the lots for the buildings. (See the map on page 24.) 2. The design plans for the site, landscaping and buildings. BACKGROUND On December 22, 1988, the city council approved the following for Mr. Brandt's property (west of Southlawn Drive): 1. A change to the land use plan from Iow density residential to medium density residential. A rezoning from F (farm residence) to R-2 (single and double dwellings) and R-3(C) multiple dwellings - townhouses for the area west of Southlawn Drive. The R-2 zoning is for the single and double dwellings on Southlawn Drive and the R-3(C) zoning is for the townhouse area of his property. In Apdl 1989, the community design review board approved the plans for the duplex at 2831 Southlawn Ddve. DISCUSSION Land Use and Zoning With the actions of the city council in 1988, the city has planned this property R-3 (M) (medium density residential) and zoned it R-3(C) (multiple dwelling - townhouses). These designations allow townhouses with up to six units per gross acre on the site. The proposed plan is consistent with these land use and zoning designations. Compatibility Staff does not find a problem with this proposal in terms of compatibility and land use. The proposed townhouses would be on property that the city has planned and zoned for townhouses. The site is near Beam Avenue and next to double dwellings and commercial property. Developers will often build townhomes next to single or double dwellings. A recent example is with the New Century Addition in south Maplewood. The developer, Robert Engstrom, is presently developing this neighborhood with a mix of single dwellings and townhomes. There are many other examples in Maplewood, such as Alton Ridge, Southwinds, Bennington Woods, Dearborn Meadows and the Carriage Homes of Maple Hills where this is the case. Density As proposed, the nine units on the 1.51-acre site means there would be six units per acre. This is consistent with the R-3(M) land use designation for the property and with density standards in the comprehensive plan for medium density residential development. Preliminary Plat Density and Lot Size As proposed, the nine units on the 1.51-acre site means there would be six units per acre. This is consistent with the zoning designation and the density standards in the comprehensive plan for medium density residential development. Public Utilities There are sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water in Southlawn Drive to serve the proposed development. The developer's plans will connect their pipes to the existing storm and sanitary sewer pipes. (See the proposed utility plans on pages 27 and 28). In addition, the applicant is proposing to build a new storm water pond on the southwest comer of the site. As designed, the storm water from this development would go into the new pond and then discharge to the existing ponding area west of the site. (See the proposed grading plan on page 25.) Tree Removal/Replacement Maplewood's tree ordinance requires there be at least ten trees per gross acre on the site after grading or the developer would have to plant trees to replace those that the contractor would remove. For this 1.51-acre site, the applicant's plans show a total of eight large trees on the site and that they would save three of the existing large trees on the property. The plans show the 2 removal of five large trees (ash, oak, and elm), but they would preserve three existing trees (primarily on the perimeter of the site). As proposed on the preliminary landscape and lighting plan (page 29) and the applicant's statement, the developer would plant eleven trees on the site. These include honey locust and five maple trees on the site, pdmadly near the ddveway and parking lot. As I noted above, the code requires there be at least 10 trees per acre on the site. For this 1.51-acre site, the code requires there be at least 15 trees on the property after the construction is complete. As such, the applicant will need to add trees to the proposed landscape plan to meet the requirements of the tree replacement code of the city. The city should require the developer to plant at least four more trees in this development (for a total of 15) to replace at a two-to-one ratio the nine trees that he will be removing. Watershed District The Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District reviewed and approved the development and has issued Mr. Brandt a permit. Drainage Concems At least two of the neighbors expressed concern over the potential for increased runoff and flooding due to this development. Specifically, there are properties to the south and west of the site that have Iow areas that tend to collect storm water and this water does not drain off quickly. The city should require that the grading/drainage plan would not increase the storm-water flow onto any neighbor's land. Erin Laberee of the City Engineering department reviewed the proposed project plans and has several comments about the proposed grading, drainage and sewer plans. (Please see the comments from Edn starting on page 35.) As proposed, the utility plan shows most of the storm water from the site, including the parking areas and driveways, going first into a new storm water pond or rainwater garden on the southwest comer of the site before it discharges into the existing ponding area to the west of the site. In times of large storms, storm water may overflow out of this ponding area to the west into Kohlman Creek. The city will not need drainage and utility easement over the ponding area, as it will be a pdvate ponding area. The city engineering department will require the applicant and his engineer to make all the necessary changes to the plans and to design the project to meet all their comments before they start construction. Design Review Building Design and Exterior Materials The proposed buildings should be attractive and would be compatible with the design of the existing nearby homes. The town houses would have two stodes above grade and each unit would have an attached two-car garage. As proposed, the buildings would have an extedor of horizontal vinyl siding with brick veneer or stone accents, white vinyl-clad windows, and the roof would have brown asphalt shingles. (See the applicant's statement starting on page 14, the building elevation 3 drawings on page 34 and the proposed project plans.) The developer has proposed earth tone colors for the siding. As proposed, the buildings and their colors would be compatible with those in the area. The site and grading plans also show three additional buildings on the site including two sets of garages and a community/maintenance building. The applicant's statement notes that these buildings will have brick or stone accents, siding and shingles to match the triplexes. The city code requires such accessory buildings to be at least 10 feet apart. While it makes sense for the developer to include such buildings on the site, the city will need to approve the plans, elevations and materials for each of the accessory buildings. Landscaping The proposed project plans keep many of the existing trees around the perimeter of the site. As proposed, the developer would plant 11 larger (replacement) trees in the development. These include honey locust and maple trees, pdmadly near each unit. (See the plan on page 29.) The landscape plan (page 29) and details (pages 30 - 33) also show the proposed plantings near the ddveway and parking areas will include a spirea, junipers, dogwoods and arborvitaes. While the landscape plan is a good start, the developer should add more trees for screening along the north and east sides of the site. The purpose of these plantings is to screen the new townhouses from the businesses to the north and from the existing houses to the east. The applicant should revise the landscape plan to show additional trees in these areas so they are consistent with Maplewood ordinance standards (for size and height). The plantings proposed around foundations of the units and in the proposed detail areas should remain on the plan. In addition to the above, all yard areas should be sodded (except for mulched and edged planting beds). Fencing/Screening This site has commercial properties on its north side, including the Outback Steakhouse and the US Bank with its ddve-up teller lanes. It would be prudent for and helpful to the residents of the new town houses if the developer installed screening along the north and east sides of the project to help ensure that the new residents and the parking areas are separated from the adjacent commercial properties and residential properties. Staff is recommending that Mr. Brandt add several black hills spruce and Austrian pines in detail areas C and D to provide additional screening between this site and the adjacent properties. Site Lighting The applicant prepared a site lighting plan for the development that shows the installation of six light posts to provide lighting for the parking areas. The city code requires the light r~xtures to have a design that hides the bulb and lens from view. This plan, however, does not show any detail about the height or style of these poles or about the proposed lighting on the buildings. In addition, the proposed plan shows little, if any, lighting along the driveway into the site. The applicant should revise the lighting plan in several ways. First, the plan should show how the lighting on the buildings would add to the site lighting. Secondly, the plan should have additional lighting near the driveway, so it is adequately lit. Finally, the plan should show details about the proposed light poles and fixtures to ensure they meet the city code requirements and so they are a design that hides the bulb and lens from view to avoid nuisances. 4 Police Department Comments Lt. Kevin Rabbett of the Maplewood Police Department noted no public safety concerns and that the extra garage space is a good idea and should deter theft from vehicles. Fire Marshal Comments Butch Gervais, the Maplewood Fire Marshal, wants the city to make sure the end of the driveways are large enough for proper snow removal and for the maneuvering of emergency vehicles. He also noted that if a townhouse building has more than 8,500 square feet of space that the code requires sprinkler protection throughout the building. Mr. Gervais also recommended that the city not allow over night sleeping in the community room unless the owner puts in place all necessary life/safety features and requirements. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Approve the Mapletree Townhomes preliminary plat (received by the city on May 24, 2004). The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final plat: 1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control, street identification and no-parking signs. d. 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). 2. 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 June 8, 2004, and shall meet the following conditions: a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code. b. The grading plan shall: (1) (2) (3) Include proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat. Include contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. Show housing pads that reduce the grading where the developer can save large trees. (4) Show the parking lot and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer. 5 (5) Include the tree plan that: (a) 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. (b) Shows no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (6) Show drainage areas and the developer's engineer shall provide the city engineer with the drainage calculations. The drainage design shall accommodate the runoff from site and from the surrounding areas. c. The driveway, parking lot and utility plans shall show the: (1) Water service to each lot and unit. (2) Repair of Southlawn Ddve (street and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the pdvate driveways. 3. Paying for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans. 4. Change the plat as follows: a. Add drainage and utility easements as required by the city engineer. This shall include an easement for the water main and easements for any other public utilities on the site. The Saint Paul Regional Water Services ($PRWS) shall approve the description and location of the easement for the water main. 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 the common area as Outlot A. 5. Secure and provide all required easements for the development including any off-site drainage and utility easements. 6. The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site drainage. 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. If necessary, obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading. 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. Submitting the homeowners' association bylaws and rules to the city for approval by the director of community development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible party for the maintenance of the pdvate utilities, parking areas, driveways, landscaping and common areas. 10. Record the following with the final plat: 6 a. All homeowners' association documents. b. A covenant or association documents that addresses the proper installation, maintenance and replacement of any retaining walls. The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city for approval before recording. 11. Obtain a NPDES construction permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Approve the plans date-stamped May 24, 2004, (site plan, landscape plan, grading and drainage plans and building elevations) for the Mapletree Townhomes on the west side of Southlawn Ddve. The city bases this approval on the findings required by the code. The developer or contractor shall do 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 building permit: a. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, sidewalk and 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 and contour information. (b) Include contour information for 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. (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~ 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. (f) Show as little disturbance and tree removal as possible on the west and south sides of the site (near the park). (3) The tree plan shall: (a) Be approved by the city engineer before site grading or tree removal. 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. In addition, this plan shall show the planting of at least 10 replacement trees on the site. (c) Show the size, species and location of the replacement trees. The deciduous trees shall be at least two and one half (2 1/2) inches in diameter and shall be a mix of red and white oaks and sugar maples. (d) Be consistent with the approved grading and landscape plans. (e) Show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (4) All the parking areas and driveways shall have continuous concrete curb and gutter except where the city engineer decides that it is not needed. (5) The design of the ponding area and the rainwater garden(s) shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. The developer shall be responsible for getting any needed off-site utility, grading or drainage easements and for recording all necessary easements. (6) The driveways shall meet the following standards: 24-foot width--no parking on either side and 28-foot width--parking on one side The developer or contractor shall post the driveways with no parking signs to meet the above-listed standards. (7) The developer shall disturb as little as possible of the area along the west and south property lines. The applicant shall change the grading plan for this part of the site as recommended by the city engineer. b. Submit a certificate of survey for all new construction and have each building staked by a registered land surveyor. c. Submit a revised landscape plan to staff for approval that incorporates the following details: (1) All trees would be consistent with city standards for size, location and species. (2) The manicured or mowed areas from the natural areas. This shall include planting (instead of sodding) the disturbed areas around the ponding area and the rainwater gardens with native grasses and native flowering plants. The native grasses and flowedng plants shall be those needing little or no maintenance and shall extend at least four feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the pond. This is to reduce maintenance costs and to reduce the temptation of mowers to encroach into the gardens. Specifically, the developer shall have the natural areas seeded with an upland mixture and lowland mixtures as appropriate. (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) The maple trees must be at least 2 112 inches in caliper, balled and burlapped. The plantings proposed around the front of the units shown on the landscape plan date-stamped May 24, 2004, shall remain on the plan. In addition to the above, the contractor shall sod all front, side and rear yard areas (except for mulched and edged planting beds and the area within the ponding area). The contractor shall restore the Southlawn Drive boulevard with sod. Adding ten more evergreen trees (Black Hills spruce or Austrian pines) along the north and east property lines of the site (in Detail areas C and D). These trees are to be at least six feet tall and the contractor shall plant these trees in staggered rows on the berm. As much of the existing vegetation (including the trees) remaining along the westerly and southerly property lines as possible. Foundation plantings near and around the buildings and additional screening (with trees and other materials) between the proposed buildings and Southlawn Ddve. (10) The in-ground lawn-irrigation system. d. Submit an in-ground lawn-irrigation plan to staff showing the location of sprinkler heads. e. Get the necessary approvals and permits from the watershed district. Submit a revised site lighting plan for city approval. This plan shall show how the lighting on the buildings would add to the site lighting, and the plan should have additional lighting along the main driveway, so it is adequately lit. This plan also shall show details about the proposed light poles and fixtures to ensure they are a design that hides the bulb and lens from view to avoid nuisances. The light f'~xtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent residential properties. g. Have the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) approve the proposed utility plans. h. The fire chief shall approve the access to the back (west side) of the buildings for firefighting needs. Submit plans for city staff approval for any outdoor trash or recycling containers and enclosures. If the developer wants to build such facilities, the enclosure shall have materials that are compatible with the buildings, and they shall have gates that are 100 percent opaque. 9 Submit for city approval revised building plans and elevations that show or include (but are not limited to) the shutters and window grids, and provide more detail about the bdck or stone accents and that add more brick on the east building elevations. Submit for city staff approval the site and building plans and elevations for the maintenance/community and garage buildings. These buildings shall be at least 10 feet apart and shall have a style, finish, materials and colors consistent with the main buildings on the site. I. Present a color scheme for the buildings with a vadety of colors to staff for approval. m. Provide the city with a letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. 3. Complete the following before occupying each building: a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. Sod all landscaped areas, except for the area within the easement, which may be seeded. c. Install continuous concrete curb and gutter along all intedor driveways and around all open parking stalls. do Install reflectodzed stop signs at the exit, a handicap-parking sign for each handicap- parking space and addresses on each building for each unit. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" signs within the site, as required by staff. Construct trash dumpster and recycling enclosures as city code requires for any dumpsters or storage containers that the owner or building manager would keep outside the building. Any such enclosures must match the materials and colors of the building. f. Install and maintain all required landscaping and an in-ground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas (code requirement). Install on-site lighting for secudty and visibility that follows the approved site lighting plan. All extedor lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light spread and fixture design. The light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and the nearby homes and residential properties. Install a six-foot-high solid screening fence or additional landscaping along the east and north property lines of the site where the vegetation does not adequately screen the town houses and the parking areas from the businesses and the existing dwellings. These additional materials are to ensure there is at least a six-foot-tall, 80 percent opaque screen on these sides of the site. The location, design and materials of the fence or the additional landscaping shall be subject to city staff approval. 10 The owner shall provide all required life/safety features in the community room/building to the satisfaction of the building official and the fire marshal before allowing anyone to sleep in that space. j. The developer or contractor shall: (1) Complete all grading for the site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. (2) Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. (3) Remove any debris or junk from the site. 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 extedor improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping by June I if the building is occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spdng or summer. c. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 11 CITIZENS' COMMENTS I surveyed the owners of the 25 properties within 500 feet of this site. The one reply had the following comments: Grade changes are too steep on the southern and east end of the property. A sidewalk or path is needed to get from the neighborhood to the library. The intersection at Southlawn and Beam Avenue is poorly designed for any more traffic. (Mielke - 2796 Southlawn Drive) 12 SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 1.51 acres Existing land use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: West: East: REFERENCE INFORMATION US Bank and Outback Restaurant on Beam Avenue Single dwelling on Southlawn Drive City park property Dwellings on Southlawn Drive PLANNING Existing Land Use designations: R-3(M) (medium density residential) Existing Zoning designation: R-3(C) (multiple dwelling - townhouses) Application Date The city received all the application materials for this request on May 24, 2004. State law requires the city to take action on this request by July 21, 2004, unless the applicant agrees to a time extension. p:sec 3~Vlaple Tree TH - 2004.mem Attachments: 1. Applicant's Statement- Development Overview 2. Applicant's Statement - Grading - Watershed - Utilities 3. Applicant's Statement - Community Design Review Board 4. Location Map 5. Property Une/Zoning Map 6. Proposed Preliminary Plat 7. Proposed Grading Plan 8. Proposed Drainage Area Map 9. Proposed Utility Plan (No. 1) 10. Proposed Utility Plan (No. 2) 11. Proposed Landscape Plan 12. Landscape Plan Detail - Plan A 13. Landscape Plan Detail - Plan B 14. Landscape Plan Detail - Plan C 15. Landscape Plan Detail - Plan D 16. Proposed Building Elevations 17. Comments from Edn LaBeree dated June 8, 2004 18. Project Plans (separate attachments) 13 May 21, 2004 To; From: 2831 5ou'rhl(~wn Drive, N~aplewood,/lAN 55109-1146 Fox: 651-748-1284 · jonbrcmdt,~ool.com · Phone: 651-777-5004 Community Development City of Maplewood Jon Brandt, owner/developer Attachment 1 Mapletree Townhomes Development Overview Mapletree Townhomes has incorporated as a non-profit association in order to form a common interest community for a 1.51 acres site on Southlawn Ddve. The property is properly zoned R- 3C, with a density for nine townhomes. The development site borders properties with zoning for different uses, and provides transition from commercial BCM (US Bank and Outback Steakhouse) to the north, to R-2 and R-1 to the east and south. To the west is the Hazelwood park reserve. The site plan considers adjacent residential and commercial development, and takes advantage of the quiet westerly exposure to the park reserve. There are a total of six buildings in the development: three triplexes, two sets of garages, and a community building. Some of the townhomes will be retained by the owner-developer as rental property. Others will be sold, with market demand. The Townhomes Each of the nine townhomes will have 2,200 ft2 finished living area on three levels, with three bedrooms and three bathrooms. The living room and dining room are west facing with views of the park reserve and sunsets. The dining reom opens to an 8' x 16' deck. The living reom features a 12-foot ceiling and a gas fireplace. The kitchen and dining room have nine-foot ceilings, an island workspace, and oak cabinetry. The upper-level features a computer loft balcony that overlooks the living room, two bedrooms two bathrooms, and a hallway closet. The main bedroom suite has a six-foot vanity with double sinks, oak linen cabinet, shower bay, and a large walk-in closet. The lower level has a family room with a walkout patio to the woods, a bedroom and bathroom, and a laundry-utility room. The two-car tuck-under garage has extra storage space. The Detached Garages Homeowner's today can't seem to find enough storage and garage space. Three car garages are becoming the norm for new home construction. Two buildings with single-car garages will be located at each end of the development, for a total of ten detached garages. Each building will have nine-foot ceilings and five separate 10'x20' garage stalls, to be used for cars, boats, sport vehicles, or general storage as needed by residents. The garages will initially remain under association control to be available to residents under association rules. Eventually the garages may be dedicated individually to each of the nine townhomes with the tenth garage retained by the association for grounds maintenance. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT 14 Mapletree Townhomes Development Overview - Page 2 of 2 The Community Building The Community Building is 800-ft2 with a handicap accessible bathroom, workshop and utility room. Initially the building will be a construction office, and then a rental/sales office. The workshop will provide storage space for building materials and construction equipment. The utility room will have Central laundry equipment and controls for landscape irrigation and outdoor lighting. Eventually the 400-ft2 community room will be available for homeowners and residents for a vadety of uses, perhaps as an entertainment center, overnight housing for guests, exercise center, association meeting room, or association office. Site Development A landscaped mailbox island will define the entry to the development. This will also serve to alert traffic coming down Radatz to the private driveway. Landscaping plans have been provided by Bachman's Landscape Services. Only five large ornamental trees (as defined by the city) have to be removed, and will be replaced by at least seven trees, mostly maples. A wooded area on the SE comer of the site will be retained to provide some natural screening for the two adjacent R-1 properties. The construction schedule is to begin with preliminary surveying and soil testing, followed by cleadng of trees and brush. Once approvals are in place, permits will be requested for general excavating and installation of utility lines. A temporary gravel driveway will be completed eady in the construction process. The first building permit applications will be for the northem garage building, the community building, and one triplex on the northem end. In order to complete a semi-final grade, control erosion, and manage storm water runoff, the basements of the second and third triplexes may be completed early. This would allow the installation of curbing, a construction layer of asphalt paving on the ddveway and parking areas, and substantial completion of the rainwater collection system. With the completion of the first triplex, some landscaping will be installed. Construction on the second and third triplex is expected to commence in the fall. The remaining triplexes, south garage building, all landscaping, and final ddveway paving should be completed in 2005. 15 May 21, 2004 To: From: 2831 5outhlawn Drive, Maplewood, MN 55109-1146 Fax: 651-748-1284 · jonbrandt~)aol.com · Phone: 651-777-5004 Community Development Public Works City of Maplewood Jon Brandt, owner/developer Attachment 2 Mapletree Townhomes Notes for Grading - Watershed - Utilities Grading The grading plan may need to be adjusted for soil conditions, pending a soil report. Elevations of buildings will be adjusted for stable soil. It may be necessary to remove soil or bdng in fill. Elevations may also be adjusted for proper drainage, and to minimize exporting or importing soil/fill. The elevations on the second and third triplexes may have to be adjusted, up or down, from the projections on the grading plan. Watershed Our civil engineers, Metro Land Surveying and Engineering completed rainwater calculations and submitted a plan for collection, ponding, and overflow discharge to Kohlman Creek, which runs through the Hazelwood park reserve west of the property. This plan was submitted to the Ramsey-Washington Watershed Distdct in April 2004, and according to Metro Land Surveying, it was approved pending some minor modifications. Also, according to the Watershed District, the development is of sufficient distance from the designated wetland area within Hazelwood park reserve as to not require any further permits for wetland considerations. Utilities Water There does not appear to be any complications with supplying water lines to the property. The existing water main in Southlawn Ddve has an 8" tap stubbed into the property. The Maplewood Fire Marshall reviewed the preliminary site plan and indicated that the existing fire hydrant at the ddveway entrance on Southlawn is sufficient in size and location to meet the needs of the fire department. Sewer There are complications with sewer lines. The southem most tdplex lot is below the existing sewer line on Southlawn, preventing a sewer gravity feed east to the street. This problem could be resolved with a private lift station that would discharge sewage to manhole 22-79 at the intersection of Southlawn Ddve and Radatz. An alternative was proposed a couple years ago by the City Public Works Department, to discharge sewage by gravity to manhole 22-67, just 80 yards southwest of the site, which is about 15' below the development site. There are pros and cons to each plan, described below. 16 1 Mapletree Townhomes Development Grading, Watershed and Utility Notes - Page 2 of 3 We are submitting two utility plans, each with an alternate sewer line discharge from the site: Plan U-1 proposes a 242' common 8" sewer line, exiting SW from the site to existing manhole 22-67. The difficulty of this plan is that the sewer line would cross approximately 25 feet of city property and approximately 205 feet of Ramsey County Open Space. Manhole 22-67 and the existing feed-through sewer lines are within a wetland area. To access this manhole would require approval from both Maplewood and Ramsey County. The major advantage of this plan is that a gravity feed sewer system is likely to require little or no maintenance for the next 200 years, or longer - the life of these townhomes and beyond. According to Larry Holmberg (651-748-2500) of Ramsey County Parks and Recreation, the county generally does not require an easement for sewer lines crossing county property, but indicated that the county does not consider requests for sewer line crossings from pdvate individuals, only from municipalities. Therefore the proposal would have to be approved first by the city. Plan U-2 proposes a 240' common 8" sewer line from a private on-site lift-pump station, east to existing manhole 22-79. One advantage to this plan is that the sewer line on Southlawn has already been extended from the street (to serve an adjacent property). This saves the expenses of opening the street, tapping into the sewer, and repairing the street. Another advantage of this plan is that it is "the path of least resistance." In a recent discussion with a city engineer this seemed to be a preferred plan, and it doesn't require approval from Ramsey County. The major disadvantage of this plan is the sewage lift-system itself. The initial cost of installation is high, and those costs are a fraction of the on-going expenses - not just for the life of the townhomes, but in perpetuity. According to Bruce Botko, Tri-State Pumps, (763-478-2000) the initial cost of the lift-system is expected to be in the $20,000 range, depending on features. A minimal system requires a holding tank, control panel, and two pumps, which work alternately and serve as back-ups. A generator system, to avoid sewage backups dudng power failures, would be additional, both in upfront costs and in maintenance. The gdnders inside the pumps need to be periodically replaced, and they occasionally jamb on debds, requiring emergency service to avoid sewage backups. The pumps have a life expectancy of ten to fifteen years. The system also requires dedicated electdc service, with monthly electdc bills. 17 | I Mapletree Townhomes Development Grading, Watershed and Utility Notes - Page 3 of 3 Our Proposal Both sewer proposals have significant upfront costs. A gravity sewer line to manhole 22-79 will require city and county approval, legal fees, engineering, surveying, applications, hearings, excavating, piping, manholes, connections, erosion control and restoration. It's possible that the gravity feed sewer costs could approach a lift-pump system. But if one compares the long-term costs of gravity vs. lift-pump, over the life of current and future townhomes (two hundred years or longer), there's no comparison. Adding together the cost of installation, operating expenses, maintenance, and pump replacement costs over a one hundred year life of the proposed townhomes, homeowners would easily pay more than $100,000 to operate a lift pump system. It's easy to tdvialize this expense by breaking it down to a monthly cost per unit, but gravity is free. A lift pump system must be maintained in perpetuity. Tri-state Pumps would like to sell a lift-pump system, however their rep advised that a lift pump is a poor alternative to gravity and should only be considered in those situations where there is no alternative. As a developer, if the initial costs were comparable, it would be very easy to take the path of least resistance and ignore future utility costs to residents. However dozens of future homeowners would ultimately bear all the expenses and future problems of a lift-pump system. On recommendations from our civil engineers and other consultants, we're asking the city to support Metro Enl3ineerina Plan U1 for a sewer connection to manhole 22-67 under Plan A or Plan B (below), or with modifications acceptable to the city: Plan A: The city council grants sewer access over the 25 feet of city property to the owner/developer and provides a resolution requesting the county and the watershed district for permission to cross county property to manhole 22-67. No large trees to be removed, and no lasting damage to the open space, park preserve or wetland. The developer will bear all costs involved in making the sewer connections and restoring the natural landscape. The owner(s) will maintain it as a pdvate sewer line or dedicate it to the city, as the city may require. Plan B: The city council approves an 80-yard extension of the sewer line from manhole 22-67 to the property, at developer's expense. The city obtains county and watershed approval. The developer will bear all costs involved in making the sewer connections and restoring the natural landscape. 18 2831 $outhlown l~rive, ~Aaplewood, MN §§109-1146 Fax: 6§1o748o1284 · jonbrandt~aol.corn · Phone: 6§1-777-§004 May 21, 2004 To: Community Development City of Maplewood From: Jon Brandt, owner/developer Attachment 3 Mapletree Townhomes Notes for Community Design Review Board Landscaping Landscape Design There are six general landscape design areas. Bachman's Landscape Services completed landscape designs for the high-visibility areas: Plan A: Street Entry - This plan was designed to provide both an attractive entry to the development and some screening to the residential property to the south. It might also handle some of the run-off from the pdvate driveway. Plan B: The Ddveway Island - This landscaped island median serves several purposes: First, to provide clear indications of a pdvate ddve for traffic coming down Radatz. Second, to further define the entry to the townhomes with landscaping that is consistent with other areas of the development. Third, to provide an attractive and convenient mailbox location with easy access for both the post office and residents. The mailbox island will be curbed, with prominent landscaping and reflectors for high visibility, and Iow growth to ensure unobstructed views for drivers. Plan C: North Parking Area - This plan was designed to provide attractive landscaping for a high-visibility area and some screening for the R-2 property to the east. The landscaping extends from the ddveway to the Community Building and adjacent patio. Plan D: Northern Property Edge - Landscaping in this area is designed to compliment both the exterior of the adjacent townhome and the view of the development for commercial traffic at the US Bank driveway. Along with existing oak trees the final landscape design will provide some screening., Deferred Landscape Plans - There are two areas for which landscape planning has been deferred. The south parking area will require extensive grading and perhaps retaining walls. A final landscaPe plan for this site will be adjusted for final grading. The landscape design will be substantially similar to Plans A and C. The other area for deferred landscape planning is the pond area and the south property edge. A final plan is not available at this time for the extensive grading and ponding required for on-site rainwater collection. The southeast comer of the development is adjacent to R-1 property. The existing woods in that comer of the property are to remain as a natural screen. A set of five garages will provide additional screening at both the north and south ends of the. driveway. Bachman's Landscape Services has suggested lilacs or viburnum plantings around the base of the garages. 19 Landscaping (cont) Mapletree Townhomes Development CDRB Notes - Page 2 of 3 Park Reserve Border (west property edge) The nine townhomes will all have west facing walkout lower levels to the Hazelwood Park Reserve. Because of the natural beauty of this area it is our intention to seed this area, with an undefined border with the woods. There may be some Iow retaining walls along this border, as desirable to control the grade. There will be a woodchip pathway and Iow voltage lighting along the park reserve edge, with access at both the north and south ends, and perhaps between the buildings. With permission from the city, the developer would extend the woodchip pathway into the park reserve to facilitate access to Hazelwood Park. Rainwater Pond The rainwater collection pond in the SW comer will be designed to be not just functional for collecting storm water run-off from the driveway, but also an aesthetic asset to the development. The pond will be landscaped with daylilies and natural grasses, and may be tiered with one or two retaining walls. The woodchip pathway along the park reserve border will extend around the rainwater pond. Sod Areas not designated for a landscaping plan will be sodded upon completion of each phase of development. Temporary seeding or other measures will be utilized for erosion control, when and where necessary. Trees · Trees to Remove There are only five large trees (as defined by the City) that need to be removed, as marked on the site plan. The rest of the property will be cleared of poplar, cottonwood, buckthom, and sumac. Trees Retained A wooded area in the SE comer of the development will be retained and left natural to provide a screen for the adjacent R-1 properties. There are several existing trees that are in locations that can be protected from excavation, roads, and buildings, including two maples, three mature oaks, and some small oaks near the north property line. Trees to Plant The Bachman's Landscape plan calls for two omamental trees in the landscape Plan C: a honey locust and a Japanese tree lilac. At least five additional inch maples will be transplanted to the site. The developer's preference is for "Northwoods" maples but a variety of maples may be desirable. Irrigation System An automatic underground irrigation system will be installed at the completion of the development. Irrigation will be controlled from the utility reom in the Community Building. Irrigated areas will include both sides of the driveway, and all landscaped areas (except the mailbox island). Areas not planned for irrigation include the existing woods (SE comer), the westem park reserve border, and the southern border - wild/natural landscaping around the rainwater pond. 2O T Lighting Mapletree Townhomes Development CDRB Notes - Page 3 of 3 Common area lighting is designed to provide residential lighting at six locations surrounding the parking areas, as indicated on the site plan. Residential style lampposts with Iow wattage bulbs will accent the landscaping, provide adequate illumination for nighttime safety, and gentle enough to not be annoying to townhome residents or nearby R-1 and R-2 property. Some landscaped areas, and the western park reserve border is expected to have Iow-voltage pathway lighting. All lighting will be controlled from the utility reom in the Community Building, or at landscape sites. The six lampposts for secudty lighting will be illuminated dusk to dawn. Parking The development will have eleven off-street parking places including one for handicap access adjacent to the Community Building. These parking spaces are in addition to the two parking spaces in front of each unit's double-car garage. The additional parking is customary in such developments because of the distance to "overflow" on-street parking, and desirable so that homeowner's garages are not blocked by guest parking. Buildings - Exterior Elevations There are a total of six buildings in the development: three triplexes, two sets of garages, and a community building. The three triplexes will be vinyl lap siding, with two complimentary earth-tone colors. Side and rear elevations will split the colors at the story line. Front elevation siding colors will split along the recess-cantilevers. Front elevations will have brick or stone accents, on both sides of each garage door. Entryways will be vinyl lap siding. Exterior lighting (homeowner controlled) and house numbers will be prominent between garage and entry doors. Roofing will be brown 30- year architectural shingles. Soffits and fascia will be white aluminum. Garage doors are white or sandstone raised panel steel. All windows will be double hung with white vinyl exteriors. Upper window sashes and all patio doors will have grills in the airspace. Windows on the front elevations will have shutters. Gutters and downspouts will be installed on the front and rear rooflines of the triplexes. Decks will be built with treated wood and stained. Front doors will be insulated steel recessed lower panels with brass and glass upper windows. A 20'x50' building containing five single-car garages will be located at each of the north and south ends of the development. Each garage building will have nine-foot ceilings and five raised panel white or sandstone steel garage doors. Vinyl siding will be one of the color tones to match the triplexes. Roofing will be brown 30-year architectural shingles. Soffits and fascia will be white aluminum. The front facade of the garages will have brick or stone accents to match the triplex buildings. The Community Building will architecturally match the garage buildings with one-tone color siding, nine-foot ceilings, white soffit-fascia and brown 30-year architectural shingles. The 20'x40' building will have one garage door, a patio door, and exterior doors on three sides. The main entry door, on the south side, will match the brass and glass entry doors to the townhomes. The community reom will have grill-in-glass sliding windows, to maximize light and ventilation. Attachment MAPLEWOOD MALL Z Z BEAM AVE MALL MESABIAVE RADATZ AVE Hazelwood Park o3 Z C Z KOHLMAN AVE }> Z -< m COUNTY ROAD C LOCATION 22 MAP "l I 2539 ;2809~ F 2799 2838 Attachmeq~ 5 BEAM AVE 1 /.'//...// . . . ~./ :- ×/ / / /'.~/ / : /' / · : .: :.:-.. / ./ .:' / / //]~/. ~ x/,-" :'] //-/ I 57',-. '¥", /. . /// /,' .../ // '/~-/ .- / / . .//./. .,/, . R2 1795 1809 2830 ~812 2804 1815 1825 RADATZ AVE 2796 2786 R1 2778 161:)0 ,' -1808 1816 1826 Hazelwood Park , . 2772 '27~4 18: MESABI AVE i f T Attachment 6 S88'48'14'E 160.18 N37'33'gg,E N38°23'46'~/ 24.73 -~ S89'44'1i~'E S89'47'30'E 64.00 30.0~0 ~ 6 ~o.o~ 89'47'30' NB9'47'30'~ 1 2839 2831 S88'48'14'£ 125.02 64.011 S89'47'30°£ 3 125,02 NBB'4B'14%/ 2809 2799 F~DA'1'Z 8"~EET PROPOSED PRELIMINARY 24 PLAT Attachment 7 9I ........... 9~1 ..................... 921 .................... MH1 RIM 920. B5 INV. 907.45 STREET WALL FES 204 15' ENDWALL INV: 892.18 899.go HWL 900.09 NWL 8~5.50 121.4LRFcp CBMH 200 CBMH 205 FE$ 202 e 6,oo~ CBMH 201 RIM: 909.89 RIM: 895.50 12" ENDWALL RIM: 909.79 INV: 900.14 ,NV: 892.50 INV: 899.00 INV: 899.84 RIM 921.01 INV 9~.18 tNV ~050~ ([) tNV. 904.95 T i Attachment 8 SCAL~ IN ~ ......... 921 .......... RETAINING WALL EOF HWL 900.09 NWL 895.50 PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA POND DETENTION STREET I I I PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA MAP 26 Attachment 9 MH 100 OUT INV: 901.56 WALL F£S 204 15" ENDWALL RIM: 900.40 iN INV: 886.45 OUT INV: 886.35 T Attachment l0 FE$ 204 15" ENDWALL INV: 892.18 MH 102 RiM: 918.20 906.99 ~ 839~ OUT INV: 906.35(E) INV; 897.90 6' D.I. WATERMNN MH 100 RIM: 912.00 IN INV: 905.30 905.19 RETAINING :~., ~ ~; HWL 900.09 .wL ..~.. ~2~%p c,,. 200 t:'~i 27~99 CBMH 203 FES 202 e 6.oox CBMH 201 RIM: 909.89 RIM: 895.50 12" ENDWALL RIM: 909.79 INV: 900.~4 INV:(Gi DETAIL)892'50 INV: Bgg.o0 INV: 899.84 ~.S~;~ STF'iI:/-:'t T t Attachment 11 PROPOSED LANDSCAPE29 PLAN T T Attachment 12 Attachment 13 Attachment 14 LANDSCAPE PLAN DETAIL- PLAN ~ Attachment 15 Attachment 16 PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS - 34 '. ¥ Attachment 17 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: Mapletree Townhomes PROJECT NO: REVIEWED BY: Erin Laberee, Maplewood Engineering Department DATE: June 14m, 2004 Jon Brandt is proposing to develop a 1.51-acre site off of Southlawn Drive into 9 townhomes. The site is located west of three existing residential properties and east of the Hazelwood Park Preserve. The developer is proposing that runoff fi.om the site be treated in an onsite pond before it discharges into Kohlman Creek. Drainage The proposed pond is neither a NURP pond nor an infiltration basin. The project engineer must redesign the pond as a NURP pond or as an infiltration basin. A NURP pond must meet NURP removal rates standards and include a 1 O-foot bench. If the project engineer designs the pond as an infiltration basin, it must be able to store and infiltrate the runoff fi.om a 1.5" rainfall event. The project engineer shall provide supporting drainage calculations to the city engineering department for the pond design. Infiltration basins typically include rock sumps. The sumps consist of 1.5" of clean, clear rock wrapped in Type 5, geotextile filter fabric, (felt). The contractor places the top of the rock infiltration sumps about 12" below the finished bottom of the basin. If the developer uses rock sumps, the project engineer shall provide a detail and description of how the contractor is to construct the sumps. 2. The proposed catch basin prior to the IrES 202 shall include a 2' sump. The outlet structure fi.om the pond includes a 4-inch orifice. Small orifices are prone to plugging. The city does not recommend the use of orifices smaller than eight inches. The adjacent property owner at 2799 Southlawn Drive has expressed concerns regarding the grading and drainage of the proposed development. The proposed grading plan shows that the majority of runoffto the south will be captured in a swale and routed to the pond. There will be minimal runoff' from this site that will flow onto the adjacent property at 2799 Southlawn Drive. The developer shall ensure that the contractor will make every possible effort to prevent runoff fi-om entering the property at 2799 Southlawn Drive. 5. There is a need for additional inlet capacity for storm water runoff. The project engineer shall add a catch basin upstream of the two proposed catch basins. The 35 1 project engineer shall ensure that there is adequate inlet capacity in the catch basins to prevent ponding in the parking lot that would overtop the curb. The applicant shall provide more detailed information about the storm sewer outlet from the pond into city property. There is a need for additional contour information to know how the discharge from the pond will affect city property. The applicant shall provide supporting information as to why direct discharge from the pond into city property is necessary. It is recommended that the discharge be directed into an infiltration trench (or implement a similar method) to lessen to the impact of concentrated flows. The applicant shall ensure that adequate erosion control measures are taken to protect the city's property during and after construction. Grading and Erosion Control 1. The applicant shall provide a detailed erosion control plan. The grading plan shall include top and bottom retaining wall elevations. The city will require a building permit if the retaining wall is greater than 4 feet in height. The contractor will need to submit a detailed plan of the retaining wall when applying for a building permit. Utilities The applicant has proposed two sanitary sewer alternatives. The first option involves the construction of a gravity sewer line through Ramsey County Open Space. This option would require the city to acquire an easement for the proposed sanitary sewer line from Ramsey County. The proposed sanitary sewer line would then become a public utility and would be maintained by the city. The construction of a gravity sewer line would require the removal of many trees and a portion of the sewer would be located through an existing wetland. Construction of and access to this sewer line would be very difficult. The city also is concerned that connecting the proposed sewer line to the existing manhole may cause damage during construction due to the fact that the existing manhole is located in a wetland. This alternative proposes the sewer mainline and services be located behind the buildings. This does not allow the city access to the sewer line. The city requires the sewer be located in the front of the buildings where it can be accessed by vehicles from the parking lot. This option is not preferred by the city due access and site concerns. The city is not willing to take over ownership and maintenance responsibilities for the proposed gravity sewer line. The second alternative involves the developer connecting into an existing sanitary sewer manhole on Southlawn Drive. This alternative would require the developer to install a pump station for the sewer because the proposed site and the proposed sewer would be lower than Southlawn Drive and lower than the existing sewer. 36 1 The city prefers this option because the sewer line would remain private and the city would not need to obtain easement rights from Ramsey County. The developer shall connect the new sewer into the existing sanitary sewer on Southlawn Drive. m.i$c The applicant shall submit plans to Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for their review and shah apply for an NPDES permit since site disturbance will be greater than 1 acre. 37 I I TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: City Tour DATE: June 15, 2004 MEMORANDUM INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission should continue with the planning of their annual tour of the city. DISCUSSION The first matter the commission should decide is the date of the tour. Typically, the planning commission holds the tour from 5:30 - 8:30 on an evening in mid-summer. In reviewing the calendar and the meeting schedules of the commission, council and CDRB, I would suggest that the commission hold the tour on a Wednesday or Thursday dudng the weeks of July 12, July 19 or July 26. (These would be July 14, 15, 21, 22, 28 and 29). Holding the tour in July will maximize the amount of daylight that would be available. At the June 7, 2004, meeting, the commission picked Wednesday, July 28 as the date of the tour. After I sent notices to all commissions and city staff about this date, several people informed me that they would not be available on this date. These include at least two council members and at least three department heads. As such, the commission may want to pick another date for the tour. The first week of August on the 4~ or 5th also are possible tour dates. Please review your summer calendars and be ready to state a preference for the date of the tour. Secondly, the commission should decide on the format of the tour. In recent years, we have ddven by many sites with little time for comment or discussion at those locations. After a recent tour, several of the commission members suggested that having fewer sites while allowing more time at those sites would be useful. Please be ready to discuss your preferences for this year's tour. Finally, the commission should let staff know of any sites they want to include on the tour (if we tour in Maplewood). We usually tn/to visit sites that we know have upcoming proposals, where construction has started or where the contractor recently finished the site work. Examples for this year include the Gladstone area, Legacy Village on County Road D, the Highway 61/County Road D area and the area along Century Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to Holloway Avenue (including the Pdory and the MnDOT land). I have attached a first draft of possible tour sites for the commission to consider. Please review this list to see if I have included the sites that are important to you. Thanks. krlmemolpctour(2).doc Attachment - Proposed Tour List Attachment 1 2004 CITY TOUR - JULY 28, 2004 (Possible Sites) Leave From City Hall Mounds Park Academy Expansion (2051 Larpenteur Avenue) MnDot Property - Century Avenue at Highway 5 Hill-Murray High School (2625 Larpenteur Avenue) and Priory Beaver Lake Townhouses (Lakewood Drive and Maryland Avenue) 7. 8. 9. Ponds of Battle Creek Golf Course (Century Avenue and Lower Alton Road) New Century Development (Century Avenue and New Century Boulevard) Alton Ridge Townhouses (Lower Alton and McKnight Roads) Dinner Break - 10. 11. Hillcrest Village Redevelopment Area (White Bear and Larpenteur Avenues) New Walgreen's Store - SW Comer of White Bear and Larpenteur Avenues 12. Start Here?? Gladstone Neighborhood - Possible walking tour?. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Carriage Homes of Maple Hills (Parkway Drive and Maple Hills Drive) ?? Toenjes Property Development Site - Roselawn Avenue and McMenemy Street Larpenteur Avenue Redevelopment Site (at Adolphus) Bart Crockett House Moving (1748 Sylvan Street) Saint Paul Water Utility McCarrons Treatment Plant- Sylvan Street, Rice Street and Roselawn 18. 19. 20. Comfort Bus Facility (1870 Rice Street North) Zittel Property (Rice Street and Roselawn Avenue) Venburg Tire and Trout Land (County Road D and Highway 61) 21. 22. 23. Reconstructed Hillcrest Animal Hospital (1320 County Road D) Kline Nissan (3040 Maplewood Drive) County Road D reconstruction 24. Tilges Office Building (1570 Beam Avenue East) 25. 26. 27. 28. Southwinds Cottages on Hazelwood, north of Saint Johns Hospital Legacy Village and Heritage Square (County Road D and Kennard Street) (Any walking possible ??) The Myth Nightclub (County Road D and Southlawn Drive) Chesapeake Retail Site (3091 County Road D) 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. Sibley Cove Apartments (County Road D and Ariel Street) Reconstructed County Road D - White Bear Avenue to McKnight Road Mendota Homes Town house Site - Chisholm Court and County Road D Maplewood Office Park (Harbor Pointe) - County Road D Bruentrup Farm (2170 County Road D) Joy Park?? ?? Washington County Bank (2520 White Bear Avenue North) Or Start here?? Van Dyke Village - Van Dyke Street Return to City Hall ! Other Possible Sites: Schmelz VW (Highway 36)??, New Arcade Street bridge at Spoon Lake and reconstructed Highway 61 frontage road (including new Hmong Church), Gervais Avenue, from English to west and then Frontage Road north to County Road C (including Imprint Enterprises, SP Richards, Miggler property, etc.) P:misc/2004 PC tour list .doc 3