HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-03-16 PC Packet
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
7:00 PM
City Hall Council Chambers
1830 County Road BEast
1. Call to Order
2. RollCall
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes
a. March 2, 2010
5. Public Hearings
a. 7:00 pm: Rezoning of properties located at 2055 White Bear Avenue, 2080 Prosperity
Avenue and 2075 Prosperity Avenue from M1 (light manufacturing) to MU (mixed use).
b. 7:15 pm: Rezoning of the Town & Country Manufactured Home Park and adjacent vacant
properties from F (farm residential), R1 (single dwelling residential) and M1 (light
manufacturing) to R3 (multiple dwelling residential).
6. New Business
7. Unfinished Business
a. Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development Ordinance Amendment
8. Visitor Presentations
9. Commission Presentations
a. Commissioner Report: Commissioner Boeser attended the March 8, 2010 city council
meeting. The council reviewed the following rezonings: 1.) Larpenteur Avenue and Highway
61 to mixed use and 2.) 2255 Duluth Street to single dwelling residential.
b. Upcoming City Council Meeting of March 22, 2010: Commissioner Yarwood will attend for Mr.
Pearson (Mr. Trippler will serve as an alternate). Anticipated items for review are 1.)
CUP/PUD Ordinance Amendment, 2.) R1 R Ordinance Amendment, 3.) Resolutions of
Appreciation for Commissioners Hess and Walton, 4.) Countryside VW land use plan
amendment to commercial and 5.) Gervais Woods preliminary plat (tentative).
10. Staff Presentations
a. Sign Ordinance Amendment Distribution-Request by Commissioner Nuss
11. Adjournment
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 2010
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Cornrnissioner AI Bierbaum
Commissioner Joseph Boeser
Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai
Chairperson Lorraine Fischer
Commissioner Robert Martin
Commissioner Tanya Nuss
Commissioner Gary Pearson
Commissioner Dale Trippler
Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood
Present
Present
Present
Present
Absent
Present
Absent
Present
Present at 7:03 p.m.
City Staff Present:
Torn Ekstrand. Citv Planner
Michael Martin. Planner
Steve Kummer. Staff Enqineer
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the agenda as submitted.
Commissioner Boeser seconded Ayes - all
The motion passed.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. February 16, 2010
Commissioner Bierbaum moved approval of the minutes of February 16, 2010 as submitted.
Commissioner Desai seconded Ayes - Bierbaum, Desai, Fischer, Nuss, Yarwood
Abstentions - Boeser, Trippler
The motion passed.
V. PUBLIC HEARING
a. 7:04 p.m.: Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment for Countryside VW/Saab Parcel from
LDR (low density residential) to C (commercial)
Planner Martin presented the staff report, explaining that John Schmelz of Schmelz Countryside
VW ISaab is requesting that the city reconsider the future land use guide of a lot owned by the
dealership. Planner Martin explained that parcel was guided low density residential during the city's
recent update of its comprehensive plan, but previously was guided M1 (light manufacturing). Planner
Martin noted that as a result of the 2003 comprehensive plan update, all parcels previously guided M1
along Highways 36 and 61 were re-guided to commercial.
Planner Mike Martin said the applicant, John Schmelz, is out of town and unable to attend this
meeting.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 03-02-10
-2-
The public hearing was opened for comments from the public. There were no comments; the public
hearing was closed.
Commissioner Trippler moved adoption of the resolution approving a comprehensive land use plan
amendment from LDR (low density residential) to C (commercial) for the 0.73-acre site south of the
main parcel utilized for the Schmelz Countryside VW ISaab auto dealership located at 1180 Highway
36. Approval is based on the following reasons:
1. The Countryside VW ISaab parcel is already developed as a commercial lot and should be
appropriately guided as such.
2. The parcels to the north and west of the Countryside VW/Saab are guided commercial, meaning
that it would be consistent to guide this parcel commercial.
This action is subject to the approval of this land use plan amendment by the Metropolitan Council.
Commissioner Yarwood seconded
The motion passed.
Ayes - all
VI. NEW BUSINESS
a. Rural Conservation Dwelling District (R1 R)-Code Amendment
Planner Martin presented the staff report explaining that since the city council has adopted the 2030
Comprehensive Plan, some adjustments need to be made to the R1 R zoning district to ensure
consistency between land use and zoning.
After discussion by the commission, additional phasing and text revisions to the ordinance were
suggested.
Commissioner Trippler moved that the numbers in Table 44-120.1 be Tier I (0-3 Principles) and
Tier 1/ (6 Principles).
Commissioner Desai seconded
Ayes - Desai, Trippler
Nays - Bierbaum, Boeser, Fischer, Yarwood
Abstention - Nuss
The motion failed.
Commissioner Fischer said she voted no since staff has put a lot of time and effort into developing this
number and they will be the ones implementing it, and she feels staff knows what figure is workable.
Other commissioners voting no concurred.
Commissioner Trippler moved approve the amended text to the R-1 R zoning district with the following
additional language changes: On page 2, first paragraph add "ecological communities" after the word
vegetation; under Sec. 44-120(b) add "and if needed a" before the word well; and on page 6,
paragraph 5, remove the commas from lines 1 and 2.
Commissioner Yarwood seconded
The motion passed.
Ayes - all
Planning Commission
Minutes of 03-02-10
-3-
b. Resolutions of Appreciation for Harland Hess and Joseph Walton
Planner Ekstrand presented the staff report for the resolutions of appreciation.
Commissioner Trippler moved approval of the resolutions of appreciation for Harland Hess and
Joseph Walton.
Commissioner Desai seconded
The motion passed.
Ayes - all
VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Gervais Woods-Preliminary Plat and Final Plat Revision
Planner Ekstrand presented the staff report explaining a revision to the plat since last considered by
the planning commission. The proposed revision would accommodate a land swap between the
developer and Ramsey County that would provide increased stormwater pond capacity.
Nathan Fair, of Landmark Development of Minnesota, said that Outlot D would be deeded to Ramsey
County, but would remain an outlot.
Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the preliminary and final plat for Landmark Development of
Minnesota for the proposed eleven-lot Gervais Woods single-family subdivision located south of
Labore Road and East of Arcade Street. This subdivision is subject to the following conditions:
a. Comply with the conditions of approval in the report by Shann Finwall, Maplewood
Environmental Planner and Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator, dated January 27,
2010.
b. Comply with the conditions of approval in the engineering report by Steve Kummer, Maplewood
Staff Engineer, dated February 24,2010 on the revised plan submittal dated February 22, 2010
and revised computations dated February 22, 2010.
c. Approval of a final plat for Gervais Woods from the City of Little Canada.
d. The Cities of Little Canada and Maplewood shall enter into an agreement as to the provision of
police, fire, code enforcement services and utilities. It is the recommendation of the Maplewood
city council that Little Canada provide these services, since the proposed four southerly homes
would be addressed in Little Canada.
e. The accessory building, swimming pool and any other "back yard" construction requirements of
Little Canada shall apply to the Maplewood portions of the southerly four parcels. However, any
construction in the City of Maplewood shall require that the builder obtain a building permit from
the City of Maplewood if required by code.
f. The proposed homes on the southerly four lots of this subdivision shall be constructed in the
footprints shown on the applicant's plans. This would require that they be located in the City of
Little Canada.
g. Within 120 days of recording the final plat, Outlot C shall be combined with the property at 2870
Arcade Street as one legally-described lot. If it is not combined with 2870 Arcade Street by that
Planning Commission
Minutes of 03-02-10
-4-
time, the developer shall give Outlot C to the City of Maplewood as he proposed to the planning
commission. This shall be a stipulation of the development agreement.
h. Within 120 days of recording the final plat, Outlot D shall be deeded to Ramsey County. This
shall be a stipulation of the development agreement.
i. The developer shall provide five, six-foot-tall evergreen trees between the homes on proposed
Lot 5, Block 2, and the neighboring house at 2870 Arcade Street prior to the construction of a
house on Lot 5.
Commissioner Yarwood seconded
The motion passed.
Ayes - all
b. Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development Ordinance Amendment
Planner Ekstrand presented the staff report explaining that this item is coming back to the
commission from the city council with the request to consider the council's questions and comments.
Planner Ekstrand reviewed each of the council's eight comments submitted to the commission.
City council member John Nephew, who is council liaison to the commission, was present and
answered questions and received comments from commissioners regarding the council's eight
suggestions for this ordinance amendment.
After discussion, the commission requested that staff make the following revisions:
Section 44-1092 - add the words to read "they are not specifically prohibited".
Section 44-1093 - replace "planning commission" with "city council", include the last sentence
"Deviations. . . provided that" and remove the word "whether" from the beginning of each sentence
in numbers 1-5.
Section 44-1097(a) - should read "In addition to any standards or findings for a specific conditional
use found elsewhere in the Maplewood Code of Ordinances, a conditional use permit may be
approved or amended by satisfying all of the following standards of approval:"
Section 44-1097(a)(5) - no revision needed
Section 44-1097(a)(9) - state ". . . no more than minimal adverse environmental affects."
Section 44-1 097(b) - strike "balancing of' and "between government units of the state" so it should
read "the public interest would be best served by such waiver."
Section 44-1103(b) - replace "permitted" with "prohibited" - Councilmember Nephew then mentioned
that by changing Sec. 44-1103(b) to prohibited, each time an allowable change was to be made to a
CUP, an amendment would be needed. Mr. Nephew recommended leaving "permitted" in this
language. The commission agreed and it was decided to leave the original language of "permitted" in
this item.
Staff said the recommended changes would be made to the ordinance and it will be brought back to
the commission for review.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 03-02-10
-5-
VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None
IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
a. City Council Meeting of February 22,2010: Commissioner Martin was not present.
b. City Council Meeting of March 8, 2010: Commissioner Boeser will attend.
X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
a. Sign Ordinance Amendment
Planner Ekstrand noted a copy of the sign ordinance amendment included in commissioners'
packets that was recently adopted by the city council. The commission said they did not receive
this copy; staff said he would have it at the next meeting.
b. Revised Council Meeting Coverage Schedule
Planner Ekstrand noted the revised commission schedule for attending city council meetings,
which was included in commissioners' packets.
c. Handouts for New Planning Commissioners
Planner Ekstrand reviewed the handout information included for the two new commissioners.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m.
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
James Antonen, City Manager
Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
Rezoning from M1 (light manufacturing) to MU (mixed use)
2055 White Bear Avenue, 2080 Prosperity Avenue and 2075 Prosperity
Avenue
March 9, 2010
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
INTRODUCTION
On January 25, 2010, the city council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. This is
the update of the city's comprehensive land use plan required of all metro area cities
every ten years. By approving this plan, the city council reestablished the long-range
land use guide for the city. State, law requires that the city now revise our zoning maps
and zoning ordinance controls to be in conformance with the newly approved land use
classifications throughout the city.
The city has nine months (by October 25,2010) to make all necessary zoning map and
zoning ordinance changes to coincide with the land use policies and land use maps in
the approved 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Proposal
One such rezoning would be for the properties located at 2055 White Bear Avenue (the
Maplewood Industrial Center), 2080 Prosperity Avenue (a single dwelling) and 2075
Prosperity Avenue (the former Excel Air Systems). These properties are currently zoned
M1 (light manufacturing). The newly approved land use classification for these
properties is MU (mixed use).
State law requires that the city council change the zoning to R1 (single dwelling
residential) to match the low-density residential land use plan designation. Refer to the
maps.
Request
Rezone the above properties from M1 to MU.
BACKGROUND
On December 9, 2009, the Metropolitan Council gave final approval to the 2030
Comprehensive Plan.
On January 25, 2010, the city council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
DISCUSSION
Statutory Requirement
Section 473.865 subdivision 3 of the Minnesota State Statutes requires that cities amend
their official zoning controls within nine months of their adopting their revised
comprehensive land use plan. As stated above, the city council has until October 25,
2010 to amend all applicable zoning maps and zoning ordinances.
Why the Proposed Revision to Mixed Use?
The reclassification to mixed use ,provides the framework for redevelopment with a
mixture of land uses that are mutually compatible and in character with the surrounding
neighborhood.
Grandfathered Uses
Residents have asked what would happen to their properties when this rezoning takes
place. All existing homes and businesses could remain as they are and this rezoning
would not affect the use of their properties. The existing uses would become
"grandfathered in," or in the terms of the zoning ordinance, would become "legal
nonconforming uses." Legal nonconforming uses may remain in place until the property
owners propose a change to something else. At that time, they would need to comply
with the requirements of the MU zoning ordinance.
Single dwellings are specifically allowed to remain and may be enlarged. The MU
ordinance allows the expansion of single dwellings. It provides that "any pre-existing
conforming or nonconforming single or double-dwelling residential use or structure which
would become nonconforming by adoption of the mixed-use zoning district may be
expanded, extended or intensified so long as such expansion, extension or
intensification would be permitted under the single-dwelling residential district or double-
dwelling residential district and/or the mixed-use zoning district.
Therefore, by this provision, a homeowner could add onto their garage, add onto their
home or build another outbuilding, for example, without any zoning-related issues
coming into play. Provided, of course, that all setback and size requirements are met.
Property Tax Impact
Residents have asked what would happen to their property taxes if their zoning changed
to mixed use. The Ramsey County Tax Assessor's office stated that:
"Zoning has no affect on property tax. Tax classifications are based on the current use
of the property, not on the zoning. The tax classification, along with the market value is
used to calculate taxes. If the current use is continued, the tax classification will not
change. So, zoning changes will not affect taxes."
2
2095 Prosperity Avenue-Low Density Residential Land Use Classification
The parcel at 2095 Prosperity Avenue is zoned M1 like those discussed in this report.
The council, however, reguided 2095 from light manufacturing to LDR (low density
residential) since it is developed with a single family home. This property will need to be
rezoned to R1 (single dwelling residential) or R2 (double dwelling residential) for
consistency with the comprehensive land use plan. Staff will bring that matter to the
planning commission for review.
Conclusion
State statute requires that the city revise the zoning map to MU to match the newly
adopted mixed-use land use classification.
State statute requires that the city revise the zoning map to MU to match the newly
adopted mixed-use classification on the comprehensive plan. Therefore, staff is
recommending the city council revise the zoning map accordingly.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the rezoning of the properties located at 2055 White Bear Avenue, 2080
Prosperity Avenue and 2075 Prosperity Avenue from M1 (light manufacturing) to MU
(mixed use). This rezoning is based on Minnesota Statute 473.865 subdivision 3,
requiring the city to bring the zoning of these properties into conformance with the
adopted comprehensive land use plan classification.
3
REFERENCE
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site Size:
23.11 acres
Existing Uses: Maplewood Industrial Center, single dwelling and former Excel Air
Systems building
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Single dwellings
South: Gateway Trail
East: Maplewood Community Center and the Ramsey County District Court building
West: Single dwellings and John Glenn Middle School
PLANNING
Land Use Plan Designation: R1
Zoning: M1-existing; R1-proposed
p:Compplanlzoning fOllow-up to 2030 Planlrezoning to MU West of MCC 3 10 te
Attachments:
1, Land Use Map
2, Zoning Map
3. Arial Photo
4, Rezoning Resolution
4
~~ ~
~'-J Il;
~~~
~ Q.J~
~~ ~
E ~
U I;)
c..
a1
~
CD
€I)
~
"C
C
a1
-J
c
CD
.....
C)
"C
o
o
~
CD
.J::
(/J
Q)
~ Q)
u ~ ~
<( U aJ
CD -. <( t5
o-~Qj<(
cnuo..w
:!: <( en 0..
e ~ _
:J (\) .c U'J
l!) 0..::> ~
~~~::>
I COO(l)
L!)::>~LOl-
.0 I C'J U
o . ~ <(
:::- CD l-
ml~~Q)
+:i<.o_Oo..
C "CC't"""C/)
(1) N :;:; ___ :t::::
"U "-" C C.
'w ro aJ ro :J
<I.)~:2:;:;
0::: e ({j ~ C!
>.Q)(J):2~
..... :-g n::: ({j
.- ({j
~(l)02D
aJ 0::: 'w ~ to
O>,CZ'__-
_ aJ.- Cll
,. ,- ({j aJ .-
;;.0 U'J 0 C (/) ~
.3~EaJ:JaJ
-o:>o"CE
ro '-.eaJE
~ :;: "C rn X
:::i Q)._.- 0
o:::.3:;;;I:;;;U
DUDU II
Attachment 1
ID
ala
"-a
'"
c0
a
'"
<D_
~
,'\
a
w
(/)
:J
o
W
><
::E
o
w
z
z
<(
..J
0..
- aJ
e ro U
aJ Cll
ro E e 0-
0 (fJ (/)
'''' e :;::; "0
- ~ :> e ID 0 <CO
({j aJ - -" aJ _ 00
:> > :;::; ~ rn.J:~
"C 0 ({j Cll 0- S b.
e C9 e (L 0 00
-"'~
I DU "'2
<l>E Z-<
.@ ~
Z~
}!
~'
,0
t;
z
;;'
"
"'
w
C!l
n I-
'22IJ9 "'
o "
o ~
!D U:l ~
m m W
- - "
SANDHURST AVE
[!ID;s
I-
"'
"
"'
'"
z
z
W
"
r1
na
013
1997
o
r"l
1f1M;
EXISTING ZONING MAP
19!11
Attachment 4
REZONING RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood City Staff proposed a change to the city's
zoning map from M1 (light manufacturing) to MU (mixed use);
WHEREAS, this zoning map change applies to the properties located at 2055
White Bear Avenue, 2080 Prosperity Avenue and 2075 Prosperity Avenue. The property
identification numbers identifying the affected properties are:
PIN 15-29-22-11-0047; PIN 15-29-22-11-0050; PIN 15-29-22-11-0049;
PIN 15-29-22-12-0030;
WHEREAS, On January 25,2010, the city council adopted the 2030
Comprehensive Plan that reclassified the land use plan for the above referenced
properties to MU.
WHEREAS, Section 473.865 subdivision 3 of the Minnesota State Statutes
requires that cities amend their official zoning map within nine months of their adopting
their revised comprehensive land use plan to match the new land use classification,
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
1. On March 16, 2010, the planning commission held a public hearing to
consider this rezoning. The city staff published a hearing notice in the
Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners,
The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to
speak and present written statements prior to their recommendation.
2. On ,2010, the city coUncil discussed the proposed zoning map
change, They considered reports and recommendations from the
planning commission and city staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the
above-described change in the zoning map based on Minnesota Statute 473.865
subdivision 3, requiring the city to bring the zoning of these properties into conformance
with the adopted comprehensive land use plan classification.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on
,2010.
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
James Antonen, City Manager
Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
Rezoning to R3 (multi-family residential)
Town & Country Manufactured Home Park and Abutting Properties
March 10, 2010
TO:
FROM:
INTRODUCTION
On January 25, 2010, the city council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. This is
the update of the city's comprehensive land use plan required of all metro area cities
every ten years. By approving this plan, the city council reestablished the long-range
land use guide for the city. State law requires that the city now revise our zoning map
and zoning ordinance controls to be in conformance with the newly approved land use
classifications throughout the city.
The city has nine months (by October 25, 2010) to make all necessary zoning map and
zoning ordinance changes to coincide with the land use policies and land use maps in
the approved 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Proposal
One such rezoning would be for the properties located on the west side of Highway 61,
south of the homes at 1094 to 1122 County Road C from F (farm residential), R1 (single-
dwelling residential) and M1 (light manufacturing) to R3 (multiple-dwelling residential).
This rezoning includes the Town & Country Manufactured Home Park and the three
properties to the north. Refer to the maps.
The manufactured home park had been guided for medium density residential prior to
the council's adoption of the new 2030 Comprehensive Plan. During the 2030
Comprehensive Plan adoption, however, the council reclassified the abutting three
undeveloped light manufacturing properties to medium density residential. The result is
that the city council now needs to rezone all affected parcels to R3. As stated above,
there are three existing zonings, F, R1 and M1, to be changed to R3.
Request
Rezone the above properties from F, R1 and M1 to R3.
BACKGROUND
On December 9, 2009, the Metropolitan Council gave final approval to the 2030
Comprehensive Plan.
On January 25, 2010, the city council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
DISCUSSION
Statutory Requirement
Section 473,865 subdivision 3 of the Minnesota State Statutes requires that cities amend
their official zoning controls within nine months of their adopting their revised
comprehensive land use plan. As stated above, the city council has until October 25,
2010 to amend all applicable zoning maps and zoning ordinances.
Why the Proposed Revision to Multiple Dwelling?
During the city council's review of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan update, a neighboring
resident requested that the council reclassify the three vacant lots behind his home to
multiple-dwelling residential, feeling that multi-family residential development would be
more compatible than a commercial or manufacturing use, The city council agreed and
moved to reguide these properties to medium density residential.
Property Tax Impact
Residents have asked what would happen to their property taxes if their zoning changed
to mixed use. The Ramsey County Tax Assessor's office stated that:
"Zoning has no affect on property tax. Tax classifications are based on the current use
of the property, not on the zoning. The tax classification, along with the market value is
used to calculate taxes. If the current use is continued, the tax classification will not
change. So, zoning changes will not affect taxes,"
Conclusion
State statute requires that the city revise the zoning map to R3 to match the newly
adopted MDR land use classification.
State statute requires that the city revise the zoning map to R3 to match the newly
adopted medium density residential classification on the comprehensive plan,
Therefore, staff is recommending the city council revise the zoning map accordingly.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the rezoning of the properties located on the west side of Highway 61, south of
the homes at 1094 to 1122 County Road C, including the Town & Country Manufactured
Home Park, from F (farm residential), R1 (single-dwelling residential) and M1 (light
manufacturing) to R3 (multiple-dwelling residential). This rezoning is based on
Minnesota Statute 473.865 subdivision 3, requiring the city to bring the zoning of these
properties into conformance with the adopted comprehensive land use plan
classification.
2
REFERENCE
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site Size: 21.41 acres
Existing Uses: Town & Country Manufactured Home Park and vacant land
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Single dwellings and Kohlman Park
South: Single dwellings and Hmong American Alliance Church
East: Park and Ride parking lot
West: Single dwellings and Kohlman Park
PLANNING
Land Use Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential
Zoning: F, R1 and M1
p:Compplanlzoning follow-up to 2030 Planlrezoning to MU West of MCC 3 10 te
Attachments:
1, Land Use Map
2, Zoning Map
3. Arial Photo
4. Rezoning Resolution
3
~Q ~
~~~
~c ~
~~ I
I;)
c..
(G
~
CD
CD m
~:J
(G"C
-Ie
e~
(G
E
-
J::
~
Attachment 1
...J
c(
j::
Z
w
C
Ui
..w
@a::
z>-
zl-
:sUi
o..Z
w
C
:!;
::l
C
W
:!;
~
Q)
~
u
<(
Q)
~
u
<(
~
Q)
~
u
<(
~
Q)
0.
00
-
Q)
~
u
<(
~
Q)
0.
a
a
'"
c0
a
a
co
~
-
e
Q) Cll
~ ,Q
~ -
<J) :>
> :-!:: ~
o - ~
(9 ~ fl..
OJ
~"
Q) 0
_ 0
Cll""
S (0)
.00
""~
"''"
'@ :g
Z.s
z
a
rp't
fj)
tJ
'~r
D
~95
ffia!ll
2~
-"'-
- ,(";'0"
!3"/
[1r79
fill1
CONNOR AVE
~
L.,,:...c
f',,;(
EXISTING ZONING MAP
Attachment 4
REZONING RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood City Staff proposed a change to the city's
zoning map from F (farm residential), R1 (single dwelling residential) and M1 (light
manufacturing) to R3 (multiple dwelling residential);
WHEREAS, this zoning map change applies to properties located on the west
side of Highway 61, south of the homes at 1094 to 1122 County Road C and the Town &
Country Manufactured Home Park, The property identification numbers identifying the
affected properties are:
PIN 09-29-22-12-0012; PIN 09-29-22-12-0009; PIN 09-29-22-12-0010;
PIN 09-29-22-12-0011; PIN 09-29-22-21-0002;
WHEREAS, On January 25,2010, the city council adopted the 2030
Comprehensive Plan that reclassified the land use plan for the above referenced
properties to MU.
WHEREAS, Section 473.865 subdivision 3 of the Minnesota State Statutes
requires that cities amend their official zoning map within nine months of their adopting
their revised comprehensive land use plan to match the new land use classification,
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
1. On March 16, 2010, the planning commission held a public hearing to
consider this rezoning. The city staff published a hearing notice in the
Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners.
The planning commission gave. everyone at the hearing a chance to
speak and present written statements prior to their recommendation.
2. On ,2010, the city council discussed the proposed zoning map
change. They considered reports and recommendations from the
planning commission and city staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the
above-described change in the zoning map based on Minnesota Statute 473,865
subdivision 3, requiring the city to bring the zoning of this property into conformance with
the adopted comprehensive land use plan classification.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on
,2010.
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
James Antonen, City Manager
Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development Ordinance
Revision
March 8, 2010
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION
On February 22,2010, the city council reviewed the planning commission's revisions to
the conditional use permit/planned unit development (CUP/PUD) ordinance. The council
referred the ordinance amendment back to the planning commission for the commission
to consider the council's questions and comments. The council directed staff to
reschedule this ordinance amendment for a first-reading public hearing following the
planning commission's review,
On March 2, the planning commission considered the council's comments and made
additional revisions to this ordinance amendment. The commission requested that staff
make those revisions and present them to them for one final review of the changes.
BACKGROUND
The planning commission reviewed the CUP/PUD ordinance on three occasions during
the past year. On January 19, 2010, they moved to forward the CUP/PUD ordinance
with revisions to the city council for their review.
DISCUSSION
City Council Comments from February 22,2010
1. Section 44-1092, Concerns the types of uses that require a CUP, Put back in the
wording. . . "and not specifically prohibited."
2. Section 44-1093. Concerns flexibilitv or deviations from city requirements. The council
felt that there is always a "degree of interpretation" to be applied in analyzing a CUP
proposal. Therefore, the hard requirement that all the findings must be met for any
"deviation" from the ordinance requirements should be softened, The council stated,
"there is no black and white."
3. Section 44-1097. Concerns the nine standards for CUP approval. As with Section 44-
1093 above, the council felt the same about the nine standards for CUP approval.
Council felt that strictly basing approval on compliance with all nine standards for
approval would be difficult since there is always a "degree of interpretation" to be
considered.
4. Section 44-1 097(a). Concerns denvinq a CUP, The council felt that the word "denied"
should be left in so it is clear that denial is an optional decision by the city. Staff had
suggested taking out the word "denied" since the standards are intended for approval. If
they were not met, the request would be denied by default. Staff, has no problem with
this reversal, however.
5. Section 22-1097(5). Concerns basinq traffic impact on street desiqn. The council felt
that this wording should be clearer so that the potential traffic increase resulting from a
proposed project would not exceed the design standard of any affected streets,
6. Section 44-1097(9). Concerns adverse environmental effects. Delete the word "not."
This sentence should read, "The use would cause no more than minimal adverse
environmental effects."
7. Section 44-1097(b). Concerns deletinq this clause qivinq the council the ability to waive
requirements for public buildinq or public utility structures. The council felt that there
were occasions where the city may need to approve a "public" project. For example, a
sanitary-sewer lift station that may be needed for the public good would likely not meet
all of the standards for CUP approval. Nevertheless, it may be necessary to provide
needed service to the community, The council found benefit in this clause.
8. Section 44-1103(b). Concerns conforminq to CUP terms or conditions of approval. The
council found this revision confusing and not a clarification or simplification.
Planning Commission Changes of March 2, 2010
In reference to the eight points above, the planning commission moved to:
1. Add the wording back in, "and specifically not prohibited."
2, State that it is the city council, not the planning commission that "may consider
flexibility from strict code compliance. . . " And also to add back in the original last
sentence of the paragraph that, "Deviations may be granted for planned unit
developments provided that. . . "
3. This wording should be made more specific by requiring, "A conditional use permit
may be approved or amended by satisfyinq all of the following standards for
approval."
4. Also in 44-1097(a), the option for "denial" as an action was dropped because if a
project is not approved, it is denied by default.
5. Add that the use would "not exceed the design standards of any affected street."
6. Add that the use would cause "no more than" minimal adverse environmental effects,
7, Subparagraph (b) shall be put back in allowing the council the flexibility to waive the
standards for approval for public building or utility structures.
2
8, Go back to the original language dealing with the alteration and enlargement of uses
either those that are nonconforming or those having a CUP already. Any changes
would require a CUP.
Some of the new changes may not be exactly what the planning commission said, so
please review them and make any corrections or clarifications you find and staff will
make the appropriate changes for the city council to review. Staff included the previous
changes made by the council in Attachment 2, for the reference purposes.
Staff has set another public hearing for this item on March 22, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION
Review the revisions to the conditional use permit/planned unit development ordinance
that incorporate the planning commission's most recent suggestions from March 2,
2010.
p:\ planning commission\PUD Ordinance Rewrite PC final review 3 10 te
Attachments:
1. Conditional Use PermiUPlanned Unit Development and Definitions Ordinance Amendment
2. Suggested ordinance changes by the city council on February 22, 2010
3
Attachment 1
THIS VERSION INCLUDES THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
REVISIONS OF MARCH 2, 2010
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS
The Maplewood City Council approves the following additions to the
Maplewood Code of Ordinances. (Additions are underlined and deletions
are crossed out.)
Section 1. This section revises Article V ofthe Maplewood Code of
Ordinances dealing with conditional use permits and planned unit
developments.
ARTICLE V. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
Sec. 44-1091. Purpose.
The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide the city with some
discretion, based on specific standards, in determining the suitability of conditional uses.
The city is not obligated to approve such uses.
(Code 1982, ss 36-436)
Sec. 44-1092. Conditional uses.
The city council may issue conditional use permits for the following uses in any
zoning district in from-which they are not permitted and not specifically prohibited:
(1) Public and private utilities lliiIity, public service or public building uses.
(2) Mining. Refer to the requirements under article IV of this chapter.
(3) Library; community center; state-licensed day care or residential program unless
exempted by state law; church; hospital and a helistop as an accessory use to a
hospital; any institution of any educational, philanthropic or charitable nature;
cemetery, crematory or mausoleum,
(4) An off-street parking lot as a principal use in a commercial or industrial zoning
district. other than a commercial or industrial district.
4
(5) Part of an apartment building for commercial use, intended for the building's
residents, such as drugstore, beauty parlor, barbershop, medical office or similar
use,
(6) Planned unit developments (PUD).
(7) Construction of an outlot.
(Code 1982, ss 36-437)
Sec. 44-1093. Planned unit developments.
(a) A planned unit development (PUD) may not be divided unless the density
distribution approved in the PUD is ensured.
(b) The city council may consider flexibility from strict code compliance in the internal
and external desiqn requirements of a proposed PUD and may consider
deviations from those requirements. It is the intention of this section and tho
other seotions of this article relating to plannod unit dovelopmonts to previde a
means to allow flexibility by substantial deviations from this ohapter, inoludin€l
uses, setbaol<s, height and other re€lulations. Deviations may be granted for
planned unit developments provided that:
-'h- The proposed development and the surroundinq neiqhborhood can be better
served by relaxinq the code requirements that reQulate the physical
development or layout of the proiect because of its unique nature. Cortain
ro€lulations contained in this ohaptor should not apply to tho proposed
de'Jelopment because of its unique nature,
2. The PUD would be consistent with the spirit. intent and purposes of this
chapter.
3. The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or
superior quality to that which would result from strict adherence to this
chapter.
4, The deviations would not constitute a significant threat to the property values,
safety, health or general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land or
to the environment.
5, The deviations are required for the reasonable and practical pmctioablo
physical development of the proiect and are not required solely f-or finanoial
reasons.
(c) The development shall conform to the plans and specifications as filed with the
city. Any substantive changes in the plans and specifications shall require a
recommendation by the planning commission and approval by the city council
after a public hearing.
(d) Common open space, The developer shall provide deed restrictions, covenants,
easements, public dedication or other equally effective and permanent means to
5
preserve and maintain any common open space. The instruments must include
all the following protection:
1. Except for routine maintenance, the city must approve the alteration of any
vegetation or topography that is visible from a public water.
2. Prohibit the exterior storage of vehicles or other materials. Storage shall not
include routine vehicle parking or the temporary storage of materials for an
ongoing construction project.
3. If on a public water, prohibit the uncontrolled beaching of watercraft.
(e) Owners' association. All planned unit developments with common open space
must have an owners' association with the following features:
1, Each lot owner must be a member.
2. Each member must pay a pro rata share of the association's expenses, and
unpaid association assessments can become liens on units or sites.
3. Association assessments must be adjustable to adapt to changing conditions.
4. The association must be responsible for insurance, taxes and maintenance of
all commonly owned property and facilities,
(f) The city shall designate PUDs on the official city zoning map.
(Code 1982, ss 36-438)
Sec. 44-1094. Outlots.
(a) No building permit shall be issued for construction upon an outlot, except by
conditional use permit.
(b) The city council shall not grant a conditional use permit for building upon any
outlot, unless the outlot meets the following conditions:
1. It meets the minimum size and frontage requirements provided for in this
chapter.
2, It has the requisite public improvements.
3. The permitted density under this Code has not been transferred to another
parcel and is, therefore, sufficient to accommodate the proposed
construction.
4. The outlot is not used for permanent common open space.
5. The proposed construction can overcome or accommodate the topographical
problems and peculiar site characteristics.
6
(Code 1982, ss 36-439)
Sec. 44-1095. Application.
(a) An application for a conditional use permit may be made by any person having a
legal interest in the property described in the application. All applications shall be
submitted to the director of community development upon the form supplied by
the city. The director shall not accept an application that is not complete.
Specific requirements shall be as stated on this form, but shall include at least
the following information, if applicable:
(1) All information required on the community design review board application.
(2) Written justification for any PUD deviations.
(3) An abstractor's certificate showing property owners' names and addresses
within 500 dW feet of the boundaries of the property for which the permit is
requested.
(4) Any other information required by the director of community development, the
city council or the council's advisory bodies.
(b) The applicant shall also, at the time of filing such application, pay a fee to the
director of community development to defray administrative expenses incurred by
the city in the handling of the application, which fee shall be established by the
city council, by ordinance, from time to time.
(Code 1982, ss 36-440)
Sec. 44-1096. Procedure.
(a) After an application for a conditional use permit has been submitted, the director
of community development shall prepare a report and recommendation and
submit it to the planning commission, afl€I community design review board and
any other commission as appropriate, for a recommendation to the city council.
The city council planning commission and community design review eoard shall
take action on the application within 60 days of their respectivo hearing dates,
unless an extension is approved in accordance with state statute. writing by the
applicant. The staff report and the planning commission's and community design
review board's recommendations by all applicable advisory boards or
commissions shall then be forwarded to the city council.
(b) The planninq commission city council shall hold at least one public hearing on
each application for a conditional use permit. This hearing shall not be held until
tHe The city council shall take final action after considerinq the has received
written recommendations or reports from the city staff, planning commission, afl€I
community design review board and other applicable commissions. or until 60
dayo have elapsed from tho respective hearing dates. The director of community
development shall have a notice of the hearing published in the official
newspaper at least ten days before the hearing. The director shall also mail
GaHSe a notice to be mailed to each of the owners of property within 500 dW feet
7
of the boundary lines of the property upon which such use has been requested
which notices arc to be mailed to the k."t kno'Nn address of "uoh ownors at least
ten days before the date of the hearing. Such notice shall include the date, time
and place of the hearing and shall describe the conditional use request. Failure
of property owners to receive notice shall not invalidate any of the proceedings in
this section,
(c) The council may refer the application back to the planning commission when the
council finds that specific questions or information that may affect the final
decision was not considered by the planning commission. This procedure shall
only be used once for each application,
(d) The city council may approve, amend or deny an application for a conditional use
permit by a majority vote,
(e) All decisions by the city council shall be final, except that any person aggrieved
by a decision, may within 30 days of the decision, appeal to the county district
court. (Code 1982, ss 36-441)
Sec. 44-1097. Standards.
(a) A conditional use permit may be approved, or amended or donied by satisfyinq
all of based on the following standards for approval, in addition to any standards
or findinqs for a specific conditional use found elsewhere in the Maplewood Code
of Ordinances: in thi" chapter:
(1) The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated
to be in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and this Code.
(2) The use would not change the existing or planned character of the
surrounding area.
(3) The use would not depreciate property values.
(4) The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or
methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental,
disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of
excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution,
drainage water runoff, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference
or other nuisances.
(5) The use would not exceed the desiqn standards of any affected streets nor
would it neqatively impact the traffic on any street based on the current
desiqn of those affected streets, generate only minimal vehicular traffic on
local "treets and would not create traffic conge"tion or un"afe aocoss on
existing or proposod streets.
(6) The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including
streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer
systems, schools and parks.
8
(7) The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or
services,
(8) The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural
and scenic features into the development design.
(9) The use would cause no more than minimal adverse environmental effects.
(b) The city council may waive any of the requirements in subsection (a) of this
section for a public building or utility structure, provided the council shall first
make a determination that the balancing of public interest between governmental
units of the state would be best served by such waiver.
(c) {Ql The applicant shall have the burden of proving that the use would meet all of
the standards required for approval of a conditional use permit. The city may
require the applicant provide, at his cost, any information, studies or expert
testimony necessary to establish whether these standards would be met or to
establish conditions for approval.
(Code 1982, S 36-442)
Sec. 44-1098. Conditions.
(a) The city council, in granting a conditional use permit, may impose such
conditions and guarantees that it considers necessary and as supported by the
record of the proceedings to protect adjacent properties and the public interest
and to achieve the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
(b) Conditions and guarantees may include but are not limited to the following:
(1) Controlling the number, area, bulk, height, illumination and location of such
uses.
(2) Regulating access to the property, with particular reference to vehicle and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic control and emergency vehicle
access.
(3) Regulating off-street parking and loading areas, including the number and
width of parking spaces.
(4) The location and design of utilities including drainage.
(5) Berming, fencing, screening and landscaping, including underground
sprinkling.
(6) Compatibility of appearance with surrounding land uses.
(7) Preservation of the site's natural, historic and scenic features in the
development design.
(8) Limiting the number, size, location or lighting of signage, notwithstanding
article III of this chapter which pertains to signs,
9
(9) The location, dimensions and upkeep of open space.
(10) Increasing required lot size, yard dimensions or setback requirements.
(11) Compliance with any plans presented.
(12) A time limit for review of the permit.
(13) A written agreement, cash escrow, letter of credit or other guarantee to
ensure that the project will be built as approved.
(14) Restrictive covenants.
(15) Control of the interior and exterior components of a building, provided that
such condition does not conflict with the building code. Such components
may include but not be limited to the finished exterior materials and
installation of elevators.
(16) Control of potential noise generators.
(Code 1982, S 36-443)
Sec. 44-1099. Start of construction or use.
The proposed construction must be substantially started or the proposed use utilized
within one year of council approval or the conditional use permit shall become null and
void. The council may grant up to one one-year extension of the permit if just cause is
shown. This requirement shall not apply to PUDs with an approved phasing plan. Such
extension shall be requested in writing and filed with the director of community
development at least 30 days before the expiration of the original conditional use permit.
There shall be no charge for filing such petition. The request for extension shall state
facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the
conditional use permit.
(Code 1982, S 36-444)
Sec. 44-1100. Duration.
(a) All conditional use permits shall be reviewed by the council within one year of the
date of initial approval, unless such review is waived by council decision ef
ordinance. At the one-year review, the council may specify an indefinite term or
specific term, not to exceed five years, for subsequent reviews. The council may
impose new or additional conditions upon the permit at the time of the initial or
subsequent reviews.
(b) A conditional use permit shall remain in effect as long as the conditions agreed
upon are observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting
or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. Any
conditional use that meets the agreed upon conditions and is later allowed
because of the city enacting or amending official controls shall be considered a
legal nonconforming use.
(Code 1982, S 36-445)
10
Sec. 44-1101. Termination, suspension or revision.
(a) The council may suspend or terminate the permit if the approved conditions have
been violated or the use is no longer in effect. Where the construction of a
building or structure of a monetary value in excess of $100,000,00 has been
permitted, the council shall provide for a period of amortization of not less than
five years. Where public health, safety and welfare concerns are threatened, the
five-year amortization period is not required, and the council may determine the
amortization period, if any, to be allowed. The owner of the property upon which
the conditional use permit was issued shall be notified in writing at least ten days
before the meeting. If the proposed termination is based on a violation of
conditions, the property owners within 500 ~ feet shall also be notified, The
director of community development may issue a stop order for work in progress
until the council hears the matter.
(b) The city council may review a permit at any time. If the council decides to
consider adding, dropping or changing conditions, the council shall follow the
procedures in section 44-1096 for approving a new permit. The council shall not
change conditions unless the conditional use no longer meets one of the
standards in section 44-1097 for approving a new permit.
(Code 1982, ~ 36-446)
Sec. 44-1102. Reapplication.
Whenever an application for a conditional use permit has been denied by the city
council, a similar application affecting substantially the same property shall not be
considered again by the city for at least one year from the date of its denial, unless the
council directs such reconsideration by at least four votes.
(Code 1982, ~ 36-447)
Sec. 44-1103. Conditional uses to conform to terms and conditions attached to
issuance.
(a) Any use permitted under the terms of any conditional use permit shall be
established and conducted in conformity with the terms and conditions of the
permit.
(b) Any change involving structural alteration, enlargement, intensification of use, or
similar change not specifically permitted by the conditional use permit shall
require an amended permit, and all procedures shall apply as if a new permit
were being issued. All uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance from
which this article derives shall be considered as having a conditional use permit
which contains conditions that permit the land use and structures as they existed
on such date. Any enlargement, structural alteration, or intensification of use
shall require an amended conditional use permit as provided for in this
subsection.
(Code 1982, ~ 36-448)
11
Sec. 44-1104. Records.
The director of community development shall maintain a record of all conditional use
permits issued, including information on the use, location, conditions imposed by the
council, time limits, review dates and other information as may be appropriate,
(Code 1982, S 36-449)
Sec. 44-1105. Filing.
A certified copy of any resolution approving a conditional use permit shall be filed with
the county recorder or registrar of titles, The resolution shall flGt include the legal
description of the property. Failure to file does not affect the validity or enforceability of
the permit.
(Code 1982, S 36-450)
Sees. 44-1106-44-1130. Reserved.
Section 2. This section revises Section 44-6. Definitions,
Basic structural alteration means any enlargement of a building or modification to the
framinq of a buildinq, whether by extending on any side or by increasing in height
lenqth. width or chanqes caused bv ef the moving of a building from one location to
another.
Conditional use means a land use or development that would not be appropriate
generally, but may be allowed with appropriate conditions or restrictions as provided by
the official controls outlined in Article V. Conditional Use Permits.
Planned unit developments (PUD) means a type of development characterized by a
unified site design, with two or more principal uses or structures. A PUD may include
townhouses, apartments, multiple-use structures such as an apartment with commercial
shops, or similar projects, Residential PUDs must have at least five dwelling units or
dwelling sites. The PUD application. timinq and recordinq process is described under
Article V. Conditional Use Permits,
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect after the approval by the city council and
publishing in the official newspaper.
The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance revision on
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Attachment 2
12
THESE SUGGESTIONS WERE MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON
FEBRUARY 22,2010
Additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out.
Sec. 44-1092. Conditional uses.
The city council may issue conditional use permits for the following uses in any zoning
district in fFem--which they are not permitted and not specifically prohibited:
Sec. 44-1093. Planned unit developments.
(b) The city council may consider flexibility from strict code compliance in the internal
and external desiqn requirements of a proposed PUD and may consider deviations
from those requirements. The city council shall consider the followinq factors: It-is
the intention of this section and the other sections of this article relating to planned
unit developments to pro':ide a means to allow f1Cldbility by substantial deviations
from this chapter, including uses, setbacks, height and other regulations, Deviations
may be granted for planned unit developments provided that:
Sec. 44-1097. Standards.
(a) A conditional use permit may be approved, amended or denied based on the
following standards for approval, in addition to any standards or findinqs for a
conditional use found elsewhere in the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: ifHAis
chapter:
Sec. 44-1097(a)(5). Standards.
(5) The use would not exceed the desiqn standard of anv affected streets.
generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create
traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed stroets.
Sec. 44-1097(a)(9). Standards.
(9) The use would cause no more than minimal adverse environmental effects.
13
Sec. 44-1097(b). Standards.
(b) The city council may waive any of the requirements in subsection (a) of this
section for a public building or utility structure, provided the council shall first
make a determination that the balancing of public interest between governmental
units of the state would be best served by such waiver.
Sec. 44-1103. Conditional uses to conform to terms and conditions attached to
issuance.
(b) Any change involving structural alteration, enlargement, intensification of use,
or similar change not specifically permitted by the conditional use permit shall
require an amended permit, and all procedures shall apply as if a new permit
were being issued, All uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance from
which this article derives shall be considered as having a conditional use permit
which contains conditions that permit the land use and structures as they existed
on such date. Any enlargement, structural alteration, or intensification of use
shall require an amended conditional use permit as provided for in this
subsection.
14