HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-04-13 CDRB Packet
AGENDA
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall
1830 County Road BEast
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes:
a. February 23, 2010
5. Unfinished Business:
6. Design Review:
a. Feed Products North, 1300 McKnight Road North.
b. Lower Keller Picnic Grounds Parking Lot, West Side of Highway 61 at South the End
of Keller Lake
7. Visitor Presentations:
8. Board Presentations:
9. Staff Presentations:
a. Vegetation Guidelines for Maplewood (no report)
10. Adjourn
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23,2010
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Ledvina called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Boardmember Jason Lamers
Chairperson Matt Ledvina
Boardmember Michael Mireau
Boardmember Ananth Shankar
Vice Chairperson Matt Wise
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Staff Present:
Michael Martin. Planner
Ginnv Gavnor. Natural Resources Coordinator
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Boardmember Wise moved to approve the agenda as presented.
Boardmember Lamers seconded Ayes - all
The motion passed.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. November 24, 2009
Boardmember Shankar moved approval the minutes of November 24, 2009 as submitted.
Boardmember Lamers seconded Ayes - Lamers, Shankar, Wise
Abstention - Ledvina, Mireau
The motion passed.
b. January 12, 2010
Boardmember Shankar moved approval of the minutes of January 12, 2010 as submitted.
Boardmember Lamers seconded Ayes - Lamers, Ledvina, Mireau, Shankar
Abstention - Wise
The motion passed.
V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Vegetation Guidelines for Maplewood
Natural Resources Coordinator Ginny Gaynor explained that through Community Roadside
Landscaping Partnership Program (CRLP) with the Minnesota Department of Transportation
(Mn/DOT), Mn/DOT works with communities to landscape the highways. Ms. Gaynor has begun
discussions with Mn/DOT to landscape a portion of the Highway 36 corridor running through
Maplewood through the CRLP program. It was agreed at the last review board meeting that
vegetations guidelines be further discussed by the board at their next meeting.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 02-23-2010
2
Ms. Gaynor gave a presentation on establishing vegetation guidelines for Maplewood. Ms. Gaynor
discussed basic concepts of sustainable landscapes, Minnesota native plant communities, showed
examples of some existing plantings and discussed maintenance issues of sustainable
landscapes.
The board discussed what streets in Maplewood have the potential of being a parkway. Board
members suggested the following: Frost Avenue from White Bear Avenue west to Highway 61,
White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to the Maplewood Mall, the potential for Hazelwood
Avenue if it is connected north of Highway 36, the area of Highway 36 between White Bear Avenue
and English Street, Upper Afton Road between McKnight Road and Century Avenue, and Lower
Afton Road between McKnight Road and Century Avenue.
The board discussed the key intersections that might need more planting intensity. Board members
suggested the following: Highway 36 and White Bear Avenue, Highway 61 and Beam Avenue, the
three Maplewood corners at Larpenteur Avenue and McKnight Road, and 135E and Roselawn
Avenue. It was discussed by board members that adding roundabouts in the future may help
identify key intersections and also, that key intersections might be considered in commercial areas
where traffic is slower and people have the ability to more easily view the area. It was discussed
that the Highway 36 and White Bear Avenue intersection might be appropriate for a monument and
an extensive planting, along with the area east of 135E on Highway 36 upon entering Maplewood.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
a. Election of Chairperson and Vice Chairperson
Planner Martin presented the staff report for the 2010 election of chair and vice chair.
Boardmember Ledvina nominated Matt Wise for vice chairperson.
Board member Lamers seconded
There were no other nominations.
The board voted: ayes - all
The motion passed.
Boardmember Wise nominated Matt Ledvina as chairperson.
Boardmember Lamers seconded
There were no other nominations.
The board voted: ayes - all
The motion passed.
b. Amendment to the Community Design Review Board Rules of Procedure
Planner Martin presented the staff report with recommended revisions in order for this document to
be consistent with the City of Maplewood Commission Handbook.
Boardmember Shankar moved adoption of the changes proposed to the community design review
board rules of procedure. This change will modify Section IX (Rules of Order) to be consistent with
the Commission Handbook, which requires following Rosenburg's Rules of Order.
Boardmember Lamers seconded
The motion passed.
Ayes -all
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 02-23-2010
3
c. 2009 CDRB Annual Report
Planner Martin presented the staff report for review of the 2009 review board annual report.
Boardmember Ledvina suggested sustainable building design as an in-service training topic.
Boardmember Wise suggested an in-service topic of defining aesthetic or architectural zones for
redevelopment within the city.
Boardmember Wise moved approval of the 2009 CDRB annual report.
Boardmember Lamers seconded
The motion passed.
Ayes - all
VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None
VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS
None
IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
None
X. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 7:50 p.m.
MEMORANDUM
LOCATION: .
DATE:
James Antonen, City Manager
Mich:3el Martin, AICP, Planner
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
Feed Products North-Conditional Use Permit Revision and
Design Review
1300 McKnight Road
April 7, 2010
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
John Fallin, owner of Feed Products North, is proposing to build a 947 square foot
addition to an existing building located on his 30 acre site. The addition would
approximately double the size of the existing 30-foot by 35-foot building to 1,997 square
feet.
Requests
Mr. Fallin is requesting approval of:
. A conditional use permit (CUP) revision to remodel and construct an addition to an
existing building. The city code also requires a CUP for structures in M1 (light
manufacturing) zoning districts that are closer than 350 feet to a residential district.
The proposed addition is within 350 feet of a residential district and there already is a
CUP for the site. The applicant is also requesting the existing CUP be revised to
remove the conditions of approval that require an existing trailer to be removed from
the site before any future development can occur. .
. Design plans.
BACKGROUND
On November 28, 1998, the city council made several approvals for the expansion of
Bulk Storage including:
1. A conditional use permit (CUP) for the existing Bulk Storage site. A CUP was
necessary because:
a. The proposed shipping-dock addition would be closer than 350 feet to the
abutting residential districts. The proposed shipping-dock addition would be
120 feet from the residential district to the north and 195 feet from the
residential district to the south. The code requires a CUP for buildings in an
M-1 (light manufacturing) district that would be closer than 350 feet to a
residential zone.
b. Of the outdoor storage on the site. The city code requires a CUP for the
outdoor storage or display of goods or materials. Presently there are
landscaping supplies stored west of the main building and roofing supplies
stored afthe east end of the site. Maplewood had never been granted a CUP
for outdoor storage at this site.
2. A CUP for a new office building between Lakewood Drive and McKnight Road.
The city required the CUP because the office building would be closer than 350
feet to the abutting residential districts. The proposed office building would be
310 feet from the residential district to the north and 59 feet from the residential
district to the south. This building was never built.
3. A parking waiver to have fewer parking spaces than the number required by
code. For a building the size of Bulk Storage, including the proposed addition,
the code requires 109 paved parking spaces (83 for the large building, 12 for the
Phase 1 shipping-dock addition and 14 for the Phase 2 shipping-dock addition).
4 Plan approval for the proposed building addition and new office building.
On July 12, 1999, the city council approved a revised CUP for the owner of the site to
add a trailer to the warehouse property.
On August 27, 2001, the city council approved a one-year time extension for the
conditional use permit (CUP) for this site.
On August 26, 2002, the city council approved a one-year time extension for the CUP for
this site.
On August 11, 2003, the city council approved a one-year time extension for the CUP for
this site.
On August 23, 2004, the city council approved a one-year time extension for the CUP
and approved a license agreement with the property owners. This agreement is so the
city crews may cross the property with trucks and equipment to city-owned property that
is east of Bulk Storage.
On August 22, 2005, the city council approved a one-year time extension for the CUP for
this site.
On January 26, 2009, the city council approved a lot division to split the Feed Products
site into two lots. The undeveloped lot is to the west of the main Feed Products parcel
on the other side of Lakewood Drive. The new parcel was approved for an office
building and has its own CUP that is not related to this request. Instead of building a
new office building on the new, separate parcel, the applicant is proposing to expand the
existing scale building. The parcel west of Lakewood Drive has been recorded with
Ramsey County and is a legal, separate lot.
2
DISCUSSION
Conditional Use Permit Revision
Office addition
The applicant is proposing a 947 square foot building addition. The addition and
remodel of the existing building is needed, according to the applicant, due to the age,
size and function of the current building. Staff does not have any concerns with the
proposed addition to the existing building and does not foresee any issues arising due to
the expansion.
To the north of the site there are Manage B wetlands that require a 75-foot buffer. This
addition is well beyond the required 75 feet, therefore there are no wetland impact
concerns. There are no other environmental concerns as the proposed addition is being
built on an area that is mostly impervious, except for a narrow three-foot strip of grass on
the west side of the existing building.
Existing Trailer
The applicant is requesting that the city council revise the CUP to allow the trailer as a
permanent structure. Though it was first intended as a temporary structure, the
applicant has found he needs it as office space for his business. Staff does not object to
this since the trailer is well concealed from homes and from streets. Furthermore, staff
has never received any complaints about the trailer. The trailer has been completed
with skirting and is kept in good repair.
The applicant is requesting the trailer become a permanent part of the CUP approval. If
the city council were to approve this revision request the trailer would not limit future
development of the site but the city could still use the CUP as a tool if any issues arise
from the trailer. Staff feels the trailer is adequately screened from the residential
properties surrounding the site.
Architectural and Site Considerations
The proposed office building is attractively designed with the building design modeled
after a 1900s train depot. The exterior would consist of galvanized corrugated metal
with several stone columns. The roof is proposed to be built with galvanized corrugated
metal but the applicant has also indicated that dark brown asphalt shingles could be an
option as well. A large portion of the building will be outfitted with a natural cedar deck.
Staff finds the proposed additional and remodel to be an upgrade to the existing facilities
on site. Also given the secluded nature of the site, staff also finds the impact of the
nearby residential areas to be minimal. The decision to model the building after a
historical train depot is a nice nod to the site's location and history.
Staff has no concern with landscaping, traffic or parking. The proposed building, though
possible to view from the bridge, would not be easily visible due to traffic speeds and its
separation and distance from Lakewood Drive. Landscaping, therefore, would not serve
3
to enhance the appearance of the building for neighbors or from streets. Staff feels that
landscaping could be provided should the applicant wish to provide some for his own
close-up view. The proposed addition would not cause any increase in traffic and the
applicant is proposing to provide ten parking spaces which would adequately serve his
needs. The CUP clirrently states the applicant does not need to provide a paved
parking area. Since the applicant is proposing 10 spaces, staff is recommending
revising the CUP to require any parking spaces be on a paved surface and be striped.
Though not required due to a previously approved parking waiver, the 10 proposed
parking spots would meet the code requirements for the proposed 1,997 square foot
building.
There is no proposal for any new site lights. Entry lights should be designed so they do
not exceed the parameters of the city's lighting ordinance. Standard front-door type
lights should cause no more problem than those on a single dwelling. If the applicant, at
some time, adds an outdoor trash container that is visible to neighbors or from streets,
code would require that he provide a screening enclosure.
Additional City Department Comments
Enoineerino Comments
Refer to the engineering review comments attached to this report from Jon Jarosch, staff
engineer dated March 26, 2010.
Buildino Official's Comments
Dave Fisher, Maplewood's Building Official, gave the following comments:
. The city will require a complete building code analysis when the construction plans
are submitted to the city for building permits.
. All exiting must go to a public way.
. The applicant must provide adequate fire department access to the building.
. Office buildings more than 2,000 square feet are required to be fire sprinklered per
Chapter 1306 of the Minnesota State building code. Verify with Fire Marshal.
. A preconstruction meeting is recommended with the building staff, contractor and
project manager.
Police Department Comments
No concerns with this project.
4
COMMITTEE ACTION
Plannino Commission
On April 6, 2010, the planning commission held a public hearing and recommended
approval of the proposed CUP revision for office addition.
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Adopt the resolution approving a conditional use permit revision for the Feed
Products North office building, located at 1300 McKnight Road. This permit allows
the construction of an office building on land zoned M1 (light manufacturing) within
350 feet of residential property. Approval of this CUP revision is subject to the
following conditions (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out):
1 . All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city.
2. Tile proJlosod trailer ml,jst bo OGGI,jJliod 'IIitRiR ORe year of GOl,jneil aJlJlroval or
tho Jlormit revision shall socomo nl,jll anEl '!oiEl. Tho eOl,jneil may elRonEl this
doaEllino for one yoar.
ag. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
4~. ^ Elosi€lnatoEl JlavoEl Jlarl<in€l area sllall not se rO€ll,jiroEl wlless tllo site Ilsa€lo
ehan€los in somo fashion 'I/arrantin€ltho neeEl for SileR I3Qrl<in€l sJlaees. Any
parking spaces provided on site shall be on a paved surface and be striped.
~. Update the alarm system at the facility, subject to the approval of the Police
Chief.
e9.. Provide several signs along the wetland edge on the warehouse site. The
number and placement of these signs shall be determined by staff. These
signs shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping in or
around the wetland.
+2. Submit an industrial storm water protection plan to the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency for their review and approval.
8. The ownor or Elo'JoloJlor chall remo'!o the trailer from tho site sefore tho eily
issuos a sllilElin€l Jlormit for any fl,jtllfO dO'JoloJlment.
9. Tho owner sllall romovo the trailor from the site witllin five yoars. The
COllnsil may renew this apJlfoval if the ownor re€ll,jests it. .
7. The office trailer must be kept in good condition and repair, including the
skirting around the base.
5
B. Approve the plans date-stamped March 8, 2010, for the proposed Feed Products
North office building. Approval is based on the findings for approval required by
ordinance and subject to the developer doing the following:
1. Repeat this review in two years if the applicant has not obtained a building
permit by that time. After two years this review must be repeated.
2. Comply with the requirements of the engineering report by Jon Jarosh dated
March 26, 2010.
3. All work shall follow the approved plans. The city planner may approve minor
changes.
4. If outdoor trash storage is used, such containers must be kept in a screened
enclosure. The design and placement of the enclosure shall be subject to
staff approval.
5. Comply with all site-lighting requirements of the city ordinance.
6. All parking spaces shall be on a paved surface and be striped. The handicap
spaces shall comply with ADA requirements.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Staff surveyed the 43 property owners within 500 feet of this project for their comments.
There were two replies and both were in favor.
In Favor
1. No concern with this proposal (Niezgocki, 2313 Maryland Avenue East)
2. No real comment, looks good. (Remackel, 1298 Myrtle Street North)
6
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 30 acres
Existing Use: Bulk Storage Warehouse facility
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Railroad right-of-way and single dwellings
South: Single dwellings
East: Additional Bulk Storage property
West: Lakewood Drive
PLANNING
Land Use Plan: M1 (light manufacturing)
Zoning: M1
Applicable Ordinance
Section 44-637(b) states that, in an M1 district, a CUP is required for any building within
350 feet of a residential district.
Criteria for Conditional Use Permit Approval
Section 44-1097(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine
standards. See findings 1-9 in the resolution.
APPLICATION DATE
The city received the complete application for a conditional use permit revision and site
and design plans approval on March 11, 2010. The 60-day review deadline for a
decision is May 10, 2010. As stated in Minnesota State Statute 15.99, the city is allowed
to take an additional 60 days if necessary in order to complete the review of the
application.
7
p:sec24-29\Feed Products CUPRevision_041310
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Land Use Plan Map
3. Zoning Map "
4. Site Plan (2 sheetS)
5. Building Elevations (2 sheets)
6. Floor Plan
7. Applicant's Project Narrative, dated March 1, 2010
8. Photo of existing building
9. Aerial photo of site
10. Engineering Report, dated March 26, 2010
11. CUP Resolution
12. Applicant's Plans (separate attachment)
8
.' _ _ ' . ,_ d... . ,_,
. _. .' ,_ "___,_~_________,_~____""__,-"",,,_,,,,-,--=_ '.' ,: .",."_~_~_~. ...._~.__...h:_.
~
j
1
11
PROPOSED
OFFICE
ADDITION
LOCATION
;1
~
:j
"
:\
j
LOCATION MAP
. . .
- -- .
- - - - --------_.._.....,.~....."'
r
Attachment 1
~
CJ
(Jo
r2 0
DQ 0
<:,~C",,'!m,~_
-
co
>
e
a.
a.
<C
c
C)
.-
t/)
Q)
C
"C
C
co
c
o
.-
t/)
.-
>
Q)
n::
a..
:.:>
u
I
t/)
1:)
:::s
"C
e
a..
"C
Q)
Q)
LL
~
Q)
~ <il
u ~ ~
<( U Q)
tu.-<(u
a.~Q)<(
'" <(u c.. Q:i
:t::' en c..
c: ~ -
:J Q) 'c '"
1.{)Q..:J:g
~.~~:J
eOOID
LO:J~LOu
OO'N<(
,::::<0-- ~
COI~--(])
+::; ~ 0 c..
c ro T'""" r.n
(])~:+=-:!::::::
:-Q C m C
~~~~;;
0:: c: '(jj Q)
>'~(]):2T'"""
- .- a::: en M
"en en >. (])
C Q) :t:: a::: 0
Q) 0:: '"
o>.c~!:e.._"E Q)
".:!:Q)",Q)'" ro U
~ ~ 0 c en .~ m ~ g ~
...JQ)Et3:JQ).;::c:"" (/)
--m 0 .2 ~ ~ EE 1ii :v .a ~ c
~ $ ~ .21.~ 0 ~ ~ ~ i- ~
~.3::2;I::2;()c:t?C:~O
D III II D
a;
"0
u..o
...
'"
o
o
I'-
III
~."
Q) 0
_ 0
Sea -E Cl
05
.oN
,<:m
"'~
.- 0
" ~
z:!11
~Q ~
~~i
sQ~
~t\lII ~
u." 8
z<
o
Attachment 3
. /"
,/
'"
'\'\,
...~,.
..
!
.: ...1'
.. ~~~\t.C,l,LIl''''''''
/.
~
,"- "--
...._. "(lo..'_~~~.
....,~
R3
.-.".-......
...........
....~.......
-,
'.
t__')
n.._
~..........
-.......-1
""f
i...
~;"U""
.~...."..,
','
~
..,
.....-.,
, l
PUD' .
.,~..
'. '., !'\,.--
;l .' '"
/,." I. # r._
....-.j
,,'
....d..~....
C;::" ..
I
4
1f
N
PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP
\
/\
\
\\
\ \ ~
) \ ~
<<I). \~:
o \ \
\ \
\\
\\
-\\
// \ \
\\
\\
,
\\\
\\
\.)..
----------- \ '\
,--\---
-"""-.~-"_.--j liI~ \ \
// \ \ \
~\ \ \
,-...\ \ ~ '.
\'<\ \\: ~
-,&-1-... \\\~
~ ~ " \"
. ~ -... \~\ '
o -... %.--
% //\",,\
~ dJ>\ \
~~ y~\
0. ij) ...-;\
~ ~ ~\ ~\:
z. y \~_.
o \Y-
O
<>
-
<'
-.;:.."...:
..........."..' .'
__,"__'_'__''-.-'_'-'-,-h"''
~
tfl
&
?
~
'*-
y
'D
&
?
~
(-~I
i::!'::!I
e;J =
""
=
>-4
"'"
<(
~.
>,
co
, ,
, ,
, ,
, '
, '
, '
, '
, '
, '
, '
\ \,'
, ,
, '
, '
, '
, ,
, "
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
'\ \ /'-----_..-,,_.-.~'\
, ,
\ \ ,/"
\ "I
\ \. \
\ 1 ,\
, , '
, , '
\ I' \
'6 \ : \
~...~~ \ J . \
\ \. _;~-~.:(~-~ _ .'11
~J.-_J..--j,.~, .--...--... M 'I
!
...-."-
, .
<"'.,,\
.
CI)
-
iil
Cl
c
'5
'3
m
."
CI)
r:l
Cl.
o
~
0..
---
---
11'-_
~- -== = ::::--- -
....10llMl0S----
- --
......
"
'iIl
-"
,ioI
Attachment 4
~
~
~
tfl
<>
<'
~
'*-
y
'D
&"
?
~
U
~
"
~
I
i
.
I.
,
,
i+
~) a
:r'~---\--T----
,... \ CO llO
"
... ...:......,..,
. 'c.,_
.. '-'---...
. -..-:...:....:_.,._:c::_..,....___.
... .,. .
\g
\0
~~
~\)
\ cl~
~
0:
\ G
\
\
. _'M,"
" ..'...-.-.--
....;--.--..---
...:.:......';,..,-,....
.
~
Attachment 4
0.<0
>(U'
y
r ')
I':!'::'l ;=
S ~
= ,....
>~
"'1f>,
<Y0
I':!'::'l"",
@:;;
I':!'::'l >,
~ OJ
I-
:I .
,
\\
\~%
~~
~%
Q~
----....."....;.:
--.' .. .
...". ..__._~--~-,._-'"-.-._--,----
_It.......
Attachment 6
t
t
"t~,O~
',"
" ,"
, -.t
"Zl~9-.6
,.o~-,z.v
"VI&9-.6
..... .
.....,' ,',
~
::::l
......
(.).
:::::l'
l-
1i)
0)
C
+:i
en
'x
(])
.......
o
I-
(])
.....
(])
E
"C
(])
a..
.... .
" "
;,',
........
.'
',',"
-", .
........
.,'
. "
......
.' ",
".,,", {..
_, ,',0
...., '
:. ....:' :~~.~-
. ','"
',"'.,"
-',(1)"
]."
;. -n''--
, 1-:....
J. . .
. ~
"':::':~~:
:.....
"
"vIEO-.tl-
..
b
,
..
m
8
.:i
"-
i'l ~
:c _
ffi-s
:r: ~
"v-.S'
...0-,9
,0.,
'. :,'_'" _ ".' ':":'_' .......',,:-:-.~.._^A...._... '."" ."._.n.
',..., ..."...........
".:."-.:....'-'-".......-_.'",..
Attachment 7
Feed Products North
1300 Mcknight Rd North
Maplewood MN, 55109 .
City of Maplewood
1830 County Rd B
Maplewood MN, 55:L09
3/1/2010
RE: Conditional Use Permit
We are requesting approval of C.U.P for the addition and remodel of our existing office facilities located
at 1300 McKnight RD North,
The existing structure due to age, is inadequate in both size and function to serve the needs
of Feed Products North.
The proposed expansion will create a 1997 sq/ft building that will serve Feed Products North
adequately for approximately the next ten years. .
The current building is located on a 33 acre parcel, which is zoned M-l Ught Industrial.
The architectural design of the proposed building is a replica of an early 1900's train depot,
Which considering the proximity to the adjacent railway lines would be in keeping with the
Character ofthe property. .
The proposed facility would conform to the City of Maplewood':s criteria for approval of Conditional
Use Permit with no deviation from the City Code's, .
Regards
n C Fallin
ner
il
:[
j
,I
;1
:,.
~; .
;;
~
j
:>
"
"''''.'''.'-'
......,.,"'..;.-...
Attachment 9
:;;:
i ~
o ;l " ~
@. l!! 2l~ i
1I1 ~..tij lij
8l~'2! ~g~~z
h~~!H~~~U
g~~~t'l~~<Jl~,
z,j! 8~ 0''"'" ,
. ,...."', b.,>"u
11 "''''~''
"
'Ii
.
"
o
..
o
"
.e
@ ~
g .
.~ >.:-
llg
~~~
11!l'"
o p.'-g
!h
g,lH
.~ ~l
"'olI
l't1l'
8 ~ Q
<IS.B ~
';:g g
~~"-
~~~
~~~
~g
.~
a.Jj
~!~
~ t\~
~~
,,~
'~ ~
Qg'"d
,~... ~
"g.8_
.0
iT
~~~
1::Qo
"-,
(j'eoll
~~~
o-gtSo
'i!~M
B.
erg ~
"'":a
~)$.
~iL.
"00
~ ".
:!l'~ll
~s~
-~,~
~>1l
u>,SE-<
~"Eo
..118
~i~
u
00
<l
~
u
Attachment 10
Ent.!ineerinl! Plan Review
PROJECT: Feed Prod nets Bnilding Expansion
PROJECT NO: 10-04 .
REVIEWED BY: Jon'Jaroseh (MapIewood Engineering Department)
SUBMITTAL NO: 1
DATE: 03/25/2010
John Fallin, owner of Feed Products North, Inc. proposing an expansion of the existing office
building at 1300 McKnight Road North. This building expansion would result in a 1,997 square-
foot building. The proposed expansion would be constructed in an area that is currently covered
by paved surfaces.
The applicant shall ensure that the following requirements are met.
Drainage
l. The applicant shall provide a plan detailing how drainage around the proposed expansion
will be handled. This plan should include any downspout locations and flow arrows.
Erosion & Sediment Control Plan
I. The applicant shall identify erosion and sediment control measures to be utilized at the
boundary of the disturbed areas and any stockpiles.
Miscellaneous
I. The applicant shall satisfy the requirements of all other permitting agencies.
2. The applicant shall ensure that the proposed handicap access ramp is ADA compliant.
Attachment 11
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, John Fallin, owner of Feed Products North, applied for a conditional use
permit revision to build an addition to an existing building on property zoned M1 (light
manufacturing) located within 350 feet of residentially-zoned property.
WHEREAS, Section 44-637(b) of the city ordinances require a conditional use permit for
a building in a M1 district closer than 350 feet to residential property. The proposed
building would be on a lot abutting residential property.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located east of 1300 McKnight Road. The
legal description is:
That part of the West Half of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 24, Township 29,
Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota bounded as follows:
On the North by a line drawn parallel with and distant 95 feet Southeasterly, as measured
at right angles, from the center line of the main track of said railway company, as now
located and established; on the West by the East line of the West 66 feet of the Southwest
Quarter of Said Section 24 to a point on the West line of said Section 24 which is distant
450 feet South of the Southerly line of the 100 foot right of way of said railway company,
said Southerly line being a line drawn parallel with and 56 feet Southeasterly as measured
at right angles, from the center line of the main track of said railway company as originally
located and established, and on the East by the East line of the Northwest Quarter of the
Southwest Quarter of Section 24; excepting therefrom that part that lies Northwesterly of a
line drawn parallel with and distant 8.5 feet Southeasterly, as measured at right angles from
the center line of the most Southerly side track I.C.C. No. 114 of said railway company, as
now located and established all in the County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota.
EXCEPT that part of said West Half of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 24, lying
westerly of the centerline of the 99 foot wide road easement as described in document
No. 2325930.
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On April 6, 2010, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff
published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property
owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak
and present written statements. The planning commission also considered the
reports and recommendation of city staff. The planning commission recommended
that the city council approve this permit revision.
2. On , 2010, the city council considered reports and recommendations
of the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council
described conditional use permit, because:
the above-
1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances.
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 run-off, vibration, general
unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed 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.
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 minimal adverse environmental effects.
10. The proposed trailer will be substantially screened from neighboring single
dwellings.
Revision is subject to the following conditions: (additions are underlined and deletions
are crossed out):
1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city.
2. The proposed trailer must be oscl,jJlied within ono year of sOlJncil approval or
the pormit revision shall become nllll and void. The cOl,jnsiI may e)(tend this
deadline for ene yoar.
ag. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
4~. ,II. dosignated pa'/od parking area shall not be reElllired I,jnloss the site Ilsago
changes in some fashion warranting the noeEl for sl,jsh flarl<in€l sflases. Any
parking spaces provided on site shall be on a paved surface and be striped.
~. Update the alarm system at the facility, subject to the approval of the Police
Chief.
e9.. Provide several signs along the wetland edge on the warehouse site. The
number and placement of these signs shall be determined by staff. These
signs shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping in or
around the wetland.
+2. Submit an industrial storm water protection plan to the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency for their review and approval.
S. The owncr or develoJler shall rcmove tho trailer from the Elite bofore the oity
iSEluCS a bllilding pcrmit for any futllrD developmcnt.
9. The O'Nner shall remove the trailer from tho site within fivo yoms. The
Counoil may renew this apJlroval if tho owner requeEltEl it.
7. The office trailer must be kept in good condition and repair, including the
skirting around the base.
The Maplewood City Council
this resolution on
,2010.
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
James Antonen, City Manager
Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
DuWayne';Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
Design Review-Lower Keller Picnic Grounds Parking Lot
West Side of Highway 61 at the South End of Keller Lake
April 7, 2010
TO:
FROM:
INTRODUCTION
The Ramsey County Parks and Recreation Department is proposing to construct a new parking
lot at the Lower Keller Park picnic grounds on the west side of Highway 61. This is the final
phase of improvements at this park. The county previously installed a new picnic shelter and
restroom structure. The completion of the grounds is still in progress. The proposed parking lot
has always been part of the overall park improvement plan. Refer to the enclosures.
BACKGROUND
August 11, 2009: The community design review board approved the plans for the picnic shelter
and restroom structure at this park.
DISCUSSION
Pavement Removal
The plans show the removal of the looped driveway through this park. Much of the old paved
loop has been removed with the construction that has already taken place. This pavement
removal will restore grass in areas nearer the lake which is a benefit environmentally. The final
result would be a driveway/parking layout that is closer to and parallels the highway.
Parking
The proposed parking lot would have 18 parking spaces in the first parking section and 26 in the
second section. The parking stalls are proposed to measure 9- by 20-feet in size with a 24-foot-
wide, two-way drive aisle. City ordinance requires that spaces be at least 9 Y, feet wide. There
is room on site to accommodate widening the spaces out to 9 Y, feet.
Park Entrance
The entrance to the park will be improved with a stone apron into the park's driveway. This is an
attractive detail. The applicant has stated that all MnDOT (Minnesota Department of
Transportation) requirements will be met. Refer to the attached letter from MnDOT. Staff's only
additional comment is that the park entrance has clear entrance signage for drivers. It is staff's
1
observation that the entrance to the existing driveway is not readily noticeable when approaching-
it at 55 miles an hour. A driver is nearly up to the entrance by the time it is clear where to turn.
Trash Enclosure
The applicant is proposing to build a concrete block, gated trash enclosure at the south end of
the proposed parking lot. The type of concrete block proposed is not clear. For example, would
it consist of a flat-surfaced block or a textured block? Concrete block is acceptable, but the
exterior of the enclosure should be of a textured or decorative block variety.
Environmental Comments
Tree Replacement
Three trees would be removed and three would be planted. According to Shann Finwall,
environmental planner, this meets city requirements for tree replacement.
Shoreland Ordinance Compliance
As stated above, the proposed parking lot would be an improvement over the existing driveway
loop since it will result in the reestablishment of turf in areas closer to the lake. The code does
not deal specifically with a parking lot setback in this scenario. The proposed parking lot would
be 110 feet from the lake, however, which is much more than the existing 20-foot-setback of the
old looped driveway at one point.
Police Chief Comments
Chief Thomalla has reviewed the plans and sees no issues of concern from a public safety
standpoint.
Engineering Comments
Staff Engineer, Steve Kummer, reviewed the proposal. Please refer to Mr. Kummer's report
(attached). The applicant should comply with any conditions of approval in that report.
MnDOT Comments
MnDOT has reviewed the proposal. Their comments are attached. Any MnDOT requirements
should be followed that lies within their jurisdiction.
CONCLUSION
The county's overall improvements are attractive and welcome enhancements to this park.
2
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the plans date-~tamped April 1 , 2010 for the proposed parking lot improvements to the
Lower Keller Picnic Grounds. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following:
1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued permits for this project.
2. Comply with any MnDOT requirements that involve highway right-of-way.
3. Provide clear entrance signage to the park.
4. Restore any disturbed areas with turf.
5. Provide a decorative, textured concrete block for the trash enclosure.
6. Provide 9 %-foot-wide parking spaces as code requires.
7. Provide handicap-accessible parking spaces as required.
8. Comply with the requirements of Steve Kummer's report dated March 31, 2010.
9. Staff may approve minor changes to the plans.
p:sec16\Ramsey County Lower Keller Park Parking Lot 4 10 te
Attachments:
1 . Location Map
2. Site Plan
3. Engineering Report from Steve Kummer dated March 31, 2010
4. Letter from MnDOT dated March 30, 2010
5. Plans date-stamped April 1 ,2010 (separate attachments)
3
, COUNTY ROAD B
HE
BURKE AVE
tm
~
~~.
I
;~i
:JlonHIIls
;:!MelhOdd(;f\u<<;h
....
00
w
c
<(
CJ
..
<(
?r.po.s..A
P~""\::.~"'J L...f-
l-Oc.a~ 011
ROSELAWN AVE
m~
SELLWOOD AVE S~"Ij,'OOD
~l ,~
~
FROST AVE
....
<f)
~
w
Cl
""
lzl
~
~
w
Cl
n
1! ~ q.
I _j.l
-l !l I,l!
I, I ! ..
" ,I !ljI
P II 1
" " ! !Ll
, I~"~!,"ij
,
; ~ I
,
I
, ,
, .
!' h.,I!
g l'l l ~ ~
!; ~ '<!( " lI!:
~~~~I~
!.!, I'
iql!,
~ ! ffi.g iE
, i~."I(
'IM.
i,
;~:
, ,
% ;;j~ g~~ !~~
o~z ~.. ~l'ct;1I ii!~ "l:Ig
~m~ ~ ~~ ~i~~1l r;: I~~
~ II'.: '" ~=1 lill~zti "j"i ..~!
tl~e~:Eli' 6z"lil~ ~., z~g
i:]" Q e~ i~"~.. _..~ ~~;;!
sQ8~ iill ~ffi~~I.; ~~ ~~~
tIl!3l:;i~ i' ~i!~ 2 '" ,m ~sj:j
Qffi[~;z ~~rl~ ~ ~I ~~~
t~"" ,I iI", "1'1
~Q~ ~ ~n ~~;~"I ~ s; I!g~
zto' ',- ". i -, I!'
8"'''' a !~-, ;;!.i!<l~ ~,,~~~
~ ;;:~ ~ll:t3! !l~ :s~~
./... d.. w
.
.
,
,I!
~?i~~
~~!ii~
. ,;
~ ~'<;l!l~
,i'ii~
'<~~,,"'i
~;;;E;~~lii
,""~!..
"'i,
!I:l,!
::Ili!
m"l
~
,
m
\
"
.
W-I
oL
~
~
. . ;
l';~~ ia~ ~i ~ ~g
~;!i'i ..~~ ~llg;~",~~
hi ,,'< <G" ."
,Iii :,b !'l ,.1." '
,'. .., ~- ,"",!
!!,; lib II: 'H!j"
~;~~ !<~a~ ~i!j; ~~!~ ~ ;
!.!~ s~ig !;;!<~ ,',"<> IS II
,,; '< 1;;" It tl~S l<?i li'" ;<
,I;! ;~!d "1 I; 0; !'n
!!i~fi 0 ~i~~ \';~" ~I ~I i!!1) \';
ii~gi igh! ~~: 0 g~ ~"' ii!~i ~
1iI1111l!! Ill! Ii d Iii i
>i. -',.
,
:g2.. ~
~I;~ ii
!'"I'
as" "
.o! ,"
'I" ~,
~,,~; !ll~~
~gg;~ ~;i!!!
!ll:a~ ;1lI~
.',1'.
!~~!!I illoli
~~:g: i:~
1" ,"
"g~ 'l!
!illbll ~"D
;
.!" ~!;;~ ~~12 ~11~
..",~., ,. 'ta~ Ill<;:! ~~!'I
I.,,, ,'14.1,1, .!.,
i'i"l'i~!!I ;~:a~" ~ai~" i"'~!;; "
'~ll! ~li!lll.!i I'l!
iii;1 i,,!; ;;111 ill!
;~il!"1 i:~h ~ill; ~I~~
,l!i !,~!: ,I'I! I'i,
~~, .!l'Eill~!< .."g"l:! ..li:~..
gllilYi ,e~~tl:l: BS!21l!!i S!~8!:j
B ~!;;~I "'li;5~8 ~~g ",!j l!i....ffi
!f~li~~ ~~5~B iil~~8~; ~~i::;bi
~ii~~~ ~~~i~ ~8;b~ ~~~i~
.. ::! - :!
Ii"
'I",.
ffi:;iii:l:
r'll
!!ll~
,II.;
..,'"
"'ill
llj.g!
"j"!
~M~!
Ii!!!!
'ill,!
.
di
"I
'"
:~~
~:!!
~il
~f'l;
'l,
i~~
1,"
- '!=
~ji!
I
'I
I. -- ~I
f' ~l
,. ,
IMl -lU
'II 'I-I
1'141111"
llr- j"j i I
!ftI-. jli~: :',,'
if.fl i E ;
,_1.,1 ~.I 0
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
i
I
!
I
I
;
!
j
I
!
I,
9
I, !i!
"
I ~ ~
; ~ D<
i ;:!
I ! :
I ~ ~
! ~ 9 :51
I, ; i il
I 8 ~ 8i
I ~ !g ~!
, III 0 VI,
jJ~I~.ei
ji----l
IE !
l~ I
]A I
1;:: I
11 III
!~ ;'~I
ie: ~.,;
!.; ~t
ii ~Jt
il~!
I I ~li
, ,
,
,
jd<fonn I
i z I=! l:i ~ii~i
i ~dl~~~al
Oi u~ ~Pi
i ~~I R~!
'n. ~
i
I
i
I "
I ,
, ,
i i j
ri-++f-1
-<...J....l....i....,
~d
~egi
1I:g1~~
',=Io=-
!!gia~8
Attachment 3
Maplewood Engineering Comments
Keller Lake Parking Lot Reconstruction
3-31-10
Page 1 of 2 '
En!:lineerina Plan Review -Narrative and Comments
PROJECT:
PROJECT NO:
COMMENTS BY: '
Re,~onstruction of Keller Park Lower Parking Lot
09::i18
Steve Kummer, P.E. - Staff Engineer
DATE:
3-31-10
PLAN SET:
City Submittal Set: Civil Drawings by Pierce-Pini and Associates
dated 3/15/10
COMPS:
Drainage Computations by Pierce-Pini and Assocates
Dated 10-14-09
Summary
Ramsey County Parks and Recreation is proposing improvements to its existing park property
bordering Keller Lake along the west side of Highway 61 north of Roselawn Avenue. The land
generally slopes to the west and sheet drains directly into Keller Lake.
Storm Water Runoff. Drainaqe Desian, and Erosion Control Comments
The developer is proposing several means of controlling and treating storm water runoff when
the site is developed. The developer is proposing a rain garden and pervious bituminous
pavement to meet rate and volume control requirements.
The storm water computations indicate that runoff for the 2-year, 1 O-year and 100-year/24-hour
storm events are controlled to existing conditions.
1) The OHW of Keller Lake is 859.64 per DNR records. This site with its proximity to the
lake will likely have groundwater table fluctuations similar to that of the lake. The
proposed lowest parking lot elevation is set at 862,4 with a 21-inch section from finished
grade. The draintile elevation of the rain garden is an 858.75. It is likely that both BMP's
will be functioning within 3 feet of the seasonably high groundwater table. The applicant
shall revise their BMP's such that the bottom of each section is above the seasonably
high groundwater table, or provide information/computations indicating that the current
design meets the 3-foot requirement.
2) The applicant has indicated in the Storm Water Narrative that the subsurface storage
(pervious pavement) and rain gardens meet treatment requirements through vegetation
and sand filtering. However, the pervious parking lot section does not show a sand
substrate. Provide information/computations indicating that the current design meets
stormwater treatment requirements or modify the design such that it is consistent with
the stormwater narrative.
3) Both storm water drain inverts (the dual6-inch draintile and 12-inch PVC) are set below
the OHW of the lake. During the OHIN, Keller Lake will back up into both the pervious
parking lot and rain water garden underdrain systems. The applicant shall raise the
inverts of both of these outfalls to at least the OHW elevation or provide means by which
the lake water does not back-flush into the underdrain systems of the BMP's.
Maplewood Engineering Comments
Keller Lake Parking Lot Reconstruction
3-31-10
Page 2 of 2-
4) If the rainwater garden or infiltration basins do not petiorm as designed, it is the
responsibility of the applicant's engineer and/or contractor to correct the problem. The
city will withhold 'ifll escrow monies, and may coordinate with the city building department
to withhold certificate of occupancies for buildings on the development site, until the
proper functioning of the rainwater garden and/or infiltration basin is restored.
5) The applicant shall provide specific information on maintenance protocols and
operations for the annual maintenance of the pervious parking lot and rain water garden.
6) The applicant shall show grading details for both outfalls, the intended location for the
scour stop installation, anchoring of the dual 6-inch draintile ends, and intended
repair/replacement of the disturbed gabions along the shoreline.
7) The applicant shall submit specification section on rain garden planting/seeding. The
applicant shall take steps such that the bottom of the garden is properly established and
the seeding takes especially after the garden fills up after the first rainfall event.
8) The applicant shall require that their designated contractor have enough Noroll or
compost log on site for the duration of construction to back any failed silt fence and for
use for any ditch/swale checks.
9) The applicant's designated contractor and engineer shall meet with Maplewood
Engineering staff as a condition of the grading permit due to the proximity of an
impaired water. The applicant shall have prepared a proposed staging plan for
clearing, grubbing, grading and setting of erosion control measures on this site
for review. No construction is allowed to commence without a meeting with city
personnel and an adequate staging plan for the site.
Geometrics/Lavout
1) The curb line along the outbound side of the driveway access shall be squared up to
highway 61 to permit drivers to line up at a right-angle to the intersection prior to entering
Highway 61. The applicant shall modify the southern radius of the driveway entrance to
accommodate this.
Sanitarv Sewer and Water Service
1) Applicant shall show existing sanitary sewer main easement over park property. No
improvements are allowed to encroach on the easement for the existing line.
Miscellanous
Any tree removals and wetland ordinance requirements should be addressed through the City
Community Development Department.
Attachment 4
~[",\""EISOJ:.,1o Minnesota Department of Transportation
~ g Metropolitan District
~ I Waters Edge
""OFTf'~"" 1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville, MN 55113-3174
}-.
--
March 30, 2010
Tom Ekstrand
Maplewood Community Development
1830 County Road BEast
Maplewood, MN 55109
SUBJECT:
Keller Lake Park Parking Lot Reconstruction
Mn/DOT Review #SI0-009
West Side ofTH 61, North ofParkwood Drive
Maplewood / Ramsey County
Control Section 6222
Dear Mr. Locke:
Mn/DOT Metro District (Mn/DOT) has reviewed the above referenced site plan and has the following
comments:
Traffic:
It is important to highlight that Mn/DOT will be doing a mill & overlay proj ect along this section of
TH 61 this upcoming summer (2010). It is strongly recommended that the project be complete, with
the completion of any entrance modifications, before Mn/DOT starts the mill & overlay project. For
questions on the timing and coordination of this project with the parking lot reconstruction, please
contact Wayne Lemaniak, Mn/DOT Metro Traffic Section, at (651) 234-7851.
Water Resources:
A Mn/DOT drainage permit will be required for this project. Post construction discharge rates to
Mn/DOT right-of-way must not exceed existing rates. The drainage permit application form can be
found at http://www.dot.state.mn.us/utilitv/forms/index.html.
The following information is required with the drainage permit application:
Final drainage plan showing storm sewer plan, storm sewer profiles and pond contours
Existing and proposed drainage area maps with flow arrows
Existing and proposed drainage/pond computations for the 2, 10, and 100 year rainfall events
Additional information may be required once a drainage permit is submitted and after a detailed
review.
For questions concerning these comments, please contact Richard Cady, Mn/DOT Water Resources
Section, at (651) 234-7524.
An equal opportunity empioyer
Permits:
As noted previous, a drainage permit will be required. Additionally, a Short Form Permit will be
required for any work within MnfDOT right-of-way. Permit forms are available from MnDOT's
utility website at http://www.dot.state.mn.us/utilitv/forms/index.html. Please include an II x 17 plan
set in addition to a full size plan set with each permit application. Please direct any questions
regarding permit requiiements to Buck Craig, MnDOT's Metro Permits Section, at (651) 234-7911.
As a reminder, please address all initial future correspondence for development activity such as plats and
site plans to:
Development Reviews
Mn/DOT - Metro Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
Mn/DOT document submittal guidelines require either:
1. One (I) electronic pdf. version of the plans (the electronic version of the plan needs to be
developed for II" x 17" printable format with sufficient detail so that all features are legible);
2. Seven (7) sets offun size plans.
If submitting the plans electronically, please use the pdf. format. MnfDOT can accept the plans via e-mail
at metrodevreviews@state.mn.us provided that each separate e-mail is less than 20 megabytes.
Otherwise, the plans can be submitted on a compact disk.
If you have any questions concerning this review please feel free to contact me at (651) 234-7797.
~
Senior Planner
Blind Copy sent via Groupwise:
Jennie Read
Richard Cady
Buck Craig
Wayne Lemaniak
Tod Sherman
Ann Braden / Metropolitan Council
File Copy:
Mn/DOT Division File - CS 6222
Mn/DOT LGL File - Maplewood