HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-12-2004A.
B.
N
Q
E.
MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:07 P.M. Monday, July 12, 2004
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 04-14
CALL TO ORDER:
A meeting of the City Council was held in the Council Chambers, at the Municipal Building,
and was called to order at 7:07 P.M. by Mayor Cardinal.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
Robert Cardinal, Mayor Present
Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present
Marvin Koppen, Councilmember Present
Jackie Monahan-Junek, Councilmember Present
Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Minutes from the City Council/Manager Workshop -June 28, 2004
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the minutes from the June 28, 2004 Ci
Council/Manager workshop as presented.
Seconded by CouncilmemberRossbach Ayes -All
2. Minutes from the City Council/Manager Workshop -June 28, 2004
Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to approve the minutes from the June 28, 2004 City
Council/Manager workshop as amended.
Seconded by CouncilmemberRossbach Ayes -All
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
M1. Panhandling on Highway Exit Ramps
M2. MET Council
M3. 50th Anniversary Committee
M4. August 3rd -National Night Out
M5. Incidents at Phalen Park
M6. NEST
M7. Addition to Consent Agenda: K9 Miscellaneous Beer Permit
City Council Meeting 07-12-04
Councilmember Koppen moved to approve the agenda as amended.
Seconded by CouncilmemberMonahan-Junek Ayes -All
F. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
1. Mayor Cardinal commended the Fire Department for their efforts assisting the City of
St. Paul with the "Grand Excursion".
2. Mayor Cardinal congratulated Parks and Recreation Director Anderson on the
spectacular Fourth of July Fireworks.
G. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of Claims
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE:
$ 12,000.00 Checks # 64188
dated 6/23/04
$ 464,205.75 Checks # 64189 thru # 64251
dated 6/29/04
$ 1,759,472.97 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 6/18/04 thru 6/23/04
$ 460,194.61 Checks # 64252 thru # 64316
dated 7/06/04
$ 150,381.96 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 6/24/04 thru 7/01/04
$ 2,846,255.29 Total Accounts Payable
PAYROLL
$ 438,833.11 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 7/02/04
$ 5,905.60 Payroll Deduction check # 97899 thru # 97904
dated 7/02/04
$ 444,738.71 Total Payroll
City Council Meeting 07-12-04
2
$ 3,290,994.00 GRAND TOTAL
2. Indianhead Council/Boy Scouts of America — Fee Waiver for Temporary Food
Waived the $47.00 temporary food permit fee for the Indianhead Council/Boy Scouts
of America temporary food waiver fee
Conditional Use Permit Review — Legacy Village PUD (County Road D and Kennard
Street)
Approved to review the conditional use permit for the Legacy Village PUD in one
year.
4. Conditional Use Permit Review - Woodlynn Ponds Townhomes PUD (County Road
D)
Approved to review the conditional use permit for the Woodlynn Ponds Townhomes
in one year.
5. Conditional Use Permit Review - St. Paul Regional Water Services (1900 Rice Street)
Approved to review the conditional use permit for the St. Paul Regional Water
Services' Campus at 1900 Rice Street again in one year.
6. County Road D Improvements — Existing Roadway (Walter St. to New Cty Rd D
Alignment) — City Project 04-06 — Resolution Approving Plans and Authorizing
Receipt of Bids with City Project 02-08
Adopted the following resolution approving the plans and specifications and
authorizing the receipt of bids wit City Project 02-08 for the Western Segment of the
Existing County Road D Improvements, Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 04-06:
RESOLUTION 04-07-119
APPROVING PLANS
ADVERTISING FOR BIDS WITH CITY PROJECT 02-08
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the city council on February 9, 2004, plans and
specifications for County Road D Realignment (West), Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 02-08,
have been prepared by URS Engineers, Inc. under the direction of the city engineer, who presented
such plans and specifications to the city council for approval on June 28, 2004, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the city council on June 28, 2004, plans and
specifications for the Western Segment of Existing County Road D Improvements, Walter Street to
the new alignment for County Road D, City Project 04-06, have been prepared by SEH Engineers,
Inc. under the direction of the city engineer, who has presented such plans and specifications to the
city council for approval.
City Council Meeting 07-12-04
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA:
1. Such plans and specifications for the Western Segment of Existing County Road D,
Walter Street to the new alignment for County Road D, a copy of which are attached hereto and made
a part hereof, are hereby approved and ordered placed on file in the office of the city clerk.
2. The city clerk shall include said plans and specifications with the bid documents for
City Project 02-08 and shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the
Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such combined improvement
under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published twice, at least
three weeks before the date set for bid opening, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids
will be publicly opened and considered by the council at 10:00.m. on the 30th day of July, 2004, at
the city hall and that no bids shall be considered unless sealed and filed with the clerk and
accompanied by a certified check or bid bond, payable to the City of Maplewood, Minnesota for five
percent of the amount of such bid.
3. The city clerk and city engineer are hereby authorized and instructed to receive, open,
and read aloud bids received at the time and place herein noted, and to tabulate the bids received.
The council will consider the bids, and the award of a contract, at the regular city council meeting of
August 9, 2004.
7. Transfer to Close Fund for Project 03-05
Approved a transfer of $14,998 from the Sewer Fund to the fund for Project 03-05 and
the appropriate budget changes to close the fund.
8. Amended Agreement for Project 03-26
Approved the termination of a lease with Daniel and Mickele Gebhard at 3062
Hazelwood in exchange for the payment of $25,000 received from Town and Country
Homes, City Project 03-26.
9. Tamarisk Resources, Inc. -Temporary 3.2 Beer
Approved the temporary 3.2 beer permit for Tamarisk Resources fort Aldrich Arena
on July 24th, 6:00 p.m. to midnight.
H. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7:17 p.m. Cahanes Estates Preliminary Plat (2415 Minnehaha Avenue)
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Planner Roberts presented specifics from the report.
C. Commissioner Pearson presented the Planning Commission Report.
City Council Meeting 07-12-04
d. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The
following persons were heard:
Gerald Prosh, 1736 Bartelmy Lane, Maplewood
Kelly Conlin, the developer
e. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the Cahanes Estates preliminary plat as
received by the city on June 28, 2004 which shall include who shall be installing the street
light (e) and will reiterate that the developer will save trees.
Seconded by CouncilmemberKoppen Ayes -All
2. 7:42 p.m. Mapletree Townhouses (Southlawn Drive)
a. Preliminary Plat
b. Design Approval
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Planner Roberts presented specifics from the report.
C. Commissioner Pearson presented the Planning Commission Report.
d. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The
following persons were heard:
Jon Brandt, the applicant
Richard McKeen, 1825 Radatz, Maplewood
Gerald Gallagher, representing Azure Properties
e. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Koppen moved to approve the preliminary plat plans for the Mapletree
Townhomes.
Seconded by CouncilmemberRossbach
Motion Failed
Ayes-Councilmember Rossbach and Koppen
Nays -Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers
Juenemann and Monahan-Junek
Mayor and council noted their vote was due to the amount of blacktop involved in the project.
Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the design plans for the Mapletree Townhomes.
Seconded by CouncilmemberKoppen
Ayes-Councilmember Rossbach and Koppen
Nays -Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers
Juenemann and Monahan-Junek
City Council Meeting 07-12-04
Motion Failed
Mayor and council noted their vote was due excessive asphalt in the proposed plans.
8:32 p.m. Trout Land (west of Highway 61 and new County Road D)
Comprehensive Plan Changes
a. Land Use Plan Changes — R-1 and M-1 to R3(M) (4 votes)
b. Collector Street Designation — County Road D (4 votes)
Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development
Preliminary Plat
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Senior Planner Ekstrand presented specifics from the report.
C. Commissioner Pearson presented the Planning Commission Report.
d. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The
following persons were heard:
Jim Kellison, developer
Ed Franzmeier, President High Ridge Point Townhouses
Robert Kranz, 1264 Highridge Court, Maplewood
Ken Halvorson, 1255 Highridge Court, Maplewood
George Rossbach 1406 East County Road C, Maplewood
Jim Kellison, developer -second appearance
e. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution amending the Maplewood
Comprehensive Land Use Plan from R1 (single dwelling residential) and M1 (light
Manufacturing) to R3M (medium Density residential
LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION 04-07-120
WHEREAS, Jim Kellison, of Kelco Real Estate Development Services, applied for a change
to the City's land use plan from R1 (single dwelling residential) and M1 (light manufacturing) to
R3M (medium density residential).
WHEREAS, city staff further requested a revision to the land use plan to redesignate a
collector street which would align with the city's proposed County Road D extension on the west
side of Highway 61.
WHEREAS, these changes apply to the property located generally on the west side of Highway
61 south of County Road D. Refer to the attached map.
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
City Council Meeting 07-12-04
1. On May 17, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing. 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. The Planning Commission
recommended that the City Council approve the land use plan change.
2. On July 12, 2004, the City Council discussed the land use plan 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
changes, including the redesignation of the County Road D extension collector, for the
following reasons:
The development would be consistent with the goals and policies of the
comprehensive plan.
2. The proposed town houses would be consistent with the city's policies for
medium -density residential uses, since they would create a transitional land use
between commercial property and single dwelling property.
3. Town houses would be compatible with the abutting town house development.
4. The difference in grade between the proposed townhomes and the existing homes
to the west will create a natural buffer between developments.
5. There would be no significant impact on the existing neighborhood streets to the
west.
Seconded by CouncilmemberMonahan-Junek Ayes-Councilmembers Juenemann,
Koppen, Monahan-Junek and Rossbach
Abstain -Mayor Cardinal
Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution approving the collector
street designation for Trout Land:
LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION 04-07-121
WHEREAS, Jim Kellison, of Kelco Real Estate Development Services, applied for a change
to the City's land use plan from R1 (single dwelling residential) and M1 (light manufacturing) to
R3M (medium density residential).
WHEREAS, city staff further requested a revision to the land use plan to redesignate a
collector street which would align with the city's proposed County Road D extension on the west
side of Highway 61.
WHEREAS, these changes apply to the property located generally on the west side of Highway
61 south of County Road D. Refer to the attached map.
City Council Meeting 07-12-04
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
On May 17, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing. 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. The Planning Commission
recommended that the City Council approve the land use plan change.
4. On July 12, 2004, the City Council discussed the land use plan 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
changes, including the redesignation of the County Road D extension collector, for the
following reasons:
The development would be consistent with the goals and policies of the
comprehensive plan.
2. The proposed town houses would be consistent with the city's policies for
medium -density residential uses, since they would create a transitional land use
between commercial property and single dwelling property.
3. Town houses would be compatible with the abutting town house development.
4. The difference in grade between the proposed townhomes and the existing homes
to the west will create a natural buffer between developments.
5. There would be no significant impact on the existing neighborhood streets to the
west.
Seconded by CouncilmemberMonahan-Junek Ayes-Councilmembers Juenemann,
Koppen, Monahan-Junek and Rossbach
Abstain -Mayor Cardinal
Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to adopt a resolution approving a conditional use
permit for a planned unit development for the Trout Land multi -use PUD.
Seconded by CouncilmemberKoppen Ayes-Councilmembers Koppen and
Monahan-Junek
Nays-Councilmembers Juenemann, and
Rossbach
Abstain -Mayor Cardinal
Motion failed due to lack of tangible plans resulting in possible premature variances.
Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution rezoning the western
portion of proposed County Road D R3) and eastern portion M 1):
ZONING MAP CHANGE RESOLUTION 04-07-122
City Council Meeting 07-12-04
WHEREAS, Jim Kellison, of Kelco Real Estate Development Services, applied for a change
in the zoning map from R1 (single -dwelling residential) and M1 (light manufacturing) to PUD
(planned unit development);
WHEREAS, the Maplewood City Council denied this proposal and approved a change in the
zoning map to R3 (multiple -dwelling residential).
WHEREAS, this change applies to the property located west of the proposed County Road D
extension west of Highway 61 and south of the existing alignment of County Road D East.
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
On May 17, 2004, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
approve the applicant's proposed zoning map change to PUD.
2. On July 12, 2004, the City Council held a public hearing. The city staff published a
notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners.
The Council gave everyone at the hearing an opportunity to speak and present written
statements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations from the city
staff and Planning Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described
change in the zoning map to R3 (multiple -dwelling residential) for the following reasons:
The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning
code.
2. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of
neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of
the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately
safeguarded.
The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community,
where applicable, and the public welfare.
4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and
economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers,
police and fire protection and schools.
5. The proposed change would not permit any variances from the city's development
guidelines, as would a change to PUD as requested by the applicant.
Seconded by CouncilmemberRossbach Ayes-Councilmembers Juenemann,
Koppen, Monahan-Junek and Rossbach
Abstain -Mayor Cardinal
Councilmember Koppen moved to table final action on the Trout Land item until completion
City Council Meeting 07-12-04
of public hearing #4.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -All
4. 9:55 p.m. Interstate 94 Improvements — Consider MnDOT Proposed Project
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. City Engineer AN presented specifics from the report.
C. Frank Pafko, North Area Manager for MNDoT provided further specifics.
d. Marc Goess, MnDOT, provided further specifics.
e. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The
following persons were heard:
Don Disselkamp, 188 Crestview Drive North, Maplewood
Theresa Gunderson, 131 Crestview Drive North, Maplewood
Bob Oliveira, 200 Crestview Drive North, Maplewood
Dee Oliveria, 200 Crestview Drive North, Maplewood
Jim Berman, 2480 Brookview Drive, Maplewood
Jim Bloemendal, 2510 Brookview Drive, Maplewood
Gene Kulzer, 152 Crestview Drive, Maplewood
Stephanie Weber, 180 North Sterling, Maplewood
Councilmember Juenemann moved to extend the meeting until the yZenda was
completed.
Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes All
Terry DeGraw, 2500 Hudson Place, Maplewood
Ann Hackler, 235 Crestview Drive North, Maplewood
Eleanor Grant, 221 Crestview Drive North, Maplewood
Nora Slawick, 2335 Snowshoe Lane, Maplewood
Don Disselkamp, second appearance
Lee Kunn, 2481 Brookview Drive, Maplewood
Jean Ashley, 2466 Brookview Drive, Maplewood
Fred McCormack, 230 Crestview Drive, Maplewood
Patrick Vang, 187 Crestview Drive, Maplewood
Jane Ashley, 2466 Brookview Drive, Maplewood
Jim Gunderson, 131 Crestview Drive, Maplewood
Joe Chounard, 27 Sterling Avenue, Maplewood
f. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Koppen moved to approve staff recommendation option 2 of MnDOT's
request to grant municipal consent for the proposed improvements to Interstate 94 between
City Council Meeting 07-12-04 10
McKnight Road and TH 120. Council also directed the City Engineer to establish a
Neighborhood Work Group with the intent of working out final design details for any and all
solutions including an earthen berm and plantings along the project corridor, and to consult
the cities engineering consultant (TKDA) and to bring back details to the July 26, 2004
Council Meeting.
Seconded by CouncilmemberRossbach Ayes -All
A five-minute break was taken.
Trout Land (west of Highway 61 and new County Road D) CONTINUED
City Manager Fursman reported that the developer had indicated that the City Council action
on the rezoning would not substantially delay construction of the County Road D
Realignment project.
Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to adopt the preliminary plat for a development
project at County Road D west of Highway 61 as proposed in the Trout Land application. The
developer shall complete the following before the city approves the final plat:
Meet all requirements in the memo by Chris Cavett dated May 11, 2004.
2. Rename Outlot B with a lot number.
Seconded by CouncilmemberKoppen Ayes -All
L AWARD OF BIDS
None
J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Olivia Gardens (2329 and 2335 Stillwater Road)
Land Use Plan Change - R-1 (single dwellings) to R-2 (double dwellings) (4 votes)
Zoning Map Change (R-1 to R-2)
Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development
Preliminary Plat
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. Planner Roberts presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to adopt the following resolution changing the land
use plan for the Olivia Gardens plat on the west side of Stillwater Road, north of Bush
City Council Meeting 07-12-04 11
LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION 04-07-123
WHEREAS, Kelly Conlin, representing Homesites LLC, proposed a change to the city's land use
plan from R-1 (single dwellings) to R-2 (single and double dwellings).
WHEREAS, this change applies to the properties at 2329 and 2335 Stillwater Road in Section 25,
Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota. (The property to be known as Lots 1-14 of the
proposed Olivia Gardens)
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
On May 17, 2004, the planning commission held a public hearing. 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. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the plan
amendment.
2. On June 14, 2004, the city council discussed the proposed land use plan change. They
considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff.
3. On July 12, 2004, the city council again considered this request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described
change for the following reasons:
1. It would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
2. This change would eliminate an area that the city had once planned for commercial uses that
was between two residential areas.
3. This site is proper for and consistent with the city's policies for medium -density residential use.
This includes:
a. It is on a minor arterial street and is near a collector street.
b. Minimizing any adverse effects on surrounding properties because there would be no traffic
from this development on existing residential streets.
4. It would be consistent with the proposed zoning and land uses.
Seconded by CouncilmemberKoppen Ayes -All
Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the following resolution changing the zoning
map for the Olivia Gardens plat on the west side of Stillwater Road, north of Bush Avenue.
This change is from R-1 (single dwellings) to R-2 (Single and double dwellings) the reasons
for this change are those required by the city code and because the owner plans to develop
this part of the property to double dwellings:
City Council Meeting 07-12-04 12
RESOLUTION: ZONING MAP CHANGE 04-07-124
WHEREAS, Kelly Conlin, representing Homesites LLC, proposed a change to the zoning map
from R-1 (single dwellings) to R-2 (single and double dwellings).
WHEREAS, this change applies to the property at 2329 and 2335 Stillwater Road.
WHEREAS, the legal description of these properties are:
Auditors Subdivision No. 77, Subject to Highway and except the South 50 feet lying Easterly of
the West 243 feet, the following; Lot 7. (PIN 25-29-22-33-0071)
2. Auditors Subdivision No. 77, Subject to Highway, Lot 6. (PIN 25-29-22-33-0070)
All in Section 25, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota. (The property to be
known as Olivia Gardens)
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
On May 17, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this
change.
2. On June 14, 2004, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the
Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council gave
everyone at the hearing an opportunity to speak and present written statements. The council
also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission.
3. On July 12, 2004, the city council again considered this request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described
change in the zoning map for the following reasons:
1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code.
2. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring
property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the property adjacent to
the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded.
The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where
applicable, and the public welfare.
4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical
extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire
protection and schools.
5. The owner plans to develop this property for double dwellings.
City Council Meeting 07-12-04 13
Seconded by CouncilmemberRossbach Ayes -All
Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to approve the conditional use permit to a
planned unit development for the Olivia Gardens development to the west side of
Stillwater road, north of Bush Avenue:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 04-07-125
WHEREAS, Mr. Kelly Conlin, representing Homesites LLC, applied for a conditional use
permit (CUP) for the Olivia Gardens residential planned unit development (PUD).
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the Olivia Gardens development plan the city received on
April 21, 2004. The legal descriptions of these properties are:
1. Auditors Subdivision No. 77, Subject to Highway and except the South 50 feet lying
Easterly of the West 243 feet, the following; Lot 7. (PIN 25-29-22-33-0071)
2. Auditors Subdivision No. 77, Subject to Highway, Lot 6. (PIN 25-29-22-33-0070)
All in Section 25, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota. (The property to
be known as Olivia Gardens)
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
On May 17, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve
this permit.
2. On June 14, 2004, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a
notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council
gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The
council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning
commission.
3. On July 12, 2004, the city council again considered this request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described
conditional use permit because:
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.
The use would not depreciate property values.
City Council Meeting 07-12-04 14
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.
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.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
All construction shall follow the plans approved by the city. The city council may approve
major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor
changes to the plans. Such changes shall include:
a. Revising the grading and site plans to show:
(1) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation.
(2) All driveways at least 20 feet wide. If the developer wants to have parking
on one side of the main drive (Olivia Court), then it must be at least 28 feet
wide.
(3) All parking stalls with a width of at least 9.5 feet and a length of at least
18 feet.
(4) The driveway in front of Lots 1 and 2, Block 6 as wide as possible while
still accommodating the required screening and tree planting.
2.The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval
or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall
meet all the conditions and changes noted in Erin Laberee's memo dated July 1, 2004.
4. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in Olivia Garden shall be:
City Council Meeting 07-12-04 15
a. Front -yard setback (from a public street or a private driveway): minimum - 20 feet,
maximum — 35 feet
b. Front -yard setback (public side street): minimum - 30 feet, maximum - none
c. Rear -yard setback: 20 feet from any adjacent residential property line
d. Side -yard setback (town houses): minimum - 20 feet from a property line and 20 feet
minimum between buildings.
5. The developer or builder will pay the city Park Access Charges (PAC fees) for each
housing unit at the time of the building permit for each housing unit.
6. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -All
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the preliminaly plat (received by the
council on June 28, 2004).
The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final plat:
1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and
meet all city requirements.
b. * Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Pay the city for the cost of traffic -control, street identification and no -parking signs.
d. Provide all required and necessary easements (including all utility easements and ten -
foot drainage and utility easements along the front and rear lot lines of each lot and
five-foot drainage and utility easements along the side lot lines of each lot).
e. Cap and seal any wells on site.
f Have Xcel Energy install a street light at the intersection of Stillwater Road and the
proposed private driveway (Olivia Court). The exact location and type of light shall
be subject to the city engineer's approval.
2. * Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans
shall include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, driveway, tree, and street plans.
The plans shall meet all the conditions and changes listed in the memo dated April 26,
2004, and shall meet the following conditions:
City Council Meeting 07-12-04 16
a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code.
b. The grading plan shall:
(1) Include proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each
home site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat.
(2) Include contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb.
(3) Show housing pads that reduce the grading on sites where the developer can
save large trees.
(4) Show the proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city
engineer.
(5) Include the tree plan that:
(a) Shows where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This
plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site.
(b) Shows no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits.
(6) Show drainage areas and the developer's engineer shall provide the city
engineer with the drainage calculations. The drainage design shall
accommodate the runoff from the surrounding areas.
c. The street, driveway and utility plans shall show the:
(1) Water service to each lot and unit.
(2) Repair of Stillwater Road (street, trail and boulevard) after the developer
connects to the public utilities and builds the private driveways.
(3) Driveway in front of Lots 1 and 2, Block 6, as wide as possible while still
accommodating the necessary screening and trees.
3. Paying for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans.
4. Change the plat as follows:
a. Show drainage and utility easements along all property lines on the final plat. These
easements shall be ten feet wide along the front and rear property lines and five feet
wide along the side property lines.
b. Label the private driveway as Olivia Court and label Stillwater Road on all plans.
City Council Meeting 07-12-04 17
c. Label the common area as Outlot A.
5. Secure and provide all required easements for the development including any off-site
drainage and utility easements.
6. The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site
drainage. The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the
developer or contractor has not completed before final plat approval.
7. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey -Washington Metro Watershed District for grading.
Submit the homeowners' association bylaws and rules to the city for approval by the
director of community development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible
party for the care and maintenance of the common areas, the publicly -owned parcel to the
north, private utilities, landscaping and retaining walls.
9. Record the following with the final plat:
a. All homeowners' association documents. These documents shall include provisions for
the care and maintenance of the publicly -owned parcel north of the project site.
b. A covenant or association documents that addresses the proper installation,
maintenance and replacement of the retaining walls.
The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions
to the city for approval before recording.
i. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey -Washington Metro Watershed District for grading.
ii. Obtain a NPDES construction permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA).
iii. The owner or contractor shall get demolition permits from the city to remove the house,
equipment building and the other structures from the two properties.
iv. Obtain the necessary approvals and permits from MnDOT.
v.If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the director of community
development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat.
*The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit
or approves the final plat.
Seconded by CouncilmemberMonahan-Junek Ayes -All
City Council Meeting 07-12-04 18
2. Code Amendment — Public Hearings at Planning Commission (Second Reading)
City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. Assistant City Manager Coleman presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to adobt the following brobosed ordinance amendment about
_public hearings:
ORDINANCE NO. 848
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE MAPLEWOOD CITY CODE
ABOUT PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances:
Section 1. This amendment changes Section 12-310 (f)(1). Variances. (additions are underlined and
deletions are crossed out):
(f) Variances. Procedures for granting variances from this section are as follows:
(1) The city council may approve variances to the requirements in this section. Before the
city council acts on a variance, the planning commission shall hold a public hearing and shall
make a recommendation to the city council.
The city staff shall notify the property owners within 500 ;=-,OQ feet of the
buffer at least ten days before the hearing. The city may require the applicant to mitigate any
buffer alteration.
Section 2. This amendment changes Section 14-57. License application approval procedure.
(additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out):
Sec. 14-57. License application approval procedure.
An application for a home occupation shall be filed with the director of community development. Upon
receipt of a complete application, the director of community development or his or her designee, shall
prepare a report and recommendation to send to the planning commission. The planning commission
shall hold a public hearing for each home occupation license request. The city shall mail a notice to all
property owners within 500 feet of the proposed home occupation at least 10 days before the hearing.
The city also shall publish the public hearing notice in the official newspaper at least ten days before the
hearing. The planning commission will consider the proposal and then shall make a recommendation.
The planning commission's recommendation shall be forwarded to the city council. The city council
will make the final decision about all home occubation license reauests. O W -MR
(Code 1982, §17-22)
Section 3. This amendment changes Section 34-5(c). (additions are underlined and deletions are
crossed out):
Sec. 34-5. Preliminary plat procedure.
City Council 07-12-04 19
(c) The director of community development shall deliver to the finance director for deposit any
moneys received as fees required in this chapter with each preliminary plan. The finance
director shall credit the money to the general fund of the city. All moneys so received shall be
used to defray the expenses of processing the application. The director of community
development shall prepare a report and recommendation. This report shall then be forwarded to
the planning commission. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing about the
proposal and they shall forward a recommendation to the city council.
The hearing shall be held following publication of
notice of the time and place thereof in the official newspaper at least ten days before the day of
the hearing. The applicant, property owner, and all other property owners within 500 ;=-'oQ feet of
the property to be subdivided shall be notified by mail at least ten days before the day of the
hearing. When a division or subdivision to which this chapter does not apply is presented to the
city, the city clerk shall with in ten days certify that this chapter does not apply to the particular
division. If the city fails to preliminarily approve or disapprove an application within the review
period, the application shall be deemed preliminary approved, and upon demand the city shall
execute a certificate to that effect.
Section 4. This amendment changes Section 44-10. Zoning map. (additions are underlined and
deletions are crossed out):
Sec. 44-10. Zoning map.
(a) Generally. The boundaries of the districts designated in section 44-9 will be shown on a map,
and the map is hereby made part of this chapter, which map shall be known as the zoning map of
the City of Maplewood. The map shall include any zoning changes recommended by the
planning commission wand adopted by the city council. map is finally appr-eN@d and
The planning commission shall hold a public hearing to
consider all zoning map changes and shall make a recommendation about such changes to the
city council. The city shall notify all property owners within 500 feet of the proposed zoning
map change about the public hearing and shall publish a public hearing notice in the official
newspaper at least ten days before the public hearing.
@i"' and Posting shall b -M f-- F—fflitwaf All interested persons shall
be heard at the hearing or any adjournment thereof. After the hearing, the planning commission
shall forward a recommendation to the city council. The city council shall adopt the zoning
map and any changes to it; and all notations, references and data shown thereon are hereby
incorporated by reference into this chapter and shall be as much a part of this chapter as if all
were fully described. The map shall be kept up to date as provided in subsection (c) of this
section.
Section 5. This amendment changes Section 44-1093(c). (additions are underlined and deletions are
crossed out):
(c) The development shall conform to the plan as filed with the city. Any substantive changes in the
plan shall require a recommendation by the planning commission after they hold a public hearing
and requires the approval of the city council.
Section 6. This amendment changes Section 44-1096(b). (additions are underlined and deletions are
City Council 07-12-04 20
crossed out):
Sec. 44-1096. Procedure.
(b) The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on each application
for a conditional use permit. This h@ar-iag shall
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 cause a notice to be mailed to each of
the owners of property within 500 4=5:9 feet of the boundary lines of the property upon which
such use has been requested, which notices are to be mailed to the last known address of such
owners 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.
Section 7. This amendment changes Section 44-1240(b). (additions are underlined and deletions are
crossed out):
Sec. 44-1240(b).
(b) The city shall send a copy of approved amendments, subdivisions, variances or conditional uses
under this article to the commissioner. The city shall mail all such approvals within ten days of
final action. When the city approves a variance after the commissioner has recommended denial,
the notification of the approved variance shall include the minutes of the public
hearing and of the city council's action.
Section 8. This amendment changes Section 44-1283(a). (additions are underlined and deletions are
crossed out):
Sec. 44-1283. Permit termination.
(a) The material extraction permit may be terminated by the city for violation of this article and of
any conditions of the permit. No permit may be terminated until the city council has held a
public hearing and the city council has determined whether the permit shall be terminated, at
which time the operator shall be afforded an opportunity to contest the termination. The city
council may establish certain conditions which, if not complied with by the operator, will result
in immediate suspension of operations until the city council holds a public hearing to consider
terminating #=PA �V�; � Q`i o 4 -the permit. .
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes -All
Electric Franchise Fee
City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. Finance Director Faust presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Koppen moved to have staff complete an impact study of fees and revenue and
City Council 07-12-04 21
return to council at the July 26th City Council Meeting.
Seconded by CouncilmemberMonahan-Junek Ayes -All
K. NEW BUSINESS
1. Charitable Gambling Fund Requests -2005
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. Assistant City Manager Coleman presented specifics from the report.
d. The following persons were heard:
Ery Carlson, representing Pleasant View Park Hockey Rink
Marilyn Vars, 622 Communities Partnership
Tamara Lee, Ramsey County Library
Joe Foxx, Ramsey County Fair Board
Joanne Zimmer, Dispute Resolution Center
Councilmember Koppen moved to table this item until the July 2e City Council
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -All
2. Police and Fire EMS Study -NO REPORT
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. Police Chief Thomalla presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Koppen moved to discuss the EMS Study on Thursday, July 22nd at 5:30 p.m.
Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes -All
3. Legacy Village Sculpture Park: Approval of Plans and Specifications
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. Parks and Recreation Director Anderson presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the concept plans for Legacy Park as presented
and authorized staff to proceed with the bid opening schedule on July 22, 2004 and funding
allocated from the proceeds of the approved tax abatement bond:
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes -All
4. County Road D Extension (Hazelwood to TH 61), City Project 02-07: Resolution
Authorizing Condemnation Proceedings on Property for Purposes of Right -of -Way
Acquisition
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
City Council 07-12-04 22
b. City Engineer AN presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolutions authorizing eminent domain
proceedings on property for purposes of right-of-way acquisition:
RESOLUTION 04-07-126
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A PORTION OF PROPERTY
OWNED BY THIES TALLE FOR ROAD PURPOSES LOCATED AT 1695 COUNTY ROAD D
AND AUTHORIZING ACTION BY THE CITY ATTORNEYS
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood desires to acquire fee title to real property in Ramsey County,
Minnesota, legally described as:
The northerly 10.00 feet of the southerly 43.00 feet of said West Half of the East Half of the
Southeast Quarter, Section 34, Township 30, Range 22, which lies south of the Southerly right-of-
way of T.H. 393-694, Ramsey County, Minnesota;
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood desires to acquire a temporary construction easement over,
under and across the following described property:
The northerly 10.00 feet of the southerly 53.00 feet of the said West Half of the East Half of the
Southeast Quarter, Section 34, Township 30, Range 22, which lies south of the Southerly right-of-
way of T.H. 393-694, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the above-described property is being acquired pursuant to the City's powers of
eminent domain under Minnesota Statutes Section 117.57, specifically including a quick take action under
Minnesota Statutes Section 117.042;
WHEREAS, the Property is within the area of operation of the City;
WHEREAS, the Property is included in the City's Maplewood Mall Area Transportation
Improvement plan ("MMATI"), which is a plan to address traffic issues in the area of Maplewood Mall;
WHEREAS, MMATI consists of reconstructing County Road D between Hazelwood Street and
White Bear Avenue to provide for the safety of the traveling public; and
WHEREAS, acquiring the Property serves the public purpose of facilitating traffic control,
furthering public safety and assisting in the orderly development of the City;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA THAT: for purposes of acquiring fee interest in the Property for road purposes, and a
temporary construction easement in the City of Maplewood, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, by a
condemnation in the exercise of the right of eminent domain (pursuant to the City's powers under Minnesota
Statute Section 117.57, and to exercise the City's power of eminent domain under Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 117, specifically including quick take action under Minnesota Statute Section 117.042) as expedient
and quickly as provided by law, the City of Maplewood authorizes its attorneys to file a Petition for
Condemnation and other action deemed necessary by the City Attorneys to acquire said property.
RESOLUTION 04-07-127
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A PORTION OF PROPERTY
City Council 07-12-04 23
OWNED BY LARSON ENTERPRISES FOR ROAD PURPOSES LOCATED AT 1755 COUNTY
ROAD D AND AUTHORIZING ACTION BY THE CITY ATTORNEYS
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood desires to acquire fee title to real property in Ramsey County,
Minnesota, legally described as:
The Northerly 10.00 feet of the southerly 43.00 feet of the East half of the East half of the Southeast
Quarter, Section 34, Township 30, Range 22, which lies south of the Southerly right-of-way of T.H.
393-694, except the East 231 feet thereof, Ramsey County, Minnesota;
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood desires to acquire a temporary construction easement over,
under and across the following described property:
The northerly 10.00 feet of the southerly 53.00 feet of the East half of the East half of the Southeast
Quarter, Section 34, Township 30, Range 22, which lies south of the Southerly right-of-way of T.H.
393-694, except the East 231 feet thereof, Ramsey County, Minnesota;
WHEREAS, the above-described property is being acquired pursuant to the City's powers of
eminent domain under Minnesota Statutes Section 117.57, specifically including a quick take action under
Minnesota Statutes Section 117.042;
WHEREAS, the Property is within the area of operation of the City;
WHEREAS, the Property is included in the City's Maplewood Mall Area Transportation
Improvement plan ("MMATI"), which is a plan to address traffic issues in the area of Maplewood Mall;
WHEREAS, MMATI consists of reconstructing County Road D between Hazelwood Street and
White Bear Avenue to provide for the safety of the traveling public; and
WHEREAS, acquiring the Property serves the public purpose of facilitating traffic control,
furthering public safety and assisting in the orderly development of the City;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA THAT: for purposes of acquiring fee interest in the Property for road purposes, and a
temporary construction easement in the City of Maplewood, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, by a
condemnation in the exercise of the right of eminent domain (pursuant to the City's powers under Minnesota
Statute Section 117.57, and to exercise the City's power of eminent domain under Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 117, specifically including quick take action under Minnesota Statute Section 117.042) as expedient
and quickly as provided by law, the City of Maplewood authorizes its attorneys to file a Petition for
Condemnation and other action deemed necessary by the City Attorneys to acquire said property.
Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes -All
County Road D Extension (Hazelwood to TH 61), City Project 02-07: Resolution
Authorizing Modification of Existing Construction Contract
City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. City Engineer AN presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution directing the modification of
City Council 07-12-04 24
the existing construction contract change order No 1:
RESOLUTION 04-07-128
DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered the Construction
of County Road D Realignment East (T.H. 61 to Southlawn Dr.) City Project 02-07, and has let a
construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and
WHEREAS, it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as
Improvement Project 02-07, Change Order No. 1.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA that the mayor and city clerk are hereby authorized and directed to modify the existing
contract by executing said Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $0.00. The revised contract amount is
$2,369,862.11.
No revisions to the project budget are proposed at this time as Change Order No. 1 is for
the purpose of modifying the contract completion dates only.
Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes -All
6. IT Technician Position
City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. IT Director Hurley presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to authorize the creation of one regular full-time position
entitled IT Technician with a pay range established at $35,313 to $44,486.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes -All
L. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None
M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
1. Panhandling on Highway Exit Ramps -Mayor Cardinal noted that this is a state problem
whereas the city does not normally get involved. Chief Thomalla noted that "begging" is
protected by the 1st amendment and a city cannot enact an ordinance to prevent it.
2. Met Council -Mayor Cardinal gave a consensus report from the Met Council.
3. 50th Anniversary -Mayor Cardinal asked anyone who was interested in volunteering time
to step forward.
4. National Night Out -Mayor Cardinal encouraged all to participate on Tuesday, August 3rd
Parks and Recreation Director Anderson stated that 50 block parties have registered with
Parks and Recreation to date.
5. Phalen Park -Mayor Cardinal expressed concerns with inappropriate activities at Phalen
Park.
6. NEST-Councilmember Koppen announced NEST will be using reserve funding to pay
City Council 07-12-04 25
for the new GPS System and that the NEST bus will be in the parade on Thursday, July
15th
N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
None
O. ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Juenemann moved to adjourn the meeting at 12:50 p.m.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - All
City Council 07-12-04 26
-
r .�Ml
Jlv
Alli
PPPiii
_ f
JIM_
r
Rw
— — — —
dr,
ay
rim
—
—
r
.--�--i
IIII
• r
I
F •■ t! d
. i �� � �_�:� �„ .•sun � TG
Gcv.' fav,.
Senator
Arles "Chuck" Wiger
Frank Pafko, North Area Manager
Department of Transportation
1500 West County Road B2
Roseville, MN 55113
771
�., Senate
/-, 1 7
State of Minnesota
June 30, 2004
RE: CONSTRUCTION OF A NOISE ABATEMENT WALL ON SOUTH SIDE OF 1-94 BETWEEN
MC:KNIGHT ROAD AND CENTURY AVENUE
Dear Mr. Pafko:
As the area state senator and member of the Senate Transportation Policy and Finance Committee, I
strongly support the construction of a noise abatement wall along the south side of 1-94 between McKnight
Road and Century Avenue.. It is essential that the reconstruction of this highway not go forward without a
plan to address the crucial noise concerns of
area residents.
As you may know, the Brookview neighborhood has 384 homes. Any increase in traffic will directly affect a
large number of people. Neighborhood residents are not opposed to the widening of 1-94; they simply want
to make sure that there will be no negative impacts as a result of reconstruction. I believe an effective sound
oarrier would do much to alleviate the worries of residents.
Representative Nora Slawik and I are very concerned that MnDOT has decided that building a noise
abatement wall would not be cost-effective, and has instead suggested that the city pay for much of its
construction costs. The city of Maplewood can not afford the cost of a noise abatement wall. The costs
should be included in the MnDot project.
I strongly encourage all parties involved to work to find a solution that allows a wall to be built. I trust that
you will soon address these concerns.
Thank you for your attention.
Sin rely,
Cha es Chuck Wiger
State Senator
cc: Congresswoman Betty McCollum
Mayor Robert Cardinal
Kathleen Juenemann, Maplewood City Council Member
Jackie Monahan-Junek, Maplewood City Council Member
Marvin Koppen, Maplewood City Council Member
Will Rossbach, Maplewood City Council Member
Richard Fursman, Maplewood City Manager
State Representative Nora Slawik
Ramsey County Commissioner Victoria Reinhardt
Theresa Gunderson (constituent)
Ira
301 State Capitol. 75 Constitution Ave., St. Paul, MN 55155-1606 (651) 296-6820 sen, chuck. wiQer@senate. leg. state.mn.us e«
9cnrlrrt Punrr `
'; Pmr Cnruumr. Fihr
Page 1 of 2
Chuck AN
From: Lisa Hawkinson [Imhawkinson@usfamily.net]
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 4:28 PM
To: Chuck AN
Cc: Kathleen Juenemann; Marvin Koppen; Will Rossbach; Jackie Monahan-Junek
Subject: Interstate 94 Improvements
Dear Mr. AN and the Maplewood City Council:
In response to the Mn DOT study, as outlined in your July 6, 2004 letter, I would like to make a few comments.
It doesn't take an engineer to notice some inadequacies of the "study" conducted. Also, data can be interpreted
in many different ways, it also can be presented in a way that doesn't necessarily paint the whole picture. I think
this information is being presented in a way that only benefits Mn DOT and not the existing residents.
The second paragraph says:
"... the existing noise wall on the eastern end of the corridor is providing 2-11 dBA of noise reduction. "
A range of 2-11 is quite a range. If the existing wall is only providing 2 dBA then it isn't doing it's job any longer.
According to the Federal Highway Administration guidelines, effective barriers reduce noise by 10-15 dBA. If the
wall is, in fact, which I seriously doubt, providing 11 dBA it can be improved to attain 15 dBA of noise reduction.
".... raising this (existing) wall to a 20 -foot height would provide less than 1 dBA of noise reduction during the next
20 -year period. "
I find this statement simply ludicrous. 1 dBA? Are these guys for real? 30 dBA is a whisper in a library.
The whole statement is not "fact" it is merely an estimate. To quote the Federal Highway Administration: "sounds
vary from person to person, there is no precise definition of loudness." Also, nearly every "study" that has been
done to predict future (anything) population, cars, whatever the case may be, is completely inaccurate. We've all
seen this happen in every situation, from building schools that don't meet population predictions, to budgets gone
awry etc. We cannot accurately predict the noise level during the next 20 years. Twenty years ago, the majority
of Woodbury didn't exist, and with the onslaught of (continued) building east of the metro and more importantly
now into Wisconsin. Again, it doesn't take any fancy study to have common sense. The traffic along 1-94 will only
increase enormously. People moving out to the "suburbs" or the "country" populate the road at our
neighborhood's expense.
".... human ear cannot detect changes in noise of less than 3 dBA".
This statement isn't totally accurate. Human ears are capable of perceiving an extraordinarily wide range of
changes in loudness. The human ear detects loudness, pitch and tone. It takes all three of these elements to
notice a "change". It is the pitch, the vibration frequency that is the most delicate. This is why we don't hear our
own heartbeat; we don't hear low frequencies. Their statement is presented in a way that misconstrues what is
going on with road noise. Anyone can find information on hearing. I found my "truth" by researching the
Otolaryngology, College of Medicine, University of Illinois. MnDOT says that they have noise experts have
testified about the human ear. The Council should wonder who are the experts, and again, we all don't have to
have a law degree to know that we could find another "expert" to refute testimony to make our case.
7/12/2004
Crestview Sound Barrier
Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works, Maplewood, MN
Dear Sir,
I am writing regarding the 7/12 hearing on a sound
barrier for the Brookview neighborhood. I have a
prior commitment that could make it difficult to
attend the hearing but I wanted to make my thoughts
known to the City Council. I have lived at 230
Crestview Drive North since the mid 1980s. Our house
is directly south of I-94 on the southeast corner of
Crestview and Hudson Place. Over the years, noise
from I-94 has steadily increased and the proposed
highway expansion will exacerbate the situation. I
request that the City Council deny Municipal Consent
for this highway project unless an acceptable sound
barrier is included in the project. I would prefer a
20 ft wall of the type that is routinely constructed
along Twin City Interstates. As a prime example, in
the last year or so, a barrier was constructed along
694 just north of highway 5 (in Oakdale I believe,
near Menards and the State Patrol). The cost of a new
wall at Crestview has been quoted as around $200,000.
This is less than 2% of the reported 11 million dollar
cost for the entire project. In this light, the sound
wall does not seem to be much of a burden for MNDOT.
I would also like to comment in the decibel (dB) scale
since these numbers can be confusing. The dB scale is
logarithmic (base 10) and was designed to allow
comparison of very large and very small numbers. This
was needed since the human ear is capable of hearing
an exceptionally wide range of sound levels. There is
an informative web site
(http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/-jw/dB.html) from the
Univ. of New South Wales that explains dB in detail
along with excellent audio demonstrations. Your
letter stated that the ear cannot detect noise changes
less than 3 dB; I was able to clearly hear 3 dB
differences in loud sounds on the above audio
demonstrations. This is because 3 dB reduction
represents cutting the sound power in half. Thus,
for loud sounds, this change is easy to hear while it
may well be hard to detect for quiet sounds. The
noise from I-94 is not a quiet sound. A 10 dB
reduction cuts the sound power to 1/10th of the
original sound. The human ear does not sense sound in
a linear fashion so a 10 dB reduction will not appear
like it is ten times softer than the original noise.
My point is that noise reductions in the 3-10 dB range
will be of considerable significance to the Brookview
neighborhood.
There have been several plans put forth for the
expansion of I-94 that have been of greater scope than
Page 1 of 1
Chuck AN
From: Donna Miller [donna.miller@codeword.com]
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 10:48 AM
To: Chuck AN
Subject: Sound Barrier
Dear Mr.Ahl,
Please accept this email as strong support of the sound barrier proposal being put before the council at tonight's meeting.
My husband and I think the construction of the additional height and length WILL make an enormous difference to the
quality of life in this section of Maplewood. The noise from the present level of traffic with the existing wall is extremely
distracting and we are 1 block south of the frontage road on Brookview Drive. Thank you for your consideration and
attention.
Donna and Timothy Miller
2488 Brookview Drive
Maplewood, MN 55119
651-578-6928
7/12/2004
BRITISH
Ministry of
6j
� COLUMBIA
Trans ortation
p
N
and Highways
J' MI 'I
W I il v
-1,
Guidelines for the Use
of Earth Berms to Control
Highway Eloise
January 1997
Highway Engineering Branch
Ministry of Transportation and Highways
940 Blanshard Street
Victoria, British Columbia V8W 3E6
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mk
�`;�• .!�y, :;.`�: •>,,,ti��,ii;: t�'t t``1 '511?:. •`;•\
in
�,;. :r:\iy,;•.••�;;k2:?`• ^w;��?;?„itis:. ,
.S
2•,
ii''Y 1�•�•14t3Y1\ t;'1:f:ii �itl� ls., ''4 �` �•,`�
%��''x�:%��t�x., x;1:7• Viz`<\��*�' 'r;: %��� .
'4i.. '� *•tvi ids":': � ;• � `:
��.ytj}� .asi•��x�.ay{ti;���7\iCS ��`i'a@'; ��`\e�,
;;�'l\s�aFyhl ;dna`•. ;^
i>Y2��{:'M' li �; •. •t ,iii\+'�
Contents
Paqe
Summary
Introduction
2 Noise Barrier Fundamentals 2
3 Noise Attenuation Performance of Earth Berms 5
4 Noise Attenuation Performance of Berm/Walls 8
5 Effects of Vegetation on Wall and Berm Performance 10
Glossary
Appendix A - MoTH Noise Policy Summary
Guidelines for the Use of Earth Berms
to Control Highway Noise
(Summary, cont'd)
3. The slopes of earth berms consume substantial space, so that berms cannot be built as close to the
traffic (the noise source) as can noise walls. Since the performance of a noise barrier improves as it
is moved closer to either the noise source or the receiver, this may give walls another performance
advantage over earth berms. The magnitude of this advantage varies with source -to -receiver
distance and with receiver elevation, but it can amount to another 1 to 2 dBA, bringing the total
advantage of a wall over an equivalent berm of normal softness to 3 to 4 dBA.
4. The top profile, or shape of the berm top, does not appear to significantly influence berm
performance, with flat-topped and round -topped berms showing only a slight (about 0.5 dBA)
advantage over wedge-shaped berms.
5. Berms with highly sound absorptive surfaces perform substantially (4 to 5 dBA) better than
berms with normally absorptive grassy surfaces. This major improvement appears to result
from the near total suppression of reflected/scattered sound waves as well as surface waves and
from the additional absorption of energy from sound waves passing over the berm's very soft top.
Berms with very wide flat tops should then perform better than those with narrower tops.
6. It appears then that the so called "soft top correction" does exist, but only for berms with
surfaces substantially more sound absorptive than normal grassy surfaces. It remains to be
seen whether such surface can be achieved in practice. Some potential may lie in the use of light-
weight admixtures such as vermiculite and pearlite or perhaps fine wood chips or bark mulch. The
sound absorption capabilities of such materials in combination with soil need to be evaluated.
7. When walls were added to the tops of normal earth berms, rather than being diminished, the overall
performance of the resulting berm/walls (for the same total barrier height), was improved by an
average of 1.5 dBA for the various height and slope combinations tested. It appears that when a
wall is used to elevate the barrier top above the berm surface, the berm-reflected/scattered
sound waves have a greater tendency to cancel, or at least not reinforce, the direct waves at
the top of the barrier. In addition, surface waves are prevented from propagating over the
berm crest.
8. Optimal berm/wall performance was observed when the wall comprised less than half the
total barrier height. For example, a 3 m high, 3:1 sloped berm with a 1 m wall on top gave the
largest noise reduction (10.2 dBA) of any normally sound absorpive berm or berm/wall configuration
tested.
9. Berm/walls then tend to perform better than pure berms of normal softness and similar to, or
in some cases better than, pure walls. While it may be possible to "tune" berm/walls so as to
achieve optimum sound cancellation at the barrier top and hence maximum noise reduction, this
would require detailed analysis of site geometry, wall and berm height and berm slope and surface
nature.
10. When a 1 m wall was added to the top of a 3 m high berm having a highly sound absorptive surface,
the overall barrier performance was reduced slightly from 10.4 to 9.9 dBA - in spite of the total
berm/wall height being 1 m greater than the pure berm. This indicates that the substantial
benefit of applying a very soft surface to a berm is largely duplicated by the placement of a
wall on top of a bene so that unfortunately the two effects do not appear to be directly
additive.
11. The presence of vegetation on the face of an earth berm or wall can have minor beneficial effects
due to the absorption and scattering of traffic noise, however, on a plantable scale, vegetation does
not provide an effective noise barrier. However if vegetation is allowed to overtop the crest of a
noise barrier, it will cause sound to be scattered down in behind the barrier, thereby reducing
its performance, particularly at higher frequencies where the barrier itself is most effective.
Guidelines for the Use of Earth Berms S-2
to Control Highway Noise