Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1994 10-24 City Council Packet
OCTOBER 20,1994: PRE - AGENDA MEETING: 4:30 - 5:00 P.M., FOLLOWED BY PARK &RECREATION COMMISSION INTERVIEWS: 5:00 - 5:30 P.M. AGENDA MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M., Monday, October 24, 1994 Council Chambers, Municipal Building Meeting No. 94 -21 A. CALL TO ORDER B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE C. ROLL CALL D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes of Council /Manager Workshop, October 3, 1994 2. Minutes of Meeting 94 -20, (October 10, 1994) E. APPROVAL OF AGENDA EA. PRESENTATIONS 1. Park & Recreation Commission Appointment 2. Ramsey County Charter Commission - Proposed Amendments F. CONSENT AGENDA All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items. If a member of the City Council wishes to discuss an item, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and will be considered separately. 1. Approval of Claims 2. Temporary Appointment /Custodial 3. Water System Analysis Agreement 4. Conditional Use Permit Termination: 2633 Stillwater Road (Carbones) 5. Conditional Use Permit Termination: 2691 White Bear Avenue Maplewood Adolescent Chemical Dependency Center) 6. Conditional Use Permit Review: 2425 White Bear Avenue (Redeeming Love Church) 7. Planning Commission Resignation 8. Certification of Delinquent Sewer Bills 9. Certification of Unpaid Weed Cutting Bill G. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 7:00 P.M.: Conditional Use Permit Revision: Aladdin's Castle (Mall) 2. 7:15 P ..: M:.: Goodrich Dome Conditional Use Permit Site and Landscape Plans 3 7:45 P.M. Mapleleaf Estates Land Use Plan and Zoning Changes (4 Votes Required) Street Vacations Utility Easement Vacation Cul -de -sac Width Variance Preliminary Plat H. AWARD OF BIDS I. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Assessment Objections - Searle Street Storm Sewer, Project 93 -14 2. Assessment Objections - East Shore Drive Storm Sewer, Project 94 -06 J. NEW BUSINESS 1. Driveway Approval Request, 936 Currie Court 2. Home Occupation License Ordinance (1st Reading) 3. Commercial Property Study 4. Request for Charitable Gambling Funds 5. Amber Hills Neighborhood Presentation 6. Purchase of Open Space - Site #153A 7. Purchase of Open Space - Site #1030 8. Purchase of Open Space - Site #140 9. Cable Television Franchise Renewal K. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS L. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1. 2. 3. 4. M. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 1. 2. N. ADJOURNMENT CITY COUNCIUMANAGER WORKSHOP OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 5:00 p.m., Monday, October 3, 1994 Maplewood Room, City Hall MINUTES A. CALL TO ORDER The Council /Manager meeting of the Maplewood City Council was held in the Maplewood Room, City Hall. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Bastian at 5:02 p.m. B. . ROLL CALL Mayor Gary Bastian Councilmember Sherry Allenspach Councilmember Dale Carlson Councilmember Mary Koppen Councilmember George Rossbach Others Present: Present Present Present Present (Arrived at 5:12 p.m.) Present City Manager Michael McGuire Public Works Director Ken Haider Community Development Director Geoff Olson C ity Attorney Patrick Kelly C. . APPROVAL OF. AGENDA Mayor Bastian moved that the agenda be amended to include Item E -1. -.. Fire,-Department Issues. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Carlson and was approved. Ayes: All D. CITY INSPECTIONS City Manager McGuire stated that staff will be reviewing City inspection of: building permits, developer projects, and City projects. Building Permits Geoff Olson handed out a memo outlining 11 steps involved with building permits. Ken Haider discussed Engineering review of drainage. Developer Prom - Ken Haider reviewed the process. In the future, the drainage plans will be marked "Preliminary -- Subject to Change." Ken Haider also discussed a typical subdivision process. i E. ASSESSMENTS Patrick Kelly handed Out information entitled "Special Assessment for Local Improvements" and reviewed it with the Council. There were numerous questions. E1. FIRE DEPARTMENT ISSUES City Manager McGuire handed out a letter from the Maplewood Relief Association stating that the City's funding obligation had not been met. City Manager McGuire reviewed with. the City Council. the amount that Maplewood paid. and the amount Oakdale and Landfall p aid. He stated that it seemed apparent that the shortfall should be paid by someone other than Maplewood and, in fact, Maplewood has been paying more.than our share for fire department operations and Relief Association benefits. The consensus of the City Council was that the City Manager should contact the Relief Association and inform them of the formula that Maplewood has been using and that the City Council would be requesting a joint meeting with Oakdale to discuss this. F. PAVER (,PMS) FOLLOW -UP This item was postponed to a future meeting. Cam. HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION Commission - members Marie Koehler (Chair), Pat Williamson, Gail Schiff and Gordy Heinin er, along with Sherrie Le, introduced themselves, and Chair Marie Koehler reviewedg . the Commission calendar for-the year. There was discussion among the members and the City YCouncil. Mayor Bastian stated that the Commission has been doing a great job and urged them to continue on. H. OTHER BUS NESS No other business. I. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. 2 MINUTES OF MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M., Monday, October 10, 1994 Council Chambers Municipal Building Meeting No. 94 -20 A. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota was held in the Council Chambers, Municipal Building, and was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Mayor Bastian. B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE C. ROLL CALL: Gary W. Bastian, Mayor Present Sherry Allenspach, Councilmember Present Dale H. Carlson, Councilmember Present Marvin C. Koppen, Councilmember Present George F. Rossbach, Councilmember Present D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 1. Minutes of Meeting 94-19, (September 26 , 1994 ) Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the minutes of Meeting No. 94 19 September 26, 1994) as presented. Seconded by Councilmember Carlson Ayes - all E. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Bastian moved to approve the Agenda as amended: L1 Future Topics - Council /Manager:Meeting L2 Park & Ride L3 Maplewood Future L4 Airplanes L5 Mayor's Update Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes - all EA. APPOINTMENTS /PRESENTATIONS 1. Cities Week Poster and Essay Contests a. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. b. Mayor Bastian presented__proclamations__to the following students for their posters Erica Whalen, Woodbury; 1st Grade, Carver School Nehal DeSai, Maplewood; 2nd Grade, Weaver School Bradley Walker, Maplewood; 5th Grade, Weaver School 1 10 -10 -94 2. Recycling Update by Mike Hinz a. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. b. Mr. Hinz, Gopher Recycling, updated the Council regarding recycling. He also presented his plans for the recycling poster contest. 3. Planning Commission Appointment a. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. b. Councilmember Rossbach - moved to appoint Milo Thompson to the Planning Commission. Seconded by Councilmember Carlson Ayes - all 4. Ramsey County Charter Commission — Proposed Charter Amendments a. Manager McGuire presented the.staff report. b. Mayor Bastian moved to table until after H -1. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach F. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilmember Carlson moved, all, to.approve the Consent l 1. Approval of Claims Approved the following claims: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: $ 482,339.26 2569916.37 739 PAYROLL: $ 236 489928041 285,409.34 190249664.97 Ayes - all d by Counci 1 member Al 1enspach :.. ayes - Items F1 thru F8 as recommended. Checks #3117 #3185 Dated 9 -15 -94 thru 9 -29 -94 Checks #14996 - #15156 Dated 10 -10 -94 Total Accounts Payable Payroll Checks #42648 thru #42888 Dated 9 -23 -94 Payroll Deduction Checks #42893 thru 42910 dated 9 -23 -94 Total Payroll GRAND TOTAL 2 10 -10 -94 2. Resolution of Appreciation for Mike Holder 94 - 10 - 113 JOINT RESOLUTION of APPRECIATION WHEREAS, Mike Holder has been a member of the Maplewood Community Design Review Board since January, 1989 and has served faithfully in that capacity; and WHEREAS, the Community PPDesignReviewBoardhasappreciated his 0 judgement; experience, insights and good and WHEREAS, he has freely given of his time and energy, without compensation, for the betterment of the City of Maplewood; and . WHEREAS, he has shown dedication to his. duties and. has consistently contributed his leadership and effort for the benefit of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED for and on behalf of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, and its citizens., that Mike is hereby extended our gratitude and appreciation for his dedicated service and we wish him continued success in the future. 3. Final Plat: Maplewood Estates Second Addition Approved the Maplewood Estates Second Addition .final plat creating nineteen lots for houses south of Ripley Avenue on Lakewood Drive. Approval is subject to the County recording the vacation resolutions, deed restrictions, covenants and deeds required by the City. 40 Final Plat: Phalen Lake Addition Approved the Phalen Lake Addition final plat.. creating lots for fourteen houses west of English Street on the north side of Frisbee Avenue. 5. Final Plat: Oak Ridge Estates South Approved the Oakridge Estates South final plat, creating twenty -one lots for houses on Lakewood Drive, north of Maryland Avenue. approval is subject to the County recording the deed restrictions, covenants and deeds required by the City. The City shall not release the final plat until the City approves these documents. 6. Park and Recreation Commission Job Description - Revision Approved a modification to the Park and Recreation Commission Job Description which was approved on August 26, 1994. This modification reflects the Commission's review role in Open Space Management and land acquisition, as well as includes the City Manager as a Reporting Division for the Park and Recreation Commission. 7. Intern Program Authorized establishment of an internship program, allowing hiring of three grades of interns for temporary non -union positions, working up to 40 hours per week, for a maximum of one year, unless there is an exceptional situation. The classes and wages would be: Intern I Up to $ 9.00 /hr. Intern II Up to $11.00 /hr. Intern III Up to $14.00 /hr. 3 10 -10 -94 8. Uniform Settlement Document - Sergeant's Contract 0 Approved the Uniform Settlement Document covering the Sergeant's contract, which is,required by the Bureau of Mediation Services. G. PUBLIC.HEARINGS 1. 7 :00 P.M. (7:29 P.M.): Assessment Hearing - Searle St. Storm Sewer, Project 93 -14 a. Mayor Bastian convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding the assessment roll for Project 93 -14. b. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. c. Director of Public Works Haider presented the specifics of the report. d., City Attorney Kelly explained the procedure for public hearings. e. Mayor Bastian opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following was heard: Dave Nelson, Trinity Baptist Church, written f. Mayor Bastian closed the public hearing. g. Counci 1 member Rossbach introduced the folIowing.Resolut, ion and moved its adoption: 94 - 10 - 114 ADOPTION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL - PROJECT 93 -14 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council has met and heard and passed.on all objections to the proposed assessment for the construction of Searle Street Storm Sewer as described in the files of the City Clerk as Project 93 -14, and has amended such proposed assessment as it deems just, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1. Such proposed assessment, as amended, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 20 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or after the first Monday in january, .1996, and shall bear interest at the rate of 7.5 percent per annum from the date of .the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1995. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 4 10 -10 -94 3. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the Council to reimburse itself in the future for the portion of the cost of this, improvement paid for from municipal funds by levying 4 additional assessments, on notice and hearing as provided for the assessments herein made, upon any properties abutting on the improvement but not made, upon any properties abutting on the improvement but not herein assessed for the improvement, when changed conditions relating to such properties made such assessment feasible. 4. To the extent that this improvement benefits nonabutting properties which may be served by the improvement when one or more later extensions or improvements are made, but which are not herein assessed, therefore it is hereby declared to be the intention of the Council, as authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section 420.051, to reimburse the City by adding any portion of the cost so paid to the assessments levied for any of such later extension or improvements. 5. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended down the property tax lists of the County, and.such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Seconded by Councilmember Carlson Ayes - all 2. 7 :15 P.M. (7 :36 P.M.): Assessment Hearing —East Shore Drive Storm Sewer, Project 94- 06 a. Mayor Bastian convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding the assessment roll for Project 94 -06. b. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. c. Director of Public Works Haider presented the specifics of the report. d. City Attorney Kelly explained the procedure for public hearings. e. Mayor Bastian opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following persons were heard: Written objection from Gunhilde Koreen, 1455 Almond Ave - Vacant lot, not homesteaded. Gary Meyer, 1069 Gordon Paul Koreen, 1866 East Shore Drive Nancy Evans, 1852 Adele f. Mayor Bastian closed the public hearing. g. Councilmember Carlson introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: 5 10 -10 -94 94 - 10 - 115 ADOPTION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT 94 -06 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, thePPP . City Council has met and heard and passed on all objections to the proposed assessment for the construction of East Shore Drive Storm Sewer as described in the files of the City Clerk as Project 94 -06, and has amended such proposed assessment as it deems just, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1. Such proposed assessment, as amended, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein. included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 20 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or after the first Monday in January, 1996, and shall bear interest at the rate of 7.5 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1995. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the Council to reimburse itself i n the future for the portion of the cost of this improvement paid for from municipal funds by levying additional assessments, on notice and hearing as provided for the assessments herein made, upon any properties abutting on the improvement but not made, upon any properties abutting on the improvement but not herein assessed for the improvement, when changed conditions relating to such properties made such assessment feasible. 4. To the extent that this improvement benefits nonabutting properties which may be served by the improvement when one or more later extensions or improvements are made, but which are not herein assessed, therefore it is hereby declared to be the intention of the Council, as authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section 420.051, to reimburse ' the City by adding any portion of the cost so paid to the assessments levied for any of such later extension or improvements. 5. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended down the property tax lists of the County, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all g. Appeals will be heard on October 24, 1994. 6 10 -10 -94 3. 7:30 P.M. Lakeview Lutheran Church, 1194 County Road C a. Mayor Bastian convened the meeting for a public hearing regardingPg9 a request from Lakeview Lutheran Church to expand the church building and increase the size of their parking lot. b. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. c. Director of Community Development Olson presented the specifics of the report. d. Commission Chair Axdahl presented the Planning Commission report. e. Boardmember Anitzberger presented the Community Design Review Board report . f. Mayor Bastian opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following was heard: Al Kruse, 1379 East County Road C g. Mayor Bastian closed the public hearing. Conditional Use Permit h. Councilmember Rossbach introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption. 94 - 10 - 116 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION - LAKEVIEW LUTHERAN CHURCH AND PARKING LOT WHEREAS, Lakeview Lutheran Church applied for a conditional use permit to expand their church and parking lot. WHEREAS, this permit allows increasing the impervious surface area of the site from 38% to 40 %. WHEREAS, this permit applies to 1194 East County Road C. The legal description is: Lots 1, 2 3 and 11 of Block 1 of Speisers Arbolada Addition WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1, On September 19, 1994, the Planning-Commission recommended that the City Council approve this permit. 2. On October 10, 19094, 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. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approve the above - described conditional use permit, because: 7 10 -10 -94 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 runoff, .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. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the City. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of Council approval or the permit shall end. The Council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The City Council shall review this permit in,one year. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all Design Plans i. Councilmember Rossbach moved.to approve the design plans stamped June 239 1994 for Lakeview Lutheran Church, subject.to the findings required by the Code. The property owner shall do the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the City has not issued a building permit for this project. 8 10 -10 -94 v 2. Complete the following before occupying the building: a. Screen all roof - mounted equipment on the proposed addition that would be visible from streets or adjacent property. (code requirement) b. Provide security lighting as approved by the Director of Public Safety. c. Provide at least one foot - candle of light over the entire parking lot.. d. All shrubs shall be below window level and away from the building to avoid any hiding places. 3 If any required work is not done, the City may allow temporary occupancy if a. The City determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The.City receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work The amount shall be 150% of the cost of the unfinished work. C. The City receives an agreement that w i l l allow the City to complete any unfinished work. 4. All work shall follow the approved plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes -.all 4. 7:50 P.M. (8:05 P.M.): Duluth Street, South of County Road C a. .Mayor .Bastian convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding a request fora change in the zoning map from M -1 (light manufacturing) to R -2 (single and double dwellings). b. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. c. Director of Community Development Olson presented the specifics of the report. d. Commission Chair Axdahl presented the Planning Commission report. e. Mayor Bastian opened the .public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following persons were heard: Bruce Mogren, the applicant f. Mayor Bastian closed the public hearing. Zoning Map Change g. Councilmember Koppen introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: 9 10 -10 -94 94 - 10 - 117 ZONING MAP CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Bruce Mogren applied for a change in the zoning map from M -1 light manufacturing) to R -2 (single and double dwellings). WHEREAS, this change applies to the undeveloped property that is east of Duluth Street. and south of County Road C. The legal description is: That part of the East 101.5 feet of the West 134.5 feet of Lot 11, W. H. Howard's Garden Lots, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Ramsey County Recorder, which l i e s Southerly of a line 30 feet Southerly of and parallel to the following described line: Commencing at the Northeast corner.of Section 9, Township 29, Range 22; thence West, assumed bearing, along the North, line of said Section 9 a distance for 498.57 feet thence South a distance of 43 feet to the beginning of said line; thence South 83 feet; thence Southwesterly along a tangential curve, concave to the Northwest, the central,angle being 90 degrees, radius 300 feet, a distance of 471.24 feet to a point; thence Southwesterly along a tangential curve, concave to the Southeast, the central angle being 89 degrees, 13 minutes, 15 seconds, radius 283.60 feet, a distance of 441.62 feet and there terminating, subject to easements of record. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1. On September 19, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the change. 2. On October 10, 1994, 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 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 the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. 3. 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. 10 10 -10 -94 5. The City zoned the property to the East R -2. r 6. The zoning is consistent with the land use plan. Seconded by Councilmember A1lenspach Ayes all Lot Division h. Councilmember Koppen m_ oved to approve - the. re,, uested lot di,v s creating two lots. on the East side of Dul ut.h Street , South of Cou Road C. subJect to completion of the following conditions.: 1. Give the City a wetland easement This easement shall cover the wetland and the land within twenty feet surrounding the wetland. The Watershed District must approve the wetland boundaries. This easement shall prohibit any building or structures within twenty feet of the wetland or any mowing, cutting, filling, grading or dumping within ten feet of the wetland or in the wetland itself. The purpose of this easement is to protect the water quality of the wetlands from fertilizer and to protect the wetland habitat from residential encroachment. The City staff must approve this deed before it is given to the County for recording. 2. Give the City a drainage easement. This easement shall cover the land within the wetland boundaries The City engineer must approve this deed before it is given to the County for recording. 3. Instal l permanent signs around the edge of the wetland buffer easements. These signs shall mark the edge of the easements and shall state there shall be no mowing, vegetation cutting, filling or dumping. 4. Install survey monuments along the wetland boundary. 5. Record the new deeds within one year. Seconded by Councilmember Allenspach Ayes - all H. AWARD OF BIDS NONE EA. PRESENTATIONS 4. Ramsey County Charter Commission - Proposed Charter Amendments a. Mayor Bastian moved to table until October 24 ,.1994,_ Seconded by Councilmember Carlson Ayes - all 11 10 -10 -94 I. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Assessment Objections - County Road C Improvements, Project 89 -04 a. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. b. Director of Public Works Haider presented the specifics of the report. c. Councilmember Carlson moved to ,accept staff recommendation regarding the assessment objections as follows: PIN 10- 29 -22 -21 -0002 (Philip Oswald) Reduction from 15 to 14 units for Street and Storm Sewer, reducin 9 total assessment from $31,625.00 to $30,000. PIN 09- 29 -22 -11 -0011 (James A. Scott Linda A. Scott) No change.- assessment to remain at $1,625.0.0. PIN 10- 29 -22 -22 -0001 (George F. Rossbach) No change - assessment to remain at $4,400.00. Seconded by PpCouncilmemberKoppen Ayes - Mayor Bastian, Councilmembers Allenspach, Carlson, Koppen Nays W None Abstain - Councilmember Rossbach J. NEW BUSINESS 1. Pull Tab Gambling Permit Hill Murray Mother's Club a. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. b. Mayor Bastian asked if anyone wished to speak before the Council regarding this The following was heard: Barb Peterson, Gambling Manager c. Councilmember Allenspach introduced the following, Resolution and moved its adoption: 94 - 10 - 118 APPROVING CHARITABLE GAMBLING BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota:.that the p permitermit for lawful gambling is approved for the Hill Murray Mother's Club to be located at the Red Rooster Lounge, 2029 Woodlynn Avenue. FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council requests that the Gambling Control Division of the Minnesota Department of Gaming approve said permit application as being in compliance with Minn. Statutes No. 349.213. NOW, THEREFORE, be it further resolved that this Resolution by the City Council of Maplewood., Minnesota, be forwarded to the Gambling Control Division for their approval. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all 12 10 -10 -94 2 Recreational Fire $urning Permit a. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. b. Shelly M r ryahepresented the specifics of the report. c. Councilmember Koppen moved first reading of an ordinance repeal chapters .12 262 12 -28, 12 -29 and 12 30 of the' Muni" ciDal Code. Seconded by Mayor Bastian Ayes - all 3. Commmun i ty Center Contingency Request No. 4 a. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. b. Assistant City Manager Maglich presented the specifics of the report. c. Councilmember Carlson introduced the following, Resolution and moved its adoption: 94 - 10 - 119 DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered the construction of a City -owned community center, Community Center Project, and has let a contract with Ado1fson & Peterson for general construction-, and WHEREAS, changes to a variety of structural features in the building required additional carpentry and WHEREAS, it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as Community Center Project A &P Change Order 5 to allow the recommended changes in design. 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 5 in an amount of $73,710.78. The contract is amended per the following detail: Current Contract $5,491,338.00 Proposed Change Order #5 73,710.78 Amended Contract $5,565,048.78 Seconded by Mayor Bastian Ayes - all 13 10 -10 -94 d. Councilmember Carlson introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: 94 - 10 - 120 DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WHEREAS the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered the construction of a City -owned community center, Community Center Project, and has let a contract with Doody Mechanical, Inc; and WHEREAS, it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as Community Center Project Doody Mechanical Change Order 4 to allow the recommended changes in design. 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 4 in an amount of $6,147. The contract is amended per the following detail: Current Contract $2,126,916.18 Proposed Change Order #4 6,147.00 Amended Contract $291339063.18 Seconded by Mayor Bastian Ayes - all e. Councilmember Carlson introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: 94 - 10.- 121 DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered the construction of a City -owned community center, Community Center Project, and has let a contract with Hunt Electric; and WHEREAS, it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as Community Center Project Hunt Electric Change Order 4 to allow the recommended changes in design. 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 4 in an amount of $42,627.07. The contract is amended per the following detail: Current Contract $ 979306.00 Proposed Change Order #4 42,627.07 Amended Contract $1 Seconded by Mayor Bastian Ayes - all a 14 10 -10 -94 K. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS NONE M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1. Future Topics - Council Manager Meeting a. Councilmember Carlson requested Adult Movie Theater's be placed on the Agenda for the next Council /Manager,Meeting. 20 Park.& Ride a. Counci 1 member Rossbach commented on the placement of handicap stalls at the. Park & Ride locations being too far away. b. Staff will investigate. 3. Maplewood Future a. Mayor Bastian inquired whether there would be any interest in establishing a committee of Maplewood residents interested in planning for Maplewood's future. 4 Airplanes a. Mayor Bastian asked if there is a place in Maplewood for flying model airplanes - some communities have such locations. b. Councilmember Rossbach commented there might also be a need for a place to fly kites - for kite flying organizations. c. Staff will research. 5.. Mayor's Update a. Parkside Fire Department's Fire Prevention Open House is set for October 11 at 5:00 P.M. b. Maplewood has earned a Pedestrian Safety Citation Award in the 55th Annual AAA Pedestrian Protection Program as a community that has been without a pedestrian death for 6 years. c. Mounds Park Academy has set a meeting date of 7:00 on 11 -2 -94 at the Mounds Park Gallery to discuss the facility and neighborhood issues. d. At the second meeting in August, The Partnership requested funding for a survey in the School District. The survey has been postponed until after the week of October 10, we will be getting feedback on those questions soon after that. e. A 24 minute tape, called "The Aftermath" is available (will be in the Council Office) depicting the effects of the car crash when Olympic diver Bruce Kimball drove through a crowd of teenagers while intoxicated. The purpose of the film is to educate and promote safe and sober driving. 15 10 -10 -94 f. The Ramsey County League of Local Governments will meet October 16 at Moundsview City Hall to discuss city /municipality taxes. ti g. Letter has been received from Governor Carlson and the Department of Transportation regarding looking into intergovernmental partnership opportunities and ways to share equipment, maintenance resources, modal planning and technical services. The letter is being passed on to staff. h. Many comments and compliments regarding the Community Center and staff. i. We need to look into means of monitoring and controlling behavior of some of the younger people at the Community Center - possible look at suspension of membership as a deterrent. j. The feasibility of paying Community Center memberships by Visa or Mastercharge is being studied. M. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS NONE N. ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING 8:45 P.M. Lucille E. Aurelius City Clerk 16 10 -10 -94 EA -/ MEMORANDUM Action by roux qjj, . ## To: Michael A. Mc e, M ag r Endorse From: Bruce K. Ande of P ks & Recreation Modi f i ed,,„*„,... Sub': Park Commissio Va Rei ected.,..,..,,,,, Date: October 4, 1994 e For The October 24, 1994, City Council Meeting Introduction The Park and Recreation Commission currently has a vacancy as Ellis Wyatt resigned, due to re- locating I outside the City of Maplewood. The Park and Recreation Commission advertised in the Maplewood Review and St. Paul Pioneer Press for Commission applicants. Two applications were received and the Park and Recreation Commission interviewed them at their regular sched- uled meeting on September 19, 1994. Back round The City Council policy currently requests that Commissions screen the applicants and make a recommendation to the City Council. The Park and Recreation Commission interviewed both Rick Brandon and Carolyn Peterson. The Commission made no formal recommendation on the two .applicants. Following an interview process, the Commission made the following observa- tions: , 1. The Commission felt it was beneficial to have a representative from the open Space Commit- tee.. Both applicants have served on the Open Space Committee. 2. The Commission is currently well balanced geographically. 3. The Commission is currrently well balanced by gender. 4. The Commission is responsible for reviewing the Park System and provides recommendations to the City Council regarding ADA. Ms. Peterson was involved in the ADA process and cur- rently serves on the North Como Disability Concerns Committee, Maplewood Seniors and Persons With Disability Committee. Recommendation The City Council should interview the two candidates at a Council/Manager meeting. Staff recommends that the City Council appoint either Carolyn Peterson or Rick Brandon to fill the vacancy on the Park and Recreation Commission. CITY Of MAPLEWOOD BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPLICANT INFORMATION FORM NAME. ADDRESS /99 q PI {Ors E - — _ ZIP.,. 1) Now ton have you 1 ed in the City of Maplewood?9 Z) noes your employ require 9muiretravelorbeingn away from the c7No i ty which would make regular attendance at meetings difficult? Yes i n re interested in serving? (check)3 n which Board or Coo ss you i nteroay Community Desi 9 n -Review Board V a rk b Recreation Commission Housing & Redevelopment Authority Planning Commission Human Relati Commission Police INvil Service Commission A ) D• you h ave an e i i areas of interest within this Board's or Commission's scope of y rocnnncihl itQS? or clubs in the Communit3) List other organizations y in which you have been or are an active participant: e 6) i!hy would you like to serve on this board or Commission? CITY OF MAPLEMOOD D BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS SEP 61 I APPLICAN? INFORMATION FORM _ I aMF F, 1k ,PtorE "/ 4DDRESS 6 aO COCXYfti Ocxc C ZIP 5 Now long have you lived 1 n the City of Maplewood? 2) Does your employment require travel or being away from the community which would make regular attendance at meetings difficult? _.Yes _X No 13) On which hoard or Comission are you interested in serving? (check) community Design; Board Housing & Redevelopment Authority Human Relations Commission Park & Recreation Commission Planning Commission Police :ivil Service Commission 4) Do you have any SC2cific areas of interest within this Board's or Commission's scope of responsibilities? I awe kvowledabl about wna +Ine C vac Lmwkee- evvi5ohd. I'M ax av Wj v e worked Lotcycl ud ah advocr..t For a5 vear5 -For + o, 3) list other organizations or clubs in the Community in which you have been or are an active participant: Ode h Space COMM 1'ee & Dev, pae Cap M a « h . AC(LjJ+-Va)l(e L-eQ ue _ t r e SkaLi t v Club Sa leaaue 6) Why would you like to serve on this board or Commission? waif to be-tp rake 9CLIPIeWOOCR info iIne. k 0 covvuh - f - V)(X+ aniohe w0 of a +ra -1 ai er% eavc vac, .. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: T dive acco55 rovn }- tazcao 'PQidc Sol ctw\ ;aw\(l 0 t4 14 t. kSSUeS rtic k5t;e- rats iti kr- rye Gborinoo 4 Charter C ommission 250 Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard St. Paul, MN 55102 October 3,1994 Lucille Aurelius, City Clerk Maplewood City Hall 1830 E. County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 1 1 Tel:266 -8016 Fax:266 -8039 A by Council-V Endorse Mo dif i e Re J ecte Date Dear Lucille, Enclosed please find brochures from the Ramsey County Charter Commission on two p pro osed amendments for distribution to the Maplewood City Council, in preparation for their October 10, 1994 meeting. Sincerely, fr ii Theurer Ramsey County Charter Commission Minnesota's First Home Rule County printed on recycled paper with a minimum of 10% post- consumer content AFBCME Text of proposed amend= ment to the Charter Sec. 2.02 Powers of the County Board K. To sell, lease or otherwise dispose of park property upon such terms as it considers best in the public interest. In the event the intended use is not consistent with park purposes, before disposal of any real prop- erty for such inconsistent use, the county board shall hold a public hearing as the intended use of the property, after first providing at least twenty days written notice of the hearing date to the municipality in which the property is located and to all owners of land within 1,000 feet of the real property to be disposed. Before the sale. lease or disposal - of nark property for any inconsistent use. the county board shall adopt. by resolution. a po =y providinLy for no net loss of nark, recreational or op_ ace land and facilities. At a minimum. the po =y shall provide that Dark. recreational and open pace land acquired for suchpurposes may not be converted to mother use unless such land and recreational facilities are replaced in equivalent amount and of similar cuality r t ap I i a I f Vote,YES r.. i on Nov. 8 for this amendment Shall the Ramsey County Home Rule Charter be amended to require the County Board to maintain a policy which provides for no net loss ofpark, recreational or open space land and facilities? ' Recommendation: The Charter Commission recommends you vote YES on this amendment. For more information, contact: RAMSEY COUNTY Ramsey County Charter Commission 250 Court House 15 West Kellogg St. Paul, MN 55102 266 -8016 O Ramsey County Charter C ommission i Information on the proposed amendment to the Ramsey County Charter Vote YES on no net loss of Parks and Open Space Shall the Ramsey County Home Rule Charter be amended -to require the County Board to maintain a policy which provides for no net loss of park, recreational or open space land and facilities ?" At the same meeting, the Commission adopted the "Process for Educating Public about Proposed. Charter Amendments." This process is based on the proposition that the Commission's most important responsibility is to make sure that the_ public understands what is being voted on; that is, that the public is given both pro and con information about the proposed amendment the amendment: h l awAAA Current Thos whoewo SUPPORT ES W t i this amendment The Home Rule Charter authorizes the say that the amendment: County Board to sell or lease park property. On the amendment for No Net -Loss when the property is intended to be used for maintains, at a minimum, the current o Park and Op Space,p p C must hold anon -park purposes, the Board _ s ac of ark and o en s ace in Ramsegpppy This information was prepared to explain the ublc hearin . An conve ance' of ark landp_ g y y p Count y' advantag and disadvantages. of the pg _ g p p must be by ordinance. All ordinances .require amendment to the Ramse ` C. t HomeyY an additional ublic hearin and are sub ectpgJ re uires in the Charter, that. the Countq Rule Charter on No- Net -Loss of Park and r f r n m.toeeedu Board . have a No Net .Loss P61 withy Open Space,.'p minimum standaxds, - h f l 3 the Ramsey Count BoardInMarco99 , y y Executive Sunrtnrtary of Commissioners established b ,resolution a.Y ensures the rotectlon of ark lands aspp Un Ma 10 , :1993 with a subse went lan-y _ . :. q n: ace and `orpolicyrequiring .park or ope sp pre for urban develop owspP guage amendments on September 20, and facilities converted'to another use, be replaced December 13 193 the Rarnse County9 .. _ )in: an a uivalent amount, in a comarableqp Charter Commission a roved ..the followinpp g Unlike hlocationandofsimilarquality. Un e t e question for inclusion on the 1994 generalqg Charter, this resolution can be rescinded or election ballot:amended by a vote of four county commis-Those :who OPPOSE . th s sinners.amendment say that Shall the Ramsey County Home Rule Charter be amended -to require the County Board to maintain a policy which provides for no net loss of park, recreational or open space land and facilities ?" At the same meeting, the Commission adopted the "Process for Educating Public about Proposed. Charter Amendments." This process is based on the proposition that the Commission's most important responsibility is to make sure that the_ public understands what is being voted on; that is, that the public is given both pro and con information about the proposed amendment the amendment: h Sec 12.04 General Laws Superseded A. In Minn. Stat. Sec. 375.08, the following lan2ua2e regarding a vacancy in the positions of cc =v attorney or sheriff is superseded by Charter Section 7.02: The person appointed shall serve the remainder of the term. Vote YES on Nov. 8 for this amendment Shall the Ramsey County Home Rule Charter be amended to provide that a County Board appoint- ment to fill a vacancy in the elected offices of County Attorney or County Sheriff continue only until the next general election, instead offor the completetion of the four year term as presently provided ?" Ramsey County Charter Commission Information on the proposed amendment to the Ramsey County Charter The Ramsey County Charter Commission initiated this amendment and recommends that you vote YES. Ramsey County Charter Commission 250 Court House 15 West Kellogg St. Paul, MN 55102 RAMSEY COUNTY 266_8016 Vacancy in the elected offices of Sheriff or Attorney AGENDA NO. F-1 AGENDA REPORT TO: Cit Mana FROM: Finance Director RE: APPROVAL OF CLAIMS DATE: October 7, 1994 It is recommended that the Council approve payment of the followin claims: U110414111-ft 297,656.49 513,959.29 PAYROLU 234,519.22 283,899-93 Checks # 3186 thru # 3199 and # 14341 thru #14357 Dated 9-30-94 thru 10-5-94 Checks # 15168 thru # 15243 Dated 10-24-94 Total Accounts Pa Pa Checks # 42922 thru # 43149 Dated 10-07-94 Pa Deduction check # 43154 thru 43171 Dated 10-07-94 Total Pa GRAND TOTAL Attached is a detailed listin of these claims, lz Attachments FINANCEAPPRUMAGN VOUCHREG C. i Y t-j F m A P i... L. ij P.A 6; E I 10/07/94 10 0 V C, Li C H L-1 R I "C H E- C K R E: G I S 7 FOR PER'10D 10 I V 0 U C H R HECK 4 DIVEOR CHECK VE14D R E il 11 il AM C HE C K NUMBER NUMBER b A TE t'll 'A M t"I D E S C R i P I i Sri A M 0 li NT AMOUNT 3186 34174"0 09/30/94 HL-kll'AGE THEA"i'ER COMFANY P R 0 G R A M S UP FL ES 00 00 0 0 • 0 0 _. . - -- ____.._. 3187 980700 0 9 i 31-1 9 4 LINDA 7 1 C K COMM C'fR CHANGE FUNDS 0 o 0 3188 72ZZOO 09/30/94 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PtE_'RA -SEF" P/F, DED OR 1'-"ICI* PR'-'3ZI .0c,i ' SARAH SAUI-NIDERS M 18 9 541400 09/29/94 MlNN. STATE TREASURER STA-fE DRIVERS LIC FtES PAYABLE 459.00 4 00 ICI i 3190 541400 09/Z9/94 MINN. s TREASURER mccri.-JR VEH LIC f• • EES PAYABLE I I lio s195 w 13 3191 4 El 0 1 ZE'O 10/03/94 L.M.C.I.T.I lq S Uifi A l C ----------3 4 _t 0 x 3 " 4, 2f 0 2 5 iii 19 2 630910 10/03/94 NATIONWIDE ADVERTISiNG SERV.A fj V E R T I S M E NT C 0 M M C T R P 0,S)i f i i7_11 N 11073.10 ADVERIISMEN"I COMM CTR FOSI 1 4 919.64 1 '5'2.74 oil 3193 450110 10/03/94 L.M.C.I.T.WORK C OMP Q TIR i 14S I'ALLM _E.NT 4 4 8 0 0 44 .382. 00 194 302580 10/03/94 GLADSTONE FIRE DEPT.41H OR PMl 7 1 39 . 0 T4THQTRPMI 1 U, I . 2 5 88 390 . 2_'5 ', 3195 20500 10/03/94 GROUP HEALTH iNC.OCTOBER 1994 PRE'MIUM OCTOBER 199.4 PREMIUM 1 -.3- 87 5 . 7 5 OCTOBER 19'44 PREMiUM 1 6 0 -.31 . -J. 0 19 3196 fj 100 10/03/94 ME-DICA CHOICE OC1*0BER 1994 PREMIUM OCTOBER 1994 PREMIUM 17 6 fj • . 7 OCTOBER 1994 PREMIUM I I C-oj . 30 IT35 . 2-0 3197 551100 10/03/94 MN MUfUAL LIFE INSURA610E OCVGBER 1994 PREMiUM 335.08 I OCTOBER 1994 PREMIUM 519.90 I OCTi)SIER 1994 PREM1UM 1 OCTOBER 1994 PREMIUM 73.67 8 . C; 2 I iii 3198 180100 10/03/94 D.C.A.OCfi__lBER 1994 PREMIUM DUE 32 1 . 51 0 1 a! 3199 501400 10 0 9 4 MADISON NATIONAL LIFE 10-01-94 OCTODIER STATEMEN"I 14341 541400 10/03/94 MINN. STATE TREASURER MOTOR 1 - EH LIC FEE-S PAYABLE 3, 51 0 0 251. . 00 161 1.4342 541400 10/03/94 MINN. STATE TREASURER SIVAIE DRIVERS LIC •E'ES PAYABLE 1 21, ti 613. 14343 84016-04 10/04/94 ST PAUL. POS TM AS S TAMPS Z_;* 9 0 0 29.00 14344 150900 10/04/94 COMMISSIONE'R OF TRANSPORTATiON MANUAL 47' • 0 0 47.00 Inl 14 -34 5 b 4 0 0 10/04/94 M I LL S s JE F'-'f'-' E Y R F U 611) G R A Ei 114 G E S C iR0iIRt".' C "1 4 1 0(** . 00 1 000 .00 1 3 4 C.",541400 10/04/94 M I 1 STATE TREASURtv,M 7 fi- V f i L I C FEES FAYAL--LE I Z 42%0. 00 12 4 Z', 0 0 0 Oil! 14347 541400 10/04/94 M I NN. STATE FREASUR'E'R S DRiVI-"RE LIC FEES PAYki"If-L t P-7 51 0 0 175 .00 HE K A lyl I'D u 11 i. o 5 4 410 1 50 2 0 01 751 00 54 7 u _T 5 v 4 0- 0 17 Q Q 4 51 4 1 VOU CH RE C 1 *1 'Y +.,+ l'-- i'll A FL L JAI 0 Ct D 10/07 '94 10 v cl li c is u 1 :7j FFJR PEf`k-l+: 10 VOUCHER/ HE Cf.'*V E. 11 DO C H'.*- C. f,".V E kl D R I'l T ..... M NUMBER N U M L R A T*N A M E eL, E S R I P f 0 N Vt i-%i T 14.-- '4 8 110700 101 `0 4 9 4 CAS'TLE DES.N RE FU N DL ) R 111 G i" S R Cl W R E C: 7 0 4 i 0 clw a 0 v tRET U ND t AD 111 ES R 0 W R E C T80 4 8 0 143"49 6 6 1 [5 0 10 0 5 9 4 NOR THERN STAT S POWEER U I 100 5 T S 345ELIiL 1J f T 1 L i 12, 4 4 Ul T I L ITI ES 1 5 1 UTILIfIES 1 G7 9 7 5 TI I E I t-9 8ULI 43 UTILIT 16.7 U " IL11 i 1775 .F -ES 1r t sal U T 1 L L" I- 11LE S 1 :3 3 9 4 UT 1 L IT I ES 18 C, kC)1316. 85 UTIL I f ItES I 15 -9 UT I L IT'l ES I '81 14 40 L 1_1UTIL E UTILII" E S 2.2. 5 1 UTILUI.ES :1.1-2 6, 8 14 4 8 0 U T I L IT' I ES 22*7 9 9 8 IP U T! L i C I ES I1 5 8 U Tl L i r i iiS wti 16 7 .5 3, U T I L 1 1* '1 Ez 92701 7 . 4 C', UTILi 1_1 I-S 2 T *,: 5 1 9 U T i L IT E S "9 2 t UTILITLES UT I L 1 Tl ES 9 1 1 r 6 T 5 14350 151 6, 0 0 5/941iGL C 14C PT I I I: NcuE R'O W I N G M A C H EN E: S I t; c) -2 0 0 11 00 1005/94 CCilq('%'-P-' 11 INC.R C, W N G MA(Hi lei i -, E _75 1 0 0 14 5 2 541400 1 i 05, /9 4 MI. N 14 . ST A T E R E A S li RE* R Y A E li R Ii V i~ R S L Ii C F E E_- Sj P A. lu". L.6 51 14 3 5 541400 10 / 0` 5 / 9 4 Ml N PJ S I-A T E R E.04. S U RE R'M 0 -j'6 R V E H L. I C F E E f A Y A B' i E 9 UY . 5 i1 1423.51 4 78060{:>10 / C) t:l / 5) 4 SAW S CLUE, DIRECT S UPF L i ES OFF i C lip 1 `235 5 4 1 10 10 t, /9 4 K ElW'YUCKY FK-l',:-__D CH_l(_J-.*EN P R F_; "Cil I A if! S G PPL 1 E S" 14 35 76 0 5 10 ,E 5 4 F,.EGi* 0N IS USPCA V C ;AI L t.Ai*,.1__4 1 7 4 i 10 8 51WS-f*10 tt 4 MID E lq T E I hI E ill A -i L'. f-, i A L 151 1 C 5 0 10 4 4 A. f". A. MED i C `L ilk I b b t L k -h 'EL 151 0 1 575 C) /'-'-'4 "_'4 H A R Lj IAJ -RE 1 LIiF lEc' jAN'.10RIAL ilk HE K A lyl I'D u 11 i. o 5 4 410 1 50 2 0 01 751 00 54 7 u _T 5 v 4 0- 0 17 Q Q 4 51 4 1 BL iC t -.." AR-F SUPPLY Slit 44 1-304 /9 4 D C K 151 E37 21 300 1 L URAM SUFFLI'Es 2- 4 1 4 DON S RODENTS' PRO"! K cc40010151.3 .3 (j,KODAK COPIER LEASE PAYMENT 4KODAKCO-Plf LEASE PAYMENT C, COPI LEASE PAYMENTKODAKCOME KODAK CoPfEA LEASE PAYMENT KWAK COPIER LEASE PAYMENT 12 8 5KODAKCOPIERLEASEPAYMENT PA 12-1 =- A til C-I U 1A 10 t, .3 . I t75. 00 5 . 00 110.00 16.64 A 4 0 0 I ti • 0 L) 0 5, 8 4 d" . 1 - 2-- I Q. 40 4 4 u 1 5 rat VOU C'J-i REG Y U F il A L L--. 14 0 0 1 10 07 4 10 0 DUViLl k, C.1 l I E R H E C V* ik ice. G I S TE'R F 0R- PERICID 10 V 0 LJ C: HE— R CHECK ENV DOR C H ._. L-K VENDOR N U N BiE R N U M.F-3iE R D A t-%t i4 M E LIE C R P f A 1'f C, U if IT 15170 0" ' i 400 10/& 4/'cl-,4 A.AIRSIGN.-L., INU.F A G, E R S r -i `! j 15171 021000 10/24/*94 AIERi-DATA SYSTEM N ti" 1- W L`1 R K S Y S E* t, I f., of-) 0 0 C C 11 S U L. 'i' 1 N (31 PROJF:(..**I*' l`,JEW NE11 6. j 145, UO 4 4 f-s NEI'WCRK SYSI`ELj NE T Wu" RK S YS I E M 4 15 1 2 030420 10 i.*--A 19 4 A N D E W-3 11 N E V E fiE -F A B-1 0 G N S P f 10 1-11 ' 94 15 1 3 0 .3 0 10 '*"**4/94 A N Y ICE CGIVANY P R 0 (24R.A M S U f P L I S 15 174 0407L'-10/Z4/94 1ARLING]FON COMPUTER P R I- 1)IJCT f 14C 'S, U P P L 1 E- S E Q U I P ftl E: N 'I i 1c_jw00 1 7 5 7 to0tf .8 10 4 9 4 A W A R- E Nri- S: S 'T R A 1 N Jq G I tq C A A "I RAI CIF EMPLOYEE 9 0 0 15176 0 Il 1 0 6 1() .2 -'* 4 I 9 4 L-',ALJER BUiLT S Li F P L i E:- S VEHII[CLE r «r l r _ r . it t 1 SUPPLIES VEH.-,,CLE It, t, 8 15177 9 Z j 4 B OCK Ell'Fl- ERPREISES C 0141P. E -f 1 )--) R LANE LiblES AQUA KING COMMANDER POOL VALCU 39 77 HP ELEC VAC 4.77 10 •#f 9 4 CAR-LE JE I Ili T 1'.1 E V E H 1 11' CL E ALLOWANCE:.44 15 17 `,4 1 loc 10 10 9 4 CARLSION EQUIPIENT RENIFAL VIBRikTORY PLATE WACf--.E.R 8C 4 1. 5 1 .8 12 0 10 1 1 J 1 4 C E D 'A R C 0 it FU R A D 1} 1 10 ftl 'T Cl 1 E I W C, R K 4 2-'; 9 151 8 1 1 -3, 0 5 0 0 10 2 4 /'.-j 4 CHAPPIAN, jUDY R E ` U N C, S 0 C C E R 15 8 130 &-10 4 9 4 C H I I D R E N'S' H Cl il E. S 0 C 1 E-I- Y R tEF"li N D UNA' hiLE I'C-i A -f E Jq D 1.00 1,5183 151650 10/1:: 4 C ONCRETE A* C C E 1-.1 TS RizPA. L"R IAINF/LFFILITY 0 9 0 15184 18 0 0 10 94 4 D A 1- C; Cl C i _ j II A C T u A h.F- E.71- F X TR A C:l C, R-I b e. 7 9 2 ki A L K B IF. H 1. 1-4 D CA R PE' EX'.} R C C-1 R 4 2--- 50-3. 0 151 1 Q0044 I t i 0 - 4 4 DEBILZAN. jUDY VEH]. :L.E ALLOWANCE 10.40 BL iC t -.." AR-F SUPPLY Slit 44 1-304 /9 4 D C K 151 E37 21 300 1 L URAM SUFFLI'Es 2- 4 1 4 DON S RODENTS' PRO"! K cc40010151.3 .3 (j,KODAK COPIER LEASE PAYMENT 4KODAKCO-Plf LEASE PAYMENT C, COPI LEASE PAYMENTKODAKCOME KODAK CoPfEA LEASE PAYMENT KWAK COPIER LEASE PAYMENT 12 8 5KODAKCOPIERLEASEPAYMENT PA 12-1 =- A til C-I U 1A 10 t, .3 . I t75. 00 5 . 00 110.00 16.64 A 4 0 0 I ti • 0 L) 0 5, 8 4 d" . 1 - 2-- I Q. 40 4 4 u 1 5 rat i r ri 4 ' !r :r ! i t +,_i L+F= }i 1J E 411fy07 ! t : t' •1 {} u 0..'tVtLii.•H...1•t i• !r.HE•, K R i« 1 f I ER V!_iU H K V E N D i °i F H E ;:: f•::V E 1% +i (-irf NUMPE NU t'M T E NA u " C ' h lC- x t Am "i MCI N LEASE PAYMEN 1 #46 LEASE PA MEN E #46.r tt t.•.S 5 Y 12 J 1 2 -3 - 0 5 1( 24/94 EASI SIDE CAR i:,SL1!-'!-LlEL — it E. H t tL•0 IIr' r -;'uit S } ,mot 151 M 1 ii i f:.t j _ r!' ; } P E" C 1 301000 1 r`4 /G RrISE:.Rr_E-liND — ADUE_! TR1F 511 0 511 'j0 c';l r 1519 c 1 _GR CEO V,iL1E NURS lf Al tf - f Lf 1 ilC f*f !" _ -A L 1 -`I •• 1 ! :• ` !r 11 H A L +_i E lV E-` f•• i-U Y1 L H Er 1C. fV i:' fJ - - -t i E :,r 14 4 c_; , : (i:10 /24 / 514 J H SAL CO PROGRAM .J. U f P L t-r .F 1isr 1 ' Y 3 8 15195 401700 10 &Z'4r94 JL -ILLY TYME FAVORS PROGR SUPPLIES t i } FBI i1414 r 1 i. f f e i t 4 KELSEY, C i_! N f`V t L L 1_! !; u ft! : E i i 1 r 4 3 - 3 t+0 J j- :.4 :."4 k:.iii0ii LUMBE~.R C o t # 2 ' 1 MA11.17ENAN "E M A I E R I A L V.i r _+ i a ..S r _,+ 15198 461900 10 1---- 9 4 L1ET, S F A K 8 1 R P A' _ R ._. -•.. _ _4 PLATFORM CARL'0 r 4 8 . 48 1 4707 *00 10/24 /94 L `•; NEWSPAPERS P ry — SEPT i _r _ i • 1 7 0 i , „, I L i•r• tr• Y 15 : i_,0 50005 1iirZ4 j`4 M —h SIGN COMPANE 41, E f+ k tl t# f ! ff , 't i:: t H: L 1 4 _ : 15Z ` 01 500800 1 Z 4/ r ; 4 L ... 7 j h j 1' 1 a f r 1 r if ' t. I! 'ti I B U • • .1. N G C O x LSr •tom. O F 1 L 1 E S V E.. ll .} sr L G f j s .. . 152 : :}t} 1:- }:;1 i r; r `: t f'f C: i t i f E i;+f E ,{ U 'f P PI E f T UP F i_ ES - V H : L E 4 .{ j 4 q• i t} 3 0070 4 '9 MC:C: WELL C:OMFA•NY L IM ., r T r -1 1 3'S F' E »} i i ... t1 t... !! `f ti*?'41 •411.57 15 ; 0 4 I ; 4 `: t 0 10 r 2 4 -t 4 M C: G R i H, INC .1 tJ `; ! A L L G U "i t E h S ;: E 0 if f ISF t- k-f U :r -11- / +ko'-, 1. 5205 5 4`0 5 0 0 10/4 M i..• \.i L+ 1 i ' a 4„E , M T C: H t_• • r. a 1 ... ..., r OCT 9VtH • L E x L rl i u f :__ C• !0 t_,.,1, 1 ' -' tM fl 4 t -r1 'METR SUPPLRO F H L E T L s1 .. A N t.1 L.7 • P L_.. :. ..• + F* R G R A 141 S Ll FFL 1 E 4 - -7e i —! 71t . _ t4 ! 1 r.0 / '. r j ` -t1IL. f . r ' -r• ( •i• f • { }•t .t +-• t ..., .. t . (- 1rrf( -Dii4 1. ! L H J i+ i1 1 : 1.. L! i t_F '_! L y 1 1i . } 3_J — ! : 1. 5 L 0 8 5 i 0 { 1 1 0 12 - . , 4 f ' . t 4 M 6 f B R 11 A 1 y1 E NA i k” 1 14 . A i tl ! 'a I .ii L.1 57 15* ".)10 / 4 a Y 4 3 t + 1 Y iwt l R E G C: I .F Y' 0 t M H E' t.. t iii t 1--11)F :•G E _ 10 07' 4 10 a i;:3,V,jitC ;-EE C HECi -: Ris G I CE Ei FOR PER 10D 10 VOU CHECK V E E'sa D C( R C: H E C: K V EN D CI k 11 , E 01 i - I E. T1 C: H E C: k:: NUMB NUMBER 1).A i E Eti E ; C 1 F' i f. + -lN AE f4{ i;E'I'U11i' 15210 5 ' +} 14 5 r 4 w410 M 0 R t Y L - U h 11 E i i t_t _ :-F' RI' F . H . SY• AEFt .L- , !C: s I 5r 4 do i 152 ' • .1 : 140 805 t} l 2 4 i s • f 4 NELSONS tF jAUTOSERY .{. C E N H I N! f E H EREPAIRy }1 {` j LI C L , i}1 521 4 fps {!8 tt 10 f 4 / .111.. W!'1AN ,.F GNS S ,tS is 'S ' N F I r 1. d_ rrrt =.t s 1 L 52. 1.:6 0Z75 ii 4'.Ni x S f r PAU MAPLEWOOD R 0'f ARY 4TH }`fT DUE S ._ t-0R ! r -j 4 100 00 15214 661181 10/24/94 N CI R "f H E R i4 AIRGAS i I i 'IE19 " rE +:,+ i ± • f=` l 'f i ' tJt= ,1 a r - __ 1 F r.. 1 F tom, f-'= ! f,`, 0 0 1 N t H 4 R iL U L L • s.1 4 j. 9 L•I.. EH iC:L ' L . w' '` "- j a L L i -S r:• "rZAr =:: 1 1 ,_ 1 t:t a 0c _14 : 4 / : r aE! _ F+; f H L H EJ l ` E F E"ti 1 G E R A - E" I t: t iV REPAIR ' ! ! L'' L 1 t k 11V 1i .iii 11 ' », G - 1. S 4 i 0 • i 8 4 . 0 . 7 1 . • i 670 10 `2 4/9 4j N'Y S i h + +M F'UBL I HINU COMPANY INC MAPLEW; OD 11\1 Mtw •4 t +N PUB_pia Li i ri i . } :.i } -j 10 ; 2 I =.r i O if d s.1 i I ; t k! INC.1 C• { V •) C tS [ tat !j i i r ' s SILKj i j ,` 1 1 a y } - R 1 CI ! : i i jl D «_ C H P E~. .. I L K FL. f Y t 1 i y 4:. f A 4 4. .179499.42-ice. 15 r f..= ' 0 4 5 0 1 t fZ 4 ! `off "i ..! t t (l ' . 11 Ls 1r i. i" U i'Si . . . `1 -r ` t . t.r t h I!`p1t n00 17.00 15 2 { 711500 10 / ' F= f 1,M ..t t E. t_ j t t t 1 5 1 71 1 /w / 9_'l-PLAZA T i.hE AND SERVICE (t ( INCi. i .f 1 lr t- 1. i'1 L i ,{ ` ` (. -•WE =mot: E H J. 't i i 4 G.. E ar .... s 1 n s.: ii . 1 u r.r T 152622 71211 '91 : / .:.. / !'4I C: Nr.. , :.+ t:iF' L. Ri L SUPPLI -it E H . .• L E 7 4 ';t '`•' REPAI VEA INT VEHC ILE f .. }}0 r40 48A 7z1I: 0t_}1t7) /24 /'-f F + =t += 3 +t E E I Ed' ; _h' C U t+ p U E 1tI _. r, g ._ w14 ' "= 7 2 :: 7 C• i / 1 1,.• U 1 E Q U 1 P11 E I V •1 r ry •..} ' rt a i.+ R ti. I RC E w I { I t-' N -." E st1 t}n tic,A , - :4 rte, %0 1 i:. r:.. 4 74 ! », 0 0 10 /C2 4 ! 9 4 R A t" E 'S E Y CLIN r {, S M I . } { P j •+, i i t • !i i t . s (1 L } .- •1 1 { "{ .... 1t1 E i E S ,.F i i.• :.+1 i 7aT10 o f« 0 F` , t - E ESE E: =` t t Y E }1 F. EV - c - F' H ` ` a C: A L c r`, ><::, F'RE-- EMPLt:iYMEET PHYSIC: J?L ;.50 utw`.0 0 15 +7 ! : : ! 0 1 c , r ; 1"1 Fi A E' ` t 1` C : L 1 EtJ 1 E = A S S - # : ! C:1 A T i =. S TRAVEL "i Fi K i EI N4:i I :, r; , r ;- J 0 1 7 1400 s:-. - r0r 14 h! HDE' S C ,LRV iC_RE E FL I y LD + .- LC. L 1' E b ,"L ' r1 u 1 t„}r , } u 5 } 15 2 7 780300 10 12 4/ 9 4 t F F .t C• E PRODUCTSRODUCt" ,' INC.s u P FI ± I ES _ 0 F i :. 1 C_ E I I I *5 I S U i 3 1 ' t-. :. E tom} .... 0 I t"' i. % IES 1 ' s U C p E.. :. E S O F F I .r C -L 1 n 04 S U P P L 1 E :: - OFF 1 CE 47,04 J .. u 1 F ti.. r..j •r {..! iMi 0 0 r +1 0 ' - 4 !' `: f 4 y '} (.. { 1 }L ( j r teatUi A M E ..f S I N I .: ! C O 7' .S C A i b ;.-t. Nt .r 4 i J 1 y.1 R' J ' ,:.. 5 . , , f s `..• i •' i C * i e I y , -rMt . ii 'E :., ! 1 :. ! !i: 1 1 L t... t a,':F! ,. _ 0n1 r V i_i U C H R E G t ii' i_i ' i# , f-` ! . . W _i t 1 1 . f _ t f j "1 i q s? »0 U w ' li R f - ...... TER i s F :+ R E' E R s ii i! 1 C: HE L :f =:.V t:l = ;F:HllE VE!_ iR 1 TEi'1 _st w =H f - NUMC NUMBt`i L h Ll t i A 1' t tfir..S t..• }1 i P i i ._ N A 4 i. i \i A M i_ U I` 1 15Z.: `:f 8:1 .f SPECI kA 1Ii_i SERVICC• E ,_if t ' F1.4T.t ±iVHt" L• 1 L. E a; ,',q 564.45 1'I 15 L:.•J0 8 J 1506 10f Z4 /':t4 SPECTRUMRUM BUSINESS ,: Y:, f'r.ms A f I N%5 f'0 _+ ' L.i JA f t 1 u t_ }I_ i!M 1 1` 1 i N S T ii N i W _ T1 i' .i _: r . Est 111. al i:. =101 ' 94 S f - I N U L E R E t_ 1 7 A B is ` Hs h f: ,' . i !i D } !! f t _ t `is i_i r,q 1 1 ! f ! 8,18 10/24 /'94 ST .C•Ri_i.tX RECREATI CO . I1dCY Ufi11:.1i +!{ i"_1.114`s!114 HA.ELlitLtIt f='K 4 4 ,f ..y .r c 1 5 Z.840275 10/ 241'94 S J H ;:, f-` 1 f , L i.: i i P Y i 1 w R : {_ . h: D 4 . L 4 i t'. a 1 1.... ••Ll .,r,i / ' 94Iw4 U J gy {/•'•, 1 J ` J i E f L L -. l ice... Q w — }11 i _.Li I .jr L,. 1_ l 1 _j 0• 0 r 1 8;_, { } l, 00 10/Z4/94 SUPERAMEh iCA UEL ft: i: E: E 17 Y 0::1 FUEL OIL 1 FUEL L tit L 3' Y 84 t_i F` !=` ," 1 E - E Q L E P M E tai - f `rt # 5 fl 0 ;:a 0 F15 t , -,0880600 10/24/ 94 i ARTS t., Ch AF INC.E I A K C: A '' ` i . Cpl 1~i '= E L 1_ A -} r = U , C: .: 11}I E . . i 1. 'E.i MZSC•E1._.#_.. ANE !US C. MM1D.t 11E S Yl1 M i C ELL C I1Y #k_` +Ui f 1 . 15 2 8 8 1 320 1; . /2`4 t.,, 4 T W .t 1# C TRANSPORT A 1 f r i E_+ a r 1F ,; 3 8 88z000 10/24/94 WIN CITY ;SAW & SERVICE CO SUPPLIES EQUIPMEN ti,_t1 Y .. t.,15 9 Y Sl 15t:39 88;r800 10 r 24 94 TW 114 CITY i RANSFOR - f i t.i11P S i AF*, { _ VEHICLE ..t0 15240 8 9 t_I 2* 0 0 10 4 ! 9 4 U S i•'sE E S T L• E L L Irk L A R 11 C F ... _ .. Cl 5 TELiEPHC±1gE 7 Y 57 TELEPHONE-1 1 901 + 00 t 2`4 `=t41 UPPER Vi:' DWEST SALES Cis.M .: #_•r,_ . , i -;,U. C:LI.!!1 =i!L!: 1E 405405 Mtn M I SC ELLANE0t_! ; C:iiMMi -!Dt I It 1E' -71 45 iI i `;': E L i._ AWE i l i z: C 0 M 1Y! E: a I:a 1 r' I ES ; U f'' P L 1 E. -- J 11 ± ! Ci Fi ! ! L 05 M 1 :_f C' E. L L .1'4 E fa l± S r. c i M t '( r_1 G 1f I .' '.77 Y 78 E — JA1 a °i ±i1 1'L tE1 = 1 PPL L. U r i E R t :,, i : R U L f::- i: h i M, i, .3 ,. - r '`1 y i = 5 . q 8 15 2 +:f 9 1 i i ce " A 4 V A L L t~ Y 1i E W A TS S C! C. s A T UMISC. E L L tt N L _ S C ! I lei M G Il 17 1 E. 1 1.:` . 4 J4 1 E-2 4 4 15 Z' 4 : 4 { } .! . 1 tj ; 4 i ' ' iii E f} l i E Ft i :: i ti F °' _ h° H `i` ! ii 11 L• LI ... 't0R1 ` H w ` ` R , N' 1 T i: "i : E !=i . , , , t ; ? i. at y tat , N t . a ci P1 FOR I - HE CURRENT PA PERIOD CHECK NUMB CHECK DA ED PAYEE A :. , LiNT 0042924 10/07/94 SHERRY ALLE,NSPACH 294, 00 0042925 10/07/94 GARY W BASTIAN 334.08 t V I ti 1 j • ~t - 00429Z7 10/07/94 SHEERYL LE 2 67 004Z928 10/07/94 MICHAEL A McGUIRE 3 i 1 0 4 ir.. s 3 10/07/94 G i T E 1 C H E • 7 M A l.•i IL I CH i i - ! J 00429 1 fi(...a Ir ftF.•I 1 0042 9 10/DAVID J J J:HH 1 i F' Cam.. ti ri ....__f' r ... .' i. .._...._._....L Ti.s"Lb _ _ ..... ............_.. .... .... .. - _.._ _... ._.. ...LYLE i 1 89 Y 15.2. .. _ 0042937 10/07/94 LARRY J CU3.?it L tir i 1 r 004Z9_38,AN-DREk 0042939 10/07/94 WILLIAM MIKISKA 203,20 0 10/DANIEL F FAU 2 00 10/0 WE DY KLAGER 11099 eill)* 0 0 ( L•• jit 4 3 10/07/94 D E b O R f 1 H i1 E l i 1 i 699-25 0 0 4 Z i . f 44---- _10/07/94-- 0042.948 10/07/94 JUDY DeBILZAN 456-45 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 0002 EMPLOYE GROSS EARNINGS AND PAYROLL DEDUCTION CHECKS FOR THE CURREN PA PER CHECK NUMBER CHECK DA 1 EIS PAYEE AMOUNT 40 0042 :=1 10i07/94 PATRICIA FRY 715 004 .c....10 /0- 7 / 9 4 --C O N l L,E. __ L - KELSEY-.-.-------7 7 ;Z . ,1. ,* ..-- 004•Z954 10/07/94 BONNIE JOHNSON 757 ,OZ f 04Z955 10/07/94 LORRA1NE st 1i IETOR 1 7 195 r ./C t j 0042957 10/07/94 JEANEI DUELLM 70u15 0042961 10/07/94 JOAN KOLASA 100,65- l' i rrtt1.- ff . -1 0 7. -'. 4----A R Y . ' k Y - - P AL A N-K -_14 , t' F: t 3 qw 10/07/94 KENNETH V COLLINS 2 t f 1 C F r. 004Z961_`.10/07/94 ELAINE FULLER 5700 r 60 i I i 4 0042967 . -f f rj y10l 7 I jf j 4 CAROL jr^'• ._.. + ._.. ... _ }! -- jj ... _ _i rT { R L i A r i 7 I i 7 S O j _ j" _ . . .I '.a ji;,[ c: r :6:f r1 00429 f A i, 0042969 101*07/94 ROBERT D NELSON 2 t r 40 s E c a 004Z972 10/07/94 CAROL NELSON l 1 E 0 T it . •r/4 10/07/94 F• Ewi i Lw f 9 >/1 r i .5rr f fi T 1 119 ao •irj - ___ .. 0042975 Jj tEy =1 i 7 f JOHN ! fj 7 /r' r it Z tc 40 CITY O{ f tAPLEWOOD 0003 EMPL OYEE GROSS EARNINGS AND PAYROLL DEDUCTION CHECKS FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK': NUMBER CHE DA I r_D PAYEE AMOUNT 0042976 10/07/94 RICHARD M MOESCHTER 1 lot "r 00 F r -. t°.. ._ _... _.. ._ ._. -.. .__.._.... i f' it j i y1 'u S. F - _ 1 9 T '.. _. ._..._.... -- j jy : j js « i [ wLL - S -T-..*.._- rTE &R L E... _. - _. - ..1-72 0042978 10/07/ 94 JAME YOUNGREN 11997 , 86 k.042979 10/07/94 0 D 4 Z9 a --_ - - - - -_. _ _ _ .1 -.0- -(X7 /- V-4 _ _H O - A -S- -- J-- S Z C ZE P ; K I_ _ _ .. _I } r ,q9 , 13- - 0042981 10/07/94 CABOT- V WELCHLIN 1,679.02 0042982 10/07i94 RICHARD J LANG 1 DALE- RA..ZSKAZffF F 6.90 s 004Z':?14 1 0/O7/94 MICHAEL RYAN Z 0042985 10 0 7 194 MICHAEL J HERBERT 1 0 0 4. ; 9 8 & - -• - ._10.107194 S C O -T -T Ar A.Ni)Rr 1 16 0 17- - 0042987 10/07/94 RICHARD C DREGER 2 004 Z ) E3 9 .. _ - .. _1 AL.-ICE- 0042990 10/07/94 GREGORY L STAFNE 1 0042991 10/07/94 RONALD L BECKER 2,942s89 00429 10/07/ =.' i i ti i i '• A BOWMA 6r S w irn• i { iJ I t.J s:...r - {a•1 {t1 - - -- --i. .. '.. -1 s ' - - _ - -- - _ ...iC- . -J.i . - - -- - i i ia. L - - -- - - - - - -- - -- - -11- 7- 15- - W-6 0042999 10/07/94 KEVIN RABBETT 1 t c 10/07/94 D..t DLE 1, sz,zz PALMA 0043002 10/07/94 PAUL EVERSON 1 043 .'Z4 0 C I T Y OF MA 0004 EMPL GR EARNING AND PAY D C•HEGi•. FOR THE CURRENT F'A'Y PERIOD CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATED PAYEE AMOUNT 004 00 3 10/071 ME F } NDA BJ ORKM 9 1 r 9&Z. 0043005 10/07/94 JOSEPH A BERGERON 1 0043007 10/07 . .. ..jjL _ } jA [} jjljJt_ 4 --- A --- S i E iw r S l 7 iT - __ . .. ...... .... _....._I. ! 7 ` 8 it- - v 54 0043001 10/07/94 SARAH SAU DERV 1 , :::: r ' 1010-7/94-D A E- J- W .I_ LL• i A- VI S -. __. 0043O1Z 10/07194 JULIE A STAHNKE 1 IZ56 r40. 004 014 10/ 07/ 94 LINDA ADELiS 7 0043015 10/07/94 DAVID L ARNOLD Z 1 !0 -1 7 ':4 WALTER--- LA- ESE- RT.Y- - - - - --0=E + 1 0043017 10/07/94 JOSEPH EEHR 11300 ,88 0 10/JILL PETERS 599,00 004 020 1 J UD I ! H WEGWR TH 726 * 00 0,043021 10/07/94 KENNETH G HAIDER 2 0043023 10/07/94 WILLIAM PRIEFER 0043OZ4 10/07/94 0043026 10/07/94 BRYAN NAGEL 1 0G4 3 0 `` - - - -1 7 9-4__- _ ..__.J A MES- -- A - T -- - - ------- - - - - -- - .. - - -- - -1 T s - -- Aft 0043029 10 /07 LANCE LUNDSTEN 1 166.5 r 1 1 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 0005 EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS AND PAYROLL DEDUCTION CHIE'CKS 4w FOR THE C PAY PERIOD CHECK NUMBER CHECK DA i ED PAYEE AMOUNT w 0043030 10/07/94 JOHN SCHMOOCK 1 2 67 60 w 004 30 10/07/94 RONAL.a J. HEL.:.E,Y i + ••tswi sus, . -- 4W 0043032 10/07/94 ERICK D OSWALD 1 00 1 E`A DAL LINDBLOM 1 0043036 10/07/94 JAMES G ELIAS J 0043038 10/07/94 JOHN DU CHARME 1 0043039 10/07/94 DENNIS L PECK 15I.:'t5 20 w f 1. t _f _..__.. _._. .. _ _ ._3 T0 . l __ _. r _ + . f Tom. . is . i .__ . _ ..._._. t156its ..5 L c Ox. 143041 10/07/94 WALTER M GEIESL.ER 1 w 004. 04 10/ 07 /94 PAUL I E STAPLES 1 # 973 ,91. 0043045 10/07/94 BRUCE ANDERSON 2 w 0043047 10/07/94 ROBERT S, ANDERSON l w _ E 04 30 -4-9 -- _1.010 7 / 5 4 -- - --------- - --ROTA D -- - R- HEL vY____ -- _ _ _1 ' ..L 1 _ -• 0043050 10/07/94 SHANE SWANSON 135*00 0043051 l O f j # 7 / j ;.F 4 MARK A M A ! 1 U S i'•. A 1 . - ..J' € } .. f +.. - -- - - .. ._...ice - 0 f- sj _ - - - --Fit.. } err'•. t=t --1 ; tE.. i 0043053 10/07194 MATTHEW KIMLINGER 100,000 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS AND PAYROLL DEDUCTION CHECKS FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATED PAYEE 0006 AMOUNT 0043057 10/07/94 JAME T M GREW HAYMAN 567 3 10/0T/54 HAWS.0N------------ -3~25- 0043059 10/07/94 LUTHER JONES 41.60 0043060 10/07/94 MARGARET KUNDE 156 00 004 10/07/94-'--JN--NLSON---'------- -712.5- 0043062 10/07/94 JUDITH A HORSNELL 705.4(} 0043063 1 0 / 0 7 / 9 4 ANN E H U T CH I S ON 1 3 84 ,40 0043065 10/07/94 KATHLEEN M DOHERTY 1 , 359.88 0043066 10/07/94 MARIER1E 8A R T A 1 1 6 2 80 10/0T/94- - --6EOF FR E-.-Y-'W --- OL SOU- — '—2, 3-25.T- 0043068 10/07/94 NANCY MIGKELL 688.75- 0043069 10/07/94 JOYCE L LIVING8TON 1 009 20^ 1 vE 1s-.a!R- 0043071 10/07/94 THOMAS G ENSTRAND 1 00430T2 10/0T/94 MARJORIE OSTROM 1 10l 0043074 10/07/94 ROBERT J WGNGER 1 0043075 10/07/94 DANIEL FEUCHT 28000 00438Z/----------10l 0043077 10/07/94 BRIAN KIENITZ IT8 .00 0043078 10/0T/94 ANDREA KIENITZ 42 00 0-- 0043080 10/0T/94 MATT LARSEN 104.00 s --------------' '—0043081 10/07/94 KRISTEN NISTRCILL 72.00 3()82---______10-.0(-- 0043083 10/07/94 JASON STUTSMAN 72800 CITY OF MAPLE.WOOD 0007 EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS AND PAYROLL DEDUCTION CHECKS FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK UMBER CHECK DATED PAYEE AMOUNT 4 0043084 10/07/94 BRANDON MUELLE'R 108.00 AW u 0 4 30 E 5 10/ARK- P E A S L E E._ __ _7 6 .0.0._ 004308 10/07/94 BRIA LOMBARD I 120,00 0043087 10 / 07/ 94 MAIii•. LOMBARD I 114000 004 - 3088 -101 ' 07i94 _ -J i i ii . T wT T. TGr iw 6 r r 4W 0043089 10/07/94 ROY 6 WARD 4160,00 0 1 D J TAUBMAN 1 16 Ztom # 1 004 yi 0 9 1 .. .. __ - .. ._ ___ _...101 7 / 94 T I i i A.S .. E E A a i M .' L _.. __ ... .... .. - .- ..__._. .. ...:.. ...I 16-50 .... i "1 - - 0 10/RICH NORDQUIST 97: .03 I 00430 10/Ri G ER W BREHE.I. M 1 4Z- 0043099 10/07/94 ROBIN WARMAN 100, T8 0 0 4- 1 10 ./.0 -7-/` ..1_ 4__ ------- -_ - -.- _K A: Y L- E -NE - -_ P E TE R.si7j _ .___ - -. -- __ _.._.6111 -4 0043101 10/07/94 JULIE CORCORAN 740,35 0043102 10/07/94 TESSA LARSON 73,13. 00431 Jr y i1 iC•-... .. 4.._. .._-- ...._.._. ..___-iy 0 iJ''['''( j ( (+1 - C. - TA. E r'__ 1— .-._- ..___ —___.. _._. __._ —.__. ____". _. __ .___.. __... . -.. _..._... .._._. ._. .... ._... __...__. -.. j,4 r - * t 75 00 10/LI KE 79 0043105 10/07/94 JEAN GLASS 94.88 r D A RL -E E S -A:.. I * R S - - - -_- -._ bo 0043107 10/07/94 SANDRA HALWEG 63*38 0043108 10/07/94 PHILIP COLEMAN 8 6 3 004 :3109 DENI 0043110 1 H DAHL KIRW 63 , 38 EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS AND PAYROLL DEDUCTION CHECi:: FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK NUMBER CHECK D A 17 E D PAYEE AMOUNT 0043.1 11 10/07/94 STEVEN FI S.CHER 1 10/07/94 BRIAN OSWALD 65xOO 043114 10/07/94 JANET FER EL1US 1 1 j { i { ' . l --4. . 3 .f: s..J tf ..f J 1 i E A' «f ..# i . i i68 0043116 10/07/94 JENNY MEINKE 63 * 004-:31 17 10 / x 194 JENNIFER FRA DER -, OHN 69 .::8 i 0043119 10/07/94 KATHLEEN STEWART 63 38 004:120 10/07!94 JOLENE CHLEDECK 60.1 00.43-12 7f.._ + e. _. _DAWN - t 0LLEFS0tt--..___ _. - -- _.5.15..s G 5 _--. 004 31;:Z 10/07/94 MELISSA COONS 60,13 00431 -23 10/07/:4 RUSSELL SCHM1DT 61.75 0 4 3 12* 4-10- / 0 7 9 4 ._ _ - .D. I A N E _ E Z T EV EZ- _ _ - _6.1 . 7.5_.... 0043125 f ft10l07 / .' 4 fDOUGLASMI: E R I C K f sj i 2 7• i 'Yf 0 0 0 4 .;: 1 Z7 .1 . 7 -/ 9 R I TA. RE -- - -- 0 10/07/94 SAUNDRA GOSSMAN 48.T5 0043129 10/07/94 ARIEL JOHNSON 48,75 004 : 1:30 CQLL- EEC4.-- D-1 -RKS A ER -- _ __ _ 004 10/07/94 LAURIE K I VEL 94,25 0043132 10/ 07/94 SYL IA DOLINSKI 53,63 c004313 4 1 NANCY ij r iii 00 35 10/07/94 CATHLEEN CASEY v w J 00-4.31 -KA.- Tl-1LEE-ti -- _ O- R_E.F I-E LD- - - -_ -_ low 0043137 10/07/94 DARLA MC DDHOUGH 53 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS AND PAYROLL DEDUCTION CHECKS w FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATED PAYEE 0009 AMOUNT 0043138 10/07/94 LORI LEHNEN 79.6 4P 0042139----'-10/0T/94--- ---'VIRINIA-[}LE,ARY- - -'55/~' 0043140 10/07/94 TENA SAGER 74 75 0043141 10/07/94 JODIE CHRISTENSEN 52.00 w 0043142---10/07/94^------DAVID JUNG.-MANN- 0043143 10/07/94 MICHAEL JOHNSON 184.92 0043144 10/07/94 CARL D. CURTIG 966.23 004314------'----10/0T/'4`----'--STE R------- - -244.3Z-- 0O4_3146 10/07/94 DENNIS M MULVANEY 1 0043147 10/07/94 GEORGE C SPREIGL 1 4W- 0043148' -10/07/94. --CONN%E WERMAGER----1,742.05i- 0043149 10/07/94 ELIZABETH J WEILAND 1 0043150 VOID 10/07/94 FIRST MINNESOTA (FICA)11,499.62 4315y ---9-'-'PU8CB' ASSOC-__206.'' 0043152 VOID 10/07/94 MAPLEWOOD STATE BANK #1 25,560.52 0043153VOID 10/07/94 MN STATE COMM OF REVENUE 10,920.26 431---10/-IC Rl4----T,2 0043155VOID 10/07/94 FIRST MINNESOTA 525.00 ^ 0043156VOID 10/07/94 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD (HCMA)4 004'' --10/0---MNSTARGNIE-4 2S.? w -0043158 00,10/07/94 GREAT WEST LIFE 900.00 0043159 10/07/94 CITY & COUNTY EMP CR UNION 32,957.00 00 43160 74__-_-E188-----0O 0043161V0 1 D 10/07/94 UNITED WAY OF ST, PAUL AREA 159.80 0043162VDID 10/07/94 COMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE 259.95 00431- _10074___O<----166.Q 0043164 10/07/94 AF8CME 2725 695.25. C I T Y OF MAPLE W 0 EMPLOYEE GROSSS EARNING AND PAYROLL DIEDUC T ION CHEC FORR T CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATED PAYEE AMOUNT 0043165 v'10/07/94 1.E S C M E 2725 9 . #. 0043167 VOID 10/07/94 PUBLIC EMP RETIREMENT ASSOC 180.66 00431 t8 VOID 10/07/94 PUBLIC EMP RETIREMENT ASSOC r, 017 n6.6 00-43169 %'`'10 / 0-7 / 9 4 .L i E R L R . _7 .. _ x 0 004 :31T0 1 /L.E 175.0 0 004317Z—VOID.-E I R S-T -- I H H-E S O T A- (EICA )-_1 1 4 _ -3 w - 7 x.043 73 VOID 1 PUBLIC EMP RETIREMENT ASSOC 61573 ,29 0043174 VOID 10/07/94 PUBLIC EMP RET IREME.fT ASSOC 2 3 5 f M'' `' 5 004 3175 VOID T ASSOC 6 53— AGENDA NO. Nw• AGENDA REPORT TO: Mike McGuire, City Manager JV_ FROM: Sherrie Le, Human Resource Director RE: EMERGENCY APPOINTMENT DATE: October 17, 1994 INTRODUCTION Action by Counoll :l Endorsed,,,, Mo d i f i e.d.,.,..,....r.. Rejected, Date On October 10, 1994, a temporary appointment was approved at the rate of $9.96 /hour for the position of Custodial Maintenance Worker. This appointment was approved as an emergency solution to a severe staff shortage of custodial /maintenance staff for the Community Center. Every attempt was made to fill the Community Center positions in a cost effective manner. We established a job title called Building Attendant at $5.50 /hour to work less than 14 hours per week. We expected to fill up to 12 of these positions. We also created apart-time Custodian class at $6.56 /hour (to start) to work 14 -35 hours per week. These were more cost effective alternatives to using the existing Building Maintenance Worker class. We advertised extensively and repeatedly to fill the Building Attendant position to no avail. We found only two qualified applicants. That left us with ten vacancies and a severe staff shortage right at the time of the Grand Opening. We are re- examining our pay rates and will be coming back with a longer -term solution. In the meantime, we had to hire a temporary full -time employee as a Custodial Maintenance Worker to supplement our staffing. We started the employee at $9.96 /hour which is slightly below the starting rate established in the AFSCME contract for the job class of Building Maintenance Worker. This title does not presently exist as a union job class or a temporary job class under the Temporary/Seasonal Pay Rate Resolution. We are, therefore, requesting retroactive approval of this emergency appointment to the position of temporary Custodial Worker at $9.96 /hour. Based on the lack of qualified Building Attendant candidates at our established pay rate, I recommend we increase the rate of pay to a rate not to exceed $8.20 /hour. As a housekeeping item, I recommend we incorporate the titles for all separately established temporary /seasonal titles into the Temporary /Seasonal Pay Rate Resolution by amendment. RECOMMENDATION 1. Amend the resolution establishing rates of pay for temporary/seasonal employees to include Custodial Maintenance Worker at a rate not to exceed 10.26 /hour. 2. Increase the rate of pay for Building Attendant to a rate not to exceed $8.20 /hour and incorporate the title and rate into the Temporary/Seasonal Pay Rate Resolution by amendment. 3. Incorporate all other temporary /seasonal titles separately established into the Temporary /Seasonal Pay Rate Resolution by amendment. recommend these actions be put into effective retroactively as of October 1, 1994. AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager FROM: City Engineer SUBJECT: Water System Analysis Agreement DATE: October 18,1994 AGENDA ITEM F go 3 Action by Council, Endorse Modif i ec ...,......,.r.... ReJected,..., Date The wholesale water contract with the St. Paul Water Utility requires Maplewood to locate and design water meter stations at the city border. In order to locate these feed points to the Maplewood water system an analysis of the distribution system is needed. This analysis is accomplished through the use of a computer model. The model simulates flow conditions in the pipes under a range of standard and extreme situations. Examples of extreme conditions are maximum daily demand (hot, dry , summer day when sprinkling is at its peak) or fire demands for certain major buildings in town. The analysis also looks at long term issues. The future demands will be estimated and compared to existing capacities. Based on these results a capital improvement pro ramg may be prepared. The cost for this study was included in the 1994 budget. It is proposed to hire a consultant, Progressive Consulting Engineers, Inc., to complete the work. They have submitted a proposal for the work and are proposing an hourly contract with a cost not to exceed 31,465. It is recommended that staff be authorized to execute the contract with Progressive Consulting Engineers, Inc. to complete the water system analysis. AGREEMENT for ENGINEERING SERVICES TIIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of October, 1994, by and between City of Maplewood, Minnesota, hereinafter called the City, and Progressive Consulting Engineers, Incorporated, hereinafter called the Consultant. Whereas, the City intends to employ the services of the Consultant for the City Water System Analysis as described in the Consultant proposal dated September 13, 1994. NOW the City and Consultant agree as follows: Article 1 Descri of 3y to be DoneQeneralrrlwlw.r.1.11111 r1_wrrA iwwlwrw..wi Done The City agrees to employ the Consultant and the Consultant agrees to provide services described in the Consultant proposal dated September 13, 1994 and subsequent letter dated October 6, 19940 Article 2 . Completion of the Workwii •.w rriwr.wwrri . .r .irwril i rww_wir The Consultant agrees to complete the work in accordance with the following schedule: Preliminary Report: January 6, 1995 Final Report: January 31, 1995 Article 3 Compensation The Consultant shall bill the City for the time spent on an hourly basis as stated and described in the proposal. Unless additional work is authorized by the City, maximum billing for the Water System Analysis, including direct expenses, shall not exceed $31,465.00. Article 4 Authorization to Proceed The execution of this contract shall constitute authorization to proceed with the Water System Analysis. Agreement for Engineering Services Water System Analysis Page 2 IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. CITY OF MAPLEWOOD BY: Mayor BY: City Administrator PROGRESSIVE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. BY: e-, v President BY: le C Projecf gineer raw- y MEMORANDUM TO:City Manager FROM:Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner SUBJECT:Conditional Use Permit Termination LOCATION:2633 Stillwater Road PROJECT:Carbone's Pizzeria DATE:September 30, 1994 INTRODUCTION lotion by Counoil' . Endorse Modified. Rea eote Date The City Council should end the conditional use permit (CUP) at 2633 Stillwater Road. (See the maps on pages 2 and 3.) This CUP allowed a restaurant in a BC-.M (business commercial- modified) zoning district. Carbone's Pizzeria planned to use the permit. The applicant decided not to open the restaurant. BACKGROUND On July 26, 1993, the City Council granted this CUP, subject to twelve conditions. DISCUSSION The applicant decided not to open his pizzeria. Section 36- 446(a) states the Council may suspend or end the permit if the use is no longer in effect. The pizzeria operator and the building owner have agreed to the City ending the permit. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution on page 4 ending the conditional use permit for a restaurant at. 263 3 Stillwater Road. to \cazbones.cup (25) Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line /Zoning Map 3. Resolution to end the CUP Attachment 1 so • mONTAM t s1 NEBRAS N Aw6nnowt. G le C83 E. MARYLA e T Lqks CASE ;Vl co oc J' ea A To 1 a RMLM wus OR Z• if mot M . 1 f A . r 40 A LOCATION MAP Q N 2 IDR 0 DR r,. •9*01W OR w a RMLM wus OR Z• if mot M . 1 f A . r 40 A LOCATION MAP Q N 2 I ' Attachment 2 2 ` • v ti t ': Z 2 w M (b372 2 T 2 0 4j (p) a i 0113 s #. I '! sA 2 a I C 3 0 ., 106 G t9 , o 1 4 Tz. I o ,,. 32*, I'4 C. ,4 2 ( 174) Ila s 16 e.u• r • rst Q - r 3 , o ( 2 V. 6 7 14,Z Igo 7 No 9 S v st i . 2638 3 .3 = 18 C •• e . ,d e.. • 1 syy.,, I 2 31 0 Clot) t 13 14 4 1 5 0 . Crw 75 C•) ( ) cr•3) N M) r °e MAI \,000, lk ry 12 4 9 a 5• 4 x CAr) n7 < 91 e +.> . 1112 1 > 40 AVENUE s 28 W 11 .49sc.`D 2 ON Z 1 111 4 • J 3 lb is 1 a 11 ao 7 e a 11 2659 z 1.540, 5 091 2613 ! 1'r iez. 7 h 7r.S. 6.•_.5 42.S 41.5 .46 c. , 0 ,t ' 26 7 0 G / J S's ' \ Q (3) s N a N G) 2664 MAPLE OAKS N' 2656,Z . 3 O o.c.. + s o J p 425 8 FUNERAL HOME .• 26 IM 030 2585 e " 26 1 0 0 0 I •' 14 0 Z s S s R - P • ' • 2588 ' s do t i n ) •) M 5 1025 030 Z of 3 go 4/ to (24.) 0 o OS ,._S3;Z ''_"_ ° 2 - e' ` tit3) s tt oTr o 4 1 Z 13 o * p T ok _ q (1 3)151.1. 03 q ar) (t 5 14 5 o nrtS.tl PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 4 SITE 3 Attachment 3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TERMINATION WHEREAS, the Maplewood City Council granted a conditional use permit on July 26, 1993 for a restaurant in a BC -M (business commercial- modified) zoning district at the following described property: All of Lot 27, Block 5, and that part of Lot 26, Block 5, Midvale Acres No. 2 which lies southeasterly and southwesterly of the followin described line; Beginning on the East line of Ferndale Street, 114 feet south from northwesterl line of Lot 26; thence northeasterlyY parallel to said lot line 59.06 feet; thence southeasterly to a point on southeasterly line of said lot and 53.67 feet southwester) X rnfromeastcomer of Lot 26. This property is known as 2633 Stillwater Road. WHEREAS, the applicant no longer wishes to open a restaurant at this location. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Maplewood Council hereby terminates the above - described conditional use ermit since the applicant decided not to open thispppp restaurant. 4 F -s INTRODUCTION The City Council should end the conditional use permit (CUP) for the Outpatient Adolescent Chemical Dependency Center at 2691 White Bear Avenue. (See the maps on pages 2 -3.) The Riverside Medical center ran this program at the Maplewood Covenant Church but they moved it in 1991 to another location. BACKGROUND On April 10, 1989, the City Council approved the CUP for this outpatient program. On October 9, 1989, the Council renewed the CUP for five years. DISCUSSION Pastor Roger Mollet of Covenant Church told me that the Outpatient Adolescent Chemical Dependency Center no longer meets at the church. As such, there is no need to continue the CUP. The City Code states that the City Council may end a CUP if the use is no longer in effect. RECOMMENDATION End the conditional use permit for an outpatient adolescent chemical dependency center at the Maplewood Covenant Church (2691 White Bear Avenue). q:sec2S \covcup.mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line /Zoning Map 3. Resolution r . A by Counoil MEMORANDUM Endorse Modifi er...........,. TO:City Manager Re j ectect...„ FROM:Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Date SUBJECT:Conditional Use Permit Termination PROJECT Maplewood Outpatie Adolescent Chemical Dependency Center LOCATION:Maplewood Covenant Church-2691 white Bear Avenue DATE:October 6, 1994 INTRODUCTION The City Council should end the conditional use permit (CUP) for the Outpatient Adolescent Chemical Dependency Center at 2691 White Bear Avenue. (See the maps on pages 2 -3.) The Riverside Medical center ran this program at the Maplewood Covenant Church but they moved it in 1991 to another location. BACKGROUND On April 10, 1989, the City Council approved the CUP for this outpatient program. On October 9, 1989, the Council renewed the CUP for five years. DISCUSSION Pastor Roger Mollet of Covenant Church told me that the Outpatient Adolescent Chemical Dependency Center no longer meets at the church. As such, there is no need to continue the CUP. The City Code states that the City Council may end a CUP if the use is no longer in effect. RECOMMENDATION End the conditional use permit for an outpatient adolescent chemical dependency center at the Maplewood Covenant Church (2691 White Bear Avenue). q:sec2S \covcup.mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line /Zoning Map 3. Resolution Attachrent 1 wHrrE 6 LAKE f • •• •• •• 4b• • • • • • • • • + • ••••• • • • dyI•••1I••••••• 1 • •• ••• • • • , •' • • • •• •• . A • s WLkm •ROAD p • GALL. AVE. DR. F Ate- D VE Kn d Loki ZAVE. COPE AVE. 10 6. rn LARK AVE. LOCATION MAP 2 Q N wOODLYNN AVE.p , BRE 19 J LYDtA % 1 AVE. cc s'T yb "WiyS b Y N Cj f 'STANDRIDCE AVE. 1J o BEAM u AVE. u. Q Q MAPLE VIEW AVE. o RADAT'Z I AVE. UESSAS AV NORTH SA/NT F 2 EDGEHILL R0.J DEMONT AVE. OKS AVE.BROOKSt; BROOKS m W .,,. SD(TM(T S= TM A AVE.r GEFtVA1S GERVIJS AVE JI EW AVE.CT. DR. F Ate- D VE Kn d Loki ZAVE. COPE AVE. 10 6. rn LARK AVE. LOCATION MAP 2 Q N Attachment 2 4 2 05 53 P.%U D Isods' /00'00' 1 c5 RAM SEYT 1 44 COUNTY 7 lei 5 - Jr i r r 1 O L. L,%OASAKE DBE K F Pro D 1 LS o OUT '^ 7 8 0 o - 701.79 O!o 0 020 - 57 1.53 ac. 30 5 da, N CA C3 Irsq 030 040 Uj ' 60 X7 In Apq 3 a`• SaS d 1 F pp) i9 4 W - - -- 1 3 4 5 L 40 ac. oo - f- C o •.. 2.92 ac. X = kirC' 1- ( E ` 4% L: so • t D.15 100 1 Loo I IF- 1 020 N L ISO • , oo • 100• to** too ... • }• • r }:•::: ::•r. }; •r:•:rr::•: 43, to • :' • :•:•:•:•:•• 26 •f ;::::.• r ' o,o t61 ' 8.5 2 ar r:: :'rr: ••:,::.;.; Q . 26 3.G I'1 a 020 c . r 0 271,._ f -- - - }, ti•' _ d. CHU `x;;:, 43 c•(8) a d LW ON QD in fir.'::•: }} . r : ~:.;.- .;' • r . ; ;. t2) ( X {rY o ( 2 (33) H D t S T. 622 3 0 (,,) MOGRENS CORNER ;7 INDEPENDENT 4 : o • In 2 18 t9 8 " C V HARMONY SCHOOLt? `} 6 '22L. o 20 h s' 5 , 0 Z 49. 1 o O * 100' 10 1 O 0' I o0' 100' +S s .. ... r.r .. ...n.. .a.a.............w , COUNTY ROAD C - rwv , O in PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 3 4 . N Attachment 3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City Council approved a conditional use permit (CUP) on April 10, 1989 for an outpatient adolescent chenmical dependency center for the property legally described as Lots 1 through 5, Homeland Addition in Section 2, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the address of this property is 2691 White Bear Avenue. WHEREAS, the City Council renewed the CUP for five years on October 9, 1989. WHEREAS, this chemical dependency center is no longer meeting at the above - referenced property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby ends the above - described conditional use permit since the use is no longer in effect. Adopted by the Maplewood City Council on October 24, 1994. At INTRODUCTION The conditional use permit (CUP) at 2425 White Bear Avenue is due for a review. This permit is for, a church. (See the maps and site plan on pages 2-4.) BACKGROUND On June 28, 1993, the City Council approved the following for this property: I - Aland use plan change from LBC (limited business commercial) to C (church) 2. A CUP subject to nine conditions. (See the CUP conditions on pages 5 and 6.) On June 27, 1994, the City Council reviewed this permit and required review again on September 26. The September 26 review was to give the church time to finish some required site work. DISCUSSION The church is meeting the permit conditions. Condition 8 (page 6) requires that the Church remove the concrete curb blocks surrounding the parking lot and replace them with continual concrete curbing. The City Council gave the church three years to do this. The church must complete this by June 28, 1996. RECOMMENDATION Review the conditional use permit at 2425 white Bear Avenue again in July 1996. p:secl l \calvary2.mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line / Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. CUP Conditions dated June 28, 1993 Action by CQr , 0111: MEMORANDUM EndorsefL- -,.... Modified TO:City Manager Re a ct e FROM:Thomas Ekstrand -- Associate Planner Date SUBJECT:Conditional Use Permit Review PROJECT:Redeeming Love Church fo Calv Assem of GodChurch ( fo y ) LOCATION:2425 white Bear Avenue DATE:October 13, 1994 INTRODUCTION The conditional use permit (CUP) at 2425 White Bear Avenue is due for a review. This permit is for, a church. (See the maps and site plan on pages 2-4.) BACKGROUND On June 28, 1993, the City Council approved the following for this property: I - Aland use plan change from LBC (limited business commercial) to C (church) 2. A CUP subject to nine conditions. (See the CUP conditions on pages 5 and 6.) On June 27, 1994, the City Council reviewed this permit and required review again on September 26. The September 26 review was to give the church time to finish some required site work. DISCUSSION The church is meeting the permit conditions. Condition 8 (page 6) requires that the Church remove the concrete curb blocks surrounding the parking lot and replace them with continual concrete curbing. The City Council gave the church three years to do this. The church must complete this by June 28, 1996. RECOMMENDATION Review the conditional use permit at 2425 white Bear Avenue again in July 1996. p:secl l \calvary2.mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line / Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. CUP Conditions dated June 28, 1993 Attachment 1 AVE BEkM N,, AVE. Q AAAPIE VIEW AVE. ge 0 o RAQATZ AVE. Q r AV is lop i . w i , ~•• •. PiW" P°^a Ro'"'SE'' NORTH Cwff Kam" -- ME Lo tg 0 cc EDCEHILL RD. ..• ooKr t ROOKS AVE t 6ROOK5 AVE. m W .. own) AVE. EVFJV 7)4 SO( TiWT AVE GERHNS 9 . GEIN .'•'•,,,'..'..;t•4.'.. C NS AVE y e cn CR/WO'1AE1N AVE. CT• VIKING •' ct SHERRfN AVE Lake GlS'R,E AVE. AVE COPE AVE Ott VE J tT W_. AVE ti LAUpJE RD. LAURIE R0. Zsr` lIURtE = R0. ° ••` SM10 URST rot AVE co. Rn. e r • 1700'O9URKEAVE. o BURKE AVE. EL.DR It10E AVE WCRFIT1gK NN AVE. W1RRlS AVE. ' :•• ROSErM000 AVE N. AN AV. ME NORdowo AVE GO-OOR04 LOCATION MAP SITE 2 4 N Attachment Eel o rw— ft"111 1 .1 30g • vac. fs U N N VACAnV: AMID IS 14WET `....... Oil- o•F, 72,e, ,, sic.. Q' tt Coss. at ' ' W spa lw 1 mug A /.7s .tl • `• 7111. `• T - 1.T'D•t '' i4.3! '•i z E. lit = y uj MON= VOL t 3543 1 1 • r 1 t.a3dr. l o qs 1 1 oo 2500Its?oso 60 M imQ1 3s . • _ s 0001f IND" 1 2480 1 I I L RAINBOW FOODS N JO'w REQUESTED ROW DEDIOATIC wasu5w.midwsm GERVAIS AVEN at lei* v 1 Q 71i p , St tom' 1 •"• ... .. IRS— , O.•: ••:S S,fi:S ••''SSSSS Y.S '•} S•, r'yY . •' S••. { : • .. y r ., •, r'0' •:y. •' _ ^1 {V'Y:'•S}.',+kS,"iS'}• •: .5. J yf+ :: : 1 I . , •ry rY., :, y S .•. SS{•. • v { y,'•i'': • ,• v. •, r S S,'J.S .. y,ySS'S;• }:5; ::• {.L;r {•;YSM. V. • ••,yV.;. • • • J S'• • ''• - `.VJr S T.? •'}' • ;'••••• •'•:•} • .•rr•• r 1 yy ' ,r• .. Svsyy Sy.. y'•.y T' S'. "Sy:ti'•. •:Y;, 4SS1 :':S •• S , '• y "'}t ' y' • : . y `•', 2462SSr:S•', • • r'Y S Y'• S' • •M •, , ;`.•'•••. y • •;:{ 1:•.•.}. tiS `' ;.• . yS;.•••. Y}'• S.''•.• rSS.;;•' i' i•{ iS' h'• Si;:•:••'• 1iS }: %A'•1••'••••ifi'••Sd••: {S',i • .,' •- •`;'•"' 'y' :• yJ1 • ' • if •y S1,• }SSY.:y;} • ! J • ,. ti .;. yS,S S • ••,Y.b''.`if'•S,Y'}.S'•Jy'•rr •S' S `iyJ 'J•y. L;.•'•• •' , ' {•JS { :rtir:';:. r `'{'' ' ' •} y' y' '• • l O , .7fi{}{•:'•'• y';T,. fi • ;y':yy;.' :S• :; , J:, v:C'{;•}S }y:' ..,W.r • yy{•'S {..yS r'•A`.•y rr .•.-'r .•:r ..P Y :• • ' S' { :.VS'fi:,ti'y .• r.'''`c.S'i{; ...•yS; ORR }:} }SS••S•'i'•SSSS ' C'.Y•• y"•.Sr}{•' ;'•'•';° f ;'{:;}''• .; S S • S {y , ;;'` •r ••• S S;y •r` ; ; 4 , • S,.•..r {.., {.•y.• y ti }S '•• :;i . S, . .',yyS•• J'J'SSdiy;:{• Y'''• y.,', ' ,•T . • '. V S•{ }' y'}y ;}.•ySS, Y:S• Y {: • •: ' .P•Ti }: 1,Sk•.;'.•'.'. :; { ;;r• }' . { _ _5'ti "S'•: S } .S. S r ,yr •• ,y ''•''i S ; y • 2456 rS4 ;; • S •;.SSr .',;SfiS•. y '' ' 'L'• SiS S S'7:: SSSS. }:,S{SS} • S;i {S;{ • 71 S r tSV • S • • S • • .r•: • • y„ ;. y `yYy '':•' : r C ,ti'•"`:•"; . '' . S. .,;, Sf • •S • S S "' y SS'S S' J•r y .: ,CS S {ry `•yR {:•{,{.yr iSS 'S .tiSS V?+'•r •'•. y •ry y , ; Y S "S S, S S •.• • S S S S • •.'S . , r ;: • 1 ' },;'S' ;;•y,•,•y,:ti :'{ ;d{'„Y,;;.'S,::•:;y :;' ;:':y'i':'y {•Si,'v''•S':•Sii ,W.S;C;, :.: .•' •r. S•y..tiy_ . S' Y • •'• SS•:S•r •' ':;•:; : ;•; :5;.;.,..5`' ''S} • •:;.Y.;.SS•yyti \•.J:_: • J : •; S, S` i .•:;r;• }'r• ,S .• . ryS';'S• :S, • '•'•i :;: _ • N yGGS""•`,' M11. • yy S;yM.} .Vr• `.'.'S r 'Y:}•y . r :•.. r SS' S {y'••Y:`:S':•:•:•:•:•r;i''i,'S 2444 S J.CS•.S • • y SS•.'S S S . SS ., S • . • '', ' Sr :•:•'•;•,',fi Y• • ......1• SS•.S' .•: ••••••• }:•;; yS ,• {Sy'Sy .:1 •': } S • •J' •SSS S•r:•.'O L1 . rS ' :!ti ''. {• SSS;y};Y• :S {Sti; .S' : .Y.: Y M {. } } {ySr;{{r` . ":•. V.• {.S;{y w • } fi. ' .:•' Y• •IN r 'fi.} .•.:'r: . • 2 4 3 4y •• 4yyb'• y''•r';.••, •: v:} } },:; / ; O •; ;S• ti •rrA'•'S ` ; • . yPIETi • .;. y.Y. •,, • • r•:•:':SSS • , S, S y {.• S y. r {:;,, S h •'•.• r. •ti.'S"71.Jw :..}:• :•y ....... ..::::• •• ••:' }:•'•.•:• }:•: ' . r „r.a•{.tiyv.•r.•:;}v.;:•.0•;.{, } s y{ •.• ' y; r yyv.•.•. •. ;, y ,r r.•..•Y "•:.:,' i 2428 1 Mr. } }.: '.•. y:......yyy..........:.y:.:;:. :2425 •::::::'.:••:::.. Lj1ti,S••;;r.SS; {:s;' v '4; {r {•. } } f •.•:: ;.SJ'••.Y ..r., J i { {:: :;:•,., } }ti ; .;;•:} •tip:; :; i • 11 } :' y;, r V•SS.•i : • . ' S • ••• 5 ;., :•. y •, -, J - S!ti.,0 :i .•. Y.Vl ;• 7• . L I fir. f S// 0S . •';. MV'• S • ; •• •• V .S;,'•ti:`.•':;SS'S'R••'{•..;Sy I .1 rS y ,, S;.'; }i •' ti:• •ti;r .1• , {;:O •••• :• •• • ' •:ti }• •} ` •A . • •:rr0.1 %{ } .7 ) , ::: •,: •':Yy :• S. y {•'S•:•Y..'''r'•'•i.Y}':'r, 'S {ti;.S..,? •;•; :i • y .. ' SSS'' 2422S• S } • Y,''S.S.• yy.S{ y.; Vy.. • •.SSY.•. h • { ,• SS•'i••VS': :•rr:.y4''•'•;Q.•.S:•'ti }• ?.} :Yr.,. SrSY'{;'•.'r.S•yS•{:r'.;.'. ,;Yr. y , r ':': ti'.} 4 { }• S.• ;.••S :•.••Y `. r S •`r ow ti;;ti { };y ;;; y }•::• ?•:} ; ;• •r Sf; }, }S ••••r., {,yS.;:v'.•.•.; {;• L. 1 1 J :K• - • • •'• SS''} •. S ; :Y.•. {•:;{ :;:;:; ,''';•, :'';•},5: +:4.''•'•.''r: }'''.}'•} .;:: .: • :'i ' tiy S' '+Y. • . 5 ,, • , ' ,:i` }. !_ •S} }r... •;.} r{.;.SS, , SY y;;yr• rr S•:S r. {{yr : • .;:'..S-y 'S;, y..•; 1. ' 1 1'• '•1iSS } }SS . yS• yS • yS ..;.•y.,.. '.'•:.•.S '.'•Si .V A;r •' ::• . S{ S r .. J . • :; j, h Y: {• {: S'`'r }i;:,Y' v •'i':'Y:}} S}; {J .•:;.•y:' : " fi r.•tii'' •':.• }.• i;.... 2 41 2 ' O1 {• rfi: }y'ti'h. r Y'•'r• ;'•'•...• Y. yy ;.• }., f ' y:;:; .,r.• ,.•.•.•. y .•:y ti'•yv.•: r .•.•.•.•.•. ( A ( 1fi:: r { } {;{,•' y ? }•:f :•''• }:•y;:' ::•1{;,y,'.;:•:;'r {y { }ti: ':; {: ;:;•; ;••.' { wrV 1' y y } :SS'••: y {};rSY •: }'; :ti ;•;:;:;:;:':ti {; :•' •'•rr'; ' ,y S•r . };: }g {.;.;.5 };vr• — 1 }1r{ i ; •' •;:•:; : {;:1:':;:;. tii {':'r :S 1 {• Sh ' i ' :• :':•:• • • ` r 3 Z or, S SS•':':::r.• } y :SSS•{ • ti .. .• S r.•r .S• • .. S ... ! C 0 ,Y ;.,r. •^•. :},:?:.• v {,'.Yr .YJy . ; . ;.•.• ev r: tfi.•.•.•••.yY `1 3S .•• fi:• S . • .S• •.. .; • .Y Y••. •, { ,. r yrti . ;,,. }., ; r • .,.. • / i1 } };r .• }y:; : } { '•:. }.•::•:; r.'•''• {titi }•.• ,.•r. SS ;•'• •,•• •;..} }y{ :'•':':':•: } : } ti .S . • SSy:;:,'Y:.L .•.,.,.r ti, tiS'':SS a sumow— GERVAIS COURT 077 GER Now40- tow 3, . •1 i 32.0 • • 22G• 32S • ' f,t _ r 1 1 70 1 '1r1 , i 11 / ( O ' fo lOo 0 2394 0 . nsetoo00 1890 ' 7 1 1818 .. N p 10 ;: 2 2 3 $ 2 C °) a o (, r) 04it) 800 , , . 1 N h Eo71 o1 1 • o 1 to r L 60 C r - 2374 miZ `rt3 Oto - -- - -- A 0 14 (4)10 8 ;; 7 6 Zr to , . (7) (s C (13) 4 000N'nLB . tooO Ab s. HIGHWAY 36 . PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP SITE 3 4 N N Orr schelen t t 4 i 3 3 f thw-ww s Attachment 3 f2-cc;2 I.1. NEW RAMP m N sw REPLACE STEPS s" r... t 2425 WHITE BEAR AVENUE { HANDICAPPED PARKING Jill mss. r a uu { NEW EXTERIOR DOOR ORONO E _.. 4 City Council approve this permit. Attachment 4 publicc heari n on June 14, 1993, The2 . The City Council held a pu 9 City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to y • everyone -the surroundingng property owners. The Council1 gave e one aty the hearing chance to speak and present written statements.9 The Council also considered reports and recommendat ions of the City staff and Planning Commission. SOLVED that the CitytHOW, THEREFORE, BE I7 RE Y Counc i 1 approve the above- described conditional use permit, because: 1. The use would be located, designed,maintained constructed and operated to be i n conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan p Y and Code of ordinances. The use would not change the existing or planned character of2. the surround: ng area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials,4 • 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,p p p dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run - off, v i brat on, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. S. Thee 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: 1. All construction shall follow the plans that the City received on May 3, 1993. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must have substantially started or the building must be used for a church within one year of Council approval or the permit shall end. The City Council may grant up to one one -year extension of the permit. 3. fill the potholes in the parking lot and driveways. 4. Sweep and restripe the parking lot to Current City Code requirements. 5 6 -28 -93 I 5. Remove and clean up the old tires Junk and arba e property. garbage on the b. The church recording deed withh .Ramsey County for five additional feet of right -of -way for White Bear Avenue at thenortheastcornerofthesiThechurchmustrecoh'eco d t s deed within sixty days of getting fee title -of the prop The County Traffic Engineer must approve thi deed before the church records it. 7. Screen any outside mechanical equipment,as required by Code. 8. Remove the curb blocks and construct concrete curb around the parking lot perimeter, as the City Cole requires. The church may compl ete this work with Phase 11 of the construction and shall have it done within three years of City approval.roval. 9.. The. City Council shall review this ermit ip none year. Seconded by Councilmember Carl -Ayes Mayor Bastian, Counci 1 members Carlson, Juker, Rossbach Hays - Counci lmember Zappa 6 FOOO, 11 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Planning Commission Resignation DATE: Ocotober 4, 1994 INTRODUCTION Action by CooijL a Endorse Modifie Rejecte . Date Gary Gerke has resigned from the Planning Commission. I have attached his letter of resignation and a resolution of appreciation for him. RECOMMENDATIONS Approve the attached resolution of appreciation. go /c :memo3.mem (6.1 Commission Terms) Attachments: 1. 9 -12 -94 letter 2. Resolution Attachment I September 12, 1994 Ma Gar Bastian City Of Maplewood 1830 E. Count Road B Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 0DearMaB It is with re that I must resi from the Plannin Commission for the cit of Maplewood. I have sold m home in Maplewood and am relocatin to Lindstrom. M resi will be effective Septemember 30, I have enjo the involvement and have sincerel appreciated the opportunit given me to serve on the Commission these past years. Thank you, Y urs truT% urs I, Gar ;. Gerke 1252 Cope Ave. E. Maplewood, MN 55109 14 Attachment 2 JOINT RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION WHEREAS, Gary Gerke has been a member of the Maplewood Planning Commission since October 10, 1989 and has served faithfully in that capacity to the present time; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has appreciated his experience, insights and good judgment and WHEREAS, he has freely given of his time and energy, without compensation, for the betterment of the City of Maplewood; and WHEREAS, he has shown sincere dedication to his duties and has consistently contributed his leadership, time and effort for the benefit of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED for and on behalf of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota and its citizens, that Gary Gerke is hereby extended our heartfelt gratitude and appreciation for his dedicated service, and we wish him continued success in the future. Passed by the Maplewood City Council on Gary Bastian, Mayor Passed by the Maplewood Planning Commission on October 3, 1994. Lester Axdahl, Chairperson Attest: Lucille E. Aurelius, Clerk 3 Plannin Commission Minutes- <10 -03 -94 10 wulated. Commission ded A T motion passed. V1, NEW BUSINESS A. Plannin Commission Resi Ken Roberts, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Roberts stated that because the Cit Council decided to consider Mr. Milo Thompson to fill Mr. Gerke's position, rather than to advertise, the staff recommendations have chan Commissioner Rossbach moved to approve the resolution • of appreciation for Gar Gerke: Commissioner Kittrid seconded A The motion passed. VII. VIS R PRESENTATIONS There were no "sitor presentations. VIII, COMMISSION PR NTATIONS a. September 26 Council etin ommissioner Axdahl reported on this meetin b. Representative for the Octo e 10 Council Meetin Conuni" *ssioner Axdahl IX STAFF PRESENTATIO Commissioner Fische poke of the pine trees at were planted alon the trail near Southwinds. She al if truth-in-hou * g re that easements be stated on information that iew / owners of these units receive. X ADJOU"MENT Mee adjourned at 11:20 f -9 S Action by CoUnOi W ' Toe Lucille Aurelius, City Clerk Front: Connie Kelsey, Utility Billing Cler Modified ReJ ecte Date Attached please find the certificaiton listing that will be forwarded to Ramsey County for collection on the 1995 property tax statements in the amount of $ 97,274.38. ACCOUNT STREET ADDRESS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AMOUNT 010000321 1752 Ruth St.14- 29- 22 -34- 0007 -0 255.80 010000453 1706 Barclay St.15- 29- 22 -34- 0021 -3 255.62 010000586 1375 Larpenteur Ave. E.15- 29- 22 -33- 0050 -4 256.14 010000768 1699 Barclay St 15- 29- 22 -34- 0070 -5 24.08 010000958 1954 Hazelwood Ave.15- 29- 22 -13- 0050 -6 235.52 010001105 1901 Hazelwood Ave.15- 29- 22 -31- 0023 -8 253.70 010001261 938 Evar St.25- 29- 22 -42- 0016 -5 236.92 010001469 1367 Larpenteur Ave.15- 29- 22 -33- 0049 -4 71.04 010001527 1889 Clarence St.15- 29- 22 -32- 0058 -1 253.78 010001717 1455 Larpenteur Ave. E.15- 29- 22 -34- 0081 -5 256.14 010002038 1894 Flandrau St.15- 29- 22 -41- 0033 -4 157.28 010002111 1689 Barclay St.15- 29- 22 -34- 0084 -4 256.14 010002327 1757 Barclay St 15- 29- 22 -34- 0050 -1 50.86 010002343 1736 Furness St.14- 29- 22 -41- 0044 -7 256.14 010002590 1860 Flandrau St.15- 29- 22 -41- 0026 -6 256.14 010002723 2505 Harvester Ave.25- 29- 22 -13- 0050 -5 252.64 010002830 1768 Flandrau St.15- 29- 22 -44- 0036 -4 255.72 010002905 1819 Flandrau St.15 -29- 22-41- 0062 -2 256.08 010003143 1852 Flandrau St 15- 29- 22 -41- 0024 -0 222.74 010003309 2321 Stillwater Rd.25- 29- 22 -33- 0046 -4 255.88 01.0003333 1925 White Bear Ave.15- 29- 22 -41- 0001 -7 256.14 010003515 1785 McKnight Rd. N.14 -29- 22-44- 0001 -1 256.14 010004414 1960 Clarence St.15- 29 -22 -23- 0015 -2 236.16 010005007 1800 English St.15- 29- 22 -33- 0088 -9 256.14 010005353 629 Ferndale St.36- 29- 22 -12- 0036 -8 256.14 010005569 2410 Hazelwood Ave.10- 29- 22 -13- 0051 -4 229.14 010005809 1830 Howard St 14- 29- 22 -41- 0021 -4 48.00 010005932 1227 Lark Ave.09- 29- 22- 44- 0017 -2 256.14 010006153 2502 Stillwater Rd.25- 29- 22 -13- 0052 -1 48.00 010006203 2036 Chambers St.16- 29- 22 -14- 0008 -9 208.14 010006989 488 Ferndale St 36- 29- 22 -14- 0039 -1 252.78 010007219 1810 Maryknoll Ave 15- 29- 22 -42- 0020 -5 107.66 010007458 1442 Sandhurst Dr 10- 29- 22 -34- 0108 -4 78.32 010007557 1211 Skillman Ave E 16- 29- 22 -11- 0063 -5 100.78 010007607 2725 Conway Ave.36- 29- 22 -14- 0058 -2 267.26 010007680 1564 Gervais Ave.10- 29- 22 -42- 0006 -4 256.14 010008134 509 Farrell St 36- 29- 22 -14- 0045 -6 222.74 1 ACCOUNT STREET ADDRESS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AMOUNT 010008209 1435 E County Road B 10- 29- 22 -34- 0114 -9 222.74 010008480 521 Farrell St.36- 29- 22 -14- 0047 -2 125.80 010008555 1595 Viking Dr.10- 29- 22 -42- 0028 -4 256.14 010008803 1780 English St.15- 29- 22 -33- 0090 -2 256.14 010008902 1513 E. County Road B 10- 29- 22 -34- 0055 -1 256.00 010009371 1107 Gordon Ave.16- 29- 22 -42- 0050 -3 256.14 010009546 1233 E. County Road B 09- 29- 22 -44- 0032 -1 256.14 010009975 1515 Grandview Ave.10- 29- 22 -31- 0018 -1 256.08 010010031 1263 Junction Ave.09- 29- 22 -44- 0110 -0 158.04 010010254 2000 Dieter St.15- 29- 22 -24- 0007 -8 207.94 010010312 1640 Sextant Ave.10- 29- 22 -13- 0035 -2 256.14 010010692 1214 Lark Ave 09- 29- 22 -44- 0043 -1 256.14 010010924 1279 Ripley Ave.16- 29- 22 -41- 0010 -8 147.72 010010932 2191 English St 09- 29- 22 -44- 0062 -2 84.46 010010973 1585 Gervais Ave.10- 29- 22 -13- 0046 -2 255.72 010011310 795 Mary St.25- 29- 22 -34- 0048 -7 255.80 010011328 1115 Gordon Ave 16- 29- 22 -42- 0046 -4 229.14 010011542 2027 English St.16- 29- 22 -14- 0002 -1 256.14 010012789 1694 Frank St 16- 29- 22 -44- 0084 -0 171.06 010013001 2636 Harvester Ave 25- 29- 22 -41- 0056 -6 97.32 010013126 1119 Ripley Ave.16- 29- 22 -42- 0045 -1 256.14 010013191 1061 Gordon Ave.16- 29- 22 -42- 0026 -0 256.14 010013357 1891 Barclay St.15- 29- 22 -31- 0071 -7 256.14 010013597 1950 E. County Road B 14- 29- 22 -21- 0023 -2 256.14 010013639 549 Ferndale St.36- 29- 22 -13- 0007 -7 256.14 010013738 2152 Prosperity Rd.15- 29- 22 -11- 0006 -5 244.50 010013753 1702 Howard St 14- 29- 22 -44- 0014 -7 158.86 010013803 2225 Prosperity Rd.10- 29- 22 -44- 0031 -4 254.76 010014066 1524 Grandview Ave.10- 29- 22 -31- 0022 -0 255.72 010014389 1745 Kennard St 15- 29 -22 -43- 0015 -0 100.78 010014397 1246 E. County Road B 09- 29- 22 -44- 0069 -3 254.90 010014504 592 Farrell St.36- 29 -22 -14- 0016 -8 118.80 010014769 1631 Gervais Ave 10- 20- 22 -13- 0041 -7 100.78 010014801 1264 Ryan Ave.16- 29- 22 -14- 0062 -3 256.12 010014884 1485 Grandview Ave 10- 29- 22 -31- 0014 -9 51.32 010014900 2229 Hazelwood Ave 10- 29- 22 -34- 0029 -2 222.74 010015006 1137 E. County Road B 09- 29- 22- 43- 0008 -1 64.68 ACCOUNT STREET ADDRESS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AMOUNT 010015311 1218 Lealand Rd.09 -29- 22-44- 0133 -3 251.46 010015378 2643 Stillwater Rd.25- 29- 22 -11- 0036 -5 256.14 010015717 2546 Stillwater Rd.25- 29- 22 -13- 0057 -6 256.14 010015782 1890 Adele Ave.1.6- 29- 22- 42- 0018 -9 246.88 010015931 619 Farrell St 36- 29- 22 -11- 0042 -6 222.74 010016038 1674 Lark Ave 10- 29- 22 -44- 0057 -6 235.30 010016236 1984 Barclay St.15- 29- 22 -24- 0032 -4 256.14 010016392 2242 Hazel St.11- 29- 22 -34- 0005 -3 243.66 010016624 1251 Larpenteur Ave. E.16- 29- 22 -44- 0022 -2 241.80 010016798 1872 Manton St.15- 29- 22 -31- 0064 -9 256.14 010016871 1029 Century Ave. N.25- 29- 22 -14- 0065 -4 213.58 010016913 1452 Burke Ave.15- 29- 22 -21- 0021 -3 256.14 010017036 2189 Craig PI.11- 29- 22 -34- 0027 -3 229.14 010017051 2206 Craig PI.11- 29- 22 -34- 0042 -2 252.34 010017077 785 Meyer St.25- 29- 22- 34- 0075 -9 151.70 010017127 1488 Sherren Ave.10- 29- 22 -31- 0064 -4 256.14 010017499 2697 Minnehaha Ave.25- 29- 22 -44- 0041 -5 254.60 010017796 1280 Ripley Ave.16- 29- 22 -44- 0005 -7 256.14 010018232 1899 Flandrau St 15- 29- 22 -41- 0047 -3 171.78 010018471 91 Dennis Lane 01- 28- 22 -14- 0090 -5 256.14 010019099 92 Farrell St.01- 28- 22 -14- 0060 -4 256.14 010019172 16 Mayhill Rd.01- 28- 22 -14- 0030 -3 255.92 010019487 1216 Belmont Ln.16- 29- 22 -11- 0057 -0 231.58 010019586 2255 Craig PI.11- 29- 22 -34- 0017 -6 256.14 010019669 77 Mayhill Rd.01- 28- 22 -14- 0037 -4 164.46 010019891 2484 Harvester Ave 25- 29- 22 -31- 0003 -3 255.62 010019974 2711 Stillwater Rd.25- 29- 22 -11- 0045 -9 255.62 010020493 2044 Prosperity Rd 15- 29- 22 -12- 0021 -1 229.14 010020543 2642 Harvester Ave.25- 29- 22 -41- 0012 -6 256.14 010020634 1871 McKnight Rd. N.14- 29- 22 -41- 0008 -1 233.18 010020675 1084 Sterling St.25- 29- 22 -12- 0162 -0 158.88 010021178 1660 Myrtle St.24- 29- 22 -22- 0004 -7 256.14 010021442 1744 East Shore Dr.16- 29- 22 -43- 0045 -8 253.78 010021533 1503 RipleySt 15- 29- 22 -31- 0043 -2 48.00 010021954 1233 Belmont Ln.16- 29- 22 -11- 0086 -8 256.00 010022036 94 0 Day St 01- 28- 22 -13- 0085 -6 236.16 010022085 76 0 Day St 01- 28- 22 -13- 0082 -7 53.30 AGCOIJNT STREET ADDRESS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AMOUNT 010022291 56 McClelland Ave.01- 28- 22 -13- 0050 -0 256.14 010022531 2554 Mayer Ln.01- 28- 22 -13- 0086 -9 246.52 010022978 1707 Ruth St.14- 29- 22 -34- 0090 -2 131.76 010023026 1872 Furness St.14- 29- 22 -41- 0049 -2 256.12 010023034 2310 Sti l lwater Ave.25- 29- 22 -33- 0020 -2 256.08 010023075 78 McClelland Ave 01- 28- 22 -13- 0053 -9 48.00 010023109 1762 Howard St.14- 29- 22 -44- 0020 -2 243.66 010023208 1451 E County Road C 03- 29 -22 -34- 0015 -5 141.26 010023562 15 Dennis Ln 01- 28- 22 -14- 0101 -4 43.00 010023950 1819 Birmingham St 15- 29- 22- 32- 0023.5 255.26 010023992 1715 Howard St.14- 29- 22-44- 0035 -4 255.66 010024610 1547 Grandview Ave.10- 29- 22 -42- 0009 -3 256.14 010024636 1461 Grandview Ave.10- 29- 22 -31- 0011 -0 256.08 010024651 1835 Flandrau St.15 -29- 22-41- 0059 -6 256.14 01 0024727 1928 Manton St.15- 29- 22 -24- 0068 -3 256.14 010024800 2671 Midvale PI.25- 29- 22 -14- 0021 -4 256.14 010095016 1956 Hazelwood Ave.15- 29- 22 -13- 0050 -6 251.96 0/0123214 953 Century Ave. N.25- 29- 22 -41- 0001 -6 256.14 010123222 953 Century Ave. N.25 -29- 22-41- 0001 -6 256.14 020025078 2695 Fremont Ave 36- 29- 22 -14- 0009 -0 114.86 020025201 1261 Skillman Ave.16- 29- 22 -11- 0071 -6 252.78 020025375 2053 Prosperity Rd.15- 29- 22 -12- 0022 -4 256.14 020025425 2452 Germain St.10- 29- 22 -13- 0023 -9 244.36 020025854 2567 Upper Afton Rd.01- 28- 22 -13- 0071 -7 235.48 020025896 2462 White Bear Ave 11- 29- 22 -24- 0010 -6 106.58 020026050 1565 E County Road B 10- 29- 22 -43- 0069 -2 48.00 020026308 2633 Edgeh i l l Rd 11- 29- 22 -22- 0038 -0 256.14 020026514 2700 Geranium St.25- 29- 22 -11- 0024 -2 255.88 020026605 1744 Prosperity Rd.15- 29- 22-43- 0017 -6 256.14 020026795 1774 Lark Ave.10 -29 -22-44 - 0015 -2 251.96 020027082 106 Roselawn Ave. E.18- 29- 22- 42- 0016 -7 256.14 020027520 1771 Agate St.18- 29- 22 -43- 0041 -0 236.16 020027868 2090 McMenemy St 17- 29- 22 -22- 0105 -1 179.54 020028007 1932 Gervais Ave.11- 29- 22 -31- 0037 -9 256.08 020028940 206 Bellwood Ave.18- 29- 22 -42- 0034 -5 86.70 020029054 1817 City Heights Dr 18 -29- 22-42- 0109 -8 229.76 020029187 1250 McKnight Rd. N.24- 29 -22 -33- 0015 -3 255.88 4 ACCOUNT STREET ADDRESS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AMOUNT 020029294 1534 E. County Road C 10- 29- 22 -21- 0002 -7 255.62 020029443 1755 City Heights Dr 18- 29- 22-43- 0066 -9 139.50 020029575 1745 Edgerton St.17- 29- 22 -34- 0070 -0 256.14 020029591 15 Kingston Ave.18- 29- 22 -34- 0020 -1 240.50 020029831 623 E. Larpenteur Ave.17 -29- 22-43- 0048 -4 256.14 020029856 157 Mount Vernon Ave.18- 29- 22 -13- 0048 -4 246.40 020030003 1865 Arcade St.17 -29- 22-41- 0074 -9 256.14 020030672 1740 City Heights Dr 18- 29- 22 -43- 0050 -4 108.00 020030698 1756 Edgerton St.17- 29- 22 -43- 0016 -7 256.14 020030847 1683 Abel St.18- 29- 22 -34- 0047 -6 158.86 020031068 1718 Edgerton St 1.7- 29- 22 -43- 0025 -1 117.94 020031134 1801 Desoto St.17- 29- 22 -33- 0001 -6 256.14 020031449 1760 Desoto St 17- 29- 22 -34- 0031 -4 76.28 020031506 1693 Jessie St.17- 29- 22 -34- 0055 -0 229.14 020031886 1746 Edgerton St 17- 29- 22 -43- 0018 -3 253.70 020031977 1720 Sylvan St 18- 29- 22 -34- 0038 -2 158.86 020032298 1050 Frost Ave 16- 29- 22 -31- 0001 -5 48.00 020032371 1969 Greenbrier St 17- 29- 22 -13- 0008 -9 48.00 020032553 2190 Edgerton St.17- 29- 22 -12- 0021 -5 256.14 020032868 608 Price Ave.17- 29- 22 -43- 0038 -7 256.14 020032926 1780 McMenemy St 17- 29- 22 -32- 0029 -7 222.74 020033221 2366 White Bear Ave 11- 29- 22 -31- 0004 -9 222.74 020033601 1873 Jackson St.18- 29- 22 -31- 0019 -0 256.14 020033817 1955 McMenemy St 18- 29- 22 -14- 0006 -7 48.00 020033932 1703 Jessie St.17- 29- 22 -34- 0052 -1 256.14 020034864 2124 Barclay St 15- 29- 22 -21- 0086 -0 101.14 020035614 157 Summer Ave. E.18- 29- 22 -42- 0055 -2 256.78 020035986 624 Price Ave.17- 29- 22 -43- 0034 -5 252.38 020036075 2191 Payne Ave.08- 29- 22 -43- 0019 -4 178.68 020036166 1957 Castle Ave 11- 29- 22 -31- 0012 -0 157.86 020036596 800 Roselawn Ave. E.17- 29- 22 -41- 0003 -7 255.92 020036976 2709 Maryland Ave.24- 29- 22 -44- 0061 -2 245.92 020037644 1991 Adolphus St.18- 29- 22 -13- 0054 -9 256.14 020037651 306 Roselawn Ave. E.18 -29- 22-41- 0005 -0 238.42 020037800 2244 Burr St 08- 29- 22 -34- 0043 -5 158.86 020038063 2153 McMenemy St 18- 29- 22 -11- 0001 -1 242.78 020038667 154 Summer Ave. E.18- 29- 22 -42- 0082 -4 255.94 5 ACCOUNT STREET ADDRESS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AMOUNT 020038907 1605 Myrtle St.24- 29- 22 -22- 0019 -9 252.32 020039293 2091 Radatz Ave.02- 29- 22-42- 0018 -2 231.22 020039400 666 E. County Road B 17- 29- 22- 12- 0004 -0 256.14 020039640 2004 Radatz Ave.02- 29- 22 -31- 0029 -6 240.36 020039699 2253 Radatz Ave 02- 29- 22 -41- 0047 -3 16.46 020039806 2196 Desoto St 08- 29- 22 -34- 0061 -3 48.00 020040200 108 Skillman Ave. E.18- 29- 22 -13- 0038 -7 256.14 020040432 1861 Radatz Ave.02- 29- 22 -32- 0020 -6 251.96 020040770 2253 Mapleview Ave.02- 29- 22 -41- 0015 -6 232.60 020040945 1742 Duluth St 16- 29- 22 -44- 0061 -7 100.78 020041067 1728 Duluth St.16- 29- 22 -44- 0059 -4 254.90 020041299 2014 Radatz Ave 02- 29- 22 -31- 0030 -6 26.76 020041646 1737 Duluth St 16 -29- 22-44- 0076 -9 122.24 020041745 1561 Brooks Ave.10- 29- 22 -13- 0078 -9 255.88 020042065 2599 White Bear Ave.11- 29- 22 -21- 0037 -0 255.80 020042156 2716 Gem St.03- 29- 22- 44- 0010 -9 256.14 020042321 1829 Frank St.16- 29- 22 -42- 0069 -7 256.14 020042362 1976 Radatz Ave.02- 29- 22 -31- 0061 -0 87.70 020043097 1775 Atlantic St.16- 29- 22 -44- 0040 -0 256.08 020043261 395 Kingston Ave.17- 29- 22 -33- 0030 -4 256.14 020043295 1711 Clarence St.15- 29- 22 -33- 0069 -8 82.82 020043345 2208 Hendry PI.08- 29- 22 -34- 0026 -0 256.14 020043477 2695 Maryland Ave.24- 29- 22 -44- 0060 -9 256.14 020043550 2114 Mapleview Ave 02- 29- 22 -42- 0021 -8 136.26 020043675 645 Roselawn Ave. E.17- 29- 22 -13- 0037 -7 239.74 020044061 2666 Margaret Ave.36- 29- 22 -11- 0038 -7 236.16 020044822 1729 Clarence St 15- 29- 22 -33- 0066 -9 100.78 020045027 2204 DesotoSt.08- 29- 22 -34- 0062 -6 15.16 020045704 2091 Birmingham St.15- 29- 22 -22- 0003 -2 255.86 020045928 163 -165 E Larpenter Ave 18- 29- 22 -43- 0017 -7 18.32 020045951 2225 Beam Ave.02- 29- 22- 14- 0106 -5 211.44 020046108 1675 -1677 Co. Rd. C 03- 29- 22 -44- 0038 -7 512.24 020046389 2184 Beam Ave 02- 29- 22 -41- 0004 -6 53.06 020046702 1912 Maryknoll Ave.15 -29- 22-42- 0003 -0 255.86 020046967 1621 Sandhurst Dr.10- 29- 22 -43- 0027 -8 256.14 020047098 1278 E County Road B 09- 29- 22- 44- 0074 -5 158.86 020047544 2540 Clarence St.10- 29 -22 -22- 0015 -0 256.14 6 ACCOUNT STREET ADDRESS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AMOUNT 020047791 666 Belmont Ln 17- 29- 22 -12- 0038 -3 100.80 020047866 1224 E. County Road C 09- 29- 22 -11- 0065 -3 256.14 020048013 2471 Maplewood Dr.09- 29- 22 -13- 0006 -8 243.66 020048203 1264 Koh I man Ave.04- 29- 22 -44- 0016 -4 256.14 020048427 365 Skillman Ave. E.17- 29- 22 -22- 0048 -9 256.14 020048500 730 E. County Road B 17- 29- 22 -11- 0016 -6 236.16 020048955 1898 Manton St.15- 29- 22 -31- 0060 -7 255.62 020049201 2929 McKnight Rd. N.02- 29- 22 -14- 0012 -1 255.88 020487211 2530 Woodlyn Ave 01- 29- 22 -12- 0019 -1 178.48 030002158 1863 Barclay St.15- 29- 22 -31- 0066 -5 48.24 030015127 1321 Frost Ave 15- 29- 22 -23- 0054 -7 18.68 030025977 1351 Frost Ave 15- 2922 -23- 0038 -5 397.64 030032015 1674 Laurie Rd 10- 29- 22 -44- 0072 -5 256.14 030035737 2626 White Bear Ave.11- 29- 22 -21- 0012 -1 857.94 030037709 1949 Arcade St.17- 29- 22 -14- 0077 -2 256.06 030042501 749 Century Ave. N.25- 29- 22- 44- 0013 -0 423.78 030044150 215 Larpenteur Ave. E.18- 29- 22 -43- 0022 -9 239.34 030046007 1800 Edward St 16- 29- 22 -42- 0074 -9 100.78 030048433 1235 Frost Ave.16- 29- 22 -14- 0087 -2 803.06 030048979 165 Century Ave. N.01- 28- 22 -11- 0018 -2 73.72 030050165 2728 Gem St.03- 29- 22 -44- 0006 -0 137.26 030050371 2938 Howard Ct 02- 29- 22 -14- 0022 -8 149.60 030051 593 2406 Highwood Ave.13- 28- 22 -31- 0080 -8 256.06 030051767 1243E. County Road C 04- 29- 22 -44- 0026 -1 251.38 030051833 3052 Bellaire Ave.01- 29- 22 -12- 0005 -2 232.56 030052781 1741 Edgerton St.17- 29- 22 -34- 0069 -9 424.86 030053458 1499 Brooks Ave.10- 29- 22 -24- 0006 -0 256.06 030053623 1769 White Bear Ave 15- 29- 22 -44- 0006 -3 158.86 030053631 1779 White Bear Ave 15- 29- 22 -44- 0004 -7 106.66 030053805 1721 White Bear Ave 15- 29- 22 -44- 0012 -8 154.44 030053813 1773 White Bear Ave.15- 29- 22 -44- 0005 -0 256.06 030053862 1871 White Bear Ave 15- 29- 22 -41- 0009 -1 63.88 030054092 1845 Lakewood Dr.13- 29- 22 -32- 0083 -3 256.06 030054233 2280 E. County Rd. D 01- 29- 22 -22- 0061 -1 222.76 030054449 2271 Londin Lane 12- 28- 22- 22- 0006 -1 48.00 030054845 1828 Walter St.16- 29- 22 -42- 0051 -6 255.82 030055032 2720 Highway 61 04- 29 -2 -44- 0009 -6 497.54 N ACCOUNT STREET ADDRESS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AMOUNT 030055370 214 Ferndale St 01- 28- 22 -11- 0002 -7 84.82 030055388 934 Bartelmy Ln 25- 29- 22 -31- 0010 -1 48.00 030055404 1192 Frisbie Ave.16 -29- 22-41- 0019 -5 256.06 030056279 2457 Seventh St. E.25- 29- 22 -31- 0020 -8 256.06 030056618 900 Kohlman Ave.04- 29- 22 -33- 0017 -1 214.54 030057020 2392 Standridge Ave 01- 29- 22 -24- 0073 -8 232.14 030057145 2338 Bush Ave.25- 29- 22 -33- 0017 -6 256.06 030057756 2306 Maple Lane 01- 29- 22 -23- 0039 -1 232.56 030058002 1470 Lark Ave 10- 29- 22 -34- 0074 -2 58.66 030058564 130 E County Road B 18- 29- 22 -12- 0005 -0 101.16 030058903 2951 Bartelmy LN 01- 29- 22 -24- 0099 -0 48.36 030059703 2895 Mary Lane 01- 29- 22 -24- 0064 -4 232.56 030060503 2887 Bartelmy LN 01- 29- 22 -24- 0091 -6 118.84 030061055 1009 Glendon St.25- 29- 22 -13- 0035 -6 256.06 030062103 1404 Cope Ave.10- 29- 22 -33- 0045 -7 244.64 030062160 1839 Frank St.16- 29- 22 -42- 0068 -4 256.06 030062624 415 0 Day St 12- 28- 22 -13- 0042 -5 26.66 030062665 1832 Gervais Ave.11- 29- 22 -32- 0004 -6 256.06 030063093 1824 English St 15- 29- 22 -32- 0085 -3 229.14 030063150 2356 Teakwood Dr 12- 28- 22 -32- 0015 -4 158.86 030064091 1978 Stanich Ct.14- 29- 22 -21- 0010 -6 34.90 030064208 2597 Geranium St.25- 29- 22 -12- 0088 -3 97.36 030064398 1775 E. County Road C 03- 29- 22 -44- 0018 -3 255.74 030064463 1700 McMenemy St 17- 29- 22 -33- 0012 -6 216.90 030064885 2329 Stillwater Rd 25- 29- 22 -33- 0071 -0 37.92 030064935 1165 Ferndale St 25- 29- 22 -12- 0171 -4 158.86 030065221 1830 English St 15- 29- 22 -32- 0084 -0 100.78 030065262 1547 E County Road B 10- 29- 22 -32- 0071 -5 48.00 030065353 2501 H ighwood Ave.13- 28- 22 -24- 0008 -8 256.06 030065726 1708 McMenemy St.17- 29- 22 -33- 0011 -3 254.02 030066088 966 McKnight Rd. S.13- 28- 22 -32- 0011 -9 52.80 030066310 3030 Mary Ct N 01- 29- 22 -21- 0030 -0 49.64 030066724 1164 Sterling St. N.25- 29- 22 -12- 0062 -1 254.60 030068258 2191 Birmingham St.10- 29 -22 -33 -0021 -1 255.62 030068399 2349 Linwood Ave.12- 28- 22 -33- 0090 -2 118.38 030068407 2300 Linwood Ave.13- 28- 22 -22- 0007 -1 255.74 030068852 2261 Timber Trl 13- 28- 22 -23- 0032 -4 48.00 ACCOUNT STREET ADDRESS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AMOUNT 030068951 3027 Bellaire Ave.01- 29- 22 -21- 0037 -1 217.02 030069165 2355 Highwood Ave.13- 28- 22 -23- 0004 -9 254.30 030069207 1252 Ferndale St.24 -29- 22-44- 0034 -0 255.78 030069231 1240 Ferndale St.24- 29- 22 -44- 0039 -5 251.96 030069249 1244 Ferndale St.24- 29- 22 -44- 0037 -9 211.88 030069298 1630 Cope Ave.10 -29 -22-43 - 0018 -4 256.06 030069546 1292 Lark Ave 09- 29 -22 -44- 0061 -9 54.02 030070528 1299 Farrell St.24- 29- 22-44- 0003 -6 256.06 030070619 1900 Myrtle Ave 13- 29- 22 -32- 0005 -3 264.12 030070866 2619 Forest St.09- 29- 22 -21- 0046 -1 254.60 030071435 2511 Geranium Ave 25- 29- 22 -12- 0065 -0 255.62 030072.250 2656 Hawthorne Ave 24- 29- 22- 44- 0100 -6 100.78 030072995 219 McClelland Ave 01- 28- 22 -12- 0017 -6 144.24 030073225 1292 Dennis St.24- 29- 22- 44- 0106 -4 255.72 030073282 2575 Germain St.10- 29- 22 -12- 0048 -1 236.16 030073324 705 Century Ave. N.36- 29- 22 -11- 0056 -5 1214.84 030073571 986 Demont Ave.09- 29- 22 -24- 0012 -9 125.98 030073738 2516 Geranium St.25- 29- 22- 12- 0155 -2 240.24 030073845 1266 Dennis St.24- 29- 22 -44- 0112 -9 48.00 030074785 2334 Hillwood Dr.12- 28- 22 -33- 0072 -4 254.60 030075014 1241 Dennis St.24- 29- 22 -44- 0141 -7 100.80 030075154 2303 Mai land Rd.12- 28- 22 -23- 0243 -5 66.90 030075170 2301 Mailand Rd 12- 28- 22 -23- 0242 -2 165.88 030075451 409 Dorland Rd 12- 28- 22- 23- 0219 -2 48.00 030075501 417 Dorland Rd.12- 28- 22- 23- 0220 -2 256.06 030076319 1291 Dennis St 24- 29- 22 -44- 0082 -9 163.34 030077267 996 Glendon St 25- 29- 22 -13- 0028 -8 251.96 030077374 2331 Dahl Ave.13- 28- 22 -22- 0042 -4 237.88 030077549 2246 English St.10- 29- 22 -33- 0076 -1 256.06 030078042 1581 Sterling St N 24- 29- 22 -21- 0052 -9 153.06 030078232 1587 Sterling St. N.24- 29- 22 -21- 0051 -6 255.62 030078653 1561 Lakewood Dr 24- 29- 22 -21- 0040 -6 158.86 030078786 2602 English St.10- 29- 22- 22- 0028 -6 256.14 030079826 925 Palm Circle 09- 29- 22 -22- 0038 -7 255.62 030080394 2080 McMenemy St 17- 29- 22 -22- 0102 -2 48.00 030081350 2278 Valley View Ave 13- 28- 22 -23- 0071 -9 85.88 030082564 1640 Sandhurst Dr 10- 29- 22- 43- 0034 -6 48.00 9 ACCOUNT STREET ADDRESS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AMOUNT 030084479 2188 English St 10- 20- 22 -33- 0077 -4 251.22 030084495 956 Currie Ct.13- 28- 22 -23- 0064 -1 255.72 030084842 2400 Gall Ave 01- 29- 22 -21- 0087 -6 48.00 030084966 2454 Schadt Dr 13- 28- 22 -34- 0047 -2 236.16 030085195 1256 Mayhill Rd 24- 29- 22- 44- 0156 -9 222.74 030085757 1210 Beam Ave 04 -29- 22-41- 0016 -3 48.00 030086623 76 Kingston Ave.18- 29- 22 -34- 0084 -5 251.96 030087043 2076 English St.15- 29- 22 -22- 0045 -6 253.84 030087894 2317 Boxwood Ave.13- 28- 22 -33- 0085 -7 252.78 030088793 1388 Dorland Rd.24- 28- 22 -23- 0037 -5 100.78 030089940 1829 Burr St.17- 29- 22 -31- 0088 -9 114.54 030090500 1930 Castle Ave.11- 29- 22 -31- 0022 -7 182.22 030090914 734 Viking Dr.08- 29- 22 -44- 0026 -9 66.36 030091433 1043 0 Day ST 13- 28- 22 -42- 0078 -1 352.34 030092142 1516 Sherren Ave 10- 29- 22 -31- 0083 -5 291.56 030092191 2952 Walter St 04- 29- 22 -13- 0059 -7 207.88 030092407 552 Mcknight Rd S 12- 28- 22 -32- 0051 -0 111.88 030093165 375 Crestview Dr 12- 28- 22 -24- 0050 -2 181.14 030093413 2633 Duluth St 09- 29- 22 -11- 0104 -7 133.18 030093678 2311 H i l lwood Dr 12- 28- 22 -32- 0091 -8 158.86 030094171 2236 Ide Ct 10- 29- 22 -33- 0126 -5 48.00 030094411 2437 Linwood Ave 12- 28- 22 -34- 0011 -6 125.10 032000317 2492 H ighwood Ave 13- 28- 22 -31- 0067 -5 13.72 040043747 1760 Adolphus St.18- 29- 22 -44- 0016 -1 2093.24 040043762 1780 Adolphus St.18- 29- 22 -44- 0016 -1 2093.24 040051997 1820 Rice St.18- 29- 22 -32- 0024 -9 89.44 040064875 1975 E County Road D 35- 30- 22 -34- 0007 -7 390.54 040071789 1566 Beam Ave 03- 29- 22 -13- 0006 -6 481.18 040082141 2565 Ivy Ave.24- 29- 22-42- 0004 -5 9299.96 040082158 2585 Ivy Ave.24- 29- 22-42- 0004 -5 9301.78 10 Fw* ? MEMORANDUM TO: City Clerk FROM: Environmental Health Official SUBJECT: Unpaid Weed Cutting Bill DATE: September 26, 1994 Aoftam Modif i e Rej eats Date Please have the attached unpaid weed cutting bill assessed to Mr. Pipkorn's taxes. ji CS- 2F- 22- ( / —OOK CIY OF LEWOOD FINANCE DIEPARTMENT TELEPH 77®r-4509 Y R01AD B MAPLEWOOD, IMN 55109 HOWARD PIPKORN 1622 LAKE JOHANNA B ARDEN HILLS, MN 55112 FED. .D. 41-6008920 ACCOUNT MIS PTgK0894 BILL DATE 826/94 FO: AL GRASS/WEED CODE VIOLATION DESCRlPTION AMOUNT RASS/WEEll' C TT CHAR6ES THISTLES ON VACANT PROPERY BETWEEN WHITE BEAR AVENUE, PROSPERITY ROAD BURKE AVENUE PAID TO DAI .00 MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO: CITY OF MAPLEWOOD BALANCE DUE 90.00 PLASE RETURN A COPY WITH YOUR REMIANCE **** CIT O LEWOOD FINANCEE DEP Ak.RTMENT TELEPHGNUE' 7 1830 E ROAD MAPLEWO-OD, MM 55109 HOWARD PIPKORN 1622 LAKE JOHANNA BLVD ARDEN HILLS, MN 55112 FORx ALL RASS/WEED CODE VIOLATION F D . 41-6 008920 ACCOUNT MIS PIK0894 BILL DATE 8/26/94 DESCRlTION AMOUNT GRASS/EED CUTTING CHARGES 90.00 THISTLE8 ON VACANT PROPERTY BETWEEN WHITE BEAR AVENUE PROSPERITY ROAD BUKE AVENUE PAID li DATE .00 MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO: CITY OF MAPLEWOOD BALANCE DUE 9O~00 PLEASE RETU RN A COPY WIH YOUR REMITTANCE **** June 24, 1994 Howard Pipkorn 1622 Lake Johanna Boulevard Arden Hills, MN 55112 THISTLES ON VACANT PROPERTY The City of Maplewood has received a complaint regarding the thistles growing on your undeveloped property between White Bear Avenue, Prosperity Road and Burke Avenue -- PIN 15- 29 -22 -11 -0047, Our City Code and state law requires that thistles be kept cut or sprayed. This must be done by July 4, 1994. If the thistles are not taken care of by that date, the City will have them cut and assess the cost to the property. If you have any questions, please contact me at 770 -4560. ROBERT J. WENGER - ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICIAL mb Equal Opportunity Employer RUFF -CUT 8581 135th Street Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124 432 -6916 City of Maplewood 1830 E. C.R. .B Maplewood,MN. 55109 QTY. UNIT DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE AMOUNT Cutting of weeds at PLEASE PAY FROM THIS INVOICE SUB TOTAL TAX TOTAL 1 130 100 G - / MEMORANDUM TO:City Manager FROM:Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner SUBJECT:Conditional Use Permit Revision PROJECT:Aladdin's Castle Maplewood Mall DATE:October 10, 1994 INTRODUCTION Request Acti by Council Endorse Modif i o Rejecte .. Date Mr. B. Brent Maples, of Namco Cybertainment Inc., is requesting that the City revise a conditional use permit (CUP), The permit is for an amusement center at the Ma lewood Mall.p See the maps on pages 3 Aladdin's Castle is now using the permit. Mr. Maples is proposing to add 1,026 square feet of floor area to Aladdin's Castle for a total of 4 square feet. The City Code requires a CUP for places of amusement and recreation. Project Description The expanded facility would have coin - operated games. Part of the expansion would be for birthday parties. There would not be food service, but arents could arrange to bring birthdayPggY cakes, soft drinks and other food. (See the applicant's statment starting on page 5.) BACKGROUND History On May 1, 1975, the City Council approved a CUP for Aladdin's Castle. On February 1, 1979, the Council revised , the CUP to allow Aladdin's Castle to expand. Code Requirements Section 36- 151(b)(3) requires a CLIP for a place of amusement, recreation or assembly, other than an indoor theater, indoor athletic activity or itinerant carnival. Section 36 - 448 states that any change involving structural alteration, enlargement, intensification of use, or similar change not specifically allowed by the CUP, shall require an amended permit.q p Section 36- 442(a) states that, to approve a CUP, the City Council must base it on the findings in the resolution on page 10 -11. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution on page 10. This resolution revises the conditional use permit for an amusement business at the Maplewood Mall. The revision allows the business to expand. Approval is based on the findings required by the Code and subject to the following conditions: 1. The construction shall be in the area shown on the store location ma that the City stampedptyp September 29, 1994. The Director of Community Development may approverove minor changes. 2.. The proposed construction must be substantially tarted within one year of Councilyy approval or the permit shall end. The Council may. extend this deadline for one year. 3. The City Council shall review this ermit in one year if the expansion has not been finished.p y p If the expansion is finished within one year, future reviews shall be waived. p:2Nlaladdin.mem Attachments: 1. Site Location Map 2. Store Location Map 3. Statement of the Intended Use 4. Resolution 2 Attachment 1 WS HE7GKM Qj v WHI i t t COUNTY •AD o COUNTY RD. D 19 MAPLE VIEW AVE. O RADATZ AVE. 40 0 v W WOODLYNN . AVE. 3 SEY • •• o NOf 19 — LYDV a a v o AVE. 4. COUNTY COURT 2. v o 1. SUMMIT CT.7MAPL2. COU NTRIMEW CIR. 3. DULUTH CT. 4. LYDIA ST.e V3. p, W mi o W Z 3 AVE / v iNTY ROAD C BEAM AVE:BEAM WOO& PGA AVE. LOCATION MAP 4 N 3 19 19 MAPLE VIEW AVE. O RADATZ AVE. 40 0 v W Mkhom Pon SEY • •• o NOf v ,COUNTY COURT U v o m KOHLMAN AVE.w KOHLMAN W Moe Q W Z 3 AVE / v iNTY ROAD C S > lyx L411 vCr J 'ct Z W O Z N CT W EDGEHILL RD. 2 ch CO AVE Off' v DEMONT AVE. m W ow BROOKS AVE t BROOKS n CL AVE. SEX TANT Z O EL E1ik ... A •Pew AVE. I O c.• GERVAIS w O AAVE GERVAIS c z GERWVS CT. GERVAIS AVE. •.own— v GRANDVIEW AVE. Y VIKING DR.Ate• 'R36 v COPE SHERREN AVE. Kn od Lope S CASTLE . AVE.r f'•• COPE AVE. V C Z0AVE. LOCATION MAP 4 N 3 Attachment 2 COUNTY ROAD D PROPOSED EXPANSION 1 r Q A?A G Z C ' ul LU t ,. C v ae mail a BEAM AVENUE C c rim 1 STORE LOCATION MAP 4 rrrii FROM :HEINRICH 8 HILL 312.640 633 -09.06 #743 P.06/12 Attachment 3 9TATID.1~fDNT or INTENDED URI OF PF-OPFR-TY IF()TmR IN THE, CONDMONAL USE PERT AND REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of THE CoNarr.:r.ONAL USE PE Alnddin%; Castlo, through its ca in planning and cis »sign, its strict adhcrcneo to the highest standards of operation, its family focus and commitment to providing a wholesome environment, has becamo a valued and welcome member of snore than 2.75 nomm mities nationwide in which our Aladdin's Castle Family Entertaimment Centers are locaterd, -- .. The proposed expansion of Aladdin's Castle in the Maplewood Mall will be no exception. Aladdin's Castle currently occupies space number 1022 in the Maplewood Mall and wishes to combine its current space with adjacent space to create a store containn a total of 4 783 squareg feet. The proposed expansion will include remodoUng the cure to update it To Al in's Castl current prototype stare. The expanded store will continue to ernphuLT.0 famly entertainment f6eusing 6r, games to he plays by aWddroji v4 li tlisir parente, Ott xv it 8aims conciytent with it9 existing store such as video, crane and redemption games. In keepinr, with the fa my enten.m ment thus. a clearly defined pertion of the enanded premises will be dedicated to a birthday party area. Aladdin's Castle does not contemplate the sale of food or beverages in connection with the birthday party area. However, parents can snake arrangments to bring birthday cakes, soft drinks and othcf fund ; tciius to the area for such parties. Aladdin's Casdo requires all food and beverages to be kept within the defined birthday party area within in the store. Aladdin's Castle has been operating a family entertainment center at the Maplewood Mall since 1975 and relocated its • rew.iws. to. a lag er.store qq1 . A addiL1S_ .. tl e. v . s.not..r:c W to. . renew or amend its existing conditional use permit when it expanded in 1991. How it is the opinion of the City of Maplewood's Con unity Development office that this proposed expansion Will require A.laddirk Castle's existing conditional u.- pemr t to b vended or re-grairmd the -t, - - • the implementation of a 1989 zoning ordinance. Aladdin's Castle respectfully requests that its existing conditional use permit be amended or re. granted to allow for the proposed expansion of its premises in the Maplewood Mall. The following is a detailed description of how our use will meet or exceed the standards set forth by the City of Maplewood for a conditional use perm it: L " P 4 f R t , RpM sHEINRICH HILL 31;e 640 6333 1994, 09:0S #1743 P.07/12 The use would he located. designedjnaintainCd. co stru ed md gpergit be in oodormit , r Aiith h* C"" 1nei. a nd D u I rd i The City of Maplewood 's curtcal comprehen plan for the Maplewood Fall assumes that the Maplewood Mall Vill be used for normal retail trade. The proposed use is part of this trade and compliments the other forms of retail trade within the Mall. Aladdi"'s Castla acxmplotely complits 11 ith all )oral, municipal, state and federal regulations applicable to each of our locations throughuut the ;ountry; such compliance is stipulated in each of our leases, including the one for the proposed expansion at the Maplewood Mall. 2, The use would not change the existinrz or planned character of the surrounding area. Aladdin's Castle has been a part of the Maplewood'communify of r feRrjy twaWycillb, ne proposed expansion would be a continuation of the successfiui,.Avell- run business that has been a welcome component of the Maplewood Mall since 1975 Aside from creating a larger store in which ,Aladdin'swill continue to provide wholesome famil entert inmen the an of theY conditional use permit will not affect the existing character of the Maplewood Mali. 3. Th use woul not de reciat g vTo2grtvy ue Aladdin's Castle, by valve of OUT pro- vv -par ictpazion-" all -r tirwiria- and-our - efficient managerent system, is :considered by most national develop to be a model tenant. As sue14 WV sad tu tlL. V lu of their property toad the property arniind that rnnll. 4. Tilt; use waul not invelve an aetia locos melon 1. a ui m n o me hods of operation that mould_tkAerqys, hazard.9us, det, - imen sNrbing or cause a nuisance to an parse_ n ot., C, A r he of excessive no se. lare , + s ( no . ,dust, odor, fumes_ water-or airdrainagc water rust.o 'h[9iori, eneTat Unsightline. electrical interference or her nuisances. Now, more than any time since Aladdin's Castle was founded in 1968, there seems to be a need in communities across the nation for safe, wholesome laces in which families and young people canPYgFP enjoy good, clew fun. Nowhere is this need more evident than in shopping centers and malls which have, in many respects become another "Town S uare," where familes o to eng an afternoon or evening. h response to this need, mall developers have added quality family entertainment facilities. More than any othef eha;ti in America, Aladdin's Castle has been their choice for family entertainment. Duc: to Aladdin's cabllc b iiiipm vablro fspUtativl% in flit fiMily Cn trtairMant indUg the management of the Maplewood Mali has selected our company for this use, we will meet the City ofMaplewood's standards by using our time- tested three step formula for quality entertainment: a) providing the right fatuity environment; ) promoting - wholesome P.ntertainrnent;_ _. and c) good citizenship. 6 The front of tie N1addin's Casttc wi he biigh!!y lit. The Store w.tl1 include a dbirthdaypartyarea, a well- stocked dedicated redemption counter and ticket dis easmsuchasSkeeba11, ball toss games and other P gamesschrldensgames,attrac Select video es and ofbonsgameswWbemerchandisedSelect her deli ba,s inviting p mnantly toward the rear of . the store. Thisgnbeenmosteffe<aic fir inu fames w elements.g title discouraging undesirable The store. manager wL,i oe an adult - rof ' • she w' P r.on.al .acrd, along with our store em to ees bezubeutuf+ormed and hi tined in the P Y o operaon ofa our . business and in at4nactiwfanaiiy•customeF mix, .throu h stria ggtadher+enc to cur standards. Witte the exceptionmre. lly planned birthday parties, no food epaon of v gcs are allowed m our store.mokxng, loitering or annoying conduct is never permitted. Aladdin' Castle aL has a very strict olic a not permitted, P gam st truancy. School- aged patrons arepeulourscoresduringschoolHours. Thy• •rePOrtcd presence: in the dial] Xvfil betotheproperauthorities. b) Promoting wholesome fun. addin's Castle active,]Y pnornotaes famil fu r • b party packages and other value y n. DU" Wt email advertisements promoting ourbig pncg offers an sent to fa es in thesurroundingtheMaplewood1at1. Aladdi.a's Ca a=s also develops other nationalpromotionswithotherfimVay- orients i compames. For example, we recently concluded our s - -second NabxscQ promotion with Nabisco' sBihbte 'Yum brand bubble M. -TD4 -t ,L r .-ev cut, twb -u cnousands o3 Imesparticipatedinbubbleblowingoantestsinhianc,d - culrntnatdd a s of mails across . Amcnca. The come .stttheLincoln 'k Zoo .n Chicago for theHornets' 1v fial round, where the Charlotteuggs' i3ogues appeared as a guest. ce eb Major televisiontheevent. tY J elevision networks covered Ve also havr, been -involveA with a • al Q th burn ]Pops bcereal. IViillions of boxes of Corn $ P rand ofFopscontaaneziaspcialofferfromAladdidin's Castle . Our +efforts produce results. Iri •1993 approximately 400,000 children bettyfourandfiiCnattendedover40l}0 betw the des ofbd • The y parties at Aladd.in's Casdes nationwide.This number does not include the thousands of wren wpisbo also attended. 7 1Z: za o tub zsd ub ALADDINS CASTLE (app FROM 1 1E I NR I CH $, N i I 1 312 640 6333 1994 09 -16 09 #743 P 09/ 12 c) .F'amilyfun starts with good citizenship. we realize that we could. never have become the nation's largest farail y entertainment dildn without strong coniniunity t. In appreciation of the support Aladdin's Castle has received, we are comm itted to give back to those who have been so generous to us. Aladdin's Castle oontributes time. effort and money to many worthy youth and to charities and organizations. A list of some of these organ xitions is attached) In 1487 we were honored in Washingt D.C. as the first corporate spon&or of the "Jur.t Say Igo! snibaance abusA prevention campaign We offC the local school syAcros Good Citizenshp and Scholastic gift certificaws frcc Ur charge. These gift certificates can be used by school administrators to foster exemplaryPrY behavior and academic excellence. Finauy, Aladdin's Casile keeps in close contact with local law enforcement authorities to help keep our stares in strict compliance with local rules and reg Cit ofSu Maplewood Police Chief Ken Collins confirmed wath us that Aladdin's Castle in the Maplewood Mall has not caused problems for local law enforcement. 5. The e would eenerate onl minimal vehicular r fie n local streets and would not create trade zon "e, tan 8r unsafe access •.,. exist;, of stem a . Traffic patterns for the Maplewood Malt have been prm4ously approved b the Cy t'y' Maplewood The proposed use, being located an the lower level of the mall is not seen as havig any effect on these traffic patterns. 6. - The use oldbe sere by a cublic facilit e -and_ service$ i ncludin stte lice and ftUrotection drain a tructure water and wer terns chools and arks. All of these elements previously have been verified and/or approved b local authorities inPFy connection with the ori&al constructi and subsequent expansions of the Maplewood Mall.P The proposed use wail be located on the lower level of the Mall and the Mall's management has made provision for the applicable items in each of the retail spaces within the Mall. 7. The use would not create .exce ive ad itiona] osts f r ub1;L ac' ides or scrvice s Since the proposed use will e lorr$ted within the Mjt elwoQd Mai, we do not anticiP • h pate that the expansion of the Aladd Castle would create any additional costs for public facilities or services, E•1 v-r L I..46 v & r -VU 44UU V4jUV 1LA1)U1IVZ) (,.&AJ11,P, 19006 FROM . ' HEINRICH HILL 3.12 640 6333 1994,09 -16 090 # 743 P.10/12 8. he Pic w ul ma t h e toreservation o and i c orate th site nes star l and ni features. 1n s As a mail tenant of the Maplewood. Mal, Aladdirals Castle is requircd to cva,fofil, with the Mall management's standards on design and tere..e> , managers to maintain a 'constant appearance throughout the M2tll. Sincethe proposed use will be msldc the. Maplewood.M Aladdin s Cuut VAM contimic to incnrpnrate these fealures of th.e development design as are required by the Maplewood Mali, thus maxima g the Pre of and inc . orating thu site's natural and scenic features of the Malt's design as was contempbytheCityofMaplewoodwhentheMattwasdevelop The u w uld ca a minimal adverse i nviron entai affects. The proposed use as a retail tenant inside the Maplewood hrlatI will not have minimal if any,adverse effects on the environment. Respectfully submitted, Namco Cybertainment Inc. dba "Aladdin's Castle" By: Its- il' -P • /:::/ a Attachment 4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Namco Cybertainment Inc., applied .for a conditional use ermit to expandpand anexistingindooramusementcenterattheMaplewoodMall. WBEREAS, this permit applies to 3001 White Bear Avenue. The legal 'g description is. SUBJ TO ESMTS & EX PART DESC AS COM AT A PT ON EL OF LOT 7 DIST 258..25 FT S OF NE COR THEREOF TH E 44.08 FT TO THE ACTUAL PT OF BEG TH N 3 DEG32N41N27SECE282.72 FT TH NELY 304.55 FT ALONG A 654.67 FT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE TO SE TH E NOT TAN TO SD CURVE 220 FT TH S 27.9 FT TI3 E 64.97 FT THS 80FTTHE 125FTTHS 90FTTHE55FTTHS20OFTTHW55 FT TH S 80 FT TH W 125 FT TH S 93.5 FT TH W 390 FT TO BEG THE FOL• LOT 5 BLK l WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use p ermit is as follows: 1. On October 17 1994, the Planning Commission recommended that the Cit Councilapprovethispermit. 2. On October 24, 1994, the City Council held a public hearing. The City staffpgyto published a inoticen the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The Councilgppy gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak or present Written statements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations from 'the City staff and PlanningCommission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council above- describedyapprovetheabovedescribed revision to the conditional use permit, because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained constructed and operated p ated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or lanned character of the surroundingounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials equipment ro 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 odorfumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run -off, vibration, general unsightlinessg 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.p 10 6. The use would be serve ... •d by adequate public facilities and services includingpoliceandfirerudin streets,protection, drainage structures, water and sewers stemsparks. systems, schools and 7. The use would not create excessive additional • • •s ve additional costs for public facilities or services. 8: The use would maximize the •e preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenicfeaturesintothen. development design.g 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmentalnvironmental effects. The permit is subject to the follouTin conditions:g tons. 1. 3'he construction shall be in the areas •shown on the store location ma that the CitstampedSeptember291994. T o p yTheDirectorofCommunityDevelmeritmayminorchanges, p approve 2. The proposed construction must be substantiallbstantially started within one ear of Councilapprovalorthepermit. shall -end. T Y The Council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The City Council shall revieww this permit in one year if the ex ansion has noexpansionpt beenfinished. If the exp n is finished within one year, future reviews shall 'be waived. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolutionpesolution on October 24, 1994. 11 a MEMORANDUM I Action by CounoillS TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Endorse - SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit and-Design Review Modifie PROJECT Goodrich Dome °: Rei eoted LOCATION: Van Dyke Street .and Ripley Avenue T3ate DATE: October 7, 1994 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................... ............................... 2 Project Description ................. .............................. 2 Requests ........ some ........•• . ..............................2 DISCUSSION ... .........................swoon ........................ 2 Location...................... a .... ............................... 2 Traffi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 On- Street Parking Ban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . . . . . . . . . ................ 4 Landscaping and Screening . . . a a a a 0 a a . . . . . . . . . . . . In - Ground Sprinklers ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. 5 OPTIONS ......... ............................... RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . on so . . . . me . . . . . . . . ..... a 5 CITIZENS' COMMENTS ......................... . . . . . . . so an . . . . on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 REFERENCE INFORMATION ................... . . . . . . . . . . as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 SITE DESCRIPTION .. . ...................... . . an . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 SURROUNDING LAND USES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . an . . . . . . . . . . . . . 01 PLANNING .......... ............... ............................... 10 PUBLIC SAFETY .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . an mammon 11 OTHER AGENCIES ................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 INTRODUCTION Project Description Fred Paul, of Kelsey Enterprises, wants to build an inflatable dome for public golfing. TheproposedlocationisthenorthwestcornerofVanDykeStreetandRipleyAvenue, south ofAldrichArena. (See the Location Map on page 12 and the Property Lme Map on page 13.)Ramsey County owns this property. Kelsey Enterprises would build and manage the dome under alicenseagreementwiththeCounty. The dome would be white fabric, and 65 feet tall. The base of the dome would be 160 feet by 210 feet. The dome would have 31 hitting stalls. There would be aone -story, 46' x 50' rock -face concrete -block building on the east side ofthe dome. (See theproposedsiteplanonpage14.) This building would be the entrance to the dome (through an airlock) and would have restrooms, office space and support space for the dome. (See thebuildingelevationsanddrawingsontheenclosedplans.) The developer wants to operate the golfdomebetween. 8 a.m. and 9 p.m seven days a week. They may have the golf dome open for fewerhoursinthewinter. (See Mr. Paul's letter on page 17 and the newspaper column on page 18.) Requests To build this project, Mr. Paul and Ramsey County are requesting that the City approve: 1. A conditional use permit (CUP) Section 36 -437 of the City Code allows the City Council to approve a CUP for a publicserviceorpublicbuildingusesinanyzoningdistrict. 2. The building design, site and landscape plans DISCUSSION Location Several people have expressed concerns about the proposed location of the dome. The Countystafffeltthatbeingneartheexistingstreets, parking areas and utilities would be a benefit. In addition, the County effects the golf dome to compliment the facilities at Goodrich golf course. They want golfers to use the dome for a warm-up area before playing on Goodrich Golf Course.The County plans to have a paging system in the dome to alert golfers to their start time. Street access to the proposed site is good and there would be no need to build additional parking. Thismakesforamoreefficientuseoftheexistingpublicfacilitiesandlessenstheprojectcosts. Another location suggested for the golf dome is the former race track area north of the CountyParksbuilding. The purpose of this location would be to hide the dome. However, this site has six 2 problems: poor access, lack of parking, lack of utilities, an existing storm water pond and the William's Brothers pip eline. The nearest existing paved parking area is about 500 feet to south in front ofthe County Parks building. To use this site, the County would have to pave more parking next to the dome. In addition, access to the north site is not as convenient as the proposed site on Ripley Avenue. Vehicles would have to go north from Ripley on Van Dyke Street or east from Frost Avenue around the barn and nursing home to get to the facility. An alternative access to this area would be another driveway to White Bear Avenue near the horseshoe pits. A storm water pond is in the center of the track. area. The Maplewood storm water plans (page 16) -show this pond as part of the City's planned storm water system The dome could not be built in the pond. The City Engineer does not feel that the, ond could be relocated. Another problem with the north site is the William's Brothers pipeline. It crosses the site from Goodrich Golf Course on the southeast to the DNR Trail on the northwest. (See the map on page 16.) The City Code requires any new building to be at least 100 feet from the nearest pipeline. The best alternative location to the proposed site would be on the south end of the parking lotpg that is east of the Nursing Home. The disadvantage is the distance from the golf course entrance. Traffii c Mr. Paul told me that he hopes to average about 1,000 customers a week at the golf dome. This would be an average of 143 users per day. For a twelve -hour day, this would be an average ofYg twelve customers per hour or one every five minutes. The County traffic engineer told me that the dome should not cause any traffic problems. Parking The County and the developer are not proposing any additional parking for the dome. Dome users would use the Aldrich Arena parking lot and the lot across Van Dyke Street to the east. With the lot across Van Dyke Street, the County could segregate the dome parking from Aldrich Arena parking. The City Code does not have a parking standard for a golf dome. The proposed facility would have 31 tee boxes and a 2,300 square -foot support facility building. At the most, the proposed golf dome should need no more than 74 parking spaces. This would include 62 spaces for the 31 tee boxes and 12 for the service building. The County feels that the existing parking lots are large enough for their needs. If a problem develops, there is a vacant area west of the proposed golf dome site to add more spaces. When the County repaved the Aldrich Arena lot, they striped the lanes but not individual parking stalls. Section 36 -22(e) of City Code requires that all parking lots have single- striped parking spaces. The County should finish striping their entire parking lot as required by Code (9.5 -foot- 3 wide stalls or 9- foot -wide signed employee stalls). The parking lot does not have curbing. Section 36-22(c) requires continuous concrete curbing. Since the Count did not previously haveYpY curbing, they should at least curb the south side of their lot. On- Street Parking Ban The City has already posted the north side of Ripley Avenue, from White Bear Avenue to North Saint Paul Road, for no parking. The Police Department recommends that the Count ogpypost both sides of Ripley Avenue for no parking. With the business curb cuts on the south side the Cit should keep the street clear of parked cars. This will improve. visibility for cars. leaving the driveways. In addition, this will help insure that fewer pedestrians will be trying to cross RiplepY Avenue to the County property. The County has already posted art of Van Dyke Street north of Ripley Avenue for no parking.p Y p Y p g. However, the installer put the signs parallel to the street instead of perpendicular to the curb. The County should turn these signs so they are visible from Van Dyke Street. In addition the CountY Y should post the curve on Van Dyke Street north of Ripley for no parking. Building Design The Code requires three findings to approve a building design. These findings are on p ag es 10 -11. The second finding states that "the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contem dated b this article and the CitppyeCtys comprehensive municipal plan." The third finding states that "the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials textures and colors." The existing buildings around the site have a mix of exterior materials and color. They range from wood siding with fake -stone accents (South China Island) to concrete block (Aldrich Arena and Mid America Bank) to stucco (Perkins). The support and service building for the dome would be built with rock -face concrete block and a standing seam metal mansard. It should be compatible with the surrounding buildings. The design of the dome would be unique to the area. It would be much taller (65 feet ) than the surrounding buildings. It would be 30 feet taller than the Arena. The owner of the Perkins Restaurant complained that the dome would block the view of their sign and restaurant fromg White Bear Avenue. However, the dome may bring Perkin's additional business. The question is whether the design would aesthetically fit the surrounding area. This is a subjective decision that will vary with individuals. If the Council is not sure how the dome would look, they could require that the County hire a consultant to produce a computer generated photo. A drawing f i g the dome could be inserted in a photo of the background. The Council could then see how the dome would look in comparison to the surrounding uses. A" Landscaping and Screening The developer is proposing . an attractive landscaping. plan. (Seethe plan on page 15.) There is a need for more landscaping or berming on the dome's west end. This would help screen part of the dome from the residential area to the west. In- Ground Sprinklers The City Code requires that the developer or owner install an in-ground sprinkler system for the new landscaped areas. The City should require that the County install this system around the proposed landscaping for the dome. OPTIONS 1. Approve the requests. 2. Table this request until the County revises their plan by moving the dome north of Aldrich Arena. 3. Table this request for a computer - generated drawing showing how the dome would look against the existing buildings. 4. Deny the request. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Approve the resolution on page 19. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for a public indoor golf dome on the northwest earner of Van Dyke Street and Ripley Avenue. The permit is based on the findings required by Code and subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the City. The Director of Community Development may approve or changes. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year after the Council approves this permit or the permit shall end. The Council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. If the City Council determines there is not enough on -site parking, the Council may require that the property owner or operator provide additional parking. 4. The City Council shall review this permit in one year. 5 B. Approve the site and landscape plans (received September 6, 1994) and building elevations the City received on July 26, 1994 for the Goodrich Golf Dome, subject to the findings required by the Code. The developer shall do the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the City has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Complete the following before the City issues a building permit: a. Submit a grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plan for the City engineer's approval. The erosion control plain shall be consistent with the Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District Erosion Control Handbook. b. Revise the landscape plans for staff approval. This plan shall show: a) All deciduous trees at least 2 1/2 inches m caliper, balled and burlapped b) All evergreen trees at least six- feet -tall c) The plan shall show additional plantings along the west side of the dome. 3. Complete the following before occupying the dome: a. Install reflectorized stop signs at all exits and an address on the building. b. Construct an enclosure as required by City Code for all outside dumpsters including those for the arena). The enclosure(s) must match the building color. Submit plans for the enclosure(s) to staff for approval. c. Install an in- ground sprinkler system for the landscaped areas. (Code requirement) d. Construct continuous concrete curbing along the south side of the Arena parking lot. (Code requirement) e. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. f. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. g. Sod all turf areas. h. Install handicap - accessible parking spaces and signs that meet the requirements of the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act). N j. Screen all roof - mounted equipment visible from streets or adjacent property. Submit screening plans . to the Design Review Board for approval. (Code requirement) k. Post both sides of the curve on Van Dyke Street, north of Ripley Avenue, for no parking and turn the existing no p asking signs so the are endicular to thegnypa curb. 1. Post the south side of Ripley Avenue, between White Bear Avenue and North St. Paul Road, for no parking. 4. Finish striping the entire arena parking lot to meet Code requirements (9.5- foot -wide stalls or 9- foot -wide signed employee stalls by ) y September 1 1995. 5. Provide at least a 30 -foot setback between the buildings and the property line along Ripley Avenue and from Van Dyke Street.. (Code requirement) 6. This approval does not include the signs. 7. All work shall follow the approved plans. The Director of Community Development may approve -minor changes. 8. If any required work is not done, the City may allow temporary occupancy if a. The City determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The City receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work. The amount shall be 150% of the cost of the unfinished work. c. The City receives an agreement that will allow the City to complete any unfinished work. Appeals Anyone may appeal the Board's decision to the City Council. An appellant must notify someone in the Community Development Department within fifteen days after the Board's meeting. h CITIZENS' COMMENTS I surveyed owners of the four properties within 350 feet of the proposed Golf Dome site. The owners of two of these properties replied. Both owners were against the proposal. In addition, we surveyed the 34 property owners on the west side of White Bear Avenue between Larpenteur and Frost Avenues. Of the 12 who responded, six were for the proposal, four were against the proposal and two had no comment. For 1. It is a positive addition to the other recreational facilities in the area and will bring some revenue into Ramsey County. (Hejny - 1829 White Bear Avenue) 2. Avery good idea, everyone whom we talked with would enjoy going there. (Strobel - 1849 White Bear Avenue) 3. I would rather see the land left the way is now- -- undeveloped. But for some reason, if someone feels the need to put something there, it might as well be a olf dome. I think a golfgg dome is better than a lot of other things they could put there. (Schaeppi - 1899 white Bear Avenue) 4. Great—more tax dollars for Maplewood. (Hirsch -Saint Paul) Against 1. It will block our sign at Perkins and view of the restaurant from White Bear Avenue. Move the dome to the far west comer. (Tom Cory, Perkins - 1829 North Saint Paul Road) 2. I sounds like an eyesore. It also sounds like an elitist use of taxpayer dollars that the County could put to better use. Leave it be an open space; we need more open space. Perhaps put in more trees and some flowers, or plant a prairie there for everyone to enjoy —not just. golfers. Sturm - 1759 White Bear Avenue) 3. The only concern I would have is increased traffic. (Allhiser - 1799 White Bear Avenue) 4. I don't want to look at it. Make it an outdoor driving range. (Arndt - 1783 White Bear Avenue) 5. The City of Maplewood and Ramsey County are continually talking and bemoaning the loss of green grass and open spaces. The grass area along Ripley and White Bear Avenue makes a good border for the Aldrich Arena area. I am sure that at some future time the strip along Ripley will be needed for. additional parking area for Aldrich Arena activities. An inflatable dome sure wouldn't add anything to improve the open view of the residences on White Bear E•1 Avenue. The County Fair has indicated its demise at the present location. The area formerly used as a racetrack and other agricultural activities should now be available. This area is more or less screened from the residences and traffic on White Bear Avenue by trees and soil berms. It also adjoins the golf course..(Holt - 1895 White Bear Avenue) 6. Additional commercial projects on east side ofWhite Bear Avenue increases, traffic flow for residential owners. Consideration should be made concerning rezoning west side of White Bear Avenue for commercial use. (Gustafson -Lake Elmo) REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 65,920 square feet (1.5 acres) Existing land use: undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Aldrich Arena and parking lot East: Goodrich Golf course and parking lot across Van Dyke Street South: South China Island, Perkins and bank across Ripley Avenue West: Vacant County property and houses across White Bear Avenue PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: P (park) Zoning: F (farm residence) Ordinance requirements: Section 36- 442(a) states that the City Council may grant a CUP if based on nine findings. See the findings in the resolution on pages 19 and 20. Section 25 -70 of the City Code requires that the CDRB make the following findings to approve plans: 1. That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed developments and traffic is such that it will not ' air the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. 2. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the City's comprehensive municipal plan. 10 3 . That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. PUBLIC SAFETY The Police Department recommends the following: 1. The applicant should install adequate site lighting for around- the - clock. 2. There should be no parking on both sides of Ripley Avenue and Van Dyke Street. OTHER AGENCIES The Ramsey County Board has approved this proposal. q:sec141golfdome.mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line /Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. Landscape Plan 5. Maplewood Storm Water System Map 6. Applicant's letter dated July 26, 1994 7. Newspaper column by Hal Norgard 8. Conditional Use Permit Resolution 9. Plans stamped July 26, 1994 and September 6, 1994 (separate attachment) 11 Attachment 1 vomc _Dk KMEN AVE. , Kn LOW AVE. 0 j ,• AVE. COPE -AVE. 1 . AVE uvw AVE LAURIE •.. RD. URlE I RD. UUR IE ° RD SAN URST AVE„ '"•: a co. <RD.e • RKE AVM. c gu E AVE; t; , I AVE. orw, •. • AVE. AvE, HAS A%El . RCaSEW AVE. N. NORTH SAINT PAUL .D SY • AN AV, AV "WG*WD pE. S. . lb V7 • CL • AVE• -t N . ODRCH su 0 go • BULL O1IAY AVE. poll p t : see o LIVE• R! PLAY NX y J Y W PRcE AvE. c MccKr uv W t . SAINT PAUL • ' wQhrT" cc NEBRASKA LOCATION MAP 12 4 N d.,w ROST AVE. rt 51 f3 RAMS y couN7Y NURSING HOM c a 35 fro.03 Attachment 2 V) uj o RAMSEY COUP t o . 1883 Q / 1871 a GOODRICH 1865 0 RA M S E Y ouNTY .= GOLF COURSE 9 9 zt - RICH ARENA ;ALD QQ 1855 1849 1831 3) 10 95. i. 93 N HEJNY { ... .... . ....... .......w RENTAL cow #: z 40 douj ro180515 13 J RIPLEY AVE. - ,Doi 2G .5574295.89 a f Olt 6" 1799 g low - ott CHINA. , ''•'% J KINS ISLAND ;> 1789 , 3 MIDAMERICA BANK (c.} v- oa p rj: r l4 QRia r Lo 5 Loo FYN Q ` DER ARE o O - -- _.BULL S SOU ARE LINE /ZONING MAP 13 L6 41 N Attachemnt 3 f i i j IIL w a, w wa SEP fi : )4 i ALDRICH ARENA 4 N 14 eel 00 s `s,,0 r 8 ac r si T • b 0 65 40 b O ti Wild . O cl I I f' GO i ab UL iaoa aa I i a or an. n is r *A kY ow 15 M' Mc s. 64 *,. ,i O7 a LW E CM for sNa. M .r 1 f , o ,. v 14 RIPLEY rw sae s`I AVDVUE roe em 32 , 46t,Mw. ; 0 .ws- ow 04 iI N' • Off"tip, OW. fie. - t . 4 N 14 I — i 1 i q dp 1 w ; f 6'6 en S CM C i : 47 E f 1t c C: Ogg IWaw min I — i 1 i q dp 1 w ; f 6'6 en S CM C i : 47 E f 1t c C: Ogg Attachment 5 w , W. 0 co . L fl - 1 0 1 comm. C ENTER Q i aD 5240 s 24623 1 COUNTY 54 w •. • • u LtJ 0 0 _ N 0 ie 0 vow IS 87 px.4 K I:IT :a, =t, (iti Ia:' r/L% .>} r y. M 1 f % S! •a. r 91+• is , ; /fs: 7t 1 1 !•t •. 1 1. f s fs.I • I J 1 d , . ..... ',, _,' .: i ,. - ; `- 1 , .. := tG "j ) ' ' ; •J':• ice - 66A Is i • `'1JOWLor O WICKLANDER S 0 ` potPOND ..aA 5260 MAID, _ LP 26 PUBLIC WORKS " ' M ELDRIDGEN' r. µ ~ «.s sa 'r le Cc'y CF o:E r1L0. _ , '• t'r r ;• :.. ADO WD 0 0 :4439 r • -_ • t - - - -7 t») r M E At ow( s•o • .• 4 1 to A BELMONTr_i TY HALL • 2 T 1- LP 27A CG . •• ,5272 s- • _ s. •r it LP 2711 r.wr•r . • .. •0- •••rr.•wr••.•.•+rrwrw. -r- ••••_ mow•...J tLw1 Zv TRAIL'... 2T0 : , • LP 2T o • 5i?3 •Coos tT f J s j * 0o •.o to w a.n. P -10 5280 04 0 MA STORM WATER SYSTEM 4 N 1 qla.6o LP 28 O 29 J • GOODRICH A GOLF PARK COURSE CP RAMSEY BLDG. COUNTY „ : A 0 P"FARM *3 x VAN KE E 1Ir1NURSING ' :•'` HOME •L .. PfWATE lysTfu 1 s : oi w lord 6101a: pub VC7. w •. • • u LtJ 0 0 _ N 0 ie 0 vow IS 87 px.4 K I:IT :a, =t, (iti Ia:' r/L% .>} r y. M 1 f % S! •a. r 91+• is , ; /fs: 7t 1 1 !•t •. 1 1. f s fs.I • I J 1 d , . ..... ',, _,' .: i ,. - ; `- 1 , .. := tG "j ) ' ' ; •J':• ice - 66A Is i • `'1JOWLor O WICKLANDER S 0 ` potPOND ..aA 5260 MAID, _ LP 26 PUBLIC WORKS " ' M ELDRIDGEN' r. µ ~ «.s sa 'r le Cc'y CF o:E r1L0. _ , '• t'r r ;• :.. ADO WD 0 0 :4439 r • -_ • t - - - -7 t») r M E At ow( s•o • .• 4 1 to A BELMONTr_i TY HALL • 2 T 1- LP 27A CG . •• ,5272 s- • _ s. •r it LP 2711 r.wr•r . • .. •0- •••rr.•wr••.•.•+rrwrw. -r- ••••_ mow•...J tLw1 Zv TRAIL'... 2T0 : , • LP 2T o • 5i?3 •Coos tT f J s j * 0o •.o to w a.n. P -10 5280 04 0 MA STORM WATER SYSTEM 4 N Attachment 6 KELSEY ENTERPRISES, INC. 404 Industrial Boulevard heap olis, Minneapolis 55413 July 26, 1994 Mr. Geoffrey Olson Community Development Director City of Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Dear Mr. Olson: As requested, this letter is to identify the purpose and use of the facility identified in the Request for a Conditional Use Permit. Ramsey County (owner of the property) and Kelsey Enterprises entered into an agreement allowing Kelsey the right to erect a dome structure solely for the purpose of operating a public golf dome adjacent to the Goodrich Golf Course. This use shall include a practice /teaching range, and services normally provided in association with the operation of such a facility. Ile goal of this facility will be to provide an opportunity for users of all levels of playing abiliies to develop and improve their golfing skills. In this joint effort between Ramsey County, Kelsey, and in the City of Maplewood it would be the goal of this project to further enhance the quality of life for this community by providing ayear -round recreational facility for its residents. If you require further information, or clarification, lease call me at 773 -8959. Thankp you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, r x: 0,00 . , GZc. -L_ Fred R Paul 17 1rCI)0ItI119 111 rCCCllt "Vill %--Itl(:s iIIS[t)Iy, ilic J[ Sl1h1)1ti ()1 11if11 Im11ti11 lO t':) 1iiii %ti1111 ll1C111. 1'ribune used a second -hand account to After all, if it's in the newspaper, it must be true, Golf opportunitiesdome I1ed,*, Every once in a while, an opportunity comes area, giving business a shot in the arm, hopefully by along that fits well into the flexibility of services a its presence helping local business a shot in the community can offer its citizens. That is the case of arm, , hopefully by its presence helping local a golf dome the county has proposed to build on its business to enjoy a healthy economy that is property next to Aldrich Arena in the southeast important for a healthy community. corner of the In addition to the driving range experience, the property. - We'"feel this dome would be "a complement , to golfing services offered by the 1=1AL NORG r , Y. , . t.. 1, •'f• Ramsey County Board Chairperson c o u n t y' s Goodrich Golf Course located in the same area. The dome would offer indoor -golf dri vi g- ,range services year around facility will offer club fitting, contract for lessons and you can buy tee time or balls by the buckeC' The proposed dome will be 210 feet long, J60 feet wide and 65 feet high. It will be built on c6unty property that currently sits idle, grows weeds, and'; is currently of little use to our community. The -, facility will be a public- private partnership. The county will provide the land and Kelsey Enterpnses Inc. (a local company) will provide the investment' a cost estimate of about $700,000 (with no' investment obligations from the county), build the facility and manage it. The county will receive for its part in the partnership a percentage of the., with a two-tier system of 31 revenues that is estimated at about $18,600 a year; tees. At present, there are no indoor golf ran facilities in the area. A person needs to trav several miles out of the community for servic offered by such a facility. This indoor golf ran would be the first of its kind to be built next to golf course offering both convenient summer winter recreational opportunities. In the summ months, a golfer would have the opportunity. to par a car (one time), loosen up at the range wh waiting their tee time at Goodrich golf course, short walk away. In winter months the recreation opportunities for all of us in the community a unlimited. Even if we are not avid golfers, the dom still will offer us an opportunity for alternati recreational activity. Maybe we would like to our hand at hitting a few balls to test our skills. F the golfer the facility will offer an opportunity keep golfing skills keen for the day when the sn once again goes away. For the young people in o community, the indoor dome golfing range offer s wholesome alternative in recreation entertainment. The proposed dome will complement the to businesses offering something that is needed for local business center. It will generate interest in C i and a recreational opportunity for the community. ' ge The dome would be built as far east on the south DI corner of the property as possible and as close to, es the golf course as it can be placed. Kelsey' ge Enterprises Inc. will landscape around the dome a with trees and other appropriate landscaping to and complement the area. The recreational piece of a, er year- around indoor golf driving range will fit well k for the recreational activities already in place for le this recreational corridor that include Ramsey a County's Goodrich Golf Course, Aldrich Arena ice al and exhibition facilities, parks and open space area re and Map. lewood's new community center. e Opportunities of this kind don't happen by. ve accident, they take good solid planning. The new try facility will offer our community many years of or good recreational opportunities. It will complement to our already existing activities in the area. It will be ow a good neighbor to the community and a new ur attraction to the area providing new business a opportunities for our local business center. It will al be a new service that will add to the quality of life we enjoy. It is a winner and it makes all of us cal winners. I look forward to seeing you on the tees, the with family or friends or just out enjoying life. LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS 1NC. NEWS STAFF lb PUBLISHERS OF MANAGING EDITOR RAMSEY COUNTY REVIEW Mary Lee Hagert Publication No. 454980 NEWS EDITOR Published Weekly 2nd Class Postage Paid, North St. Paul, Minnesota Holly Wenzel y STAFF WRITERS Amelia Swisher MAPLEWOOD REVIEW Pamela O'Meara Publication No. 328680 8 BUSINESS WRITER Published Weekly -- 2nd Class Postage Paid, North St. Paul, Minnesota Edie Grossfield SPORTS P% A Iir% w . e— I w WC! e1 RR^ 13C'%11CXA1 Wally Wakefield Lynn Carver, Du I ( . Mulcahy, North St. Fa: Bill Sandberg and other of this fine school list been active in the org, Citizens Concerned fo Education." While this letter is s behalf of myself and n organization, I can to pride in knowing that tt district has a group of who are truly concernc children of. this schoo ea19ng with the taxpayer. v &t Paul, Maplewood, Lake Elmo, Woodb Landfall. CCQE has been re: a Vv t C e1ee fAp lie Ifll A To encourage debt of topics. All letters N The Review, 2515 E. publish letters in thei Writers should a1 numbers will not be CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Kelsey Enterprises applied for a conditional use permit for a public golf dome. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property on the northwest Comer of Van Dyke StreetandRipleyAvenue. The legal description is: The East 31 feet of the West 625 . feetet of the ..South 192 feet of the North 1/2 of theSouthwest1/4 of Section 14, TONNnshi 29p ,Range 22. WHEREAS, the history f this conditiorytoral use permit is as follows. . 1 • On October 3, 1994, the Plann Commission thi g numsson recommended that the City Councilspermit. 2• On October 24, 1994, the City Council held a public hearing. The City staffpublished anoticeinthepaperandsentnoticestothesurroundingpropertyowners. The Council gaveeveryoneatthehearingachancetospeakandpresentwrittenstatements. The CouncilalsoconsideredreportsandrecommendationsfromtheCitystaffandplanningCommission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approve the above -de 'conditional use permit, because: scribed 1. The use would be located desig - ' ty with the City's Co gn , maintained, constructed and operated to be inconformirehensivePOrdinances. Plan and Code of Ordi 2. The use would not change theegxlsting or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property p perty values. 4. The use would not involve actlveanyactivity, process, materials a uiqpment or methods ofoperationthatwouldbedangerous, hazardous, detrimental, •disturbing or cause a nuisancetoanypersonorproperty, because of excessive noise re smok e, dust, odor, fumeswaterorairpollution, drainage, water rung vibration, 11 • g on, general unsightliness electricalinterferenceorothernuisances. ' 5 • The use would generate only ' 1 •y vehicular traffic on local streets and would nocreatetrafficcongestionorunsafeact t access on existing or proposed streets. 19 6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services gncludin streets police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer stems , schools andsy parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would made the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause 1 adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the City. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year after the Council approves this permit or the permit shall end. The Council may extend this deadline for one year. 3, If the City Council determines there is not enough on -site parking, the Council may require that the property owner or operator provide additional parking. 4. The City Council shall review this permit in one year. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on 1994. 20 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The Maplewood City Council invites you to a public hearing. This hearing is about a requestgg oqfor a conditional use permit for a 160- by 210 -foot inflatable public golf dome. The -applicant is Kelsey pp Enterprises. The location is the northwest corner of Van Dyke Street and Ri ley Avenuep south of Aldrich Arena. The Council will hold this hearing on Monday, October 24 1994 at 7:15 p.m. or later in the City Hall Council Chambers (183 0 East County oad BtY . ) Call Geoff Olson at 770 -4562 for more information. Sign language interpreters. are available. You must request this service at least 96 hours in advance. Call 770 -4524 to make arrangements. The City Council must make the following findings to approve a conditional use permit. Please address these findings in your comments. 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,g 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 r proposed streets.p p s 6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including treetsg 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. PUBLISH: October 12, 1994 Planning Commission Minutes of 10 -03 -94 8 6.* Provide all easements required by the City Engineer. These shall include: a. Give the City wetland easements over the wetlands. Th easements shall cover the wetlands and any land within. twent eet surrounding s a wetland. The easementement shall prohibit any buildi or structures within twenty feet of the wetland or an mowin c in fill'Y g g, Ong or dumping. tl within ten feet of the wetland or within t wetland itself. The purposeIfthiseasementistooqualityofthewetlandsfromprotectthewatequali4L h i ' eowners fertilizer and to •pro#et the wetland habitat from reside'ptial encroachment. b. Drainage easements for off -site drainage areas and i)Vould g wetlands that this project affect. This shall include an easement on the lot that will be south ofZo 19, Block 2.F rdryt ' If the developer decides "to final lat art of the preliminary 'p p ary plat, the City may waive any conditigM that do not apply to the final plat. The developer must complete these c ditions before the City is 'o t es a grading permit or approves the final plat. Commissioner Pearson seconded A es -- Fisch Sandelldell,. Rossbach, Pearson, Sigmundik, Ko esky, Frostd a .r a Nays -- Axdahl, Kittr e 1' The motion passed. J Secretary Olson noted that the Maplewood City ouncil will hearY this m on y October 24, 1994. B. Conditional Use Permit: Goodrich Dome (Van Dyke Street and Ripley Avenue) Ken Roberts, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and directeded the PlanningCommission to focus on the conditional use and the use of the property.Fred Paul, representing Kelsey Enterprises, answered questions andq assured the Commission that the facility would be paying arious taxes. Bill DeWitt1tt of KelseyEnterprises, Greg Mack, Director of Ramsey County Parks and Recreation, 'Y tY eation, Kevin Finley, Director of Operations for Ramsey County arks and Garyary Hook of Kraus Anderson, the contractor, were also present to answer uestions. The 'q applicantpresentedasketchoftheproposedbuilding. The Commission discussed the appearance of the building and its suitability to this location. Planning Commission Minutes of 10 -03 -94 9 Commissioner Kittrid e moved 'g the Planning Commission recommend •Council: mmend the City A. Approve the resolution on page .19. This resolution approved a 'Permit for a public indoor o pp conditional usegolfdomeonthenorthwestandRipleyAvenue. The comer of Van Dyke Streetpermitisbased .on the findings resubjecttothefollowingo g required by Code andgnditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the City. TheDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentmayapproveminorchanges. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one yearaftertheCouncilapprovesthispermitorthepermitshallend. The Councilmayextendthisdeadlineforoneyear. 3 • If the City Council determines there is not enough on -site parking, theCouncilmayrequirethatthepropertyowneroroperatorprovideadditionalparking. 4. The City Council shall nevi •review this permit n one year. Commissioner Frost seconded Ayes-- Axdahl, Sandell, Rossbac h, Pearson,Slgmundlk, Kopesky, Frost Ki 'ttridge Nays -- Fischer The motion passed. Home Occupation License Ordinance Ken Roberts - Associate Planne presend die staff report and answeredTheCommission staff disc veered questions.ussed some of the conditions beinspecificoccupation. , g targeted to a Commissioner Aach moved that th iann' • on recomme • ing Commission •Council ave the followin c nd the CitygchangestothaplewoodCodeofOrdinances: 2) Customers or customers' vehicles on the premises. 6) If the home occupation produces any waste that should be treat or G -3 MEMORANDUM TO:City Manager FROM:Ken Roberts, Associate Planner SUBJECT:Mapleleaf Estates LOCATION:Forest and Cypress Streets, north of Gervais Avenue APPLICANT:Gonyea Company, Inc. DATE:October 14, 1994 CONTENTS Aoti on by Co unc3.1 -p Endors Modifi y, e eas Date INTRODUCTION ............................... ............................... 2 ProjectDescription .............. . . an am . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 2 Requests......................... ............................... 2 DISCUSSION OpenSpace ....................... ............................... Land Use Plan and Zoning Changes .. .... *Sousa . was among ....:....... . StreetVacations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................... . Utility Easement Vacation ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w . . . . . Preliminary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........................:. . Intersection of Demont Avenue and Cypress Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wetlands ....................... ............................... Drainage ....................... ............................... Density Lot Size ....Seem .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parks .......... ................ ............................... Forest Street Connection ...... ............................... . Trail .... .............. assesses .. a.............................. Conclusion . . . D e m a g o g u e s m a s s a g e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 6 6 RECOMMENDATIONS ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a 7 CITIZENCOMMENTS.... magma wasesswes onamesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 REFERENCE ................................ ............................... 15 HISTORY ........................ ............................... 15 SITE DESCRIPTION ............... ............................... = 15 SURROUNDING LAND USES ........ ............................... 16 LEGAL .......................... ............................... 16 PLANNING ....................... ............................... 16 TREES .......................... ............................... 16 SOILS ........................... ............................... 17 HOUSING POLICIES . 6 . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . 0 . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . 17 INTRODUCTION Project Description Mr. Dennis Gonyea, representing Gonyea Company, Inc. is proposing to develop lots for 78Yppgp homes. The project's name is Mapleleaf Estates. This plat would be on a 32.5 -acre site along p on es 19 and 23pagesForestandCyprusStreets, north of Gervais Avenue. (See the location maps a . Requests To develop this site, Mr. Gonyea is requesting that the City: 1. Change the City's land use plan map. This change would be from R -1S (small lot single dwellings) and M -1 (light industrial) to R -1 (single dwellings). (See the land use maps on pages 20 and 21.) 2. Change the City's zoning map. This change would be from F (farm residential), R -1S (small lot single dwellings) and M -1 (light manufacturing) to R -1 (single dwellings). (See the zoning maps on pages 22 and 23.) 3. Vacate the undeveloped streets within the proposed plat. (See the map on page 27.) 4. Approve a cul -de -sac width variance of twenty feet. The Code requires 120 feet of right -of- way. Mr. Gonyea is proposing a 100 -foot -wide right -of -way at the end of Demont Avenue. Note: This cul -de -sac is not shown on the rYrelimina plat. Demont Avenue is shown as ap through street between Forest Street and Cypress Street. The developer proposed a the cul- de -sac after submitting the plat to the City. See the detail drawing on pagee 25 for the cul -de- sac design.) 5. Approve a preliminary plat for 78 lots. (See the proposed plat on page 24.) The City staff is proposing the following additional changes: 1. Drop Forest Street as a major collector street from the land use plan map. (See the land use maps on pages 20 -21.) 2. Vacate part of an existing utility easement between proposed Gervais Avenue and Sextant Avenue. (See the map on page 24.) K DISCUSSION Open Space Many neighbors prefer to keep this property for open space or a park. The City would have to buy this property to keep it as open space. In 1992, the Maplewood .Open Space Committee rated 67 sites for permanent open space. The area west of Forest Street and south of Brooks Court (site 116) was thirteenth on the list of all sites. (See the map on page 26.) The Committee ranked this site first of seven sites in the neighborhood. The Committee strongly recommended that the City buy nineteen sites. On November 2, 1993, the voters approved a $5 million bond issue for open space. The City is currently studying the purchase of all or part of this site. The City Attorney advised me that buying this site for open space should not affect the City's land use plan, zoning and platting decisions. The City annot use land use controls to et a betterYg price on land they intend to buy. The City could approve the preliminary plat and later buy the land. Land Use Plan and Zoning Changes The density of this plat was a concern to some neighbors. The proposed land use plan and zoning changes would reduce the possible number of housing nits on art of the site. The developererpp could plat the land that the City has planned and zoned R -1 S (small -lot single dwellings) with 7,500-square-foot lots. Instead, he is proposing a zoning change to R -1 (single dwellings ) with a minimum lot size of 10, 000 square feet. The average lot size would be 14,617 square feet, which would be similiar to the adjacent neighborhood. The City's land use plan shows Forest Street connecting County Road C and Keller Parkway. See the land use plan on page 20.) Because of this connection the City has classified Forest Street as a major collector. The proposed plat would eliminate the connection to Keller Parkway. If the City approves this plat, the City should drop the major collector designation for Forest Street from the land use plan map. This is because it would not connect to Keller Parkway and serve as a collector street. The developer could still connect a local street to Forest Street. Street Vacations The developer is requesting that the City vacate the following rights -of -way in the plat: 1. Connor Avenue, east of Cypress, Meadow Lane 2. Brooks Avenue 3. A 16.5- foot -wide undeveloped public road between the east side of Meadow Lane and the east side of the proposed plat site 3 4. The part of the Gervais :Avenue easementt that is west of the end of the existing street These rights - of - way are shown on the ma -p on page 27. They were dedicated. in 1950. State lawstatesthatacitycannotvacateastreetunlessiti 'sin the public interest. There is no publicinterestinbuildingstreetsontheseexistinrih - p g g is of way. The developer will be dedicating newstreetrights -of -way with the plat. The City shoal g y d keep a 25- foot -wide utility easement for theexistingwatermainthatrunsthroughtheGervaisAvenueueright -of -way. Utility Easement Vacation The City Engineer is recommending that the developer move part of an existing water main thatisbetweentheproposedGervaisAvenueandSextantAvenue. (See the map on page 24.) TheCityEngineerprefershavingthewatermaininthestreet. The City would then not have to dig upyardstorepairormaintainthemain. This water main is now in a utility easement that runsthroughthesite. If the City requires the developer to move the water main, then the City shouldvacatethepartoftheeasementthatisnolongerneeded. Preliminary Plat Intersection of Demont Avenge and Cypress Street As mentioned above, the develop is r _p proposing to cul-de-sac Demont Avenue and Cypressstreet. The advantages of this cal -de -sac are that p tit would save part of a small wetland and keeadditionaltrafficoffofDemo - pntAvenue. (See the wetland on the reliminap ry plat on page 24.)However, to save the wetland, the developer is requesting cul -de -sac 'g width variance. While thesubstandardwidthwillwork, it would not be the normal width. Along dead end is another roblem. If the 'p e City buys the west half of the site for open sdeveloperwouldnotconnectpace, thecttoForestStreetorKellerParkway. The streets southStreetandConner .Avenue would b of Cypresseadeadendlongerthan1,000 feet. The Citydeadendsto1,000 feet unles y Code limitssnootheralternativeispossible. Connecting •buys the g o Demont Avenue ispossible. If the City y e west half of the site for opens ace the develDemontAvenuetoCypresspper should connectypsStreet. If this connection is made the developer •DeS oper should redesign themontAvenue /CAvenue/Cypress Street intersection with a four -way design. SpeedinproblemonCypressStreetbecausepg may become auseitwouldbealongstraightstreet. Future residenta -four -way stop at the Demont Avenue in s may wantintersection. The jog intersection on the lot would mahazardousfour -way stop intersection. p ake Wetlands Several of the residents were concerned about the loss of the wetlands on the site. There areseveralwetlandsonthesite. (See the wetlands on the preliminary plat drawing on e 24 or thepaglargerplatdrawingsthatareattached.) The developer will preserve most of these wetlands. He isproposingtofillpartofonewetlandatthenorthwestcornerofOutlotB (to build Cypress 4 Street). The developer may want to reconfigure the south half of the Outlot B wetland to realign the Demont Avenue /Cypress Street intersection. Any wetland filling requires a Watershed Board permit: The developer must mitigate by adding twice the wetland area that the developer fills. The City should require wetland buffer easements to protect the wetlands. Drainage Several neighbors complained about the existing drainage on Cypress Street. These neighbors were concerned that the new development would increase these problems. The City Engineer is requiring that the developer's drainage plan not add to an existing drainage problems. The CityYggpY Engineer told me that the developer's engineer could design the project so the drainage would not harm nearby properties. The staff is recommending that the developer acquire off -sitepq easements for any off -site wetlands that he .plans to drain into. Density and Lot Size Several neighbors thought there are too many lots in this plat. The proposed lot sizes range from 10,049 square feet to 38,483 square feet with an average lot size of 14,617 square feet. The average lot size is larger than many of the lots on Brooks Court and Demont Avenue. These range in size from 10,14021,466 square feet. The City ode requires at least 10 000 square feetYq q above a drainage easement and 75 feet of width. In addition, the average size of the lots within the shoreland must be at last 15,000 square feet. All of the proposed lots meet or exceed City standards. The City cannot. reduce the number of lots if the developer is meeting the City's ordinances. Parks A concern of several of the neighbors was the amount of park land available in the area. They feel there is a need for additional park land in the area. The City's Director.of Parks and Recreation told me that Kohlman Park would serve this development. He also told me that the City is planning a trail extension and additional playground equipment to Kohlman Park in 1995. The City is also planning for a possible land purchase on the east side of the p ark for a tennis court. The City has listed these improvements in the 1995 -1998 Maplewood Capital Improvement Program. Forest Street Connection The connection to Forest Street is controversial with many of the neighbors. If the City does not buy the west half of the plat for open space, the developer needs a second means of access, other than Cypress Street. There are four options: Forest Street, Gervais Avenue, a street to the east over the drive -in property or Keller Parkway. 5 The developer is proposing a connection to Forest Street. Many neighbors are opposed to this because it would add traffic to Forest Street. Since Forest Street would not be connected to Keller Parkway, the traffic would be local only. Several neighbors suggested - connecting to Gervais Avenue. Gervais Avenue is a substandard commercial street. It is in poor quality and is too close to the loading docks of the adjacent businesses to the south. Semi- trucks back into the loading docks and block most of the street. Cars have to singly go around the semis, often onto the dirt boulevard. Fork lifts dart onto the street to unload pallets. For these reasons, the Director of Public Safety recommends against using Gervais Avenue as an access to this lat. To make Gervais Avenue useable the City wouldp Y have to buy out the homes to the north and move Gervais Avenue to the north. The City had previously considered this project and denied it. The denial was because of the cost and objections from surrounding home owners. People did not want Gervais Avenue connected to Forest Street. They feared trucks would go up Forest Street to County Road C. A street to the east over the drive -in property has problems. Mr. Gonyea does not own this property. The drive -in owner still owns this. He plans to develo p propertythis into a commercial use. He does not want a public road. This option raises the question of who pays for this street? A drive -in road would be longer and more . expensive than a connection to Keller Parkway.Y Connecting the developer's plat to Keller Parkway, with or without a connection to Forest Avenue, is the last option. The people on Cypress Street want a connection to Forest Street to take the traffic off of Cypress Street. The people on Forest Street do not want their street connected to the plat for the same reason. A compromise would be to connect the developer's plat to Keller Parkway without connecting to Forest Street. This would take some traffic off Cypress Street without connecting to Forest Street. The problemiswhopays for the streetp extension to Keller Parkway? Trail A trail should connect this neighborhood to Keller Parkway and the regional park at Spoon Lake. The best location would be through the property to the west. The trail would then come out across the street from the regional park. The City hould build this trail if the City buys theYYY property to the west for open space. If the City does not buy this property, the City should require that the developer build a trail between Lots 24 and 25 south of Gervais Avenue. The City should extend this trail from the plat to Keller Parkway. The developer is proposing to build a sanitary sewer line from the proposed Gervais Avenue between Lots 24 and 25 to the south. See the map on page 24.) In addition to pedestrian and bicycle access, the trail would provide access to maintain the sewer. Conclusion The City should allow the developer to plat the east half of the project, but the City should table the west half until the City decides how much land they will buy for open space. Until the City makes this decision, it is difficult to plan the streets and utilities. The developer has agreed to give the City a time extension on the west half of the site. The Council should make sure that the developer provides a written time extension or agrees to an extension at the meeting.g g RECOMMENDATIONS A. Adopt the resolutions on pages 36 and 37. These resolutions change the land use plan and zoning map from R -1 S (small lot single dwellings) and M -1 (light industrial) to R -1 single dwellings). The resolution also drops the major collector designation for Forest Street. This change is for the Mapleleaf Estates plat. In addition to the findings required by the Code, this change is for the following reasons: 1. The developer is proposing to develop the site for single dwellings. 2. This change would reduce the allowable intensity and traffic from this site. 3. The R -1 classification would be more compatible with the surrounding homes than the present classifications. 4. Forest Street would no longer serve as a major collector Street. B. Adopt the resolution on page 39. This resolution vacates the undeveloped street rights -of- way (Connor Avenue east of Cypress Street, Meadow Lane, Brooks Avenue, the 16.5 - foot -wide undeveloped public road and the west end of Gervais Avenue). The City should vacate these street rights -of -way because: I 1. It is in the public interest. 2. The City has no plans to build streets on these rights -of -way. 3. The adjacent properties have street access. This vacation is subject to the City retaining a 25- foot -wide utility easement over the east end of Gervais Avenue. C. Table the request to vacate the utility easement that would be on the property line of Lots 7, 8 and 9. Block 6 of the proposed plat until January 23, 1995. D. Approve the resolution on page 41. This resolution approves a cul -de -sac width variance for a cul -de -sac at the end of the existing Demont Avenue for the following reasons: 1. The variance would save part of a wetland. 2. The City Engineer stated that the cul -de -sac would be large enough for snow- plowing. 7 E. Approve following parts of the Mapleleaf Estates preliminary plat (received by the City on July 26, 1994): Block 1; Block 2, Lots 1 -17; Block 3 Block 4, Lots 1 and Block 5, Lots 1--8. Table the remaining parts of the plat until January 3 1995. Before the City Council approves the final plat, a developer shall complete the following conditions: 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 and street identification signs. d. Install permanent signs around the edge of the wetland buffer easements. These signs shall mark the edge of the easements and shall state there shall be no mowing, vegetation cutting, filling or dumping. e. Install survey monuments along the wetland boundaries. f. Have NSP install street lights in three locations, primarily at street intersections. The exact location and a of lights shall be subject to the CitytypgJy Engineer's approval. 2. 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. 3 . * Have the City Engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, trail and street plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: a. The erosion control plan shall be consistent with the Ramsey Soil and water Conservation District Erosion and Sediment Control handbook. b. The grading plan shall: 1) Include proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site. 2) Include contour information for the land that the street construction will disturb. 3) Show sedimentation basins as required bqy the watershed board. c. The drainage plan shall show catch basins between Lots 5 and 10, Block 3 anddedicatenecessaryeasementsforthesedrain 'sand pipes. d. Provide storm water storage and/or an off-site ' e between Outlots AandB, based on a drainage stud g outlet pip done b the dev •Y y eloper s engineer. The CityEngineershallapprovetheexactlocationcapacity 'and outlet for this storage.If the City requires more and capacity .the1' developer may have to drop lots.The lots shall meet the Shoreland requirements. e. Provide adequate storm water ca acit for thepy shall provide on Lots 19 and 26, engineerBlock2. The developer 'g p e a drainage study to determineadequatecapacity. The City Engineer .shall approve •g pp ove the exact location, capacityandoutletforthese. If the City requires more 'q pond capacity, the developer mayhavetodropalot(s). f. The tree plan shall show the size spec 'and location of any trees that thedeveloperwillplantasreplacementtrees. 4. Show the following changes on the final 1gpat. a. Show drainage and utility easements along ll 'g property lines on the final plat.These easements shall be ten feet wide along the • nes. g a front and rear property linesandfivefeetwidealongthesidepropertylppY b. Change Street C to Demont Avenue and change Street D to Adele Street. c. Drainage easements for drainage areas and wetlands •g t ands that thus project wouldaffect. This shall include an easement on the lot that will be south of Lot 19,Block 2. d. Drop Lots 1,2 or 3 from Block One or 'channel the drainage between Outlots AandBthroughadrainagepipe. e. Redesign the Demont Avenue / Cypress Street ' •Yp intersection to eliminate the dogandmakeafour -way intersection. The developerp shall redesign the DemontAvenue /Cypress Street intersection to eliminate the jog and make afour -way-stop design. If the City decides not to buy te west half of the plat, thedevelopermaycul -de -sac Demont Avenue. 5. Show the wetland boundaries on the final 1pat as .approved by the WatershedDistrict. L• 6. * Provide all easements required b the 'q y e City Engineer. These shall include: a. Give the City wetland easements over the wetlands.. These easements shall .cover the wetlands and any land within twent 'y feet surrounding a wetland. Theeasementshallprohibitanybuildingrstructuresgwithintwentyfeetofthewetlandoranymowing, cuttin fill"or •g, g dumping within ten feet of thewetlandorwithinthewetlanditself. The •purpose of this _easement is to protectthewaterqualityofthewetlandsfromhomeowners' • •meowners fertilizer and to .protect thewetlandhabitatfromresidentialencroachment. b. Drainage easements for the .off -site •drainage areas and wetlands that thusprojectwouldaffect. This shall 'include an easement on the lot that will besouthofLot19, Block 2. If the developer decides to final a 'p part of the preliminary plat, the Cit may waive anyconditionsthatdonota1tothefinalyYppYaplat. The developer must co • •p complete these conditions before the City issues •approves the final lat. Y es a grading permit orp 10 CITIZEN COMMENTS We asked the nearby property owners for their ' 'opinion of these requests. we sent surveys to thePropertyownerswithin350feetofthesite. Out of 102 properties, we received 31 replies. Nineagainst, were for the requests, 17 were a four h p g had comments and one had no comment. Those for the requests had the followin g comments. 1. It meets City concerns for eliminating commercial traffic from residential areas.Herringer - Minneapolis) 2. As a local church, we like to see new families move into the area. (Lakeview LutheranChurch) 3. It will improve the appearance of the rparea. (Ambler - 1065 Viking Drive 4. This plan is the - best one resented in the •p e seven years I have lived here - The only thinthatcouldpossiblyhelpwouldbearoadco g connection to Gervais Avenue or KellerParkwayonthenorth. end. Traffic flow to County Road C could .present a problem. Iknowthishasbeenlookedatbeforeandtheconcern 'is the use of the frontage road onHighway61 - some traffic would go west to Arcade if accessess was provided through.Berry - 984 Brooks Court 5. R -1 zoning is best for me - should keep resale of my .home up. Nice expansion to taxbase. Forest not connected -like keeping the •p g e isolation. If connected, Forest will turn intoafreeway! would like to see ark im fovemenpp t as part of the plan. (Blautuss - 962DemontAvenue) 6. I would rather the land be used as R -1 than anything else. Comments: a. I would like to see stop signs and other appropriate 'children P priate signage to warn drivers ofenplaying. b. It would be nice if the trees .could be 1 'eft in place as much as possible until lots aresoldtoavoidhavingviewsofabarrenwastelandanduntilhomesarein. C. Another concern is that the new homes be of a value that would not lower existinghomesvalues. (Gore - 974 Demont Avenue) Co 7. There are no through streets. This should promote slower speed and hopefully less crime.However, many of the lots are smaller than the current homes have. Enlarge the size ofthelotstoencouragesimilarhomestowhatexist. (Kiekhoeter - 969 Demont Avenue) 11 Those with comments gave the following: l . I do not object to the development •J elopment but I would like to see some changes in thRoadCg e proposal.We live on County between Cypress and Forest. There is already atrafficonCountYy to muchunsafetrayRoadC. I know that it is collector road but at some point therehastobesomealternative. There is no other way out for the 100 -home develomentan nexttotheproposeddevelopdforpeoplethatlivenorthofGervaisandwestofKohlmanLake. Beam does .not o through theygg changed County Road D so you can'tenterHighway61sowegetallthattraffic. I would like to see you punch a road out on the other side of this development, eitherCypressorForestorGervaisAvenue. You are also planning on running the traffic by aMaplewoodCitypark (Kuhlman) were children play everyday. County Road C is ahazard, someone is going to get hurt! there is no other exit for the people in thedevelopmentbehindusnow. We were promised when they built the last development,they would put through Forest. I would just like to see at least one out eat. (Huot - 988CountyRoadC) 2. We are for the rezoning to R -1 but our main objection is that we do not want ForestStreettogothrough. We feel access to this new neighborhood should come from othersources (such as Gervais) because of the already heavy traffic on Forest from ourneighborhood. This will give the new neighborhood its own privacy and improvedqualityofareabecauseofnothroughtraffic. The streets of both neighborhoods will besaferandlessbusy. We also feel that some open space fora ark is necessary. With thetwoareas (Mapleleaf Estates and Carsgrove Meadows) there will be over 150 home.Kohlman Park is at one end of Carsgrbve Meadows but isn't much of a park! If MapleleafEstateshasasmanychildrenasCarsgroveMeadowsdoes, this is a definite need.Wahlstrand - 972 Brooks Court) 3. See the letter on page 28 for additional comments. Those against the requests had the following comments: 1. I would first like this space considered for open space. If that is not feasible, I would liketoseeForestStreetremainasis (as a dead end) fewer lots and as much wildlife and asmanytreesmaintainedaspossibleintheproposeddevelopmentplan. Rezoning to R -1 isamust. (Peters - 948 Brooks Court) 2. I object to this proposal because Maplewood has very few open spaces where deer andwildlifecanexist. In the past we have been able to enjoy this beautiful piece of land thathousefox, deer and other animals in their natural habitat. We sincerely hope the City willbeabletopurchasepartofthislandtomaintainitsbeautyandnotdeveloplots9through15byrezoningthispieceoflandOS (open space). We also oppose Forest Street as being 12 - a main traffic route to this piece of land. If possible, we prefer an entrance at Gervais Avenue to access the proposed development. (Leafgren - 954 Brooks Court) 3. The changes are too great for the neighborhood. I would support the proposal however with a few changes as follows. The following changes to the ro osal would make itpp acceptable to me and. I believe will improve the neighborhood and still be attractive to the developer: a. Leave Forest Street as is. Do not extend it but rather add a new entrance to the new development at Gervais or somewhere else on the south side. b. Add a park to the new development. There are lots of children in the area and I presume many more in the new development. Parks and open space add a lot to a neighborhood and should be included in the proposal. I suggest lots 9 -15 and on the end of Forest Street. If the area must be developed, I do favor R -1. (Varbergp - 960 Brooks Court) 4. Traffic flow, schools and parks would be greatly strained to unacceptable levels. I would not be opposed to this plan with the following changes: a. Do not let Forest go through to the new development except bike and walking path. b. Neighborhood park with no parking. c. Reduce the number of homes by making the lots bigger (15 less homes). d. Make entrance from County Road C and Gervais. I voted for the school referendum because of current student teacher ratios and facility problems. Lets not over build again. (Sargent - 965 Brooks Court) 5. There are negatives to my neighborhood I would want addressed. First, I very much approve of the rezone to R -1 classification. I would however disagree that 78 homes should be constructed here. Maplewood has a chance to incorporate some open space with this development, thus reducing the number of homes which would have a negative impact. The negatives of concern are: a. Increased traffic flow through the neighborhood putting the many children here at risk. b. Putting Forest Street through will bring traffic in and out of our neighborhood that doesn't necessarily live here. c. Building that many homes without leaving some type of open space will have a 4.negative affect on the aesthetics of the community and the environment (greater pollution, too much run -off and reduction of wildlife). 13 To preserve the beauty and quietness of our neighborhood, I would suggest making a cul- de -sac out of Forest Street, create a community rk behind the homes on Brooks CourtYP accessible by walking path only, and exit traffic from homes along proposed Street A to either Gervais or Keller Parkway. (Dey - 966 Brooks Court 6. The destruction of open space and increased traffic in area. I feel that this area should not be developed. One of the reasons we built in this area was due to the open, undevelopedpp woods around the area. The proposed development would not only destroy these areas but drive out the wildlife that thrives there. My proposal would include the developer making a nature preserve out of this area in conjunction with the nearby chain of lakes. Another option would be to sell the area to the City as part of the open space acquisition program that our taxes were raised for. I realize the City will look at this from income stand point in the form of additional tax base. Therefore, the City will probably not consider the views of the few residents who presently live in the area. If this area is inevitably Ppdeveloped, I oppose the extension ofp Forest Street to access this area. I feel that access to this area should be made off Keller Parkway to the south of this area rather than burden the residents of Carsg rove Meadows with the increased traffic flow. (Thomalla - 971 Brooks Court) 7: I think it would be OK to develop the theater for housing but I strongly object to the development of the little treed area directly behind my house. In that section are numerous wild life - birds, fox. . . even a family of deer. It seems a shame to destro their precious habitat with one more housing plan. The deer actually come into our yards during the early morning or evenings. Then in the day, they go right back to their quiet haven in the small forest. Destroying this last vestige of their habitat in this area is sad. My hope would be that the City would make the developers imit their plan and avoidpersp this section, thus preserving a nature trail (many locals hike through this area) and one of the few remaining deer habitats right here in Maplewood. (Johnson - 978 Brooks Courtp ) 8. The details are unclear concerning the types of buffer created between existing properties and the new development. What about the City easement? Between the Farm and theater property and the current homeowners on the farthest eastern side of Carsgrove Meadows. I do not like to see Forest as a main vain disrupting a current community for another. It will be the biggest roadblock to gain neighborhood approval. (Warner - 983 Brooks Court) 9. Demont Avenue east would no longer be a dead -end street to the east. Would increase traffic. Make Demont Avenue east a cul -de -sac or dead -end to the east of Forest. Also, decrease the number of new single family houses from the proposed 78. Fifty is much more reasonable. Finally, increase the size of Kohlman Park. (Kutrubs - 950 Demont Avenue) 14 10. There are approximately 20 children that are age 8 and younger that play on Demont Avenue east which would no longer be adead -end street. (Haubn*ch - 980 Demont Avenue) 11. The number of lots is too dense and there isn't a provision for parks and open space. We would support it if parks or open space were incorporated into the plan and Forest were preserved. Also Forest Street should not go through to Gervais or Keller Parkway. Seppala - 2462 Forest Street) 12. This change would make my property more difficult to use or sell. Develop within the limits of the current zoning. (Let them buy us out.)(Lund - 2411 Maplewood Drive) 13. Do not want zoning changed -leave it as it exists. (Zuercher -North St. Paul) 14. See the letters on pages 30 -34 and the petition starting on page 42. REFERENCE HISTORY On September 23, 1958, the City Council approved a rezoning from F (farm - residence) to BC business commercial) for the Maple Leaf Drive -in. On May 28, 1991, the City Council approved land use plan and zoning changes for the area west of Highway 61, north of Highway 36. This was for the Comprehensive Plan update. These changes included much of the property in this prop osal. The land use plan changes were from RL low - density residential) RM (medium - density residential) and LSC (limited service commercial) to RM (medium - density residential) and BW (business warehousing). The zoning changes were from R -1 (single dwellings), F (farm residence) and BC (business commercial) to R -1 S (small -lot single dwelling) and M -1 (light manufacturing). These are the land use and zoning designations now in the area. SITE DESCRIPTION Gross Area: 32.5 acres Net Area: 26.2 acres Proposed Density: 2.98 homes per net acre Existing land use: undeveloped and drive -in movie theater 15 SURROUNDING LAND USES North: houses on Brooks Court, Cypress Street and a manufactured home park East: commercial properties and houses on the west side of Highway 61 South: undeveloped and commercial property on Gervais Avenue West: undeveloped property and houses in Carsgrove's Meadows LEGAL For street vacations, Chapter 412.851 of Minnesota State law states that "No such vacation shall be made unless it appears in the interest of the public to do so ..." PLANNING The existing R -1(S) land use plan designation is for small lot single dwellings and the M -1 designation is for light manufacturing. The proposed R -1 (single dwellings) land use .designation is for low-density residential land uses like single dwellings. Lot Sizes: The average lot size in the proposed plat is 14,617 square feet. This is similar to the lot sizes (10,140— 21,466 square feet) on Brooks Court and Demont Avenue. The City Code requires at least 10,000 square feet above a drainage easement and 75 feet of width for each lot outside the shoreland zone. All of the proposed lots meet or exceed City standards. The shoreland rules require an average lot area of at least 15,000 square feet in shoreland districts. The proposed lots in the shoreland district have an average lot area of 15 190g squareq feet. TREES The developers tree plan shows 95 large trees of a variety of species scattered across the site. They are proposing. to keep 31 of the large trees and remove 64 large trees. In addition'. g y are proposing to plant 64 trees to replace the 64 large trees that they would remove. The City's tree ordinance defines large trees as those over eight inches in diameter. Large trees do not include box elder, cottonwoods or poplar trees. The developer plans to grade most of this site. 16 SOILS The Ramsey Soil and water Conservation D'istnct informed us that the soils on this site. aresuitablefordevelopmentifthedevelopcontrolsontrolstheerosion. The District recommends that thedevelopergetspecificsoilsdatabefored 'developing the site. HOUSING POLICIES The land use plan has eleven overall land use goals. of these, four apply to this ro osal. The merit protect p p yare: provide for orderly develo p , p tect and strengthen neighborhoods, minimize landplannedforstreets, and provide safe and a 'attractive neighborhoods and commercial areas. Thelanduseplanalsohasseveralen •g eral development and residential development policieses thatrelatetothisproject. The are: p po idThey Safe and adequate access will be rovided foror all properties. Transitions between distinctly dyffering types of land uses should not create a nhscalimpactnegativeeconomic, social or p y p on adjoining developments. whenever possible, changes in typesypes of land uses should occur so that similar uses frthesamestreetoratbordersofareasse ont on separated by major man -made or natural barriers. The City requires drainage andg erosion control plans with new developments. Such all prevent erosion. lansshallnotincreasetherateofrunoffandshallp Protect neighborhoods from activities which produce excessive noise, dirt odorsgenerateheavytraffic. ors or which Protect neighborhoods from encroachmeent or intrusion of incompatible land uses badequatebufferingandseparation. y The housing plan also has olicies about h 'P housing quality that the City should consider withdevelopment. They are: this Plan and design new housing to: Protect existing housing, natural features an •d neighborhood identity and . ualitqy Assure there are adequate utilities communityy and convenient shopping.pp . g Maintain or strengthen the character of established 'b fished neighborhoods and assure that allhousingunitsaresafe, sanitary ecure and 'ry free from blight. 17 p:sec9\maplelfinem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Land Use Plan Map (Existing) 3. Land Use Plan Map (Proposed) 4. Property Line /Zoning Map (Existing) 5. Property Line /Zoning Map (Proposed) 6. Proposed Mapleleaf Estates Preliminary Plat 7. Demont Ave. Cut -de -sac Detail 8. , Property Line Map (Open Space) 9. Property Line Map (Vacations) 10. 8 -11 -94 letter from Moore - Foster 11. Statement from Wiermann 12. Statement from Kornmann 13. Letter from Van Elsberg (Northeinaire) 14. 8 -11 -94 letter from Oak Ridge Pond Rentals 15. Letter from the Seversons 16. Land Use Plan Change Resolution 17. Zoning Map Change Resolution 18. Street Vacation Resolution 19. Cul -de -sac Width Variance Resolution 20. Petition 21. Project Plans (separate attachment) 18 Attachment I 04. too 8 F A 4b U • • Lai. 44 Lake COUNTY I PL42A CK 2 ALVARADO OR PALM vp Or, 2. 1. SUMMIT CT. 2. CO U NTRyvlEv 3. DULUTH CT, 0 4. LYDIA ST BEAM Q V z W 0 X U KOHLAAN AVE ROAD C hit 7 . 0 S` Cr. u CO NO AV If GERVAIS AVE. 4 BELL.E CRCDEALNILLpCT.gyA C 5 MEMM DR COPE OR. CONNO LARK 3 co. <RD.L CT. DEMO VC LE LAN D W- RD. Lr JUNCTION AVE. W z w 0 : j- 1) CKAMBERS ST AVE. PKW Lk ELDR 10 pVE.BELMON7 O OLf SKILL xy E SKILL ko,.N pw- 0 40 4b or u VIKING OR. V) w K@Aw Lake 0 0 0 LAURIE CT. 05 z BURKE CT. BURKE AV a-ism,we V7 z 0 ElDRIDGE PW* AV ehrfin Lake 8 ELM 0 NT AVE,40S K I LLMAN AV.R KEKENW00D IA I vp Or, 2. 1. SUMMIT CT. 2. CO U NTRyvlEv 3. DULUTH CT, 0 4. LYDIA ST BEAM Q V z W 0 X U KOHLAAN AVE ROAD C hit 7 . 0 S` Cr. u CO NO AV If GERVAIS AVE. LOCATION MAP SI 19 4 COPE LARK CT. co. <RD.L LE LAN D W- RD. Lr JUNCTION AVE. W z mom 1) CKAMBERS ST AVE. Lk ELDR 10 pVE.BELMON7 O OLf SKILL xy E SKILL ko,.N LOCATION MAP SI 19 4 Attachment 2 REVISED 10/29/93 J 16 I-e C) 00 4C Count Rd. 0 interchan mum minor collector iF minor Beam Ave. collector 07- irRl 11 r Hi 36 I - - --- — KOHLMAN LAKE NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN SA EXISTING) ty Rd. C K o P PARK OS = OPEN SPACE M-1 = LIGHT INDUSTRIAL major vvipes.;tv, R-1 = SINGLE DWELLINGS su" AWAR 'KOMI R-3(M) = RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSIT i i i i I 1--- - VI 1;-%fokfal of awl IC&I Y 20 Attachment 3 REVISED 10/29/93 County Rd. D C m r J c v m 0 0 Ef 0 U t Vadnais Heights 0ty Rd. C I I' +KEY P =PARK OS = OPEN SPACE M -1 = LIGHT INDUSTRIAL major collector R -1 = SINGLE DWELLINGS D Gervais R-3(M) M = RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSIT w Highway 36 ge KOHLMAN LAKE NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN SITE (PROPOSED) interchange i y NNW minor collector IV a o F minor Beam Ave. collector Av 1 r t I L t Q N Y 21 Attachment 4 13 03 - II,I MANUFACTURED HOME PARK 3) I 741# oto 4 Ml .. ........ . ..... • 4 .......... xe*C. I Moe I tr o MO. I ....... AVESA JeoGERRoomVAISAVENUE A.)0lit a 4 20AC. a w n I M lk7WI"KEY ca F = FARM RESIDENTIAL 0 Ns. Rl = SINGLE DWELLINGS HIGHWAY 36 RIS SINGLE DWELLINGS (SMALL LC Ml = LIGHT MANUFACTURING KELLER LAKE ° ' •. ' PROPERTY LINE ZONING MAP SITE ( EXISTING) aOLINTY ROAD U rz :*Y, fl;%O 4 . 22 2 Ah. 13 14 r: ; :: :4•:• ... ........X LOOM BROOKSJA 17 17 410 7e X 4 I .23 22 ( 21 .......... I C twsc I. ...... THEATEDRIVE - 4 ti ft 741# oto 4 Ml .. ........ . ..... • 4 .......... xe*C. I Moe I tr o MO. I ....... AVESA JeoGERRoomVAISAVENUE A.)0lit a 4 20AC. a w n I M lk7WI"KEY ca F = FARM RESIDENTIAL 0 Ns. Rl = SINGLE DWELLINGS HIGHWAY 36 RIS SINGLE DWELLINGS (SMALL LC Ml = LIGHT MANUFACTURING KELLER LAKE ° ' •. ' PROPERTY LINE ZONING MAP SITE ( EXISTING) aOLINTY ROAD U rz :*Y, fl;%O 4 . 22 Attachment 5 MANUFACTURED HOME PARK IN I fA GD is 00ut 1 13 Call) CL taw IN THEATERDRIVE lit ON ks 00~' NN SITE AL IN XMIN.2 I" GERVAIS AVENUE 4 , v qC Do AL SIL M) RM RESIDENTIALFFA Mr toww Rl SINGLE DWELLINGS HIGHWAY 36 Ali RIS 0000 SINGLE DWELLINGS (SMALL LOT) RINGMILIGHTMANUFACTU l KELLER LAKE PROPERTY LINE ZONING MAP PROPOSED) 0COUNTYROADC 23 Attachment 6 U k 13 .09 A, MPNL' VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE mows 10 3o r FRONT YARD 5 FUT RIDE YARD (GARAGO six-RD (MOLLS[) V ; G* OEPTw FOR REAR YARD MWIMUV AREA Or LOTS - IMODO SQ. FT. J1MKJP OF SINGLJE FAMILY LOTS a 67 AKA w7w1h 4041MUM LOT APKA 15.000 SO F"T AWJtAGE NUMM OF ONCLE FAMILY LOTS 11 AWXAGE LOT AREA .- 15.190 50. fry. 707AL NUMBER LOTS - 79 107AL ARE! a 32 46 ACRES ARE! OF STREETS - 6.30 ACRES W" AREA - 28 ACRES ZOKD f - FARM IV WOENCE IS LLSMA LOV At LIGH' MA6#.W2v4X I S*XXL DINIE.WK PROPOSED ZONING RI LA LINE Apyr FOREST STREF R ELEVAT*N goo 1 AI 7sa-A2 r 33 133 Pet, GRAPHIC SCAIE DEMONT AVENUE.. I IN't 0I*ft L r 0.644 J L 40 14! 13% ui 141 io , ui 1.260 F_ 16800 sr W, dpow 133 aw coma n NowemyS11.266 s F. 10.8orn 1 ?rl S.F TAMAW 900MV10483136LuA$ KUWATO Wr 5 1010,440 11.2.7 Sr. laeoo S, 1 Sr in ui or w f Or 2 7 11.241 Sr. 2 6 /a 10.600 &F C%rlop &A 146 Ix 14,043 S.F. 78 v. S J 4 SF. 8 1 %_ F2 146 AVENUE MSEXTANT 4o r, a or WATERMAIN AND EASEMENT t ono thol I w. 240-00 .,,der the love of Slot• 10=to F. 1009 19 T z PA No. Del4 35,71 S.r.GERVAIS AVENUE' 1 7.644 12T. 5 s6r.p '14 - LXCEP y 15 S or 5 w z ",/A, A a— --oft—ftLLwv4f'ft4pwt1k lot v. rw PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER LINE MAPLELEAF ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT 1OUn/DZ"WPn: GOMM coup"y w =0vzu" Mm"M WWWOUS XBOMOTA 5640 6121377-0191 24 4 15, c, C E7jket,M I D [LIE S I. P I I - E N TEL No Oct Attadhmmt 7 T " A" LEAF ATE S 1 vp 600 25 Attachment 8 ML Cov 5 { N 00 Z P c•y 2!0 CGO CONNOR AV E. IF VIM 13 k v t tt • r)u o .,bl) ' i AYE.p• s , N ' s ' -- -T--- -- CONNOR 1 ay 0 „ ka a ( «i . a t J 19 a 4 . c..c a AW 1 to fell 1• 1 {• 1 +...IM ` e 1• .. ij • 1 O E. j Sa SVOWallsOEMONT th AVE •) ' --- -- — s W 6" a2.0 s47 M IN CS+ ( 4 s { 84 0• • s a 11 T SAO" WERPM assol /ss•e: o ' .s0 csii jj 1 lYt ' ::"},ti•, d } }•:; ;::•: : •o •' ':` ti ••••' ? :Y• } :ti' ••• i 13 14 1 • S.•• • 'r' • , ' S' • , fi'.STS,. ,S :i;. •, • }':i;y 4 }• 'S •J.•.:ryS la S }':, y y ,r• • J y', i'•• } Pis•,.,. : ::, ', ' 11 '• .. '— . J '' } ti :'•S'L' .. 1 ' L '•: iC.:i• '•r • " i'::•i ..•.•.,, ., i0 „t - to 1 yw • yi•'Jtiy }''.ti •'y }:J l !' ( 4ic) r.} }'; :;C :• :'•`.• iMY •. ' Y' r:''r •.,} ' • GT` 0 (411111 _' t Ors .yam } '' • • by • .,iti•. .., J•yS.';:: i•':, • r.,:': • :yJY • • y } ` y+.ti::'•,y }:, • ''•'•''• r '; r.:;{'..;y O 11yi'i•'J'• }. ev .4 :•Jr::• % M '}•:;' f • 71L LawS''; •'.''i • Y } ti• y •' `yS • :ti• • `'i rJ:•J •y O 6s) :riti• {:?;: titi'i'i;• ° yy, y •, :'':'• }:;;:;J'Jti }•;. [ rl. 2 is TRaI'1•As• JY , '''• ;••4iY" y :•yiititi:::;';:•;• s 1 M y • ;;'.•.;....•. y :ti.•..,•.tiY v yr.} °•:i:• ..•. My1a •t.af D+i iw 'fb•afrs ti T .YJ•, S • • :•J•S SS'SS: 1• S;. :S J• - yJyk • Y '• S: i ;: ; ; ;,' : ±;,• J • y} } `J•;. S •ti • iSY • }; }r, •'`•'. ti•:; :: • .ti1' i,S. •S: •• S S • Y •:. •Y•114114111 y • .. Y•S•y:`SJ., y 1' rySS ••. :• l ;iY,Y•ti• irS;•.• y :;:;::,•;• • titi':i' 'J'`:•} ••:;y.• .., y ;,y. .'J: JS .S y y; }}r }'W tiy:;},. `rJYr r.:.33 J, ,vYyi} , ,: h' •,• S'•i ,''i,• ':y; :•::: . - —ti,1'`. S r'• 5...,'.= , , ; i ; ;J • ::•• • • { J ; ;, ;•:,; • 'y JJ ••• :;5;•p: • ,; 6iS..'S, ,•' •;:; ;•;;:`to Y':y}`} S'`y'S' :y,''•••'••':}J }•' :.. •;• y '• }ti:, :: i:: i •J •,:;:: • ;' Y A, S:: • •` • • SY yy Y S, •; J• • ' :` •;• S Py • • •: • • ' S •P • • •iYiy' -• • ti ' •• ,y:SS`y:4.; iy ;} :, •• y,:',.5, : S,: '•'•: •• Y y:` `:SeyYS:i} i,: y: y •::...,.,. Y:}, , 'YJ ••• ti + V S, - i-78 • for. h . }:;:: ;:;. .. r ; ti; S;. `i • ;. i. iy }'•• :' :;:, }r• }" :i '.;.5:,. '•.ti 'i4':} . •p•. w y; , :•: • ,'•; y;;• i• :Y }, :•. i`}J } J : i:;:ti; }i'Y;•i:•; i.i }• :i }S;••'J, • S• ' i`'} • : i•: r' SSYy., , • ; };. S1 . \ ••' i ; ; ; ' J •'N :`::S •; ; i ; ;;••y,'••4} ;•Y: • `J }: :; ;0, };: • i •S •' S; YA,.` b, i, ;,•`Syy } :;•, •,, • .• 'S: J: 1r• •S:'i • ••'' :;y:JJ•S•r• • S' •'•• '' •:SiY::;iSS • y;.; :• , f• ;,;,' .. ,ti '• : }S' •, • y • r ; ;;.; SY •., • ' A },., S , •:': Yy ,;,., • • 1! 1 v,• •;•, •.;..• r ., yS }:; •; ;;i;, ;• •, • , ••, ;,• yr }- ":. }r.,• y ...,•, y ,• Sr} }. • • :•"'•';;:; 1 1A) 1 1 : , ,}:;• ••••i.• ?•; ; }ti.y':. { ' ':i•} ~S..; ':'.,` I : :•i S '`,'"•y S• LiSS° Y ,.` ''•'.yY ' fiti y ':{}•} :•'•. L \ h .'',ip;'4:;. •' S,. y'Y,.,;,} . jam:, .::} • y }'C : }':, • ':''• 4ii•{ •r :' • i }; .Y.•} '• :; ;;yr',iS • •• ;:Y:} •. • • •Y }}:;Ji'yS'• r •:•:• S i;•Y •. S•: i:• } • i }''. • -'• •l.isaa. ': yby'iir },C, ': • • y.: . ti } ' }; y' j{ S . - { r1' • :''•:•: : • •.; :,. ; • rtii .} . .•} ;v,fi:S Ly: ti ;` 0 • :•1.SY•'. y.•• S,• S • y •` i` J ••' `S•:'. };• • r }S .;. y y4, r `i •:; ' \ la.+•. 1 •S Y• . • • •• }•S Ay S`• .•.'•••.,•r,:S YJ•`y ; ;: ;., • , ••'• • •,y Y • i.S ;;•;•;• • i ;i , : ''• \SS • ' `. ' YJJ , • :''•. •r S S •;• •J •,.,•, `'Y Y S }, • • y:,•S .Y!ri • , SS :Yiy' • • • •Ai'i • S• S :•: } } :Y;•i;•; ;: •.,SSA }•.••Ji` SSy ::S'}} •y: } .`. A, "i }4', • y,::riJ:;:S1 -. : Y }•ii :tiS,• SSiiS• SS•.•. J:•i •:•J• •: ryS r::•.S . • • yy: :Y Y }: •': J ::•:;.JJ.;.•.S;•;• • ------ • • .. '` •J:r: , ; } J . r . .. y ., • , • .. . r Mej '' SJJ }•Y•; ;; `S•ti: :Sh'' ",i ••' •, S '••,• •: :i:S'`` • ` :`• ; ; :.:• '}•:;' . •, i • Y • • :Si;• ' ':Sy • • ,•S:O•.5;• bJ. : S y.,.,•,. J, ••;.;•} S • .• •,. 'r} '} , }•;:;••' •! •,• •,',;•• ;,• •• '::•h• • ': •, J ,,y • y - ••S .: •;:i, J y S • •'1`, ' :' SS' •.:Y: S }•;y.•YJ ;:SS;. ;,, YSS yyi y S :;:; }' • . Y •, •:. •Yy :J;J..' , '• :'• ::; •::' •, S;J ` • Y iS S :4 1i. , • '0 Jy vie -- i}J • y ti •;i. i 0 : ySi'1' J 1:: •JS • i;`SiT L: "1.5 ,S' SS • Y S •' , y ?ti :ir }• • ..ti;•:. :;.:; i ti:';ti: • .:r.:•y1:b'i•: • ••...... : ;;;. Sri' •.:•.::, • •. •.; •. iY •., 0 J• yyy.,• yyyY:i; :': } }: •yy ;ii• Y. S • • y1 •1 • : J:ti} '' i;: ;' S .. S • ':;.'••:: SO :•,:,, '::;• ; Y•'• • ': ; • i •'•••',: •y ySY; J ; 7 . •, 'y J. ":;,• Y'' 5,, • ' ., • •S :;: •• ::`J: }'' •, y 'y. • . • • • • }•: ;:::;•; 2;V:i S ::;.; :' Y tiS' S •y,• ;•••} y i ':1;• •} S •' .J :;;. •:•:Y: ;. . ti ,yi• }• y • • :.y •: • •'•, J • S '" JSi : •• YJ} S}: } y'• :: },; Y },`.,• J:•fJ • S :• : ''• :,JC • ,v,.Jfi:;wY• stir' :Y:. • ••i• y} S,• ••. • y • _ 7 • O; ti, ••, J rr;.. S,S :• . •:.'••.•y SJJY • ••.} •.;.. },•':'y .; :5`';:, S•: S':•: / S;:.S :;:;., {;• i`} : iJ1 :Y. • r S . }yS, J ;}i, •: i• }y:•.• iS; :, Y : ; : }::•!'•:1 '::•:' ti :Sti' S'' :` •'Y.:`•' it :• :Y'yi•LiS' • :;.: • .•1• , ••; : {•;y %; Ss. P ::;r • Y • Y••R''•} i .} Jr.'• l•Sr'., • : , r•, 1Y , J•;•1;.,y, y •;'S•S.y,,•y y:J, •i,. Y S • Y44 Jr0 •' •` Y .:Y'• .• .Y ••S •'• ;:•it . }'^,'::•y .; ':` y. • aC r.• y v ' %}yJ;v };y: }, : ..:y'i . y y ..; ,., y S••}: .. . . '• •y.;•, d ; S :'; •Ji: . •' :• , ;:5'•'• Sy Y:S: • :Y: • :::,yry • : • 1 w i. ii ; i• } ? :; ;••., . ,' •:; .;.v::; fi } ti.;.•.,{., • . i••• yY: S'•., • • :; . y; •SS;.;ti T S StiY.Ti ::, :::.5 y;• • .S'. S • Oy ;. yiSyS • •y • i`,,5;:,'.;:;• } ;:: ;:•• : }:•'S; :••: i•:•:••` •,• P }' }`.' S i ,• •i } ' : f• ;:;:.J • ••;. ,, ,, • •• •Ji;•.:;•.:V;'• • •y: JJ :Y••: •, .. i }y;.:•;., y •.;;' :; ?i• 'v:;:;; i ;tif:;';i ; , ••,; yy: • ';••: i•:: y. . ,r•:;:;:;•. iii•:•. . }::•:• ..•. "1 .. ' yYJ ,:'.ti •,ti :Y. J:. ':•I. ' :: , • :.. .. • _. A . y} ;. }• ••'. 'r• :ti :• }M •iJJy'•; . • .JJ :• :1:Y •J :,J•; i; ti •} .,,.. • J 'J / SS .•:•' S :; S:;y ;; .,. ;:i;: '';.;;. . 'y'''•y:.• .•:•yY' Sy y, M l .iiit ..3' .71•M' r ' :i S' } ;b :•:;: •, ' • S YyS SvCJti :;ii . y •• :. '• ti :•:• :'J: J•Y :•:i•: i• .s fps y , JS ;:YfSS•• :'.•', S y : ; .' • Y:., : S '•' ; •• • ' : •,•,,,,,:.y J .;' 1:'•.;• '.}•, •° r:StiS' } rry, • : S;: S' }S: ;;;:;i 1: •••J5, , ;.SS },• • S•r••rAY'•S :, • isi • iS ` r '•:S•; • fvS } S;Y fi.Ss'•ti{ yS• y . } } •ryS }Y:•'ti,:;'•'::'i. :';:`• J.. . rr SS S•' : • y JS . " ;; Y'`yr.,y'`':•i• J,;' ' • •,•': y:i'i,:•:•: _ .ry .:, ; }y.;is• S,r,'.S,:rS•5: ;. S }, iL' y•• }':,S'•Sy}•"+•S •i'S.y:::;• }'.,r: i' '' }ttir'•,•'',''•::;:;:;~ tip:;:: ?:;:;ti: ;.ti; }r ;, `;: ;: ti •:;:•: ;J • ' — — — — SPOON LAKE C r -WOO** \` t HIGHWAY 36 - K tl rr t----- - - -- • POSSIBLE OPEN SPACE 4 56 f.N 16.0040 PROPOSED PLAT SITE ' PROPERTY LINE MAP N OPEN SPACE SITE #116 26 PROPERTY LINE MAR PROPOSED VACATIONS 27 Attachment 9 Attachment, 10 AUG 986 Demont Ave. East Maplewood, Minn August 11, 1994 Kenneth Roberts Community Development Department Cit of Maplewood 1830 E. Count Road B Maplewood, Minn. 55109-2797 Mr. Roberts. We are responding to the proposal for the use of land surroundin our communit b the Gonyea Corporation. We are not opposed to the building of single famil dwellings but we do have some concerns/su that we would like to have considered. Our first concern has to do the wetlands located on the land* The map was not ver clear, but we are hopin those areas would not be tampered with and left intact. As you are probably aware, it provides a home for several different t of water fowls. In addition, our propert has a substantial amount water beneath the house foundation. Durin and after rainfalls, our water pump runs continuousl We are afraid that if the present natural draina s is-disturbed, we ma experience serious draina problems. Our next concern has to do with the mature trees located on the land. 'Those trees not onl help to maintain the quality of the air, but is also home to an abundance of wildlife. Includin but not limited to owls and deer. We realize that some of the trees will have to be sacrificed in order to build the homes. However, it would be greatly appreciated if the cit could re that a certain percenta of the trees remain on the land. Another concern has to do with access to the communit There appears to be onl two streets to gain access to the nei This will mean that the traffic to reach the new development will be routed throu the existin communit We would like to see another street allowin access to the new homes that would not route them throu Forest or C Streets. W Lastly, we would we like to ensure that the lot sizes are kept e to the properties in Carsgrove Meadows. Again, due to the quality of the map it was difficult to'ascertain th new lot sizes. In order to allow existing homeowners to maintain our property values, we would re that the lot sizes remain consistentonsistent with the existing homes. Thank you for listenin to our concerns. We can be reached at 486-0023 if further clarifications on our su are needed. incerel A AAMA"'-,cia and Walker Moore-Foster 29 Attachment 11 We the homeowners of Carsgrove's Meadows and surrounding areas strongly oppose Mapleleaf Estates as proposed for the following reasons: 1.) Extending Forrest beyond it's present ending point would forever change the character of one of Maplewood's most beautiful neighborhoods. Greatly increased traffic flow would diminish the safety of our neighborhood in general not to mention unnecessarily putting our children at far greater risk. 2.) Development of the entire tract of land would further the destruction of habitat and wildlife and destroy some of the natural beauty of Maplewood. 30) The result of effectively doubling the number of homes in a small area would increase the burden on our already overcrowded schools as well as increase crime, and increase demand on public services such as police, fire, and street maintenance Increased water pollution would also stress existing wetlands and surrounding lakes. The below signed residents would strongly support the development of Mapleleaf Estates if the plan were to be improved. We firmly believe the following refinements would help to maintain the character of the existing neighborhood and still allow the developer to create a highly marketable com 1 .) Leave Forrest exactly as is. Build another entranc to the development at Gervais. This will lessen the negative impact on the safety and chara of th existing community. 2.) Rezone entire tract of land as R1 (as presently proposed). 3.) Reduce the number of new Lots. This will reduce the negative impact of higher density. 4.) Leave "Open Space" or build a Community Park on proposed lots 9 -15 and on the end of Forrest (encourage community use only by not having a parking lot). This would enhance the livability of Maplewood by blending nicely with the existing parks along Spoon Lake and Keller Lake. wEEmanin/- q5S Pp,Lb,S Co7" 30 Attachment 12 #4 SS dor:-t eEl hrrnes Stu:UPel e u<<! Sin cc G CA ot On Cl Lf9e- 0.1r) r) ke gin. o C I-'.F t= l,,e - 'utT'cle- lL n1t, `Ilw OL, u n.tC GnPI YD CSrcu - Lle U2:: c -Elt 4- , a.:Le i pcLl /z- l-uLA eU..2.o rrvtLnkac.P-I. 17G LC - f. tLL tUQ7 /]{,.E{ .,Vn vivl I.LY G{ .L o Q.FC'kJ Ly CS -/J'li hlsr F ctC al c' htxd ULC 6-1 4C fz eft(rytd l -x Clw /lez zrn CV,sy. 51 -u% ue Ikd; {,lam /LCrneS (crtC( !L Gt'z CLCC /J - - -, tGCCrf o*-. 71 jut& x c da - sun,, _Q tGu..l - E 2 d.t i1a.+ ,Eca /,ct r -EA. d.u- eCtl.z^ o be ct. kEu-u(t'bit, oi 0 cz, KEt.' Ch2. CtC t,e f VY ,d sP1CU -f c e .F c I C Q-L 1 ` /v°L t(_a iil4aE use aun 11u, q al 31 YOUR : /NN " P SPOT 0 Attachment 13 Nortbernaire Motel 2441 Hwy 61 St, Paul, MN 55109 (612) 484 -3336 1 800 - 899 - 7578 Reservations & Info. only Fax 484 - 2063 We are strongly against the projected development. All the existing Commercial properties )ro rties ad'o' the ro development will lose value. If any businesscs were to makeu8Pp' improvements, along with meeting the city of Maplewoods requirements, we will need to notify our neigh 350 ft. from our property. Currently, we wouldn't get any negative feed back from any of our neighbors, as our commercial business's won't hurt any of their properties. If this Proposal goes through as projected, we will have 35 or more, residential properties to satisfy. Homeowners, once established, are not going to want. Noise, Lights, Trucks, etc., etc. Those thin that areapar of operating a business. New Business may find it easier to go else were, Then to Try to appease residential home owners with their business designs, Expansion, and dons. wing businessls may eventually be required to meet the needs of the home owners and residential guidelines, rather then fit the needs of the business itself. An owner building a new business will. not want residential owners to determine their fate. The two homes on Jarvis are not marketable as residential now, if this proposal goes through they will not be marketable as commercia, for all the aforementioned reasons. Another great concern, is the Land that we have adjoining the proposed property. We would not want any new development directing any drainage over our Property. My husband and I have been hear for 6 years, through the wettest tunes, there hasn't been any water in that area, and we don't want anyi In respect to our thoughts for this prnperiy: There should be L a buffer zone next to the residential. Office buildings, Dr. clinics etc. Then our business won't disturb them, and there business won't disturb the residential. We agree with the existing zoning map. This buffer was well thought of from the city, to avoid futurep zoning problems, like those that now exist. This corner is already a conglomeration of zoning with residential homes overlooking loading docks, glog-k- 32 The Friendly Place to Stay! OAK RIDGE POND RENTALS Attachment 14 P80. BOX 10859 WHITE BEAR LAKE, MN 55110 612) 433-3621 FAX (612) 433 -4017 August :11, 1994 VIA FACSIMILE Mr. Kenneth Roberts, Associate Planner City of Maplewood 1830 E. County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Re: Response to Proposed Gonyea Company Development Dear Mr. Roberts: Thank you for the information you sent August 1 regarding the proposed change of Zoning in our neighborhood. As I stated in the enclosed survey, I object to the proposal from Gonyea Company. Our industrial park building has tenants who are manufacturers, wholesalers and service businesses. There is traffic on our property and it is very active. In the future, our main tenant has shown serious interest in having us build an addition on to our building which would extend the building to the west, and right into the proposed new residential development. I expect we would have problems with neighbors complaining about our addition, noise, traffic and building lights at night, and this is NOT a desirable situation. Please keep me advised on this matter. I will strongly oppose any change in the zoning for this neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Charisse M. Hall Property Manager cmh PS Please note our change in address: James M. Muellner dba Oak Ridge Pond Rentals P.O. Box 10859 White Bear Lake, M N 55110 33 Attachment 15 October 8, 1994 Mr, Kenneth Roberts Associate Planner City of Maplewood Dear Kenneth, OCT I attended the recent public hearingMapleleaf .Estates g egarding the proposeddevelopment. I did not speak at the meeting, but I w • comet g would like you to share9commentswiththeappropriateCitypersonnel: the followin I. I thought the presentation rovidwelldone. p ed by Geoff Olson was 2.As many stated at the meeting,the extension of g Forest street,the extension of Cyprus street park. I am strongly opposed to and I am concerned about due to the location of the I agree that the City should evaluate •access options toeastandthesouthoftheproposeddevelopment. 1 am mainly opposed to the extensionbe -cause I feel of Forest streettheCitydoeshaveothertrafficroutingtangOptionsforthisdevelopment, I think that the frontageroadtotheeastandKellerParkwaytothesouthcouldfeedmuchofthetrafficintothenewdevelopment.pment Existing traffic is relatively light light y g on the frontageroad, and very ght on Keller Parkway south of theproposeddevelopmentascomparedtoCountyRoadCandForest. There is very little residential developmentalongtheseroads,.so more traffic should not be ofconcernasitwouldbeonCountyCandForest, I agree that the City should explorep an access road fromtheEast,perhaps running thru the area of the existingdriveintheater. I also supportPp a access road off ofKellerParkwayfromthesouth. 34 Concern was expressed over how an access road from theeastwouldbepaidfor. I would like to know what theincrementalcostofsucharoadwouldbeand .how itmightbepaidfor. Does the City have the ability tospendmoreonsucharoadinrecognitionofthehighertaxbaseassociatedwiththeexistingndproposedmeat? Co g P p seddevelopment? Could the neighborhood pay for it? If possible, I would like to receive a co the trafcopy f isplanforthePhaseIdevelopment, and I would like toreceiveothertrafficrelatedinformationwithrespectPhaseIIasitbecomesavailable P t to 31D Someone on Brooks court expressed concern about excessivetreeremovalonthelotstothesouthofBrookscourtduetothegradingplan. I got the impression that trees mayberemovedtosatisfycityordinancewheninfact- they y ycouldremainwithsomeminordeviationsfromompolicy. Iwouldencouragethecitytospendsometimeandmoneyevaluatinghowmoreofthetreescouldb •e saved, - whileStillprovidingforacceptabledrainageetc. 4. Naturally, I hope that the City can acquire thdiscussedforopenspace q e land 5, with this additional development, it seems reasonablethatmorefundswillbeaddedfortheark. I would lighted to P uld liketoseeali9tenniscourt, and was encouraged to hearthattheCitymaybuildone. Thank you for your consideration of these p oints. Sikere l Jeff and Heidi Severson and family926PalmCircle Maplewood, MN 55109 797 -3404 -work 35 Attachment 16 LAND USE :PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Dennis Gonyea applied for a change to the City's land use plan. This change is from R -1S (small lot single dwellings) and M -1 (light manufacturing) to R -1 (single dwellings). V`TI-IEREAS, the City staff is proposing to drop the collector designation on Forest Street. WHEREAS, this change applies to the property south of Brooks Court between Forest and Cypress Streets north of Gervais Avenue in Section 9, Township 29, Range 22. WEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: I . The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 3, 1994. 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. The City Council discussed the plan amendment on , 1994. They considered reports and recommendations from the Planning Commission and City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approve the above- described change for the following reasons: 1. The developer is proposing to develop the site for single dwellings. 2. This change would reduce the allowable intensity and traffic from this site. 3. The R -1 classification would be more compatible with the surrounding homes than the present classifications. 4. .Forest Street would no longer serve as a major collector street. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on , 1994. 36 Attachment 17 RESOLUTION: ZONING MAP CHANGE WHEREAS, Dennis Gonyea applied for a change in the zoning map from F (farmresidential), R -1S (small lot single dwellings) and M -1 (light manufacturing) to R -1 (singledwellings). WHEREAS, this change applies to the ro ert south of BrooksppY Court between Forest andCypressStreetsnorthofGervaisAvenue. The legal description i •g s. The East half of the Southeast quarterquarteroftheNorthwest f 'q o Section 9, Township 29 North,Range 22 West, Ramsey County, Minnesota except the North 3 96 feeteet thereof and except theSouth290.4 feet of the East 240 feet thereof and except the South 'p 13 5 feet lying West of the East240feetthereof, and Lots 4 through 6, Block 1; Lots 1 through 14 Block 3 ' vacatedted Brooks Avenue, Meadow LaneandthevacatedConnerAvenue, all in Peters Addition according to the recorded plat, RamseyCounty, Mn. and The North twenty -four (N. 24) rods of the East half of the East half of the Southeast quarter oftheNorthwestquarter (E 1/2 of E 1/2 of SE 1/4 of NW 1/4); ), and that part of the East half of theEasthalfoftheNortheastquarteroftheNorthwestuarterEq ( 1/2 of E 1/2 of NE 1/4 of NW 1/4)described as: beginning at the SW corner thereof thence East to the Southeast corner thereof;thence North along the East line thereof Four (4) rods thenc a Southwesterly to the place ofbeginning, all in Section Nine (9), Townshi Twent •-nine (29 • p y ), Range Twenty -two (22), subs ectto. easements of record including agreement in 41 Misc. 574 and Southwest quarter of SoutheastquarteroftheNorthwestquarterofSection9, Township 9 North Rangep 22 West, RamseyCounty, Minnesota, and The South 321.27 feet of the East 199.10 feet fo the Southeast quarter oftheSouthwestquarterofNorthwestuarterofSection9Townshipqownship29North, Range 22 West,Ramsey County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: 1 On October 3, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended thatat the City Councilapprovethechange. 2. On October 1994, the City. Council held a public hearing. The 'p g e City staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding propertygpprty owners.The Council gave everyone at the hearing an opportunity to speak and present written statements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations 'p ons from the City staffandPlanningCommission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City ouncil •y approve the above - describedchangeinthezoningmapforthefollowingreasons: 37 1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose 'p , p rp and intent of the zoning code. 2. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboringpropertyorfromthecharacteroftheneighborhood, and that the use of the propertyadjacenttothe - area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. 3. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences 'e ces of the community,Where applicable, and the public welfare. 4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, 'g p g .cal, efficient, andeconomicalextensionofpublicservicesandfacilities, such as ublic water, sewers,ers,police and fire protection and schools. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on 1994. 38 Attachment 18 VACATION RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Dennis Gonyea, representing on ea Corporation Inc.,g Y rp c. applied for the vacationofthefollowingdescribedstreets: 1. That part of Connor Avenue east of the east right-of-way figye of Cypress Street, all ofMeadowLanebetweenConnorAvenueandBrooksAvenueandallofBrooksAvenuebetweenMeadowAvenueandthevacatedCyStreet 'yp as dedicated as part of thePetersAdditioninSection9, Township 9 Range 22p g 2. The 16.5- foot -wide undeveloped public road between the east is de of Meadow Lane andtheeastsideoftheproposedplatsitethatdividesPIN09-29-22-24-00012240001 as noted inBook636, Page 556. 3. The west 77 feet of the Gervais Avenue fight-of-way that isgy west of the west 1 /2 of the east 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of Section 9, Township 9 Range 22.p g WHEREAS, the history of this vacation is as follows: I . On October 3, 1994, the Planning Commission recommend •ed that the City Councilapprovethisvacation. 2. On October 1994, the City Council held a ublic he 'p hearing. The City staff published anoticeintheMaplewoodReviewandsentanoticetotheabutting gave g p operty owners. TheCouncilgeeveryoneatthehearingachancetospeakandpresentwrittenstatements.The Council also considered reports and recommendations 'from the City staff andPlanningCommission. WHEREAS, after the City approves this vacation public ' •cp .interest in the property will go tothefollowingabuttingproperties: 1. Lots 1 -14, Block 3 of Peters Addition 2. Lot 6, Block 1 of Peters Addition 3. The North 396 feet of part of east 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the - onandalsoatriangulartractadj . on N being 1 /4 East of Peters Add in and measuring 66 f 'g g feet on the east line of the east1/4 of NE 1/4 of NW 1/4 all in Section 9, Township 9 Rangege 22. 4. The south 10 acres of the west 1/2 of the east 1/2 of the •NW 1/4 of Section 9, Township 29,Range 22 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Cou •y c approve the above - describedvacationsforthefollowingreasons: 39 I. It is in the public interest. 2. The City has no plans to build streets on these rights -of -Way. 3. The adjacent properties have street access. This vacation is subject to the City retaining a 25- foot -wide utility easement over the east end of Gervais Avenue. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on , 1994. 40 Attachment 19 VARIANCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Dennis Gonyea applied .for a variance from the subdivisionslon ordinance. WHEREAS, this variance applies to the ro posed cul -de -sac appt the east end of DemontAvenue. WHEREAS, Section 30- 8(b)(3) of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances requiresequires a right -of -waydiameterof120feetforcul -de -sacs. WHEREAS, the applicant is ro osin a diameterppg of 100 feet. WHEREAS, this requires a variance of twenty feet. WHEREAS, the history of this variance is as follows: 1 On October 3, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended that the 'City Council approve this variance. 2. On October 24, .1994, 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 writtenstatements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations from the City staffandPlanningCommission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City ouncil approvetyppe the above - describedvarianceforthefollowingreasons: 1. The variance would save part of a wetland. 2. The City Engineer stated that the cul -de -sac would be large enough for snow - plowing. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on 1994. 4.1 Attachment 20 MAPLELEAF ESTATES PROPOSED SITE PLAN MODIFICATIONS AUGUST, 1994 We, the homeowners of Carsgrove :Meadows and surrounding areas stronglyfeelthereshouldbemodificationsmadetotheMapleleafEstatesproposedsiteplanbeforewecanfullysupportthat. plan. . The existing plan is not acceptable for the following •o g reasons. 1.) Extending Forest Street beyond it's present ending point would forever change the character of one of Maplewood's most beautiful neighborhoods. Greatly increased traffic flow would diminish the safety of our neighborhood in general, not to mention unnecessarily putting our children at afar greater risk. 2.) Development of the entire tract of land would further the destruction of habitat and wildlife and destroy some of the natural beauty of Maplewood. 3.) The result of effectively doubling the number of homes in a small area would increase the burden on our already vercrowded schoolsY as well as increase crime, and increase demand on ublic services suchP as police, fire, and street maintenance. Increased water ollution wouldpud also stress existing wetlands and surrounding lakes. The below signed residents would fully 8 U P p o rt the development of Mapleleaf Estates only if the below mentioned modifications are made to the proposed plan We firmly believe the following refinements would help to maintain the character of the existing neighborhood and still allow the developer to create a highly marketable community. 1 .) Leave Forest Street exactly as is. Build another entrance to the development at Gervais-This will lessen the negative impact on the safety and character of the existing community. 2.) Rezone entire tract of land as R1 (as presently proposed). 3.) Reduce the number of new lots. This will reduce the negative impact of higher density. 42 4.} Leave "Open Space" or build a Community Park on proposed lots 9 -15 and on the end of Forrest (encourage community use only by not having a parking. lot). This would enhance the livability. of Maplewood by blending nicely with the existing parks along Spoon Lake and Keller Lake. A "buffer" in this location would also help to maintain the character of the existing community. 43 i l • •m In Pf. 4t irt j/ri • ff 1E.1'!0 R. um • Is . M ANN" . K•ILMson s ft am$ 11LO c 7Ki,LS. 466 IM I 1 elm 40M dow mob MOM OMM 7( 1 t 1 1 t Ale • 11 Now N R* r 1 # we * wo wtMaw" ow • p"...r by 0. . .w. fog ~ r sNr. •J ? 2 E • " y OWN A now Ammons" 0 s. s , ern r mom mom m AND a.. u..44 . Mw ...... n.. .r•• VICINITY o 41m. I MMw Ol 1110*+ ftAt 1a[ ft Pont twt l 44 NAME ADDRESS 2 000,00 7 3 C W J-04 7 `,i l Y v 9 lei IIIL ViD V 14 15 45 NAME ADDRESS Mc 41 dL 23 24 zs 26 oo' 31 3E n Pn.\ j , pclt.c_ C l f t I Vh ,i '- Wo NAME ADDRESS 40 V N/i.li / i0)mti" "I O 7 6c I;Q/4 as 3 6 . l C ;,, Y 44 Q 7 , 45 lC/zl /C /O i / /"). d/ /lL '- 9le 4 =114a 47 Cz trtr as y 22L2 lam` 49 50 5 53 '>N Q P 974 7A/ es_ 56 57_ 47 s, sx (X" 63 F y 6 AA LM c T, 64 d PA LM «. aeon LIZ 66 V A N VFW L*N u / J Lo Loaf 2 73 1.4 IoLo Co. 74 75 vxo 4 wPk S.01 aeon NAME ADDRESS fns 641 /1 C eat41 ro -r. 79 1 80 81 ej. - 4.., (2000/ 83 c4i sa 1 Mu ,4 E e, man- q7 e$ 7 as 97 j "15d .o `..,o.. r-IVe. 92 " g3 - /so be,^n"f 49 NAME ADDRESS 50 1 1 AM if-e s 1 1. VA OF i I t e I All 50 NAME ADDRESS 115 5 V AA .s.Q •. T 122 124 125 126 130 Z. N 131 IAA I 2-- _2 132 rvu flt ' - 133 C 7 51 cc5 YC Cf yg NAME 134 ' r- 135 10136 137 - 138 139 140 i 141 cef . 142 ADDRESS G 4/0 Ke le P L IEI c L lr7(1 toz %AW 4 5-A 4 P 150 151 152 52 as `- °U -'1 -c; 1 n 2lo I It ' GQ Ilea- ,1'L\1 MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION October 3, 1994 7 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers 1830 East County Road B L N, Call to Order irperson Axdahl called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. 11. Rolkall Commi Toner Lester Axdahl Present Commis ner Lorraine Fischer Present Commissio' r Jack Frost Present Commissione evin Kittridge Present Commissioner ve Kopesky Present Commissioner M Martin Absent Commissioner Gary eazson Present Commissioner Willi Rossbach Present Commissioner Todd S ell Present Commissioner Marvin Si undik Present III, APPROVAL OF MINUTE A. September 19, 1994 Commissioner Fischer m d submitted. val of the minutes of September 19, 1994 as Commissioner DCarson seconded The moti9llpassed. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA es- -all Co issioner Fischer moved approval of the agenda as su fitted. ommissioner Sigmundik seconded Ayes - -all V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Mapleleaf Estates (Forest and Cypress Streets) Planning Commission Minutes of 10-03-94 2 Secretary Olson presented the staff report and answered questions from the Commission. In addition to the four requests listed in the report, Mr. Olson stated theqp , developer is also asking for a right -of -way variance to allow a 100 -foot rather than the required 120 -foot diameter cul -de -sac at the end of Demont Street because of a small wetland there. Mr. Olson discussed how the pMaplewoodOpenSpace Plan couldpp affect this development area. He mentioned the drainage plan should be adequate when easements are obtained and also that Kohlman Park is scheduled for upgradingper' g in 1995 which should serve the entire area. Secretary Olson stated that he asked the developer to phase this project and table development of a portion until the city makes a decision open ace. The developer agreed to this request and will allow the city, on the second phase, an extension to the state law that requires action on a lat within 120 days of a lication.p Pp Mr. Olson revised the staff recommendation to include approval of a variance from pp120to100feetforthecul -de -sac on Demont Street and also a roval of the preliminary plat, but only for the area including Block 1, Lots 1 -17 of Block 2, Blocks 3 through 4, and Lots 1- 8 of Block 5. Mr. Olson also recommended the balance of the preliminary plat be tabled until the first Planning ommission meetingg in January. Chairperson Axdahl opened the public hearing for comments from the public. Larry Olson of Midwest Land Surveyors and Civil Engineers, the engineers on the project,g p J answered questions and stated that a mitigation plan, to be. approved by the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed Board, would be prepared. Dennis and Tom GonY ea the developers, were also present. Jim Traeger, 2612 Forest Street, spoke about the wetlands and expressed opposition to this development. Mark Peters 948 Brooks Court, spoke against the project. Don Huot, 988 East County Road C, was concerned about increased traffic on County Road C. John Swenson, 2595 Cypress Street questioned the engineer about the additional traffic and water problems on Cypress. Rita Huot, 999 East County Road C, spoke against the development. Dr. Steve Kuslich, a property owner in the area, discussed various aspects of the proposal.p p p Mark Warner, 990 Connor Avenue, asked Mr. Larry Olson about a wetland survey site visit on April 28, 1994 and was concerned about several issues. Kath Kornmann, 982 Connor Avenue, spoke in favor of opening up the service road for the new development. Al Carlson, 946 Connor Avenue asked about the radin andgg removal of trees. Mary Johnson, 978 Brooks Court, also questioned the removal of trees. Dick Seppala, 2462 Forest Street, spoke against the Jro'ect. Diane Carlson 946p Connor Avenue, asked about the repair of Gervais Avenue. Gene Lund, corner of Highway 61 and Gervais, spoke about Gervais Avenue reconstruction. Jim Planning Commission Minutes of 10 -03 -94 3 Wahlstrand, 972 Brooks Court, suggested alternate routes for traffic. Dave Kornmann, 982 Connor Avenue, requested that traffic be routed to 'q Gervals Avenue. Theresa Huot, 988 East County Road C, spoke of traffic and water problems in the area. Mark Larson, 894 Connor Court, asked for clarification of the p pro osed cul -de- sac and commented on the traffic and drainage. Andy Zuercher, representing the. property owner of 2483 Highway 61 asked aboutgY the buffer zone. Judy Schenian, 2550 Forest Street, development.spoke against the developgp Peter Dey, 966 Brooks Court, preferred that the area be ace. developed for open sppp Dennis Larson, manager of the Maple .Leaf Drive -In Theater, explained the theater driveway and spoke of the view In the area. Joe Varber , 960 Brooks Court, suggested that the plans be reconsidered to address citizen concerns. Pat Jondahl 938 Demont Avenue, also wanted further study. done on the lan. Jerry Herrin er Maplep Y g p Leaf Drive In Theater. (fee owners of the property), spoke for the develo ment. Johnpp Wieremann, 95.5 Brooks Court, asked about the change from a through street to a cul- de -sac on Demont Street and questioned the capacity of the wetlands. Bob Blaufuss 962 East Demont was concerned With traffic issues but favored the rezoning to R -1.g Dennis - Gonyea, the developer, explained that certain treespecies are not counted.p Since there were no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Kopesky, a resident of the area for man earsyyears, about traffic and drainage on Cypress Street. Commissioner Pearson asked if cul -de -sacs could be built on Forest Street so it would not be a through street. Secretarytary Olson stated that two means of ingress and egress are required to a development. Commissionerp Fischer questioned the traffic count on County Road C. Ken Haider, Director of Public Works, responded that it was 2550 averse daily traffic atgy County Road C and about Cypress Street according to a 1993 traffic count. The Commission also discussed tahe feasibility of tabling the project and requesting additional information. Commissioner Kittridge moved the Planning Commission table the project andpJ direct staff to come back with some answers to egress and further information on open space. There was no second to the motion. The Commission discussed the requirements of the shoreland ordinance as it appliedto1pplotsinthisdevelopment. They also questioned traffic on Gervais Avenue near the warehouse area. Commissioner Rossbach moved the Planning Commission recommend the CityCouncil: Planning Commission Minutes of 10 -03 -94 4 A. Adopt the resolutions changing the land use plan and zoning map from R -1 S small lot single dwellings) and M -1 (light industrial) to R -1 (single dwellings). The resolution also drops the major collector designation for Forest Street. This change is for the Mapleleaf Estates plat. In addition to the findings required by the Code, this change is for the following reasons: 1. The developer is proposing to develop the site for single dwellings. 2. This change would reduce the allowable intensity and traffic from this site. 3. The R -1 classification would be more compatible with the surrounding homes than the present classifications. 4. Forest Street would no longer serve as a major collector Street. Commissioner Fischer seconded Ayes -- Axdahl, Fischer, Sandell Rossbach Pearson, Frost Nays-- Sigmundik, Kopesky, Kittridge The motion passed. Commissioner Rossbach further moved the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council: B. Adopt the resolution vacating the undeveloped street rights -of -way (Connor Avenue east of Cypress Street, Meadow Lane, Brooks Avenue the 16.5-foot- wide undeveloped public road and the west end of Gervais Avenue). The Cit should vacate these street rights -of -way because: 1. It is in the public interest. 2. The City has no plans to build streets on these rights -of -way. 3. The adjacent properties have street access. This vacation is subject to the City retaining a 25- foot -wide utility easement over the east end of Gervais Avenue. Commissioner Kopesky seconded Ayes - -all The motion passed. Planning Commission Minutes of 10 -03 -94 5 Commissioner Fischer moved the Planning Commission: C. Table the request to vacate the utility asement that would btY eon the property line of Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block b of the proposed plat until Jan 23 1995.January , Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes - -all The motion passed. Commissioner Rossbach moved the Planning Commission recommend the City Council: D. Adopt the resolution approving a cul -de -sac width variance for a cul -de -sac at the end of the existing Demont Avenue for the following reasons: 1. The variance would save part of a wetland. 2. The City Engineer stated that the cul -de -sac would be large enough forgg snow - plowing. Commissioner Frost seconded Ayes- -all The motion passed. Commissioner Rossbach moved that the Planning Commission recommend City Council: E. Approve the following parts of the Mapleleaf Estates prelimina platlat ( received by the City on July 26, 1994): Block 1; Block 2, Lots 1 -17; Block 3 • Block 4 Lots 1 -3 and Block 5, Lots 2--8. Table the remain rts of the plat untilgpp January 23, 1995. Before the City erCouncilapprovesthefinalplat, a developerp shall complete the follovving conditions: 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 and street identification Planning Commission Minutes of 10-03-94 .6 signs. d. Install permanent signs around the edge of the wetland buffer easements. These signs shall mark the edge of the easements and shall state there shall be no mowing, vegetation cutting, filling or durn ingg . p g e. Install survey monuments along the wetland boundaries. f. Have NSP install street lights in three locations, primarily at street intersections. The exact location and type of lights shall be subject to the City Engineer's approval. g. Construct Demont Avenue, east of Cypress Street, after the City decides how much open space they will buy. 2. 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. 3 . * Have the City Engineer approve .final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, trail and street plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: a. The erosion control plan shall be consistent with the Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District Erosion and Sediment Control handbook. b. . The grading plan shall: 1) Include proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site. 2) Include contour information for the land that the street construction will disturb. 3) Show sedimentation basins as required by the watershed board. C. The drainage plan shall show area drain .catch basins between Lots 5 and 10, Block 3 and dedicate necessary easements for these drains and pipes. d. Provide stormwater storage and/or an off -site outlet pipe between Planning Commission Minutes of 10-03-94 7 Outlots A and B, based on a drainage study done by the developer's engineer. The City Engineer shall approve the exact location, capacity and outlet for this storage. If the City requires more pond capacity, the developer may have to drop lots. The lots shall meet the Shoreland requirements. e. Provide adequate stormwater capacity for the wetlands on Lots 19 and 26, Block 2. The developer's engineer shall provide a drainage study to determine adequate capacity. The City Engineer shall approve the exact location, capacity and outlet for these. If the City requires more pond capacity, the developer may have to drop a lot(s). f. The tree plan shall show the size, species and location of any trees that the developer will plant as replacement trees. 4. Show the following changes on the final plat: 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. Change Street C to Demont Avenue and change Street D to Adele Street. C. Drainage easements for drainage areas and wetlands that this project would affect. This shall include an easement on the lot that will be south of Lot 19, Block 2. d. Drop Lots 1,2 or 3 from Block One or channel the drainage between outlots A and B through a drainage pipe. e. If the City buys the west half of the site for open space, the developer should connect Demont Avenue to Cypress Street. If this connection is made, the developer should redesign the Demont Avenue/Cypress Street intersection with a four -way design. If the City has not decided about the open space purchase when the developer is read to finalpY plat, the developer shall show Lot 1, Block 5 and Lot 4, Block 4 as as an outlot. The outlot shall be large enough for two lots and a cul -de- sac. 5. Show the wetland boundaries on the final plat as approved b the WatershedY District. Planning Commission Minutes of 10 -03 -94 8 6.* Provide all easements required by the City Engineer. These shall include: a. Give the City wetland easements over the wetlands. These easements shall cover the. wetlands and any land within twenty feet surrounding a wetland. The easement shall prohibit any building or structures within twenty feet of the wetland or any mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within ten feet of the wetland or within the wetland itself. The purpose of this easement is to protect the water quality of the wetlands from homeowners' fertilizer and to protect the wetland habitat from residential encroachment. b. Drainage easements for the off -site drainage areas and wetlands that this project would affect. This shall include an easement on the lot that will be south of Lot 19, Block 2. If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the City maywaiveanyconditionsthatdonotapplytothefinalplat. The developer must complete these conditions before the City issues a grading permit or approves the final plat. Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes -- Fischer, Sandell, Rossbach, Pearson, Sigmundik, Kopesky, Frost Nays -- Axdahl, Kittridge The motion passed. cretary Olson noted that the Maplewood City Council will he item on Oc er 24, 1994. B. Conditiona e Permit: Goodrich Dome (Van e Street and Ripley Avenue) Ken Roberts, Associa lanner, prese d the staff report and directed the PlanningConunission to s o e conditional use and the use of the ro epP rty• Fred Paul, representing Kels terprises, answered questions and assured the Commission that the fa wou a paying various taxes. Bill Dewitt of Kelse Enterprises, Greg , Director of sey County Parks and Recreation Kevin Finley, Direct f Operations for Ramsey unty Parks, and Gary Hook of Kraus Anderson a contractor, were also present to wer uestions. The applicantqpp prese a sketch of the proposed building. The ission discussed the appearance of the building and its suitabili t to this lo c ' on. AGENDA REPORT City Manager Assistant City Engineer LLt AGENDA ITEM Acti by COUA,411 I Endorse Modified Re j ected... Date SUBJECT: Project 93 -14, Searle Street Storm Sewer— Assessment Hearin g Appealseals DATE: October 18, 1994 Staff has reviewed the appeals filed for the aforementioned 1ro'ect. The notice ofp objection letter has been attached for your information. A separate letter to staff referencing both the assessments and the negotiating of easements for said project hasg9pj also been included. The recommendations are as follows: PIN: 8 -29 -22-43 -0035; Trinity Baptist Church Said property was proposed to be assessed the following Storm sewer (commercial) 84,707 sq. ft @ $0.10 each = X8 Total $8,470.70 This portion of the church's property currently sheet flows across the parkin g lot to the existing pond at the south end of their property. The proposed improvement would include catch. basins within the arkin lot to decrease thepg amount of sheet flow, particularly at. the main entrance to the parking lot. The staff recommendation is to have the assessment remain as original) proposed.originally p PIN: 8- 29 -22 -43 -0038; Trinity Baptist Church Said property was proposed to be assessed the following:g Storm sewer (commercial) 23 sq. ft. @ $0.10 each $2 ,392,20 Total $2 This heavily wooded parcel is adjacent to the ponding area that is proposed to be improved. Overland drainage from this parcel contributes direct) to the andYp and would be addressed by the improvement. Staff recommends no revision to the assessment. This parcel is also the subject of permanent easement needed for the construction and maintenance of said improvement. Due to the numerous mature, desirable trees on the parcel, the storm sewer alignment has been 2 October 19, 1994 proposed to have the smallest effect on the trees. This alignment crosses the parcel at an angle, potentially negating the usefulness of a portion of said parcelp in . excess of the ten -foot wide easement itself. Because the parcel is vacant and potentially developable, the affected area with need of compensation for said easement becomes 10,670.88 square feet. The parcel was appraised in 1990 at a value of $0.78 per square foot. Total compensation for the easement ap t that rate would be $8,323.29. Staff recommends that com p ensation in this amount be approved for said easement. PIN: 8 -29 -22-43 -0034; Trinity Baptist church No assessment was proposed for this parcel. A majority f the neededY easement area is included within it. A portion of the proposed alignment of the easement parallels and is adjacent to an existing water main easement alon g the eastern edge of. the church parking lot. The remainder of the proposed easement within the parcel encompasses an existin g g Ydrainageway. Due to the proposed alignment only slightly limiting the usefulness of the property, based both on existing uses and existing easements, compensation for this permanentpp easement should be comparable to utility easements acquired recently on commercial properties within the city. An amount of $0.25 per qs uare foot for the 8,551.5- square foot permanent easement, totalin g $2,137.88 , is recommended by staff for compensation. PIN: 8- 29- 22- 43- 0039; Dr. J. Richard Burton Said property was proposed to be assessed the following:g Storm (residential) 1 unit $525 each 52 Total $525.00 An appeal for this parcel was not received, but it is involved in regards to easement acquisition. Due to the storm sewer alignment chosen to avoid the desirable trees, a small portion of Dr. Burton's ro ert is needed as appY permanent easement. Dr. Burton has requested $75.00 as compensation for the permanent easement. Staff recommends said compensation amount. RAM jC Attachments le September 30, 1994 Lucille E. Aurelius City Clerk City of Maplewood 1830 E. County Road B. Maplewood, Mn. 55109. Re: Notice of Objection of Special Assessment for D P No. 6420; Project No. 93 -14 Searle Street Storm Sewer City Council of Maplewood Public. Hearin g of October 10, 1994 Please take notice, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Annotated 429.061, Trinity BaptisttYP Church, as owner, hereby objects to the Special Assessments for the reference project against the following Statement of Assessment parcels described as PIN number 08-29-22-43 - 0035 and 08- 29 -22 -43 -0038. B Dave Nelson Chair, Board of Stewards Trinity Baptist Church TBCsew2) September 29, 1994 19940 Russ A. Matthys Assistant City Engineer ;...:.:..., City .of Maplewood _ ---- _ _ __ -___ 1830 E. County Road B. Maplewood, Mn. 55109 Re: D/P No. 6420; Project No. 93 1M14 Searle Street Storm Sewer Thank you for the. opportunity to meet with you on Tuesday, September 27, 1994, to discuss the project including the easements necessary for the project and the assessments proposed. After discussing the project with the governing board of Trinity Baptist Church (TBC) we propose the following: TBC will sign the attached Right of Entry and Construction Agreement covering parts of PIN 08- 29 -22 -43 -0034 and 08- 29 -22 -43 -0038: provided, that the value of the easements as described in the Right of Ent ry and Construction Agreement covering parts of PIN 08- 29 -22 -43 -0034 and 08-29- 22 -43- 0038, are equal to or exceed the dollar amount of the assessments as shown in the Statement of Assessment for the referenced ro•ect for parcels PIN 08- 29 -22 -43 -0035P and 08- 29 -22 - 43 - 0038, in the respective amounts of $8,470.70 and $2,392.20, for the referenced project; and further provided, that PIN 08- 29 -22 -43 -0035 and 08- 29 -22 -43 -0038 shall be considered in their entirety to be previously assessed for all future Storm Sewer projects, For purposes of indicating your acknowledgement and agreement to the above ro osal, IPP have . included a signature line below on which you can affix your signature. Some practical consideration of the project, should it proceed: 1. That the construction be performed during he work - week (monday-friday) g and in the event construction is not completed within the work week, temporary access be provided over the weekend to Edgerton Street and County Road B. 2. That the. conveying documents for the easements be prepared by the City of Maplewood and reviewed with the owner and upon signature by the owner, be recorded at the Ramsey County Recorders Office, and at the City of Maplewood. expense. 3. The payment for the easements be paid to the TBC on or before November 10, 1994, so 4 that TBC shall be permitted to pay the assessments as stated herein, without enal ofAty interest. Finally, I would like you to understand, that in order for TBC to retain it s• rights under the r law, in the event that this proposal is found not to be acceptable to the City of Maplewood, TBC shall being filing with the City Clerk of Maplewood a written objection of the assessments as previously stated herein. Thank you for your consideration. Should you want to discuss this matter, p lease call me at 266 -8860. Sincerely, Dave Nelson Chair, Board of Stewards Trinity Baptist Church cc:.Dr. Dale Saxon Dr. Dick Burton Mr. Allen Johnson Mrs. Shirley Johnson By signing below, I acknowledge that the City f Maplewood is in full agreement of thetyAg proposal as stated above. TBCsewl) AGENDA ITEM dz AGENDA REPORT Aotzon by Council Endorsed TO:. City Manager odlie FROM: Assistant City Engineer ] Rejected toDa SUBJECT: Project 94 -06, East Shore Drive Storm -Sewer Improvements-- Assessment Hearing Appeals DATE: October 18, 1994 Staff has reviewed the four appeals filed for said improvement. The appeals have been attached for your information. The recommendations are as follows: PIN: 16- 29 -22 -31 -0013; Gunhilde S. Koreen, Paul S. Koreen Said property was proposed to be assessed the following:g Storm sewer 1 Unit @ $525 each = 525 Total $525 Ms Koreen addresses the issue of compensation for a drainage easementpg needed as part of the proposed improvement project.. Staff concurs with her request. for compensation, but definitely feels that the parcel would benefit from the proposed storm sewer improvement and thus justify the assessment. Due to the lack of grading or physical change to Ms. Koreen's arcel. her songp and she have agreed to accept compensation in the amount of $525 from the city for the drainage easement. with the council's approval, upon receip of thePppp compensation, the assessment would be paid in full. Mr. Koreen has requested that the council grant him permission to use said drainage easement in any manner that does not interfere with the ur ose of thepp easement. Staff recommends that a license of use be included with the $525 as compensation for the drainage easement. PIN: 16 -29 -22-42 -0084; Stanley P. Kralik Said property was proposed to be assessed the following: Storm sewer 1 unit @ $525 each = 525 Total $525 Project 93 -14 2 October 19 1994 Mr. Kralik's objections seem to indicate some miscommunication or misunderstanding in regards to his notification and involvement with the proposed project. Regardless, the assessment p rocess followed Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 appropriately. The 30 day period he refers to is also p art of the same Minnesota Statutes. Due to the fact that his property contributes to the drainage being addressed by the improvement, his assessment should not be revised. PIN: 16- 29 -22 -42 -0085; Robert S. and Nancy Evans Said property was proposed to be assessed the following: Storm sewer 1 unit @ $525 each = 525 Total $525 The Evan's objections seem to stem from a past improvement ro'ect. Theirpproject. references to a procedural flaw are incorrect based on the state statutes regulating assessments and the associated improvement Jro'ects. Runoff fromp their property contributes to the drainage that would be addressed by the Proposed storm sewer project. Their assessment should not be revised. PIN: 16- 29 -22 -42 -0090; Gary R. Meyer Said property was proposed to be assessed the followin 9 Storm sewer 1 unit @ $525 each = 25 Total $525 Mr. Meyer raises concerns that also seem to refer to a revious project, otherppJ than the project being assessed. His comments regarding the one month period to pay the full assessment without interest are addressed b Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. All assessments. on this project may be paid off over a 20 -year period, a very small annual installment. Mr. Meyer also seems to have misunderstood his role within the ro'ectpJ development. His parcel contributes drainage that would be addressed by the improvement and should not be excluded from the assessment roll. PIN: 16- 29 -22 -31 -0011; Paul S and Mary Rae Koreen Said property was proposed to be assessed the following: t f i r 4 k Project 94 -06 3 October 19 1994 Storm. sewer 1 unit $525 each = 525 Total $525 The Koreens did not appeal their assessment. Their p arcel does contain the entire easement proposed for the storm sewer pipe. Through negotiations with staff for the. acquisition of permanent utility and drainage easements, the havegY requested $525 for compensation for said easements. This would equate approximately $0.10 per square foot of easement. The council has approved equivalent compensation for similar easements in the recent past. After the receipt of said compensation, the Koreens would p a Y their assessment in full. Staff recommends $525 for compensation to Mr. and Mrs. Koreen for the permanent easements on their property. RAM % y October ] 0, 199+ Maplewood City Council 183 E. County Road B Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 RE: 16 29 22 31 0013.8 Dear Council Members In regards to the East Shore Drive Storm Sewer Public Improvement Project #'94 - 06, I feel .I should be compensated for the taking of .my band for a drainage easement. No easement was granted when the Adele Street Storm Sewer Project was "dumped ". on to my land. whether or not this land was a wetland before this Project was done, your addition of a storm sewer on to this.private proper With no easement was wrong. . A one - time storm sewer assessment against the land could be done.but I.feel I should be compensated at least the. cost of the assessment. I am an 83 year old woman on a fixed income living in HUD Housing and this assessment would cause me financial hardship. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely 1 r t '1 unhild Koreen s av, V Q.l.LELCA fL a-000 uhnu ;ItAro- tom" ctli - a-- t. pro/ zt 1 LA) 5io 9 yo j AV-OV41 e C24 121a pub &te aolu 6 1 A041, Pao" puil q tnu%C^ /tt Q/YXAIrc -f/ l -VClei hOi -ter/ prcev. nof JPU- q - ZZS Ab gw r Alt PIP IF ou I r 1 AGENDA ITEM T . / AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager FROM: City Engineer SUBJECT: Driveway Approval Request - 936 Currie Court DATE: October 18, 1994 Aotion by Co1ancU v EndorseA UodifieA ReJecteA Date City Code Sec. 29 -120 requires that driveways have a five (5) foot setback from property lines. There are two ways to permit a lesser setback allowed in the Code. If the requesting party igets the permission of the adjacent owner, the staff can permit a lesser setback. If the adjacent owner objects to the lesser setback the city council may grant permission based on findings outlined in the code. Bruce and Paula Aherns are adding on to their garage at 936 Currie Court. As part of the construction the driveway needs to be extended. The driveway extension would be three(3) feet from the property line at the closest point. The neighbors at 946 Currie Court will not grant permission for the reduced setback. The Aherns are requesting the. city council allow the reduced setback. According to the ordinance the neighbors have been notified ten (10) days in advance of the October 24, 1994. meeting. The attached letter and drawing are the Aherns request. Based on the request and the considerations outlined in the code the request appears reasonable. G4. A 7 /Jr2i7FC5 cJ d.iu2icJr1 / r o5 Js'Q' ((s IG'\ !S J t iC1 l lL e 76(e () n1la't , 12. o,f fjwse rvewA pi J i ; N`C eGt Gt't2 a,, Pe 4- q R`y6 Al CCf..4A)CXi$ IN GP2 eoe w,us Ctn,v2/id f l i; s /. e ttie G9Se ii ge oLZ; 5 bcl .Z Gul /''v SeE UFr21ANcer- r_... ,. _ .,<. ....•...<w.. -..._. w,.- ,-- .+.....- ..-.: .. . : - .. :... .. .... ........<:vrn.....r•... w. .. ... re. ..- ._...,. .., .- ....,.+. _ .. •r.. ._. ... ., _.,. .. ... .-.. ... . -... <.. .......... .............. -'.... ..w. -... n...<... .'.! -... ........ .. .. .. .__.. . .o... . -._ .._ ....... _... _, a v.... ... .. ..- _... ..- ...._. .. f1. r... _._._. ._. N _." ..f.iR1F .7ANdMia•+ hi.x +..»,. n.. ..- _ .. AMS.• ---' ..i... . -v ....+a... .... _. _. .... .. r+.r.T..1r•rMr.rw ,.ywrwr. ... +...- rM^^...fw.uw.•+M - .. ,.r ... :,ai v ...++v:. +r...r:.rraK ., .!•.. '- .,. s- w.wr.. < i s' Y.>.. ..r.wwY..:.. +•rn..•1V+•.r... .. rry a . a_ 4+ M • ! aMMV>'..•.• .^. +•.•+... . rvnr++.-•.. .' w.+" w!• rYw< y. a-' .Yrra•..r•w.- w..wrr.{.••/< - v.. M... _.. A+./ r• r`0.•n•[T'..rYl.r.u.'ss.r.a.T ] r.' r. vwwrray. e.ft. • w. M••-- r. a•.. .rra..rr....r.r.•r_au- a+'... .- .+..• -. - ....... .. awwwTS ..a•nl...wrww- ...r +++sn.. rrY'r•v.+MaMs.... _r _.y1..yfiv.rs.r.M•./s. +.-. _+..•.wrlr. -..+n •t.- rir.+.- ._ . rn• r• Mlr+ 'T ^.'.•ae+r.•.r•a•+i•M.•n.•+4a _._. r..< - MYwrw '!- L.YwV••w.••/0..4•.• w...Vr w.w..a.. _s ..-. y... _.. r. .. a. r.r......r..•rs+ ••w.•w. -.w w. -.r. •. f•.. IMaMY- .s..rY..'r...ri.MV- rK.1mt.. fro+ rn+ -.s.. cur.. iar.:. r•.•<+ s+. r'aJ•.v.a-rr. +.xrnrw••+ra_.. rY.Na•+w•r•+• -r "::. M- +.+- w^'1- arrrwww.w+•.wtb ':- vn.+Mllt Yw a .rMnitlrr.•..rAMU n.._lYaPaM4Y'L • r m v. v .r...... .. .. narl.....••.r ... iw.•w.•Ra- ]r.w.e.nr• . .Mrrbs -W:!. ••vY _.+,e.+ .. w.v -..wa r. .r;. Y. .. r.. w.a.s..- . --w... ... -. -. ...y . .__.•t rn.r.t... _rw- r........ -.w. - ..rw.. -.- .•oI`MMY -._ •..Nwr•rv. ...I.iMM.'Y aV a. .: _. r. _....r•wv- v.- .._i•r.._. -. r..w«.uw.-r. -••. _- v.•r.. «•._- .9•..ur. _....... +. rTr- n .w.M:........- •Pt+/...r_.w.rtr ..rr.. . 'v.n.aa +Mr. .. ..n..r.rnw . cr.. a...ry..V..sw• -.f.. ._- wl....a:/....v .>nr; sr.+t -+. rvr. -. r .,Mtilrwv>-- .._= .w+++wwV.....wt .•ir....+rr -.. w!.. i. f- .1•'r.. v_r «. -!. .• r.w. vw..._r. .. -... .. r. -. ..sr .__..r...wlti ..._......w r..•r_..a wa..r''tY a.- w.wwr.r....r•.Y -. ;. . - w.- ....- Y.•.. -. ... -... i- .ar•rr -r.. a.r1...... .+.Y_.•+r P.r. -.-..v,. w.. ..0 r.. a..aY Yrr-' ... r..+.w..._. •.o... . -._ + r. yM+. rw. +l+ rw. e_ ww.+'.• rwr. wW__. i.TSe.a.1- u..- wM...iw.:_e.Cvr r+W- .- •w..w_.. _. _.._ _.... 1y.w... ... r 1 . .. . . ..,-- ._,..... r...- '....'. <.... -. .. _-. -.. ..._ .y _........._ _.. _,:.'_...t-.,...... a...»_....<..... ....<............. . r.:-.,._.. -.._,:.,.....--.....w...._,,,..-. r.,,...... „„ n,,_....... . y.-..:._... n'. a... a......._ w.. er.-•-- > -._, _.:,.,r,-- •,....-- .,w.w;.•• -. mar%._-"..-...,..--.'..• n..«,.........+:_.-... .,.- ..b.._._.'.,«- .........T .o- ....w..K.._.,,. -•. - __... . ,.. .._ .. .. _ .. r.n...,i...e..om+a -.+.....+ aso->-... awaiei. w•.•-. u>.. u..+. +..• iw+ ts.. n.., .. r, r,. s.... o. e..-,.. n- s«.+ w.. wvvrr..- ..,u....rn•.- w.xv.... -..• n ...•+. ara.e..,•a...s. ,.......»r... - ,.. _ . - .._.... -.. -. _.w. r.......,. e.. nyu> a...,.+ .....,-..+ a..• _- v .. .•.+r...o....a_.w- ...•,c...wv +,tea.+.- :«rr+- .-rrs.-.a....w w..:•-:..._e «e.n.emKVw.. »rrc w.-........ a.-++. s! w.+.. ir.--.-.. a. usw...-.._. ...+ A.. wa-. wc... r+. r;» n. .... cx- wti. w..... rr..... swv.. r-.. . nr+. w...•^.. M^ wv.+... s. ..+.+.as+..+.asY+r..++<w+.•r .•ss.+.....warcrx ari+ r++ a• ur'. atAW1P• rawu'-....•..:.+.•..-.. . cvrwr+ r- n. r. w.... w. rtA> wnvarr ..e+.w.............,.....__ ,... .._ - ._.. .. a . , ..r- ._.__+w -..- •. w. r,......-.. r.-. r.>.. n.... .<,w.+w+..+s+..,.•.:....•.+.. ...+ .r.: >.- ,n.,..wv.......w•. -w+_. .- •..•...u.,. - -- - -..,.. - e.. a ....+. k,,. w.... v-•..,...++. .- .......- ..........,w...,s_ rr . ....- ........,r,- .«r•..,.. - .r_.- ..v...... _y... -..... - ..- .......-+e. n......•._.. »......-..• . n„ w.... -•. + r..••-. r. +....r.•- .........T..e...w _..•.... -..._ . , ww. .......++. ....+.cy.w'.>,.+..•.....v -+. .. r.:.+n' <.w..r- vc- .._. -r. ......,r.«... - »>•._.._ ..__. •. ..._. ., .. _ w, a, s--.,,,, •... i,.-...--,-. ."^'YR^....*+..- a +_..w..rn.. w- ...- ..v:- rsrwc. - ..,..•.....r:..+aue.•iw. n ..•....-.. an... .....+•.s...'....e..- .._...+b ..- ....._..a_.., w. s- .o••.,- ..r•..r_- xww.• »_•cr .«. .r.- w. -.-. -. .. ..r-- .. -a-r.. .. .. ... -. __ - 34. Y3 1 i7, S 0;. S Ek, fZZ. : 7/6. `T A, le INVI 'I 11L o lb400 /,07 EL E F/R ST Tiew po 10 o Riv.wey wo Q is. ocK C4-C 71. 6 AD DN. f) J'- a aMEMORANDUMactionbyCouncilz Endorsed , TO: City Manager Modifie FROM: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Rejected SUBJECT: Home Occupation License Ordinance Date DATE: October 13, 1994 INTRODUCTION The City Council asked staff to review the Home Occupation Ordinance (Chapter 17) of the City Code. This was after they discussed a proposal by Shannon Kimball to operate a vehicle clean- up business from his home. BACKGROUND On June 28, 1988, the City Council last changed the home occupation ordinance. The Council changed home occupations from a conditional use to a license. On July 11, 1994, the City Council reviewed a proposal by Shannon Kimball of 1652 Lakewood Drive. He was asking the City for a home occupation license to operate a car clean-up businesspp from his home. The Code required a license because Mr. Kimball wanted the option of customers bringing their cars to his home. During the City's review of his request, Mr. Kimball decided to pick -up and deliver the customers vehicles. As such the current home occupation license requirements would not require him to get a license from the City. Mr. Kimball then withdrew his request and the Council asked staff to review the ordinance. DISCUSSION The home occupation ordinance has worked well for the City. It controls the business size by limiting the number of employees and the area of the home that the operator may use for the business. The operators of most of the approved home occupations have run their businesses without a complaint, some for many years. The main concern of the City with home businesses is their effect on the neighborhood. The City must have standards in the ordinance to insure that home businesses do not have a negative effect of the surrounding properties. Staff is proposing several language changes to the Code. These are to strengthen the protection of the neighborhood near a home business and to make the Home Occupation Code consistent with other parts of the Code. RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached ordinance. p:ord\homeocc.mem (5.6) Attachments: 1. Proposed Home Occupation ordinance 2. Existing Home Occupation ordinance ORDINANCE NO, AN ORDINANCE CHANGING ARTICLE 11, HOME OCCUPATIONS, OF THE CITY CODE The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: SECTION 1. The section changes Section 17 -21 as follows: (I have underlined the additions and crossed out the deletions.) Sec. 17 -21. License requirements. a) Home occupations shall require a license approved by the City Council if any of the following circumstances would occur more than thirty (30) days each year: 1) Employment of a nonresident in the home occupation. 2) Customers or customers' vehicles on ' ' ' the premises. 3) Manufacture assembly or proces, si. ng of products or .materials on the premises. 4) More than one vehicle associated with the home occupation which is classified as a light commercial vehicle. 5) A vehicle(s) used in the home occupation, and parked on the premises, which exceeds a three - quarter -ton payload capacity. 6J If the home occupation, produces anv waste that should be treated or re,ulated b) Home occupations requiring a license shall be subject to, but not limited to, the following requirements: 1) No traffic shall be generated by a home occupation in greater volumes than would normally be expected in a residential neighborhood. The need for off - street parking shall not exceed more than three (3) off - street parking spaces for home occupation at any given time, in addition to the parking spaces required by the residents. 2) No more than one nonresident employee shall be allowed to work on the premises. Nonresident employees who work off- premises may be allowed to visit the premises. If an on -site employee is parking on -site, off -site employees shall not leave their vehicles on -site. If there is no on -site employee vehicle parked on -site, one off -site employee vehicle may be parked on- site. 3) No vehicle associated with the home occupation, including customers or employees, shall be parked on the street or block sidewalks or public easements. Private vehicles used bytheresidentsshallnotbeincludedinthisrequirement. 4) An area equivalent to no more than twenty (20) percent of each level of the house, including the basement and garage, shall be used in the conduct of a home occupation. 5) There shall be no change visible off - premises in the outside appearance of the building or premises that would indicate the conduct of a home occupation, other than one sign meeting the requirements of the City sign code. 6) No more than twenty (20) percent of business income shall come from the sale of products produced off -site unless approved b the City Council.pp Y y 7) No equipment or process shall be used in such home occupation which creates noisep vibration, ht glare, fumes, smoke,, dust odors or electrical interference detectable to the normal senses off the lot. In the case of electrical interference noequipment or process shall be used which creates visual or audible interference in any radio or television receivers off the remises or causes fluctuations ip n line voltage ofd the premises. 8) There shall be no fire, safety or health hazards. 9) A home occupation shall not include the repair of internal combustion engines bodg Y repair shops, sprapamting,, machine shops, welding, ammunition manufacturing orsalesthesaleormanufacture. offirearms or knifes or other objectionable uses as determined by the City. Machine shops are defined as places where raw metal is Y( 120) fabricated, using machines that operate on more than one hundred twent volts of current. 10) Any noncompliance with rhtheserequirementsshallconstituteroundsforthedenialgo revocation of the home occupation license. 11) The City may waive any of these requirements if the home occupation is located at least three hundred fifty (350) feet from 1-residential, lot line. ' 12) The City Council may add any additional requirements that it deems necessary to insurethattheoperationofthehomeoccupationwillbecompatiblewithnearbylanduses. 4 Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect after the City a roves it and the official ne publishes it. pp newspaper The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on 1994. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-03-94 V& mmissioner Kittridge moved the Planning Commission recommend the City unciL• A. Xpiprove the resolution on page 19. This resolution approved . a condti al use pe for a public indoor golf dome on the northwest corner of Van yke Street and Ri y Avenue. The permit is based on the findings required Code and subject to e following conditions: 1. All c,onstn tion shall follow the site plan approve y the City. The Director of mmunity Development may app e minor changes. 2. The proposed co traction must be sub ti ally started within one year after the Council a roves this pe or the permit shall end. The Council may extend this deaclne for on ear. 3. If the City Council Bete es there is not enough on -site parking, the Council may require at th roperty owner or operator provide additional parking. 4. The City Caincil shall review this ermit in one year. Commissioner Frost seconded Ayes--A,Xdahl, Sandell, Rossbach, Pearson, Sigmundi Kopesky, Frost, Kittridge Nays -- Fischer I-,- The motion passed. C. Home Occupation License Ordinance Ken Roberts, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and answered questions. The Commission and staff discussed some of the conditions being targeted to a specific occupation. Commissioner Rossbach moved that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: a) 2) Customers or customers' vehicles on the premises. 6) If the home occupation produces any waste that should be treated or Planning Commission Minutes of 10 -03 -94 10 regulated. Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes--all The motion passed. VI. EW BUSINESS A. arming Commission Resignation Ken berts, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. . Roberts stated that because a City Council decided to consider Mr. Milo Th son to fill Mr.p Gerke s position, ra er than to advertise, the staff recommendat' ns have changed. Commissioner Rossb h moved to ap the resolutio of appreciation •pp for Gary Gerke. Commissioner Kittridge s onded Ayes -- 1 The motion passed. r VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS There were no visitor presentations. + f Vlll, COMMISSION PRESENTAT 0' NS y a. September 26 Councal Meeting: Co 'ssioner Axdahl . reported on this meeting.g b. Representative fir` the October 10 Council eeting: Commissioner Axdahl 1 f IBC. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Commissioner Fischer spoke of the ine •p p trees that wer planted along the trail near Southwinds also questioned if truth-in-housing re *red that easementgq s be stated on information that new owners of these units receive. X. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 11:20 J 3 MEMORANDUM Action by Council:, TO: City Manager Endorsed.,,. FROM: Director of Comnauni Deve Modifiedtypd SUBJECT: Commercial Property Stud Re ected. DATE: September 8, 1994 Date CONTENTS 1NTRODUCTION ..... ..................... ............................... 3 BACKGROUND ... ............................... 31992CommercialStudy ................... ................ 3The1993/1994 Study ............ ............................... 3 DISCUSSION sages 0 0 8606890 ....................... Problem One—Intra-City Land 4 Use Conflicts ......... Woodbury I- 494 /Lake Road Interchange q, a assessesCenturyAvenueandStillwaterRoad 5 Century Avenue— Minnehaha Avenue to Brand Street 5 Ariel Street — Highway 36 to Eleventh Avenue g Planning Commission Recommendation on Problem One 6 Problem Two — Blighted Homes Near Commercial s Planning Commission Recommendation on Problem Two 7 0 0 0 a a a 8 a 0 aProblemThree— Inadequate Buffering of Single Dwellings 10 qcreeni.n.10 Setbacks from residential properly Planning Commission Recommendations on Problem Three 11 Problem Four — Bothersome Types of Commercial Too Close to Homes 11 Fast -Food Restaurants 12 The Methadone Clinic 1 2 Check Cashing Businesses 13 Heliports and Helistops ....................... ........13 Gun Shops 13 Planning Commission Recommendations on Problem Four 14 Problem Five — Controlling Nuisances from Commercial Uses 14 Noise.......................... 14 14Trespassing .................. ............................... ............... Visuallmpact 14 Traffic Infiltration 14 Planning Commission Recommendations on Problem Five 16 Problem Six Transition 16 Zones ..................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 aPlanningCommissionRecommendation. on Problem Six 17 18 Problem Seven — Commercial Spread Along Major Streets and Into Residential Neighborhoods a **assesses . ....... 000 ....... a ............. 18 Planning Commission Recommendation on Problem Seven ............. 19 Problem Eight— Nonconforming Commercial Uses ...................... 19 Nonconforming uses ......... ... ............. ............. 19 Don John 20 Solutions........ guesses .. ego 0000000 ........ so .............. 20 Planning Commission Recommendation on Problem Eight .............. 22 Intensity of Commercial Uses .. 0 0 00000000 .......... *Soso ......... 22 Off- street Parking Requirements ...................... 0 a .......... 22 Regulating Businesses Near Residential Neighborhoods. With a Conditional Use Permit ... a 00000000 ..... ............................... 23 Floor Area Ratios and Lot Coverages ......... .................... 25 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ................ ............................... 25 REFERENCE............................ ............................... 27 CURRENT COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL POLICIES .................. 27 MAPLEVUOOD'S COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS ................... 27 NC .(Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District ................ ego ... 27 Commercial Office (CO) ......... ............................... 27 BC (Business Commercial) Zoning District .......................... 28 LBC (Limited Business Commercial) Zoning District ................... 28 BC(M) (Business Commercial Modified) Zoning District ................. 28 SC (Shopping Center) Zoning District .............................. 28 M -1 (Light Manufacturing) Zoning District 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 00000000000009 ...... 29 LAND USE CHANGES FROM COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL AND VICE VERSA29 2 INTRODUCTION The City Council directed the staff to initiate and coordinate a commercial propertystudy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between commercialandresidentialzonesandthecontroloftheintensityofuseofcommercialproperty. BACKGROUND 1992 Commercial Study Can July 13, 1992, the City completed a stud of all of its commercial oYzones. As a result of this study, the City Council passed an ordinance that changed four 'g commercial zoning districts —the BC (business commercial), BC -M business commercialal modifVied),SC (shopping center) and M -1 (light manufacturin distric ' g) districts. The Ordinance made the following changes: 1. Updated the permitted and conditional uses and created consistent wordingbetweendistricts. 2. Prohibited motor fuel stations and maintenance garages within 350 feet of a residential lot line. 3. Required a conditional use permit in the BC district for buildings or outsidee uses within 75 feet of a residential building.. The 1993/1994 Study On March 1, 1993, the Planning Commission prepared a proposal to the City Councilforacommercialpropertystudy. (See the proposal on page 32.) On March 22, 1993, the Council approved the Commission's proposal.. The Councildirectedthestafftoinitiateandcoordinateacommercialpropertystudytoevaluate therelationshipbetweencommercialandresidentialzonesandthecontroloftheintensityofuseofcommercialproperty. On April 19, 1993, the Commission identified a list of 33 problems to study as part ofthecommercialpropertystudy. The Commission sent these problems to the HRA and Community Design Review Board (CDRB) for their review. On July 6, 1993, the Commission received the comments from the HRA and CDRB and approved a final list of 28 problems. 3 On September 7, 1993, the Council considered the Commission's list of 28 problems. The City Council directed the Commission to focus on the first eight problems. Theseg problems were about how to protect single dwelling neighborhoods, from commercial uses. The eight problems are discussed later in this report. On May 16, 1994, the Planning Commission referred three recommendations from the commercial property study to the Community Design Review Board (CDRB). These are recommendations 1 -3 on pages 11 -12. On May 24, 1994, the Community Design Review Board (CDRB) recommended against the three recommendations from the . Plannin Commission. The Board briefly looked atg the Chanhassen landscaping ordinance. (See the ordinance starting on page 35.) The Board did not consider it or make a specific motion about this ordinance. The Board felt that their current landscaping policies were sufficient. On June 6, 1994, the Planning Commission discussed the commercial roe studpP Y Y with the City Council. They talked about the nine recommendations that the Planning Commission had prepared to date. It was the consensus of the City Council that the Planning Commission study intensities of commercial land uses and ways to classify and regulate development based on that intensity of use. DISCUSSION On September 7, 1993, the Council asked for a study on eight problems. These eight problems were about protecting single dwelling neighborhoods from commercial uses.g The following discussion is about these eight problems. The last section discusses controlling the intensity of commercial uses. Problem On ntra-City Land Use Conflicts The City should determine if there are infra -city land use conflicts at the City's boundaries. An example is the effect of a proposed 1-494 interchange in Woodbury on traffic and development in Maplewood. Another example, the area of Century Avenue and Stillwater Road. We identified and studied the following four potential areas of intra -city. land use conflicts: 4 Woodbury I- 494/I,ake Road Interchange Woodbury started work on the I -494 and Lake Road interchange in August, 1994. They expect to finish the project in late 1996. Lake Road will intersect Century Avenue north of Linwood Avenue. (See the plan on page 47.) I have attached the Vista Hills and Highwood Land Use Plan Maps from the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan. (See pages 48 and 49.) These neighborhoods are closest to the new interchange. The Vista Hills map shows the land west of Century Avenue and north of Linwood Avenue as open space. The County Correctional Facility is .using this land for fanning. The Highwood Land Use Plan Map shows the land south of Linwood Avenue for single dwellings. Both land use plan maps show Century Avenue as a major arterial street. Woodbury has planned and zoned most of the property on Century Avenue, south of Linwood Avenue, for single dwellings. They are planning the balance of the frontage for office and high density residential land. Their plan is compatible with Maplewood's plan. (See Woodbury's Land Use Plan and Zoning Maps on pages 50 and 51. The zoning map shows the new interchange.) Woodbury expects the traffic to increase on Century Avenue, north of Lake Road. This part of Maplewood has the County Correctional Facility and its farm land. The interchange would not affect this land since the City is planning the County land for open space. Maplewood has been concerned that the traffic from this project will negatively affect the houses on the west side of Century Avenue and add more traffic to Linwood Avenue. The Lake Road intersection with Century Avenue has been designed to minimize this problem. Lake Road will not directly connect to Linwood Avenue. Traffic from or to Lake Road must make three turns to drive between Linwood Avenue and Lake Road. (See the drawing on page 47.) Time will tell if traffic becomes a problem. Since the interchange is under construction, the only action for Maplewood is to consider changing the land use plan. I do not see any reason to consider a change now. Century Avenue and Stillwater Road The Century Avenue and Stillwater Road intersection does not have any intra -city land use conflicts. The existing and planned land uses in both Oakdale and Maplewood are compatible. The land is nearly all developed. There is a vacant site on the southeast corner of the intersection. Oakdale is planning this site and the existing commercial businesses near this intersection for commercial land uses. (See the Oakdale Comprehensive Plan Map on page 52.) Maplewood has planned and zoned the land near this intersection for commercial land uses as well. (See the Maplewood Land Use Plan and Zoning Maps on pages 53 and 54.) 5 Century Avenue-i-Minnehaha Avenue to Brand Street There are a variety of land uses on the west side of Century Avenue, between Minnehaha Avenue and Brand Street. The uses include the Holiday Station Store, the A &W Restaurant, the Dairy Queen, the Dege Garden Center, the Underwater Caverns, eleven houses and two vacant lots. Maplewood has planned and zoned this land with a variety of designations. These designations reflect the existing land uses. (See the maps on pages 55 and 56.) Oakdale has planned the land across Century Avenue from this part of Maplewood for commercial uses. (See the Oakdale Comprehensive Plan, Map on page 57.) The existing land uses in this part of Oakdale include a Freedom Center Station, two strip centers, a restaurant and office buildings. Maplewood is planning residential uses. Thus, there may be a conflict between .land uses. However, Century Avenue creates more of an impact on these homes than the commercial uses in Oakdale. These homes are in a similar situation to the homes on White Bear Avenue, north of Larpenteur Avenue. An option is to ask Oakdale to change their land use plan to single dwellings. I do not recommend this. The commercial land uses in Oakdale are appropriate given the traffic on Century Avenue and the high density residential to the east. Ariel Street-4iighway 36 to Eleventh Avenue Ariel Street between Highway 36 and Eleventh Avenue is the border between North St. Paul and Maplewood. Apartments and town houses are on the North St. Paul side. In Maplewood there are two houses and undeveloped property on the southwest corner of Ariel and 11th Avenue. (See the Property Line /Zoning Map on page 58.) Maplewood has planned most of this area single dwellings and the part on the south side of 11th Avenue for office uses. (See the Land Use Plan Map on page 59.) The City's land use plan states that changes in differing types of land use should occur along rear lot lines. As such, the City may want to consider allowing multiple dwellings along Ariel Street, particularly south of the planned commercial on 11th Avenue. Before the 1983 update of the Comprehensive Plan, the City was planning the land between 11th Avenue and Highway 36 and Ariel Street and White Bear Avenue for high density residential development. The City has received an application to make this change. Planning Commission Recommendation on Problem one The Planning Commission did not recommend any changes. a Problem Two— Bligtrted Homes Near Commercial Single and double dwellings around commercial uses are becoming blighted. An example is the homes west of Duluth Street on County Road C. The City has zoned them commercial. This discourages property owners from maintaining these homes. This problem has two parts. The first part is whether there is a problem with blighted houses near commercial uses? On February 11, 1994, we did a windshield survey of houses near commercial uses. The maps on pages. 60-63 show the general locations of these homes. The maps on pages 64 -85 show the property line /zoning maps for these properties. We wanted to see if blight or maintenance was a problem. We found no wide - spread problem. A few houses needed paint or minor repairs. These houses, however, were an exception, not the rule. The number of houses needing maintenance or repair were no more than in other neighborhoods of a similar age. The main reason for maintenance problems was age rather than proximity to commercial uses. The second part of this problem is about properties with homes that the City has zoned commercial. The maps on pages 66, 67, 69 -71 74 and 84 show examples of such properties. Our windshield survey did not find an unusual problem of unmaintained homes. We surveyed the owners of homes that have a commercial zone. We asked the owners if they would be fob object or have no comment about rezoning their property to residential. Of the'23 surveys we sent out we received thirteen responses. The owners of twelve properties wanted to keep their commercial zoning and 'one property owner 1210 County Road C) wanted residential. We received the following comments: 1. I object to changing the zoning of my property because we have commercial on all three sides and we would just as soon stay as we are. (Patwell , 1927 Radatz Avenue E. —map on page 67.) 2. My property is bordered on the east by a McDonald's restaurant and a strip mall across the street is a Holiday gas station and store, a large repair garage and storage lot for their vehicles, and on my west side is a fourplex. With all of the commercial and R -3 properties around me, it has lost value as a residential (single home) property. Therefore, I would prefer that it remain zoned commercial. Moritz, 2708 Minnehaha Avenue E. -map on page 84) 3. I object to changing the zoning of my property because it's too late now; we are completely imposed to commercial property. (Peltier, 2497 Maplewood Drive N. —map on page 71) 7 4. I object to changing the zoning of my property because the location better fits a commercial use and resale would be impossible. (Lund, 2411 Maplewood Drive N. -map on page 71) S. As owner of this property, I want to go on record as being opposed to anything that would prevent my property from being zoned commercial. This property was purchased as an investment with the intent of eventually building a commercial building on it, and the property is priced accordingly. In addition, the properties along both sides of Highway 61 in the immediate vicinity are commercial properties. There is no reason why my property should remain residentially zoned. Brooksbank owner of property at 2889 Maplewood Drive N. —map on page 69) 6. I object to changing the zoning of my property because of its location on the frontage of Highway 61 and the possible change of its value. (Slomkowski, 1075 Pierce Butler Route) 7. i object to changing the zoning of my property because I would not want to invest more money in a house 100 years old. (Zuercher, owner of 2911 Maplewood Drive —map on page 69) 8. Since 1986, we have had two appraisals and one market study done on our property, all with the same conclusion, saying the best use of this property would be commercial. In the past, your office has come to the same conclusion. In addition, we now have a new frontage road 25 feet from our property with the improvement project on County Road C, increasing traffic by double, thus making our property less attractive residentially and enhancing it commercially. If our zoning changes, it will not only decrease our property value but decrease our marketability. (Sorenson, 1215 E. County Road C —map on page 70) 9. I object to changing the zoning of my property because value of property would drop. Tines and house payment would go up. (Graham., 1224 E. County Road C —map on page 70) 10. I object to changing the zoning of my property because of my business. Need room for equipment. (Langness, 1227 E. County Road C —map on page 70) 11. I object to changing the zoning of my property because it is not in my best interest in the future -- (property value or home -based business). (Hanson, 1230 E. County Road C —map on page 70) 12. I want it residential. (Munchow, 1210 E. County Road C —map on page 70) 13. I object to changing the zoning of my property because do not want the taxes to be any higher. In regard to rezoning, we have had no business for the last 15 years or more. At that time, the flash floods ruined my back property. It killed fruit trees,.raspberries and blackberries and garden land and did at least $3,000 damage to business property. You keep raising my taxes, but 1/2 of my property isn't of anyusetome. I would be willing to sell some of the back property if someone had use for it for commercial property. (Nienas, 1706 Parkway Drive E. —map on page 74) We wanted to know the effect on property taxes of changing the zoning. of a house .from commercial to residential. We talked to Kent Smith in the County PropertyRecordsandRevenueDepartment. He told us that such a zoning change would not change the property taxes if the lot is too small for a commercial use or standard sizeforaresidence. (See his letter on page 86.) There are five options the City could consider to improve the maintenance of homes in and around commercial uses: 1. Increase the City's enforcement of the housing code next to commercial uses. The City only enforces the housing code when we get a complaint. 2. Offer financial aid through grants or low- interest loans for home remodeling,odelulg. The State already offers a low- interest loan program for low- to- -'p gr moderate income residents for home improvements. The State also has a ant program familiesgrpgramforfamilies with incomes below $10,0oo per ear. The Ci ma wantYCityy to supplement these programs. 3. The City could buy up substandard homes, fix them u and resell them 'p em or demolish them and sell the lot to a builder. The staff is exploring this option. We have identified five or six houses that wouldbethemostlikelycandidates. Only one of the houses is near a c 'commercial district. 4. Increase the enforcement of the maintenance code for businesses next to residences. The City Code requires businesses to maintain their properties in at least as good aconditionaswhenoriginallybuilt. Keeping surrounding businesses looking goodmayencourageadjacenthomeownerstoimprovetheirproperties. The City onlyenforcesthiscodewhenwereceiveacomplaint. 5. Rezone properties that the City has zoned commercial or industrial but the owners are using for residential purposes. This option would probably not be effective. The City changed the land use plan from commercial to residential for the homes on White Bear Avenue, between Frost Avenue and Larpenteur Avenue. The maintenance of these homes has not changed, For now, housing maintenance is no_ more of a problem in and around commercial uses than in the rest of the City.. The roblem may appear worse because the homes arePYPP more visible. Most of the problem homes that we are aware of are in residential neighborhoods, rather than next to commercial areas. We are not recommending anyY changes. We should watch these homes and act in the future if housing maintenance becomes more of a problem. The City should explore the removal or rehabilitation of substandard homes. These homes may or may not be around commercial buildings. Planning Cosunission Recommendation on Problem Two The Planning Commission did not recommend any changes. Problem Three -- Inadequate Buffering of Single Dwellings There is not enough buffer between R-1 (single dwelling) and commercial or multiple dwellings. (The Commission excluded mixed use planned unit developments from this problem.) Buffers between different types of land uses are to protect less intense (single family) land uses from more intense (commercial or multiple- dwelling) land uses. Owners and developers can do buffering with screening or larger- than - normal setbacks. Screening Pages 87 -90 show the City's landscaping, screening and setback standards. The requirements .include at least a 20- foot -wide landscaped and between single or doublePYg dwellings and other land use types. Landscaping does not . always mean screening*,g Landscaping may only be grass and .low bushes. The Community Design Review Board can require more landscaping if they feel it is needed. Screening eans: a fence berm, landscaping or combination of these three that provides at least an 80% opaque screen. The City only requires screening where: 1. The light from automobile headlights and other sources would be directed into residential windows. 2. There would be exterior storage of goods or materials that could annoy or endanger property owners. 3. Mechanical equipment on the ground or roof would be visible from public streets or adjoining property. 10 49 A parking lot is next to a single or double dwelling or the City is planning the property for single or double- dwelling use. The Code allows the use of a screening fence, a planting screen, a berm or a combination of these for screening. Setbacks from residential property The City Code requires commercial and multiple dwellings to be at least fifty feet from a residential property line (Section 36-28[c) [61). A developer must increase this setback to a maximum of 75 feet for buildings exceeding 25 feet in height or having an exterior wall with more than 2,000 square feet of area that faces aresidentially -zoned property. The Code allows the City Council to approve a conditional use permit for additions within a required setback. (See Subpart (7) on page 89.) Planning Commission Recommendations on Problem Three 1. Change Subsection 36 -27(a) of the City Code. This section requires a landscaped yard of not less than twenty feet in width. Landscaping could mean just grass. The Commission recommended that the Council change . this subsection to require trees or shrubs in addition to grass. Staff Comment: The Community Design Review Board (CDRB) recommended against this change. The CDRB's main concern with this recommendation was the lack of flexibility in the wording. The neighbors may not need or want screening. AYg compromise solution would be to require trees or shrubs in addition to grass, but allow the CDRB to waive the requirement where the adjacent owners object.J J 2. Change Subsections 36-27(c) and (d). They require that owners or developers satisfy screening with a screening fence, planting screen, berm or combination thereof. If the owner or developer uses fencing, the Commission recommended that the City require trees or shrubs. Staff Comment: The CDRB recommended against this change. The current ordinance already allows the CDRB to require landscaping in addition to fencing. The CDRB wants the flexibility to deal with individual situations. Some neighbors may prefer not to have landscaping with the fencing, particularly if they feel that the landscaping may become a maintenance roblem. There may be other casespY where existing vegetation may screen the fence and new vegetation is not needed. In other cases, neighbors may prefer just a fence for security r trespassingtYpg reasons. 3. Change Subsection 36- 28(c)(6). This subsection requires a minimum setback between residential and commercial property. The Commission recommended that 11 the Council increase the minimum setback from 50 feet to 75 feet. The ordinance requires a larger setback for large and tall buildings. The Commission is recommending that the Council increase the maximum setback for large and tall buildings from 75 feet to 100 feet. Staff Comment: The Commission's main concern with this recommendation has been with tall or large buildings next to residences. The CDRB feels that requiring a larger setback for all commercial buildings may be too restrictive. The Board noted several smaller commercial buildings, such as Rainbow Cleaning Systems on Duluth Street or the veterinary clinic on Cope Avenue that would not need a larger setback. They are compatible with residences. Irecommend acompromise —leave the minimum setback at 50 feet, but increase the maximum setback for large or tall buildings from 75 to 100 feet. This would not keep the current fifty -foot setback for small and low buildings but would require larger setbacks for large or tall buildings. Problem Four — Bothersome Types of Commercial Too Close to Homes Bothersome types of commercial, such as fast food, are too close to single dwellings. These commercial uses create nuisances, such as littez For the purposes of this study, I am defining "bothersome types of commercial" as those that create a nuisance to adjacent homes. Controlling such uses is a function of the zoning ordinance. The Planning Commission reviewed all the types of commercial in the zoning ordinance and recommended that the City Council make the changes shown on the chart on page 91. I have singled out the uses below for discussion because the Commission spent more time discussing them than the other changes. Fast -Food Restaurants The Commission used fast food as an example of a bothersome commercial use. The City limits fast -food restaurants to BC (business commercial) zones. The City requires a conditional use permit for a BC use that would be within 75 feet of a residential building. One of the main reasons for this permit is to assure that the commercial use would be compatible with any surrounding homes. The only residences next to fast -food restaurants are on Minnehaha Avenue and Radatz Avenue. The house on Minnehaha Avenue is west of the McDonald's on Century Avenue. The City rezoned this house from a residential zone to a commercial zone. The zoning change was to allow McDonald's to expand their parking lot. After the City rezoned the house, McDonald's decided not to buy the property. There is a house on the north side of Radatz Avenue that is south of the Kentucky Fried Chicken and Burger King. The City has zoned and planned this house, like the one on Minnehaha Avenue, for commercial use. I do not know of a problem with the two situations just described. 12 The Methadone Clinic The neighbors around the White Bear Avenue methadone clinic consider the clinic to be a bothersome use. The neighbors have given the City a list of complaints. None of these complaints violate City ordinances. The staff prepared an ordinance that would have required a conditional use permit for clinics that primarily treat chemical dependency. This was done at the City Council's request. (See the staff report starting on page 92.) The Planning Commission recommended against this ordinance. The City Council passed a I moratorium to give the City time to finish this commercial property study. Check Cashing Businesses Saint Paul is working on a zoning code ordinance amendment. The new ordinance would allow check cashing businesses as a ermitted use in commercial districts if theyy were at least 100 feet from a residential district. Saint Paul found that check cashing businesses had significantly higher police calls than other financial businesses such asYgP , banks. Neither Saint Paul nor Maplewood license these uses. However, the State does license them. The Commission recommended that we add check cashing businesses as a permitted use in commercial districts if they are at least 350 feet from residential districts. Heliports and Helistops The Planning Commission asked the staff to investigate rules for the location of heliports. I contacted the Metropolitan Council and Saint Paul. The Metropolitan Council has a model ordinance that recommends allowing heliports as a conditional use in any zoning district. Saint Paul has definitions for heliports, helistops, private heliports or helistops and public heliports or helistops in their Zoning Code. They define a heliport as a place for the landing or takeoff of helicopters (including maintenance and fueling). A helistop is a place for one helicopter to land or take off, but does not include maintenance or fueling operations. By conditional use permit, Saint Paul allows private helistops as an accessory use for a hospital. A condition for a hospital helistop is that it must be at least 250 feet from a residential property line. Saint Paul also allows public and private heliports and helistops at an airport with a conditional use permit. They require that a heliport or helistop at an airport be at least 1,000 feet from a residential property line. Saint Paul requires all heliport and helistop applicants to do noise studies and to follow the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. The noise study is to find out if the heliport or helistop will meet the State noise regulations. Saint Paul will only allow heliports at an airport and not at a business. Saint Paul only allows helistops at airports or hospitals, not at businesses. 3M told us that they do not have or plan to have a helistop. 13 The Commission recommended that the City change heliport to helistop since we do. not have an airport or plans for an airport. The also recommended that we define helistoThey p, limit them to hospitals and prohibit them within 350 feet of residential districts. Minnesota Pollution. Control and FAA reg would apppy Gun Shops The Commission is recommending that the City prohibit gun shops anywhere in the City. (See their list of changes in uses on page 91.) The City Attorney has advised me that it is highly unlikely that there is statutory authority to exclude gun shops. (See the attorney's opinion starting on page 101.) Planning Commission Recommendations on Problem Four 4. Change the commercial districts to conform to the Commission's list on page 910 5. Make no change to clinics, and lift the moratorium on new or expanding clinics.P g Problem Five: Controlling Nuisances from Commercial Uses The City needs to ease and relieve commercial noise, trespassing, visual impact and traffic infiltration through single- dwelling neighborhoods. Noise The City follows the State noise regulations in approving development. I am not aware of any problems with these regulations. Trespassing Trespassing can occur from neighbors cutting through the residential yards that abut a commercial use. The City does not require a business to ut u fencing unless requiredppgq for screening. The Community Design Review Board could require additional fencing ifqg they anticipate a trespassing problem. The Board should consider this on a case -by -case basis. Residential owners may not want or need fencing.g Visual Impact The Community Design Review Board reviews all new commercial development. The Board must make the following findings: 14 1 That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighbo ring, existing or proposed developments and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or neighborhood; occupation in the hborhood ; that it willpg not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. 2. That the design and location of the proposed development is. in keeping with the character of the surroundin g neighborhood and is not detrimental to theg harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the City's comprehensive municipal plan.P 3. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. Visual impact is in the eye of the beholder. An example is the conditional use permit for the Kinderbeny Hill Day -Care Center (586 Carlton Street). A thick tree and shrub screen separates the day -care center from the adjacent homes to the east. An, eghboring resident had cut down the vegetation behind his home. He testified at the hearing that he did not want screening because it interfered with his view of the 3M buildings. The Planning Commission discussed three subjects about visual impact — building maintenance, the Chanhassen Landscaping Ordinance and reserve parking. Building Maintenance As far as existing buildings, the City requires that property owners maintain their building and grounds in at least as good a condition as when originally completed Section 36-28[b]). Maintenance shall include: 1. Replacing any landscaping shown on the approved plan that dies. 2. Picking up all trash and debris from the grounds. 3. Removing all noxious weeds. 4. watering the grass, trees and shrubs. 5. Repairing any exterior parts of the building that deteriorate or break. Chanhassen Landscaping Ordinance One of the planning commissioners suggested that we look at the Chanhassen landscaping ordinance (pages 35 -46). This ordinance is very detailed and specific. A concern of the CDRB is that an ordinance like this may limit their flexibility. Another concern is that minimum standards can become maximum. standards. As an example, the Chanhassen ordinance requires that 1% or 2% of the project value be in landscaping. This may be enough in some cases or too little in other cases. Developers 15 may provide only the minimum ordinance requirement, when they may have done more without. the ordinance. Ordinances can be self - defeating if the City writes them with too much detail. Because of the detailed requirements, the City should informally use the Chanhassen standards before adopting them. It would be like test - driving a car before buying it. Reserve Parking The Planning Commission has recommended that the City allow part of the required parking spaces to be deferred in a reserve strip until needed. This would create more open space and reduce storm water run -off. Tic Infiltration Traffic infiltration means commercial traffic going through residential neighborhoods on local, rather than collector or arterial streets. The City has planned its streets and commercial areas to prevent commercial traffic from going through local residential streets. As such, the City has planned certain streets for through traffic. The City has shown these streets on the land use plan as collector and arterial streets. Most' of these streets have homes on them. People should expect more traffic if they live on these streets. I am not aware of anywhere in the City where commercial traffic is causing a problem by infiltrating through local residential streets. The only recent case I know of has been the controversy about traffic from Mounds Park Academy going through the neighborhood to the west. The City Council solved this problem by closing the driveway from the school to Price Avenue. Planning. Commission Recommendations on Problem Five 6. Use the monetary standards, vehicular, foundation and aesthetic plantings, landscaping materials and definitions of the Chanhassen ordinance for a one -year trial. The staff would apply the ordinance to each project and report the results to the Community Design Review Board. Since it is not a Maplewood ordinance, the Board can use or ignore the Chanhassen standards on a case by case basis. At the end of the year, the Board shall recommend whether the City should add all or some of the Chanhassen ordinance to the Maplewood Code. 7. Direct the staff to write an ordinance that allows the City to replace some of the required parking with reserve land. 16 Problem Six — Transition Zones Is the City planning transition uses between commercial and single or double dwellingsorfollowingthemarket? The City has tried to use transition zones. Maplewood, however, P not do its first landuseplanuntil1973. Development had occurred in much of the CityfiY y then. The City designed all of its commercial districts except the BC (business commercial),SC (shopping center), M -1 (light manufacturing) and M -2 .(heavy manufacturing) to be compatible with surrounding residences. The commercial districts that the City intendstobenexttoresidentialusesareasfollows: NC (Neighborhood Commercial) Section 36 -126 of the City Code lists the intent of the NC nei hborho 'C g od commercial)district. It says, "the intent of this district is to reserve land for the 'P e use of businessesthatarecompatibleandadjacentresidentiallanduses. Uses are limited to offices andsmallerretailusesthatcatertoconvenienceshopping,." CO (Commercial Office) Section 36 -136 gives the purpose and intent of the CD commercial office) 'C e) district. It says, "the Co district is established primarily o provide areas for the developmentYPepment ofprofessionalandadministrativeoffices, related uses together with supportive, g pportive, lowintensitycommercialusesinlocationsincloseiiroxmtorepnialareas ... " It also says, This district is intended to be located rimaril on heavily traveled strPYy or adjacent to commercial or industrial districts and is designed to lessensen the impact oftheseusesonresidentialareas." LBC (Limited Business Commercial) The City designed the LBC district to be compatible with nearby resiPyential uses. Offices, medical or health clinics and day-care centers are the only usYy es that the CityallowsintheLBCdistrict. BC(M) (Business Commercial- Modified) The BC(M) zoning district allows a variety of commercial uses. The City added theBC(M) (business commercial- modified) to the City Code in 1976. The City created thiszoneasabufferbetweenthebusinessesonthenorthsideofBeamAvenueandthehomesonRadatzAvenue. Section 36 -155 of the City Code gives the intent of theBC - zoning district. It says that "The BC(M) district is intended to provide for theorderlytransitionbetweenmoreintensivecommercialusesandlow- or medium - density 17 residential areas. Restrictions on, but not limited to, building height, setbacks, orientation, parking lot location, or location of building ntrances may be required togYq ensure compatibility with abutting residential uses." The zoning ordinance does not specifically state that the City intends the following districts to be next to residential uses. They are, however. BC (Business Commercial). The BC zoning district is the City's most permissive commercial district. The City allows a wide range of commercial uses in the BC zoning istrict.. The Code requires agq conditional use permit for any BC use within 75 feet of a. residential building. SC (Shopping Center) The SC (shopping center) zoning district allows many types of commercial land uses. The Plaza 3000 Shopping Center is the only place in the City that has this zone. M -1 and M -2 (light and heavy manufacturing) The zoning code does not specifically say that the City intended these districts to be next to residential neighborhoods. The M district, however, often is. Both districts require a conditional use permit for any use within 350 feet of a residential lot line. This requirement protects residential neighborhoods and allows the City to use the M -1 district near residential neighborhoods. If the City feels that a commercial zone next to a residential property is too intense, they should rezone to a less intense commercial zone. Planning Commission Recommendation on Problem Six 8. Change the intent section of the BC(M) zoning district. Drop the first sentence. This sentence states that "The BC(M) Business Commercial District (Modified) is intended to provide for the orderly transition between more intensive commercial uses and low or medium density residential areas." The Commission did not feel that the BC(M) district was a buffer between commercial and residential uses. Problem Seven—Commercial Spread Along Major Streets and Into Residential Neighborhoods Continuous commercial spread along major streets and around the corner into residential neighborhoods. W Problem Seven uses the term "continuous commercial spread." The City has had steady commercial growth over the last 20 years. Most of this growth has occurred on land that the City had planned for commercial use. I can find little evidence of "creeping commercialism" in land use. plan changes. In, the last five years, the City has changed about as much land from. commercial to residential use as from residential to commercial use. (See the list of land use changes starting on page 29.) None of these were significant changes. The City made most of these changes as part of the updating of the Comprehensive Plan in 1989 .1991. The lan is a 'de.p As conditions change, the City should adjust and change its plan. However, most of the changes to commercial locations have been adjustments, rather than major policyJJPY changes. There is one exception to the above. The City has recently received a proposal to redevelop the homes between White Bear Avenue, 11 th Avenue, Highway 36 and Ariel Street from residential to commercial. Phnnng Commission Recommendation on Problem Seven The Planning Commission did not recommend any change. Problem Eight— Nonconforming Commercial Uses Nonconforming commercial uses in residential zones, such as Don John's commercial business on Stillwater Avenue. Nonconforming uses The City Code defines a nonconforming use as "A building, or a use of land or of a building, existing at the effective date of any provision of this chapter which does not conform with the requirements of such provision of this chapter, or a use authorized under Article III of this chapter." In other words, a nonconforming use is a use that was legal, but no longer conforms to the current zoning laws because of a change in the law. The Code allows a legal nonconforming use to continue as long as it does not expand or end for one year or more. The City may allow a nonconforming use to expand by approving a conditional use permit. Zoning ordinances are not retroactive. Existing land uses that do not conform to a new ordinance can continue as a nonconforming use. For example, if the City rezoned a welding shop to asingle- family zoning, the welding shop could continue as a nonconforming use. Most communities do not allow an expansion of a nonconforming use that would prolong its use. This is because a nonconforming use may not be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Maplewood requires a conditional use 19 permit to expand a nonconforming use. If natural causes destroy nonconformingg building, the owner has one year to reconstruct it or he must rebuild following the current rules. If the owner abandons or does not use a nonconforming building for onegg year, then the building or use must conform to the current ordinance and standards.. Don John Don John's property (Stillwater Road) is the nonconforming use that we have had the most complaints about. The City created this problem by approving a spot commercial zone. Three years later, the City tried to correct this error by rezoning the site to R -3. Unfortunately, Mr. John's use became a legal nonconforming use. While he cannot expand, he can continue to operate. On October 22, 1979, Don John applied for a rezoning from R -1 (single. dwelling) and R -3 (multiple dwelling) to BC (business commercial). Mx John applied for this rezoning to park construction vehicles on his property and to build a commercial storage garage. On December 2, 1979, the Planning Conunission recommended that the City Council rezone the site to BC(M) (Business Commercial Modified) and change the land use plan for this lot to commercial. The Commission based their decision on neighborhood support for the rezoning and the unlikely development of that area into high density residential use. The staff recommended that the Council deny the request. The 1Commission asked the staff to investigate changing the surrounding properties to commercial as well. On February 7, 1980, the City Council approved the rezoning and land use e. lan change,g On February 14, 1983, the City Council rezoned Mr. John's roe to R -3. The Cipp Y started this change after many complaints from the neighborhood. On January 14, 1991, the City Council changed the land use plan and zoning maps for Mr. John's property and the properties around it. These changes were from RH (high- density residential) to RL (low- density residential) and R -3 (multiple dwellings) to R -1 single dwellings) . Solutions The City has two options for dealing with nonconforming uses: 1. Buy or condemn the property. 2. Change the ordinance to allow the City to amortize nonconforming uses. Buying or condemning the property is the surest and fastest option. This option would cost the City money. Condemnation would add legal costs. The other option is for the 20 City to amortize the use. Amortization also may result in legal costs. Since most other cities do not amortize nonconfornung uses, exce t si owners of nonconformin usesP8 g may decide to sue the City to try to keep their businesses. Gunnar Isberg,. in his book Local and Regional Planning, in Minnesota, says: "Some cities have adopted provisions in the zoning rdinances which attempt to elate orgP amortize the nonconforming use over a eriod of : time. The time period varies and isPP dependent upon such factors as the amount of investment in the use, the losses due to the elimination, and the cost of relocation. In addition the time eriod usually isPY shorter for uses which may cause a nuisance adversely gaffectin the public health. For such nonconforming uses the amortization eriod m be 6 -12 months whereas for thePY type of uses which present less danger to the public health or where the investment is substantial, the amortization period may be five or more ears or may be allowed toyy continue in perpetuity. In Minnesota, the courts have ruled that cities do have the authority to amortize at least some nonconforming uses.* We tried to find a city that amortizes nonconforming uses. We surveyed thirteen of the closest cities to Maplewood in population. None of the thirteen cities amortize nonconforming uses. Brooklyn Center adopted an ordinance around 1980 to eliminate a specific nonconforming use. The target was a fertilizer plant that was a considerable nuisance in a residential neighborhood. The ordinance provided for an amortization period of several years. The fertilizer plant owners challenged the amortization ordinance. While negotiations were underway, afire significantly damaged part of the plant. The part of the plant that the fire damaged was not nonconforming. However, the fire provided the City with an opportunity to use another provision of its code. This provision held that a nonconfornung use that is significantly damaged cannot be rebuilt unless in conformance with Codes. The City thereby forced the plant to rebuild with significant site improvements (curb and gutted buffering and landscaping). The plant owners challenged these efforts by the City as well. The suit went to court. The City planner could not remember whether the amortization ordinance itself was 1triedbeforethecourt, or whether the City simply dropped the issue out of court as part of settlement negotiations. The upshot, however, was that the City abolished the nonconforming amortization ordinance in 1981. A positive note was that the City stuck it out" on the site improvement issue and won in court. The Maplewood City Attorney's opinion is that a City can amortize nonconforming uses if the amortization period is reasonable. (See the Attorney's opinion starting on page 103.) The problem is that the City cannot arbitrarily enforce such an ordinance. If we amortize Don John's business, the City must also amortize other commercial uses in 21 residential zones. If the City Council passes an amortization ordinance, they should rezone uses that they do not want to amortize. The question is whether the City can write an ordinance that is fair and provides for reasonable amortization periods. If this option interests the Council, they should initiate an ordinance. We could then study this issue in more detail. Planning Commission Recommendation on Problem Eight 9. Initiate an ordinance to amortize nonconforming commercial uses in residential neighborhoods. Irrtensity of Commercial Uses On June 6, 1994, the Planning Commission met with the City Council to discuss the commercial property study.. The Council asked the Planning Commission to study the intensity of commercial. uses in the commercial properly study. A concern of the Council was inadequate parking, particularly when there is a change in use from a less intense to a more intense commercial use. A councilmernber used the methadone clinic as an example. The first step in dealing with this problem is to define what intensity of commercial uses means, Are we talking about parking, traffic generated, size of building, type of use (noise created or outdoor activity) or amount of green space left on the lot? Without first defining this problem, it is difficult to propose solutions. off -street Parking Requirements Parking problems relate to the intensity of use. Inadequate parking leads to problems with on- street parking in adjacent residential streets or on adjacent commercial parkingJpg lots. The amount of city- required parking effects the intensity of use by limiting the site area for building. While buildings can go higher, this increases the cost per square foot. The Council mentioned parking as one of the main concerns with the methadone clinic. The clinic does most of its business in the morning. Parking was inadequate at times and customers were parking on the streets and adjacent parking lots. The rest of the day the lot was nearly empty. The Council resolved the on- street parking problem by putting up "no parking" signs. The staff obtained the off - street parking requirements of several suburbs. We attached Maplewood's Code requirements (page 110) and summarized the parking space requirements for five other cities (starting on page 111). We included these five cities because they have more uses listed in their requirements than the Maplewood Code has. Maplewood's commercial requirements are similar to these cities, 22 The problem with requiring minimum parking spaces is that similar uses may have different parking needs, dependin on how successful their businesses are. Best Bu isgY an example. They used to be in the Pier One Import store on Beam Avenue. The parking standard is the same for Pier one as for Best Buy. Parking was 'inadequate when Best Buy was there, but is fine for Pier One. Another problem is peak demand. Some uses, such as the methadone clinic, do most. of their business during certain peak times and the rest of the day they have empty parking spaces. Parking demand can also be seasonal. The Mall needs more arkin at Christmas than other times of the ear.p g y Parking standards are based on averages and minimum needs. If the City required enough parking to meet all needs at all times, we would have more asphalt. One of the recommendations of the Planning Commission is to limit parking lots to create more open space and less storm water run -off. Regulating Businesses Near Residential Neighborhoods With a Conditional Use Permit One method of controlling nuisances from commercial uses around residential neighborhoods is to require a conditional use permit. The CUP gives the City some control over land uses. The public hearing gives neighbors. a chance to have input into the design and operation of adjacent commercial uses. The City has used CUPs 'to periodically review businesses, regulate hours of operation or limit outside storage. The City does not need a CUP to regulate the design of commercial buildings or site plans. The Community Design Review Board (CDRB) already has this authority. The question is what types of changes or uses should the City require a permit fox There are at least three options: 1. Require a CUP for each new commercial building or expansion that is close to a residential property line. The City could add this option to some or all the commercial zones and could include all or potential nuisance uses. The City already requires a conditional use permit for new uses in the following zoning districts: a. In M -1 (light manufacturing) districts where the use would be within 350 feet of a residential district. b. In BC (business commercial) districts where the use would be within 75 feet of a residenrial building. This option would cover new buildings or expansions but would not cover changes in use within an existing building, such as happened with the Methadone Clinic. 23 2. Require a conditional use permit for every change in type of business that is close to a residential lot line. This option would give the City more control over specific businesses near residences. The City could make this change to some or all the commercial zones and could include all or potential nuisance uses. As an example, the City may approve a CUP for a video store. A change from one video store to another video store would not require a CUP. A change from a video store to an athletic store would require a CUP. The City would have to be specific in the permit about the type of business the permit is for. The disadvantage is that this option would take more of the City's time and would delay changes in tenancy. The City could lessen this disadvantage b issuingYg conditional use permits for broad types of uses rather than specific uses. As an example, the City could issue a permit for a medical clinic, rather than a specific type of clinic. Another disadvantage is enforcement. The City might not know about such a change unless the owner applies for a building ermit.PP g p 3.. The City Code requires a conditional use permit when one nonconforming use replaces another. As part of the conditional use ermit the Council could re uirepq that the new use follow as many of the City's current standards as practical. These standards could include more parking, landscaping, screening or building maintenance. The City Attorney advises me that the City ust relate an suchtYY requirements to the impact of the development. As an example, the City should not require that a business build an off -site trail that is not related to the business. ( See the attorney's letter starting on page 116.) This requirement would not have affected the methadone clinic. The methadone clinic meets the City's current parking space requirement. The Code requires fourteen parking spaces. The clinic has twenty spaces. To solve a similar problem in the future, the City would have to increase the required spaces for clinics. However, the current requirement has been adequate for the other clinics. The Guy's parking space requirements are minimum standards. There will be uses that need more than the minimum number of spaces. Requiring a CUP for every use in the BC(M), NC, Co or LBC districts that is near a residential district seems impractical. The City designed these districts to be next to residences. If a specific zone is causing a tYroblem, the City should rezone it to a lessP intense commercial zone. There are BC zones adjacent to residential neighborhoods. The BC zone was not intended to be next to residential neighborhoods. Some of the permitted uses in the BC district require a CUP or are prohibited in the other commercial districts. To solve this problem, the City could rezone all the BC zones near residential neighborhoods or 24 requires a CUP in the BC zone for any use within 75 feet of a residence. The City should . require a CUP for some BC uses that are within 350 feet: of a residential property line. The City should require a CUP for uses that require a CUP or that the Code .prohibits in the BC(M) district. These uses include: restaurants, new car sales, parking lots as a principal use and CNG or LPG dispensing facilities. The other option would be to rezone all BC properties that are within 350 feet of a residential lot line. These rezonings would take a lot of time. Simply changing the Code to require a CUP for more uses would accomplish the same purpose and save much time and consternation by property owners. The Planning Commission recommended changing the permitted and conditional uses in the commercial zones to help protect residential land uses. (See the proposed list on page 91.) Floor Area Ratios and Lot Coverages Another way to control the intensity of business use is to create floor area ratios. Floor area ratios limit the ratio of commercial floor area to the area of the lot. If the primaryrim concern is green area, rather than floor area, the City could adopt maximum lot coverage requirements. Planning Commission Recommendation 10. The Planning Commission recommended that they address the intensity of commercial uses by studying traffic, floor area ratios and lot coverage over the next six months. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS (The numbers refer to the numbers of the Planning Commission's recommendations in this report.) 1. Initiate an ordinance that changes Subsection 36 -27(a) of the City Code to require trees and shrubs in addition to grass, but allow the CDRB to waive the requirement where the adjacent owners object. (See page 11.) 2. Initiate an ordinance that states that the City may require landscaping with any required screening fencing. (See page 11.) 3. Initiate an ordinance that changes Subsection 36- 28(c)(6). This change would, increase the maximum setback for large and tall buildings from 75 feet to 100 feet. See pages 11 -12.) 4. Initiate an ordinance to change the commercial districts to conform to the Planning Commission's list on page 91. Exclude the prohibition on gun eshops. (See aPpage 14.) 25 5. Make no change to clinics in the zoning ordinance, and lift the moratorium on new or expanding clinics. (See page 14.) 6. Use the monetary standards, vehicular, foundation and aesthetic plantings, landscaping materials and definitions of the Chanhassen ordinance for aone -year trial. The staff shall apply the ordinance to each project and report the results to the Community Design Review Board. Since it is not a Maplewood ordinance, the Board can use or ignore the.. Chanhassen standards on a case by case basis. At the end of the yeah the Board shall recommend whether the City .should add all or some of the Chanhassen ordinance to the Maplewood Code. (See page 16.) 76 Initiate an ordinance that allows the City to replace some of the required parking with reserve land. (See page 16.) 8. Iniriate an ordinance that would drop, the first sentence of the intent section of the BC(M) zoning district. This sentence states that "The BC(M) Business Commercial District (Modified) is intended to provide for the orderly transition between more intensive commercial uses and low or medium density residential areas." (See page 18.) 9. Initiate an ordinance to amortize nonconfornung commercial uses in residential zones. (See page 22.) 10. Direct the Planning Commission to study the intensity of commercial development. The study should include the following: a. Define what intensity of commercial development means. b. Decide whether the City needs to control the intensity of commercial development. C. If the Commision decides that the City needs to control intensity, recommend ways to do it. The Commission should consider regulating maximum lot coverages and floor area to lot area ratios. 26 REFERENCE CURRENT COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL POLICIES The City's commercial and industrial development policies are on pages 22 -23 of the Comprehensive Plan. The following five of these olicies relate to protecting residentialPPg properties: 1. Avoid disruption of adjacent residential areas. 2. Use planned unit developments wherever practical. Maintain orderly transitions between commercial and residential areas. 3. Require commercial and industrial developers to make all necessary improvements to ensure compatibility with surrounding residential uses. 4. Require adequate screening or buffering of new or expanded commercial areas from any adjacent existing or planned residential development, 5. Plan land uses and streets to route nonresidential traffic around residential neighborhoods. MAPLEWOOD'S COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Refer to the attached sections from the Zoning Code on pages 118 -125 for specific types of uses allowed and prohibited in each zone.) NC (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District The Code says that the City intends the NC (neighborhood commercial) district for activities and businesses that are compatible with adjacent residential uses. The Code limits the uses in this district to offices and smaller retail uses that cater to convenience shopping. Each NC zone has residential uses on at least two sides. Commercial Office (CO) The commercial office classification is for offices and related uses, such as supportive, low- intensity commercial uses. These zones should be close to residential neighborhoods to conveniently serve the public. These zones should be on heavily traveled streets or adjacent to commercial or industrial districts. to lessen their impact on residential areas. 27 BC (Business Commercial Zoning District The BC zone is the general commercial zoning district in Maplewood. The BC zone allows a wide variety of commercial land uses in this district. The City may permit high-tY Y P g intensity commercial uses, such as fast -food restaurants and gas stations subject to specific guidelines. The City Code does . not state that this zone. is intended to be next to residences. There are some examples of this however. In 1992, the City Council changed the Code to provide more protection for adjacent residential uses. The changes included not allowing a motor fuel station within 5o feet of a residential use and requiring a CUP for any building or outside use within 75 feet of a residential building. LBC (Limited Business Commercial) Zoning District The City intends this district for offices, medical clinics and child -care facilities that would be adjacent to residential uses. It also may serve as a transition zone between residential and more intense commercial uses. The permitted uses in the LBC are compatible with residential uses. LBC uses are usually ot open during evenin s orYpgg weekends. The LBC zones have a residential use on at least one side. This zoning district does not have conditional or prohibited uses. BC(M) (Business Commercial Modified) Zoning District The City Code says that the intent of the BC(M) district is to provide for the orderly transition between more intense commercial uses and low and medium density residential uses. The City may require restrictions on building height, setbacks, orientation and parking lot location to insure compatibility with abutting residential uses. There are eight areas in Maplewood with the BC(M) zoning. These areas have residenrial uses on at least one side. The conditional and pernutted uses in the BC(M) zone limit the activities that could occur in this zone. These limits help protect the nearby residential uses. SC (Shopping Center) Zoning. District The permitted uses in the SC zone are similar to the permitted uses in the BC(M) zone. The only SC zone is the Plaza 3000 shopping center. This center is north of Lydia Avenue between White Bear Avenue and Ariel Street. N M -1 (Light Manufacturing) Zoning District The M -1 zone allows the permitted uses of the BC zoning district and a variety of industrial uses. These include wholesale businesses, contractors shops, manufacturep g plants, laboratories or research facilities and warehouses. The conditional uses in the M -1 zone include the conditional uses in the BC zone trucking and or terminal and privately -owned recycling facilities. The M -1 zone also requires a CUP for any building or exterior use within 350 feet of a residential district. This help protect residential uses from the effects of potentially disruptive nearby commercial and industrial uses. LAND USE CHANGES FROM COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL AND VICE VERSA The City changed the land use plan for the .west side of White Bear Avenue, between Larpenteur and Frost Avenues. This change was from LSC (limited service commercial) to low density residential. The City changed the zoning on the west side of Highway 61 between County Road C and Beam Avenue. This change was from commercial to F (farm residential). Most of this land is wetland owned by KSTP. The City zoned 1881 -1889 Clarence (south of Frost Avenue) from BC (business commercial) to R -1 (single dwellings). The owner had developed these two lots with single dwellings. The City changed the land use plan and zoning behind Guldens and 3065 Highway 61 from M -1 (light manufacturing) to R -1. The City changed the land use plan and zoning at 1765 County Road D from multiple dwelling to commercial for the expansion of Frank's Nursery. The City rezoned about one acre of Hillcrest Development land on Ariel Street, between Cope and Castle Avenues, from commercial to R -1. The City rezoned 2708 Minnehaha Avenue (next to McDonald's) from R -1 to LBC limited business commercial). This change was to allow McDonald's to expand their parking lot. (McDonald's decided not to expand the parking lot.) 29 The City rezoned a 2.5 -acre parcel in the middle of Battle Creek Park from commercial to F (farm residential). The City rezoned several properties west of Highway 61, between Gervais Avenue and County Road C from residential to commercial and vice versa. The Council made these changes as part of the updating of the Comprehensive Plan. 1991 The City rezoned the rear of the Maplewood Drive -In property from BC (business commercial) to R -1S (small-lot single dwellings). The City rezoned the land behind the former Carlton Racquetball Club (600 Carlton Street) from R -1 to M -1 (light manufacturing). The rezoning allowed 3M to expand the parking lot for a training center. The City changed the land use plan and zoning from R -1 to LBC (limited business commercial) for the property at 2702 Stillwater Road. The Council made this change to allow Knowlan's Supermarket and the Midvale Center to expand. The City changed the land use plan from medium - density residential to M -1 (light manufacturing) for the south side of Frost Avenue, east of Phalen Place. The City had already zoned this land commercially and the owner was using the site for commercial use. The City approved a planned unit development (PUD) on the north side of Gervais Avenue for the Care Free Cottages of Maplewood. The City has zoned this property LBC limited business commercial). The City changed the land use plan and zoning map from medium - density residential to single dwelling for the north side of Frisbee Avenue, west of English Street. The City made these changes for the 14 -lot Frisbee Hill plat for single dwellings. 1993 The City changed the zoning map from M -1 (light manufacturing) to R -2 (single and double dwellings) for the south side of Duluth Street, south of County Road C. The City made this change to allow Goff Homes to build double dwellings on the site. The City changed the land use plan from LBC (limited business commercial) to C church) for the property at 2425 White Bear Avenue. The City made this change to convert the former Montgomery Ward's office building to a church. 30 go :b -7 :commprl l .mem (4.55) Attachments: 1. The February 23, 1993 Planning Commission Proposal 2. Chanhassen Landscaping Ordinance 3. 1993 Lake Road /1 -494 Interchange Plan 4. Vista Hills Land Use Plan Map 5. Highwood Land Use Plan Map 6. Woodbury Land Use Plan Map 7. Woodbury Zoning Map 8. Oakdale Comprehensive Plan Map (District 6) 90 Beaver Lake Land Use Plan Map (Stillwater Road and Century Avenue) 10. Property Line /Zoning Map (Stillwater Road. and Century Avenue) 11. Beaver Lake Land Use Plan Map (Century, north of Minnehaha) 12. Property Line /Zoning Map (Century, north of Minnehoha) 13. Oakdale Comprehensive Plan Map (District 8) 14. Property Line /Zoning Map (Adel, north of Highway 36) 15. Land Use Plan, north of Highway 36 at Ariel Street 16 -19. Location Maps for Homes Near Commercial Uses 20 -41. Property Line /Zoning Maps and Land Use Maps 42. 2 -18 -94 letter from Kent Smith 43. Sections 36 -27 and 36 -28 of the City Code (Landscaping and Screening) 44. Proposed Changes in Commercial Uses by Zoning District 45. Memo on Chemical Abuse Clinics Ordinance 46. City Attorney's Letter on Gun ,Shops 47. City Attorney's Memo on Amortizing Nonconforming Uses 48. Maplewood Off- street Parking Requirements 49. Blaine Parking Requirements. 50. Bloomington Parking Requirements 51. Brooklyn Center Parking Requirements 52. Golden Valley Parking Requirements 53. Richfield Parking Requirements 54. City Attorney's Letter on Requiring Conditions of Changes in Nonconforming Uses 55. Commercial Zoning Districts 31 Attachment 1 TO: MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL FROM: MAPLEWOOD PLANKING COMMISSION TOPIC: COMMERCIAL PROPERTY STUDY DATE: FEBRUARY 23, 1993 The planning commission has a concern with commercial development in Maplewood with special concerns in areas were commercial zoning and residential zoning adjoin each other These concerns come from some basic beliefs they are, 1) The residents of Maplewood are the foundation of the city and as such should receive all due benefits and protection in development matters. 2) Commercial development is a convenience to the residents. It does have benefits to the city which do deserve consideration but these considerations should not be allowed to overwhelm existing residents'or burden the future residential areas of the city. 3) Com development can have.a deteriorating effect' on residential areas. Over the long term a vicious cycle of encroachment of commercial development, deterioration of residential, and expansion of commercial into residential can take place. 4) Consideration of all areas where commercial and residential land uses adjoin should receive the same consideration. Areas of future residential development should be protected in the same manner as existing residential areas. In doing so the city will be creating the best situation to attract better quality residential developments to these areas. 5) Some intense or bothersome commerical uses which generate excessive noise, fumes, or traffic should not be allowed to adjoin residential areas. 6) The city should have the ability to regulate the intensity of use on commercial property, much like it does with residential property. There are a number of areas which could be looked at to regulate the buffer zone between residential and commercial development areas. A) Make some changes to the existing zoning codes. B) Rezone land to create buffer zones. C) Change the comprehensive plan. D) P.U.D, ordinance update. 32 The most likely situation to affect changes which would have some impact now and into the future would be to put in place a combination of these options. The following are some examples of items which could be reviewed by a commercial property study. These are just examples and may not encompass all possible options. Increase the amount of landscaped area. In our concept the idea is to create some distance and aesthetic value to the area between commercial and residential uses. Take a close look at any land which has residential zoning but is being used for commercial purposes also review any land which is zoned for commercial use but is being used residentially. We believe that the city's screening ordinances along with all required setbacks should be reviewed and updated to offer the greatest protection to residential areas as is deemed possible. A study should also look at the city's existing farm zoning areas and update these areas to minimize or eliminate the farm zone. The commercial property study should also address some aspects of the commercial zones. We should review what can be done to improve the overall appearance of commercial areas and how to introduce more green area into commercial development. The regulation of commercial intensity is also an area of concern. All the residential zones are governed by density tables as a means to control intensity of use. We could look at floor area, percentage of building coverage of property, traffic generation, etc, as some ways to regulate the intensity of use of commercial property. Rezoning some properties to create a buffer zone may be a possibility in some areas, a review of the city's zoning and land use maps may turn up some areas which could be changed. This action would have to include a review of the comprehensive plan as well. We would suggest that a review of commercial property, both existing development areas and future commercial areas be done to determine: A) How many areas exist with BC adjoining R -1, BC adjoining R -2, BC (M) adjoining R -1 and R -2, etc. B) What existing roads are in place and are they adequate. C) What future roads might be needed to handle future development. D) Other infrastructure needs for development. 33 E) Gather information from existing developments as to density or intensity of use. F) Special situations which might need addressing or future developmentlopment on any particular parcel of land. I.e. wet - lands or terrain. These items if cataloged could serve as guidelines for the staff, planning.commission and council when a development is proposed and eliminate some reacting.to proposals with concerns thought out in advance. One other tool which has been under consideration which should be used in concert with these proposals is a revised P.U.D, ordinance. To what affect it may play a role is yet to be determined. However, if the P.U.D. was imposed as an overlay zone, then the underlaying zone still serves as a basis to code changes and variances as modified by the P.U.D. and if some stronger ordinances are in place in the underlaying zone then the city's position can only be strengthened. In conclusion the city should initiate a study to look at commercial areas of the city and their relationship to residential areas. The study should encompass, improving the overall appearance of commercial areas, and studying the intensity of use on commercial property. The study would include all existing and proposed commercial land and would locate trouble spots and gather information for future use. Ordinances should be reviewed to find areas were changes could be made to improve the residential environment. The study should include input from the city council, planning commission, design review board, engineering department, the community development department and any other department or groups which have input. Recommendation- Direct staff to initiate and coordinate a commercial property study to evaluate the relationship between commercial and residential zones and the control of the intensity of use of commercial property. 34 Attachment 2. CHANHASSEN CITY CODE DIVISION 2, TREE PRESERVATION The section below will be amended with the adoption of the Tree Preservation Ordinance proposed for subdivision. . Sec. 20 -1178. Generally, DIVISION 3. LANDSCAPING STANDARDS Sec. 20 -1179. Landscape budget. a) Landscaping shall be provided that meets the minimum landscaping budget provided in the table below. Project value*Minimum Landscape Value ** egls building construction, site (Is the minimum landscape value and shall preparation, and the site improvements) include only expenditures on trees and plat material excluding sod or seed, excluding labor and grading.) Below $1,000 1,000,001- 2 20001- 3,Q00,000 2% 20 + 1 of project value in excess of 1,000,000 30,000 + 0.75% of project value in excess of $2,000,000 3,000,001- 4 $37,500 + 0.25% of project value in excess of $3,000,000 Over $4,000,000 1% b) AtJAW "AW '%W0&W W .The value of tree preservation may be utilized to offset landscaping requirements, if there is a finding of significant trees that are worthy of preservation. The following formula shall be used for calculating the value of tree preservation: 35 Cross• sectional Dollars Per Species Condition Location Dollar Tree Area x Square Inch x Factor x Factor x Factor = Value NOTE: The formula used may be changed by resolution approved by the City Council. see definitions section) Add definition of Interior Landscaping (area exclusive of mandated setback). Sec. 204180. Screening for visual impacts. a) Visual impacts must be screened as required by the city. These shall include, but not be limited to, truck loadin g areas, trash storage, parking lots, interior lot areas and erimeters, outdoor storage areas, large unadorned building massing, garage doorsPg associated with auto - oriented uses and vehicular stacking areas for drive- through uses. 1) Required screening ee-.4.g for any visual impact may be achieved with fences, walls, earth berms, hedges or other landscape materials. All walls and fences shall be architecturally harmonious with the principal building. The use of wooden screen fences or chain link fences equipped with slats is prohibited. Earth berms shall not exceed a slope of 3:1 unless provided with landscaping designed to minimize maintenance. The screen shall be designed to employ materials which provide effective visual barrier during all seasons. 2) All required screening e- hu€€eriag shall be located on the lot occupied by the use, building, facility or structure to be screened. No landscape screening shall be located on any public right -of -way or within eight (8) feet of the traveled portion of any street or highway. 3) Screening eff.- - 1818.€€eg required by this section shall be of a height needed to accomplish the goals of this section. Height of plantings required under this section shall be measured at the time of installation. b) The following uses shall be screened e.; 19.1.1.€€ere in accordance with the requirements of this subdivision: 1) Principal buildings and structures and any building or structure accessory thereto located in any business, industrial or planned unit development district containing nonresidential uses shall be wed screened from lots used for any residential purpose. 2) Principal buildings and structures and any building or structure accessory thereto located in any R4, R8, R12, R16 district or planned unit development district containing residential development at densities exceeding four (4) units 36 per acre shall be Niffees.: screened from lots located in any Al, A2, RR or RSF district 3) Additional buffer yard requirements are established by the city comprehensive plan and listed in individual district standards. 4) Outside storage in any district subject to these provisions and allowed by other provisions of this ordinance, shall be screened from all public views. Sec. 20 -1181. Vehicular areas. a) Parking lot perimeters where vehicular areas, including driveways and drive aisles, are not entirel y screened visually by an intervening building or structure from any abutting right-of-way, there shall be provided landscaping designed to buffer direct views of cars and hard surface areas. The goal of this section is to break up expanses of hard surface areas, help ytovisually define boulevards and soften direct views of parking areas and provide for reforestation with overstory tree from the approved tree species list identified for parkingarkin or other species as approved by city staff. All new planting areas must have an irrigation system installed atAft. b) Interior landscaping for vehicular use areas: 1) Any open vehicular use areas T012-sand Ra containing more than six thousand (6,000) square feet of area, or twenty (20) or more vehicular parking spaces, shall provide interior landscaping in accordance with this division in addition to "perimeter" landscaping. Interior landscaping may be peninsular or island types. 2) For each one hundred (100) square feet, or fraction thereof, of vehicular use area, eve -f cl eight (8) square feet of landscaped area shall be provided. 3) The minimum landscape area permitted shall be SiM.M.,,; -€elarr 9 two hundred 200) square feet, with a€ems --e six foot minimum dimension to all trees from edge of pavement where vehicles overhang and a four foot minimum dimension to all trees where vehicles do not overhang. 4) In order to encourage the required landscape areas to be properly dispersed, no re- quired landscape area shall be larger than seven hundred twenty 720) square feet in vehicular use areas under thirty thousand (30,000) square feet, unless there a preservation area. In both cases, the least dimension of any required area shall be four -foot minimum dimension to all trues from edge of pavement where vehicles overhang. Landscape areas larger than above are permitted as long as the additional areas are in excess of the required minimum. 5) A minimum of one (1) tree shall be required for each two hundred. fifty (250) square feet or fraction thereof, of required landscape area. Trees shall have a clear, trunk of at least five (3) feet above the ground, and the remaining area shall be landscaped with shrubs, or ground cover (not to include rocks or gravel except as a mulch around shrubs and ground cover), not to exceed two (2) feet in height v v . • • v . • • • . . • v • • . • • 7) All landscaped areas shall be protected by concrete curbing. 8) All landscaping area shall have the proper soil preparation to ensure the viability of the vegetation to survive. The landscaping plan shall provide specifications for proper soil preparation. Sec. 20 -1182. Foundation and aesthetic plantings. a) Landscaping plans shall provide for an appropriate mix of plantings around the exterior footprint of all buildings. The intent of this section is to improve the appearance of the structures and, where necessary, break up large unadorned building elevations. These plantings are not intended to obscure views of the building or accessory signage. b) All undeveloped areas of the site, excluding protected wetlands and tree preservation areas, shall be seeded or sodded. In addition, an appropriate mix of trees and other plant material shall be provided to create an aesthetically pleasing site. c) Boulevard and streetscape plantings, Where undeveloped or open areas of a site are located adjacent to public right-of-way, the plan shall provide for over -story boulevard trees. A minimum of one (1) tree for every thirty (30) feet of frontage is required. The city may approve alternatives if it meets the intent of the ordinance from approved tree species list or as approved by city staff. Sec. 20 -1183. Landscaping materials. a) The landscaping materials shall consist of the following: 1) Walls and fences. Walls shall be constructed of natural stone, brick or other appropriate materials. Fences shall be constructed of wood. Chain link fencing will be permitted only if covered with plant material or otherwise screened. 2) Earth berms. Earth berms shall be physical barriers which block or screen the view similar to a hedge, fence, or wall. Mounds shall be constructed with proper and adequate plant material to prevent erosion. A difference in elevation between areas requiring screening does not constitute an existing earth mound, and shall not be considered as fulfilling any screening requirement. 3) Plants. All plant materials shall be living plants; .artificial plants are prohibited. Plant materials shall meet the following requirements: a. Deciduous trees. Shall be species having an average crown spread of greater than fifteen (15) feet and having trunk(s) which can be maintained with over five (5) feet of clear wood in areas which have. visibility requirements, except at vehicular use area intersections where an eight -foot clear wood requirement will control. Trees having an average mature spread of crown less than fifteen (15) feet may be substituted by grouping of the same so as to create the equivalent of a fifteen foot crown spread. A minimum of ten (10) feet overall height or minimum caliper (trunk diameter, measured six (6) inches above ground for trees up to four (4) inches caliper) of at least two and one -half (Zi) inches immediately after planting shall be required. Trees of species whose roots are known to cause damage to public roadways or other public works shall not be placed closer than fifteen (15) feet to such public works, unless the tree root system is completely contained within a barrier for which the minimum interior containing dimensions shall be five (5) feet square and five (5) feet deep and for which the construction requirements shall be four (4) inches thick, reinforced concrete. Trees shall be selected from the approved list of tree species or as approved by city staff. b. Evergreen trees. Evergreen trees shall be a minimum of six (6) feet high with a minimum caliper of one and one -half (Ilfi) inches when planted. c. Shrubs and hedges. Deciduous shrubs shall be at least two (2) feet in average height when planted, and shall conform to the opacity and other requirements within four (4) years after planting Evergreen shrubs shall be at least two (2) feet in average height and two (2) feet in diameter. Materials to be selected from approved list or as approved by city staff. d. Vines. Vines shall be at least twelve (12) inches high at planting, and are generally used in conjunction with walls or fences. Materials to be selected from approved list or as approved by city staff. 39 e. Grass or ground cover. Grass shall be lanted ' •p in species normally grown aspermanentlawns, and may be sodded, lu ed ri edPSgsp gg . , or seeded; except m swalesC)r other areas subject to erosion, where solid sod erosion reducing .net, or .suitablemulchshallbeused, nurse -grass seed shall be sown •for immediate protection untilcompletecoverageotherwiseisachieved. Grass sod shall be clean and free of .weeds .and noxious pests or diseases. Ground cover such as organic material shall be plantedinsuchamannerastopresentafinishedappearanceandseventy -five (75) percent ofcompletecoverageaftertwo (2) complete owinPg1' g seasons, with a maximum of fifteen15) inches on center. In certain cases groundgr cover also may consist of rocks,pebbles, sand and similar materials i city. Materials tofavppr ed by thebeselectedfromapprovedlistorasapprovedbc'PP y qty stab. f. Retaining. Retaining walls exceeding iie -fsr} four (4) feet in height, includingstagewallswhich. cumulatively exceed €tve -4 3) four (4) in height, must be constructedinaccordancewithplanspreparedbyaregisteredengineerorlandscapearchitectofbrick, concrete or natural stone. Artificial material may be approved if appropriate. Abuildingpermitisrequired. DIVISION 4. MAINTENANCE AND INSTALLATION Sec. 20 -1184. Generally.. The owner, assigns, tenant, and their respective agents shall be held jointly and severallyresponsibletocontinuallymaintaintheirpropertyandlandscapingasapprovedwiththeofficialsiteplaninaconditionpresentingahealthy, neat and orderly appearance and freefromrefuseanddebris. Plants and ground cover which are required by an approved site orlandscapeplanandwhichhavediedshallbereplacedwithinthree (3) months of notificationsbythecity. However, the time for compliance may be extended up to nine (9) months by thedirectorofplanninginordertoallowforseasonalorweatherconditions. Sec. 20- 1186 - -20 -1260. Reserved, DEF'INI'TIONS: Screening - Visually shielding r obscuringg st ructures or uses through the use of denselyplantedvegetation. Vegetation shall include g de a mix of deciduous and coniferous toprovideyearroundscreening. Cross - Sectional Area - is a measure of tree Size, It is calculated from the trunk diameter using the formula 0.785d2 where dZ is 'the trunk. diameter of the tree measuredininchessquared. Diameter measurements shouldould be taken at a point on the trunk 4%feet above the level. 40 Dollars per square Inch - is the value determined by the Council of Trees and. Landscape appraisers. The current value is $27.00 per square inch. Species Factor - is the measure of the relative value of each shade or ornamental tree species. See attached list with values (Attachment A). Condition Factors is the measure of an individ ual. tree and its relative physical condition compared to a tree of the same species which bas perfect health and form Attachment B). Location Factor - is the function valtile of a tree based on its location in the landscape. The location factor may vary from 0 to 100 percent, with 100 percent representing a perfect location. Its greater value is due to its aesthetic and functional impact on I the property. Positive functions such as providing shade, controlling snow drifting, or providing wildlife habitat enhances a tree's location value. Negative functions such as interference with public safety, utilities, sidewalks, building or other properties can lessen the value. List of Desirable Tree Species for Planting in Chanhassen means the following list tree species. List of Desirable Tree Species for Planting in Chanhassen Key to notations used ST = Relatively tolerant to deicing salt DT = Relatively tolerant to drought or dry sites Size: (in terms of expected mature height) L = Large (over 50 feet) M = Medium (between 25 to 50 feet) S = Small (less than 25 feet) Blvd = Suitable for boulevard planting and parking lot Pkg = Suitable for parking lots Suitable Tree Species Broadleaf Species Size Tolerance Location Notes Ash, Mountain Sarbus spp. M BLVD Protect from sunscald 41 Birch, River M Relativel y tolerant of wet Betula nigra sites Coffeetree,L DT BLVD Kentucky PKG Gymnocladus dioicus Corktree, Amur M DT Phellodendron amurense Crabapple,S BLVD Many varieties available; Flowering check for disease Malus spp.resistance; protect from. sunscald Ginkgo M BLVD Male trees only Ginkgo biloba Hackberry L DT ST PKG Celtis occidentalis Hawthorn S DT ST PKG Thornless varieties Crataegus spp.available Hickory, Shagbark L DT Carya ovata Honeylocust M -L ST BLVD/PKG Protect from sunscald. Gleditsia Thornless varieties triacanthos popular Ironwood M Grows well under shade Ostrya virginiana of other trees Lilac, Japanese S ST BLVD Tree Syringa reticulata Linden, American L BLVD/PKG A. K.A Basswood; Ti'lia americana Relatively tolerant of wet sites Linden, Littleleaf M BLVD Tilia cordata 42 Locust, Black L DT PKG Robinia pseuedoacacia Maple, Amur S Shade tolerant. LAcerginnalale, Norway M -L ST BLVD/PKG Protect from sunscald. platanoides Maple, Red M -L BLVD Protect from sunscald. Acer rubrwn Grows best on mo sts, acid soils. MaP le, Sugar L BLVD Protect from sunscald. Acer saccharum PKG Prefers heavy, moist soils. Shade tolerant. Northern Catalpa M -L DT Catalpa speciosa Oak, White L Quercus alba Oak, Bur L DT ST BLVD/PKG Quercus macrocarpa Oak, Red L ST BLVD/PKG Quercus rubra Oak, Swamp L PKG Relatively tolerant of wet White sites Quercus bicolor MUWNEEWWWMM Ohio Buckeye M BLVD Aesculus glabra Walnut, Black L Juglans nigra CONIFERS Arborvitae,M American Thuja occidentalis 43 Fir, Balsam M Relatively tolerant of wet Abies balsamea sites. Shade tolerant. Fir, white M DT Abies concolor Pine, Austrian M Pinus nigra Pine, Red L DT S tate tree Pinus resinosa. Spruce, Black M Hills Picea glauca densata Spruce, Colorado M Picea pungens Spruce, Norway L Picea abies Spruce, White L Picea glauca Tamarack L Tolerant of wet sites. Larix laricina Only conifer that drops its needles each year in fall. 8/26/93 9/22/93 44 LIST OF DESIRABLE GROUND COVER AND HERBACEOUS PERENNIAL KEY: ST = Relatively Salt . Tolerant SN = Relatively Tolerant of Snow Loading Botanical Name Achillea Filperd Common Name Yarrow Size 24" Tolerance PT DT SN Notes Artemisia Schmidtiana Silver King' Artemisia 36"DT ST SN Astilbe spp.Astilbe 12" -30"SN Partial Shade Aegepodium Podograria Goutweed/ Snow On The Mountain 12"SN Baptisia Amstralin False Indigo 36"ST DT SN Shrub Like Euophorbia Epithymoides Cushion Spurge 1.8"DT SN Festica Ovina 'Glauca' Hemerocallus spp. Hosta spp. Huechera Sanguinea Hypencum Calycinum Blue Fescue Day Lily Plantain Lily Coral Bells St. Johns Wort 12 12 " -30" 12 %30" 18" 18 %24" DT SN ST DT SN SN ST SN PT SN Fall Sun Pardal Shade L ium Maculatum Pend Nettle 1811 SN Sun or Shade Linum Perenne Perennial Blue Flax 24"DT SN Monarda Didyma Beebalm 24"ST SN Partheno Cissus Quingnefolia Virginia Creeper 15"SN Partial Shade Polygonum Tricuspidatam Compactum' Fleece Flower 24 DT SN Can Be Invasive Pennisetum Alopecumides Fountain Grass 36"SN Rudbeckia Fulgida Goldsturm' Black -eyed Susan 24"ST SN Sporobolus Heterolepis Prairie Drapseed 24"ST DT SN Full Sun Veronica spp.Speedwell 24"SN 45 Shrubs Continued 2 Botanical Name Common Name Size Tolerance Notes Yucca Pilamentosa Yucca 24"ST DT Full Sun Sedum Spectabile Stone Crop 18"ST DT SN Autumn Joy Ins Siberica Siberian Iris 24"ST DT SN Comus Alba 'Red Elf Dogwood 'Red Elf 36" Diervilla Loncera Dwarf Bush Honeysuckle 36"SN Juniperus Horizontalis Juniper 18"DT SN Hughes' Juniperus Sabina Juniper 18"DT SN Arcadia' Junipers Sabina 'Baffalo'Juniper 18"DT SN Lonicera Xxylosteum Honeysuckle 24" Emerald Mound' Potentilla Fruticosa McKay's White Potentilla 30"DT SN Potentilla Fruticosa Potentilla 30"PT SN Gold Fingee Rosa spp.Carefree Beauty Rose 36"DT Rosa spp.Nearly Wild Rose 36"DT Spires Japonica ' Alpina'Alpine S Pirea 12"SN p rea Japonica 'Alpina'Alpine S ireaPP 12"SN NOTE: Other materials may be used subject to city approval. 46 m ` °° A. achment 3 0 3 C) CAWWd o u. co co Q -- J uj D m :o Q > cis a: m n o0 CC w a. -41% E uu CkAl W c - d wwgyp' z o Zjmx WOODBURY g CL o Z Z Q o W j zVWOro z 1 ..UCC sn cn o QQU. Q W O J 6 Q. z Q F o = W o W tl) O > O Q N 0 : Q. n Q Q3o W CL Q w t Y 0 o ;. o N l r/ Lu a + , cf) O ,a Q a o C V08 Aua - _ a.nog .. . G U.b LL U O v w ccOw Y J o W Y Z 0uj 9 INTER PLAN 47 V c2 z L" z z oz z CG VCdV E- o t1 V Ln 0 z Attachment 4 VISTA HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN PLANNING AREA NUMEII N 48 4 N Figure 20 M ME am m • s ` Jim minor collector fr i ® miw I t IM 0 Ul IN ffi• it a IN . M IN s r minor I l i f i i i! 11 1! f! Ai 1 i;`it i i t i i o t e i i , NEW 11 WON VISTA HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN PLANNING AREA NUMEII N 48 4 N Figure 20 HIGHWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN PLANNING AREA NUMBER 1Z 49 Q L2J Figure 21 40 r }Y.w.s....... i S e.ef.V cY . { . L _ .. ...._• ... .. ....... ._. LD ..s:i 0 _ , . r .. ' • ,, ,:. ` is ESTeIov 4 W r ` - • / a d60t ! - ate. _ : .. L 'v - f J . ? : " ' I ate. ; s: - ) • C - S -1` : '^ -I 5\ ` 1ryv • : ' , yl ; ry • ' L...A'/.(, +...,. . 1 ..i ` '_ Q t .;c . _ x a % - 5t- . , v r i slMtlwertf* eC :. . '"- -: • y " ^r+r4 ! yep` -I^ ,i {.,• wt Ilk mel "l c'^,C r- t • ` `` ' o-c ` • + r ; / ` ..,yT,,_[ ` t 1 /.. 4. yr wx"'. ' ` ` y ' A e .; ..< / ^:"!. - ' L . 1 { • - •" - - fir ' ,,, i • ! `', j ' f qiy l ' , l Z l i / i+ ` :. t l G W'Y.f yam! ' I ..L.+• rv. 1 _- l.. •/ .: # .'' ` - - 01. I "•i' - /\ • t •`'^.,.: 1 .aT ='/Ei .. VAS RE._ t WIN -1 ate• t { I Q - w / vb ,+:. .K . -• .'h. 1 441= r7 ^\f _ _.__.... y; ! /` t } - "' _ i sr z ^ ti ` '" ,_ r t e • r 1 ` i err r 11 rws a ..::{ " '- a r - r „• '(1" % •' C' e ? a+ _ \ \•Ji/` t- •.+;',Pir3LS"7' - 4 ' /~ y • ,., _'•- `" _ • f . `/`'"' . tidLi, ihi \ ' r ..z. 2' ' 1 '+. `' • n t . S .tC.! ., ','L -.t ^ I t ._: i : 3G:, - .. l z : - mil ' e" • / t Y lF4i1.1 r11 <• / / -•\ r' A klk LD1 ", . { - - n - _ s , • r des . 'St,. L ' ; l r \ r .. f Y NG —_ - y ?f T "` K' Y 1 vo SOW ol K)N : % URBAN r SPIMI CE ARRA ` cal 1 ^ ~`ii•1. - JK ! , .- fr-• r . y , - ... ...,a t ri 4 . 51 LD LOW DENSITY RESID. MD MED. DENSITY RESID, CITY OF WOODBURY LAND USE PLAN HD HIGH DENSITY RESID. O OFFICE INDUSTRY C COMMERCIAL RETAIL 50 r Home m 1111410mu soSS1 In 60 no EWof all01 .0 SLI ik AO m ru INN 0 I e_ e Of 2 I MINDIm L ti flfs " Mae met lug Moll Sto HIM I ii. Wawa An 111 R Igo I ti n ! / i / /llfff FAgET779MmF-A I-A 7 Fi 41 fill +: JL 4 57-7 i C = . :till 7 r i C"r = =T ay. Z.r s:t 4 so C3 A - n 4P1. a_/! 5! - .52' OAKDALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN F scsd W rk Attachment, 8.= LD - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MD - MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL E3 WETLANDS Oakdale HD - HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL E2 WOODLANDS Minnesota P - PUBLIC STEEP SLOPES P - SEMI-PUBLICS1SULC EXISTING TRAILS ,Planning District C - COMMERCIAL PROPOSED TRAILS 6 1/0 - INDUSTRIAL /OFFICE FUTURE STREETS NM TM na Is a prrri,q Wpows «+h GI - GENERAL INDUSTRIAL Mw riod na be used ~ p.as. 11 wowe mquk•n I« . mbvmom 04% 5! - .52' OAKDALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN F scsd W rk Attachment, 8.= Attachment 9 - i o os V R,,3(F OS c I actor Ivy Ave. R.2o isNC _3(It) E R-3(ol e tor s 1:f w Maryla Ave. R• Stillwat r Rd R -3(M) * = 8CJP Q -Sw -- a.os 0 _ . M « •, r F . 1 j Co F m f - i i e c to Harvester Ave. C R.w3(Hl cc8C CEM 0 cc M6CC r- T ---+ : L.1. •'fix -± ..LBC BC r hlinnehaha Ave. BC M - r „ L BC LAND USE MAP 53 N Attachment -10 d a 3 l-c c (a) < 13_: too S v 0 L N1 r3 1316.4T b%m A YL A N D AV Z3 a9. ' 0 100 8 6 „.-„ 533 s _ ( 8 (7) ( ) 4) i o a 01 %9 0 0 I PWIL8 6 °' 1 2700 271 FIRE DEPT I X00.9 0. N 1177I A M 27072701 , n m o 0 (l9) too . 20 ro*.0 21 'o «, 4 22 toe , to 05 2) w 2 goo u111'' S zs ._._. _ YOCUM OIL pia) / P 8 2 9 1149. ,.115 , ` , 7.45 a , _ .46 Z So a TEXACO a ' ' S E 4 +oII t 1 - « 2729 . YOCUM OIL OFFI s Csa yN 4, CE t W01 , g os I 400M O4 b `• 129.1 129 12 ` 0 a 54) o° C4-3) 2730' W ass V9 a • O o (0Z ° 0 Z 55) 0000,0 No •` 42 0 o No to A (' ri g W NP J 10\ . 1077 ; oC 24 N C 7) PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 54 4 N l w J Q CL j y R•3(H) lm" BC(M) --- 8C— LAND USE MAP 55 Attachment _11 R•3(M) Maryland Ave. Stillwater Rd. BC BC(M) LBC rvester Ave. innehaha Ave. 8C LBC R os Co Co E sway Ave. I Attachment 12 V) ( 101 kwlf Vol to T 2 ° Q - ` t 11 10 1 T to (`4 fill ot 3 ^ 3:2 03 mss fir. s. ...._ t L•I,. A IF All. GO 19,461 too. On O 133. J hCHURCH 925 l l t'r Fi sib rOt 1011 ' ) 1 _ _ O 915 M1 ; L) I W o L :, f895jrPtoA992 • » • . Zleo' BRAND J W i S 2173 v L air F i » 1 71?a 39) (,7, , go-I 1 F-2730 > It --- — oci413 , + : 12 ! ti 10 9 A , I , I 883 ,j.. W ltil - V I I I 4 865 17 1 19 2p I 2t 22rr [: 851 s wl C49) 8 ( s•) Gt) 72 5 . v E 'scti. i ._ 1' ~ =W L 4. .III APARTMENTS'' Own* low 100 am W wDEGE GARDEN CENTER V.: a co 4r 30 Z s:? -- G DAIRY QUEEN i y ` HOLIDAY STORE ,_ zb34 z. sta soR PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 4 56 N wDEGE GARDEN CENTER V.: a 4r 30 Z s:? -- G DAIRY QUEEN i O s) u 805 43) 6 00 2T 799 IWO -7 _7 ----- — — --- — i 7 ° Q z4 779 o t 771; T • U 763 W ) J 12 411) 1 1. of .__ _... 13 (K)N 3 O (4) 19 749 A &W Q , , 743'' a V I ' 1 j " HOLIDAY STORE ,_ zb34 z. sta soR PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 4 56 N I HARVE BI M1NNE LD - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WETLANDS Oakdale MD - MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Q WOODLANDS Minnesota HD HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL STEEP SLOPES P - PUBLIC /SEMI - PUBLIC EXISTING TRAILS Planning District C - COMMERCIAL PROPOSED TRAILS 1/O - INDUSTRIAL/ OFFICE tl FUTURE STREETS Mw Tw WAp r IN pwving pupw" 0 fi GI - GENERAL INDUSTRIAL and wrow not to used when pies. WAOw«nws as nKPAna one Mw sa m UMMM opt. of w.nw.wuon • im NORTH FrN zso• 0• 2so• soo• 000• soo 7 iocla Attachment 13 Attachment p o lil3iZ Stts+ lsw. ags a a s Y e s, s s Zo) o 7o a0 ' o 9 (f 0 L Eo 000 T OJQ 07 OO 3 o PL t) loop to , ,- • 100 , ri 7 HIGHWAY 36 7 r ______J.R1_v_E_ ____ _ ___310. i - -r, 3e s , mw Stow .47 . I ! i ift HWY E3MT 3 TS.4"1.32. -• -••.i I I C too. -_ - -! L- • - - - -- - -- _i..3 (3 t4 M t ' I I '" o .5 , 4p 4e 410•• w I of * n I 18 19 20 21 2 1,, C,T) C 4} ape T(;4NQ OUTLOT 4 L oaf l (23) ;9 SAM ao. PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP m 7) 1 — Q- N 10 9 9) All ° <i R C Gs) 22 O too go*toe ioo CzZ (23)zo I 18 17 16 1.5 14 21 (IT) sm ELEVENTH ---- Q- N Attachment 1.5 low joc'colleC -.`W Rl FS. t N o 44 • 4 Highwa 3 intsrchakge . cc m V C Q O ` V Q Q Co ft cc d Er LAND USE MAP 59 Attachment 16 2640N • - t MAU are n 2 ALMMWO M PAS v DE LMLL E ORWWswoawvat .,• ; CT• pN.NC) O Opp ,,, ooiI C( or 3 o o A CA: B ofC 20 240ON Q t to LITTLE CAN O . . III0 tooq o.• •,• •• • • t• • ,••. 1 V a ..n Not... . •' LARK AVE v 4i VIKING R. KIK s lAUR IE RD. a• < o o 64 W g LAURIE CT 11 1• ••• ••• 1 I • • •00two0 • •• .,.. y off" y (L oCOUNTYRDB BURIC CT U AV /O 8 RKE ..,..tEI . D RIOCE AV E. Zo - EWRIOC AVMSandy • Lokilip BELMONT i,.A• riin• BELMONT 44LO + ") ^ SKIIIMAN AVE. w ! /i sKiLLMMI Av. 1. • sKILLMAN AVE. Y KENw o0o58QQL.MT. VERNON to •.1 ] t W a 3 ,o C DOWNS AVE. _ m HWO"W W Z00 ;'• --- j r. o o v NON AV z W d ROSEI_AwN CL GO BElLwppp AVE.sEU. wooD o Q AVE. e AVE.o Q °SUMMER AVE. AVE a o SUMMER 0o FENTON AVE. in 4 l+..w RIPLEY m Y ? if v out . " n X10 O ti AVE. pNN x R{PLEY AVE. SE 41 KINGSTON ti k/ v o V SOD KIN GSTON < AVE. Z oundZY V Q _ 4O p A V W LakeG2QRW@) z 2 g AVE o m LARPE PtTEUR AVE. •... Y3 a. Q 14 too ij•ti .• . , 1. J •+ • • •• • • • • • 0 • 1o1bto to 49 © 61o SA/NT PAUL A 8 C D VIIIM E S O W WOOpp W W mot- o O 0 o LOCATION MAP Homes Near Commercial 60 N Attachment 17 B AVE. • ab v ® N 1•• • •I• •• ••• • • BErAM AVE. W Q • ondV • o- Kohimon P3 i Lv Low ,.KOHt•MAN AVE lfas Mr V . J Jam ' CQUN7y ROAD C W i Q I PLAZA aR Q2ALVEPADOOR 3 BELLCRW OR PAL1 ' PW6 CT v : 2 4 OEAIJNLLE OR PAO3AIERIONNOR •• '• CONNOR C LS f" EDCEHAVE.- OR3 aEMONr D "E ' m o ` c AVE. BROOKS LL. SBCT. ' EX T z AV f AVE iA llraw ERVAIS AVE, S CERVAlS Pte,v CRANDVIEW AVE Lo VIKING DR.j • SHERREN AVE s • : OP COPE K Lek* AVE. Cr. Keller -r LARK AVE. C7 n LARK < AVE- 3• VIKING DR. ® Lake o < z a o° ` ` I CO. R0. 0 -Z v LAURIE RD. sr,,..,..r LAURIE Z RD. Led w 3 LAURIE CT. o LELANO RD. o SAND URST AVE• JUNCTION AVE — 8 n CO. RD.BURKE CT. BURKE V / O iQKE ® BURKE AVE. o1) CHM a ERS ST (1 AVE a o ® B AVE. zo ELDRIDCE AV ti ELDR IDLE AVE d W Oehr4in BELMONT COLOE t; VE. [BELMONT AVE, AVE. W i / SKILLMAN AV. _R SKILL AV SKILL MAN AVE. W1RR AW KENW 000 Kf- SHO iS AVE. ROSEWOOD AVE. r ROSrW&jD ifus o ® AN AV. W A AVEV S. c. aM cc AA WN 7 FROST S AVE. HELLW000 AVE. IL MDN AVE. - @00 AER C a O ® V E. AVE, 3 S 3 U A a SU M COR ISBIE AVEacY w ~ Z 3 ® a Iii RIP LEY a Z 21PL AVE. REC `''F1f 1Kaki SO PH L1 o KIN GSTON C AVE, und1 p Y OPN! A ST. W PRICE w AVE Lola Y N PRICE 1v 3 CL Q 4 o w7: :: o 1 • • •• • •• • •• • 0000 • 61 SAINT PAUL LOCATION MAP Homes Near Commercial 61 Q N Attachment 18 r •.. WHffE 19k4R LAKE COUNTY ROAD 0 •• CALL AVE. ' . WOOOL WOOOLYrrN .YNN AVE. Q,,. BIN AVE O !9 d I & ' ti t . AVE I. CHIPPEINAaa CT. ' LYDIA Z E ° M. p MIE ° c ' 2. w 2 . BARTELMY .LN. . •'OFP . o AVER o lb Y o t N• c ' STANORIDGE t •• .•. '• 1 BEAM ® 4 z MAPLE Q ;. h"i' •' • ' AVF j9 IAAPtE HEW AVE. s: `! , ,•,.:..... s..,. • , ' :,;: - sRADATZacAYE. Lake Qi b d M r - _.ESSAM AV A r •.• ..:.:. _ Pond J CoU RAMn orid+om . ti` NORTH S4/NT OHLMAN AVE. COURT PAUL O ® z o AML L ko v 3 W EDGEHILL RD. @ . • N DEMONr ,,vE ROOKS AVE BROOKS L'i ...• AVE. EL IZ, SEX TANT EVfJV7N)f AVE. o +r ! . • _ y GERVAIS .: GE ' ;S CERtVAIS AVE (nCRAND'VIEW AVE. . VIKING =D1 'Ck5nj AVE. SHERREN AVE COPE Kn l.ck. ( AVE COPE AVE AVE C LARK J 7v=i LAURIE RD. Ci LA o AVE. n a LAUR • ~ RD z o LAURIE Z R0. W ca t SAND URST z AVE. t, o Gi v v W ' kE Scale AVE. Q BURKE AVE. o ® BURKE AVE. © 1700 01 17001 ELM , DCE AVE .., ® ! 3400 aEl1rloNT AVE. d • 64 l5 • .. 1 = 1700'sir`AY E SKID. MAN AVE. RECRC4 )7, C Coto Md f HARRIS AVE, ROSEWOOD AVE N. $ `.•4 1 • MARYJOE LA.ROSEINO p * :. 2. TIERNEY AVEANAV. .; 3. MEADOW DR.NUAVE. S. F GROtX6AkO 4. RIPLEY AVEr 0o, NORTH SAINT PAUL AVE. T . jCl AL.DRICN L'.t •~.'•...'.1•.v ' /'' •• f• .bL :•'•`t GY GOLF NO MIM AM E. b •: AVE ' -•SU MIA - R AVE. Q ® C .. EVE, ° ,• T. . , z \ o ' °CK " .r 3. • KNOLL CIR. Wake PLEY AV g XJ zOPHIAST. ` 3 i K GSTON AVE PRICE NJ- Y I7 w ICE AVE 30 4C LARPENTEUR AVE. • Jti • d4 . 3 IDAHO AVE.. MONTANA AVE • r Z LOCATION MAP Homes Near Commercial 62 Attachment 19 12 0 ON -00own-w-mm R 9 6 0 N 10 I o E MARYLAND o o ke CASE AVE 6 720N - -: 48ON j 12 240N • 13 00 120ON 9 960N 10 720N t. 48ON dw 12 Tonram If Lake V 240N 13 00 I LOCATION MAP Homes Near Commercial 63 Attachment 20- lig• Its 4 0so . I z 33) w LL. I 441p V410 ff ohm F—S v ff. v v %W am 60+ tsp ist copy t PL^r *^ 06 TAo L.& I Fo P4 o RES MAPLf! * 04) ilk 2j) IMRo LAURIE ROAD 0 Z 1 (141 *j oll Aft% 4 UJ A3 t ISANDHU ST AV E. 0, Ica* u oo t?cIto 35) (34:1 Q 10 ir,0 ro-Mo 44)R 4w Lf I O UIAW R 11 . M I COUN&V PROPERTY LINE ZONING MAP 64 oof 13 bmr q ASOL JKK *, oa< r •! s t 4 Attachment 21 PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 65 4 N Attachment 22 L S 0 IM-Mu GERV ' °jam °'' FRVAIS - 1 - /7a. - ' t O 2YG•32S :.Nj ' o ° a1 % loo too t 0 r Co M . , t'to . Q I O C3 7 0Q • 2394 , o T T. v I " tooVM 1 ti 1.•z3 W TT06. r 10 %o 2 eYCj .,Gp cc i) p 2374 CO lob Z }.. CIX A ,-j 10 9 e E t .j A 2366 t c Z O ' 2 so LBMEN I t A # It I LoCr ' - - -- I - -- oQ1oQ` , N P`rQ . i td O Oy loo .. 5 G 4V 4V r HIGHWAY 35 N T 641 N : ;Y SsMr - T S 113 I F. H * ; 7 i T. 4301)24 7 1 1 16 17 19 21 22 2 2425 272829 5 6 7 8 1 ' rzVQ* pf AV alI 6 . .. r - ., .. 4h (3 ACA T Tj 15) 1 _ I 1 1, 91 x. , 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 11514 1 12 1.1 10 9 7 4 3 2 0 • - I 19 24 25 2 7 16 17 19 2021 2924 7 28 291723it31Iof 16 ' . 1s t o IRt lM - COPE ZXI) C 0 ( 3 .0 26 i e t 1 i PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP WO Q N Q 1 71 1 1 `.- 2462 (io) 3aa 31p 35 L n -l t 2456 y"z 2444 , _ N 2434 lot z 2426 t r1 2428 17) 1 40L ' °f 9S . S oc. t REDEEMING LOVE CHURCH 2415 Go 4• 19)ts. 320 L S 0 IM-Mu GERV ' °jam °'' FRVAIS - 1 - /7a. - ' t O 2YG•32S :.Nj ' o ° a1 % loo too t 0 r Co M . , t'to . Q I O C3 7 0Q • 2394 , o T T. v I " tooVM 1 ti 1.•z3 W TT06. r 10 %o 2 eYCj .,Gp cc i) p 2374 CO lob Z }.. CIX A ,-j 10 9 e E t .j A 2366 t c Z O ' 2 so LBMEN I t A # It I LoCr ' - - -- I - -- oQ1oQ` , N P`rQ . i td O Oy loo .. 5 G 4V 4V r HIGHWAY 35 N T 641 N : ;Y SsMr - T S 113 I F. H * ; 7 i T. 4301)24 7 1 1 16 17 19 21 22 2 2425 272829 5 6 7 8 1 ' rzVQ* pf AV alI 6 . .. r - ., .. 4h (3 ACA T Tj 15) 1 _ I 1 1, 91 x. , 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 11514 1 12 1.1 10 9 7 4 3 2 0 • - I 19 24 25 2 7 16 17 19 2021 2924 7 28 291723it31Iof 16 ' . 1s t o IRt lM - COPE ZXI) C 0 ( 3 .0 26 i e t 1 i PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP WO Q N Attachment 23 W 00 ._ CITY or twLEwoeC . s so 4 • •Mar' .,. it toate• o.Tr4 a7. del"s ASSN .•a .vs. tT t+«s•t "" .•.•.w K... :: •. W g i.saw sr. we v . 1: rarwc ias.KL- .!!'rw. .?=C . M: ' r• as, ( 40 • if:il' =Z3 () BANK 101" tofato ;.GS ». 41 • • • • w L°/ • -144 Aft 66 ( o) U) (!) ; ( 1 spa rs .. ;: ss ac. s o 218382836• _ as 2830' •- !- 00 00 •- *- ' Meo• .00' , i E R A CAT Z AV E. mailwilow 187 It• .>f4 ls. at. • gar we ••:• ::•:•:::. * tN tN' t i N Sets .sr" .so .yi.. m rw.a •rat• wr.t. rr O Mrs• ' Llis. #at. s t •• C .. tr. 1 .4. 1 81 _ ' i 0•1 =o 2811 « .. ' . is Iro 'f *- r' ' sti i;:•:; -, INS) I r . 41- - t w 4O 1 rtM MEO atta 41w e TOWN HOUSES -= " T ...- . 2800 T OFFICE- Z.. 6 so _ BUILDING • a '° n Jtt t a . a • 11 1',Q ' ' '; LBC 'r.'. A E QE p K IL a 'f ; o t . Lt cy 977 `- - t •. 2785 OUT A loop it .04 O' r• IVINy, ••. R+u+fit 7607,aps. a• a , '»' a..s. .+rr t' ( tI) 2755 u a 1'' , f.lt as. 10 w fs as. • T - • M , 3) 04 M y , M ,•` 1 • 0) WATC R 4016 ow PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 67 4 N Attachment 24 O 3z , ,8 EDGEHILLj4A ) - ; 4 33 =o1 b, M , • 407•T5 -a • . _ it2 - N o .al 15 14 13 12 11 10 S 8 7 5 4 3 2 1b.4 Q VAC. 11 DOC.20G2543 _ 27) a 2 23 24 6 2T 28 29 30 W 16 17 18 19 20 21 24,252627 829 0 so 40 it -1G -7 Li VAC. . .,• ! .4 i '.1 ' VA CA?Ep : e 2062543 AVE& J 3o I 36 OI c S) °a MOGRE 15 14 13 .12 11 Flo 9 _8 7 5 4 3 2 1NSi _W s QOO N 2•GGst, { - - A ` N W 16 17 18 19 2021 22 23 4 5 6 7 28 29 30CID ! W o M M M DE MORT • 3s allL,Ba,.• 4) n Ir °ry Clb 1 - 5)U27 ti a ...... 31! v r 40 w asis00o1i A 1 02500: ::::: :., a 0oC N PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 68 N y ) .18 a. 0 CD 4.w aw,r • 2480 o a Now NAME a GERVAIS AVENUE .I , ocl813572 i o Street Esp,t.8,5133 1 1.41 a,,F AV E 2462 (D 3 33 L 8.6 9 a . 03 03(0 1 .f 3S 7 12 36 3 J f L 79 de.: ono N 1 ,r 80 ets,es v f PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 68 N Attachment 25 3) <s) r AMIN lip. 60 7(4s) 33 lwt r Ia rr a h 0 (8 ) 3 t 4 2999 390 _D SEEN d So o I C) 9 () 7 ) - aJ O v 13 3' oira- 0 14 oo i e 2911 3 (Z1) CZ3 ' G 3 • - ' 8 ;ter.• ftj 2 ) 1 _ 4 i Iq fi 7 1 a 19 o M Q rN '' row sr0) — (GL) (67) W r ',^ _ 2889 r3' y 5 994 -a 12n r 1 a l 7o Sye 1r6 " a /t4/" TOR 11 Lbl at. $ N ' 287 ! T F " srG ! N sc a. ac. 3 r . sr /, ! . / It s T • fft49 3) W CST)o) lot P Uhl 16L 'ART op t ' 1 s Sac rfit. '° :. .._. Ap l . ass PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 69 4 N Attachment 26 Xv)- = . ".. -mss ' i ( dpi - --C 4 37.•4 I tli ) (4-0 t 6o) ° I k(4 Gin • 3 K:• t 4i o NO* 477 Itit te+ .s e ago 2688 `4'' R c)- j JIA ;726729 Vol 0+1 tj M Cam) • ' t) sL i o +tJ ' i. j,.•. •:::. : 2 13D 62 13Z 103*1 33 ae ROAD - • "' 1 7I _ - . : 0 : .. 0: r 8 . S 3 stir' • 1 t7 IV E : r R' .,..,. • r. N : M tr a r s.: a 3 j 119 : !" ', a r• : r '.. 4C a 9 1.. Cj o v t CHURCH - e a o s s Qt 1 v a * 2 0 I O • J • o ft j 1 33 t 1 b f ' tot ( 76) ti AAjIRA 03) AMA 01) 2 •t4 r t .y _ 7 '>> os.r• t 4 r V Sl 3 d 2 r wts163f# L , lot 1> MITSU ;_ POND! NG o ZI .tf . 19 z q' 3 103) 63 S0 >. 17 16 a 1 ; v o r 1.47 `• e E E 12 - f lob ao _• «. rr -i - ' iyRA4N AGE 14 l3s loo 3RD* 'A o p tt« - Q ,r..a w t.a.. AREA `• } FONVIN AptCA 4 I Dec. o.MWETLAND7. S. f'• p 1sa r 539.3S 17Jtt Air 1 4 PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 70 4 N Attachment 27 ear - a s. as -- - - s Nbbft mot Am 40 2 0 s its` yr _ , ' . ie,i.1 • ;'1 ,_ 3f, dILA Its 7 4 1 Cte,1 ;,'J S Sti•c• 1 I f G•I o car, ` 4 ' :.+ ..11 . ..• , f Mr L law. kwCONNORAV ' E '" Js , , , q 1• . MOBILE HOME PARK car) 144 II) O O i • UL IL Ilk o r13 a 11 4 1d) W AVE ,, ,,, lowDEMONT s(,) , N.W. CAMERA ' del ,two log S h J ,r Lit 7Z • ' ,, .. y ~ . e u) ,f Z f A!I1T 'YT «r i • • • • • •+..• . Ate• i1i///yiyiyi . • • M „s , . : :X 4 7 e/ !!• f 3.000e• • w 4 Z 7!•° A•) 3 2483 • 1)Tt tear)I f b 13 14 900 ZUERCHER WELL DRILLINGAdw to • , a1) , G r x. 1 7 Z • LCI -ter • • •T Tt GT• i o ts. ttt.is) . :: .t.fridstL•::.•.•:.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.:•: M I9 . WLrRo0K3 _ (i tte) ..... . .................... Je .. ...... ... atii s ` cw •.•::.•:. .•• Z 471 •'•'• Q s.,s sx t:•: •3 f.ZP rt.S 7l. 2e-4 I DRIVE—ININ prM WIVIda 141111101., 0 t , O 0' •WX n s M 2411 --- . AAIX 1. 1 c v • s • st" Osso i.Bt•s O ,•e• +e ., o.y • .,, Ilo ,•., ETHANE` - ZIto /ro . J - • ' l.iTaa 'f ALLEN { o c 1.OD•i a ! 09 , to . ' opt. .to,,;, 1 HIGHWAY 36 ;__.,.._ ' •• - tom f s r: L'°... r PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 71 4 N Attachment 28 o s3 lira Q. M I Z.5 Ca 2.4 ec s e - ------ - - - - - j A.1w"oo4N awqr D" ii: zw 0 5 -OIL. I r 391 4i 0 lop ag f.P w ' C s 7. AN .L 4V& AID 4 3*1 -- j u I Al C t 0140p 1.50 4p* 4(41 F BLJ Slo 0 CO 0 I Vv 8) a g to 6) !o f 4 4 Si-i P. itecovioa 1 - I .; "'^ 0loTt061 t ice), Ifni lei13) a Ida CS Z.0 -.._ 8 0 I "A I 8 r. _ 1 i.! L+A ff 4 0 3 0 J OEM T. 4 ::19( 39 19( 9 4- ............. . 05 194- 041 ? REALTOF Lop ASSO( 34,8 ass. ROSELAWN AVE.., 1 Jh ftm 40W. 00 C44 C4 7 7O1 9 to 63 • rr 4 W Z W j J. PROPERTY LINE ZONING MA 72 Attachment 29 irl 1 T tZ3.34 PI 4Rif46 t-%9 A 0i * IV . t bjo37 ' PC fb3tao EN 1738 ;7• too ins •:• ::.......:.....• :::;::•:::Iso a AJA 1 1733: s J. 340 _Wx 330 11lti • i 030 ` GOLDEN STARSAR 2 i Cz) , • ,i APARTMENTS N J 33 -P0'3 - 10oa. 1451047- 5o 3.31 =58 fit_ a-- LARPE NT E RAVE. a lb , D Wz Vi Y,% t Z; t i i t PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 73 4 N stiR k 00 o 1.29 aye, 1 • J iowal rn tre " 2 ' e'-- 00, AWOC, 1.5 to i O r I 1 90 ate. t Q v 1 T tZ3.34 PI 4Rif 46 t-%9 A 0i * IV . t bjo37 ' PC fb3tao EN 1738 ;7• too ins •:• ::.......:.....• :::;::•:::Iso a AJA 1 1733: s J. 340 _Wx 330 11lti • i 030 ` GOLDEN STARSAR 2 i Cz) , • ,i APARTMENTS N J 33 -P0'3 - 10oa. 1451047- 5o 3.31 =58 fit_ a-- LARPE NT E RAVE. a lb , D Wz Vi Y,% t Z; t i i t PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 73 4 N Attachment 30 633) 3s 7c so to 3 S T ' Lo C' ` lS94 • l9.Ka .1t Ms 1 Ono ;0 2S s to :~ , -..Jk N . 8 2 40 C` 14brii ISO. o 2Z) IL t =t ra•• .1 me of N E 4 o d& Z 11w4 *IF 1010 Moore N S.S SAO 7, 00 -- Je lift .010 s soo.9 -41-wise 9% • 2 -- S t 12 lotZs 0 . 6 to0 Ab 00 ' R Z c •. • • s R 33.9 '` 7 • SO 27 t a log lbUs at zS lot v ' . A ' ' •.' •• v ,O '1' 24 • ta y Not 3 N 23 ' op v 13 a •.• ..•...... _ Za 19 to 117 ' •' 1 h' 6 (1& ... aC. or '730,400 ° . w w ` ' .W. 1 = X - T __!.tF _ _ o. _, I so 1 •_,_. F COURSE - .1741GOLCOUS . - r - rZ t 907 wsA . - b 371.4 mium Cf • 'y I T M isENO t` . p z 05Z ,h• z - w 6 P 3 1721 # I f V Q 9 6 Z 3 N2 { 3g ) 3 OAo 0 _ It • Ova - - - ' • , ,, ,4 co z ti - t ., b 2-` - ',' :: :::' : ":; _:: 31 co v 4 WIN R Y 0 O 3 ti ItlFA ' C1 g,N °5 - ` :' 5 168`'5 ; r A THROE ' v+ 9) 100 :• . (z, T ) 4 M. 1291.iS 4 + s . u_ _... _ - Vi •... 4'03 t 1 -- --'.' .. ti • . - •''26 0 Oo R a i22. Sao . s s4 SAINT PAUL PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 74 4 N 46)19 (440) QN ;L a v M 041. ft .) 6 3 03 1 t `gZ .l TOTAL53 -' %, 12• -fG - T? I ' HILLSIDE CENTER PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 75 o 4 sn ILI GC Attachment 31 S (am) 12 9 (141 13(46) = .. Ct 33 in ( 4 9 Q p ( , ie)ratRI o 10 (43; 1O IN i, i' 66) (S7) ZO s f3 st 4 13 o e S N 12 Z (4) ' 291.Q9 29 t .09 4 ' i 1 5. is Zoe •. I93 •a Olin I% j 0 rb on VI s so i 1 G 2 pea v.T o• h (49 1745 !ts r : + {aa) j •a 43) qv 1737 (29 z X30 e i I (3 %li 1146 u u in 3 I) 2,00 1 Sc _S o fs •8 G(o , oA 35.32 1709 1702 1°J 43 1700 .°95Oo p _ .. 4 N Attachment 32 - i i i 1 RAMSEY COUN i 1 1 1 rz aa.sa. zo:rc 1 O t WEE SEEN N"EMNE MRIPLEYi - - -- I i • s I , i, • w .. CIO2 IOO '1... of • • : Q': cu '`:01: 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 t a I r t 1 4 r Ri •za I 1 14 ' ' ' Q: 27 2 25 24 23 22 i S 1 '' aa. : Q Cam,? C C3) C IV (sx) (,u) t o ' I&, - ' K I NG S TO RlV•- 6 It o ' 00 :r: 7 a H Q 5 r' w rz aa.sa. zo:rc 1 O t WEE SEEN N"EMNE MRIPLEYi - - -- I i • s I , i, • w .. CIO2 IOO '1... of • • : Q': cu '`:01: 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 t a I r t 1 4 r Ri •za I 1 14 ' ' ' Q: 27 2 25 24 23 22 i S 1 '' aa. : Q Cam,? C C3) C IV (sx) (,u) t o ' I&, - ' K I NG S TO RlV•- 6 It o ' 00 :r: a H BUILDER'S SQUARE r' 27 26 25 24 23 22 i t 8I f) Cb) 3 4l. 1 PRICE r 7 t0;4 cfT c •)PS 70 71 • 7: 13) Iz i6 og.r 2 3 4 5 6 7 t Ts tS WD 1 'oo rc 05oo:'. •Si OZo 51 030 100 51 SI2.3G Q M 1 = t Z T'o 1. t t et. a•:• CK)Rs) ( toe (,' t t0 A,r r r V V V r c :•: :•:• 1 T r/1• r Ic s r w- •VMS, PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 76 Q N Attachment 33 1 v Ir •tr V M w 2 VA DYKE ST. 40* to 13 i ' .OS ra. i "F fssxsAlFROSTAVE.' -- -- ,d -ass •. • 1- i ( " {: 192 5 f+ ,,, I IrAMitll OOt/NTI3qi lam• L 1913 Ow 9 1899 o r " ) RAMSEY COUNTY - SOL m) f _ - 1883 r 1871 ts.e 4-0 1865:: ALDRICH ARENA 1 '"" 855 ono Q x) r cz, 18,49 ' t (gyp () • •:;-fir .. . ,;.: • a rs tom+ ......... sum RENTAL' llis• 'K) : (tJ) Lam_ VOL tat• "— y X. , - - -- _ ,, 1805 _ - ± - -- Cl 44.) ('N) 9 9 i. i i 2 3' s 7 8 a iK (47) ......: :i _.!•. , t M , Irv) Sk Law) •: :178 4 as 27 2% 2SI&COIcaw1779 :6c •.• _ 1 s t! cs) car uh c y (s (? • 773 o e ' • 3 K I N G S T 0 Q • r tt ' 30 w ( : .176,7 Ovv :* :1763. 7• ' t 2 3 9 ` to 77) (s + •—,;r r-rs a ' (off 1 53.._. 20 27 as 2! 174 1 ,o to 3 O (!t) - v , Z ttiri) ts'r tr1 uw caw 1„ 2 „ c :Ei:::::173 3 , , • S PR I C E lip 17 Ito) so WW t« f 1717eaaa._I 1, 3" (rt) (bV 1709AN 01) W ............ 13 BC t7 I eee ....... 1 . 1 -_ tt . If S) h•) () W ` (9J (CQ (o) (ii) (tol / .t.r 3.110 4 -n• tss.a. via _ N 1 UA. to r 1 • 1 I r- Q) M f 40 UV) tD rr PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 77 Q N Attachment 34 v1 t rLSy ' ao 1 61,18 - 1 -78 1 » 1 w 101.4 roo 7s tqr 3 x) • 11 33 1 ' zs 4 s A ZG ' 4 23 *' ' V eta s A . s 3 (40)V ( c 7 to .I c ' 4 (GD)W di r ww- wur, O ?-) 17 n 22K. 1 Il02 # w IL 14 n 1 , 7 =i I , 10 10 70 r + to rsop s I J qj sl 15 v 14 was .C., E 2' Z ,1 v1 t rLSy ' ao 1 61,18 - 1 -78 1 » 1 w 101.4 roo 7s g(1s 3 x) • 1 W 1 ' zs 4 s A 4 23 *' ' V eta s A .Z — a 7 to .I c ' 64) s 1' • j o di r ww- wur, O ?-) 17 22K. 1 Il02 # w IL 14 n 1 , 7 =i I , 10 70 r + to rsop J qj sl v was .C.,1 . v1 t rLSy ' ao 1 61,18 - 1 -78 1 » 1 w 101.4 roo 7s g(1s 3 x) •U) _3 4 A W i7 _ .V eta s A .Z — a 64) di AA f i ll 1e N Hp to + to q4 11 It 139 14 w T 0 w w w •• 7f Y4 302230 30 r 60 g + 1 3 7 1 3) -- To P 7` _ 4 lase a 1 , r irr.f ~ _ w two pa 1 1 ''— Its • 3(5f.} ( (84) I 71 ISO 1 A 60 Is AN 0 S Fb 1960 ' p i I 77 970 1954S " , I _ s .• Q SCHOOL 1 T. NQ iZ is 21 to ,) -'1940 r 1942 — — -- ,— — —, t3 T 1 6 0. - 30 a= all w' F R.0 S T Ole" L'gv sk V E I's :a :T ?i as its 4 ' 1900 Z(92)3 22 = 896 :.; ...#??.: :':f • :`: : 8944 0 24 u is ._ v ss(to i • :ram ..,}:rw. 'ir:i• . - ... «*, Tom' 1889 tad s . ::: a IS • s 17 r4 Is T Is to • ' 18 i8 13 1!/ f! 1t 4 (M) 1, 4 17 _ • 4) 14 (1 17 ' _ (loo) 1,y 17 (10%) . (p) 1 we VA IS SUMMER % zM AV E t- I (14)Z Z2) • PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP w Q N Attachment 35 V t N oD z z, -ZZ.Z • , o LEASED TO VILLAGE OF MhPLEWOOD •• 1G t G. ?7oti. Ar. 15044l E•K- ..... IG __ 't• •• s .rT AL SON FROST AVE.Ir coo GOB .• 10 6O o11I10 - 15c dwIsmij 13 8 Q. Al: l0 1307 ° o•r Z. ap 14 • .: 2# :: r::: 7 4 + t / . / N C L_ ni G F 5 M, ?. 000I -M DIY. + L r ' 1904 o oa 7si 5 t f: tom•: ? G c s 18901 I VA L :18$4to -- - ;-;M- -- , 1 w Q • 40)10 ' '• •: 1 10 w t MEMO 0000 Now IG N 7v' 5 . 1 5 w 5 t9 tr i Ci r0 1'1 CG4 Il 4 (,5 7 IZ J) 4 — O NONNI iT) 17% 0 w HUN 2p 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 _ Z (t 15 so , 14 o P E N E>D - I . t S G o a -- 44 3 50 C , ' . J . AL a-wow 'r2 , 10 9 FS 'T 6 5 4 312,, 1 14 ..... 47 GO 19 s T ° 4 . eb, Go GO o 6 0 Z v R1 PLEY AV •IZ 14 15 1G 11 i 19 20 Z1 2 LOOKOUT _ _ 13 0 0 /i J) T - 4 ) > ,OLK PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 79 4 N Attachment 36 s ItOoc `m i • s• 0984 1PS4 ' ' •89 SOsc. oo % 't , 2.32 ws.. # s .98ac go a - ft6 low,' C.E. Af 41; t r v C74 6 _ oh 4b6.36 1t _ ... --- 2 Im - A69.4 ` 1.00 bc. d0 ko 243 ul 403•, S J 3111 231 <8 (7) . 4 X0.1 p • N Y1 z •• 784 .................. ............................., e . a N ......... .....................::.•::...• ..•: :... :.•............. :..... _ 4Z0.01 6$3.t t 40 Co • • • • • •.i • I? • ..• . 1 . E •776:.'.%%* ..::.. SARRACKS .. .. ice ........ . - Gfi 54 O6 K w w w r.ZT o' f So j.768 .. ........... , ,,ow: * _ IiIX. N,... 756:....• : ,w Sib oiM s o (9V G ? 20 ! 2300Q 2+ 22 23 34 zs 6 a 1 0 # p @O30 f N z 13 tZ.. S) N N (Z (3 ° 3 (3L) (3 (3q ( (3r.) (3T) (38) g l 7 f PIP93 v oMo . A VNov %W HA--- *#--s %wo 0 PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 80 Q N Attachment 37 s 2) j s• ' t9 20 t ) ass j 22 j 4A ( Z3) f 23 / VA j 1 f r 15 15 j A ISO A 2t 0 X ` , : •t 9S 9o.' ti.3 T 7iyii 7f."!!i 7G y I3 ( 4 1 5 e) 7 8 9 1 Z3a& ( ! vdy -tOtO• i t ti4 4w t css) ' f34.6i' • 134 9a so 13494 134%.& t" r , p 2 eo L9 $ S) . 1 5 0 olpf ts Ov A 70 7 t - 64 Q w DsAl22rpC'S 4)as AW 7 r f 7 j• za I 10 s c AUTO PARTS: Z a 42 u (a I W 9 ( ") % ' 2& II :13 7 two , 10 : s IQ : t 19 to • ' all I 28 3 11 = I I If Is 11 t ) t0 13 TOM THUMB , ry 22 1•,a _tom C) ''' (+ ' . • - 4. I = • . 9 • 16 13 h to US ;; S Of 14 o,14 c IS t4 ° 1"7 !6 0 O s,3 ° g Cad - — Gr, _ G o .. o ' (6) - ffL. 1 (44 so .46 1401 135 Is& ob 1.35 13 a'• +N 1 UPPER AFTON ROAD• 1 T C T '1 ttf ' I t 330 1 5 SCHOOL DIST N PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 81 4 N Attachment 38 N our, L0 or vy 0 R :;I r • •85, MW o.ee , Z ;: q : ;_ i1''f 190' •' t' I :1Q.l: !.t 1 ,. 1 wo_ t 2A. 3 4-218 ;. ;: (Irl Z.'! :,,,, J _ i ' , •'• • 4 ;;•:..•. •. ;.,; 9.33. ,._. ,, it.) • 214.: ._ lift . do Is t Sr , G 1 Z MERIT CHEVY $• BC/-f) N 20 r • r 1 . •, iii i13 ,% 7 . u -- 1 198 • too 9NC •' 12 .• • t •r ; y (4) cc 1• r180 • :••: :• ' :.•••'• ••• • •••'••:•• ••••• . ) + CC44IA CA 4t o` s s 1 kq Q.•. io Is ze 0( '• N: y.1 f • I t:•::•: :•:: • .APARTMENTS Toys ''•'.•. •:*•. , ^ '` yo . tZ9.so 99•t t 3 jS I C) 7 S 9 .o g 4 - 1 P4i 0 kf 4 LM X. < <) - IOC V1 cas)' t'S4•fii'• 148 !O 1J430 134! 100 6esp t3p 0 1 ) o ; e ; ) i ' Cam) • I See 1470 ) . r....,_......__. _. 146 • iii'941 ?. 3 r APARTMENTS1c ,S 4 u. q s s 4 s 4 ' ,, s , , 4 I' 3NAL- _,— , s1 00 me IS I in Now 2 1 '4 b • w . mow. 36 - 1 „ 39 PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 82 Q N Attachment 39 to I I ogIa c ItItoJ2 or 4 3 N. I N, q Sri 585 o- r COW J I i W , W jo 00t d P. i0 Q J j : 64 665 L,. T" 1. --- — --- — - - -- 3 M A R GA R E T ro 657'*' 1 ' 649: "` ' din iiiiiiiiit 111=1 M 643 N z i 9 4, _ N 13 635 M 14 629 awmi.74 - — — — 6 Is 7.621 4 t ,Rl X. Oct 03 es 6 moo. 3607T 143 .70 1 1.5 , 197.1 Qp' 19i alc 1 2 OtI s t. -O3A.. I 11BC 0 Lo 2 3 59 5 ; •, ,. c3t, 585 3 577: %' COW J trT) 3o09 r 74 Q; c = a a rt•) +W , W 56 e - 55 P4. C. slI., 0 CMCO Des t4s LOU zib I n•r Y 6-B•'f7 2 3 59 5 ; •, ,. c3t, 585 3 577: %' J 4 i+ 571 '=Q; c = a a rt•) +W , 561 e - 55 ov ) Zt, T , 549 t 5 Z3, I e 543 9 537 IiC 529 Ma 4 521 0:0 513 4<&) s r4. 505 a-- ( 46) o1 , 4y Gs 14 o9t s) CI O C )Ma plz CONWAY1 ,AVE. t PAD c s 4 I 3 ' Z 41 PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 83 Q N Attachment 40 MINNEHAHA AVE. a - - _ ... ...,............., wtlttD to i +• woeKo 119 53 :,;; :. • bba i 0 C4 N N :N: N• lei 1 o p i o, s oft% ESMT CGO) AOO k - - CENTURY CENTER was ON W ( t) ooso _ I d1 as Ac. ..._ ...— 91 W C I I —f • J 7. .I 9 .._ PONDIlApe W- 6, b4 t ul it o a I 19.0 ,, • ... 7s1 - I ll MARGARET AV E. W 1 a285.01 t9o c 101) Ip o N . 1 10 .' _ Z A I ' t • tax :t . z , Yo Wl s o . o o / T qv.N I 9 N V; i " 9 for 3e trtr. NEW —To Vi llaga for Si a.k Ccjv" "*A3 P. ES- I O6a Oda4$) 04IF W % W w ^.w , .• _.rte. R r _ . -.. r .- - _...r - • - - 4•7) .. w ~ oet O4 ( • I 7 =j ( 4 Owns— Cam) 1 j <1) - sussMss,sm—ft N.-ONS, w"w"' -- "so - I 71 ssmlI 1o1) I (62-) W 1 Oct 03 5 I 03 N W (33) ;1' " x.32) ( 143.70 1 q. 1 7. S -144.5 .144.s' _L o o_ o 4 F l-F T 1 42 .5 a- 0- Oj" l33 • a `410ft (i) AV E-7- - f44 ( 66)d NI - I W J a 0 Y O PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 4 Q N Attachment 41 AL. i o I j2 Cz=) LT) Tovtootoo , Ar M ism.. 4 K J B ST- 21 12Z r ` o 1-d! . . . goo i o p i p 0 44W 200 37 ' ' o X04 o i ` C 11 t4 1 12 ( fo 5 S T Z 3iII a i - -* I +rr . r ... wry :f• w •' uu 0 15 5I NATURE CENTER, I - 1 C , C ) I 47 as S3 zG-1 %z6-1 100 » w r 541 Sol too OA E. SEVENTH uTVwE 's1: t . . ,; - -i _ N $Z'W 4$4.1 777 s "`.Y, ;• ; ;...•; + 83. /..?•' ; IL 30) 17154 3' ( •.: ;;: ;; ;: ;:? ;:• ;.DAiRY3 Cr. 3 0 :K' 814': - 1 17s,7 QUEEN • 1 179.O;r . • : 804 -:.. 8055X : ;:'. ;• .. . 6 C4 798• ' 792•,;;:.::. :.:...... 7: ;::':: 785.84 4i 16*45 .•..•. • :... a N •: 778 .'• :'. ••.•• -•• ,.••779'.Q ........:. am) 772 771_ 7 7637) ;. 1 80.7 • W .• N = :750.:::: A &w LJ 3 o (44 .:. 744: :::::: 14 3) 181.5 moo ' a M ! (1+)i Q t5 U ,4) © HOLIDAY't HOLIDAY, , 392.0 co N • " 2X34., - Z! _ 476S tc3 +.So R 1 1 t i f W J c Q Y 0 PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 85 4 N Attachment 42 Division Manager BRIAN DUCKLOW February 18, 1994 Ken Roberts, Associate Planner City of Maplewood 1830 E. County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Dear Ken: FEB 2 2 1994 This is a follow -up to our discussion F •ebruary 14, 1994, regardingPropertieszonedcommercially, but being used residentially, There are two issues dealt with •y the Assessor s office that impactthistypeofproperty: classification and valuation.anon. Classification of a property; examples being 'apartment or c p g r esidential homestead,a P commercial-industrial, is determined b the useproperty. Zoning has no im . on unless the Y of the 10 g pact on classification is unimproved vacant land. property Valuation of property is based on the concept f 'Highest and best p o highest and best use.Hi g use relies on four tests: 1. le all permissible,9 y P ssible,2• physically possible, 3, economlcall feasible,productive.Y sable, and 4. maximally The question in this case depends on highest •typically for an g and best use, whichtYPyimprovedparcel, is its' current use. Highestnotherthangest andbestusecanbesomethinganits ' current I f , forexample, a house of minimal value sits on a ver y large lot that iszonedcommercially, the highest and best us be as a vacantcommercialsite. Unless a residential property has a highest an •g d best use different thanits' current use, the taxes would likely be the same whether zresidentialorcommercial, zoned In situations where the issues dealing ith ' parcels g .zoning changes take place,we look at p on a case by case ibasis f warranted. Sincerely you s, Ke t Smi Appraiser KS:sp 86 RAMSEY COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER WEST • 50 WEST KELLOGG BOULEVARD SUITE 840 0 ST. PAUL, MN 55102 -1695 FAX 266 -2199 * TTD # 266 -2002 OWN Attachment 43 See. 36.27. Landscaping and screening. a) A landscaped area of not less than twenty (20) feet in width shall be provided where: 1) A nonresidential use abuts a residentially zoned property. 2) A multiple dwelling abuts a property zoned for single or double dwellings. The requirements of this subsection shall not apply where the residentially zoned property is being used or is designated on the city's land use plan for a nonresidential use. b) Screening shall be provided where: 1) The light from automobile headlights and other sources would be directed into residential windows. 2) There would be exterior storage of goods or materials which could annoy or endanger property owners. 3) Mechanical equipment on the ground or roof would be vis- ible from public streets or adjoining property. Mechanical equipment shall not include chimneys, antennas or vents. The city shall not require screening for single dwellings, double dwellings, mobile homes or equipment for indi- vidual town house units. Equipment that serves more than one town house unit shall be screened. The community design review board may waive the screening requirement for mechanical equipment if they determine that screening would not improve the building appearance or protect prop- erty values. If the board waives this requirement, they shall require that the mechanical equipment be painted to match the building. Such screening shall be compatible with the materials and design of the principal building and subject to staff or design review board approval. Approval shall be based on creativity in design to enhance the esthetics, durability of the structure and materials, and the per- cent of screening afforded. The screening and mechan- ical equipment shall be painted or stained to match the building. 4) A parking lot is constructed next to a property that is used or shown on the city's land use plan for single- or double - dwelling use. The community design review board may waive this requirement if they determine that screening would not be needed or would not protect surrounding prop- erty values. c) Screening shall be satisfied by the use of a screening fence, planting screen, berm or combination thereof. If the topography, natural growth of vegetation, permanent buildings, or other bar- riers meet the standards of subsections (1) and (2) below, they may be substituted for all or part of the screening fence or planting screen. 87 1) A planting screen shall consist of evergreen plantings. Trees shall be a minimum of two and one -half (2Y2) inches in trunk diameter, two (2) feet above grade. Shrubs may be used in combination with a berm and shall be a minimum of two (2) feet in height. Spacing of trees and shrubs shall be so as to create an eighty (80) percent opaque screening at least six (6) feet in height. 2) Berms shall have mowable side slopes. Slopes greater than two and one -half (21 /2) to one may be used if the slopes are stepped with retaining walls. Plant materials resistant to erosion may be substituted for sod when approved by the community design review board. 3) Screening fences shall be painted or stained whenever nec- essary, so as not to fade, chip or discolor. Broken or knocked down fences shall be repaired. Planting screens shall be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. Plantings that have died shall be promptly replaced. d) Screening may be satisfied with a screening fence. A screening fence shall be attractive, compatible with the principal building and surrounding land uses, at least six (6) feet in height, and provide a minimum opaqueness of eighty (80) percent. e) Trash container enclosures shall be provided around all trash containers and shall be one hundred (100) percent opaque. , hey shall be protected by concrete - filled steel posts, or the equivalent, anchored in the ground at the front corners of the structure. If the enclosure is masonry, the protective posts may be omitted. In all instances, the enclosure must be of a design, material and color compatible with the building and be kept in good repair. A gate that provides one hundred (100) percent opaqueness shall be provided. The community design review board may waive any part of these requirements if they find that the trash container would be hidden from adjacent properties and streets. ord. No. 530, § 1, 11- 22.82; Ord. , No. 580, § 1, 2- 11 -85; Ord. No. 633, § 1 10- 10 -88; Ord. No. 710, § 1 3 -8 -93) Sec. 36.28. Additional design standards. a) All construction and landscaping shall comply with the plans approved by the city. b) The property owners shall maintain their building and grounds in at least as good a condition as when originally com- pleted. Maintenance shall include: 1) Replacing any landscaping shown on the approved plan that dies. 2) Picking up all trash and debris from the grounds. 8) Removing all noxious weeds. 4) Watering the grass, trees and shrubs. s) RePnB any prior parts of the building that deteriarateorbreak. } c) The developer of any project, other than single or double dwellings, shall do the following. 1) Install parking lot lighting. Lighting shall not be directlvisiblefromanyresidentialareaorpublicstreet. Lighting shall not exceed one footcandle at a residential propertyline. Residential areas are areas planned or used for resi- dential purposes. 2) Drain all stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces to an underground, on -site stormwater collection system_ that is connected to a public stormwater system. 3) Restore any public right -of -way, adjacent property or prop-P y -P P erty irons disturbed by the construction 4) Install stop signs, handicap signs and building address signs as required by the city. 5) Construct parking lots with the following minimum setbacks: a. Fifteen (15) feet from a street right -of -way. b. Five (5) feet from all other property lines. This setback shall be increased to twenty (20) feet if the adjacent property is used or shown on the city's land use P lanforresidentialuse. 6) Construct all buildings, except single- and two-family homes, with the following mminimu setbacks: a. Thirty (30) feet from a street right -of -way. b. Fifty (50) feet from property that is used or shown on the city's land use plan for residential use. This set- back shall be increased up to seventy -five (75) feet based on the more restrictive of the following requirements: 1. Building height: The building setbacks shall be increased two (2) feet for each one foot the building exceeds twenty -five (25) feet in height. 2. Exterior wall area: Where an exterior wail faces a residentially zoned property, the wall setback shall be increased five (5) feet for each one thousand 1,000) square feet, or part thereof, in excess of two thousand (2,000) square feet. 7) The city council may approve a conditional use permit to allow an addition within a required setback if: a. The required findings in section 36 -442 for a condi- tional use permit are met. b. The setback would be consistent with the setbacks for surrounding properties. c. At least eighty (80) percent of the addition would be screened from property that is used or shown on the city's land use plan for residential use. 8) Plant trees with the following rnirumum sizes: a. Large deciduous trees, two and one -half Z2inches in diameter, balled and burlapped. b. Small deciduous (ornamental) trees, one and one -half 1 inches in diameter, balled and burls ed. c. Evergreen trees O feet in heightsix6f PP 9) Install a lawn irrigation system that will not spray on publicstreets, or sidewalks. 10) Use low - maintenance materials on buildin 11) Use building materials that are compatibleati •p ble in quality withsimilardevelopmentinthearea. 12) Locate any bike racks so the do not interfere 'Y e with vehic-ular or pedestrian traffic or fire lanes. 13) Preserve significant natural features such as wetlandseands andlargetrees, as required in the IX). environmental protectionrdinance (Chapter Article P P cle 14) Provide on -site loading and unloading spacepe where needed so that public streets are not used for this purpose. (Ord.No. 652, § 3, 9 -11 -89 Ord. No. 676, $ 4 11- 26.90) Secs, 36.29 -- 36.40. Reserved. KC Attachment 44 PROPOSED CHANGES W COMMERCIAL USES BY ZONING DISTRICT CUP = a use that should have a conditional use permit (CUP) if within 350 feet of a property that the City is planning for residential use 350 feet = a use that should be at least 350 feet away from a property that the City is PI anning for residential use BC (Business Commeraa!) Permitted Uses: On -sale liquor that is not part of a restaurant. -350 feet Craftsman's shop —CUP Motor vehicle sales (new only or new and used) -350 feet CNG (compressed natural gas) or LPG (liquid petroleum gas) dispensing facilities limited capacity) -350 feet Add check cashing businesses -350 feet Conditional Uses: Sale of used cars -350 feet Omit heliport (see below) Major motor fuel station, vehicle wash or maintenance garages -350 feet M -1 (Light Manufacturing) Permitted Uses: Contractors' shops -350 feet Manufacturing, assembly, or processin g of products-350 feet Conditional use: Mining or material recycling -350 feet Other Changes Gun shops (or sales)— prohibit anywhere in the City Add helistop as an accessory use to a hospital, if it is not within 350 feet of a residential district. Define helistop as a place for one helicopter to land or takeoff, but does not include maintenance or fueling operations.erations. 91 Attachment 45 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Chemical Abuse Clinics Ordinance DATE: November 12, 1993 INTRODUCTION On September 27, 1993, the City Council directed the staff to study changes to the zoning ordinance about clinics. The Council heard complaints from residents near 2223 White Bear Avenue. A methadone clinic is at this address. The clinic concerned the residents because it is so close to their neighborhood. On October 25, 1993, the Council considered first reading of the attached ordinance. The Council tabled first reading and referred the ordinance to the Planning Commission and .Human .. Relations Commission. Both commissions have recommended against an ordinance regulating clinics. The Planning Commission felt that the City should look at all commercial uses near residential areas. BACKGROUND The City permits clinics in all commercial and industrial zones. The zoning code does not define clinics or differentiate between types of clinics. We use the dictionary when the: zoning code does not define a term. The dictionary defines clinics as: 1. A class of medical instruction in which patients are examined and discussed. 2. A group meeting devoted to the analysis and solution of concrete problems or to the acquiring of specific skills or knowledge. 3. A facility (as of a hospital) for diagnosis and treatment of outpatients. 4. A group practice in which several physicians work cooperatively. OPTIONS 1. Prohibit all chemical abuse clinics. 2. Prohibit all chemical abuse clinics within 350 feet of a residential lot line. 3. Require a conditional use permit for all chemical abuse clinics. 92 4. Require a conditional use permit for all chemical abuse clinics within 350 feet of aresidentiallotline. 5. Take no action. DISCUSSION On November 8, 1993, the Council passed a moratorium on new or expanding clinicsuntilFebruary28, 1994. The Council wanted to look at the "big picture' -allcommercialusesaroundresidentialareas. Because of the moratorium there is no needtoadoptanordinanceregulatingclinicsnow. The Council is leaning towards a mo.e comprehensive study by the end of February. The Planning Commission has alreadystartedworkonthisstudy. The Commission will discuss the regulation of clinics as a Part of this study. If the Council wants to adopt an ordinance on clinics no I have attached an ordinance on page 4. The attached ordinance requires a conditional use permit (Cu P) for clinicsthatprimarilytreatchemicalabuseandarewithin350feetofaresidentialpropertylineOption4). The CUP would give the City the authority to regulate or prohibit suchuses. The City requires a public hearing for a CUP. A hearing would give the residents achance: to ask questions and get information before a clinic opens. The City Attorney advised me to be careful when creating regulations that orly apply tocertainclinictypes. There must be a rational basis for protecting the health, safety andwelfareoftheresidents. I contacted six other cities about how they regulate clinics. None of these cities havespecialconditionsorrulesaboutoutpatientclinics. Four of the six cities have thesetypesofclinics. The cities with these clinics were not aware of any special problems.Our police department checked with the police departments in other cities. The othercitiesreportednoproblemsorminorproUlems, such as loitering. (See the referencesectiononpage3andthepolicereportonpage8.) I cannot find any evidence forprohibitingclinics. RECOMMENDATION Take no action on a clinic ordinance now. The Council may reconsider this ordinancewhenthePlanningCommissionfinishestheirbroaderstudyofcommercialusesnearresidentialneighborhoods. 93 REFERENCE OTHER CMES—ZONING REGULATIONS FOR CUNICS There are thirteen outpatient treatment. programs In' Ramsey County. Eight are in St. Paul and five are in the suburbs. Two of these clinics are in Maplewood. One is the methadone clinic. The other is an adolescent chemical dependency clinic at 1707 Cope Avenue. I contacted the planning offices in six other cities. I asked how they regulate drug treatment or other outpatient .clinics. I also asked about any problems these clinics caused. I contacted Bloomington, Minneapolis, Saint Paul, Atlanta Georgia, Orlando Florida and Ocala Florida. Each city considers such clinics as a permitted use in commercial and office zoning districts. The Colonial Group (the operators - of the Maplewood clinic) has clinics in the last three cities. The planner in Orlando told me there are two of the Colonial Clinics in Orlando.. The planner in Ocala told me that the chemical dependency clinic there has been open about seven years. The clinic is in a medical office park. None of the planners was aware of any problems with these types of clinics. The police report on page 8 did not find any serious problems with these clinics, other than loitering before the clinics open. go/b -5: clinic3.mem (5.1) Attachment: 1. Ordinance 2. Police Report A ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ABOUT CLINICS IN THE LBC (LIM D BUSINESS COMMERCIAL), BC-M (BUSINESS COMMERCIAL MODIFIED), BC (BUSINESS COMMERCIAL), NC NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) AND CO (COMMERCIAL OFFICES DISTRICTS THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL APPROVES THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCE: I crossed out the deletions and underlined the additions.) Section 1. This section changes subsection 36- 154(a) and adds. subsection 36 154(b) to the LBC, Limited Business Commercial District as follows: Permitted Uses. The City shall only permit the following uses by n*ght: Offices. Clinics. except those that I?rmg& treat chemical abuse and are within 350 feet of a residential lot line. Dav care centers. r -- - • -- - -- - - - - HONPM L • • V iRR•r1 'fir 'K- a FLIM . 4"1 4 7 ice• • 4 • 4 f i• 411 } • • 4 • 1TI1• • T i i `7 • i`•`1T 4 °1 T•ly b Conditional Uses. The following use must have a conditional use uermit: Clinics that primarily treat chemical abuse and are within 350 feet of a residential lot line. Section 2. This section changes subsection 36- 155(b)(1) and adds 36- 155(c)(8) to the BC(M) Business Commercial District (Modified) as follows: b) Permitted uses. The City shall only permit the following uses by right: 1) Retail or commercial rental activities, offices, clinics. except those that primarily treat chemical abuse and are. within 350 feet of a residential lot line Vie studio, bank, personal service, day care center, craftsmen's shop or mortuary. All business, storage or display, except signs and parking, shall be in a closed building. c) Conditional uses. The following uses must have a conditional use permit: 8) Clinics that primarily treat chemical abuse and are within 350 feet of a residential lot line. 95 Section 3. This section changes subsections 36- 151(a) (3) and (b) (8) of Division 7 of Chapter 36 of the BC (Business Commercial District) as follows: a) Permitted uses. The City shall only permit the following uses by right: 3) Retail or commercial rental activities, restaurant, on -sale liquor business (subject to license), office, clinics. except those that primarily treat chemical abuse and are within 350 feet of a residential lot line.. eerie studio, bank, personal service, day care center, craftsmen's shop or mortuary. All business, storage or display, except signs and parking, shall be in a closed building. b) Conditional uses. The following uses must have a conditional use permit: 8) Clinics that nrimarily treat chemical abuse and are within 350 feet of a residential lot line. I.Ae.;: Section 4. This section changes subsections 36- 173(a)(1) and (b)(3) of Division 8 of Chapter 36 of the SC, Shopping Center District as follows: a) Permitted uses. The City shall only permit the following uses by right: l) Retail or commercial rental activities, restaurant, on -sale liquor business (subject to license ), office, clinics.. except those that primarily treat chemical abuse and are within 350 feet of a residential lot line Vie studio, bank, personal service, day care center, craftsmen's shop or mortuary. All business, storage or display except signs and parking, shall be in a closed building. b) Conditional uses. The following uses must have a conditional use permit: 3) Clinics that primarily treat chemical abuse and are within 350 feet of a residential lot line. Section S. This section changes subsection 36 - 127, Permitted Uses, of the NC Neighborhood Commercial District as follows: Sec. 26 - 127. Permitted Uses. Permitted uses. The City shall only permit the following uses bri provided that the floor area of all buildings- any one NC zone shall not exceed three thousand (3.000) square feet: me 1) Bakery or candy shop. Any izoods produced on the premises must be sold on the premises. 2) Beauty parlor or barber shop. 3) Dry cleaner or Laundromat. All odors must be controlled so as not to be noticeable to adjacent residents. Office. 5) Repair shop, except for motorized vehicles. All business. storage or display shall ILe in a closed building. 6) Drug, hardware or grocery store.. 7) Studio. 8) Tailor or dressmaker shop. 9) Veterinary or grooming clinic where there are no outside kennels or storage. 10) Video store t0e,.=e-s. 11) Printing shop. 12) .Clinics, except those that primarily treat chemical abuse and are within 350 feet of a residential lot line. Section 6. This section changes subsection 36 -129, Conditional Uses, of the NC Neighborhood Commercial District as follows: Sec. 36 -129. Conditional uses. Conditional uses.. The following uses must have a conditional use permit. In addition, the floor area of all buildings in any one NC zone shall not exceed eight thousand (8.000) square feet: zene S.16.841 ftwesE. e0ighte.: tlieusafid (8 Q033mr. 1) Any permitted use listed in Section 36 -127. 97 2) Club, lodge or hall. 3) Private school, day care center or community service use. 4). Taxi stand or bus stop. 5) Restaurant, where there are no drive -up order windows of serving food to patrons in their automobiles. All cooking odors must be controlled so as to not be noticeable to adjacent residents. 5) Other uses, where the City Council finds that the use would be compatible with the neighborhood and the intent of this division. Clinics that urimarily treat chemical abuse and are within 350 feet of a residential lot line. Section 7. This ordinance shall become effective after publication. Passed by the Maplewood City Council on . . 1993. September 16, 1993 MEMORANDUM To: Chief Kenneth Collins From: Ser Michael R A; 0. Sub St. Paul Metro Treatment Center I have contacted several of the names listed as rentin office space to treatment centers located in several states. These sites var from business district/industrial areas to sharin facilities with other medical related clinics and shoppin center or store front areas. The locations also seem to be varied from hi traffic, main street locations to other locations that could be described as "off the beaten path.." When asked about the clinics, the renters almost universall replied that the initiall were apprehensive about rentin to such facilities but admitted that the have had onl minor problems. For the most part, these seem to be related to clients leavin coffee cups and ci butts at the clinic sites'. None of those questioned had an ne comments and felt the clinics were good tenants. I contacted police departments in Ocala and Temple Terrace, Florida to 'Inquire about their clinics. Ocala reported onl one incident at their clinic, that bein a bur in March of 1992, Temple Terrace Police Department advised that the were familiar with the clinic in their area. The have had man complaints that mostl deal with the clients loiterin in the area. Temple Terrace has done some surveillance work on their clinic, Temple Terrace referred me to Sherr Miller with the DEA at 813) 228-2486. In speakin with her, I found that Dr. Randall Green, the clinic owner, operates in accordance with all FDA and DEA rules and re Miller told me that their concern was with the philosoph behind the "for profit" clinic where addicts are not ur to get off methadone or other substances. Miller did not have an ne information about the clinics. I contacted police departments in Atlanta and Ft. O Geor Atlanta advised that complaints deal with the loiterin clients. The also advised that the have had incidents of clients bu other dru at the clinic site and also sellin their methadone, especiall their take home doses on weekends. The Atlanta clinic hires outside securit for their site,I Ft. O Police advised that their clinic, while in Geor is onl 10 miles from Chattanoo Tennessee. The reported man problems with transients related to crimes in the area. Most of their crime consisted of shopliftin and shopliftin rin operatin in the area. The clinic is located in a business district. The also reported that the have incidents of people 99 I buying the methadone from the clinic clients. Ft. Oglethorpe Police felt that most of their problems came from persons that were from outside.the area stating they come from Nashville, Knoxville and Florida. Generally, the various police problems appear to be related to the locations of the clinics. It does appear that.the Most common complaint has to do with the loitering that occurs prior to the clinic opening in the early morning. Other police departments suggested that police presence seemed to help and they often made warrant arrests of clients waiting at the clinic. 100 Attachment 46 Bannig2 Kelly, PA. A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W 1750 NORTH CENTRAL LIFE TOWER 445 MINNESOTA STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA SS 101 JOHN F. BANNIGAN, JR. PATRICK J. KELLY JAMES J. HANTON JANET M. WILEBSKI JOHN W. QUARNSTROM 612) 224 -3781 FAX (612) 223 -8019 March 31, 19 H Mr. Geoff Olson Director of Community Development City of Maplewood 1830 E. County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 RE: Maplewood Planning Commission /Gun Shop Regulation Dear Mr. Olson: Pursuant to our earlier telephone conversation, I did contact the St. Paul City Attorney's office regarding the studies which have been initiated by the St. Paul Planning Commission to regulate gun shops. I was referred to Mr. Lawrence Soderholm with the St. Paul DepartmentofPlanningandEconomicDevelopment. Mr. Soderholm was extremes coo erative and willingYp to provide access to his file. In fact, Mr. Soderholm indicated that he would be more than happyoY to meet with you to discuss the matter further. I am enclosing a variety of documents which I excerpted from Mr. Soderholm's file. The particular proposal before the St. Paul Planning Commission is presently tabled. There is a sense that the legislature nigh . t take further action this session with respect to n control and np shops. As a result, the Planning Commission is waiting to determine what steps, if any,p Y, legislature might take. Mr. Soderholm has collected an enormous amount of materials and literature regardinggg gun shop regulations. I would estimate that Mr. Soderholm has several files totalling perhapssP one foot of documentation.. The documentation includes a large number of studies, reports and statistical surveys. I have not copied any of those materials at this time. I would suggest that you review the materials which I am currently enclosing. You willg note that St. Paul is not attempting to exclude gun shops. In fact, you will not in the gun sho zoning study dated January, 1994 that there is a section addressing the authority of local 101 Mr. Geoff Olson Page Z March 31 1994 municipalities. to regulate.. the location of businesses that sell guns (see page four The stud ) Y specifically makes reference to Minna Stat. 5471.635 which provides that "a governmental subdivision may regulate by reasonable, non-discriminatory nd non-arbit zoning ordinancesrYrYg , the location of businesses where firearms. are sold by a firearms dealer. As I mentioned in my previous correspondence, there is no question that ursuant to this statute the Cit ofp .ty Maplewood can take some action to regulate, by zoning, the location of gun shops. However, it is highly unlikely that this statutory authority can be construed so as to P ermt the exclusion of all gun shops. I hope that this information will be of some assistance to you as you consult with the Planning Commission. If you have any further uestions regarding this matter, lease contactqgg ,p me. Sincerely yours, JJH: e Encl sures C: Mr. Michael McGuire ANNIGAN &KELLY, P.A. a r mes J. H on 102 Attachment 47 MEMO To: Director of Community Development From: City Attorney Date: February 6, 1994 Re: Legal Opinion /flmortization of Non - Conforming Uses 0 On February 3, 1994, this office received from you a Prequestforalegalopinion to be discussedqg with the Planning Commission on February 7, 1994. You have raised the following question: Whether the City has the legal authority to adopt an ordinance for the purpose of amortizing non - conforming uses? It is the opinion of this office that the adoption of a zoning ordinance including an amortizationg provision is authorized and legal. ANALYS I S The controlling case in Minnesota is that of Naegele outdoor Advertisin Company Villag ogpan .Y v. g f Minnetonka, 162 N.W.2d 206 (Minn. 1968). In that decision, the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the legality and constitutionality of a municipal zoning ordinance which required the removal of non - conforming uses after a specified amortization period. A co of that decision i specificallysenclosed. The Minnesota Supreme Court specifically concluded that the use of an amortization provision was rconstitutional "on its face." The Supreme Court went on to considerPse whether the particular amortization provision could be held unconstitutional when applied to that particular property owner. In essence, the Supreme Court analyzed whether an amortization period of three years was reasonable for the interest of that articular owner. The SupremePPCourtultimatelyconcludedthatthethreeyearamortizationperiodwasreasonable. As noted above, it is the opinion of this office that the Minnesota Supreme Court has reviousl acknowledged the constitutionality of amortization provisions contained within zoning ordinances.g or The primary focus on such ordinances will be concerned with the "reasonableness" of an amortization requirement when applied to a articular situation. It should alsoPPP be noted that the establishment of an amortization requirement or schedule should be linked in some manner to the promotion of the public health, safe or welfare. Therefore shorter amortization periodssafetypods should be linked to greater public risks. It is also important to note that any applicationlication of an amortization provision should be enforced equally in order to withstand any constitutional challenges. 103 Memorandum Page Two February 6 1994 In determining a reasonable period of amortization, there are a number of factors which should be considered: 1) how severe a risk is presented by the particular non - conforming use; 2) will the amortization of that use advance_ some legitimate public objective; 3) how much investment does the owner have in the use; 4) has the owner had sufficient time to recover his /her investment; 5) has the owner financially benefitted from enjoying a "monopoly" in the area. There may be other factors as well. 104 206 Minn. 162 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES case amply sustains the specific finding made by the trial judge. Affirmed. OTIS, J., took no part in the considera- tion or decision of this case. promote general welfare of the communi- ty, and authorize creation of residential districts pursuant to comprehensive munici- pal plan. The Court further held that the length of the amortization period was rea- sonable and that ordinance was constitu- tional on its face. w Q S KEI NUMBER SYSIEM T NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADVERTISING COMPANY OF MINNESOTA, Inc., Appellant, V . VILLAGE OF MINNETONKA, and Arthur C. Rydmark, Its Chief Building In- spector, Respondents. No. 40781. Supreme Court of Minnesota. Oct. li 1968. Declaratory judgment action against village and its chief building inspector seeking to have zoning ordinance declared unconstitutional and requesting permanent injunction against enforcement, in which village counterclaimed seeking order direct- ing plaintiff advertising company to re- move nonconforming billboards. The Dis- trict Court, Hennepin County, Arnold Hat- field, J., found that ordinance was. not by its terms unconstitutional but had been dis- criminatorily enforced against plaintiff and enjoined enforcement until ordinance was uniformly applied, and advertising compa- ny appealed. The Supreme Court, Rogo- sheske, J., held that while no statute ex- pressly or specifically authorized a munici- pality to enact an amortization zoning ordi- nance requiring removal of pre- existing nonconforming billboards from exclusively residential districts before a stated date, such a power must necessarily be implied to effectuate grant of powers which author- ize municipalities to enact ordinances which A firmed. I. Munlcipal Corporations 0=122(4) Ordinances enacted pursuant to the po- lice power cannot be successfully attacked on constitutional grounds unless there is af- firmative proof that the restriction is clear- ly arbitrary, discriminatory, and unreason- able and without any substantial relation to public health, safety, morals, or general welfare. 2. Constitutional Law e=48 While decision of a legislative body on what promotes public health, safety, morals, and general welfare is not conclu- sive, it is entitled to great weight. 3. Zoning {°620 Even where reasonableness of zoning ordinance is debatable, or where there are conflicting opinions as to desirability of re- strictions it imposes, it is not function of courts to interfere with legislative discre- tion on such issues. 4. Municipal Corporations 0602 Where village enacted ordinance re- quiring removal of pre- existing noncon- forming billboards that were concededly not detrimental to public health or morals and did not constitute safety or traffic haz- ard issue of constitutionality turned on whether plaintiff advertising company, es- tablished that village council was arbitrary and unreasonable it, its legislative determi- nation that exclusion of billboards in resi- dential districts promoted general welfare. 5. Zoning =loi Zoning regulation need not be a neces- sity but need only be substantially related NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADV. co. v. vILLAt#E OF MINNETONKA Minn. 207 Cite as 162 N.W.2d 206 to promoting general welfare of communi-11. Zoning X115 ty to meet constitutional requirements of Three -year amortization period of zon- reasonableness.ing ordinance requiring billboard removal within three years of enactment was rea- 6. Municipal Corporations X602 sonable and not unconstitutional on its face Whether restrictive ordinance requir-for failure to compensate for removal when ing removal of pre - existing nonconform-value of billboards would either be extin- ing billboards was constitutional depended guished before or at end of grace period, on whether village council, in exercising its or would equal in value their increased legislative prerogative acted reasonably,worth, by virtue of monopoly, enjoyed dur- with the question of reasonableness to be ing statutory period. resolved by deciding whether its determi-12. Municipal Corporations 0122(2)nation upon a consideration of the facts was based on reason and logic and not on Where ordinance is constitutional b y whim or caprice and that it promoted le-its terms, party challenging constitutionali - gitimate police power objective.ty has burden to establish that ordinance as applied is unconstitutional. 7. Zoning e=36 Mere fact that adoption of zoning ordi- nance reflects desire to achieve aesthetic ends should not invalidate an otherwise val- id ordinance. 8. Zoning e:=36 If a zoning ordinance is otherwise constitutional as reasonably related to pro- moting the general welfare of community or any other legitimate objective of a mu- nicipality's police power, the mere fact that aesthetic considerations were significant factor in motivating its adoption will not invalidate the ordinance. 13. Eminent Domain e=2(1) Where restrictive ordinance that re- quired removal of billboards at end of three -year grace period was constitutional on its face, there must have been taking from plaintiff of some valuable property interest without payment of just compensa- tion to render ordinance unconstitutional as applied to plaintiff. 14. Eminent Domain e=95 When leasehold is condemned, lessee is not entitled to compensation for cost of re- moving personal property which it has a right to remove upon expiration of lease. 9. Zoning 0115 Zoning ordinance, which was enacted by village pursuant to its police power, which was part of comprehensive municipal plan, which prohibited construction of all commercial enterprises, including billboards, in residential districts and which required removal of all pre- existing billboards with- in a three -year period was not so arbitrary, unreasonable, or unrelated to the general welfare of the community as to be uncon- stitutional by its terms. 10. Zoning e=72 Exclusion of commercial enterprises, no matter how seemingly inoffensive, from residential districts is valid exercise of po- lice power. 15. Eminent Domain 0=95 Where billboards are situated on prop- erty under lease and do not become part of realty so that title to them would pass to lessor at end of lease, lessee is not en- titled to compensation for cost of their re- moval. 16. Eminent Domain X205 Evidence did not support alleged claim of billboard owner that vested right to con- tinue conduct of lawful business at billboard locations was compensable property right. 17. Eminent Domain 0147 If property right is taken for public use, compensation by payment of its fair market value is required, and in case of taking leasehold interest, this amounts to LO C1 20$ Minn. 162 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES fair rental value of premises less amount of rent for remainder of - term. 18. Eminent Domain 0=147 Valuc of oral leases that are month -to- month tenancies is limited to rental value of premises for 30 days less rent payable for that period. 19. Eminent Domain X205 Absent evidence of value of orai and written leases at end of statutory amortiza- tion period, evidence did not indicate that there had been taking of valuable propertyinterestfrombillboardownersoastoren- der application of exclusionary zoning ordi- nance unconstitutional. 20. Eminent Domain 0155 If a lease by its terms automatically terminates upon condemnation of land,lessee is entitled to no compensation for loss of his leasehold interest, since he agreed in advance to such a termination. 21. Eminent Domain °' 155 Where billboard owner, as lessee, had sole power to terminate leases if value of locations became diminished or if use of billboards was prohibited by any law or ordinance such leases would not preclude receiving compensation if taking occurred. 22. Zoning 11 While no statute expressly or specif- ically authorizes a municipality to enact an amortization zoning ordinance requiring re- moval of pre - existing nonconforming bill- boards from exclusively residential districts before stated date, such power must neces- sarily be implied to effectuate grant of powers that authorize municipalities to en- act ordinances which promote general wel- fare of community, and which authorize municipalities to create residential districts pursuant to comprehensive municipal. plan. M.S.A. §§ 412.221, subd. 32, 462.351, 462: 357, subd. 1. moting the general welfare or to any other traditional objective of a municipality's po-lice power, the mere fact that aesthetic con- siderations were a significant invalidate in mo- tivating its adoption will not the ordinance. 2. A zoning ordinance, enacted by a village pursuant to its police power, which as a part of a comprehensive municipal plan prohibits the construction of all commer- cial enterprises, including billboards, in residential districts and requires the remov- al of all preexisting billboards within a 3- year period is not so arbitrary, unreason- able, or unrelated to the general welfare of the community as to be unconstitutional by its terms. 3. While no statute expressly or spe- cifically authorizes a municipality to enact an amortization zoning ordinance requiringtheremovalofpreexistingnonconforming billboards from exclusively residential dis- tricts before a stated date, such a power must necessarily be implied to effectuate the powers granted in Minn.St. 412.221, subd. 32, which authorizes municipalities to enact ordinances which promote the general welfare of the community, and in the Municipal Planning Act of 1965, Minn. St. 462.351 et seq., which authorizes mu- nicipalities to create residential districts pursuant to a comprehensive municipalplan. Montreville J. Brown, David C. Donnel- ly, and Edward N. Denn, St. Paul, for ap-pellant. Carl F. Dever, Village Atty., Charles J. Hauenstein, Minneapolis, for respondent. Louis Claeson, Jr., Minneapolis, amicus curiae. OPINION Syllabus by the Court. I. If a zoning ordinance is otherwise constitutional as reasonably related to pro- ROGOSHESKE, Justice. On May 8, 1961, the village of Minne- tonka, as a part of a comprehensive mu- NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADV. CO. V. VILLAGE OF MINNETONKA Minn. Cite as 162 N.W.2d 206 209 nicipal plan, enacted a zoning ordinance Two issues are raised: (1) Whether awhichprohibitedbillboardsandsignserect- municipality has the power to prohibit byedforadvertisingpurposeswithinareaszoningordinancetheuseoflandinresi-zoned exclusively for residential use. A dential districts for billboard advertisingprovisionoftheordinancerequiredthatand (2) if so, whether the removal ofallnonconformingbillboardsberemovedpreviouslyconstructedbillboardscanbewithin3yearsafteritseffectivedate. required within a period of 3 ears from the d t 4-L y On February 6, 1964, plaintiff, Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company of Minneso- ta, Inc., received a letter from the chief building inspector of the village notifyingitthat14ofitsbillboardswerenoncon- forming and would have to be removed by May 8, 1964. On the same day, General Outdoor Advertising Company, whose as- sets plaintiff had previously purchased, re- ceived a similar letter with regard to eight of its billboards. On April 30, 1965, plaintiff commenced this declaratory judgment action against the village of Minnetonka and its chief building inspector, seeking to have this ordinance declared unconstitutional and re- questing a permanent injunction against its enforcement. The village counterclaimed, seeking an order directing plaintiff to re- move 18 specified billboards which had be- come nonconforming under the ordinance. The court temporarily restrained the village from enforcing the ordinance and from prosecuting plaintiff for its alleged failure to comply pending the outcome of the ac- tion, the trial of which began on January 12, 1966. The trial court found that the ordinance is not by its terms unconstitutional but that it had been discriminatorily enforced against plaintiff, denying it due process and equal protection of the law. Enforce- ment of the ordinance against plaintiff was enjoined until such time as the village uni- formly enforced it against all violators. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment en- tered, assigning as error the trial court's conclusion that the ordinance is not uncon- stitutional by its terms. I. Connor v. Township of Chanhassen, 249 Minna 205, 81 N.W.241 789; State v. 162 N.W.2d-14 a e ey became nonconforming uses. Plaintiff primarily contends that the or- dinance is unreasonable and arbitrary in that it is based solely on aesthetic consid- erations which are not reasonably related to the public health, safety, morals, or gen- eral welfare, and that it is therefore un- constitutional on its face. 1 -3] In Kiges v. City of St. Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 530, 62 N.W.2d 363, 369, we de- clared that ordinances enacted pursuant to the police power in this state "can- not be successfully attacked on constitu- tional grounds unless there is affirmative proof that the restriction is clearly arbi- trary, discriminatory, and unreasonable and without any substantial relation to public tD health, safety, morals, or general welfare." O r-- While a decision of a legislative body on what promotes the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare is not conclu- sive, it is entitled to great weight. As we said in State ex rel. Howard v. Village of Roseville, 244 Minn. 343, 347, 70 N.W.2d 404, 407: Even where the reasonableness of a zoning ordinance is debatable, or where there are conflicting opinions as to the desirability of the restrictions it imposes f it is not the function of the courts to interfere with the legislative discretion on such issues." 4) The trial court found, and the vil- lage concedes, that the billboards in ques- tion have no detrimental effect on public health or morals. The trial court also found, apparently on the basis of the un- contradicted and unchallenged testimony of an expert witness testifying on behalf of Modern Box Makers, Inc., 217 Minn. 41, 13 N.W.2d 731. 2.10 Minn. 162 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES plaintiff, that these billboards "do not con- stitute a safety or traffic hazard along any of the streets or highways" of the village:z Thus, in this case, the issue of constitu- tionality must turn on whether plaintiff has established that the village council was arbitrary and unreasonable in its legisla- tive determination that the exclusion of billboards from residential districts pro- motes the general welfare. The ordinance in question is part of a comprehensive zoning plan designed, among other things, to exclude all commercial en- terprises from residential areas. In the early years of the development of zoning law, courts were extremely reluctant to ac- cept the judgment of legislative bodies that a nonconforming but essentially inof- fensive commercial structure, such as a neighborhood store, endangered the health, safety, morals, or general welfare of a resi- dential area. State ex rel. Lachtman v. Houghton, 134 Minn. 226, 158 N.W. 1017, L.R.A.1917F, 1050. Essentially, the only zoning ordinances upheld were those de- signed to eliminate nuisances. In several Cases ordinances excluding billboards from residential neighborhoods were sustained on the ground that billboards are a nui- sance. Cusack Co. v. City of Chicago, 242 U.S. 526, 37 S.Ct. 190, 61 L.Ed. 472; St. Louis Poster Advertising Co. v. City of St. Louis, 249 U.S. 269 39 S.Ct. 274, 63 L.Ed. 599. In this case, however, the trial court found, and the village concedes, that plain- tiff's billboards are not a nuisance in the common -law sense. Thwarted in their attempts to use the po- lice power, municipalities attempted to de- velop restricted residential areas by use of the power of eminent domain. After first holding that the power of eminent domain was not applicable to residential zoning since no "public use" was involved, this court reversed itself and upheld such a con- demnation ordinance. State ex rel. Twin City Bld & Investment Co. v. Houghton, 144 Minn. 1, 13, 174 N.W 885, 176 N.W. 159 8 A.L.R. 585. . Residential zoning by use of the police power alone was finally upheld in the landmark case, State ex rel. Beery v. Houghton, 164 Minn. 146, 204 N.W. 569, 54 A.L.R. 1012, affirmed, 273 U.S. 671, 47 S.Ct. 474, 71 L.Ed. 833, in which this court specifically reversed its prior contrary opinions. In that case the city of Min- neapolis had by ordinance excluded multi - ple- family dwellings from residential dis- tricts. The court stated (164 Minn. 150, 204 N.W. 570) : cc* * * The police power, in its na- ture indefinable, and quickly responsive, in the interest of common welfare, to changing conditions, authorizes various restrictions upon the use of private prop- erty as social and economic changes come. A restriction, which years ago would have been intolerable, and would have been thought an unconstitutional restriction of the owner's use of his prop- erty, is accepted now without a thought that it invades a private right. As so- cial relations become more complex, re- strictions on individual rights become more common. With the crowding of population in the cities, there is an ac- tive insistence upon the establishment of residential districts from which annoying occupations, and buildings undesirable to the community are excluded." 2. The court, however, found that the Village is a suburb of the City of Min- neapolis, Minnesota. It is presently pri- marily a residental area. Because of its proximity to the City of Minneapolis and to lakes and other residential areas and for the further reason that its topography consists generally of rolling, wooded Bills, its further development and growth, including the areas adjacent to the highways, points toward residential developillent almost exclusively. The maintenanep of billboards and signs in an otherwise potential residential develop- ment area, causes it to be far less desira- He for home sites. It retards construe- tion of and. prevents an increase in the population and the assessed valuation of the Village." NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADV. CO. v. VILLAGE OF MINNETONKA Minn. 211 Cite as 142 N -W-2d 2N Exclusively residential zoning has been from residential districts is a legitimate held consistently since that time to be a exercise of the police power. See, e. g., valid exercise of the police power. United Advertising Corp. v. Borough of In Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co., Metuchen, 42 N.J. 1, 198 A.2d 447; Grant 272 U.S. 365, 388 47 S.Ct. 114, 118, 71 L. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, Ed. 303, 311 the United States Supreme 212 Md. 301 129 A.2d 363. In the latter Court, in upholding a zoning ordinance en- case the Maryland court said (212 Md. acted under the police power which ex- 316, 129 A.2d 370) : eluded commercial and industrial uses, in- cluding billboards, from residential zones whether they were inherently inoffensive or not, said Here * * * the exclusion is in gen- eral terms of all industrial establishments, and it may thereby happen that not only offensive or dangerous industries will be excluded, but those which are neither offensive nor dangerous will share the same fate. But this is no more than happens in respect of many practice - forbidding laws which this Court has upheld, although drawn in general terms so as to include individual cases that may turn out to be innocuous in themselves. Citations omitted.] The inclusion of a reasonable margin, to insure effective enforcement, will not put upon a law, otherwise valid, the stamp of invalidity. Such laws may also find their justifica- tion in the fact that, in some fields, the bad fades into the good by such insensi- ble degrees that the two are not capable of being readily distinguished and sepa- rated in terms of legislation. In the light of these considerations, we are not prepared to say that the end in view was not sufficient to justify the general rule of the ordinance, although some indus- tries of an innocent character might fall within the proscribed class. It cannot be said that the ordinance in this respect passes the bounds of reason and assumes the character of a merely arbitrary f iat.' " A number of jurisdictions have specif- ically held that the exclusion of billboards L See, e. g., State ex rel. 1-Toward v. Village Of Roseville, 244 Minn. 343, 70 N.W.2d 404; State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc., supra. it * * * It does not follow that be- cause billboards are not prima facie ob- jectionable in commercial and industrial districts -- although there they may be found as a fact to be objectionable —that the people acting through their legisla- tive representatives, may not find them to so seriously incommode the health, comfort and general welfare of the dwellers in residential zones that the benefit to the public, brought about by their removal, substantially outweighs the resulting harm to individuals. If it does not clearly appear that this legislative finding was unreasonable and arbitrary almost demonstrably wrong from the record —the courts may not disturb it." Thus, today it is generally held that mu- nicipalities by use of their police power may O constitutionally exclude all commercial uses, including billboards, from residential dis- tricts. Plaintiff, however, relying upon dicta in several recent Minnesota cases which re- iterate an old rule, argues that a zoning ordinance based primarily on aesthetic con- siderations cannot reasonably be said to promote the general welfare. Since the council's conclusion that the ordinance promotes the general welfare is admittedly the only constitutional basis for enacting it, plaintiff argues that it is unconstitu- tional. 5] The rule that zoning for solely aesthetic reasons is invalid has been ex- plained on the ground that aesthetic con- siderations are luxuries and the police pow- 4. See, Pearce v. Village of Edina, 263 Minn. 553. 118 N.W.2d 659; Olsen v. City of Minneapolis, 2(;.3 Minn. 1, 1.15 N.W.2d 734. 212 Minn. 162 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES er is exercisable only in cases of public necessity. Stoner McCray System v. City of Des Moines, 247 Iowa 1313, 78 N.W.2d 843 58 A.L.R.2d 1304. We have held, however, that the police power may be exercised to promote the "public conven- ience and general prosperity or welfare of the people." Western States Utilities Co. v. City of Waseca, 242 Minn. 302, 310, 65 N.W.2d 255, 262. Hence, a zoning regula- tion need not be a necessity but need only be substantially related to promoting the general welfare of the community .to meet the constitutional requirement of reason- ableness. The other primary objection to aesthetic zoning is founded upon its subjective na- ture, for what may be attractive to one man may be an abomination to another. See, Forbes v. Hubbard, 348 Ill. 166, 180 N.E. 767. Therefore, many courts have long been unwilling to act as super art critics by ruling on the reasonableness of ordi- nances which are essentially based on sub- jective aesthetic considerations, and they have held all such ordinances invalid. See, e. g., Trust Co. of Chicago v. City of Chi- cago, 408 I11. 91 96 N.E.2d 499; Stoner McCray System v. City of Des Moines, supra; Hitchman v. Township of Oakland, 329 Mich. 331, 45 N.W.2d 306. In recent years, however, a growing number of courts, recognizing the role which plan- ning and zoning play in municipal efforts to guide future development of land so as to insure a pleasanter and more econom- ical environment in which its residents may live and work, have begun to uphold Zoning based exclusively on aesthetics on the ground that the pleasant appearance of a district or community has a direct and beneficial effect on property values and on the well -being of its residents, and thus inevitably promotes the general welfare. State v. Diamond Motors, Inc. (Hawaii) 429 P.2d 825; Matter of Cromwell v. Fer- rier, 19 N.Y.2d . 263, 279 N.Y.S.2d 22, 225 N.E.2d 749; Oregon City v. Hartke, 240 Or. 35, 400 P.2d 255. 6-8] Whichever of these views is ac- cepted, however, the test governing our decision on the constitutional issue present- ed is whether the village council in exer- cising its legislative prerogative acted rea- sonably, with the question of reasonable- ness to be resolved by deciding whether its determination . upon a consideration of the facts was based on reason and logic and not on whim or caprice, and that it promotes a legitimate police -power objec- tive. The mere fact that the adoption of a zoning ordinance reflects a desire to achieve aesthetic ends should not invalidate an otherwise valid ordinance. Thus, if the challenged restriction is reasonably related to promoting the general welfare of the community or any other legitimate police - power objective, the fact that aesthetic considerations were a significant factor in motivating its adoption cannot justify hold- ing it unconstitutional. Oscar P. Gustaf- son Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 231 Minn. 271, 42 N.W.2d 809; State ex rel. Beery v. Houghton, supra. 9,10] In this case, as part of a compre- hensive land -use plan, the village decided to exclude ail commercial uses from resi- dential districts. Surely no one could dis- pute that billboards are a commercial use of land incompatible with achieving the objective of having, as nearly as possible, an exclusively residential area. There is clear evidence in the record that exclusive- ly residential zoning enhances property values, ultimately increasing the tax base of the village. Numerous courts, including this one, have repeatedly sustained the ex- clusion of commercial enterprises, no matter how seemingly inoffensive, from residential districts as a valid exercise of the police power. Obviously, aesthetics play a significant part in residential zon- ing. But such considerations of taste and beauty more likely reflect a community - wide opinion of what is necessary to advance and stabilize neighborhood values rather than the purely subjective opinions of members of the council. Thus, while NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADV. CO. v. VILLAGE OF MINNETONKA Minn. 213 Cite ae 162 N.W.2d 206 aesthetics admittedly were a significant factor in the council's decision, they were not the sole basis. As the trial court found upon ample evidence, its purpose was to ad- vance the general wel f are.s We therefore hold that, even though plaintiff's billboards do not threaten the public health, safety, or morals, it cannot be said that the village council's decision that all commercial uses including billboards should be excluded f rom residential dis- tricts is arbitrary, unreasonable, and not substantially related to the general welfare of the community. The ordinance, however, goes one step beyond merely forbidding the establishment of nonconforming uses in the future. It provides that all nonconforming billboards, such as plaintiff's, must be removed with- in 3 years after the of fective date of the ordinance. In essence, plaintiff challenges this aspect of the ordinance on the ground that it deprives it of its property without just compensation. Traditionally it has been held that, while an exclusively residential zoning ordinance enacted under the police power may con- stitutionally prohibit the creation of new nonconforming uses, existing nonconform- ing uses either must be permitted to remain or must be eliminated by use of the power of eminent domain. See, Hawkins v. Tal- bot, 248 Minn. 549, 80 N.W.2d 863. This rule, however, does not require that pre- existing nonconforming uses be permitted to expand or be rebuilt upon destruction, and accordingly many ordinances expressly prohibit expansion or reconstruction of nonconforming uses. It was thus hoped that nonconforming uses would soon vanish due to destruction, exhaustion, or obsoles- cence. This, however, has not happened. These nonconforming uses have often en- joyed an unchallenged monopoly in the residential areas because of the zoning or- dinances, and with reasonable maintenance, they have prospered instead of withering away. In recent years a number of municipali- ties have sought to eliminate preexisting nonconforming uses by means of so- called amortization provisions, of which the Minnetonka provision is a prime example. The theory behind this legislative device is that the useful life of the nonconforming use corresponds roughly to the amortization period, so that the owner is not deprived of his property until the end of its useful life. In addition, the monopoly position granted during the amortization period theoretically provides the owner with com- pensation for the loss of some property in- terest, since the period specified rarely cor- responds precisely to the useful life of any particular structure constituting the noncon- forming use. 11,12] Plaintiff cannot successfully challenge this ordinance as unconstitutional on its face unless it would be unconstitu- tional as applied to the property interests of every billboard owner. The underlying issue in making this determination must therefore be whether the amortization period provided by the statute is reasonable. If the value of plaintiff's property interest was extinguished before the running of the 3 -year period, there would be no taking, or if the value of freedom from new com- petition for the statutory period equalled the value of the property interest remaining at the end of the period, there would be just compensation fdr the taking. In ei- ther case, the length of the amortization period is reasonable and the ordinance therefore is constitutional. Moreover, since several conceivable applications of the ordinance are reasonable, it is not uncon- stitutional by its terms. The question then becomes one of the unconstitutional applica- tion of the ordinance in a given case, and the burden is on plaintiff to establish that the ordinance, as applied, is unconstitu- tional. Plaintiff, however, has based its challenge on the argument that the ordi- nance is unconstitutional on its face and has introduced little or no evidence that 5. See footnote 2, supra. 00 O 214 Minn. 162 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES the 3 -year amortization period is unrea- sonable as applied. 13 -15] In order for its application against plainti f f to be held unconstitutional, there must have been a taking from plain- tiff of some valuable property interest without the payment of just compensation. The billboards themselves have not been taken. Plaintiff, as a lessee, under its leases has every right to remove them. It is shown, however, that it will cost over 44,000 to remove and relocate these bill- boards, which plaintiff is willing to under- take if the village will compensate it. When a leasehold is condemned, a lessee is not entitled to compensation for the cost of removing personal property which it has a right to remove upon expiration of the lease. State, by Lord v. Pahl, 257 Minn. 177, 100 N.W.2d 724; Korengold v. City of Minneapolis, 254 Minn. 358, 95 N.W.2d 112. Unless the billboards have become a part of the realty so that title to them would pass to the lessor at the end of the lease —which the evidence here expressly negates —, the lessee is entitled to no com- pensation for the cost of their removal. 16] But plaintiff claims that it has a vested right to continue the conduct of a lawful business at these locations which amounts to a property right. While there . is some support for the contention that such a compensable property right may exist see, Connor v. Towship of Chanhassen, 249 Minn. 205, 81 N.W.2d 789), plaintiff has introduced absolutely no evidence as to the value, if any, of such a right. There is therefore no support for this claim. 17] Finally, plaintiff claims that it was deprived of its property interest in the leases themselves. If a property right is taken for a public use, compensation by payment of its fair market value is .requir- ed. In the case of a taking of a leasehold interest, this amount "is the fair rental value of the premises less the amount of the rent for the remainder of the term." In re Assessment for Widening Third Street in St. Paul, 176 Minn. 389, 390, 223 N.W. 458. 118,191 Ten of the leases in question are oral and amount to no more than month - to -month tenancies. The value of such a leasehold is limited to the rental value of the premises for 30 days less the rent pay- able for that period. Riebs v. Milwaukee County Park Comm., 252 Wis. 144, 31 N.W. 2d 190. The other 8 leases are written and vary in length from 1 to 10 years. How- ever, plaintiff has offered no evidence on the fair market value of any of these leases at the end of the statutory amortiza- tion period. Thus, it is impossible for us to say that there has been such a taking of a valuable property interest from plaintiff as to render this application of the ordi- nance unconstitutional. 20,211 The Naegele leases contain pro- visions permitting the lessee to cancel the leases on written notice if the value of said location for advertising purposes shall be or become diminished, and the General Out- door leases may be canceled if the con- tinued use of the billboard. is prohibited by any law or ordinance. If a lease by its terms automatically terminates upon con- demnation of the land, the lessee is entitled to no compensation for the loss of his lease- hold interest, since he agreed in advance to such a termination. Korengold v. City of Minneapolis, supra. The same is true if the lease is terminable upon condemnation at the option of the lessor. In re Improve- ment of Third Street, St. Paul, 178 Minn. 552, 228 N.W. 162. In this case, however, the sole power of termination is in the hands of the lessee. These clauses, if anything, make these leases more valuable and would not preclude plaintiff from receiving com- pensation if it had been established that a taking occurred. State, by Lord v. La- Barre, 255 Minn. 309, 96 N.W.2d 642. Since plaintiff's challenge is limited to the sore claim that the ordinance is uncon- 6. See. Kaf ka v. Davidson, 135 Minn. 389, 160 N.W. 1021. NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADV. 00. v. VILLAGE OF MINNETONKA Minn. 215 Cite as 162 N.W.2d 206 stitutional on its face, and there is a lack pality into districts or zones of suitable of proof to support any claim of unconsti- numbers, shape and area." tutional application, the trial court's deci- sion must be affirmed. 22] Plaintiff, in passing, also argues that the village has no statutory power to enact this type of zoning requirement. While it is true that a village has no ex- press statutory power to enact such a re- quirement, there are several statutes from which such power can reasonably be im- plied. Minn.St. 412.221, subd. 32, provides: The village council shall have power to provide for * * * the promotion of * * * convenience, and the general welfare by such ordinances not incon- sistent with the constitution and laws of the United States or of this state as it shall deem expedient." Since, as previously indicated, the cases interpreting this general grant of the police power have long and consistently held that an ordinance which excludes commercial uses from residential districts is reasonably related to the general welfare and is there - fore constitutional, a village has the statu- tory power. Moreover, the Municipal Planning Act of 1965 is specifically designed to give munic- ipalities "the necessary powers and a uni- form procedure for adequately conducting and implementing municipal planning." Minn.St. 462.351. Section 462.357, subd. 1, provides in part: For the purpose of promoting the general welfare, a municipality may by ordinance regulate the location and] the uses of buildings and structures for trade, industry, residence, recreation, public activities, or other pur- poses, and the uses of land for trade, industry, residence, recreation, agricul- ture, forestry, soil conservation, water supply conservation, flood control or other purposes, and may establish stand- ards and procedures regulating such uses. The regulations may divide the munici- The act, therefore, expressly gives munic- ipalities the power to create residential districts as part of a comprehensive zoning plan. Thus, today no one can seriously con- tend that the creation of exclusively resi- dential districts is beyond either the con- stitutional or statutory power of a munic- ipality. In order to make this power to create ex- clusively residential districts effective, municipalities must have the power to pro- hibit the construction of future noncon- forming uses and to require the removal of old ones. The continued presence of pre- existing nonconforming commercial uses within these residential districts may rea- sonably be found to vitiate the effective- ness of the entire comprehensive municipal plan. A district can never be exclusively residential until all nonconforming uses are eliminated. The legislature, in giving mu- nicipalities broad land- use - planning powers, could not have intended to render them in- effective by denying to municipalities the power to eliminate preexisting noncon- forming uses. Thus, even though the en- abling statutes do not expressly give munic- ipalities the power to eliminate noncon- forming uses, such a power is necessarily implied from the broad grant of power to establish and implement a comprehensive municipal plan. The village of Minnetonka has deter- mined that exclusively residential districts promote the general welfare of that com- munity and has undertaken to create them. It has not only prohibited the construction of new commercial uses within these dis- tricts but has also required the removal of existing billboards after a 3 -year amortiza- tion period. Such an ordinance is clearly within the powers given the village by the enabling statutes. Whether this ordinance has been constitutionally applied in any given case depends upon the facts of that case. A f firmed. O V_ Attachment 48 Sec. 36-22. Off- street parking. a) The. following types of uses shall provide additional off - street parking space, as indicated, unless otherwise authorized by the city council. All. parking spaces shall have proper access from a street or alley and shall be located on or near the lot on which such use is situated; 1) Single - family dwelling: Two (2) spaces. 2) Multiple dwelling: Two (2) spades for each housekeeping unit. One of these spaces must be enclosed. 3) Hotel or tourist cabin court: One space for each rental room or suite. 4) Restaumnt, cafe or tea room: One space for each fifty (50) square feet of floor space devoted to patron use. 5) Theater, auditorium, church or other place of public as- semblagc A minimum of one space for every four (4) seats. Schools must. have a minimum of one space for every twenty 20) auditorium seats. 6) Commercia4 office or recreational building use, other than those specirted abovs• One space for each two hundred (200) square feet, or portion thereof, of floor area. 7) Shopping centers hawing enclosed no ble common areas• One space for each two hundred (200) square feet, or por- tion thereof, of leasable floor area. 8) Manufacturing and warehouse establishments• One space for each two (2) employees, or one space for each four hundred (400) square feet of manufacturing; space and one space for each one thousand (1,000) square feet of ware - house space., whichever is greater. 9) Motor fuel stations: Four (4) spaces, plus three (3) addi- tional spaces for each service stall If there is a conve- nience store or restaurant amociated with the fuel station, additional parking shall be provided in accordance with this section. 10) Off-street parking facilities: Shall not be reduced below the requirements of subparagraph (a). 11) Motor vehicle repair. Two (2) spaces for each service stall, one space for each employee and one space for each busi- ness vehicle stored on the site. 110